Lex propaganda!
Apr. 22nd, 2007 03:03 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
xparrotScrubs was cute and fun. Supernatural was cute and fun x100 and Sam was looking way yum and Dean's hair was so fluffy in the final scene that I nearly exploded from the need to reach through the screen and tousle it.
In SV news, idly reading a random journal, I think I found myself obliquely accused of being a Nazi sympathizer for my Lex posts. It could have been another post mentioned in their comments...but it sounded a lot like they were referencing our prattle about 33.1 and why it maybe is justified as Third Reich-esque propaganda. I'd be more disturbed by the comparison if we weren't talking about a totally fictional scenario. (If it was my post they were talking about, the person was polite enough not to flame me; they didn't even reference me by name. Such a well-mannered fandom!)
It's wild that Lex-fans are dividing into such totally opposite camps. Half of us think he's a sociopath, willingly marching down the road to Hitler-hood; the other half think he's a victim caught in a terrible and inescapable quandary, being pushed and pulled down into something he never wanted to be. We all think he's awesome (when he's not being pathetic), and the final destination's the same either way...but it's like we're watching two different shows.
And frankly? I wish I were watching the other camp's show. SV's just painful for a Lex-apologist, because it's never going to redeem him, but it keeps giving us supporting evidence. And it's pretty depressing to find oneself rooting for the losing side.
I'm not going to say much about "Progeny", not because we didn't rip it apart at length last night, but because![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
gnine already has gone on about it at wonderfully great ranty length, decrying that Lex was the villain at all. Go, check out her post, comment and discuss. There'll be a few spoilers to the ep here, but the real ep commentary meat's there.
The thing is, while I might agree with some of what Lex is doing, I don't think he's doing the right thing, or a good thing. I don't think imprisoning people against their will is right; I don't think murder is right, ever, under any circumstances.
But I don't think Lex thinks he's doing the right thing - just what's necessary.
The anti-apologists see Lex as having choices, as manipulating for his own desires, as turning on the people close to him for the sake of personal gain. Taking "Lexmas" at face value, selfishly choosing the personal security of money and power over the love of family and friends. All the worse because Lex proved at one time that he had a conscience, so he has to realize he's doing wrong. There's a certain terrifying innocence in a true sociopath's lack of morals; they can't choose the right thing because they don't have the empathy to have a moral sense at all. There is no right or wrong to them. Lex isn't a sociopath (though Lionel might be); he knows right from wrong. He knows hurting people or using people isn't right. And while he might have suffered traumatic abuse all through his life, he's (mostly) sane and mentally competent, so he is still morally accountable for the choices he makes.
The question is what choices Lex has (or sees he has, which ultimately is the same thing.) And it's a tough question to argue either way, because SV doesn't give us that much insight into Lex's head, ever. Seldom are a villain's motivations so opaque. (Though Lex is only one of the crowd here; no one's motivations in SV are ever explored at any length, except when they involve love for Lana Lang. ...Bitter, much? Oh, you betcha!) The show's awfully careful to give fuel for both our campfires. There are a few things he does that are pretty unequivocally Evil. There are about an equal number of things (mostly in earlier seasons, to be sure) that are unequivocally Good. And just about everything else is gray, with a lot of wriggle-room to argue it either way.
In a pulp comic book, the black-and-white photocopy of absolute morality, gray always registers as black. Motivations mean nothing; actions are everything, and the hero's path is a narrow and difficult one. But Smallville is all in technicolor shades of gray - I can't see how it would be satisfying to watch, by such standards, because there would be no hero at all, only villains. Clark puts on the red ring willingly, and has let multiple people die while being fully able to save them; Chloe illegally collects private files and medical records; Aquaman is an environmental terrorist; Green Arrow blows up buildings; Moira Sullivan manipulates her own daughter into being a murderer. And when morality is relative, motivation matters. If an action can potentially be either good or evil, then the why has to count for something.
But we're not talking which moral framework to follow. We're talking Lex's Catch 22. Morality is mattering less and less to Lex; the choices aren't mattering as much, because he's damned either way. He can stop what he's doing. Close 33.1. End his experiments*. Release his captives. Walk away from the whole dirty business.
* (whatever the hell said experiments are. "Experiments" does not automatically mean "evil." I wish SV would be clearer on this point. Human test subjects are a part of much medical and psychological research. The most important ethical concern is that such subjects are informed volunteers, and not all of Lex's subjects are...maybe. 33.1 is holding a lot of mutants, but whether it experiments on all of them, willingly or unwillingly, isn't clear.)
