holtz

POSTED BY: est120
UPDATED: Saturday, July 9, 2005 13:16
VIEWED: 8905
PAGE 2 of 3

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE

RABIT

Friday, December 10, 2004 4:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by RhymePhile:
Holtz, if you remember, let Connor live after he saw Darla dust herself to give birth to him. He could have killed them all in that alley, but let them walk away. Holtz wanted Angel dead, but instead decided that his revenge would be to claim Connor for the child he lost to Angelus. Warped thinking, true, but Holtz has had years and years to think and brood about the loss of his loved ones to Angelus and Darla.

But I suppose in my mind -- and this is why I empathize with Holtz -- forgiving Angel (even though he has a soul) is similar to forgiving a murderer who has found religion in prison and is a "changed man," much like the Angel/Angelus character duality. Having a soul and trying to make up for all the pain and misery Angelus caused doesn't do anything for the people already dead, and I think Holtz sees this.

Yep - watched that ep just before posting my earlier comments, comically enough!

I took his allowing Conner and Angel (and Fred) to live not as an act of mercy or anything of the sort. He decided that killing them there was going to be too easy, that he could do much greater harm to Angel by allowing him to go. He wasn't being merciful - in fact, he immediately answered Sahjhan's accusatinos by saying that he would show no mercy.

The man's letting hate rule him. I honestly feel a lot of sympathy for him and what was done to him. But he chose to go down this road, good judgement or not. There were decisions, and he made them. No offense to anyone who feels Holtz is a good man or anything, but I honestly feel that he became what he had previously hated: a monster.

Rabit

GROUNDED

Friday, December 10, 2004 5:28 PM

He wasn't being merciful - in fact, he immediately answered Sahjhan's accusatinos by saying that he would show no mercy.

This is why I hate that 'And I won't' line at the end of Lullaby - I don't think it's in character for Holtz at that point, having just witnessed the birth.

MAUGWAI

Friday, December 10, 2004 5:45 PM

Holtz is completely justified in hating Angelus. Even some of the things he does to him are completely justified. But Holtz stepped over the line when he hurt Connor. He used him to get his revenge, putting Connor in a position to take the punishment for what his father did. His last act in this world was to cause Connor pain and turn him onto his own quest for vengeance. That's what makes him evil in my mind.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

RABIT

Friday, December 10, 2004 6:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by maugwai:
Even some of the things he does to him are completely justified.

Do you think that torture in the name of revenge is justified? Personally, I could never justify what he was doing to Angelus back in the 1800's, that time that he caught him. He even said that he was going to make it take days... *shudder*

Sorry, but I just can't justify torture as a means of revenge. I don't care what someone has done - it won't change what they've done and it won't make anyone feel better.

But, again, just my opinion. I understand that other people feel differently.

Rabit

GROUNDED

Friday, December 10, 2004 7:04 PM

Torture could have been significant within a religious context - doesn't he bring some Inquisitor like guy in to 'purge' the demon?

IDEFIX

Monday, December 13, 2004 2:36 PM

Holzt is worse than Angelus.

he is human, he has a soul and he choses to ignore it and hunt and torture and kill and even turn an innocent child against his father in the name of revenge. revenge is not justice. it's never justified. killing to prevent future criemes might be justifable in certain situations if there is absolutely no other way but killing or torturing after a crime is just as bad as any other killing. it's a choice to do evil.

we all get wronged sometime in life the good guys learn to live with it, maybe try to prevent it from happening to others. the evil ones get consumed by revenge and go over to the other side being no better as the ones that wronged them in the first place. "tooth for tooth" that's not justice that's primitive hate.

just my 2 euro-cent
Idefix

GROUNDED

Monday, December 13, 2004 2:43 PM

I don't agree. Holtz is not a sane man. Why? Because he's been driven to do terrible things by the actions of Angelus and Darla. He's not evil, he's just very, very messed up.

RABIT

Monday, December 13, 2004 3:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Grounded:
Torture could have been significant within a religious context - doesn't he bring some Inquisitor like guy in to 'purge' the demon?

Yeah, but I wouldn't agree that this is what he was doing. In Joss's Buffyverse, it's understood by those who know that you can't get rid of a vampire's demon like that. I didn't get the impression from that scene that they were doing it to purge the demon so much as torture it, but that was just my impression - I could very well be wrong!

Quote:
Originally posted by Grounded:
I don't agree. Holtz is not a sane man. Why? Because he's been driven to do terrible things by the actions of Angelus and Darla. He's not evil, he's just very, very messed up.

I would say that he is both. River is messed up, but she doesn't go around torturing anyone - anyone we can't spare.

I'll agree that Holtz isn't quite right, but I would not say that he does not have his mental facilities about him when he's making these choices. Peronsally, I think that he's thoroughly cognizant of what he's doing and why he's doing it. He just doesn't care. That's not the same as someone who can't distinguish fantasy from reality (such as River) or someone who doesn't have the social norms to fall back on. He used to know and agree with those norms, but when he lost his family he chose to cast those aside - in my opinion.

In the episodes that showed his back story, I saw him grieve and I saw his resolution gel into hatred, but I didn't really see him lose his sanity or in some other way snap. I could be missing it, but I just don't see it.

But the beauty of this is that we can all have our own interpretations and it still works.

Rabit

IDEFIX

Monday, December 13, 2004 3:20 PM

ok, that's a very real possibility here.

I just don't tend to excuse evil deeds by citing harsh lifeconditions. I think we're human because we have the choice to act like we want to and we're responsible for what we do always and under any circumstances.

just as a (probably very bad) example:
I've been driven to fleeting thoughts of murdering my own father because he's a drinking, fight-loving bastard that terrorized my mum and myself for years. but I don't think that gives me an excuse to actually do anything to him, apart from going away and never looking back and getting my mum to do the same. we're much happier now and I really don't care how he feels.

it sure is a comparison lacking in severity, I've not been physically harmed, no one has been killed. but getting yelled at for nothing at all at your own home for years on end get's even a gentle nice person mad someday. I can understand how having your family killed get's a man mad but giving into that isn't gonna help. If there was no Slayer (vampire-police) around he might have been justified to kill Angelus and Darla to prevent them from killing anyone else's family but that wasn't his objective. Holzt might have had a life and maybe even some happiness had he gotten over himself and actually led his life instead of giving into revenge and going mad over what happened to him.

I think it's either the choice of a very weak man or the choice of an evil man. and he never seemed weak to me. but he's responsible for this choice either way. you can't just go around torturing whomever for the 'good' cause. there's no such thing as "justified revenge" or "good torture" in my book.

but then again maybe I just didn't like him very much ;o)

and as we germany say: "nothing get's eaten as hot as it is cooked." we're just arguing for the sake of it anyways. Holtz was a good villain for the show. that much we can surely agree upon.

Idefix

MAUGWAI

Monday, December 13, 2004 4:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Idefix:
I think it's either the choice of a very weak man or the choice of an evil man. and he never seemed weak to me. but he's responsible for this choice either way. you can't just go around torturing whomever for the 'good' cause. there's no such thing as "justified revenge" or "good torture" in my book.

Normally I'd agree, but Angelus is a demon. Holtz does not see him as a man. The things the demon did were pure, unadulturated evil. The same way the gypsies punished Angelus in their way, Holtz wishes to punish him as well. And I'm fairly certain that if any one of us had to kill our own child after finding the rest of our family dead, we'd feel pretty justified.

It's true that torture wouldn't accomplish anything positive other than to give Holtz some satisfaction, but would any of us want to do any less?

Angelus deserves no sympathy. Angel, on the other hand, does. Hotlz' problem is that he makes no distinction between the two.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE