Dicks with Wings
So Supernatural was on last night, which means time for the weekly round of "who's the biggest jerk and why, and who owes what to who..." Since I’ve been reading a lot about it, I'm going to say ...( why I think I think Castiel's transgressions coming to light is irrelevant. Possibly spoilers inside. )
I don't have an issue with Dean trusting Castiel after learning the truth. For one, it's now been months since the incident and it happened before Castiel switched sides. Castiel did a lot that Dean didn't approve of but has forgiven him for. For another, in the greater scheme of things, Castiel's actions were incredibly minor. He might have released Sam, but ANY angel could have done the same and Zachariah has the entire host of Heaven that he could have sent to do so.
Castiel did a bad, bad thing but as others have pointed out before, if he hadn't proven his loyalty to Zachariah by releasing Sam, he wouldn't have been trusted enough to have access to Dean in 4x22. And if Castiel hadn't had access to Dean, Dean would never have escaped. Sam might have been taken by Lucifer right then (or maybe not, since we don't know the full story of how that went down), but it's likely that the angels would have forced Dean into compliance in accepting Michael or would be torturing him into that compliance currently.
It might make for an interesting story; Sam and Dean still on their own, having never met up again, Sam being tempted by Lucifer (because Lucifer doesn't seem the sort to physically torture in SPN but I don't see him saying "yes" either), Dean being held captive by the angels, Castiel maybe off with Anna suffering whatever punishment comes to the wayward flock. It wouldn't be canon though and I'd argue it would be a far darker and grimmer take on how things could have been vs. what we actually got.
Until Castiel does confess, any and all criticism of Sam by Castiel is rank hypocrisy and is the continuation of a lie.
This I very much disagree with. While I don't think it's necessarily fair that so much of the blame for the breaking of the seals goes to Sam and Dean (it's not like either of them did it on purpose, after all) IMHO, Castiel was less referring to the final seal here so much as Sam's choice to dabble in some very dark behaviors and mindsets. Sam might not have known that he'd be releasing Lucifer, but he DID know that drinking demon blood and trusting Ruby probably weren't the best of moral choices. Since canon has made it clear that Sam did so because he was seduced by the idea of having power and control as opposed to more positive motives, there's nothing wrong with calling Sam out on it, to my mind.
Don't get me wrong - I want Castiel to be called out and I'm actually more interested now in *Sam's* response to this when the truth comes out than Dean's. That said, what Sam did and what Castiel did are entirely different things and come from entirely different sources. Castiel seemed to think he was following the will of God (via Zachariah) when he released Sam. He believed that Paradise on Earth would be the better option. He had doubts, yes, but he still had hope that Zachariah's way was the best way. And on paper, it certainly sounds good; eternal peace and comfort for all.
Given that Castiel is an immortal being with an extremely long view of things, it seems pretty easy to me that he'd delude himself about the righteousness of his choice, right up until he was called on it. The difference between Sam and Castiel is that when Cas was called on it, he thought it over and then made the choice based on what he actually knew was right - even if it went against what he hoped was the best decision. When Sam was called on his delusions though, he refused to consider anyone's vantage point but his own and kept living the lie.
Reply
Yes Sam was warned against many things, but when Sam says "If we tell him the WHOLE truth then he may make the right decision." Castiel replies "You didn't". That is what I consider the hypocritical lie. Neither Sam nor Dean EVER knew the WHOLE truth, and on the last day Castiel released Sam knowing what the result would be and leaving Sam clueless. Although any Angel could have released Sam, I'm arguing that to say that Sam knew the whole truth and still "made the wrong choice" is a big, fat, cruel lie.
Also, Castiel never told Sam a damn thing. He told Dean to stop him and that what Sam was doing was dangerous, but even though he knew that Sam believed at one point in the goodness of Angesl and that Sam trusted Dean judgment to trust Castiel to some extent, Castiel never made a personal plea to Sam. All that Sam got were Uriel's threats and orders and Sam has always wanted to know "why" something was wrong. "Just Because" was never an answer that Sam would accept.
I don't have an issue with Dean trusting Castiel after learning the truth. For one, it's now been months since the incident and it happened before Castiel switched sides
Sam had Dean's back for years. They were incredibly close (with exception of the going to Stanford period). Sam supported Dean in season one giving up his revenge to save John in Devil's Trap (and look how well that worked out). Supported Dean through his grief over John's death and deal. Spent season 3 not training his powers at Dean's request. During season 4 Dean was all over the map as far as Ruby was concerned. He didn't trust her, yet he thanked her for what she did for Sam while he was in Hell. He didn't trust her, yet he allowed her to protect Anna alone at a time that he knew that every demon in the world was looking for Anna. He didn't trust Ruby, yet he trusted her enough to think she would allow herself to be tortured in order for the plot to save Anna to work. In other words, Dean didn't trust Ruby until it was convenient for him. It has been the same number of months since Sam "betrayed" Dean yet Dean is still cautious and untrusting of Sam and his judgment, as he has every right to be, but if he continues to trust Castiel, a supernatural being who was working against his interests last year, just because he has been good for the same number of months that Sam has been working on redemption, then I will not be happy. Frankly, if I had a sister who was a drug addict who I had gotten checked into detox and a friend of mine broke her out and she got back on her addiction of choice and killed someone partially due to the drugs in her system, I would never forgive that friend, even if his answer was if I didn't do it, I knew someone else would.
