Random updates
I need a new sketchbook. Somewhat to my bemusement, I discovered I'd used the last page on my current one yesterday, which was wicked annoying because La Bohème came on the classic movie channel and I really wanted to draw some of the people there. They're all just ridiculously pretty in that 1920's sort of way. Something about how stylized
( Read more... )
Well in Supernatural, even though Sam was doing things his way, you have to remember that like Dean Sam was always giving in to Dean's needs. Whenever Sam felt he needed to do something on his own, he would ask Dean to let him do it i.e. Bloody Mary. Sam was always arguing with Dean about Dean's choices but in the end Sam submitted to them because of the big brother little brother relationship. Sure Sam was able to go off and do what he wanted i.e. Scarecrow, but ended up coming back because he put his brother's needs over his own. So, to me when Sam is saying you have to let me grow up, I believe he means - I have to be able to make these decisions without feeling guilty without feeling like you're going to disapprove and pull rank and do what you always do. Also, I don't think Sam was threatening Dean, he was simply stating that this 'so called fresh start' isn't going to work, unless we do something about it. He isn't blaming Dean for the things he's done the choices he's made, he's made that clear. He isn't blaming Dean for any of it, he's blaming himself, because he wasn't secure and strong enough to say it sooner. This could have all been avoided if he came out and said this in 'Lazarus Rising' when Dean took the lead and made the 'well the smarter brother is back' remark. If Sam stopped him right there and had this talk with Dean, I believe this whole situation could have been avoided, and it probably would have ended differently.
I don't know, if Dean meant what he said about them both keeping each other human, to then just pull a Ruby on Sam, wouldn't that mean that Dean will be the cause of pushing Sam away? I mean if Dean truly isn't considering Sam's words, if Dean truly is just keeping Sam to keep an eye on him, then wouldn't that be just like what Dean has always done? To me that's telling me that Dean hasn't changed, that's telling me that Dean is yet again being his hardheaded self and doing things out of fear. To me that would mean Dean's character isn't developing at all. Which is why I really think that Dean isn't submitting or pulling a Ruby, he's finally showing something his father never really showed, and that's growing and using more than just emotion and fear to steer the boat.
Reply
Honestly, we've not seen Dean less in control of Sam or in a more unstable position in their relationship since, well. Ever. Sam owned that conversation from the get-go. He had the upper hand in their verbal confrontation and he used it to push Dean into calling him a monster, then he had the complete upper hand in their physical fight. If Sam is using that incident as THE example of Dean being bossy, then, well. Man. I don't have words. How can Dean be the bossy one when Sam told him what they were doing and then when Dean refused, Sam beat the crap out of him and strangled him?
Sam didn't always ask Dean to do things his way. Look at Home - Sam wanted to go to Lawrence and they went, even though Dean had HUGE issues with returning. Dean asked for a valid reason before they left, true, but he gave in to Sam's demand. Likewise, wasn't it Bloody Mary where Dean asked Sam what was wrong and Sam responded with "you're my brother and I love you, but I've got to do this on my own"? What about Hunted, where Sam actually promised Dean that they'd do it together only to vanish in the middle of the night? And later that episode where Dean wanted out and Sam told him that if he wanted to keep protecting him (which Sam proved that very ep that he needed, seeing as he'd be dead if it weren't for Dean), he had to go with Sam and keep hunting?
I don't want to make it sound like Sam has NEVER put Dean's needs above his own, but it's not been a set pattern either. We've never had it where Dean told Sam what to do and Sam just toddled off with a melancholy sigh and did it. That was the whole point of Asylum - Sam felt like Dean was bossing him around and was incredibly resentful for it.
I have to be able to make these decisions without feeling guilty without feeling like you're going to disapprove and pull rank and do what you always do
The problem with that though is Sam forced Dean to be his moral watchdog in Playthings with that promise. Sam WANTED Dean to watch his every move and ensure he didn't go dark side. Then when Sam started to slip (and WAS going dark side) he gets all affronted by it and offended because Dean isn't letting him grow up? No, I don't buy that.
