#( interesting to me how dean also 'knows' he can't have what he wants e.g. a normal life & a family ) | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

scripted-downfall · 1 year

Note

How do/did you feel about the SPN series finale?

Hello! Thanks for the ask!

However, this is a bit of a tough question. I haven't actually seen it --- I'm currently at the tail end of season 12, and I had to take a pause on watching it for a bit because of an unfortunately timed family issue --- so, in some regards, I'm unfortunately unclear on my emotions regarding it. In some ways, I simply can't address everything, and my stance right now might shift substantially whenever I get there for real. (Consider this the disclaimer section of my answer.)

Additionally, when I first heard about it... I didn't feel especially strongly. I watched a few clips --- mainly consisting of the driving-in-Heaven-and-atrocious-wig section --- and that was about it; I certainly didn't get why everyone was so aggravated. Partly, I suspect, this is because I had only just started watching the first season and, thus, hadn't grown as attached to the characters as I now am; partly because I have a tendency to rationalize things. If I can't change something, I'll try to make my peace with it.

All this being said, I'm now about 99.99% certain that I hate the finale. (Again, I haven't seen it yet, so I don't know for sure... but I made a post earlier about my transition from my state of eh, it happened and I expected it to happen so that's fine to oh bloody goodness, this is horrible, as well as some of my rationale for the latter point of view, and that's available: here.)

However, my main stance is as follows: it's not a happy ending. If that was intentional (e.g. it was supposed to be in line with the "Chuck won" theory I've seen floating around)... idk. I guess they did what they intended. But if they wanted it to be a happy ending --- and everything I've seen about the behind-the-scenes stuff suggests that they did (but, again, could be wrong) --- then I can't help but feel that they very much missed the mark.

First, there are the personal endings for both characters. I... honestly don't understand how anyone is happy. Obviously, I far prefer Dean of the two brothers, but I don't even think that Sam had a good ending. Dean died early in hunting, in the same lifestyle and same manner that would have happened years earlier, if he'd died in season 1. He didn't get a normal life --- despite the dog and the home and the job (or something like it) application sitting on his desk --- and it basically came across as though his sole 'peace' came from his death. And this is especially bad because a large part of the series --- especially back when he wanted to take on the trials during season... 8? I think? --- had featured various characters trying to convince him that no, it wasn't reasonable for him to die like a "grunt". Sam, meanwhile, moved on and got the same normal life he'd have had if nothing happened in season one, which might seem like a good thing. Except. He repeatedly (earlier in the series) expressed a dissatisfaction with normalcy and just moving on, and some of his biggest ostensible regrets from the show are his periods where Dean was dead (or in Purgatory) and he had to keep going. It's just a reprise of what Dean had to go through with the season 5 finale, except permanent, and the aftermath of Swan Song had never been shown to be a good thing, so... I'm really confused as to how it's supposed to be one now. Eileen isn't present --- nor is any other fully-developed love interest that would make it believable for him to have a happy life --- and it's a struggle for me to see that this qualifies as a happy ending.

But also, one of the main arguments I see in favor of the finale is that "the show has always been about the brothers." And I guess I get it? Or, at least, I get what they're trying to say. I just don't agree with it. One of the most quoted lines in the show is "Family don't end in blood", so it seems far more reasonable to say that "the show has always been about family." It's been about the idea that blood family isn't the end-all, be-all of what matters, and yet the entire finale basically just said: psych.

Jack is barely mentioned. Cas is barely mentioned. (And, while, yes, I've made no bones about the fact that I ship Destiel, that's not what's motivating this. I struggle to understand how the finale was liked by anyone, even from a platonic viewpoint.) To the extent that they are mentioned, it (to my knowledge) solely consists of saying that their worth consists of what they could do. This is the same message the show has been resisting in terms of Dean, in terms of Cas, et cetera, and going back on it now feels, frankly, like a bit of a betrayal. Bobby's the only actual family member to show up. (I recognize, however, that COVID interfered with this to some degree, and I can't say that I know all the ways in which it did. I would argue that it's still a bit weird that they couldn't even bring in Cas/Jack, especially since I'm pretty certain they'd been on set for another thing not long before... but, again, I could be wrong.) The presence of John and Mary in Heaven is suggested to be a good and reasonable thing. (I would also mention that it's kinda amusing that Dean finds out his parents are there and then drives in the other direction... but that doesn't really redeem much, so.)

And, in short, the entire message of the show... combusts. The idea has always been to never stop fighting. That's the point of season 3 (even though it fails), season 4 (even though it fails), season 5 (even though it fails), and so on, and so forth. That failure on a season-by-season basis sucks... but they keep going. They keep fighting fate. And then fate takes control and the whole struggle becomes completely pointless because... fate wins. Dean dies a season 1 death. Sam dies a season 1 death. And all their fighting to avoid that? At root: essentially pointless.

