Why Teenagers Hate Supernatural
Friday, 29 July 2011 23:04 | Last Updated on Saturday, 30 July 2011 02:03 | Written by Cassy | 
| 
| 
Yes, I said it. Teenagers hate "Supernatural."
Okay, so maybe that’s a little harsh. When one looks at the fandom, it’s fairly obvious that most "Supernatural" fans are women over the age of 18. A good sized-portion of the fans is made up of teenagers, but for a network that is targeted towards teenagers, "Supernatural" doesn’t tend to do as well with that demographic. And this is a teenager speaking-a Supernatural loving teenager. And as much as I’ve tried to push the show on my friends and have begged them to watch it with me, I’ve only been successful once. And he hated it.
Two brothers fighting supernatural beings and other urban legends-boring. Yes, that is what I was told. My dear friend who I finally convinced to watch the show thought it was yawn-inducing. (Then again, he saw “Jus in Bello”, so maybe that wasn’t really the greatest episode to make him watch.) His exact remarks were that “the plot is cheesy” and “the characters were unrealistic.”
Dean and Sam are not, by any means, unrealistic. Fighting demons, maybe that’s unrealistic. But doesn’t everybody have those “Hans Solo/Luke Skywalker” relationships? Dean and Sam, although they’re brothers, are different as night and day. Some of my closest friends and family are the opposite of what I am, but it makes me love them all the same. And doesn’t everybody have somebody that you would die for, go to hell for? Maybe not your brother, but a significant other? A child? A parent? A friend? I’m sure that most people can see glimpses of themselves in not only the Winchester boys, but Bobby and Castiel and Ellen and Jo and Rufus and whoever else. I know I can. “Dean and Sam Winchester are two of the most relatable characters on television!” That’s what I told my friend. And I meant it too.
But then, I remembered the words of Atticus Finch. “You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view - until you climb into his skin and walk around in it.”
I just tried to imagine myself as my friend or a “typical” teenager.
Now, I see why teenagers don’t watch "Supernatural."
Most teenagers-most people, in fact-relate better to characters around the same age as them. Sam and Dean are adults. They were children and teenagers at one point, but children and teenagers that were forced to grow up way too fast. Most suburban teenagers, they can’t relate to that! And how could they? And the fact that there is such an age gap between the teenage viewer and the Winchester boys doesn’t help much. I’ve talked to a couple of my friends and described the characters to them, and my they just “don’t get it.”
I’m sure that many fans can sympathize when I say that I like TV shows that help me escape my everyday life. Supernatural does just that, and that’s one of the things I love about it. But talking to my friends and my classmates, I realized that most teenagers just “aren’t into that anymore.” Why would my best friends all watch Jersey Shore or Glee over Supernatural? Because it’s realistic. Most of the students at my school have said that they prefer reality television and hate fantasy or sci-fi shows . I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard somebody say that they want to be on Jersey Shore. And Glee is about high school students! Way more relatable then two grown men fighting monsters. My generation doesn’t want to imagine themselves fighting alongside Dean and Sam-they want to see themselves in Snookie or Kurt or Rachel. (I’m not picking on Glee or Jersey Shore-these are actual responses I received.)
I have met a handful of people my age that do enjoy "Supernatural," and I love that, I do. But they have said the same things I’m saying-that they have tried to get other people to watch the show, and their friends all hate it as well. I’ve found that "Supernatural" just doesn’t cut it for most people my age, mostly because they can’t connect to the characters or the story. I don’t agree- "Supernatural" has touched me on a personal level that few other books and TV shows ever have-but you have to understand that the current generation isn’t interested in everything that "Supernatural" is. Of course, this might change as they get older, but most teenagers don’t enjoy sitting there and thinking. They don’t wonder how this character grew during this season or a slow build up of a storyline arc-it’s just not how their minds work. They want…well, frankly, a lot of them want "Jersey Shore." A reality show that provides instant gratification-nothing more, nothing less.
But there are those of us who are young and love this show for everything it is-“cheesy and unrelateable” characters and all. We love it because it isn’t instant gratification. This show makes you think, if nothing else. About good, evil, souls, faith, family, destiny-you name it, this show probably covers it. We love it because we can see ourselves in Dean and Sam and other characters in this show. We love it because it takes us on this incredible ride. We love "Supernatural" because it’s "Supernatural." And that’s something all fans can agree on, whether we’re 15 or 50.
