All Episodes Talk: Saving People, Hunting Things

[rue721]

From the Spoilers & Speculation thread, but no spoilers, just talking about TFW's reaction to the MoC and the massacre in The Things We Left Behind: 

 

Sam was pretty MIA on Deans issue when he first took on the mark. And then he side eyed him without doing much research even after he saw Dean get squirrelly and saw how much it affected him during blade runners and even then he still didn't do any research. Cas was too busy being involved with the angel war to really focus on Deans plight. So here they are just so shocked when Dean cracked as though they didn't kind of see it coming. They might not have been able to do anything but surely Sam knew he was slipping before he became a demon. I guess I just don't get their indignation or surprise.

 

Sorry in advance for being incoherent and rambling (yet again). I've really tried to be clear and concise! But these are the ~horrors~ sleep deprivation wreaks on a person [scary ghost noises].

 

So, I've been continuing to wonder about John's estrangement from Sam when Sam went to school, and finally realized that what bothered me most about the idea of it being a consequence of hotheadedness/stubbornness was that John then estranged himself from Dean, too (during S1) -- and even though the final straw between John and Sam was a blowout fight, the split between John and Dean seemed like it came about without them actually having a dispute (it seemed to me like John did some kind of slow fade and then gave Dean radio silence). I think that once Dean realized John had really ditched him, he went and got Sam -- but meanwhile, John was apparently crawling off to die alone, like an animal? I wonder if maybe John thought he was a burden or a bad influence on them, and was trying to protect them from him, in a way? Of course, that kind of possible self destructiveness and perverse self regard made me think again about the "drinking problem" theory. But I do think that I was too literal about that. Maybe the "addiction" that's actually a problem on this show is metaphorical, and it's actually hunting/killing. (And that's how imo it also ties in with the MoC -- and even the "born killer" thing?).

 

What made me wonder about alcoholism in the first place wasn't so much the actual drinking on the show (which always seems poorly/unrealistically done, to the degree that I find it weird since many of the people who make this show presumably do drink -- well, doesn't matter) but the characters' relationships with each other. I've been thinking lately about how Dean and Sam's relationship now is echoing John and Dean's relationship. I mean in terms of how Sam currently seems to be trying to prop up and "handle" Dean, while apparently terrified of taking control of the situation or of directing Dean himself -- that seems not dissimilar to how Dean related to John, imo. And in terms of Dean's fatalism, and how he's becoming less reachable and even less human (more and more *just* the hunter/killer), and how he's turning into a sort of shadow or ghost of himself -- that also seems not dissimilar to how John eventually drew back from everything/everyone except hunting and YED, and seemed so ready to die.

 

What I think is notable about how John and Dean related to each other, in that imo it's being somewhat repeated between Dean and Sam now:  I feel like Dean tried so hard to compensate for John in the way that you have to in order to keep a gloss of plausible normalcy over things when someone is physically there but not reachable or truly functional (mentally). I also feel like Dean tried so hard to keep from rocking the boat with John and to keep him placated, in the way you have to if you're terrified that any wrong move or even just putting any pressure on a person (by asking anything of him, for example) will send him spiraling out into seeking comfort in whatever it is that's destroying him (and that has already destroyed him enough to get into this state of slipping slowly away/becoming a ghost or a shadow of himself).

 

Now, it seems like Sam seems like he's been trying so hard to compensate for Dean in how he's trying to sell (to himself, to Cas, to Dean, to whoever) the idea that Dean still has things under control (like in his enthusiasm over and prompting through that stupid CBGB story). The gloss of ~plausible normalcy~ that Sam and Dean were trying to paint over the current situation was torn off by Dean massacring those thugs, though -- because Dean was not in control of the MoC when he did that, regardless of what he'd been claiming about being "more" himself lately and implicitly more in control, the MoC was in control of him.

 

Not to be insensitive, I'm sorry if this is offensive to anyone. It's just something I've been thinking about and am open to corrections:  if you think of it as a sort of analogy to something like alcoholism, imo it's like if someone keeps saying that he's in control of his drinking, and his loved ones trying very hard to believe him (i.e., Dean telling Sam that he feels more like himself and Sam going along with it, etc), and that person saying that he just needs to drink a certain amount to stay "level" and his loved ones trying to make sure he has a way to get that certain amount in a "safe" way (i.e., Dean needs to kill or he'll get very sick, maybe even die -- so Sam agrees to go hunting with him), and then that person losing control and going on a destructive binge (i.e., Dean's massacre), and finally being forced to admit that he's *not* in control after all and needs help.

 

I think that Sam seems so frozen and subdued because, like Dean was with John back in the day, Sam's terrified of rocking the boat and inadvertently "causing" Dean to slip further. I think that's actually been a concern for Sam since he called Dean out about the Gadreel possession thing and requested that they go their own ways, and then saw that, almost immediately, Crowley*** got his hooks into Dean, and Dean was a wreck in general. I think that Sam realized then that if they were to split up, Dean might self destruct (even die), and imo that's why Sam went back to him even though he clearly wasn't ready (I say "clearly," because the weirdo boundaries that Sam tried to set up, like the "we aren't brothers" rule or whatever, were ridiculous and unworkable and not the ideas of someone legitimately ready to reconcile imo).

 

I also think that something that's going on now with Dean that went on with John previously is this whole "my fate is sealed" or "I'm doomed" thing. Dean has been saying that explicitly, and I sure got that feeling from John. Each has seemed to me like a person who felt/feels that he's hurtling downwards and all that's left is to steel himself for when he inevitably hits bottom -- and Dean knows that hitting bottom means something like becoming a *demon* ffs. He knows that when he's at his worst, he's a literal monster (and that he might even *enjoy that more,* at least according to him when he was a demon). I actually feel terrible for Sam when Dean says things like that, because talk about feelings of powerlessness.

 

Anyway, what's important about all this stuff, in my mind, is the feeling or position of trying to hold things together as the person who you *want* to be able to count on is reduced to a shadow of a person/himself right in front of your eyes -- and how that feeling/position is passed along. I sort of feel like this is John's legacy in a way? He made hunting/killing his solace after his life fell apart, and the effects of that just seem to keep rippling out. I'm not saying anything now is his fault, just that I think a theme of this season is "ripple effects" (what with Cole and Claire, and even Hannah's husband) and I think this is still a ripple effect of the choices that John made as well (as the choices that Dean and Sam have made for themselves).

 

***Crowley is so "that scumbag" who inevitably shows up when someone is lonely and vulnerable. And not just in the usual "scumbag boyfriend" sense imo. He basically "turned out" Dean, and tricked him out to Cain. Blech.

[SueB]

I think you've got a good analogy going.  Sam is exhausted, at this point, being Dean's babysitter.  And that's how he feels, I think.  He feels responsible for whatever Dean does.  It's definitely a reversal of the position Dean was in for years with BOTH John and Sam.  Sam is quiet and slightly panicked all the time.  His mind seems to be racing 100 miles an hour while he looks at Dean.  

 

Welcome to the role of "in charge" Sam.  Sucks, doesn't it.  

[Aeryn13]

I don`t see any similarities. John broke off contact because IMO he felt that big mission was something he should take on alone. Meanwhile Dean and Sam were supposed to do "little league stuff" in terms of hunting. In a way he wanted to protect them but never for a second did I think he meant to protect them from himself. Or that he feels the same self-loathing and judgment for himself that Dean does now. He was entirely too convinced of his general righteousness for that. Sure, he regretted the parenting choices but he did not think himself a monster at all.

 

Now I don`t think Dean is one either. Even as a demon he wasn`truly demonic. He didn`t bathe in babies blood or anything. And what he enjoyed was being freed from responsibility. After the life he led, I can totally get why.

 

Sam IMO is not the caretaker type. At least not with his brother but in general he doesn`t give off the vibe. That`s why he doesn`t really know how to handle it. He tries because the guy who is usually filling that slot is literally now unavailable because he is the one with a supernatural problem for a change but for Sam this entire situation is a novelty. He knows what it is like to BE that guy with the supernatural thing and Dean was the one reacting to it. Now the roles are reversed. Dean IMO has a natural instinct for it so he can follow his gut and it will more or less turn out okay on the caretaking front (not always but in general).

 

Sam doesn`t have those instincts and no experience and I think he tries to go at it intellectually, i.e. he knows what would generally be considered supportive, how you probably should act and what might work. If there was a manual, he would read it and apply the ideas. But that is something Big Bang`s Sheldon would do, too, and it would fail in 99 % of all the cases. Sam doesn`t really know when to push and when to let it rest. And since HE himself has a general problem with being pushed too much, he extrapolates that and thinks "less is more".

 

Only with the MOC, he should have been more vigilant and pushed on some level. Stuff like leaving Dean alone in that house with those guys for no real reason - Cas was completely capable of walking Claire to the car himself - was just stupid. So now he reacts with extreme judgment and frankly, that is also having terrible instincts as a caretaker.   

Edited January 15, 2015 by Aeryn13

[supposebly]

 

I've been thinking lately about how Dean and Sam's relationship now is echoing John and Dean's relationship. I mean in terms of how Sam currently seems to be trying to prop up and "handle" Dean, while apparently terrified of taking control of the situation or of directing Dean himself -- that seems not dissimilar to how Dean related to John, imo. And in terms of Dean's fatalism, and how he's becoming less reachable and even less human (more and more *just* the hunter/killer), and how he's turning into a sort of shadow or ghost of himself -- that also seems not dissimilar to how John eventually drew back from everything/everyone except hunting and YED, and seemed so ready to die.

rue721, I really like your thoughts on that and it makes a lot of sense to me.

The alcoholism or addiction angle however I can't get on board with. Any emotional or somewhat compulsive (or stubborn or hard to understand) behavior that seems "out of control" to at least someone seems to invite those types of comparisons but I really don't see it except for the fact that Dean's "well-being" is clearly dependent on the mark getting "fed". But I don't think the whole situation can be explained purely in addiction terms. I'm not offended, I just think it's a lot more complex and interesting than that.

Edited January 15, 2015 by supposebly

[rue721]

rue721, I really like your thoughts on that and it makes a lot of sense to me.

The alcoholism or addiction angle however I can't get on board with. Any emotional or somewhat compulsive (or stubborn or hard to understand) behavior that seems "out of control" to at least someone seems to invite those types of comparisons but I really don't see it except for the fact that Dean's "well-being" is clearly dependent on the mark getting "fed". But I don't think the whole situation can be explained purely in addiction terms. I'm not offended, I just think it's a lot more complex and interesting than that.

 

I agree with your overall point that an analogy can't explain the whole situation/family dynamics/etc. In terms of the MoC *specifically,* though, as its own SL aside from the larger relationships/family dynamics/etc stuff, I think they're pretty explicitly drawing on alcoholism in how they're portraying the Mark's effects. I don't mean in a metaphorical sense in that case, I mean in terms of how they've decided to plot out what it's doing to Dean. It's like they're going down an "are you an alcoholic?" checklist. There are so many things about how the MoC is affecting him that are literally *exactly* what you're taught to look for as "warning signs" of problem drinking specifically:

 

He's literally getting the shakes when he doesn't [kill], he can't go cold turkey because he's physically dependent on [killing], he's having huge personality changes (*cough* demon *cough*), after Sam found/"cured" him Sam wanted him to stay home to "rest" but Dean insisted on going right back to the same habits/places that he associates with [killing] (i.e., on hunts), Sam agreed to that partly because [killing] is a bonding activity and family tradition for them that's woven through their relationship/family/lives, he and Sam made a deal that he'd only [kill] a certain amount and under certain conditions (i.e., hunting monsters), even when his [killing] was under control (like in Ask Jeeves) it wasn't like a "normal" person [kills] (i.e., the "over kill" of the Shifter, which Sam then asked him about), after [killing] he told Sam that he felt more "like himself" (at the end of Hibbing 911), has told Sam how many times now that everything's fine and he's in control and all that, when he lost control/"slipped" he went from zero to sixty and couldn't stop [killing] until all the [people] around for him to [kill] were gone, he also blacked out during that [massacre] and god knows left a big mess behind him.

 

Tbh, I would guess that the producers/writers are (purposefully) using alcoholism as a model for how the MoC is affecting Dean, as part of an effort to keep the SL at least sort of tethered to reality. I mean that they seem to me like they're using it as a way of guiding their writing/plotting so it stays grounded, not as a metaphor. If you think of it in that context, I think writing choices like Sam not just barging in and deciding how to "fix" Dean or "fix" the MoC for him, etc, start falling into place. BUT! of course YMMV, I mean that things start falling into place for me personally.

