Bergamot

Even if Cas had properly apologized, which I could see myself agreeing with, that doesn't excuse him acting like Dean owed him forgiveness and basically being a catty little bitch until he finally did. Not to mention how he wouldn't STFU about Jack, the soulless psychopath who murdered Mary (whom he sided with). Cas' attitude has basically been "Will you just get over it, already?" ie. he doesn't actually care about Dean's grievance. If one felt genuine remorse for their actions, they wouldn't be such a snippy asshole to the person they wronged. How can you get angry at someone for not forgiving you quickly enough and not see the ass-backwardness of that? Dean had no obligation to stop being angry, and Cas should have been grown-up enough to let him be (or leave without blaming Dean for "letting him go.") Yes, exactly. The problem was never about whether or not Castiel apologized. Here is that conversation between Dean and Castiel in this episode, where Castiel is talking about guilt: Castiel: It was my fault the Leviathan got out. It was my fault we were here the first time.I carry that guilt every day. Dean: I know you're sorry, Cas. About Bel, about Mom. Castiel: I was talking about Jack. I already apologized to you. You just refused to hear it. Dean: Sorry I brought it up. Maybe if you didn't just up and leave us... Castiel: You didn't give me a choice. You couldn't forgive me. And you couldn't move on. You were too angry. I left, but you didn't stop me. Okay, first of all -- "I was talking about Jack"? No you weren't. You were talking about the Leviathan and how they ended up in Purgatory the first time. Second, "I already apologized to you"? I hated his nasty, snippy tone here. What do you want, Castiel, a gold medal for apologizing? And Dean did hear you -- he just said he knew you were sorry. Third, "You wouldn't move on"? You don't get to decide when that must happen, Castiel. You don't get to tell someone that you have injured, "Okay, time's up, you have to be over it now." I hated Dean putting himself down because he gets angry when bad things happen. You are allowed to feel what you feel, Dean. You are not always required to repress your emotions because someone who hurt you has decided that you need to "move on". Castiel is, and has been for a while now, a grade-A, pompous, self-righteous asshole. And if the people who make the show think he was in the right here, then I really have to wonder what kind of people they are themselves.

Yes! Loved that! I also liked Dean at the end, answering Sam's "What now?" by saying, "We'll find another way." Because Sam was right when he told Chuck that Dean would not give up.

Ha! Yes, I agree, I would co-sign that as well. I'm not sure I can help you with this, because your way of looking at the show and the characters, to be honest, does not make any more sense to me than this does to you. As I've said before, two of my favorite storylines for Dean are when he sold his soul for Sam, and when he took on the Mark of Cain. Both of which started with Dean making a terrible choice, and neither of which ended with a triumphant "win" for him. But I loved these stories. I understood why Dean made the choices he did, even if he was wrong, and I loved him for the way he dealt with and lived through the consequences. Part of it, I think, is what I was saying before about needing Dean to be an equal protagonist in the story. Being at the center of the story, making decisions that propel the action forward, facing the consequences of those decisions and the obstacles that arise as a result. To be the protagonist (and let me be perfectly clear, I am not saying he needs to be the SOLE protagonist, but at least an equal one) is not the only thing I find necessary for a good Dean story, but it is the bare minimum that is needed. Otherwise what's the point? I see no reason whatsoever that the writers on the show should not have been able to always give us this. If you want an example where the writers did however fail to give us this, here's one: "Swan Song". Here's another one: the Trials. In neither of these stories did Dean make any egregiously wrong choices. He was brave and loyal and a good brother. If all that mattered to me about a story is that Dean must never screw up, I ought to have loved those stories. But you know what? I hated them, HATED them, because Dean was not an equal protagonist. Because the writers had taken Dean out of the story. And THAT is what was the real, crucial problem with the resolution of Michael story. Not that maybe Dean made mistakes. Not the awkward and grudging way the story was handled all along by the writers -- although good writing is important. Not the way the story ended without Dean being triumphant and winning handily over Michael -- a good ending is also important, but we all know that sometimes the Winchesters achieve at best a Pyrrhic victory. But because once again, the writers took Dean out of the story. And it has happened too many times on this show.

Regarding Dabb's latest interviews on Episode 9:

Yes, that's what I'm expecting too. As you say, I can't wait. 🙄 And since this is Berens, I am expecting Dean to be either ineffectual, or a bully. Or hey, why not both?! On second thought, I might better take the rest of my reply to B Vs J, even though it is about spoilers.

