Supernatural University: The Pitfalls of Confirmatory Bias
I spent several hours Saturday at the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Training Center listening to a presentation on and reviewing the evidence from the NTSB investigation of the explosion of TWA flight 800 off the coast of New York, which happened 15 years ago. I can hear you asking what the investigation of a demon-free plane crash has to do with Supernatural, and the answer is this: it gave me an enhanced perspective on one psychological reason for things that have happened both inside the show in the relationship between the brothers, and outside the show in the fandom itself, including the constant Sam-girl versus Dean-girl bitchy debates over which brother is supposedly being favored or ignored on the show. Welcome to a new Supernatural University psychology seminar on the topic of confirmatory bias!
Supernatural University: The Pitfalls of Confirmatory Bias
I spent several hours Saturday at the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Training Center listening to a presentation on and reviewing the evidence from the NTSB investigation of the explosion of TWA flight 800 off the coast of New York, which happened 15 years ago. I can hear you asking what the investigation of a demon-free plane crash has to do with Supernatural, and the answer is this: it gave me an enhanced perspective on one psychological reason for things that have happened both inside the show in the relationship between the brothers, and outside the show in the fandom itself, including the constant Sam-girl versus Dean-girl bitchy debates over which brother is supposedly being favored or ignored on the show. Welcome to a new Supernatural University psychology seminar on the topic of confirmatory bias!
Plane Crash Investigation
Let me set the stage by sharing a bit about TWA 800. Depending on how old you are, you may or may not recall that the plane, a Boeing 747-100 with 230 people aboard, exploded in midair over the ocean shortly after taking off from JFK airport about 8:30 PM on July 17, 1996. Everyone on board died. After a painstaking investigation that included recovering the aircraft debris from the ocean floor and actually reconstructing much of the plane, the NTSB investigators determined the probable cause of the crash was an explosion in the center wing fuel tank resulting from the ignition of the flammable fuel vapor/air mixture in the nearly empty tank. The ignition source couldn’t be determined with absolute certainty, but was most likely a short-circuit outside the fuel tank that allowed excessive voltage to enter the tank through electrical wiring associated with the fuel gauges. In the aftermath of the investigation, changes were made to aircraft to prevent this from happening again.
Early in the investigation however, over 500 of the 700-plus witnesses along the coast who’d reported seeing the explosion told investigators they’d seen a streak of light or a missile in the sky before the blast. Even before most of those interviews began, the FBI and CIA had joined the NTSB in the investigation because of concerns that the crash might have been a terrorist event. After all, it was only a few years after terrorists blew up Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, and after the first car bombing at the World Trade Center in New York. With the recent collapse of the Soviet Union, people were worried about Russian weapons, including missiles, being available to terrorists on the black market. The waters were further muddied by Pierre Salinger, who had previously been a U.S. Senator, the White House press secretary for both John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, and an ABC News correspondent, asserting a highly public claim that he had radar evidence proving a U.S. Navy vessel had accidentally shot down the plane and the government was covering it up. By the time the witnesses were being interviewed, Salinger’s wild claims had made the national news, not to mention being spread like wildfire by conspiracy theorists across the budding internet.
The witnesses who said they’d seen a missile or a streak of light leading toward the plane weren’t lying, but they were definitely mistaken about events. Simple physics explains most of what they saw. The plane was several miles offshore and about 14,000 feet in the air when the tank exploded. No one was gazing intently out at that random spot in the night sky; their attention was drawn to it only when they heard the explosion. As anyone knows who’s done the math during a thunderstorm to calculate how far away a lightning strike is by counting off the seconds until you hear the thunder – every five seconds equaling roughly a mile – sound travels slower through air than light does. The streak of fire people saw in the sky when the sound of the explosion made them look was the trail of the burning plane itself, still climbing because the engines were still running. Had the plane been hit by a missile, there would have been two trails in the sky, one from the missile and one from the plane. However, seeing that flare moving in the sky and learning shortly afterward that a plane had exploded, the logic most witnesses leaped to was a cause-and-effect explanation based on their immediate visual perception. And for many of those witnesses, who weren’t interviewed immediately but only after a number of days had passed, the news coverage with reporters speculating about the possibility of the explosion having been due to a missile just reinforced that erroneous perception.
Human Psychology v. Searching for Truth
Here we get into the background psychology aspect of things. We as human beings are hard-wired to perceive patterns; it’s how we explain the world to ourselves, how we assemble our own personal narrative of events. Speaking from an evolutionary perspective, this is a huge advantage, because it allows us to make imaginative leaps to fill in the things we don’t directly perceive. In seeing a pattern behind where things currently are or where we want things to wind up, we can gloss over missing data to fill in with imaginative, intuitive logic what we think would have to be there for the picture to make sense. We do it all the time. In the worlds of science, technology, and invention, that pattern-seeking sense is often the singular gift that allows us to make advances by coming up with hypothetical explanations for events and then looking for the missing pieces that would either prove or disprove our theories. In the worlds of philosophy and religion, it allows us to come up with shared, believable explanations for things we may not be able to prove empirically, such as why we exist and what our lives mean.
That pattern-seeking drive is also part of what makes questions so intrinsically frustrating to us and answers so satisfying – at least, if those answers either corroborate the pattern we believe we’ve seen, or provide a different picture we still can readily accept. When something happens and we don’t know why it happens, we’re uneasy until we can come up with a reasonable explanation, because then the world can make sense and we at least can believe that we know what to expect the next time we confront a similar situation. Our brains are hard-wired to positively need to connect causes with effects. We come up with stories that fill in the blanks – the holes in the plot, the actions we can’t see – to help make sense of our lives.
However useful that patterning drive can be, however, it can also mislead us. We’re so predisposed to see patterns that we often see them where they don’t exist. For example, our superstitions about good and bad luck – carrying a lucky charm, playing a certain set of “lucky†numbers at the lottery, performing a pre-game ritual to improve your team’s chance of winning – involve our minds having made a spurious link between unrelated events, falsely implying one will influence the other when they’re actually independent. Our pattern sense also misleads us when we encounter a new event that appears similar to something we’ve seen and explained to ourselves before, because our immediate reaction is to accept that the two events are the same and overlook clues that they’re actually different. And if we’ve already come up with and invested belief in an explanation – in a pattern – that seems to make sense to us, most of us are reluctant to change our existing view. We’re not comfortable with the sense that the world is shifting around us, we want the certainty of already knowing the answer, and we generally don’t like to admit we were wrong.
All those cautionary points factor into the concept of confirmatory bias. Confirmatory bias, or confirmation bias, is the very human tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms our preconceptions. Confirmatory bias affects almost everyone, but most of us aren’t even aware of it. The problem is, it gets very much in the way of finding the truth, because if the truth isn’t what you already believe it to be, you’re not even going to look for it.
The NTSB scientist who gave the TWA 800 presentation yesterday mentioned the effect confirmatory bias had on the investigation, and while it was a small point, it made a big impression on me. NTSB conducts its investigations in cooperation with partners, usually including companies involved in the accident because they built or operated the equipment, science labs that can help ferret out clues, and other agencies with an interest in the case. The NTSB investigators are rigorously trained to start by simply collecting facts, without forming or discussing any theories about how the accident might have happened, expressly because as soon as an investigator forms a theory of events, he or she unconsciously begins looking for the pieces of data that support that theory, and may well overlook data that would indicate something else.