All this being said, this is just my personal opinion. If people like the finale, all the more power to them; I'm glad it was satisfying (and, no pressure, but it'd be cool to hear alternative viewpoints... as long as they're kind and logical instead of the slurs and threats of late). And, of course, a lot of this is at least half talking out of my hat, since I haven't seen it (either in full --- e.g. not in clips --- or in chronological order with the rest of the series), but I suspect that my overall feeling shan't really change, and only the specifics will. Regardless, I'm sure I'll make posts about it whenever I get there :)

Thank you again for the ask, and I hope that did answer the question to some decent degree!

#answered asks #scripted downfall asks answered #i always come when you call (sd)#spn s15 #anti spn finale #i'll leave off the general tag in case the filtration won't work with it present #dean winchester #sam winchester #not anti for once!#castiel #jack kline #destiel #if desired #gen #if preferred

3 notes · View notes

fedonciadale · 3 years

Note

Your thoughts on Lavender Brown and her role in HP books?

Hi there!

I talked about the role of the girly girl in HP (and how JKR did them dirty) here.

Lavender is the typical girly girl, she is meant a) as a (inferior) foil to (active) Ginny and (brainy) Hermione and b) as the girl that represents R0n taking the wrong crossroads with his first girlfriend.

We don't see much of the girls and how they interacted when they were alone because the books were told from Harry's PoV and Harry is blind in several aspects. I headcanon that Harry has been blind over 7 books to the blooming romance between Seamus and Dean.... lol.

From what we see, Lavender is interested in being pretty, and we know that she is very interested in divination. Divination is very ambiguous in HP. On the one hand Sybil Trelawney is a laughing stock but on the other hand, she is actually right quite often, like when she talks about Harry's birthday and reads his fate from that and it is seemingly all wrong because Harry was born at the end of July. But if she was talking about Voldemort and the part of his soul in Harry she could be right. The events of the books would not have happened if her prophecy had never been told. So, maybe, just maybe Lavender is not wrong to study divination! It looks like she is lured in by all the drama Trelawney tends to drape over her divination but we can't discount divination just because Hermione doesn't believe in it.

Lavender tends to look up to her teachers and she is probably rule-abiding. She's friends with the Patil twins who share her interests, and they are close enough that Harry notices their friendship.

All in all, Lavender seems to be a nice girl. She has friends, she works for the subjects she is interested in, she does not seem pretentious or arrogant and when it comes down to it she does the right thing (when it comes to fighting with the Gryffindors e.g.)

We don't know much about how Hermione got along with the girls in her dorm. I think though that we can assume that it was not too bad. Of course Hermione spends a lot of time with Harry and Ron but she never complains about the other girls. So, I think we can assume that they might not have been best buddies but we don't hear about fights. It is only in the sixth book that she becomes sort of an antagonist to Hermione at the exact moment when suddenly Cormac McLaggen turns up, a Gryffindor who we never heard about before - whose sole purpose is to be used by Hermione to make Ron jealous. (*rolls eyes*).

The whole Lavender-R0n-Hermione-Cormac situation is incredibly childish if you ask me. Well, they are teenagers, so I guess there is that, and Lavender is obviously happy to have a boyfriend and that's o.k., but it always gave me vibes of being incredibly overdone.

The interesting thing is - and that happens often with JKR - that JKR depicts Lavender and Cormac as the bad ones. Cormac is over-confident, the boy who gropes the girl on the first date, expecting her to swoon over him and Lavender is over the top with her fangirling about her boyfriend. I mean "Won-Won" is ridiculous. Did JKR really have to go all the way? I know that ridiculous pet-names happen, but still... This is what JKR shows us and I think it is obvious what she wants us to think. The frivolous girly girl is in the wrong and is the wrong choice for R0n and the overconfident sunny boy Cormac does not know boundaries and is also wrong.

If you look closer at what the 'heroes' do, you realize that they are wrong as well - and I would be absolutely o.k. with that if it was just addressed! R0n is angry that Hermione has kissing experience (which is problematic in itself, because he was the one who botched inviting her to the Yule Ball), and then he decides he needs experience on his own? I mean he sort of stumbles into a relationship with Lavender after a glorious Quidditch win, but it always rang so false to me that he used her just for getting experience. Hermione on the other hand lashes out at them both (the avis spell) and this is one of her worst moments - and it's never addressed as such. I love Hermione, but she is not always in the right and she never apologized to Lavender or R0n for that. She's not good at apologizing, but come on....

And then Hermione wants to make R0n jealous, because she is jealous. Again, this is maybe realistic for teenagers but it's so cliché. And I hate the trope: They make each other jealous and finally realize how they feel.... I always felt that R0n and Hermione are at their worst in regard to each other.

And then how R0n and Lavender broke up. I think Lavender was absolutely in the right to ditch R0n and I feel sorry for her that R0n did not have the balls to break up with her sooner. She comes over as a jealous bitch in that scene and I think it's a disservice to her character.

So, I see the narrative purpose of Lavender but I think she could have been more of her own character. I mean she is a teenager and she is easily excited and there are girls like that, but I just wish JKR had toned it down - just a little, and would not have depicted it as if Lavender is in the wrong for being girly.

But she is R0n's detour on his way to Hermione, just like Cho was on Harry's way to Ginny. So she is - at least in part - a plot device to further R0mione and not in a good way if you ask me.

