CluelessDrifter

Not that it means anything, but I don't think Sam was going to Rufus's cabin, so he could start hunting again. This: This: And this: Are some things Sam says in the first 3 episodes that make me think that. I think these and other things he says or the way he says some things are the reason why some people might think that he was resentful of Dean coming back, not that Dean was alive, but that he was hunting again, and to him, Dean represents hunting on some level. It wasn't that he disparaged Sam trying to build a life with her, or he wouldn't have said this: I think it's because responsibility is such a big part of who he is, that Dean just couldn't fathom Sam not following through on what Dean saw as responsibilities Sam had to Kevin, and yes, him. And when Sam said things, like this: It could come off as somewhat confrontational (to some personality types), and Dean pushed back with snide comments of his own.

Just going to chime in here. As with everything else, I guess it depends on how you interpret what's on screen. Some ignore scenes. Some forget scenes. Some take what's in a scene and run with it. Some need more than what's in a scene for it to be considered on-screen canon. I'm guessing that if everyone here was asked what parentification means, there wouldn't even be a similar starting point. Medical textbook definition: the assumption of a parentlike (or adult) role by a child. It's not in Merriam-Websters, but yourdictionary.com has it as: A process of role reversal whereby a child is obliged to act as parent to its own parent. Wikipedia (an unreliable source, but I don't have all night to look up definitions :) ) has this to say about it: Two distinct modes of parentification have been identified technically: instrumental parentification and emotional parentification. Instrumental parentification involves the child completing physical tasks for the family, such as looking after a sick relative, paying bills, or providing assistance to younger siblings that would normally be provided by a parent. Emotional parentification occurs when a child or adolescent must take on the role of a confidant or mediator for (or between) parents or family members.[2] Does Dean fit any of these? John in IMToD: "You know, when you were a kid, I'd come home from a hunt, and after what I'd seen, I'd be, I'd be wrecked. And you, you'd come up to me and you, you'd put your hand on my shoulder and you'd look me in the eye and you'd... You'd say "It's okay, Dad." Dean I'm sorry. You shouldn't have had to say that to me, I should have been saying that to you. You know, I put, I put too much on your shoulders, I made you grow up too fast. You took care of Sammy, you took care of me. You did that, and you didn't complain, not once. I just want you to know that I am so proud of you." I think John admitting that Dean took care of he and Sam fits. I think Dean having to cover for his Dad not being there at Christmas by getting gifts for Sam and pretending John did show up fits. I think a 9 or 10 year old Dean left to make dinners for his younger sibling and being left with a shotgun to protect his younger brother at night while their Dad was hunting a Shtriga fits. I think John not leaving enough money, and Dean having to steal food for them to eat fits. I think Dean stepping between John and Sam in their arguments fits. I think Dean saying: "And I... I had to be... more than just a brother. I had to be a father and I had to be a mother, to keep him safe." fits. I would say we have seen it on screen, and somehow I have to say that's my opinion, but for me, it's clear as day.

No worries. I just think that sneaking around and keeping a secret about having an amulet because you don't want your brother to think you aren't respecting his wishes makes it seem as though said brother would be angered by it. I see no other reason for secrecy. Out of respect for said brother's wishes doesn't work for me, because if you think Sam kept it, then it was his and no longer Dean's, and why would Dean care what he did with it? If he took it thinking Dean might want it again some day, then there were plenty of times over the years he could have given it back. If he kept it for himself, then there were plenty of times we could have seen him look at it or just have it. He had it when Dean was in Hell. Why not any of the other times he thought Dean was dead, or Dean was missing? I contend that it's because Sam never picked it up. He (and the writers) left it behind until Chuck brought it back into the story in season 11.

No, I'm saying that's how I see your argument for why Sam might have kept it to himself.

This is the 'paints Dean as an ogre' argument that I really detest. Not only does it make it seem like Dean would lash out at Sam for keeping the damn thing, because . . . because why? Because he would think it means Sam doesn't respect his decisions? Seriously? If I throw something away and my brothers want it, they're welcome to it. I'm not going to go through all the mental gymnastics I would have to go through to be mad that they picked it up and think it means they don't respect my wishes. But it also paints Sam as a head ducking, mousy, keeps-his-opinions/wants/wishes-to himself kind of guy, and I just don't see Sam like that. Then why not use it instead of the pictures in Brother's Keeper? That was in season 10 and an optimal time to bring it out if he's the one who had it.