One of the partner investigators, however, was the CIA’s top “go to†guy for missile investigations, an expert analyst who’d spent 30 years picking apart the scientific evidence of explosions and proving which were missile strikes. Long after the other investigators weighing the preponderance of the evidence (which amounts to a LOT more than I’ve mentioned here), were seeing a veritable cascade of unfortunate events leading to an onboard incident triggering the explosion, the CIA investigator remained stubbornly convinced that it had to have been a missile. Eight months into the investigation, reviewing the witness statements for the bajillionth time, he finally made the connection for himself between the flash-and-sound arithmetic and the single trail of fire, and realized he’d blinded himself to the truth by his own ingrained perception, based on his history, his approach, and the myriad of statements from witnesses who insisted they’d seen a missile. He hadn’t accepted the information when it came from others. It only had impact when he finally worked the equations out for himself.
Supernatural Bias
We’ve seen the perils and pitfalls of confirmatory bias on the part of Sam and Dean any number of times. Sometimes it’s been a feature of the plot. For example, in All Dogs Go To Heaven, the guys assumed, based on the initial case information, that they were hunting a werewolf and thus stopped their surveillance at dawn, only learning later that they were up against skinwalkers, whose M.O. was slightly different. Similarly, their automatic expectations, based on their knowledge and experience, that they were dealing with certain monsters or ghosts left them surprised to learn the villains in both The Benders and Family Remains were simply warped, twisted people.
Much more ruinously, both brothers have displayed confirmatory bias in dealing with each other, based on their often mistaken beliefs and fears concerning each other. For example, in seasons one and two, Sam was always hesitant to bring up his psychic powers with Dean, not just because Sam himself was afraid of what they portended, but because he was afraid Dean would reject him as a freak. Sam often interpreted Dean’s comments and actions negatively even when Dean didn’t mean them that way; as just one example, look at Sam’s reaction to Dean’s reluctance to seek information on the psychic kids at Harvelle’s Roadhouse in Simon Said. Dean was worried about what might happen to Sam if other hunters learned there was something possibly supernatural about him, but all Sam heard was Dean calling him a freak. Sam expected and feared that Dean would consider him a freak, so instead of hearing Dean’s fear for him, Sam heard seeming condemnation.
Dean often did it too: remember Dean in season three – seeing Sam behaving differently and wondering, because of what Azazel had said in All Hell Breaks Loose, Part 2, whether Sam had really “come back wrong†– watching Sam with growing disquiet and even asking Bobby about his thoughts on Sam’s behavior in Sin City, but not asking Sam about his behavior outright until Malleus Maleficarum (and never telling him what Azazel had said even then). Think about how much we learned from episodes as early as Skin through Shadow, Devil’s Trap, and finally Dark Side Of The Moon about how Dean’s perception and (mistaken) belief that he needed and cared more about Sam than Sam did about him had darkened and distorted Dean’s view of events involving his brother all along the way.
In season four and much of season five, both brothers, trapped within confirmatory bias, saw only what they most feared and had thus conditioned themselves to expect from each other – betrayal, mistrust, weakness – rather than seeing the truth of each other, and acted accordingly. Their misperceptions of the truth and their fear of and inability to open up to each other and hash out a common understanding drove wedges between them that facilitated the demons’ and rogue angels’ plans to free Lucifer. Those barriers to and gaps in mutual understanding persisted up until their common resolve at the end of Point Of No Return, which finally started to heal their partnership and paved the way for their brotherly love and belief in each other to save the world in Swan Song.
And that brings me to the fandom aspect of confirmatory bias. I think nothing demonstrates it more than the non-stop Sam-girl/Dean-girl arguments about which character is being ignored, defamed, or favored more or less than the other. Welcome to a psychological, human understanding of what’s going on. A fan who is passionate about one or the other brother and has come to a personal belief that he is being shortchanged is going to seek out and interpret every piece of available information in a way that supports that belief and reinforces that pattern, and won’t even hear anything that would counter that belief. I’ve seen disputes from both camps using the exact same episodes and story arcs to argue each side against the middle, and both sides at once. I don’t buy either side, and openly acknowledge that my brother-balance reflects my own personal bias.
Unfortunately, because this is a matter of individual belief based on personal perception rather than physical science, it isn’t amenable to a purely rational, arithmetical resolution like the one that let the CIA investigator finally trump his own preconception of the cause of the plane crash. I’m afraid the differing views, with all their rancor, will still continue, since few on any side are psychologically equipped or emotionally willing to perceive the others’ views.
I would hope, however, that we might all take a step back and think about the extent to which our personal bias – our human need to see understandable patterns in our existence and to find validation for the beliefs in which we’ve invested our hearts – may be distorting the real image of the world. And I’m not just talking about the world of the show or of fandom, but also about the world of our own real lives and real relationships.
Take the experience of the Winchester brothers to heart, and consider: what you see from your perspective as a deliberate slight may be nothing of the sort. Don’t assume you know what someone will do or why they did something; always be willing to ask, rather than to accuse.
After all – what you think is a missile aimed at you might just be someone else’s pain exploding in a random direction.
Class dismissed.
***************************************************
The WFB is a lurker-friendly site, so please respect the following rules before posting a comment:
1. Be respectful. Debate and discussion is welcome. Attacks are not. If you wouldn’t say your comment to someone’s face, don’t post it.
2. No Sam vs. Dean business. Discussion of their issues re: each other and everything else, and commenting on the above article, is fine. Promoting one brother at the expense of the other is not.
3. The administrators, Alice and Ardeospina, reserve the right to edit or delete any comments we deem offensive or not in line with site policy.
4. Further questions can be directed to Alice and Ardeospina via the contact us area.
Thank you for you co-operation in this matter! ~Ardeospina
This just might be my new favorite article ever. I’ve seen both Dean fans and Sam fans argue that one is being favored over the other, etc. It goes both ways. I’m just so bi brother, I can’t conform to one side. But this whole article is just amazing. I love it, honestly, and you make so many valid points. (And I loved the history lesson!) Thank you so much for writing this and I admire your bravery, because I’m sure not everybody will be thrilled with this article.
Thanks, Cassy! Much appreciated!
Wonderful article, Mary, thank you! First of all, I don’t think I had ever heard the report about Flight 800. I knew it must have been a catastrophic accident, but I had never gotten that confirmed.
Second, I wish this could be required reading for all the Sam vs. Dean hysterics. I agree it won’t change them, but maybe it would make them ever so slightly more tolerant of each other. I rarely read many comments following articles about the show anymore because they nearly always degenerate into a flame throwing mele. I love that this site doesn’t tolerate such nonsense.
Thanks, Susie!
Like you, I often elect not to read comments on articles precisely because they too often devolve into negativity and incivility. (I get enough of that from Congress!)
Wow, interesting and informative article. And very well written. Great way to illustrate the contention in the fandom.
I’ve always thought it was funny how we could all be watching the exact same show and yet our perceptions were so vastly different depending on which brother was favored.
I’m definitely bi-bro, and although I have not always liked the writing for either of them on occasion, it never occured to me to think there was a distinction or that one was being favored over the other, until I read others opinions. I did not start reading fan sites until into season 3 so I had not been subjected to any bias. That just confirms to me what you said:
“A fan who is passionate about one or the other brother and has come to a personal belief that he is being shortchanged is going to seek out and interpret every piece of available information in a way that supports that belief and reinforces that pattern,”
I don’t mean that I was seeking out things to confirm my opinions, I just mean that I’m pretty sure that those who just watch the show because they like it, don’t even think about any of the bias that’s perceived by the fandom.
And I admit that it influenced my opinion at times, though I try not to let it. I wish sometimes that I could just go back to watching the show like a regular viewer. My husband thinks we’re all nuts.