Reply
He had the upper hand in their verbal confrontation and he used it to push Dean into calling him a monster,
I don't think so, he was pleading to Dean to listen to him and to see things his way and Dean just said no, and then proceeded to say 'it's not what you're doing it's who you are', Dean did that without Sam pushing him. Sam knew exactly what Dean meant and he wanted Dean to just say it, because he was tired of Dean's looks and insinuations he was fed up of it all and he just wanted Dean to say it, and Dean did. Dean didn't have to be pushed, he did what he always did when he was angry and emotional and he said the hurtful thing he's been thinking. THAT'S what prompted Sam to punch him.
The thing is Sam only asks to be heard and his ideas considered without having to fight tooth and nail for them to be heard and considered. In Home, he had a vision about the house and Dean was reluctant in going but he wasn't going to just sit around and do nothing while a family could die, so he went. In Hunted Sam didn't promise Dean that he would stay, Dean pleaded to him and Sam simply just looked away, now that could be seen as Sam promising but he didn't actually say 'okay I'll stay and do this together'. Besides Sam had legitimate reason to do what he did, Dean kept this huge secret about him and the possibility of him going dark side, and it looks like he's doing it again with the whole future trip. In 'Bloody Mary' he tells Dean 'you have to let me do this' meaning he wants Dean's permission to do the bloody Mary thing, in the end he tells his brother that he loves him and would die for him but some things he has to keep as his own, those were his emotions and dealing with Jessica's death. I can understand Sam not wanting to open up about that right away.
There are a lot of incidents where Dean said to Sam this is how it's going to be and Sam didn't fight him on it. One of those things being Sam wanting to look for their father after Jessica's death and Dean finding hunts to do, Sam protested most of season 1 about it and in Scarecrow when they finally had a lead on their dad Sam wanted to go after him and Dean didn't, so Sam went off on his own to find their father, but didn't get that far because he decided to go back to Dean. There are plenty of incidents where Dean told Sam how things were going to be and Sam would protest and go along and then when it got to the point where he needed to speak up he did and things changed course. It was always a battle and I think this episode was basically telling us Sam doesn't want to have this constant battle with Dean, he wants to be able to say - hey I don't think this is over- without having Dean with one foot out the door ready to leave and not listen.
The problem with that though is Sam forced Dean to be his moral watchdog in Playthings with that promise. Sam WANTED Dean to watch his every move and ensure he didn't go dark side.
Sam wanted Dean to make sure that if he ever became something horrible that Dean would kill him. Dean failed to do that several times and proved he would never ever do that. Sam embraced his abilities, and he liked them and he liked being able to save people, of course he's going to feel affronted by Dean not letting him do that.
Reply
This might be one we have to agree to disagree on. *g* To me, Dean was shown as willing to compromise when he offered to go with Sam when he'd already made it clear that he didn't think them ready and I can't ever be convinced that Sam was bullied into submission and forced to follow Dean's plans all the time.
Dean was in hell when Sam started things with Ruby so that can't be a reason he went with Ruby.
That's the hypocrisy that a lot of people are commenting on though. It DID sound to us that Sam was blaming Dean for something he started to do when Dean was dead.
I don't think Dean was being condescending there either, so that's something else we'll have to disagree on.
For Home, Dean had vowed that he'd never go back. Dean remembers what happened in 1983, Sam doesn't. Just like Dean can never really understand the horror that Sam feels at being infected with demon blood, Sam can never fully grok having a home and having it destroyed and what it was to lose his mother. I don't blame him for wanting a good reason to go back again.
I disagree that Sam had every reason to go off on his own, especially when they made a point of showing that Sam would be dead if Dean hadn't been able to track him down again. I'll have to rewatch the episode; I thought he'd at least nodded when Dean begged him to stay so they could figure it out together. Sam did come across as condescending to me there, with his "he means well" comment.