Dean may in fact have no problem with Castiel's actions of last season, but I want to see how he reacts, how Sam reacts, and if Dean is cool with Castiel while continuing to doubt Sam, I want to see Sam's reactions to Dean.
Reply
You know, that's a good point. I'd argue though that the issue is once the kid knows the full truth, there's potentially no other chance to deal with him. It would be all or nothing at that point because once the kid was aware he could do anything, there was no stopping him. In the end though, I think it's significant that Sam's plan turned out to be the best - Dean wanted to take a middle path and tell him just enough of the truth to keep them from getting in trouble and the demon exposed them, Castiel wanted to kill him but even unaware of what he could do, the kid zapped him into a toy. Which left Sam's plan and means that Jesse remains a very, very dangerous wildcard.
I'm glad that they didn't kill the boy. I don't like the concept of anyone being so powerful in SPN, personally, which is why I hope we don't see him again any time soon, but it's morally wrong to kill a child, no matter how dangerous he might become.
It's true that Castiel didn't tell Sam directly not to use his powers, but I guess I don't see why that really matters. Castiel's only tie to Sam has long since been his importance to Dean. It was only later that Sam as a threat emerged on Castiel's radar and as soon as that happened (on his third episode, no less), he told Dean to make Sam stop it. Dean passed that message along that very same night.
Sam needing to know why vs. Castiel's assumption of need to know is very much a driving point between them - but another of their similarities. Sam did the same thing himself, after all, when he was keeping secrets from Dean. Would this drive Sam crazy? Sure. Was it not the best of tactics to make when dealing with Sam Winchester? Also true. However, angels aren't perfect and aren't omniscient and they don't know Sam. In their experience, humans should do as they're told because they're human and they're being told what to do by angels. It would be the ultimate in arrogance to refuse. Frankly, arrogance was one of Sam's major flaws in S4.
Sam had Dean's back for years.
You're sort of turning this into Sam vs. Dean here and I'm sorry, but I've had waaay too much of that for my taste as of late. Forgive me if I'm brief as a result.
A couple of points to mention; one, you spoke about Dean's trusting Ruby. It's true that Dean's opinion of Ruby fluctuated wildly in S4 but bear in mind that he only trusted her towards the middle of the season - and only because Sam asked him to. Sam trusted Ruby, Dean asked him why he should as well, and Sam told him about his summer without Dean. That was in 4x09, and Dean did his best to trust Ruby and incorporate her within his plans. The incidents that you speak of (protecting Anna, duping Alistair) both happen in 4x09 - 4x10. Dean was showing faith in Sam by trusting Ruby. It was when Sam was obviously keeping secrets from him and when he discovered that Ruby was a part of that that he started to distrust her again (or perhaps better phrased gave up on attempting to trust her).
Castiel also wasn't working against Dean's best interests for the vast majority of S4. The only major time I'd argue that Castiel did do so was in 4x09-4x10. Even in 4x20-4x22, Castiel thought that Heaven and the peace of Heaven would be in Dean's (and the world's) best interests. When Dean slapped him upside the head with how stupid that was, he reevaluated and changed his stance.
I want to see how he reacts, how Sam reacts, and if Dean is cool with Castiel while continuing to doubt Sam, I want to see Sam's reactions to Dean.
Oh, I never said Dean would have no problems with it. I think Dean will have a massive problem with it - just that I think he'll do his best to get over it ASAP since the three of them are the only ones working towards the same goal. It's the same thing he did with Sam; Dean obviously still has major issues with his brother (as shown in 5x05 and 5x06) but he's doing his best to work through them as quickly as possible to serve the greater good.
Reply
would be OOC for Dean.
Reply
If anything, I'd argue that Dean's deep hurt and distrust of Sam lingering is a sign of how much love and trust he had in Sam before. It's going to hurt considerably worse to be betrayed by someone you love and have held close to your heart for years than someone you've only known for a matter of months and have known you couldn't fully trust.
With those thoughts in mind, it's not OOC at all to me for Dean to have issues with Sam afterward. I'd have been really annoyed if Dean HAD forgiven Sam so easily because it would mean so many terrible things about Dean's self esteem and concept of self worth. If you can forgive that sort of treatment so readily, it's either because you're a saint (which is almost laughable to consider of Dean) or because you think you deserve it.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
It's definitely a give and take sort of relationship, though, and it almost makes me wonder why Dean trusted Castiel even to the extent that he did in late S4. Dean trusts Castiel, his trust is betrayed because of a difference in orders. It happens again and again. I suppose it's due to Dean fundamentally understanding what it's like to be given orders from someone you love but never see and expected to perform those, even when you've doubts about them.