In reference to the discussion going on about the amulet or 'Samulet' in another thread, I guess my unpopular opinion is that Sam didn't fish the amulet out of the bin or keep it all those years. There are logistical problems. I guess the keepsake box is supposed to side step them. Dean could have kept the box while Sam was in the cage, the way some have suggested, or it could be argued that Sam left the box at Bobby's, but the problem for both scenarios is that once Sam was soulless, he wouldn't have taken it, because he wouldn't have cared enough about anything in the box to take it. Playing devil's advocate, all that means is that he would have had to get the box after he got his soul back. Those aren't the biggest issue I have with it though. It's the times Sam could have given it back if it had ever been intended that he picked it up after Dean threw it away. He and Dean were in a good place before he agreed to be Lucifer's vessel, so he could have done it then. I could have probably lived with Sam seeing the amulet around Dean's neck rather than the never-before-seen green army man as a way to break Lucifer's control over him. Then there was when he was trying to get through to Dean in Brother's Keeper. There are more instances, but those are the biggest examples I can think of right now. There are times when Sam could have looked at it if he had it, like when Dean was in Purgatory or when he was trying to find Demon!Dean. I also think that it borders on making Sam look bad for not having given it back, which is why I think it was left up to the viewer to decide if he had it or Chuck did and why I think Chuck had it. I think the writers realized the holes and left it open for interpretation for that reason. (As an aside, I've seen it argued that Sam didn't give it back, because he was worried Dean would reject it, but there were plenty of times they were in a good place when he could have. It's also an argument that paints Dean as an ogre. I've seen it argued that he didn't give it back, because basically, 'finders keepers,' as in Dean threw it away, Sam picked it up and just kept it, but again there were plenty of times Sam could have looked at it if it was just keepsake for him. I think the easiest solution is most likely. After Dean threw it away, that was meant to be it. The writers and show runners didn't plan to bring it back until it was suddenly reintroduced in Season 11, and that's why it doesn't make sense from a story perspective, IMO)

No, I don't think Dean was trying to redeem himself for not killing Sam. To be redeemed, you can't try to do it, because you can't do it for the purpose of redemption. It has to be selfless and not calculated in any way. It has to be simply doing the right thing for the sake of it, not so you can get something out of it. Or do you mean save Sam using Gadreel? I don't think his redemption was for that either (I think I've written that a few times, so I want to make sure you're reading me right and your perception is based on what my real opinion is). I think it was supposed to be for the things he did while he had the MoC. No, the MoC wasn't the redemption arc, IMO. It's what necessitated the redemption arc. The problem is that they kept him from going too dark. While he was a demon, they made a point of saying he needed to pick a side, because he hadn't. His intentions weren't good, but his actions 'saved' Lester's soul. When the waitress turned him down, he didn't react in any way that one could describe as 'good,' (Or like Dean at all), but I think he meant it when he asked her to come with him. He liked violence for the sake of it - was sleazy with the stripper, so he could bait the bouncer into a fight, etc. He didn't care about Sam or the Impala, but he still sat at a piano, played a few notes of Hey Jude (his Mom's song), and was contemplating his new existence. He hunted Sam down in the bunker - He didn't get the chance to go full-on 'evil' or 'dark,' but it was enough for Dean to never want to be a demon again after he was cured. Then when he was cured, they had him kill a room full of scum bags, and while he beat himself up about that, it didn't necessarily make me think he was 'bad'. We heard in the back half of the season how he was getting 'worse' over and over again, but never really saw it, because they had him do things like, slam a guy's head into a table and then had Cas act like Dean wouldn't do that, so it meant he had to be sidelined. He didn't really go dark until The Prisoner, the episode before they started his redemption for having the MoC, IMO. Sam did have a personal redemption arc going on during the MoC story line (IMO). I think it was supposed to be the culmination of his redemption arc, and we were supposed to see it that way, but I don't think they fleshed it out well enough.

