Angel & Connor question

[kangeiko]

Something just occured to me, and I'm sure that the A:TS devotees have figured out the answer to this already.

Why the hell didn't Angel lose his soul when Connor was born? Or, just after, when Darla had gone Pfft!, and he had a tiny, wriggly baby in his arms? And don't go on about his fear for Connor's well-being - he managed perfect happiness with Buffy when the world was about to end.

So?

*brain!cramp*

Comments

[ex-ms-katoni171.livejournal.com]

Grief over Darla marring the happiness? Sure, he had his son, but he'd lost his sire again, and for good this time. At the actual birth moment, I'm sure it was shock rather than happiness going through his mind.

It could also be that he was scared for not only the kid's wellbeing but that he wouldn't make a good father. Given Angel's personality, I'm nearly certain that would be it.

[kangeiko]

Well, that would explain why he didn't lose his soul immediately after - but later on, Cordelia (and everyone else) is cooing over Connor, and Angel doesn't seem to me to be stricken with grief over Darla. I mean, I totally get that he'd be upset, but, again, he managed perfect happiness with Buffy given that he was faced with the prospect of killing Spike&Dru, who I do believe he loves, at least as much as Darla if not more.

I'm more inclined to believe your second reason - that he was convinced he'd be a terrible father, and it's basically him holding a bomb rather than a baby. Hmmm.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

he managed perfect happiness with Buffy given that he was faced with the prospect of killing Spike&Dru, who I do believe he loves, at least as much as Darla if not more.

'scuse me, but no. Not that he doesn't love them, but he doesn't feel more for tham than for Darla. That's fanon which was thoroughly blasted into smithereens by season 2 of AtS.

[kangeiko]

No no no! *cough splutter* S5 of Angel, IMO, clearly shows that Angel feels responsible for both of them in a paternal (well, as paternal as vamps get) capacity. When Spike's hurt by the crazy Slayer? Big upset. When he thinks that his 'girls' have been messed with by the Immortal? Big upset. I'm not buying the 'Angel only really loved Darla' line, because there's different kinds of love. Angel not killing Drusilla when he first sees her in the cemetery? Love. When he tells her to take Spike and go, instead of trying to fight them? Love. He disposes of Penn pretty damned easily, but he's with those two for almost as long as he's with Darla, and they are just a tiny bit crazy and dependent on him during that time. Darla, OTOH, is very much his equal, if not more so. It's a different kind of love, but it's still love.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Of course it's love, I never denied it, and never claimed he didn't care, but:

He disposes of Penn pretty damned easily, but he's with those two for almost as long as he's with Darla

You suck at maths almost as much as Joss.

Liam gets sired by Darla in 1753.

Drusilla gets sired by Angel in 1860.

William gets sired by Drusilla in 1880.

Angel gets the soul in 1898, then comes back in 1900 for a brief return visit in China.

Now, in what universe makes that the same time for Dru and Spike as it does for Darla? Darla/Angel = 150 years. Angel/Darla/Dru: 40 years. Angel/Darla/Dru/Spike: 20 years. Sorry, no way around it.

And of course Darla was his equal with a slight edge of dominating him. One of the things I love about the relationship. Spike and Dru were the kids. Not coincidentally, the kids who never got a clue why Dad left; note that Darla doesn't tell them during her attempt to convince the gyspies, hence Spike eating same, Dru doesn't notice in China, and when showing up in Sunnydale, Spike STILL doesn't know about the soul until he actually meets Angel.

[kangeiko]

Now, in what universe makes that the same time for Dru and Spike as it does for Darla? Darla/Angel = 150 years. Angel/Darla/Dru: 40 years. Angel/Darla/Dru/Spike: 20 years. Sorry, no way around it.

Oh, if you're going to use the truth against me... *g* OK, good point, I'd never actually worked out the maths of that - given the amount of screen time the foursome share during S5, and given that I'd forgotten when exactly Angel was sired, I'd taken it to be, erm, longer.

My point remains, though. He loved them as much as he loved Darla. If we're ranking in order of great loves, I reckon it would be Connor first, then Buffy, then Darla (with Spike & Dru as inadvertent add-ons, though it galls him to admit it), then Cordelia (now, this bit I'm not sure about, as he seemed to really love her in S5, but the whole relationship never really worked for me, esp. after the Connor debacle), then Fred & Wesley & the rest. Your mileage may vary.

Spike and Dru were the kids.

Precisely why I think that Angel loves them. They're his 'practice' for Connor. They're never a threat to him, not really - more a threat that he'd have to kill them. Same as for Connor, really - I never thought that Connor would out-fight Angel, ever, merely that Angel might not be able to kill him if it came to it. As it turns out, he could. But Spike? Spike never could, before. And when he manages it in S5, it really, really hurts Angel. I don't think that it had ever clicked for him before, that his 'kid' could actually come into his own and best him.

Not coincidentally, the kids who never got a clue why Dad left;

Part and parcel, really. They both protect them. I still point to the bit in S2 where Angel tries to get Dru and Spike to leave, rather than actually fighting them.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Oh, if you're going to use the truth against me...

Very unfair of me, I know.*g* Incidentally, my rp-partner-in-crime karabair once made a similar mistake when she had the Immortal mention something to Darla with the addendum of what a pity it was this was before her time, and I promptly and gleefully, because I'm nerdish that way, pointed out it wasn't, as Darla got sired in 1606, not, as Carrie had subconsciously assumed, in the 18th century like Angel.

Here's an interesting thing, though: Hearthrob has Darla and Angel hanging out with James & Elisabeth in the late 1700s, who came across as proto-Spike and Dru, except with paler personalities, which is presumably why Darla and Angel ditched them. But it would indicate that they were looking to, well, form a secondary couple like S & D to compliment and contrast them. I wonder whether that was the wish to have children as well...

I always thought that the Hearthrob flashback summed up the Angelus/Darla relationship beautifully, which is quite different from Spike/Dru - thalia_seawood once compared it to the Marquise de Merteuil and Valmont:

ELISABETH: (to Darla) I heard he trapped you both in a barn and *you* fled, leaving him to die.

JAMES: It's not true.

ANGELUS: It's entirely true. She hit me with a shovel, wished me luck and rode off on our only horse.

DARLA: (smiling at Angelus) Life is full of surprises.

ANGELUS: (smiling back) Ah, life is boring. You're full of surprises.

DARLA: Of course when you finally did catch up with me in Vienna I had to pay for my sins, again and again.

ANGELUS: Hmm, can you even begin to fathom the things that we did? Of course not. You're in love.

Order of love: yes, that would be my ranking as well, with Wesley outranking Fred, definitely.

Oh, and because it's fun, another flashback quote, which has a Darla sentence which is black irony in retrospect but neatly illustrates something about her and Angel's idea of family. From when Holtz has Angelus captured in Rome:


HOLTZ: I don't want anything. My family is gone. I don't trust you to give me Darla, although I *will* find her, you know that. My only desire here is to discover if a thing such as yourself can be made to pay for its sins. (Holtz digs the claw-thingy in somewhere below Angelus waist (off screen) and Angelus groans in pain) You're a demon. It is your nature to maim and kill. But you were also once a man. If we beat and burn the demon out of your living flesh, will there be anything left? Anything at all? I doubt it. But I'm willing to spend the next fortnight of my life finding out. In either event, you have no soul, you can not be saved.

(A flaming arrow streaks across the room and buries itself in one of the monks.)

DARLA: Sorry it took me so long, darling. (to her minions) Kill them.

(monks vs vamps battle)

MONSIGNOR: (Cross at Darla) Vai' all inferno, demonio lordo! (subtitle: Go to hell foul demon!)

(Darla pushes the cross aside, then sends the Monsignor flying into a wall.

DARLA: No, grazie, padre.

(more of Darla's minions arrive, with a cart. Darla frees Angelus and they climb in the back.)

ANGELUS: Darlin'?

DARLA: What?

ANGELUS: Shouldn't we be killing Holtz?

DARLA: I know, but it's just so much fun ruining his life. He's like family now.

Part and parcel, really. They both protect them.

I think it's also that as long as they don't know, the parents can pretend it might one day get back to the old family again. Certainly Darla staying with Spike and Dru after Angel has left has something to do with that.

Darla timeline

[kangeiko]

Gonna reply in more detail to the rest of the post, but in the meantime - the Darla timeline confuses me. At least, if we're supposed to take her for an Englishwoman. (Or are we?)

If she's sired in 1606 in the US, in a mission, that must be a Spanish mission, as the first English colony didn't get set up until 1607 (jamestown). Or are we to believe that she was part of the Roanoke set-up? 'cause that could make for an interesting 1602 / A:TS crossover that would break my brain.

Darla timeline

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Argh, sorry, checked again - 1609 it is, not 1606, and Jamestown is named on screen as the place.

I still love the idea of a 1602/A:TS crossover, because the Jossverse can't be ours anyway. Just think of all the Catholics running around in overabundance. Now Liam, okay, Irish, but:

- the Master poses as a priest towards Darla, and I get the distinct impression he's meant to be taken as a Catholic priest

- Daniel Holtz, a Yorkshire man from the later half of the 18th century, is Catholic when it would make far more sense if he were a Wesleyan (he) or at any rate a CoE Protestant

- Drusilla, a girl in London in 1860, is a Catholic as well

Re: Darla timeline

[kangeiko]

Argh, sorry, checked again - 1609 it is, not 1606, and Jamestown is named on screen as the place.

!!!

That's just...

*chokes*

Sorry, the historian in me is having a heart-attack. There were definitely no prostitutes in the original settlers of Jamestown. I suppose that she could have come in on the 1608 supply shipment when they sent through 110 more colonists, but... *shakes head* They sent through men, gentlemen, at that, which is why Jamestown nearly died out. Noone would work!

If she was Spanish, however, that would 1) explain the Catholicism, 2) account for the mission, and 3) explain the presence of a prostitute in what should be a nearly all-male colony...

I still love the idea of a 1602/A:TS crossover, because the Jossverse can't be ours anyway. Just think of all the Catholics running around in overabundance.

yes, exactly. That works nicely with the slightly-out-of-synch timeline.

*thinks of all the lovely crossover possibilities*

Re: Darla timeline

[selenak.livejournal.com]

I know, I know. But you know, in the Jossverse, Anya starts the Russian revolution in 1905, so clearly, AU.

*roots for 1602 crossover*

Re: Darla timeline

[kangeiko]

Hey, I'll write it if you write the Six Feet Under/A:TS one!!

Re: Darla timeline

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Deal!

Re: Darla timeline

[kangeiko]

*g* I'm holding you to that!

[kangeiko]

Here's an interesting thing, though: Hearthrob has Darla and Angel hanging out with James & Elisabeth in the late 1700s, who came across as proto-Spike and Dru, except with paler personalities, which is presumably why Darla and Angel ditched them.

I completely forgot about them!

But it would indicate that they were looking to, well, form a secondary couple like S & D to compliment and contrast them. I wonder whether that was the wish to have children as well...

That would make sense to me. I always wondered why Dru&Spike never had any 'kids', actually - they sired quite a few vamps, near as I can figure, but not ones they actually kept around. Kita did a really nice treatment of Dru's desire for children wherein innocent young Dru doesn't realise that she can't have kids until some time after she's turned. Hence the dolls.

I think that maybe Dru was Spike's charge, in a way - he devoted all his time to taking care of her, so he didn't feel the need to bring anyone else over.

I always thought that the Hearthrob flashback summed up the Angelus/Darla relationship beautifully, which is quite different from Spike/Dru - thalia_seawood once compared it to the Marquise de Merteuil and Valmont:

That also make sense to me. Wouldn't it be nice to have a fic done in that style for those two? We could even have the innocent young maiden in Dru...

Order of love: yes, that would be my ranking as well, with Wesley outranking Fred, definitely.

Is this more S4 stuff I'm missing? *g* It's funny, I'd instinctually rank them in that way, but the gap between the Wes/Angel relationship end of season 3 and it during S5 is so vast for me that I just had to shake my head and hit the re-set button.

ANGELUS: Shouldn't we be killing Holtz?

DARLA: I know, but it's just so much fun ruining his life. He's like family now.

Hee! That's so true!

I think it's also that as long as they don't know, the parents can pretend it might one day get back to the old family again. Certainly Darla staying with Spike and Dru after Angel has left has something to do with that.

yes, good point.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

I completely forgot about them!

They weren't that memorable.*g* But interesting in what their existence says about the Fanged Four dynamics.

I think that maybe Dru was Spike's charge, in a way - he devoted all his time to taking care of her, so he didn't feel the need to bring anyone else over.

Yes, though consider that sickly Drusilla as we meet her is atypical; she's a lunatic but quite capable of taking her of herself (or Spike) in the flashbacks and post-What's My Line. Also, the very first thing William the vampire did was to sire Mother, and given how that turned out, he might have been scarred for good as far as genuine "children" as opposed to disposable minions were concerned.

Is this more S4 stuff I'm missing? *g* It's funny, I'd instinctually rank them in that way, but the gap between the Wes/Angel relationship end of season 3 and it during S5 is so vast for me that I just had to shake my head and hit the re-set button.

Well, yes, because season 4 shows the two of them coming to terms. They have some great scenes together.

Hee! That's so true!

I know! Black, black irony!

[kangeiko]

Also, the very first thing William the vampire did was to sire Mother, and given how that turned out, he might have been scarred for good as far as genuine "children" as opposed to disposable minions were concerned.


Hmmm, that's an interesting thought that hadn't occured to me before - that the mother issues actually had a hold over him for the entire duration of his unlife.

you have completely swayed me on that s4 thing, btw. must get my hands on it next time i get paid...