I agree, ahrtee! Excellent post. I liked Benny as a character, and I also found his relationship with Dean interesting. I liked seeing their interactions. You make a couple good points as to Sam's feelings about Benny. To me, the problem was not the way that Sam felt about Benny -- the problem was that the show refused to go anywhere with it. I thought it could have been a story that delved into aspects of the relationship of Sam and Dean, but in the end it was a story that did not matter, because the writers did not want to go there. Sam's actions in "Citizen Fang" were dropped like they never happened. Nothing to see here, move along. Once Benny was out of the picture, we were back to the status quo, and I guess we were supposed to believe that this was all that mattered. I could be wrong -- it has been many years since I watched these episodes -- but I had kind of different view of why Dean told Benny to stop calling. I thought it had something to do with Dean's conversation with Kevin, when Kevin tells him that he sent his mother away so that he could concentrate fully on his task of translating the tablet. He says that he can't enjoy the world while he is trying to save it, and Dean seemed very struck by this. This is also the point where Dean talks to Sam about having both feet in or both feet out, in regard to hunting, and where Sam finally decides to leave Amelia. Sam's ultimatum to Dean about Benny doesn't even matter in the end, because he comes back without ever hearing what Dean has decided to do. (As an aside, this does not change the way I feel about Sam issuing the ultimatum.) And I think Dean decides to break with Benny not because of Sam's threat, but for the same reason that Kevin sent away his mother: he can't afford to be distracted from what he needs to do. That's why the final scene of Dean and Sam together seems so grim and subdued; it's not a joyous reaffirmation of the brotherly bond -- it's that they both have decided to fully commit to what they need to do. It's like Dean realizing the answer to his own question when he is talking to John's grave in "What Is and What Should Never Be", when he asks his father "Why?" This is the way I remember it, anyway. Like I said, it's been a while since I watched that season, and I think the episode where this happened might have been kind of vague about it.

Well, I don't know that killing Death belongs on that list. That is something that came out of nowhere and went absolutely nowhere, except to bring about the replacement of the original Death with Billie. So there was no point to it, except I guess as a showcase sacrifice on the altar of the brotherly relationship, and there were no consequences. As a result I don't see it as a wrong act but instead just as a kind of bizarre plot point. But other than that, yes, absolutely, those were wrong choices, committed by Dean. With terrible consequences, both personal and cosmic. I have no problem with saying that -- never have. And it has never been a roadblock to me enjoying the show or loving Dean as a character. But to say that Dean making the deal for Sam, or lying to Sam about Gadreel, was not "acknowledged as wrong" on the show? Sorry, but that is just not true. I can't be bothered, and don't have the time right now, to go through all the transcripts and find quotes, but it's not. Dean was acknowledged as wrong by Dean himself and by other characters. The fact of his wrongness was brought up and discussed at length by both the show's writers and the fans. The consequences that arose as a result of his wrong choices were clearly shown in the story. And there was no switcheroo that caused it all in the end to have never been his fault. So why, as someone who loves Dean, do I love storylines like Dean selling his soul or taking on the Mark of Cain? Why don't I resent a story that shows Dean making a bad choice, or try to rationalize that it wasn't really wrong? Part of it, I guess, is that Dean is such a wonderfully real, complex, three-dimensional character, with both admirable qualities and flaws. And the choices he made were motivated and rooted in what we had come to know about Dean and what we had seen happen to him, so that I understood why he made those choices even though I knew they were wrong. And we saw the consequences, and they mattered, and the character could never again not be the person who had made those choices. Of course I am protective of Dean, and will defend him if I feel he is being treated unfairly. My post before this was a specific reaction to the false equivalence being drawn between Sam's actions and Dean's actions in "Citizen Fang", and also the way that the show made a point of singling out Dean as being "wrong" there while completely ignoring what Sam had done. I did not say that Dean has never done anything wrong, or conversely, that Sam is never shown doing anything wrong -- that's a straw man argument. And I reject as untrue the idea that the show does not acknowledge it when Dean makes a wrong choice. Fortunately, in the past the show has usually handled those stories in a way that for me does not change my love for Dean or regret following his story.

gonzosgirrl wrote in the "Citizen Fang" thread: Unfortunately, g-girrl, it seems to me that even though Dean is sometimes (not always) right about things, the show contrives to find a way to put him in the wrong. Sam was wrong about Benny. He was wrong to conduct this vendetta against him. He was wrong to entrust Martin, a man he knew was unstable, with the job he gave him. It led to Martin being killed, Elizabeth being endangered and traumatized, and Benny's chance of making a new life for himself being brought to an end. Yet everything that Sam did that was wrong and harmful to others, as a result of his blind hatred of Benny, is never mentioned again by the show. Not once. Meanwhile they make a point of having Charlie berate Dean for what he did in this episode and inaccurately accuse him of destroying Sam's chance at a normal life. So somehow everything is all Dean's fault. Talk about predictable outcomes.

