“Bitch” Vs. “Jerk”: Where We Discuss Who The Writers Screwed This Week/Season/Ever

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

However, it was in direct response to the sarcasm I read in your "Did I say there was?" post.  Because that read as pretty sarcastic to me.  

Sorry if you perceived it that way.

3 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

My comments were not intended to jump into all that.

Never said that they were; just that as a result I didn't remember this particular post which is why I stated " did I say that there was".

[RulerofallIsurvey]

8 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Sorry if you perceived it that way.

Never said that they were; just that as a result I didn't remember this particular post which is why I stated " did I say that there was".

Gotcha.  

ETA: Never said that you said that they were.  :)  Just trying to 'splain myself is all.  

Edited July 31, 2017 by RulerofallIsurvey

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Actually, I'm fine with Sam not being Leader of Team Free Will.  I'd prefer a much more equitable relationship between the brothers myself instead of one being the "Leader" or not.

Agreed especially with the bolded statement.

 

3 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I think both Sam and Dean are equally strong characters.  I don't think I'd be in once piece if I'd been through what either of them have.

Also agreed!

[auntvi]

11 minutes ago, rue721 said:

And then later on, it turns out that Sam apparently didn't even realize, let alone appreciate, any of the work that went into keeping them as together and normal as they were, for all those years? I think that was what was sticking in Dean's craw during the Dark Side of the Moon memories.

 

12 minutes ago, rue721 said:

I think Dean believed that Sam was shirking his responsibilities to the family/Dean, as well as shirking his duty to help save people and kill things, and he was straight up pissed off about it.

What I react to in both these situations is that it is unreasonable, IMO,  to expect young Sam to be aware of all of this, and that these were choices Sam had the right to make. So I have a hard time sympathizing with Dean's anger.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

34 minutes ago, rue721 said:

I think the issue is that John believed that Sam was shirking his duty (to society), that he was being selfish by refusing to hunt and that people were going to die as a result. And I think Dean felt betrayed when Sam left, because he felt like Sam fucked him and the family over when he did. I think it's pretty key that Dean didn't strike up a partnership with anyone else, and when he really needed a partner (once John was missing, and it seemed like Dean thought there was a strong possibility he was dead), he went back to Sam -- and *only* Sam -- for help. In Dean's mind there seemed to be a specific job (Dean's hunting partner) that Sam was refusing to do, and he took Sam's refusal personally AND it was a legitimate obstacle professionally. I think Dean believed that Sam was shirking his responsibilities to the family/Dean, as well as shirking his duty to help save people and kill things, and he was straight up pissed off about it.

I agree that part of Dean's anger and/or resentment was that perhaps he thought that Sam was shirking his responsibilities  to help save people and kill things.  However, I don't think that was part of John's anger at Sam for leaving for college.  Probably part of John's anger was that he thought Sam was shirking his responsibility to the family (he and Dean) especially after they'd kept him safe for so many years, but I never got the impression that John cared about a duty to society so much.  That seemed to come more incidentally to John in the course of hunting for what killed Mary.  Rather, I think most of John's anger about Sam leaving for college was because he afraid of what Sam would become (since I think John already knew about the demon blood by then) - but not necessarily afraid 'for' Sam, if that makes sense - without him and Dean around.  

[DeeDee79]

27 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Gotcha.  

ETA: Never said that you said that they were.  :)  Just trying to 'splain myself is all.  

Fair enough ?

[RulerofallIsurvey]

20 minutes ago, auntvi said:

What I react to in both these situations is that it is unreasonable, IMO,  to expect young Sam to be aware of all of this, and that these were choices Sam had the right to make. So I have a hard time sympathizing with Dean's anger.

It was unreasonable to to expect Sam, at 17-18, to be aware of all that.  But Dean was only 21-22 at the time.  And 21-22 year-olds are also often unreasonable.  :)  (Latest scientific research puts the brain being not fully developed, especially where logic functions are concerned, until age 25.)  So while I don't exactly sympathize with Dean's anger, I can give him a pass for being an unreasonable young adult.  

[Wayward Son]

1 minute ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

It was unreasonable to to expect Sam, at 17-18, to be aware of all that.  But Dean was only 21-22 at the time.  And 21-22 year-olds are also often unreasonable.  :)  (Latest scientific research puts the brain being not fully developed, especially where logic functions are concerned, until age 25.)  So while I don't exactly sympathize with Dean's anger, I can give him a pass for being an unreasonable young adult.  

Yes, but the problem with this is Dean continues to exhibit such belief well past the age of 21-22. He even goes as far as to question if Sam was ever his brother because he "ran away to Stanford" in Lucifer Rising. A period when he would have been what 29-30? Well past the point when Dean ought to have grown up. 

[sugarbabex23]

40 minutes ago, auntvi said:

 

What I react to in both these situations is that it is unreasonable, IMO,  to expect young Sam to be aware of all of this, and that these were choices Sam had the right to make. So I have a hard time sympathizing with Dean's anger.

Agreed completely. This is why I have a hard time sympathizing with Dean when it comes to Sam leaving and going to college. No matter what, I'm definitely on Sam's side when it comes to the leaving for college over living a hunters life situation. Sam had a right to make those decisions. He was an 18 year old adult at the time and Dean and John were legally no longer responsible for Sam and could no longer make decisions for him. 

Edited July 31, 2017 by sugarbabex23

[sugarbabex23]

6 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Yes, but the problem with this is Dean continues to exhibit such belief well past the age of 21-22. He even goes as far as to question if Sam was ever his brother because he "ran away to Stanford" in Lucifer Rising. A period when he would have been what 29-30? Well past the point when Dean ought to have grown up. 

Dean has serious abandonment issues that, to me, are a huge warning sign that he needs some serious therapy. He also seems to show signs of dependent personality disorder or borderline personality disorder. He simply can't take it when someone leaves him and he doesn't handle rejection very well. The fact that Dean thinks that Sam leaving to go to school and gain independence is one of the "worst nights of his life" is the epitome of overdramatic. I just simply don't understand how Dean operates when it comes to his relationship with Sam. It's beyond abnormal and alien to me. Maybe it's because I have a completely different personal experience. But Dean, particularly in the past seasons, can't seem to treat Sam as an independent person instead of one of his possessions (like his car or his guns, etc).  

[catrox14]

On 7/29/2017 at 9:50 AM, Wayward Son said:

I need to rewatch the opener of eight, but as I remember it he was happy to see Dean alive. He pulled Dean in for a hug exclaiming "you're frigging alive" (again supporting the belief that he thought Dean was dead) in a delighted manner. It was when Dean went on the attack and started criticising his choices in the past year, without consideration of why Sam acted the way he did, that Sam grew more defensive and closed off.

The order of events played out this way:

Quote

SAM: What the –? I'm not a demon.

DEAN pours Borax over SAM.
SAM
Or a Leviathan. What –
DEAN grabs SAM’s arm and cuts it with a knife. SAM gasps in pain.
DEAN
Or a shifter. Good. [He stands up.] My turn. Come on. Let's go. [He holds out the bottles to SAM.]
SAM
I don't need to. I know it's you.
DEAN
Damn it, Sammy! [He splashes the holy water and Borax over himself and holds out a knife to SAM, who has stood up.] Come on!
SAM
No! Dean, can I just say hello?
DEAN rolls up his sleeve and cuts his own arm.
DEAN
All right. [He smiles as he binds his arm.] Well... let's do this.
SAM
I don't know whether to give you a hug or take a shower.
DEAN
[laughs] Come here.
DEAN holds out his arms and they hug.SAM
Dude. You're... freakin' alive. [He walks a few steps away with his hands in his hair.] I mean, what the hell happened?

DEAN
Well, I guess standing too close to exploding Dick sends your ass straight to Purgatory.
SAM
You were in Purgatory? For the whole year?

DEAN
Yeah, time flies when you're running for your life.
SAM
Well, how'd you get out?
DEAN
I guess whoever built that box didn't want me in there any more than I did.
SAM
What does that mean?
DEAN
I'm here, okay?
SAM
What about Cas? Was he there?
DEAN walks a few steps away and speaks with his back to SAM.
DEAN
Yeah, Cas didn't make it.
SAM
What exactly does that mean?
DEAN
Something happened to him down there. Things got pretty hairy towards the end, and he... just let go.
SAM
So Cas is dead? You saw him die?
DEAN
I saw enough.
SAM
So, then what, you're not sure?
DEAN
[turning back to SAM] I said I saw enough, Sam.
SAM
Right. Dean, I'm sorry.
DEAN
Me too. So you – I can't believe you're actually here. [He takes two beers out of the refrigerator.] You know that half your numbers are out of service? Felt like I was leaving messages in the wind. [He sits down at the table and sets a beer down for SAM. SAM remains standing.]
SAM
Yeah, I-I-I didn't get your messages.
DEAN
How come?
SAM
Probably because I ditched the phones.
DEAN
Because...?
SAM
I guess, um... I guess something happened to me this year, too.[He shrugs.] I don't hunt anymore. [He smiles tentatively.]
DEANYeah. And Sasha Grey's gone legit. [SAM exhales.] What?
SAM
Nothing. Um, she did a Soderbergh movie.
DEAN
What?
SAM
She did a Soderbergh –
DEANNo. You, Sam. You quit?
SAM
Yeah. Yeah, I – you were gone... Dean. Cas was gone, Bobby was dead. I mean, Crowley even shipped off Kevin and Meg to parts unknown.
DEAN
So you just turned tail on the family business.
SAM
Nothing says "family" quite like the whole family being dead.
DEAN
I wasn't dead. [He stands up and walks around SAM.] In fact, I was knee-deep in God's armpit killing monsters, which, I thought, is what we actually do.
SAM
Yes, Dean. And far as I knew, what we do is the thing that got every single member of my family killed. I had no one – no one. And for the first time in my life, I was completely alone. And, honestly, I-I didn't exactly have a roadmap. So, yeah, I-I fixed up the Impala, and I just... drove.
DEAN
After you looked for me. [SAM says nothing.] Did you look for me, Sam? [SAM looks away.] Good. That's good. Now, we – we... always told each other not to look for each other. That's smart. Good for you. Of course, we always ignored that because of our deep, abiding love for each another, but not this time, right, Sammy?
SAM
Look, I'm still the same guy, Dean.
DEAN
Well, bully for you. I'm not.
DEAN walks away and we hear the door close.
SAM
Welcome back.

I think it's open to interpretation who initiated the hug. IMO Dean initiated the hug more than Sam.  IMO Sam was just as flummoxed as Dean to see each other and not that he was delighted as much as HOLY SHIT WHY ARE YOU BACK. That's just my interpretation.  YMMV

[catrox14]

On 7/29/2017 at 9:41 AM, Wayward Son said:

As Sam rightly pointed out, in Salvation I think, he was only going off to college like any other 18 year old. It was John who closed that door by telling him not to come back and Dean who chose to standby and allow that to happen. I hardly think it's unreasonable that Sam chose to disassociate himself from the family that chose to disown him. A lesser man would have told Dean to go away and find John himself under those circumstances. The fact Sam actually agreed to help showed there was still some lingering love there IMO. 

 

I'm a little confused by something.  What do you mean WRT to 'Dean chose to stand by and allow that to happen'?  What would Dean have done? I don't think Dean had that much influence over John to get him to change his mind. 