I do understand Sam's irritation in early S1, I really do. He obviously wanted to go after John and Dean didn't seem particularly keen on the idea. I've never been all that sure why that was; Dean was all about finding John in 1x01, but that was before they started to get the texts so perhaps the urgency was mostly spurred on by his worry that John might be dead. Once he knew otherwise, well...
But the point is, Sam made his own choice to leave in Scarecrow, just like he made his own choice to return. He made the choice to stay with Dean in Chicago rather than go with John. When he wanted to return home in the pilot, Dean took him, even though John was still missing.
I think it's a perspective issue. From Sam's perspective, of course Dean saying "we're doing it this way" would grate. That said, even at Dean's worst in S1, he was never so bad as he was in 5x05. Dean was a jackass in 5x05, which was annoying because he had legit reasons to be annoyed and distrustful of Sam's judgment but instead he was shown as petty.
Dean failed to do that several times and proved he would never ever do that.
When did Dean fail to do this? When he was possessed by Meg? That's the only major incident that comes to mind and I think the entire fandom would have exploded if Dean had actually killed Sam in BUaBS. Otherwise, the next major issue where he knew Sam was really going offtrack was in S4. There were a couple of incidents in S3 that he obviously was suspicious and leery about (I think he even asked Bobby once if Sam seemed "different" since his resurrection), but nothing worth killing Sam over.
When he found out about Sam using his powers and thought he was going dark side, he immediately confronted him on it. Later, when Sam wanted him to trust his judgment about the powers (and Ruby), he did as Sam requested because again Dean saw nothing worth killing Sam over. When it became obvious that Sam really WAS going off the rails, he took decisive action. Seems Dean did his part here to me.
Reply
I don't even buy that much. Sam put the blame back on Dean when he said that he went with Ruby because Dean bossed him around too much. He might have claimed ownership for the blame there, but that was in word only. Everything else in that conversation was all about what Dean had done wrong.
In the best possible light, it comes out as "I should have told you to back off sooner." And honestly, if that was his only effort to claim his part of the divide, if he didn't even consider mentioning the lying, betrayals, secrets being kept, his sneering sense of superiority, his claims that Dean was weak and stupid, much less the actual beating and strangulation, then don't you think it comes off as hypocritical?
wouldn't that be just like what Dean has always done?
Not entirely. Dean has kept his mouth shut before when he felt Sam was going off the right path, but before that was to keep Sam happy. Now it's to keep the world safe.
As for doing things out of fear, I see it more as being overly cautious and refusing to be blind. Dean HAS blinded himself to many of Sam's faults. While you think Sam should have called Dean out in 4x01, I think Dean should have called SAM out in S3. He didn't back then, nor in S4 when he really became aware that there was a problem. He didn't because he needed to protect Sam and he couldn't if he drove Sam away. Now the concern is that if he drives Sam away, Sam will fall to Lucifer and the world will end. I really doubt the future in 5x04 was real, but I don't blame Dean for being cautious there at all.
And honestly, what reason has Sam given Dean to trust him? Can you name one at all that doesn't tie back in the end to "he's his brother and should love him"?
Reply
As for doing things out of fear, I see it more as being overly cautious and refusing to be blind. Dean HAS blinded himself to many of Sam's faults. While you think Sam should have called Dean out in 4x01, I think Dean should have called SAM out in S3. He didn't back then, nor in S4 when he really became aware that there was a problem.
He kept his mouth shut about certain things not to keep Sam happy, but out of fear. He was scared that Sam was right about what was going on with his psychic abilities, and Dean was keeping his fears hidden from Sam. He called Sam on his actions in season 3, when Sam told him about Ruby the first time. He couldn't believe that Sam was considering listening to a demon, but when Sam told him that she could save him, Dean listened. Why? Because there was a possibility for him to be saved. When Sam was willing to kill the virgin, Dean called him out on it. When Sam was willing to kill the witches, Dean called him out on it. When Sam killed the demon and her priest in 'Sin City' Dean had his doubts about Sam being Sam, he didn't say anything then, because he was probably blaming himself, because of what YED said to him. Dean called Sam out on a lot of the things Sam was doing that were considered morally ambiguous in season 3.
