I agree that we don't have any framing where demons are good, and I didn't mean to imply that Ruby ever came out well, just that there was a time where it was unclear to me whether or not some demons might be at least goodish and that Ruby might be one of those. For me, this was partially caused by angels which seemed bad, which caused me to wonder if demons might be good if angels could be bad. I don't like this sentence, but can't seem to come up with a better way to put that right now.

I also agree about the unreliable narration, which I both find frustrating and thoroughly enjoy, although more the latter. I think it's a strong part of the show, as it makes the characters stronger and more relatable.

I don't quite understand what you're saying about subtext. I'll try to look at this again tomorrow.

In my earlier post, I said the show and not Dean accused Sam of hubris. You labelled that subtext, if I read you correctly, and I was saying by dint of the constant unreliable narration it's not subtext, it's front and centre.

Dean is often right in the end and wrong in the reasoning...well, he's just often wrong in the reasoning. That's more accurate to say. He's short-sighted and hypocritical when it comes to emotionally responding to the behaviour of people he cares about.

Unrelatedly--Oct 1st means flip the calendar to a shot that looks a shade like Good God Y'all with Sam and Dean in the street with shotguns, but I'm not sure it's actually that.

And 2 MORE DAYS.

And 2 MORE DAYS.

Meep. I will not watch 15 episodes in two days. I will not watch 15 episodes in two days. I will not watch 15 episodes in two days.

Also, I get what you were saying now, ita, and don't disagree. I may have been using an inaccurate term.

Get this fundamental misunderstanding of my philosophical position. Someone thought I should be BFF with this chick: [link]

Hello! How could I disagree with her more? Maybe she wants Jensen to "fix" his bowlegs? AS IF. I like the state of things.

Then someone asked why I wasn't making money off my "hobby" of finding the right pic(s). I'm just not making enough.

I may have been using an inaccurate term.

I think some people think that Dean is the authorial voice, because he gets more POV time, but I think he's a bit more of a main character, and that his mainness isn't filtered through anyone, and Sam's is sometimes filtered through him. But that's not the same thing. He's wrong a lot, and the text explicitly mocks/judges him enough that I feel comfortable when they're implicitly doing it from time to time too,

I hope I hope I hope that I don't have to unsubscribe in two days!

I could never figure out if I saw Dean as the main character because I'm a Dean-girl, or because the Show treats him as such. Even though Sam gets more of the movement of character and Dean is there reacting in the forefront (IMO).

I think Deangirls never have to worry about POV or Dean-heavy episodes not happening, even though Jensen directs every now and again (it's #3 this season--I have heard #2 and #1, but it seems definitely #3 now, which is good, considering the summary of #2 I heard), so I think he's main from that point of view. But I don't think the show lacks for investment in Sam.

It would be nice, though, if Dean could go dark onscreen. Sam's had that opportunity, kinda, twice now.

Dean's gone dark as, what?, a shapeshifter and in storytelling? And the End, which I'd count as more hardened and desolate than dark.

Losing his soul, drinking demon blood--you know. Dark.

I just read a bit of a Zap2it review because SPOILERS on Tumblr, and I'm pissed at a whole bunch of things right now. Just happen, show. Happen. You fix things.

Just popping in to say that Jared Padalecki was the guest today on Aisha Tyler's Girl on Guy podcast, and I thought this might be relevant to some of your interests: [link]