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

Aeryn13 · August 3, 2017

Quote

When we first got the spoiler that Sam wasn't going to look for Dean, I understood where Carver was coming from. He wanted Sam and Dean to have a healthier relationship. I didn't disagree on the concept. Unfortunately the execution as lacking. Carver's mistake was ignoring the middle ground. There is a large gap between making deal and doing nothing at all. They found this middle ground with Dean in s6. We know he didn't stop looking for a way to free Sam, but he was resarching. He didn't poke at the cage or do anything that would risk releasing Lucifer.

Unfortunately, when that didn't go over well, I found Carver took it way to far in the other direction where Sam and Dean started to look selfish and too wrapped up in each other. Dean wasn't that clingy even in s1.

I agree. I think Carver had a valid idea but a horrible execution. Couple years after Supernatural, they had pretty much a replica of the story on Vampire Diaries. One brother missing, with every reason to be presumed dead and the other brother had seemingly given up and sported a "whatever, I needed to move on" attitude. And what do you know, previously to that, he had looked and researched and just gotten so defeated by any lack of progress that he just snapped. That worked so much better. At least trying isn`t in and of itself the picture of terrible toxic codependency, almost everyone would try.

But even if Carver wanted the "Sam just snapped" part right at the beginning, it played out horribly after the reunion.

It is no wonder the storyline didn`t go over well but IMO it still could have been fixed and smoothed out in a better way than running to a codependency that was 10 times worse than before. Dean, while hurt, seemed a bit more independent in 8.A and then boom, he turned into the most clingy, hand-wringy nursemaid imaginable. And suddenly that was cute and brotherly.

Also agreed that stuff like Red Meat was a gross romantication of the concept. Oh, look at the Romeo and Juliet imagery. Urgh. Yes, that story is largely known for being (tragically) romantic but you also have to take into account that those were teenagers in Medieval Italy. You can to some degree transfer the story to modern times if you keep to... teenagers. With grown men? Not so much, It`s also a picture of romantic love, not familial love. Those two aren`t wholly interchangeable or they could make brother-fucking canon.

Dean looked incredibly pathetic in that episode. Coupled with Sam`s super-human-ness, both sides of the story were unwatcheable in my eyes.

Unfortunately, the show will never pick a side when it comes to deciding if the codependency is cute and cuddly or toxic and tragic. Plot convenience will dictate that. Since they usually make Dean the clingier brother, that hits him harder because depending on if it`s good or bad at any random episode, he will be told to step back or hold on tight and will be wrong if he does something in one episode that two episodes prior he was told he should do.

Wayward Son · August 3, 2017

14 hours ago, SueB said:

**For those relatively new to the board, I am personally convinced that the proactive "Shut the Gates of Hell" lever that the boys CHOOSE to pull was a fundamental error. They were attempting to change the natural order by using the demon tablet. It could be argued that there were more demons walking the earth since S1 and that the whole Apocalypse-prep (opening the Devils gate, etc...) was being corrected by this move to use the demon tablet, but they never used that explanation. They just said they wanted to put away those things that had killed their mother and brought all sorts of evil into the world. It's my theory that if they had just simply left us in a post-Apocalyptic status quo and provided a better protection solution for Kevin, then:
- Abbadon would not have been resurrected to be the third trial, thus no need for the Mark of Cain.
- Sam wouldn't have undertaken the trials, thus turning into a physical mess
- The Angels wouldn't have fallen because they wouldn't have gone hunting Metatron. Kicking the hornets nest on Metatron set off that series of bad moves.
- With Abbadon still buried in cement and no need to try and do SOMETHING (because Sam would never have been possessed by Gadreel), Dean/Crowley would never have teamed up. They wouldn't have kicked the hornets nest that was Cain. Again, the Mark of Cain would have remained quiescent on Cain's arm.
- With no Mark of Cain Dean, no Demon Dean. With no Demon Dean, no need to remove the Mark via that spell, no release of the Darkness.
- With no release of the Darkness, no Amara, no Chuck vs Amara showdown, no return of Mary.

So... I believe an argument can be made that the proactive choice to attempt to close the Gates of Hell was the boys overstepping their role (by attempting to pull a big lever). All the negative consequences SINCE that time, came from that MUTUAL decision.

Honestly, for all the show tries to sell us the idea that Sam and Dean are heroes and use speeches such as Castiel's to tell us they're essential to the world. An objective look at the show reveals the world would actually be better if Sam, Dean and Castiel were all locked away and kept separate from the world around them. Roughly 90% of the threats they face from season four and beyond are down to their actions.

Season 4: The biggest threat was Lilith and her plans to break the 66 seals. The blame for this lies with Dean. I'm not saying he's the villain of the piece. I understand why he made the deal, but the fact remains if Dean hadn't made the deal, he would have never gone to hell, he wouldn't have broke the first seal and the apocalypse couldn't have begun.*

Season 5: The big threat was the released Lucifer and the blame for this lies with Sam. If he hadn't drank the demon blood and killed Lilith then Lucifer would never be free. *

Season 6: The biggest threats of this season were the alphas, soulless Sam, the mother of all and ultimately Castiel. The blame for this season events lies with Crowley and Castiel. Although the most blame falls on Castiel. If he hadn't raised SS then none of the damage he caused would have occurred. If Castiel and Crowley hadn't captured the alphas then they would never have gained the attention of Eve, and she would never have crossed over. If Castiel hadn't become power drunk on the 50,000 souls from hell he wouldn't have messed around with the purgatory portal.

Season 7: The biggest threat here was the Levithians, and blame for this lies solely with Castiel. If Cas hadn't opened the portal to purgatory they would never have gotten out. Dick Roman would not have went about digging up the tablets and the issues they caused would never have occurred.

Season 8: Here it gets murkier. Naomi was not anyone's direct responsibility, but it could be argued that if the demon tablets weren't dug up she would never have felt the need to get involved. The blame for Abbadon lies with no one as she would have always reappeared in the timeline. The Metatron related stuff really lies with all three. It was Sam and Dean who hunted down Metatron and kicked that hornets nest. It was Castiel, and to a lesser extent Dean, who accidentally helped him kick the angels out of heaven.

Season 9: The big threats of season nine were Abbadon and Metatron, which I've already covered.

Season 10: The big issues were Deanmon and the mark of Cain's influence on Dean. The blame for these lie with Dean. If he hadn't agreed to take on the Mark he would never have become a demon, and he wouldn't be fighting against its influence. The blame also lies with Metatron for Demon Dean as he is the one who killed Dean and activated the mark.

Season 11: The big threats here were Lucifer and the Darkness. The blame for the darkness lies with Sam, as he broke the mark. While the blame for Lucifer lies with Castiel as he never should have said yes.

Season 12: The big threats were the BMoL and Lucifer. I've covered Lucifer - although the blame for him does shift to Crowley from LOTUS on. While I wouldn't blame the BMoL for anyone as hey were a long term organisation.

Season 13: The blame for Jack originates with Cas, as he is the one who let Lucifer out and stopped the brothers from depowering him as a foetus.

* There is a question mark about how much responsibility lies with the brothers for season 4 and 5, as we know a lot of work was done by both heaven and hell in the background.

RulerofallIsurvey · August 3, 2017

53 minutes ago, Katy M said:

Maybe that was the point. Maybe in order to move on he had to leave everything behind. But, I noticed a few years ago, that Sam doesn't really have "stuff." He has his laptop, his phone, and his clothes. Dean has or has had: the Impala (which I consider Dean's not really both of theirs), the amulet, his leather jacket, his tape collection, a picture of him and Mary.

He also - now at least - has that box of mementos shown at the end of Into The Mystic.

32 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

I agree. I think Carver had a valid idea but a horrible execution. Couple years after Supernatural, they had pretty much a replica of the story on Vampire Diaries. One brother missing, with every reason to be presumed dead and the other brother had seemingly given up and sported a "whatever, I needed to move on" attitude. And what do you know, previously to that, he had looked and researched and just gotten so defeated by any lack of progress that he just snapped. That worked so much better. At least trying isn`t in and of itself the picture of terrible toxic codependency, almost everyone would try.

But even if Carver wanted the "Sam just snapped" part right at the beginning, it played out horribly after the reunion.

I agree with this part of your post.

I just didn't see anything in Red Meat romanticized or glamorized or even comparable to Romeo and Juliet. That's just way to weird for me to think that's what the show actually intended - partly for the reasons you mentioned.

51 minutes ago, Katy M said:

1. I honestly just can't care that much about Lester. SAm didn't plant the thought of killing his wife in Lester's head. That was his own desire. So, yeah, you shouldn't use civilians as bait, but, at the same time, I just can't care.

2. I kind of agree. We know that Charlie went out on solo hunts after learning to hunt from an app. Seriously. Who even made that app? Doesn't sound too birhg or safe to me. She went after the BOD on her own (with their knowledge and approval) and managed to escape the Steins several times. So, maybe she was feeling kind of invincible. Who knows?

1. Yeah, in all honesty, I didn't really care that much about Lester - even when DemonDean killed him. I'm just saying it was wrong of Sam to use him as bait unknowingly.

2. LOL! It was probably a GhostFacers! app. :D

Aeryn13 · August 3, 2017

Quote

I just didn't see anything in Red Meat romanticized or glamorized or even comparable to Romeo and Juliet.

They put in this imagery of one falling to "death" (Dean) whereas the other just "woke up". Granted, they weren`t in the same room but it evoked that final scene from Romeo and Juliet so much. I`m not certain right now but didn`t even one of the writers or someone from the show live-tweet and invoke the Romeo & Juliet comparism. I do know it was all over social media when the episode aired so lots of people picked up on it. I definitely think that image was put in the episode on purpose.

Quote

Honestly, for all the show tries to sell us the idea that Sam and Dean are heroes and use speeches such as Castiel's to tell us they're essential to the world. An objective look at the show reveals the world would actually be better if Sam, Dean and Castiel were all locked away and kept separate from the world around them. Roughly 90% of the threats they face from season four and beyond are down to their actions.

I do think TV writers just have a huge blind spot when it comes to that. Because while I agree with what you said above, SPN isn`t even the worst offender on that scale.

The Flash is all about proclaiming how its titular character is not only a hero but not even the dark, brooding guy but the really goody-two-shoes-guy. Meanwhile, due to his own actions where he knowingly put the world at risk for a personal goal, he was responsible for the Season 2 villain wreaking havoc. And he capped off the Season with once more screwing over the world for a personal goal. To which end? Literally bringing the Season 3 Big Bad to the table as a version of himself. Granted, he fixed all those and under personal hardship, too, but the only villain he wasn`t responsible for is the Season 1 one and even that is debatable because of time travel involved so he kinda did.