Before that I think he knew that Castiel liked him and let's say he didn't trust Castiel to intentionally hurt him, but that's about it.
I agree with this. Maybe I was using the wrong term before; maybe it was less trust that Dean had for Castiel in early S4 and more an understanding that they were on the same page? Even that is off though.
I'd argue though that something significant happened between 4x16 and 4x20 that really changed their relationship. Dean DID trust that Castiel would help him do the right thing in 4x18 and Castiel came through. Dean says in that episode that they have had communications we haven't seen on screen. Not that Dean and Castiel have been hanging out, but it makes you wonder how many of those conversations they've had and what they were doing. Planning ahead? Discussing demons? Worrying about Sam? So many possibilities!
Dean's trust certainly seemed cemented after 4x22. We hear Dean call Castiel his friend for the first time in 5x01 and he did it again in 5x06. He treats him like a friend in 5x03 and is dismayed for his future self in 5x04. I think it's like Castiel's turn in 4x22 was the final thing necessary for him to be pushed over the line and into one of Dean's "people".
Reply
In fact, why not go for that parallel even moreso? Sam often identifies with the monster character. Perhaps we should look at all the ways Dean clearly identifies with Castiel as an angel. I think he understands Castiel's betrayals better than another person might. So when Castiel actually left the angels Dean saw what a big deal that was.
Reply
I'd argue almost that Dean seems to get that Castiel isn't human more often than most other characters do. He demands that Castiel react from a human-centric mindset often enough, but he didn't hold it against Castiel that he was willing to slaughter an entire town in ITGP,SW, after all. Likewise, Castiel proved to him exactly how inhuman he could be in 4x02 when he threatened to send Dean back to Hell - and he didn't seem to have any issues (outwardly, at least) with Uriel threatening to do the same in 4x10.
That was S4, though, and before Dean counted Castiel among his own. Makes me wonder if that perspective has changed now that we're in S5!
Reply
Calling Sam out on it isn't wrong - calling Sam out on it while advocating the murder of an innocent child at the same time, though, is pretty pocritical. The difference between Sam and Castiel now is that Sam hasn't once tried to blame anyone else for his mistakes, and that's all Castiel's doing right now.
I want Castiel to be held culpabale - however, it's going to take a while to get there. He's not human and we can't expect him to think like us. He's also not Anna, who lived a life as a human and learned how to think like one. He's an infant in the case of human thinking and morality as we see it, and asking him to suddenly take the blame he deserves is asking a lot.
So, yeah. Taking a shot at Sam or Dean, not okay - what he's saying is still very understandable though, considering how much he's lost and where he's at.
Reply
Calling Sam out on it isn't wrong - calling Sam out on it while advocating the murder of an innocent child at the same time, though, is pretty pocritical.
I don't see how what he said was hypocritical there. It thought he was just using the practical example of just hoping that somebody will make the right decision. Sam knew his powers were demonic but it didn't lead to him listening to Dean rather than Ruby, so it's better to just take out the threat of this kid with super powers. Could Sam say for sure that if he was in Jesse's position he'd surely make the right choice? Of course not. Sam knows other things can come into play. It's not like Castiel is saying Sam is immoral while advocating something immoral himself. Sam thinks they should let Jesse make his own choice, Castiel's saying they shouldn't risk him choosing against them.
Reply
I'd go a little further--I have a huge problem with him calling Sam out at all when he could have made sure Sam's choices did not have disastrous consequences with a single sentence, but repeatedly chose not to. But the the part where he was castigating Sam for doing exactly the same thing he was at that moment doing adds a special layer of hypocrisy, certainly.
Reply
The difference between Sam and Castiel now is that Sam hasn't once tried to blame anyone else for his mistakes, and that's all Castiel's doing right now.
Now this is something I agree with 100% - at least in regards to the apocalypse which IMHO we should stay focused on right now. Sam HAS owned up to his part in releasing Lucifer and Castiel as not. To me, that's why Sam is one of The Heroes and Castiel isn't.
Reply
Define innocence?
If a five year old picks up dad's gun because he saw the cops on tv point them at the bad guys, with no intent to harm his playmate, and the gun goes off and a playmate is killed, was the five year old retroactively not innocent? I'm pretty sure he would not be considered legally culpable.
The people that died as a result of Jesse's belief that urban legends, lies his parents told him, were real, would not have died if his parents had told him the truth - joy buzzers are harmless, itching powder is annoying but also harmless.
He did not know he had the power to makes his beliefs happen to other people.
My personal take is that Jesse only lost his innocence when Dean and Sam told him what the consequences of his abilities are. Necessary loss of innocence.
Reply
Leave a comment