Anyway, thanks for a well written, informed and thought-provoking article.
Thanks, Sylvia!
It’s truly said that no two people see the same rainbow: since a rainbow is the refraction of sunlight by water droplets in the air, two people standing side by side are actually seeing different light waves being refracted by different water drops.
Sometimes, point of view can be everything, and depends not only on where we stand, but on who we are because of where we’ve been.
Mary, thank you for this wonderful article. I love both Sam and Dean. I honestly don’t know how people can choose one over the other, and I especially can’t understand the ones that hate one or the other brother because they perceive an injustice being done to the one they love.
One complaint I hear often (and am already hearing about Season 7 after what few bits of information we got at Comic Con) is that Dean doesn’t have a storyline of his own, that his only purpose is to angst over and drive around the extra-special Sam. That his last storyline – to be Michael’s vessel and stop the Apocalypse – was stolen from him and given to Sam and Adam. This has never made any sense to me. First, Supernatural to me has always been a story about the Winchester brothers — what happens to one happens to both of them, what one of them feels is felt by the other, what one of them does has repercussions for the other. And more than that, Dean did stop the Apocalypse. If he had given in and become Michael’s vessel, Sam would not have been strong enough on his own to stop Lucifer and Lucifer and Michael, in their respective vessels, would have started the Apocalypse, not stopped it. But instead Dean was able to defy the “destiny” the angels had for him and move past his fallback position of watching out for Sam, to go against “every fiber I’ve got” and back Sam’s play – the only hope they had left of stopping the Apocalypse. And together they were able to do that. Together – well, them and the Impala! What better storyline could there be?
So thanks again for this, Mary. It put me in mind of an LJ meta I read back in the 3rd season (it was written during the hiatus after “Jus in Bello”) that tried to explain that Dean did have a storyline and that we did know Sam. Like your post here, it was a wonderful essay, though her final thought – that where she thought Season 3 was going would finally put an end to the disgruntled fans’ perception of Sam getting more of something at Dean’s expense or Dean having more of something else at Sam’s expense – was very clearly wishful thinking on her part. This perception – that Dean’s characterization and story suffers because Sera is a self-indulgent Sam-girl – has only gotten worse. I will never understand it, and often feel I am watching a diferent show than some other fans watch. That insightful meta was written by bowtrunckle and can be found at her LJ if anyone is interested:
http://bowtrunckle.livejournal.com/34017.html
Thanks again, Mary! I am so very thrilled to again be learning at the Supernatural University! Please have another class soon!
[quote]That insightful meta was written by bowtrunckle and can be found at her LJ if anyone is interested:
http://bowtrunckle.livejournal.com/34017.html%5B/quote%5D
Thanks for this, Deborah. It really gave me some insight into the whys and hows of the way the show has played out. You’re right that things have gotten worse,not better since it was written.
Thanks, Deborah!
Like you, I’ve never understood either the “Dean doesn’t have a storyline” or “We never get to see inside Sam’s feelings” fan camps. I’ve always seen [i]Supernatural[/i] as the story of two brothers, and while different writers may find it easier to write the viewpoint of one or the other in individual episodes, the overall story, to me, has always been about both. Ergo, the rancor and bitterness often on display in the fan debates never made sense to me. Oh, well.
Thanks for the link to bowtrunckle’s meta! I read it at the time and remember liking it a lot. 🙂
Bravo! You wonderfully explained this whole bias issue in a way I wouldn’t have even thought.
I’m a Sam AND Dean girl. I do not favor one over the other. I might lean more towards one at any given time in the story, but I don’t choose.
I loved how you brought in the bias both brothers have had throughout the series—and how that colored what happened in the story.
Story = Character + Conflict.
IF you do NOT have conflict, your story ends and that’s that. Complex stories come with multiple sources of conflict. Conflict with enemies, conflict with allies, conflict between the main heroes, all of it pushes story forward and provides us with story.
The difficult thing about interpreting a story is NOT trying to place an absolute bias upon it, which is hard because we want to fill in plot holes or adapt things we see in the story to what we’d rather see.
Thank you, Far Away Eyes!
Funny thing about conflict; most of us, I think, really don’t like [i]experiencing[/i] conflict. We find it much more comfortable and pleasing when things go our way, when what others want harmonizes with what we want and things flow smoothly together.
That makes for a pretty boring story, however. So we need conflict in our fiction in order to be entertained.
But we still like to win. We still want the story to resolve in a way that satisfies us, and where we empathize strongly with one character in the story, that can mean resolving the tale in a way that magnifies, justifies, and validates that character.
I guess … I don’t have a dog in this race. I don’t see the Winchester brothers as being in competition with each other for a place in the story. The story is their lives – it’s what happens to them and what they choose to do and feel about it. I suppose I don’t see the story as something to win or lose, but just as something to live – so I win as long as the story, and the brothers, continue. There’s my bias!
I have the same bias you have, Bardic. I’m not a Sam Girl. I’m not a Dean Girl. I just want the boys to come out the other side intact and a brotherly unit.
Conflict in stories keep it interesting. If it was simply a character getting what they want anytime they want with no growth or change, it’d be damn boring and we wouldn’t even be here having these discussions!
Mary this is a terrific article on so many levels and it hits home for me in so many ways. I’m not nearly as eloquent as you (or many of the posters here) and my ambivalence over getting into any of the Sam vs Dean debates in fandom have often caused me to avoid chiming in with my own opinion- just to avoid the [i]possibility [/i] of becoming the subject of fannish derision or attack by people whose confirmatory bias may blind them to any valid point I might make if it doesn’t match their beliefs exactly! Dealing with enough personal fights, to keep my job, helping patients as much as I’m able despite mounting health problems hitting me the past few years, like demons attacking Sam& Dean (only with no mental training or preparation for the fights to come in years prior) has often made me sit on the sidelines as an appalled and paralyzed witness. Or even worse; not even attempting to bring reason or balance to the “Jensen vs Jared” fan debates with the most vehement opinions on what posters think or imagine what Jensen has had to put up from Jared or Jared from Jensen from quotes, rumors, blown out of proportion incidents, as the fans’ confirmatory bias for one brother over the other spills over shrilly& with harsh personal attacks often by fans who have never had the opportunities you, Mary and I have had; the fortune to have even met either of these classy, mature, young gentlemen (who both have goofy streaks& great heads on their shoulders) who have made wonderful choices in friends& Clif as bodyguard who all help keep their privacy& the crazy ones at bay.
Still… It hurts me even to read the fans attacking each other in supposed defense of the actor they are biased towards. However, clearly these guys are professionals and are quite capable of protecting themselves, their own reputations and their own working& personal relationships without fans’ biased ‘help’. I’m glad for that
Sam& Dean however have a lot more to work through. Major repercussions still continue because of their negatively (sometimes by outside interferrence) influenced& biased opinions of what the other can ‘handle’ and fears of and for their brother. As you explained with concise eloquence have had disastrous personal& apocalyptic consequences for the people they were brought up to try to save.
Some of these consequences could have been averted by either Sam or Dean giving up their confirmatory biases and actually talking to each other& really listening to the answers, not to confirm what they were afraid to be true!