[Wayward Son]

7 hours ago, catrox14 said:

The order of events played out this way:

I think it's open to interpretation who initiated the hug. IMO Dean initiated the hug more than Sam.  IMO Sam was just as flummoxed as Dean to see each other and not that he was delighted as much as HOLY SHIT WHY ARE YOU BACK. That's just my interpretation.  YMMV

Thanks for the transcript :) 

And I see the hug can be open to interpretation.

 

Also, thanks for providing the wording. What I'm seeing is Sam talking about how he couldn't cope with being alone, of how he fled after his entire family was killed (from his perspective anyway) and not the smug "OMFG I QUIT AND IT WAS AWESOME! Get away from me Dean you pleb" many fans try to sell in fandom.

 

3 hours ago, catrox14 said:

I'm a little confused by something.  What do you mean WRT to 'Dean chose to stand by and allow that to happen'?  What would Dean have done? I don't think Dean had that much influence over John to get him to change his mind. 

I'm generally a believer that if something isn't stated as occurring then it mustn't have happened. Anything else is simply head canon. IIRC corrrctly what we know of the night Sam chose to leave was

 

1) Sam announced he was leaving for Stanford

2) John did not react well to this and an argument began. According to Dean, and it wasn't refuted by Sam, harsh words were said by both sides with Sam giving as good as he got. 

3. Dean was present when this went down since he talks about recalling the harsh comments mentioned in 2. 

4. John reaches the end of his tether and the argument concludes with the ultimatum that if he walks out the door he isn't to return.

5. Sam accepts this is the way it has to and he leaves.

 

There is no reference to attempted interventation on Dean's part. He may not have been able to change John's mind, but Dean could have tried to stop John. Even if it was a simple "come on dad, that's too far" about the ultimatum only for him to be rebuked by John, but there's no mention of Dean even trying to do that much. 

 

So I think it is fair to describe the situation as John kicking Sam out and Dean standing by while it happened, 

 

P.S: In regard to the picture of John and Mary shown in the pilot, could it not simply be a case of Sam displayed that picture because it showed Mary? While he may have had his issues with Dean and John there is nothing to say he felt the same about Mary. In fact, even if not to the same extent of Dean, he had a rather romanticised view of her as the perfect mum. It makes sense to me he'd display what is possibly the only picture he has of her without it actually meaning he was more angry with Dean than John. Maybe he just hadn't reached the level of petty needed to tear the picture in half and burn John's end. Plus with Mary leaning no John's chest it would have been pretty hard to crop John out anyway.

 

Of course since Sam never explicitly states his motivation this is only an alternative explanation / potential head canon :)

Edited July 31, 2017 by Wayward Son

[mertensia]

My guess for the night Sam left for Stanford is that Dean, ever the peacemaker, tried to get them both to back down, but that once John and Sam really got into it they focussed on no one but each other. 

[DittyDotDot]

2 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

In regard to the picture of John and Mary shown in the pilot, could it not simply be a case of Sam displayed that picture because it showed Mary?

It may have simply been the only family photo Sam had? I mean, there couldn't have been many that survived the fire and it's not like their lifestyle was one where they stopped and took a lot of photos. Maybe he just simply didn't have any photos of Dean? That one photo might've been his only link to his family. The fact that Sam was displaying that photo at all might suggest he didn't walk away and never looked back, though?

[Wayward Son]

1 hour ago, mertensia said:

My guess for the night Sam left for Stanford is that Dean, ever the peacemaker, tried to get them both to back down, but that once John and Sam really got into it they focussed on no one but each other. 

But the show has never made reference to such a thing happening and surely they would have, if we the audience are meant to believe that Dean did try to intervene. Plus, considering the fact Sam's decision to go to Stanford was a source of bitterness for Dean years later it makes sense he agreed with John's condemnation. 

[auntvi]

49 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

But the show has never made reference to such a thing happening and surely they would have, if we the audience are meant to believe that Dean did try to intervene. Plus, considering the fact Sam's decision to go to Stanford was a source of bitterness for Dean years later it makes sense he agreed with John's condemnation. 

I know, Sam with the demon blood was not blameless and gave as good as he got, but it's striking that at the end of the big fight in 4.21 Dean angrily tells Sam that if he leaves, he should never come back. The writer intentionally invokes Dean's memory & bitterness of Sam's leaving, indicating that it was still a source of bitterness for Dean.

Edited July 31, 2017 by auntvi
finished thought

[Myrelle]

1 hour ago, mertensia said:

My guess for the night Sam left for Stanford is that Dean, ever the peacemaker, tried to get them both to back down, but that once John and Sam really got into it they focussed on no one but each other. 

ITA. In fact, I'd bet the ranch on it.

[Wayward Son]

11 minutes ago, auntvi said:

I know, Sam with the demon blood was not blameless and gave as good as he got, but it's striking that at the end of the big fight in 4.21 Dean angrily tells Sam that if he leaves, he should never come back. The writer intentionally invokes Dean's memory & bitterness of Sam's leaving, indicating that it was still a source of bitterness for Dean.

And he also references it in Lucifer Rising when questioning whether he and Sam were ever family and again in Dark Side of the Moon when he describes Sam as bailing out on his family. If it's a sore topic for Dean six years after it occurred, is it really hard to believe that he wouldn't even more angry the night it actually happened? 

 

I dont think so and so and neither do the show runners since the show never mentioned Dean acting as the "Peace maker" on that night. Any such claims are fanon and not at all in line with what the show states about that night, or Dean's treatment of Sam over it years later.

Edited July 31, 2017 by Wayward Son
Because fanon and canon are opposite things.

