S10.E03: Soul Survivor

[catrox14]

At the ChiCon Meet-n-Greet Director Jensen Ackles confirms the blood type disconnect was a prop error.

https://twitter.com/carryon_spn/status/526396194374029312

Thanks to CarryOn_SPN for live tweeting

Good lord. Someone actually asked that? LOL wut. I mean they are not going to retcon either one into not being John's son. Especially since we already have Adam to fill that angst requirement of illegitimate child/half-brother. I think Jensen would try to redirect /squelch that SL if he could. I mean I just can't fathom what the point of them doing that would be.

Edited October 26, 2014 by catrox14

[DittyDotDot]

Now that would have been great. I feel like it was a big cheat to not have Sam use his own blood. At minimum they needed to address why Sam didn't use his own blood. To me it's a cheat to go with Dean needing his own blood type.

 

While I agree that it feels a bit like a cheat, I'm betting TPTB got a lot of flack for not addressing the blood type issue the first time they did this with Crowley, so they made sure to make it clear that Sam was thinking ahead with Dean. It's funny to me what this show gets caught up on and decides to change. Most of the time their over-reaction just ends up being more confusing. Like them changing Dean's age in that flashback episode last year. The change made the story more confusing than it would have been to have a kid look a little older than the character.

 

I think we all would have accepted Sam's blood just fine, in-fact I think it would have been a bit more impactful if it had been Sam's blood. Sam would have had to confess to purify himself first--tying in the Lester storyline better--and him drawing his own blood would have been another drain on Sam throughout the episode. Ah well, it was not to be, I guess.

Edited October 26, 2014 by DittyDotDot

[AuntTora]

A wizard did it.

[catrox14]

While I agree that it feels a bit like a cheat, I'm betting TPTB got a lot of flack for not addressing the blood type issue the first time they did this with Crowley, so they made sure to make it clear that Sam was thinking ahead with Dean. It's funny to me what this show gets caught up on and decides to change

 

 

I don't know why anyone would care if Crowley's blood type was a match. I mean if it killed him, why would anyone care? It's the King of Hell we're talking about.  Sam didn't finish the trial anyway so if Crowley died...meh. I know I wouldn't have cared especially since him being alive resulted in Demon!Dean which was awful and great . Talk about your cognitive dissonance.  demon!Dean has done me in.

 

I just think the show has gotten really really bad about not keep characters consistent at the expense of plot (and even the plots lately are just like whatever except for the Mark of Cain plot is pretty great. DON'T SCREW THIS UP SHOW. You already took demon!Dean away too soon).

 

They really screwed the pooch when they decided that Sam shouldn't look for Dean in s8. It was character assassination for the most part even if there is some wiggle room because of Sam leaving the family the first time and leaving in 'Scarecrow'.  But the audience isn't going to forget that HUGE thing because it's a huge thing for the brothers.  

 

I wish they would have tied that entire plot point into Sam's actions here. Maybe they will going forward. Maybe we'll get some apologies on both sides for the shitty decisions they both made.

 

Maybe pigs will fly out of my ass too.

Edited October 26, 2014 by catrox14

[AwesomO4000]

I don't know why anyone would care if Crowley's blood type was a match. I mean if it killed him, why would anyone care? It's the King of Hell we're talking about.  Sam didn't finish the trial anyway so if Crowley died...meh.

 

I completely agree. I think I said that for Sam, if Crowley had died after he became human if the trials were completed, Sam would've thought of it as a bonus. Sam's been wanting to kill Crowley since season 5, and Sam was finishing the trials using Crowley soon after Crowley killed Sarah right in front of Sam. Why would the writers think they should have to worry or think that Sam should care at all if he killed Crowley and so then try to over-compensate. If anything, in my opinion, based on everything Crowley had done to them, and Sam in particular with the still open wound of Sarah looming, Sam should've said that he hoped his blood type would kill Crowley.  I would've been entirely on board with him saying something like that. In my opinion, there was no reason Sam should have had any compassion for Crowley. In terms of Sam, he didn't deserve it.

[DittyDotDot]

I didn't mean to imply Sam had any compassion (or lack of it) for Crowley. But I don't think TPTB even thought about the blood type issue and probably someone (or  many someones) brought it up after the episode aired. So this time they went over-board to show everyone that they listened. I just find it funny they then made it even worse and less important with their over-correcting.

[catrox14]

I understood what you meant DDD I just don't know why anyone in or out of the show would have thought about the blood type in conjunction with Crowley.  But I agree that the overcorrection on the wrong stuff boggles my mind.  And I swear it's the Nepotism Duo and Jenny Klein that screw up more than most and why are they still writing.  I mean I know why Ross-Leming is but gods.  Can we just push them into a crappy spinoff and

 

Can we please have Ben Edlund back? Please....seriously. I want this like I want chocolate and demon!Dean. 

 

ETA: I laugh at myself every time I write that I want demon!Dean back considering how I had my "F/U Carver" hat on and one foot out the door because of advent of demon!Dean. Now I have my "F/U Carver" hat and one foot out the door because he dumped demon!Dean already.  LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL at me.

Edited October 26, 2014 by catrox14

[DittyDotDot]

I understood what you meant DDD I just don't know why anyone in or out of the show would have thought about the blood type in conjunction with Crowley.