 

Anyway, one of the things that I think is interesting about how the MoC storyline is shaking out is that as Dean's been struggling with the MoC, Sam seems to me like he's been dealing with Dean increasingly similarly to how Dean dealt with John (in the ways I was talking about earlier, will try not to be redundant!) -- and it also seems like Dean isn't conscious of that? I think a turning point in their relationship, when they "switched roles," might have been when Sam realized he had to partner back up with Dean after finding out about the Gadreel possession. I think their relationship did fundamentally change at that point, because that's when Sam realized that Dean needed him. I wonder how Dean perceives Sam's change in behavior/demeanor (that he's been so subdued and all)? Maybe he doesn't even perceive a change?

 

Also, speaking of Sam maybe taking on Dean's role and Dean is taking on John's, in The Things They Carried, when they touched *again* on the ~My Father, My Hero~ thing that Dean's played up for so long, Dean (and Sam) were implicitly encouraged Cas to model his relationship with Claire on Dean's with John (by way of that CBGB story). And Cas apparently *was* encouraged (since he went to the house to rescue her in response to that story)! That's kind of horrifying, right? I mean, from at least the time of John's death until now, Dean has said pretty much flat out and frequently that nobody should model their relationship with their child on his with his father. He left Ben specifically so he wouldn't (even inadvertently!) end up raising him like John had raised him, and he went to Krissy's dad in the hospital specifically to tell him not to raise her like that, either. He's been pretty consistent about it. So what's going on now with the Winchesters encouraging Cas to use John as an inspiration? (Though I'm not shocked at Sam in that case, he's had the rose-colored glasses about his father firmly in place since John's death imo).

[SueB]

I thought Sam sort of settled back into a place where he loved his father but saw the damage he did to him and Dean.  In Bad Boys, they had this exchange:

 

 

Sam: You were here for two months and Dad couldn't find you?
Dean: Oh, no. He found me. He found me quick. But he left me here 'cause I lost our money.
Sam: You were 16. You made a mistake.
Dean: Yeah. I made the mistake. Look, I know how you think. None of this was Dad's fault.

emphasis mine.

Sam was gearing up for crabbing about John's tough love approach and Dean shut him down.  I'm with Sam on this, BTW, that was a shitty move on John's part. And shitty to just rip Dean out of where he was with no notice.  

 

But I do see Sam and Dean reversing roles.  I'm not sure if Dean=John so much as Sam=Dean.  Sam's trying to keep the family together even if it's just the two of them.  He doesn't have the dynamic of two members fighting but he is having to deal with someone who is damaged. And I agree John was damaged, driven to revenge and hunting,  and a functional alcoholic.  

[catrox14]

I still don't know if the addiction angle is being used as a metaphor but I'm sure it's a basis for creating the drama. Dean and Sam are both alcoholics IMO in the show and drink like fish (do fish drink?), and they both continue to drink even with Dean having the MoC. Dean drank even more with the MoC so that is where the metaphor /analogy falls apart as being intentional. How can they try to show alcoholism as a bad thing via the MoC when Dean and Sam still both drink? Sam suffers no ill consequences from drinking and Dean suffered no ill consequences from drinking either before or after he took on the MoC. The closest they ever came to showing Dean using alcohol as a continual crutch was in s7. But Dean didn't really even drink after purgatory and he started again in s9 after he let Sam be possessed by Gadreel. And then drank more and more once he took on the Mark. So I guess I'm not really seeing the metaphor/analogy as intentional. 

 

I'm not really seeing that Dean is like John at all here. And if they are attempting to say that Dean is as bad as John by paralleling his relationship with Sam to being like John and Dean then they are creating the most egregious retcon in the history of the show short of Mary never actually dying. 

 

Sam and Dean's entire relationship has been built on the fact that Dean was essentially trying to be a mother and father to Sam throughout the show. That Dean was attempting to and often succeeding at being a better parent to Sam than John ever was. The show went to pains to differentiate the parenting and relationships. If the retcon Dean into being an asshole like John, well I'll be out. I can take Dean being a demon. I cannot take Dean being John. 

 

To me, Sam looking out for Dean right now really just a role reversal for Dean and Sam. And it's  about damn fucking time. Dean has sacrificed for Sam and literally was his caregiver/nurse for the entire backhalf of s8. He became Sam's stay at home Mom in the backhalf of s8. Dean has always made sure Sam was fed, that Sam was looked after and protected as best he could until even when he was a Weechester himself.  Even with the college thing, Dean wasn't really saying Sam shouldn't go to college but just didn't want him to leave the family.

 

With the CBGB scene,   I got hung up on the idea that Dean thinks JOhn was there when he really needed him, but I'm really hoping that Sam took more out of that and he realizes that Dean has been there when Sam needed him.  Maybe Sam is going to finally see how much of a father Dean has been to him, and how much better at it he was than John.  

[7kstar]

 

To me, Sam looking out for Dean right now really just a role reversal for Dean and Sam. And it's  about damn fucking time. Dean has sacrificed for Sam and literally was his caregiver/nurse for the entire backhalf of s8. He became Sam's stay at home Mom in the backhalf of s8. Dean has always made sure Sam was fed, that Sam was looked after and protected as best he could until even when he was a Weechester himself.  Even with the college thing, Dean wasn't really saying Sam shouldn't go to college but just didn't want him to leave the family.

Sam isn't prepared to be the caregiver.  Also he is quite aware that Dean on his own won't be a good thing, as the two times he's been on his own in the last two season's he got the MoC and paired up with Crowley for a partner. 

 

The entire series it has shown Sam having his eyes opened to how much Dean took care of him, protected him when he wasn't really aware of the weight it put on Dean.  He was allowed to think like a kid, Dean wasn't.

 

As an older sibling I can get this.  My little brother and sister don't see what I did to help out when they were little.  I doubt they see it even now...but like Dean I willingly chose to do it.  I also realize that when I left it left - a hole that they didn't know how to deal with my parents because I had always stepped in when it got rocky.  Like Sam when I left I didn't think about it, but for the first time put myself first.  It was weird.

 

So I can get it is weird for Sam to be in the shoes of looking after his brother and not really getting how to do that.  Dean had years to learn how to do that, Sam hasn't had that long in the scheme of things.  So seeing him floundering is realistic for me.

 

Sam for the first time may also understand why Dean did step in and saved his life instead of just letting him die.  But he has a bigger issue...If Dean dies, he won't go peacefully to heaven, he will become a Demon.  If he fails and goes to heaven, he will still have the knowledge of what he couldn't do to live with. 

 

Which would be the worst part...because he (Sam) was saved from being a demon.  For me in a way Sam is in John's shoes.  John understood what would happen to Sam and the weight of how it killed his wife, destroyed his family and he was driven to stop it with the only way he could do it, which was revenge and kill the demon.  If he could kill the demon he could somehow save Sam.  It is twisted logic but it is how I see John, JMV.

 

Sam gets what will happen to Dean, and he knows that when it was reversed he asked Dean to kill him.  Demon Dean told Sam do you have the guts to kill me.  Sam failed just like Dean did, though to be fair Sam was possessed.  The richness of this complex storyline could be really interesting.  Just not sure they will use it which is why I remain hopeful but ready for bitter disappointment.

Edited January 17, 2015 by 7kstar

[rue721]

I still don't know if the addiction angle is being used as a metaphor but I'm sure it's a basis for creating the drama. Dean and Sam are both alcoholics IMO in the show and drink like fish (do fish drink?), and they both continue to drink even with Dean having the MoC. Dean drank even more with the MoC so that is where the metaphor /analogy falls apart as being intentional. How can they try to show alcoholism as a bad thing via the MoC when Dean and Sam still both drink?

 

I don't mean that the literal drinking on the show is supposed to show alcoholism, the drinking on the show makes no realistic sense imo. On the show, drinking itself is just meant as a shorthand for having ~feelings~, I think, and nothing else. It has no effects on their lives, they don't even face relatively minor consequences for drinking heavily, like being undependable or forgetful and hard to talk to or being more likely to get hurt (physically) in a fight or driving or out of clumsiness.

 

(Rant Warning:  Not to be an uptight school marm about it but it really aggravates me how SPN depicts drinking because I think it normalizes messed up, dangerous behavior, especially since the show doesn't even bother to show any of the (natural) consequences of that behavior. It's actually not cute to have to carry around a flask or a handle to "maintain" during the day, for example. I like alcohol irl, and the skill that's paid my rent many a month is that I'm very good at selling it. But to depict it like this is irresponsible imo. I don't need them to make PSAs or even have the characters drink less, I just wish they'd show the natural consequences/costs of habits like needing to take snorts from morning till night just to get through the day).

 

Anyway, when someone is acting like an alcoholic or like someone who is used to being around an alcoholic -- I don't mean in terms of literal drinking going on onscreen, I mean in terms of how characters are treating each other or the assumptions they make about people/each other -- I'm like, "oh, is the show making a reference to alcoholism?" Thinking about it more, though, that way of looking at how the characters behave in this show is probably too literal. I don't think that the literal drinking on the show is even problematic *within the world of the show* (which is exactly what I don't like about it).

 

It's weird because on the one hand the show depicts a ton of drinking and on the other hand the show depicts lots of the long term *emotional* effects that alcoholism (among other things) has on a person or on a family, but the drinking and those effects are completely divorced, as though the drinking *wasn't* what produced those effects (and those other things that I can think of that could produce the same effects don't seem like they apply). So I'm like, "if the drinking isn't an issue, then why is everyone acting like this?" And I don't know the answer.

 

The reason I keep harping on it (and I don't mean to make such a ~thing~! I'm sorry!) is because I genuinely find it disturbing that Dean could be slipping into becoming his father, and I genuinely find it disturbing that Sam could be watching his brother vanish and be replaced by this other ~thing~ right before his eyes and be unable to stop it.

 

How I think Dean's human "self" slowly being snuffed out and replaced by this demon or MoC-compelled killer is similar to what happened to John is that it seems like, as John got more obsessed with YED/revenge/hunting/whatever, John's "self"/humanity (including John-as-a-father) also got snuffed out and replaced by this hunting-compelled "new" person, too. He even apologized for that when he met back up with his sons in the first season. I think that Claire is in a similar position with Cas, too, where he looks like her father, he's got the same meatsuit -- but he's an imposter, he's this not-human not-father stranger. Cas has his own strengths and weaknesses and all, but the point is, Claire's father is dead, she doesn't have a father, even though "Jimmy" (aka Cas) might show up and treat her sorta/kinda "paternally."

 

The idea that someone is still there physically, but the actual *human being* who you loved and trusted has been snuffed out and replaced by some stranger who doesn't even seem human -- that's heartbreaking to me. Especially if you have to witness that whole process of the person you love slowly, slowly being snuffed out completely, and the stranger who will replace them slowly, slowly taking over. Irl maybe that happens because someone has an addiction or (mental/neurological) health problems or something, and I guess in this show, that happens because of an obsession with hunting or becoming an angel's vessel or becoming a demon? It doesn't matter to me that much what causes it to happen, anyway, just seeing the process of it happening, no matter the cause, is heartbreaking imo.

 

It's especially heartbreaking to me w/r/t Dean because it seems to me like he witnessed that happen to John (I say that mostly based on how much he obviously tried to compensate and cover for John) and now he's putting the person he loves most and tried hardest to protect from that (Sam) through the same nightmare anyway. You know the thing of Bobby not wanting to have kids because he was afraid he wouldn't be able to help doing to them what his father had done to him? Dean seemed to me to make the same choice when he decided he had to leave Ben and Lisa. And I guess he was right to do that, because he was doomed to be destroyed like his father had been?! And now what, is Sam going to one day have his humanity snuffed out and become a monster or a killer/hunter just wearing Sam's old meatsuit, too?

 

W/r/t the Mark specifically:

I mean that the way that the Mark is compelling Dean to kill and how he's reacting to not/killing is seriously like going down a checklist of behavior you're supposed to look for to know if someone has a problem rather than just likes to [drink, kill, whatever]. It's pretty clear imo that they're using alcoholism as a model for how the MoC is affecting him, because they're lifting a lot of real life symptoms of alcoholism wholesale (but applying those symptoms to Dean's killing, not to anyone's drinking). Last season, the thing of him having the shakes when he needed to kill, and then him needing to kill to physically survive even as all that killing was ultimately destroying him, made me think of the MoC as being a sort of metaphorical alcoholism. (I don't think that the MoC is a metaphor for addiction in general, because killing specifically is such a centerpiece of their family life and so "expected" of them (since they're hunters) that becoming "addicted to killing" is more similar imo to becoming addicted to alcohol specifically, since alcohol is also ubiquitous/acceptable/deeply familiar/etc, than it is comparable to becoming addicted to something more hidden or taboo, like hard drugs). But this season it's like they're just lifting all the symptoms of alcoholism and directly applying them to Dean's need to kill, maybe as a way of making the effects of the MoC easier to imagine or write about or something, so that it seems almost too literal to be a metaphor even. I guess it's technically still a metaphor because it's not actually that Dean is an alcoholic, he's "addicted to killing" or whatever instead, but it's not like it's reimagined as some big ~metaphor~ imo, it's like they are taking their plot points from an AA pamphlet but with "killing" subbed in for "drinking," right down to the role(s) that killing plays in their family/life/history.

