Dean's role in S5

[feliciakw]

Just got done rewatching "Heaven and Hell." And something jumped out at me that I'd completely forgotten. Each time Dean has confronted Uriel, and Uriel has threatened him with death and/or damnation, Dean has tossed back that God had him pulled out of the Pit for a reason. In this episode, Dean calls Uriel's bluff, and Uriel says, "This is bigger than you. You can be replaced."

Dun-dun-DUUUUUUUUUNNNNN.

Makes me think it was never their intention to have Dean act as Michael's vessel at all. (I still would pay money to see Jensen play Michael, though.)

These developments in the mytharc, though, make me wonder who knew what when. I also think the majority of the angels, the ground forces, if you will, were more along the lines of Castiel in their goal: save the Earth, save the human race. I just wish, you know, we'd met a couple more of them and that they were further up the command ladder, to counterbalance the unpleasant ones we got.

Of course, in the end, it was only Dean who could pull Sam out from under Lucifer's influence long enough to leap into the abyss. And it took a lifetime to get there.

Dean Winchester: hanging out, being awesome, saving the world.

Comments

[leelust.livejournal.com]

Mmmm, disagree. I think it was obvious, imo, that kripke went for parallels and in the end it should be dean and sam as vessels of luci and mike both jumping into the pit. But something happened (S6 or kripke chickened out or whatever) and we got that harshed replacement, again imo, that ruined the ep and the whole story. Otherwise there's just no sense in dean's resurrection at all.

[feliciakw.livejournal.com]

Please don't take this too harshly, but what's obvious to me is that you and I will never agree on Dean's importance to the story. :-)

You see him as an ultimately useless character who served no purpose.

I see him as the person on which the entire outcome hinged, not by being Michael's vessel, but by being Dean, Sam's brother, and the only thing, the only person who could reach Sam through Lucifer's possession, simply by his presence. It wasn't the Impala or the toy soldier that saved Sam, it was a lifetime with Dean--a lifetime of Dean's support and humor and love. That says more about the family dynamic of the show than the parallel brothers analogy. Dean gave Sam the strength he needed, simply by being Dean. He didn't have to make some grand gesture and become Michael's vessel to defeat Lucifer. He simply had to be Dean in order to reach Sam so that Sam could defeat Lucifer.

Dean put a stop to the Apocalypse, simply by showing up.

And he couldn't have done that if Castiel hadn't rescued him from Hell.

If you want to put it really cheesily, love saved the world. I can live with that.

As far as Kripke's thought processes go, I don't know how the man thinks. He does say in an interview that Dean was never going to be Michael's vessel, but who knows for sure what the plan was or when/if it changed. What I do see in the way things worked out is that Dean--who was all about free will and self-determination--said no to Michael and continued to say no. Whereas Sam, who was always worried about his destiny, said yes to Lucifer (with Dean's reluctant blessing). So that particular outcome is true to the characters.

Do I think, had S6 not been green lighted, that Dean would have been Michael's vessel, and both would have fallen into the abyss? I think it's a distinct possibility, and I would have really disliked that ending. Because if that's how it would have ended, the previous five years would have had an extremely disappointing payoff, and it all would have been for naught. So I'm delighted that there's a S6 to give a chance for a modicum of hope and a future (yes, I've heard it's going to be bleak and noir But I'm hoping for a little bit of hope in there, too). And now that Sera's running things, I'm interested to see how she shapes the "sequel."

I'm curious: Would you have preferred to end the series with Sam and Dean both acting as vessels and jumping into eternal conflict and torment?

I hope this didn't come across as too harsh. I know we don't agree on a lot of things about the show. And neither of us are going to convince the other. :-)

[leelust.livejournal.com]

I don't take it harshly don't worry. I heard that POV you present and since the finale i'm trying to understand it and still fail. :(
I don't see a point in a character in being just a character. And most of all i don't see that that was Dean who helped sam to overcome luci. Dean was there, yes and luci bit the shit out of him and nothing happened. Luci still ruled sam's body so it told me that Dean being did nothing for sam. But then he saw the Impala and that toy soldier and that's when the effect worked. It could be Bobby to drive Impala there and out her in the right place and the effect would be the same. It makes Dean useless in the whole story. That's how i see it.
Also i have a big problem with Dean adreeing with sam's, imo, stupid plan because it was OOC for Dean and it didn't work anyway.
As for being or not being Micheal's vessel i would be ok either way but if i was told the whole season that it must happen it became Checkov's gun and to in the end to deny it was... yeah, i felt betrayed.
Forgot to add if you're right and Dean loving sam was the clue of saving the world then the series don't even need 5 years to tell its story. Dean already loved sam unconditionally in Pilot. He didn't need to suffer through 5 years to go to hell and spend 40 years there to learn the lesson of *how to love sam*.