In season 4 he makes sure to find out if Sam is doing his freaky psychic powers, he calls Sam out in 'Metamorphosis' when Sam wants to talk to the guy first before ganking him, he calls Sam out in 'S&V'. There was really no reason to call Sam out about it for half the season because Sam doesn't start showing those major behavior changes till Sex and Violence and beyond. Another reason why Dean doesn't call Sam out is because how could he when he knew he was keeping things from his brother as well, when he was laying too. How can he expect his brother to open up if isn't?
A lot of what Dean does is out of fear and obligation to do it because it's what his dad taught him. We are finally seeing Dean doing things for other reasons other than fear and obligation, and the end of 'Fallen Idol' we see that.
And honestly, what reason has Sam given Dean to trust him? Can you name one at all that doesn't tie back in the end to "he's his brother and should love him"?
I'm not saying he completely trust Sam, but when has Sam steered him wrong in a hunt? When has Sam ever put Dean in danger during a hunt? So Dean's mistrust is misplaced, Sam always has his back in a hunt and he always has his back when it comes to the emotional stuff as well. But Dean never makes it easy for him, and in season 4 Sam didn't have the patience or the time to coddle Dean. So if anything Dean's mistrust should be with opening up to Sam not with the hunts, which he was proving in this episode.
Dean is still hurt and still feels betrayed, I don't think he's going to let that go easy, but the hunt and keeping a tight leash on Sam, that's what that conversation was about and that's where Dean realized he needs to loosen that leash. Now, we'll see how he handles actually opening up to Sam emotionally. I think it'll take time before either of them do. So far I think they're headed in the right direction :)And honestly, what reason has Sam given Dean to trust him? Can you name one at all that doesn't tie back in the end to "he's his brother and should love him"?
Reply
That's not worth killing Sam over though and IMHO he was still in denial about how bad Sam had gotten then. I see it more as denial than fear, but Dean would have had to be an optimistic moron to not fear Sam's supposed destiny. I'll grant you that.
What I was mostly referring to then was later in S4, when Dean kept his mouth shut even though it really bothered him when Sam snuck off with Ruby and was obviously keeping secrets. It wasn't fear then, or denial. Sam already had one foot out the door by then; if Dean had pushed Sam in late S4, Sam would have left. He proved that much in 4x18 when he showed no hesitation or qualms about Dean leaving Sam.
What secrets did Dean keep from Sam? Remembering Hell is the only big one and even that he only kept to himself for three episodes.
I do think fear drove some of Dean's actions, primarily in S2 and S3, but I'd also argue that fear drove almost all of Sam's actions between the same time period. I don't think that fear is a really terrible motivator as long as it doesn't hamper your actions. And Sam and Dean had some pretty scary things to be afraid of, all things considered.
When has Sam ever put Dean in danger during a hunt?
Off the top of my head, Hunted and Asylum come to mind, but that wasn't really the main issue. It's not about Sam's competency as a hunter; Sam's damned good. It's Sam's behavior in S4 here. Sam very much didn't have Dean's back in late S4, most especially with the emotional issues. Sam under the siren's influence merely released his actual emotions - he really did consider Dean weak, he really did mock Dean about Hell and his ongoing guilt and horror at having tortured others, and considered himself better, stronger, and smarter.
I agree, Dean should be trusting Sam about the hunts and that's a huge part of why I think Dean was a jackass in 5x05. It's just that was such an unusual behavior for Dean to indulge in, you know?
