Oh, don't worry, you weren't lecturing. I hope you won't think *I'm* lecturing, I just love discussing different aspects of the show and the characters.
I love John too, so in many ways it's hard for me to look at him objectively and actually *say* that he was a bad father, but when I *do* I find that he really was. Yes, I know he was just a man and had flaws, and both the war and then the manner of Mary's death left him scarred, and that those things deeply influenced him and the way he raised his sons. And I know he meant well, that in his mind it wasn't only revenge driving him, but also the need to protect his sons, to make them strong and resourceful, capable of handling anything, and he certainly did that, but at the same time he also harmed them, Dean in particular. From the moment John put baby Sammy in Dean's arms and trusted him with his brother's life, he started to take away Dean's innocence little by little. Have you ever noticed how when they're sitting outside watching the house burn, John is cuddling the baby in his arms but *isn't* touching Dean at all? I know he was in shock, and that since the fire started in Sam's nursery he might've been feeling more protective of him, but still, his other son--who is barely more than a baby himself and has just lost his mother--is sitting right next to him and John isn't offering him any comfort, isn't feeling the instinct to protect *both* his sons?
At first John was probably just lost, not really knowing how to handle his kids without Mary, but after the initial shock became obsession, that side-effect to overprotect Sam at any cost, at Dean's expense, became a tendency that only worsened with time. It's canon that while Dean knew about the supernatural world at an young age and knew how to handle guns, Sam didn't. It's canon that John was gone for days at a time, leaving Dean in charge of keeping his brother safe and fed. So I don't think it's that much of a stretch to imagine that instances like in your story happened in canon too.
The boys do love and respect their father, but I think that if--when--they allow themselves to be honest about it, they both harbor a lot of resentment towards him, too. Again, it's canon that Sam often butted heads with John because he was dissatisfied and angry about the kind of life they led. And Dean, he calls his father an "obsessed bastard" or something of the kind in the dream episode. His outburst at the end of ELAC and his emotional arc during season 2 also indicate a lot of anger at the burden his father left him before dying--save Sam or kill him. Which is really just a stepup in their family dynamics, John heaping too much responsibilty on Dean's shoulders and leaving him to deal with it.
John thanks Dean right before dying about being the one who kept their family functioning when he couldn't, so I think that even he recognized his shortcomings as a parent.
So, in conclusion, yeah, I know John's intentions were good. But you know what they say about good intentions. In their case, that's frighteningly literal.
no subject
I love John too, so in many ways it's hard for me to look at him objectively and actually *say* that he was a bad father, but when I *do* I find that he really was. Yes, I know he was just a man and had flaws, and both the war and then the manner of Mary's death left him scarred, and that those things deeply influenced him and the way he raised his sons. And I know he meant well, that in his mind it wasn't only revenge driving him, but also the need to protect his sons, to make them strong and resourceful, capable of handling anything, and he certainly did that, but at the same time he also harmed them, Dean in particular. From the moment John put baby Sammy in Dean's arms and trusted him with his brother's life, he started to take away Dean's innocence little by little. Have you ever noticed how when they're sitting outside watching the house burn, John is cuddling the baby in his arms but *isn't* touching Dean at all? I know he was in shock, and that since the fire started in Sam's nursery he might've been feeling more protective of him, but still, his other son--who is barely more than a baby himself and has just lost his mother--is sitting right next to him and John isn't offering him any comfort, isn't feeling the instinct to protect *both* his sons?
At first John was probably just lost, not really knowing how to handle his kids without Mary, but after the initial shock became obsession, that side-effect to overprotect Sam at any cost, at Dean's expense, became a tendency that only worsened with time. It's canon that while Dean knew about the supernatural world at an young age and knew how to handle guns, Sam didn't. It's canon that John was gone for days at a time, leaving Dean in charge of keeping his brother safe and fed. So I don't think it's that much of a stretch to imagine that instances like in your story happened in canon too.
The boys do love and respect their father, but I think that if--when--they allow themselves to be honest about it, they both harbor a lot of resentment towards him, too. Again, it's canon that Sam often butted heads with John because he was dissatisfied and angry about the kind of life they led. And Dean, he calls his father an "obsessed bastard" or something of the kind in the dream episode. His outburst at the end of ELAC and his emotional arc during season 2 also indicate a lot of anger at the burden his father left him before dying--save Sam or kill him. Which is really just a stepup in their family dynamics, John heaping too much responsibilty on Dean's shoulders and leaving him to deal with it.
John thanks Dean right before dying about being the one who kept their family functioning when he couldn't, so I think that even he recognized his shortcomings as a parent.
So, in conclusion, yeah, I know John's intentions were good. But you know what they say about good intentions. In their case, that's frighteningly literal.