The Problem with Divine!Dean: A Secular Humanist Perspective
So this idea of Divine!Dean keeps popping up, and it seems to be fairly popular. At first, I felt seduced by it as well- it seemed to imbue him with something beautiful and poetic that as a Dean stan, is hard to say no to. But upon deeper reflection, I simply can’t support it.
*Note to readers: My intention here is not to insult anyone religious, and I believe I’ve expressed my opinions respectfully. However, some Christians may find some of the arguments presented here offensive (not because I believe they are, but because they challenge certain fundamentals, and that can be perceived as aggressive or insensitive). Anyways. Caveat emptor, y’all.
Humanists acknowledge that there is still a great deal that we can’t change about the conditions we live in. But we look around us and see how much we can change and how much we have changed. We might occasionally have to resign ourselves to fate. But more often, we value the ability to push forward with ambition, vision and a sense of humor when things get tough, instead of humility, resignation and submission.
-Greg M. Epstein, on suffering, in Good Without God
If a child has been brutalized by a parent and grows up to become a good parent, that is a moral triumph for the child-but it does not endow the original suffering with positive meaning or with any meaning. Good may emerge from evil, but evil and suffering are more likely to breed more evil and suffering.
-Susan Jacoby, “Atheism and the Myth of Redemptive Suffering”
I believe Dean doesn’t represent divinity, but humanism. Through such symbolic acts as suffering at the hand of those he loves and simultaneously reaching out to them, he isn’t displaying characteristics meant to evoke martyrs or saints, but rather humanity in general, and a capacity for empathy and connection that on Supernatural, seems to elude angels more than it does men. Dean is good for goodness’s sake.
One could make a case that this only makes Dean’s divinization ironic; he’s an angelic being or a god without faith. Clever, maybe. But to me, it de-values Dean as a person completely. It implies that his goodness isn’t based in his humanity, but in some kind of magical essence inside of him that he isn’t even aware of. It takes away his agency to do good, and explains it as coming from something other and ethereal.
And I’m sorry, but that’s lame, and Dean would think so too. And here’s why: When it comes to morality, Dean has never answered to anyone but himself. He determines what course of action to take based on his own deliberations, and when he struggles with his beliefs, it is only when he is faced with new realities, which he then processes and learns from. Dean’s morality, like Secular Humanist morality, is a work in progress, modified based on circumstance, knowledge and experience, that at times may appear inconsistent, but only because he considers each moral decision as unique. It isn’t written in stone.
We see him fight against fate and inevitability, and defy it successfully. He doesn’t believe in the righteousness of angels, and defies them as well. He recognizes vast injustices, and as a result, is highly skeptical of god’s existence and/or interest in humankind. And when eventually, Dean is faced with the reality of God through the existence of angels, it’s only as a misotheist; someone who acknowledges God but rejects and defies him.
However, his life is still one of extreme self-sacrifice and suffering. And what I think the show gets right-and what people looking for divinity in Dean don't-is that suffering, and Dean's in particular, isn't placed on a pedestal, it isn't "Christian" suffering (which I’ll elaborate on in a moment). It's frustrating and brutal and unjust. The damage it does to Dean's psyche isn't hidden, nor are the causes of that suffering.
Yes, it’s easy to interpret Dean’s self-sacrificial behavior and his willingness to suffer as martyr-like. His incredible capacity for human connection, his love and loyalty all seem larger than life. But why, when we are repeatedly reminded of Dean’s humanity, would we feel the need to interpret his most admirable qualities as rooted in the divine? Why is it more appealing, more beautiful to so many of us, to interpret those awe-inspiring qualities as transcendental or holy? Especially in the context of a show wherein everything we imagine to be sacred is often just as corruptible as anything earthly, to the point that the sacred often becomes the profane. Angels murder each other. Heaven is controlled by brute thugs. Metatron, the voice of God, lies and manipulates others into committing violent acts in a ego-maniacal plan to become the New God. In such a universe, how can we honestly place value on divinity?
--
Not only does the divination of Dean hold little value in the Supernatural universe, but it also endorses certain views on suffering that the show has presented as damaging and counter-productive.
