#showrunning vs storytelling

[wanderingwomanwondering]

I’ve watched 15x19 Inherit the Earth twice and I still hate it. Chuck’s end was fitting but the weak ass storytelling to get us there was unforgivable. Also, Cas is still gone and we barely mentioned him or adequately mourned him in that episode. I just...can’t with this show rn. 15 years! For this?!?!?!?!

What quality storytelling and wrap up could they possibly accomplish in the final episode next week. The fans needed and deserved narrative throughlines and intentional, carefully developed character growth throughout the series. Some characters grew (e.g., Castiel, Jack) but Sam and Dean have been mindbogglingly more or less the same for about 10 years. Occasionally a “good” episode rehashes their old issues and makes the boys feel their feelings, but the show has been mostly plotty shark-jumping antics. That’s entertaining only in how inconsistent and strange it is.

I wanted Dean to wrestle with and work through his mommy and daddy issues (ages ago). I wanted Sam to figure out how to love and trust a woman who could actually live a “normal” hunter life with him. I wanted Dean to figure out that he’s queer (don’t at me) and work through what that means given his archaic ideas about masculinity in the context of the hunter life. I wanted both men to learn to be more emotionally mature and overtly open-hearted over time (and not just with pretty women but with scores of men in their lives that they loved and lost). I wanted them to learn how to grieve in honest, overt, and healthy ways since death and loss are a cornerstone of their lives.

I wanted Sam and Dean to have a long ass memory, mentioning fallen friends freely and often, lighting a candle on Jo’s birthday and then going about their hunter business. I wanted Dean’s hilarious comment in 11x4 when he said “I read” to mature into a special interest area that he researched and became an expert in, taking full advantage of the Men of Letters library. I wanted Sam to never stop inviting Dean to be more emotionally vulnerable. I wanted Sam and Dean to slowly stop keeping secrets. I wanted Sam to keep demanding that Dean treat him as an adult and capable hunter who he doesn’t have to keep sacrificing for and taking care of. Codependency is not a good look after 15 years.

I wanted Castiel to confess his love for Dean (dont at me) at least seven seasons ago. I wanted him to be in every epsidode, a tried and true and unequivocal part of the family, always fighting by Sam and Dean’s side. I wanted Dean to reciprocate! Even if he had to spend half a season struggling to redefine himself in light of his expanding heart and romantic interest in Castiel. I wanted Castiel and Dean to hash out what it means to be in love, and queer, and of two different species (angel and human) and the beauty of that and the complications.

I wanted Dean to work on wrangling his rage over the years rather that letting it control him and endlessly put him on the outs with Castiel mostly and sometimes Sam. I wanted Mary and John to stay dead (don’t at me). They were a critical part of Sam and Dean’s past (and Dean’s issues in particular) but with quality writing and support from friends and family, Dean could have worked through that, letting himself grieve what his parents weren’t and celebrate what they were.

I wanted Sam and Dean to turn the bunker into a headquarters for hunters and MoL around the country, reminiscent of Ellen’s Roadhouse and name a few mixed drinks after her. I wanted Sam and Dean to regularly remember Bobby as not just Bobby but as their foster father. The boys lived with him and were raised by him during huge chunks of their childhood while John was away hunting.

I wanted Dean and Sam to see and treat the women in the show like sisters, occasionally texting with them, asking about their hunts, calling them on birthdays, tearfully meeting up to toast a dead hunter or 12. All of this because it is human and facilitates character growth and it shows who they are, not necessarily because it serves the plot. The plot is secondary to why I stuck around for 15 years! I’m here for the characters.

I wanted Sam and Dean to grow as people despite their endlessly brutal and painful circumstances. Whether you’re a hunter fighting evil or a normal clueless person drinking too much Starbuck’s and worrying about your family, adversity is a part of the human condition and learning how to navigate that adversity and learning who you are and how to be in the face of that is what we are all here doing.

Ngl, each new season of the show since the 5th has been harder and harder to watch because the boys have been defined in terms of their persistent unresolved issues instead of by their ability to grow and adapt as people.

We see them, week after week, rally and rise to meet external threats (monsters, demons, angels, etc). I wanted to see that same energy around their personal growth. Naming the boys’ issues and watching them drink and cry about it once or twice per season is technically character development, but narrative throughlines that go beyond merely naming their issues, throughlines that actually delve into their issues and force them to begin dealing with them in order to resolve them (as much as possible) is character growth. One does not require strong storytelling skills and basic knowledge of human psychology, the other definitely does.

In the last 10 years (basically after Kripke left) fans have been given a show, sure. But, in many ways, the story died at the end of the 5th season. Honestly, I could write about this for the next week, with receipts (because I’ve been here for 15 years), but I’ll stop here.

[sortasirius]

Hello, I saw you say in one of your replies that in your opinion spn has changed alot since season 11. I just want to ask in what ways? For context, I left the fandom in 2018 and didnt see anything after s11 but for years i was a huge spn and destiel fan. Since it's ending I felt the need to check up on it again. Also, would you say that the focus on dean and cas in this season is more than in s8?

Hello!

So I talked about the difference in the SPN showrunners and their approaches to Dean and Cas specifically here, but I’ll elaborate a little on not only what’s changed, but why I think Dabb’s run has been by far the strongest from a storytelling perspective.

I will say, before I go any further, that each one of the showrunners is very very very talented in their own way, and certainly brought something that I love to each part of the show.

What I love about Dabb and his core group of writers is that they approach the characters as the most important thing, not necessarily the story.  We’ve seen more growth from all of the major characters (and most minor ones) since the end of s11 than we had in all the other seasons combined. 

Every season of Dabb’s era has had a plot, sure, but it was a lot less “the conflict of the season is that the brothers are mad at each other and also there’s a huge thing that they’re fighting.”  It’s been much more about personal growth, from Dean and Sam learning that getting their mother back wasn’t going to be the idealistic thing they had hoped for in season 12, to the birth of Jack and Sam and Dean trying to reconcile that they had a responsibility to him, that he wasn’t what they thought he was in season 13, to Dean having to fight Michael in his own head and Jack losing his soul in season 14.  Sure we have the big action arcs, like the Apocalypse world and Michael and Lucifer’s big fight and Jack losing his soul, but the main focus is on the characters, not the action arc.

This differs from the other showrunning eras in a pretty dramatic way.  Kripke’s era was, for the most part, more of a monster of the week, one off episode sorta arc, with the big plot coming in towards the middle or end of the season.  Gamble’s was...well, it was pointed towards action, but each arc always got muddled somewhere and it seemed like they were scrambling to clean it up by the end of the season.  With Carver, he leaned more towards character driven arcs, but he never really crossed the line, so you ended up with the Mark of Cain and demon Dean and Amara, which informed us about the characters we love, but didn’t offer them a whole lot of actual growth.

That, to me, has been the biggest change in the show since Dabb took over at the end of season 11: the boys actually learn from their mistakes now.  Too often in seasons 1-11, I would sit there and just see the mistakes they had made for years happen over and over and over again.  So many of their problems could have been solved with basic communication, so it’s been nice, in the last few seasons, to see them steer away from “we’re stoic men and we don’t talk to one another.”

I was the same as you actually, I left the show for 5 years in season 9 (after “The Purge” made me quit cold turkey) and only came back for the 300th episode for “old times sake” I think I could sense the dramatic positive shift the show had taken even just watching “Lebanon” with no context, and I ended up right back where I was before, mostly because I just found myself really enjoying the new seasons and the way that the writers approached their arcs.

As for season 8 vs. now...yeah, there’s been a major focus shift onto Dean and Cas from the second that Dabb took over.  I talk about it in my post I linked above, but the major difference is that Dean and Cas are integral to the actual plot, to the arc of the story, instead of just being a side narrative as they were in season 8.  Don’t get me wrong, I *love* season 8, but looking at season 15 comparatively, there’s really no question.  Dean and Cas are the major emotional arc this season, there’s really no getting around it.  It’s why people who don’t like Destiel hate this season, because they can’t just ignore it or push it to the side.  It’s there, loudly in their faces every episode, that Dean and Cas, their relationship, the challenges that they face, are the central emotional turmoil of the season.

[mittensmorgul]

You and the show itself have repeatedly called Chuck a hack writer... ("Ayn Rand after firing her editor" hahahahah), and yet the story is deep, moving, multilayered, endlessly engaging. So what gives? Or is it the fact that Chuck-the-writer himself is a character?... *gets a headache*

HAAAA.

Well, first off, I thought I’d said “Anne Rice after firing her editor.” *goes to check* yup, that’s what I said. :’D

https://mittensmorgul.tumblr.com/post/188632630880/i-know-this-is-a-weird-question-but-with-his

(for context, early in her career after her first brush with success, she just... unilaterally decided that she would have sole control over her creations, and has since refused any and all editorial guidance. And it’s... noticeable...)

but YES I mean ~Chuck the Character~. Since he’s not the one writing the show we’re watching. He’s writing his own thing in-universe. Which we know for a fact is... not exactly true to what *we* have seen happen.