You're absolutely right. I put 'before' instead of 'after'. Funny how one little word can change the entire meaning of a sentence. :)

While I agree with a lot of what you said, I think where we disagree is that: 1) I agree that Sam was introspective in Season 5, but I think for me, it was more about overcoming his addiction and identifying the route cause of said addiction, so that by the end of the season he was in a relatively 'good place' and 'in his right mind' - back to being Sam again - and was at that point ready for redemption through his act of self-sacrifice. Not a massive difference from what you said, but slightly different. 2) I don't think Dean wanted redemption when he took the Mark, let alone a quick redemption by taking the Mark. I don't think Dean thought he could be redeemed, which is a good starting point for a redemption arc, but a redemption arc is often a last chance for a character after everything they have done wrong, and taking the MoC certainly wasn't that. It was another thing to add to his list of bad decisions - so on this part we agree. I think that the set up for Dean's redemption began when he decided to go to Death to find a solution for his MoC problems, but Death put up another road block by saying that Dean had to kill Sam first, so I agree that Dean's redemption started with his choice not to sacrifice Sam in the moments before the Darkness was released, but I disagree that it was because he took on board what Sam said about him being a force for 'good.' While it offers a nice kind of symmetry, since Dean took the MoC not long after Sam said that Dean thought he did more good than bad, but that that wasn't true; I think it was simply a combination of Sam and those family photos breaking through his MOC-hazed-mind, however briefly. I'm not even sure that Dean knew where he was going to swing that scythe when he swung it, because he seemed surprised when he killed Death and afterwards said, 'I think I just killed Death,' as if it hadn't been his intention. From a more practical standpoint, sacrificing an 'innocent', is never the right call to make for a redemption to be had, even if it's for the greater good (Unless it's self-sacrifice), and that's why they couldn't have Dean sacrifice Sam in order to be redeemed.

Never? What about To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Shawshank Redemption, The Great Gatsby, The Terminator, etc.?

The very first episode I ever saw of this show was Devil's Trap way back in 2006. The first scene I saw was the Meg exorcism scene. It captured me straight away, and from that scene and throughout the rest of the episode, I fully thought Dean was the main character. He was the one in charge in that scene. He seemed to be in charge when it came to finding their Dad and had enough foresight to bring the Colt. Azazel seemed especially focused on Dean in the cabin, and we had Dean's POV throughout. I picked up on Azazel wanting Sam to use some kind of powers to take the Colt off the table, and not knowing anything about the show at that point, I wondered why, but really all of the focus was on Dean (to me), and not having seen anything before that, I didn't realize there was a shift to that dynamic about halfway through season 1, but after it happened, I think it stuck. I still think that Season 2 was about Dean saving or killing Sam and solving the mystery of what it was about Sam that made Azazel want him. Season 3 was about Dean's deal and him going to Hell. In season 4, Dean came back from Hell and was the Righteous Man. I could keep going until probably season 11, and definitely 12, when Dean lost his POV and quite a few of the characteristics I have always associated with Dean. Until that happened, Dean was the protagonist, not Sam. I feel like I've written this a million times, but Sam is the focal character. He's the one who pushes the plot forward, because things are either happening to him, or he is the one doing things to push it forward, and Dean has to react/ do something about it/ give us the POV/ is the moral center/ and the character that the audience is supposed to sympathize with in the story (that's what a protagonist does when there is a split between the focal character and protagonist. Usually, they are the same person, but in this case, it's been split between the brothers, not unheard of as far as stories go, but not as common).

I'm curious. How do you actually see Sam and Dean, because I think there's a lot that annoys you about Sam's story lines, but to me, those story lines happen because of the way Sam is. Do you separate him from his story lines in some way? Like, how can you relate to his flaws, but then think he gets shafted by the writing when it comes to said flaws? What do you think his flaws are? You can see the things he does sometimes are wrong . . . perhaps more wrong than even non-Sam fans might think, but it seems like what makes you annoyed is that Dean doesn't make those particular mistakes or comes out looking better in your opinion when he does make mistakes, and that's what lowers your opinion of Dean. I almost imagine the way you see them as something like when one sibling gets in trouble and then says, but he did this or he did that about another sibling to shift the blame off of themselves and then gets upset when he or she is still in trouble? I think it might help me to understand how you see the show and it's characters if I can see how you see the characters apart from their story lines.