I don't blame Sam for telling Dean to back off, but the writing to set that up was insanely clunky and painful. Both Sam and Dean felt OOC to me and it was contrived, as if they had the end scene in mind and wrote whatever they felt necessary to get them to that point, rather than actually keeping Sam and Dean IC and allowing things to develop naturally.
Reply
Sam didn't put Dean in danger, they weren't on a hunt. It just so happened that Gordon popped in when he did. Asylum, you're really blaming Sam for thinking that Dean had called him, and Sam went off to assist his brother? Again I don't see that as Sam putting Dean in danger of a hunt.
To me the main issue of episode 5 was trust, Dean still didn't trust Sam and by taking on this little hunt which turned out to be a major one, that was Dean's way of keeping Sam close (like you said pulling a Ruby) while also attempting miserably to start fresh. This episode showed exactly what Dean was attempting, what he always attempts, keeping Sam close so he can have an eye on him, something he felt he didn't want to have to do anymore from the beginning of this season. Which was why it wasn't working and which is why Dean contemplated Sam's words in the end and they both came to an equal grown up decision. Dean was falling back to bad pattern, he's always been like that, it's just more emphasized in this episode because of how bad things got with Sam. But it was Dean not trusting Sam, and to me that was misplaced, because like I said Sam has never put Dean in danger, in season 4 it was the angels who did that and Sam saved him every single time. So the fact that Dean was not trusting Sam with a hunt was just Dean's way of showing Sam that he's the boss again and you do as I say, sure he's never been that extreme before but it's always been Dean's personality.
The only thing that felt clunky to me was the way it was revealed that Sam knew about Dean breaking the first seal. To me that felt like the writer's after thought, when did Dean reveal to Sam that he broke the first seal? Or did Sam figure it out on his own? Or did Bobby tell Sam about it or did Castiel tell Sam about it? I feel cheated that we don't know when and how it happened. Otherwise everything else seemed in character for me, only it was magnified because the situation between the brothers has gotten that bad.
Oh the two incidents where Dean failed to kill Sam and showed how he would never do so, is 'BUABS' and 'Croatoan' In 'BUABS' it was obvious that Sam wasn't Sam, and it's a good thing that Dean didn't kill him, but he still didn't do what he promised Sam he would do. In 'Croatoan' he refused to kill Sam or rather let Sam kill himself when he was obviously infected and would turn into a monster, again it's a good thing non of them had to because it turns out Sam was immune. So yes of course it's a good thing that Dean didn't but they can't be discounted. oh the whole of season 4. Yes I know I know to us Sam wasn't evil, he was using his powers for good, until we found out about the blood, but to Dean Sam was turning into a monster and he saw glimpses and signs of it happening and he didn't do what he promised he would do back in season 2, I guess he was still holding on to his words in 'BUABS' when he said he would try and save Sam no matter what, the thing is he didn't do that in season 4, his attempts were bad and it just further messed up the situation. Of course it doesn't help that Dean had major issues of his own, and that Sam wasn't making it easy for him, which is why it would have been good to see the conversation in 'GGY' and 'FI' happen early in season 4. That way the boys would be able to deal with things their way but together.
Reply
But it was Dean not trusting Sam, and to me that was misplaced, because like I said Sam has never put Dean in danger
Except for when Sam withheld information and then half killed him in 4x21. ;)
Dean has very valid reasons to distrust Sam. Sam lied to him repeatedly and snuck out with Ruby on a regular basis. He cut Dean out of the loop. Sam's decision to start drinking blood put him in so altered a state of mind that he literally went insane in 4x21 and later that episode, strangled Dean.
My thought about 5x05 was that he was trying to build Sam's confidence back up and that's why he kept shoving everything at Sam. He chose an easy case, he tried to get Sam to do the things he knew Sam enjoyed... He was just an utter jackass about it and went about it in all the wrong ways. Dean has never been "the boss" between them but given Sam's poor decision making in S4, I don't blame Dean for trying to assume a leadership role there. The episode was incredibly one sided though, which meant that we only ever saw Sam's perspective of the situation. Dean's (again, very valid) reasons for distrusting Sam were all discounted or ignored.
