Angel and perfect happiness

[lettered]

Sometimes fandom, lj, and people are callous and strange. And confusing. But I love them lots. Again. Still.

Anyway, back to Important Issues.



I'm sure this has been discussed before (I know a2zmom and I had a great discussion about it once), but I'm interested in what everyone else thinks.

On the one hand, it seems unlikely Angel could lose his soul due to the curse again. Wesley points out that, "99.999-ad infinitum percent of the best relationships in the recorded history of the world have had to make do with acceptable happiness" ("Smile Time", AtS, 5x14). He believes "perfect happiness" is something rare and virtually unattainable--like nirvana or enlightment? I guess, in Buddhism? Who knows.

Also, the episode "Awakening" (AtS, 4x10) suggests that "perfect happiness" can only arise from a confluence of events: LA must be safe from the latest threat, Wesley and Angel must come to an understanding, Connor and Angel must come to and understanding, Cordelia and Angel must not only come to and understanding and have sex, but Cordelia must claim she forgives him for his past, etc.

Even "Surprise" (BtVS, 2x13) can be seen in this light. I hope we can all agree Angel doesn't lose his soul there due to sex, but love. But one could argue it's not just the act of love, or even Buffy herself, or anything but again, a confluence of events that leads up to that moment. At this point, it seemed to me as though Angel believed he could love and have some measure of happiness, even if he also knew it was a foolish belief. Also, (and I think this was a2zmom's argument, correct me if I'm wrong) he thinks he might be able to achieve some kind of atonement or forgiveness...perhaps not completely, but to some point where he can live with himself. He never seems to really believe either of those things again, but if he does then it makes sense that he loses his soul not due to just Buffy but some belief that in some way he's kinda forgiven.

Thus, it would seem logical to argue that so much has happened with Angel, particularly the loss of his son, etc, that perfect happiness would never really be possible.

On the other hand, I think it's possible that "perfect happiness" may not be everything at a certain time going right, or even most things. Look at the other side of the coin: many people have experienced despair so great they feel like ending their lives, but a lot of those people have a bunch of wonderful things going for them. Everything is not going wrong, but a few things or even just one big thing has made them feel their lives are not worth living. Is that "perfect despair"? I guess I would say so, though I can see arguments against it.

My thing is I feel like I've experienced perfect happiness, once or thrice in my life. It wasn't that everything was going right, or that might life at that point was what I wanted it to be. It was being with family or friends, and just feeling this...surge, as of joy or beauty or something so great it can't really be described except by the word love. And it only lasted a moment or two, but in those moments, I sincerely believe that nothing could've made me happier, not a million dollars, not the jobs of my dreams, not at last knowing the love of my life or whatever. Two seconds later, hell yeah, but in that moment, and one or two others in my life, I felt like my life wasn't perfect, but that I was feeling perfect happiness.

I think Angel could feel that. I think it's what he felt with Buffy. I think he felt like none of his issues with her resolved and that he was no good for her and that it wasn't going to work out and he could never atone, but in that moment it fell away and he was just perfectly happy in the moment. I don't think it could've happened with Cordy in S4 because too much other stuff was going on, but that doesn't mean he couldn't feel it with her or some other woman at some calmer point in his life.

My beef with that is he should've felt it with Connor in his arms. I still think that he would have, when Connor first said "dada" or "Dad" while not pointing a weapon at him. But anyway, I don't see the curse as a non-issue because he won't ever be perfectly happy again. I think it could be in the cards for him, depending on what happened post-NFA.

What do you think? Discuss, disagree, throw tomatoes, eat cheese, stare at your navel. Please.

Comments

[baffae.livejournal.com]

In Innocence, perfect happiness for Angel was described as being a moment, no matter how short, in which the soul that was meant to torture and haunt him no longer plagued his thoughts. One split second in which Angel completely forgot about his past as a demon. One split second in which he let himself live in and be taken over the moment at hand.

For S2 BtVS Angel, it was in Buffy's arms, having her complete and total acceptance and trust (in the form of her body), that he was able to achieve this moment. He had one moment of perfect happiness. He felt only good things about himself and his situation and his future. He didn't think of his past.

With baby Connor in his arms, Angel would be bombarded with the thoughts of the impossibility of Connor. He would, no doubt, be in awe of his child; but, he would, no doubt, be in awe of the fact that two vampires could have made said child. Thus his past was still on his mind; his conscience always weighing down on him. That's why, IMO, he did not achieve perfect happiness with Connor.

Do I think he is capable of acheiving it again? The answer is a resounding yes. Because no matter how scarred a person is, I must believe that there is something or someone that can help them forget it all. Maybe it will be a little harder for him to let himself get to that place, but I believe that that place still exists. And as a B/A shipper, I think that the potential still lies with Buffy, but then again, I am a B/A shipper. . .

[tkp.livejournal.com]

I'm not a mother, so I don't really know. But to hear some parents tell it, holding your child in your arms really can make you feel only good things and forget whatever's in your past for one brief moment.

I just don't feel like every time Angel looked at Connor he thought of him as the "product of two vampires". I mean, yeah, every time Angel looks at Connor in the back of his mind he thinks of him as something miraculous, but he's not constantly thinking what he is and where he came from. He's just glad to have him. I guess I'd compare it to a woman who thought she couldn't have a child, and does, or even someone who adopts a kid--it's not always about how the kid got to be there. I know that's not the same thing, because the latter happens sometimes and vamps having kids does not, but I can't help but think that the same thing happens: you look at the kid and he's a miracle but all you're really thinking is how ecstatically happy you are he's yours somehow.

And I totally think Angel's most likely to get there with Buffy, if he does so again. I'd add Connor in, too, but the way things stood in S5 I thought it more likely that B/A could get together than Angel and Connor having a really excellent father-son relationship, the kind that could really give Angel perfect happiness. But I guess it all depends on what happened after NFA...
which is what fanfic is for. Yay!

[baffae.livejournal.com]

I'm also not a mother so I don't understand the feeling either. (but I've also never been in love so I don't understand that feeling either). It's all just speculation on my part.

Nonetheless, I think there's a fine line between the love one has for a lover and the love one has for a child. Part of me feels that a person cannot have that obsessive, body controlling, can't-think-of-anything-else-love for a child, that it is reserved for a lover. A lover is chosen. A child is given. (I'm having trouble expressing the difference I see because it is rather small). And we seem to agree on the idea that this moment of happiness has a direct correlation to love.

Also, I think another part of it relates to first love. "The first cut is the deepest"-- all other experiences are tainted, are compared to the first.

[tkp.livejournal.com]

I guess I've always kind of felt the opposite about loving-your-children vs. loving-a-lover. It's the same as what you say, I guess: a lover is chosen and a child is given. But to hear many parents talk, the second that child is given the love is instant and unconditional and doesn't happen for any other reason than that he's your child, and no matter what happens, that love will always be there. With a lover, you can always choose to walk away (of course a parent can choose that too but it's a little rarer).

But eh, I have no real experience in either, so I'm talking out of my ass.

I also don't believe that a first love is always the strongest or the best or the most important. I think it's something that IS important and you'll always remember it and it'll always be unique in your mind, but as someone who had a pretty crappy experience for first love I certainly hope there's something better out there for me.