At least the Winchesters were innocent of some big threats on the show.

I will give the writers (all writers here) some bit of leeway because it is usually more dramatic and more engaging if the villain is in some way connected to the hero - personally I really dig former friends/lovers/allies because it can hurt in just right the way - and it is easier to do that if you make the hero responsible for the villain somehow. It also draws the hero in more easily.

But yes, absolutely, there needs to be a balance between the havoc they wreak and the good they do, with the scales tipped in the latters favour.

Edited August 3, 2017 by Aeryn13

companionenvy · August 3, 2017

31 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Honestly, for all the show tries to sell us the idea that Sam and Dean are heroes and use speeches such as Castiel's to tell us they're essential to the world. An objective look at the show reveals the world would actually be better if Sam, Dean and Castiel were all locked away and kept separate from the world around them. Roughly 90% of the threats they face from season four and beyond are down to their actions.

I think your account is accurate, but slightly misleading.

4-5: Even if Dean hadn't made the deal, gone to hell and broken the first seal, and even if Sam hadn't followed Ruby, I strongly suspect the angels and demons would have found a way to get the apocalypse on track. These aren't people with a great track record of playing by the rules, after all. Someone was going to have to play the Michael-sword and Lucifer's vessel. While Sam and Dean could both have done better, especially Sam, I think, given how the deck was stacked against them, they did do better than almost any two other people could have in the same situation, which is the relevant metric for me.

6-7 Cas messed up. But what is often forgotten, I think, is that the alternative to what Cas did might well have been the restarting of the apocalypse plan. In that sense, as bad as the Leviathans, et al were, the consequences were probably a lot less dire than leaving Raphael to his own devices. One thing that always bugs me about s6 is that no one ever presents a viable solution to what Cas did.

8-9: No arguments here.

10: Deanmon, as Chuck said, wasn't actually a major problem, except for the Winchesters and Cas. MoC Dean, while reckless and excessively brutal, also caused a very limited amount of harm, and most of his victims had it coming.

11/12 This is the one case where I think Dean and especially Sam really are to blame for a major catastrophe. Sam trying to save Dean unleashes the darkness. Dean is far less culpable, but had he not taken on the Mark, this would never have happened. I'm not sure that I blame Cas (and to a lesser extent Sam) for Lucifer from the end of 11 on because while the plan failed, Chuck obviously thought he needed Lucifer to overcome Amara. Which suggests strongly that if Cas hadn't already sprung Lucifer, Chuck would have done precisely that. So, Cas has to own anything Lucifer did before Chuck's arrival, but I don't think he is responsible for anything that happens subsequently.

13. Jack may be a threat, but I think there's a good chance Cas will ultimately wind up being right about him being a force for good, so TBD.

catrox14 · August 3, 2017

1 hour ago, Katy M said:

. Sam knew that Oscar existed. Because Cas touched her head and she told the story before Sam left. However, Sam had no reason to think someone from a couple of hundrerd years ago was still alive. Howevver, he DID know that the final ingredient was killing something Rowena loved and he said to do whatever it took. But, we don't know for sure what he would have done if confronted with a live, kind of cute looking, Oscar. And, I don't even think Crowley and Cas knew she was actually going to kill him, considering she pulled him in for a hug and told him it was going to be OK.

Sam knew about Oskar. He knew it was a boy that Rowena loved and he knew that he was alive. Sam was kind of let off the hook about Oskar because he essentially passed the responsibility for spell onto Cas because he had to leave to find Dean after Rudy called. He told Cas, "I need you to do this for me. Make the spell happen, whatever it takes. Please." after handing Cas a handy dandy ziploc bag of Dean's hair that he just happened to have, which will never not be funny. Like was he just collecting Dean's hair from the shower drain at the bunker in case of......reasons? Why did he have it? LOLOL

IMO Sam was obsessed with the getting the Mark off Dean and nothing was going to stop him. Just like he was obsessed with finding the Trickster in s3. I think much of Sam's obsession in s10 was proving to HIMSELF that he wouldn't let Dean become this thing as much as wanting to save Dean for the sake of Dean. Not that he didn't love Dean, of course, but because he had to prove to himself he would do what he didn't in s8.

catrox14 · August 3, 2017

1 hour ago, Wayward Son said:

Season 10: The big issues were Deanmon and the mark of Cain's influence on Dean. The blame for these lie with Dean. If he hadn't agreed to take on the Mark he would never have become a demon, and he wouldn't be fighting against its influence. The blame also lies with Metatron for Demon Dean as he is the one who killed Dean and activated the mark.

Don't leave Crowley out of this. He's the one that lead Dean down the path to Cain. Crowley knew damn well what could happen to Dean and he wanted it to happen. Sadly and much to my chagrin, he played Dean like a fiddle. Dean made the choice yet Dean wouldn't have been at Cain's at all if Crowley hadn't manipulated him into that position.

Katy M · August 3, 2017

16 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Please." after handing Cas a handy dandy ziploc bag of Dean's hair that he just happened to have, which will never not be funny. Like was he just collecting Dean's hair from the shower drain at the bunker in case of......reasons? Why did he have it? LOLOL

The probably both have been ever since DALDOM, LOL.

Katy M · August 3, 2017

1 hour ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

He also - now at least - has that box of mementos shown at the end of Into The Mystic.

I think I made my observation in Season 6 and didn't give it another thought. I think at the time I was just wondering if Dean had held onto any of Sam's stuff, and I was like wait does he have any stuff? So, then it was just like did Dean save any of Sam's clothes? They wouldn't fit him. Did he give them to charity? Same with Dean's clothes post season 4. I wonder about stupid things. I'm assuming they kept each other's weapons as part of their stash. Since Sam had to get new weapons did they have like double the weapons? Probably since they had no trunk space.

catrox14 · August 3, 2017

11 minutes ago, Katy M said:

The probably both have been ever since DALDOM, LOL.

OHHH for the dreamwalking. LOL maybe so.

MysteryGuest · August 3, 2017

8 hours ago, Katy M said:

I put Charlie's death 100% on Charlie. Well, no, I put it on the Steins. But, Charlie would have been safe if she had stayed with Cas. She's the one who left just because Rowena was bugging her.

Charlie's death is 100% on Singer, I think. It was bad enough to kill off a popular character, but to do it in such a horrible way was unforgivable. They made Charlie look stupid, which she was not, and they made Cas look pathetic, which sadly happens all too often. If they felt they had to kill off her character, they certainly should have been able to write something better than what we got.

RulerofallIsurvey · August 4, 2017

20 hours ago, Katy M said:

I think I made my observation in Season 6 and didn't give it another thought. I think at the time I was just wondering if Dean had held onto any of Sam's stuff, and I was like wait does he have any stuff? So, then it was just like did Dean save any of Sam's clothes? They wouldn't fit him. Did he give them to charity? Same with Dean's clothes post season 4. I wonder about stupid things. I'm assuming they kept each other's weapons as part of their stash. Since Sam had to get new weapons did they have like double the weapons? Probably since they had no trunk space.

Hm. Interesting...taken to the Sam thread.

DittyDotDot · August 4, 2017

23 hours ago, Katy M said:

Maybe that was the point. Maybe in order to move on he had to leave everything behind. But, I noticed a few years ago, that Sam doesn't really have "stuff." He has his laptop, his phone, and his clothes. Dean has or has had: the Impala (which I consider Dean's not really both of theirs), the amulet, his leather jacket, his tape collection, a picture of him and Mary.

I know neither Sam or Dean have a lot of possessions, but this was all imagined inside Sam's head. If you were dying and imagining a place to go to let go of your life and move on, would it be some random place with nothing to bind you to that life?

Pondlass1 · August 4, 2017

After thirteen years it would be interesting if they gave us an intimate peek into their lives. An episode something along the lines of "A Day In The Life..." kind of thing. We really don't know much about them at all. How do they get away with credit card fraud? When does Dean fix up Baby, and where does he get the parts? Where do they buy the plaid? The FBI suits? An upfront and personal episode. No MOTW. No monster.

Would it work? I don't know? But I'd sure be entertained.

Edited August 4, 2017 by Pondlass1

Katy M · August 4, 2017

15 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

I know neither Sam or Dean have a lot of possessions, but this was all imagined inside Sam's head. If you were dying and imagining a place to go to let go of your life and move on, would it be some random place with nothing to bind you to that life?

I might for the reason I mentioned. He wants to leave life, so he doesn't want to be reminded of anything from life. He also ditched Dean and Bobby before he talked to Death. I think the goodbye stuff came earlier in the dream.

AwesomO4000 · August 8, 2017

Wow. I go on vacation for a week and this thread goes nuts. Crap. So okay, I'm going to be bringing up stuff from page back, so I apologize in advance. I'm going to try to comment on just stuff I really felt the need to comment on. Please feel free to pick and choose or just skip altogether.

On 7/29/2017 at 10:43 AM, CluelessDrifter said:

Supposed to be, being the operative words for me. I've never particularly thought Sam's 'empathy' was anything more than surface level. Sure, he's great at understanding how others feel when they directly relate to him, but the rest of the time? Not so much for me. Every VotW he has bonded with has been a reflection of him in some way and what he's personally going through at the time, and the same is true of any 'good monsters' he wants to save. It comes off as very selfish to me at times, most notably in the early seasons, but even as late as season 12, I thought the same thing with the girl in Somewhere Between Heaven and Hell. I've always thought Dean's empathy, and yes, he does have it despite Sam getting all of the praise, is more well-rounded and for the sake of the other person rather than himself. And as for Dean being portrayed as 'a born killer,' I think his take on the the family business says everything. 'Saving people and hunting things,' Saving people comes first.

While I agree that Sam tends to identify with the Person in peril or the monster of the week more often than Dean, I strongly disagree that every victim of the week Sam bonds with is a reflection of Sam. Especially in the early seasons. Just a few examples: Charlie in "Bloody Mary" - Sam empathized before he knew what her trauma was, and even before she became the victim of the week. Lori in "Hook Man." Sarah in "Provenance." Diana, the detective in "The Usual Suspects." The husband in "Crossroad Blues." Madison in "Heart" - he seemed to bond with her before they knew she was a werewolf. Arguably the frat guy in "Tall Tales" (if any part of Dean's account is to be believed that is). Randall in "Folsom Prison Blues." It was season 3 where things got twisted a bit to further the, in my opinion, somewhat silly/annoying "did Sam come back wrong?" misdirect, but Sam did do his best to make things less horrible for Corbett. Things got off track from there... But there were still a few more once we got out of the "bad" Sam arc: Lindsey in "Free to Be..." Jody from "Dead Men..." The Father in "Adventures in Babysitting." Marin in "The Born Again Identity." Those are in addition - in my opinion - to the ones that Sam "identifies with."