 

I'm just guessing here because they went so far out of their way to add this in, I have nothing official to back it up other than I remember a comment or two over at TWoP about it when Sacrifice first aired. It wasn't that the people who noticed it necessarily cared if Crowley lived or died, but doing as fans tend to do, they noticed something that didn't make real-world sense--one person could inject someone else with their own blood without typing the blood first--and brought it up.

 

I'd love a few more Edlund scripts too--I know Jensen said he wrote good Dean scripts, but I think he wrote good scripts for all characters--I think he's working on Gotham now, so probably not going to happen anytime soon, if ever, though.

Edited October 26, 2014 by DittyDotDot

[echo]

Can we please have Ben Edlund back? Please....seriously. I want this like I want chocolate and demon!Dean.

 

When Revolution was cancelled I was sooo hopeful! I share your feelings.

 

 

I'd love a few more Edlund scripts too--I know Jensen said he wrote good Dean scripts, but I think he wrote good scripts for all characters--I think he's working on Gotham now, so probably not going to happen anytime soon, if ever, though.

 

Yep, we can't have Ben back because of Gotham. I've been watching that show and so far I'm not feeling the Edlund...

I digress.

[AwesomO4000]

Yep, we can't have Ben back because of Gotham. I've been watching that show and so far I'm not feeling the Edlund...

I digress.

 

Maybe because - from the previews at least - that seems to be a rather serious show that maybe doesn't allow as much for the quirky? I could be wrong since I haven't actually seen it yet.

 

I love it when Edlund is allowed to get quirky. They are some of my favorite episodes. I still remember with great fondness the "Smile Time" episode of Angel. The self-esteem song alone was memorable... along with Groofus, the dog puppet who insisted that just because they were evil didn't mean they should slack off on the quality of their episodes - bwah! (I loved that episode).

[catrox14]

Oh gods. Smile Time is one of the greatest episodes of TV ever created. It's sheer genius. Followed by ALL the heartbreak to the very end.  Guh I love Angel. It's like my 2nd favorite show ever.

[supposebly]

 

I don't know why anyone would care if Crowley's blood type was a match.

 

Agreed, why would that ever be an issue? Didn't they plan to kill Crowley after the trial whether it would work or not? Human or not, he was the king of hell and deserved it many times over. So basically, he would have ended up back in hell right after they killed him.

 

I'm not sure blood type would matter for a demon's meat suit. It's dead already and only animated by the demon anyway.

With Demon!Dean, he animated his own meatsuit just like a regular person, so to speak, so in that case, it would matter.

 

The things this show makes me type.......

Edited October 26, 2014 by supposebly

[AwesomO4000]

I didn't mean to imply Sam had any compassion (or lack of it) for Crowley. But I don't think TPTB even thought about the blood type issue and probably someone (or  many someones) brought it up after the episode aired. So this time they went over-board to show everyone that they listened. I just find it funny they then made it even worse and less important with their over-correcting.

 

I understood, and didn't mean to imply that you thought otherwise. I was mainly pointing out - as you say here - the silliness  of them going overboard on the issue, especially if they did it because they thought viewers might be upset that Sam didn't consider he might kill Crowley with the process.  I would've said faster pussycat, kill! Kill! The writers just as easily could've had Sam say something like "don't worry, our blood types are compatible" and still had Sam use his own blood. If they were so concerned about the past case, they could've had Dean taunt Sam with "Aww, Sammy, did you give this much care to Crowley?" And then Sam say "Hell, no. Didn't care what happened to him, but as I said, Dean, I'm getting you back."  But I'm guessing here they didn't want the blood to be compatible for whatever reason. (My younger sister could give me blood, but not vica versa. I'm positive, she's negative.)

 

I can't remember if Sam and Dean have ever given each other blood before. Donating doesn't mean giving directly either, because I think sometimes you can donate to "switch out" - i.e. donate yourself to "replace" blood given to a family member even if it's not directly your blood used.

[SueB]

 

the silliness  of them going overboard on the issue, especially if they did it because they thought viewers might be upset that Sam didn't consider he might kill Crowley with the process.  I would've said faster pussycat, kill! Kill!

First off, YAY Buffy Reference.

 

Second, I think there's an actual plot point with Sam using bagged blood. They didn't explore it but it could still be brought up -- maybe Sam doesn't feel his blood could get consecrated again after Lester.  Then again, Demon!Dean should have exploited the topic in this episode so could be nothing.  

[catrox14]

od. They didn't explore it but it could still be brought up -- maybe Sam doesn't feel his blood could get consecrated again after Lester.

 

 

I don't get this. Wasn't the trial supposed to have already cleaned Sam from his demon blood which is why he could cure Crowley? And the only reason he stopped was that he was going to die from it? I thought once his blood was consecrated or cleaned or whatever it could be undone.  Is it like "Once saved, always saved" or do you have to get resaved every time you sin kind of thing. I'm not religious so those ideas and rules are often lost on me.

[DittyDotDot]

Yes, he had to confess just before he started the ritual so his blood was purified--not the demon blood taint, but to be free of sin, so to speak. But humans being continual sinners, he'd need to confess again to be cleaned of his more recent sins. Personally, I never felt like the taint had to do with actual sin, but guilt. What Sam confessed to was disappointing Dean--which isn't an actual sin--and Sam obviously felt guilt for Lester, so having him confess again might have been a nice tie-in.

