Just War and "Moral" Monsters: An Analysis of "Heart" and "The Girl Next Door"

[seramgrigori]

Supernatural seems to have a sort of scale when it comes to determining the inherent nature of a thing. At eye level is humanity. Everything else seems to stem from there. Monsters are creatures that were born or transformed into a perverted form of humanity. They are physical entities--werewolves, vampires, Leviathan, etc.--and can usually be

Comments

[borgmama1of5]

Another 'monster' whose story was morally challenging was the rugaru in "Metamorphsis" (4.04.) Jack did not know he was a monster--he lived as a human, had no idea that genetically he was something else. When he started experiencing cravings he fought them. He did not want to become the monster he was destined to be. Only when he and his wife were about to be killed by the hunter Travis did Jack give in to his nature in order to save his life and his pregnant wife.

Then Sam and Dean did have to kill him. But if Travis had not provoked him, should Jack have been allowed to live? Would Sam have been able to convince Dean?

That episode has stuck with me as one that really called into question whether monster always equals inherently evil.

[seramgrigori]

As you said, Jack is a relatively moral monster who certainly fought his nature. He acted on instinct--one that is particularly shared by humans--when he attacked Travis to save his wife. By nature as a rugaru, Jack was fundamentally distinct from humans. Nonetheless, he was born that way and didn't necessarily have a choice in the matter (much like Sam, when Azazel bled into his mouth as a baby). Quite frankly, it all comes down to what Sam said when he was locked in the closet: "It's not what you are, it's what you choose to do