And it could be argued that because Dean feels good about the "saving people" part of the equation that in a way it does something for him to bond with and empathize with these people. Is it good and heroic? Yes, but the fact that it makes Dean feel like he's making a difference is arguably not entirely for the other person's benefit, but because it gives Dean purpose as well. I'm not saying that's a bad thing at all, considering Sam now also feels similarly about hunting and likes to "make a difference," but I think just because Sam also likes to "bond" with others going through similar things to himself doesn't take away from what he does or somehow means that he only empathizes with those who are like him. And I think my examples are representative of that.

On 7/29/2017 at 0:12 PM, ahrtee said:

I think you need to take this statement *in context*. Dean NEVER said that about Sam at any other time either before or after. I think it's pretty clear that it was meant in this case only and there would be no need to qualify it with "because he's so worn out from the Trials." It seemed pretty obvious that he was sick/physically weak.

I somewhat disagree here. I guess it depends on how literal you are being with regards to the chaperone thing or what version of Dean is saying it. For example Dean didn't literally say that Sam needed a chaperone in "Point of No Return," but he did say that Sam was going to cave and say "yes" to Lucifer and that was why he (Dean) had to say "yes" to Michael because someone would have to clean up after Sam's failure to not resist Lucifer. In my opinion, that's pretty darn close to "Sam needs a chaperone." There was also Demon Dean's declaration that he (Dean) always has to clean up Sam's messes - which again, in my opinion is pretty close, but could be argued to be not how Dean really thinks or is at least an exaggeration, depending on how truthful one thinks Demon Dean is.

Quote

This. In the beginning, you could tell that they really *wanted* to be with each other (for whatever reasons) and so they wanted to work through their disagreements. But somewhere (I think about season 7) the relationship became toxic, and like they were staying together to punish to other. (Even in season 4/5, they were still trying to work things out) But when Sam gives Dean an ultimatum about "we'll just be hunting together, not brothers," and Dean accepts it meekly, well, that for me was the time to say, "you know what? I can find other hunting partners. What I want is my brother." And all the bitter fights and walking away and both veiled and direct insults were not intended to work things out and make them better, but just to hurt the other one, and (as we've seen) haven't been forgotten or forgiven by either. So let the writers get them to have it out in one big brawl and either hug it out or split permanently. Remember, even Bobby and Rufus split many years ago, and "brother acts are tough."

Okay this is more of a season 7 thing for me than a Sam/Dean thing, because I am a season 7 proponent and will defend it when I think it is being misunderstood. Unless you are actually referring to the season 9 situation, this did not happen in season 7. Not even a little bit. In season 7's "The Mentalists", the idea to just work the case was Dean's idea not Sam's, and even though Sam agreed and said "okay" and was working the case - I thought rather cordially even - Dean went back on his promise to just work the case and was angry that Sam was only working the case, calling Sam a dick when all Sam asked was "All right. Hit up the graveyard, dig up Kate?" because "just the facts" were apparently not good enough. Then Dean finally explains why he lied to Sam - while somewhat contradicting himself by saying "you can be pissed all you want, but quit being a bitch" - but despite that it's Sam who caves in the end and tells Dean he was right and lets bygones be bygones. I don't see Dean accepting anything meekly in that scenario or either of them trying to punish each other. There was a disagreement. Sam was understandably angry. Dean was frustrated, but then expressed why he did what he did. Sam understood, agreed, and they reconciled. No one was meek or being unreasonable. And Dean's response to "...sibling acts are tough"? "Oh, don't compare us to that hall of crazy. We're like poster kids of functional family life compared to them." And Sam responded with smiling banter.

I personally thought that - later minor Bobby disagreement aside - that after "The Mentalists", Sam and Dean's relationship in season 7 was more open and supportive than it had been in a long time and that they actually enjoyed each other's company much of the time.

It's one of the reasons that I adore season 7. The season that brought us the giant slinky.

On 7/30/2017 at 5:53 AM, Aeryn13 said:

When Sam gets angry (and honest) enough, he always uses ad hominem attacks. But he himself can`t even take attacks on his actions without breaking out the victimhood card about it. God forbid, anyone used the kind of attacks on the entire personhood on him that he favours on others. The victim complex would be out of this world.

Yet it didn't happen in "Point of No Return" when Dean threw whatever ad hominem attacks he could think of at Sam. Or in "Soul Survivor" when Demon Dean did the same. Both times Sam didn't feel sorry for himself, but continued with the problem at hand.

On 7/30/2017 at 0:16 PM, CluelessDrifter said:

Going all the way back to season 1 and every season that follows, Sam has always gotten his way with Dean, with few notable exceptions, and when those happen, Sam harps on it until Dean gives into what he wants, just harps on it, or takes off and does whatever he wants. To me, it's often been like that flashback with Sam and the Lucky Charms when they were kids. Sam wants something. Dean says no, and then ultimately gives into him, because he puts Sam's wants above his own and spoils him - IMO.

I disagree. Sam certainly didn't want Dean to make the deal, and he couldn't even be angry about it or harp about it (he was made to feel guilty instead). Sam certainly didn't get what he wanted in season 9, and Dean didn't give an inch, not only reinforcing that he (Dean) was right, but insisting that Sam better fall in line and do whatever Dean dictated. And I'd hardly say that Sam has the corner on the market on taking off to do whatever he wants.

On 7/30/2017 at 2:22 PM, ILoveReading said:

Looking back on the series I can't think of many times Sam didn't do exactly what he wanted regardless of what Dean said or thought.

But in my opinion, the same can be said of Dean.

On 7/30/2017 at 4:09 PM, DeeDee79 said:

I personally see both sides of the Gadreel incident since I like both characters. Dean should have told Sam but I can see how he was afraid that Gadreel would abruptly leave Sam to die from his injuries. Sam was right to be angry about the possession & the lying but ripping into Dean beyond his feelings for said possession was brutal and intentionally hurtful. After the scene wrapped I was disappointed that the writers went there to make a point.

I was disappointed, because I was pretty sure the that "point" would be that the situation would be turned around on Sam and he'd end up looking like the jerk in the end... and he did. For me, there was no attempt to make Sam's - perfectly understandable, in my opinion - complaints at all reasonable or sympathetic since Sam wasn't given a logical argument, only hurtful insults. And since it was likely planned by this episode that Sam would be saying or doing some version of "I lied" in the finale, I think that was all on purpose since the show had no intention of letting Sam keep his principals or his dignity, so as with the end scene, our sympathy was supposed to be with Dean.

On 7/30/2017 at 5:13 PM, DeeDee79 said:

This along with Dean calling Cas to get his opinion of the angel offering help is why I don't hold it against Dean too much for allowing the possession. My disappointment came in when he didn't tell Sam about the possession when his conscious seemed to be telling him to do so but I'm at a loss of how he could have done so when Gadreel was threatening to leave Sam high and dry.

I'm one of those weird people who while I prefer Sam, I don't hold the initial Gadreel situation against Dean either. It was the lying I objected to... and as I've said before on this subject: Dean is smart. He could have clued Sam in somehow... maybe via those codewords they use. What? They wouldn't have a codeword for "Warning! You might be possessed?" ; )

But seriously, it should have been Sam's decision to make once he was conscious... and especially when he was suffering thinking he was "wrong." And Dean could've thought of something to warn Sam to let Sam decide for himself.

On 7/30/2017 at 5:37 PM, Res said:

I wish I could do more than just like this post! As a solid Dean fan, I was whole heartedly pissed when the writers took the scenario to the lengths they did in the Season 9 premiere and absolutely hated it the moment Dean sent out that prayer, knowing where it would lead. Did I understand where he was coming from? Yes. Did I agree? No. In fact, I was praying he would just let Sam die instead but knew that would get him crucified by fans as well. It was no win for him then. After the possession, every time he didn't fess up to Sam, I was more and more ticked at him. But I still find the Purge speech over the top for several reasons, mainly because as Aeryn13 stated it attacked Dean's core person and not his actions as well as the fact that it wasn't a heat of passion response. This was days, possibly weeks, later before Sam stated it. It was cold, calculated and premeditatedly aimed to destroy Dean and Dean's psyche as much as possible. Was Sam still angry at the time? I don't doubt it but he had enough time to think through things logically, which means that he had time to understand why Dean did it and what position Dean was in and to know that he, Sam himself, had to agree to the possession in the first place or it couldn't happen. He can still be pissed about it all but as stated above, if that is the case, make it explicitly clear that under NO circumstances should Dean EVER do that again and attack the actions. I wouldn't have had a problem in the world with that speech.

While I agree with those who say that Sam likely was ticked off anew at Dean's not apologizing and insisting that he would do it again, I agree that the speech they gave Sam here was over the top. But I don't necessarily think the writers wanted to give Sam a speech as you described, because this was episode 13 and after the mid season finale, so in my opinion, they likely knew that Sam was going to have moved over to Dean's way of thinking - "I lied" or some equivalent - by the finale, so they didn't want Sam to have a legitimate point here. I think they wanted him to look like a hypocrite since that's probably what they had planned for him in the finale... And after season 8, I don't think Carver had any problem with trashing Sam's character, so this was just another example. Sam served his purpose here as long as we could get the finale shot of Dean's devastated face. No matter if Sam was turned into a jerk to make that happen.

On 7/30/2017 at 6:24 PM, MysteryGuest said:

Then by this argument, I guess we should assume that Sam would choose to allow Dean to succumb to the effects of the Mark of Cain next time, if he had it to do over again? He wouldn't lie about burning the Book of the Damned, keep Rowena chained up to do his bidding, ignore countless warnings about the dangers of removing the Mark, put Charlie's life at risk and ultimately get her killed, and then release The Darkness?

The reality is that he would do it again, and Dean will have Sam possessed again, if that's the only way to save his life. The show is going to continue to put both brothers' lives in peril, and have the other brother do whatever it takes to save them. That's the whole show. If it weren't, then this show would have ended in season one when Dean would have died from heart failure. Or in season two when Sam would have died from a knife wound to the back. Or season three when Dean would have died from loss of blood and organ failure. And on and on and on...

I find it bizarre that people are angry about the fact that their favorite character's life was saved by whatever means necessary. Would you have preferred the alternative? If so, then I think you're watching the wrong show.

No, I wouldn't have preferred the alternative. What annoys me is that the show is not consistent with its treatment of each brother doing whatever they have to do to save the other anymore. For one, it is considered sympathetic and everything turns out as he says it will and mainly positive. For the other, it is a betrayal - both when he doesn't try to save the other brother and when he does - and it causes an apocalypse and thousands of deaths. For me it's becoming annoying how the writers seem to be going out of the way to continue this weird dichotomy.