 

As far as the demon blood taint...Sam said he felt like the trials were purifying him, but that was never brought up again after The Greatest Escapist. I think it was just wishful thinking on his part. Personally, I believe when he was resurrected from hell in S6 probably cleaned him of his demon blood taint, but that's just my way of making sense that they've never brought it up since, nothing in the show itself has stated that.

Edited October 27, 2014 by DittyDotDot

[Linderhill]

 

Second, I think there's an actual plot point with Sam using bagged blood. They didn't explore it but it could still be brought up -- maybe Sam doesn't feel his blood could get consecrated again after Lester.  Then again, Demon!Dean should have exploited the topic in this episode so could be nothing.

I took it that Sam didn't use his own blood because of the trials.  That he didn't want to risk even an inadvertent completion of the trials and therefore his death.  But then its Ross-Leming so we really can't count on any real depth or meaning here.

[catrox14]

I took it that Sam didn't use his own blood because of the trials.  That he didn't want to risk even an inadvertent completion of the trials and therefore his death.  But then its Ross-Leming so we really can't count on any real depth or meaning here.

 

Theoretically wouldn't he still have been able to close the gates of Hell by curing Dean of being a demon? What if he could have closed the gates of Hell by curing Dean but didn't because he didn't want to confess what he did re Lester?  Or that he didn't want to die? Oh man....missed opportunity there.

[echo]

Maybe because - from the previews at least - that seems to be a rather serious show that maybe doesn't allow as much for the quirky? I could be wrong since I haven't actually seen it yet.

 

I love it when Edlund is allowed to get quirky. They are some of my favorite episodes. I still remember with great fondness the "Smile Time" episode of Angel. The self-esteem song alone was memorable... along with Groofus, the dog puppet who insisted that just because they were evil didn't mean they should slack off on the quality of their episodes - bwah! (I loved that episode).

 

 

Oh gods. Smile Time is one of the greatest episodes of TV ever created. It's sheer genius. Followed by ALL the heartbreak to the very end.  Guh I love Angel. It's like my 2nd favorite show ever.

ANGEL is my 2nd favorite show ever! Loved "Smile Time" & the quality "edu-tainment" the demon puppet wanted. And Puppet!Angel! IIRC, Edlund didn't always do quirky stuff...

Edited October 27, 2014 by echo

[Mcolleague]

 

What Sam confessed to was disappointing Dean--which isn't an actual sin--and Sam obviously felt guilt for Lester, so having him confess again might have been a nice tie-in.

 

I just wanted to point out that he said his GREATEST sin was letting Dean down, not his ONLY sin - which to me still suggests actual sin than guilt?

 

Hmm, I don't think Sam can accidentally complete the trials, aren't there specific words of enochian that have to be spoken for one of the trials to be completed? Can't remember since I hated that season and never rewatched it lol.

[DittyDotDot]

Yes, there are specific words to complete the last trial, so he couldn't do it "accidentally".

 

 

I just wanted to point out that he said his GREATEST sin was letting Dean down, not his ONLY sin - which to me still suggests actual sin than guilt?

 

I was just pointing out that disappointing your brother isn't an actual "sin", like murder and stealing and such. I guess Sam might think of it as a sin, but would the church actually see it as a sin. Maybe I'm being too literal, but just because you feel guilty about something doesn't automatically make it an actual sin, right?

[Aeryn13]

Are the trials really be something you can put on hold and then randomely finish a year or so later? Òr whenever you feel like it? That would be seriously lame. To me, if you made a conscious choice to abandon, then the whole thing should be invalid and you would have to start anew. Heck, maybe they can put Cole on it, This guy seriously needs some other focus in his life. 

[catrox14]

Yes, there are specific words to complete the last trial, so he couldn't do it "accidentally"

 

I was just pointing out that disappointing your brother isn't an actual "sin", like murder and stealing and such. I guess Sam might think of it as a sin, but would the church actually see it as a sin. Maybe I'm being too literal, but just because you feel guilty about something doesn't automatically make it an actual sin, right?

And the guilt may or may not even be legitimate. Meaning self imposed guilt vs being guilt tripped by someone else vs true guilt for having done something wrong. And none of that is a sin IMO

[SueB]

1. Even if the trials COULD be complete by Sam ATT, now is not the time to keel over (if completing the trials kills him). Dean still has the Mark of Cain. Closing Heaven left a mess, etc... Sam really should discuss it with a few people before executing.

2. Guilt is not a sin, encouraging Lester to sell his soul to the Devil? Yeah, that's a sin in my book. Probably most theologian's books too.

[catrox14]

Guilt is not a sin, encouraging Lester to sell his soul to the Devil? Yeah, that's a sin in my book. Probably most theologian's books too.

See I'm not sure that is a sin. Sam used Lester to call out the demon but he also tried to stop him when he made the bargain with the crossroads demon. So to that point Sam lead the horse to water but he didn't make him drink. That was Lester's choice.

[Demented Daisy]

See I'm not sure that is a sin. Sam used Lester to call out the demon but he also tried to stop him when he made the bargain with the crossroads demon. So to that point Sam lead the horse to water but he didn't make him drink. That was Lester's choice.

Yeah, and Charles Manson didn't kill anyone, but the jury sure did find him guilty.

 

ETA  Do I find what Sam did worse than Dean killing Lester?  Absolutely not.  But would Lester have hired someone to kill his wife had Sam not put the idea in his head?  We'll never know.

Edited October 28, 2014 by Demented Daisy

[catrox14]

Well at least you didn't Godwin's law this discussion LOL. That's quite a hyperbolic comparison and way off base. Way off base.