[Myrelle]

16 minutes ago, auntvi said:

The writer intentionally invokes Dean's memory & bitterness of Sam's leaving, indicating that it was still a source of bitterness for Dean.

Dean still has abandonment issues to this day, IMO(and with good reason, again IMO). He had them then, too.

Both brothers have ample reason to still feel/harbor bitterness and resentment deep down inside and towards the other and it would undoubtedly come out in situations like that one.

I'd wholeheartedly welcome some further discussion between the characters over these issues(as long as Dean's are addressed in a more in-depth manner than they've ever been before), but they might fight about things and get angry with each other over them and we can't be having any of that these days.

Edited July 31, 2017 by Myrelle

[RulerofallIsurvey]

1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said:

It may have simply been the only family photo Sam had? I mean, there couldn't have been many that survived the fire and it's not like their lifestyle was one where they stopped and took a lot of photos. Maybe he just simply didn't have any photos of Dean? That one photo might've been his only link to his family. The fact that Sam was displaying that photo at all might suggest he didn't walk away and never looked back, though?

Boy I wish I could LIKE this more than once!  I whole-heartedly concur!!!

[mertensia]

30 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

And he also references it in Lucifer Rising when questioning whether he and Sam were ever family and again in Dark Side of the Moon when he describes Sam as bailing out on his family. If it's a sore topic for Dean six years after it occurred, is it really hard to believe that he wouldn't even more angry the night it actually happened? 

 

I dont think so and so and neither do the show runners since the show never mentioned Dean acting as the "Peace maker" on that night. Any such claims are fanon and not at all in line with what the show states about that night, or Dean's treatment of Sam over it years later.

Nope, it's not Canon, but I never said it was: I used the words "my guess"".  

[CluelessDrifter]

1 hour ago, Wayward Son said:

But the show has never made reference to such a thing happening and surely they would have, if we the audience are meant to believe that Dean did try to intervene. Plus, considering the fact Sam's decision to go to Stanford was a source of bitterness for Dean years later it makes sense he agreed with John's condemnation. 

It's always seemed clear to me that the fight John and Sam had in Dead Man's Blood is meant to be a representation of the family dynamics, so we can see firsthand the inferences we've been getting about the three of them all season.  Dean mentions twice that it's already starting or that it is starting back up again, which means that this isn't an unusual occurrence, but something that happened frequently, and we see the roles that all three play in such situations.  John grates on Sam.  Sam instigates.  John responds badly.  Dean stands in the middle and tries to get them not to fight.  They shout over Dean's head until Dean breaks through and manages to separate them.  On the night Sam left for college, I think the only difference was that Dean wasn't able to stop things from escalating to the point that Sam left and John told him not to come back.

Edited July 31, 2017 by CluelessDrifter

[CluelessDrifter]

On 7/31/2017 at 1:34 PM, auntvi said:

I know, Sam with the demon blood was not blameless and gave as good as he got, but it's striking that at the end of the big fight in 4.21 Dean angrily tells Sam that if he leaves, he should never come back. The writer intentionally invokes Dean's memory & bitterness of Sam's leaving, indicating that it was still a source of bitterness for Dean.

To me, it never seemed like it was Dean still being bitter about the night Sam left for Stanford in that moment, but that it was the worst thing he could think to say to Sam.  He knew Sam was going to leave, so it wasn't to get him to stay.  It was his parting shot, one only a sibling would understand would hurt the other the most.  He wanted Sam to feel the way he felt after what'd just happened between them.  

Edited August 1, 2017 by CluelessDrifter

[PAForrest]

39 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

It's always seemed clear to me that the fight John and Sam had in Dead Man's Blood is meant to be a representation of the family dynamics, so we can see firsthand the inferences we've been getting about the three of them all season.  Dean mentions twice that it's already starting or that it is starting back up again, which means that this isn't an unusual occurrence, but something that happened frequently, and we see the roles that all three play in such situations.  John grates on Sam.  Sam instigates.  John responds badly.  Dean stands in the middle and tries to get them not to fight.  They shout over Dean's head until Dean breaks through and manages to separate them. 

Exactly this. A perfect example of show not tell, which the series is sorely lacking these days but is much better storytelling.  From that scene on there was really no doubt that being stuck in the middle and trying to defuse situations was Dean's role when the boys were teens.  We even see in Dark Side ... that toddler Dean was attempting to defuse situations between Mary & John too. So this was clearly a role Dean just naturally took on within the family dynamic.

[Aeryn13]

The show never stated in specific dialogue that Dean interfered, true. But it never stated in specific dialogue that he didn`t either. Or where was that if I`ve forgotten? So this alone is not compelling evidence to me either way. 

I agree the fight in Dead Man`s Blood was supposed to be a template for the family dynamic of yesteryore. And really, Dean could have announced he was pregnant with triplets right then and there and neither John nor Sam would have taken notice. It didn`t matter what he said, they were too focused on each other. So I wouldn`t buy either one`s account of that night in terms of what Dean may have said or not said. They probably could quote each other ad verbatim but not know what Dean had said.

And as a former failed peacemaker, that doesn`t negate bitterness. In fact, quite the opposite. You are bitter towards either party because even while you tried for the five millionth-time you knew you were talking to two walls.

 

As for the photo of John and Mary. Well, the reason why it was there is obviously because the show wanted to make it clear after the teaser that time had passed and this (Sam) was the baby all grown up. And they couldn`t have a picture of Dean as is because Jensen Ackles hadn`t been introduced yet and they wanted to have the fake-out with him breaking into the appartment. Even though it would have been clear to most viewers who it was gonna be. 

