#realising that yes intrinsic things and his childhood experiences can and will affect him in ways he can't help

[imblocking-you]

Therapy Game

[aliusfrater]

hello, can you please share more thoughts and elaborate on dean viewing sam as an extension of himself? and how does that reflect on the way he treats him?

yes! personally, this is the basis of the dean-sam dynamic — in the same way dean's lack of personhood is intrinsic to and stems from the john-dean(-sam) dynamic — that i think is realised only when dean begins the adoption of the role of patriarch in season two when the whole responsibility of sam's life is passed on from john onto dean in 2.01 through the inheritance of 'save him or kill him'. i think it stems from:

the dichotomy of monstrosity and dean's view of sam's monstrosity as a personal failing. — Sammy as 'the innocent' 'us' to be protected.

dean's self-perpetuated parentification that manifests within his view of himself as sam's ultimate protector his inability to live without sam.

dean as both an authoritative figure regarding 1) the dichotomy of monstrosity and sam's existence within it, and 2) consequence as well as the foundation of sam's personhood and reality as it relates to hunting and their relationship, which is his life.

which exist simultaneously and lead to while also stemming from each other. i think it's also essential to recognise that the sam that is an extension of dean is the idea of sam as Sammy, the role of dean's little brother and a role that sam fundamentally struggles to fit within based on the differences of their experiences within the john-dean-sam dynamic and how that manifests within their individual values.

regarding how it affects the way dean treats sam: i think dean's actions are a symptom of every root causation listed above, as well as the ways in which their roles both within the john-dean-sam and dean-sam dynamic are perpetuated within every structure that surrounds these relationships: the dichotomy of monstrosity, the cycle of abuse, the cycle of grief, of revenge and even an allegorical patriarchal structure. quite foundationally, i think dean begins to assume the position of a patriarch from the moment of john's death but specifically, the passing sam's life onto dean with the job of 'saving sam or (if he cannot), killing him' (re: sam's probable monstrosity), which is an extension of dean's childhood parentification. dean's view of sam as an extension of himself manifests within both the winchester familial role that dean holds as well as dean's self-perpetuation of this role, which also perpetuates the structures that revolve around the dean-sam dynamic and the conditions of sam's own (non)role¹.

the thing is that it's such an expansive idea that spans their entire relationship (past season one, anyway) and fundamentally changes sam's character post-cage (after which dean's presence is entirely unconditional to sam's reality and sam begins to adopt a lot of similar views of structure synonymity with his and dean's relationship that mostly dean had previously held). it's in every resurrection dean attempts or undertakes, it's in every lie and secret dean keeps to himself on sam's behalf (2.22, s3 when dean learns but doesn't tell sam that ruby can't help save dean, 6.12, 7.03, gadreel, 15.16), it's even fundamental to the way most basic way in which dean hunts—protect the innocent, protect Sammy, even at the expense of the will of the victim (a la ghoul!adam 4.19 or even claire 12.16). it's even in dean's tendency towards physical domestic violence that tends to turn up in a lot of instances during which sam behaves beyond the dynamic of his and dean's relationship; this idea does extend beyond the physical though. for example:

despite reoccurring explicit examples sam's monstrosity in season two, dean is able to stretch an aspect of the dichotomy of monstrosity to fit sam within the 'us' of 'us vs them/hunter vs monster/innocent vs intruder'. he remains Sammy, dean's little brother that dean continually 'defies' john's dying wish in favour of and this invariable aspect of sam's identity is compartmentalised as being separate from Sammy. this is even repeated in season three, and sam's straying from his non-role, from the script of Sammy And Dean, is considered indicative of a monstrosity dean is reluctant to admit. in season four, sam's straying from his non-role with indications of monstrosity is met with dean's reluctance to stretch the dichotomy of monstrosity to fit him within the role of the innocent; sam, the monstrous, begins encroaching upon Sammy, the little brother to be protected. this is the monster killing show, sam's monstrosity is worthy of death should dean decide so, hence, 4.21.