 

Charles Manson actively encouraged a race war and for his family to kill people as gruesomely as possible. He order his followers to go Helter Skelter. He specifically told his followers to kill and maim. See Sharon Tate and the La Biancas. Manson attempted to murder someone himself but he failed. So Manson was directly linked with ordering the deaths of innocent people which is why he was convicted. 

 

Sam did not order Lester to kill his wife. Sam did not tell him to kill anyone. Sam did not try to kill anyone other than the demon. Sam did not actually make Lester sell his soul. Sam had a bad plan and it escalated beyond what he was trying to do.  Manson's intentions were that people should be murdered. That was not Sam's intention that we know of to this point.

 

When did Sam put the idea of killing his wife in Lester's head? I don't remember that happening that we saw on screen.  Lester said he wanted "revenge" but he never said what the revenge was. Sam told Lester he could have revenge or pretty much anything he wanted by summoning the demon. Then we see Sam putting the box in the ground, and having Lester say the words.  Once the demon appeared, Lester immediately made the offer to the demon.  That never came from Sam's mouth nor do I believe he encouraged the murder of his wife.

Edited October 28, 2014 by catrox14

[miles2go]

I'm no expert on what's a sin and what isn't; all I know is that in Roman Catholic theology, encouraging some one to sin is a sin in itself.  So, yes, by that standard, Sam committed a sin.  That, of course, does not absolve Lester at all.  Other theologians may have different views on the matter; in this particular case, I'm inclined to agree with the Catholics.

[DittyDotDot]

While maybe not on the same level as Charles Manson, I think the point was that Sam may have some responsibility here too. While Lester was the idiot willing to go along with Sam's plan and probably holds the most responsibility, Sam encouraged Lester to summon a demon in order to get revenge. I think that probably qualifies as sin.

 

ETA: or what miles2go said far more eloquently.

Edited October 28, 2014 by DittyDotDot

[catrox14]

I'm no expert on what's a sin and what isn't; all I know is that in Roman Catholic theology, 

ncouraging some one to sin is a sin in itself.  So, yes, by that standard, Sam committed a sin.  That, of course, does not absolve Lester at all.  Other theologians may have different views on the matter; in this particular case, I'm inclined to agree with the Catholics.

 

Wouldn't it only be a sin if someone's faith believes it's a sin?

 

What I mean is that Sam and Dean have never been shown to be religious men that follow any particular dogma or faith. Dean believes in what he sees.  I think Dean still disdains religion on it's face. 

 

The only reason Sam "confessed" was to complete the trials, not because he necessarily is following the tenets of Catholicism because it's what he believes in per se. He did it for the mission. Sam prays but that doesn't make him a devout Catholic or devout Evangelical Christian or what have you.

 

So that's where I wonder how the "sin" of it comes about here.  Sam is culpable of corrupting Lester with messing with a crossroads demon but again he didn't encourage him to murder his wife.  So for me that is where the big difference comes from

 

And to be clear I am not absolving Sam of doing a super shady thing but I don't think it's remotely the same as what Manson did.

Edited October 28, 2014 by catrox14

[SueB]

I think, based on the look on Sam's face, Sam felt it was a sin. Regardless of his specific belief system, he clearly knows a God exist ( maybe absent), there is both a Heaven and a Hell, upstairs is better than the basement, etc... This takes no actual faith as Sam has proof. So, as Sam has said in the past, the road to Heaven is not what's paved with good intentions. It's not murder but it's not a small nit either IMO. And Sam's face seemed to indicate he knew that.

[catrox14]

Oh I think Sam's face showed that he knew he fucked up and had culpablity in using Lester...but whether he thinks it's a sin IMO is debatable.

[AwesomO4000]

I think Dean still disdains religion on it's face.

 

I think that Sam is pretty close to being there with him now. I think he probably has pretty much same opinion as he expressed well in "99 Problems:" "I believe, yeah. I do. I’m just... Pretty sure God stopped caring a long time ago."

 

Sam prays but that doesn't make him a devout Catholic or devout Evangelical Christian or what have you.

 

I'm not even sure about that anymore except to pray to Castiel when he needs to talk to him. In my head canon, Sam gave up praying when he had to bury Dean knowing Dean went to hell.

 

 

I'm not sure about the sin aspect of it, but I'm not sure Sam looks or looked at it as simply as purification meant getting rid of sin. He seemed to be thinking as much about guilt even back in season 8 as anything else. Sam also seemed concerned about what he termed "tainted" playing into it. Even if he confessed and was absolved of guilt, I don't think Sam would've considered his blood "purified" if he hadn't also though that the trials were also getting rid of his demon blood "taint." So I think it was maybe more complicated for Sam than just sin, but I'm not clear on that, so I could also be wrong.

 

Nonetheless, from the look on his face, I do believe that Sam is deeply disturbed about his involvement with Lester and he likely thinks it's not something he should be easily forgiven for.

[miles2go]

Wouldn't it only be a sin if someone's faith believes it's a sin?

 

Are you saying that sin is subjective?  That it all depends on what you believe?  So, if you have no religious faith, you're scot free?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AwesomO4000]

Are you saying that sin is subjective?  That it all depends on what you believe?  So, if you have no religious faith, you're scot free?