Adam asked Michael about going back to heaven, but Michael did not ask Adam if he wanted his body back. Considering how much power Michael has in their relationship, and how little Adam has, I would need to have the question actually asked and answered in order to feel differently. But you're right, neither of them seemed interested in discussing it. Now, if it were Dean..... Sorry, I had to pause there for a moment of bitterness. But if it were Dean, I can see him finding a way to make the relationship work with a non-evil version of Michael, if he had no choice, or if it was for the greater good, like they had to stay together to save everybody. But otherwise, I think he would want to be free.

Fair enough! And obviously that's what the writers were going for there -- something unexpected and different, and I guess kind of charming. But the more I think about it, the less it works for me. I don't know if this is because there was not enough time in the episode for them to expand upon their idea, or if (more likely) they didn't bother to think about the implications. For me it's too facile to just assume that being stuck in the Cage together long enough would eventually lead to Michael and Adam bonding, considering that Adam's relationship with Michael began with acts of duplicity and coercion. I mean, anything is possible, but I find it hard to believe and would need more than we got to convince me that it was inevitable. Or even possible, that two sentient beings trapped together in a little box in Hell would only need enough time to pass in order to come to a state of peaceful coexistence. In that situation I think it much more likely that years of utter boredom, accumulated resentments and petty annoyances would eventually cause a deterioration to a state of stark raving insanity. Call me a cynic, but like I said, I find it hard to believe. But setting that part aside, at least in the Cage, there were no other options. Now that they are out, their continued relationship seems really problematic to me. For example, you have Adam musing about how he can't go back to college, considering that he has an archangel inside him, and Michael scoffing at Adam's thought that he might want to get a job.Sure, it's sweet of Michael to let Adam sit and enjoy his burger and fries with only a little mild nagging, but I mean, come on, let's not forget that he is USING ADAM'S BODY for himself. Adam has no bodily autonomy. Dean had to ask Michael's permission to say goodbye to Adam. In their current situation, Adam and Michael can't just agree to disagree. What if Adam does want to go back to school, or find a job, or enjoy a normal life after being all that time in Hell, and Michael doesn't want to? What if Michael decides to go to war against God, and Adam doesn't want to be a part of it? What if Adam wants his BODY back? Even if Adam is fine with Michael calling the shots, or so attached emotionally to Michael that he is happy to do whatever Michael decides to do, that doesn't make me feel comfortable about the situation. There are just too many unanswered questions, too much potential darkness lurking underneath, for me to automatically buy their easy-going buddy relationship.

I know! It would have been so, so amazing! But like I said, the writers seemed to begrudge every bit of attention that was paid to the fact that Dean was Michael's perfect vessel. They worked very hard to keep that story off the screen, didn't they? One thing I will say for AU Michael, at least he figured out for himself that his father had screwed him. I know that the original Michael was stuck in the Cage for forever, but it was kind of pathetic how he wouldn't believe the truth until it was almost literally pounded into his head. Even Adam seemed to feel sorry for him that he was still worrying about being a good son.