*A huge thank you goes to mainegirlwrites, who wrote the article “How the Suburban Housewife Escapes, or Why I Love Supernatural”. The article inspired me to write about Supernatural from a younger point of view, so mainegirlwrites, thanks again!*
For all the latest Supernatural info and article links, follow The Winchester Family Business on Twitter at @WinFamBusiness| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Comments
I think perhaps one reason lots of younger fans (male and female) are turned off by the show, when they dig a little deeper, is that they experience the fandom....
Which is a helluva lot of Sam and Dean"GIRLZ" who are loud and rabid. That's why I tend to stay out of the fandom as much as possible, I watch the show for the story, not for the shirtless shots of the guys.
When I started watching SPN almost two years ago, I remember scribbling some notes on my pc about "Why SPN is NOT a 'teen-horror'". I did it because sometimes, on some tv critics sites, I saw it referred at as "teen-horror", like "The Vampire Diaries", or "Buffy", or movies like "Friday 13th", "I know what you did last summer", "FInal destination", and so on.
I always found this description not entirely fitting: yes, Sam & Dean are young and good-looking (just what the female teenagers seem to love), but this is not enough to label SPN as "teen-horror". Thinking about the matter, I came to the same conclusion as you: the lead characters in SPN are youg, yes, but not enough. In fact, they are young adults, and their issues, though sometimes can resemble the "typical" teenagers ones, in Sam's (first seasons) struggle to "find himself", "find his way" away from the father figure or from his brother's (sometimes) over-protectiveness, or to come to terms with his "powers" and resources, limits and abilities (all of them the typical "coming of age" elements), many of the other issues are "adult" ones: responsibility for someone, duty towards the others and the world, contrast between desires and reality, self-sacrifice for someone or something and the meaning of this sacrifice... and then the problem of moral choices, and the ends vs. means, and destiny vs. free will... and the meaning of family, the struggle to be a family despite the obvious differences, to maintain relationships even when they are strained...
THis is really a bit "too much" for the average teenager, and I don't say it in a dismissive manner: it's just that average teenagers still don't have to cope with such issues, they have other problems, other things to know or to come to terms with. Things they find more easily addressed to in shows like "Glee", that show a reality (the school, the group of friends, the nerd, the beauty queen, the first sex experiences and consciousness of sex/gender identity...) more close to what they experience everyday, so they can relate more to Kurt or Snookie, than to Sam and Dean (or Han Solo and Luke Skywalker).
It would be interesting to make the reverse operation and to know what exactly teenagers who like SPN find so fascinating in it, why they can "relate" or "get" these characters and stories while other teenagers can't do it.
What I think is awesome about Supernatural is that there is such an age variety that watches the show. Teenagers to people in their 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, and even beyond. So, maybe it doesn't hit as hard in the CW's targeted demographic, but with the age range it has, I'd say that's pretty impressive!
I don't know too many teenagers in real life anymore, but I do know that a lot of teenaged fans of the show hang out on tumblr.
I tried to get my friend, a woman in her late 40s into it and failed, so I don't think it's just your age group.
Some of the themes on this show are hard to grasp for some people. It's not that they're difficult concepts, it's that they make you assess your own life at times. Good art does that.
To me, Supernatural is good art. It covers the human condition. Anything that examines the human condition in this manner can make people---uncomfortable. People shy away from uncomfortable. They want their entertainment, as you said about "Jersey Shore," to be instantly gratifying and satisfying. They don't want to have to think about this uncomfortable problem we all face as mortal beings. What is life? What is death? What is the punishments or rewards for this life I've led? What IS a family? How far will I go for mine?
I think it's interesting that both Jared and Supernatural are currently in the running for the Teen Choice Awards. Before this article, I mused to myself that I thought it deserved the recognition, but didn't see either Jared or the show doing well there. Jared's got the biggest strike against him, summed in one word: MARRIED. It has nothing to do with his talent, nothing to do with his wonderful art on the show. He's out of reach, older, adult. They can't relate to him---as they might have done in his earlier career in shows like Gilmore Girls. He's also grown into that frame of his so much so that he can be intimidating to those that don't know the sweetness he possesses. Having met him, I wasn't intimidated, but I knew if he had wanted to he could have easily snapped me in half with just his hands. They want someone who is skinnier, more like them in size---someone that doesn't look like they can bench them.
Most teenager awards like this want to reward those in their own age group, the one they feel is their representative. Someone who is either 16-22 at the oldest (Though I think Robert Pattinson is 25 or so now, so he's an exception), is unattached, and is usually doing shows or movies set in high school or around a high school theme. It's probably why Ian Somenholder, who is fantastic at what he does, will succeed more than Jared.
Living on the run, hunting monsters, dealing with very adult problems such as life and death doesn't appeal because to MOST teenagers (you're an excellent exception to this rule, as there always are) don't think that way. They're convinced that they're invincible, death is far off, and the notion that mortality is a serious matter just holds no sway. It's why most Lit classes bore so many students. A lot of literature deals with the same concepts.
I do hope you'll continue to show your view point on the show. It's nice to see what someone younger thinks. I truly think Supernatural was designed to target, in the beginning at least, the mid to late 20s set. It just happened to suck a lot of adults in all age groups in, too.
I tried getting two friends--I'll mention that they're both male since that seems rare enough in our fandom--into the show. One is two years older and he has enjoyed it considerably. The other is two years younger and was not having any of it. And he would rather watch Jersey Shore, and I quote, because "they keep it real." Uh huh. So maybe there is something to the age theory here.
It has struck me in seeing how people talk about the CW, saying that is is all teen shows, but Sam and Dean are older. Sam and Dean face more adult problems--yes, coming of age has been a big theme for Sam since he started out younger, but not so much in the high school way. I think there's a pretty big difference in coming of age stories at 16 and at 22, so as much as I've found that story interesting and the Winchesters relatable, I can see where a younger audience might not. I think it's unfortunate but I can see it.
A lot of shows on TV about adults are procedural crime dramas and those shows that teens might watch don't deal so much with the human issues that SPN does. Then again, fantasy/sci-fi tends to get a bad rap--on TV and in literature--despite the fact that the genre tends to deal with the most human issues, exploring them in unique ways. It's just not "cool" to be into genre shows or fiction. I'm a Publishing grad student and unapologetically advocate for genre fiction in my classes when my peers are all about literary fiction. The genre doesn't get the cred it deserves and that turns people--especially impressionable younger people--away. And they miss out.
Haha, there are a lot of varying issues in that post. Rather fascinating.
I see both view points.
The strike against Literary Fiction is that it is too stuffy in a lot of people's eyes. It's also a misnomer for those who uphold its superiority to genre, because each "literary" piece can be classified into a genre. The other issue with literary fiction is that it is a lot harder to sell to the general public. People like to know what they're reading before they start and have an idea what they're picking up. Literary may be classified into genres, but not quite fit one or more at any given time, making it harder to understand to those outside literary circles.
The issue with genre, and this is NOT true about ALL genre, is that it can lapse easily into the formulaic. It's not hard to imagine a sci fi story or fantasy story falling into pitfalls, cliches, obvious traps to tell its story. Romance has the same issue. Each genre has "rules" and "formulas" that define it not just to the writer or literary circles as being bad or good, but to the general public. You know when you pick up a sci fi story you're going to get technology. A fantasy piece might have dragons or wizards. Westerns involve horseback riding and saloons.
The trick to both literary AND genre is to revolutionize them, to attack them in a new and interesting manner. Basically, it is up to each writer to essentially reinvent the wheel, sell it as a new idea, and give us something within the story that is novel, fresh, and different than others done before it.
I think there's too many misconceptions about both out there that it is easy for people to dismiss one, the other, or both. That's the shame of it all.
To the article, I find this interesting. As someone who teaches mostly those in their late teens and early 20s, I often bring SPN up as an example and get many an eyeroll. I think it's because they think I'm a cougar (hey, I'm still in the 30s, so I resent that, but oh well). Anyway, I agree with what you noted Far Away in that Supernatural is very much a human show, but it has very specific adult themes that many of us don't really contend with until we are older.
I also think there is the bias toward reality television or pseudo-realism, as I like to call it, which presents (both in cinematographic but also dialogic ways) worlds that to quote Cas "appear similar to ours in many respects but are drastically different in others." My students know Jersey Shore or Big Brother - they are not really interested in other types of entertainment much. And if they are, then they either refuse to acknowledge it or they are forthright about it to an extreme.