What you researched& revealed about the bias of the TWA 800 crash investigation& how one investigator realized how he had been tainted by witness bias was illuminating of human psychology as well as a lesson in hope that such confirmatory bias (my new favorite phrase!) Can be overcome with due diligence& careful re-examination of what people think they know to be ‘fact’. That really hit home for me because I remember being at my specialty (hospital corpsman) school in the Navy just about to receive my first overseas orders to a duty station in Europe (flying the same route off the East Coast of the United States. I watched the scattered fires on the waters off the coast of NY, glittering in the night like horrible dying stars, knowing no one could’ve survived that crash (long before the sad fact was confirmed) and being afraid that the plane I would take off in would be shot down before cruising altitude even before I had a chance to serve my country& help people& save lives! So pervasive was the assumption that the plane was brought down by a missile, that I developed a new fear of taking off in airplanes that never really receded. I overcame it for my sense of duty then never flew again (I completed my service shortly before 9/11, when my dad called home saying he was in DC, had just seen a plane hit the Pentagon,& to turn on the TV, but to tell us he was ok!) The best&worst phone call I ever received, & I refused to fly for both my plane terrorist fears until my passion for Supernatural and desire to let the Show’s cast& crew know (often :D)how much the show has meant to me in so many ways & things the characters& writing& dedication to family & helping others has helped sustain myself, brought my family together, including reconnection with those I served with overseas in the ER, so many years after nearly being scared off helping others due to the coverage bias of the fateful crash of flight TWA 800, that haunted me still until reading your article. Thank you Mary!
Cheers!
Rachel
And yes, This! Agreed!
[quote]So much insight so early in the morning. Thank you for this article. The human mind and its psychology is so tricky. ‘m willing to change my view immediately. I once wrote a 1 page comment and the only feedback I got was the only minor thing I didn’t get right. So noticing the Sam vs. Dean discussions make me thinkk Really?!?[/quote]
Thank you, Rachel! I’m glad my report on the crash investigation had particular meaning for you; that was an unexpected benefit. And I’m very glad you shared how [i]Supernatural[/i] – with all it means to you (and to me!) – helped you reach beyond fears. Our passions can enrich our lives in so many ways! I’ve met friends through this show and its fandom whom I would never otherwise have known, and that’s a blessing. I’m glad you’re one of them!
Everybody can have personal bias in any walk of life not just over two fictional characters in a tv show. I am a Sam girl and do see things from his perspective that is not going to change however I do see the show has being about the two the two brothers not Castiel .
But AND THIS IS A BIG BUT people are not unintelligent either or stupid and sometimes the point they are making are actually valid and cant merely be dismissed as fan-girl biased . Idont believe Sam has had the pov or exploration of character Dean has had and others have that issue to for me that is a valid issue .
Yes some of it is bias and in no way at any point should anybody take it to the actors that is a line you dont cross for me but some of it is genuine points that shouldnt be dismissed.
I don’t dismiss ideas, Ellie, but I can’t point to my perceptions of them as being their objective truth. We can watch the same show and come away with vastly different perceptions of it, and we clearly do. That just makes us human and different. It doesn’t make either of our perceptions the “right” or “wrong” one.
Thanks for commenting!
This was an interesting read, Mary, thanks for your efforts.
However, I have a few nitpicks I’d like to point out, respectively a few points to add. For a ‘university class’, I find it important that you should differentiate between various types of cognitive bias, and I miss that here, I have to admit. I hope you won’t take it amiss if I elaborate a bit on what I mean…
Confirmation bias is one such type, but there are some more that can be applied to the example of the Sam-girl/Dean-girl debate (or the characters in the show), such as hinsight bias (or I-knew-it-all-along effect) or attribution effect (the inclination to overemphasize dispositional clarification for others’ behaviour or points of view while underestimating the situational one).
I am personally also quite fed up with the ongoing debates in that department, but when it comes to form an opinion about people or explain their behaviour based on psychological background, to only look at one aspect of the possible variations and deducing from that ‘what’s going on’ is too simple for me.
But that is, of course, just me, and I am, surely, biased in terms of scientific background.
I think it’s necessary to also take into observation other types of cognitive biases that apply here, like anchoring (the human inclination to one piece of information when finding decisions), the phenomenon of reactance (the human need to do the opposite of what someone offers out of an urge to resist a perceived attempt to regiment one’s opinion), selective perception (expectations can affect perception. It’s in the neighbourhood of confirmation bias, but still a different matter), negative bias (tendency to appreciate negative information or experience more than positive), or wishful thinking and others.
I agree wholeheartedly that a step back is often required, as is an understanding of our own personal biases.
It’s a more complex field, though. So is the ability of people to emphasize and/or change perspective which is based on experiences/intellect/growing up/social factors/imprinting…
I don’t usually engage in the Sam-girl/Dean-girl debates (except with the occasional plea that those may stop). I would like to champion a more complex view of the fans involved and of the examples in the show – even with Sam and Dean it’s not only the confirmation bias we find…
I tend to be a tad critical about these topics 😉 , since it’s so often misunderstood and leads to many interpersonal problems people like me have to take care of eventually…
Thanks, Jas
Thanks, Jas!
I hope nobody takes the “university” moniker on these articles too seriously; I’m an essayist, not a scholar! You’re dead-on right that cognitive bias reaches far beyond just confirmatory bias, and that there’s a lot more to perception and how we respond to it than is discussed here – but an essay can only go so far. I hope these little topic explorations of mine can provide stimulating beginning thinking points for people to consider; I never meant to imply any of them were anything remotely close to a complete picture or analysis of a concept!
I really do like everything you bring professionally to the discussion table, and I look forward to you keeping me intellectually honest when I do these things, especially in the area of psychology! 🙂
Loved, loved, loved this!!!
Your last sentence…is that a quote from you personally, or from somebody else, cause I love it!
Great job. I need that. 🙂
Thanks, moncitymom! That last line is pure me. It’s one I really couldn’t resist, too.
All too often – and I’m as guilty of this as anyone else I know! – I’ve had a knee-jerk negative reaction to something I’ve read or seen or heard, because I perceived it as an attack or as someone opposing or disrespecting me. I think stepping away from reactive anger, resentment, or fear can be the hardest thing to do, once you’ve already flashed on that negative reaction, because you’re already hurt and defensive – but I’ve learned to my cost that my quick emotional response is very often not only wrong, but something the other person never imagined I would feel, because what they said or did came spontaneously out of their own emotional upset and wasn’t intentionally directed at me at all.
Not everything is enemy action. 🙂
Love the University articles that you write. This one was exceptional!
Though perhaps I see it through biased eyes in my own way, as I am a Dean girl who has never felt that he was shortchanged in any way by the writers. He is my hero and he certainly has been the centre of this story as I see it. It is the brothers together that make this tale so fascinating and Sam would be so less interesting if it were not for Dean, and vice versa. They are two parts of a whole that at peace with each other or at war can not be separated and still have a viable narrative. Myself, I love the brothers as a team entirely on the same page,and loving each other with all the little scraps and teasings that go along with being brothers, but completely understand the need for conflict to keep a saga like this one ongoing and alive.
Mary, you helped me to see the biases displayed by disgruntled fans in a new way and also my own bias, which I thought was no bias at all. :-*
Love the show for never letting me down (for very long, at least. re: RoboSam) and I am so grateful to have met these wonderful Winchesters. Thanks to the creators and crew and two wonderful young actors who have immersed me into Sam and Dean’s world and who I would be bereft to have to give up on now. So, Carry on Wayward Sons. I’m here till the very last word has been written and aired. May it be a long time from now! 🙄
Thanks, Bevie! You know I’m bi-bro for certain sure; that’s my bias, as it is yours!