The thing is, I actually think that Lavender and R0n would have been good together. She is far better suited to him. R0n with his self-confidence issues likes to be fawned over - just a tiny bit, and he likes pretty girls. I must admit that I sort of ship R0n with a Lavender that has survived - after they have talked about their break up.

Thanks for the ask!

P.S. I censored the name and the ship name of R0mione because I don't want another lecture on how wrong it is that I just don't vibe with the ship....

#anon ask #HP verse #Lavender Brown #Anti JKR #Anti R0mione #just in case #Girly girls in HP #are done so dirty #Lavender as foil #To Ginny and Hermione

37 notes · View notes

dimples-of-discontent · 6 years

Note

(part 1) im gonna preface by saying sorry if you've answered this before or it's obvious, but I wanted your opinion on something. I can't really read Misha at all when it comes to Destiel. I wanted to know if you think Misha plays Cas as being in love with Dean? Do you think Misha sees that relationship or is too in the moment to view it the way we do (similar to Jensen). I'm asking because I know he has gotten questions about it before and something that is obvious 9/10 times when he answers...

(part 2) is that he turns it into something sexual. I know he obviously wont say either way whether for higher up backlash or simply because he’s Misha, but I never got if that is just his wink wink to the fans because he’s supportive of our beliefs or he thinks that we only see sex so he’s like yeah perverts. He genuinely seems insightful at times and I do love the way he has described their relationship on several occasions. i know a few years ago there was a moment where, if i remember…

(part 3) correctly might have been one of the only times he answered without really joking? he seemed incredibly in tune with the audience talking about it but there seemed to be a sad/awkward air to his words. most of the things i have seen are from a few years ago though (pre-season 11) and we have gotten some incredibly deep destiel scenes since then so I guess im asking if you think he sees it, if so, when he might have started, if he thinks it now, if he thinks its just sexual, ect. thanks!“

Hi Nonnie,

First off, it sounds like you actually know a whole heck of a lot about Misha’s take on Destiel so I’m flattered that you would ask for my opinion on it too. I haven’t formulated a whole post about it, though I have reblogged and commented on some really great ones that I will also link you to here.

I think it’s important to distinguish between Misha’s take on whether it is an intentional part of the show (do the writers write it that way? do he and Jensen play it that way?) vs. his response to fanfic and fandom commentary on Destiel. About the second, he tends to wear his snarky persona and call us perverts and joke about how “me and Jensen write most of that stuff anyway.” That’s easier. It’s a deflection. If faced with a question about intentionality and whether he thinks that the show has been amping up the romance tropes, it’s far safer to instead talk about the fan response and how “I would never have imagined seeing myself depicted giving so many blowjobs.” How much Cas fanart have you looked up Misha? FFS!

So when, as you say, he immediately jumps to making things sexual I don’t at all think that it’s because he thinks that accurately reflects the way the character is written or how he plays him. After all, as recently as S10 he had Cas stare at a porn site and say, bemusedly, “What is ‘Fortune Nookie’?” (10x03). In 13x21 Cas was obviously embarrassed both by and about Gabriel and Rowena. And, as we learned from S12, the sacred oath that forbids human-angel sex must be very much on his mind. Now, some of us are of the opinion that this season in particular has been revealing Cas to have some understanding of or interest in sex even as an angel but YMMV on that one. But it’s safe to say that no matter how many jokes Misha makes about Cas being a creeper and perving on Dean he knows that that isn’t in the show. He’s responding to a particular, over-exaggerated fan version of Destiel. And he’s doing it because it’s safe.

It’s actually Misha’s standard deflection now because, in my opinion, not only do they want to avoid pissing people off but they are all bound by NDAs (non-disclosure agreements) of some kind when it comes to the actual show…but not when it comes to the fans. So he can say whatever he likes about fanfic or fanart or “what goes on on oil rigs” and neither risk offending people as deeply (since he’s clearly joking around) nor violating any contracts. I don’t know if he really thinks that all fanworks are all about sex. I think….perhaps. And, honestly, given the kinds of things people bring to cons for them to sign I can’t blame him. The linked post also shows how totally ok both he and Jensen are with smutty fanart, as does the infamous Cockles video that I’m adding here because, well, why not:

youtube

If you can’t hear the audio it’s Jensen describing two different pieces of fanart that they signed, one of which they drew penises on the other of which was already nsfw that he captioned, and laughing about it and draping himself all over Misha ew.

But back to your original question, which was whether Misha plays Cas as being in love with Dean or sees that relationship as inherently romantic. I’m actually just going to flat out answer: he does. Misha is an intelligent and sensitive reader (which is not to say the other actors, especially Jensen, are not but that Misha approaches the script as a reader in a way I don’t think Jensen does because his process is so different). I believe Misha has always seen that in the character. As @amwritingmeta discusses in this epic post on Jensen, Destiel, and Dean’s bisexuality:

“Misha started out talking rather openly about how Destiel is an intentional part of the narrative - almost going so far as to get pissy about how this was even a question, if rumours are to be believed - then less openly, until he, as early as last year, was scuttling around the Destiel question like it was on fire. Why? I would venture a complete guess and say that it’s most likely to do with all the negativity thrown his way whenever he’s engaged with it, accusations of queerbaiting flying at him and the show, when this couldn’t be farther away from what they’ve actually been doing all these years, delivering a narrative the likes of which has never been seen on television before.”

Comments he made about his initial decisions, staring at Jensen “as if I was looking into his soul”, and the teasing that he garnered, “We’re missing the gay angel,” indicate that he–and Jensen, fwiw–were fully aware of the homoerotic aspects of the character and his portrayal.

I think that the convention clip you’re thinking of might be this one from NJcon 2013 where Misha first says that he ought not to talk about it but then goes on to say that there is a “very profound bond” but that “I will leave you to read into that what you will” and remarks that he doesn’t want to be accused of queerbaiting, which he felt was unfair because he is such a supporter for the LGBTQ community overall. He’s absolutely sad there. He concludes by saying “It’s a lot of things. It’s deep and meaningful, you know. Is it love? Probably. What does that mean? It’s a million different things. I don’t know” which then becomes a joke about “you know, my boyfriend is a wavelength of celestial intent.” He ends by saying outright that “They love each other” before adding “but it’s purely sexual.” That backtracking is frustrating but totally characteristic because otherwise it’s just too definitive. (I’m gonna keep my tinhat in the closet on this one but I can’t help but murmur about actor bleed.)

By 2016, at DCcon, he was delighted to get out of the Destiel question by having West throw balls at him. He talks about how he was discouraged from even mentioning that relationship when he came on the show and how he then flouted that rule because he didn’t see the point. The implication, though, is that he now does see why he shouldn’t discuss it and I can only imagine that a lot of it has to do with the vitriol that often came his way. Most of his answer is a joke on this panel, “How would you approach it if it happened” becomes “face-forward” and “How would you set the scene” becomes a seduction joke. Rich and Rob are there to help out and keep the carnival atmosphere going. (Cockles sidebar: I had never noticed that he answers the question of “How would you set the scene” with “In another language; in Russian.” CAN YOU SAY ACCENT KINK??) That’s a huge difference from 2013′s serious answer, though it’s not easy to tell whether that change is due to something contractural about the show or Misha’s own desire to avoid upset. I kind of think the second.

His most recent comments are from Seacon 2018 where he says that he could “go on and on and on” with his thoughts about Destiel and that he and Jensen do have conversations about it. He again uses it as an opportunity to talk about the fandom response and reflect on changes in attitude within the fandom not on the show…which is interesting, of course, but not really what we are fishing for. As he says at the end he gets in trouble with someone no matter what he says on the topic. And then he will deflect with a joke (”Jensen and I don’t write a ton of Destiel fanfic”) before giving us a tiny glimmer of hope (”because we live it all the time”). The whole cast is certainly much more open about it than they used to be, even Jensen. And I’m not sure whether or not that can be attributed to the deeper Destiel scenes you mention or not. I do think it would become much harder for them to deny the existence of a romantic element and that the way they are coping with that is pure humor.

I hope that helps a little. It’s a very complex question, since it’s bound up with so many other things about the show and about Misha’s character and his relationship to the fans. (I have tags for both “misha and destiel” and “misha about destiel” if you want more.) I agree with you that he is the most in tune with the fan view of the relationship and supportive of it as an interpretation. I think he’s either not legally able to say more about it or, perhaps, is too conditioned not to by previous negative reactions from the fans. His jokes that make it sexual, or refer to fandom and not the show, are simply a clever deflection and one which he does much better than either Jared or Jensen (though Jensen has learned from Misha and gotten markedly less defensive in general, e.g. “There will now be fanfiction written about what goes on on oil rigs” “Don’t let us down”).

My gut feeling is that, yes, Misha has seen the romantic element since Day 1 and that lines like “I love you. I love all of you” and “I know who you love” confirm for him that it is there for Cas. I think that he supports that reading of their relationship but we will likely never get to hear him say that…unless something miraculous happens on the show so that he feels free to.

#asks #misha and destiel #misha about destiel #seacon 2018 #njcon 2013 #dccon 2016 #misha about fanfic #misha and fanart #misha and fandom #destiel and cockles #cockles and destiel #jensen and destiel #because it's in there a little #my thoughts #misha feels #tiny bit of #rps for ts

196 notes · View notes

elizabethrobertajones · 7 years

Note

(1/2) I can literally understand all of your bi-dean meta except for the male siren thing. The siren literally was trying to be the perfect little brother for Dean. I mean the siren literally says "I should be your little brother. Sam. You can't trust him. Not like you can trust me. In fact, I really feel like you should get him outta the way, so we can be brothers. Forever." as well as "No. I gave him what he needed. And it wasn't some bitch in a G-string. It was you. A little brother."