5.16, in which sam's desire for an existence beyond the synonymity of the dynamics of their family with hunting, sam's desire for normalcy, his difference in familial values and, by proxy, his attempt at existing outside of his non-role as an extension of dean (in which sam is dean's Sammy) is perceived as sam's abandonment of dean by dean and is then conflated with sam's relationship with ruby and sam's season four attempt at independence from his and dean's relationship which is then encapsulated within dean's disposing of the amulet, a symbol of their childhood relationship dynamic, an action that is representative of dean's authoritative position and dean's ability to redefine the boundaries of sam's role and dean's ability redefine sam's inclusion within the family. the same is true for the real voicemail dean intends to leave for sam in 4.22.

most recently (as in based on when i got this ask), i made explicit reference to sam as an extension of dean in commentary about sam and dean's gadreel arc in the first half of season nine and fundamentally the issue there stems all the way from and throughout season eight in which dean is grappling for control for the entirety of their relationship especially when it comes to the prospect of sam existing outside of it. there's the purgatory conflict and then there are the trials in which dean already decides for them both as well as their relationship the way in which the trials are to go in 8.14 without sam's input. he backtracks to the ideal of sam existing outside of his and dean's relationship into an idea in which sam does but on his terms and this perpetuates throughout sam's undergoing on the trails. dean struggles to grasp for control over sam's worsening health and makes it for up through basically helicoptering his decisions and every day life and there's a major aspect in which that childhood dynamic comes out and he attempts to infantilise sam to enact his care for him. he tries to take care of him, he pilots and hovers, he demands to read things for sam, he demands to decide things for sam/on sam's behalf, and he tries to cancel out a lot of different agencies that sam tries to enact while his health worsens (case in point: the case they work with charlie). there's even a point where sam brings up the hovering and infantilising gaslighting, and asks him to stop and dean lasts about three episodes (8.15 -> 8.18). this continues into gadreel's possession of sam during which he quite literally acknowledges sam's autonomy and backtracks into tricking sam into the possession because dean cannot live without sam. this is sam as an extension of dean.

also like. narratively Third characters very often view sam as an extension of dean as well: gordon, bobby, castiel, lisa, benny, gadreel, chuck, jack, etc. my favourite examples: gordon's usage of the name sammy and gordon as fodder for acknowledging sam's monstrosity as it disrupts the winchester hunting dichotomy of monstrosity, sam and ruby's relationship as a whole, the soul fisting scene in which cas takes consent about sam's body from dean, bobby treating sam's psychosis as something that's affecting dean's emotional state rather than an experience sam is having, and instances of sam speaking to chuck while chuck responds to dean, even speaking about sam in the third person in sam's presence.

fundamentally, i view supernatural as a show to be an ultimate, extended exploration of this original john-dean-sam dynamic, reflected and refracted throughout the plot and i think of this idea of sam being viewed as an extension of dean (and tbh. john because john handed sam over to dean) by dean, the narrative, sam himself, and from the audience, as being Intrinsic to the way the story works. so much of sam's conflict revolves around his loss of autonomy because sam's non-role in their original familial dynamic involves that fundamental loss of autonomy—mary, azazel, john, and dean have all held authority regarding sam's autonomy and it reflects itself in everything else.

there's another aspect to this—dean as patriarch, sam as an extension of dean, and dean's parentification—that cannot exist without dean's emulation of john + the ideal of dean's genre and genre emulating (or attempted emulation) heroism that reflects into the way dean treats sam or even the way the narrative itself represents dean's ideal of sam and dean's perspective of their relationship. anyway, the point is that sam gets to a point where he starts believing it too (case in point: his 13.20 monologue).

¹a role that is so defined by sam's inability to fit within it, a role defined by the fact that sam's character exists to examine the structure(s) it exist(s) within, that it stops being a role and becomes a non-role.