[Aeryn13]

 

It's especially heartbreaking to me w/r/t Dean because it seems to me like he witnessed that happen to John (I say that mostly based on how much he obviously tried to compensate and cover for John) and now he's putting the person he loves most and tried hardest to protect from that (Sam) through the same nightmare anyway.

 

I don`t see it like that at all. Dean right now is being influenced by something supernatural. That has been Sam`s storyline for years, it was the visions and largely the special Child-ness, then the demon blood powers, then the soullessness, then the Hellucinations, then the Trialuberculosis. And Dean was in the position Sam is in now each and every time, for the majority of the whole freaking show. This is the first time their roles are reversed and Sam is in the Dean-position. Just don`t see where John parallels comes into the equation or why it is only a nightmare for Sam apparently when Dean had that thing going for years and what was it then? A walk through the park?

 

John was never incluenced by something supernatural, other than the one time demon possession but his life-long choices were made by his human self. Dean has been for a few months now (the timeline is hard to guess but it hasn`t been years) carrying the Mark and that affecting his behaviour. But for all intents and purposes, he is holding it together pretty well. The demonization happened after he died so it`s not something he could help. But with the MOC in general, he is not going kill-crazy all the time, he is not incapable of going out in the world without slaughtering every single person he meets or at least even trying to do so. By which I mean, he is not that THAT hard to deal with currently. Not leaving him alone with a bunch of thugs while waiting in the car wouldn`t have been an unreasonable order of business even.

 

Sure, Dean took on the MOC initially willingly and recklessly, without thinking about the consequences. Sam equally chose to guzzle down demon blood and pretty much hoped for the best. If anything, I see THOSE two situations as comparable. You also got the addiction metaphors laid on pretty thickly with the blood itself. Sam is now on the other side of the fence but that doesn`t make him Dean to John. It makes him Dean to Sam.    

 

 

And now what, is Sam going to one day have his humanity snuffed out and become a monster or a killer/hunter just wearing Sam's old meatsuit, too?

 

Sam had his beige-side arc already during Seasons 2-5, maybe a bit with the soullessness during Season 6 so I think the writers got it out of their system. Next was Cas with the Godstiel bit. Now it`s simply Dean`s turn in the narrative. He is catching up to their arcs as I see it, not vice versa. 

[DittyDotDot]

From The Hunter Games thread...

 

Actually, that reminds me -- why was Crowley helping them? He's the one who tried to get Dean the MoC in the first place so that he could act as his attack dog against Abaddon, so you'd think he'd still want Dean around, right? I mean, you don't just give your guard dog away.

 

You do if it bites you and refuses to attack when told.

 

OK that was mostly just a joke but now that I've come up with a way to thoroughly torture the metaphor:  Up until Crowley called Sam to come and get him, he'd been training Dean basically how I've seen a lot of people "train" (aka, horrific abuse -- but that's a digression, I guess) fighting dogs.

 

First, you treat the dog badly, but you *personally* treat it the least badly. Like, the dog is starving -- but what little food it does get comes from you personally. Etc. I think this is what Crowley was doing when he insinuated himself with Dean after that falling out between Dean and Sam over the Gadreel possession, and that insinuation continued on until Metatron killed Dean. Next, you get the dog strong and primed to fight. Make it carry weights, put it on a choke chain, beat it, egg it on when it gets aggressive, etc. I think that was when Crowley and demon!Dean were drinking buddies. Then, I hear that a lot of people don't do this but the men who I grew up around did -- you train it to go completely into fight mode when presented with a specific target (presenting that target will eventually signal the beginning of the fight, because the dogs will fight over it). That's when Crowley told demon!Dean to go after Lester's wife, I think. Finally, once the dog is basically out of its mind from deprivation and abuse, and is trained to go wild at the sight of this target, you can turn it on another dog. I would *think* that that would mean turning demon!Dean on other demons. I actually don't know why Crowley dropped the whole idea right when he was on the precipice of that. Demon!Dean killed the "wrong" human and was difficult to control, but on the other hand, a lot of aggression like that is exactly why he'd have had potential as someone for Crowley to turn on people.

 

Overall, I have trouble understanding Cas/Dean's relationship, and Crowley/Dean's relationship. Neither really make any sense to me, I'm perpetually confused.

 

Yes, that was a joke, but also a metaphor. I think your attack dog training is very apt with Crowley and Dean. I think what you're forgetting though is Dean was outwardly defiant of Crowley in front of his minions and made him look weak. That's what I meant by him biting Crowley. Add on top that he would only fight when he wanted to fight, not when Crowley commanded--makes him kinda useless to Crowley. Crowley's should've found himself a puppy to mold; Dean was already his own dog by the time Crowley got ahold of him.

[rue721]

From The Things We Left Behind thread:

 

You're right. Sam DID act like a Dad in that moment.  And the month he spent looking for him was the same.  What Dad-like thing Sam did was do what was right for Dean, even if Demon!Dean said "no".  Because Dean was impaired and Sam used his judgement.

 

But since they've gotten back to work, Sam's cautious but he's relaxed just a bit -- and the MoC egged Dean on to slip the leash.  Now please do not think that I believe Sam is responsible for the massacre.  That's still on Dean.  But they need to treat Dean like a ticking bomb at this point.  And maybe if the situation had been reversed, Dean would have relaxed at that point too.  All I know is that I think Sam still sees Dean as his brother and it's not instinctual for him to lay down the rules.  Dean needs that now.

 

So...what made me say this in the first place was how they cut the scene.  From Sandy saying Claire didn't need a friend, she needed a Dad.  Then they cut to Dean laughing like a 12 year old and sharing the moment with Sam.  Dean continued to act kinda childish the whole episode (Sam gave him a "Dude!" when he insulted him and looked at him funny when he was chowing on a hotdog).  But he should have been the last to leave the house.  He fell back into the old pattern of Dean covering HIS back.  As the "Dad", he'd have been the last out of the house.  That's just the instinctual thing to do. 

 

Now I don't think they are necessarily going to put this subtext into text, but this is what I observed. 

 

I think you're right, and they're going for that subtext. I also think they're going for a subtext about what happens when an authority figure (probably the wrong word choice, but I can't figure out a better way to put it?) can't be depended on. I think that's what's going on with Claire (w/r/t Randy and Jimmy) and with Crowley (w/r/t Rowena), as well as with Sam (w/r/t Dean).

 

Sam trying to take care of Dean right now isn't at all comparable to Dean trying to take care of Sam when they were kids, imo, because -- as silly as it sounds considering they're both grown men etc etc etc -- Dean is an authority figure to Sam. Taking care of someone *as* the authority figure, and taking care of someone who *is* (ostensibly) the authority figure are very different dynamics imo and have really different feelings attached to them. One isn't going to look like the other, I don't think. (That's why I think a better comparison is Sam/Dean and Dean/John, but I promise to stop with the broken record!)

 

I think that Sam is also in denial, on and off. When he told Dean that maybe he would just have to live with the Mark, I think he was just trying to give Dean (and himself) a sort of pep talk, in that he was trying to say that he believed in Dean, though he was strong enough to carry the Mark and still be himself, etc. But Dean had also already explicitly asked for help, apparently because he *didn't* believe he could handle it. No telling what Dean heard when Sam was talking about that, but in his place, what I would have heard is, "don't come to me for help, handle this yourself," and would have felt very alone.

[SueB]

I thought Sam was complimentary, showing faith in Dean's strength to fight the Mark. 

[catrox14]

From The Things We Left Behind thread:

 

 

I think you're right, and they're going for that subtext. I also think they're going for a subtext about what happens when an authority figure (probably the wrong word choice, but I can't figure out a better way to put it?) can't be depended on. I think that's what's going on with Claire (w/r/t Randy and Jimmy) and with Crowley (w/r/t Rowena), as well as with Sam (w/r/t Dean).

 

Sam trying to take care of Dean right now isn't at all comparable to Dean trying to take care of Sam when they were kids, imo, because -- as silly as it sounds considering they're both grown men etc etc etc -- Dean is an authority figure to Sam. Taking care of someone *as* the authority figure, and taking care of someone who *is* (ostensibly) the authority figure are very different dynamics imo and have really different feelings attached to them. One isn't going to look like the other, I don't think. (That's why I think a better comparison is Sam/Dean and Dean/John, but I promise to stop with the broken record!)

 

I think that Sam is also in denial, on and off. When he told Dean that maybe he would just have to live with the Mark, I think he was just trying to give Dean (and himself) a sort of pep talk, in that he was trying to say that he believed in Dean, though he was strong enough to carry the Mark and still be himself, etc. But Dean had also already explicitly asked for help, apparently because he *didn't* believe he could handle it. No telling what Dean heard when Sam was talking about that, but in his place, what I would have heard is, "don't come to me for help, handle this yourself," and would have felt very alone.

 

 

I think Sam loves Dean. I think he worries about him, but I also think he's scared of him right now but that is not the same as seeing Dean as an authority figure in his life, not anymore. Sure when they were kids and probably right up to Sam leaving for college, Dean was the leader of the two IMO but that is not the same as Sam looking at Dean as an authority figure now IMO. And I think that is even further away since the Gadreel incident. I think Dean thinks he is should still be authority figure for Sam but I don't think Sam sees it that way, nor should he anymore. Dean going on his own last season was a normal response to what happened between them. Dean was feeling alone and the Mark was accuentating that IMO. 

 

al. I think it's really difficult for Dean to accept that Sam as the younger sibling/pseudo son has to take care of him or help him fix his problems because that is what Dean thinks he  should be doing for Sam or for himself.  I think that is part of the reason he punched Sam last season to keep him out of the fight with Metatron and why he gave him the slip in King of the Damned and to protect Sam.  I think since being de-demoned Dean is trying to accept Sam's help.  

 

But I think Sam thinking Dean is an authority figure went by the wayside long ago and definitely ended in s9.  MMV

Edited January 23, 2015 by catrox14

[Aeryn13]

 

I think that is part of the reason he punched Sam last season to keep him out of the fight with Metatron and why he gave him the slip in King of the Damned and to protect Sam.

 

But Sam has and would pull similar moves when it was his turn as the special one. It`s actual a common trope that the hero won`t bring the sidekick to the really important fights because the sidekick has no place there and no special abilities. It`s just reversed now in terms of characters. I agree that it has little to do with authority figures but IMO is also not really that much about caretaking. Sure, it involves the "protect this person" shtick but more than that I see it as a placement of the characters in the narrative.

 

And it even has cold tactic value, If someone with powers - Dean with the Mark and the Blade had some of those, at least he could fight off Abaddon`s hold and TK the blade to himself - fights against someone else with powers, why bring in the non-powered person? What good would have come from Abaddon telekinetically pinning Sam to the wall? Dean`s Mark powers wouldn`t have allowed him to fight THAT off and instead would have given him a big disadvantage in terms of leverage for Abaddon.

 

I said it before that this show IMO never celebrated "just humanity" despite paying very much lip service to the concept. In reality it was always more "power and destiny", even if they didn`t admit it. For years I have been dismayed that Dean was the one left in the dust by it. Now he is the one at the forefront but it is the same principle.

[Demented Daisy]

And yet, what made Dean special in my eyes was that he had no "power".  He was a human who did what he did because it was the right thing to do, not because he was given some special powers that he felt compelled to use.

 

And, lamentably, they threw that away.  To bastardize Dr. Ian Malcolm in Jurassic Park, they were so excited they could make Dean a demon, they never stopped to think if they should.

[catrox14]

I agree with you completely that they should have never made him notHuman!Dean, but for me, once they went there, at least let him use the power for something other than being Stabby McKillerson.

[Aeryn13]

 

they were so excited they could make Dean a demon, they never stopped to think if they should.

 

I think they should. Not necessarily the demon thing but something that make him "not-human". This is simply not the show where "just human" flies in the narrative IMO. Not if you want anything more than sidekick roles or emo stuff. So I was always excited about powers and specialness. Heck, we should have seen a power-palooza from Dean once he became in effect a Knight of Hell. They could pull out the flashy blue eye effect for every Tom, Dick and Harry of scene when Sam was Gadreel but Demon!Dean got NADA in terms of power effects? Once again, you suck, show.  

[Demented Daisy]

I never thought that Dean was merely a sidekick, so we will have to agree to disagree on that point.  

 

Since he got the Mark, he's just another character who gets to be "more than" human.  Like Sam and the demon blood; like Cas and his angel powers; like Bobby and his ghost powers; like Kevin and his prophet powers; like Crowley and all the other demons with their powers.  Hell,

even Charlie is going to be temporarily powered

.

