We know that Angel fed on humans after he got his soul back (the first time) because in the flashback to just before the turn of the century, Darla kind of tests him and makes a comment that he only feeds on the scourge of the human race – rapists, thieves, etc. She then tries to get him to kill a baby, but he saves him/her instead by leaping out the window.
You know, that’s darned clever. It never even occured to me that Angel might not have been completely honest about the curse to his friends. It makes sense, though, as it’s probably a painful subject for him. Although Cordelia did say something about “perfect bliss” on Monday night, but then she might have been using a different definition of “bliss.” 
As I think about it further, I’m not sure that even Angel himself necessarily understands all the ins and outs of the curse. After all, when Jenny was explaining the whole “moment of perfect happiness” thing, she was talking to Buffy and Giles. Angelus wasn’t there to hear it. Whatever information Angel got about why he lost his soul would have come to him second-hand after he got back from Hell. Probably from Buffy, who may not have understood it perfectly. She may well have focused on the sex when she was explaining it to him.
My problem is that I run into so many fans (although admittedly not so many here at SDMB) who do seem to believe in the sex equals evil idea. Maybe I’m overanalyzing the word “perfect,” but I really do think a moment of perfect happiness would be, if not unique, pretty damn rare. A quick roll in the hay, in and of itself, wouldn’t do it.
And you call yourself a Buffy geek. Tsk, tsk. It is common knowledge in the shows that “perfect happiness” is the key, not sex per se. Note the ep from Angel season 1 when that actress slipped Angel that bliss-inducing drug and he sorta morphed into Angelus. Neither Wesley nor Cordy were shocked that Angelus came on without Angel having sex - they knew happiness, not sex was the key. Instances abound where people express this knowledge, both in Buffy and Angel.
'Course, being shallow humans like the rest of us, they very often equate sex with true happiness - not that they are far off. 
Sua
Now, now, let’s not start slapping faces with gloves here. I swear on my Watcher’s Guide that I am a true Buffy-geek…
Cordelia and Wesley know that it’s perfect happiness that breaks the curse, true, but they also connect that blissfulness with getting horizontal (or the perfect happiness that certain intimacy with a true love can bring). They recognized that Angel could not be truly Angelus because he hadn’t had achieved true happiness and/or had sexual relations. Otherwise, there’s no explanation for why Cordelia keeps warning girls to keep hands off him – like Telekinetic-girl last season. Or why she referred to him as a “eunuch” in one of the recent episodes.
And don’t get me started on that particular episode because I consider it the “Zeppo” of the Angel Series (i.e. the only episode I didn’t like, and try to pretend never happened because I think it had some continuity issues).
You didn’t like “The Zeppo,” Peta? Why in Hod’s name not? I think it’s one of the best, strongest overall episodes of the early seasons.
I’m going to have to agree with Fiver on this one. “The Zeppo” is great. The Xander story is great and the background story is hilarious. The only problem with it is that it’s ignored by later writers. Suddenly, Xander is a geek again afterwards.
I should point out that I have a tendency to enjoy episodes moste people hate, and vice-versa. Remind me to tell you why I liked “Beer Bad” sometime.
I have a question about the mechanics of turning. It’s established that a vampire is a demon inside the body of a dead human, but there’ve been a couple of different (at least they seem different to me) explanations as to how the demon gets there. In the ep FX aired Thursday with Buffy’s tumor-ridden friend, Buffy says something about how he will die and a demon will take up residence, implying that the demon for each vampire is unique and separate from the sire. Another episode (I don’t remember which one, sorry), as well as the act of blood exchange, states/implies that the vampire infects or impregnates the victim, which would indicate that each new vampire is a piece of the previous one. Drucilla reinforces that idea with all her talk of the familial relationships between herself, Spike, Angel and Darla. So is there a definitive explanation?
Also, does anyone else notice how demons in the Angel cosmology seem a lot like the MYTH books, where “demon” is just short for “dimension traveller”? We’ve seen a number of rather benign demons, yes?
Okay, cool stuff:
rushtopher:
Cool point. I always forget about that episode, coincidence hmmmm 
It is an interesting question, I hope they address it before Angel goes the way of M.A.S.H. (Yes, it will be cancelled someday, not soon or anything…)
Sure Peta
Tell you what, I’ll get your gender right if you spell my screen name correctly Check your post, its rushtopher.
Anyway, you said:
The above might be true, but I think we have seen him more recently have those blood bags (then again there is the tupperware too). I don’t think the necessarily mean he was drinking human blood. But Angel was much more morally ambiguous at the time. He rarely helped Buffy more than the occasional warning, and didn’t really start fighting along side her regularly until the second season. So maybe he didn’t have a problem with stealing from blood banks then.
