Two extra thoughts about 5.17

[ratherastory]

Back home, and I think LJ is letting me post again...

So why is it that when SAM wants to have a normal life and a family, it's wrong and selfish and hurtful to his family, but when DEAN wants it everyone goes "AAAAAAAWWWWW!"

Is it because Sam actually tried to get it for himself, whereas Dean is apparently willing to throw himself on the proverbial grenade? What?

The double-standard makes me sad.

:(


Also, I am SERIOUSLY ANNOYED by the Whore of Babylon thing. Come on, SPN. You can stop being so blatantly misogynistic any day now. :(

Comments

[claudiapriscus.livejournal.com]

I don't know if it was 'aawww' this time- I was feeling kind of annoyed at Dean. Any 'awww' in my book was just because of how TRAGIC and SAD it is that he LONGS FOR WHAT FATE WILL ALWAYS DENY HIM! (yes, i am being a bit tongue in cheek there).


I think it comes down to the way they've set up the conflict. They've pretty much always had sam's desire for a better life notably (as in, with giant anvils raining down) do not include his family...which I could have believed in early days, but now seems kind of off (the last episode in that regard left me feeling a little puzzled.) They've tended to tie Sam's desires to hubris, to his pride and ambition.

Whereas Dean...well, they've made it a bit more complicated, with his virtue being the loyalty to his family and his flaw being his codependency, to not being able to let go of his family. I'm sure that's the symmetry they were going for anyway.

The result is that (problematically) anything that involves Sam desiring 'normal life' or whatever is a sign of fault winning over virtue and anything involving Dean desiring those things represents virtue overcoming fault.

An odd and awkward set up for just the reasons you outline, but there you go.



The whore thing didn't bother me as much, it was just too over the top. I figured it was a...tease or at least an acknowledgment of the criticisms along those lines.