Sam became so opaque that the audience couldnt relate to him , he became a hate figure in a two lead show.. The inability for the audience to grasp Sams pain , his pov because the way the writers approached the situation. Sera . staed they deconstructed Sam I say they went way beyond that but they then think they can make it all alright . The damage that was done to him some he has never recovered from. If objecting to that makes me a disgruntled and biased fan then good .
This might be true for a part of the audience, Ellie, which is sad, of course.
Personally, I have always felt a lot of sympathy for Sam (as I have for Dean) and understood well what his ordeal was about. Relating was never a problem, and I can’t see him as a ‘deconstructed’ character.
Both Winchesters are wonderfully complex characters which makes them all the more human and authentic. I just love that…
Ellie, you are certainly free to have your own feelings about this show and these characters, but there is no way that I could or would ever hate Sam. Sam, and Dean, are two of the best realized characters to ever grace my TV screen. I love that they have been allowed to grow and change, which allowed me to grow with them and feel deeper about them as the layers of each brother were slowly peeled back. I’m not sure what you find so opague about Sam. While he may not have spoken directly about his feelings all the time, I certainly feel like I understand, and can sympathize with, why he did the things he did, even the things that would be way off the deep end for people in normal circumstances. I’d really be interested in what you think Sam has done that is unexplained, or unexplainable, to you.
I love these brothers so much. They are noble characters to me, willing to risk their lives and sanity to save others. I am so looking forward to their continued journey aned, I assume, their continued growth as human beings and brothers.
I love you, Deborah. That is all.
Okay, not quite. Sam and Dean fulfill, for me, meta fictionally, THE most important and essential element of a story. They WANT more than any pair of characters I’ve ever followed. Ever.
That being said, as characters outside the meta fictional aspect, they seem REAL. Sure, their story is a fantastic story, demons, angels, monsters, spells, but the story under all the magic is human. They’re flawed. They sometimes get it wrong—even when they mean to do right.
Sam, for me, in seasons 4 & 5 took us down the path of “good intentions” and its consequences, both figuratively and literally. Sam DID end up in Hell, his path to Hell was paved with those good intentions. And yet, it is figurative for all of us in our own lives. Maybe we think we’re doing something for someone in our lives, when in actuality it might hurt them. We might have convinced ourselves otherwise, or ignore the red flags telling us to turn back, but we’ve all done this at one point or another.
Sam didn’t want to cause any harm to the world at large, he didn’t want to raise Lucifer. His goal was to STOP Lucifer. He didn’t want to start the Apocalypse. In Micro, Sam NEVER wanted to hurt Dean, either. His whole reasoning to killing Lilith was to avenge Dean’s time in Hell, to stop her from possibly doing it again to his brother, to prevent her from bringing the Devil to Earth. I think he’s fully emerged on the other side knowing where he went wrong. His reaction to Cas’s same path in Season 6 proves that he knows the warning signs, knows its peril.
I do look forward to seeing how both brothers react to one another in the upcoming season. It should be a good ride, and as long as I can grow with them, that’s all the better!
Are you talking about Sam in S4 being opaque and a hate figure? Because I have to disagree. For me, that’s when I began relating more to Sam, where I finally thought I had insight into him and was interested in the character.
If you’re talking about Robo!Sam? I could never hate him. I understood him perfectly well and agree that it was a masterful deconstruction, not only of Sam, but of what having a soul means.
Ellie, I have to agree with Jas, Deborah, Far Away Eyes, and Melanie. My perceptions of Sam were never the negative ones you describe, so I can’t agree with you that the audience as a whole was unable to grasp Sam’s pain or point-of-view, or that the way the writers approached his story irreparably damaged Sam as a character. I still empathize with Sam as much as ever, and in fact love him even more because of all I’ve learned and seen of him. To my eyes, Sam and Dean are both wonderfully complex and humanly flawed characters, and I’m proud and happy to know them and to be able to watch them grow and change as they live their storied lives.
Your perceptions and mine are different, and I think they always will be because we are looking at the same events through very different eyes and minds. I do wish you could see the world from my standpoint if just for a moment, however, because I think it’s a brighter and happier place than the one you’re seeing, and Sam looks much better and stronger in my mind’s eye than I think you believe. 🙂
I’m always sorry to see fans disgruntled and displeased. All I can say is, I’m not either of those things.
Human beings are not perfect, we can’t always agree with everything that’s put in front of us. I don’t always agree with things my siblings say or do, and I tend to keep that to myself. I think this is what makes this show so good. The characters are well defined, flawed human beings, just like the rest of us. And I do think the writers do great justice to both Sam & Dean. As for people who tend to denigrate either actor in their personal life, that is just wrong. It’s one thing to take the side of a character on tv and another to go after the real person! I stay away from any of those biases thank you very much. I think you made your point beautifully.
Thanks, Sylvie!
You know, the world would be a boring place if we were all alike. Here’s hoping we can all celebrate our variety and learn to see things through each others’ eyes; there are so many different ways to see the world!
Fantastic article, Mary! I can’t tell you how much I appreciate your balanced and insightful comments on the show and characters. As someone who tends to maybe get a little overexcited and emotional about the show, I can use a little grounding sometimes, and reading one of your reviews or articles never fails to help me take a step back and consider.
Thank you, my friend! I’m glad I can sometimes be of assistance!
Thanks, RisenShine!
I can sometimes see aspects of the arguments about how characters are written or portrayed in particular episodes, but I truly don’t see what partisans of either side advocate as being obvious and persistent misuse, disregard, or favoritism of one over the other. It’s just not in my perception, but it clearly is in theirs. And all we can do is agree to disagree, because beliefs grounded in emotion aren’t amenable to dispassionate change. So it goes. 🙂
Excellent article, Mary. The part I love the most – is how everything –[i]everything[/i] — relates back to Supernatural. Even a plane that crashed years before the show was even a glint in EK’s eye.
Thanks, Melanie!
Isn’t it funny how all the world becomes [i]Supernatural[/i]? Hmm, must be wearing Winchester glasses … 😆
Another interesting and informative article, Baricvoice. You have stated a principle that I always try to live by, and that is that all strong feelings are a matter of perspective. When I encounter a totally different perspective than mine, I try to research what that differing perspective is based on. For instance, following 9/11, it occurred to me that all of the major conflict that I was aware of in the world waas caused by “isms” — colonialism, communism, racism, feminism, terrorism; or, in the case of SPN, fanaticism — you get the idea.
I simply could not understand why the world hated America, or had a different perception of the country I grew up in. So, I quit my job and went to live as a majority in a minority population for five years. It was a wonderful experience.
Here’s my point as related to your article and SPN. What I learned from my experience is that it takes both the heart and the head to be fully human. I engage on a couple of forums, but always use examples from the show to present my POV. Yes, mostly the ‘hater’ word comes flying out with no substansive show facts to back it up, but occasionally there is a poster who presents a very good, well thought-out viewpoint different than mine and an intelligent discussion can be had (not often, but occasionally) with the end result being that there is a fuller understanding on both sides of the show and other’s perspectives — usually not a change of opinion, but new insight. I always learn from your articles, although I don’t always agree with them 100%, because you use show facts to present your viewpoint.
I only engage on a couple of boards. This board sparingly (because I don’t feel comfortable enough with what I feel is a heavy character bia to truthfully state my position) and another actively, because although every board has a biased fandom, I find for the most part, civil posters open to opposing discussion (although the majority do not agree with my viewpoint).