However, those are the behind-the-scenes reasons. I know they are there but narratively, I would have prefered a picture of the whole family with both boys. If they had been both there as kids, it would have kept the "it is Dean and not a supernatural cat burglar" secret intact. Well, it`s a Pilot and they would re-used props (aka that picture) and not twice about minute story points. That is something that I might expect from someone like Joss Whedon but not green-behind-the-ears-Kripke at that point. We`re lucky he got talked out of his previous, atrocious Pilot scripts with the Harrisons and then "Sam argues the viewpoint of leaving hunting and ten minutes later argues the viewpoint of how irresponsible it is to leave people to a supernatural threat when you can do something about it and is still validated each time". The last one was Jared`s audition script (it is on some DVD extra) so it made it quite far into the process.  

Quote

Also, thanks for providing the wording. What I'm seeing is Sam talking about how he couldn't cope with being alone, of how he fled after his entire family was killed (from his perspective anyway) and not the smug "OMFG I QUIT AND IT WAS AWESOME! Get away from me Dean you pleb" many fans try to sell in fandom.

The "I had something I never had before" convo came later. Which a) way to rub it in, Sam and b) fuck you, Jessica, you got nothing on the bitchy vet. That birthday cake flashback on the meadows? Jeeze Luise, show.

Also, like I said, I had a real problem with the acting in that first (and subsequent) scenes. Not to mention, I would, as a general rule prioritize the guy who just returned from presumed death/a supernatural realm. If that conversation had gone like "well, Purgatory schmurgatory, what about you, Sam? Are you okay?", I would have thrown something.

At least I got Kevin`s "eat me" voicemails which were richly deserved. 

Then there was this later scene in the cursed coin episode where Sam had that smug look on his face when he told Dean to tell Garth how he escaped from Purgatory. In what Sam-distorted world did he think he would come out smelling like roses in that story? I would have gone off on him there, wouldn`t have needed the coin. And of course that little diatribe in the end would have been met with an entirely different reaction.

It was so bitter to see how Dean folded and lost his spine after that point. Because if Sam`s asshattery in early Season 8 had one good effect it was that Dean seemed so blown away, he moved beyond hurt and confusion into a state of "you know what? fuck you, I don`t have to take that shit." That was such a great progression for him.

And then boom, right back to where he started and worse off during the trials. That harping on that voicemail alone like that episode had been a one-way-street? Mindblowingly bad. So THAT guy he became again during that period, of course that guy did that stupid angel crap in Season 9. The guy with the spine from early Season 8 might have stood more of a chance. Maybe for everyone`s sake he should have stuck around.  

Edited July 31, 2017 by Aeryn13

[sugarbabex23]

3 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

But the show has never made reference to such a thing happening and surely they would have, if we the audience are meant to believe that Dean did try to intervene. Plus, considering the fact Sam's decision to go to Stanford was a source of bitterness for Dean years later it makes sense he agreed with John's condemnation. 

Agreed. Dean obviously took John's side in the argument. There's a reason why Sam avoided both Dean and John for all those years. Dean gave no implication that he took Sam's side in the argument. 

[SueB]

6 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

I'm generally a believer that if something isn't stated as occurring then it mustn't have happened. Anything else is simply head canon. 

Singer, Dabb, and Kripke have all made comments along the direction of leaving some things unsaid because they presume the fans will fill in the blanks.  That explaining everything makes for too much exposition.  

So, while it's your prerogative to presume 'it mustn't have happened', I think that -- in and of itself -- is a variant of head canon. Which I think you've kind of stated is the case from your perspective.  

But since the writers have stated they presume we 'fill in the blanks' when they (the writers) think we don't need it spelled out, I think the 'then it didn't happen' is an overly restrictive interpretation of events.  I think presuming an established pattern of behavior continued while off screen is much more likely. 

So, in the case of Dean in the Stanford argument, since its offscreen and we are left to 'fill in the blanks', it seems far more likely that Dean either tried to broker peace or 'took Dad's side' (a common Sam complaint). What would have been unusual behavior was complete silence or Dean taking Sam's side.  

Finally, I support them leaving some things unsaid.  No matter WHAT Dean actually said that night, Sam feels like Dean generally takes Dad's side and (at the time of DSoTM), Dean felt Sam abandoned the family. Note: Dean, IMO, doesn't feel that way anymore.  Now after all that's happened, Dean IMO, Is more at peace with why Sam did what he did.  I take as evidence the way he mentioned it to Mary as something that was tried and didn't work.  But not the emotionally charged feeling of 'abandonment.'  Interestingly enough Dean never mentioned his own attempt to have a normal life. He just said they were at peace with their vocation because they do good. 

Edited July 31, 2017 by SueB

[sugarbabex23]

I think the dynamics of the Winchester family would have been so much different if Mary had never died. I think that Mary would have acted as a support system for Sam (for both boys really) against John and he wouldn't have felt so lonely and ostracized. I think Sam growing up without a mother really affected his life (Dean had 4 years with Mary whereas Sam had none). Sam really had nobody in his corner during childhood. Something tells me that even though Dean and John were technically there for Sam, he still felt alone and like he didn't belong. I always felt like in the Winchester family, Sam was at the bottom of the totem pole and he was the outsider. Mary probably would have been the only one who could have made Sam feel like he was part of the family. 

Edited July 31, 2017 by sugarbabex23

[CluelessDrifter]

23 minutes ago, SueB said:

Singer, Dabb, and Kripke have all made comments along the direction of leaving some things unsaid because they presume the fans will fill in the blanks.  That explaining everything makes for too much exposition.  

So, while it's your prerogative to presume 'it mustn't have happened', I think that -- in and of itself -- is a variant of head canon. Which I think you've kind of stated is the case from your perspective.  