Except that if Lex walks away, more people are going to die. That's not a possibility; that's fact. How many people have died at meteor freak hands already? Meteor freaks kill people. Not all of them, but most of them. Chloe knows it, Clark knows it. Clark doesn't have a perfect track record, not by a long shot. Lex has the capability to stop them, keep them from hurting more people - one of very few people to have the power to do so. It's by morally wrong means; but if his inaction allows others to come to harm, isn't there a moral responsibility there, too? A sin of omission can still damn a soul. He's going to be guilty either way; he's choosing to take the active rather than passive road to hell. There is no road to salvation, not that he can see. By now he might have stopped looking.
--This is not even taking into account the whole saving-the-world-from-aliens aspect of the Lex-nalysis. That's a little harder to argue because Lex's motives are, as formerly whined about, so damn opaque. Except I really wish, just once, the other chars would question why Lex Luthor wants a secret army of super-soldiers. Do they think he's after military profits? Or taking over the world? What?
The two biggest dangers of Lex are firstly, that he is a private citizen, who is taking society's issues into his own hands. He's establishing a private dictatorship. That's probably the biggest problem I have with 33.1, the secrecy of it (and why I have such a problem with the "heroes" handling of it. If Oliver was less petty about wanting to go mano a mano against his old target, he would just blow the whistle on the project, expose it to the world. Chloe doesn't have the clout or the evidence, but Queen Industries and Green Arrow's boy band have both. But Oliver would rather just blow shit up.) If it were public, then it would have to follow social, legal standards, decided by the community that is being threatened. It shouldn't be up to one man. (Though considering how utterly insanely blind said community is to the threat, and the urgency of it, there's a good argument for emergency measures...)
Regardless, Lex has no checks and balances, no limits, not even a trusted adviser. He's navigating very uncertain moral ground without anyone to hold him on course. I have trouble holding him responsible for this, however, because I'm at a loss myself who could possible function as such. There needs to be trust for such a position, and there is no one Lex can trust.
The other danger is that Lex is psychologically unbalanced. Putting aside a past history of schizophrenia, alcoholism, and at least two episodes of psychotic blind rage, he's obsessed. I hesitate to call it paranoid obsession when the threats he fears are very real, but he's definitely unhealthily involved in his various projects. And willing to pay increasingly high moral prices in the pursuit of his goals.
Ultimately, what makes it so hard for me to call him evil, even in the face of the evil he's done, is Lex's motivations. To my mind, evil is a matter of sadism and selfishness, of causing deliberate harm and ignoring the pain of others for one's own benefit. But I have yet seen any evidence that Lex is doing anything he does for himself.
(...er. With the exception of Lana. And can I say grr that we ended up being right after all about the baby being a hoax? Unless Lex is playing an even deeper game...I know he isn't, but man, I wish he were. That bit of soap opera villainy is not only unequivocally evil; it's also stupid, which is far worse. Lex couldn't get to the doctor before he told her the truth? Man. Pathetic. That's all I'll say about that...I know I should be considering Lexana in the grand Lex-nalysis, but any long-term contemplation of teh Lana pains me, so it will have to be left to sturdier spirits than mine...)
That Lex is working toward a greater agenda than his own advancement doesn't make him less scary - a true believer is more frightening than any wicked, petty soul. But I personally don't see such as evil. Misguided, yes; insane, often. And sometimes irredeemable, if they refuse to accept any questioning of their righteousness.
What gives me hope for Lex is that he doesn't seem to think he's righteous. He doesn't believe he's doing the right thing, but the necessary thing. A desperate man; but for now, at least, he's still trying to go for the lesser of possible evils. Doing what he has to, but not proudly or happily (look at his fears with Lana, and how he dreads her learning the truth about him), and not without restraint; there's still lines he hesitates to cross. If Lex thought his ends justified any means, then he would have manipulated Moira in the most efficient way - by bringing in Chloe and putting a gun to her head. She already hated him; what did he have to lose?
And man, I want to know what exactly his ends are. Judging by (our wacky interpretating of) the director's cut for next week's ep, Lex puts his projects above his own life...
For Lex to fully come into his own as the Lex Luthor of comic fame, he's going to have to either give up his higher cause, or give into it entirely, become absolutely assured of his righteousness. The former way he'll declare moral bankruptcy and then I'll comfortably admit to his evil; the latter way makes for a more frightening villain, but one I'd hesitate to call evil; insane, more like, for all that he's damned either way. Maybe it's only a matter of personal definition. But either way, I don't see him as being there yet.
A couple final thoughts about "Progeny" - having watched the director's cuts last week, I was pleased that most of Clark's hesitation in saving Lex from Chloe's bullet was cut. Not really for the Clex. But Clark, for all his stumbles, is still pretty pure morally, and while I don't actually have much problems with him wondering for a moment whether he should let Lex die (I believe he has good reasons to think Lex is evil, even if I don't agree with that judgment, and he still made the right decision in the end, after all) - it bothered me a lot that he would consider letting Chloe become a killer. I know this is SV and no one is ever held accountable for what they do under the influence of whatever, but gunning someone down in cold blood, even if she didn't remember and believed he deserved it - that's not something Chloe should have on her conscience.
Also, I am starting to think Lex is adopting the Subterfuge approach to supervillainy, and is deliberately leading people on in the extent of his evilness because he's realized the advantages of that assumption. He can intimidate with vague threats and insinuations without having to making good on them, because people are frightened enough of him to fall into line without proof. Chloe was terrified of him (without Lex even having to mention that if she possibly managed to get her article published, without evidence, he could sue for libel and she would never work in newspapers again) - so terrified that she didn't even consider that for some bizarre reason he's neglected to sweep her or Clark up into 33.1. And I'm very curious as to the reasons for that. Because he doesn't actually put anyone in 33.1 who didn't first prove themselves dangerous by getting committed? Because he bears some lingering loyalty to their past friendship? Or does he have a more nefarious agenda? And will the show always leave us wondering in doubt about it? (I don't know about you, but I'm inclined to go with the wondering in doubt, myself...)
In SV news, idly reading a random journal, I think I found myself obliquely accused of being a Nazi sympathizer for my Lex posts. It could have been another post mentioned in their comments...but it sounded a lot like they were referencing our prattle about 33.1 and why it maybe is justified as Third Reich-esque propaganda. I'd be more disturbed by the comparison if we weren't talking about a totally fictional scenario. (If it was my post they were talking about, the person was polite enough not to flame me; they didn't even reference me by name. Such a well-mannered fandom!)
It's wild that Lex-fans are dividing into such totally opposite camps. Half of us think he's a sociopath, willingly marching down the road to Hitler-hood; the other half think he's a victim caught in a terrible and inescapable quandary, being pushed and pulled down into something he never wanted to be. We all think he's awesome (when he's not being pathetic), and the final destination's the same either way...but it's like we're watching two different shows.
And frankly? I wish I were watching the other camp's show. SV's just painful for a Lex-apologist, because it's never going to redeem him, but it keeps giving us supporting evidence. And it's pretty depressing to find oneself rooting for the losing side.
I'm not going to say much about "Progeny", not because we didn't rip it apart at length last night, but because
gnine already has gone on about it at wonderfully great ranty length, decrying that Lex was the villain at all. Go, check out her post, comment and discuss. There'll be a few spoilers to the ep here, but the real ep commentary meat's there.The thing is, while I might agree with some of what Lex is doing, I don't think he's doing the right thing, or a good thing. I don't think imprisoning people against their will is right; I don't think murder is right, ever, under any circumstances.
But I don't think Lex thinks he's doing the right thing - just what's necessary.
The anti-apologists see Lex as having choices, as manipulating for his own desires, as turning on the people close to him for the sake of personal gain. Taking "Lexmas" at face value, selfishly choosing the personal security of money and power over the love of family and friends. All the worse because Lex proved at one time that he had a conscience, so he has to realize he's doing wrong. There's a certain terrifying innocence in a true sociopath's lack of morals; they can't choose the right thing because they don't have the empathy to have a moral sense at all. There is no right or wrong to them. Lex isn't a sociopath (though Lionel might be); he knows right from wrong. He knows hurting people or using people isn't right. And while he might have suffered traumatic abuse all through his life, he's (mostly) sane and mentally competent, so he is still morally accountable for the choices he makes.
The question is what choices Lex has (or sees he has, which ultimately is the same thing.) And it's a tough question to argue either way, because SV doesn't give us that much insight into Lex's head, ever. Seldom are a villain's motivations so opaque. (Though Lex is only one of the crowd here; no one's motivations in SV are ever explored at any length, except when they involve love for Lana Lang. ...Bitter, much? Oh, you betcha!) The show's awfully careful to give fuel for both our campfires. There are a few things he does that are pretty unequivocally Evil. There are about an equal number of things (mostly in earlier seasons, to be sure) that are unequivocally Good. And just about everything else is gray, with a lot of wriggle-room to argue it either way.