I also think that serial dramas require a lot more attention and time than the current adolescent life has resources for. And why watch a show about two hunters when you can get on an Xbox or PS3 and be a hunter?
Serial dramas DO require time and commitment on part of the viewer. It's a long haul to follow any show during a prime time season, thus why DVD box sets seem to be so popular. You can digest an entire season literally in one weekend binges.
Weekend binge....oh how I want to watch season 2 now. Croatoan, I love your angst so much.
I was out with some classmates a few weeks ago and mentioned Supernatural in passing and one asked me how the season had ended since she'd heard it had started out slowly. I told her about the noir aspect of the season and that things came together in the end, and she (my age, early 20s) replied that she didn't like serials and would rather be able to watch any random episode at any time. She had, consequently, watched the first five seasons of SPN via DVD box set which was why she was curious about season 6. It's all very intriguing.
With those types of shows, you can miss a week or two---or a month's worth---and not have missed all that much. The story will have moved so fast and have already moved into the next section, usually with a loose basis for relating the events together, that a casual fan could enjoy it.
The same can be largely said for the procedural cop show. Each case is a complete and new story, with small threads of character growth embedded within that may or may not fly over a viewer's heads, but not totally distract them from the overall episode.
A show like Supernatural, the X-Files, True Blood, or Fringe have season long story arcs. They have smaller storylines that may or may not be wrapped up in a episode or two, but for the most part it is a SEASON long story. It's another reason why I am oft to reserve judgment of a season of this show type until I've seen the entire package.
That type of commitment is hard for some. They're busy with jobs and families, or they have other activities they would much rather do and thus would much rather the show be open to a casual viewing. It's just how it is, I suppose.
With anything, people will do it if they seriously want to, though.
I came across this article yesterday and think it applies (in the sense of SPN being considered genre fiction): "Tolkien, Lewis, George R.R. Martin: Why Fantasy is a Real Part of Literature": online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904800304576474430386670622.html
I'm curious, as I am only a writer and have never seriously looked at publishing itself, what do you learn in your classes? Mine were all on how to TELL a story. I'm guessing yours is on how to SELL a story. That would be a neat thing to see. (Side note, I must go to the library at some point and look at the Writer's Market for this year and next)
Ooo, a meta article to read later. Yay!
Now, I must be off to write my damn novel. It most certainly will not write itself, now will it?
As for my publishing classes, we have to take book and magazine classes (since the two are very different), so we cover various aspects of the industries, from acquiring work to editing (ranging from developmental to copyediting) to working with a writer, as well as more technical behind-the-scenes stuff like production, design, and so on. I'm also taking a class on E-Publishing next semester. It's a wide gamut of things to study :)
My job is retail at the moment. I would love to get into real writing for money and living, but I never went into my degree pursuit in order to get a job. I went in to it to become a better fiction writer.
I'd love to see a book list to read up on some of it, though!
That's pretty neat. Mine never had that. Just didn't. Shame.
I can also relate to the age thing. For example, I don't like the Twilight story because they're all teens and I'm 40. And, while Sam and Dean are younger than me, they deal with heavier subject matter, and in a realistic way. Granted, I don't have to worry about most of the things they do, but there are parallels.
I have turned a few people on to SPN (co-workers and family) and one of them was my teenage nephew. I'll consider that a win.
I run a youth bible study and yes, all are teenagers and alot of them reserve their Fridays to watch Supernatural. I never told them about the show until one night they asked me if I knew about Supernatural and upon finding out I did, asked if I could incorporate it into the bible study class. I said hell no to that one.
Btw, I'm about 5 years older than most of my students; I'm continuously amazed that they actually listen to me, and obey!
Call me crazy but I believe teens do recognize Jared's stellar talent as an actor, after all supposedly it was teens that submitted the nominations. Teens have critical and cynical eyes and they know it’s more challenging to play multiple sides of a character and convincingly portray a character that is always changing versus Dean's character who is a constant character.
Unlike many other shows, Supernatural has shown an ability to poke fun at itself ... to not take itself too seriously.
For me, that has always been part of its charm.