Volume 1 or Volume 2?
Deep down, Cordelia is still a little shallow. She’s not the bitch she used to be, but she has never experienced true love [SUB]no xander doesn’t count, nor that guy from the host’s world[/SUB] so she does tend to equate sex-bliss. The eunuch is a play on the phrase from the first season of Angel, the episode where Westley impersonates Angel and watches over the woman who eventually becomes his girlfriend for one night. After the bad guys are thwarted one of them says “And he’s a eunuch” referring to Angel. There’s some funny banter going all around and Angel says repeatedly, “I’m not a eunuch” and finally “the curse isn’t even that clear anyway.” Furthermore in the episode where the hollywood starlet slips Angel drugs to simulate bliss Westley mentions to Cordelia how it isn’t just sex, but sex with Buffy. However it just wouldn’t do for our hero to go out taking advantage of women to satisfy his sexual lust when he is madly in love with Buffy.
Yes Otto there is a definitive explanation, but I am getting tired.
Have to agree with Fiver and Trion on The Zeppo - I think it’s one of the best episodes ever. In fact, I think it’s almost s good as The Body. Not just for Xander’s story, which beautifully highlights his character, but also the way they flipped what would normally be the main plot with the comic-relief subplot. You’ve got the hellmouth opening, an apocalypse coming, and the rest of the group preparing to sacrifice themselves to save the world, all shown in a few brief scenes when Xander happens to stumble on to them. The scene where he interrupts Buffy and Angel saying their final farewells to each other is magic.
And the scene where Xander is seduced by Faith (and her subsequent booting of him out the door with a “Thanks, that was great!”) are pricless.
Who’s never felt like a Zeppo? And who’s never wanted to see a look like that on the face of their very own Cordelia?
And the best thing about “The Zeppo” is that at the end, Xander was so secure in himself that he didn’t even need to tell the other Scoobies what he’d done. It was enough for him to know.
Really, the only reasonable complaint I can imagine about the episode is the very idea that Cordy would know about the Marx Brothers and how unimportant Zeppo was. But of course that’s minor.
All the stuff I wanted to respond to has already been answered…
Something else I’ve noticed: I question if it was even the sex. You realize that he does not turn evil during sex, or even after. It’s when he wakes up from the lightning in the middle of the night, lying beside her. Maybe this was just convenience for the director, but…
As a matter of fact, at that point he had not yet started fighting vampires. His first real act against them was killing Darla.
And I thought Peta meant that the Angel episode was the outsider (Zeppo) of the series.
Which is another way of asking: Peta, what’s wrong with you?
WHY am I reading this damn thread? What the hell is wrong with me?
You mean to tell me that Angel and the Buffster finally get horizontal, and he immediately becomes an evil bastard?
WTF???
ARGH!!!
[sub]I don’t know why I’m surprised, that’s been the M.O. of half the men I’ve slept with…[/sub]
So, you rested up yet?
I think the writers are throwing a bone to us older viewers. Buffy makes a reference to another old movie, “The Lost Weekend”, in the episode The Dark Age. Given her usual distain for all things even vaguely historical the reference struck me as out of character.
My goodness! Sorry to have not checking in sooner…
Nothing wrong with me…Actually, I meant that the Zeppo is the only Buffy episode I didn’t like, and I certainly wouldn’t compare it to “The Body.” Ergo when I say I feel the same about the episode in which Angel is drugged and believes he is Angelus, I mean that I also didn’t like that episode (that’s the only *Angel * episode I didn’t like). I have my reasons…first…
A thousand pardons RusHtopher. I was not rebuking, merely pointing out gender so you could write “…she said.”
Ah, both! And I’ll throw in “Monsters” for good measure…
Yeah, and that lasted….hmmmmm….how many episodes?
“What? I can’t have layers?!” ~ Cordelia Chase
And I can disagree, and do. I think IMHO that it’s the worst written of the Buffy episodes. I’d have to go back and watch it again, which I shutter to do, but if I recall my primary reason is that they went out of their way for that episode alone to alienate Xander from the group just to try and show his value, but then they didn’t show his value. In episodes preceding and following it, Xander is back in as one of the gang—la-la-la-le-la.
Also, I thought that it was pretty cavalier the way they chose to have those high school bullies raise other bullies/boys from the dead (yeah, remember that?). IIRC, I also felt like a lot of the dialogue seemed off. Checking the credits, I believe it was a first episode for some staff writer, possibly the explanation for out-of-characterness.