I mean, one of the first things we learn about his books is that he never used Sam and Dean’s last name in the books. We also learn that he HEAVILY edited stuff out to suit the story. Like, in the Supernatural books in canon, there’s no mention of Sam’s blood drinking. Chuck left it out because he thought it made Sam seem “unsympathetic.” So what else has he left out, or changed, to suit the story he ~actually~ wanted to tell?

Lizbob wrote a great piece years ago about this-- the in-narrative “book fandom” vs “our tv show fandom.” This was from January 2015, so it’s been a while, and doesn’t include current... developments... regarding Chuck. (so please don’t go asking lizbob for an update on this one... she’s still half a dozen episodes behind and doesn’t know things yet... thanks!)

https://elizabethrobertajones.tumblr.com/post/108911450713/he-seems-helpful-and-dreamy

So that’s for what he actually LITERALLY writes in canon, as a character. But as for what he metaphorically writes as GOD? As the creator of the universe in-narrative, who set the stage by his own creation, and then repeatedly manipulated circumstances to attempt to force his characters to enact certain plotlines? And then when they finally REFUSED? Because as part of the story he’d not only given his characters free will, but also spent the last 14 years testing that sense of free will by fire at every opportunity, hardening it into a rock-solid foundation they finally stood upon in 14.20? And ultimately defied him?

Yeah, he had a temper tantrum.

This is the point in my reply where I begin to feel a bit dizzy, because it’s one of those mind-bendy sorts of situations. So apologies in advance if I go a bit *wobbles hand back and forth*

When they introduced Chuck as a character, I don’t know if there was already intent, or even long-term thought put into him secretly being God playing a hack writer in his own story. But I do know that Kripke told Rob that he’d been essentially playing God, and joked with him about it. So even if it hadn’t started with the firm conviction that Chuck was actually God, it was definitely the intent by the time 5.22 aired.

That said, how much influence over creation did Chuck really have? How much was his characters surprising him, and defying his original intent? Supernatural has played with this concept repeatedly since then, but especially heavily in Dabb era. Which, as I’ve stated many times in the past, I firmly believe began at the midpoint of s11 when he quietly took over the showrunning duties. I believe Chuck As Final Boss had been his intent since he took over, and he’d been setting up the pieces all along. He could’ve run another season on the AU!Michael arc, he could’ve drawn out the story for several more seasons after that if everyone had wanted to keep going. But I believe that what we’re seeing unfold now had always been the Bigger Picture Plan. Which makes him very un-Chuck-like.

And this is what makes the whole thing incredibly meta. Because the writers in ~our universe~ have been creating this story all along, deliberately writing Chuck as a mediocre writer. Sure he had some interesting ideas, but remember those characters with Free Will? Who he gave this power to make choices for themselves? Yeah, they’ve been getting better and better at ~interfering~ with Chuck’s big plots. And Chuck... has been getting worse and worse at thinking up plausible alternate scenarios to throw at them to wrench them around to the tragic plots CHUCK wanted to write for them.

Chuck is NOT an in-story symbol for the current writers. He’s The Original Storyteller. He’s also a handy metaphor for the “Supernatural should go back to what it used to be” crowd. It can NEVER go back to what it was at the beginning, because the characters have grown and evolved so much since then, because remember, in story THEY ARE AUTONOMOUS BEINGS WITH FREE WILL! And Chuck doesn’t WANT them to be. He wants them to be actors on his personal stage, willing to follow the script, even when it doesn’t make SENSE. Even when none of the characters even like the play.

He created this world, and has spent years tormenting Sam, Dean, and Cas (and now Rowena, Jack, and everyone else too) for his own personal entertainment. And he refuses to let them rest. The moment they earn themselves a win, he throws yet another problem at them. To the point where he’s had to break his own “storytelling rules” to divert them back into the story numerous times.

Have a gun that can kill anything? Great! Try shooting the devil in the face with it! WHOMP-WHOMP. Sorry, there’s only five things in the world that gun can’t kill, and Lucifer’s one of them! Sucks to be you guys!

Angels don’t have weapons, they just have glowy mojo! WHOMP-WHOMP! Except this one sword that can kill other angels! Wait, you like that? OKAY SO MAYBE ALL angels have swords from now on! Sucks to be you guys!

Oh, you have a magical necklace that glows in my presence? WHOMP-WHOMP! Sorry, I switched it off. Blocked your number. Wasn’t taking calls. Too busy writing my masterpiece to be interrupted by your pestering. Sucks to be you guys!

He’s repeatedly blamed all the worlds problems on anyone but himself, despite most of the problems his characters have complained about to his face... were literally of his own design. They’ve got a list of complaints about his storytelling about five miles long by now, and he just shrugs and goes on writing.

And he’s so completely lost touch with his own “characters” and now so CONVINCED that he’s actually telling a good story that it’s become the Last Job of his characters to somehow (by the end of the series) wrest control of their own story from him, one way or another.

He’s “written” countless other universes that he considers (and that AU!Michael referred to as) “failed drafts.” He didn’t like the way the story was going, and abandoned ship to create a new universe, with a different story. But all the stories are essentially the same, or at least similar enough to see his pet themes and plotlines play out over and over in different permutations.

His attempt to control the story had faltered so badly by 14.20 that he finally felt compelled to turn up in person to set things back on track, to wrangle in his misbehaving characters by literally having Dean kill both Jack and himself. I mean... this was Chuck’s last ditch attempt to force all their hands back into compliance.

So... the entire “story” of Supernatural the television show hasn’t been a contrivance by Chuck, you know? The characters of Sam, Dean, Cas, and Jack (and all the rest) haven’t been all Chuck’s doing. The characters do have free will (to an extent, as Chuck’s narratives have sometimes limited their choices they have available to them), but he’d finally driven them to a point where they refused to keep acting out his dramas.

But Chuck’s so not done with them yet.

I hope this makes sense... because I think it’s incredibly clear what Chuck is arranging, what he’s manipulating, and what’s just ~life~, or what’s just ~characters acting out of their own free will.~ But that distinction is not clear at all at the moment to, say, Dean for example. Because he’s inside the story, and can’t see what the truth of the situation actually is yet. He doesn’t realize he’s STILL inside Chuck’s story, and that Chuck isn’t done with them yet, you know?

But they will. And it’s OUR writers in THIS universe that have written ALL of this.

So THAT’S where your incredibly nuanced and layered storytelling has come from. Chuck writes the setup, but the characters don’t have a script. I said in something a while back that it’s like he puts the characters into an escape room with a set of parameters and then watches them work out how to escape on their own, only to find themselves still stuck in an even bigger escape room. As the creator, he can manipulate the room they’re stuck in, arbitrarily change the rules on them, but he can’t manipulate THEM DIRECTLY. That pesky free will at work!

But OUR writers in OUR universe are the ones telling the ENTIRE story, including those characters with free will. And isn’t that just incredible?

[visitingthefuneralhome]

Periodizing Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV) Part 1

An attempt to categorize how fans have periodized Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and some alternatives

By season: The most common way of periodizing the show, this method assumes each season has a coherent set of themes, ideas, visual language,  and self-contained story arcs, with a clear beginning, middle, and end.

Season 1 (”Welcome to the Hellmouth” to “Prophecy Girl”) Season 2 (”When She Was Bad” to “Becoming”) Season 3 (”Anne” to “Graduation”) Season 4 (”The Freshman” to “Restless”) Season 5 (”Buffy VS Dracula” to “The Gift”) Season 6 (”Bargaining” to “Grave”) Season 7 (”Lessons” to “Chosen”)

"The High School Years” and “Post-High School Years” - identified by sites such as “Buffy Phenomenon”, who splits fans by those who believe the show only got better each year (”Loyalists”) and fans who believe the show peaked in season 3 and jumped the shark after (”Jumpers”). The decline of the show is attributed to the introduction of unpopular characters (Riley, Dawn), the removal of the high school setting, and the introduction of unpopular arcs.

HS Years: “Welcome to the Hellmouth” to “Graduation” Post-HS Years: “The Freshman” to “Chosen”

“The WB Years” and the “UPN Years” - the transition from the WB network to UPN after season 5,  identified by fans as another point where the show possibly jumped the shark. The transition is noted for a much darker final 2 seasons of the show, poor reception by fans, and the introduction of much more controversial character and plot choices. Often blamed on Marti Noxon becoming Executive Producer and taking on more showrunning roles. In recent years, the UPN era have received a lot more positive critical attention, with sites such as CriticallyTouched offering new perspectives and books such as “Buffy Goes Dark: Essays on The Final Two Seasons of Buffy The Vampire Slayer on Television”.

WB Years: “Welcome to the Hellmouth” to “The Gift” UPN Years: “Bargaining” to “Chosen”

A periodization offered by CriticallyTouched:

Act 1: “Welcome to the Hellmouth” to “Graduation” Act 2: “The Freshman” to “I Was Made to Love You” Act 3: “The Body” to “Chosen” 

Here, the show is interpreted as a three act structure. In this periodization, the darkness of seasons 6 to 7 is traced back to the death of Buffy’s mother in season 5. The three act structure enfolds the previous periodizations of the show to perceive the show as one singular story, a Hero’s Journey, with less focus on production choices and more on thematic choices. By year: What happens when we treat each year of Buffy the Vampire Slayer as a coherent unit? To my eye, it is interesting what this brackets: for example, 2000 begins and closes with Buffy deciding to enter a relationship with Riley and Riley leaving. 1998 begins with the rising escalation of Buffy and Angel’s relationship, and closes on another affirmation of the intensity of their connection. 2001 is bookended by contrapuntal explorations of Willow’s reliance and recklessness with magic. 2002 charts Buffy’s flight from reality back to her commitment to defending this reality.

1997: “Welcome to the Hellmouth” to “Ted” 1998: “Bad Eggs” to “Amends” 1999: “Gingerbread” to “Hush” 2000: “Doomed” to “Into the Woods” 2001: “Triangle” to “Wrecked” 2002: “Gone” to “Bring on the Night” 2003: “Showtime” to “Chosen”

By airing block: This structure helps us think of each season as three-act structures (except season 1), with each act decided by the airing date rather than arc significance, necessarily (though they do coincide). 

“Welcome to the Hellmouth” to “Prophecy Girl” “When She Was Bad” to “Ted” “Bad Eggs” to “Killed By Death” “I Only Have Eyes For You” to “Becoming” “Anne” to “Amends” “Gingerbread” to “Enemies” “Choices” to “Graduation” “Earshot” to “The Freshman” to “Hush” “Doomed” to “Superstar” “Where The Wild Things Are” to “Restless” “Buffy vs Dracula” to “Into The Woods” “Triangle” to “The Body” “Forever” to “The Gift” “Bargaining” to “Wrecked” “Gone” to “Normal Again” “Entropy” to “Grave” “Lessons” to “Bring On The Night” “Showtime” to “Storyteller” “Lies My Parents Told Me” to “Chosen”

[naruhearts]

OKAY SO I've just spent the best part of an hour scrolling through your blog and reading a bunch of your destiel meta and I HAD to message you... I was one of the many people who STRONGLY believed destiel had a chance of being canon after season 8 (more like season gr8 am i right), but throughout the years I slowly lost all hope. However, S14 has made me 110% invested in the show again and YOUR META IS GIVING ME HOPE FOR DESTIEL, which is TERRIFYING. Your writing is wonderful and I'm STRESSED.

Got back from Washington late last night!

Oh my gosh @alovelikecas, your message really made my day and I’m SO glad you enjoy my meta xox (even when most of my meta looks like, to me, sloppy-ass writing, haha! I’ll probably make an end-season meta post after 14x20 — if I have the time — that touches upon SPN’s current and repeating themes since Season New Beginnings S12/Dabb Era, not to mention I have, like, some more unfinished meta in my drafts >.>)

Yeah I mean, I didn’t join Destiel land until Summer 2016, and before that, I was late to the Season 11 party, so I basically had no narrative context for anything, and I’ll copy-paste what I said here: 

Looking back, one significant thing I recall? S11 gave me a sense of Destiel’s true narrative validity (as not a ‘fanon’ ship but organically developed in the canon) when I perceived it as a season that was ‘missing something’. Keep in mind I had no idea about Destiel yet while watching S11 at the time.

I was literally asking myself — repeatedly — why Dean/Amara seemed to contain odd narrative holes, considering A. Dean explicitly said that the non-consensual attraction he felt for Amara was NOT love and “it scares him”, B. Amara told Dean that ‘something stops you - keeps you from having it all’, C. Djinn!Amara stated that she can: ‘feel the love [Dean] feels, except it’s cloaked in shame,’ and D. Mildred’s iconic ‘You’re pining for someone’ —> which did not logically correlate with A and C, meaning: since Dean doesn’t freely love Amara and thus isn’t possibly pining for her — with female love interests as currently non-existent (I remember crossing off the dead/gone girls on a piece of paper lol) — who the hell was he pining for, then?

Originally posted by elizabethrobertajones

Obviously, without writing long-ass paragraphs of meta about it again in this post, S11 made sense as soon as I watched it within the Destiel context (especially after I read up on some grandiose pieces of Destiel meta (@charlie-minion was the very first person who inspired me to write meta; I followed her once I joined the fandom Oh my god, here we go, holy crap this subtext – I’m invested in this godforsaken ship because they’re in love with each other and I’m not getting off any time soon. The rest is history.

I’m aware that I do come off as positive (and I’m still Destiel-positive; whatever happens in 14x20 this week may or may not change that), but I hope you don’t mind if I use your lovely ask as an additional opportunity to clarify my meta standpoint: no one’s saying Destiel WILL become text. 

The general Destiel meta community (all subfactions: Destiel-positive, -negative, -neutral, and in-between) is not the Most Holy Canon Word, and we aren’t SPN writers, and again, we can’t actually speak to the veracity of Destiel as guaranteed-gonna-go-textual, but we — a diverse pool of critical thinkers from all walks of life: particularly those who have some degree of experience in literary academia/English literature studies (fun fact: I was actually pursuing a Minor’s in English until I changed my mind - my first love’s Health Science/Biology, which I stuck with, but here I am doing lit-crit analysis on the side *wink*) — can speak to the veracity of Destiel as a real, palpable, and ever-substantial long-running romance narrative aka the love story between Dean and Cas IS THERE. I see it. We all see it. We didn’t pluck it out of the random ether one day. It naturally evolved across the show’s overarching narrative like some vast spiderweb, linked together by numerous character arc amalgamations of Dean Winchester and Castiel as separate individuals who were then brought together — who brought themselves together, by the sheer force of free will and choice — and are now inherent parts of the other’s story (and respective character progression).

I say this too many times to count: the entire point of writing meta? Personally, it enables me to appreciate the literary gorgeousness of Dean and Cas’ relationship as, first and foremost, a tentative alliance offset by the very moment Cas raised Dean from perdition (it’s a poetic beginning). Their alliance then inevitably proliferated into a rocky — at times, necessarily turbulent — friendship, then a deep profound bond…one that crossed platonic boundaries since S7/8 and is, ultimately, indelibly rooted in romance. Together, Dean and Cas build up each other’s strengths, complement each other’s flaws, and narratively motivate the other to self-introspect — to become the best version of themselves that they were always meant to be: self-actualized entities who let go of their painful, horrifying, psychologically/emotionally destitute pasts.

These above reasons and more are why I think Destiel belongs right up there on the shelf of Ye Olde Classics, similar to epics by John Milton, Shakespearian tragic dramas, Homeric characteristic cruxes, and the great Odyssey journey: a legendary journey, fraught with circumstance, that finally ended with Odysseus (now an enlightened man) returning to Penelope, the love of his life.

Channeling the scope of Homer’s Odyssey, Destiel is an incredible storytelling feat of obstacles, both internal and external, romance tropes, mirroring, foreshadowing, and visual cadence/emotion, enhancing SPN’s already character-driven main plot in that Dean and Cas try to make it back to one another; like Penelope, their love holds true despite everything. If Destiel were an M/F couple, we all know their love story would be absolutely undeniable to the GA.

I do understand the bitterness S14’s fostered in some viewers, though. I do understand that Dean and Cas seem distant (and yeah, it’s a noticeable difference compared to S12/S13), but I believe the Destiel subtext is still heavy and holds steady.

Right now, at this point, there remains multiple personal issues for the characters to solve, you know? Dean and Cas aren’t talking properly; their love languages stay mistranslated, although we’re persistently shown that they still understand each other on a certain level that no one else can, and the visual narrative keeps framing them as on-the-nose solid counterparts: a domestic-spousal romantic unit independent of Sam.

Originally posted by incatastrophicmind

They want to be there for the other. They need to quash the final remnants of their respective internal loathing (Dean’s self-worthiness, Cas’ self-expendability) before they’re able to give the other 100% of their time, efforts, attention, and love (as flawed and complicated but compellingly beautiful as it can possibly be). During the times Dean and Cas do try to talk shit out, extraneous issues continue to get between them.

As other friends/meta pals discussed with me, S14 is like S10 in that it’s confusing the cast/audiences. And exactly: S8, besides S11/S12/early S13, also belongs in the close-to-canon serious Destiel narrative transition! I can discuss the showrunning/writer problem of SBL (Singer + Bucklemming; @occamshipper hits the nail on the head) that tugs subtext – especially subtext linked to Destiel – back and forth, sometimes in the weirdest nonsensical ways, but I won’t go too far into it here. I agree, however, with the recent idea that Jensen does seem a bit confused as to where he should bring Dean emotionally this season (don’t get me wrong, I do NOT believe Dean is OOC; OOC is a completely different concept vs expected character behaviour). And if Dean’s consistently romance-coded past interactions with Cas are any indication, Jensen would also — in the same vein as all of us — want Dean and Cas to start getting their shit together. Long-running fictional characters like Dean and Cas, conceived over 10 years, are so well-written to the point where you, the author, can predict what they’ll do even if you just plop both of them inside a room and give them no direction, and I personally feel that nowadays Jensen is prevented from achieving Dean’s further internal growth/unsure how to act in the moment because of some dumb SBL scripts saying one thing while his character’s heart says another. Wank aside—

Season 15 should hopefully convey a much more logical subtextual perspective e.g. unbelievably amazingly cohesive Season Destiel 11 that aired after choppy S10. Not all hope is lost!! I also want to clarify that I personally LOVED Season 14 in general. It’s been mostly Emotion-centric constant, with Yockey, Berens, Perez, and Dabb usually making my top-rank SPN writer list.