I honestly don't know where you're going with this? I was talking about Dean being willing to let Sam jump in the cage, the same way Sam was willing to let Dean go to confront Amara. I suppose I should have been clearer. Sam died in AHBL. Dean sold his soul to bring him back. Unintentionally, this lead to the first seal breaking, and Sam broke the last, so Lucifer was released. Dean, after having sold his soul to save his brother, had to let Sam go for the greater good in Season 5. Sam's set up was different. He went from not looking for Dean in Purgatory to an attempt at redemption with the trials (a failed attempt at showing Dean there was a light at the end of the tunnel, and failed, I think in part, because Sam entered into it thinking he was right about his newfound outlook on life - i.e. He wasn't contrite, and that doesn't make for true redemption even though he did suffer) to backing up his actions while Dean was in Purgatory by saying what he said in The Purge (I know it's usually the other way around -tell and then back up by show -but that's how I saw it). Then Dean died in Sam's arms, and Sam saw that his outlook was flawed when faced with the reality of it. He set about trying to make up for his mistakes by summoning Crowley to make a deal, tracking Demon!Dean down, curing him, finding a way to get rid of the MoC (they couldn't just have him sell his soul to save Dean and lead to another Apocalyptic event. They drew it out over a season). Letting Dean go to confront Amara after everything that Sam had done to save him was what mirrored what Dean did with Sam in Season 5.

I'm not sure how you can see Dean losing control when killing Abaddon and think that wasn't intended to show us that it was a step down in terms of him spiraling out of control, another step closer to rock bottom. To create a redemption arc, you have to tear the character down before that character can be built back up, hence the reason why Dean dying and becoming a demon was a final step down to rock bottom rather than a step up of redemption. In story telling terms, having a character intend to do something isn't the same as having them do it. That's just not good story telling, IMO. If we were talking real life, that'd be one thing, but this isn't real life, and in a story you have the freedom to make your characters do anything. On top of that, Dean gave almost the exact same speech to the girl in JMI, so it took some of the power out of the final act to have it be a rehash of something that'd been done earlier. There's good foreshadowing, and then there's what we got. And again . . . step down, step down, step down, so he could be built back up by being willing to let Dean sacrifice himself in S11E23. (It's the same arc Dean got in Season 5). ETA: Sam's was a more personal arc because of what happened while Dean was in Purgatory and what was said in the Purge (whether it was meant or not), so his redemption was an attempt to make up for those things, which really just lead to Amara, and then he was trying to make up for that. Dean's would have been for more external things that happened when he had the MoC (the problem being that he wasn't actually allowed to go too bad as a demon and in fact saved Lester's soul by killing him without completing the contract; we were told he was getting bad again in season 10 (Angel Heart would be a good example), when I didn't see what the characters were talking about until The Prisoner; and then in season 11, I thought it seemed like he was in a daze or subdued throughout much of that season due to the lackadaisical Darkness/Dean story line, IMO of course).

Dean's redemption didn't include killing Abaddon. It was another step on his spiral down. Sacrificing himself would have concluded the arc if he'd stayed dead, but he didn't. It was another step down because of what he became. Letting Death send him to another planet would have been the end of his redemption arc if Death hadn't thrown in the weird caveat of killing Sam, but Death did, and if Dean had done that, then it wouldn't have been the conclusion of the redemption arc, because to be redeemed, you don't sacrifice a person or people in order to do it. That's just not how it works, IMO. If we'd gotten Dean sacrificing himself for the greater good by going with Amara and becoming one with her . . . whatever that meant (It's still unclear to me. I think it means let her take his soul and become part of her, the way the others did, but it could mean that he would have been elevated to her level somehow and ruled next to her? It was a bad storyline, IMO that just sort of fizzled out and went nowhere) it would have been a suitable end to the redemption arc, because it would have required sacrifice on his part instead of just talking her down, and it could have continued in season 12 with him being saved from that, but that's not what happened, and we were left with a weak conclusion to make way for the BMoL and Mary (IMO of course). And all the while, Sam was going through his own redemption arc, which is why he tried so hard to find/cure Dean when Dean was a demon (step down because of what he did to do that) and then tried so hard to find a way to get rid of the MoC (another step down because Amarra was released), and then Sam tried to make up for that by not killing meatsuits/facing Lucifer for the greater good, letting Dean be willing to sacrifice himself, etc. in season 11.

