| — |
x (via spnsamdeancas) I AM GOING TO DIE HAPPY NEXT SEASON. |
casneedspie replied to your post:
i have to disagree with you here because subtext in this case is queerbating imo,since it’s smth that the casual viewers can brush off or don’t even see at all which makes the rest of us(lgbtq community/supporters)seem delusional.
You’re not disagreeing, that’s what I’m saying x - IN THIS CASE, IN THIS MOMENT IN TIME, subtextual queer narratives (inc. Dean and Dean/Cas) have BECOME a form of queerbaiting.
But INHERENTLY, subtextual stories are NOT baiting, they are NOT delusional, they are NOT any less canon. Despite the way casual viewers/readers can brush subtext off. Because just because some people brush subtext off or don’t see it or actively ignore it doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
It just happens that queer subtext is being persistently, to the point of prejudice (which it is), brushed off and/or ignored and/or belittled.
It’s sad that it’s come to this :( Because I LOVE subtext and subtextual storytelling. I love reading between the lines and finding the story within the story. And in academia, ALL potential subtext is considered with equal validity, NOTHING is delusional. So I HATE to see subtext being abused like this atm. Either deliberately by writers by them consciously and cruelly ‘relegating’ queer characters and narratives to the subtext NOT in order to tell a beautiful and subtle subtextual story but simply so they can deny said subtext if they want (which I DON’T think is what SPN is doing btw), or by readers/viewers who are denying the subtext as a valid part of the text and implying that VALID SUBTEXTUAL READINGS of a text are ‘delusional.’
SUBTEXT IS TEXT damn it. If we’re delusional for reading certain subtexts into stories then every single student of English Literature is delusional.
hm, ok let first tell you: I am with Holly that I LOVE subtext and relationships that start out there. Because it isnt as obnoxious in your face as most het romances tend to be. though to be fair I am not saying all. Looking at Brienne and Jaimie? there is a whole lot of subtext and its beautiful. Will it go canon at one point? I dont know but it could.
Do I think the writers are queerbaiting? Right now, no. Sorry but if they were they wouldnt be as open and receptive of the whole Dean/Cas questions and talk. and last season there was a lot of back and forth from fans and production on exactly that issue. Well a lot compared to seasons before. Unless they really pull this out to just keep us appeased and have actually no intention of pulling through it is no queerbaiting.
And yes until the show is over WE DO NOT KNOW! (though if there is no progress in the next season we might be very justified to ask politely why they havent followed up on their set up of it in season 8? they will still have a season to go but it will be close then) It is frustrating but we have to wait. and yes we might get hurt by them when they just leave it under the rug. (be it because of Writers, producers or the network… though a multitude of people have already said how much sense narrative wise and business wise it would make to go through with that.)
But we have to wait, it sucks but we have to. Cause they arent ready yet. Dean and Cas for all they have been through arent ready yet to become romantically and intimately involved with each other. Maybe there would have been in the past. But the apocalypse was pressing down on them. then in the year off maybe. If Dean hadnt gone to lisa but stayed with Cas trying to find a way to get sam out? trying to help him with heaven? But these routes werent taken. they were broken up. they had a giant fall out and their relationship was broken to shambles. Only now in season 8 they started to heal and rebuild what was lost. the finale marked a step of them going their own ways even when they wanted to stay by each others side. But the fact remains they werent ready yet for an intimate relationship. Cause boys do they got issues and a whole lotta baggage.
But something else? it never looked better for them. Seriously. Season 8, put all the pieces in place. It set up the up today best possible set up for a Dean/Cas romance. And I trust now the writers to follow up on that. A lot of the stuff that went on this season the greater exchange and exposure through social media of SPN? they dipped their toe into the fanbase and audiences to see not only fandoms but the generall reception of it.
And to be called delusional? It hurts I know, but you know what? Both Misha and certain writers said our interpretation is very valid. that we ARE NOT imagining it. There is something there.
End of story, wait and see what Season 9 will bring. Cause right now it feels anything but queerbaiting. the pieces are in the best possible place. I am just waiting for the next move.
I agree here that we can’t officially label it queerbaiting until the show is over. From the way I’ve come to understand the term/concept (and understand it is still very NEW to me) it’s something that can only really be judged properly in hindsight (which is why I don’t consider anything in 8.17 to be queerbaiting for example, although I understand if people got that vibe, because while that finished Cas and Meg’s story, it did NOT finish Cas and Dean’s which is still mid-story, so I don’t believe you can properly compare the two stories/relationships within that episode).