Currently the narrative’s still allowing pretty significant (imho) wiggle room for the lovers to fracture apart and get back together, where their miscommunication comes to a dramatic head. We just saw Dean and Cas argue over Jack’s well-being in 14x18 and 19. Dean — besides putting Cas at the top of his You’re-Dead-to-Me-Because-You-Lied-but-I-Still-Love-You-Goddammit hitlist (for clear spousal-coded reasons) and taking Cas’ actions to heart (he’s the person he trusted the most who lied to him) — no doubt blamed himself for what happened, and Sam was, like I said, the mouthpiece of truth. TFW were all culpable. They all failed Jack in some way, shape, or form.

I’m not expecting anything for 14x20, but I’m nervous either way! Thanks for sticking with my long answer

[neven-ebrez]

Meta Writing: "Finding balance as a television viewer and academic, a look at viewing under the narrative lens versus the psychological lens"

I’ve spoken on Supernatural’s utilization of a mirrored narrative to tell the repressed story of its main characters many times. My blog is full of these essays and discussions.  As a meta writer for Supernatural, this is what I've focused on writing over the years because I found this to be where the complete “full picture” of the story of the show was to be seen.  If Sam and Dean weren't openly talking about their issues then one could simply look at the monster/victim character foils within the MOTW episodes and listen to them talk where Sam and Dean either wouldn't or couldn't.  If one wanted to understand the main characters and their situation better, the show practically forces one to do this.  Or rather, I should say, I felt it forced me to do this.  And for a long time I got used to looking at the show through this type of narrative lens, where practically everything told the story of something else.  I wasn't looking at Charlie Bradbury anymore, I was looking at a narrative mirror for the issues of Sam and Dean in 9x04, where the witch symbolized codependency and Dorothy wasn’t a woman trapped by her own mechanics, but rather a sounding board for Sam and Dean trapped by their own.  

I must say, it's not a terribly fun way of looking at the show, but I thought, back then, a practically necessary one. Supernatural is post modern, after all, and frequently has episodes pointing out its own function as a story.  Robbie Thompson did this a lot (9x18 is forever one of my favorite episodes) and I remember someone asking Robbie about the mirrors of 8x11 on Twitter back in the day, where 8x11-8x16 represented one of the most blatant romantic coded arcs Dean and Cas has ever been given in the structure (as viewed through the "narrative lens", but I'm getting there!).  The person asking Robbie what his intent with the mirror was was clearly viewing the show the way I was (with the narrative lens) so I was curious as to Robbie's answer.  And when Robbie did answer, I remember being disappointed.  He told the person, "That's just how I saw the story of Charlie and Glinda."  This was a recognizing of the what I’m going to call the psychological lens (the surface, real life), but not the narrative one.  No acknowledging of how they functioned in that arc as a narrative mirror for Dean and Cas, nothing.  I felt that as a writer using such a structure it was almost his duty to at least acknowledge it.  But it was like... none of them ever did. Supernatural clearly used it, hell, still uses it, but it's only ever mentioned in passing, in showrunner interviews and the like.  

Probably every documented case of anyone with creative content creation control referencing it (the mirror narrative) is on this blog.  Back then, I was very obsessed with validating what I was seeing in any way I could.  It was like figuring out a secret, a mystery, a truth I absolutely knew to be real and then gathering as much evidence as I could to prove it because people were telling me that I was wrong and I knew I wasn't.  Stuff like 9x15 even bent characterization to cater to it, to sometimes the complete confusion of the actors.  And so that's what meta became to me.  Using the narrative lens I viewed and wrote on the narrative structure at length, writing standalone essays on the matter, discussing it in threads and speculating using the structure to extrapolate how likely certain plotlines were.  Sometimes you're right, sometimes you're wrong, but usually not about the big stuff, the stuff a season was building towards.  The longer I studied the show the better the better I got at recognizing its patterns of repeat.  And for minds like mine, with autism, which are best suited for pattern, these patterns just come so naturally.  For me Supernatural is honestly so predictable, for many reasons, the most of damning of which is right in the structure and its inability to go past a certain point.

I say this word a lot, "structure".  My family hates it.  What I really mean is its overall design.  When I talk about the structure of a car I'm talking about how it looks: the color, the features, the durability, the points of safety, whether it drives smoothly or not.  Things like that.  When I talk about the structure of a story I'm talking about how it looks as well: how it is paced, the significance of the characters involved and whether they and the themes involved within the story itself "teach" the main characters anything, what relationships are formed and how they transform each individual character, (and for visual mediums) the overall visual presentation of light/color, how the setting visually informs what the characters are doing or saying, what the characters are designed to learn through the show pointing out such steps in various ways and then cleanly implementing traditional arcs that change them in some way (usually to betterment, but not always).  All this is structure, a story's design.  Visual mediums like theatre and television have an obvious visual element meant to be incorporated, designed to support (and not work in place of) the story being told. Analyzing a book is not the same thing as analyzing a television show.  Analyzing a television show is much, much more complicated.  Books contain one author and one editor (usually).  Intent and meaningful storycraft is usually easy to decipher. If design in detail matters, the author provides that information. Television, on the other hand, involves hundreds of people refining and creating on a tight deadline. This makes deciphering meaningful story intent particularly tricky.

Discussing the structure, the story telling elements, using that knowledge to speculate or write essays giving a reading of the text (what the term “meta” generally refers to) is what we'd call viewing the show through a "narrative lens", or rather, in the case of television, a "television lens".  It's when you watch the story and realize that you are not looking at real life.  This is easier for something like cartoons (moreso when humans are completely absent), but a little harder for the brain to actively distinguish when looking at something that could *almost be real* (as in, live action people in a familiar setting).  Understanding how fictional rules are different from real life is only half the story though because real life must be accounted for in visual storytelling. I’ll explain what I mean because I’m not talking about behind the scenes stuff. Since being sent an ask about the current state of the meta community (which I still occasionally write for but don’t personally follow anymore aside from following my friends @mittensmorgul and @elizabethrobertajones) I’ve been thinking about this a lot. The fact that we’ve lost a lot of voices over the years as a community of narrative academics is, I think, the root of the challenge currently facing the meta community.  With so many lost voices and angles there's a significant sort of echo chamber that begins when you get people together that all view the show through the same lens against a lack of diverse readings.  In this case, the narrative lens and the Destiel reading.  You see, the problem is the show, as it exists now, isn't always so rigidly written through the narrative lens like it was in Carver era, it's now written primarily through the real life lens.  I find this to be especially true in Dabb era showrunning.  

Regarding the meta writing community and the fandom's two main shipping sides, there’s also a huge disconnect, fostered over YEARS of discord in acknowledging subtext designed by writers for both factions, both readings, and, of course, the arguments over intent (which is usually unknowable unless a public record is made and even then a lot of academics ascribe to “Death of the Author”, particularly given the collaborative nature of television production, so...). Wincest subtext gets scoffed at or ignored, derided for not standing a chance at being canon by the Destiel side and the Wincest side often mocks the Destiel side in such a profound way (pun intended) as to suggest (or outright say) the subtext isn’t even there at all to mean anything in the first place (which is ridiculous).  Again and again I also see (and it's never really worded this way) a disconnect over the lens the show is viewed with: narrative (televison) vs psychological (real life).  The most major arguments I see are between fans watching for the Wincest reading and using the psychological lens versus fans watching for the Destiel reading and using the narrative lens.  

There’s rarely any common ground between these two distinct groups, with the Wincest psychological viewers acting more as critics than providing anything resembling essays of their own.  Maybe they are out there.  I haven’t seen them.  Most “good” Wincest meta died out relatively early. We, as a viewing and academic community, are a house divided in so, so many ways, even on each side of the chasm.  Maybe I have no right to make this post. I don’t know. I don't like things that treat fandom like it's something to be picked apart and examined. This kind of examination makes me... uncomfortable. I keep thinking about that ask the other day asking me what is going on in the meta community though. So I'm going to try and tackle it.  The fact is... we are not a whole and we are not supposed to be. That’s the point. Getting a single exact read off any text, let alone getting a group of people on the same page to watch with the same lens, is practically impossible.  But lately the divide and inbalance has gotten to be so bad that we aren’t even talking to one another anymore, not really. We are all just yelling a lot of misunderstandings back and forth. So... what is happening to the meta community? I'm going to try and talk about it.

Okay.  So I've explained what structure is and what a lens is.  So now I'm going to talk about balance because the current issue plaguing the meta community is a lack of voices discussing and viewing things in balanced way. And I'm going to focus on ship related meta writing because let's face it, that's where a lot of the most passionate arguing is.  Since meta is usually written with a bias for a certain reading we most often get four distinct readings:

A --The Narrative lens: Wincest

B --The Narrative lens: Destiel

C --The Psychological lens: Wincest

D --The Psychological lens: Destiel

Post S12 when Dabb era started I personally made the decision to switch from writing/watching through B to D instead.  A narrative lens focuses on things like mirroring, set design, character arc reading.  A psychological lens focuses on things like characterization (usually with a focus on where a character is and not how they are designed to change), seeing the characters as real people, rather than narrative constructs.  Lynn from Fangasm is a good example here and I don’t think she’d mind me mentioning her here.  Lynn, as a psychologist by trade and J2 fan by choice, views the show through a Wincest psychological reading, in total opposite from me in Carver era Supernatural, viewing with a narrative Destiel lens.  We disagreed on a lot on stuff as you can imagine.  I read her from time to time but she didn’t read me. Now, sometimes viewing one lens too much can make you blind to other things (not limited to readings).  Frequently she’d hate and not understand things that I felt were explained perfectly as viewed through my lens.  It's the difference in seeing Charlie Bradbury personally go through some stuff vs seeing Sam and Dean's issues elaborated on in the complex abstract.  However, for me, post S11 I found myself way too stuck in the narrative lens.  I felt I wasn't even seeing or experiencing the show the way it was designed anymore.  And I wasn't.  And being that Supernatural is part of my job I knew I had to reorient myself.

In Dabb era in particular, there's text and communication between the characters, which means that a narrative lens isn't strictly needed for viewing anymore.  When S12 was airing I had the absolute pleasure of meeting Robert Berens and talking to him at length about meta.  My friends @ibelieveinthelittletreetopper​ and @nicky36​ were with me and the post is on my blog somewhere.  Berens is my absolute favorite writer for the show.  I talked to him about the narrative lens and how stuff like what he wrote about Mary leaving in 12x03 lost its emotional resonance with me because I knew she was leaving for contractual reasons, rather than general characterization ones.  It was a problem with me, rather than a problem with the writing itself.  It's watching a puppet show and instead of paying attention to the story, staring at the strings the whole time.  I knew I had to learn to stop that even before talking about it to anyone.  We also talked about 9x06, which was my favorite S9 episode as a Cas fan!  I remember I talked about the season's theme of consent issues and I mentioned something from the divine reviews I wrote about a consent reference 9x06 made through a pop culture reference about the sex practices this random island had.  He wrote the episode and chose this island to reference.  I thought surely he knew what I was talking about.  I was complimenting his cleverness, after all.  And I'll never forget what he said to me: "You know, meta writers are often far more clever than the writers are themselves."  It means we, as pattern seekers to themes (in the case of S9, consent themes), can pick out any kind of pattern if we are simply looking hard enough for it.  And some things that we think are intentional, are simply coincidental, even within the written screenplay. After talking to Robert Berens that day I never looked at meta writing the same way again and began to work towards switching my viewing lens.

That's not to say viewing the show through the narrative lens is bad, or wrong. It's valid and a fucking important way to view the show, but equally important is realizing that sometimes you need to take a step back and consider other readings and lenses, too.  So I stopped focusing on pop culture references and their thematic associations.  I stopped looking at the set design as a primary storytelling point and regaled it to a secondary support point.  I stopped looking at who Dean and Cas were mirroring and started looking at what they themselves were actually saying to each other, doing together.  I realized that all the mirrors in the world didn’t matter if Dean and Cas weren’t actually talking to one another and physically in the same scenes together.  All the romantic coding in the world through the visual presentation and mirror structure would not take the place of real life escalation.  And I found looking at it and talking of the show in this manner, was getting beyond exhausting, especially when I ended up saying the same thing over and over.  Carver era made the narrative lens necessary to view Destiel, while Dabb era has made it practically irrelevant. Even now I can still see these storytelling elements and comment on them in passing but mostly for me they started working like an overlay in tandem.  And it provided something I hadn't had in a lot time watching: clarity.

Concerning mirroring, I've seen that often the Cas!fan Destiel side focuses too much on this (like I used to) through the narrative lens because Misha isn’t a lead therefore Cas isn’t in every episode so he often exists in this narrative space within the mirrored structure of the show (also called us seeing Destiel parallels).  Through the continued use of the mirrored narrative, the show makes it so Cas fans (who watch primarily for Cas) must look for him there when he’s not physically present in the episode, desperately so in some cases. A Wincest reading, however, has the benefit of J2 being leads and present in every episode, with the reading enjoying touchstone psychology updates/deepening usually in every episode (though yes, Sam/Dean scenes have been cut drastically this year because of contractual reasons). Mirrors for the brothers (good and bad) are easily ignored completely (unless extremely heavy handed) because they are physically there for each other in every episode. Because of this priority watching divide (and handicap on the Cas fan’s side) I believe this has lead some meta writers to focusing too heavily on this element of Supernatural’s storytelling (or otherwise the symbolic narrative), to the point they sometimes even focus on it over Cas’ physical presence without really realizing it.  And other fans do the opposite and/or ridicule them.  And both types of fans and focuses are what I'd call being "out of balance".

On the flip side of discussing the impracticality of viewing primarily through a narrative lens, I'm going to also discuss how it's impossible to view solely through a psychological one, like so many “antis” in Supernatural fandom do.  How many times have we heard, "You are disrespecting the character's sexuality by doing your analysis!  Dean says he's straight so you must accept he is!"?  I know I've seen it a lot.  It's heavy on the fans that favor a Wincest reading through a psychological lens. This type of argument treats the character, Dean in this case, as REAL, instead of a fictional construct subject to other mechanics within storytelling.  This is because the fan is viewing the show primary through a psychological lens and thinks the same ethnics of real life people apply to fictional constructs such as Dean Winchester. This is simply not true.  You don’t judge a real life person’s sexuality based on the colors of their shirt!  What’s wrong with you?  It is quite impossible to disrespect a fictional character. As a viewer/academic, you can only really feel your understanding of them is being disrespected.  In the end, Dean is still very much a fictional construct and thus, is not subjected to being viewed strictly under a psychological lens especially since a medium of storytelling like television and screenplay use visual elements and other narrative devices to also tell the story of the character.

Mel sent me several old posts with some examples. In real life the mailman damaging my mail and delivering it late one day isn’t symbolic of my messed up internal issues as a person. It’s just a crap thing that merely happened one day (even if I muse it feels like my own personal symbolism). I, unlike Dean, also don’t put on the same shirt every time I’m about to make a bad decision.  When May rolls around I don't worry about the world maybe coming to an end each year, but Sam and Dean probably dread it.  When I decorate and paint my walls I'm looking to create a certain pleasing aesthetic for the sake of it being pleasing, not for the sake of displaying the current problems plaguing my inner psyche. Or maybe some people do this to some degree, idk.  Mostly, no.

Supernatural does indeed put storytelling clues in the wallpaper, but usually the intention is not as far reaching as some people conclude.  And it’s in it’s own created language. Regardless, you can’t write a story with wallpaper alone.  At most, you can simply look at it and guess something small ahead of time (like hourglasses signifying time travel). I'll use 11x06 as an example. In this scene we have a demonic liar getting interrogated in a room with Gabriel’s wallpaper from Changing Channels because the demon is trying to trick Sam and Dean into releasing him and saving his meatsuit instead of kill him (since Carver realized he needed to refocus the Winchesters onto saving people after S10, which, idk, maybe he realized how heartless they were seemingly becoming by choosing each other over the world so much, anyway...). Anyway. In 5x08 Gabriel used that entire episode to trick and trap Sam and Dean in a fabrication. Trick and lies.  There’s your thematic tie in. I remember some people just immediately saw that wallpaper and thought it meant Gabriel was coming back when instead it was a simple "beware of trickery" thematic callback. Under the show’s silent storytelling language when this wallpaper is used, it means we are being lied to and tricked.  This is all the wallpaper is meant to invoke.  Sam immediately realizes this in the same scene.  The silent storytelling here is just a fraction ahead of the textual storytelling.  And that’s what silent storytelling is designed to do.  Looking at wallpaper for clues on character development is a whole different analysis problem because Supernatural, by very much all appearances, want Sam and Dean to develop as slowly and as little as possible because the bulk of fans watch for their issues, not to the resolution thereof.  The show doesn’t know what Sam, Dean, and Cas look like past a certain point of development and they are wholly uninterested in exploring that.

But back to wallpaper, interpretation, and 11x06.

A request for this wallpaper was probably not in the script.  Screenplay usually puts as little detail into the script as possible because they simply trust Jerry Wanek and his design team to do their jobs (and Jerry, in fact, usually disregards certain script directions in favor of his own ideas as better symbolically worked into the show).  AU!Michael’s church was originally a concrete bunker and Billie’s minimalistic fate library in 13x05 was originally a country cottage.  Jerry is given extreme leeway on SPN (with I think only like 6 of his decisions have ever been vetoed he told us), but only because he’s so in sync with the show’s thematic presentation.  I’m going off topic again because I’m supposed to be talking about fandom.  Sorry.  Back to 11x06 (again). Gabriel is such a fan favorite, however, that this (look out for tricks) was not the basic thematic message a lot of fans took away.  No, the message they took away was Gabriel was probably coming back soon. I remember speculation continued about that for weeks.  When at the time there were absolutely no plans for that during production. This reading, I can say with confidence, was absolutely unaccounted for.  Jerry Wanek’s whole department is quite literally kept in the dark about future storylines. He’s told me this himself. By the time production for an episode rolls around they have a few scripts ahead maybe, nothing more. This is why Jerry was confused as hell about Asmodeus being a shape shifter in S13, because he didn’t know Gabriel was definitely coming back and that Asmodeus was siphoning Gabe’s powers. Poor Jerry just thought Buckleming was just butchering the canon for fun (I mean... this does happen so...). If there’s an intentional visual motif present, it either draws on some simple visual theme from earlier (tricks and 5x08 vs 11x06) or it’s part of the language of the show as written in the screenplay.  It is very much something Supernatural does.  Just not in such a complicated way, and one that definitely doesn’t conform to real life.

