Aries leads with confidence, decisiveness, and energy.
Taurus leads with patience, practicality, and persistence.
Gemini leads with intelligence, persuasion, and positivity.
Cancer leads with adaptability, understanding, and thoughtfulness.
Leo leads by showing many times but also with warmth, confidence, and generosity.
Virgo leads with efficiency, attention, and sensibility.
Libra leads with tact, fairness or objectivity, and adaptability.
Scorpio leads with perception, passion, and daring.
Sagittarius leads by example but can also lead with optimism, inspiration, flexibility, and zeal.
Capricorn leads with decisiveness, calmness, maybe sternness, and realism.
Aquarius leads with innovation, encouragement, and self-assurance.
Pisces leads with intuition, expressiveness, and tolerance.
1K notes · View notes
Re: Trivial arguing on “lead,”
...Did you know that technically there's no such thing as a show that has "two leads?" And yet, at the same time, did you know... you can have more than one lead? So, how can both statements be true?
Let's have some real talk.
Okay so let's backtrack a bit. A leading actor or, simply, "lead" plays the protagonist (πρωταγωνιστής [protagonistes] "player of the first part, chief actor") of a film of play.
What is a protagonist
The protagonist is at the center of a story, makes key decisions, and experiences the consequences of those decisions. The protagonist affects the main characters' circumstances as well (thereby is not necessarily considered as THE main character, but among them), as they are often the primary actor propelling the story forward. If a story contains a subplot, or is a narrative made up of several stories, then then the protagonist is the character who is interpreted as the driving force for various sub plots and stories.
Generally it refers to the largest role. (see: largest role does not also define most present, as technically if an NPC wandered around the back of the screen the entire show even while the protag left screen, that designation would assign Random NPC the spot of "lead" even if they made no impact and it was just the studio being unable to afford more extras.)
Let’s talk literature,
On a literary and even classical level, this is called the "multiple protagonist narrative" and at times the "Double journey narrative."
"Multiple protagonist” is visible in American Beauty, Little Miss Sunshine, Saving Private Ryan, Galaxy Quest, Tea with Mussolini, Ordinary People, the Full Monty, All about my Mother and more. (Even SPN counts with “ONLY SAM AND DEAN”) Multiple protagonist films are all either missions, reunions or physical or emotional sieges and they are all about groups, not the ‘one hero on a single journey’. Almost all films about families are multiple protagonist films, because they are emotional sieges. In successful multiple protagonist films, think of all the protagonists as being versions of the same protagonist and construct the film accordingly, running multiple characters through a consecutive end goal and story arc, a "team" of multiple characters that reach a destination, even if taking different methods.
The Double Journey narrative is in The Departed, Brokeback Mountain, Finding Nemo, and The Lives of Others, in which there are two equally important protagonists who are journeying either towards, apart or in parallel with each other physically, emotionally or both. Because they are seen so often apart, interacting with other characters, both travellers need their own plotline and they often have a shared plotline too. Double Journey form is a kind of multiple protagonist form, but with specific plot content about the metaphorical double journey.
Now let’s talk modern,
Now, what happens when you have more than one protagonist that features as a main character? This becomes the title, "co-leads."
That's right. Hence terms also like "co-star." Jensen and Jared are co-stars, ergo, they are co-leads,
but let's dig a little bit deeper at this beaten horse of pointless wank.
Did you know a large enough supporting role can even be titled a "secondary lead"? Did you know that large award nominations take large enough supporting roles, in class of secondary lead, and allow nomination as leads? The line, also, of co-lead and secondary-lead can become incredibly blurred in result. Thus, sometimes more than one actor in the same performance can be nominated for "Best Actor" or "Best Actress," categories typically reserved for leads. The industry doesn't give two sh*ts if it has a "co" or a "secondary" assigned. It's a goddamn lead.
Let's give an example. In 1935, Clark Gable, Charles Laughton, and Franchot Tone were each nominated for Best Actor Academy Award for Mutiny on the Bounty. Franchot was listed behind what is typically perceived as the two "co-leads" and yet - miraculously - (holds breath for dramatic pause) the industry considered him a lead!