I’m still not convinced AT ALL, however, that the show or the writers plan to take Dean/Cas beyond the subtext though. I really do think what we’re seeing is what we’re getting, all the behind the scenes talk and support and receptiveness of Dean/Cas included. Not because the writers are mean and deliberately trying to bait queer viewers and/or Dean/Cas fans, but because they think a subtextual narrative is the best way to tell the story, and don’t REALISE that the current climate has made that itself a form of baiting and is unfair.
Time will tell…
My issue with saying “people can only use ‘queerbaiting’ as a term once the show is over” is that it basically makes the word… pointless? The term developed (is developing?) to describe the jerked-around feeling that (mostly queer) people have with a lot of current media. The goal of using and describing the word — to me — is to try to explain to media creators why it’s damaging to jerk people around on this issue while never planning on actually following through. So, to police the use of the word and say it can only be applied to completed media absolutely defeats the purpose of the word to me. It becomes simply a term of condemnation for a finished show rather anything that can actually be useful.
Disallowing use of the word to describe continuing narratives also seems to place the feelings of the people in power over the feelings of the people being marginalized.
On the one hand, I do understand waiting until after the series has ended to have a definite opinion — and opinion that has considered everything in the context of everything. But, I also think fans aren’t stupid and they understand where the producers and actors are going with storylines.
Because you can have a showrunner like Moffat who, by being the word of God, kills Johnlock. In this case, everything that’s problematic starts with the Moffat, the show runner. Or you can have Supernatural’s writers and actors who all talk about Dean and Castiel in a relationship and, with the people responsible for music and editing, progress that. And if the fans don’t want to see it, then that’s not on the producers and actors, that’s on the fans.
But yeah, Johnlock and Destiel are not the same. Johnlock is played for laughs and once the no-homo joke is over, it’s over. Johnlock will never go anywhere. Whereas: Destiel is performed with all the weight and seriousness of a romance comparable to how Caskett on Castle and Booth / Brennan on Bones have been developed and the relationship continues to progress. Where Supernatural gets into trouble is that Destiel is being developed like any other cishet romance when, because it’s two cis male bodies involved, it’s not just another romance to an audience not trained to project will-they-won’t-they romantic tropes onto non cis het couples. What they don’t intend to be queerbaiting ends up being and intent is not a magical get-out-of-jail-free card.
Because, yes, it’s true that in the end, Moffat can push Johnlock out of his ass and Carver and et all can ax Destiel and the possibility of those things happening do make the argument for waiting until the very end. But let’s be real about how out of character it would be for them to do so with the patterns they’ve already established.
Exactly. Actually, I thought of a show-related example.
When Cas left in 8x17, he did not intend to hurt Dean. However, he did hurt Dean. When he realized he’d hurt Dean, he apologized and then took action to try to make things up to Dean. That he hadn’t intended to hurt Dean was something Castiel realized was not as important as the fact that he had hurt someone and that hurting people matters.
The creators of SPN are aware that intent doesn’t negate hurt — they’ve showed us that by validating Dean’s pain over Cas leaving. Cas not intending to hurt Dean doesn’t mean Dean wasn’t hurt. They understand the concept that intention =/= results.
My issue with saying “people can only use ‘queerbaiting’ as a term once the show is over” is that it basically makes the word… pointless? The term developed (is developing?) to describe the jerked-around feeling that (mostly queer) people have with a lot of current media. The goal of using and describing the word — to me — is to try to explain to media creators why it’s damaging to jerk people around on this issue while never planning on actually following through. So, to police the use of the word and say it can only be applied to completed media absolutely defeats the purpose of the word to me.
Gosh, pls pls don’t think I’m trying to POLICE anything! I’m just trying to UNDERSTAND. I’m getting SO MANY conflicting explanations of what queerbaiting is and isn’t and stuff that is queerbaiting and isn’t. That it’s something that can only be judged AFTER the event seemed the clearest understanding out of everything to me, because otherwise you might call a scene/line queerbaiting, that then turns out not to be a few episodes later, you know?
So I just… idk. If the point of the word IS to describe a feeling of being jerked around - then that’s pretty subjective I can’t help thinking. Some people might feel jerked around by a subtextual story, others might prefer a subtextual story, you know? So who is right? Example - Mulder and Scully didn’t get together for SEASONS… was that baiting? Or was that just a slow building story? So I feel like, if the word is being used in THAT sense, that it’s impossible then to say outright that something is queerbaiting. What’s queerbaiting to one member of the queer community may be a great and valued subtextual story to another member.