I don't know how Kripke's head working too but it was him who said that he didn't make the finale 100% as he wanted and it was only 50% (or something he changes percentage every time) so who knows what he planned for it. From the storytelling i'd say both brothers as vessels would fit.

As for the end of the series? I could live with them both jumping into the pit but i'd prefer the both of them to overcome their destinies and not jumping there but finding a way to fool both heaven and hell and win. that' for me would be triumph of humanity (as Kripke called his story) because what he showed us in S5 finale i didn't see there any triumph at all.

And i think our conversation isn't about convincing each other but is about to try and understand each other more and maybe find some explanation of things that wouls be good for both. I'm ok with it.

[feliciakw.livejournal.com]

I don't know how else to explain it. Dean being Dean--an average, fallible brother and still saving the day--is much more in keeping with the original concept of the series. Because it's always been Sam and Dean against the evils of the world.

It means that we don't have to have superpowers or be recognized by the world as extraordinary in order to actually be extraordinary or make a difference.

But then he saw the Impala and that toy soldier and that's when the effect worked.

But it wasn't a lifetime with the Impala or the toy soldier that reached Sam. It was a lifetime with Dean. That cascade of memories meant something to Sam, and reached Sam through Lucifer's possession. Dean's presence did make a difference. Sure, Bobby could have driven the Impala, but it wasn't a lifetime with Bobby that reached Sam. It was Dean's voice that was calling to him. It was Dean's face Sam saw when he surfaced. It was Dean's willingness to die with Sam, Dean's lifetime of brotherhood and love that gave Sam the strength to hold on long enough to complete the mission. The Impala and the toy soldier were just the triggers for the memories. The bullet or arrow or whatever you want to call it that reached Sam was a lifetime with Dean.

It can take a lifetime to make a difference. But oh, what a difference it makes.

I don't know how else to explain it.

It makes Dean useless in the whole story. That's how i see it.

If that's the case, then Dean could be eliminated from the entire series, and it would still play out the same way, with just Sam. I can't even begin to outline how much I disagree with that assessment.

Dean adreeing with sam's, imo, stupid plan because it was OOC for Dean and it didn't work anyway.

The point of that was Dean trusting that Sam was strong enough to do it. Trust involves risk. Was it a risky plan? Absolutely. Did it go sour? It would have completely tanked if Dean hadn't been willing to die with Sam. Was it the only plan left? Yeah, it was. To paraphrase Dean in JiB, "I'm not saying it's a good plan. But it's better than letting Lucifer run loose on the earth."

i was told the whole season that it must happen it became Checkov's gun and to in the end to deny it was... yeah, i felt betrayed.

Betrayal I understand. I didn't feel betrayed so much as I felt let down by a lot of the execution. Because there was a lot that suffered from the execution of the story. But ultimately, I don't think Dean's role is one of those things.

Dean loving sam was the clue of saving the world then the series don't even need 5 years to tell its story. Dean already loved sam unconditionally in Pilot. He didn't need to suffer through 5 years to go to hell and spend 40 years there to learn the lesson of *how to love sam*.

I . . . don't even know how to respond to that because it's an incredible over-simplification of the brothers' relationship. Of course Dean has always loved Sam. That's why all the memories of Dean's love. It was that lifetime of love that gave Sam the strength to push out from under Lucifer for the moment needed to fall into the abyss.

As far as the deal and the 40 years in Hell goes, that's a tangential situation that is a bit too lengthy to address in this comment.

both of them to overcome their destinies

Yes, I agree that would have been ideal. I spent much of S4 dreading the suspicion that Sam was going to give in to his dark side. Still, I think a case can be made to say that both boys did overcome their destinies. Dean by actively refusing Michael, and Sam by finding the strength (thanks to Dean) to pull himself out of the possession long enough to jump in the abyss. It's not the triumph you and I want as audience members, but I've learned never to expect 100% triumphal, happy endings from someone like Kripke, who is so enamored of the dark.

Don't get me wrong. I have several issues with SS. It's just that the issues I have are not the issues you have.

I hope this all makes sense, even if you don't agree. At this point, I think we're probably talking in circles, though, as I'm not sure there's anything left to say. Is there?

[leelust.livejournal.com]

OK, i see you see things very differently. or maybe i expect of the show the different thing you excpect.
For me Dean's role of just being awesome and nothing else is an insult. It puts him in *female* role of sitting in the corner waiting for the prince to come and save. it's not Dean i knew.
See? If it was a life with Dean that helped sam than why he didn't break through when luci almost killed dean with sam's hands? Why his almost alive brother did nothing for sam but some toy he put in Impala did? I just think it was made deliberately to show it wasn't dean himself it was sam who broke through. Maybe made they that scene a little differently i'd see it in more positive light for dean but they did what they did.

If that's the case, then Dean could be eliminated from the entire series, and it would still play out the same way, with just Sam. I can't even begin to outline how much I disagree with that assessment.
Hehe, that's exactly how i see Dean's role because taking him out of mytharc wouldn't change a thing. Sam still would argue with John about something (just because they're too similar) and would give in to his dark side and still would be a vessel for luci. In heaven ep we were shown that dean wasn't important for sam so i don't see *his life with dean* as something that could help him. Maybe if they wouldn't changing the course of the season so drastically in the last 3 eps and would address that heaven ep more i'd believe in *his life with dean* but they didn't and felt too far-fetched for me.

The point of that was Dean trusting that Sam was strong enough to do it. Trust involves risk.
Yes but the plan was about to damn the world or not. Too much risky i would say and i don't see dean agreeing to that level of risk. Also they had alternative - dean saying tes to Micheal but they were so against it i couldn't believe it. There they at least had a chance for a half of the world to survive but they decided to ignore it and go with more risky plan...

don't even know how to respond to that because it's an incredible over-simplification of the brothers' relationship. Of course Dean has always loved Sam. That's why all the memories of Dean's love.
See? The thoing is that dean's role never changed. As Kripke loved to point out dean's only perpose in the zstory is to love sam. Nothing more. It's not a characterization of vivid character it's a describing of a tool. Sam maybe needed that journey to change his view of something (i don't know about what because in the end he was shown as flawless) but dean was ready for the finale of S5 in Pilot. His only role was to love sam and he did love him. Is it simple? Yes. But that's how the show presents it. At least how i see it. All growing on dean's part was unnecessary to this point. He loved sam and he continue to love him. There's no progression.

As for ideal finale i still don't know if dean saying no to micheal was a good thing but i have bigger issues with sam first killing 2 innocnt people to drink their blood only to have his plan busted and needing dean to be almost killed to overcome luci. And can you explain why falling into the pit sam/luci took micheal with him? It wasn't necessary at all. Why sarcifice micheal?

Well, i understand that we see things too differently to find some middle ground but it was nice talking to you. My mind is still boggling at how you see enough for dean to take so inactive role and be ok with it but i think i never understand that. I like Dean as a protagonist and no matter what kripke said he was a protagonist for about 4.5 years. *sigh*

[feliciakw.livejournal.com]

I don't think we're watching the same show. My whole point is that Dean saved Sam simply by being who he is--everything that makes Dean Dean. His humor, his heroism, his love, his loyalty. Dean was certainly not passive at the end. He did the only thing left to him: being there for Sam, not letting Sam die alone. If you think that kind of love is passive and pointless, we've got very different views on what love is.

He certainly did not sit in the corner and wait for the prince to save him. He rode into a losing battle to save the prince.

You're also not understanding my difference between "mytharc" and "story." Yes, the "mytharc" would have continued without Dean, but the story would not be the same, because it was Dean's influence on Sam kept Sam going. If there had been no Dean, then Sam would have fallen into revenge and obsession faster than he did, and wouldn't have been able to pull himself out. Dean is integral to the story, which to me is greater than the mytharc.

I'm sure that doesn't make sense to anyone but me, though.

killing 2 innocnt people to drink their blood

But we don't know that Sam had to kill two people for their demon blood. The hosts might already have been dead, in the same way that Ruby 2.0 was a dead body inhabited by a demon. Did they actually say that Sam had to kill two living people? If not, then I think you're putting more blame on Sam than is strictly necessary.

And can you explain why falling into the pit sam/luci took micheal with him? It wasn't necessary at all. Why sarcifice micheal?

Much as truly disliked that aspect of the ending, I'm sure they did it for the symmetry or something. By that point, there was nothing redeeming left of Michael's character. He wanted to fight "because it was destiny," not to save the world. There's no way they could have ended it with Michael escaping.

I like Dean as a protagonist and no matter what kripke said he was a protagonist for about 4.5 years

Of course Dean has always been a protagonist of the story. He was just never the protagonist of the mytharc. He was never meant to be.

My mind is still boggling at how you see enough for dean to take so inactive role and be ok

For what it's worth, I do understand where you're coming from and what you're saying. I just don't agree, obviously. :-)

But my mind can't understand why you see Dean as passive, or why you insist on reducing Dean's role to nothing, without trying to see something redeeming or necessary in the existence of the character. What I see as subtle and realistic in RL (because very few of us are going to fight literal demons, but all of us can make a difference in someone's life, simply by being there for them), you see as passive and pointless. And I just can't understand how someone who likes Dean can settle for passive and pointless without trying to see something more in the character.

It comes down to what we choose to see in the story. I choose to see a hero who is a hero, inherently, in his very make-up. (It's much the same way you see Dean as a hunter at his very core, that being a hunter is "who he is.") A hero not just in what he does, but in who he is as a person. That's encouraging to me.

You choose to see a passive "deansel in distress" who is of no use to anyone and holds no value either as a person/character or as an element of the other characters' experience.

As a Dean!girl, and as a person, I just don't get that.

[leelust.livejournal.com]

OK, i think it's better to PM about it.

[ann-tara.livejournal.com]

Makes me think it was never their intention to have Dean act as Michael's vessel at all. (I still would pay money to see Jensen play Michael, though.)

I don't think so. I think it was simply too obviously being set up that way for most of season five with all the brotherly symmetry that ended up going nowhere and falling flat as a pancake and making absolutely no sense at the end for the 11th hour change.

Plus, given Kripke's comments this weekend that his finale was, oh 60% no 70% no 50% the way he wanted it to play out, it's obvious that the 50% that didn't play out the way he originally intended was Dean's story line. I'm sorry, nothing about Dean in season four or most of season five makes any sense now without Dean being the other half of the equation at the end.

ETA: Though I realize I feel like a lot doesn't make sense to me where others might, and maybe in a couple years when I go back and rewatch with season six in the mix, it might play out differently for me.

But I do feel like Kripke kind of confirmed everything didn't play out the way it was supposed to and the way he was setting it up to with the Michael/Lucifer thing supposedly mirroring the Dean/Sam thing.

[feliciakw.livejournal.com]

I can't speak to all of Kripke's interviews, so I don't know how much he changed his percentages. :-) What I did hear, when he answered the question during the panel, is that the finale was 80% what he wanted. He also said (in an interview or a panel, I don't remember which), as I understand his answer, that they never intended Dean to be Michael's vessel. Now, that could simply be Kripke covering his backside now that S5 is a thing of the past, or it could be true and the execution of the whole thing was extremely lacking. (Which is a whole different issue, because there was a lot of S5 that was lacking in the area of execution.)

But the fact that they give us this throw-away line that essentially leaves them an out this early in the arc . . . it's interesting to me. And the line explains or foreshadows or whatever you want to call it the turn of events wherein the angels give up on Dean and turn to Adam. Because as it turns out, Dean can be replaced (as Michael's vessel. But not, as it turns out, the one who puts a stop to the Apocalypse).

Now, whether or not the writers put it in there intentionally or if it just works for the way things turned out, I don't know. But within the story we were given, it certainly indicates that Uriel knew more than he was letting on.

that ended up going nowhere and falling flat as a pancake and making absolutely no sense at the end for the 11th hour change.

That right there? Is a whole 'nother rant. (See my above comment about poor execution.) Because, dude, there was so much that could have played out better, possibly simply by tweaking the focus of the mytharc. Or something. My brain hurts. :-)

ETA: Just read your ETA. I can totally believe that Kripke was actually going to toss both boys into eternal conflict and torment. And I would have really disliked that ending. As it is, I'm very glad we got a S6, because even if they couldn't recover having to re-write the ending, or whatever, at least we get an opportunity to see how someone else--namely, Sera--will shape the show. Ya know?

[ann-tara.livejournal.com]

What I did hear, when he answered the question during the panel, is that the finale was 80% what he wanted. He also said (in an interview or a panel, I don't remember which), as I understand his answer, that they never intended Dean to be Michael's vessel.

I never saw or heard any specific answer about Dean being or not being Michael's vessel in particular in the different interviews (I could have missed one, though, I watched so many!). He did get very defensive when he admitted he went on line and saw almost nothing but negative responses after SS aired. And in the panel he said 70%-80%, but in some of the press room interviews, he said 50%. So he was definitely tap-dancing given the high amount of negative reaction he saw after the fact.

In the one long press interview I saw where Kripke was specifically asked about what he had to say to fans who thought Dean's story line got tossed under a bus - and he knew Dean was the big reason he got so many negative reactions - again, he didn't say anything about Dean not being Michael's vessel, but the answer he gave about Dean's "role" made me so angry that I honestly almost made the decision right there not to tune in at all next year. In the same interview he was pretty bitchy about the fans who didn't like the finale too, so clearly he was biting back against the backlash.

I do think overall season five was the most poorly executed season of the five - and that includes season three which, personally, I think looks inspired next to season five (though I genuinely do think there were many really good episodes that year). There were so many places I thought they could go this season that, at the end, when they went nowhere, I was flabbergasted.

I hope for better next year, I really do - beyond Dean, who I never have any problems with in terms of characterization. But I will be approaching with caution.

If only I could give up The Ackles. Damn him. ;D

ETA to your ETA ... LOL!

[ann-tara.livejournal.com]

Okay, in response to your ETA to my ETA, yeah, I admit if the series had ended as it was supposed to with both boys in the pit, it would have been bleak, for sure. But they would have been together, I guess.

Then again, the very last scene could have been both of them suddenly resurrected topside, just as Sam was at the end of S5. Remember, no one is ever really dead in the SPN universe. ;)

Re: ETA to your ETA ... LOL!

[feliciakw.livejournal.com]

Then again, the very last scene could have been both of them suddenly resurrected topside, just as Sam was at the end of S5. Remember, no one is ever really dead in the SPN universe.

Oh, I doubt Kripke would give us something that hopeful. Sera might, though.

And I'll answer your other reply here. :-)

As far as Kripke goes, I've only watched the panel, and half of a press interview. It was in the press interview, when the reporter asked what his original five-year plan was, that he said Dean's roll ended up being just as he originally envisioned it to be. He didn't seem defensive, and he was fairly detailed in describing how things came to be. Oh! I remember now. The reporter asked how he would have completed his plan if he hadn't included angels, because he originally said he wasn't going to include them. He said he didn't know, that a lot of the series happened by luck and seeing opportunities and using them. Then he went on to describe how the demon storyline originally developed, and how Dean's role didn't change. As I understood his answer, he was saying that the basic outline of Sam being evil and Dean saving him played out as he intended. He actually seemed to be saying something along the lines of what I wrote to leelust up-thread. (I flesh it out much better than he does, though. Lol!) I only listened to about half the interview, because I actually like to make my own decisions about the show rather than depend on the writers' in-put. So I don't usually read or listen to interviews with the writers.

If I stumble across the interview again, I'll give you the link, if you're interested.

Re: The Ackles. If you've been reading my journal, I don't need to detail my feelings about the man. :-) I will give him full credit for keeping me watching the show, particularly mid-S4 (when I was very tempted to quit watching), and through the convoluted and personally annoying--even insulting--developments that occurred this season.

For Jensen, I'll watch just about anything. *iz hopeless*

[blacklid.livejournal.com]

Yuuuuup. :) Didn't go so good without Dean in The End, did it? And he fixed it soes he didn't have to say yes like they wanted him to. That's why he really went back -- soes he'd know how to save Sammy, I mean the world, I mean Sammy... just by bein' awesome. *loves Show*

[feliciakw.livejournal.com]

"Save Sammy, save the world," is it? :-D

I think I need an icon of "Dean Winchester: Hanging out, Being awesome, Saving the world."

Also, I think kalquessa needs to see your icon.