(2/2) I mean I’m NOT against bi-dean, everyone has the right to their own opinions. And A LOT of your analysis is interesting and valid, but if your suggesting that bi-dean is proven through “Sex and Violence.”, I’m lost, cause that seems to have incestuous subtext rather than bi-dean subtext (not that there’s anything wrong with shipping Wincest). I mean Dean could get any girl (and probably guy) if he wanted. The siren revealed what he needed/wanted most was family(specifically Sam)…

(3/2) Cause at this point, tensions were high between the brothers due to Sam’s powers/secrets and Dean needed someone he felt he could trust by his side, a little brother who was devoted to him, some one who understood him (which is why Nick shared the same tastes and interest). I mean I have a little sister and every time she likes something I enjoy, I’m fucking ecstatic. I mean I’ve watched this episode so many times and I fail to see how this is anything but an episode meant to solidify…

(4/2) and push the point that the brothers were not on the same page, and it foreshadowed the future fight and subsequent rift b/t them in “When the Levee Breaks.” I mean y'all say that Nick was a sexual being meant to seduce Dean, but it’s still weird cause he’s trying to being the perfect brother in canon. Sorry this got so long, I’m just curious at why so many people think the male siren has anything to do with bisexuality (of the non-incestuous variety, cuz I can see tht meta 4 wincest ship)

Heya!

I think this is really to do with something I was talking about last night about suggestive subtext, when trying (incoherently) to explain why I didn’t think Dean getting his memories back was textual - I think it can be taken as a strong reading and I wouldn’t disagree because I literally make the same reading, but I think it’s implied canon. Ditto the bi subtext around Larry this latest episode. We all know it’s a mechanical bull with a gendered name, not a human male, but between Dean being told he “had the hots” and the ridiculously pornographic riding sequence, and the general phallic nature of the bar they were in, it all still is overwhelmingly suggestive of queerness.

When it comes to the siren we actually had some more of this suggestiveness this episode which sort of repeats my point I’ll make about it: we only heard Sam say that there could be male sirens. No context, about brothers or even the context of the case for the easiest surface reading that it was just trying to get some hunters off its back by any means necessary. If you’ve forgotten the siren episode or it’s only a dim hazy memory and you sort of connect it to Dean but don’t regularly chug the entirety of canon and then yell about it with strangers online, the episode is not as memorable. So it’s really just posing the point that sirens aren’t all hot chicks, and giving us Dean’s reaction because, right then, he is the casual viewer, and all he knows is the concept that a siren could seduce you as a guy as well, and he just says, “huh.”

Its surface text reading (and I checked this with my mum after watching because she’s admitted she has 0 queer subtext reading skills but is a very smart, character-driven writer who knows how to read a text) is platonic, not remotely sexual, and when I told her that some of the fandom takes it as proof of Wincest, she burst into hysterical laughter at the concept, and explained to me the reading that Dean is just concerned about his brother and it was an obvious exploitable emotional weakness.

(So the rest of this answer is like a more than usual implied “sorry Mum” :P)

To me, this episode works by sorting out several layers and understanding that any reading of it you make has to have at least the surface text pasted firmly on top at all times. It WAS a platonic brother thing, and that’s the only way to wring a successful queer reading out of it, because if you start to suggest too far, you immediately cross over into wincest territory, by suggesting the surface text has the sexual element and that it was actually present in the episode as like, feelings and shit the characters were dealing with.

If you look at it as SUGGESTIVE subtext, accept that the siren is “just” Larry the mechanical bull, then you have exactly the right angle on it for the “huh” of your own.

So, I guess you’re bringing up the meta I wrote about Bobby and 4x06/4x14 - in that case Bobby is the perfect little “huh” angle into it. No one tells him on screen about the brother thing. He definitely knows the siren was presenting as male when it attacked Dean. He killed the thing :P He was the one who sussed it out by checking Nick’s FBI alias out. He knew for half the episode that Dean was being stalked by a male siren, came in, killed it, and aside from some pointed looks from under his hat, didn’t mention it.

There’s a popular text post about the episode that goes:

remember how sam and dean both thought that the siren infected its victims through sex

and when sam walks into the motel room to find dean with nick-the-siren and dean’s totally under the siren’s control sam just

rolls with it

This is the suggestive subtext at work. Nothing here affects the actual text of the episode: it’s about both our interpretation and interpretation within the text of the episode about how this situation might be read. (Obviously this mentions Sam but it goes doubly for Bobby who didn’t see the talky part of the fight, and is never corrected on screen about what he just saw.)

It’s not about wilfully forgetting that the episode has a main text about the brothers, but to see beyond it, within that text. I think it’s probably the causes of the biggest misunderstandings about this episode when you see arguing about it because I think an all or nothing “it’s literally about bisexuality” gets usurped by “I should be your brother” but saying “it’s just about these surface text platonic feelings (because the show would never make it about surface text wincest)” also means you block yourself off from analysing it. The wincest reading of the episode exists in the exact same liminal space of the subtext as the bisexual reading, which means they stumble all over each other and makes the arguments incredibly difficult to untangle because two people can both stand there pulling on the arms of the same moment arguing it means different things in a way most episodes don’t have when it comes to direct, sexual subtextual readings. (e.g the Dean & pie/cake subtext if you don’t agree can just be discarded, rather than it being directly suggestive of the completely alternative reading.)