Yes, there is a prevalent Sam -vs- Dean as the writers favored character debate going on right now, which (as Elle states) I believe the writers have created and continue to perpetuate, so naturally, the fans will continue to discuss it. So, yes, I agree that others should try to understand the others’ perspective in a civil manner. The biases are there, including the writers’ biases, but posting only positive comments serves no purpose that I would have to engage as an online fan, because I would gain no learning or fuller undstanding…and believe me, I’ve been called a hater, negative, a ‘not real fan’ (whatever that is) a lot. I simply dismiss these people. All I expect from other posters is facts presented in a civil manner to back up their stated viewpoint so I can evaluate mine.
Thank you, Ginger!
I hope you always feel free to disagree with me and share your reasons why! I have my own ideas based on my observations, education, personal history, and understanding, but I don’t pretend to have or speak revealed “truth”; I can only explain what I think and what things I observed that led me to my conclusions and beliefs. And I’m happy to engage with anyone else who operates on the same understanding and keeps the discourse civil.
When it comes to this show, all of us fans are in that same position; we weren’t in the writers’ room to hear or participate in season and character arc discussions, story-breaking, or notes on script drafts, so we can’t really know precisely what the writers/producers intended. We doubtless sometimes read in things they never even thought of, and interpret others in ways they never meant – and sometimes, they’ve got a ring through our fannish noses and lead us precisely where they want us to go while ensuring we can’t see beyond the hand holding our lead-line! Part of the writers’ goal is to hold our interest, and they know they won’t if the course of the story becomes too predictable; but at the same time, it can’t jump the rails of our belief or violate the limits of our understanding and delight, because that would make us reject it out of hand. It’s a delicate balance and an intricate dance, and since we’re all making up the choreography together while the music plays, we and the writers sometimes step on each others’ feet and get in each others’ way.
But even with stumbles and barked toes, I still enjoy the dance!
There is definitely a bias on this board. Just look at the number of articles written about each brother.
Authors submit articles, I publish them. However, measuring bias by number of articles each brother has? Seriously? Are you also one of those people that count the minutes each brother has on screen? I highly suggest you read a lot of the articles we have here. They’re pretty even keeled for the most part. If article counts bothers you so much, go ahead and write up some Dean articles and send them in. I’ll publish them, as long as there’s no Sam bashing.
You know, I’ve been reading a lot of comments of late and people claim that they keep getting shouted down for saying their opinions. I honestly don’t see that, but I’ll never be able to guarantee you’ll get a conforming opinion. That goes beyond my powers of editor. That doesn’t mean people aren’t welcome to post on this site and that opinions don’t matter.
However, comments like this, you aren’t getting any respect from me. We just aren’t that petty.
Amen, Alice. Couldn’t have said it better.
Cindy, you may be right that there are more articles here about one brother than the other – I don’t know as I haven’t taken the time to count the articles or figure out if an article should be considered a Sam or Dean article. But the tone of your statement is unfair as it infers that the site has a bias for one brother over the other. Despite the fact that I haven’t read every article posted here in its entirety, I feel safe in saying that you would be hard pressed to find an article here that attacks one brother or the other, or praises one or raises one up at the expense of the other.
I realize some people relate to one brother more than the other, and I can appreciate that even though I don’t personally understand it. That’s why I appreciate this site — that while the authors who post here may not all be like me (unable to choose one brother over the other), their “bias” for the brother of their choice is not expressed or explained by denigrating the other brother to make their point. That’s all I ask for from a site, or its moderators, not only with regard to the articles posted but also in the comments section for the articles. This site does a great job in both instances, and if I haven’t told them how much I appreciate that already, please consider this a big thank you, Alice and Ardeospina.
I agree that the articles I’ve read about both brothers are pretty positive. I haven’t seen any articles that bash either brother. However, I do believe that there is a bias towards Sam on this board. I don’t necessarily think it’s a bad thing. Just making an observation.
My sincere apologies if your statement was misconstrued by me. I have to admit, I’ve gotten that “Sam bias” accusation a lot. It tends to be a sore subject.
You see, its the “birds of a feather” phenomenon. Back in season three when I started writing about Supernatural, that’s when the writers really started developing Sam’s character. I was spending a lot of my effort in articles trying to figure out who the hell he was. Dean, I got him and his character was so clearly defined in the first two seasons. So my early writings tended to focus on Sam. Naturally, that earned me the scarlet letter of “Sam fan.”
It’s funny too, because I’ve read on other boards in the past (I don’t go to other sites anymore) messages from some fans that have warned people to avoid this site. “That Alice Jester is such a Sam fan it’s sickening.” They even still bring up one loathed review that I wrote (incorrectly I might add) all the way back in season four as if I write like that all the time. Some fans in this fandom are really bad with their grudges and perceptions. Hmm, that does parallel a bit with Bardivoice’s point here, doesn’t it?
What’s funny is Elle2 has been writing on this site almost as long as me and she has a Dean leaning. She’s attracted tons of Dean fans in her articles. I don’t get how this entire site gets condemned at times because of a perceived bias of one writer, one who for the most part writes about both brothers. That’s where I jump into the “petty” argument.
Now, discussions, I just can’t control that. A lot of time is spent among the commenters focusing on Sam’s issues. I highly encourage comments from both sides, but that doesn’t mean I get them. I think it’s still that “Sam fan” perception, all started because of the way I wrote articles three years ago.
Whew, that was a long way of saying thanks for clarifying your observation! Again I’m sorry for the misperception.
[quote]My sincere apologies if your statement was misconstrued by me. I have to admit, I’ve gotten that “Sam bias” accusation a lot. It tends to be a sore subject.
…It’s funny too, because I’ve read on other boards in the past (I don’t go to other sites anymore) messages from some fans that have warned people to avoid this site. “That Alice Jester is such a Sam fan it’s sickening.” They even still bring up one loathed review that I wrote (incorrectly I might add) all the way back in season four as if I write like that all the time. [/quote]
I think I’ve seen references to that review: is it the Sex and Violence one where you claim that Dean’s distress at being lied to by Sam was expressed far more cruelly and hurtfully to poor defenseless Sammy than Sam’s mocking of Dean’s torture in Hell?
I think you’re being a tad disingenuous to effectively claim (as a self-confessed Samgirl) that you are somehow above the confirmatory bias your blogger is describing here. I think it’s pretty telling that you posted a warning for negativity on an article by one of your bloggers who expressed discomfort at the fact Sam’s Hell was being presented as so much worse than Dean’s, but didn’t warn similarly on another blogger’s article that compared Dean to a rapist for resouling Sam. IIRC, the Deangal blogger you mention in comments, elle2 (who wrote the former article) longer blogs for this site – a fact you didn’t even bother to reveal to the many people, myself included, who only came here to read her articles, until pressed.
Ah, I was hoping one of you grudge holders would show up. Alright, I’m going off topic, but here goes.
It seems your memory is quite selective (bias!). If you also recall from that incident regarding the “rape” article, the other article with the warning was published after that article. It was BECAUSE of all the uproar on the “rape” article that I issued a warning. The author of that article, elle2, was fully supportive of the warning. She also felt is was necessary given the backlash from the previous one. Trust me, a warning would have gone on the rape article if I had known it would cause such a controversy. It’s one of those hindsight is 20/20 things. That was all explained back then though, but it seems your bias forgot about that (or someone else’s and you didn’t come here for the full story). You also forgot about how I’ve more than apologized for my wording in the Sex and Violence review, which I wrote in a rush while at New York Comic Con. My statements were VERY misconstrued, but yeah, poorly worded too. That was 3 years ago. Get over it.
I have NO idea where you took my statement to be I’m claiming I’m above confirmatory bias. That’s actually against our rules here, PUTTING WORDS IN OTHER PEOPLE’S MOUTHS. Unless you see that directly written (it isn’t) don’t you dare assume that’s what it is.