In a pulp comic book, the black-and-white photocopy of absolute morality, gray always registers as black. Motivations mean nothing; actions are everything, and the hero's path is a narrow and difficult one. But Smallville is all in technicolor shades of gray - I can't see how it would be satisfying to watch, by such standards, because there would be no hero at all, only villains. Clark puts on the red ring willingly, and has let multiple people die while being fully able to save them; Chloe illegally collects private files and medical records; Aquaman is an environmental terrorist; Green Arrow blows up buildings; Moira Sullivan manipulates her own daughter into being a murderer. And when morality is relative, motivation matters. If an action can potentially be either good or evil, then the why has to count for something.
But we're not talking which moral framework to follow. We're talking Lex's Catch 22. Morality is mattering less and less to Lex; the choices aren't mattering as much, because he's damned either way. He can stop what he's doing. Close 33.1. End his experiments*. Release his captives. Walk away from the whole dirty business.
* (whatever the hell said experiments are. "Experiments" does not automatically mean "evil." I wish SV would be clearer on this point. Human test subjects are a part of much medical and psychological research. The most important ethical concern is that such subjects are informed volunteers, and not all of Lex's subjects are...maybe. 33.1 is holding a lot of mutants, but whether it experiments on all of them, willingly or unwillingly, isn't clear.)
Except that if Lex walks away, more people are going to die. That's not a possibility; that's fact. How many people have died at meteor freak hands already? Meteor freaks kill people. Not all of them, but most of them. Chloe knows it, Clark knows it. Clark doesn't have a perfect track record, not by a long shot. Lex has the capability to stop them, keep them from hurting more people - one of very few people to have the power to do so. It's by morally wrong means; but if his inaction allows others to come to harm, isn't there a moral responsibility there, too? A sin of omission can still damn a soul. He's going to be guilty either way; he's choosing to take the active rather than passive road to hell. There is no road to salvation, not that he can see. By now he might have stopped looking.
--This is not even taking into account the whole saving-the-world-from-aliens aspect of the Lex-nalysis. That's a little harder to argue because Lex's motives are, as formerly whined about, so damn opaque. Except I really wish, just once, the other chars would question why Lex Luthor wants a secret army of super-soldiers. Do they think he's after military profits? Or taking over the world? What?
The two biggest dangers of Lex are firstly, that he is a private citizen, who is taking society's issues into his own hands. He's establishing a private dictatorship. That's probably the biggest problem I have with 33.1, the secrecy of it (and why I have such a problem with the "heroes" handling of it. If Oliver was less petty about wanting to go mano a mano against his old target, he would just blow the whistle on the project, expose it to the world. Chloe doesn't have the clout or the evidence, but Queen Industries and Green Arrow's boy band have both. But Oliver would rather just blow shit up.) If it were public, then it would have to follow social, legal standards, decided by the community that is being threatened. It shouldn't be up to one man. (Though considering how utterly insanely blind said community is to the threat, and the urgency of it, there's a good argument for emergency measures...)
Regardless, Lex has no checks and balances, no limits, not even a trusted adviser. He's navigating very uncertain moral ground without anyone to hold him on course. I have trouble holding him responsible for this, however, because I'm at a loss myself who could possible function as such. There needs to be trust for such a position, and there is no one Lex can trust.
The other danger is that Lex is psychologically unbalanced. Putting aside a past history of schizophrenia, alcoholism, and at least two episodes of psychotic blind rage, he's obsessed. I hesitate to call it paranoid obsession when the threats he fears are very real, but he's definitely unhealthily involved in his various projects. And willing to pay increasingly high moral prices in the pursuit of his goals.
Ultimately, what makes it so hard for me to call him evil, even in the face of the evil he's done, is Lex's motivations. To my mind, evil is a matter of sadism and selfishness, of causing deliberate harm and ignoring the pain of others for one's own benefit. But I have yet seen any evidence that Lex is doing anything he does for himself.
