I was boppin’ around on EW.com’s Supernatural section and the thought happened again and then typing happened.
I’ve been muddling this over a while and I’m just going to share it and see if anyone else agrees or not.
There’s this entire subplot called “Dean always has to step in and ‘save’ Sam”. Whether it’s the big things or the small things, when it comes down to it and someone has to be the guy who’s incapacitated/about to die and one has to be the guy who comes in and saves ’em, there’s really only one way that looks.
Okay, save for Jensen and the doped pudding and, really, it was pudding so you know they had to give it to him.
Look at the last couple of episodes, then look back further and ask yourself what would have happened if the roles were reversed?
Putting in a break cause SPOILERS!
Okay, so. A couple observations.
“The Purge” – Jensen gets pudding face, but Sam gets incapacitated and Dean saves the day.
“Sharp Teeth” – Sam ends up chained to a tractor while Dean does the whole tricking the werewolves with scent and saves Sam and everyone else.
Those two things. Just those two. Tell me why either one couldn’t have gone the other way?
Sam’s a smart guy. He would decoy himself with a jacket. He would be that cold about killing those dudes if it meant saving Dean. Why do we have him chained to a tractor or being incapacitated by a fat sucking fish face monster?
It’s those times where the writers seem to automatically put Sam in the “needs to be rescued” category — which sets up Dean needing to come save the day. It makes Sam look weak and then like a brat when he’s mad at Dean for always saving him.
I don’t even know if the writers know how often they do it. I don’t know if it’s intentional. But I feel like they’d benefit by sharing the rescuing duties a bit more if we’re ever supposed to believe that there’s any equality with these two.
Please, someone discuss this with me. It’s driving me crazy!