I disagree on the fundamental premise of this argument. What happened with Dean in seasons 9 and 10 was not, in my opinion, a redemption arc for what happened with Gadreel, Sam, and Kevin. That was the set up for Dean taking the Mark and nothing more, IMO, which is why, I think you didn't find it sufficient as a redemption arc (It wasn't one). The Mark wasn't taken so he could kill Gadreel (a way to make up for what'd happened - the way Sam made up for releasing Lucifer by jumping in the cage). He took the Mark because he felt less than worthless and saw himself as a means to an end when it came to killing Abaddon. The redemption arc he got was for taking the Mark in the first place, the things he did as a demon, etc., and it didn't culminate until S11E23 (IMO).

After having some time to think about it, I think maybe it's harder for some people to see how bad of shape Sam was in because it's such an abstract concept. We're used to things like car accidents and gunshot wounds in our every day life, be they on TV or in person, so we know how bad they can be and how often they take lives, but the internal damage done while doing trials designed to close the gates of Hell? I can't think of anything in every day life that really equates? Maybe being stuck in a burning building for an extended period of time with oxygen deprivation from smoke inhalation and burns to the lungs and airways from the heat, and instead of burns on the skin he had them on his internal organs? Nobody would last like that for very long. Usually the smoke inhalation kills you before it gets that bad, and all his damage was internal, so we couldn't see it, which means it's still not quite as relatable of an example, but that's all I've got.

Death was written wildly out of character, but then it was a season where reaper canon was butchered, and I still think it was supposed to be him, considering the next time they see him, Death mentions it. I've seen people twisting him saying that Sam stood him up into all kinds of things to justify that it wasn't really him in 9.01, but I disagree, because I think the simplest solution is the correct one, not the time Sam died in AHBL1, DSotM, other times we don't know about off screen, or any other time, but the last time Sam was supposed to die and Death was there. And again, I feel like people are underestimating that when you have hypoxia of the brain as severe as what the doctor makes it seem, you're talking irreversible brain damage, life support (as minimum treatment), and death. That was just his brain, and doesn't include his other major organs, and Sam was heading toward death at the start of the episode before Dean prayed and angels had time to find vessels, get onto tractors, and drive to the hospital in order to respond to Dean's prayer request. Dean spent hours waiting for and then fighting off said angels. I don't think Sam had more than a few seconds left. Death or the fake Death, which ever way you want to see it, told Sam it was time, and to me that means it was time. I just don't see how people can think that Sam wasn't really dying and not see this as a poor attempt at giving Sam his own death episode with actual Death as his reaper, but to each their own. The world would be boring if we all thought the same things. We'll agree to disagree.

This was Sam's condition at the very start of the episode: Doctor: The MRI shows massive internal burns affecting many of the major organs. Oxygen to the brain has been severely deprived. The coma is the result of the body doing everything in its limited power to protect itself from further harm. If your brother continues on this trajectory, the machines might keep him alive, but – Dean: He'll be dead. Doctor: Technically, yes. I'm afraid so. And Sam was worse by the end of the episode when Death was there. IMO, this was supposed to be like Sam's IMToD or Death's Door. I'm not sure why you think hypoxia, a coma, and massive internal burns on Sam's major organs doesn't count as him being in a similar case to either Dean or Bobby in their reaper cases.

Death never tells Sam that he's going to Heaven. He talks about what an honor it is to be reaping him. Not once is where Sam is going mentioned.

I guess I'm not following you either, because when you die on the show, you either go with a reaper to your final destination or are stuck in the veil. He could have just faded into the veil when he died, like every other soul was doing. And neither Bobby or Dean were dead when their reapers came for them.

Originally, I didn't think it was really Death until Brother's Keeper. Now I do, and after thinking about it, it makes sense to me that it was Death. Sam could have just gone into the veil if that's where spirits with no home go. Or Hell, I guess. Heaven was blocked. Reapers. I don't know what the hell was going on with reapers after the other angels fell. Presumably they didn't lose their wings, or Billie wouldn't have just been able to show up random places, like black sites . . . unless she was a super stealth stalker and followed Sam and Dean around in a car for 2 seasons. Maybe reapers just didn't have a way to get past Metatron's blocks on Heaven. Surely Death would have known the second that happened. That's that why I think it was Death. He was the only being that could continue taking souls to Heaven (other than Metatron and Chuck, I guess). According to Tessa, the cries of the souls in the veil were what drove her to commit suicide on the First Blade, so Death wasn't doing it for everyone, just Sam, and he brings it up the next time he sees Sam in Brother's Keeper. I don't like that he said he was honored to be reaping Sam in the slightest, because I don't think it's in keeping with his character prior to that, but he showed up, so . . .