But since the writers have stated they presume we 'fill in the blanks' when they (the writers) think we don't need it spelled out, I think the 'then it didn't happen' is an overly restrictive interpretation of events.  I think presuming an established pattern of behavior continued while off screen is much more likely. 

So, in the case of Dean in the Stanford argument, since its offscreen and we are left to 'fill in the blanks', it seems far more likely that Dean either tried to broker peace or 'took Dad's side' (a common Sam complaint). What would have been unusual behavior was complete silence or Dean taking Sam's side.  

Finally, I support them leaving some things unsaid.  No matter WHAT Dean actually said that night, Sam feels like Dean generally takes Dad's side and (at the time of DSoTM), Dean felt Sam abandoned the family. Note: Dean, IMO, doesn't feel that way anymore.  Now after all that's happened, Dean IMO, Is more at peace with why Sam did what he did.  I take as evidence the way he mentioned it to Mary as something that was tried and didn't work.  But not the emotionally charged feeling of 'abandonment.'  Interestingly enough Dean never mentioned his own attempt to have a normal life. He just said they were at peace with their vocation because they do good. 

I would agree with almost all of this, but I think as the peace keeper, you're always in a bad position, because one or both parties are most likely going to think that you're choosing the other person's side.  I think this was the case a lot with Sam, like he felt that if Dean wasn't on his side, he must be on John's side, not that Dean didn't have a side and just wanted the fighting to stop.  (We don't know how John felt about it other than he'd maybe make little snide comments about things, like Dean not taking care of the Impala, after a disagreement with Sam, so maybe this was his thinking too only he thought Dean was siding with Sam?  Most likely it was a kick the dog kind of situation, so I don't know other than that what John thought about it).

Edited July 31, 2017 by CluelessDrifter

[DittyDotDot]

17 minutes ago, sugarbabex23 said:

I think the dynamics of the Winchester family would have been so much different if Mary had never died. I think that Mary would have acted as a support system for Sam (for both boys really) against John and he wouldn't have felt so lonely and ostracized. I think Sam growing up without a mother really affected his life (Dean had 4 years with Mary whereas Sam had none). Sam really had nobody in his corner during childhood. Something tells me that even though Dean and John were technically there for Sam, he still felt alone and like he didn't belong. I always felt like in the Winchester family, Sam was at the bottom of the totem pole and he was the outsider. Mary probably would have been the only one who could have made Sam feel like he was part of the family. 

I would say that John would've probably been a completely different parent if Mary hadn't died. I don't think he would've went hunting, got paranoid or left them to raise themselves while also dragging them around the country. Sam and Dean would most likely be completely different people without the childhood they had. Sam's main motivation to go to college was to escape the life, without that, would've he still went to Stanford or would he have been content enough to live in his mother's basement forever? Would Dean have taken off to make his own life if he didn't feel the necessity to stay and help John? Could be that if Mary lived, John would've actually been the more caring and nurturing parent of the two?

[Aeryn13]

Quote

Dean had 4 years with Mary whereas Sam had none

I don`t think the first few months count because in that case Sam had 6 months with her. But obviously, he wouldn`t have any memories of that. Equally, I wouldn`t count Dean`s time from birth on.  

Quote

I would say that John would've probably been a completely different parent if Mary hadn't died.

Agreed. It is pretty much impossible to say how any member of the family would have turned out if you changed that crucial event. Or even how the context of said event. Having seen the flashbacks to Mary now where she left her baby to go on hunting trips and John didn`t know crap, Say she would have died on such a trip, John might have never known. Or he would have been informed that his wife died in a freak accident/under suspicious circumstances in God knows where. Would he have acted the same way? After all, dying and the way he saw her die are different things. 

In such a scenario Sam would never have been born. Unless she went on those little trips when he was a baby, too. Or she didn`t anymore because Dean was older and would have asked questions?

Or say they had both lived and stayed together, Dean and Sam could be radically different people. 

Quote

I would agree with almost all of this, but I think as the peace keeper, you're always in a bad position, because one or both parties are most likely going to think that you're choosing the other person's side.

Oh, absolutely. Because that is what being a peacekeeper entails. You try to get person A to see the viewpoint of person B. Which inevitably leads to person A going "why do you always take B`s side?" Well, if you just told person A what they want to hear and harped in on person B, too, then you wouldn`t be a peacekeeper, that`s why. Of course the warring factions never understand that basic logic. You are just a "traitor" or disloyal somehow. That it doesn`t help anyone to start a threeway fight? Well, again, that isn`t thought of. 

Like I said, it doesn`t preclude bitterness. At all.  

Edited July 31, 2017 by Aeryn13

[Katy M]

1 hour ago, DittyDotDot said:

I would say that John would've probably been a completely different parent if Mary hadn't died. I don't think he would've went hunting, got paranoid or left them to raise themselves while also dragging them around the country. Sam and Dean would most likely be completely different people without the childhood they had. Sam's main motivation to go to college was to escape the life, without that, would've he still went to Stanford or would he have been content enough to live in his mother's basement forever? Would Dean have taken off to make his own life if he didn't feel the necessity to stay and help John? Could be that if Mary lived, John would've actually been the more caring and nurturing parent of the two?

I would go so far as to say that John probably would have also been a completely different parent if Mary had died of cancer or a car accident, or even if she had been murdered and the murderers immediately apprehended and punished.  If his need for vengeance hadn't been constantly fueled he would have settled down into more "normal" after a while.  I'm not going to say he would have gotten over it, because I don't like that phrase for when someone close to you dies.  I think it does stick with you.  But, it would have been a different healing process, without the need for moving around.