On 8/2/2017 at 9:38 AM, Pondlass1 said:

Dean will continue to provide POV and emotional narrative, I think they're well aware they can't hand that over to Sam.

I rather enjoy Sam point of view episodes / arcs myself - with the second half of season 10 being a good example - so I don't see why not.

On 8/2/2017 at 10:10 AM, ILoveReading said:

Logically, the plan makes no sense because Lucifer was 3 steps away from his vessel imploding, so that would have made it easier for Michael to defeat Lucifer in a weakened state. (The way that scene went with them basically whining at each other, I didn't believe they were going to destory half that cemetary let alone the world).

Except that the point of the prophecy - and Michael killing Lucifer - was to bring about the end times as in Revelation. So dead Lucifer = bye bye to the world as we know it. People either end up in Memorex heaven or in hell or stranded, and the angels remake the world in their image - whatever that was. And I very much doubt that it would be good for the people left behind. No matter what Michael wanted, we already knew there were angels doing their own thing, and considering how clueless and / or hands off he was, once Lucifer was dead, Michael likely would've shrugged his shoulders while humanity was left to the mercy of the rest of the angels.

On 8/2/2017 at 5:43 PM, catrox14 said:

IMO Sam's comabrain was manifesting heightened aspects both good and bad of Dean, Bobby and Death and those came from memories or impressions Sam has of all 3 of them in his brain. MO Bobby would never suggest that Sam should give up and just go with Death simply because Bobby was already dead and would know best. That's not sage advice from Bobby. I don't see Death ever being "honored" to reap a Winchester. I don't know if Dean would beat up Sam to get him to not give into dying. I think he would probably shake him about the shoulders probably a wake up slap in the facein a "Goddammit, Sam WAKE UP AND FIGHT' way.

The question I have is what was Carver trying to communicate about all the three of them and Death with those manifestations.

If it was anything like what he seemed to be conveying in the season 8 season opener, I would say "ehn, so what if this makes Sam's character look bad... it gets the plot where I want it to go! Yay!"

Wait was that too mean? Tough - I still haven't forgiven Carver.

Katy M · August 8, 2017

3 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I'm one of those weird people who while I prefer Sam, I don't hold the initial Gadreel situation against Dean either. It was the lying I objected to... and as I've said before on this subject: Dean is smart. He could have clued Sam in somehow... maybe via those codewords they use. What? They wouldn't have a codeword for "Warning! You might be possessed?" ; )

On this show, when you're possessed, your possessor knows everything you know. So, if Sam and Dean had a codeword, Gadreel would have known it. Plus, after the code word had been given Gadreel would have known Sam's thoughts about it. He should have told Gadreel, when going into Sam's dream, to go as himself, explain he was an angel, and the only way he was going to live was possession. Then, it would have been sam's choice as it should have been. If Gadreel hadn't done that and lied while in the dream, well, that wouldn't have been dean's doing, at least.

3 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

No, I wouldn't have preferred the alternative. What annoys me is that the show is not consistent with its treatment of each brother doing whatever they have to do to save the other anymore. For one, it is considered sympathetic and everything turns out as he says it will and mainly positive. For the other, it is a betrayal - both when he doesn't try to save the other brother and when he does - and it causes an apocalypse and thousands of deaths. For me it's becoming annoying how the writers seem to be going out of the way to continue this weird dichotomy.

Yes, thank you.

ahrtee · August 8, 2017

OK, I'm going to have to read this in small bites (and respond in bits and pieces) instead of one long chunk so I can consider each point carefully. For now, the first two:

6 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

While I agree that Sam tends to identify with the Person in peril or the monster of the week more often than Dean, I strongly disagree that every victim of the week Sam bonds with is a reflection of Sam. Especially in the early seasons. Just a few examples: Charlie in "Bloody Mary" - Sam empathized before he knew what her trauma was, and even before she became the victim of the week. Lori in "Hook Man." Sarah in "Provenance." Diana, the detective in "The Usual Suspects." The husband in "Crossroad Blues." Madison in "Heart" - he seemed to bond with her before they knew she was a werewolf. Arguably the frat guy in "Tall Tales" (if any part of Dean's account is to be believed that is). Randall in "Folsom Prison Blues." It was season 3 where things got twisted a bit to further the, in my opinion, somewhat silly/annoying "did Sam come back wrong?" misdirect, but Sam did do his best to make things less horrible for Corbett. Things got off track from there... But there were still a few more once we got out of the "bad" Sam arc: Lindsey in "Free to Be..." Jody from "Dead Men..." The Father in "Adventures in Babysitting." Marin in "The Born Again Identity." Those are in addition - in my opinion - to the ones that Sam "identifies with."

And it could be argued that because Dean feels good about the "saving people" part of the equation that in a way it does something for him to bond with and empathize with these people. Is it good and heroic? Yes, but the fact that it makes Dean feel like he's making a difference is arguably not entirely for the other person's benefit, but because it gives Dean purpose as well. I'm not saying that's a bad thing at all, considering Sam now also feels similarly about hunting and likes to "make a difference," but I think just because Sam also likes to "bond" with others going through similar things to himself doesn't take away from what he does or somehow means that he only empathizes with those who are like him. And I think my examples are representative of that.

I think part of the issue with this one are the distinctions between "bond with" "empathize with" and "identify with."

I think Sam's "normal" MO in dealing with traumatized victims is gentler (call it more "empathetic" if you want) than Dean's, and that's where the reputation comes in. It's not necessarily the same as "bonding with" or "identifying with." IMO both boys treat victims kindly (unless they're particularly unsympathetic, as the guys in Mannequin 3); but their standard MOs (except in special cases, when they do "identify" with the person) is: Sam is more personal, Dean more focused on fixing the problem/killing the monster. Neither one is bad, and that's why they (used to) work so well as a team. Saving People is the prime directive for both of them, and I don't think we need to look too closely at motivations for either. They just go about it differently.

So--Sam was gentler with Charlie (Bloody Mary), Lori (Hook Man), Marin, and Madison (before she turned). He was more matter-of-fact trying to help (more like Dean normally treats people) with Jody in Dead Man (before they *all* bonded), Randall, Chrissey's father and Diana, in your examples.

Then there are the women he's attracted to, like Sarah and Madison. I don't think we can include them in "empathy," and his bonding was for a different reason IMO.

But IMO, Sam does treat those he *identifies* with differently--takes things way more personally, gives them more of a benefit of the doubt, often going against logic (and usually against Dean) specifically *because* he sees something of himself in them. That's more than "saving people" from monsters, and more into "saving people from themselves/their destinies." In the early years in particular it was mostly the "special children" (and some "monsters," who he felt were being misunderstood.) IMO he treated them differently--and far more than normal empathy-- than just normal "vics" (and, for the most part, they weren't vics--like Ava, Andy, and even Max, Lenore and Jack the rugaru.) Not that it's bad, but, yes, IMO he only gave the benefit of the doubt (and special treatment) to those he identified with as "potentially being a monster so I want to prove that they don't have to." The same thing goes with Madison, once they knew she was a werewolf.

Bottom line: In the early years, both Sam and Dean were kind to victims. I wouldn't say either of them "bonded" with victims unless there was something more personal, such as attraction or some identification, and both tend to get more involved when it becomes personal to them--such as Dean with Lucas in "Dead in the Water" or Sam with the special children. Dean tends to be more guarded about his emotions, so something has to really strike a chord before he shows it (same reason he was angry/unsympathetic to Evan in Crossroad Blues--not because he was less empathetic than Sam, but because it struck a sore point with him that made him over identify.)

In the later years, I think they became less involved (or "empathetic") when dealing with victims or their families just because of burnout. It was less obvious with Dean (because he'd never been so gentle) than with Sam. It doesn't mean they won't still occasionally bond with someone (Sam with Eileen, Dean with Mildred) but that's more the exception these days than the rule.

Wayward Son · August 8, 2017

I'm putting it in here to be safe, but it's a general query more than a bitch vs jerk complaint.

I kmow now we've had at least two very Sam / Jared lite episodes namely In the Beginning (he only appears to get in a car with Ruby) and The End.

Have we had any episodes as Jensen / Dean lite?

ILoveReading · August 8, 2017

33 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

I'm putting it in here to be safe, but it's a general query more than a bitch vs jerk complaint.

I kmow now we've had at least two very Sam / Jared lite episodes namely In the Beginning (he only appears to get in a car with Ruby) and The End.

Have we had any episodes as Jensen / Dean lite?

I'd say All Hell Breaks Loose Part One, and The Man Who Knew to Much, and Sacrifice

Aeryn13 · August 8, 2017

These days it`s hard to say which episodes aren`t brother-lite and Season 12 had overall more Dean-lite eps. But none to the degree of In the Beginning or the End. I`d say the Dean-lightest episode in the show might be All Hell Part 1? I know he was in more than just the ending but not that much.

Quote

and The Man Who Knew to Much, and Sacrifice

Yeah, the Man who knew too much probably qualifies. Though I have blocked that one out wholesale because I can`t stand the episode.

Sacrifice, I think he was in it a fair bit, he just was so completely pointless in it. Bounced around from one storyline to another because he awkwardly had nothing to do in either. Another crap episode.

Personally, I would be all for less screentime (though it`s stretching it at that point) if he got better material when he is onscreen. Like, by all means have him only marginally appear in an episode or two but in turn give him half a Season soulless or angel arc. Or revisit his hell trauma for half a Season or something. And by God, give him fucking action scenes and smarts back. If I never have to hear another "can you fix this, Sam?" or "you found something, Sam?", it will be too soon.

Edited August 8, 2017 by Aeryn13

catrox14 · August 8, 2017

50 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

I'm putting it in here to be safe, but it's a general query more than a bitch vs jerk complaint.

I kmow now we've had at least two very Sam / Jared lite episodes namely In the Beginning (he only appears to get in a car with Ruby) and The End.

Have we had any episodes as Jensen / Dean lite?

I guess that depends on what one considers character or actor lite. Is it the character's physical presence in the episode that counts? Is the actor's physical presence or lack there of that makes it character lite? I would argue that even if the actor/character is not on screen much but the episode is still about the character then I don't count that as character lite. Not being snarky. Just wondering.

The End: It was Sam lite but only in the sense that Sam wasn't physically present in the episode other than at the beginning and the end, but Jared the actor was in the beginning, middle and the end. Jared didn't work much but it was still a huge impact on the episode with his brilliant turn as Samifer (best Jared work EVER IMO)

In The Beginning: I can see the case for Jared lite but Sam was present in the beginning, (heh) and important to the story even if he was not IN the episode much. The episode was essentially about Sam. But I can see the case for it being Sam lite.

