Tension, Conflict, Motivation, and Plot: Why the Story is About Dean and We Do Know Sam

[bowtrunckle]

I wrote a meta thingy! :)

There’s been avid discussion about Sam and Dean and which of them, if either, seems to be favored by Kripke as well as debate about “who is the story really about”. I’ve noticed there’s been a propensity for some self-proclaimed “Dean girls” and “Sam girls” to run circles around each other, trying to prove their points. Both this topic and the fan polarization seemed especially heated in the comments to The CW’s Source’s "Hottie Bracket Finals" featuring Sam vs. Dean. Based on my cursory glance, one anonymous commenter summed up the debate:

“Sam Fans bash Dean Fans and call them crazy, obsessed and rabid because they want Dean to have a presence in the mytharc episodes that doesn't just revolve around Sam. Yet Sam Fans whine continuously about Sam not having any characterization.”

Being that it’s the hiatus and I apparently need my SPN fix, I found myself thinking about why some people believe Dean has “no plot” and Sam has “no characterization”. This meta is my SPN-deprived brain’s attempt to explain why.

Let me first say I’m not a Sam or Dean girl. I like both the boys (according to the lingo being thrown around I’m apparently “bibro” (bi-brother) *snortlaughs at self*). And although my initial connection to the show was through Sam, I’ve grown to love Dean. It’s difficult for me to think of one without the other, and if asked to choose which one I favor, it wouldn’t be an easy answer. Each, to me, serves two different yet vital roles in the story—without either of them the plot that’s kept me watching would collapse. I’ve not contributed to the discussion on the CW page. I’m not into fandom wank or purposefully stirring up controversy. So if your knee jerk reaction is to type a ranting reply in caps lock, please do that in your own journal and, if you feel so inclined, send me a link or spin it into a meta and post to spn_heavymeta where I’ll likely stumble across it. However, I love SPN-related discussion and enjoy all pleasant and good-intentioned chatting regardless if what’s being said is inline or refutes my points. I welcome people expanding the discussion, playing devil’s advocate, and/or pointing out inaccuracies or misinterpretations. I don’t ever expect or ask people to agree with me, but when talking about “hot topics” lets keep things civil because it’s a lot more fun. Fandom is supposed to be where show love and fan fun smash together to equal good times to the power of a million and five. Enough said, now onto the blabber! *hurkie jump*

In “The Art of Fiction” John Gardner uses an analogy about two territorial tigers to illustrate how tension must be maintained between characters in order for the climax of a story to be persuasive and interesting:

“The value of the standard feud story always depends on the writer’s ability to create powerfully convincing characters in irreconcilable conflict, both sides in some measure sympathetic--that is, both sides pursuing real, through mutually exclusive, values. For the climax to be persuasive, we must be shown dramatically why each character believes what he does and why each cannot sympathize with the values of his antagonist; and we must be shown dramatically why the conflicting characters cannot or do not simply avoid each other, as in real life even tigers ordinarily do.”

The bolded section is what I find especially relevant to Sam and Dean. They’re like the two tigers that must be constrained to the same territory by the artificial constructs of plot and motivation in order to build tension and conflict necessary for a satisfying and inevitable story climax. As a result, I believe they have fundamentally different (and sometimes overlapping) roles in SPN’s story. And it’s out of these prescribed roles that I believe the “Sam hogs the plot” and “Dean steals all the characterization” debate has emerged.

But before getting to the Sam and Dean tigers, let me back up and ramble about tension and conflict in fiction. I realize there are execution differences between writing fiction that’s being digested in written form (short stories, novellas, novels) and fiction for the visual medium (theater, television, cinema), but I feel the heart of storytelling is largely the same--which is why novels are commonly adapted to the screen--and there’s relevance in applying the rules of fiction to both. So I may be generalizing a bit, but for any screenwriters who may stumble upon this please know it’s not my intention to butcher your medium. I have a better understanding of literary fiction, so that’s where this discussion is sourced.

One of the most important and difficult things to do in fiction is sustaining audience interest. The main way to do this is through tension, if that be through character vs. character tension (antagonist/protagonist tension or romantic tension a.k.a. UST (unresolved sexual tension)), plot driven tension based on a yet-to-be-solved mystery or a what-will-happen-next quest, tension based on a character vs. nature or society, or tension that occurs entirely within the hidden self of a character (character vs. self).

Tension is mostly achieved through conflict. And without conflict, an interesting and compelling plot is impossible. Even tales, arguably viewed as “simple” stories, have concrete, specific, and sustainable conflict. Cinderella was at odds with her stepmother and stepsisters; the Three Little Pigs had the Big Bad Wolf repeatedly banging on their door; even Snow White, who was a push over, had her stepmother queen creating havoc. Furthermore, conflict doesn’t have to be imposed on the character by external forces; it can be entirely internal. In Dorothy Parker’s “A Telephone Call”, an interior monologue about a phone call, the conflict takes place entirely in one character’s head.

In fiction (let’s brush aside modern and postmodern fiction, okay?) sustainable conflict must be magnified to be compelling. Likewise, the characters in the story need to be pumped up so they’re slightly larger than life without becoming completely unrealistic, which can alienate them (unless the point is to make them a caricature or parody a character archetype, usually only done for flat characters who are villains or act as comic relief). The reason why characters capture our hearts is because they act in ways we wish we always could. They say things most of us might think but would never say. They're braver, cockier, funnier. They’re who we wish we could be. Heroes blast ahead and take a stance against impossible odds, and must, at some point, deal with conflict.

However, in real life most of us do whatever we can to avoid overt, messy conflict. We try to keep our mouths shut, procrastinate, acquiesce and capitulate to demands/requests that we may silently not been keen on in order to keep the peace. And only when we’re backed into a corner or are pushed beyond our breaking points do we usually act. We do our best to play nice because the world is a better place when we don’t fight.

And this is where fiction diverges from real life and the tiger analogy comes into play. People in reality are like territorial tigers. Tigers normally avoid conflict. Rather than invade another tiger’s territory, they stalk away and establish their own new territory. But fiction requires a concrete and specific reason why characters must butt heads. Fiction also requires that those involved not be allowed to simply exit the story and establish a new territory off page. It this happened there wouldn’t be a compelling plot and the ending would be unsatisfying (how disappointing it would it have been if Sam walked out after finding John in “Dead Man’s Blood” 1x20 or Dean never chose to return to reality at the end of “WiaWSNB” 2x20). Like two trapped tigers, characters must be made to repeatedly invade and eventually stay in each other’s territory for the conflict to play out. The tigers must be forced, by either internal or external forces, to circle each other until something happens. And this slow circling, evading, hiding, and seeking builds until the climax of the story where their meeting is inevitable and the conflict finally comes to a head.

So how are the tigers kept circling?

A character must be attached to the story in a way that prevents them from avoiding the conflict indefinitely and escaping. As I see it, this is done though:

1. External forces: the character is directly tied to the plot so they can’t escape. This is what I’ll call the plot tiger.
2. Internal needs/desires: the character’s motivation is constructed such that they won’t leave. This is what I’ll term the motivation tiger.

I think Sam and Dean represent these two different conflict tigers, one tied largely to the plot and one made unable to leave because of constructed motivation/characterization. As a byproduct, Sam and Dean are lashed to the story in fundamentally different ways, resulting in the notion of the Sam-centric plot and Dean-centric characterization.
 
Because I believe Sam and Dean conflict tiger roles have evolved, I’m going to discuss S1 and S2 together and then S3 (through the currently US aired episode “Jus In Bello” 3x12). Then I'll talk about why I think The Show/Kripke doesn't favor either Sam or Dean, but the perception that "it's all about Sam" and "we know Dean to death" both at the expense of the other are artifacts of SPN-specific plot construction, the nature of creating compelling and believable conflict in fiction, and how the fundamentally different conflict tigers are used in a story (I have a really geeky table, too *grins*).


S1 and S2: The Injured Sam Tiger and The Mama Dean Tiger

Every story needs a plot tiger. It doesn’t matter if it’s a person, an animal, or an object, but the story must be about someone or something in order for the plot to move forward in a logical manner. For S1 and S2 Sam was the unwilling plot tiger, tied to the story by external forces outside of his control. He was dragged kicking and screaming from his chosen life, bonked over the head, and essentially concussed by the plot. And like an injured tiger, he literally couldn’t escape the story (i.e. the territory) because it was about him, happening to him, and following him … a monkey humping his back.

Even if Sam had run off to Yemen and left Dean in the dust, he would've only been postponing the inevitable. Azazel would’ve eventually come charging through Sam's front door, dragging the story with him. In fact, the intervening 22 years between the pre- and post-title card scenes in the pilot was exactly what this was; a postponement of what eventually must be and Sam’s futile attempt to escape the inescapable. So by necessity and story construction, someone had to be the plot tiger; in this case it was Sam, who simply had no choice in the matter.
 