It is rather interesting though that your slanted comments come on an article about bias. Thanks for playing.
Isn’t it fascinating that the only thing people remember from the ‘rape’ article (and I don’t like that depiction, to be honest) was that one line and forgot about everything else mentioned, described and analyzed there.
If one needed proof for fan-bias, it was found in the comments in abundance. Just as we find it here.
Cheers, Jas
My apologies Jas. I don’t like referring to it as the “rape” article either. I was caught up in proving my point! And I so concur. That’s exactly what happened with my Sex and Violence review.
Don’t worry, Alice, I’m not upset. I feel appalled that some people take one sentence out of context and blow it up to proportions we, as the authors, never dreamt of..
😮 , Jas
Oh, and I forgot, elle2 does write for us. She was taking an extended break and at the time I wasn’t sure how long that break was. As soon as I got word, I did put that in announcement article. Sorry you missed it. I’m not sure how else to spread the word short of flashing it in giant letters on the main page.
Anyway, she’s back so look for her articles. One is coming tomorrow I believe.
“Part of the writers’ goal is to hold our interest, and they know they won’t if [b]the course of the story becomes too predictable; but at the same time, it can’t jump the rails of our belief or violate the limits of our understanding and delight, because that would make us reject it out of hand.[/b] It’s a delicate balance and an intricate dance, and since we’re all making up the choreography together while the music plays, we and the writers sometimes step on each others’ feet and get in each others’ way.
But even with stumbles and barked toes, I still enjoy the dance!”
While character and actor biases are, have been, and always will be a part of this fandom, they are not necessarily always the reason that the part of this passage of yours that I bolded happens, IMO.
But whether it’s because of a bias or because there has been a genuine decline in the nuts and bolts parts of the writing that we’ve been presented with by the Supernatural writing team in the last 2 seasons, the fact is, many are not enjoying the dance any longer due to that bolded part happening for us.
And we post about it and continue watching because we want so badly to enjoy the dance again; and to be told-as we often are, at most sites these days- that we’re not watching “right” or we “just don’t get it” or we’re watching “wrong” is extremely frustrating to say the least(which I’m not saying that you’re actually doing in this post here, but I DO feel that you are strongly implying that you could be feeling this way about others just from the fact that you felt the need to write this article). It is this type of frustration on both parts of the fandom that I think we’re seeing at this point. And the very intense frustration that we’re experiencing now is directly related and proportional with how long the unhappiness has been going on for. From all that I’ve read(and I lurk extensively and predominantly), I think one more season will bring a change-and whether it will be that the segment of fandom that is most unhappy now, will become happier because the writers might have heard, heeded, and done something to make things better for us, or if there will be yet more of an exodus from the boards than we’ve seen in the last season because they didn’t-I think things will probably get quieter either way. Unless, of course, the other segment of fandom feels that they are being wronged yet again. My hope is that the writers might be able to find a way to lessen the frustrations on all sides w/o that second(and probably larger) exodus happening. I hope for that predominantly because I fear that I will have to take part in this second exodus; and to say that it would sadden me to feel that I could no longer watch this show because the joy has gone out of it for me, for whatever reason, would be the understatement of all time.
I’m watching the show because I simply love it, all the themes it touches on, all the heartbreak and the compassion, the wonderful characters….
I am determined to not let anyone ruin my joy of watching this show.
😉 , Jas
Amen, Jas. Amen.
I would like to point out that the writers have not ANY “obligation” towards us as fans, to “lessen our frustrations”. Sure, they have to take it into consideration if they hope to have enough of an audience to keep on going. But it’s [i]their [/i]problem, not ours. They are free to take it into consideration or not, or to a lesser or greater degree, or for some aspects and not for others. [u]And they would be in their right in doing so.[/u] They are not in our service, nor in the service of one or another of the characters: they are in the service of the [u]story[/u]. Even if they have to bash, kill, let going darkside, concentrate on a character or another at different times, as long as they create a good, interesting, entertaining, logical, consistent, beautiful, moving, funny, psychologically believable and thematically meaningful story, they are [u]good writers[/u].
Personally, I find way more interesting writers that DON’T take fans too much into consideration. Like Bardic said, we are ALL biased, each one of us towards something or someone different. If the writers had to satisfy each one of us, the story would soon become “schizoid”, in a sense. In fact, I have just a huge respect for writers, when they have the guts to defy fans’ expectations (even MY OWN eexpectations), especially when those expectations are about the way one or another character is “(mis)treated”. Because, as much as we love these wonderful characters, and are emotionally involved and invested in them, they serve the story, and not the contrary.
[quote]”Part of the writers’ goal is to hold our interest, and they know they won’t if [b]the course of the story becomes too predictable; but at the same time, it can’t jump the rails of our belief or violate the limits of our understanding and delight, because that would make us reject it out of hand.[/b] It’s a delicate balance and an intricate dance, and since we’re all making up the choreography together while the music plays, we and the writers sometimes step on each others’ feet and get in each others’ way.
But even with stumbles and barked toes, I still enjoy the dance!”[/quote]
Very well said, Shelby. I, too, am at the point of no longer enjoying the dance. I am feeling the show has gone from sci-fi to comic fantasy and was very much hoping the angel storyline would end. I was looking for concrete spoilers out of Comic Con this season for Dean to have a story…or at least a purpose…this season and the show would veer away from fantasyland. I did get concrete spoilers…that neither was going to happen.
I’m still holding out hope that S7 will be better than S6, but I’m not going to wait all season again like I did last year.
Don’t get me wrong: this is not a zero sum game wherein Sam’s story has to suffer at the expense of Dean’s story, and it should not be the other way around either. I just hope the current showrunner realizes this, and that is where I have little faith and that is where, IMO, the most favored character debacle started. Nobody enjoys it, and it is a simple problem to fix.
Good post, Shelby.
“I would like to point out that the writers have not ANY “obligation” towards us as fans, to “lessen our frustrations”.”
I agree-that was why I said I only “hoped” that they would be able to find a way to lessen the frustrations of everyone.
Speaking a little more personally, I’m actually feeling more numb than anything after Comic Con, because it’s the first time in all the years I’ve been watching Supernatural that I could actually envision myself NOT wanting to watch it anymore, at some point…which again, just saddens me beyond words. I’m going to try and hang in for the entire season. I know many who won’t if the show just isn’t doing it for them again after the first few episodes of S7-and this because they actually will have been waiting for over two seasons for that. And I cannot blame them one bit. Two seasons is a long time. I’ve realized in the week since Comic Con that I’m not feeling nervous or hopeful or negative or excited or dejected anymore about Show. I’m not really feeling anything, to to be honest; and I expect nothing from the writers. I know and have always known that they can do whatever they wish or want to do with the show; but I also now know that I can’t love or relate to just anything that they give us-neither in terms of characters OR a story-not after these last 2 seasons-so in this way I’m well aware that I’m at odds with the feelings of most who post here. And I’m not looking to argue or spread negativity or ruin the show for anyone. I was just trying to comment on an article with my honest feelings. And again I’ll say this to end things on a more positive note-I want to feel the love for this show again, and I hope I will be, by this time next season.