And oh I UNDERSTAND that you can hurt without meaning to of course I do. I’m not saying at all that the lack of intent that I believe exists on the part of SPN cast and crew means that queerbaiting isn’t and/or can’t be happening in the show and hurting people…
Perhaps a better way to use the term would be to make it more personal? To say not that ‘such and such is queerbaiting’ but that ‘such and such makes me feel queerbaited,’ similar to ‘such and such offends me’? But then that risks taking away culpability from those executing the suspected queerbaiting, which is not ideal.
So yeah, idk!
I’m sorry if I gave the impression I was trying to enforce a definition on the term at the exclusion of people/feelings though. I was just putting forward my understanding x
Agree. Completely 100% agree. And that’s not fair.
But for me personally that has been both a curse AND a blessing.
Because I’d long grown bored of textual TV/film romances (I was never one for romance plots in the first place tbh) and I’d been LONGING for a good, long, emotional, subtle, SUBTEXTUAL romance… but none of my shows ever provided that, because as soon as a male and female character started to show the slightest inclination towards each other the writers would go ahead and hit us over the head with romance between them and take away any deep sense of satisfaction for me and so I’d pretty much dismissed ALL romantic plots altogether as things of little to no interest to me (although I gather this was NOT the case with Mulder/Scully, and therefore I am planning on watching The X-Files henceforth :D).
So… yeah, Dean/Cas as subtext has been and continues to be deeply deeply satisying FOR ME PERSONALLY, because it’s giving me exactly the kind of romance I’ve been lacking in my TV/film watching (though not in my reading, I can think of a few books that gave me a satisfying romantic story).
Which means I’m sometimes almost GLAD of how the m/m status has unfairly forced and/or kept Dean/Cas subtextual, because I feel like I’ve got a better, more satisfying story out of it and the relationship has developed better.
But yeah, it’s a double standard and it’s not fair :(
On the flip side of it, I would very very much appreciate more subtle, subtextual het romances on TV (something that Elementary has the potential to provide perhaps, since, like the X-Files I think, Holmes and Watson are being played very very much as PLATONIC right now - which is itself a breath of fresh air and I applaude that - but if the show is a success then perhaps 5 seasons or so down the line a nice, slow build of a romance might be able to develop? I think that might be cool. Although in that case it would come with its own issues re: needing to make Watson a woman to allow for a Holmes/Watson romance, of course, so maybe it wouldn’t work for that show).
So yes. It’s unfair for m/m romances and Dean/Cas to be subtext when m/f romances are made and accepted as text at the drop of a hat *cough*megstiel*cough*. But then again, I can’t help enjoying subtextual romances MORE so, while it’s a bad thing, it’s also a good thing for me, and… oh what a world!
casneedspie replied to your post:
i have to disagree with you here because subtext in this case is queerbating imo,since it’s smth that the casual viewers can brush off or don’t even see at all which makes the rest of us(lgbtq community/supporters)seem delusional.
You’re not disagreeing, that’s what I’m saying x - IN THIS CASE, IN THIS MOMENT IN TIME, subtextual queer narratives (inc. Dean and Dean/Cas) have BECOME a form of queerbaiting.
But INHERENTLY, subtextual stories are NOT baiting, they are NOT delusional, they are NOT any less canon. Despite the way casual viewers/readers can brush subtext off. Because just because some people brush subtext off or don’t see it or actively ignore it doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
It just happens that queer subtext is being persistently, to the point of prejudice (which it is), brushed off and/or ignored and/or belittled.
It’s sad that it’s come to this :( Because I LOVE subtext and subtextual storytelling. I love reading between the lines and finding the story within the story. And in academia, ALL potential subtext is considered with equal validity, NOTHING is delusional. So I HATE to see subtext being abused like this atm. Either deliberately by writers by them consciously and cruelly ‘relegating’ queer characters and narratives to the subtext NOT in order to tell a beautiful and subtle subtextual story but simply so they can deny said subtext if they want (which I DON’T think is what SPN is doing btw), or by readers/viewers who are denying the subtext as a valid part of the text and implying that VALID SUBTEXTUAL READINGS of a text are ‘delusional.’
SUBTEXT IS TEXT damn it. If we’re delusional for reading certain subtexts into stories then every single student of English Literature is delusional.
hm, ok let first tell you: I am with Holly that I LOVE subtext and relationships that start out there. Because it isnt as obnoxious in your face as most het romances tend to be. though to be fair I am not saying all. Looking at Brienne and Jaimie? there is a whole lot of subtext and its beautiful. Will it go canon at one point? I dont know but it could.
