It's like the writers made him just for Dean, and it makes my skin crawl.

What does it have to do with Dean?

A large part of Castiel fans accept him as slash fodder with Dean. While I'd have no problem at all with Dean/Jimmy, other than the human moral issues of unfaithfulness, the otherness of angels is proving a squick for me.

A return engagement post-reconstitution, with her fully aware of her angelhood would be as creepy for me.

But there's no host there. Why would it be a problem? It's condom-free.

Again, see otherness, squick.

As I said, it's a personal thing, I don't expect anybody else to share it. I've attempted to get past it, but it's stubbornly right there, making all that yummy TFW and spn_foxhole fic unpalatable to me.

S4, final vote: Perdition.

I find myself wanting to say "It's perdition, bitches" over and over again.

I could see multiple uses.

Why is I-40 backed up? It's perdition, bitches.

What's that stain that won't come off my white linen shirt? It's perdition, bitches.

We have to wait until September for the S5 dvds? It's perdition, bitches.

I could see multiple uses.

Now I kind of want to tag it. It's so useful!

A large part of Castiel fans accept him as slash fodder with Dean.

But we know the writers didn't do it for Dean. At most it would be continuity for all involved, both characters and audience. The fact that people like to slash Castiel with Dean...what would that have to do with it? Technically they could have found (should have found, or they'd do the show a disservice) another actor with just as much chemistry, and the slash would continue.

Again, see otherness, squick.

Ah, okay. I see that as different from angel-condomness.

I like the other. I like the gulf, and what that means. I like the idea of what Castiel sees, and gives up, for this messed up hedonist hunter. It's way more interesting to me than a human falling for him.

Which isn't to eliminate fallen Castiel from D/C enjoyment. That has its own pleasures. And AU D/C--as long as you translate the otherness properly. The last couple AUs I read were pretty much hed iz pastede on yay. You don't just name them Dean and Castiel and make one popular and one shy and then have done with it. It's not that simple, people.

It's so useful!

Now I have to prevent myself from saying it in my next meeting.

Skipping in to say I am really really depressed over vancouvernights tweeting: [link]

What's ever really gone forever, @sgirl18 ? But I can't see THE necklace ever coming back unless there's flashbacks.

And I know she's crew, and I know she's now on another show so anything could happen. But damn, I didn't want to read that today.

I'm starting to Love/Hate my relationship with SHOW.

No! I...I know it's an irrational attachment to a physical object, but dammit...I already formed it, and they made me.

Dean without the necklace, is naked Dean. And not in a good way.

I'm gonna have to cast my vote for perdition on this one, but it was not an easy choice.

I am looking forward to and dreading the anime adaptation of the show in equal measure. I did look up the two voice actors who are said to have the roles, and while some of the roles I've heard them in before have me a bit boggled at the character juxtapositions, the vocal qualities are a damned good match from what I recall.

I think it's sort of funny that the writers have an idea of how fans relate to the show, the characters, certain canon events, and canon customs and habits they helped to create. And then how they can be so blind or indifferent to totemic things like the impala or John's journal, or Dean's ring, the Samulet, Sam's jelly bracelet, Dean's skull bead bracelet.

They apparently have little to no idea of how details amplify and illuminate the characters they write, do they? Jensen was so dismissive of the ring in LA--"It was beat up, and I cut my hand on it a couple of times. It was just time for it to go."

Well okay, I can certainly appreciate the practical reasons, but come on. The guy's been wearing that ring since we've known him. Give us a single line, at least to explain why he's stopped wearing it. The bead bracelet replaced the elephant hair ones they cut off Dean in IMToD at the hospital. Through ectoplasm and being thrown into walls, smoked and tossed around by demons and even freakin hell Dean wore that bracelet and ring. And now they just...disappear? Without a line or a word of explanation? Let alone the amulet which fans asked and wondered about for two and a half seasons, until they built an episode around it and the relationship it symbolized? The one thing Sam couldn't bear to bury with Dean, and wore on his own person until he could return it? The god-finder that Dean surrendered only reluctantly to a heavenly messenger? Even if it was burnt out as a tool, even if the devotion it symbolized had been tattered and tarnished for Dean, obviously they had not for Sam. And it would have made all the sense in the world for Sam to retrieve it, to keep it against the possibility of returning it to Dean sometime when it would mean something again.

I know there have been Big Doings at the ranch. But Winchesters don't have a lot of possessions. Those they keep have multiple utility and deep meaning. Casting them aside merits--requires--a word of explanation. I don't understand how the writers don't get that.

I'm not sure how you could have seen the same season finale I did and call them indifferent to the totemic nature of the Impala, honestly. They were pretty explicit.

I've read that the writers said that they're moving past what the amulet represents, so I feel they know damned well what they've created. I'm just scared about what that means.

As for the rest of the jewelry, I don't have a vocal care. I miss the ring because it looked nice, and I was kinda curious to see if there was payoff or deep meta, but jelly bracelets? I don't think most people are noticing things like that.