 

How does becoming like every other character make him special?  

 

I take it back -- we'll have to agree to disagree on all of it.

[rue721]

I thought Sam was complimentary, showing faith in Dean's strength to fight the Mark. 

 

I agree, for sure Sam was being complimentary. Why I think that probably would have fallen flat for Dean, though, is that Dean had *just* gone to Cas and Sam to say that he had to get the Mark off *now,* if it meant cutting off his arm or burning it off or whatever they had to do, because he doesn't think he has the strength to fight the Mark.

 

How I saw it was, it was like if Dean were carrying an extremely heavy box, and he finally manages to carry it over to Sam, and just as he's about to lose his grip, he tells Sam, "this box is too heavy, I'm about to drop it!" Sam should probably NOT reassure Dean that he's plenty strong and totally won't drop it. He should just grab hold of a corner and carry some of the weight before Dean drops everything and smashes it across the floor.

 

LOL I guess in this analogy, the heavy box contains Dean's humanity. It's a sort of "this is your soul! this is your soul on the Mark!" kind of thing? OK won't continue to torture it.

 

I don't think that Sam is being a jerk or anything, I think he's just trying not to rock the boat, just trying to keep himself and Dean calm. I'm not sure that Dean's going to be able to really manage "calm" right now, though? The MoC is making him pretty unstable.

 

I wonder if the Mark is like a separate "person" who takes over? It's strange to me how Dean described himself as a having become "a stone cold killer," since apparently he was upset about it and not "stone cold" after all? I mean, he wasn't sobbing into his pillow over Randy or anything, but he was freaking out more than Sam or Cas and was more willing to condemn what he'd done than either of them were. Then with Metatron, he wasn't laughing at that attempt at a guilt trip like I meanwhile was, and decided not to kill him. So how much control does he have, or what does losing control mean?

 

I think it's really difficult for Dean to accept that Sam as the younger sibling/pseudo Sam has to take care of him or help him fix his problems because that is what Dean thinks he  should be doing for Sam or for himself.  I think that is part of the reason he punched Sam last season to keep him out of the fight with Metatron and why he gave him the slip in King of the Damned and to protect Sam.  I think since being de-demoned Dean is trying to accept Sam's help.  

 

But I think Sam thinking Dean is an authority figure went by the wayside long ago and definitely ended in s9.  MMV

 

"Authority figure" is the wrong word, because I agree that Sam isn't looking to Dean to be in charge in that sense. I guess in my mind it's more like a power dynamic thing. Can't seem to articulate it, though, so I'll think about it a little more and figure out if I can be clearer.

[MYFAKETVBOYFRIEND]

And yet, what made Dean special in my eyes was that he had no "power".  He was a human who did what he did because it was the right thing to do, not because he was given some special powers that he felt compelled to use.

 

And, lamentably, they threw that away.  To bastardize Dr. Ian Malcolm in Jurassic Park, they were so excited they could make Dean a demon, they never stopped to think if they should.

I agree that what made Dean special was that he had NO powers but was still able to fight the good fight and occasionally win. I was heartbroken when he became a demon-he became the thing that killed his family and caused him to take up a life of hunting. To me it was the worst thing that could happen to him.

[catrox14]

I agree that what made Dean special was that he had NO powers but was still able to fight the good fight and occasionally win. I was heartbroken when he became a demon-he became the thing that killed his family and caused him to take up a life of hunting. To me it was the worst thing that could happen to him.

I00% agree that is the worst thing that could happen to him. I nearly quit the show because of it. My rant posts are in that episode thread. I still think it's the worst thing. Yet I figure why not let Dean use a supernatural power for something worthwhile or at least entertaining since they went to the trouble of literally killing him and resurrecting him as a demon. The problem for me was they once more prematurely truncated Deans arc like they did in s8. They could have turned this into a Dean vs Crowley battle Royale but instead we waste time with Cole and Claire and Rowena.

I wonder if the show had gotten an 11th season like in the first episode if they would have kept Demon! Dean around longer and extended Sams search and extended a battle between Dean and Crowley. Or was he doomed to be truncated early because of the 200th needing to be a happy episode?

And I wound up finding demon! Dean to be fascinating and terrifying due to Jensen s performance. It seems like it would have been really weird and bit of a disappointment for Jensen to read the script for the episode he directed in which demon Dean is ended since it was filmed first so he could direct but then he has to expend all the time and mental energy creating demon! Dean in his head, finding the right way to play him and then prepping to direct the episode in which the character he created with IMO overwhelming success is essentially killed off but then he still has to play him for another two episodes as being alive and powerful whilst knowing the character has already been killed off. I have a headache just thinking about it. And then he has to go to comic Con to present the sizzle reel and promote demon Dean knowing it was already over almost before it started. Talk about whiplash. 

Edited January 22, 2015 by catrox14

[Wynne88]

Why I think that probably would have fallen flat for Dean, though, is that Dean had *just* gone to Cas and Sam to say that he had to get the Mark off *now,* if it meant cutting off his arm or burning it off or whatever they had to do, because he doesn't think he has the strength to fight the Mark.

 

Unfortunately, at that particular moment, Sam  didn't have anything else to offer.  Unlike the heavy box analogy, Sam can't take part of the weight - the mark is Dean's, and although Sam can sympathize and do everything possible to figure out a way to get it off, it's Dean who is going to have to do his best to live with it until they succeed.

 

Sorry - moved remainder of comment to the Episode thread where it belonged.

Edited January 22, 2015 by Wynne88

[Demented Daisy]

Or was he doomed to be truncated early because of the 200th needing to be a happy episode?

 

Yes.  As far as I can tell, they wanted an episode that could be watched by anyone at any time, even fans who haven't watched in a couple of years or more.  

[Aeryn13]

 

 

Since he got the Mark, he's just another character who gets to be "more than" human.  Like Sam and the demon blood; like Cas and his angel powers; like Bobby and his ghost powers; like Kevin and his prophet powers; like Crowley and all the other demons with their powers.  Hell,  Spoiler.

How does becoming like every other character make him special?

 

The way I see it as that he was finally brought up to their level. And another fuck you to the show because why did all those guest star mofos real arcs before the supposed second lead got one? Priorities, writers, look it up.

 

In a genre show this is just what I expect to happen and want to see. Those characters belong there, they literally couldn`t be in any garden variety real life drama. The human characters on genre shows are usually the most expendable and boring in my eyes because they can never really participate in the genre plots. Not as leads. They can react to it and flutter along on the sidelines or emo about it but that is not the participation I`m talking about. That`s okay for guest star roles but it doesn`t work for leads IMO. I didn`t hate Xander on Buffy but he would have easily been the one I cut if I had to make a character exit. A slayer, vampires, a witch, a werewolf, even a Watcher of a former demon all offer more rich potential for storylines to build around them. Han Solo, as cool as he was, worked because it was only three movies and not a years-long TV show.

 

From the beginning I thought Dean had to offer more than that. He wasn`t just "Joe Schmoe" from the streets. He had an epic backstory with the Mom being killed by a demon, the growing up in such a strange lifestyle and pretty much as a warrior. Then hallelujah and all hail the writer`s strike that allowed him to go to hell because finally a real genre story about him personally. They even capitalized on that at first with a supposed mission from God and everything. Then the vessel stuff for Michael. That is all larger than life destiny.

 

Of course then they pissed that all away with the Season 5 Finale, my most hated episode ever. Afterwards, he was apparently a nobody again because no overarching genre plot in sight. That went on for two more years before Hallelujah, he went to Purgatory. Amazingly, they managed to totally scramble that too and after that he went on to be the biggest nobody ever in the second half of Season 8. Even the usually boring human characters in other genre shows would have laughed their asses off at that kind of "role".

 

Next we come to our third and final Hallelujah when he received the Mark of Cain. That storyline actually moved somewhere. I didn`t necessarily need Dean to become a demon but didn`t terribly mind it either. After all, it wasn`t the endgame for him and offered rich story potential to be explored. But of course, we wouldn`t have a dramatic and exciting mytharc episode for 200. No, we needed some cutesy meta crap where once more the only fan-representation ever to see in the show is Sam-fans.

 

At least the Mark is still ongoing but even though it`s kinda evil, it is literally all that is between the character and being sent back to the kitchen as far as I`m concerned. So if I could, I would want it to stay on till the end of time.   

[rue721]

Unlike the heavy box analogy, Sam can't take part of the weight - the mark is Dean's, and although Sam can sympathize and do everything possible to figure out a way to get it off, it's Dean who is going to have to do his best to live with it until they succeed.

 

That's exactly what I mean, though. Sam can take part of the weight by doing everything possible to figure out a way to get it off (and in practice, that's what I assume he's going to do?). He could have sat down there and said, "we're going to get it off, everything's going to be OK," and started brainstorming how to do that.

 

It's not that I think he was being an ass by the direction he took the conversation instead, I think he was genuinely trying to be comforting/kind/calming. But someone desperate enough that he's fantasizing about cutting off his arm is probably not going to want to hear that he's never going to find relief after all, so the "comfort" was probably going to be ineffective as far as Dean was concerned imo. Mostly, I think that Sam was trying to tell Dean that even if he had to keep the Mark that he'd be OK, because Sam was trying to escape into denial *himself.*

 

I think Sam was trying to tell *himself* that things would be OK because Dean can take it. Dean himself knows he can't take it, though, that's why he went to Cas and Sam and said he couldn't and they shouldn't minimize what had happened already.

 

That's pretty similar to TONS of miscommunications that the guys have had before, imo, and it wouldn't really be a big deal -- except that I thought the conversation was interesting in that I think that Sam seemed like he was in denial. I think that Dean knows that if he keeps the Mark, it's going to destroy him, and sooner rather than later. I think Sam is still trying to tell himself that the Mark won't destroy Dean, though. I don't know Dean feels about Sam trying to sell himself on the story that Dean can handle the Mark. (In Dean's place, I personally would feel hurt, resentful, and alone. But I honestly don't even remember what Dean's reaction was onscreen and am not going to be able to rewatch the episode for a bit, so my spec on that is probably not very helpful right now).

Edited January 22, 2015 by rue721

[AwesomO4000]

From the beginning I thought Dean had to offer more than that. He wasn`t just "Joe Schmoe" from the streets. He had an epic backstory with the Mom being killed by a demon, the growing up in such a strange lifestyle and pretty much as a warrior. Then hallelujah and all hail the writer`s strike that allowed him to go to hell because finally a real genre story about him personally.

 

I decided to move my response over to that "unpopular opinions" thread. Even though I think it has multiple points on both sides, I decided to be on the safe side.

 

No, we needed some cutesy meta crap where once more the only fan-representation ever to see in the show is Sam-fans.

 

I'm pretty sure Maeve was a Dean-fan. And ironically for Marie supposedly being such a Sam-fan, she spent most of the episode interacting with Dean and relating to Dean rather than Sam. Sam spent more time interacting with Dean-fan Maeve, since ironically, perhaps, Maeve found real-Dean insulting and wanted to strangle him for knocking the production value and storyline of the play. I am thinking that this was not accidental on the writer's part.

 

It was also obvious to me from the content of the play that Marie loved Dean's character as well. Her songs focused on Dean's emotional background, story, and relationship with Castiel. There was no way, in my opinion, that Marie was only a Sam fan. There was too much emphasis on Dean in that play for that to be the case. Sam may have been her favorite, but she was not strictly a Sam fan, in my opinion. And lo and behold, in real life, it was more Dean she related to and had a connection with.

[Aeryn13]

 

It was also obvious to me from the content of the play that Marie loved Dean's character as well.

 

I think she loved him in that "he makes a good pair of binoculars to look through at SAM" way aka the Big Brother Dean, the attachment to her true favourite, the guy on whom the SAMulet hangs. So, like she might have "loved" that prop, she "loved" Dean. The starry-eyed "sweet, brave, selfless Sam, there is nothing he can`t do" declaration was a dead giveaway IMO. Her interacting with actual!Dean more didn`t change that. 

 

But it`s more than that, the first fangirl introduced was a raving Sam-stan - and as a Wincest-shipper, she should technically like both sides of the pairing, too, but that`s actually accurate to how shipping often works, lots of shippers only really like one person of the ship, not just Supernatural but many fandoms. But she salivated over Sam and gave Dean the "whatever" reaction. Her bias was abundantly clear. Incidentally, she was also the fangirl who the Creator/God in this fictional universe got in bed with and fell for. Gee, Kripke, the meta, it burns.

 

Then they make an episode about fans putting on a production and the most prominently featured fangirl character writing the play and narrating it is... also a Samgirl. Their meta-episode for "al" the fans felt really inclusive there right from the start. If you love Dean in that binocular way, you are good but the idea of someone seeing more in and for the character? Even, gasp, focusing on him? That is so ridiculously alien to the writers, it probably never entered their minds. I think they are baffled by the existence of Dean-fans in the first place. Having none àmong the writers, maybe they think it`s an urban myth or something.   

[Iguana]

Then they make an episode about fans putting on a production and the most prominently featured fangirl character writing the play and narrating it is... also a Samgirl. Their meta-episode for "al" the fans felt really inclusive there right from the start. If you love Dean in that binocular way, you are good but the idea of someone seeing more in and for the character? Even, gasp, focusing on him? That is so ridiculously alien to the writers, it probably never entered their minds. I think they are baffled by the existence of Dean-fans in the first place. Having none àmong the writers, maybe they think it`s an urban myth or something. 

 

Aeryn, while I respect your view of the writer's take on Dean, and perhaps you were exaggerating for effect in the above quote, but I'm afraid I see it quite differently.  I've never felt that writers/showrunners hate a particular main character or resent the popularity of a character or set out to destroy or marginalize or beat down a character in some subversive plot to make the character less appealing or deliberately piss off a section of fandom.  Aside from the fact that Dean and Sam are fictional creations of the writers and can only do what is scripted for them, the show needs fans to survive, so why would the showrunner set out to discourage anyone from watching.  It goes against their best interests.  And as I believe the role of a writer is very different from the role of a fan, (although one person can be both), writers don't have to be fans of Dean or Sam or Castiel or whoever to write (a hopefully good) storyline/episode for them.

 

It's an interesting question to ponder:  If the writers don't like Dean, and don't understand why he would have fans, and never give him any good storylines and just make him play second fiddle to super-special Sam, it's hard to understand how  Dean Winchester become such a popular character in the first place.

[SueB]

Comment taken to the bitterness thread.

Edited January 23, 2015 by SueB

[AwesomO4000]

I think she loved him in that "he makes a good pair of binoculars to look through at SAM" way aka the Big Brother Dean, the attachment to her true favourite, the guy on whom the SAMulet hangs. So, like she might have "loved" that prop, she "loved" Dean. The starry-eyed "sweet, brave, selfless Sam, there is nothing he can`t do" declaration was a dead giveaway IMO. Her interacting with actual!Dean more didn`t change that. 

 

But it`s more than that, the first fangirl introduced was a raving Sam-stan - and as a Wincest-shipper, she should technically like both sides of the pairing, too, but that`s actually accurate to how shipping often works, lots of shippers only really like one person of the ship, not just Supernatural but many fandoms. But she salivated over Sam and gave Dean the "whatever" reaction. Her bias was abundantly clear. Incidentally, she was also the fangirl who the Creator/God in this fictional universe got in bed with and fell for. Gee, Kripke, the meta, it burns.

 

Then they make an episode about fans putting on a production and the most prominently featured fangirl character writing the play and narrating it is... also a Samgirl. Their meta-episode for "al" the fans felt really inclusive there right from the start. If you love Dean in that binocular way, you are good but the idea of someone seeing more in and for the character? Even, gasp, focusing on him? That is so ridiculously alien to the writers, it probably never entered their minds. I think they are baffled by the existence of Dean-fans in the first place. Having none àmong the writers, maybe they think it`s an urban myth or something.   

 

I still don't see it, because if that was the case, then for me the focus of what was in the play would be exactly that - binoculars through Dean to look at Sam, but that's not what we got. We did get one song in which was Dean talking about "The Road so Far" which did include some stuff about Sam, but it also included their mother, their father and his influence, and the family mission as well as how both Dean and Sam got to that point. Then we got "Sam" - who was in this case Marie the Sam-fan - singing (as well as having written) a song all about Dean: Dean's feelings, Dean's motivations and what an awesome brother Dean was ("the perfect brother, a man without sin.") Then we had "Castiel" singing about Dean and how he was important and Castiel would do what he needed to for Dean. Every scene in the play that we saw either had Dean as the main singer or as the main character being sung about. He was the most prominent character in the play. One of the four or five scenes we saw didn't include Sam at all and another had him only as background along with John at the end of it. I'm just not seeing what we saw of that play as "binoculars to look at Sam." There was no song about Sam at all, except that small part about "it cursed my brother."

 

So personally, I thought that what we saw of the play did focus on Dean. I'm really not sure how it could have been any more about or focusing on Dean. Even the interaction between real Dean and Marie was mostly about Dean and his feelings about the play and his commentary on what the real story was. So at least half of the episode or more focused on Dean also. I'm really not seeing how Dean's character was slighted here in the least. And personally, I loved the episode. My favorite episode since "Time After Time..."

 

As for Becky, considering what she ended up doing to Sam, if I took her as a representation of what the writers thought about Sam-fans... I'd be deeply offended. For one thing she's a bit crazy, and secondly she mind-screwed Sam... and considered raping him. So if Becky is supposed to represent Sam-fans: yeesh. Or if she's supposed to be some kind of - I don't know what, writers' love for Sam?  - then they sure have a weird way of showing it, because: yikes. It's all bad. Ditto if "let's chastise Sam, but then give him conflicting and therefore entirely impossible to follow advice" Chuck is supposed to represent the writers' attitude towards Sam, because again: yikes.

 

At least Marie was better - though Maeve seemed more stable - but again, for all of Marie's "Isn't Sam wonderful" there was also a lot of "man without sin" and "perfect brother Dean" going on. As well as Destiel, which for the most part is Sam-free in which case, in my opinion, there would have to be interest in the Dean part of the pairing rather than just being interested in the Sam part of Wincest, because technically there is no Sam involved *... only Dean and Castiel. I think it would be far-fetched to say that in that pairing, Dean is again just the extra and that Castiel is her favorite since it seems the common thread in both of her shipping likes is Dean.

 

* That would be Wincestial rather than Destiel.

Edited January 23, 2015 by AwesomO4000

[Aeryn13]

 

Aeryn, while I respect your view of the writer's take on Dean, and perhaps you were exaggerating for effect in the above quote, but I'm afraid I see it quite differently.  I've never felt that writers/showrunners hate a particular main character or resent the popularity of a character or set out to destroy or marginalize or beat down a character in some subversive plot to make the character less appealing or deliberately piss off a section of fandom.

 

Aside from a general lack of talent in this writing cadre, it is actually not uncommon IMO for writers to want push something and be annoyed when not only doesn`t it happen but another thing does. Which makes this:

 

 

It's an interesting question to ponder:  If the writers don't like Dean, and don't understand why he would have fans, and never give him any good storylines and just make him play second fiddle to super-special Sam, it's hard to understand how  Dean Winchester become such a popular character in the first place.

 

a pretty common effect as well.

 

For example, I do not think the Smallville writers set out from the very first episode with the goal of getting Chloe hated. They just figured they would write Lana as the perfect princess of perfection and that would be a surefire way to make her a fan favourite. They were much more laid back writing a character considered more as an expositionary sidekick. And surprise of all surprises (well, a surprise to noone BUT the writers), Lana met criticism and Chloe was more embraced. Then starts what I call the "can you hear me now"-period, like from those phone commercials? Only in TV writing it becomes "do you like them now?" "how about now?" "and now?"

 

Recently the same thing is going on over on Arrow with Laurel where the producers pretty much spell out in interviews that this time it`s the arc that will make fans love her. For sure. 

 

And the "what the fuck is wrong with you, we give you neon signs to where we want you and how much we want you to love/like each character and fangirl them proportionally, how much clearer can we make it to where your favouritism SHOULD fall?" to fans is always implied. And fans latching onto a particular character that is not hyped as the "most likely to become the popular one" is met with constant befuddlement and annoyance.

 

It`s been years and dozens of shows later where this has happened and the writers still don`t understand or have caught on to the fact that in most cases (not all but the vast majority), it is exactly their hyping and huffing that ensures that whoever they want to be the break-out character from a show doesn`t become it and whoever they did not give much thought in the first place does. 

 

Same thing happened on Supernatural. Dean was supposed to be the fun sidekick and I think they did expect viewers to like him as such. They wouldn`t have or would discourage it anyway but then the tragedy happened and lots of fans got more investment in the character, they saw him as more, they expected and wanted more from him and so on and so forth. Ironically, if the writers had gone into this show with the mission of "Dean is our IT-character and we will make sure he is embraced as the most awesome one ever, if it`s the last thing we do on this Earth", he probably wouldn`t have been. Jensen is great but it is almost impossible to overcome that writing.   

 

 

writers don't have to be fans of Dean or Sam or Castiel or whoever to write (a hopefully good) storyline/episode for them.

 

Nevertheless, it does make for a better balance if each character has at least one champion in a writer`s room. At least one person who is interested in writing for them in the first place, who would take more care with their characterization and maybe even fight for them on occassion. The opposite shows.

[catrox14]

To the point about writers not liking their own characters, I think it's absolutely a real thing.  I can't remember exactly but I thought Kripke said he didn't really like Dean on paper IIRC.  I know that Robert Kirkman who writes the Walking Dead loathes many of his own characters even as he creates them, Shane in particular.

 

I don't think writers have to love their lead characters to write decent stories for them, but IMO it does help. And I do think disliking their own characters can lead them to make poor character choices to meet their plot desires.  For me, reading comments from The Nepotism Duo about Dean having killer DNA or what have you or writing him to be disrespectful towards human women which he really has never been despite being promiscuous, or even turning him into a demon IMO strikes me as missing something fundamental about Dean's characterization over the years. Either that or they do have a viewpoint on Dean that doesn't mesh with who I perceive Dean to have been over the years. IMO that is a function of just plain lazy ass writing that makes the character fit the plot or it's having a viewpoint of a character regardless of what's gone before. 

 

Same goes for Sam in s8. Sam was made to behave in ways that were largely inconsistent from what had gone before and they did a piss poor job of explaining to the audience that Sam either had a mental breakdown  so he quit immediately or Sam had made a pragmatic choice to just get on with his life.  To me if Sam had a mental breakdown it would have been shown because goodness knows that the show loves to show us some mentally ill/emotionally destroyed Sam.  So since we didn't see that I am going with Sam's pragmatic decision to just stop was supposed to be considered healthy behavior and that Dean being friends with a vampire was supposed to be considered terrifying and that Dean is untrustworthy now.

 

Either way it was telling me that Carver and Co.  intentionally wanted me  to forget the Sam and Dean of before and focus on what they envision for Sam and Dean post s7. To do that they made it so Sam hit a dog, abandoning Dean and leaving Kevin alone in the wilderness.   And that doesn't sound like love of characters to me. It sounds like using the cache Sam and Dean built with the audience, "flipping the script" to continue the series past it's best use by date via character assassination to mine new stories.  They are now doing with Castiel and Crowley too.  But they ran into the snag with the 200th and had to revisit the first 5 seasons which really just served to remind me how much they have screwed the boys post s7 character wise. 

 

The only good thing that came out of it is that Dean has an extended arc of something new and different for him and Jensen got to do something new with Dean.

Edited January 23, 2015 by catrox14

[catrox14]

 

It's an interesting question to ponder:  If the writers don't like Dean, and don't understand why he would have fans, and never give him any good storylines and just make him play second fiddle to super-special Sam, it's hard to understand how  Dean Winchester become such a popular character in the first place.

 

Jensen Ackles is the reason Dean Winchester became so popular and interesting IMO. Out of the gate and on paper, Dean wasn't supposed to be all that sympathetic from all that I've read. He was the smarmy, snarky comic relief at first. IMO that is what he was at first. He was bossy and occasionally uncouth or what have you next to Sam who was mannered and smart and sensitive. But then Jensen gave him qualities beyond the writing. Sure Dean is difficult. He's not all that likeable especially at first. He's annoying, he's arrogant sometimes, he's stubborn, he's promiscuous, he bosses Sam around, he can be hypocritical.  But IMO there is a quality to Dean that underneath all of the surface annoying things is a brave man. A good man.  Sometimes he's charming and funny and sometimes he's just kind of a jerk. He's not a perfect man but IMO he became a good man and a badass when need be.  And I think Manners and Kripke (and now Carver and Co. ) would  have been complete fools to not write interesting things for Dean to do when you have a talent like Jensen to work with. But that doesn't mean they necessarily like Dean Winchester but they like what Jensen Ackles brings to the table. 

 

I tuned into Kripke's Revolution a couple of times and one of the leads was so much like a lesser for more obnoxious version of Dean that I thought man, this is who Dean probably would have been if not for Jensen bringing so much more to Dean. 

 

So to me that is all due to Jensen. He plays with what isn't on the page. And he kind of forced the writers hand to come up with good stuff for him to play or risk losing him to another show.