Like, stuff your ears to the other subtext and sail right on past :P (When I did the rewatch I actually did essentially lash myself to the mast and demand to hear the song while obviously letting the ship sail to the proper place without getting dashed on the rocks, and I think it’s compelling but not my subtext and most importantly, since I read 0% of other episodes as having overt Wincest readings but many many episodes as having overt bi!Dean readings, I’m utterly secure in literally watching the siren episode and picking out the Wincest subtext and being like “yeah okay then”)

If you don’t assume that the show is saying anything profound about Wincest, though, and the “i should be your brother” is just a deflection away from overt sexual readings, it’s much more interesting for the bi Dean subtext. An example I’ve compared it to before is in 2x03, which follows a very similar emotional pattern to this episode with Dean and Gordon. Before Sam and Dean fight, we’ve seen Dean get VERY buddy buddy with Gordon, and there’s a wealth of suggestive subtext in their very brief interactions since they bond alarmingly fast at a bar, thirdwheeling Sam, and that’s immediately got hook up connotations. When Sam confronts Dean he has a sort of “I know what this is about” moment and there’s a real “Oh shit he’s going to tell Dean he’s crushing on Gordon and his judgement is impaired” moment, before Sam tells him it’s because Dean misses John and is filling the gap. I do not think the suggestiveness of Gordon and Dean’s interactions suggests that Dean had the hots for John, just like I carry on not thinking that when Crowley starts his official seduction in 9x11 comparing himself to John, or later in 10x01, to Sam.

Once I’ve got a surface reading and the deflection and the way it was read in the aftermath (yeah we’re working backwards through the episode here :P) then there’s a kind of solid place of understanding my own interpretation to examine the rest of it.

There’s this article which would be kind of pointless as evidence in other cases of actor commentary on the story because PR is not showrunning, etc, and we can’t really depend on them to answer with a proper understanding of what WE are listening out for, or what the show has crafted around their understanding, but in this one when we’re looking at suggestiveness is fascinating:

http://elizabethrobertajones.tumblr.com/post/147614438213/bluestar86-findmyjaffa-mishabethyname

“yeah, at that point I thought he should be ambiguously sexual. As an FBI agent he was a guys guy, but this creature wasn’t a guy or a girl. I tried to find something in between and enjoyed having control over these boys in a sexual way”

This is not describing anything between Sam and Dean, but how the actor played it between himself and them - he saw the siren at work, as using sexuality as part of its control. This reading applies to the entire episode, with all the cases of the siren at work, but obviously those were all “hot chick” siren moments, and so exerting control over the men was a given that it had been using a strip club full of female dancers as the lure to find them, so they’d be understandably into hot women. Which means the overt reading of sexuality is oh so much easier to make and credit and honestly having him say even this much about it is pretty dramatic, though of course as a killed-off one time character, he’s got a lot more freedom to chat about the process and admit to playing up sexuality in a room with 3 male actors.

I’m just going to grab my laughing from the rewatch I did for the next point, about the gap between Nick commenting that he was the siren and had trapped Dean, and the brother line:

That glorious, glorious moment of floating amazement where the it-was-a-actual-legit-seduction text peaks, and you’re allowed a moment from which most bi Dean peeps never recovered. (There’s a three strikes and you’re out policy here: Playthings, this, Dr Sexy. :P)

Because of course, whatever comes out Nick’s weasely mouth once I press play again, the question has been asked. The idea has been planted. It doesn’t matter what they say after this even setting aside all the logic of siren lore explained in the episode or any of the other circumstantial stuff which leads me to my text of the episode conclusion this is a bi Dean episode through and through.

They gave Dean a male siren and gave us these few seconds to let us reflect on that in its pure, this-was-a-seduction in the main text of the episode moment. There’s a level outside the text here where they set this all up, and threw this at us, and handled it in such a way as to leave it open to going on 7 years of fandom arguments about what interpretation was the correct one of the 3 on the table. This is the thing about these fandom arguments: when it comes to people trying to tell those who see Dean as bi that they’re making it up or something, or putting it into the text themselves, the response is usually, no, we’ve got it from the show. Even if you immediately go along with one of the other 2 alternatives (it was platonic all along despite the siren’s sexually charged MO: it was about a sexual proxy for Sam all along despite the fact the siren textually does not have to replace like for like objects of affection) THIS MOMENT before we know it’s officially about Sam, the show is textually letting you think about it for 3 seconds in a deadly serious context.