 

I'm not saying I'm scott free. I have no specific religious faith, and yet I feel guilty for more things than most people I know. I even feel guilty about taking the Lord's name in vain even if I don't really believe in Him per se... mostly because I don't want to offend other people. Okay, yeah I'm weird. (Whereas my Grampa entirely believes in God, but he curses that way all. the. time). I'm also really straight-laced despite my lack of religion. (Though that doesn't mean I don't curse in general - shit is apparently my current favorite). But if I did something bad I wouldn't think of it as a "sin" necessarily, but I'd feel just as crappy about it. This tends to confound people who try to talk to me about religion. They don't understand at all why I don't just do whatever the hell I want or why I feel guilty for even doing small things. I think maybe I believe a little in Karma* sort of - which might be even a little more scary than sins you can be forgiven for?

 

So to answer the question - which you didn't ask me, but I butted in and answered anyway ** - I guess to me "sin," in the literal sense, is subjective, but it's not an excuse for getting off scott free.

 

* By the way "My Name Is Earl" was awesomely messed up and funny in my opinion.

** ::sigh:: now I'm going to feel a little guilty for being rude. Karma's a bitch sometimes.

[catrox14]

Are you saying that sin is subjective?  That it all depends on what you believe?  So, if you have no religious faith, you're scot free?

 

Not exactly. If you don't believe in the concept of sin and punishment from a higher and/or lower power then sin would not really be meaningful on it face.  Atheists can still determine right and wrong and have consequences for their actions but that does not necessarily include punishment by "God" or an omniscient being.  

[SueB]

In the Supernatural universe, not everything is 1 to 1 with our universe. Since the nature of sin has not been spelled out in-universe, I don't think we can be 100% definitive on the topic.

OTOH, the ritual was created in-universe by a Catholic priest and Sam followed that ritual for curing a demon. So, if Sam actually wanted to use his own blood, he'd need it to be purified through confession per the ritual. In this specific incidence, the Catholic definition of sin would appear to apply. If Sam didn't know it was a sin but committed a sin (encouraging Lester to sell his soul is not an acceptable act from God's perspective) then it's a material sin. If Sam knew it was a sin and committed the sin, it's a formal sin. Both are still sins, but knowledge of the individual matters. Again, it only matters because of the specific need to purify. Sam purified his blood in S8 because it worked on Crowley. And he had the whole drinking demon blood thing to confess. So, if he was truly contrite about Lester, he should have been able to purify his blood. But I personnally think Sam is not ready to forgive himself or he mistakenly believes what he did was unforgivable. Regardless, he didn't try to use his own blood and this may or may not have anything to do with Lester.

Edited October 28, 2014 by SueB

[miles2go]

I'm not saying I'm scott free. I have no specific religious faith, and yet I feel guilty for more things than most people I know. I even feel guilty about taking the Lord's name in vain even if I don't really believe in Him per se... mostly because I don't want to offend other people. Okay, yeah I'm weird. (Whereas my Grampa entirely believes in God, but he curses that way all. the. time). I'm also really straight-laced despite my lack of religion. (Though that doesn't mean I don't curse in general - shit is apparently my current favorite). But if I did something bad I wouldn't think of it as a "sin" necessarily, but I'd feel just as crappy about it. This tends to confound people who try to talk to me about religion. They don't understand at all why I don't just do whatever the hell I want or why I feel guilty for even doing small things. I think maybe I believe a little in Karma* sort of - which might be even a little more scary than sins you can be forgiven for?

 

So to answer the question - which you didn't ask me, but I butted in and answered anyway ** - I guess to me "sin," in the literal sense, is subjective, but it's not an excuse for getting off scott free.

 

* By the way "My Name Is Earl" was awesomely messed up and funny in my opinion.

** ::sigh:: now I'm going to feel a little guilty for being rude. Karma's a bitch sometimes.

I didn't think you were rude, so don't feel guilty.  I might be able to ease your mind about using the word "shit".  It's considered a vulgarity, and while it might be offensive to use in polite company, it's not cursing in the theological sense.

Not exactly. If you don't believe in the concept of sin and punishment from a higher and/or lower power then sin would not really be meaningful on it face.  

Unless there really is a higher power that judges us,(or an impersonal force like Karma) in which case one's subjective viewpoint may be irrelevant. 

 

And it may also be that issues of right and wrong are independent of a deity or the rules of a religion.

[catrox14]

I didn't think you were rude, so don't feel guilty.  I might be able to ease your mind about using the word "shit".  It's considered a vulgarity, and while it might be offensive to use in polite company, it's not cursing in the theological sense.

 

 

Unless there really is a higher power that judges us,(or an impersonal force like Karma) in which case one's subjective viewpoint may be irrelevant. 

 

And it may also be that issues of right and wrong are independent of a deity or the rules of a religion.

 

In the case of Sam, I don't think he specifically believed the entire tenets of Catholicism before he participated in the ritual or that he was bound for Hell if he didn't confess his "sin"/guilt about Dean other than as it related to completing the ritual. So here he may have thought he did something wrong but if he didn't believe it to be a sin then he wouldn't have asked for forgiveness from the Higher Power/Flying Spaghetti Monster. 

 

I do hope the show addresses any kind of ties back to the curing of a demon to closing the Gates of Hell and Dean's status but of course this is Supernatural and they won't so I don't know why I"m even wasting my brainpower thinking about it.  Sigh

Edited October 28, 2014 by catrox14

[AwesomO4000]

then he wouldn't have asked for forgiveness from the Higher Power/Flying Spaghetti Monster.