Episodes I would consider Dean lite:

Weekend at Bobby's: Dean lite because Jensen was directing and Dean didn't really need to be in the episode at all really.

Mother's Little Helper: Jensen lite but not Dean lite because of good writing and editing.

American Nightmare

Bitten and Bloodlines were brothers lite

Wayward Son · August 8, 2017

4 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I guess that depends on what one considers character or actor lite. Is it the character's physical presence in the episode that counts? Is the actor's physical presence or lack there of that makes it character lite? I would argue that even if the actor/character is not on screen much but the episode is still about the character then I don't count that as character lite. Not being snarky. Just wondering.

The End: It was Sam lite but only in the sense that Sam wasn't physically present in the episode other than at the beginning and the end, but Jared the actor was in the beginning, middle and the end. Jared didn't work much but it was still a huge impact on the episode with his brilliant turn as Samifer (best Jared work EVER IMO)

In The Beginning: I can see the case for Jared lite but Sam was present in the beginning, (heh) and important to the story even if he was not IN the episode much. The episode was essentially about Sam. But I can see the case for it being Sam lite.

Episodes I would consider Dean lite:

Weekend at Bobby's: Dean lite because Jensen was directing and Dean didn't really need to be in the episode at all really.

Mother's Little Helper: Jensen lite but not Dean lite because of good writing and editing.

American Nightmare

Bitten and Bloodlines were brothers lite

In this instance, I'm talking in terms of physical presence so perhaps it's safer for me to refer to it as Jensen lite :)

Edited August 8, 2017 by Wayward Son

catrox14 · August 8, 2017

16 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

In this instance, I'm talking in terms of physical presence so perhaps it's safer for me to refer to it as Jensen lite :)

Thanks for the clarification. I'll still stay with my choices.

Edited August 8, 2017 by catrox14

Katy M · August 8, 2017

37 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Weekend at Bobby's: Dean lite because Jensen was directing and Dean didn't really need to be in the episode at all really.

You could say the same for Sam in that epi, also. I think Bobby had earned his own epi by that point, though. I love this episode even if it doesn't have much of my boys in it.

catrox14 · August 8, 2017

Just now, Katy M said:

You could say the same for Sam in that epi, also. I think Bobby had earned his own epi by that point, though. I love this episode even if it doesn't have much of my boys in it.

I was just answering what I thought was Jensen lite since the question was about Jensen lite episodes :)

AwesomO4000 · August 8, 2017

4 hours ago, ahrtee said:

But IMO, Sam does treat those he *identifies* with differently--takes things way more personally, gives them more of a benefit of the doubt, often going against logic (and usually against Dean) specifically *because* he sees something of himself in them. That's more than "saving people" from monsters, and more into "saving people from themselves/their destinies." In the early years in particular it was mostly the "special children" (and some "monsters," who he felt were being misunderstood.) IMO he treated them differently--and far more than normal empathy-- than just normal "vics" (and, for the most part, they weren't vics--like Ava, Andy, and even Max, Lenore and Jack the rugaru.) Not that it's bad, but, yes, IMO he only gave the benefit of the doubt (and special treatment) to those he identified with as "potentially being a monster so I want to prove that they don't have to." The same thing goes with Madison, once they knew she was a werewolf.

Bottom line: In the early years, both Sam and Dean were kind to victims. I wouldn't say either of them "bonded" with victims unless there was something more personal, such as attraction or some identification, and both tend to get more involved when it becomes personal to them--such as Dean with Lucas in "Dead in the Water" or Sam with the special children. Dean tends to be more guarded about his emotions, so something has to really strike a chord before he shows it (same reason he was angry/unsympathetic to Evan in Crossroad Blues--not because he was less empathetic than Sam, but because it struck a sore point with him that made him over identify.)

I actually agree with you about most of this, and I agree my use of "bond" was likely overstating. The reason I mentioned it was because the post I was responding to was at least indirectly connecting empathy and bonding, basically saying that unless Sam bonds with the victim of the week and the victim has some connection to him, Sam's empathy is only surface empathy and he only "feels their pain" so to speak if the situation directly relates to him - and it is therefor more "selfish" rather than real empathy (whereas Dean's empathy, in the poster's opinion, was more "well-rounded" and for the victim.) This is what I was disagreeing with in that I think Sam's empathy with some of the examples I gave in my post is genuine - not just surface - even though Sam is not identifying with those PiPs.

I agree with you that Sam sometimes does give preferential treatment and second chances to people and monsters he identifies with, and I think based on what was going on in his life at the time, I can understand why. This is also why I didn't include the mother and little girl in "Playthings" in my examples, because based on Sam's mental state at the time, it was almost like he had to save them, to prove to himself that he wasn't evil. So I didn't count them as among the examples of Sam's non-identifying victims. But I don't think that means that he has little or no empathy for other potential victims. Does Sam sometimes "go through the motions" with his empathy? Absolutely - season 3 and 4 arguably have many examples of this, especially when he's in a driven and / or ends justify the means mode, or just because, for some reason (Ronald, for example.) But I don't agree / believe that Sam never has / had real empathy for the victims unless it relates to him, and that's mostly what my examples were trying to show. I was giving examples of what I thought were genuine Sam empathy moments despite Sam not having a real "connection" with those victims / potential victims.

Interestingly to me, quite a few of my examples seem to be teen or younger adult women. For some reason, Sam seems to be good at talking with them - or at least he used to be until he was branded "too old" and therefor creepy last season. Whereas Dean seems to be better at talking with the kids.

2 hours ago, ILoveReading said:

I'd say All Hell Breaks Loose Part One, and The Man Who Knew to Much,

I'd say more the first than the second, but in both episodes, Dean had his own scenes and plot points with Bobby. In "All Hell..." he was mostly looking for Sam, but in "The Man Who Knew Too Much," Dean had an entire plot separate from Sam with Bobby, complete with Impala destruction and interaction with Balthazar and Castiel. Dean was also a major theme in Sam's flashbacks and Sam's head journey.

CluelessDrifter · August 8, 2017

14 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

While I agree that Sam tends to identify with the Person in peril or the monster of the week more often than Dean, I strongly disagree that every victim of the week Sam bonds with is a reflection of Sam. Especially in the early seasons. Just a few examples: Charlie in "Bloody Mary" - Sam empathized before he knew what her trauma was, and even before she became the victim of the week. Lori in "Hook Man." Sarah in "Provenance." Diana, the detective in "The Usual Suspects." The husband in "Crossroad Blues." Madison in "Heart" - he seemed to bond with her before they knew she was a werewolf. Arguably the frat guy in "Tall Tales" (if any part of Dean's account is to be believed that is). Randall in "Folsom Prison Blues." It was season 3 where things got twisted a bit to further the, in my opinion, somewhat silly/annoying "did Sam come back wrong?" misdirect, but Sam did do his best to make things less horrible for Corbett. Things got off track from there... But there were still a few more once we got out of the "bad" Sam arc: Lindsey in "Free to Be..." Jody from "Dead Men..." The Father in "Adventures in Babysitting." Marin in "The Born Again Identity." Those are in addition - in my opinion - to the ones that Sam "identifies with."

How I see it:

Charlie is a reflection of Sam in that her 'secret' makes her feel responsible for her boyfriend's death and is a reason Mary targets her. Sam's 'secret' makes him feel responsible for Jess's death and is a reason he thinks Mary will target him. He had no reason to empathize with her before she became a victim. She caught them in their lie when they were investigating her friend's house, and then she became a teenager willing to help their investigation - no empathy required until she becomes the victim.

Lori is again another reflection of Sam. The first thing he says to her is, 'I kind of know what you’re going through. I-I saw someone..get hurt once. It’s something you don’t forget," and later Lori says she's cursed, because people around her keep dying. Again Sam says that he knows how she feels - references to him losing Jess abound. She's also set up as a potential love interest, but the timing isn't right, because he's still grieving Jess.

Madison in Heart is the biggest mirror of Sam in the show as far as I can remember. She's a monster, but she doesn't want to be, so she decides to die. It's the same thing Sam was going through with the psychic kids and going dark side at the time.

I don't think he was particularly empathetic with Evan. I think he was concerned with Dean's behavior and coming to the same realization that Dean was about their Dad. He barely spoke to Evan except to tell him to believe him or not about the goofer dust, but not to leave the circle, and then directed Evan on what to do when the hellhounds showed up.

The frat guy that Sam laughs at when he tells them that the aliens probed him? I don't think that's empathetic.

I wouldn't say he's empathetic with Randal either, just asking the guy questions for their investigation.

Lindsey flirts with him and attempts to show him empathy, because she wants to know his life story. I don't think he shows her any empathy, merely pleasantries.

He takes the vetala's attention off of Lee in Adventures, because he knows Lee can't survive anymore bites, but that's not empathy. Being a decent guy, a hero? Definitely, but not empathetic.

Marin, he again empathizes with her, but she's a reflection of his current situation. She hears the voice of someone the way he does, but her voice is real. His isn't, but I think in helping her get rid of her real voice, it makes him further question how real his is.

Sarah - In fairness, Sarah isn't a reflection of Sam. She's just a reflection of the life he could have had if he stopped hunting again, and she's also a measuring stick for Sam's grief. Lori was too soon. Sarah's almost right.

Diana - You're right about Diana. She was a victim that needed help, so he helped even though she could have arrested him. This was a solid MoTW episode that had nothing to do with Sam's personal myth arc that season, but I guess it does tie into him coming to the notice of the authorities, which becomes a problem later.

Jody - Sam has always connected well with Jody. They gel well together.

14 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

And it could be argued that because Dean feels good about the "saving people" part of the equation that in a way it does something for him to bond with and empathize with these people. Is it good and heroic? Yes, but the fact that it makes Dean feel like he's making a difference is arguably not entirely for the other person's benefit, but because it gives Dean purpose as well. I'm not saying that's a bad thing at all, considering Sam now also feels similarly about hunting and likes to "make a difference," but I think just because Sam also likes to "bond" with others going through similar things to himself doesn't take away from what he does or somehow means that he only empathizes with those who are like him. And I think my examples are representative of that.

Now you're getting into the philosophical debate of whether or not anything can be truly altruistic if the person carrying out good deeds gets something out of them by feeling good about it. It's a debate I'm perfectly happy to discuss in an PM if you'd like, but I don't want to clog up this thread discussing it here.

14 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I disagree. Sam certainly didn't want Dean to make the deal, and he couldn't even be angry about it or harp about it (he was made to feel guilty instead). Sam certainly didn't get what he wanted in season 9, and Dean didn't give an inch, not only reinforcing that he (Dean) was right, but insisting that Sam better fall in line and do whatever Dean dictated. And I'd hardly say that Sam has the corner on the market on taking off to do whatever he wants.

