![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
brightly_litI'm a writer, so I've always made up stories in my mind about every show I loved, came up with ideas for episodes I wished they would make but never did ... until Supernatural. I would imagine an episode, and then they would make it (which was, needless to say, fantastic). This went on until season 4, when the angels came in. Now, don't get me wrong, I thought the angels were a necessary element on the unrelentingly dark show where they encountered only evil. Goodness was a vital antidote. Too bad they made the angels evil, too!
I thought the creators of Supernatural really missed an opportunity there, to create a new kind of character. I'm not saying the angels shouldn't create tension and conflict for the sake of the story, but I think it's uncreative of them to assume the only way they could do that was to make the angels just like all the other bad guys on the show. I preferred (as most of us seem to have) Michael and Anna and Balthazar and Gabriel to Uriel and Zachariah, because they had their own reasons for doing things and they weren't just, as Dean would say, dicks. Still, though, to have even the better angels act exactly like (annoying, selfish) children was also rather a cop-out. Anna and Cas are the only angels who behave to some degree as we imagine angels would: compassionate, deep, wise. It's beautiful and entrancing. And yet, you can't say they don't contribute to the conflict and drama on the show.
In my own fiction, I avoid battles between good and evil for the most part. TV and movies have been hashing that over for long enough that I think we've seen pretty much everything there is to see there. Life creates enough conflict of its own without anyone having nefarious intent. Life is hard, people have conflicting goals and ideals and values. I would have loved to see them create a variety of unique, good (or, at least, truly believing they're good and righteous), compassionate, warm, lovable angel characters whose goals and beliefs created the conflict as they diverged from Sam and Dean's. (Maybe Sam and Dean are even wrong--that would be interesting, too.) Even the craziest hunters were better than the worst of the angels. Why bother to have angels on the show at all if they're just like demons?
I thought the creators of Supernatural really missed an opportunity there, to create a new kind of character. I'm not saying the angels shouldn't create tension and conflict for the sake of the story, but I think it's uncreative of them to assume the only way they could do that was to make the angels just like all the other bad guys on the show. I preferred (as most of us seem to have) Michael and Anna and Balthazar and Gabriel to Uriel and Zachariah, because they had their own reasons for doing things and they weren't just, as Dean would say, dicks. Still, though, to have even the better angels act exactly like (annoying, selfish) children was also rather a cop-out. Anna and Cas are the only angels who behave to some degree as we imagine angels would: compassionate, deep, wise. It's beautiful and entrancing. And yet, you can't say they don't contribute to the conflict and drama on the show.
In my own fiction, I avoid battles between good and evil for the most part. TV and movies have been hashing that over for long enough that I think we've seen pretty much everything there is to see there. Life creates enough conflict of its own without anyone having nefarious intent. Life is hard, people have conflicting goals and ideals and values. I would have loved to see them create a variety of unique, good (or, at least, truly believing they're good and righteous), compassionate, warm, lovable angel characters whose goals and beliefs created the conflict as they diverged from Sam and Dean's. (Maybe Sam and Dean are even wrong--that would be interesting, too.) Even the craziest hunters were better than the worst of the angels. Why bother to have angels on the show at all if they're just like demons?