[i]Think about how much we learned from episodes as early as Skin through Shadow, Devil’s Trap, and finally Dark Side Of The Moon about how Dean’s perception and (mistaken) belief that he needed and cared more about Sam than Sam did about him had darkened and distorted Dean’s view of events involving his brother all along the way.[/i]
Actually I felt that [i]DSOTM[/i] confirmed that Dean’s perception about Sam caring less was true. Didn’t Sam actually make a comment about family not meaning as much to him as it did to Dean? It may well be that it wasn’t true insofaras [i]Sam himself[/i] hadn’t realized at that point how much he really did care, and I agree this did come to the fore at season’s end. But I think that as far as [i]DSOTM[/i] is concerned, Dean’s perceptions were right.
[i]Their misperceptions of the truth and their fear of and inability to open up to each other and hash out a common understanding drove wedges between them that facilitated the demons’ and rogue angels’ plans to free Lucifer.[/i]
Granted, all that manipulation was going on but I feel you are brushing off Sam’s [i]individual choice[/i] to keep screwing Ruby and set her higher than Dean by implying that he only did this because he didn’t get the validation he needed from Dean. That puts the blame for Sam’s choices on Dean in much the same way Sam did when he told Dean “she said what you would have said.” It also completely discounts the fact this was a sexual relationship and that there were biological urges and I think genuine feelings involved both on Sam’s part and Ruby’s.
Plus, what misconceptions did Dean have? He was proved right – Sam [i]was[/i] still seeing Ruby and sucking down demon blood. And he [i]was[/i] still lying to Dean. And what he was doing [i]was[/i] wrong (until it was all retconned to be good in Swan Song of course).
[quote][i]Actually I felt that [i]DSOTM[/i] confirmed that Dean’s perception about Sam caring less was true. Didn’t Sam actually make a comment about family not meaning as much to him as it did to Dean? It may well be that it wasn’t true insofaras [i]Sam himself[/i] hadn’t realized at that point how much he really did care, and I agree this did come to the fore at season’s end. But I think that as far as [i]DSOTM[/i] is concerned, Dean’s perceptions were right.
[i]Their misperceptions of the truth and their fear of and inability to open up to each other and hash out a common understanding drove wedges between them that facilitated the demons’ and rogue angels’ plans to free Lucifer.[/i]
[b]Granted, all that manipulation was going on but I feel you are brushing off Sam’s [i]individual choice[/i] to keep screwing Ruby and set her higher than Dean by implying that he only did this because he didn’t get the validation he needed from Dean. That puts the blame for Sam’s choices on Dean in much the same way Sam did when he told Dean “she said what you would have said.” [/b] [/quote]
You have brought out a point that I have believed for a very long time going back to Fallen Idols actually. Sam said in that episode that he went off with Ruby because Dean wouldn’t [i]”let”[/i] him grow up; that they had an unequal relationship. Dean then apologized and let Sam drive the car. Right there, in accepting the blame for Sam’s choices, the Show turned the ship to where Sam listening to Ruby, choosing Ruby over Dean, ignoring all the warnings from everyone that he was headed down the wrong path, and even letting Lucifer out of the cage was actually Dean’s fault. DSotM, to me anyway, was Sam’s first indication of how his actions throughout his life affected his brother…although I could never quite buy into the fact that Sam would not have known that John would be mad at Dean for “letting” Sam get away. And the fact is that if Sam did not realize at 14 that Dean would be terribly worried and be in terrible trouble with John, then all of the canon that Dean’s sole job growing up was to raise and care for Sam, that they had an unbreakable bond because of their life circumstances, is really kind of far-fetched and hard to believe.
All that said, the fans learned in Swan Song that Sam did not do anything wrong. He became the hero by drinking demon blood and getting Luci back in the cage, thus correcting all of Dean’s mistakes in not [i]”letting”[/i] Sam grow up. By being the righteous man that started the seals breaking and by accepting responsibility for all of Sam’s actions, it was Dean’s action that needed redeemed, and Sam did this for him.
It’s an argument, anyway, that is as credible as what was shown.
[quote]
Plus, what misconceptions did Dean have? He was proved right – Sam [i]was[/i] still seeing Ruby and sucking down demon blood. And he [i]was[/i] still lying to Dean. And what he was doing [i]was[/i] wrong (until it was all retconned to be good in Swan Song of course).[/quote]
ITA. I think it’s a really flawed argument to imply that part of the reason for it all going horribly wrong was that Dean misperceived Sam as some kind of monster and mistrusted him. It’s more arguable that it all went horribly wrong because Dean wasn’t cynical [i]enough[/i] about his brother and in fact trusted him too much. He believed Sam’s many lies and I don’t see how that could happen in the context of misperception/mistrust.
Hi Kate, just a quick question in relation to your post. [i]Dark Side of the Moon[/i] is quite a contentious (possibly the most contentious) episode so I feel it is best to get some clarification on one of your points in case I have misinterpreted it and go off on an irrelevant tangent. This quotation:
[quote]Actually I felt that DSOTM confirmed that Dean’s perception about Sam caring less was true.
[/quote]
Am I reading it correctly in that you got from Dark Side of the Moon, that Sam cared less for Dean than Dean did for Sam? If I am, may I ask what you’re basing that on? (If it’s not, mucho apologies!)
I’m not the person you’re quoting but I seem to remember Sam actually making a comment in that episode that family didn’t mean the same to him as it did to Dean. I also felt the inference was that it didn’t mean as much.
I’m not the person either, but I got from DSOFM that Sam was learning for the first time how his past actions had hurt Dean. In other words, Dean held his memories of family dear to heart, cherished them; whereas Sam, having no memories of a normal family, had always longed for it and actively sought it out without giving any consideration to how his actions affected Dean. Dean (being at a low point in his life) was very hurt that Sam had not included him in any of his fondest memories.
I don’t think it was that Sam cared less for Dean; more like it was the first time Sam gained some understanding of what motivates Dean and why. I think Dean, however, took it to mean that Sam didn’t care as much for him as he had always thought.
I took it similarly, but more that Sam didn’t think of him(Dean) and how he might be feeling in any given situation, as much as Dean thought of Sam and how Sam might be feeling in a given situation. And I also think that this particular perception of Dean’s has often been true of Sam(and common on the part of a child in any type of parnet/child relationship, IMO) AND that this was actually part of the intended message of this episode. And while Sam has made some strides in correcting this since then, he fell back into old habits again and in this with his reaction to Dean’s pain after the mindwipe of Lisa and Ben in 6.21. I’m hoping we’ll get more work on this ingrained-from-childhood flaw of Sam’s in S7.
I thought DSOTM meant that Sam had learned something, that there had been significant character growth there, and especially so from Sam’s actions in Point of No Return. Then in Unforgiven, Sam’s right back to sneaking off behind Dean’s back. I’m disappointed to learn from JA’s comic con interview that in 7.03, Sam sneaks off from Dean again and that he wants to handle his breakdown on his own, telling Dean that he knows there is something wrong, but he has it under control. I just feel that the growth they gave Sam is being overlooked or taken away under this scenario. I hope that’s not the case.
Haven’t had much time lately to read comments so I am a little late to this party.
But let me express my thank you to you Bardic for explaining the different views we all have. I am watching the show for the story which includes [u]both[/u] brothers. Even so I call my self a Dean girl only for the simple reason that Dean represents to me a rebell for the cause, a guy who likes to make jokes and tries to have fun even if the times might not call for it. Simple the kind of guy I fell for in real live often enough. But otherwise I love both – Sam and Dean and the show wouldn’t be what it is with only one brother or without the problems they are having.
Mary, wonderfully written, thank you for sharing!
True, confirmatory bias seems to be a constant companion through life. How many times have I a seen a light ignoring where it came from and making my own conclusion of its cause. I love it how our show, though dealing with not-real things, relates to real-life things.