You get no argument from me on that. I can't help sympathizing with John's near-panic at the thought of losing either of his boys. And I can't help wondering if he'd already learned something about Sam's destiny that made him even more frantic to protect Sam by keeping him close and training him to protect himself.
John could be, had to learn to be, a one-track mind sort of person, over-focused (as Sam is, himself). He'd completely forgotten what it was like to be 13, to want to play with kids his own age, to do normal things. John had a bunker mentality, like Anne Frank's parents. He understood that for his family this is wartime, and rather than explaining it in terms Sam could grasp, understand, and believe, John just kept giving orders and tightening down control, giving Sam less and less room to stretch and grow, less information so that he could think things through, and to come to accept what needed to be done. John saw Sam's rebellion as disregarding and disrespecting all the sacrifices John had made to keep him and Dean safe. It's an arrogant dismissal of John's love, something guaranteed to make a parent both hurt and angry.
It doesn't make John's actions right, but they're certainly understandable. I think it would have been impossible for Sam to accept John's tending to the injuries he'd inflicted, which is why John gave him the dignity of doing it himself. I also think John would have done it in a heartbeat, though it would have caused him great pain to do it. He would have taken the pain as the price of keeping Sam safe.
Not entirely sane, agreed. But the circumstances were always dire.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
You get no argument from me on that. I can't help sympathizing with John's near-panic at the thought of losing either of his boys. And I can't help wondering if he'd already learned something about Sam's destiny that made him even more frantic to protect Sam by keeping him close and training him to protect himself.
John could be, had to learn to be, a one-track mind sort of person, over-focused (as Sam is, himself). He'd completely forgotten what it was like to be 13, to want to play with kids his own age, to do normal things. John had a bunker mentality, like Anne Frank's parents. He understood that for his family this is wartime, and rather than explaining it in terms Sam could grasp, understand, and believe, John just kept giving orders and tightening down control, giving Sam less and less room to stretch and grow, less information so that he could think things through, and to come to accept what needed to be done. John saw Sam's rebellion as disregarding and disrespecting all the sacrifices John had made to keep him and Dean safe. It's an arrogant dismissal of John's love, something guaranteed to make a parent both hurt and angry.
It doesn't make John's actions right, but they're certainly understandable. I think it would have been impossible for Sam to accept John's tending to the injuries he'd inflicted, which is why John gave him the dignity of doing it himself. I also think John would have done it in a heartbeat, though it would have caused him great pain to do it. He would have taken the pain as the price of keeping Sam safe.
Not entirely sane, agreed. But the circumstances were always dire.