It’s like 2:30am I need to stop waxing on about this but seriously this fucking moment.

http://elizabethrobertajones.tumblr.com/post/125513601548/spn-hellatus-rewatch-4x14-or-honestly-this

If I ever try to explain to myself WHY this episode is bi Dean, it’s all resting first and foremost on those few seconds of screen time, because in that point, no take-back has been offered. Knowing there IS a take-back a second later doesn’t actually detract from the raw suggestiveness of this moment, which let us think, if we picked up on it immediately, that Dean had a male siren and had been seduced just like all the men and their “hot chicks”. It allows a whole moment where it seems like the show is telling us that Dean is *just* into men and the siren managed to snare him that way by catching him unawares. After all, Sam and Dean are looking for a siren-cum-stripper so getting in under their noses would be important. Dean didn’t trust Cara because she was female despite her being in a generally more socially accepted job, and she was used as a deliberate false lead by Nick (by planting the flowers) AND the show to imply that someone in their general vicinity that they’d been having a thing with that episode could be the siren. Sam’s new female character hook up was not, in fact the siren. Dean’s new male friend WAS. Admittedly it’s a lot of thinking to do in 3 seconds but if you’ve been waiting for the blow to fall that the siren has been worming its way in romantically as Cara, and going along with the surface text of the episode so far, then the instinctive “wait WHAT” is enough to do the work here before the show comes back out of slow mo and carries on like usual, establishing a nice safe cushion-y layer of no homo.

The show DOES however offer its own reading on TOP of the no homo, within the episode, to make it absolutely unequivocally clear there’s a “no incest” reading too - the surface text is EXTREMELY fragile this episode and they do a lot of hard work and backpedalling to try and maintain the fragile surface tension, so, still working backwards through the episode, we get to this:

DEANSo whatever floats the guy’s boat, that’s what they look like?

SAMYeah. You see, sirens can read minds. They see what you want most and then they can kinda, like, cloak themselves. You know, like an illusion.

Cut to the siren seducing the next dude and cue the sweet relief of the subtext that shatters the first interpretation offered by the subtext so far. Sam n Dean have had their relationship portrayed a certain way (overtly: the lying and ongoing season 4 angst, subtextually, a little odd framing and more stray comments beyond the norm) and the episode will come down about said relationship, but this random bloke is the key to what happens next.

Siren:

Disappointed mom and Jesus judging this guy:

The siren emphasises not that she’s a sexual rival (although we don’t know if that guy has Oedipal issues) but mentions that she is a sink on his time and an anchor stopping him from running away with them to be alone together forever and ever and ever, which, with their line about him not sticking her in a care home yet, suggest that she is ill and frail enough to be a full-time job for the guy, much like Dean is stuck with Sam as part of their full-time job and ongoing “look after Sammy” mentality.

So before Nick ever shows up it’s clearly shown that “floats the boat” has a surface level disconnect to the target of murder (and it’s just that statistically the siren is going after mostly hetero dudes with wives, given where they pick the men up and how lends itself to the typical MO). This scene is obviously the “lol no incest” for the end of the episode once the siren tries to drive them apart. […] Both sexualised interpretations live on: the massive logic leap to say “yeah well what if there were Oedipal undertones to this relationship?” which is a headcanon you can float which will mean the siren can still get Dean for that reason, but at this point, the main text of the episode becomes: “the siren will use sexuality to seduce the man, but the target closest to the man that will be the victim is that of unfortunate proximity, not necessarily a sexual rival to the siren.” And therefore, until the reveal after Dean drinks from the flask, we have a long stretch of episode where Nick is main-text seducing Dean with no argument, and the only counter-argument offered is Nick’s own words.

[…]

DEANWait, he killed his mom?

SAMThe woman he was closest to.

Dean’s thoughts go there. Sam shrugs it off, having either not noticed this is weird because new info makes sense to him, or he’s already worked this one through and come to the realisation the siren’s pattern isn’t strictly sexual or that this was a thing but he’s not going to judge. :P So we have two conflicting interpretations at work here; Sam’s chill attitude which surface level suggests there was nothing odd about it, and Dean’s ‘ugh wait but with the information I had available to me I have come to an incredibly awkward realisation!’ tone of voice. (And the subtextually buried one contradicted by the main text of Sam’s dialogue where it is also possible he assumes like Dean this was incest but that it isn’t weird/gross enough for comment.) Sam is implied to be ahead and be offering a rational explanation for this to Dean, i.e. wow that was an unfortunate interpretation, Dean! Fortunately, I, a better-informed individual who has had more information to work with than you before we started this conversation, have come up with a rational alternate explanation which does not involve incest!

This one particular death has pretty much the whole episode riding on it when it comes to interpretation because it is used as the way to confirm non-incestuous relationship replacement with the siren (which along with the siren still showing sexual control over Sam and Dean when he has them under his control backs up the way it seduces the man and says they should run off together romantically - Nick also makes them fight in order to be in love with one of them ~forever~ (a.k.a until the spell wears off and the survivor comes to his senses and probably kills himself over what he did)) - of course because despite the focus on the mother, the man still sleeps with the siren and it’s still framed as a romantic/sexual seduction to get him to the point of murder. The sexual element persisting after the siren says “I should be your brother” is a point I’ll get to better in a minute when I recap the conclusion from my rewatch but does essentially give you the choice of reading that he was talking crap there :P

There’s also the implication of the empty beds/back and forth of the episode, where Sam and Dean’s time management parallels back and forth. There’s suggestive subtext here between Dean and Nick because Sam has wall-banging sex with Cara, and their part of the story is directly back and forthing with Dean and Nick - we have some serious gaps in time, and when Sam returns to the room just before the fight, Nick and Dean are waiting, on those neatly made beds that seem to see no action. I don’t think they slept together. BUT the suggestiveness is right there and people have commented on it and picked it up, so it’s a valid part of the subtextual layer.

