First of all: GMRIWJTROITKBRfkltmgrwiatu8945u4nftl your ICON! I COMPLETELY FORGOT ABOUT THAT LINE! See?! They ARE tigers! Rolling about in the dark and pulling on each other's tails! *supresses urge to use caps lock any more but will obviously fail*
psychoGordonworkaholic tendencies
You're making up words again! *adores*
Such a little brother Sam thing to do, stand there with his feet planted and that determined Sam face, calling Dean out, then taking the punch without pushing back because he knows he finally struck a real chord that goes deeper than any amount of physicality would. That's definitely Sam.
*nodsnods* Love the way you put it. I'm not so elequent. (I draw cartoons, for God's sake. Hee.) That whole moment when he DIDN'T punch back really did say a lot about Sammeh. I suppose that while Dean is characterized mostly by what he DOES, Sam is characterized mostly by what he DOESN'T. (Didn't you hit on this in the meta? Or mayhaps I read it in one of the comment threads. Because I read comment threads. *is lame*) This would be a glaring reason why Sammeh doesn't feel as "characterized" as Dean. As motivation tiger, Dean has to hop about and wave his sign and ACT in order to express his personality. Sam RESTRAINS himself from certain things, and through that restraint - his willful rejection of a certain path or value - that we see Sam express his personality. Of course, certain lazy viewers don't do the extra braining and see that they are supposed to extrapolate that he has the opposite value to what he rejects. (God forbid we ask the viewers to think beyond Teh Prettah. I know it's hard for me at times. My viewing habits concerning The Show are usually like: "So Dean feels conflicted and will perhaps pull away - ZOMG the light hit his eyes just right!" *drool*) It isn't as colorful or straightforward as Dean, but it is subtle and smooth. I mean, Dean does have his subtle moments (his whole emo!monologue to Gordon in the bar in "Bloodlust" comes to mind, and also when he RESTRAINS, he DOESN'T shoot Dwayne in "Croatoan"), but Sam is more anti-action-hero characterized. He feels like he belongs in some postmodern novel where the dialogue isn't in quotation marks.
I think when we say that Sam is a "thinker," we don't necessarily mean this automatically makes Dean the "brawn." Only lazy viewers would pigeon-hole the characters like this, that they can only be either-or, or opposites. I think we mean what you say: the weighter or options who is less apt to go on pure knee-jerk reaction. Dean is more instinct and training. And he feels part of a militaristic team; that is, that orders are orders and actions are meant to be missions. No see-sawing or hesitation, because for Dean such hesitancy will get you killed. That's not the way a militaristic team functions properly and efficienty. Sam, on the other hand, rejects that militaristic view. Well, at least up until some signs of change in "Jus in Bello."
[I have to cut my response in half because LJ is telling me I talk too much. See below for more.]
no subject
You're making up words again! *adores*
*nodsnods* Love the way you put it. I'm not so elequent. (I draw cartoons, for God's sake. Hee.) That whole moment when he DIDN'T punch back really did say a lot about Sammeh. I suppose that while Dean is characterized mostly by what he DOES, Sam is characterized mostly by what he DOESN'T. (Didn't you hit on this in the meta? Or mayhaps I read it in one of the comment threads. Because I read comment threads. *is lame*) This would be a glaring reason why Sammeh doesn't feel as "characterized" as Dean. As motivation tiger, Dean has to hop about and wave his sign and ACT in order to express his personality. Sam RESTRAINS himself from certain things, and through that restraint - his willful rejection of a certain path or value - that we see Sam express his personality. Of course, certain lazy viewers don't do the extra braining and see that they are supposed to extrapolate that he has the opposite value to what he rejects. (God forbid we ask the viewers to think beyond Teh Prettah. I know it's hard for me at times. My viewing habits concerning The Show are usually like: "So Dean feels conflicted and will perhaps pull away - ZOMG the light hit his eyes just right!" *drool*) It isn't as colorful or straightforward as Dean, but it is subtle and smooth. I mean, Dean does have his subtle moments (his whole emo!monologue to Gordon in the bar in "Bloodlust" comes to mind, and also when he RESTRAINS, he DOESN'T shoot Dwayne in "Croatoan"), but Sam is more anti-action-hero characterized. He feels like he belongs in some postmodern novel where the dialogue isn't in quotation marks.
I think when we say that Sam is a "thinker," we don't necessarily mean this automatically makes Dean the "brawn." Only lazy viewers would pigeon-hole the characters like this, that they can only be either-or, or opposites. I think we mean what you say: . Dean is more instinct and training. And he feels part of a militaristic team; that is, that orders are orders and actions are meant to be missions. No see-sawing or hesitation, because for Dean such hesitancy will get you killed. That's not the way a militaristic team functions properly and efficienty. Sam, on the other hand, rejects that militaristic view. Well, at least up until some signs of change in "Jus in Bello."
[I have to cut my response in half because LJ is telling me I talk too much. See below for more.]