sometimes i wish dean would’ve been allowed to be angry at sam for more than one episode…

SPN and Going Forward

Hi, guys, ugh. So we’re still here, huh? After spending most of the night talking and talking with polol folks, being in my feelings, see the shitshow on twitter, I have cried, laughed, and been in utter disbelief. I’ve been a lot angry, and I’ve betrayed and fooled. Really very very confused. Suspicious. Then I laughed some more at the sheer 2020 energy of this finale. Now that I’ve actually gotten time to process the bulk of my feelings and gotten some sleep, I want to address a couple thing about my stance on the text, what went down, and what you can expect from me here on the blog. 

First, I want to thank y’all again for the love you’ve sent my way. Thank you. I said weeks ago that if all went to hell in a handbasket, we’d get each other through it and I meant it. I mean it still. Supernatural, more than ever, belongs to us now. The finale can’t ever take that from us, and it can’t take the community we built from us. That’s how we...well, carry on. Not in honor of how Supernatural ended, but in honor of all that it did before. Of all the good memories we created, the ideas, the stories, the friendship, and the laughter we shared. If you hurt too much to stay, that’s ok. If you ever want to come back, we’ll be here waiting. SPNfamily only ends if we let it, and I for one don’t plan on giving whoever is behind this finale the satisfaction, which brings me to my next point. 

The finale sits at the end of s15 awkwardly. It doesn’t fit the emotional narrative. I can’t believe I’m saying this but 19 actually hits the emotional brief much better. 19 could arguably have a metanarrative purpose. I could understand the point of 19 in a way I can’t for 20. This is all to say I don’t buy that this was authorial intent. Compare the structure of 20 to anything else this season. It doesn’t fit, it’s sloppy, and the pacing is weird. And none of the emotional beats are there when they have been featured expertly since day 1, not only of s15, but all of Dabb’s run. This is all to say that my blog will not be a space that will engage in dunking on Dabb or Berens or Glynn. I simply will not do that because I’ve seen their other work and the finale was not it. If new info comes to light, then that’s that, but I have no reason to believe the finale was the conclusion to the story they wanted to tell. 

I have no idea how or why we got here. There’s a lot of rumors floating around, and we all want someone to blame. There’s a lot of information that doesn’t add up, and I sincerely hope one day we learn why Supernatural ended like it did. I hope we get to see what the writers envisioned. I’m personally inclined to place my blame on corporate meddling, but I have no evidence of that beyond that’s usually where fuckery comes from. We’ll see what unfolds, if anything does. 

Moreover, I want to say that I stand by every piece of meta I’ve written and engaged with. Last night I said that the finale did hit the mytharc brief, and, largely, it did: we got a restructured heaven that allows souls to be their true selves. Peace and freedom. The eternal sandbox. I appreciate that whatever happened, the writing team gave us the ability to take back the narrative and fix it because they weren’t allowed to. Philosophically, s15 delivered what is set out to, and I’ve always been a fan of that vision. I still am. I’m not upset over Dean’s death because as I’ve said all along: death is an illusion. Real life, true life, is the life of the soul not of the body. However, I understand that I have my own spiritual philosophy allowing me to exist so easily and happily with that conclusion. I don’t begrudge anyone who can’t. I always figured the finale would have to be very careful in how it delivered that plotline to make it work for an audience that isn’t already plugged into the philosophy. I meant that, but I also ask for understanding for those of us who do live that philosophy; we are allowed to be happy about the mytharc conclusion. 

The character narrative, however, was shamefully dropped. None of our characters got the emotional catharsis they deserved. I’ll maybe write about some of that one day, and I’ll definitely engage with the writing of others about it. Supernatural shined not because of its mythology, but because of its characters. The finale failed because those characters were erased and denied the last leg of their journey. They got their reward in heaven, I suppose, but there’s no satisfaction in off-screen resolutions. Our character-driven beats were absent. That’s why it hurts so much. And that’s why despite my loving of the mytharc, the episode itself is a bust. Our characters deserved better. Supernatural deserved better. 

It’s our sandbox now.

I have read Misha's post on Facebook and I didn't know what to say or what to think. I said it over and over I have zero expectations so on one hand I am satisfied with Castiel being gay and didn't think they were going to show more than that, but on the other hand... reading that felt bitter. And there’s a couple things I’d like to answer to that.

I am trying to sort of explain all of this to myself, I’m trying to make sense of things, but what is clear to me is that: the CW is at fault, the showrunners, producers and writers are at fault too, and I think Misha is being honest. He genuinely doesn’t believe the CW censored destiel and maybe they haven’t in the way we’d want to think they did. But they did. 

Also, let’s be clear that there is something fishy in him saying there wasn’t some cut bits from 15x18 and no alternative ending when he, Jensen and even the writers admitted there was. I think maybe he was saying “there is no alternative gay ending for Dean”, still... I don’t know. But I believe him when he says there is no destiel conspiracy in which a gay scene existed but was censored - like I for a moment believed there was (I even twitted that yesterday). I am not so sure now but what I think is that it doesn’t matter HOW they fooled their queer audience, it’s the fact they did at all.

There was a form of interference and Misha needs to understand that people are right to be angry nonetheless. 

I  know that CW is still not a lgbt ally, however they have some lgbt friendly shows. They are probably the network that has the most lgbt characters.

Just to recap things a little bit and give sort of a context, from my perspective - I think it’s really important to know what are their other shows in term of representation - it’s probably gonna be a long read but bear with me:

I don't know them all but I am also a DC fan so I know the majority of the arrowverse shows are lgbt friendly, plus there is The 100, there was 3 lgbt characters in Vampire Diaries, I didn’t watch those but I think there was a little bit of representation in Gossip Girl, Riverdale, the Charmed reboot, the Roswell reboot, Beverly Hills reboot, The Originals and Legacy - and some others I don't remember here.

So yep, there is some representation and they truly believe it’s ok, they pat their backs calling themselves progressive for allowing one or two characters in each show to be lgbt, and sometimes the writers are good enough to make it good on screen (which really is the case for Black Lightning for instance).

And actually we owe the representation in the arrowverse shows to a gay producer named Greg Berlanti,  the CW allowed it, they didn’t came up with the idea.

The CW is not an ally, they are a company and they show what brings them money. And if you watch the shows I cited you know they are familiar with the bury your gays trope, maybe a little less blatantly than in Supernatural. As far as I know, in only three shows they have couples that are happy and that haven't been killed : Supergirl, Legends of Tomorrow (which is not that popular cause in terms of writing the first 2, 3 seasons were awful, it started being good when they got free to be more goofy and self-mocking) and Black Lightning - which btw has not been renewed for a 5th season and Supergirl has one season left too - with all the arrowverse shows ending one after the other I can only predict LoT won't last much longer - there would be Batwoman but we don’t see a settled couple, we see a broken relationship and since they chose not to recast the lead, they have made the subsequent decision not to give this relationship a satisfying resolution).

There is a number of issues with the representation in those shows, but yeah, the arrowverse is progressive because the shows producers, the writers and the CW were on board for that. It wasn’t the case for Supernatural who has had more BYG than all the other CW shows united - because CW had better interests in making it the way it is, and because the writers are not that good. I keep repeating it but it’s true, they also are to blame, THEY wrote the BYG in the show and they wrote that ending. It was possible for a better representation in spn if everyone tried. Only the actors tried, that’s the problem, and they don’t have much hold on what can and cannot be done. 

Supernatural is different in CW eyes - not because it is their most popular show in terms of audience - I know everyone says that but when you look at the numbers The Flash is actually their top popular show (and that is why it will be the last big arroverse show to go, what will stay will be Stargirl, maybe Batwoman for one or two seasons), it’s the one that has the most viewers, it was racking up 1.2 million viewers in 2019 against 1.1 for Supernatural (x) - without counting the illegal streaming and downloading), Supernatural only comes second in terms of audience in 2019/2020 (and it is important to note that) (it was also second best in 2017, this is not only true for 19/2020 (x) ). But it it special in terms of status and fanbase, it doesn’t have the most viewers but it a show that have a consistent audience; it is big to them nonetheless. Just as this article explains: “Supernatural’s linear ratings have faded. But its importance to the CW, however, hasn’t”.

 At this point you will note that The Flash has, in terms of representation, one (1) gay character that is a secondary one (David Singh, the chief of Central police) and he is mentioned to be gay.

Supernatural is important to them because Supernatural’s ratings influence their other shows and the network as a whole.

It is also because they have a contract with Jared for Walker and they don't want it to fail (Supernatural and the arrowverse shows are all coming to an end rn so they need a new golden goose), if they have had shown interest in being lgbt friendly with this show they would have done it earlier. This only means that it's not financially worthy for them. 

All of this only shows that the CW has monetary interests and that you need everyone involved to make it work. It worked for the arrowverse because the producer pushed and because it was actually a form of queerbaiting for the CW. This ensures that the lgbt people have what they want and they get to have their money, but they don’t loose their straight audience either. They don’t touch Supernatural and The Flash because that’s their big money makers. 

So, as a conclusion, what this context definitely show us is that they aren’t interested in progress in itself, they are interested in profit. They give us lgbt representation as long as it’s their interest to do so. Castiel was gay so episode 19 and 20 ratings could skyrocket, don’t let yourself think it was for the love of progress. No, Misha, there wasn’t the kind of conspiracy you describe, but the CW still wronged its viewers and weren’t well intentioned. And the showrunners did us wrong too because they wrote that and they wrote Dean impaled on a nail and Sam miserably codependent with his brother. I do believe they didn’t actually wrote destiel, but they cut out the possibility of it being written, mainly because they are the network’s bitches and because they don’t have interest in writing it. 

Misha might be well intentioned by saying what he said but he’s wrong, The CW did interfere and sort of censored destiel, if not by subtilizing a script for another by preventing it to be written at all. Whether he knows and he is coverint the CW whether he doesn’t know at all, but, he’s wrong to defend them - the network as well as the writers. 

I still think we were robbed and I understand why he thinks it's not a bury your gays because Cas goes to heaven but he's not sitting in our seat, however great of an ally he is, I am sorry to say he just don't feel it like lgbt fans do. Another point that has to be made is that not every representation is good representation, and it doesn’t matter that Castiel is alive and reconstructing heaven if we don’t SEE IT, if we don’t see him at all nor the effects of his self realisation, it might as well mean it didn’t matter, Cas is gay but it had absolutely zero importance. It has only shown the character being erased afterward. Sure he was resurrected but it still was wiped out of the writing, you’ve GOT to understand bury your gays doesn’t necessarily means the character has been LITERALLY killed, it means it has been taken out of the narrative. Like, for example, Claire has been erased from the narrative, we never see her again once she’s revealed to be a lesbian, even though subtextually she’s fine and happy.

Misha is sweet and the fact he is always on board to learn and spread love is amazing and I love him for that but he is wrong here and he should listen and learn what BYG effectively means. 

I kinda want to copy paste that into another post because it is important and I wish someone would say that to him, I am sure he is kind enough to listen.

What we’re also mad about isn’t only that Castiel has been erased. It’s that Dean has been erased too and doesn’t get to answer and give a full closure to this narrative. Castiel being gay is huge, I said that already, but it’s only half satisfying if he doesn’t get to be with the man he loves and who loves him in return, or if he doesn’t get an answer. Maybe it wasn’t written, maybe it was censored, no matter what, Dean’s love was there and it should have been acknowledged. And after all, I wouldn’t have been mad about them writing a platonic answer because it would have been an answer (even though I wouldn’t have been satisfied because in the whole context of television, there is not enough gay couples that are settled and not written in traumatic way). The fact no one acknowledges the fact Castiel was gay, it’s hurting, from our perspective. It’s like he spoke his truth but wasn’t heard. 

And that is a problem. Not every representation is a good representation and people need to understand how offensive it is to us to hear “well you should be happy we’ve given you that much” - especially when in the whole picture, there is like TWO shows that aren’t about homosexuality that shows a healthy relationship between two lgbt characters without one of the two be killed or erased from the narrative.

We deserve more than the bare minimum.

So, okay, no, the mexican sub wasn’t the proof of a manipulation (and nonetheless we just can’t tell because there is NO objective evidences), BUT THAT DOESN’T MEAN ANY OF THAT IS OK.

I love Misha Collins, I think he is a beautiful human being, but he doesn’t possibly know why we are hurt and I am sad he didn’t think this further. 

Wow, I just saw a giffed version of the therapy scene (at least the part where Dean tears off the kiddy gloves and goes after Sam’s whole life). 

First of all, Jensen’s life during all of it gives me life.

Second: “you just upset your brother so much he had to leave the room” but he wasn’t so upset he couldn’t yell a bit before, right? Also, even though it’s just an act, they tried to give the impression that it was Sam’s idea to go to therapy, but he wasn’t expecting to have an outburst? 

Third: the therapist’s reaction? I’d like to talk about her reaction towards the patient who had just been prodded and responded by getting angry and prodding back. Am I talking about Dean or Sam? I’m talking about the person who stayed so the “conversation” could play out. If I was a therapist, no scratch that, because that would require knowledge of a field I don’t have, if I was witnessing that argument, I would assume, because of their reactions, that this was the first time they said those things to each other. They were communicating. That’s progress, even if it’s ugly. She condemned one of them for doing the same thing the other did, only because Sam ran out of the room (after giving his own shot [btw, that looked like he was overwhelmed by his own confession, not what drove him to it]). She called him out in front of Jack, which has the same effect as a parent favouring/targeting a sibling while they’re having a row. It was a terrible reading of the situation and a not too better handling of it. I mean, “don’t deal with your anger if you don’t want to, but don’t make it other people’s problem”? Paraphrased, but accurate. Also, with that face? And that tone of voice? (I watched the scene on youtube while writing this) Talk about a safe space. 

And going metatextual! She was supposed to be the mouthspeak so the audience. We (or you, I don’t watch anymore) were supposed to listen to her and say “Aha! So that’s what’s wrong with Dean!” But the situation she faced was completely different to what was going on. She saw three brothers whose mother had just died. One of them went so far as to say she hadn’t, but the little one contradicted him.* Then they went in and they started talking and Dean wasn’t cooperating, which is contrasted with Sam’s therapy vocabulary. (”I hear what you’re saying...” “I wish...” “I threw up a little in my mouth”- oh no, that was just me.) Nicely ignoring how Sam is just pushing everybody, first to therapy, then by talking about Dean’s issues before even touching his own, even an “I’m sad that...” (where’s your therapy vocabulary now?) And then, the patient she just saw and thought “this one’s gonna be trouble” is... trouble. He refuses to let his brother puch him to the front line (like cannon fodder) and returns the favour, with the added bonus of acutally taking a shot by not only pointing out that Sam has issues, but by explaining them, making him confront them. Nicely ignore how Sam admitted to having those issues and expounded on the resons for them, including some blame towards Dean (which was weird, because first he accuses Dean of having an easier time than him with her death and then says they had a deeper relationship, like, okay). This also might have left her with the opinion that a) Dean had been a bit of a momma’s boy and/or b) Dean was hit the hardest because he was closest to her. He who denies there’s a problem and might but seen as lashing out. Hmmm. Then, Sam walks out. We’re left with Dean and Jack (who hasn’t talked yet). Well, I’ve talked about what bothers me here, picking at one of the hurt parties only because he’s  the one who stayed. (hey, season 1 Sam!) She thought that Jack was scared of Dean. (I’ll talk about this later.) It all points to something, violence, most likely, even if it might not be physical. This is what she reads.

The truth is that they’re hunters (and the devil’s child) who are there to solve a case. No matter how real some of the accusations and feelings are, they are there on a lie. 

Their mother did die, suddenly, but she got her goodbyes and her resolution, even if the expected outcome of that wasn’t her death. Yeah, it was probably a life where they were all together. Guess what? It wasn’t Dean who kept Sam from that. In fact, he was quite free to go for it, by working with the BMOL. She would’ve paid them attention then. But, hey, guess they decided betraying their values weren’t worth that. (And here I use they with a pinch of salt.) The reasons Sam didn’t have a relationship with Mary were 1) Mary herself avoiding them, at least at first and 2) none of them reaching out except for Dean. Dean and Mary weren’t even on the same side, the way she was with Sam. And let’s not even analyse the last ep, with Dean’s speech (which would supposedly solidify their bond) ending up being about Sam (I mean, if anything, his beef abt being made to take care of him was with John, that was on him) instead of all the ammo the season gave him, then this fight where they aknowledged they were both killers (??? ? ?????) and a hug for Sam and not Dean because (??? ? ?????). Sure, okay. Relationship.

So, they go there, the whole narrative manipulation- er, I mean, Dean being rude and a just plain bad hunter happens. Sam says they’re brothers. Understandable for the lie, but for the audience it reinforces the “we’re family now” crap, which Dean has been rejecting so far, while Sam has been puching, and pushing and paushing at him. As many other people have pointed out, this is him reinforcing the parentification he has already been through, ironically, with Sam, making him completely responsible not only for another life but, because this is a nephilim, countless other lifes. Jack not even being a relative. All this to say: no, they’re not family, Dean wants nothing to do with Jack and, at the moment, probably not much to do with Sam. Aside from all of this, he’s grieving (as the showrunners love to point out). Instead of being allowed to deal with it, he has to deal with the Jack dilemma even though he doesn’t WANT TO, AND HE MIGHT BE FEELING EVEN WORSE BECAUSE HIS BROTHER IS TELLING HIM THAT IF jACK IS SCREWED UP IT WOULD BE HIS FAULT. 

Anyway. They’re not a family, at least not all three of them. The show is already painting Dean in a bad light for rejecting Jack, i.e. the concept of family wich, supposedly, is what the whole show is about (forget actually treating your family well, just collect as many members as you can, right?). Then they go to therapy, where Dean behaves like a caveman despite everything we’ve known of him. They play their act, where Dean looks even worse because the only thing we see as a reaction from him is his “attack” on Sam (see paragraph 3 of this post which is turning out to be a lot longer than I first thought it would be, which, typical) while Sam uses his therapy talk and conciliatory manners and actually gets to talk about how he’s feeling and then walk away and be validated for it. (Which, yeah, if you don’t want to talk about something, you shouldn’t have to. I mean, if you go to therapy, it’s because you know you need to talk about it, even if it makes you feel wretched, so the therapist shouldn’t have reacted like that. Within the context of the lie, though, Sam probably wasn’t planning on and didn’t want to talk about it. Like, I’ve said before, walking out of the room seemed to me to be more about realising what he’s been feeling than what Dean said.) How is he validated?, you say. You mean besides the tragic music going on in the background?, I respond.

No, but really. The therapist’s response is what validates him. (Besides the writers and their manipulation the rest of the time.) Everything from what she says to how she says reeks disaproval. And because she’s a professional (and let’s face it, this sort of reluctance we have about going against a black woman) we’re supposed to take it at face value. Yes, Dean just upset Sammy, completely unwarrantedly. Yes, Jack, a nephilim, the son of Lucifer, who has been shown to be dangerous (even if his intentions aren’t malicious), is scared of him, and that makes Dean such an asshole, because look how tiny and smol he is. (Like I’ve said, I haven’t been watching, but really? What does he think Dean is gonna do?) Yes, he’s angry and taking it all out on everyone else. Yes, he should stow his crap, again, because Sammy’s right, of course, as always. (Btw, is this the episode when Sam says Dean supported him when he was drinking demon blood and everythign turned out okay because of that and not literal divine intervention? Just curious.) 

It’s a method they’ve used before: tak someone who knows more than the boys (maybe even make them more scary because they know so much) and make them say what they won’t admit to themselves or others/what they don’t know/what they should know and the writers/audience wish they could tell them. Does Marie in Fan Fiction ring a bell? (Miss Scarlett in the ballroom with a fucking bulldozer?)

The thing is, what the therapist sees? What she says? That’s what the show’s trying to tell, but it’s ahowing a completely different story, which would be much more compelling if it was the one they were actually trying to tell. Instead, they’re trying to erase it through a manipulative narrative and shitty retconning, which wtf? I may be biased, because I love Dean, but I dare you to tell me where I got it wrong.

*(Btw, Dean’s attitude the whole while? Completely unprofessional as a hunter. We’ve seen him screw up a little [in The Purge, which, btw (I’m using a lot of btw, but there’s a lot to say that isn’t completely necessary but helps understand where I’m coming from when I say all this) was also meant to show him in a bad light textually], but that was going too heavy with the lie, too enthusiastic, and that was when his brother had disowned him. Here he’s just uncooperative in a hunt, which could get them all killed. And so blunt! Tose were rookie mistakes, which we can recognise as such because Dean had to deal with them when Cas and Charlie made them. We can say that he’s depressed and reliving past trauma, but the fact that he’s still kicking goes to show that he’s good at what he does, and this is just insulting him.).

The frustrating thing for me, when people use Dean's issues to point out WHY he handles emotional situations badly is that the sympathy isn't with the people that suffers because of it (like Cas). It's with Dean. An explanation for Dean's behaviour shouldn't become a justification. If Dean loves Cas but treats Cas badly, why should we root for this relationship? Him almost killing Cas is about CAS' suffering, not his. But his reaction is not about what Cas deserves, but about his wants. IMO etc.

I’ve been trying to come up with something clever about this ask for a few days, but I got nothing, so I’m just going to tell you what’s going through my mind in the clearest possible way.

1) The viewers will often have a favourite and defend them to the death, and if you find it frustrating, there’s not much you can do other than unfollow people or blacklist some tags. I understand where you come from - I also get annoyed when people justify everything’s a character’s ever done, even the most twisted and problematic things, just because they like him or her. To be honest, I think I stopped caring when I saw a discussion about how Tate Langdon was the perfect boyfriend - some part of my soul just shrivelled and died and I decided that yep, some people are batshit insane and most people get unreasonable around stuff they love, and what can you do about it? 

2) If you’re talking about the writers/creators of a show, on the other hand, I think it’s important to remember where is our POV and what kind of story those people are telling. Like, Supernatural is not House of Cards: whatever he does, Dean will be written as sympathetic, and since we see this world (mostly) from his POV, everything is reflected back on him. I know some people get angry about this - characters getting killed to make the Winchesters feel bad, or simply to advance the plot - but that’s how you tell a story (everybody does the same thing, and if you don’t see it, it means they’re doing their job right). Your main characters are the ones who matter, and the ones whose emotions we care about. So, even when it comes to someone as important to the story as Cas is, Dean will get most of the plot, and this is just how things work.

The next point might upset some people, so I’ll place it under a cut. Stay safe.

3) On placing sympathy on the abuser, rather than the victim - I think there are several reasons for this. One is that, traditionally, our stories in the West are about the conquerors and the victors, not those who have been defeated (when Euripides wrote a tragedy about the Trojan noblewomen being sold off as slaves after the war, people were not happy, and that play is still controversial today). At the same time, we all realize, because we’re not psychopaths, that violence is not nice, and that’s how you end up with this compromise narrative best summarized by Frankie Boyle.

Another aspect of this is that many victims are women (or people ‘outside’ a community, such as queer people or POC), and many abusers are men, and, again, traditionally we give less weight and importance to the feelings and wellbeing of women than we do to those of men. Combine that with the fact many storytellers (I use the term loosely) are men, and you get where we are today: a story about a woman being beaten by her husband is ‘boring’ and not something the audience will want to watch, but the story of a tortured man who can’t help but beat his wife because demons is ‘interesting’ and worth everyone’s attention.

Finally, I think there’s a combination of these two factors in play as well - we mostly want to see stories about people acting, not reacting; about people being brave and fighting and winning, because we generally identify with the main character and we want some sort of happy ending for them. And the problem is - a victim of violence who overcomes this violence - that can still be perceived as a bleak story, right, because abusers are often a solid part of the community (husbands and fathers in family dramas, soldiers and commanders in war movies), which means that this kind of stories are, in their very nature, unsettling and revolutionary, because what they’re telling you is that the community was wrong in trusting those people. It’s no wonder, really, that Francesco Rosi’s Uomini contro was threatened, sued, and had great trouble to find distribution in Italian cinemas: despite being a movie about a century old war, it sided - very clearly - with the soldiers who’d been brutalized by their own commanders, and while the situation was well-known and mostly accurate from a historical point of view, the backlash was still enormous. And this is the same reaction you get, not only towards fictional stories, but about real ones too. All those murder-suicides - ‘normal’ men killing their wives and children before shooting themselves - both the media and the public’s reaction is inevitably incredulity and a refusal to dig deeper. We want to believe our societies are healthy and we want to believe that men (unlike women, those fickle and untrustworthy creatures) are mostly right about everything, and this is what we get as a result. We’re so good at ignoring violence it sometimes comes back to haunt us (is it just me or all the latest US shooters had priors of domestic violence?). So, you see - a man coming to terms with his own anger and becoming a better person, that’s an inspiring story we’re all okay with; but a woman standing up to her husband, that’s a bit different. There’s a seed of revolt there, a sort of If she did it, why can’t I? that we really don’t want people to see.

(In case it’s not clear, I’m violently against all of this. I’m sick of this kind of stories, and I do think that we need some waking up and some revolution in our communities.)

4) You say an explanation shouldn’t mean a justification, and I totally agree, but I also think it’s hard to do this right, both IRL and in fiction, because the more you know about someone, the more you empathize with them, which means any villain can become redeemable with the right background story - just ask Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. As for Dean and Cas, I don’t think Dean ever justified his own behaviour; in fact, he even atoned for it, in his own Dean way, when he allowed a crazed Cas to beat him up and insisted in keeping the bruises. It wasn’t perfect, but, then again, neither is Dean.

5) Why should we root for this relationship if Dean treats Cas badly - does Dean really treat Cas badly? I don’t think so. Dean is a MESS, all capitals. He tries his best, and I really feel for him, but the truth is, he doesn’t know how to do this. As far as we know, he didn’t have any friends or significant relationships growing up, and by the beginning of the series, the only person he seems to connect to in any healthy way is Bobby. Honestly - it takes years for Dean, who grew up as a soldier and a conman and a loner and never had a right to his own childhood and a life that wasn’t taking care of his brother and helping out his father, to get better at this. And, sure, the relationship with Cas is no different - at the beginning, Dean is confrontational, a sarcastic little shit, occasionally cons Cas into having his way - but the magic of what happens between them is that pretty soon, all of Dean’s traditional walls and posturing take a step back. What’s really special here is that Dean is honest with Cas in a way he isn’t with anyone else, and despite the fact he loves Cas so fiercely, he mostly tries to respect his decisions, and is never harsh with him if not in very extreme circumstances. Personally, the one moment between them I truly hated was Dean’s Nobody cares that you’re broken, because, OUCH - looking back, I can see that this was Dean channelling John, but still - it was an incredibly dickish thing to say (and it must have haunted Dean in Purgatory, especially since, as far as he knew, Cas had died - because of him). As for the rest of it - I doubt we’ll ever have fluffy lines between them, but that doesn’t mean they’re not incredibly soft with each other. I don’t know if you were referring specifically to S12E19, but Dean pushing Cas against a wall in anger - that’s not abuse. He knows he can’t hurt Cas (physically) unless he really tries, so that scene was about Dean needing to put his hands on Cas, to feel him, to make sure he was there and he was okay; and also a harmless way to let his frustration out, to say what he doesn’t know how to put into words (that he cares, that is, and that he doesn’t need Cas to bring him back any win, the dumbass, because that’s not what actually matters). And maybe that reaction doesn’t seem soft to you, but this is Dean Winchester, right, the killer even demons are afraid of and the guy who basically doesn’t trust anyone - Cas just spent weeks MIA, never bothered to call, didn’t tell them he had a line on Kelly, stole the Colt form Dean knowing full well how much that weapon meant to him, collaborated with Heaven without telling him one word about it - and, on the whole, Dean’s not even angry. He’s worried, and he’s frustrated (with Cas; with himself), but he understands why Cas did what he did, and that makes all the difference. 

“Dude, if anybody else - I mean anybody - pulled that kind of crap, I would stab them in their neck on principle. Why should I give him a free pass?”

“Because it’s Cas.”

You know - I always felt that for Dean, who’s always been coded as the ‘female’ character both with Sam and with Cas, the Mark of Cain was the ultimate undoing precisely because it took from him all those ‘feminine’ traits which are such a profound part of who he is. The fact that it all culminated in him beating the hell out of Cas, in a reversal of their traditional ‘fights’ (I’m inverted commaing this because most of those happened under some sort of mind control, so they weren’t really fights), was, in a way, a complete assertion of his new role of Alpha Male - while Cas had stepped back into a more traditional ‘feminine’ role the whole season. In this sense, I understand that the narrative focused way more heavily on Dean, because he was the one acting out of character and doing ‘weird’ things - but ideally, yes, I would have wanted to know what that beating meant for Cas, what he was thinking as he healed himself, and everything else. So, yeah - it’s a mess, and it’s not a traditional love story, perhaps, but I still think they’re right for each other and they do make each other happy, so personally, I’m rooting for them. There are tons of abusive relationships on TV that are passed off as normal, even romantic, but this isn’t one of them.

I really dont want this to happen. But if Cas die, do you think their relationship at this stage is so close, so in love enough that Dean will do everything to resurrect Cas?

That’s a complicated and painful question, and I want to try and answer purely form a narrative point of view, focusing on Dean, and not Misha and Dabb and all the other real life trappings.

The short answer is, no - I don’t think he would.

First, Dean is acutely aware of the fact that he understands next to nothing about Cas’ world. He doesn’t know how to heal an angel, how to bring one back. He doesn’t even understand when something is seriously off, and when a few days of rest will be enough to make everything better. He doesn’t know if angels need to breathe, he doesn’t have much in his arsenal to help Cas when he’s injured, he can’t pray to other angels because they all hate them both, and he can’t step into Heaven without being incinerated on the spot. Plus, despite the time they’ve spent together, Dean doesn’t get Cas like he would Sam, or another human being. He’s done his best, and he’s really tried to relate to him - that scene when he tentatively compared what John had done to him with the relationship God has with His angels almost made me cry, because there is where you see it - Dean cares so much, and he tries so hard, but the thing is, he can’t really understand. He’s only human, after all. For instance, Cas spent the entirety of their time together in Purgatory feeling he deserved to be there, his heart set on staying there, and Dean didn’t pick up on that at all. Also, he prefers not to think about the history Cas has with his brothers, or the obligation he feels he has towards Heaven. It’s a form of self-defence, perhaps, but what it means is that whenever Cas dies or goes dark, Dean is left with nothing, because not only he knows that he’s got no information at all on angels and what happens to them when they die and how to help them when they’re in danger - he also knows he’s just a human being, and it’s probably not in his power to save Cas. He wouldn’t even know where to start. In this sense, it was significant that Crowley was the one to attempt something, and not Dean, after Cas was poisoned by Ramiel’s lance. So this is why, I think, Dean took a step back and drowned himself in hunts and booze whenever something happened to Cas in the past. There’s nothing in John’s journal, no instructions as to what you should do when your angel buddy is taken over by Leviathans and walks into a river and disappears. No way to know if he’s alive, no info anywhere on how to bring him back.

Second, there’s the problem of what Cas wants. On the whole, Cas seems to not care an awful lot whether he lives or dies. It’s likely he’s got a whole different understanding of what death even is. We’ve seen him listless and depressed, of course, and we’ve seen him fight off the Rit Zien he’d unwittingly summoned, but he’s also quite the martyr figure, and has mostly been adamant about one thing: that it’s not Dean’s job to protect him, and that Dean can’t help him, in any case. Of course, Dean is not very good at respecting Sam’s wishes either, but, then again, he doesn’t have the same responsiblity towards Cas that he does towards Sam. Protecting Sam is hardwired in everything he is - protecting Cas is more of a choice, which is why, whenever Cas has asked him to let him go - at the very beginning, when Cas stayed behind to fight Raphael, for instance, but also a couple of years ago, with that whole Gates of Heaven business - Dean’s generally accepted that Cas is a grown-ass whatever and can make his own choices. Dean doesn’t have to like them, of course, and he generally doesn’t (to the point where he’s depressed and borderline suicidal when Cas is not around), but he’s also been capable to step aside. Also because, see point one, he’s got no other option.

And third - I’m going to share an upsetting personal story with you, because it’s been a while and maybe it’s time I get it off my chest. Death for ts, and all that.

So, third - when I was a teenager, I met the most extraordinary man. He was probably in his seventies at the time, very fit, very active, a brilliant mind, but what impressed me the most was the way he’d chosen to live. He’d been born in a filthy rich family, had basically inherited a private bank, studied economics, ran the thing for a few years - and then he sort of had an epiphany - about how little all that mattered, and the fact he was throwing his life away. He basically sold everything, moved into a much smaller house, and proceeded to live in monk-like conditions for the next forty years - he spent a lot of time walking around in the mountains, ate simple, no-frills food he cooked himself, and he read - tons and tons of books. When I met him, he was basically an expert on every subject - from history to sociology to biology, he knew everything. And then he met this woman, who was around his age and a widow. They fell in love like teenagers, but the problem was - they were so different. While he was ‘woke’, as kids today would say, she’d lived all her life in a very small village, was a staunch Catholic, and basically didn’t know how to handle this unprecedented passion that had fallen upon her like water from an exploding dam at the ripe age of 73. He wanted them to live together, was ready to move next door to her, marry her - all sort of things, because, well, they were both old and he wanted to make the most of their time together. But she was ambivalent - as much as she loved him, she couldn’t shake off the feeling that seeing him like that, loving him, was a sin of some kind - an act against God. She resisted his every offer, didn’t marry him, didn’t move in with him, but would welcome him every weekend to her house, and the rest of the week, he would call her three times a day, like clockwork, to chat and laugh together (they lived about three hours of train from each other). And then this one morning, he didn’t call. And she told me later - she was lowkey hysterical, like some people get when they want to let it out but have been conditioned their whole life that no, a good woman shouldn’t be a burden in any way - that she’d been sure, at once, that something terrible had happened to him. By that point, they’d been together for ten years, I think, and never, ever, had he been late in his calls. Not once. She told me she knew she should have called an ambulance, or a relative, at the very least, so someone could check on him, but she didn’t - because some horrible, hidden and scared part of her soul had thought, If he dies, it’s all over. The love, yes, but also the sense of sin, the guilt, the certainty what she was doing wasn’t allowed. She wasn’t strong enough to stop loving him, because he gave her so much joy, and she couldn’t leave him (she really didn’t want to), but if he died - if he died - and, well, he did. I’m actually crying as I type this, because he was the most extraordinary and kind and amazing man, and his health was okay, considering his age - he would have lived to a hundred, no doubts there. But instead, he slipped and fell in the shower, and if she’d alerted someone, anyone, they would have saved him - but she didn’t. She couldn’t. I was angry at her till the day she died, but, thank God, I had enough common sense and kindness never to mention it, because she was distraught enough on her own. After his death, her health rapidly declined - she started to be forgetful, moody. She was sad, all the time. She felt, undoubtedly, very guilty. She kept going to Mass and Confession till the end, and I hope that brought her some peace. I can see now that she was a kind person - and also someone who’d led a simple life, light years away from the life he’d had (while he met all sort of interesting people and filled his days with books and travels and wild ideas and Eastern philosophies, she’d kept her head down, married the neighbours’ son, and cooked him three meals a day for twenty years), and was in no way prepared to deal with this intense attraction, this love to end all loves. She did her best, I know she made him happy, and yes, perhaps she did make a mistake that day, but I’m now old enough to admit it’s not my task to judge her for it. May the earth rest lightly on them both.

Anyway, all this to say that for Dean, falling in love with Cas has been a life-changing, earth-shattering process. Cas literally represents everything Dean’s been ignoring and fighting and pushing away his whole life - his attraction to men, his (non-existent) faith, his deep-seated believe that he does not deserve happiness or a happy ending of any kind (that he won’t get one). So I’ve been wondering, on and off - if Cas truly died, Dean would be devastated - we know that (we’ve seen it). But also, if Cas truly died, Dean would be comforted in his self-loathing, in his doubts, in his traditional way of thinking: that when things go well, it’s too good to be true, that there’s no way out, that he never deserved Cas in the first place, so, whatever. This is heartbreaking, of course, but I know for a fact that when your thoughts have been dark for a while, it’s difficult to let the light in - you can see, sort of, that it would make everything better, but it’s still a change, and we hate change. Depression, anxiety, self-loathing - as shitty as those emotions are, they can still make you feel safe because you know what they’re like. You’re used to them, and that’s one reason why it’s so hard to walk away from them - for good. For Dean, Cas dying would mean not having to come clean with Cas about his own feelings, skipping that difficult conversation with Sam, avoiding what he’s probably been scared of his whole life (people looking at him differently, mocking him, perhaps attacking him), and, above all, letting go of that last illusion - that there could be a happy ending for him - something that makes it more difficult to do his job, even to look after Sammy. 

So, well - on the whole, I think that if Cas died, a huge part of Dean’s soul would die with him - but no, Dean wouldn’t try to bring him back.