It wasn't really a surprise to see Rowena, since people had already guessed that she would end up as the Queen of Hell. It actually seems inevitable now that she would replace Crowley -- both in her position as the ruler down there, and in her relationship to the Winchesters, as a powerful, ambiguously evil being that can be counted on for supernatural assistance, just so long as they remember not to trust her too much. At least Sam doesn't have to feel bad any more about killing her, since she seems to feel as if he has done her a huge favor and given her what she always wanted. Although it does sort of make his angst and depression over her death seem a bit pointless. But this kind of sums up the whole episode for me. The return of characters that have a history with the Winchesters, whose appearance on the screen should carry with it a deep emotional resonance, but which instead seems to fall flat. Rowena's death was supposed to be a heartbreaking act of sacrifice, but now she's back, and is apparently totally cool with how things ended up. Her return is treated in a somewhat comical manner (surrounding herself with handsome, hunky demons, asking Sam to refill her glass, talking about a lack of Amazon deliveries.) It makes her sacrificial moment seem like not such a big deal after all. Then there's Adam. Back when the character was introduced, the discovery that they had a half-brother was a real emotional bombshell to the Winchesters. Especially Dean -- I remember how shocked and hurt he was. And considering the importance of family on the show, and the fact that Adam felt his brothers abandoned him to Hell, I expected his reunion with them to be intense and painful. Instead, he was just like, "Hi, Sam. Hey there, Dean. I'm back!" and that was it. I appreciate how mellow Adam was about things, but I felt like the character's connection to the show's history didn't seem to matter much. As for Michael, I guess it should be surprising that he seemed to have no memory at all of Dean being his Sword, but considering how begrudgingly the writers have always handled that storyline -- like they resented having to acknowledge its existence -- it really isn't unexpected. But also, everyone was talking about how Michael had gone insane in the Cage, and that was not important in the episode either, being dismissed with a single line about how it was just a lie. It was hard to believe that Michael and Sam had a history together either. That part of the story, about their time in the Cage, appeared unimportant as well, along with any feelings Michael might have had about his little brother Lucifer. Both Adam and Michael were in such good shape, so sane and reasonable, that it was hard to imagine their time in the Cage as being all that bad. It seemed that it mostly served as a time-out which gave them a period of bonding. Even Michael's reaction to realizing that God had betrayed him seemed pretty mild. Not much wrath there, mostly hurt feelings. Here was Michael, Heaven's greatest and fiercest warrior, reacting to the devastating truth by handing over a spell (the main ingredient being a blossom) and then just sadly leaving. It seemed so perfunctory. I couldn't help compare it with AU Michael talking about Chuck, how the depth of his anger and bitterness was revealed as he said to Castiel, "Because he doesn't CARE!", and how he was going to hunt God down and kill him. The episode was a showcase for Jake Abel, and he did fine. But the mid-season finale of the last season of the show -- featuring the return, among others, of Adam and Michael -- should have been a real blockbuster, should have gripped you emotionally. I didn't hate the episode, but I didn't feel emotionally involved the way I should, either. There were a couple moments that I liked and that worked for me, moments where I felt a connection to the show. When Michael, after learning the truth, quietly and forlornly says to himself, "I'm not even the only Michael." And when Dean talks to Adam before he leaves, and apologizes and tells him that Adam didn't deserve what happened to him. And Adam smiles sadly and responds, "Since when do we get what we deserve?" -- and I thought to myself, "Yes, he's a Winchester, all right." But otherwise, the episode mostly seemed like an exercise in checking off a few boxes before the end of the show.

I don't think I would say so much that I am "worried". (Bitter, yes. But I am hardly the only one who is unhappy with choices that the show has made. Like people who felt that we did not get enough about Sam's time in Hell.) I thought that the story of Dean in Hell was very powerful and well-acted. The scenes where Dean tried to deal with it afterward were very moving and some of my favorites of the series. But what happened to him should have continued to matter. There were so many interesting ways that this story could have been revisited in the years since then. I would have loved to have seen an episode, or even a storyline, where Alistair came back and Dean had to deal with him. Sure, Alistair was dead and gone, but so was everybody else who kept coming back. Not only was the story of Dean in Hell not revisited, it was apparently mysteriously forgotten. There was one stretch of years, from the beginning of Season 7 to partway through Season 13, where the mere fact that Dean had been in Hell was not even mentioned. This did not happen with Sam. I have not gotten a good answer to the question as to why this happened. And sorry, but I am not buying the idea that the writers just thought it was too awful. Sam's experience was supposedly even worse, and that wasn't a problem for them, and didn't keep them from bringing it up. I buy even less the idea that they thought it made Dean look bad because he broke under torture. First, because it doesn't -- no one should be judged for what they did under torture. And second, because if the writers were so concerned about making Dean look bad, they would never have brought up, several times, the fact that he became a torturer down there. My feeling is that there was not a problem with the Dean in Hell story. So I still don't know the answer to my question. Perhaps someone, maybe the writers, was concerned that the subsequent story of Sam in Hell not suffer from any comparison. They have certainly focused enough attention and effort on it over the years, and worked to ensure that it not be forgotten. If someone feels that his story fell short in spite of all this, I guess you have to decide for yourself what was lacking.