(...er. With the exception of Lana. And can I say grr that we ended up being right after all about the baby being a hoax? Unless Lex is playing an even deeper game...I know he isn't, but man, I wish he were. That bit of soap opera villainy is not only unequivocally evil; it's also stupid, which is far worse. Lex couldn't get to the doctor before he told her the truth? Man. Pathetic. That's all I'll say about that...I know I should be considering Lexana in the grand Lex-nalysis, but any long-term contemplation of teh Lana pains me, so it will have to be left to sturdier spirits than mine...)
That Lex is working toward a greater agenda than his own advancement doesn't make him less scary - a true believer is more frightening than any wicked, petty soul. But I personally don't see such as evil. Misguided, yes; insane, often. And sometimes irredeemable, if they refuse to accept any questioning of their righteousness.
What gives me hope for Lex is that he doesn't seem to think he's righteous. He doesn't believe he's doing the right thing, but the necessary thing. A desperate man; but for now, at least, he's still trying to go for the lesser of possible evils. Doing what he has to, but not proudly or happily (look at his fears with Lana, and how he dreads her learning the truth about him), and not without restraint; there's still lines he hesitates to cross. If Lex thought his ends justified any means, then he would have manipulated Moira in the most efficient way - by bringing in Chloe and putting a gun to her head. She already hated him; what did he have to lose?
And man, I want to know what exactly his ends are. Judging by (our wacky interpretating of) the director's cut for next week's ep, Lex puts his projects above his own life...
For Lex to fully come into his own as the Lex Luthor of comic fame, he's going to have to either give up his higher cause, or give into it entirely, become absolutely assured of his righteousness. The former way he'll declare moral bankruptcy and then I'll comfortably admit to his evil; the latter way makes for a more frightening villain, but one I'd hesitate to call evil; insane, more like, for all that he's damned either way. Maybe it's only a matter of personal definition. But either way, I don't see him as being there yet.
A couple final thoughts about "Progeny" - having watched the director's cuts last week, I was pleased that most of Clark's hesitation in saving Lex from Chloe's bullet was cut. Not really for the Clex. But Clark, for all his stumbles, is still pretty pure morally, and while I don't actually have much problems with him wondering for a moment whether he should let Lex die (I believe he has good reasons to think Lex is evil, even if I don't agree with that judgment, and he still made the right decision in the end, after all) - it bothered me a lot that he would consider letting Chloe become a killer. I know this is SV and no one is ever held accountable for what they do under the influence of whatever, but gunning someone down in cold blood, even if she didn't remember and believed he deserved it - that's not something Chloe should have on her conscience.
Also, I am starting to think Lex is adopting the Subterfuge approach to supervillainy, and is deliberately leading people on in the extent of his evilness because he's realized the advantages of that assumption. He can intimidate with vague threats and insinuations without having to making good on them, because people are frightened enough of him to fall into line without proof. Chloe was terrified of him (without Lex even having to mention that if she possibly managed to get her article published, without evidence, he could sue for libel and she would never work in newspapers again) - so terrified that she didn't even consider that for some bizarre reason he's neglected to sweep her or Clark up into 33.1. And I'm very curious as to the reasons for that. Because he doesn't actually put anyone in 33.1 who didn't first prove themselves dangerous by getting committed? Because he bears some lingering loyalty to their past friendship? Or does he have a more nefarious agenda? And will the show always leave us wondering in doubt about it? (I don't know about you, but I'm inclined to go with the wondering in doubt, myself...)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-04-21 06:08 pm (UTC)LEX FOREVER!!!
:D
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-21 06:41 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:I'm a Nazi now?
Date: 2007-04-21 07:35 pm (UTC)Maybe that choice isn't always selfish. It's the same dilemma Clark had in Vessel. He couldn't kill Lex then. It wouldn't be right for him to murder Lex (though if Lex had known, he might have said DO IT). It wasn't right for Clark to do nothing to prevent it. Inaction is just as wrong. The result was many people DYING. Lex is at that crossroads now, while everyone else is la la laing over Lana's choice of a marriage partner.
Besides the point that people argue the threat is gone. It AIN'T. Okay, WE know that there are very few Kryptonians left. One of them is Clark, who has been maiming and killing (one onscreen, but I thought it was implied that that was how Clark was getting rid of them*) mutants and Zoners. Which if Lex has any inkling about, without context, this makes Clark a scary guy. And it makes him a scary guy to me because if Clark doesn't impose standards of morality on himself, he could easily become as dangerous as Zod. Also, we PROBABLY have the black haired female Disciple of Zod from the Phantom Zone unless Raya or Clark killed her. There could still be a few left. If Lex has contacts all over the world, he's probably seeing other alien Zoners too, who are... yep, killing people. Not to mention that there are probably other alien threats out there and BRAINAC, who Raya hinted could come back. She also said that this planet was in DANGER. (Which Clark apparently forgot, along with how to read Kryptonian.)