Do I think the writers are queerbaiting? Right now, no. Sorry but if they were they wouldnt be as open and receptive of the whole Dean/Cas questions and talk. and last season there was a lot of back and forth from fans and production on exactly that issue. Well a lot compared to seasons before. Unless they really pull this out to just keep us appeased and have actually no intention of pulling through it is no queerbaiting.
And yes until the show is over WE DO NOT KNOW! (though if there is no progress in the next season we might be very justified to ask politely why they havent followed up on their set up of it in season 8? they will still have a season to go but it will be close then) It is frustrating but we have to wait. and yes we might get hurt by them when they just leave it under the rug. (be it because of Writers, producers or the network… though a multitude of people have already said how much sense narrative wise and business wise it would make to go through with that.)
But we have to wait, it sucks but we have to. Cause they arent ready yet. Dean and Cas for all they have been through arent ready yet to become romantically and intimately involved with each other. Maybe there would have been in the past. But the apocalypse was pressing down on them. then in the year off maybe. If Dean hadnt gone to lisa but stayed with Cas trying to find a way to get sam out? trying to help him with heaven? But these routes werent taken. they were broken up. they had a giant fall out and their relationship was broken to shambles. Only now in season 8 they started to heal and rebuild what was lost. the finale marked a step of them going their own ways even when they wanted to stay by each others side. But the fact remains they werent ready yet for an intimate relationship. Cause boys do they got issues and a whole lotta baggage.
But something else? it never looked better for them. Seriously. Season 8, put all the pieces in place. It set up the up today best possible set up for a Dean/Cas romance. And I trust now the writers to follow up on that. A lot of the stuff that went on this season the greater exchange and exposure through social media of SPN? they dipped their toe into the fanbase and audiences to see not only fandoms but the generall reception of it.
And to be called delusional? It hurts I know, but you know what? Both Misha and certain writers said our interpretation is very valid. that we ARE NOT imagining it. There is something there.
End of story, wait and see what Season 9 will bring. Cause right now it feels anything but queerbaiting. the pieces are in the best possible place. I am just waiting for the next move.
I agree here that we can’t officially label it queerbaiting until the show is over. From the way I’ve come to understand the term/concept (and understand it is still very NEW to me) it’s something that can only really be judged properly in hindsight (which is why I don’t consider anything in 8.17 to be queerbaiting for example, although I understand if people got that vibe, because while that finished Cas and Meg’s story, it did NOT finish Cas and Dean’s which is still mid-story, so I don’t believe you can properly compare the two stories/relationships within that episode).
I’m still not convinced AT ALL, however, that the show or the writers plan to take Dean/Cas beyond the subtext though. I really do think what we’re seeing is what we’re getting, all the behind the scenes talk and support and receptiveness of Dean/Cas included. Not because the writers are mean and deliberately trying to bait queer viewers and/or Dean/Cas fans, but because they think a subtextual narrative is the best way to tell the story, and don’t REALISE that the current climate has made that itself a form of baiting and is unfair.
Time will tell…
casneedspie replied to your post:
i have to disagree with you here because subtext in this case is queerbating imo,since it’s smth that the casual viewers can brush off or don’t even see at all which makes the rest of us(lgbtq community/supporters)seem delusional.
You’re not disagreeing, that’s what I’m saying x - IN THIS CASE, IN THIS MOMENT IN TIME, subtextual queer narratives (inc. Dean and Dean/Cas) have BECOME a form of queerbaiting.
But INHERENTLY, subtextual stories are NOT baiting, they are NOT delusional, they are NOT any less canon. Despite the way casual viewers/readers can brush subtext off. Because just because some people brush subtext off or don’t see it or actively ignore it doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
It just happens that queer subtext is being persistently, to the point of prejudice (which it is), brushed off and/or ignored and/or belittled.
It’s sad that it’s come to this :( Because I LOVE subtext and subtextual storytelling. I love reading between the lines and finding the story within the story. And in academia, ALL potential subtext is considered with equal validity, NOTHING is delusional. So I HATE to see subtext being abused like this atm. Either deliberately by writers by them consciously and cruelly ‘relegating’ queer characters and narratives to the subtext NOT in order to tell a beautiful and subtle subtextual story but simply so they can deny said subtext if they want (which I DON’T think is what SPN is doing btw), or by readers/viewers who are denying the subtext as a valid part of the text and implying that VALID SUBTEXTUAL READINGS of a text are ‘delusional.’