 

The Flying Spaghetti Monster is awesome, but he/she/it would likely be very disappointed in Sam as he doesn't dress up for Halloween and therefore does not please the FSM by wearing pirate garb. So Sam would've had to be purified by being touched by a noodley appendage before doing the ritual. And perhaps have had to wear pirate garb to gain the FSM's favor and been deemed worthy to be touched. Likely a good thing it was not a Flying Spaghetti Monster inspired ritual then. ; ).

 

Sorry, ahem, serious and on topic...

 

In season 8, since Sam didn't seem to know exactly how the purification ritual went, he would likely have "confessed" to things he felt guilty about, and then likely asked for forgiveness for all of his "sins" in general in order to cover all of the bases/requirements of the ritual, because as you say here, if he was unfamiliar with which things would be considered sins in the Catholic tenants, he wouldn't know exactly what to ask for forgiveness for. Likely he would've had to do the same here if he had used his own blood...

 

Also - and someone might have asked this earlier - I wonder if his "purified" blood there was the same as the purified blood here. Apparently both worked, but this time it being blessed by a priest(?) would that make it more like holy water? And if so, no wonder it hurt when Sam injected Dean with it.

 

I do hope the show addresses any kind of ties back to the curing of a demon to closing the Gates of Hell and Dean's status but of course this is Supernatural and they won't so I don't know why I"m even wasting my brainpower thinking about it.  Sigh

 

Not only that, but how about all of those poor spirits floating around because they can't get into heaven? What happened to them? Are they going psycho? Can/are they getting in through the back door to heaven like the angels? Why is there not an exploding crazy spirit problem all over the place?

 

This is a huge plot thread left dangling here, and considering a major recurring character is part of that plot thread I would think they would have to address it at some point. Right?

Edited October 28, 2014 by AwesomO4000

[catrox14]

I very badly want a Halloween episode now with Sam and Dean in pirate garb for the entirety.  And maybe have Cas with an eyepatch.

[Demented Daisy]

That's quite a hyperbolic comparison and way off base. Way off base.

 

Oh, for Chuck's sake, I was making a simple comparison.  You don't have to wield the blade to be responsible.  In no way was I suggesting that Sam was on the same level as Charles Manson.

[rue721]

In the Supernatural universe, not everything is 1 to 1 with our universe. Since the nature of sin has not been spelled out in-universe, I don't think we can be 100% definitive on the topic.

 

I agree that it's not 1:1 with our universe, and I think that even within the world of SPN, there's a gap between the dogma (even if the dogma is literally true) and meaning.

 

Actually, not to veer too far off-topic, what I think is interesting is that the dogma that the guys were apparently taught, not just in the religious sense but even in terms of what John taught his sons about how the world works, has almost entirely been proven *true.* Although I can think of a few times when the guys have been tricked/bullshitted, I can't actually think offhand of a time when John's journal or the kind of Sunday school religiosity that the show seems to base its angels/demons stuff on is proven straight up wrong. Even stuff that seems kind of difficult to take on faith is pretty much always affirmed to be correct. For example, it might be hard to believe that John would be there for his sons whenever he was gone, let alone after he was dead, even though he told them he was, but yup he literally came out of hell and saved them from Yellow Eyes even after he was dead. Or, it might be hard to believe that God exists but won't step in to stop an Apocalypse, but yup, apparently that's exactly what's true, they heard it directly from Joshua in the Garden. And that's just the really big stuff -- of course, smaller stuff, like that angels can hear prayers or that ghosts don't like iron or whatever, is taken as a given on the show, for the most part.

 

What I think is interesting is that, regardless of finding out over the years that the dogma he's been taught is by and large correct, Dean has pretty obviously had this huge crisis of faith that has been a big deal for him and is apparently *still* an issue even when he's a demon judging by his aimlessness and bitterness. I was struck in this episode when he said that John brainwashed them, because I think of "brainwashing" as convincing people of something that isn't true, which the guys have learned over the years that John didn't actually do -- there really are lethal supernatural creatures, their mom really was murdered by a demon and the quest for revenge against that demon was even successful, etc. It's turned out that John actually did give them a pretty realistic picture of how their world works and how to survive within it, so it seems strange to say he "brainwashed" them? I get why Dean would be bitter toward John in general, because John was a huge PITA, but it's interesting to me that Dean's apparently pissed that all John passed on to them was dogma (i.e., training on how to survive as a hunters), and it's cold comfort to Dean that at least the dogma he taught them was correct? I guess what Dean got was dogma, but what he wanted was meaning?

 

I also thought that was a strange thing to say, because Sam wasn't even all that brainwashed, he decided to blow that pop-stand and become a Stanford JD. It was Dean and Yellow Eyes that brought Sam back into the game. So I don't know why it would be hurtful to *Sam* to say that John brainwashed them, when John didn't even manage to convince Sam to become a hunter in the first place? I would think that it would be hurtful thing to say *to* Dean, considering he actually did respect John, at least at one time, but I can't think why it would be a hurtful thing coming *from* Dean. Well, except if Dean were saying it to John himself, which is one of the many reasons I wish that there had been a John/Demon!Dean face-to-face, but I digress. The thing of, "who did John even 'brainwash' into becoming a hunter -- wasn't it just Dean?' made me think about Cole, because Dean basically played the same role in his life as Yellow Eyes did in his and Sam's and John's -- he killed a loved one and Cole dedicated his life to revenge, and is apparently now entering this whole world of supernatural stuff and hunters (judging by him checking out all the library books about demons, anyway) because of it.

 

Anyway, if we're talking about what sins Sam committed in this episode, wasn't his worst one that he tortured and killed the Crossroads demon? First of all, because the demon was in a human shell even if she wasn't human herself, and Sam knifed open the human shell. Second of all, because of what Dean said in this episode and Sam has alluded to previously -- how do they know what the difference even is between them and what they're hunting? How do they even know it's OK to kill the creatures they hunt? Also, Sam really doesn't have a lot of ground to stand on in terms of saying calling and murdering the demon was justified, because he was just doing it in order to call up the King of Hell and get in touch with yet another demon (Dean). It's not even as though he were on some Grand Mission for the Greater Good, he was just trying to get in touch with this one other demon who he happens to care about.

 

I don't hold him responsible for Lester's actions, though. Lester was the one who made the vow to sell his soul for his wife's death, Sam didn't make that decision for him, not even the Crossroads Demon made that decision for him. If the thing of letting Lester know that there are Crossroads Demons to make deals like that with and how to get to them is the sin, then isn't that the same sin that Dean committed against Cole, and that John committed against both of them -- telling them that the supernatural exists? If that's comparable to a religious sin, I would think it's comparable to Original Sin, since it's about taking away people's innocence but granting them free will (to make a contract with a Crossroads Demon or to research demon possession and become a hunter or whatever).

 

Also, in terms of having faith and whether that means anything in terms of religiosity:  some real-world religions prioritize practice over faith, and it seems like the religious world on SPN is prioritizes practice over faith, too. When Dean went through those "righteous man" trials in Hell, he "broke" when he changed what he did, and started torturing -- if what he believed also changed, that was apparently tertiary. When Sam was going through the Trials, what was important was whether he literally did things, too. When they pray, it is literally to call an angel to come help them, it's a mechanistic act rather than a spiritual act. In the world of the show, I think that regret and guilt and other moral emotions are primarily important because they cause you to suffer. I actually don't think they have any meaning beyond that, or that suffering in general has any inherent meaning. God is apparently indifferent and not keeping score in terms of human suffering, and all the individual angels/demons/humans are just looking out for themselves. Even if it were to get you a ticket to heaven, anyway, who cares about that? Heaven sucks, if/when it even exists. I think that's actually really unusual -- to make suffering such a *huge* component of the characters' lives, and then to emphasize over and over that all that suffering is meaningless.

[mertensia]

Dean was brainwashed. John brainwashed him into believing- and acting on- the idea that "save Sammy" was his entire purpose in life. I can see DemonDean being rightfully bitter about abandoning his childhood to raise Sam. I would be bitter.

[AwesomO4000]

Dean was brainwashed. John brainwashed him into believing- and acting on- the idea that "save Sammy" was his entire purpose in life. I can see DemonDean being rightfully bitter about abandoning his childhood to raise Sam. I would be bitter.

 

I don't think that is what Dean is talking about with his "brainwashing" comment, and I'm not sure it's entirely true either. While it is true that Dean gave a lot of  of his childhood to raise Sam and that John drilled "watch out for Sammy" into his head, Dean didn't necessarily always do that as we saw even after the incident with the Shtriga. This is in no way a slam against Dean. Dean had every right to be his own person and thankfully he sometimes was. I'm just saying that this was not the thing that was brainwashed into Dean's head, in my opinion or what Dean was referring to in this episode.

 

John didn't even believe that himself as John and Dean went off to hunt together leaving young/mid teen Sam alone to fend for himself on multiple occasions, demonstrating that even "save Sammy" was at least secondary (if not farther down on the list than that), since John considered it more important to have Dean hunting with him than keeping Sam safe. Sam's main purpose there was to do research for them - even to the detriment of his own health and schoolwork - while John and Dean hunted. Also John was apparently training Sam to be a hunter just like Dean - not something he would be doing if his number one priority was to keep Sam "safe" as that would be ridiculous considering how unsafe being a hunter is. I'm still convinced John was less worried about Sam being "safe" at college and more concerned that he couldn't keep an eye on Sam and make sure he wouldn't turn evil and that's why he was angry Sam left. Even John's dying words to Dean were not that Dean should save Sam no matter what, but that Dean would either have to save Sam or kill him.

 

I also believe - from what happened later - that once Adam was born, he became John's "second chance" to get it right and that "save Sammy" was even less of a priority. All of that then shifted over to Adam, who then got the sheltering and the keeping safe effort from John (ironically since that sheltering partially contributed to him getting dead). My opinion only there.

 

What John brainwashed them with, and Dean in particular, was that killing The Yellow Eyed Demon ("the thing that killed you mother") and demons and monsters in general was the most important thing in their lives and as part of that that all monsters should be hated and killed. Dean mentioned this specifically in "Bloodlust." That is what Dean referred to in this episode as well: that John brainwashed them into "wasting our lives fighting his losing battle."

 

Demon Dean's digs about Sam sucking the life out of his life came before that and was separate from the brainwashing comment. And this was not something new in the show or coming out of "Dean" - which is why the dig hurt Sam so much. The issue of Sam being the reason Mary died was raised in "Changing Channels" and Shifter Dean had expressed Dean's hidden bitterness about having to take care of Sam and giving up his own dream of potentially going to college (the second of which especially wasn't Sam's fault, in my opinion) to Sam in "Skin."