I'm a librarian at a high school for girls, and I have my fellow SPN fans that come to see me on Monday mornings to discuss the show. But I do see what girls read, and most of them like the stories with girls their own age that they can relate to. Unfortunately, too many of them like "Gossip Girl" or "The Clique" and other such drivel. But a lot of them are into fantasy so there is hope for the future!
My niece is 23 and she is a huge fan of SPN, and so is her boyfriend, so I can at least talk to them about the show. No one else in my family understands my obsession. This is why I love this site, I can come here and meet like minded people, whether they be 16 or 50.
That being said, it did bother me that you implied that only mature teenagers watch Supernatural, and those who don't like it are shallow and in need of instant gratification. I love Supernatural--and I also love House, Top Chef, Project Runway, and yes, Glee. I'm not trying to insult you or your article, but I would suggest that you not use such broad classifications for our entire generation. You had a good point when you said that we watch what we relate to. Just because people our age tend to prefer Jersey Shore and Glee to Supernatural, that doesn't mean that "most teenagers don’t enjoy sitting there and thinking. They don’t wonder how this character grew during this season or a slow build up of a storyline arc-it’s just not how their minds work. They want…well, frankly, a lot of them want "Jersey Shore." A reality show that provides instant gratification-nothing more, nothing less."
Frankly, I think you're selling our generation short, and making a gross generalization. This May, I had a party for the Season Six finale. Myself, aged 21, my sister, aged 19, and my brother, aged 16, all attended, along with a big group of our friends, all 14-25 years old. The people in that group were theater geeks, athletes, chess club members, poets, accounting majors, and car mechanics. Aside from Supernatural, they all are fans of different shows, ranging from the History Channel to, yep, Jersey Shore. My (entirely too long winded) point is, our generation is awesome because it's so unique and varied. And while I may think that those who watch Supernatural represent the best of our generation, that doesn't mean I think the others are shallow, in need of instant gratification, or unable to follow complex stories. You and I are part of an unbelievably cool generation--please don't dismiss them so quickly.
When I watched Lost, I decided to stop worrying about the plot and just watch the characters and I loved it all (except maybe that second season with the tailies). I adore Fringe and find it much more about family than SPN is most of the time. But I'm just not obsessed with it the way I am Sam and Dean, or SamnDean. I'm not a Wincester, I just like the idea of their unshakeable bond and trust and love in each other. And I honestly haven't felt I've gotten that since season 4 began. It started creeping back in with fits and starts at the ends of season 5 and 6 but I hope it is finally here to stay in season 7.
When I was a teenager, I watched whatever was on the networks, so that was mainly sit coms or detective shows. Genre was very few and far between and series got cancelled all too quickly. What got me into genre were reruns of Star Trek and the Twilight Zone. I think viewing preferences are influenced by a lot of factors.
insight into the relationship of teenagers to Supernatural. I really enjoyed reading your piece.
I think Supernatural can be a hard sell to any age group because the show is so hard to define, categorize or explain. It's about monsters, urban legends, and spooky stuff. Oh, and its about the relationship between two brothers ( and their Dad). Oh yeah, and their Mom died tragically. And it is about fate vs. free will and angels vs demons and who is God and what is his (or her ) role in the universe. And sometimes the shows are deeply emotional and sometimes they are hilariously funny. It's about heroes and villains and everyone in between. PS: The two main characters are HOT.
I teach at a middle school and some of the students there are very into SPN, but usually they are also the ones who read scifi, fantasy, and dystopian literature.
Not many of my colleagues are into SPN. Most of my friends really prefer reality tv shows to any other type.
Thank you, Nitewoman 7. I am another 59 year old who loves Supernatural (and also loved Buffy and Angel). However, I was not obsessed with them as I am with Supernatural.Something about the characters and plot just hooked me at the stage in life I am at right now. It doesn't hurt that the guys are really smokin' as well as being top notch actors. And, like you, I don't feel 59. I look in the mirror and go, "Who is that old lady?"
So, Supernatural may be a tough sell- but certainly worth the effort.
There are a number of brotherly affection shows - White Collar, Suits, Franklin and Bash now. Entertaining ... but don't come close to Spn.
I've gotten like 5 people into Supernatural as well, most of them teenagers... so...
RSS feed for comments to this post