Edited January 23, 2015 by catrox14

[SueB]

My thoughts on the current topic

 

http://forums.previously.tv/topic/15558-mod-announcements/#entry655741

[rue721]

I don't know, I still think Dean's a good man. For the most part he's trying to help people and do good. He doesn't always get it right, but I still think he's a good man.

 

I agree that he tries to help people, and I actually think he cares a lot about being a good person. He's always seemed to think a lot about how things should be or how people should be, and doing things right has always seemed to matter a lot to him. However, I don't even get the sense that he's legitimately trying to be a good person at this point -- I think that's been the case since S8 began.

The show seems like it's intentionally pushing that imo. S8 began with him missing the "purity" of killing in Purgatory and the friendship with a vampire, which was clearly meant to be unsettling and "over the line" (I say that since they then backed way the hell off on it, imo thinking that they didn't want risk doing too much damage to Dean/making him unlikeable or unrelatable, since the show is very cautious with him in that respect), and S8 ended with him trying to convince Sam to let Hell stay open in order to stick with him. Then S9 opened with him deciding to go ahead with the whole Gadreel debacle/trick and ended with him becoming a demon. I think he wishes he were a good person but he isn't actively trying to be one anymore. I don't know what brought about that change within the show -- disillusionment? Idk. I think it was just part of Carver's S8 revampt, tbh, and there's not a deep character-based reason for it.

 

My personal thing is that I don't think that Dean is a bad person, but I have trouble believing wholeheartedly that he's a good one, either, because how can he be a good person if he does things that are completely wrong, like torture? And not just once, but over and over?

 

There's no way for him not to know that torture is wrong, either -- it's what Hell is all about. It's how demons are *made.* Within the show, torture isn't even useful in getting information very often, either, just in hurting people. It was not useful this time around with Metatron, for sure. So what's the justification for it, even?

 

I just can't forget how, after Dean had already figured out what was going on with Gadreel, he still went on to torture him until they were both passed out in exhaustion (and the torture turned out to be utterly useless). In this episode, he went to Cas and Sam, telling them he knew he was crossing the line from hunter to being just a plain killer, and seemed torn up about it, but then as soon as he got the chance, he was locking himself in with Metatron and pulling out the knife. Even though he knows torture's wrong, or at least something that *demons* do (!!!) and that he therefore *shouldn't* do (he only just got cured ffs), and even though it's often not useful anyway and he even told Metatron he didn't expect it to be useful this time, he's still torturing people and shows no sign of stopping?

 

It wasn't just that he decided to torture Metatron, either -- just like way back when he made the vampire look in his eyes as he sawed his head off, what was so frightening about how he interacted with Metatron imo was that he seemed like he was even getting off on scaring/hurting him, like it was a power trip for him. I think that's the MoC's doing, but is that going to change if it goes away?

Idk, it's not that I have a hate on for Dean. I don't think he's a bad person, and I know he doesn't *want* to be a bad person. But he seems like a lost soul to me at this point. I can't decide whether he's actually a good man or not tbh.

 

There are other things that put me on edge about him, but that are YMMV territory to the point that it's probably not interesting. Stuff like how physical he gets sometimes when he's freaking out (like throwing everything off the desk after Kevin was killed, or even just how he'll start raising his voice). It's often not unwarranted or dangerous even, but seeing a grown man get like that out of anger, especially since on the context of this show, he's probably also been drinking -- just freaks me out. I can't look at that and think "attractive" at all, I just think "get out of the room!" And obviously, I do just generally wish he would lighten up.

 

I'm trying to understand what woman he was disrespectful to in this episode who wasn't actively trying to kill him...I'm kind of confused.

 

In this episode? Idk, I don't even think he talked with any women in this episode? He gave Claire a look, but that's the most I remember.

 

Off the top of my head, horndog things that I've found offputting: in the pilot when he broke into Jessica and Sam's home and then made a big show of ogling Jessica (that was her home ffs), when Sam brought him over to that college friend's house and it's like Dean could not get over that the friend's sister was hot, when he was pretending to be a coach or a gym teacher and was talking about how some of the high schoolers were legal, at one point I remember him flipping through photos of a bunch of teenage girls and saying they were hot, etc. I'm of two minds of the pressure he was putting on Sam to get some tail. It's realistic and all, but ehhhhhh. I think all the porn stuff is gross in general, especially since they've apparently decided Dean has some racist Asian fetish with the Busty Asian Beauties and the anime porn crap. Aside from anything to do with sex (and I don't think anything to do with sex is the major issue), I think there's a huge difference in how he treats (younger) men versus how he treats women -- usually he treats women with kid gloves, and I guess that's better than the other way around because this way he's not misogynist, just sexist, but it still bothers me. How he treated Jo or Krissy versus how he treated Kevin, for example. It ends up coming off to me as infantalizing and dismissive to the women, cold and harsh to the men.

 

I don't think he's especially sexist relative to how most men are in real life. Even men I've loved dearly, like my father or my ex boyfriend, tend to say and do much worse things when it comes to women. Thank god Dean doesn't provide a running commentary on how ugly or bitchy every woman is or try to flip the script on any woman by blaming whatever's pissing him off about her atm as some inherent ~female~ trait, lol. But regardless that he's not on a total sexist tear, I still notice when Dean seems like he's treating women like objects or like delicate porcelain dolls, which imo he does do fairly often.

 

That's why it seemed so unusually self-aware when *as a demon* he suddenly cared about Lester's double standards. Or how he took the trouble to try and justify himself (for beating her ex) to Ann Marie, and even cared enough to get pissed off when she called him on it, as though her opinion of him mattered (I guess what I'm saying is, he tried to treat her like an equal, including trying to convince her he was acting in her best interests). Or how he taunted that dancer not to give himself an excuse to beat *her* for being mouthy, but as an excuse to leap onto the bouncer. While he was obviously all-around more cruel as a demon, he also seemed weirdly at least as self-aware about sexism as a demon as he was normally and sexism seemed to bother him at least as much as usual (if not more -- the disgust over the double standards really surprised me). Totally bizarre imo. I actually kind of liked that, because it was so inexplicable -- but I still found it inexplicable.

 

In terms of whether he seemed like a hedonist as a demon -- I didn't think he came off that way at all. That was the most most Hotel California, dour, lonely version of hedonism he could have gone with. I think that he just still seemed like a lost soul.

[Pete Martell]

I agree that he tries to help people, and I actually think he cares a lot about being a good person. He's always seemed to think a lot about how things should be or how people should be, and doing things right has always seemed to matter a lot to him. However, I don't even get the sense that he's legitimately trying to be a good person at this point -- I think that's been the case since S8 began.

The show seems like it's intentionally pushing that imo. S8 began with him missing the "purity" of killing in Purgatory and the friendship with a vampire, which was clearly meant to be unsettling and "over the line" (I say that since they then backed way the hell off on it, imo thinking that they didn't want risk doing too much damage to Dean/making him unlikeable or unrelatable, since the show is very cautious with him in that respect), and S8 ended with him trying to convince Sam to let Hell stay open in order to stick with him. Then S9 opened with him deciding to go ahead with the whole Gadreel debacle/trick and ended with him becoming a demon. I think he wishes he were a good person but he isn't actively trying to be one anymore. I don't know what brought about that change within the show -- disillusionment? Idk. I think it was just part of Carver's S8 revampt, tbh, and there's not a deep character-based reason for it.

 

My personal thing is that I don't think that Dean is a bad person, but I have trouble believing wholeheartedly that he's a good one, either, because how can he be a good person if he does things that are completely wrong, like torture? And not just once, but over and over?

 

I don't think it's anything from Carver on. There have been comments for years that Dean is nothing, that Dean exists only because of his father and his brother, that Dean has no hunger for anything because he is dead inside, that Dean is, as I think Bobby said, "not a person." Dean had also chosen Sam over the good of the world many years earlier (the deal at the end of season 2), so I don't think that's new either.

 

Once you strip away the wisecracks about booze and babes and the cocksure rictus grin, you're left with a husk. Once his father was gone, his main enemies were long dead/imprisoned, Cas was gone, Benny was gone, Lisa and Ben were gone, and Sam wanted to die, there was nothing left for Dean but emptiness. That's where he was at the end of season 8 and the start of season 9. He tied himself to Sam's survival, which backfired horribly, hollowing him out more than ever. He then let the mark define him, as his role as a son or a brother or a "hero" had once filled him. That's why he was so restless and solemn as a demon - there was still nothing inside him. I think the scene of Demon Dean cutting his hand open and watching it heal, over and over again, was a brilliant way of showing just how what a malaise he was in and had been in for a very long time.

 

I just hope once the mark is gone, we'll finally see Dean figure out who he is and what he wants to be. 

Edited January 24, 2015 by Pete Martell

[Aeryn13]

 

My personal thing is that I don't think that Dean is a bad person, but I have trouble believing wholeheartedly that he's a good one, either, because how can he be a good person if he does things that are completely wrong, like torture? And not just once, but over and over?

 

I think that hinges heavily on your definition of "what makes a good person". Like I said over in the other thread, the torture is done for intel gathering and I also disagree that it is mostly not effective. The run of the mill demon usually spill after some time. And he lost with Gadreel and Metatron, both under the influence of the Mark of Cain and the backstory with them. How is that making him turn in his good guy credentials?

 

For me, especially in a fictional scenario, killing and torturing per se don`t make me think someone is not a good person. The context in which it happens decides that. I also don`t have much patience for the "do not kill ever, must keep hands clean at all costs" kind of heroes who put their dainty morality over stopping an actual threat with necessary force. Give me a "darker" hero over pretty much a coward like that anyways.

 

There are some goody-two-shows characters I like, Nick Burkhardt on Grimm is one, but while he will mostly try to make the arrest or something when it`s necessary he WILL go with the slice-and-dice and brute force. Scott over on Teen Wolf is actually a very good-hearted non-violent person but he is weakened as a character by the narrative always giving him an "out" with the bad guys and not having to kill them. That`s not how it works.     

 

The world of Supernatural is harsher and their moral judgyness and pearl-clutching notwithstanding, more often than not Sam and Cas seem to look to Dean to do the tough things like torture. And he plays that expected role more often than not. But to me that makes him that much stronger and badass.

 

I think the writers, especially the nepotism duo, think that makes Dean a worse or bad person but they come across to me as those kind of people who morally pearl-clutch but in the face of real danger or tough decisions would cower and whimper behind someone like Dean. I`m not a heroic person and I wouldn`t throw myself into the fray, let alone risk my life for others (I wish I were but I doubt I would be so courageous) and I would be grateful to hide behind a Dean-like-figure if the situation arises. But I would admire them for it.  

 

 

I agree that he tries to help people

 

That alone marks a "good person" for me already. If that person believes it about themselves or think they have to "try" to be it (when in fact, I think they are already) is beside the point. Someone who fights for others, tries to protect them and help them and especially at the cost of their own life is a good person and actually a hero. Full stop. Because it puts them above the roughly 90 % of the "average person" who wouldn`t go out of their way to help people, not counting small-scale ways here like common courtesy, some manners or being nice for five minutes.

Edited January 24, 2015 by Aeryn13

[DittyDotDot]

I agree that he tries to help people, and I actually think he cares a lot about being a good person. He's always seemed to think a lot about how things should be or how people should be, and doing things right has always seemed to matter a lot to him. However, I don't even get the sense that he's legitimately trying to be a good person at this point -- I think that's been the case since S8 began.

 

The show seems like it's intentionally pushing that imo.

 

I see what you're saying, but I guess him trying to help people says to me that he is still trying to be a good person, even if he doesn't always do it right. I tend to see intention being nine tenths of a person. So, yeah he does things wrong at times, but I think his intentions were to do it right. Ultimately, this probably comes down to what one personally thinks makes a good person.

 

As to the show, yeah, I think they've been pushing Dean is making more wrong choices than right ones. I think Its directly related to Dean having a prominent dark arc. It's the same thing they did with Sam in S3-S5. I think it's purposeful to get Dean to the place we're currently at and I think in the end they're going to try and redeem him--but that's another one of those things that will depend on each viewer to judge whether they were successful or not.

 

I definitely think the current reign of the show hasn't figured out that Sam and Dean aren't the same boys from S1, though. I've felt both Sam and Dean to be much more immature, petty and annoying since Carver took over. It was one thing to watch a 26-year-old Dean oogling at hot chicks and completely another to see a 36-year-old man (or 38 depending on whether one follows the time jumps or not) oogling at hot chicks. At what point does he stop looking like a youthfully charming horndog and becomes a creepy old man? In general, I don't mind Dean's horndoggy ways and have no issues with the porn myself (although, it does annoy me greatly when he's lusting after teenage girls), but I do understand what you're saying here.