[catrox14]

episode as well: that John brainwashed them into "wasting our lives fighting his losing battle."

I think Dean was talking about all of it. Don't forget John told Dean he would have to kill Sam if he couldn't save him. The brainwashing was there after the shrigta incident when John gave Dean the most contemptible withering look a parent could direct towards a child. IMO that was when Dean 9 year old brain ticked into forever after save Sammy. I so to me it was both true and not 100% factual. It was hyperbole based in Dean's lost youth and watching his mother die and having an obsessed bastard of a father that Dean struggled to stand up to until he was in his twenties.

[SueB]

 

That is what Dean referred to in this episode as well: that John brainwashed them into "wasting our lives fighting his losing battle."

I thought that was the brainwashing topic as well.  I think was particularly important is Dean saying it's a losing battle.  He earlier made a comment about being a demon is the "natural order".  Taking the two together, it sure seems like Demon!Dean thinks he wasted his life fighting monsters and demons. That these creatures are part of the natural order and no hunter is ever going to do anything but eventually lose out.  Contrast that to Dean in early S8 (Heartache) where he said that he felt good about the Hunting Life. That this is what he was best at and it made him happy. 

 

I guess what I'm saying is this is all feeding the "who are we and is what we do a good thing?" existential crisis the boys are going thru.  In the past "Saving People, Hunting Things, The Family Business" was a credo for Team Winchester.  And even if Sam didn't want that life, he didn't look at it as a waste of existence, just maybe not what he wanted.  At this point Demon!Dean's comments combined, with poking at Sam's actions in looking for Dean, suggest that maybe the family credo is under the microscope.  

 

It'll be interesting to see the episode tonight to see if they address their thoughts on their profession as Hunters. 

[rue721]

Taking the two together, it sure seems like Demon!Dean thinks he wasted his life fighting monsters and demons. That these creatures are part of the natural order and no hunter is ever going to do anything but eventually lose out.  Contrast that to Dean in early S8 (Heartache) where he said that he felt good about the Hunting Life. That this is what he was best at and it made him happy.

 

Yes, I agree, I think that Demon!Dean was saying in general that he thought Dean had wasted his life, and was saying that he thought hunting is pointless altogether, since according to him there's not even a fundamental difference between the hunter and the hunted when you're talking about a bunch of demons and angels and Winchesters and what have you. He pretty explicitly blamed the whole family for his wasted life, too -- John for "brainwashing" them, Mary for dying, and Sam for "sucking the life out of his life." It also seemed to me that Demon!Dean thought that being a hunter is a fate worse than death, since that's what he "sentenced" Cole to, rather then being "merciful" by killing him outright, and he hinted he was sentencing/had sentenced Sam to the same thing. I actually can see Demon!Dean's point about all that, my only qualm is that Dean actually did/does have *some* agency, and imo it's awkwardly childish of Demon!Dean to slough off all responsibility for him deciding to be a hunter in the first place onto the rest of his family.  Even though there was a lot of pressure on him at the time, it was still ultimately Dean's decision, not anyone else's, to stay with John and dedicate his life to being a hunter after Sam left for college, and imo it's bullshit for him not to own that. (To be fair to Dean, though, imo he does own his own decision(s) when he's actually himself, including his decisions to prioritize his family. I'm not shocked or think it really means anything about Human!Dean that as a demon, he was trying to play the blame game. However, I did roll my eyes when Demon!Dean started railing against fate and was including incredibly basic complaints like, "Sam exists." I mean come ON, are we actually in a Greek Tragedy now? Although thinking about it more, maybe. Maybe we are).

[Bishop]

Everything was fine about the episode, regarding Sam and Dean, except the end.  There should have been a conversation between the brothers.  I don't get why the writers just had Dean healed and Sam was off somewhere else.  I have no idea what the writers do sometimes when it comes to writing these stories cohesively.  Also, I would have had Demon Dean touch more on how much Dean has sacrificed and how Dean had to be the father to John and to Sam, and he gave up his life because of it.  Demon Dean just mentioned losing his mother and how John was a bad parent, but not how much Dean gave up.  I remember that episode when Dean had been sent away to a type of "reform school" at that guy's house, and he really bonded with him.  He wanted to stay, and he was about to say "yes" to staying when he saw his father pull up in the Impala with his little brother looking out the window, and a barely teenage Dean Winchester gave up the chance at a happy, normal life in order to protect his brother.  The writers never seem to touch on those points.

 

I am happy that Sam did not give up on Dean this time around, as compared to last year's mess of him abandoning his brother.  So at least they corrected that travesty.  That being said, they still didn't really give Dean a voice.  

Edited October 29, 2014 by Bishop

[millennium]

 

My big WtF came at the end. Who/what the hell was that? Did I miss something where I should know what that was about?

 

For a moment I thought it was Kathy Griffin.   That would have been interesting.

 

I watch the show for the show and don't get much concerned about who's writing episodes, directing, etc.   But I am curious -- what is meant by the "nepotism duo?"

 

Liked Cas's "angel eyes" effect. 

 

The episode itself was underwhelming.   I can't understand why Sam declared Dean cured less than two seconds after Dean awoke with black eyes.

 

The montage of pictures on Dean's nightstand had the unintended effect of reminding us how much better the show was in earlier days.