And what intrigues me is the way the fandom is using this language to discuss Bobby's possession - that it's bad writing because Bobby knows better, Bobby would never do that, Bobby must have done something stupid for a demon to possess him. (And don't the hunters do the same when Sam is possessed? He was possessed because of his blood, a theory that protects the other hunters from the same fate.)
I think that's a bit of oversimplification. Bobby was introduced on the show at the end of S1 as someone with a lot of knowledge about demons (in stark contrast to Sam and Dean's ignorance). He's the one who gave the boys the charms to keep them from being possessed after BUaBS; he's the one who gave them the devil's trap. He's the closest thing the show has to a demon expert, and unless there's something about this demon that made it able to possess him despite the general precautions we can assume him to take, I don't think it's blaming the victim to suggest possession seems like a convenient plot device that doesn't fit what we know of Bobby.
It's a Doylist complain, not a Watsonian one. The problem isn't that Bobby got himself possessed; it's that the writers made a convenient decision that, at least unless we get more information, doesn't seem to fit the established canon we have to this point.
And I think that it is an easy sidestep to say that it's just a plothole. With the explicit sexualisation of possession in this episode and the possession of Bobby/attempted possession of Dean by Michael via Zachariah it means that every male hero of the show (Bobby, John, Sam, Dean) has had this sexualised violation made against them. And indeed it is a violation - Bobby stabbed himself to stop it, Sam said that Dean should have kill him.
I think we can learn extratextually from this. If you choose not to, that's your choice, but I do think the writers are saying something explicit with Bobby and Dean in Sympathy for the Devil.
I'm confused. Are you saying you think it's in character for Bobby to take no precautions against being possessed by a demon, or that you think the writers were going for a larger point so it doesn't matter if it's in character or not?
I am saying that a) even Bobby has said that the demons walking the earth after the opening of the Devil's Gate were powerful beyond what hunters know, so they could only expect terrible things and b) presumably the breaking of Lucifer's Seal means that even more demons are out and about. It could be that he was possessed by a demon that he didn't know how to protect against, or against whom there are no protections, etc. It could be, as someone else on this post pointed out, that his protective amulet was literally torn from him before he was possessed.
After Sam was possessed, Bobby gave them amulets. As far we know, their decision to get tattooed was their own, not Bobby's. It is logical to assume, then, that Bobby uses a similar amulet to protect himself. But if the demon was possessing someone else, couldn't they pull the amulet off Bobby?
To say, "Bobby took a precaution against possession, thus he can never be possessed ever at all, amen," is simplistic and foolish. He could be and was and there are plenty of logical explanations for the wherefores of that. And, yes, I do think there is a larger point within the "The demon expert was possessed himself in the episode that made possession explicitly sexual" statement.
I don't think anyone is saying Bobby can never be possessed. People are saying that without further information (i.e., more powerful demons, something that can circumvent whatever precautions he has taken--and while we don't know for sure that Bobby has a tattoo, I think from what we know there's an excellent chance that he does), it seems odd for him to be possessed. They may well clarify this in the next episode, but I think your suggestion that, with the limited facts we have on hand, anyone given pause by this plot point is blaming the victim is incredibly simplistic.
I kind of agree with both of you - basically, it would have taken two seconds for the writers to throw in a line about how it happened (which could have furthered the rape parallel as well, depending how they wrote it). There may be some victim blaming going on but there was also some godawful lazy writing in that episode.
He's the closest thing the show has to a demon expert, and unless there's something about this demon that made it able to possess him despite the general precautions we can assume him to take, I don't think it's blaming the victim to suggest possession seems like a convenient plot device that doesn't fit what we know of Bobby.
On the one hand, I agree with you. There's totally a realistic possibility that the matter was one of convenient plot device. OTOH -- I'm surprised that more people are not at least allowing for the possibility that this is DemonMeg we're talking about. She's had previous encounters with Bobby, and it's plausible to me that she's learned from them and fine-tuned her approach on how to get to Bobby, coaching the demon that actually did possess him. Not to mention a desire to hurt him, simply because he's been a part of her getting her butt kicked a couple of times.
I'm not entirely following, sorry. Meg's never possessed Bobby or even, that we've seen, tried to possess Bobby... how would Bobby sending her back to hell give her special insight into possessing him? I'm honestly not trying to be snarky here; I'm just having trouble parsing the logic.
Sorry -- my bad for being unclear. No, Meg's never specifically tried to possess Bobby. But she did get trapped by him and the boys in Devil's Trap, and specifically went after him to kill him while possessing Sam in Born Under a Bad Sign. Both of those previous encounters gave her knowledge of how he protects himself/handles the presence of demons. Giving her specific insight as to how to possess him, not too sure about. But learning about some of the precautions to take if targeting him... surely that's helpful. Also in BUABS, didn't she say she'd learned new tricks? We don't know what those are. But it is text that she's got some tricks up her sleeve.
Not really a big deal to me, I just do think it's not a shock that she might have a better approach to attacking Bobby than some random demon who wouldn't know to check the ceiling for devil's traps, or spiked holy water beer, etc. Basically, she's had a learning curve of what NOT to do, moreso than what to do, maybe. Does that make sense? :)
I think that's a bit of oversimplification. Bobby was introduced on the show at the end of S1 as someone with a lot of knowledge about demons (in stark contrast to Sam and Dean's ignorance). He's the one who gave the boys the charms to keep them from being possessed after BUaBS; he's the one who gave them the devil's trap. He's the closest thing the show has to a demon expert, and unless there's something about this demon that made it able to possess him despite the general precautions we can assume him to take, I don't think it's blaming the victim to suggest possession seems like a convenient plot device that doesn't fit what we know of Bobby.
It's a Doylist complain, not a Watsonian one. The problem isn't that Bobby got himself possessed; it's that the writers made a convenient decision that, at least unless we get more information, doesn't seem to fit the established canon we have to this point.
Reply
I think we can learn extratextually from this. If you choose not to, that's your choice, but I do think the writers are saying something explicit with Bobby and Dean in Sympathy for the Devil.
Reply
Reply
After Sam was possessed, Bobby gave them amulets. As far we know, their decision to get tattooed was their own, not Bobby's. It is logical to assume, then, that Bobby uses a similar amulet to protect himself. But if the demon was possessing someone else, couldn't they pull the amulet off Bobby?
To say, "Bobby took a precaution against possession, thus he can never be possessed ever at all, amen," is simplistic and foolish. He could be and was and there are plenty of logical explanations for the wherefores of that. And, yes, I do think there is a larger point within the "The demon expert was possessed himself in the episode that made possession explicitly sexual" statement.
Reply
Reply
Reply
On the one hand, I agree with you. There's totally a realistic possibility that the matter was one of convenient plot device. OTOH -- I'm surprised that more people are not at least allowing for the possibility that this is DemonMeg we're talking about. She's had previous encounters with Bobby, and it's plausible to me that she's learned from them and fine-tuned her approach on how to get to Bobby, coaching the demon that actually did possess him. Not to mention a desire to hurt him, simply because he's been a part of her getting her butt kicked a couple of times.
Reply
Reply
Not really a big deal to me, I just do think it's not a shock that she might have a better approach to attacking Bobby than some random demon who wouldn't know to check the ceiling for devil's traps, or spiked holy water beer, etc. Basically, she's had a learning curve of what NOT to do, moreso than what to do, maybe. Does that make sense? :)
Reply
Leave a comment