Oh, I hated the reveal about the first seal! It's such a huge and significant moment between them; how could they have left that out? It's one of the best examples of clumsy writing in the episode and it leaves me very worried. If TPTB don't understand why that would be such a major issue between Sam and Dean, it makes me wonder if they even understand Sam and Dean at all. Otherwise, how could it have been forgotten?
Which sounds like such a stupid and elitist fan thing to say - "Kripke is writing his characters wrong!" But, you know... Based on what we know of Sam and Dean? Kripke DID write his characters wrong. I just hope the characterization gets better. It was up a bit in 5x06, so let's hope that continues.
IMHO, Dean knew that something was up with Sam in BUaBS. He didn't know what, but he walked into the bar utterly certain that Sam was somehow not Sam. Even if that really had been Sam, I think he made the right decision there. He needed to wait until he actually had proof that this was SAM doing the bad things before he could take fatal action. It was the same thing in Croatoan. Sam showed no signs of turning and Dean WAS prepared to do what was necessary. As soon as Sam turned, Dean was going to kill him and then kill himself. Seems to me that Dean was willing to keep the promise then.
which is why it would have been good to see the conversation in 'GGY' and 'FI' happen early in season 4.
I'm of two minds about that. Yes, it would have been good if those misconceptions were cleared up earlier, but not in early S4. Not when Dean had just gotten back from Hell. That would have been terrible timing! I think they should have had that conversation back in S2, personally, if they were going to have it before. The problem is that Sam hadn't done anything that showed a sign of needing it back then and he didn't really want to "grow up" yet - he wanted Dean to be his big brother still. Dean did try to call Sam out on it in S4 (4x04, 4x08, 4x09, 4x12, 4x14, 4x15, 4x18 all come to mind as times when Dean tried to call Sam out on his behavior), but it wasn't effective because Sam didn't want to meet him half way and Dean couldn't figure out a way to connect to him.
Reply
You can't compare those incidents with S&V. In Hunted Sam was trying to find information about himself. If anything he endangered himself. Also, in Asylum Sam didn't let himself get infected, he got a call from who he thought was Dean and went to see what Dean had found, and then got caught off guard. It's not the same as Dean not seeing something wrong with Monroe, I mean he didn't even check to see if the guy was real FBI :/ then shared a drink with him, which got him infected. To me that's putting yourself and your partner in danger. It's not the same as what happened in Hunted and Asylum. Sure Dean got caught by Gordon and was in danger, and he was attacked by Sam in Asylum, but Sam didn't forsee the Gordon situation happening, and he believed his brother was the one who called him.
Except for when Sam withheld information and then half killed him in 4x21. ;)
If you're talking about the demon drinking blood, if anything that was putting himself in danger, not Dean. It never hindered him incapable of having Dean's back on hunts, and it was more of a personal issue than anything. Just like Dean's time in hell. The 4x21 incident again was because it was provoked, it's not the same, in away it's the same as when Dean punched Sam in 'Bloodlust' or in 'Metamorphosis' they were both incidents where Dean was provoked. Now, of course Sam took it to the next level o_o but it's not the same as going on a hunt and making a cautious decision that puts the other party in danger. Example: Dean trusting Manroe in Sex and Violence and letting his guard down and getting infected.
In 'IBLCAOF' we get to see the boys building on what was discussed in 'Fallen Idol' and we are seeing that character growth happening and I so can't wait to see how awesome it gets in the other episodes. There definitely is still a lot to do and build, but if the boys continue down the road they're on now, I think they'll make it :)
But I'm still boiling over how the reveal of the first seal was handled. I just can't believe it was done like that x( ... I really hope they do better when the phone call in 'Lucifer Rising' and the news of Castiel releasing Sam is revealed, if it's done at all :/
Reply
Leave a comment