Sam was dead when Dean made the deal, ergo he had no input into it until after it was done and dusted. It's not the same as getting his way the way I suggested. When did Dean insist that Sam had better fall in line and do whatever Dean dictated? Do you mean after he got the MOC, and Sam finally noticed it wasn't a good thing?

Edited August 8, 2017 by CluelessDrifter

ILoveReading · August 8, 2017

29 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I'd say more the first than the second, but in both episodes, Dean had his own scenes and plot points with Bobby. In "All Hell..." he was mostly looking for Sam, but in "The Man Who Knew Too Much," Dean had an entire plot separate from Sam with Bobby, complete with Impala destruction and interaction with Balthazar and Castiel. Dean was also a major theme in Sam's flashbacks and Sam's head journey.

Granted, I've only seen this episode once, but I don't remember Dean being a major plot point. Interacting with someone doesn't mean you impact the episode. 30 out of 42 minutes took place in Sam's head. If you take him out of the episode, nothing really changes.

Quote

. Sam certainly didn't get what he wanted in season 9,

If Sam truly wanted to die, he had plenty of chances after Dean left. Sam has a bunker full of weapons and he was standing on a bridge. Cas also did the same thing. He made a choice for Sam and Sam seemed okay with it. So what did Sam really want in season 9?

Edited August 8, 2017 by ILoveReading

CluelessDrifter · August 8, 2017

58 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I actually agree with you about most of this, and I agree my use of "bond" was likely overstating. The reason I mentioned it was because the post I was responding to was at least indirectly connecting empathy and bonding, basically saying that unless Sam bonds with the victim of the week and the victim has some connection to him, Sam's empathy is only surface empathy and he only "feels their pain" so to speak if the situation directly relates to him - and it is therefor more "selfish" rather than real empathy (whereas Dean's empathy, in the poster's opinion, was more "well-rounded" and for the victim.) This is what I was disagreeing with in that I think Sam's empathy with some of the examples I gave in my post is genuine - not just surface - even though Sam is not identifying with those PiPs.

And in my original post, I was responding to someone who said that one of Sam's defining characteristics is supposed to be empathy. I find it's a brush with which Sam is commonly painted, and Dean isn't for some reason. The crux of my post was that I disagree with this assessment and briefly why.

MysteryGuest · August 9, 2017

15 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

No, I wouldn't have preferred the alternative. What annoys me is that the show is not consistent with its treatment of each brother doing whatever they have to do to save the other anymore. For one, it is considered sympathetic and everything turns out as he says it will and mainly positive. For the other, it is a betrayal - both when he doesn't try to save the other brother and when he does - and it causes an apocalypse and thousands of deaths. For me it's becoming annoying how the writers seem to be going out of the way to continue this weird dichotomy.

I personally don't think it's as lopsided as some Sam fans think it is. The two potential world-ending crisis that we've dealt with, the Apocalypse and The Darkness were a joint effort, IMO. Dean made a bad deal to save Sam's life and was sent to hell, and ultimately broke the first seal to start the Apocalypse. Sam killed Lillith in hopes of ending things, but instead it broke the last seal. Neither brother knew what the results of their actions would be, so I can't hold them responsible. Plus, they were being manipulated by angels and demons the whole time.

Dean took on the Mark of Cain, consequences be damned, became a killing machine and was prepared to kill his own brother in an effort to rid the world of himself. Sam used the Book of the Damned to remove the Mark from his brother and The Darkness was set free. Again, both brothers' actions caused that to happen. On a side note, I have an issue with The Darkness storyline. I know she was eating souls at the beginning, and obviously, that wasn't good, but I hated that Chuck just allowed that entire town to be killed. He saved one, but didn't bother with the other. Considering I think we were supposed to find Amara to be a sympathetic character at the end, I found those deaths to be unnecessary and hold Chuck responsible. He could have saved them, and he simply chose not to.

As for the rest, Dean allowed Sam to be possessed by an angel, and Kevin was killed. Sam involved Charlie in his efforts to save Dean, and she was killed. I think both brothers are equally culpable and blameless, depending on the circumstances. They've both made decisions that ended badly, and they've both allowed themselves to be suckered in by demons (Crowley and Ruby). I personally think the scorecard for bad choices is pretty even. I have never felt that Sam was more to blame than Dean for any of it, and I've never really gotten that vibe from the show.

Reganne · August 9, 2017

2 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

How I see it:

Charlie is a reflection of Sam in that her 'secret' makes her feel responsible for her boyfriend's death and is a reason Mary targets her. Sam's 'secret' makes him feel responsible for Jess's death and is a reason he thinks Mary will target him. He had no reason to empathize with her before she became a victim. She caught them in their lie when they were investigating her friend's house, and then she became a teenager willing to help their investigation - no empathy required until she becomes the victim.

Lori is again another reflection of Sam. The first thing he says to her is, 'I kind of know what you’re going through. I-I saw someone..get hurt once. It’s something you don’t forget," and later Lori says she's cursed, because people around her keep dying. Again Sam says that he knows how she feels - references to him losing Jess abound. She's also set up as a potential love interest, but the timing isn't right, because he's still grieving Jess.

Madison in Heart is the biggest mirror of Sam in the show as far as I can remember. She's a monster, but she doesn't want to be, so she decides to die. It's the same thing Sam was going through with the psychic kids and going dark side at the time.

I don't think he was particularly empathetic with Evan. I think he was concerned with Dean's behavior and coming to the same realization that Dean was about their Dad. He barely spoke to Evan except to tell him to believe him or not about the goofer dust, but not to leave the circle, and then directed Evan on what to do when the hellhounds showed up.

The frat guy that Sam laughs at when he tells them that the aliens probed him? I don't think that's empathetic.

I wouldn't say he's empathetic with Randal either, just asking the guy questions for their investigation.

Lindsey flirts with him and attempts to show him empathy, because she wants to know his life story. I don't think he shows her any empathy, merely pleasantries.

He takes the vetala's attention off of Lee in Adventures, because he knows Lee can't survive anymore bites, but that's not empathy. Being a decent guy, a hero? Definitely, but not empathetic.

Marin, he again empathizes with her, but she's a reflection of his current situation. She hears the voice of someone the way he does, but her voice is real. His isn't, but I think in helping her get rid of her real voice, it makes him further question how real his is.

Sarah - In fairness, Sarah isn't a reflection of Sam. She's just a reflection of the life he could have had if he stopped hunting again, and she's also a measuring stick for Sam's grief. Lori was too soon. Sarah's almost right.

Diana - You're right about Diana. She was a victim that needed help, so he helped even though she could have arrested him. This was a solid MoTW episode that had nothing to do with Sam's personal myth arc that season, but I guess it does tie into him coming to the notice of the authorities, which becomes a problem later.

Jody - Sam has always connected well with Jody. They gel well together.

I guess what I don't understand is how having a reflection or similar situation to someone somehow makes the empathy 'selfish' or only showing empathy on the surface. I think if anything having similar experiences strengthens the ability to emphasize with someone else because you do in fact know how it feels to be in that situation. It makes it easier to understand what someone else is going through.

As far as empathy for characters in different situations, I do see it with both characters. I think the difference is that Sam as a character in general usually comes off having a more gentle way of speaking which I think people identify with empathy and caring for others which is why a lot of people equate empathy with Sam. That's not to say Dean isn't empathetic as well. I think they both show empathy towards people they relate to and those that they see different from themselves.

CluelessDrifter · August 9, 2017

3 hours ago, Reganne said:

I guess what I don't understand is how having a reflection or similar situation to someone somehow makes the empathy 'selfish' or only showing empathy on the surface. I think if anything having similar experiences strengthens the ability to emphasize with someone else because you do in fact know how it feels to be in that situation. It makes it easier to understand what someone else is going through.

I think the best way to explain it is to use an example (Don't take from this that this is the only example I think there is of it and have extrapolated it to all other instances. It's just one I've chosen). Sam empathizes with Matt, the kid in Bugs, because he sees himself in that situation, so he can understand Matt's frustrations with his father, but he uses it as a way to validate his own thoughts about John. It seems selfish, because while empathy is taking place, it's not about understanding the other person as much as it is using the other person to understand himself or prove to himself that he's right or wrong about something (As with the girl in Somewhere Between Heaven and Hell for a more recent example). It feels like a surface level of empathy to me, because on the surface, it's packaged as empathy, but he's really projecting quite a bit as well and doesn't truly understand Matt's relationship with Larry, but skews it to fit within the parameters of his own personal biases. It's not always surface level. There are instances where he can definitely empathize more fully with victims or family members, but I still get the impression that often it's because he uses their feelings about something to validate his own and sometimes learn from them.

Edited August 9, 2017 by CluelessDrifter

RulerofallIsurvey · August 9, 2017

10 hours ago, ahrtee said:

Then there are the women he's attracted to, like Sarah and Madison. I don't think we can include them in "empathy," and his bonding was for a different reason IMO.

LOLOLOL! heh. heh. ::ahem:: Sorry. Back to your regularly scheduled bitching now....

Reganne · August 9, 2017

47 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

I think the best way to explain it is to use an example (Don't take from this that this is the only example I think there is of it and extrapolate it to all other instances. It's just one I've chosen). Sam empathizes with Matt, the kid in Bugs, because he sees himself in that situation, so he can understand Matt's frustrations with his father, but he uses it as a way to validate his own thoughts about John. It seems selfish, because while empathy is taking place, it's not about understanding the other person as much as it is using the other person to understand himself or prove to himself that he's right or wrong about something (As with the girl in Somewhere Between Heaven and Hell for a more recent example). It feels like a surface level of empathy to me, because on the surface, it's packaged as empathy, but he's really projecting quite a bit as well and doesn't truly understand Matt's relationship with Larry, but skews it to fit within the parameters of his own personal biases. It's not always surface level. There are instances where he can definitely empathize more fully with victims or family members, but I still get the impression that often it's because he uses their feelings about something to validate his own and sometimes learn from them.

Even if Sam manages to learn something from people he empathizes with, that still doesn't mean he only does it for selfish reasons. Now if he were talking to the VOW... only listened to a small portion of what they said and then started talking about himself, I could see where you're coming from. TBH, I think the show sets Sam and Dean up to relate to the VOW in a way to have them bond with the different characters. This happens with Dean as well. One example would be in Something Wicked. He bonds with Michael after he relates to him and how he cares for his younger brother. Dean shows his empathy in this episode, but at the same time Michael is a reflection of Dean as a young boy looking after Sam. The two of them then bond over 'doing anything to save their brother'. Did he bond with Michael for selfish reasons? I am sure there are more examples with Dean but to be honest, through my watches I didn't look out for which brother was being the most empathetic or selfish towards the VOW.

