Did "crush" have the same meaning in Dorothy's time? I'm not sure when the meaning shifted, but I've seen it used in stuff at least as late as WWI to mean a strong, rather one-sided female friendship. (In one of the Anne of Green Gables books, it's used for a little girl who sees a new girl in school and thinks this new girl is just the bestest most incredibly little girl ever, and wants to be her best friend forever and ever. And when I was in college, I remember going through some old campus magazines and seeing a few things from around 1918 or so where it was used in a similar sense in mentioning that a freshman girl had a crush on a senior girl.)

Did "crush" have the same meaning in Dorothy's time?

I don't think that either the writers or the bulk of the audience are going to translate, though. If the ruby slippers would be confusing (and I think that's fair, silver is a pedant's thing), this would be a whole different level of missed message.

What have we seen it magically kill, though, outside of the Heaven/Hell paradigm? I assume that when you stabbed a human with it, they just react like you stabbed them with a big dagger.

Balthazar used his in an assassination attempt on one of the Fates, and angels have killed various pagan gods, which I'd think would trump faerieland witches. Presumably the angelic rescue squad that retrieved Castiel from Purgatory used them in combat with the leviathans as well (though we don't know if they were actually able to destroy any, we just know there were angel casualties).

To my mind, standard issue angel blades should be able to kill anything except archangels (too powerful), Mother of All (possibly unkillable, as even the phoenix ash final solution left a still-fecund tabula rasa behind), Cas amped up on the spirits of all the Purgatory creatures, and Death himself.

Matt, I am so disappointed in you. Why don't you understand how badly homosexuality is portrayed, how the queer audience is betrayed 23 times a year plus conventions and interviews? Are you sure you're gay? Please view and report back your heart rate and blood pressure.

Hey, that convention stuff about Jensen stifling questions got my nose out of joint too, but none of my complaints about what I'm actually seeing on the air involve queer representation or the depiction of Dean and Cas's relationship. Both are being handled as well as I could hope for in a show that's not specifically targeted at a LGBT audience.

To my mind, standard issue angel blades should be able to kill anything except archangels (too powerful), Mother of All (possibly unkillable, as even the phoenix ash final solution left a still-fecund tabula rasa behind), Cas amped up on the spirits of all the Purgatory creatures, and Death himself.

I still haven't swallowed Hammer Of The Gods, but I don't think Jehovah's blade should have anything to do with Kali or Thor, and they're here. I certainly don't think that random alien god on random alien planet should be concerned about the weakenesses of the seraphim, et al. But, as you note, Balthazar was going to kill someone from a Greek pantheon with one.

However, Oz is not here. I would really be happy if the writers pulled their heads out of their Judeo Christian asses and let other pantheons be other, especially with something like Oz that's....another dimension? Something quite separate with its own power sources, anyway.

Uriel said that only angels can kill angels. Apart from Dean, what non-angels have we seen kill members of the Heavenly Host? Was the original idea that angel swords didn't exist, but now that they do, they fill the angel quota of that equation?

If I were going to tidy up the Supernaturalverse, I'd give Balthazar's sword power over atropos because it's in his hands, and not put the power in the sword itself. I think that's tidier and more respectful. The swords' inherent power would work against creatures in its same sect.

Those criteria are irrelevant, though, in the face of canon. UNFORTUNATELY. I could totally fix things...

that convention stuff about Jensen stifling questions got my nose out of joint too

Hey, if he didn't act the way he chose to act, there would be fewer people on board the ship (not that the sum total of crazy would be any less, though...that kind of expands to strain the space allotted). Jared keeps his genital fondling implications off camera. Surely he should know not to taunt the happy slash fun ball?

Uriel said that only angels can kill angels. Apart from Dean, what non-angels have we seen kill members of the Heavenly Host? Was the original idea that angel swords didn't exist, but now that they do, they fill the angel quota of that equation?

Meg, the leviathan inside of Edgar (not by using an angel blade though), and I'm not sure whether Sam has or not (aside from his unsuccessful attempt on Castiel).

If I were going to tidy up the Supernaturalverse, I'd give Balthazar's sword power over atropos because it's in his hands, and not put the power in the sword itself. I think that's tidier and more respectful.

I'd definitely have preferred it that way, with the swords just being an outward manifestation of the individual angel's power/aggression rather than a handy trinket anyone could pick up, use, and melt down for making bullets. Unfortunately, that ship sailed in Season 5.

Dean's tally is Zachariah, the angel from the season opener...who else? I can't think of any that Sam has killed, but then again, I'm also blanking on

melt down for making bullets

God, I hate this the most. Remember when the Colt was special??? Poppy bullets irritated me as well. Could they just have hit her with a poppy stick? Stabbed her with a knife that had been used to slice bagels? They're...they're productising magic in a way I don't think serves the story (I feel like Charlie now).

Remember when we wondered what Dean not being blinded by Zach's death meant? Well, I wondered, anyway. Now I think it's just coincidence.

Unfortunately, that ship sailed in Season 5.

I could even wrap my head around a "pagan" god with a Christian tool killing an angel--they're only angels, after all. Like, on some level, there are supernatural creatures with supernatural powers that go mano a mano, and angels have their strength and their smiting and their time and space travelling, and Kali has her cleansing fire, and etc, etc, those powers go up against each other. And then there are charmed objects which exploit weaknesses, but not necessarily things that mortals can wield.

Of all the episodes whose canon I want to ignore, good lord, it's Hammer Of The Gods. Not only because of what it made canon, but also because of what it revealed about the writers' though processes.

UNDO IT, UNDO IT.

I felt Dorothy was pretty strongly coded as queer in the episode, from her mode of dress to her way of moving.

I felt Dorothy was pretty strongly coded as queer in the episode, from her mode of dress to her way of moving.

nods

I choose to believe that the Witch of the North's kiss wasn't just a chaste peck on the forehead.

Well, if there were ever a good character to choose for giving the gay audience a nod, Dorothy would be it...

I felt Dorothy was pretty strongly coded as queer in the episode, from her mode of dress to her way of moving

If she were straight, how would you dress her, and how would you change her way of moving? To me, she was an Amelia Earhart vintage adventuress clone (which I don't mean in a bad way, or think that Earhart being gay affects), because I can't think of another way for her to look, and, well, I know more straight women than gay who move like her. As code goes, it's too subtle for me.

if there were ever a good character to choose for giving the gay audience a nod, Dorothy would be it...

That's the only code I saw.