Sure I can! Sorry that you missed it. But this answer here sums things up pretty well: If you need a few specific episodes, here are a couple: "Caged Heat" in Season 6, where we had this exchange: CASTIEL: Sam’s soul has been locked in the cage with Michael and Lucifer for more than a year. And they have nothing to do but take their frustrations out on him. You understand? If we try to force that mutilated thing down Sam’s gullet, we have no idea what will happen. It could be catastrophic. DEAN: You mean he dies. CASTIEL: I mean, he doesn’t. Paralysis. Insanity. Psychic pain so profound that he’s locked inside himself for the rest of his life. "The Man Who Knew Too Much" in Season 6, where we actually get to see the personification of Tortured-in-Hell Sam. "Meet the New Boss" in Season 7, where Sam hallucinates Hell more than once, with visions of chains hanging above him and meathooks dripping with bits of flesh. There are more examples, but those are just the first few that came to my mind. (We never got a literal and detailed flashback to Sam's torture, but you know what? We didn't see any of that for Dean either.) Sam's time in Hell has been referenced many, many times. The show is still talking about it now -- for example, two episodes ago, with Elaine. If the Sam in Hell story did not work for someone, I'm afraid that the problem certainly cannot be due to the writers not devoting enough time and attention and effort to it, because they really have. In contrast, after Sam went to Hell, Dean's time in Hell -- a crucial and essential part of his story, something that shaped him and still affects him to this day -- was never brought up except to minimize it in comparison. And since then, the show has tried very hard to erase even the memory of it. (Except of course to mention, completely without the context of the whole story, that Dean tortured souls while he was there.) And yet -- to me it is still the most powerful of all the "I've been to Hell" stories that we have seen on Supernatural. Dean's trip to Hell was the first and the best written and the most compelling. Dean wasn't simply tortured for entertainment, but because Hell, chillingly, needed something from him, and was going to find a way to get it. He was "carved into a new creature" in a horrifying way by his twisted Hell-version of a father, Alistair, and the repercussions were enormous, both for the character and for the plot. What happened to Dean in Hell and how he dealt with it afterwards are a story I will never forget, no matter how much the show might want me to. I think it is disingenuous at best to imply that the problem is resentment of the other brother having a storyline. That's not a problem I have -- it's a problem the show and its writers have, for some reason. Minimizing and then trying to erase Dean's story this way did not make Sam's version better or more interesting, and it never will. I simply do not understand why the show keeps doing this kind of thing over and over again.

Back then, it seemed to me at first that claiming a few drops of blood dripped on this tongue would turn Sam into a demon, was like saying that dripping a few drops of ketchup on his tongue would turn him into a tomato. But I came to think the idea is that even though we see manifestations of these things in the normal physical world, they actually exist only in the supernatural realm. So when someone turns regular water into holy water, it doesn't actually change the physical composition of the water. It burns a demon because of its effects in the supernatural realm. And when Meg used a "blood phone" to talk to her father, the blood was not physically altered into something that could transmit a conversation like radio waves. The sacrifice triggered a spell that allowed communication in the supernatural world. I could be wrong but that's the way I have always thought about it.

I think maybe Castiel sent another voicemail or a text. And who knows, maybe Dean did call and Castiel wasn't that eager to talk to Dean about what happened and how Sam got hurt, so he didn't pick up. After all, it's not unknown for Castiel to not immediately answer phone calls. It was pretty vague, the way it was written. I guess if someone wants to believe that Dean didn't bother to call, they are welcome to. Personally I think that anyone who thinks Dean could not be bothered to worry about Sam really doesn't know him at all. But I think the focus of that scene when Dean arrives home was supposed to be on the tension and awkwardness between Dean and Castiel, as they see each other for the first time since Castiel left. Maybe that's why the writer chose not to show any previous phone conversations. It doesn't bother me too much that we didn't get to see Dean making anxious phone calls on his way home, because I know Dean and I know he would have cared if Sam was hurt. It also doesn't bother me that we had a separate story that focused on Dean instead of having him hovering anxiously at Sam's bedside for this episode. Not to worry, I am 100 percent sure that we will have plenty of scenes of Dean worrying about Sam before the end of the season.