SUBTEXT IS TEXT damn it. If we’re delusional for reading certain subtexts into stories then every single student of English Literature is delusional.
Anonymous
Thank you! :) And right back at ya - you are amazing and sweet and awesomesauce as well for caring and sending lovely, positive messages x
Also - agree about Jensen. How can we know how he feels about a topic when he has never actually explained how he feels?
(and damn I need a gif of Dean and Cas’ ACTUAL hug…)
Anonymous(…) and even asked you if you were happy with his answer was very sweet. So yeah, just know that your updates are very much appreciated and even when I do not agree with some of your analysing posts I think they always encourage people to think! :-)
Thank you hon! x
And yeah, I didn’t notice any discomfort in Jensen as he was answering any of my questions.
I was worried at first during the Jensen and Misha panel, actually, because after I asked my question Jensen looked down and said ‘Misha!’ Passing the question over for Misha to answer. So I was worried that was because Jensen didn’t like the question or want to answer it. So for a while there I was fully prepared to accept Misha’s answer, thank them both and leave. But then Jensen went ahead and answered me AS WELL and, like you say, actually apologised for not giving me as serious an answer as he could have. So I think now his passing the question to Misha was because it was an unexpectedly detailed question (which, yup, it was!) and he was having trouble processing it :p
Glad you like my analysis even if you don’t always agree. Where WOULD be the fun if we all saw eye to eye over everything? Pls feel free to drop a line debating anything you disagree with in my ask box - I love a good discussion and have expanded my understanding of a lot of things because of it since joining tumblr (most recently over Dean as a leader, which discussion convinced me of a different opinion about just this week :D)
mischievous-mouse replied to your post:
I like your interpretation and I agree that everyone is a blend of manly and effeminate traits. But it’s funny that people equate LARP with effeminate. It is about battles, political intrigue, etc i know more manly men that play than girly women
Good point!
It’s something about LARPing being ‘geeky’ I think. And that it’s not REAL battles or fighting, it’s just pretend. It’s ACTING essentially, and I think acting is perhaps widely considered as a not manly profession? THEATRE, certainly, is considered that way.
This would be an interesting thing - to collect public opinion on the things that are manly or not.
With LARPing, now I think about it, it’s perhaps not that it’s considered effeminate, but that it’s not quite a ‘manly’ thing to engage in. And since the opposite of manly is effeminate, people assume that’s what LARPing must be. Whereas actually it’s neither?
Just like people aren’t either one or the other, neither do hobbies or professions fall easily into one category or the other, I guess :)
butterflydm replied to your post:
the bar scene in the finale has made me consider that jensen is actually trolling everyone, since that would have already been shot when he answered you
Hmmm… maybe. I am not, however, going to be holding my breath on that. The bar scene was great, but the queer/romantic elements to Dean and Dean and Cas’ relationship were all still subtext in it.
I still think that when it comes to Dean as possibly bisexual and Dean/Cas that we’re looking at a good, carefully crafted, but intentionally subtextual queer narrative, and Jensen is not as interested or consciously aware of that subtext as we are.
I do think it’d be pretty funny though if the tables turned and now every time Dean walks into a room he’s like “Hello, Cas” and Cas nearly jumps out of his shoes and is like “DON’T DO THAT!” and Dean just gets the biggest kick ever out of sneaking up on Cas.
“Of the blessings set before you, make your choice, and be content.” - Johnson, Rasselas
Metatron, ever the reader, presents us with the key to his heart and mind when he quotes to Naomi this line from Samuel Johnson’s philosophical allegory Rasselas, in which an Abyssinian prince leaves a utopian paradise and journeys out into the world on a quest to discover the meaning of true happiness.
DYING OF THE AWESOME.
This bit THIS BIT:
The person who wants nothing may as well be dead, and that’s the problem with the angels in heaven: they don’t know want. Angels exist, they don’t live, and because they don’t live they place no value on human life; this is why they find it so hard to love God’s creation.
The angels would never have chosen to fall. But because they fell, the angels will finally be able to understand choice.
YES.
