The only constant in life is change

[feliciakw]

Once upon a time, in the mid-2000s, a production company was putting together a new show called Supernatural. A young actor by the name of Jensen Ackles read for the leading role of Sam Winchester. The producers were much pleased with Jensen and said, "Woo hoo! We have our Sam!!! \o/"

Then the producers were introduced to another young actor by the name of Jared Padalecki. He, too, read for the role of Sam, and the producers said, "Woo hoo! We have our Sam!!! \o/"

Jensen's agent called the young actor to break the news. "They've chosen another actor, Jared Pada . . . Pada . . . PadaSomething to play Sam."

To which Jensen replied, "What about Dean? Can I play Dean? I like Dean. He's funny."

So Jensen read for the role of Dean.

And Jared and Jensen read together for the roles of Sam and Dean Winchester, and the producers said, "Woo hoo! We have our stars!!! \o/"

I've often wondered how the show would have turned out if Jensen had been cast as Sam, because Jared seems to be uniquely Sam, and Jensen seems to be uniquely Dean. It doesn't look like I have to wonder much longer.

Because after six years--six years of tragedy and loss and searching and death and resurrection--Sam is Dean and Dean is Sam.

Okay, so the role reversal isn't that black and white. There hasn't been a body swap (drat!) or an exchange of brains or anything. But each character has done an about-face to where now Dean represents the longing for "normal" and Sam represents the pragmatic hunter.

When we first met the brothers (as adults), Sam had left The Life. He was attending college, getting ready to propose to his girlfriend, had an apartment he shared with her, had "safe." Sam, who wanted something different for himself. Enter Dean, to ask for Sam's help one last time. Dean, who embraced the hunting life, who relished the chase and the kill. Dean, who cracked wise and snarked good-naturedly and defended his father as having reasons for doing what he does.

Now, six years later, having had the idealistic lenses removed from his perception, Dean continues to struggle with the idea that maybe his dad didn't make the best choices. His dad should have tried to preserve Dean's innocence longer than he did. And he wants to give his own family what he himself never had.

Now, six years later, Sam understands why his dad did what he did, and has forgiven John for the measures he took to keep them safe. Now Sam knows that what must be done, must be done to get the job done.

Where once Dean was the one saying, "Dad does what he does for a reason" without questioning, now Sam is the one who says "Dad did what he did for a reason, to keep us safe, because he had no other choice."

Where once Sam was the one wanting a safe, normal life with family and career, now Dean is the one who wants to stay with his woman and his son.

Sam has even started displaying Dean's behavioral patterns, inasmuch as he has been "becoming Dean" since S3. He drops pop culture references and gives backhanded compliments. He scarfs down his sandwich on the run and trusts the hunters who have taken him into their fold. But for some reason, a lot of people think he's a jerk for doing this (at least, that's the only reason I can see for such thinking)--for doing just what Dean did back in the early days of yore. The difference? Sam does not have Dean's sense of youthful bravado. He does not have Dean's roguish charm. Rather, Sam now has months of living while his brother suffered in Hell. Sam has suffered through demon-enhanced psychic visions, and an addiction to demon blood. He's been possessed by Pure Evil, and lived--well, been pulled out--to tell the tale. There is no innocent bravado for Sam, only a change in attitude due to the life (and death) experiences he has been through and assimilated. And perhaps something else . . . *quirks eyebrow*

Then there's Dean, who has also experienced a great many things in the past six years. He has struggled long and hard to reconcile the two sides of John that helped make him the man he is now. John as caring father vs. John as laser focused hunter who won't return his son's calls. And what Dean needs to learn--to experience--is that the two are not mutually exclusive. Yes, John was flawed and made a lot of mistakes, and where once Dean had the youthful bravado to believe that his dad could do no wrong, Dean has now lived through enough to recognize that his dad did indeed screw up on many points. And now, having experienced the family and home his father wished for him--the family and home that Dean has always wanted--Dean wants to do things differently than his father did. He doesn't want to pull his family into a world of monsters and death. He wants something different, something better, something safer. He wants to break out of the pattern, just as his mother wanted to. And now, he's got someone to tell him it doesn't have to be either/or.

Sam and Dean both are uniquely skilled to be hunters. It's how they were raised, and it's "in their blood." For Sam, it's about avenging evil. For Dean, it's about saving people and protecting families. And in this way, the brothers' roles are the same as they ever were.

Because the more things change, the more they stay the same.

And that's how they worked it so Jensen could play (a variation of) Sam, and Jared could play (a variation of) Dean.

Comments

[leelust.livejournal.com]

See, but that's because you wren't diappointed in S5 and you still had good feelings about the writers. Those who didn't feel like that of course tended to see it as *proof* of their feelings. And honestly everything that Jensen said makes sense but otoh it can be spinned into damage control because there's no way Jensen would admit he actually was unhappy about the start of the season. He's too professional for that and there's no chance for us to know how he really felt.
Just for example, i didn't even saw the titles of those articles when i read them and i still got the impression he wasn't happy so that marketing move didn't affect me. And it also interesting that there were not one reporter and all of them got the impression he wasn't happy? Was it a conspiracy then? There's a lot of ways to interpret what he said.

[feliciakw.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I wasn't disappointed in S5 as a whole. There was a LOT about S5 that bugged me. It just wasn't the same stuff that bugged you.

And any time you get a reporter injecting their own interpretation of a quote, you're going to get spin. The most objective of those reports that I read was the longest, most complete transcript of quotes from Jensen. The other reports that I read, the reporters would preface or follow the quote with an interpretation or explanation, always negative, and not really objective.

Was it a conspiracy then?

In the media? Of course it was. Perhaps not together, but the news media makes its money on stirring controversy with its stories. To take Jensen's quotes and give them an angle of "Well, he was disappointed and uncomfortable at first, but he's stepping up to the challenge and he's quite content with his work," would not have "sold papers" (gotten the site hits) that they want for their ratings.

I'm also a little concern by the claim that Jensen's second statement was damage control. Because if he was unhappy and now he's saying he's wasn't unhappy, then he's lying. And while Jensen is tactful and professional and protective of his privacy and only reveals what he wants us to know, I've never gotten the impression that he outright lies about his opinions and feelings.

And yes, there is more than one way to interpret what he said. You'll notice that the only interpretation that the news media and much of the fandom took it was negative.

[leelust.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I wasn't disappointed in S5 as a whole. There was a LOT about S5 that bugged me. It just wasn't the same stuff that bugged you.
Oh, i know you had issues with S5 i just meant your feelings about the season weren't that dark as mine after the finale. The last 3 eps just killed the whole season for me.

I'm also a little concern by the claim that Jensen's second statement was damage control. Because if he was unhappy and now he's saying he's wasn't unhappy, then he's lying
I'm not sure i see it that way though. He's an actor and saying polite things about his work place is a part of his job. You can't publicly say that your boss is an asshole even if you think that way and i don't see it as lying. Actually it's boss' job to be sure your workers are comfortable with their jobs. In Jensen's case i think he explained it all very good. He didn't deny he was all that happy but he assured he's happy now - perfect damage control. And i'm saying it in a good way. He's saving Sera's ass.