One of Christianity’s key concepts is redemptive suffering exemplified by Jesus’ crucifixion. And through Jesus and a long list of Christian Martyrs , many people have come to see suffering as something to be admired, something dignified. As something that actually raises the suffering person up and strengthens them. It produces a sense of awe. So instead of getting angry on their behalf, people focus on the “admirable” traits of the victim, which they are meant to internalize and emulate. It's an insidious sleight of hand which ends up distracting attention away from victims’ abusers, as if suffering is some kind of intangible miasma that comes out of nowhere-magician's smoke that hides the social realities that are the actual root of the suffering. Obviously not all suffering is a result of some kind of malice. It often comes about naturally with illnesses and natural disasters, accidents and such. But consider poverty, servitude, slavery, abuse, all kinds of terrible fates which are accepted, and entire populations subdued on the notion that suffering begets strength and a deeper connection to the divine. **
The martyr and the suffering Christian are not valorized for externalizing their anger, quite the opposite. They surrender themselves to their victimization and focus it inwards instead of outwards. Dean’s suffering certainly doesn’t seem to bring him any solace, but he does internalize it, he does surrender himself to it. Does that mean his values do in fact reflect Christian values of suffering? In action, yes. But in consequence, no. If anything, Dean’s reality is a testament to the failure of that model. In his attempt to be that martyr, he is not bringing himself closer to God. He is only cycling through psychological patterns that are a result of past trauma.
Sam reacts differently. He gets angry at his father. He gets angry at the world. And when he does, he’s shown to be more healthy emotionally than Dean. Dean bottles up his anger. He denies his victimhood by taking on responsibility for things that aren’t his fault. Part of the reason he is capable of forgiving others for so much is because he blames himself instead. And by doing so, he unintentionally lets other people get away with things they shouldn’t. He lets John get away with being a shitty Dad because he denies himself the right to a childhood, and feels responsible for Sam’s welfare himself. And at the root of his deep connections to his loved ones is a desperate fear of being abandoned by them.
This is Dean’s epic capacity to forgive and love. This is his martyrdom. Is that really something to admire? Or is it something to simply understand and empathize with?
If we are meant to see Dean's suffering at the hands of those he loves as something to be in awe of, it isn't due to divinity, so much as humanity. Human fallibility, and the desire to love and be loved.
Suffering is human and through it Dean makes human connections, as opposed to a connection with a higher power. Claiming the latter misses the point. Dean’s power lies in his humanity. His empathy. His troubled past, and the flaws that come with it. He has no interest in obeying god or angels. The only angel he does get along with is one whom he has made more human through their friendship. Cas learns more about love and loyalty from Dean than he ever did from his fellow angels, or even God himself. So instead of talking about Dean’s Divinity, let’s talk about his Humanity, his recognition of a human being’s intrinsic value. Let’s talk about the importance he places on human dignity, on the RIGHT people have to be free from suffering (not often himself, but always others), and how he fights for that right for them, tooth and nail.
************************************
**This isn’t to say that Christians are more accepting of the suffering of others. Obviously Christian organizations place a huge emphasis on alleviating suffering. However, it’s usually more along the lines of feeding the poor, as opposed to exposing those responsible for the poverty to begin with. Both are equally important endeavors.
* I wanted to include something in here about the idea of “good” and “bad” victims, but couldn’t find the right place. I’ve seen the terms pop up on my dash a few times (Via amonitrate and veneredirimmel, I believe) These are terms that reflect the different perceptions of suffering that I’ve talked about here, but in more practical, societal terms (as opposed to moral and religious).
It is tempting for restorative justice advocates, consciously or not, to differentiate between “good” and “bad victims.” Good victims are those who are ready to forgive and reconcile; bad victims are those who are angry, punitive and unforgiving.
I think it’s interesting that the "good victim” notion, is likely a product of that Christian conception of suffering and/or martyrdom. In both cases, the passive aspects of the one who has endured suffering are praised/encouraged. The “bad victim” makes people uncomfortable because he/she shoves the actual event or moment of victimization in your face, the scary ugly thing that needs to be dealt with, the person or persons responsible for its occurrence. They resent being victimized, fight against it, and don’t embrace it. And by doing so, they draw attention to the root causes of that suffering, which can lead to more social justice. Anger has the ability to imbue people with the confidence to speak out against their abusers, and to me, that seems more important than passive forgiveness.
(Finally, if you’re interested in reading more about Secular Humanism, I highly recommend the book Good Without God, which I quoted from at the beginning of this essay. Epstein’s approach to non-belief is much more sensitive, thoughtful and philosophical that the likes of Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, whom I find just as fanatical as some of the worst Christian Fundamentalists. So if you aren’t religious, per se, but you also don’t hate on religion quite as much as neo-atheists do, Secular Humanism can be a nice place to hang out.)