I never took dean's extremely antagonistic attitude towards sam drinking blood as compared to anything else really seriously. While in first seasons they were still new to weird and their reactions might have been not as desanitized as later seasons it was always kinda clear he was illogical about this. The immoralness of demon blood was a pretense at most. An excuse dean could latch onto to clad his deep-seated personal unadulterated hatred to sam seeking someone else. And also his insecurity that his place- his entire purpose is easily being replaced/filled by ruby and taken right from under his nose and he's so driven up the wall he acts unreasonably and borderline psychotic like locking sam up and emotionally manipulating him to prevent it, when that doesn't work he resorts to violence. He was rationalizing his ugly feelings of hostile defensiveness and jealousy as some kind of a higher moral endeavor, but it was painfully obvious that was not the case. Dean literally at some point implies he agrees that sam is doing good and he's willing to accept him back but ruby is a deal breaker he unintentionally makes a visible distinction between it being a corruption/-humanitydescend issue and a more gripe that demon blood is rooted in dependence on demons and/or the constant need for supply; leaving sam not entirely dependent on dean alone. (Combine this with dean's emphasis on them finally being together and for nothing to come between them in s2&1)
Sam killed demons, he could exorcise people without killing them, he could kill Lilith and prevent the apocalypse (what they believed at the time) all objectively good acts. But dean blatantly did not care. Because his issue was never in the moralness of it or ''becoming less human'' hell this guy covered up for sam in an instant when he killed a hunter without thought. He threatened anyone to not lay a finger on sam when he thought sam was 100% going to turn into a monster and start killing them all (rather wanted to stay with him). Come demon blood and he suddenly is narratively very expected to kill sam out of moral obligation? Nahh it's a very fucked up psychotic break from a possessive driven mad who used up all his cards and is not willing to hand down what he finally owed to someone else so he's going to make sure no one else can have what he doesn’t. Dean stringed bobby along with him thinking they were both doing a savior mission for sam's ultimate sake and the world's when they were both on very different pages. Heck bobby is not the only one dean had fooled it was the audience and the narrative too. Insanely ironic
53 notes
·
View notes
Damn where are you guys getting your blorbos? I’m like “mine is a normal man with knife 😙✌️ (not even like particularly good at using the knife in combat, he just has it for safety reasons)” and you guys are like “so anyway, my combat-savvy serial killer/godlike being/supernatural kaiju started blasting,”
17 notes
·
View notes
travis matagot just -- the very concept of him unlocks something deep and feral in my brain, even aside from all the changeling stuff. an angel looked upon you once as a child and, after seeing every possible thread and pathway of the man you will grow into one day, said 'I see no sin here' even as its holy flames consumed your screaming parents and the town around you. that angel, having stumbled head over heels to earth after killing god, later deliberately loses their name to you in a card game so the eyes of heaven can't find them. you and the angel have proceeded to annoy the everloving FUCK out of each other for centuries because you just keep. bumping. into each other!!!! through the power of like Narrative and also simply being two of the only people who've even been around that long. you've kept their name for them this whole time and never breathed a word of it, even though they seemingly never even explained why they wanted to lose it in the first place. you've sworn to die together or not at all.
what if you met an eldritch horror as a child and then became their best (and most irritating) friend/life partner/frenemy/perpetual thorn in their side (affectionate). I'm obsessed with this idea of being divinely judged as unworthy of damnation so early in your life and having to have that in the back of your head forever even as your self-loathing and trauma start piling up over the centuries and you have done so many shitty things along the way. like. is he trying to prove them wrong. is that part of his whole thing about trying to escape the narrative. or is it to prove that 'no actually awful things happen to me because I'm awful, you got it wrong from the start (fuck you btw)' because at least that feels like a choice, like some kind of control to hold on to? what is going on here travis. what the fuck
134 notes
·
View notes