Real life ≠ Fiction and Fiction ≠ Real life

Do we see yet the limitations of relying too heavily on one lens over the other when viewing and analyzing media?  How staring at the wallpaper can blind you to your psychological understanding of the characters, and how likewise, thinking of the characters as real people can just as well blind you to what the story is trying to tell you using a complete framework as a thoughtful examination of human expression and experience? You have to see it all and all at the same time to get a good picture.  If you are going to write about the show then somewhere you must find balance or risk going blind. Television, most of the time is about creating stories that feel real, fourth wall breaks aside.  The average television viewer is honestly not sitting there seeing Charlie Bradbury as Dean and Cas', Sam and Dean’s issues or whatever.  They see her simply as Sam and Dean's nerdy little red headed friend who is coming to help them out with something.  Writers often write through the narrative lens, but realize that most people watch through the "real life" one.  

This psychological lens is not only accounted for, but it is generally catered to all of the time.  Significant storytelling is therefore always in the psychological lens because the truth is television rarely wants you sitting there figuring out futrue storylines.  It operates on you wanting to WATCH to see what’s next.  They hate fans like me who can guess major plot points ahead of time. The truth is they want you to suspect certain things, but not expect them.  The difference is a bit complicated and I extracted my discussion of speculation based on structure out of this post for cohesion.  I hopefully make a separate post on it because I think I pretty much got the S14 finale figured out at this point.  As much as I love, LOVE and have written on the narrative lens, it is not how the show delivers its primary narrative, especially here in Dabb era.

Go through and rewatch S8-S10 of Castiel (or better yet, Dean/Cas) only scenes and really look at what the show is giving itself. Then look at the difference in S11-S14, paying close attention to the difference in S9 over S14.  For those immersed in the subtextual and mirror narratives with Destiel, this is an extremely good exercise, especially if you are someone who really believes or hopes the show will (eventually) convert the subtext into undeniable romantic text at any point (hint: Cas and Dean have to be physically together in scenes in a way that allows for escalation). Note that I don’t say canon here for a reason. Based on compounded narrative character mirrors (meaning mirrors repeated at least three times by various writers and can be deemed "significant" because they are witnessed by either Dean or Cas, though lbr usually Dean because we most often get these in the physical absence of Cas in an episode) and subtext (used to compare and explain Dean and Cas’ feelings towards one another), Destiel is already subtextually canon. Hell, without the mirrors, it’s this almost through romantic tropes alone.  Supernatural is way past something like Korrasami, that got declared canon through subtext, mirroring, and Word of Gay.  Destiel has honestly been way past this point for a long ass time, just like Dean being a canon drug user.

Both things are subtextually canon through different visual/dialogue/mirroring storytelling elements, but I'd consider each canon nonetheless, yet still easily ignored/misunderstood due to various degrees of disbelief or ignorance, usually based in a gap of the viewer’s understanding as informed by their own experiences and/or a lack of understanding concerning how television writing works differently from real life experiences of the same nature. The term "psuedocanon" is something I adopted back in S10 (I believe it was) to talk about the exact undeniable/deniable nature of Destiel within the split academic writing/viewing community.  There’s no right or wrong about something being subtextually canon and television writing accounts for this viewing disparity in every significant narrative. Read that, then read it again because it’s so often the core of so many fandom arguments to the point I wanna rip my hair out. Right now, Destiel is not a significant narrative in the show.  It’s not an obvious plotline.  It’s what we’d call a secondary plotline, yet one that often drives action (usually in the form of Dean and/or Cas moping around in various ways). You don’t really need text of either (not the nature of Dean and Cas’ relationship nor the true nature of Dean’s relationship to drugs) to watch and understand the show on the primary surface level, well... except lately when the show points out how Sam doesn’t understand certain things between Dean and Cas (13x03, 14x12) but even then the show seems content to let us be just as oblivious as Sam there.  

If I’m going to make a comparison here, the show is content with you selling you a car, but it is also content with you not completely understanding whether or not it has cruise control even as an option. The important thing is that you understand they are selling you a car.  Personally I really want and need cruise control, but it’s not a deal breaker for me like it could be for some.

Now, we don't have Word of Gay like Korrasami, but I think... I think a lot of people need to stop trying to prove themselves right about Destiel being subtextually canon through continuously, in a way that denotes hyperfocus, pointing out the new ways in which it is by discussing the show mostly (or even solely) through the narrative lens.  I honestly believe we, as a community, have written enough on it over the years.  It feels... exhaustive at this point. Meanwhile, the psychological lens is right there and, as I can attest, helps keep your analysis' merits grounded in a way that is more easily explained and personally examined.  The future of Destiel lies there. I don't think there are many of us out here writing on the nature of the Destiel narrative that are doing it because it's popular anymore.  If we are still writing on it and have been for a while, it's because we genuinely care and we find it fun.  That or we are frustrated.  For me, it’s a little of both.  When meta used to be written, back when queer reading and codings stayed in the subtext, there wasn't all this pressure being put on meta writers about possibly leading people on.  This post by @bakasara​ from back in the day perfectly sums up the situation we, as a community, keep finding ourselves in, only now the situation seems worse. Since these storylines never got text, the fact that they wouldn't was a given.  Now that the television landscape has changed, and Supernatural still remains, with one reading (Destiel) having a chance of going canon over the other (Wincest), the meta writing community of the show is in a particularly interesting place in fandom history where apparently meta writers can be blamed for somehow leading fans on in place of the narrative itself doing this.  

I used to think this was wholly rubbish, but when you have meta writers ascribing writer intent to a product that deals with hundreds of individual intents, some of which have nothing to do with the writing's main intent, in a way that denotes the meta writer somehow knows best, then we do have a genuine problem.  I feel like I’ve been here long enough and studied this fandom and this text to such a degree that I can say that. I don't personally know of any meta writer who does this, whether they are hyperfocused on viewing the show through the narrative lens or not.  Doesn’t matter. I've already said I don't read other meta writers anymore since meta writing as an art form of expression made for enjoyment has shifted beyond my tastes from writing academic essays on a reading into this kind of weird meta writing subset that either simply tags discussions (anyone’s opinion post) as "meta" or otherwise uses this weird analysis/speculation blend in a way that is not clearly separated and/or defined.  Just because I don't follow it, doesn't mean those voices aren't out there.  I think they probably are.  

And it's no secret that I personally lament what the meta writing community has become, even though it still imo has its essay gems.  There are simply a lot of people inexperienced in many things concerning the analysis of media and they are out there telling people that certain things matter that don't and that certain things are right that aren't.  These I have seen.  I remember back in S10 having to correct someone that thought the title of "Story Editor" meant that another writer could edit a script they didn't write.  Television writing isn't like a school yearbook staff.  I don't remember who they were.  But I do remember thinking, "Dear LORD, this person is talking like they know something when they have NO CLUE!  And what's worse, people are believing it!"  The “story editor” title is literally a pay grade distinction on Supernatural. I think most people would be shocked to know Supernatural doesn't even have a traditional writers room.  The writers get together a few times a year and that's IT.  There’s some collaborate efforts made among themselves but it's not like episode meetings among the whole staff are made.  They aren't. They have a certain piece to write and they write it. The writer's room is a dictatorship overall.

So to sum up... While yes, language and knowledge among certain meta writers is a problem, there's also a growing problem with how different readings are coming to depend too much on a single viewing lens. None of that invalidates any of the meta being written if it is what can actually be classified as meta. We need to stop associating discussion/speculation with meta across the board.  If we want people to stop speculating intent over possible future relationships using meta, then say that.  People won’t do it, but say it like this, I beg you. To this hope, I feel like I might as well be talking to a wall on this point. And like I said earlier, many voices have been lost.  And for that, there's really nothing we as a community can do at this point.  Those people are pissed, bitter, or have been driven away at this point. When I first joined the meta writing community in S8 we were very diverse, and now we simply are not.  And I wrote this not to sound like a policing or patronizing wake up call to anyone.  I fucking love meta writing.  It’s important.  I was asked what was happening in the meta community. Here I attempted to answer that in a general way. I tried very hard to talk about my own experiences writing meta, how I viewed it, how I saw the community on tumblr as it started and how I feel it has since irrevocably changed.  Meta is supposed to be fun, providing a certain point of view, nothing more.  By merit, it can't promise anything and shouldn't be confused with speculation.  In my next segment I'm going to discuss speculation, how writing is designed to create suspicion and not expectation.

Thanks for reading and a special shout out to @justanotheridijiton who had to view this meta in its raw unreadable form and who encouraged me to rewrite it and publish it despite my initial desire to write all this out for myself, then just delete it.