I went back to look at it and want to widen the scope to the conversation being had at the time as well, because I think that was lost by the focus on a small portion of one of my sentences. At the time, there was discussion that some were looking forward to Sam being the leader of TFW, and that there were no complaints when the leader was Dean. My original post was in response to that as in Sam has always had input and gotten his way with Dean, not that it was something new. I still did put with exceptions in my post, because I knew people would pick on the 'always', and I did bring up that the way Sam deals with not getting his way based on how I saw it, because to me that indicates that Sam has much more control in their relationship than some believe. I then elaborated more on my points on team dynamics in a post after the one you found. I just wanted to clarify, because this is coming from a while ago.

. . . with a few notable exceptions. ; ) I was careful to write that, because I didn't want anyone getting hung up on the word 'always.'

This is the second time I've started to respond to this, because my post inexplicably deleted itself mid-answer, so it won't most likely won't be as detailed as originally planned, and if this comes across as being somewhat short, it's that happening that has annoyed me, not you. This is what I wrote originally, so I can have it here as a reference and respond to your post accurately: Wendigo - Sam doesn't want to stay at Stanford. He says, "Maybe we shouldn't have left Stanford so soon," as in he's unsure of their decision to leave. We then find out that they stayed around Stanford for a week before deciding that finding their Dad was what they needed to do if they wanted answers. When they get to near where the coordinates John sent them are, Sam doesn't want to stop and ask questions to see what they're walking into out in the wilderness, and he doesn't want Hayley going, because he doesn't want to be saddled with babysitting her (that's her choice to make), but it isn't until they get to Blackwater Ridge and John isn't there, that Sam thinks that John isn't there. The whole reason he was in a rush to get there was because until then, he thought he was going to find John, and you're right, as soon as he finds out John isn't there, he wants to force Haley and the others to go, leave Tommy, and continue on with the search for their Dad. Except Hayley doesn't want to go without her brother, it's getting dark, which isn't the best time to be travel through the woods with a wendigo chasing you, and Sam can't get what he wants because of circumstances. In the meantime, Dean tells him that they need to finish the job. Sam says he wants to find their Dad, because all he can think about is finding Jessica's killer. Dean tells him that they'll find their Dad, but the search could take a while and Sam needs to be patient. It's not a no, it's a we're in this now, so we'll finish it, and then we'll do what you want, which is getting back to looking for their Dad. Just because he doesn't immediately get what he wants, doesn't mean that Sam isn't going to get to resume the search. Dead in the Water - Sam is upset the trail for their Dad is getting cold. Dean asks what they're supposed to do about it. Sam says, "I don't know. Something. Anything." He wants to find his Dad. That's great. Dean does too. Sam isn't going to get what he wants without a plan, and he doesn't have one at this particular point in time. Asylum - He has a plan. Sick the Feds on his Dad. Dean says John would be pissed if they did that. They get the text that lets them know John's alive. Sam wants to find their Dad instead of doing the case. Things still haven't really changed on being able to find John, and so Dean says they should do the case. This episode falls into the category I mentioned where Sam harps about something incessantly if he doesn't get his way. Scarecrow - This episode falls under the category I wrote about Sam taking off to do what he wants when he doesn't get his way. Going off to do his own thing is something adults do, and Dean lets him do it. Sam is the one who ultimately decides he wants to go back to Dean. Something Wicked - You're right. He doesn't want to use Michael as bait. Funnily enough, this is the episode with the Lucky Charms though. :) Everybody Loves a Clown - I've written before that just because someone else wants you to divulge your feelings about a tragedy doesn't mean that they're entitled to that. Having said that, Sam still harps on Dean about it throughout the episode, which is something I said he does when he doesn't get what he wants. I could keep going, but I think I've explained my point . . . twice now even though it's only going to be recorded once, so I'll leave it there for now.