Walking off the chessboard: part 5

Jul 28, 2010 22:33

Sorry for the delay in posting. Complicated couple of weeks. Thus ends the main body of this sucker, though I'm noodling with a short conclusion that talks about the traditional/biblical concept of the scapegoat. Sadly I know nothing of the bible, so it will probably be a really shallow isn't this kinda cool thing.

Walking off the chessboard: Sam ( Read more... )

scapegoat, meta:spn, essays

Leave a comment

amonitrate August 14 2010, 15:55:29 UTC
Thank you for reading!

This is not true. Beyond the fact that John (arguably) was proud of Sam for his actions/Sam was the favoured son, I never read Sam as being rejected by his family.

I am referring to John's telling Sam that if he leaves for Stanford, not to come back. That's a pretty clear message to me.

I think it's possible Sam could have filled this role, if monsters weren't real. But since they are, the problem always came down to the fact that there was this actual problem the world faced (monsters eating/killing/whatevering people), which the family was then reacting to.

Of course there was an external problem to deal with: the monsters, what had killed Mary. Dysfunctional families often are reacting to external stressors such as unemployment, poverty, medical problems, etc. That does not negate how the family deals with the problems internally, which is what the "family roles" is part of. The role Sam plays in his family is a separate issue from these external issues, though of course they are related.

Sam is the focal point of the emotional tension in their family, without a doubt. But he is NEVER blamed for the problems they have overall-- other than by himself.

I guess I'd just refer you back to the examples I offered from the show, where John places the blame for Dean's condition and for the failure to kill YED onto Sam, where Dean places the blame for the shattering of the family onto Sam for leaving for college.

There's also the point where the Scapegoat isn't always directly blamed for all of the family's problems; instead he's a distraction from the problems, by the family focusing all of their attention onto him instead of facing the actual problems.

Thanks for your thoughts, it sounds like we will be in disagreement but I appreciate you taking the time to read.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up