That's what I thought. Dean says, " Hey. I got your message. Sam is he, uh..?" and Castiel responds, "He's fine." Dean doesn't sound, in his tone or his words, if he is asking if Sam is still dying, so I assumed that the message he mentioned was an update that Sam was doing better. (I don't know why Castiel would not have sent an update, anyway, instead of making Dean wait until he got all the way home.) I don't know exactly what Castiel told Dean about what happened, but if Dean didn't already know something, if all he had was one terse voicemail that Sam was hurt, he wouldn't have just responded, "That's good", with no further questions. His first, natural question would have been "What happened?", followed by questions as to what were Sam's injuries. As it is, he is still anxious, but is easily reassured.

For me, this episode tied back to the end of "Proverbs 17:3", when Dean expressed despair at the thought of trying to defeat God.This was an important moment, first of all, because it emphasized the impossibility of what they were facing: the ultimate challenge -- to defeat God -- for the ultimate season of the show. "It’s God, Sam. And he’s coming for us. How the hell are we supposed to fight God?" (Personally I think that Amara was actually a bigger challenge, but I don't think that's the story that the writers want to tell.) The writers used Dean in that scene, and the intensity of Jensen's acting, to convey how high the stakes are. But it was also an important moment for Dean as a character. There was an interview with Jensen about the episode he directed, and as he was talking about the season so far, he said, "Sam is struggling to find a purpose and Dean is struggling to help Sam find purpose." And I thought to myself, but who is going to help Dean find purpose? Dean feels despair at the end of "Proverbs 17:3" because he doesn't know whether anything in his life has been real; he doesn't know what was God and what wasn't. For all he knows, he could have ALWAYS been just a hamster running around and around in a wheel, all the while under the delusion that he was actually getting somewhere and accomplishing something. It's an awful thought, and it has been obvious to me that Dean has not just been just goofing off, he has been thinking deeply about the implications of what they have learned and trying to deal with it, trying to "find purpose" for his life. That's why Dean's encounter with his old friend Lee is so significant. Spending time with Lee takes Dean back to an earlier period in his life, when his father was alive and he knew what to do and the world made sense. But that was a long time ago, and it doesn't make sense to him anymore. Lee sees this dark place that Dean is in, and offers him a Faustian bargain. If no one cares, if it doesn't matter to the world whether you are good or bad, if no one is innocent and even God isn't God, then why bother trying to do the right thing? "If evil like that exists in the world, then guys like you and me, we ain't ever gonna win. The best we can do is just have a little fun.... Aren't we owed a little happiness?" That's the bargain Lee offers Dean: he can have "everything he's dreamed of", and all he has to do is to stop caring. But even though Dean has no hope that they can defeat Chuck, and no reason to think his choices will make any difference, he still rejects the bargain. He chooses to continue to care, to be someone who fights for the little guy and kills the monsters. He finds his purpose. I'm just glad that we had this episode to see Dean dealing with what he is going through, instead of having it happen off screen, or worse yet, just be waved aside. I think it is missing the point, to say the least, to see Dean's story in the episode as useless fan service because Dean sings in one scene. As for the idea that Dean needs to start "doing something", I am all for it. For one thing, I think it would be awesome if Dean was also given a connection to someone powerful and/or significant to the story. After all, it's the final season; shouldn't he be equally as important in what happens? The writers don't even need to look very far, because Dean has a unique bond with Amara, the one individual in all the universe who can handle Chuck. I would love to see Dean facing the challenge of fighting God, figuring things out, making plans, carrying out plans, dealing with obstacles. What I don't need is for him to join Elaine at Sam's bedside and spend his time doing nothing but worrying about Sam and being supportive of Sam (and I have a feeling that's what we would have seen if he hadn't had his own story in the episode.) Maybe Elaine can fill that role so that Dean can instead "do something."

From this interview with Andrew Dabb: This is the only mention I could find about it. Now that we know that the key to Death's library is somewhere in the bunker, I was thinking that maybe this episode has something to do with that?

