Walking My Turtle

I also found this series of books by Carver Edlund. Did those books really happen? Wow, that is some meta madness. Thanks for saving the world and stuff.

insp | template

my take on the whole "dean was parentified" narrative and where that slippery slope usually takes people ("sam was spoiled as a kid and dean shielded him from all harm") is that many people can't comprehend that dean was in fact parentified, but that doesn't mean he was sam's father. sam had a father, and it was john.

nor does it mean sam was spoiled or babied by either of them. canon doesn't support this interpretation despite it being so popular in the fandom.

dean was parentified in the sense that he had responsibilies and stressors that weren't appropriate for his age and his role as a son... but that doesn't change the fact that his relationship with sam was that of a brother, not a parent.

at one point dean says "I had to be more than just a brother. I had to be a father, and I had to be a mother." and his feelings of overwhelm and resentment are valid—their childhoods were difficult, stressful, and abnormal.

however, this doesn't mean "john was absolutely useless and neglectful, so he was completely out of the picture. dean was indeed sam's father and mother. and he fulfilled those roles so well that sam had a happy, easy childhood and he was freed from any parent-related trauma, since dean was his parent, and he did a stellar job at it"... you know?

parentified siblings are siblings after all (and sam and dean only have a 4-year age gap). and dean did "fail" in his parentified role—sometimes he fucked up, sometimes he was the one hurting sam. in many ways, he didn't understand sam's needs or how to fulfill them. which is understandable. and he definitely couldn't shield sam from the difficulties they both had to face. that was well beyond his capability after all

on top of that, sam was taught self-reliance from a young age and he was exposed to the hardships of their lifestyle just like dean (hardships in general since he was born, and hunter-related ones since he was eight). and most of the glimpses we get of sam as a child/teen show a lonely, sad, troubled person. where's the pampered and unconcerned child!sam people keep hallucinating?

deep down, the issue is that people seem to put sam and dean on a seesaw and weight their problems and traumas against each other. if we say sam had a shitty childhood, then we're somehow denying dean's traumas and sacrifices. and if we believe dean suffered a lot in his youth, then that must mean sam had everything served on a silver platter. and that makes no sense.

On Friendship.

"what do eggs have to do with Jesus?"

Eggs are actually a really common piece of Christian symbolism for the Trinity. It's a shell, a white, and a yolk, but it's all one egg. Just like how God is made of the Father Son and Holy Spirit.

You know that image that's like, a youth pastor explaining the Trinity with a fidget spinner? It's like that. That was the metaphor every medieval monk used to explain the basics.

Every episode of Supernatural they ask, "How will we defeat this new and unique monster?" and the answer is "shoot them with guns," mostly.

1x14 Sam on my mind tonight

I always have a hard time depicting the various layers of back muscles under the skin, so I made this as a study/reference.

i'm going to move on from supernatural posting, i swear to god, but first i'm going to talk about ep 9x07 bad boys

the episode itself is fine and good (i mean it's another example of dean having a support network while sam can't have anyone and dean keeping secrets while when sam does it it's the worst betrayal ever but that's not what this is about and sometimes i think about what this show did two earnest, loving traumatized characters by turning them into the most tragic versions of themselves and - ok, this really isn't what this post is about)

but fandom interpretation of this episode actually drives me up a wall because it does a disservice to literally every character

one, john did not leave them without enough money for food. dean gambled it and lost it. there's nothing in canon to say that john was taking longer than expected, that they were running out of money, none of that. dean gambled food money and lost it and then tried to steal to make up for it. he was 16 when this happened and it was a bad decision but i don't think he should be at all vilified for this. he made a dumb mistake and then tried to fix it with another dumb mistake. john was right to be mad and sam was also right to tell him that he shouldn't beat himself up about it. just like with shtriga - yeah, dean was climbing the walls stuck in that hotel room. but you know who else was stuck in that hotel room? sam. and he didn't get a break to go play at the arcade. again, i'm not blaming dean here, he shouldn't have been stuck taking care of his brother that young and he was a kid and john leaving his his children behind while hunting a child eater, whether he was using them for bait or not, is crazy. but dean stealing food wasn't about john's neglect and all the sacrifices dean had to make for sam. it was about him trying to fix his fuck up

two, and this is the one that really gets me, dean didn't go back with john because he had to take care of sam

listen. listen to me. i am speaking from experience when i say this

parentified siblings are still, first and foremost, siblings. especially with only 4 years between them. the show shameless i think did an absolutely excellent job with this and is why i love the first few seasons of it so much. fiona is without a doubt parentified, she is raising those kids, but she's also clearly their sister not their mother

i know later seasons dean and fandom like to make it seem like dean literally raised sam and john was just a background figure but like. that's not realistic, and frankly doesn't even make sense

the reason dean leaves sonny and goes with john isn't because he feels like he has to keep him sam safe. it's isn't because he feels like he has to raise him. it's because he loves him

you are reducing dean to the most pathetic woe is me archetype with this interpretation and ridding him of all his rich loyalty and care and love to saddle him instead with comparatively flat duty. dean is more than sam's caretaker. he's his brother

there's also no reason for dean to feel this way. he just massively fucked up in taking care of sam - that's why he's with sonny in the first place. john has alternate people to take care of sam when he can't do it himself, as he has just proven, and while i don't think we should turn a couple teenage mistakes into making dean incapable, dean absolutely would - and did! he carries every fuck up regarding sam with him! so right now he's really, really low when it comes to his own estimation to take care of sam and leaving sonny because of that doesn't make any sense

but he looks at his brother and is reminded how much he missed him and loves him and realizes staying means he loses his brother. the good and the bad. so he goes, because he loves sam more than anything else

this is also why sam leaving for stanford cuts him so deep. that's why this moment is a parallel to that rather than being unrelated. stanford isn't about sam leaving dean even though he has a duty to care of him, because he doesn't. dean's 22 and at this point is always hunting with their father so there's no reason for sam to believe his presence is necessary for either john or dean's safety

no, dean's mad because he chose his love for his brother over a normal life and sam didn't

(sam didn't want to choose at all but this isn't about him)

anyway. dean fucks up sometimes and john sucks but not quite in the ways fandom thinks and dean loves his brother past reason or sense