#i vs we

[jhsharman]

"Net Profit"

Changing a decision on who and what counts as a "straight shooter" -- Reggie versus Archie. Or maybe what winning and losing is -- Archie wins by losing, but does he really? Or, they can't decide what the word play is all around.

[naruhearts]

Ackkk. Cas’ internal sense of expendability reflected off of TFW mirror Jack. You—both of you—are more than your powers!!

And this is what they must both address, individually and collectively.

[elizabethrobertajones]

what if the theme of clarification and getting words right is about something that will probably be revealed in the finale and not destiel related at all.. :/

I mean it could well be. There are family declarations which may need to be said among the various dynamics which include Mary and Jack too which a we/i might abruptly turn out to be where it was all going, and the instances between Dean and Cas as the main instigators was really only to carry the theme through the season. 

I also think it’s probably important to remember that literally everything we talk about when analysing this stuff has already happened and is still important with its own inherent weight, and there’s not necessarily a bait and switch or something worth a “:/” if themes don’t appear to play out as seemingly promised. The stuff that has ALREADY happened where we have analysed this theme will not lose meaning if the finale contains a different take on it. For example 11x23 having the beer run conversation did not negate the romantic subtext leading up to this, and there was confusion on the matter of correct labelling and knowing one’s own feelings within the episode, in the dramatic conclusion, which kept the whole thing afloat, along with the hilarious evidence that Dean clearly engineered that conversation. 

I mean I’m at the stage of the season where I’m just constantly like, seriously, I know I’m 1 blog in the noise but I RARELY engage in spec and will NEVER make declarations about what I think will happen especially Destiel wise that are wildly promising, and you can miss it in its absence so this is where I start pointing out I am not doing it, so that it’s clear where I stand on the end of the season. 

12x23 shocked and amazed me with how overtly Destiel the storytelling was, as did 13x01-6 as the grief arc coming out of it, but at no point did I ever really feel my expectations were definitely 100% for more of that stuff, or escalations of it, and I stayed as cautious as possible. Which means I got surprised in a very pleasant (though heartbreaking) way with it all and it felt wonderful to me. That’s the mood I want for the finale: excited in general, cautious about feeling like any Destiel is coming, with the kind of fingers crossed hope that MAYBE we’ll get hit with a doozy of a storyline which will be fun to watch and really shippy and engaging. But only as a hope and pleasant sort of desire, and if there’s not as much as some people have been promising and only the usual few shippy lines and moments in the background of a much greater plot, I’m not going to be annoyed, as long as the writers don’t really abandon characterisation.

So, idk. Yeah, the clarification theme revolves closely around Dean n Cas and it’s not unreasonable to expect it to stay there and for them to maybe have some clarification… But I need to be clear it’s not a cause to riot if it doesn’t pay off. The clarification theme started back in the middle of season 12 and so it’s a season and a half old and could probably run further, or indefinitely. There’s old “the label is wrong” imagery going back to like season 10 or whatever, which this clarification and finding the right word theme is just an evolution of, though you could say it maybe paid off in 11x23 with Amara and Dean incorrectly identifying their feelings for Dean and Cas respectively… 

[elizabethrobertajones]

Do you think Dean’s inability to get his words right is because he doesn’t get the difference or because he’s afraid of the repercussions if he does make the distinction out loud? If he doesn’t make the distinction, then he keeps Cas, even if not how he wants him, but if he does make the distinction, he runs the risk of losing him completely if his feelings aren’t reciprocated. I just have difficultly believing Dean can’t see how inaccurate his words are.

Oh, I agree, he absolutely gets the difference.

I just got very very woozy so I can’t use my brain on this to write anything long but last episode he stumbled over saying “I-I-I-We” when trying to apologise to Cas, and I think he’s very nervous about either the act of revealing too much or how he will be perceived for doing it in ways which don’t match the specific walls of performing!Dean to do with it… But I can’t delve any deeper right now, sorry :<

[flyingfish1]

more ‘we’ vs. ‘I’

Another example of the we/I distinction:

Sam says to Margaret Astor, “It’s very, very important to us,” and then he has to clarify, “To me,” because she’s not invested in Dean’s opinion. She’s not interested in a “personal relationship” with Dean, but she is interested in Sam. He can only get what he wants by making it all about his own individual feelings.

[browneyedview-blog-blog]

"I" living in a "we" world

My pastor's sermon yesterday has been stuck in my head for over 24 hours.  I have to admit that I didn't listen as closely as I could -- my young son was distracting but I did hear snippets here and there about giving.  There was one thing in particular that he said, which I found haunting.  I'm paraphrasing so bear with me.  Over the years, several conversations were had regarding giving -- it prompted him to ask, "Why do you give?"  The answer?  It made me feel good.  It's good for me to give back.  I am blessed with extra, so I am giving to those less fortunate.  He concluded with it's as if "I" is living in a "we" world.  

My employer recently celebrated Volunteer Week.  There were questions asked in our internal website why we give.  Almost everyone talked about how great they felt afterwards and how they feel it is their moral responsibility to share their "wealth" or "excess" with those less fortunate.  

I gave the same response but now I'm wondering why is it about me?  Why isn't it about the recipients who are relying on that kindness, generosity or giving spirit?  It shouldn't be able how I feel but the benefits reaped by those receiving.  Giving them dignity during a tough economy.  Focus on the individual and not the empty cart -- find out the individual's needs instead of what the group needs.  At the heart of each and every outreach/charity is an individual.  A soul with a living and beating heart.  What is his/her name?  Where are they from?  Let them now that their voice is being heard.  

We are called to give our time, talents and resources to the church and his people.  It isn't about us but about what God calls us to do.  Perhaps that should be the focus -- not how good we feel but how does the person receiving that resource feel?