CluelessDrifter · August 9, 2017

1 hour ago, Reganne said:

Even if Sam manages to learn something from people he empathizes with, that still doesn't mean he only does it for selfish reasons. Now if he were talking to the VOW... only listened to a small portion of what they said and then started talking about himself, I could see where you're coming from. TBH, I think the show sets Sam and Dean up to relate to the VOW in a way to have them bond with the different characters. This happens with Dean as well. One example would be in Something Wicked. He bonds with Michael after he relates to him and how he cares for his younger brother. Dean shows his empathy in this episode, but at the same time Michael is a reflection of Dean as a young boy looking after Sam. The two of them then bond over 'doing anything to save their brother'. Did he bond with Michael for selfish reasons? I am sure there are more examples with Dean but to be honest, through my watches I didn't look out for which brother was being the most empathetic or selfish towards the VOW.

I think you're misconstruing what I wrote and getting upset by it, but that was not my intent. I merely wanted to explain my thinking on it, because you asked. If you don't like the word selfish . . . I'm not sure how else to phrase talking to someone about how he/she thinks or feels and rightly or wrongly interpreting that to validate your own life, choices, etc. Self-centered? It is a writing device to allow us into Sam's head, but I really don't like the way it comes across at all.

As for Dean and Michael, it's slightly different. Dean empathizes with him about being a big brother. Then later he decides to use Michael as bait and pulls out the big brother card again as a way to persuade Michael to help them. The first is genuine empathy. It's simply for the sake of letting Michael know he understands. The second isn't to let Michael know he understands him, but to make Michael empathize with him, so he can get Michael to relate to him enough to act as bait for an external threat. At no point do I think that he internalizes how Michael feels about Asher to validate or invalidate his own feelings about the case or Sam. His internal conflict is set off by the text from John sending them there after Dean sees what they're hunting.

Edited August 9, 2017 by CluelessDrifter

AwesomO4000 · August 9, 2017

6 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

Charlie is a reflection of Sam in that her 'secret' makes her feel responsible for her boyfriend's death and is a reason Mary targets her. Sam's 'secret' makes him feel responsible for Jess's death and is a reason he thinks Mary will target him. He had no reason to empathize with her before she became a victim. She caught them in their lie when they were investigating her friend's house, and then she became a teenager willing to help their investigation - no empathy required until she becomes the victim.

But if I remember correctly, they didn't know about the secret until late in the episode - almost the end. I thought Sam was fairly sympathetic with her about the death of the other girl, and as you said, no real empathy was required, but - for me - I thought Sam showed it anyway. But I understand if you don't see it that way.

6 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

I don't think he was particularly empathetic with Evan. I think he was concerned with Dean's behavior and coming to the same realization that Dean was about their Dad. He barely spoke to Evan except to tell him to believe him or not about the goofer dust, but not to leave the circle, and then directed Evan on what to do when the hellhounds showed up.

The frat guy that Sam laughs at when he tells them that the aliens probed him? I don't think that's empathetic.

Sam didn't say much to Evan, but he did seem to empathize when he was talking about him with Dean. It wasn't just that he thought Dean was acting strangely. Sam mentioned that he understood why Evan did what he did, because he was trying to save someone he loved.

The frat guy was actually more of a tongue-in-cheek example (there really should be a sarcasm and kidding type font), because I was referring to the other frat guy - the one from Dean's retelling where Dean had Sam telling the frat guy "I feel your pain," hugging him, and declaring "You're too precious for this world."

6 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

When did Dean insist that Sam had better fall in line and do whatever Dean dictated? Do you mean after he got the MOC, and Sam finally noticed it wasn't a good thing?

Yes, except that I thought Sam questioned Dean's taking the MoC from the very beginning, so I wouldn't call it Sam finally noticing. And Dean entirely got his way on that one, with even Sam having to admit that Dean was right (I hated the second half of season 9).

3 hours ago, MysteryGuest said:

I personally don't think it's as lopsided as some Sam fans think it is. The two potential world-ending crisis that we've dealt with, the Apocalypse and The Darkness were a joint effort, IMO. Dean made a bad deal to save Sam's life and was sent to hell, and ultimately broke the first seal to start the Apocalypse. Sam killed Lillith in hopes of ending things, but instead it broke the last seal. Neither brother knew what the results of their actions would be, so I can't hold them responsible. Plus, they were being manipulated by angels and demons the whole time.

Dean took on the Mark of Cain, consequences be damned, became a killing machine and was prepared to kill his own brother in an effort to rid the world of himself. Sam used the Book of the Damned to remove the Mark from his brother and The Darkness was set free. Again, both brothers' actions caused that to happen. On a side note, I have an issue with The Darkness storyline. I know she was eating souls at the beginning, and obviously, that wasn't good, but I hated that Chuck just allowed that entire town to be killed. He saved one, but didn't bother with the other. Considering I think we were supposed to find Amara to be a sympathetic character at the end, I found those deaths to be unnecessary and hold Chuck responsible. He could have saved them, and he simply chose not to.

As for the rest, Dean allowed Sam to be possessed by an angel, and Kevin was killed. Sam involved Charlie in his efforts to save Dean, and she was killed. I think both brothers are equally culpable and blameless, depending on the circumstances. They've both made decisions that ended badly, and they've both allowed themselves to be suckered in by demons (Crowley and Ruby). I personally think the scorecard for bad choices is pretty even. I have never felt that Sam was more to blame than Dean for any of it, and I've never really gotten that vibe from the show.

I don't have too much of a problem with raising Lucifer - which is why I qualified my statement with "anymore" (meaning recently) - because I agree there that it was fairly balanced... except concerning my point below, but that's fairly minor in comparison to the rest.

I disagree with season 9 and Amara, however. The mark of Cain - though the results were mainly positive in the end - wasn't to save Sam, so doesn't really consider into my example. However it is interesting that Dean taking on power recklessly resulted in some good results (Abbadon being killed, Metatron being distracted while Castiel found the angel tablet) and wasn't considered as a factor in causing Amara - and in case there was a question about that, Chuck made sure to tell us so. But I was referring specifically to the saving the other brother circumstances, especially in recent seasons.

Yes, the Gadreel situation resulted in Kevin being killed but Gadreel was also redeemed and helped to save the world from Metatron - positive result. So Sam was saved and the world was saved. Dean also killed Death to save Sam, not considering the consequences and... nothing bad happened. At all. In fact, as it turned out, Billie the reaper who was supposedly so angry about that in the end ended up helping Dean to defeat Amara, so again - positive result. So within 3 seasons, Dean does risky and/or questionable things to save Sam twice and gets two mostly positive results. Not an apocalypse in sight.

Sam, on the other hand, uses the Book of the Damned to save Dean and raises Amara resulting in thousands of deaths and starting an apocalypse - which Dean gets to stop - and Chuck himself tells us it was all Sam's fault - all negative result. So Sam risks things to ave Dean and gets only negative results.

So for me, I don't consider that too even and don't quite get what the the writers (mainly Carver) are trying to tell me. Is it that risking everything to save your brother is only apocalyptic if it's Sam doing it? Or was Sam the only one chosen to show us the error of the brothers' ways - ironically for both the not saving and the saving - by convenience. For me, considering how crappy they made Sam look in both season 8 and 9, and seemed to somewhat justify Dean's choice to save Sam via Gadreel (by redeeming Gadreel, having Sam call him a friend, and having Sam in the end agree that he, too, would've done the same thing in Dean's place.), I'm a bit skeptical. Especially since they then indeed had Sam do a similar thing to what Dean did, but instead "punished" Sam by having him start an apocalypse and having Chuck/God explain how it was all Sam's fault. For me, I'm a little confused by the message.

Edited August 9, 2017 by AwesomO4000

AwesomO4000 · August 9, 2017

32 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

I think you're misconstruing what I wrote and getting upset by it, but that was not my intent. I merely wanted to explain my thinking on it, because you asked. If you don't like the word selfish . . . I'm not sure how else to phrase talking to someone about how he/she thinks or feels and rightly or wrongly interpreting that to validate your own life, choices, etc. Self-centered? It is a writing device to allow us into Sam's head, but I really don't like the way it comes across at all.

Since this really isn't what I see from the circumstances - in that I don't see Sam consciously, or even unconsciously, using the victims' circumstances to justify his choices at all - we'll have to agree to disagree.

Quote

@ILoveReading: Granted, I've only seen this episode once, but I don't remember Dean being a major plot point. Interacting with someone doesn't mean you impact the episode. 30 out of 42 minutes took place in Sam's head. If you take him out of the episode, nothing really changes.

Dean and Bobby call up and convince Balthazar to tell them where Castiel is so they can try to stop him. This development is what gets them the information they need to track down Castiel to try to stop him. Dean leaves the information for Sam, so he, too, knows where to go when he wakes up. Granted they don't stop Castiel, but knowing the approximate location of the spell and how it went down and what was involved leads to them being able to reopen the door and putting the other purgatory souls back into purgatory in the season 7 opener. So without Dean and Bobby contacting and convincing Balthazar, they wouldn't have been able to track down Castiel and find out about the spell to have that information later on. I think that might have changed things, myself in that they wouldn't know how to begin fixing what happened with Castiel. So I don't agree with nothing really changing if you take Dean out of the episode, but miles vary.

Edited August 9, 2017 by AwesomO4000

catrox14 · August 9, 2017

21 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Yes, except that I thought Sam questioned Dean's taking the MoC from the very beginning, so I wouldn't call it Sam finally noticing. And Dean entirely got his way on that one, with even Sam having to admit that Dean was right (I hated the second half of season 9).

I'm not sure I understand this. Sam couldn't have done anything to stop Dean from taking the Mark of Cain and he had no idea what has happening with Dean, so I don't know what there was for Dean to have his way about?

AwesomO4000 · August 9, 2017

22 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I'm not sure I understand this. Sam couldn't have done anything to stop Dean from taking the Mark of Cain and he had no idea what has happening with Dean, so I don't know what there was for Dean to have his way about?

Sorry if that was confusing - I meant in general concerning the MoC in that Dean's insistence it was necessary - rather than reckless - was eventually justified. That's what Sam's story in "Mother's Little Helper" was about - him learning that Abaddon had to be stopped and getting on board with Dean's plan despite his initial concerns. Dean thinking that because he, Dean, was the one with the power, Sam should just stay out of it and fall in line ("this is not a democracy") was also somewhat justified in that Dean was able to stop Abaddon and he and Castiel were able to stop Metatron and avert that catastrophe without Sam's help. So Dean had his way there too, in my opinion, in that he was able to freeze Sam out despite Sam's objections and be justified in doing so.