[elizabethrobertajones]

It’s interesting how we interpret things diff in fandom. For ex, I’ve always felt negatively towards dean’s use of sex as comfort Bc of my own experiences w csa but to some other people this reads as more positive on the whole. Do you think that maybe this is what makes people have such astronomically different takes on a character/plot event ?? Maybe this would also apply to 8x17 being read as conversion therapy while others wouldn’t see it. Not original thoughts but interesting nonetheless

Yeah, this is a whole thing in literature/media interpretation classes… You know what’s wild, it’s a pretty postmodern concept that everyone has their own interpretations and there’s rational reasons why we would see things very differently based on our own experiences. Incredibly this wasn’t always the case, and it used to be that there were definitive interpretations and analysis created by a sage literary critic which were then the be all and end all of the interpretation, even if with modern eyes those might seem inherently flawed. It’s why when we learn about historical texts they teach us both the context that the original audience would have interpreted it in, the stuffy academic opinion, a range of other thinkers, and importantly the modes of interpretation to attack it for ourselves, and a chance to write our own opinions. 

When it comes to fandom, people as a whole seem very set in the original stuffy one true interpretation thing, which is completely wild to me. I don’t see it as contradictory to read and reblog a dozen different metas on a scene and even if there’s one I personally lean towards, I find it fascinating to consider multiple interpretations and how they come across to people. And, often circumstantially, certain things seem to fit better than others. For example there are a few Dean hook ups I’m quite positive towards that he seemed to be in a healthy place and it wasn’t too weird, while others are quite tellingly wrongbad to me where he’s in a very poor place and it makes me very sad to see him trying to apply that comfort to very little effect. If someone writes meta that ALL of them are good or ALL of them are bad then I’m probably going to end up reblogging meta that says both to get both viewpoints to have the meta background to pick and choose to where it seems more suited to me to say either.

But I guess a lot cases people get really invested in their particular theory or analysis and can’t see past it either to how other people could think different things, or to find it interesting that they do, and to see how those ideas can be equally merited either talking about the same instance or how it can’t be applied uniformly. Some people just aren’t very flexible and get very angry about their one idea being challenged, even though something like a very specific read of a scene, like that 8x17 reads as Naomi putting Cas through conversion therapy, could be given a few different readings but it never hurts to say “this scene also can be interpreted as…” even if when you have your overall opinion of what’s going on there it might not mean as much overall. 

I personally read a huge overall narrative of Cas vs Heaven as a queer kid in a conservative family so it makes a lot of sense for me to read it that way. Someone who generally leans towards interpreting him as various other things such as portrayed as a soldier first or a metaphor for him being an immigrant among humanity, or other ways in which this metaphor don’t apply so neatly might have much less use for that interpretation but I find it super weird to think of the ones that apply less to a personal read as therefore wrong. There shouldn’t be a right and wrong in this case, but a collection of interpretations you can understand, respect, see the reasoning for, but at the end of the day are not the ones you fall back on for your overall personal meaning and understanding of the show. 

But then at the end of the day, I think the way we all approach the story differently and that leading to different interpretations also comes down to our need for validation etc. I approach it with a somewhat detached academic curiosity when it comes to the fandom’s meta project, as much as the story and characters mean to me, the analysis can be super fascinating but also not particularly relevant or “useful” in the sense of getting a clear grounding in tools to keep on understanding the ongoing show like abstract literary parallels to old episodes or whatever. Like, I just like reading essays branching off and exploring themes and parallels and such, while a lot of people are more interested just in hashing out a clear picture of what happened in each episode, what influenced it, and how to use those tools to guess what happens next or something, which is a fascinating practical application of analysis which is really a hallmark of fandom for ongoing projects and something I’d never even thought you could use analysis for before I got to fandom… 

But for people who are much more interested in a clear interpretation of validation of their readings of characters an plot, they just want the things which will prove to be the most accurate to canon and give them the clearest answer and vindication with new episodes, and that means a lot less room for theoretical asides, and for clear answers for what things mean so that when that thread of the story continues there’s certain ground on what it’s telling them… It means a lot less room for having multiple points of views on events and knowing clear right and wrong interpretations means that it’s easy to determine how things are going. 

Which I think in some ways can lead to quite aggressive fandom behaviour, not just in the obvious gatekeeping of ideas and fighting over interpretations, or refusing to engage with theories that contradict the one you’re most invested in instead of dabbling in them all, but also that when new content appears, people get upset or argumentative about events in very odd ways about what things meant. Obviously you can see it most with anti-factions which are aggressive about people applying interpretations about ships and stuff, but also with getting so rigid about a reading that if the story changes meaning, people are left in the lurch. 

To not be contentious about any current specific stuff so I’ll just use a large vague example, Carver era had very clearly defined symbolism and themes and tropes, but Dabb era didn’t use these and Dabb’s approach to storytelling is very subtle in some ways and really brash in others, none of which can be read like the carefully weighted symbolism of Carver era. I find a LOT more use in analysing the emotional arcs than the symbolism between showrunner eras, even when there is symbolism, it’s often… topically applied? Presifer sat with flames burning behind him in his staff meeting, but Cas sat in front of a similar open flame pit in 14x01 and I don’t think there was any parallel in their intent or behaviour, and I wouldn’t draw the two together, but to take the symbolism of each. But for some people who had been really hugely into the language of Carver era, Dabb era completely threw them, and was physically enraging by how much Dabb wasn’t writing like Carver used to, and there was a lot of upset about how basic his writing was and how wonderful Carver’s symbolism was, and how the show didn’t MEAN anything any more. Of course it still meant TONS, but it wasn’t being expressed in the same way any more, and by running headlong into Dabb era still trying to read it like Carver era, these people bounced off completely and could never get into it in the same way as when there were very prescriptive symbolic and metaphoric rules to follow which made understanding events so easy you could just take a glance at a single screenshot towards the end and explain everything about the scene and its wider meaning in the mytharc. 

(What’s interesting is that the show wasn’t previously written like this - Kripke era runs on mirrors and flips in a way which is actually more similar to Dabb era but minus, of course, 10 years of show history which makes Dabb have such a meta, kaleidoscope version of this, and it was in a very heightened, dramatic form which is very elegant and sublime and worked well as the tragedy it was set up to be… Gamble era was more like Dabb era in running more off emotions but lacked a clear symbolic language AND didn’t have the back to front structure Kripke did, being caught in the middle of completely overhauling the story, and I honestly don’t blame her showrunning in a sense that it was an almost impossible job to salvage the subtextual telling of the show from itself in the wake of Kripke essentially ending the show in 5x22 with raised middle fingers at anyone who dare continue past the original vision. Leaning into their trauma and the story’s trauma was a sensible bridge, all things considered, but it makes hers the least elegant storytelling >.> Anyway this is a total aside… it’s early in the morning and I’m just sitting here :P)

Anyway. Yeah, you can tell I do find it interesting to think about how everyone has all their own interpretations :P I mean I know it’s my own experiences which make me so annoying about having this uwu all interpretations are valid sort of approach to it as well, which is just another interpretation at the end of the day. Though I will be snobby and say I do think it’s better that people could read each other’s analysis and even if it doesn’t go hand in hand perfectly with their pet interpretations at least acknowledge it’s interesting and has its own merits, rather than dumping on it in a knee jerk reaction. But then, some people come to the show and end up with their interpretations because the emotional meaning they give is so intrinsically personal, another interpretation DOES feel like an attack, and trying to deal with people who CAN’T accept that some of us are just shooting the breeze and aren’t in a death grip to any one meaning can get very sticky. Especially when someone seems rational for a while but then on disagreeing they get very emotionally violent and it takes you completely by surprise when you thought you were just chatting and then it turns out you’ve hurt them in their most deep emotional place by being like, anyway lol whatever I still mostly ascribe to this other idea - OH NO SORRY D: WE WEREN’T ON LOL WHATEVER TERMS OH GOD OH - 

[neven-ebrez]

I’m bringing this old con panel back because yesterday in my blocking of people on my Wanek post someone plugged this in as Singer commentary on Destiel. And it’s fair. I just simply think it’s as outdated as Singer himself. And honestly, I forgot it existed because when it first made the wank rounds it was mostly focused on the Charlie death answer and how much Singer just doesn’t understand what fans were even upset about.

Watch for yourself but the context of him bringing up Destiel is whether or not maliciousness is involved in the treatment of certain characters and storylines. And while he doesn’t say the word, Singer is talking about the accusations of queerbaiting in regards to Supernatural and Destiel, and how this maliciousness simply isn’t INTENDED (whether this is relevant or not is up to you: murder vs manslaughter). Singer is on the defense here. He goes on to say there’s love between the characters (only mentioning Dean and Cas throughout his answer) but that it basically is unquantifiable and that it’s actually not their job as writers to quantify it (lmfao it literally is). But this is old. Almost four years old and a lot has changed since then. And Carver is no longer running the show with him, Dabb is.

Singer talks about Cas also being homeless in the (and God, I had to cringe through this because Misha is right beside him and Singer is talking willy nilly about homelessness and Misha has been homeless himself) sense that his home is his MISSION. Cas doesn’t think of home as a place, but rather a purpose, according to Singer’s understanding of the character anyway. Well, fast forward four seasons and Cas very much lives in the bunker now (home sweet home) and his “purpose” is still very much his family’s safety and whatever brings Dean Winchester the most peace.