The part about Sam's soul being stretched like a rubber band was because of what Castiel did, according to what Sergei said. Sergei made it worse, in order to blackmail them, and then in the end he fixed it. If it were still being stretched out, Sam would still be dying and in a coma, but he is back, at least for now. Again according to Sergei, the connection is the "wound" itself, which reaches down into Sam's soul at one end and is connected at the other end to Chuck. I don't know if they had specifically mentioned the connection to Sam's soul before, but I had just assumed that if there was a connection, which we already knew, it had to be to the soul. I mean, where else would the connection be? To Sam's spleen? So I tend to agree with those who say that there were no great revelations in this one, except that they learned what we already knew about Chuck being weakened by the wound. I think you are right, gonzosgirrl, about the most important part of the episode being the mention of the key to Death's library. I have a feeling Death's books are going to be crucial in some way. Because after all, they are the All-Powerful Books of Prophecy and Destiny. Unless, of course, they are about Dean. Then they really don't matter. I don't know, but does anyone want to bet there will be one for Jack?

I don't know if there is an explanation, or if they just thought it would look cool. At least it gave Eileen one good moment in the episode. I wanted to like having Eileen back, in spite of the fact that I disliked the easy, simplistic, pain-free, no strings attached manner in which she was saved from Hell. But I did not like the way she was written in this episode. She was too cutesy and too much of a "I can be supportive and worry a lot but I am useless in a crisis" female. With the exception of that one moment, all she did was stand around and say things like "Isn't this too dangerous" and "Help him, please" and "Can you save him?" She's a hunter, isn't she? Instead of waiting anxiously by Sam's bedside to tenderly wipe his fevered brow, she should have been researching, looking frantically for a way to help him. Or at the very least badgering Castiel with some hard questions about what he was going to do about the situation. As for that scene where she comes on to Sam, and he (gasp!) gingerly puts his hand on hers, I was kind of cringing for her. She has made it plain that she is interested in Sam. But when the viewers are equally divided on whether or not Sam was about to kiss her, or about to tell her "It's not you, it's me" -- then I don't think the scene worked. If Sam is interested in a relationship with Eileen, we should definitely be able to tell. Personally I saw no chemistry there; I mean, they don't necessarily need to be pushing each other up against the wall, but Sam was acting like he was Sir Galahad and too pure to touch her. But if Sam is not interested, he needs to let Eileen KNOW, as soon as possible. (Maybe, for instance, he could have brought it up at some point during the night they spent drinking margaritas together!) Because otherwise it is not fair to her.

Yes, this was very satisfying in a number of ways. I especially liked that Dean's awakening, as you put it, emerged not in relation to some spectacular world-saving feat, but from him applying himself to helping what he refers to as "the little guy". Because "saving people, hunting things" has always been Dean's touchstone. I understood completely why Dean was struggling so much with what had happened with Chuck, so I was glad that we got to see him finding his balance again. And it was very enjoyable watching him interact with his old buddy, even though it did end tragically. And I have decided that I support Jensen in this, 100 percent. Maybe if the show had indicated that there was anything else planned for Dean, something like Sam's special connection to God or his inheritance of Rowena's witch powers, I would not want to waste any time getting back to the importance of the main storyline. But so far this season there has been nothing. So why not have fun? Agreed. If ultimately, all they have planned for Dean's role in the final season of the show is for him to be supportive of his brother while he does important things, I really think I would rather watch Dean sing. It was fun!

Oh is that who the blonde woman was supposed to be, Sergei's niece? I was thinking that we were supposed to know who she was and I was drawing a blank, so that was confusing me. Sergei did mention that he was spending the day with his niece though, didn't he? I still don't get it though. Was she supposed to be Sergei's accomplice, or just an innocent bystander in the situation? If she wasn't involved, why am I supposed to think Castiel was so awesome for planning ahead to have Bobby in place to -- well, to do what exactly? Put a bullet in this woman's brain if Sergei didn't cooperate? Yeah, I know, Castiel was trying to save Sam's life (after having put him in that situation in the first place.) And it didn't bother me when Eileen threatened to kill Sergei if he didn't help them. But Sergei's reaction to the threat against Anna, the way he complimented Castiel on being so "Russian", makes me think that she really was just an innocent pawn. In which case it was weird to me that it felt as if the episode wanted me to admire Castiel for being so clever. Good for him, I guess?

I don't know anything beyond what I just read here, but if there were threatening messages sent (as was mentioned in Danneel's post, and I have no reason at all to doubt it), then it is indeed different from the usual fan wank. According to the FBI, "Issuing a threat—even over social media, via text message, or through e-mail—is a federal crime (threatening interstate communications). Those who post or send these threats can receive up to five years in federal prison, or they can face state or local charges." https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/hoax-threats-awareness-100518