This is why Sam was the entry character for the series, and why the pilot was told from his POV. He was whom the audience was meant to identify and empathize with, which was why it was important to cast a likable and accessible actor to portray him (as substantiated by Kripke in the S1 DVDs). To draw the audience Sam had to be a seemingly regular college student to provide the contrast for his subsequent character development (Campbell’s hero's journey). We had to be charmed by Sam's normalcy, and it was his everydayness that was meant to endure him to us. Sam was the audience’s security blanket, the one we could depend on when inevitably the plot got gnarly (which is why Sam's transformation in S3 is that much more unsettling). So at the beginning of the series it was Sam's story because the story had to be about someone. The mytharc, which so far features Sam at its center, supports this supposition: the generations of PsyKids and their seemingly dark destinies, the fate of a demon army, and the surface motivation for the big bad gal/kid/thing in S3. Even Mary's death—the catalyst for John's and subsequently Dean and Sam's hunting lives—was a consequence of actions centered on Sam and his demon blood baptism.

Certainly S1 and S2 Sam was also made to fit the description of the motivation tiger by making the plot (mytharc) personal in the last five minutes of the pilot with Jess burning on the ceiling. This was repeated at the beginning of S2 with John's death. However, all characters need motivation otherwise the story seems nonsensical and sentimental, so although Sam filled both conflict tiger roles to some degree, his primary purpose in S1 and S2 was to be the plot tiger, the foundation of the story, and anchor the mytharc (plot) firmly into place.

On the other hand, in S1 and S2, Dean was never held hostage by the plot: he wasn't having visions, a demon wasn't hunting him, he wasn't part of a generation of psychics. He wasn't entrenched in the plot the same way Sam was because, at that point, the mytharc (which is what I’m referring to as “plot” even though technically the definition extends it beyond that narrow application) wasn't about Dean. Furthermore, Dean wasn't meant to be the audience surrogate, so he was free to be whatever the writers wanted him to be. He didn't have to be likeable or totally believable. Therefore, he was bigger than life, funnier, tougher, gruffer, snarkier, and sexier than your average Joe. Whereas we were meant to sympathize with Sam and follow him into the plot because we cared about what happened to him (plot), Dean’s role was to entrance us like the Pied Piper, making us follow him because we were curious about who he was (motivation). Dean was the frosting on the cake and the sparkly glitter on the tiara and what Sam couldn't be by construction.
 
But all of Dean's charisma couldn't anchor him in the story and keep him circling the injured (and sometimes pissy) Sam plot tiger in a believable way. And for the story of two brothers to work, Dean needed to absolutely stay with Sam. Therefore, Dean's motivation had to explain why he wouldn't run off to find John alone even though he physically could've escaped the story (i.e. the territory) without the plot following him. This is why Dean's needs and desires were made to be familial, why Dean needed to need John and Sam more than anything else, why it was necessary for his sense of self to take a backseat to his collective SamDeanJohn identity, and why Dean had to be the bridge between Sam and John (who needed to be at odds for Sam’s rejection of his former life implicit in Campbell’s hero’s journey to take place). In this way, Dean became the mama motivation tiger who repeatedly chose to stay because his internal needs/desires prevented him from exiting the story. It wasn't that Dean couldn't leave; it was that he simply wouldn't (which is why S3 Dean's impending departure is that much more heartbreaking).

Keeping the motivation tiger circling requires different treatment than the plot tiger. Whereas it's usually clear why the plot tiger—Sam in S1 and S2—can't escape as he's essentially trapped in the story, the audience needs to understand why the motivation tiger—Dean in S1 and S2—continues to hover despite the difficulties, bone-aching angst, and single-tear manpain otherwise his character's involvement feels contrived and the conflict appears artificial. The motivation tiger requires a significant amount of characterization independent of the plot (a.k.a. mytharc) as he can’t rely on the plot to elucidate his actions and use it as a characterization crutch like the plot tiger because, by nature, the motivation tiger isn’t tied to the plot. And as a consequence, the motivation tiger appears to be an attention hog because without specialized attention geared specifically toward characterization, his actions simply won't make sense. Essentially the motivation tiger is the shiny dude in the middle of the three-ring circus juggling oranges and pineapples and humming the Benny Hill theme song while the plot tiger is the quiet guy in the corner holding the tent up. But without either of them, things would fall apart; keeping the circus running requires a collective effort.

I think a story can have multiple motivation tigers, plot tigers, hybrid motivation-plot tigers, and/or a combination of all three. However, in the case of the S1 and S2, the story (as we’re learning) was convoluted enough that I think there was room for only one plot tiger, Sam. And I think in order to further delineate character roles without injecting more messy competition in an already conflict-ridden surface plot, Dean was appointed the motivation tiger. However, in any story, as the plot develops and the characters become more complex, the plot and motivation tigers begin to blend, and as a story evolves and the stakes are upped, hybrid conflict tigers are the natural result. Anchoring a character into the story by trapping them in the plot as well as assigning them concrete reasons why they won’t leave only strengthens plot and ratchets everything up for a big-payoff climax. I think this is exactly what’s been happening in SPN and brings us to Sam and Dean and their convoluted relationships with the S3 story.


S3: The Trapped Dean Tiger, The Watch Guard Sam Tiger, and a Mix of Each
 
S3 feels like the fulcrum on which the mytharc is balanced and we're experiencing the shifting power dynamic as the Winchester seesaw begins to slowly tilt in the opposite direction. I think this makes sense when framed in Kripke’s five-year plan. Year three is when everything should begin to shift; when character foundations laid in the previous seasons are expanded and previously planted plot seeds begin to sprout. S3 is when things should begin to change. And appropriately S3 is when Sam and Dean reverse conflict tiger roles with Dean becoming plot tiger and Sam reverting to the motivation tiger. Then later they evolve into hybrid tigers, supporting the idea that as a series evolves the characters become more firmly incorporated into story through both plot and motivation.

Dean became the plot tiger the moment he locked lips with the Crossroad’s Demon in “AHBL-2” (2x22). By sacrificing his life for Sam’s, Dean trapped himself in his own plot. And like Sam in S1 and S2, he’s now being carried on the back draft of the story, and regardless of his actions, Dean will be forced to deal with the conflict in some manner if it be weaseling out of the deal or taking a trip to the pit. Also, like with the inevitable meeting of trapped plot-tiger Sam and Azazel in S1 and S2, the tension, what enthralls us, isn’t if Dean will deal with the consequences of his deal (because it’s unavoidable) but how he’ll deal with it. Even more satisfying is Dean’s previously established characterization/motivation built through his motivation-tiger role was used to catapult him directly into the plot. The Winchester propensity for self-sacrifice (“Salvation” 1x21, “Devil’s Trap” 1x22, and “IMToD” 2x01) and Dean’s need to save his family, his reflexive response to put others before himself, his inability to accept failure, his fear of being alone, or whatever one interprets the reasons behind his choice made his switch from motivation to plot tiger seamless and a natural extension of his character, the hallmark of good characterization.

Dean’s role as plot tiger marks the emergence of a dual mytharc-related plot. For the first time Sam and Dean have their own plots, “demons after Sam” and “Dean’s deal”. And I think the competing nature of a two-plot story adds to the emotional estrangement between Sam and Dean and the more fragmented feel of S3 by dividing their attention and toggling between each plot respectively. As a result, Sam and Dean must operate more independently because they’re responsible for carrying and cultivating their own plot as well as each other’s (their propensity for secret keeping also acts as dividing agent that supports more individualized plots). In S3 we’ve had at seven out of twelve (58%) episodes featuring plot-driven scenes with Sam sans Dean (“The Magnificent Seven” 3x01, “TKAA 3x02, “Sin City” 3x04, “Bedtime Stories” 3x05, “Mystery Spot” 3x11) and Dean sans Sam (“TKAA 3x02”, “Sin City” 3x04, “Malleus Maleficarum” 3x09, “DaLDoM” 3x10) whereby in previous seasons with a single-plot mytharc there were only seven out of forty-four (16%) such episodes (“Scarecrow” 1x11, “Bloodlust” 2x03, “Crossroad Blues” 2x08, “Hunted” 2x10, “BUaBS” 2x14, WiaWSNB” and “AHBL-1” 2x21). It’s easy to see why a single plot was important for S1 and S2 when part of the goal was to first build the fraternal bond then strengthen the collective Sam-and-Dean identity. But as we’re entering the middle of the series it seems natural that as the story expands their relationship also experiences growing pains regardless if this was done purposefully and/or created inadvertently from story construction. In all likelihood we’ll see the two S3 plots merge, reunifying the brothers with a single larger, stronger plot as the series comes full circle to its finale.

Like flipping from heads to tails on a coin, as Dean became the plot tiger Sam became the motivation tiger. This wasn’t a matter of Sam simply defaulting to motivation tiger because Dean became the plot tiger, but I think, like Dean in S1 and S2, the easiest way to reattach Sam to the plot was through motivation. Furthermore, it was imperative that Sam learned about Dean’s deal before the end of “AHBL-2” to prevent him from leaving the story. When Dean killed Azazel, Sam’s surface goals set up in S1 and S2—avenge Jess and Mary's death and get Azazel off his back—were fulfilled, and without the big bad guy perusing him and the other psychics of his generation dead, the plot previously tangled around Sam’s ankles seemingly fell away. Sure, there was the threat of the newly released demon army but with what we knew at that point Sam could’ve likely exited the story without it following him (Gordon and Kubric didn’t emerge until “BDaBR” 3x03 and mentions of Lilith didn’t occur until “Malleus Maleficarum”). Therefore, Sam had to be retied to the story in a new way, and this had to happen before the curtain closed on S2. The easiest way to accomplish this was to endanger what Sam had come to care about most, what The Show has been building since the pilot, his relationship with Dean, and then reveal Dean’s life was at stake as soon as possible (in the resolution of S2’s climax, the last five minutes of “AHBL-2”). As a result, we never doubted that Sam would stick around for S3 because it was ingrained in his character to need, above everything else, to save Dean. And, voila, that’s how Sam’s character development over the last two seasons was used to flip him from the plot tiger to the motivation tiger in one swift and easy plot reveal. :)

To support this, we’ve seen a number of S3 episodes specifically centered on Sam’s characterization that parallel S1 and S2 Dean-centric episodes when he was the motivation tiger. The Sam-centric flashbacks in “AVSC” (3x08) mimicked the flashbacks in the Dean-centric episode “Something Wicked” (1x18). I think the Sam-centric alternate-reality episode “Mystery Spot” was purposely made the counterpoint to the alternate-reality Dean-heavy episode “WiaWSNB”. Watch the opening montage for “Mystery Spot” and you’ll see clips from “WiaWSNB” despite the fact the episodes didn’t share reoccurring characters outside of Sam and Dean nor were linked by a through-going plot thread.

As the plot becomes more complicated and the characters develop, the relationship between character, plot, and motivation becomes more complex. Plot and motivation tigers are no longer mutually exclusive and characters begin to mesh into the plot based on both external circumstances and internal desires/needs. The need to save Dean kept Sam pigeonholed in the motivation tiger role until Kubric and Creedy tracked him down in “ABDaBR” (3x03) and the revelation a demon was gunning for him in “Malleus Maleficarum” pulled him back into the plot, making Sam a hybrid plot-motivation tiger. And, strangely, this also turned Dean, the new S3 plot tiger, into a hybrid tiger as we know Dean would never exit the plot on his own accord and leave Sam. So although the dual plot might have the boys by the ankles, Sam and Dean have their hands around both plots’ necks and aren’t letting go. In S3, plot, motivation, internal needs/desires, and external pressures/circumstances have melded to create a tangled ball of drama/angst and a no-exit story where the characters are solidly tied to two separate plots and each other. And by the nature of fiction and compounding effect of plot complications it’s only going to get messier. Yay!


Why the Story is About Dean and We Do Know Sam

So far I’ve tried to come up with reasons for some of fandom’s staunch belief “the plot is all about Sam” and “Dean hogs all the characterization”. But just because there’s a possible explanation doesn’t necessarily mean the original observation is true. So because I was curious if there really were more episodes centering on Dean’s motivations and more Sam-based plot episodes (and because I’m a dork), I made a table *makes a face*. Marks in the Sam (P) and Dean (P) columns denote episodes where I thought new information about Sam and/or Dean’s mytharc-related plot was revealed, while marks in the columns labeled Sam (M) and Dean (M) identify episodes featuring new revelations regarding Sam and/or Dean’s motivations/characterization. These designations were based on new information/reveals instead of reiterations of previously known facts because the nature of storytelling is to forward the plot and character development as efficiently as possible, and I felt new information would be the best measuring stick in which to judge the central focus (character/plot) of each episode.

The table of extreme dorkery is here (something is very wrong with Macs and table format preservation and I can't spend any more time trying to figure out how to get the table in this post *headdesk*).

The table results generally support the plot/motivation tiger trends. S1 slightly favors Sam’s plot-slanted episodes (9-8 episodes) and S2 slightly favors Dean-heavy motivation episodes (16-13 episodes). Episodes spent on character motivation in S1 are the same, which makes sense considering both characters needed to get up and running and needed almost equal attention. Sam was favored slightly in S3 with one more motivation-based episode than Dean. It’s not surprising that S1 and S2’s plot results are similar because there was only one plot (see the * table note for explanation), but with the emergence of Dean’s deal, I thought S3 would be telling. But, weirdly, Sam had one more plot-based episode than Dean, which was probably a result of Sam being reincorporated into the plot through two threads (Gordon and Kubric as well as Lilith).

The designations for each episode are somewhat subjective and the table might vary slightly depending on opinion. But I tried to be non-biased so any “errors” are hopefully random (gah, whatever). Even if fandom at large disagrees on the specifics of the exact episode designations, unless I was biased and consistently ruled in favor of one brother over the other, even a moderate amount of non-biased play in the plot and motivation designations wouldn’t likely result in huge differences whereby one brother was favored dramatically over the other in any category. Enough of that boring methodology stuff *snore*, moving on…

The point is neither Sam nor Dean-centric episodes based on plot or motivation overwhelm each other. The slight emphasis on Sam’s plot (28 Sam-plot episodes to 26 Dean-plot episodes) and Dean-motivation episodes (37 Dean-motivation episodes to 35 Sam-motivation episodes) supports the idea of Sam being the plot tiger and Dean being the motivation tiger for the majority of the series. However, overall there’s not a significance difference between Sam and Dean-heavy episodes, suggesting both brothers have more or less been treated evenly with respect to both plot and motivation. Put plainly: Sam isn’t a total plot pig and Dean isn’t a complete characterization hog.

To me, it feels like these numbers (which I expected to be highly skewed) don’t really account for fandom’s avid discussion about this topic. Weird. So if you’re onboard with the discussion so far, the question now becomes: if Sam and Dean are treated more or less fairly with respect to the number of episodes designated to their character and plot development, then why does it still feel like Sam gets less characterization and Dean is short-changed on plot? Could it be something about the nature of their conflict tiger roles rather than the number of episodes they’ve been occupying those roles?


Sam and Characterization

“AVSC” made me realize that I really did know Sam even though I felt he wasn’t as concretely defined as Dean. During the flashback scenes with wee!Sam and notsowee!Dean, I immediately recognized Sam’s snarky sarcasm (“A pony.” :D), his 2+2=4 logic (“If [monsters] got Mom, they can get Dad, and if they get Dad they can get us.”), and his propensity to question the obvious and steadfast, unquestionable boundaries (Is Dad a spy? Why do we move around so much? Is that why we never talk about Mom?). Hiding behind those scruffy bangs was the same Sam, that deeply damaged little boy who idolizes his big brother, who pushes until he gets answers he doesn’t want to hear. In contrast, my knee-jerk reaction to Sam in the flash-forward in “Mystery Spot” was to think, “Wrong! Wrong!” and suddenly want to watch the pilot or “Hookman” featuring the emo-bangs-hoodie-college boy from S1. Then I realized in order to feel the strong affinity for wee!Sam in “AVSC” and the omg!wrong contrast in “Mystery Spot”, I must have good sense of who Sam is to begin with. I don’t think my thoughts are original enough to make me the only one who in fandom felt this way after watching those episodes, so…

I think we do know Sam. I think he has received his fair share of characterization, but it’s been done in a less obvious way. Recall the plot tiger’s characterization is largely filtered through the plot. It’s more direct than the motivation tiger and requires less attention-grabbing work to explain the how and whys of a character. The irony is because the plot tiger’s characterization results in a more straightforward approach we don’t necessarily notice it, making it appear to be covert and sneaky even though we’re staring straight at it.  It’s like the non-squeaky wheel, we don’t think about Sam’s characterization being delivered through the plot because it’s meant to be transparent; it’s what’s supposed to happen and we take it for granted.  When things work right for the plot tiger, characterization naturally spins from the plot and is virtually unnoticeable.  The motivation tiger is the squeaky wheel you can’t help but notice because he’s making noise and waving a sign that says, “LOOK AT ME!” because to understand him you must look away from the plot.  When things work right for the motivation tiger, he entrances the audience into paying attention to him, not the plot, and that’s what we remember. 

Furthermore, when Sam became the motivation/hybrid tiger in S3, his motivations didn’t need much individualized attention because we already had two seasons of pre-plotted Sam characterization. When Dean was motivation tiger in S1 and S2 we were still learning who the characters were and Dean’s motivations needed to be explained as the story unfolded with scene and subplots outside of the mytharc plot. We didn’t need to be told as many things about Sam in S3 because we’d already seen them—it was understood that Sam wouldn’t abandon Dean because we saw Sam’s head-down determination and his efforts to save Dean in “Faith” (1x12). With Dean it was like we were given the already-constructed building and had the time-consuming task of personally deconstructing half of it to see how it was made. Whereas with Sam we passively monitored the construction from the beginning and saw the innards as the final product was being fabricated.


Dean and The Plot

I think the perception that Dean gets “no plot” is partially due to the nature of the story and Dean’s invented motivation/characterization. This may sound like a cop out, but implicit in Dean’s role in S1/S2 was his need to be all about John, Sam, the family Winchester at the expense of himself in order to set up the motivation for his deal in “AHBL-2”. So according to Dean’s character, Sam’s S1 and S2 plot had to be Dean’s plot, and in a roundabout way the plot was also Dean’s. That’s the paradox; by being about Sam it’s also about Dean because what happens to one affects the other. You kick one and the other jumps. And reinforcing this idea that Dean’s invented motivation partially defines his relationship to the plot is the fact his more assertive sense of self expressed in “DaLDoM” is coincident with the development of his independent plot. It’ll be interesting to see how his character develops as his plot plays out in the rest of S3. :)

In some cases, our understanding of mytharc made some episodes, at their airdate, appear to be Sam-centric even though we now know they weren’t. “IMToD” is an excellent example of Dean’s plot hiding in plain sight. Until “AHBL-2”, the last episode of S2, when Dean’s own plot emerged, the plot-related events in “IMToD” were viewed only in terms of Sam’s plot arc because Dean’s plot, although present, was incognito. But looking back on S2, it’s clear that Dean’s plot had been quietly unfurling since the fall of 2006, we just didn’t notice. Silly us.

I think what also adds to this false perception is even when “it was about Dean” the larger outcome, what we remember, was tied to the mytharc-related plot and, therefore, to Sam, the S1 and S2 plot tiger. Take “Croatoan” (2x09) where the surface plot was Dean-centric (the mystery of him shooting Duane Tanner, his choice to stay with infected Sam). Even though there was lots Dean-centric stuff happening, Dean’s story was the vehicle delivering information about the mytharc-related plot that centered on Sam (Sam’s immune to a demonic virus that’s being cultivated). So what the majority of fandom remembers foremost about “Croatoan” is its ties to the mytharc plot that just happens to be attached to Sam because those facts are directly relevant to the construction of the larger story.

Even though technically Sam was the plot tiger in S1 and S2, that doesn’t negate Dean’s role in the plot. In fact, without Dean to forward the story, the plot would’ve fallen flat on its face. Dean enlightened and deepened the story considerably. Like two facing mirrors reflecting an image to infinity, the consequences of Sam and Dean’s actions bounce off of both brothers over and over again. They’re foils for each other. We understand the story better through their combined reactions. Without Dean, this story wouldn’t have been possible. Think about how different some mytharc-related episodes like “Dead Man’s Blood”, “Scarecrow”, “Croatoan”, or “Devil’s Trap” would’ve been without Dean. Some episodes such as “IMToD”, “BUaBS”, “AHBL-1 and 2” wouldn’t have been possible at all. So I argue that even though Dean wasn’t directly linked to the plot like Sam in S1 and S2, he was definitely part of the plot, got his fair share of plot-related episodes, and was and an active and integral component of the story.


Final Blabberings

I think the idea Sam hogs the plot and Dean hoards the characterization at the expense of the other is a perception, a misconception even. I believe Sam received just as much characterization as Dean and Dean had his fair share of the plot. I maintain The Show doesn’t favor either of them, but has divided its attentions between Sam and Dean more or less equally over the last three seasons and this debate is a perceived artifact of SPN’s plot construction and the nature of creating compelling and believable conflict in fiction.

A character’s motivation is rooted in plot and plot spins directly out of a character’s needs and desires. So plot and characterization are like a snake swallowing its tail, where one ends the other begins. And Sam and Dean’s relationship with the story and their conflict tiger roles illustrate the circular-nature of this debate perfectly. More than anything, this story is about two brothers who are fundamentally different but work together all the same. And I think the same is true for how Sam and Dean are tied to the plot and how their characterization is dealt with. Each are accomplished in different ways and delivered through different means, but somehow they compliment each other and are used in tandem to forward the story. This is Sam-and-Dean’s story, not only Sam’s, not only Dean’s. I think it’s worth a closer look to realize that it’s not a matter of Sam getting more of something at Dean’s expense or Dean having more of something else at Sam’s expense. And with S3 melding previously established conflict tiger roles, I think this perception may very well be on its way out.

Gah! The end!  I'm sort of embarrassed about how long and detailed this got, but apparently this is what happens after weeks without new shows. *needs chocolate and caffeine*

ETA: kentawolf drew this gorgeous and so appropriate picture of our furry plot tigers! *eee*  Thank you, sweets!

Comments

[sevenandthree.livejournal.com]

i'm here via spn_heavymeta

this made me all thinky! i have to compose and then maybe read it again, then come back and comment.

you rule for writing this all down. :)

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Hi, welcome. Thanks for leaving me a note, it's nice to see new faces. Looking forward to any thoughts you may have. :)

[blackjedii.livejournal.com]

So, in the nature of SPN uh, stuff, first off you get this:


Secondly, THANK you for writing this up. I have to admit I was a little disappointed this season about boys being shafted in certain ways, but it was less characterization and more motivation that I thought was missing. (Mainly that we haven't seen Sam focused so closely on Dean's deal, Dean being so weirdly offbeat but then again, I expected it was going to pick up on the latter half of the season except for the strike happened so uh,)
ANYWAY, I apologize. Um, where was I going with this.

Right. It's really fascinating because even when it looks like there is a great deal of things NOT happening in Supernatural that I'd like to see, it still seems like there is a lot of thought about themes and motivation and storylines going on in the background. More so than the average drama, and certainly more than most other series I've watched. So either consciously or subconsciously, someone really is thinking the story through. Really really interesting.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

LOL! So I've been "twizzlered", eh? ;) *hugs*

we haven't seen Sam focused so closely on Dean's deal, Dean being so weirdly offbeat

I think I know what you mean (but maybe I misunderstood your points?). Yes, I thought we'd get more actual scenes of Sam actively persuing a solution to Dean's problem rather than just hearing about off-screen happenings (i.e. Sam saying, "I've tried everything, Dean, and I can't save you.") and getting close-ups of maudlin Sam's desperate puppy eyes. But in the sense that Dean's deal is the focus of S3 Sam's actions (the catalyst) I think we've have plenty of that (only "MM" and "JiB" have forwarded Sam's "solo" S3 plot). I hope the last episodes of the season give us some tangible Sam-trying-to-save/saving-Dean scenes because I really want to know exactly what Sam's doing/going to do. Considering he hauled Dean to a faith healer in S1, whatever Sam's supposedly been doing/will resort to should be a magnitude more desperate and spectacular. *bounces* However, I had a moment of weakness months ago and read a spoiler in a Con post... *glee*

As for early S3 Dean and his weird flippancy and Sam disconnect ... that was disturbing. It's hard for me to watch pre-"Fresh Blood" episodes for that reason. I think that distance was necessary in order to provide some texture to the brother relationship and contrast to the team mentality of SamandDean. I liked how it showed that, IMHO, the only way to bring down the brother Winchesters is from the inside (which reminds me of another meta I started last fall ... omg *runs off to ransack hard drive*). Anyway, uh, I think Sam and Dean's bro-bro convo in "Fresh Blood" dispelled some of Dean's early S3 machismo and I hope that it doesn't resurface ever for a long time.

it still seems like there is a lot of thought about themes and motivation and storylines going on in the background

YES! Or else there are just fans with out of control OCD, lol.

One thing I love with Sam and Dean relationship with the plot is that it's like a gigantic fake out. You're busy being distracted by one of them while the other is quietly spinning away in the corner, getting ready to burst back onto front and center stage when you least expect it. Sam and Dean, they're sneaky. Like mischievous children, you have to keep an eye on both of them. ;)

[just-ruth.livejournal.com]

Good stuff and much to chew on - I'm bibrolar (rhymes with bipolar) myself.

I like the idea of the boys as tigers - although I laughed out loud at the idea of Dean as a glittery tiara.

The stories were what attracted me to the show, actually, what attracted me in the first place was the plot's siliarity to a Japanese anime plot.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

I'm bibrolar

LOL! That is just so perfect for this fandom!

I laughed out loud at the idea of Dean as a glittery tiara

Aww, Dean. He is very glittery, though. ;) I had a silly analogy of Sam as a worn T-shirt and Dean as a sequined-halter top that I took out because it was too long.

Found it.

Sam, the plot tiger, is like your favorite T-shirt, comfortable and safe and the first thing you grab without thinking. It's familiar, unobtrusive, functional, and goes with everything. It's the backbone of your wardrobe, and you LOVE it. Your family and friends don't think twice when you show up in your T-shirt for Sunday dinner. They don't need to be convinced why you decided to wear it. Like the plot tiger, the T-shirt just is there for obvious reasons.

Dean, the motivation tiger, is the sequined black halter top you bought in Mexico during spring break, form-fitting and revealing and something you want to wear all the time because it makes people pay attention to you. When you show up to Sunday dinner wearing it, your family and friends stare. Like the motivation tiger, you need to explain to them your compunction to buy it, why you just had to have it, how it speaks to your SOUL. The conversation centers on the attention-hog halter top that you know you look awesome in.

lol. OMG. Look what silliness this show inspires.

[yourlibrarian]

Watch the opening montage for “Mystery Spot” and you’ll see clips from “WiaWSNB” despite the fact the episodes didn’t share reoccurring characters outside of Sam and Dean nor were linked by a through-going plot thread.

That's very interesting. I'd originally thought those clips were in there to distract attention from the spoiler of the Trickster clips and I'd never paid attention to the connection.

I like the way you laid out the interrelationships of the mytharc and the internal motivations. I hadn't seen those arguments expressed before, but I would agree that they seem like misperceptions to me. I'd also argue that Dean did have something of a plot arc in S1 but it was buried in his motivational one. He had the role of reintroducing Sam to hunting and also to have his commitment to the family tested. But I think viewers more often catch on to action plots and less to emotional ones.

I kind of came to something a bit similar in a roundabout way.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Thanks for linking me to your meta. You didn't post that in LJ and I missed it, did you? I'm going to reply here because I don't have a IJ account and leaving an anonymous comment trips my stalker alarm.

Really interesting discussion. I, too, remember being surprised to find JP's name credited first (for the reasons you stated). Especially being that because my friends who were rabidly whispering about this "Supernatural" show only mentioned Dean (or I should say that's what I only remember them talking about), I had no idea there was even a "younger brother". My response when I first saw Sam was "WHO IS THAT?!". But I think that reinforces what you discussed, Dean being the break-out character who fandom popularizes and why his characterization contributes to that. I also think his role as nurturer and that his character is more emotionally accessible than Sam, despite his prickly exterior, makes it easier for the audience to identify/empathize with him.

You also mention something I didn't touch on here: the reactionary character being largely the motivation tiger. The character bound to the plot is reactionary in the sense they're stuck reacting to external circumstances (the plot), but there needs to be an element of choice, otherwise the story seems fated and loses it's tension (and this is an American story, not European, where free will is practically a requirement). So while the plot tiger is confined to the story and must appear to have choices (drive the boat so to speak), the motivation tiger --whose central drive is usually another character--is stuck being reactionary without the illusion of choice. Unless they change who they are or the power dynamic changes, they're "fated" to react to the other character/characters they're bound to because that's ingrained in their role.

And the flipping power dynamic brings up what you said:

Dean is still the one who rescues Sam and even when he needs rescuing is aided by Sam but usually saves himself in the end.

Interesting that we're beginning to see Sam rescue Dean more this season ("Sin City", "Fresh Blood", "Bedtime Stories" to some degree, and even the original script to "MM" had Sam killing Tammi!demon, switching the rescue role to Sam).

the cumulation of this growing independence of Dean from Sam is going to result in an externalized change of power between them in S4.

I agree that we're seeing a power shift and it'll be fascinating to see where Krikpe takes us for S4. I'm not sure if we'll have an inverse power relationship. I like to think that it's becoming more equal that flipping like a coin only because having 2 characters in an equally matched power play (plot and characterization-based) makes for great tension. I'd love to see Sam and Dean go head to head in S4.

[julorean.livejournal.com]

Amazing meta. I love the discussion of literary devices, and the statistics table was great! The whole 'debate' really is just a misperception. I was one that saw this apparent inequality, and wondered, but now I see just how vital they both are. The same thing about Sam in AVSC and Mystery Spot happened to me too - I marveled at how Sam-like wee!Sammy was, and was very creeped out at the cold, hardass Sam in Mystery Spot.

Again, wonderful work! I do hope the rest of the season will provide a rich field to meta some more in. :)

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Hello!

Thanks for reading. I'm glad you like the table. For me, it was toeing the alarmingly too-detailed line, but then I figured "Who cares, just do it ... somebody in fandom has probably already made a it anyway." Fandom exists for the details.

I hope we get some juicy episodes as well to cap off our beheaded S3. I keep telling myself that it's quality not quantity that matters.

[manzanas-verdes.livejournal.com]

GUH this is why I love fandom, man, thinky things that think.

I agree with every word you wrote here, it's all about the bigger picture and I would have thought that after three seasons of Spn, we'd know better. But that's also part of fandom, so.

I would comment with something meaningful and possibly seemingly intelligent, but it's late here, my neighbors are having a party and there's a baby somewhere crying. It's also very, very late and I should have been in bed like, yesterday (literally), and this is entirely your fault because I stayed up reading this and now I'm kind of wired and awarding you with feedback would feel as wrong like Sam without Dean. ::breathes in:: so I'm not giving you anything more than this slightly rambly comment.

My hat comes off before you, I'll give you that.

::goes to happy, fanish place::

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

thinky things that think

*chuckles* I think I like things like that, too. ;)

I hope you got some sleep in the end even with babies crying and raucous partying. Thanks for dropping me a comment, I'm always interested in hearing what people think, regardless if they think it's rambly or not. Heck, rambly is good ... I'm rambly ... fandom is made for rambliness like bitchfaces are made for Sam and mini philly cheese steak sandwiches are made for Dean.

[kjpzak.livejournal.com]

In “The Art of Fiction” John Gardner uses an analogy

...I'm sorry...I got this far and started laughing and couldn't stop...you understand, I'm sure...wait until I bring this up a week from Tuesday...Okay, deep breath...I shall continue...

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Heh! I laughed to myself the whole time I was typing Gardner's quote! Half of me couldn't believe I was actually revisiting that pompous marble-garbler's words and the other half was thinking "So he did have something useful to say in all of that blabber." Watch out, next I'll be quoting Calvino IN ITALIAN XD! OK, seriously, if I ever do that you have permission to hit me over the head with your moss scraper. BTW, how's the shoveling going? ;) *ducks runs away laughing*

[kjpzak.livejournal.com]

Yowzer. All kidding aside, you should give yourself a pat on the back. You understood class & Garnder and quite frankly, I believe that's half the battle. I say, WHOOT!

Now, knowing I come from left field here, the character emphasis makes sense to me season to season. (And makes me wonder how deliberate this was on the writers' part or if they just lucked into it.) On day one, Sam was a college student, on the verge of law school (right?), lost his girlfriend, and gave up his future for a brother who made a less than desirable first impression (exactly what happened to the reference about Dean's drinking Sam made in the pilot?). I think it was totally the writers' intentions for the viewer to empathize with Sam because he seemed normal compared to his demon hunting brother. However, three years later, Sam is now just as sucked into the demon hunting world as his brother and that chasam of big man on campus versus dropout leather wearing bro with a trunkful of weaponry is non-existant. This closure, though, I'd argue isn't so much because Sam's been riding in the car next to Dean for three years, but more that Sam has come to accept Dean and that that has allowed Dean to develop as a character. When Sam stopped fighting Dean, Dean got to drop his guard and show more of who he is and that makes for an interesting persona.

I like your argument that Dean's motivation is family oriented. Of course it is. And because it is, having Dean stand a little off center from the story lines of the first two seasons makes the third season better. We've watched Dean keep Sam tied to the family for two years and now we're on the verge of Sam losing that tie. We hurt for Dean because we know he does what he does because family is family. We hurt for Sam because he's still learning that lesson and because it's hard to imagine Sam as Sam without a big brother keeping an eye out for him. Some people, no matter their destiny, just simply need that to be whole.

I look forward to the seasons to come. While I don't belive the writers' ever intended this show to hightlight one brother over another (it's just not filmed that way), I think they've finally found a balance or at least the depth of both characters. Seeing Sam and Dean continue to grow will be fun to watch.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

I believe that's half the battle.

It's pretty much the whole battle for me and my limited-space brain.

makes me wonder how deliberate this was on the writers' part or if they just lucked into it

I'd love to say that it's entirely pre-plotted and deliberate, but we all know how predicting what the characters to do in storytelling is like nailing Jell-O to the wall. In reality, it's probably a combination of a pre-plotted mytharc and emotional/characterization sign posts along the way with a huge amount of wiggle room in between for Sam and Dean to develop somewhat organically. And unlike with fiction for novels, there's also the not-so-inconsequential matter of actor interpretation and chemistry. Or, heh, you could just default to the easy answer: they're professionals and they know what they're doing all the time.

exactly what happened to the reference about Dean's drinking Sam made in the pilot?

I don't recall a drinking comment about Dean (which doesn't mean it's not there). I know he did say something about John's drinking, something about him being out with Jim, Jack, Jose on a Miller Time shift and eventually stumbling home. But there's been changes through S1 as the characters were being flushed out ... Dean used to have a tattoo on his arm that's mysteriously disappeared and I remember something about ghosts or demons being able to walk through walls.

This closure, though, I'd argue isn't so much because Sam's been riding in the car next to Dean for three years, but more that Sam has come to accept Dean and that that has allowed Dean to develop as a character

Good point. *nods* Humanizing Dean, for me, was really important. When I first met Dean, I didn't like him. He was too everything ... too cocky, too snarky, too (OMG, am I actually going to write this?) good looking, too tough, too swaggery hero-like. I had trouble identifying with him and seeing beyond what I thought was a cookie cut-out persona. But Sam, I got. Bitchy, complaining, scared, lieing Sam who was silently freaking out but kept plodding ahead was my kind of flawed character. Now that we're seeing a role reversal of sorts, I'm finding that I'm naturally drawn to Dean now! LOL.

I agree with you, thanks for pointing that out.

having Dean stand a little off center from the story lines of the first two seasons makes the third season better.

Yes. Character development is all about contrast! The starting point being noticeably different than the end and making the journey between them believable and interesting without losing who the heart of the character is.

it's hard to imagine Sam as Sam without a big brother keeping an eye out for him. Some people, no matter their destiny, just simply need that to be whole.

I'm not writing a meta about the implicit promise and upping the stakes. *whistles innocently*

Seeing Sam and Dean continue to grow will be fun to watch.

Hopefully. :) *crosses fingers*

[astri13.livejournal.com]

And with S3 melding previously established conflict tiger roles, I think this perception may very well be on its way out.

I wanted to pick up this point because as one who has been unhappy in the past about Dean not being tied to the plot as much as well as felt that Sam being the plot hindered his characterization, I found myself even more unhappy this Season.

Granted Dean has now a plot but one he can have no agenda in, i.e. he couldn`t do anything about the deal. What was thus left was more characterization that frankly was nothing new to me, the same old issues I had known since Faith in Season 1. Coupled with the false analogy of a person with a terminal illness - he choose his fate which to me makes it different - I heavily disliked even the characterization this time.

And I do believe the deal in a roundabout way will turn out to be a vehicle for the larger arc of Sam`s destiny, leaving Dean once again in the role of what would typcially be the love interest in a comics movie - emotional support or blackmail object by the baddies. The Padme role in the Star Wars sequels so to speak. And to me that is one lackluster role. And one able to be filled by any number of characters: lover, brother, friend etc.

I`m not sure I`m explaining myself very well but to me the show has created a disconnect between story and show itself. The show itself is about both brothers, their bond the foundation of its success, the screentime is pretty evenly divided and everything from a production standpoint makes it about both.

The story however can function with or without Dean as the central mystery only needs Sam to not crumble. Sure, the story would have to be adapted a little bit if Dean was taken out - find a new companion - but it is absolutely possible in my eyes.

In general I haven`t been too happy with the clear divide into plot and characterization the show established from the start (and I`m never happy when I get an identification figure so blatantly served, pretty much guarantees I`ll identify with anybody else) as I believe it possible to intermingle the two - for only two characters no less - right from the start. The buddy principle vs. Campbell`s hero story so to say.

I wanted to say though that even if I have a different POV yours was an interesting and well-written meta.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

All excellent points. I see where you're coming from. This is why this fandom rules so very much, awesome counterpoints. *digs in* Let me say I'm not trying to change your mind, you're entitled to your opinions. I'm just playing my part of the discussion.

What was thus left was more characterization that frankly was nothing new to me

I thought this was true in early S3 when Dean was running around with his indestructible hamburger-eating face. It was frustrating to see Sam and Dean locked in the same argument every week; I was so relieved when they had their communication break through in "Fresh Blood". However, I think mid-S3 has begun to show us new parts of Dean's psyche. "DaLDoM" showed us a new Dean who could assert things about John and himself that were a far cry from what we've heard in "Skin", "BUaBS", and "AHBL-2". "TKAA" showed us a side of Dean that longed for the "normal", something I can't remember seeing before. I think "Sin City" peeled away his macho layer and showed his terrified, doubtful side; I found it interesting his view of God had evolved since "HotH".

he couldn`t do anything about the deal ... Coupled with the false analogy of a person with a terminal illness - [in "Faith] he choose his fate which to me makes it different -

I hope I'm understanding what you're saying: you feel Dean in S3 is less empowered than he was in "Faith" where you felt he had a choice. Let me play the devil's advocate and suggest Dean has a choice now. He technically could try to break the deal, but he chooses not to (it's pretty much a non-choice considering Sam's life is at stake, but it's a choice nonetheless). He has a choice in his mental attitude. He chose to be in denial and blase, but with the emergence of his sense of self in "DaLDoM", he's beginning to take charge of his mental game; he's choosing to want to live. To me, the switch in his mental approach makes him seem less helpless and more heroic; he's acknowledging his wants but then consciously choosing to do something to the contrary for what he believes to be the best interest for someone else. Even if he won't take action to save himself, at least he'll be walking to the pit on his terms. That seems much more empowering to me.

OK, I've blabbed so much my comment needs more space! lol

[llywela13.livejournal.com]

Wow. That's a fantastically analytical and well-crafted meta. You've summarised everything I've always instinctively believed about the brothers and their respective development.

Sam's connection to ongoing plot has always tended to be rather more overt than Dean's (in seasons 1-2 anyway), but that doesn't mean that Dean's hasn't been quietly simmering away in the background anyway. It has. His is just a very different kind of plot than Sam's. And Dean's personality and characterisation have always tended to be more extrovert, quirky and in-your-face than Sam's, but that doesn't mean that Sam doesn't have a character. His is just a very different character than his brother's: maybe blander at times, certainly quieter, but just as definitely defined.

Thanks for a great read.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Thank you for reading and leaving your thoughts. :)

I think the personality contrasts you point out are also what makes Sam and Dean so complimentary. In fact, "complimentary" is a dyadic structure used to describe a kind of spousal relationship dynamic. LOL. Anyway, that's beyond the point ... but just think how tiring and uninteresting it would be if Sam and Dean had virtually the same personality? Variety is the spice of life!

[kynikey.livejournal.com]

Huh. This makes so much sense it's scary...lol. I've never looked at it like that (but then again, I can't meta to save my life. I just sit, watch, and drool. ;o)). I'm a Dean-girl, but I've never partaken in those silly arguments you're refering to in the beginning, cause really, shouldn't fans of the same show stick together? Yeah, I sometimes grumble when an episode focuses mostly on Sam, but after reading this, I might even have to rethink doing that. I think all those people who have nothing better to do than insult others who have a different opinion should come here and read this, then maybe they'd spend their time actually being excited about the show instead of trying to bash each other's heads in.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

I just have to say I love your icon! Aww, Dean.

I just sit, watch, and drool.

I'm pretty good at that, too. In fact, that's what I do best and enjoy the most. :D

shouldn't fans of the same show stick together? ... maybe they'd spend their time actually being excited about the show instead of trying to bash each other's heads in.

I agree 110%. We have enough network pseudo-"enemies" *coughDawnOstroffcough* to thwart *evil grin* that we don't need to expend energy on each other. Plus, fandom is supposed to be a place for FUN not a source of stress and negative feelings. It's much more enjoyable to be screaming about the show in a pee-your-pants gleeful way.

[redrikki.livejournal.com]

This is probably one of the most well thought out and think-y meta posts I've read in this fandom, and, more importantly, I agree with pretty much all of it. In the commentary for the first season, Kripke claims that Sam was supposed to be the entry everyman character and Dean was the cool older brother we had to learn to love as more than a cool leather-wearing badass. That's why episodes about Dean's character tend to be more in your face than Sams. But, interestingly, even in those in-your-face Dean episodes we still get plenty of Sam characterization. If Faith is all about Dean's Jesus complex, than it's also all about Sam's single-mindedness, self-righteousness and devotion to his brother. Furthermore, I think the perception about the show being all about Sam stems in part from Sam and Dean's preception of it being all about Sam. Sam repeatedly makes the claim that people die as a direct result of him being there (Hookman, Home, Provenance, Devil's Trap, etc.) and even Dean in DaLDoM admits that Sam has always been the focus of his life.

So, in short, I agree with you completely about what kind of tigers they are, and rambled a bit besides.

[kuromatic.livejournal.com]

*RANTING REPLY IN CAPS LOCK*

Just kidding!

omg! You've written a book. A very interesting book. It has left me now totally imagining Sam and Dean as tigers O_o

But seriously, that's a great analysis. I lose at the whole "realize this myself" part but I'm really grateful to read meaty meta like this that makes me go, yes!

[savage-midnight.livejournal.com]

Like two facing mirrors reflecting an image to infinity, the consequences of Sam and Dean’s actions bounce off of both brothers over and over again. They’re foils for each other. We understand the story better through their combined reactions.

I think this summarises their relationship beautifully. Until 'Mystery Spot' I don't think I realised how damaging their dependence on each other could actually be (Sam's spiral into depression after Dean's death, his obsession to change the past, his willingness to kill Bobby despite not being one-hundred-percent certain it wasn't him). I think I knew it, underneath, subconsciously, just the way most fans know that Sam and Dean need each other to the point of obsession. But I think this episode really slapped us in the face and showed us that, no matter how endearing their loyalty to each other, it could one day do more damage than good.

You've articulated beautifully what I've always believed -- that Sam and Dean are both hybrid tigers. I know Sam through Dean and vice versa, and I know about each through their actions, their motivations, the way they approach the plot. Despite my fannish love for Jensen Ackles/Dean, this show cannot exist without Sam. It's almost as if I adore Sam because Dean does and because Sam loves him back. Even if Kripke insinuated now that the show would soon become the Dean-show, without Sam present, I'd know instinctively that it wouldn't work, because as brilliant as Dean is, it is through Sam that he's allowed to be this reckless, this snarky, this heroic. His relationship with Sam is one of the fundamental things that makes his character so interesting -- the conflict it causes him, the choices he makes me because of it, his self-sacrificing nature.

I don't get weepy watching this show because Dean happens to be crying man-tears or beating the crap out of cars. I get weepy because I understand why he gets upset. I understand how his displaced identity, his choice to give up everything he was and could be for Sam and John, damaged something in him. The fact that he is a motivation tiger seems a little more devastating than being a plot tiger. Because once the plot is finished that tiger can go off and make his own territory. But Dean's motivation, his love for his family, will always tie him to them. It will never end. Even if Sam dies, he won't be free. His need for vengeance will motivate him. And once he's fulfilled that he will have nothing.

I think that's why I'm enjoying season three, because now Dean isn't the only motivation tiger. Sam is, too. I sympathise with his terror of losing his brother because I have an emotional investment in Dean just like he does. And that allows me to jump into his shoes and really get to know the character that he is.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

I think this episode really slapped us in the face and showed us that, no matter how endearing their loyalty to each other, it could one day do more damage than good.

*nods* "MS" was an eye-opening episode. Although I'd consciously realized that Sam, I think, is the only person that can really destroy/end Dean and Dean is the only person that could truly wreck/defeat Sam, I'd never consciously considered their "saving thing" being utterly and completely destructive in and of itself. But the beauty of eye-opening meta (if it be delivered via canon or through fannish blabber) is it's simplicity, that it just seems to so blatantly obvious you say, "Well, that makes complete sense, duh."

I'm sure this "no good comes of self-sacrific" idea will resurface just like the "what's dead should stay dead" mantra.

it is through Sam that he's allowed to be this reckless, this snarky, this heroic. His relationship with Sam is one of the fundamental things that makes his character so interesting -- the conflict it causes him, the choices he makes me because of it

Beautifully said! And I think the same is true for Sam. Both characters have grown into each other over the past 3 years such that, excuse the horrible Jerry McGuire reference *snortlaugh*, they do complete each other. It's Sam and Dean's symmetry, the fact that they can be mirrors for each other and weirdly be such opposites at the same time, their push-pull dynamic on all sort of levels that gets the meta brain churning. How is that possible, and how does that somehow work? *ponders*

I get weepy because I understand why he gets upset.

Sympathy/empathy is a powerful thing. I think the writers have gone above and beyond in building not just the plot but the characters. In fact, I'd hazard to say that characterization is what's bumped this show from just another cast of pretty faces jumping around on a rather fluffy network to a story about brothers learning how to live with each other on a rather fluffy network.

To go along with your last thought, I'm also relieved that Sam's become more emotionally available this season. There's a lot of stuff bottled up inside of him and I want to see it!

Because once the plot is finished that tiger can go off and make his own territory. But Dean's motivation, his love for his family, will always tie him to them. It will never end.

I've never thought of this in terms of long-lasting effects and what happens beyond the story. O.O OMG, I think I'm going to cry. Actually, I think you touch on something tangentially related to the original meta that sparked the one we're now discussing (which I have yet to finish): the fact that the implicit promise established in the pilot is that this is a story of a pair brothers muddling through impossible odds together. In fiction, for a satisfying ending the implicit promise MUST BE fulfilled. Ergo, in my mind, Sam and Dean need to be together in some capacity. Plus if they're not, there will probably be a worldwide Kleenex shortage. ;)

Thanks for sharing your insight! Excellent thinky thoughts. :)

[spankulert.livejournal.com]

Wowsie! I salute your brain fu. Whenever I run across someone with this complaint, from now on I intend to simply point them in this direction. Thanks for doing all the hard work! ;p

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Thanks for dropping by! My journal is mostly public; as long as people don't shove pie in my face (lol) it'll remain so. :)

[blackcat333-99.livejournal.com]

(Whoops! First, apologies. I deleted my original comment because of typos and whatnot that are just not cool. *facepalm*)

I really like and tend to agree with your logic and its supporting structured analysis. Well done.

I think many of the differing opinions on the brothers and the weight of their perceived importance/relevance in their different capacities comes very much from exactly the point you make: The squeaky wheel gets the grease, the quiet wheel gets a more passive recognition. Both are still in motion, however. And the balance is evening out, especially this year. I really am looking forward to seeing where next year, especially, takes us, considering that the point of Mystery Spot was about trying to get Sam (audience stand-in/surrogate) recognize that the codependant and claustrophobic nature of the time between the brothers can indeed hurt more than it helps. Regardless of how bad it may feel to allow some separation.

Both boys facing the idea of letting go, and who knows where that will take us all. But it seems to be setting up an organic shakeup in characters, motivations and plots.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

I deleted my original comment because of typos

Oh, no problem. Typos are the bane of my existence. When LJ actived their "edit comments" function it was like the heavens opened up and angels started singing. ;)

Both are still in motion, however.

Yes, for sure. Stuff is always happening to both brothers even if we're only watching one of them. I think I said in another comment that Sam and Dean are the ultimate fake-out team: one distracts while the other quietly lays the groundwork for the future plot.

the point of Mystery Spot was about trying to get Sam to recognize that the codependant and claustrophobic nature of the time between the brothers can indeed hurt more than it helps.

Yes, I agree. Although I'm still fuzzy about the trickster's motives, I think his message held some truth. What Sam and Dean are willing to do for each other, the lengths to which they'll go to "preserve" their relationship will destroy them.

I love the irony that the show is about brother's hunting the supernatural (i.e. the "un-natural"), but they themselves defy the natural order of things/nature with Sam being half-human/half-demon as well as both brothers having cheated death and essentially living a preternatural existence. I think Dean's words in "CSPWDT" "What dead should stay dead" will come back to kick him in the mouth in S4.

But it seems to be setting up an organic shakeup in characters, motivations and plots.

I look forward to seeing where we end up at the end of S3 and then the flurry of meta and fic that'll follow. :)

[hugemind.livejournal.com]

*basks in the glow of this meta*

EEEE, tigers! Sam and Dean tigers! *rawr* So, not only am I thinking about the boys as tigers, I'll be thinking about tigers when plotting a fic and about the boys when I see tigers. It's a perfect win-win-win! :D

I have nothing intelligent to add because to me, this sounded perfectly logical. And you know, by applying a theory about writing and story elements to something so familiar (SPN), you made them both (the writing AND the show) sound even more fascinating. I love big cats, so the tigers help, too. ;)

And about the topic at hand. Personally, I think that the fandom world would be a shinier place if people stopped labeling themselves as Dean girls or Sam girls and became all bibro. Because it is a show about brothers, and it wouldn't be nearly as interesting as it is if it was about just one random dude hunting ghosts.

\o/ for the power of chocolate and caffeine! They're the only things that are keeping me even remotely functioning nowadays.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

*eee* tiger!fic, yes! They would make such awesome tigers, esp. Sam with his gigantic hands and feet (tiger paws, ftw). I bet tigers like mini philly cheese steak sandwiches, too. Hmm, John as a papa tiger stuck with two awkward adolescent tiger cubs... *imagines*

I think that the fandom world would be a shinier place if people stopped labeling themselves as Dean girls or Sam girls and became all bibro.

Yes, I agree. When I scanned the comments to the CW's "hottie poll" I was disappointed. If I didn't know what the majority of the fandom was really like and read some of those comments I would've thought the entire fandom was rather insane. It's too bad that discussion happened in a more public, non-SPN forum where other people stumbled upon it.

*waves bibrolar flag* That term, bibro, makes me laugh everytime I type it.

Because it is a show about brothers, and it wouldn't be nearly as interesting as it is if it was about just one random dude hunting ghosts.

AMEN. And a random ghost-hunting dude is no fun because he couldn't bitch at anyone or put itching powder in anyone's underwear or have anyone to annoy with his farting noises. But, most of all, he wouldn't have anyone to save him and give him an occassional hug.

[growyourwings.livejournal.com]

Wow1 This is amazing. My mind is a bit overloaded now so I can't make any significant comment. But I just wanted to let you know how much I appreciated and enjoyed this. It made so much sense. Thanks.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Thanks for reading and leaving a comment! I'm glad you enjoyed it. Fandom is a great place to share thoughts and the occasional incoherent scream of glee. :)

Very eloquent - I only wish I was

[zazreil.livejournal.com]

I am glad I am not the only geeky fan girl. About 2 months a go a friend first got me really hooked to a show I only watched casually - so I made my first investigation of the fan boards only to find on the Sam/Dean battle in process on most of the boards I checked. Since after a my first marthon viewing I really thought Dean had the majority of the story but before I posted like you I went and did a count. My numbers are slightly different since my criteria was different (screen time) but like you I found that the balance even and the numbers were was with in minutes with Sam being in the lead in season 1 by 1 episode, Dean leading season 2 with 1 episode and season 3 was an even split at 5 and 5 when I did my count. So it is really all perception

Thanks for the great write up

Zaz - highly amused by it all

Re: Very eloquent - I only wish I was

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Welcome to the fangirl gathering that is the SPN fandom! :)

my first investigation of the fan boards only to find on the Sam/Dean battle in process

I usually restrict my fannish activities to my f-list on LJ, so I've isolated myself from the larger Sam-girl vs. Dean-girl debate. Although I have a vague idea how tense it can get, I have no idea how intense it is on a day-to-day basis. Is it a pretty pervasive issue on the boards you frequent?

My numbers are slightly different since my criteria was different (screen time)

Oh, wow. Fascinating. Did you write this up anywhere? If so, I'd love to read it. :) You know, one thing I was dorky enough to think about when I was doing this was the fact I was categorizing episodes (P or M) based on a minimum single occurrence/event of something (a new piece of information revealed about plot and/or motivation), not necessarily the magnitude of that event. For example, "Mystery Spot" and "Playthings" were both technically classified as Sam-motivation episodes (M) even though "MS" had more Sam-motivation meat to it than "Playthings". Your analysis covers that nicely. I find it really interesting our results are very similar, nothing like independent lines of evidence suggesting the same thing! Awesome.

[pie_andcoffee]

dude.

*hands you twizzlers and pie*

i'm gonna need at least a couple days to digest this. on the surface, it's beautiful. not sure i agree with absolutely everything, but there are enough tasty bits here for me to chew on for awhile. i'll be back when i have something of the coherenty to say.

thanks so much for posting this. i'ma samndean girl too. not one without the other - there'd be no show otherwise.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Oo, twizzlers and pie! *grabs* Thank you. :)

not sure i agree with absolutely everything

Oone of the many things I really enjoy about this fandom is it's perfectly fine if people have different opinions. In fact, overall I feel like discussion is encouraged. Trading ideas is what meta is all about. I've certainly read meta that switched the lightbulb in my head on and presented points that made me think about themes, characters differently. I love it when that happens. I really look forward to hearing what you have to say!

i'ma samndean girl too. not one without the other - there'd be no show otherwise.

Sam-and-Dean girls unite. :)

[sgriobadh.livejournal.com]

Uh. Wow. I'm going to have to give that a couple more read-throughs. Also, I friended you, so, hi! :)

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Hi! Thanks for dropping me a comment and letting me know what you thought. I friended you back. Feel free to drop me a comment anytime, my journal isn't exclusive or anything. And ... welcome! :)

[fannishliss.livejournal.com]

I don't have anything useful to say yet, but I loved your meta and am having lots of contradictory thoughts.

Let me just say that I have always loved Dean (his love for and need to protect Sam, linked to his desire to kill all the evil sons of bitches, is why I watch the show!) but I'm only now beginning to love Sam. Sam's need to escape the plot has come across to me as self-centered sometimes, even when he's perfectly justified in his desire for a normal life. One really can't be expected to give up one's life to follow in one's driven brother's footsteps -- even if the driven brother is poor sad, neglected, awesome Dean. But the deal ties Sam in with something that's not about him -- his love for Dean is what drives him now, and I like it!

Why is it that I never identified with Sam (I think I was supposed to?) I way more identified with dashing daring Dean, who not only had the cool weapons skills, but whose motives are so admirable and pure (also he's popular with the ladies). He stands in for this great American road myth of self sufficiency through pure coolness (even though he's really NOT a rock or an island ("for a rock feels no pain, and an island never cries") >:) ). I couldn't really identify with or admire Sam's pure need for revenge or his desire to get back to the normal life. I guess having spent my own life consuming fictions about the extraordinary path has skewed my alignment somehow. I do admire Sam now, even tho Ruby is trying to twist his moral dipstick, even tho his love for his brother and his desperation to save him from the deal may not be "healthy" -- but the world of the story has methodically stripped away everyone else from the two brothers -- sure you can say, they need a bit of separation, but the story doesn't work that way. It's not just that Dean couldn't live without Sammy, but we now see that Sam without Dean is more of an automaton than we ever could've guessed. Show is not perfect, but I love it like a basket of helpless little kittens, with their blue eyes and stubby tails and their sharp little claws and annoying mewling!

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Hello!

Thanks for dropping in. I love hearing boy/Show love. It never ceases to amaze me the different ways people were drawn to The Show.

Initially I was fascinated with the hows and whys of Sam, but Dean weaseled his way into my heart and made himself at home. Dean's voracious need to protect Sam and his sense of duty and honor to his family and work have always been admirable. He's just hard work, salt of the earth, and what you see is what you get. There's an honesty in that which is hard to come by, sort of a backwards vulnerability (like, "Here I am if you don't like me screw off"), I think. I love that even though he's a hunter and deals with the intangible, Dean makes it a point to root himself in the tangible (women, beer, food, the car, guns). He's this huge walking contradiction that is so fun to pick apart.

In so many ways he's counterpoint to Sam but, weirdly, they're so very similar. Half the time I'm thinking, "Is Sam even related to John and Dean?" and the other half I'm nodding my head thinking, "Gah, those Winchester self-sacrifice genes!" But I guess it's the push-pull of Sam and Dean's dynamic on so many levels that has me enthralled.

But the deal ties Sam in with something that's not about him -- his love for Dean is what drives him now, and I like it!

I'm glad we're finally beginning to see the extent of Sam's devotion, too. Sam's not without his contradictions either. He's gives the impression that he's all soft and cuddly and empathetic (OK, maybe he is?), but on the inside he seems to be the harder, more driven brother, the one who doesn't necessarily let his heart rule his head (the exception being Dean, of course). Sam seems to be more about calculated risks and "acceptable" losses this season. And during war those tough decisions have to be made, but I worry about what Sam thinks will be "acceptable", especially because he has virtually no perspective when it comes to Dean (which is why I love him!).

"for a rock feels no pain, and an island never cries"

Good old Simon and Garfunkel. :)

the world of the story has methodically stripped away everyone else from the two brothers

I love that The Show has made the other their world entire AND then had the courage to put it ALL at stake. But the more a character has to lose the more they have to win. Plus, I'm a sucker for desperate, angst-ridden characters in impossible situations--it's even better when they cry!

Show is not perfect, but I love it like a basket of helpless little kittens, with their blue eyes and stubby tails and their sharp little claws and annoying mewling!

A couple other people have pointed out how they're thinking about Sam and Dean as tigers now. I'm becoming slightly enamored with the idea of fuzzy little felines. Aww, tiger cub boys. ;)

[dianne-37.livejournal.com]

How sad is it that all I'm stuck with from this meta is the image of someone with a monkey humping his back ... I have to read it again. Whoa!

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

LOL! I was almost had the monkey humping Sam's leg, but then I thought that was kind of gross. Plus, I didn't want to stir up any mental images of Sam being molested by a primate (heh, I bet you're imagining Sam now being molested by a primate XD)!

Thanks for reading my silly meta (yes, this is the one I told you about). It's nice to have friends who are supportive of your fannish obsessions.

Finally, I want to apologize for not getting your fic beta'ed and back to you by yesterday evening. I should've e-mailed you sooner *hangs head*. A and I are about to eat dinner (oops, it's 10 pm here) and then I'm going to return to your fic posthaste. I'm using my H/G icon in tribute to your fic. *points*

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Oh, thank you for reading and commenting! It's so nice to hear what people think. I'm happy this meta summed up your thoughts.

There seem to be a lot more members of fandom who feel Sam and Dean are treated more or less equally than I thought (or maybe those are the people who tend to comment on this post *shrugs*). It's affirming to hear comments like yours. :)

[http://users.livejournal.com/amy_star_/]

I totally agree with you on this. However, I have to admit that I think the majority of people complaining about Sam lacking characterization and/or Dean not having enough "plot" are being far more superficial. :) I've always tended to view it as:
a)Sam not having as many easily identifiable characteristics (because as you pointed out, early on, Dean had to be "a character" of sorts, therefore we can say concrete things about what Dean is - he's a ladies man, he uses humour inappropriately, etc - where Sam often is described by what he isn't - Sam isn't as into classic rock, Sam doesn't have flings like Dean, etc) which gives the appearance of "weaker" characterization. I definitely think we know Sam, and know him well. It's just that he isn't a larger-than-life persona, and when comparing him to Dean, there is a difference. And some people don't like that. ;)
b) Dean isn't the "hero" of the story. He isn't the entrypoint character, as you pointed out, nor is he the focal point of the plot (mytharc) early on, by way of Campbell's hero's quest. And I definitely agree that he gets his fair share of plot but to some people, because Dean isn't tied into the mytharc the way Sam is, it feels that Dean is somehow "lesser" to the story.

Anyway. I get your point, and I agree with it. I'm just pointing out the arguments I tend to hear for the sake of playing devil's advocate here.

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

I think you're right in your assessment. :)

where Sam often is described by what he isn't

Wow, you're the fourth person to bring up something tangentially related to comparisons between the brothers in the comments to just this post. I think this is a really significant point, one I can't remember being discussed much in formal meta. And I totally agree with you; in fact, lol, I pretty much said the exact same thing here:

http://bowtrunckle.livejournal.com/34017.html?thread=421857#t421857

I think it boils down to "different" not necessarily being "worse" or "better". Feel free to jump into the discussion if you feel like it.

nor is he the focal point of the plot (mytharc) early on, by way of Campbell's hero's quest.

*nods* Have you read the series of Campbell's Hero's Journey meta by kentawolf? Even though I side-stepped this in this meta, she makes a really awesome point about how, in her opinion, both boys are used together to make a single "hero" who walks through Campbell's stages through their collective experience.

but to some people, because Dean isn't tied into the mytharc the way Sam is, it feels that Dean is somehow "lesser" to the story.

I think it's just a matter of perspective. I consider Sam and Dean having different roles, which doesn't necessarily equate to better/worse or more/less. But I think it's the knee-jerk reaction and human nature to play the comparison game and see things in an either/or and more competitive light (which is perfectly fine, too). And I guess this just goes back to your first point about the propensity to definine the boys by what the other isn't.

I always enjoy playing the "devil's advocate" game. Thanks! :)

[rheasilvia.livejournal.com]

This is a lovely, thoughtful and extremely well-argued post - bravo. :-)

You make a lot of interesting points, and I agree entirely that Sam does get characterization and Dean does get plot. (And I see I've happily managed to avoid a lot of irritating fannish discussions...) I love your chart, BTW, and I have no problems believing that plot and characterization attention is distributed more or less equally between them.

Personally, I have a slightly different - though related - concern. But because that goes off on a slight tangent from your topic, and because what I wanted to say took way more words than I thought it would, I posted in my own journal, with a reference to your essay (http://rheasilvia.livejournal.com/34740.html). I hope you don't mind - but let me know if you do and I will take down the link at once. :-)

[bowtrunckle.livejournal.com]

Hi! I'm sorry this took me so long to reply, but I wanted to do it properly (and read your meta). RL had me in a stranglehold for a bit.

I love your chart, BTW

Thank you. I thought it slightly obsessive and scared myself a little. But then I realized fandom exists to share such silliness. :)

I hope you don't mind - but let me know if you do and I will take down the link at once. :-)

Oh, not at all! I'm happy this meta inspired tangential thoughts (in fact, this entire thing was a tangent from another meta I was writing). It's such a wonderful compliment to have others take an idea or build off of something and make it something new. I think fandom is for sharing ideas; the more sharing the better.

*wanders over to your journal*