[DittyDotDot]

6 minutes ago, Katy M said:

I would go so far as to say that John probably would have also been a completely different parent if Mary had died of cancer or a car accident, or even if she had been murdered and the murderers immediately apprehended and punished.  If his need for vengeance hadn't been constantly fueled he would have settled down into more "normal" after a while.  I'm not going to say he would have gotten over it, because I don't like that phrase for when someone close to you dies.  I think it does stick with you.  But, it would have been a different healing process, without the need for moving around.

Oh certainly. I think if she had died like any other normal person, he would've grieved, but moved on and probably raised Sam and Dean quite normally. He also likely would've had a support system to help when he fell down, as all parents do from time to time. John was just so isolated and the help he did have was fleeting and easily gotten rid of by throwing the boys in the car and running off to the next town.

I actually think what broke John more than anything was learning the truth about Mary and Sam. I think that's what drove his quest for vengeance more than anything.

[catrox14]

2 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

It's always seemed clear to me that the fight John and Sam had in Dead Man's Blood is meant to be a representation of the family dynamics, so we can see firsthand the inferences we've been getting about the three of them all season.  Dean mentions twice that it's already starting or that it is starting back up again, which means that this isn't an unusual occurrence, but something that happened frequently, and we see the roles that all three play in such situations.  John grates on Sam.  Sam instigates.  John responds badly.  Dean stands in the middle and tries to get them not to fight.  They shout over Dean's head until Dean breaks through and manages to separate them.  On the night Sam left for college, I think the only difference was that Dean wasn't able to stop things from escalating to the point that Sam left and John told him not to come back.

I agree and to add: I think this dynamic is reinforced with In My Time of Dying, even with Dean's "ghost" self as he was trying to stop them fighting. He was so upset about them fighting that he "Swayze'd" the glass and broke it.

IMO, even when I post written dialogue for discussion purposes, that isn't really enough to interpret a scene or IMO a characterization regardless of the scene or the character in question. 

It's not sufficient to tell the tale of the tape, so to speak. The nuance of the acting of a scene, the vocal changes, non-verbal face and eye acting, physical body movements often communicate much more than is on the written page. IMO, Jensen communicates just how UNCOMFORTABLE and upset Dean becomes when Sam and John fight with his non-verbal acting. IMO DEAN HATES when they fight. He doesn't want the acrimony between Sam and John.  IMO, it HURTS Dean to see them at each others' throats. Because Dean is an emotional guy who feels things deeply, especially when it comes to Sam and John.  IMO Dean does not want the people he loves and cares about to fight with each other and he tries to intervene and keep the peace in the family. This behavior can be traced back to child!Dean who comforted Mary when she and John were fighting, and comforted John after Mary died when he came back from hunts.

Given Dean's actions as a peacemaker in Dead Man's Blood, and  in IMToD (and even later in the series refereeing the spat between Benny and Cas in Purgatory) I think he did the same thing the night Sam dropped the bomb on John and Dean that he was leaving for school. 

[ahrtee]

2 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

I actually think what broke John more than anything was learning the truth about Mary and Sam. I think that's what drove his quest for vengeance more than anything.

Taking to "All Seasons" thread, since my thought is more about John than the boys.  

[shang yiet]

Sam never acted like Dean betrayed him just because he was in the middle. Anyway, it so happened Dean agreed with John when it came to daring to leave for college. That it was Sam betraying the family for college. So it was 2 against one. No, Dean was not quite in the middle.

Edited July 31, 2017 by shang yiet

[Myrelle]

6 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

It's always seemed clear to me that the fight John and Sam had in Dead Man's Blood is meant to be a representation of the family dynamics, so we can see firsthand the inferences we've been getting about the three of them all season.  Dean mentions twice that it's already starting or that it is starting back up again, which means that this isn't an unusual occurrence, but something that happened frequently, and we see the roles that all three play in such situations.  John grates on Sam.  Sam instigates.  John responds badly.  Dean stands in the middle and tries to get them not to fight.  They shout over Dean's head until Dean breaks through and manages to separate them.

Thanks for this post. This is the scene that laid it all out there IMO also. And the topper was John's added guilt trip that he laid on Dean about failing to take care of the one rust spot on the Impala, and Sam's reaction to that(I think this was all in that one scene). Those things were all very indicative of the usual family dynamic and how things usually went down, IMO too.

Edited July 31, 2017 by Myrelle

[DittyDotDot]

32 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Thanks for that clarification. I'm not sure exactly what story editors do for a writer but I'll take that to the PTB thread

Looks like I beat you to the punch!

My very unscientific understanding of what a story editor does is: They're part of the writer's room and give ideas and notes on scripts, and sometimes pitch episodes ideas. Some of the writing staff is credited as a story editor when they didn't write the episode and some never write their own episodes at all. Many of the writers started out as story editors and became producers over the years. I believe Sara Gamble and Raelle Tucker were credited as story editors in S1 and S2, except on the episodes they actually wrote. Gamble was elevated to producer in S3.

So, they do have influence over the story but how much is anyone's guess. Probably depends on the individual. I do think Buckner/Leming-Ross probably have more influence now than they did when they weren't writing episodes and just making suggestions.

[catrox14]

37 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Looks like I beat you to the punch!

My very unscientific understanding of what a story editor does is: They're part of the writer's room and give ideas and notes on scripts, and sometimes pitch episodes ideas. Some of the writing staff is credited as a story editor when they didn't write the episode and some never write their own episodes at all. Many of the writers started out as story editors and became producers over the years. I believe Sara Gamble and Raelle Tucker were credited as story editors in S1 and S2, except on the episodes they actually wrote. Gamble was elevated to producer in S3.

So, they do have influence over the story but how much is anyone's guess. Probably depends on the individual. I do think Buckner/Leming-Ross probably have more influence now than they did when they weren't writing episodes and just making suggestions.