Here’s the conclusions I came to in my rewatch:

Aw, Nick, no. We were having so much fun.

MUNROEOr it could be her saliva… You really should have wiped the lip of that thing before you drank from it, Dean. I should be your little brother. Sam. You can’t trust him. Not like you can trust me. In fact, I really feel like you should get him outtta the way, so we can be brothers. Forever.

DEANYeah. Yeah, you’re right.

So, what’s left on the table?

Completely valid if out of left field for the episode’s subtext alternate reading of Dean as somewhere on the Aro spectrum so the siren doesn’t affect him at all romantically, and goes for filling the emotional void it creates from a different angle (several season 3 moments imply Dean has a void in himself for romantic love as emphatically distinct from his need for Sam, but I’m pretty sure I clocked them all coming from Sera as an ongoing subtext about Lisa as endgame, including foreshadowing of what happened with Lisa in the long run when Gamble got to write that full arc, so you could argue A: it’s all from one source as with the many contradictory writer impressions of Dean’s sexual/romantic identity, and B: it wasn’t even as straightforward as that even when she was implying it existed, as that relationship eventually wrecked itself upon the shores of the brotherly bond too, by her pen).

The interpretation that this was just about Sam, platonically, because this is his closest relationship, and the siren, recognising he was a hunter, needed to get to him fast (the other victims took a lot of softening up and a hefty blow to their bank accounts first because this is clearly how the siren makes a living: like the shifters it doesn’t need to kill to eat, just for fun, using its powers for personal benefit and amusement) and so it took an alternate approach to get under his skin in a day using the available tools: Dean is all fucked up about Sam’s secrets and sneaking around talking to Ruby and being a monster and so on, creating an ideal weak spot to get at him: Nick creates an uncomplicated ideal other human for Dean to adopt as a brother in the shortest time possible, because he fully intends just to make the hunters kill each other/themselves on realising what they did and leg it out of town before anyone comes to finish him off and so to Nick the sexual side of it is an unnecessary complication to tidying up the situation.

As above, but the wincest reading, with the siren’s sexually charged MO included despite the only proxy-kiss because of all the subtextual implications and the apparent links between Nick and Sam.

As point 2 again, but with the siren’s sexually charged MO still counting in the background of why Nick, because Dean’s repressed bisexuality made him a double easy target. Dean would not suspect the dude, while thinking he was hunting a stripper, and yet the siren’s MO still works on him as Dean’s “float the boat” umbrella is very wide. The “brother” thing goes back to the main text platonic reasons, and Nick just needs to say something to get Dean on his side that’s still broadly in character for Dean (like, he would not have just magically got through his whole gay panic in that moment: the other victims were all aware of who they were and what they wanted throughout [see also: the first man they interviewed at the start]: part of Dean’s horror in this moment is probably realising the siren affected him AS Nick and having the same moment of wondering about himself before Nick’s reassuring words ease him along - oh, this is just about Sam). So in this case Nick finds it easier to go for the surface reasons Dean was emotionally vulnerable with the emphasis on his lack of trust in Sam, because Dean IS emotionally vulnerable in his most important relationship, and creates an ideal other person is someone who represents Sam just enough to show he fits the emotional void, but is sufficiently different enough (fun, common traits and interests to Dean, trustworthy) to count as a separate identity to Sam (because Dean does have a ton of issues which do not necessarily have to be incestuous but can be to do with the most important relationship in his life having an overbearing effect on everything he does and the way he relates to other people, as constantly shown elsewhere without demanding we pay attention to the alternative reading unless the viewer is inclined to like it and look for it).

And I am aware that after talking about how the incest subtext takes the most leaps along the way, it’s the bisexuality argument which, by being debunked by platonic bros main text, gets relegated to the back seat, now needs a strong counter-argument to its own “debunking”, while the main text is more compatible to the other subtext’s conclusions.

This is why there are fights. :P

Obviously I choose to believe the very careful mental meanderings that back up my reading that there is a suggestive element to the episode that can imply Dean’s bisexuality without having to credit that the sexual element includes a wincest reading, and as I said, this is because the episode is highly suggestive, but everything it tries to tell us in text is broadly the platonic bros reading, so it is left to choice, favoured interpretation, emotional preference, whatever, to pick out what you want. There’s a valid in-text suggestion that the siren does NOT work incestuously even when the most important relationship is a family one, and if you use these as the guidelines, the rest of the suggestiveness about the sexual elements can just be read as the fact that Dean was into Nick as a person rather than having been attracted to him because he reminded him of Sam.

Although honestly it really just comes down to part 23346346 of infinity under the same heading as:

why I’m on the dean is bi train:

we’d never get a two minute montage of sam “riding larry.”

http://elizabethrobertajones.tumblr.com/post/157196244593/goodfemalecharacters-why-im-on-the-dean-is-bi

#Asks #4x14 #references to #12x11 #Dean is bi #long post for ts #incest for ts #suicide mention cw

90 notes · View notes