I was finding reasonable analogies, recognizing that nothing is perfectly the same. It wasn't the worst analogy ever and it wasn't the Wikepedia version of BtVS.
When she didn't tell them Angel was back, she still had no belief any of them wouldn't attack him since Angelus tortured Giles, Xander wanted him dead and she believed Willow was with them. This is more equatable with Wes if all this transpired in BatB (and Angel was killing people, she knew about it and covered it up), but it didn't. It's not different because it all turned out OK, it's different because it was at most dereliction of duty, if that, since Oz and Angel are equated in that ep, not a betrayal.
Just because Angelus tortured Giles doesn't mean that Giles would kill Angel. Just because Buffy believed that Willow wanted Angelus staked before he could raise Acathala (much like Buffy at the time because Buffy *was* off to stake Angelus and told Willow to not bother re-attempting the re-ensoulment) doesn't meant that Buffy had good reasons to believe that Willow would want Angel dead. Heck, there wasn't even probable cause to believe that Xander would kill a souled Angel. True to form, Willow and Giles never attempt to kill a souled Angel; Xander starts but abandons his effort because Xander would stake a Bad Angel without his soul or out to lose his soul again (since he didn't believe Buffy's arguments that Angel was good) but he wouldn't stake an Angel allied with good,.
However, I still get Buffy's paranoia that her friends would stake Angel, even though they didn't really indicate that they'd stake a fully good Angel. Buffy's paranoia had emotional validity because of the severity of Angel's rampage of terror in S2. It's not really anything Willow/Xander/Giles *did* against Angel. It's that Buffy is also shamed by Angel's actions and believed that there was plenty of motive to stake him even with a soul but Buffy loved Angel too much to surrender him to that fate.
To compare the two, Wesley was observing Angel who was high on Connor's blood (since W&H was spiking Angel's blood supply with Connor's blood). Angel acted unusually irrational and angry and lashed out at Connor for crying as babies do. Angel made an awful, scary joke about how it'd be OK if he was trapped in a burnt out room because he could eat Connor. In addition, to the prophetic warnings, big omens of fire and blood, the Loa's warnings, and Holtz's threats to wipe out the whole of AI if Wesley didn't take the baby to safety. Ironically, Buffy hadn't witnessed nearly as frightening dangers to a souled Angel from her friends as Wesley witnessed from Angel towards Connor in Loyalty and the start of Sleep Tight.
Buffy did betray the group by hiding Angel. If a family member of mine hid the murderer of the love of my life and someone who tortured me for hours, I'd feel damned betrayed. If someone lied to me for weeks about their whereabouts, I'd feel betrayed. Buffy actively conspired to avoid bringing Angel to justice to the some of the people that Angel recently hurt the most.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
rosecarmine
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-11 08:59 pm (UTC)When she didn't tell them Angel was back, she still had no belief any of them wouldn't attack him since Angelus tortured Giles, Xander wanted him dead and she believed Willow was with them. This is more equatable with Wes if all this transpired in BatB (and Angel was killing people, she knew about it and covered it up), but it didn't. It's not different because it all turned out OK, it's different because it was at most dereliction of duty, if that, since Oz and Angel are equated in that ep, not a betrayal.
Just because Angelus tortured Giles doesn't mean that Giles would kill Angel. Just because Buffy believed that Willow wanted Angelus staked before he could raise Acathala (much like Buffy at the time because Buffy *was* off to stake Angelus and told Willow to not bother re-attempting the re-ensoulment) doesn't meant that Buffy had good reasons to believe that Willow would want Angel dead. Heck, there wasn't even probable cause to believe that Xander would kill a souled Angel. True to form, Willow and Giles never attempt to kill a souled Angel; Xander starts but abandons his effort because Xander would stake a Bad Angel without his soul or out to lose his soul again (since he didn't believe Buffy's arguments that Angel was good) but he wouldn't stake an Angel allied with good,.
However, I still get Buffy's paranoia that her friends would stake Angel, even though they didn't really indicate that they'd stake a fully good Angel. Buffy's paranoia had emotional validity because of the severity of Angel's rampage of terror in S2. It's not really anything Willow/Xander/Giles *did* against Angel. It's that Buffy is also shamed by Angel's actions and believed that there was plenty of motive to stake him even with a soul but Buffy loved Angel too much to surrender him to that fate.
To compare the two, Wesley was observing Angel who was high on Connor's blood (since W&H was spiking Angel's blood supply with Connor's blood). Angel acted unusually irrational and angry and lashed out at Connor for crying as babies do. Angel made an awful, scary joke about how it'd be OK if he was trapped in a burnt out room because he could eat Connor. In addition, to the prophetic warnings, big omens of fire and blood, the Loa's warnings, and Holtz's threats to wipe out the whole of AI if Wesley didn't take the baby to safety. Ironically, Buffy hadn't witnessed nearly as frightening dangers to a souled Angel from her friends as Wesley witnessed from Angel towards Connor in Loyalty and the start of Sleep Tight.
Buffy did betray the group by hiding Angel. If a family member of mine hid the murderer of the love of my life and someone who tortured me for hours, I'd feel damned betrayed. If someone lied to me for weeks about their whereabouts, I'd feel betrayed. Buffy actively conspired to avoid bringing Angel to justice to the some of the people that Angel recently hurt the most.