And yeah. I don’t know if old fart Singer still doesn’t understand why fans were upset about Charlie’s death, why they accuse Supernatural of stringing them along in regards to their investment in Dean and Cas’ relationship, or what. So much has changed since this panel. The tone of the show has dramatically shifted (becoming more ensemble than ever), its values refined (chosen family hailed and celebrated above all), and yet, one Old God of Television still remains...

It’s like this: Singer is always constant on the show (S11 temporary step down aside), but with every new showrunning partner comes a shift in the show’s presentation. If Singer’s vision was enforced more, then the show would appear more uniformed. It’s just... not. I don’t need to understand the exact dynamic between Singer and his various co-showrunners to see this and tell you it’s a thing.

So that’s how I see things with Singer. I have no clue how much he’d fight against Destiel being more textually romantic beyond him acknowledging that it’s already ambiguous (and him being defensive as subtext being a valid storytelling option). Given how Dean and Cas’ relationship has continued to be a part of Supernatural’s compelling narrative, given how many bridges they’ve already burned and how they’ve toned down hunter romances in general, I don’t think his arguments could look very good or sound very convincing, if they are there.

Anyway, this is already on my blog somewhere. I talked about this four years ago when it happened. Singer basically confirms that at that time four years ago he and Carver intended Destiel to simply be ambiguous but that doesn’t really help us know how he sees things under Dabb, nor *exactly* how much of his ongoing will/vision vs Dabb’s goes into making Supernatural as it exists today. I’d personally argue not that much given how the show looked then as compared to now. But I’m not here to convince anyone of anything. This is simply how I feel. You can decide for yourself, but feel free not to argue about your opinion on my post if it’s drastically different than mine:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HgOc4D_uYy8

[naruhearts]

hi, i love your blog! i just wanna bring up a discussion. I LOVE DESTIEL AND IT IS COMPLETELY 100% REAL- but, why does jensen insist so persistently that destiel isn’t real, and if misha and jensen purposefully act the way they do as dean and cas, why is he so uncomfortable with the topic? is jensen homophobic ?

Aw thanks, nonnie! :D

There it is, the burning topic that holds polarizing opinions.

Annelie wrote an extensive, thorough post about this already (and it’s a SENSIBLE PIECE that dictates ALL my thoughts since I joined the Destiel fandom; she addresses your questions). I mention it here as well so I won’t delve too far into it. However *briefly walks the wank plank*

^^Jensen says this (about Dean being a fan of Dr. Sexy MD which we all know is a significant subtextual moment) after “Destiel doesn’t exist” — after denying the one topic he’s explicitly avoided numerous times (and I wholeheartedly believe that respectful fans would never bring up Destiel unless they want to draw unsavoury reactions from him on purpose and/or create more hateful bronlie fodder).

Let’s be real: folks are super adamant on proving that Destiel/Bi!Dean isn’t real that they completely overlook the second half.

It’s…uh, peculiar, right? I mean, look at his face. His use of quotes around “closet fan”–making weird implications about THE METAPHORICAL CLOSET. And then–

*side eyes* 

For someone who’s allegedly homophobic (a claim I believe is false), he sure stoked the fire himself, huh?

Jensen denied Destiel, but not that Dean is bisexual. 

In the past he’d simply deflect. No confirmations or rejections of any sort.

Note: this certain exchange was pretty frustrating to watch seeing as Jensen was most likely tired, and the poor fan just exacerbated his low mood by, again, bringing up something he explicitly avoids.

Circling the discussion back to Destiel — Dean and Cas’ love story is a nine-year long underlying narrative that has, frankly, been walking the (now thin thin thin) line between subtext and text post-S7, and TPTB are employing Will They Won’t They? as both:

A. a PR device (“stoke the fire”, Jensen and Misha freely joking around about Destiel, Dabb & Co pushing POSITIVE endgames, “the re-emergence of Castiel is a huge piece in turning Dean around again”, “Western Romcom with Misha”, “Give it to ‘em in a way they don’t expect” etc)

B. plot device (Dean and Cas using their words, past and present subtext complementing each other, TPTB supplying S13′s momentum towards canon with more and more overt expositions, parallels, symbolism etc).

The show’s premise conveys GROWTH — breaking the traditional mould, introducing social progression, cracking toxic norms, and uncovering WHO YOU ARE. Dean Winchester is the epitome of it. His characteristic journey was formed since 1x01. If Jensen comes out (pun intended) right now and yells: “YES, DEAN IS BI, DESTIEL’S REAL, AND HE’S IN LOVE WITH CAS!!” when their story hasn’t yet reached its denouement, they’ll be throwing the suspense, the intrigue, the literary fixation, and the COLOSSAL effort TPTB poured into creating a nuanced wholesome narrative for the GA out of the window. SPN’s (silent) storytelling becomes moot! Endgame Destiel becomes moot! (NDA’s are violated and TPTB’s wrath rains down upon the cast lol)

So, Jensen’s right: Destiel doesn’t exist TEXTUALLY. It will (I hope it does) soon. And while it’s absolutely true that Destiel doesn’t have to exist in order for Dean to be bisexual, the two are INTRINSICALLY connected (even though the latter predates the former) because Dean’s attraction to men — which Jensen deliberately portrayed in brilliant ways over 13 years — is linked to Performing!Dean’s degradation and the death of his toxic masculinity/sublimation –> linked to Dean accepting that he deserves GOOD THINGS and WANTING those good things for himself despite what (John) anyone else thinks –> linked to Dean LOVING Cas — his male best friend, his Everything, his Win — and entering into a HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP with him. 

**PR isn’t showrunning, but I’m not surprised that the cast/TPTB nowadays are running ‘round the stage like excited-ass toddlers, mostly devoid of restrictions and filters, happy-go-luckily shaking up the Destiel (+ Cockles) arena at cons vs two years ago.

I hope (EXPECT) we’re getting a beautiful end to the story of Love...and Love.

[naruhearts]

So I wrote this during 12x17 Samleen era and—

[[[[SPOILER]]]]]

—NOW THAT IT’S BEEN CONFIRMED EILEEN IS RETURNING FOR S15 I’M YELLING

I’m flabbergasted tbh, because this bodes very well for a positive endgame in which Sam finally gets what he always wanted, implied by both narrative and plot in recent Dabb Era seasons — his own family. A hunter who is the characteristic counterpart to Cas, Dean’s spousal-coded partner...ushering in ‘something with someone who understands the life’. A DOG.

The endgame metathemes of self-actualization are all falling into place. Here we come, Maslow!

(Yes, in S14 Sam/Rowena were an intriguing additional romantic parallel to Dean/Cas storytelling-wise, and the nuts and bolts that support canon Samwena are probably still scattered everywhere; I’m not saying it will happen, but it’s certainly a possibility that I won’t refuse. In light of 14x20, the prophecy between them may be altered in a fundamental way. I’d personally love it if Rowena kicks it in the metaphorical ass once again with her own autonomy. After all, free will is now an open question which, conceptually, challenges itself in the most narratively mindblowing way, and again, the characters we love must re-evaluate everything they thought they knew about their lives and each other; changing the paradigms becomes a ginormous challenge which I do believe the writers shall close out with a death-less Happy Ending for their personal arcs).

*looking for the vid source again* It’s also been confirmed by Singer (or was it Dabb? I haven’t had time to watch all SDCC press room footage) that S15 will have a ROMANTIC ELEMENT.

1. Recall Dabb’s claim that there shall be ‘no new love interests on the show’ pre-S13. As expected, indeed none, and his claim holds.

2. #1 falls directly in line with Sam/Eileen and, most importantly, Dean/Cas.

3. Going off of repeated romantic vs familial juxtapositional gongs in canon, it’s highly likely that we either receive textual M/F at the expense of M/M via ambiguity — a realistic prediction — or both are textualized/canonized (semi-idealist. Hey, the realist in me tries to keep in mind all options, and let me tell you, I do not believe canon/textual Destiel is completely off the table. If anything, Eileen’s return increased my cautious hopes that Dean and Cas may be allowed to achieve their own satisfactory denouement to the love story they’ve cultivated together for TWELVE long years as the mirroring romantic element to Sam/Eileen that S12 effectively consolidated, followed by the infamously pertinent late S12/early S13 Dean/Cas arc shift, and to me, the cyclism of S14 personally hammered home Found Family in conjunction with Love and...Love. Cas’ Empty deal is still narratively viable unless there’s a twist that voids it while introducing an opportunity for Sam, specifically Dean, to find out. I also gotta say that if we fail to get even the slightest acknowledgement, subtext or not/ambiguous or not, that Dean/Cas is a romantic subtextual-sometimes-bordering-textual arc in the cards to live a life together as spouses independent of Sam — which I think their character journeys are absolutely aiming towards — I’ll disappear into the ether; jk)

PR is not showrunning, but 🤷🏾‍♀️ interesting-ness abounds here. So much interesting-ness. I think we’ll have a damn ball scrambling our meta minds with endless speculation :P

Disclaimer: here be spec, not Gospel Truth! I wrote this post in good fun. *throws confetti*

This episode totally showed me that both Sam and Dean are waiting for their dark-haired lovers to come back to them :’)