I still haven’t finished reading Rasselas (hopefully tomorrow - only about 30 pages to go!), but I wrote this down in my notes when I reached the part Metatron quotes (and a lot of other musing too, I’ll probably make my own post, but this was my rough conclusion of sorts):
“The following part of the quote [ie. after the ‘of the blessings… make your choice’ bit Metatron quotes] is not so much about the necessity of choosing between opposing states, but the idea that everything has its own time and place. You can’t enjoy Autumn during Spring, but you CAN enjoy both Autumn and Spring separately. And experiencing them in sequence can help heighten your enjoyment of both – after the cold nights of Autumn, the warm Spring evenings will feel more delightful for example. So the quote also alludes to the idea that perhaps the angels need to experience life on Earth with/as humans in order to truly appreciate life in Heaven. Perhaps implying that their casting out is to be temporary (like Rasselas’ time away from the Happy Valley was and Metatron’s time away from Heaven has been). Ergo, paradoxically, choice of how to live needs to be removed from the angels in order for them to reach a position where they are capable of choosing for themselves – Metatron is both removing and providing the angels with choice/free will.”
Ugh, I LOVE IT when we all start tapping into the same understanding of things. This is what fiction is all about for me, small moments of enlightenment :)
Yes, sometimes you have to lack choice (and be aware of your lack of choice and it’s unfairness - which existence in Heaven doesn’t really allow) in order to appreciate and truly GAIN choice.
You have to hit rock bottom before you can fully comprehend how bad life is and start to work to make it better.
You have to die in order to be reborn.
Oh, let’s end on some pop culture (Dean IS Batman after all):
Why do we fall? So we might learn to pick ourselves up.
How stories can shape you (Charlie+The Hobbit).
How they can trap you or hinder your development (Naomi wrote ‘stories’ inside the minds of so many angels dictating how they should live, John’s teachings were like a story dictating how Dean and Sam should live).
How the stories that shape you can turn out to be false (John’s story about his dad leaving him wasn’t true, Charlie’s identity was a series of fake stories, Dean’s memory of getting Cas out of Purgatory wasn’t real/accurate).
How learning the truth of a story can change you (when Aaron learnt that his grandfather’s stories were real it gave him courage and strength to take on the mantle of owning the Golem, when Sam and Dean learnt the truth about Henry it opened up all new possibilities of how to live their lives, Kate’s story of how she became a werewolf inspired Dean to let her go, reading the Supernatural stories inspired Charlie to take a more active role in the supernatural world).
How you can write yourself into other people’s stories, for better or worse (Dean stepped into Charlie’s story and convinced Charlie to let go of her mum, Dean and Cas of course have put themselves inextricable into each other’s stories).
How you can use other stories to write your own story (Kevin used information from the tablets to escape Crowley, Cas attempted to use TV stories/characters to mould himself into what he believed a hunter should be, Garth uses Bobby’s teachings/stories to change his own when he takes on Bobby’s mantle)
How not knowing the full story leads to confusion/conflict (Dean and Sam early on not knowing what happened to each other in their year apart, not knowing Benny’s side of the story with the vampire killings led to a series of unfortunate events, not knowing Cas’ side of the story of their time in Purgatory caused Dean a lot of turmoil) - but then, does anyone EVER know the full story?
And then we have METAtron, who I’m SURE is a personification of ‘meta’ or ‘metafiction’ somehow. Spending his time consuming and analysing other people’s stories. Inserting himself (Mary Sue like?) into Castiel’s story, into Heaven’s story, into SPN’s story, and rewriting it. Taking SPN’s characters and using them to tell the story he wants, like a fanfic writer.
If Kripke is the god of SPN, then is Carver Metatron, the scribe? Writing down Kripke’s ‘word,’ but not quite as Kripke intended, making it so that following god’s plan will turn out to be something undesirable? To follow this metaphor - Metatron wrote down the trials to close Hell in the demon tablet, but omitted/changed certain elements such as the fact that completing the trials would kill whoever took them on. And so Carver wrote the co-dependent brotherly bond into this season, as Kripke dictated the show was about, but omitted/changed certain elements of it, such as the way said bond is a good thing. So, by the end of the season, Sam and Dean realise that completing the trials is not the great and wonderful thing they thought it would be and not worth the cost, as do the audience (or so it’s perhaps intended we should anyway) realise that continuing with a plot about co-dependency between the boys is not worth it.
But then Metatron in the show goes FURTHER, rewriting god’s word altogether by casting the angels out of Heaven instead of closing the gates to Heaven. That act effectively MAKES METATRON GOD by mimicking god casting out Adam and Eve, which is maybe a metaphor for Carver taking over the show for real and becoming ‘god’ in Kripke’s place??
There’s just SO DAMN MUCH about storytelling and the power of storytelling, for good and for ill, this season!