How about a more relevant example.
Kripke evoked Campbell’s Hero's Journey (as, though some of us never forgot Kripke's words, Jared reminded us at Paley 2018) , wherein Luke/Hans parallels abounded. Many roles reflected this structure, such as Ruby with the Temptation of the Woman and initially, Anna as the Lover/Goddess, though she summarily traded off her story part to Castiel when McNiven wasn't working out on set.
You know who that is in Star Wars? LEIA! So here's where this gets fun. The Saturn Awards variably credited her both as a Supporting Actress and just Actress or - read it - lead! In fact, while Harrison Ford was listed as Best Actor in 1977, Carrie Fisher was, same year, Best Actress! But... but LUKE was the main character of Star Wars... right?! Well, Mark Hamill was in the running with all of them. Go figure?
They were all considered leads, even if Luke was inarguably introduced first, had the most screen time, and the others issued in later and came and went?
Shock and awe: You do NOT need to be glued to every second of the screen to be considered a lead by the industry. I have no idea where this #)$*ing fallacy came from. It's like someone said it, a few people thought it sounded smart, and they echoed it ad nauseam without ever questioning what the hell defines a "lead."
IDK though. Castiel's respective Hero's Journey role says he's a lead. 13 year showrunner Robert Singer says Castiel is a lead.
In fact, the only time it's been implied he ISN'T a lead is when J2 are on stage ball-busting, like they do (and even in this, they said lead-supporting, and we've covered large lead-support roles actually qualify in industry as lead, so I mean-?). Now, we can take every word they say when punching across like bros do as gospel and thus believe Jensen and Jared deep down hate each other and don't want to work together, or we can have common sense and understand ironic humor; and, most of all, even if you did want to take it as gospel, that the person who actually runs the show, the set, and the production that they work on says he's a lead - just like the industry does.
Anything else is circular logic of literally trying to argue with the industry.
Shows can add new leads after the beginning - imagine that. And there is no definition of a lead mandatorily being in every minute, scene, episode or otherwise. Similarly, in later iterations, if there is a mix of lead/co-lead/secondary lead, these can also trade off depending on later iterations of the story, and there is nothing demanding other incarnations of a show or other form of story maintain the specific structure of lead. Kripke Era, Gamble Era, Carver Era, Dabb Era have all shifted their focuses, but most explicitly, Kripke's Era was even a whole other Genre than everything after it. We shifted from horror to high fantasy. Like it or not is up to you, but it is what it is. Different co-runners with Singer, different visions he's working with - but funny enough, Singer was always there as a co-runner. Kinda like a lead. But production. A co-lead of production. Go figure.
And guess what he says?
Under the strictest form of the word, they are co-leads. All of them. At one point he was a strong supporting character in line for secondary lead, but that threshold has long since come and gone. If you have a problem with it, you can contend it with the head of production, and the industry.
Otherwise it's pretty obsolete.
They are all protagonists, all take charge of respective portions of majorly impacting story, influence major critical decisions, impact on the definition of familial role, engage across distances to the same ends, and have their own story-driving sub-arcs. There is no demand for equal screen time, though Misha overshadows most other possible fillers of this role beyond J2 on screen time, fulfill every literary, media, production, and industry merit to the term, and have been announced as a showrunner. If anyone chooses to argue in the interest of being wildly uneducated beCaUsE jAyToO MaDE a JoKE that's on you, but understand, you are literally wrong in every sense of the term. In history, in literature, in literal meaning of the word, in industry... even on official statements by the people that RUN the show. Sorry? You’ve got yourself a phantom lead that can come and go. But nowhere near as phantom as any level of reach involved in trying to pull any source anywhere that isn’t based on a slapstick J2 joke that actually corroborates any opinion pieces implying he isn’t one.
He’s a secondary lead. And, just like in industry awards, Singer just deadass addresses him as a lead.
It’s not hard, Carl.
(Waiting for inbound comments telling me How Wrong I Am Cuz Jared And Jensen Made A Joke from someone who can't read entire documents.)
128 notes · View notes