Edited August 9, 2017 by AwesomO4000

catrox14 · August 9, 2017

21 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Sorry if that was confusing - I meant in general concerning the MoC in that Dean's insistence it was necessary - rather than reckless - was eventually justified. That's what Sam's story in "Mother's Little Helper" was about - him learning that Abaddon had to be stopped and getting on board with Dean's plan despite his initial concerns. Dean thinking that because he, Dean, was the one with the power, Sam should just stay out of it and fall in line ("this is not a democracy") was also somewhat justified in that Dean was able to stop Abaddon and he and Castiel were able to stop Metatron and avert that catastrophe without Sam's help. So Dean had his way there too, in my opinion, in that he was able to freeze Sam out despite Sam's objections and be justified in doing so.

I guess that is a matter of perspective. Considering Dean ended up as his own worst nightmare as a demon, and eventually murdered 15 human beings, and was a party to unleashing the Darkness, getting his way seems like a rather Pyrrhic victory. So yay?

AwesomO4000 · August 9, 2017

Just now, catrox14 said:

I guess that is a matter of perspective. Considering Dean ended up as his own worst nightmare as a demon, and eventually murdered 15 human beings, and was a party to unleashing the Darkness, getting his way seems like a rather Pyrrhic victory. So yay?

So business as usual for our little show? ; ) (since Sam getting his way generally ends up at least just as badly.)

And technically Dean was absolved from being party to unleashing the Darkness by Chuck... and he got to be the main reason Amara was stopped as well. And hey at least it was only 15 people and not a couple thousand. Coulda been worse. ; )

catrox14 · August 9, 2017

4 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

So business as usual for our little show? ; ) (since Sam getting his way generally ends up at least just as badly.)

And technically Dean was absolved from being party to unleashing the Darkness by Chuck... and he got to be the main reason Amara was stopped as well. And hey at least it was only 15 people and not a couple thousand. Coulda been worse. ; )

For me, as much as I loved Demon!Dean, Dean being murdered by Metatron and resurrected as a demon is the worst thing that could have happened to Dean. He killed Abaddon, and lost more of himself in the process. He slaughtered Randy an the Rapists, assholes or no, that's not kosher and fell further into the Mark's control. How was Dean absolved from releasing the Darkness by Chuck? I literally have no idea what you are referring to there. I remember Chuck accused Dean of not just being unable to kill her but not wanting to kill her.

AwesomO4000 · August 9, 2017

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

How was Dean absolved from releasing the Darkness by Chuck? I literally have no idea what you are referring to there.

While it is true that Dean wasn't there to hear it specifically, the show - through Chuck - put the blame for Amara solely on Sam. I think it was in "Don't Call me Shurley." *** In show, Dean isn't considered to have any significant part in raising Amara... that was all Sam and his bad choices again. Chuck specifically takes pains to explain it to Metatron that the world would be just fine with Demon Dean (or I'm assuming, Mark of Cain Dean) in it, but Sam had to try to save him, and thereby cause Amara to happen, so the fault is all his (Sam's). It's part of why I complain (as outlined above) about what looks to me to be a dichotomy between the aftermath of the brothers' actions to save each other during the last few seasons. As I said in that post, it could just be coincidence, but considering the pains the writers sometimes went through to twist some things - like Sam's speech in "The Purge" when they likely knew that Sam was going to change his mind at the end of the season anyway - I'm not so sure, and it makes their message confusing for me.

*** An episode I ironically adore despite this.

CluelessDrifter · August 9, 2017

10 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

Yes, except that I thought Sam questioned Dean's taking the MoC from the very beginning, so I wouldn't call it Sam finally noticing. And Dean entirely got his way on that one, with even Sam having to admit that Dean was right (I hated the second half of season 9).

Thanks. I wanted to narrow it down to the right episodes. It didn't seem like you were talking about the angel possession but something else.

About when I think Sam really took notice of the MoC:

Sam didn't notice things were off until the end of Blade Runners, 5 episodes after Dean got the Mark and coinciding with when Magnus put the First Blade in Dean's hand.

His first conversation with Dean about the Mark and how he's changing isn't until the next episode after that, Mother's Little Helper, and at the start he says that Dean's becoming obsessed with finding Abaddon, they split, and after he works the case retracing his father's footsteps, he comes back agreeing that they need to find Abaddon ASAP, because she's mining souls to create an army (never mind that apparently all it takes to create a demon is to put a soul in jar for a while).

Sam doesn't really say anything about the MOC in Meta Fiction. Cas finally sees it and tells Sam to keep an eye on him.

Sam mentions that Dean looked like he enjoyed killing the vamps at the end of Alex Annie Alexis Ann too much, but to me, that's an observation more than Sam wanting or not wanting Dean to do something.

Bloodlines doesn't really exist for me.

About what you wrote about Dean dictating that Sam should fall in line with what he wanted and what I think about it:

The final three episodes are when Sam starts to push more that they should keep the First Blade far away from Dean, and that's when Dean really becomes more obstinate about keeping it by giving him an unequivocal 'no.' Dean also becomes more steadfast in his plans to go it alone, first with Abaddon and then two episodes later, with Metatron. In the finale, Sam tries to exert some control by locking Dean in the dungeon at the bunker and when that doesn't work by following Dean until Dean knocks him out, and I did say in my original post that there have been some notable instances where Dean hasn't given into what Sam wants or Sam's way. These last three episodes of Season 9 would be one of those notable instances for me.

Edited August 9, 2017 by CluelessDrifter

ILoveReading · August 9, 2017

20 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

Dean also becomes more steadfast in his plans to go it alone, first with Abaddon and then two episodes later, with Metatron.

I agree about Dean being steadfast about wanting to go it alone, but I also think a small part was Dean thinking this was the only way he'd be able to accomplish his goal. More so with Abbadon but with Metatron to a lesser extent. What I mean is that Dean knows Sam is his weak spot. When Dean walked into his confrontation with Abbadon, she had the upper hand at first. Had Sam been there, he would have been pinned against the wall right alongside Dean. I can see Abbadon threatening to kill Sam if Dean didn't give her the blade. Given Dean's need to protect Sam, he knows he probably would have done it.

I think this was was Dean was trying to communicate, just not very effectively.

I think given Sam's tendency to fall back into little brother mode, he wasn't listening. I always felt the scene was actually Dean admitting more his weakness than Sam's.

I think its also why he felt the need to go after Metatron alone. Not because he was worried about Sam not being able to handle himself, but because Dean needed to make sure he didn't have that distraction.

auntvi · August 9, 2017

13 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

I think this was was Dean was trying to communicate, just not very effectively.

I understand that Dean wanted to reduce distractions or the possibility that Sam would be used against him, but my problem with Mark of Cain Dean is that he wouldn't talk to Sam about the options instead of acting unilaterally. Sending Sam on a wild goose chase to keep him away from Abbadon is not terrible, but I thinking punching Sam and leaving him unconscious by the side of the road while he faced Metatron alone was OTT. Plus it didn't work - even with the MoC and the weapon he was crushed by Metatron.

Katy M · August 9, 2017

On ‎7‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 0:16 PM, CluelessDrifter said:

Sam has always gotten his way with Dean,

I don't think he always gets his way. Wendigo, he wanted to stick around Stanford longer, nope. Then, he wanted to ditch the job and look for dad. Nope. Dead in the water, ditto, nope. Asylum, ditto, nope. Scarecrow, ditto, they each did what they wanted to do, which in general is what normal adults would do. Something Wicked, he didn't want to use Michael for bait, they ended up doing it. Dead Man's Blood, he wanted to fight with his dad and Dean broke it up (I'm actually kidding on that one). Everybody Loves a Clown, he wants Dean to open up, Dean doesn't. Children Shouldn't Play with Dead things, he doesn't want to look into a case that he doesn't think exists, they do. Crossroad Blues, he doesn't want Dean to summon the CRD, Dean does. Folsom Prison blues, he doesn't want to go into prison to solve the case, they do anyway. The Magnificent SEven, he wants to go to LA to try to break Dean's demon deal, Dean says no. Recurring theme through the season. A Very SPN Christmas, Sam doesn't want to celebrate Christmas, but he ends up doing it anyway. DALDOm, SAm doesn't want to go dreamwalking in Bobby's head, they do it anyway. Ghostfacers, Sam didn't want to hunt that haunted house, they did it anyway. When the Levee Breaks, pretty sure it wasn't his idea to lock himself in the panic room.

ILoveReading · August 9, 2017

1 minute ago, auntvi said:

I understand that Dean wanted to reduce distractions or the possibility that Sam would be used against him, but my problem with Mark of Cain Dean is that he wouldn't talk to Sam about the options instead of acting unilaterally. Sending Sam on a wild goose chase to keep him away from Abbadon is not terrible, but I thinking punching Sam and leaving him unconscious by the side of the road while he faced Metatron alone was OTT. Plus it didn't work - even with the MoC and the weapon he was crushed by Metatron.

That's why I felt it applied far more the Abbadon situation than Metatron.

If Dean had tried to discuss the options would Sam have listened? When Dean tries to explain something to Sam, Sam immediately gets defensive and falls back into the "stop treating me like a kid/stop protecting me" stance. If Dean said, "Stay behind, I don't want Abbadon to use you against me" I doubt Sam would have listened.

Dean probably knew that which is why he sent Sam on the Wild goose chase, and if Sam went into the fight with Dean, there is a good chance they both would be dead and Metatron in possession of the first blade.

These guys are stubborn.

Katy M · August 9, 2017

I don't think he always gets his way. Part 2

Sympathy for the devil, he wanted Dean just to forgive and forget, and Dean didn't, not saying he should have. The End, Sam wanted back in Dean said no, Zach changed his mind on that. Fallen Idols, Sam didn't think case was finished, Dean did, only changed his mind when sherriff called with new victim. Sam didn't want Dean to go off with Crowley, Dean did. You Can't Handle the Truth, he never specifically said, but he probably didn't want to get beat to a pulp. Appointment in Samarra, he didn't want his soul put back. The Girl Next Door, he didn't want Dean to kill Amy, he did. Shut Up Dr Phil, he wanted Dean to tell him what was wrong, Dean wouldn't. Adventures in Babysitting, he wanted Dean to go with him, Dean went to Frank instead. Blood Brother, Sam wanted answers before Dean took off, he didn't get them. Trial and Error, Dean did not give Sam his way, they both had a crack at killing that Hell Hound and Sam was successful, Dean wasn't. I Think I'm Going to Like it, Sam was in a coma, but Dean specifically said that he knew that Sam would not want to be possessed so he didn't give Sam his way on that, either.

Sign In

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

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Aeryn13

BabySpinach

BabySpinach

Posted Images

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment