Thoughts on SPN season six (aired episodes only, no spoilers)

[rusty_halo]

Since almost the first thing I did when I got home from Paris was catch up with Supernatural…

I'm feeling better about the season. In 6x01, I was honestly worried that the problem with Sam was just that the writing was off and that Jared Padalecki is a terrible actor, but I was wrong! Clearly there is something very wrong with Sam and the narrative is going to follow up on it--figuring it out and fixing it will presumably be the main issue driving the narrative for at least the first half of the season.

So the question is, is Sam's problem metaphysical or psychological? Given the emphasis on the value of human souls in 6x03, could it be that Sam somehow managed to come back without a soul? Or is there some remnant of Lucifer causing Sam's lack of emotional/moral response? Maybe this is just what happens when you drink massive tons of demon blood and then get possessed by the devil? We've been wondering if Sam "came back wrong" since the end of season two, and the question has been generally brushed aside so that we could assume the changes were psychological, but perhaps this time there really is something metaphysically missing? Of course, in general a psychological story is better storytelling and more interesting in terms of character--is this PTSD causing Sam to shut down emotionally? (I'm not sure how well that would work on such an action-driven show, but then Dean's S4/S5 breakdown was entirely psychological.)

I do kind of like the idea of the plot requiring some sort of quest to fix Sam or get the real Sam back--this is an action show where stuff has to happen, and I would like to see the plot driven by something that is ultimately so character-based. Or is it even something that can be fixed, or maybe just ameliorated by some brotherly love and moral guidance?

I have to admit that, while I am much more of a Dean fan, I really do miss Sammy's sweet puppy dog eyes!

But I also find myself somewhat bewildered by a lot of the fandom reaction. One big complaint seems to be that Sam has been sidelined by the narrative, which, okay, so far, we haven't been seeing as much of Sam's emotions as we have Dean's. But the core question of the show right now is "What's wrong with Sam?" so it's narratively necessary to keep us somewhat in the dark regarding what's going on with him. You know that an answer and a lot of character exploration is coming--Sam's issues will be back at the center of the screen soon. This is the buildup to a payoff, so the Sam fans charging off in a huff of "I'm not watching anymore!" right now are probably shooting themselves in the foot...

And there's the complaint that it's so awful that the boys are having conflict with each other, and wouldn't it be nice if they just went back to brotherly bonding and not being in conflict? Which... what? I think this opinion must come from people who've been watching for a long time and have idealized previous seasons, because having recently watched the entire series in the course of about two weeks, I can verify that the boys have always been in conflict with each other. They were in conflict in season one about Sam going back to Stanford and Dean hero-worshiping John and the choice of vengeance or family; they were in conflict in season two about Dean's failure to deal with John's death and over whether Dean would be willing to kill Sam to stop him going evil; they were in major conflict in season three over Ruby and Sam's potential to go dark, Sam's anger over Dean's deal, Dean's attempts to hide his fear of death and to stop Sam from trying to save him; their conflicts in season four and five are obvious and widely-acknowledged enough that I don't need to list them, right?

Television is driven by conflict. If the boys aren't having conflict with each other, it means that the conflict has to come via the boys having conflict with other people (which means the boys will have more screentime with other people and less screentime with each other--I don't think the fandom wants that!) or from other people having conflict and the boys being tangential (which would be a return to early season one's MOTW episodes, where the primary emotional drive came from characters of the week--again not something I assume the fandom wants).

Supernatural has always been driven by stories about the boys being in conflict with each other, but also loving and caring for each other. The narrative arcs have always involved the boys growing apart, growing back together, and growing apart again, as one conflict gets resolved and another gets going. This is the formula that gives us the maximum amount of our two pretty boys onscreen emoting at each other, so I am all for it continuing.

Also, Lisa! I can't talk about season six without talking about Lisa. I love Lisa so much, and I really like Lisa and Dean together, and I am increasingly dreading what is going to finally separate them. They have such a mature relationship--it's not all overflowing passion, but there is a very adult love and understanding between them. Especially because Dean is such an emotionally immature person in general--he knows how lucky he is to have Lisa, and he seems to have grown quite a bit from being around her. I really like that it's a relationship where they are both getting something out of it--Dean wants a family and Lisa wants another parental figure for Ben, and whatever other flaws Dean has, that he is fantastic with kids has been established since early season one. Plus they seem to genuinely enjoy each others' company and we know they're sexually compatible (always a plus!). It really makes me happy to see how much Dean treats Lisa with respect and that he's faithful to her--apparently even he was getting sick of all those years of being a womanizing jerk.

I pretty much cheered when Lisa suggested that Dean could return to hunting and they could stay together. Go show for challenging your own false dichotomy! Plenty of real-life couples manage to stay together and raise families while one partner travels frequently for work. (Although LOL at the way SPN consistently glosses over the fact that people need money to live.) This makes me worry even more about what's going to break them apart, though. I don't want Dean to give up his dream out of fear, or failure, or the realization that raising a kid is not as meaningful as killing monsters...

The biggest question I have is What does Dean want? Being our typical codependent Dean, he seems to be thinking in terms of wanting whatever is best for Lisa and Ben. But what does Dean actually want for himself?

The core, driving trait of Dean's character is that he's a caretaker. The thing that gives him the most fulfillment and happiness is being able to care for the people that he loves, in a way that often veers into emotional unhealthiness, because Dean puts other peoples' needs so far above his own that he fails to recognize his own needs, which is usually to his own detriment and ends up biting him in the ass anyway since his failure to take care of himself also hurts the people he cares for.

The thing that really hits me about Dean's relationship with Lisa and Ben is that it's a situation that gives him permission to be his truest self. Sam's arc for years has been that he doesn't need Dean to take care of him anymore, but Ben actually does. Plus, in that environment, Dean can be a caretaker without the macho bullshit defense mechanisms he learned in the manly man's world of manliness in which John raised him. When Dean says he wants to stay with Lisa and Ben, I think he means it. He wants to be part of a family, to be needed, and loved, and safe. I can't see him wanting to give that up, though I can see him choosing to do so because he's inclined to subsume his own needs in favor of what he thinks is best for the people he cares about. (The more danger Dean brings home with him, and the more Dean sees Lisa and Ben drawn into the hunting life themselves, the more Dean is going to pull away.)

I do worry that the show is trying to have its cake and eat it too when it comes to hunting. It's spent the past five years thoroughly convincing me, through Dean's eyes, that hunting is an emotionally and physically destructive lifestyle with very few redeeming qualities, and that most of Dean's professed enjoyment of it has been a result of denial and defense mechanisms--the need to please his father and protect his brother, and the insistence that he didn't want a better life not because he didn't want it, but because he thought he couldn't have it.

Hunting has two apparent virtues: one, that it's a life of meaning, of being able to help people directly and see the results immediately. But now that Ben's in the picture, I don't buy this as a motivation to leave, because raising a child well is also meaningful and good, and where's the virtue in choosing to help others over your own family?

The second apparent virtue is that hunting is the modern continuation of the American Western, the myth of the cowboy, of freedom and the open air and heroism without the restraints of civilization. (Which is also often a very sexist myth, in which men and traditional constructions of masculinity are associated with "freedom," and women are associated with "civilization," family, home, being tied down, conforming, not being "free.") Many--most?--Westerns deconstruct this myth on some level, usually by showing us that the hero's life is terribly lonely and he actually does want to settle down, but can't (because he's already too far outside the bounds of society, because he brings danger wherever he goes, or because guilt or responsibility drive him to believe that he must protect the happiness of others but mustn't allow it for himself, whatever.) Supernatural has been deconstructing this myth from the beginning, showing us the devastating consequences this lifestyle has on its heroes' emotional and physical health. This was why the end of 6x02 felt so off--following a scene that was about dealing maturely with a complicated situation, it was a reversion to the simplicity of a myth that the show itself usually doesn't even buy into (aside from during the occasional "Previously..." at the start of a season, and a "Back in Black" here or there).

The one thing I'm convinced that Dean misses is his bond with Sam. That's actually the core subversion of the Western mythology that this show has embraced from the beginning--it's not a story of a lone hero who doesn't need others but of two brothers whose isolation from society ties them together in a great big ball of codependent emotional need. I'd say that Dean has fairly successfully transferred his codependent need-to-live-through-the-happiness-of-people-he-cares-for from Sam to Lisa and Ben, but he still misses Sam. Lisa is a romantic partner and Ben is a child, but Sam is a brother and a best friend (you could even see Dean trying to fill that missing slot with Sid in 6x01, unfortunately for poor Sid). And something is obviously wrong with Sam which will require Dean's increasing involvement to resolve.

So, we'll see. I'm not convinced this plot is going to suck. I'm just worried. I want to see it work out in a way that doesn't read as sexist and that doesn't go too far in terms of either glorifying the hunting lifestyle or fatalistically implying that Dean can never be happy. Dean's connection with Sam still seems to be the most compelling reason for Dean to leave Lisa and Ben behind for good, in whatever way the narrative comes up with to make it necessary.*

* Although there is totally a part of me futilely hoping that Lisa and Ben will actually stick around and be there for Dean in the real ending after all.

Originally published at rusty-halo.com. You can comment here or there.