 

I've found a lot of what they've done since Carver took over is very "dramatic" but not necessarily very grown up. So, I understand you being uncomfortable when a 36ish-year-old man starts growl-yelling at folks and stomping around like a big bully and knocking things over. It actually annoys me far more that Dean seems to have lost all his instincts and smarts since Carver took over. I'm not talking about him not being a big reader or his not wanting to do research and such, but his general not questioning things, trying to find his own solutions and/or making one foolish decision after another. He looks far more like a lost little boy, to me, than I've ever thought Dean Winchester was. Which can be hard to reconcile since I know he's at least 36 and has lived the life of at least an 80-year-old man. I'm also equally unnerved by Sam being more pissy-pants and petty than I think a 32-year-old man (or possibly 34) should be too. I'm just not sure that the TPTB really see them as grown men as much as perpetual boys. I think this is one reason why I'm more forgiving of the Gamble years than I have been of Carver. Gamble had a propensity for the 12-year-old humor in her plots--9 million Dick jokes ring a bell?--but I think Sam and Dean were far more adult under her reign than they've ever been since.

 

In terms of whether he seemed like a hedonist as a demon -- I didn't think he came off that way at all. That was the most most Hotel California, dour, lonely version of hedonism he could have gone with. I think that he just still seemed like a lost soul.

 

I didn't see that carefree person Jensen talked about either. To me he was more depressed, clingy and lost than regular Dean Winchester--and that's saying something. It seemed to me, Demon Dean wanted the same things regular Dean wanted--companionship, loyalty and fun times--just a lot more angry that he wasn't getting those things as a demon either. But, like always, I'm weird, so maybe I just missed the part where Demon Dean was actually enjoying himself.

[catrox14]

I agree that he tries to help people, and I actually think he cares a lot about being a good person. He's always seemed to think a lot about how things should be or how people should be, and doing things right has always seemed to matter a lot to him. However, I don't even get the sense that he's legitimately trying to be a good person at this point -- I think that's been the case since S8 began.

The show seems like it's intentionally pushing that imo. S8 began with him missing the "purity" of killing in Purgatory and the friendship with a vampire, which was clearly meant to be unsettling and "over the line" (I say that since they then backed way the hell off on it, imo thinking that they didn't want risk doing too much damage to Dean/making him unlikeable or unrelatable, since the show is very cautious with him in that respect), and S8 ended with him trying to convince Sam to let Hell stay open in order to stick with him. Then S9 opened with him deciding to go ahead with the whole Gadreel debacle/trick and ended with him becoming a demon. I think he wishes he were a good person but he isn't actively trying to be one anymore. I don't know what brought about that change within the show -- disillusionment? Idk. I think it was just part of Carver's S8 revampt, tbh, and there's not a deep character-based reason for it.

 

My personal thing is that I don't think that Dean is a bad person, but I have trouble believing wholeheartedly that he's a good one, either, because how can he be a good person if he does things that are completely wrong, like torture? And not just once, but over and over?

 

There's no way for him not to know that torture is wrong, either -- it's what Hell is all about. It's how demons are *made.* Within the show, torture isn't even useful in getting information very often, either, just in hurting people. It was not useful this time around with Metatron, for sure. So what's the justification for it, even?

 

I just can't forget how, after Dean had already figured out what was going on with Gadreel, he still went on to torture him until they were both passed out in exhaustion (and the torture turned out to be utterly useless). In this episode, he went to Cas and Sam, telling them he knew he was crossing the line from hunter to being just a plain killer, and seemed torn up about it, but then as soon as he got the chance, he was locking himself in with Metatron and pulling out the knife. Even though he knows torture's wrong, or at least something that *demons* do (!!!) and that he therefore *shouldn't* do (he only just got cured ffs), and even though it's often not useful anyway and he even told Metatron he didn't expect it to be useful this time, he's still torturing people and shows no sign of stopping?

 

It wasn't just that he decided to torture Metatron, either -- just like way back when he made the vampire look in his eyes as he sawed his head off, what was so frightening about how he interacted with Metatron imo was that he seemed like he was even getting off on scaring/hurting him, like it was a power trip for him. I think that's the MoC's doing, but is that going to change if it goes away?

Idk, it's not that I have a hate on for Dean. I don't think he's a bad person, and I know he doesn't *want* to be a bad person. But he seems like a lost soul to me at this point. I can't decide whether he's actually a good man or not tbh.

 

There are other things that put me on edge about him, but that are YMMV territory to the point that it's probably not interesting. Stuff like how physical he gets sometimes when he's freaking out (like throwing everything off the desk after Kevin was killed, or even just how he'll start raising his voice). It's often not unwarranted or dangerous even, but seeing a grown man get like that out of anger, especially since on the context of this show, he's probably also been drinking -- just freaks me out. I can't look at that and think "attractive" at all, I just think "get out of the room!" And obviously, I do just generally wish he would lighten up.

 

 

In this episode? Idk, I don't even think he talked with any women in this episode? He gave Claire a look, but that's the most I remember.

 

Off the top of my head, horndog things that I've found offputting: in the pilot when he broke into Jessica and Sam's home and then made a big show of ogling Jessica (that was her home ffs), when Sam brought him over to that college friend's house and it's like Dean could not get over that the friend's sister was hot, when he was pretending to be a coach or a gym teacher and was talking about how some of the high schoolers were legal, at one point I remember him flipping through photos of a bunch of teenage girls and saying they were hot, etc. I'm of two minds of the pressure he was putting on Sam to get some tail. It's realistic and all, but ehhhhhh. I think all the porn stuff is gross in general, especially since they've apparently decided Dean has some racist Asian fetish with the Busty Asian Beauties and the anime porn crap. Aside from anything to do with sex (and I don't think anything to do with sex is the major issue), I think there's a huge difference in how he treats (younger) men versus how he treats women -- usually he treats women with kid gloves, and I guess that's better than the other way around because this way he's not misogynist, just sexist, but it still bothers me. How he treated Jo or Krissy versus how he treated Kevin, for example. It ends up coming off to me as infantalizing and dismissive to the women, cold and harsh to the men.

 

I don't think he's especially sexist relative to how most men are in real life. Even men I've loved dearly, like my father or my ex boyfriend, tend to say and do much worse things when it comes to women. Thank god Dean doesn't provide a running commentary on how ugly or bitchy every woman is or try to flip the script on any woman by blaming whatever's pissing him off about her atm as some inherent ~female~ trait, lol. But regardless that he's not on a total sexist tear, I still notice when Dean seems like he's treating women like objects or like delicate porcelain dolls, which imo he does do fairly often.

 

That's why it seemed so unusually self-aware when *as a demon* he suddenly cared about Lester's double standards. Or how he took the trouble to try and justify himself (for beating her ex) to Ann Marie, and even cared enough to get pissed off when she called him on it, as though her opinion of him mattered (I guess what I'm saying is, he tried to treat her like an equal, including trying to convince her he was acting in her best interests). Or how he taunted that dancer not to give himself an excuse to beat *her* for being mouthy, but as an excuse to leap onto the bouncer. While he was obviously all-around more cruel as a demon, he also seemed weirdly at least as self-aware about sexism as a demon as he was normally and sexism seemed to bother him at least as much as usual (if not more -- the disgust over the double standards really surprised me). Totally bizarre imo. I actually kind of liked that, because it was so inexplicable -- but I still found it inexplicable.

 

In terms of whether he seemed like a hedonist as a demon -- I didn't think he came off that way at all. That was the most most Hotel California, dour, lonely version of hedonism he could have gone with. I think that he just still seemed like a lost soul.

 

Taking my response to the Dean thread. Also HAPPY BIRTHDAY DEAN

[SueB]

There's no way for him not to know that torture is wrong, either -- it's what Hell is all about. It's how demons are *made.* Within the show, torture isn't even useful in getting information very often, either, just in hurting people. It was not useful this time around with Metatron, for sure. So what's the justification for it, even?

Also answering in the Dean thread

Edited January 24, 2015 by SueB

[Pete Martell]

I definitely think the current reign of the show hasn't figured out that Sam and Dean aren't the same boys from S1, though. I've felt both Sam and Dean to be much more immature, petty and annoying since Carver took over. It was one thing to watch a 26-year-old Dean oogling at hot chicks and completely another to see a 36-year-old man (or 38 depending on whether one follows the time jumps or not) oogling at hot chicks. At what point does he stop looking like a youthfully charming horndog and becomes a creepy old man? In general, I don't mind Dean's horndoggy ways and have no issues with the porn myself (although, it does annoy me greatly when he's lusting after teenage girls), but I do understand what you're saying here.

 

I've found a lot of what they've done since Carver took over is very "dramatic" but not necessarily very grown up. So, I understand you being uncomfortable when a 36ish-year-old man starts growl-yelling at folks and stomping around like a big bully and knocking things over. It actually annoys me far more that Dean seems to have lost all his instincts and smarts since Carver took over. I'm not talking about him not being a big reader or his not wanting to do research and such, but his general not questioning things, trying to find his own solutions and/or making one foolish decision after another. He looks far more like a lost little boy, to me, than I've ever thought Dean Winchester was. Which can be hard to reconcile since I know he's at least 36 and has lived the life of at least an 80-year-old man. I'm also equally unnerved by Sam being more pissy-pants and petty than I think a 32-year-old man (or possibly 34) should be too. I'm just not sure that the TPTB really see them as grown men as much as perpetual boys. I think this is one reason why I'm more forgiving of the Gamble years than I have been of Carver. Gamble had a propensity for the 12-year-old humor in her plots--9 million Dick jokes ring a bell?--but I think Sam and Dean were far more adult under her reign than they've ever been since.

 

I barely remember Sam actually existing during her reign. Over half a season was Soulless Sam. The second half of season 6 was Sam mostly reacting to people and being held back because of his wall. The first 3/4 of season 7 was Sam dealing with Hallucifer and his only other story being splitting after the stupid Amy Pond storyline. 

 

I guess Dean could be called mature, but I mostly felt like that was down to his stories revolving around him reacting to other people's problems with the pattern of being drunk/miserable/angry/violent. Nothing was ever really about him. When something was about him (like Lisa and Ben) it was just to remind us that he would always be alone and miserable and would only ever have Sam.

 

I don't think Dean behaves that immaturely under Carver. There are exceptions, like that whole thing where he was using the hookup site, but the rest, like Dean ogling porn or Dean trying to ignore his problems through sex, was there with Kripke and Gamble, probably much moreso than now.

 

Dean's immature moments like the need to put Sam above others or the deal he made for Sam have been a part of him for a long time. If there's a difference it's that Kripke used to use romantic music cues and loving, expansive dialogue to show us that this may be twisted, but it's brotherly love, that's what good brothers do, he's looking out for his Sammy, etc. I also think Dean's intelligence is generally more in use in MOTW episodes than arc episodes, which I feel like has always been the case. 

 

Dean spent many years trying to be his father. For all the talk of him being more like John now, I actually think he's less like John than he's ever been. I think that's one reason he likely seems more immature. It's because he was never allowed to be anything and now he doesn't know what he is.

 

As for Sam, I feel like he has little to no personality under Carver, as he mostly didn't under Gamble, but it was worse here because Gamble mostly had him mark time while being endlessly ill or stricken, whereas Carver put him under what should have been life-changing things and gave him no POV, or gave him a POV that seemed wildly OOC and hostile (the Samelia era).

[AwesomO4000]

I barely remember Sam actually existing during her reign. Over half a season was Soulless Sam. The second half of season 6 was Sam mostly reacting to people and being held back because of his wall. The first 3/4 of season 7 was Sam dealing with Hallucifer and his only other story being splitting after the stupid Amy Pond storyline.

 

I disagree. Even though Sam was in unusual situations because of first his wall and next his hallucinations, I though that he still showed maturity to me that he sometimes hadn't before. For example, when Sam felt guilty and wanted to try to fix things he might've done when soulless even though Dean warned him against it, at first Sam ran off to try to anyway. But maybe unlike Sam in the past who sometimes used to grab onto to causes and not let them go even when he should, this time Sam learned very quickly that he couldn't always make things right. Once he had the close brush with the wall, he instead accepted that he was going to have to learn to let it go. He also seemed to be more attentive and observant of people and Dean especially during the Gamble years. He made sure to thank Dean for getting his soul back. And I thought Sam's attitude about his hallucinations was very mature. After his early slip up and Dean explaining how important it was for Sam to let Dean know what was going on, especially if they were going to be hunting together, Sam made sure to keep Dean informed on how he was doing, and he basically took a very logical approach to the situation.