As far as Faith “seducing” Xander, that’s about as far from seducation as you can play it. She jumped his bones, don’t romanticize it. It might’ve been necessary for future plotting, but I thought it was a waste of Xander’s virginity. I think it could’ve been written much more effectively, and I think they handled the whole Hellmouth opening aspect of the script poorly. Sorry…some of this has to be about personal opinions, after all. It is the only time the show left me feeling just: “Eh.”
I realize people were jonesing for an episode which featured Xander prominently. I like the character and think Nicholas does a fabu job. My problem is that when they do have an opportunity to let the character grow and show a change in his personality, the next episode, he’s back to being comic relief with lines of humor and fodder for the rest.
I mean, after they did the double-Xander’s, and he saw himself as confident, smart and witty, it should’ve been a wonderful device for allowing the character once – you know happened (don’t want to ruin it for Stoid) – and there was only one Xander again, why didn’t Xander learn and grow?! He has it in him to be all those things, but they keep pigeonholing him in the “butt-monkey” mode.
That’s why I get upset about the whole job issue, too. As others have said in the other thread, Xander is the only one without “superpowers” so he gets to be the “everyman” of the show. He represents us. They’ve shown he’s capable of more, let him do more. They’ve shown he’s integral to the success over badness, let him grow…
Stoid: Just plug your ears (or cover your eyes). If it helps, I believe they’re supposed to have a marathon on one of the coming up weekends where it’s all day Buffy.
Ah, not true, Darla chastises Angel in that episode (obviously before he stakes her) for fighting (killing?) vampires. For trying to be like “one of them.” She also speaks with the Master about bringing him back “into the fold.” I’ll check my script books when I get home to see if it says this definitively.
Chipping in on the Xander-bashing… I think Xander does have his place on the show, but it’s a really big pigeonhole, if such it really is. I can think of numerous examples of Xander, while being entirely in character, making a real difference.
I think he’s a goof, has a real awareness that he is a goof, seems at home with being a goof, and truly enjoys his goofiness. I’ve seen fewer examples of his goofiness interfering with anti-vampire ops of late, and I’ve seen him make a difference in the fight against vamps, much more so than you might think a mere mortal with no superpowers could.
His brief semi-posession by military-guy seems to have done nothing but reinforce his determination to be true to his own, goofy self.
Heck, even if you think he is a waste of script time, you have to admit, he redeemed himself with the one line: “The glorified bricklayer picks up a spare.”
Anyhow, on to my own pet Buffy peeve. I know guns are a no-no in the Buffiverse; heck if I accepted that in MacGyver, I’ve got to take it from Buffy. But if I were up against vampires and demons on a regular basis, I would find the hardest, deadliest martial art I could get my hands on, and drill constantly in my off-time. Why hasn’t Xander picked up on that, especially after being half-Military Guy for a season or so? Worried about being useful to the group? Sign up for your local martial arts school, and come out swinging. Heck, I’d even recommend kendo for swordfighting techniques; vamps die if beheaded, too.
To sum up: Why don’t the Scoobs take butt-kicking lessons?
Just clarifying…I don’t know if you meant me, but I’m not Xander-bashing. Well, not exactly. It just seems like he’s the one character the writers have grow (up) in an episode and then forget until they need it again. He did some really dramatic stuff with the whole Buffy-Riley-break-up thing, right or wrong, it showed depth. So how come he gets reduced to shallow (and I don’t mean humor – I think he can be humorous and even consciously-humorous without being shall or “a goof”) so frequently?
And see, that’s my problem with “The Zeppo” is they so over-emphasized goof and screw-up so they could set him off on his own, that I think they overplayed (wrote) it.
Wow Otto nobody answered your question, I’m shocked.
No pressure, but now I have to get it right.
Actually its not so complicated:
As I understand it, this is correct.
These are not necessarily contradictory. Think like a parent, Angel has a special relationship with those he sired. He can “feel” when Darla/Drucilla are around (there was a mention of another vamp, who was particularly nasty, on Angel. Think like a parent, after all one cell of your mom and one cell of your dad made you, but you aren’t just an extension of them, you are unique (at least I hope so :).
Oh and Peta:
Good answer!
But the two statements are contradictory. In one instance, the demon reproduces. In the other, a new demon moves into a dead body (which is apparently prepared for it by the removal and partial replacement of its blood). I didn’t “take up residence” in my mother when I was conceived. I didn’t exist as a separate entity and move into her body.
Moving to a completely different topic, that being Cordelia’s layers, someone added a new one tonight with the “Mr and Mrs Bickerson” reference. “The Bickersons” was a radio comedy from the 40s (starring Don Ameche, I think, and was the wife Alice Faye?). I’m amazed that Cordelia’s heard of it.