Thanks!.  Sorry I got sidetracked. LOL

[JanetWaldo]

On 7/30/2017 at 0:39 AM, DeeDee79 said:

It gets frustrating when you try to offer an unbiased point of view

Not to get too off-topic, but philosophically, is there really such a thing as an unbiased point of view on this (or any similar) forum?  After all, we aren't talking math equations, where undisputed, 2+2=4.  Isn't some bias inherent in the phrase 'point of view'?

On 7/30/2017 at 3:38 PM, Aeryn13 said:

 Sam uses ad hominem attacks.

So do a lot of people in this thread when discussing the brothers.  :/

Edited August 1, 2017 by JanetWaldo
Clarifying about the brothers, not other members

[DeeDee79]

4 hours ago, JanetWaldo said:

Not to get too off-topic, but philosophically, is there really such a thing as an unbiased point of view on this (or any similar) forum?  After all, we aren't talking math equations, where undisputed, 2+2=4.  Isn't some bias inherent in the phrase 'point of view'?

So do a lot of people in this thread when discussing the brothers.  :/

Yes IMO. I'm more or less speaking as a fan that likes both brothers and looks at both sides of the argument instead of whatever will make their fave look better.

[Wayward Son]

22 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Yes IMO. I'm more or less speaking as a fan that likes both brothers and looks at both sides of the argument instead of whatever will make their fave look better.

But then you've admitted yourself to having a preference for Dean. So while you may not loathe Sam and assume the absolute worst in everything. Your Dean preference may create a bias your unaware of.

[DeeDee79]

5 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

But then you've admitted yourself to having a preference for Dean. So while you may not loathe Sam and assume the absolute worst in everything. Your Dean preference may create a bias your unaware of.

Are you forgetting that I also stated more than once that I like both brothers or just choosing not to mention it? Having a preference for one doesn't translate to having blinders when your favorite acts shitty. 

[Wayward Son]

5 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Are you forgetting that I also stated more than once that I like both brothers or just choosing not to mention it? Having a preference for one doesn't translate to having blinders when your favorite acts shitty. 

Nope, I did not forget that. However, IMO a preference is a preference and creates a certain level of biasness. Admittedly, not as big as the bias of a viewer who hates one and loves the other, but a bias nonetheless. Unless one loves both equally it's impossible to claim complete unbiased. But we can agree to disagree on this.

[DeeDee79]

Just now, Wayward Son said:

Nope, I did not forget that. However, IMO a preference is a preference and creates a certain level of biasness. Admittedly, not as big as the bias of a viewer who hates one and loves the other, but a bias nonetheless. Unless one loves both equally it's impossible to claim complete unbiased. But we can agree to disagree on this.

I admit that no one can be completely unbiased but my original post was more along the lines of how it's frustrating to try to offer an opinion on both sides of the argument but the person that you are communicating with hates one of the characters so much that it's pointless to even engage them in discussion. I should have worded it better instead of saying unbiased.

[MysteryGuest]

1 hour ago, DeeDee79 said:

I admit that no one can be completely unbiased but my original post was more along the lines of how it's frustrating to try to offer an opinion on both sides of the argument but the person that you are communicating with hates one of the characters so much that it's pointless to even engage them in discussion. I should have worded it better instead of saying unbiased.

This actually seems like a fairly new development, IMO.  We've certainly always had these discussions before about who did what to whom, which brother we like best, etc., but I don't remember there being so much open dislike for either brother.  

I admit to being a Dean fan, but I have come to Sam's defense many times throughout these discussions.  I absolutely think it's possible to have a favorite, but to still see things from multiple perspectives.  And just because Dean is my favorite, that doesn't mean I dislike Sam.  To each his own, I guess.  I'm not sure I'd want to watch if I actually disliked one of the brothers.  That wouldn't be much fun for me, personally.  

[DeeDee79]

22 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

This actually seems like a fairly new development, IMO.  We've certainly always had these discussions before about who did what to whom, which brother we like best, etc., but I don't remember there being so much open dislike for either brother.  

I admit to being a Dean fan, but I have come to Sam's defense many times throughout these discussions.  I absolutely think it's possible to have a favorite, but to still see things from multiple perspectives.  And just because Dean is my favorite, that doesn't mean I dislike Sam.  To each his own, I guess.  I'm not sure I'd want to watch if I actually disliked one of the brothers.  That wouldn't be much fun for me, personally.  

I wholeheartedly agree with this entire post.

[Reganne]

1 hour ago, MysteryGuest said:

This actually seems like a fairly new development, IMO.  We've certainly always had these discussions before about who did what to whom, which brother we like best, etc., but I don't remember there being so much open dislike for either brother.  

I admit to being a Dean fan, but I have come to Sam's defense many times throughout these discussions.  I absolutely think it's possible to have a favorite, but to still see things from multiple perspectives.  And just because Dean is my favorite, that doesn't mean I dislike Sam.  To each his own, I guess.  I'm not sure I'd want to watch if I actually disliked one of the brothers.  That wouldn't be much fun for me, personally.  

Oh I absolutely agree.  Even though I prefer Sam, I really do love Dean too.  I try to see things from multiple perspectives, but I'm sure I hold a small bias as well.  With the way things go around here though, I feel I'm mostly defending Sam.  lol

[Pondlass1]

I'm a Dean girl and am very aware of my bias. I love Dean and I think Jensen is a brilliant actor. But I also appreciate Sam  I don't think either brother is 'better'. I just prefer Dean.  So long as we remain respectful we can have our biases. We have to be aware we have them. The whole show spins along because there are two tall handsome screwed up brothers to argue over.

I do have to smile, tho, when a scene or line of script totally out of context is dredged up to support a point. ?