 

Also despite his hallucinations in season 7, Sam was observant enough of Dean to know that Dean needed help, and often found unobtrusive - and therefore more likely to work with Dean - ways to distract Dean when he was getting too obsessed. Sam was also, despite the running off after Amy, able to think it over and see Dean's side of things and then talk it out with Dean - rationally - and within a short period of time. Compare that to how Sam acted in season 8 doing things like bitching about Benny and threatening to kill him without even knowing the situation and refusing to even listen to Dean's side of it - and then going behind Dean's back to spy on Benny himself and recruit an unstable person to help him with it... and trusting his judgement over Dean's. And then in season 9 where he pissily held a grudge against Dean after finding out about Gadreel and instead of talking rationally about it, used insults and biting remarks and stomped off to his room to sulk about it... multiple times.

 

In my opinion, even when Sam was half crazy with his hallucinations in season 7, he was more rational and reasonable than Sam in the first half of season 8 and the second half of season 9. Heck, in my opinion, even soulless Sam was sometimes more reasonable with Dean. Once the cat was out of the bag, at least soulless Sam was willing to tell it how it was and talk about things calmly with Dean.

 

Also since Sam's hallucinations of Lucifer were coming from Sam, I thought that they actually revealed some interesting things about Sam's personality. I personally found season 7 Sam one of the more complex and interesting versions of Sam. He also was one of the versions of Sam that made the most sense - unlike say season 4 Sam who was often contradictory and did things that made little sense or the above mentioned first half of season 8 Sam and mid season 9 Sam. And I adored second half of season 6 Sam. "The Man Who Knew Too Much" was one of my favorite Sam episodes of the series.

 

So yes, all in all, I liked Sam under Sera Gamble's term as much as I did under Kripke's... in some ways even more so when I think of some of the in my opinion unnecessary things Krikpe did to Sam's character in season 4.

 

Gamble had a propensity for the 12-year-old humor in her plots--9 million Dick jokes ring a bell?--but I think Sam and Dean were far more adult under her reign than they've ever been since.

 

I enjoyed the dick jokes myself. Not only do I have a 12 year old sense of humor which sometimes enjoys being activated, often times Sam was the one making the jokes... Sam sometimes had a sense of humor in season 7. That in itself was totally worth it for me.

[Pete Martell]

I appreciate it when you lay it all out...I just didn't feel like the show expressed this well (especially in season 6). I felt like they just weren't interested in Sam, which has gotten even worse with Carver. I've seen some fans insist the characters are ruined because we don't see them expressing their love for each other enough and it's not about this bond, like "Point of No Return." My feelings on that episode aside (PS - they aren't good), I think we've seen more caring between Sam and Dean than we have since Carver took over. It still doesn't give Sam much of a POV or purpose.

[Aeryn13]

Gamble was a self-proclaimed Sam-girl and I consider Season 6 a Sam-Season, first half got some ridiculous stanning fantasies with Soulless!Sam, the Sex-god and Uber-Badass out of the way and the second half he was back to the Woobie-behind-the-wall. For Dean, they didn`t even bother to invent a storyline where it would make sense that he organically came back, he just kinda resumed sidekick-dom, occasionally Lisa/Ben were thrown in to make character jabs, he was rusty and Deansel. In the second half it got a tiny bit better but storyline-wise? Still nothing. The "detective" role Death mentioned led nowhere and was only brought up in Season 7 to blame the character for it going nowhere.

 

And while hookers forgot to ask for pay from Soulless!Sam, possessed!Lisa had to throw in a line about him being a lousy lay. It was so pathetic "the guy I want to bang" and "the guy I can`t stand" by the writer, my middle finger was in risk of being permanently stuck in a certain position.

 

Season 7, I`m not sure Gamble had much creative control anymore. Maybe about the idiotic Amy Pond plot that dragged the first half of the Season down but arc-wise, they really didn`t even bother to include the Winchesters. You had the Leviathans as the main mytharc and technically Dean and Sam were onscreen as well but those two had bukis to do with each other. I will give the Season this: it was just boring and not overly offensive. 

[DittyDotDot]

I don't think Dean behaves that immaturely under Carver. There are exceptions, like that whole thing where he was using the hookup site, but the rest, like Dean ogling porn or Dean trying to ignore his problems through sex, was there with Kripke and Gamble, probably much moreso than now.

 

To me, sex jokes and or horndoggy behavior aren't a signs of immaturity. Of course context can make them so, but I've never really thought Dean was immature because he has a healthy love of the carnal. 

 

What I meant by Immature is, the bicker rather than the banter, grudge holding, pettiness, rash and impetuous decision making and I don't I feel like they really own up to their decisions anymore. Yeah, Dean felt bad that Kevin had to die, but he'd do the same thing over again if presented with the same situation. And, Sam barely even recognized his jealously and his actions with Amelia in S8. Under Carver, it feels more like they feel bad things went to shit, but it wasn't really their fault so, oh well lets make another rash decision and fall further down the rabbit hole. Whereas, I used to feel like they not only felt bad things went to shit, but they also tried not to make the same mistakes all over again--growth, learning...maturity.

 

Rash and impetuous decision making is a biggie for me though--that's how kids make decisions not grown men. I think it doesn't help that Sam and Dean don't seem to have well-developed instincts any more, so they feel more like foolish teenagers who didn't know any better. They rarely seem to question things and tend to take what people tell them more at face value and rarely do they seem to be proactive, but more reacting to each situation as it comes along. Which is kinda funny when you consider that S8 was the first time they were on offense that I can remember. But so much of the closing the Gates of Hell was them acting before they knew all the facts and/or bothered to ask any questions. This is behavior of inexperienced kids who've never had to make their own decisions rather than men who've been on their own more than not, since they were very young children and know these sorts of things can only lead to more and more and more bad.

 

And, the grudge holding and pettiness...ugh! Sam and Dean have always had differing points of view, but even though they were having an argument, I always knew there was an underlying feeling of affection and caring. Now its a lot of sniping and lashing out at one another--actively trying to hurt one another because they were feeling hurt. When they used to be able to see each other had a valid point of view and come somewhere in the middle. 

 

This is not how a grown men (or women, for that matter) should behave, IMO, especially men in their 30s who've also lived the life of much older men. I'm not saying there wasn't childish behavior at times under Kripke, but I can forgive some of it because they were young men in their 20s. But, even in S1, when Sam and Dean were at their youngest, they seemed far more mature to me. Compare Sam and Dean in Scarecrow--where they have a fight and break up--to Torn And Frayed or First Born.

 

Personally, I think both Sam and Dean were at their most mature under Gamble. Granted Sam wasn't really Sam for the first half of S6, but once he was Sam again, I felt like he was handling the situation as an adult rather than the petulant little boy I saw in the back half of S9. And I rarely thought Dean was impulsive or rash, but instead used his well-honed instincts to make decisions and find solutions, unlike the Dean I've seen since the end of S8. Rarely there was the sniping and bickering, but I saw a lot of support and caring between them and I genuinely felt like they enjoyed each other as their own person. Yes, there was the Amy thing, but that was resolved fairly quickly and I thought was resolved far more maturely than the non-resolution they've had since mid-S8. Compare Sam and Dean in The Mentalists to Torn and Frayed or Sharp Teeth.

 

I'm not saying this has made me totally dislike Sam or Dean--I still think they're both good men--but I do find it increasingly more difficult to bend the story around so I can see them less as little boys.

[Pete Martell]

To me, sex jokes and or horndoggy behavior aren't a signs of immaturity. Of course context can make them so, but I've never really thought Dean was immature because he has a healthy love of the carnal. 

 

What I meant by Immature is, the bicker rather than the banter, grudge holding, pettiness, rash and impetuous decision making and I don't I feel like they really own up to their decisions anymore. Yeah, Dean felt bad that Kevin had to die, but he'd do the same thing over again if presented with the same situation. And, Sam barely even recognized his jealously and his actions with Amelia in S8. Under Carver, it feels more like they feel bad things went to shit, but it wasn't really their fault so, oh well lets make another rash decision and fall further down the rabbit hole. Whereas, I used to feel like they not only felt bad things went to shit, but they also tried not to make the same mistakes all over again--growth, learning...maturity.

 

I guess for me Dean and Sam were always in a holding pattern, even when there were hints of more. I felt like Kripke never dared to do otherwise. He had Dean pay lip service to not letting his relationship with Sam define his life and lead him to make terrible choices, but he also made sure Dean could never have anyone in his life but Sam. He took a toxic, codependent bond and made it good and right, because in the end, codependency was fine - a cool car, and childhood memories and stargazing saved the world. 

 

I don't think Dean being flirtatious was immature, but the days when they'd make sure to show him using a case to hit on women (with Sam making a sour face in the background) came across that way to me. I think they used that to contrast him with Sam. I don't think he does that as much now - to me his attempts at sex come across less as him being immature and more as him feeling lonely and desperate and having no identity, and trying to use whatever he can to ignore this.

And, the grudge holding and pettiness...ugh! Sam and Dean have always had differing points of view, but even though they were having an argument, I always knew there was an underlying feeling of affection and caring. Now its a lot of sniping and lashing out at one another--actively trying to hurt one another because they were feeling hurt. When they used to be able to see each other had a valid point of view and come somewhere in the middle. 

 

This is not how a grown men (or women, for that matter) should behave, IMO, especially men in their 30s who've also lived the life of much older men. I'm not saying there wasn't childish behavior at times under Kripke, but I can forgive some of it because they were young men in their 20s. But, even in S1, when Sam and Dean were at their youngest, they seemed far more mature to me. Compare Sam and Dean in Scarecrow--where they have a fight and break up--to Torn And Frayed or First Born.

 

I agree, but I think this went away with Kripke, not Carver. The grudge-holding, pettiness, and bitterness took over in season 4, and Kripke never bothered to resolve it, instead having Bobby shame Dean into silence and slowly but surely erasing any POV Sam ever had in order to just make him into the boy who saved the world. I think the terrible back end of season 5, which focused not on rebuilding Sam and Dean but instead on murdering (literally and figuratively) every other relationship or road in their life to make sure they would never have an option but to be together, did severe damage to the characters and their bond, and it's never been repaired.

[Pete Martell]

Personally, I think both Sam and Dean were at their most mature under Gamble. Granted Sam wasn't really Sam for the first half of S6, but once he was Sam again, I felt like he was handling the situation as an adult rather than the petulant little boy I saw in the back half of S9. And I rarely thought Dean was impulsive or rash, but instead used his well-honed instincts to make decisions and find solutions, unlike the Dean I've seen since the end of S8. Rarely there was the sniping and bickering, but I saw a lot of support and caring between them and I genuinely felt like they enjoyed each other as their own person. Yes, there was the Amy thing, but that was resolved fairly quickly and I thought was resolved far more maturely than the non-resolution they've had since mid-S8. Compare Sam and Dean in The Mentalists to Torn and Frayed or Sharp Teeth.

 

It's difficult for me to remember Sam and Dean doing anything proactive in season 6, because the whole thing was rewrites and macho posturing. Even Dean killing Eve was ultimately just Dean and Sam being a pawn of Crowley and Cas. 

 

On paper, Dean was supposed to be the mature one, the one trying for a "normal" life, coping with a broken brother, etc. but onscreen, I felt like Gamble just reduced him to bitterness and sharpness, with no inner life. He was there to beat up Soulless Sam, to lie to Sam, to be the loser the Campbells openly mocked, to snap at Bobby, to snap at Cas, to snap at Lisa and Ben. The only moral to this seemed to be yet another reminder that he could never amount to anything beyond being a good big brother.

 

Season 7 had the extended breakdown story, but again I felt like Dean had much less of an inner life, and in a number of episodes, like that trash episode Edlund wrote (I can't remember the title) near the end of the season, I felt like they almost resented even having Dean in it. 

 

For me Carver did a lot to give Dean more of a heart and a voice after Dean had mostly been made into such a stock figure in seasons 5-7. I do agree with some of your complaints, but I feel like they've taken Dean to a lot of places in the last few seasons that Kripke should have taken him to long ago, but never bothered. And I just keep hoping maybe something good will come out of it.

Edited January 25, 2015 by Pete Martell

[AwesomO4000]

like that trash episode Edlund wrote (I can't remember the title) near the end of the season, I felt like they almost resented even having Dean in it.

 

"Reading is Fundamental?" I really liked that episode. I thought that the scenes between Dean and Castiel where Dean was trying his best to hold it together and get he job done in the face of a damaged and giving up Castiel were very well done, the introduction of Kevin was interesting, and the plot moved along nicely. I thought it was fairly apparent that Dean was the one keeping the mission moving along and doing the tough recruiting towards that goal. It helped that there were some nice lighter and humorous moments also for me. But I understand that miles vary.

[Pete Martell]

Kevin's part worked for me, as did Meg, but they seemed oddly uninterested in having much interaction between Cas and Dean/Sam beyond commentary on how hilarious it is to be mentally ill, and I didn't care for the scene where Dean threw the game off the table. It just felt like it was cheaper than their relationship should have been. The way Hester was treated bothered me too. 

Edited January 25, 2015 by Pete Martell