Then of course, we have your point that the meteor mutants are dangerous as well. Which is proven and continues to be proven. Here are my (drunken) comments on the "good" vs "evil" in Progeny:
http://ladydreamer.livejournal.com/226843.html
Why does Smallville glorify abuse? Either Moira doesn't care about her daughter (and I think she does) or she can't see how her actions affect other people. Which pretty much means she should NOT be on the outside yet. When Lex got angry with her for hurting his wife, her excuse was, sounding very genuine, I was only trying to hurt you! Um... wut? Seriously? Well, that's peachy then. You're free to go la la la...
And it's unfortunate that Chloe can't see her mother's manipulation of her as abusive. And it's worse that Clark can't be more than window dressing in this episode and say, "Hey, it's NOT okay for your mother to control you like that." Because it isn't. Even if she's trying to save herself. There are better ways of getting Chloe to come help you other than making her assault people and run others off the road to steal a flashdrive (how did Moira even know Lex had that on him?). Except, we're supposed to still see her as good at the end of this ep?
/tangent
*I've also heard that killing aliens doesn't count, which is a pretty scary ideology to me. They're all living things.
Part II. Sorry!
Date: 2007-04-21 07:36 pm (UTC)Word. No, it's Moira for whom the end justifies the means. Ordering the mutant to kill him. Ordering Chloe to help her, to hurt Lex, to run away against her will...
Human test subjects are a part of much medical and psychological research. The most important ethical concern is that such subjects are informed volunteers, and not all of Lex's subjects are...maybe. 33.1 is holding a lot of mutants, but whether it experiments on all of them, willingly or unwillingly, isn't clear.
Again, word. It seems like some of them are not voluntary, though, and that's pretty problematic, but I think this is part of Lex's dilemma. I think that he demonstrates here (and in Cyborg) that he does ask them nicely. It seems to me that some of them have to be voluntary, however, unless everyone has read the comics. And even then, you have to take self-interest into account. Who would want to rot in a place like Belle Reve? I'd rather take the chance to get better. It won't happen in that hole of a mental institution.
You're right about the dangers. Lex does need someone to help him stay on course, and he is mentally unbalanced. We know this. And I think having to do these things is just making him worse. This isn't the path that he wanted, but no one else is stepping up to take care of it as far as he knows (The Queen's Men just blowing his shit up and making it harder for him to accomplish his necessary goals), so he feels driven down that path. It seems to be the second path that you mention, giving in to his higher calling, which will eventually mean destroying Clark by whatever means necessary, though it hurts him and makes him miserable to do so. It's something he fervently believes that he has to do, and is justified in doing (read Lex Luthor: Man of Steel).
Long live the Lex-nalysis.
Argh! More.
From:Re: Argh! More.
From:Re: Argh! More.
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-21 07:54 pm (UTC)and is deliberately leading people on in the extent of his evilness because he's realized the advantages of that assumption.
I think it's more the producers who have realized this, but of course it's cooler if it's Lex. And Lex has certainly brooded about people's opinion of him enough to finally use it for his advantage.
I think I found myself obliquely accused of being a Nazi sympathizer for my Lex posts.
Haven't they ever heard that the first side to bring up a Nazi comparison loses? (And yeah, I read that post, too. Found it pretty shocking.)
Clark puts on the red ring willingly, and has let multiple people die while being fully able to save them; Chloe illegally collects private files and medical records; Aquaman is an environmental terrorist; Green Arrow blows up buildings; Moira Sullivan manipulates her own daughter into being a murderer.
Very true. This is why I'm always unhappy when fans think they have to take (permanent) sides. It's a TV show, not a war! They end up hating characters and then use moral reasons as justification and also conclude that *their* character is good. Just because you oppose a bad guy (or think you do), it doesn't make you better than them. And just because a character is victim, it doesn't mean they're a nice guy/girl.
(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-21 08:16 pm (UTC)*sigh* That's probably my fault. I was discussing my own views on Lex's motives in "Progeny," and naturally I had the Lex-theory you and gnine came up with as the basis for much of it, since I now take that theory as gospel. When I was challenged, I would ordinarily have credited you and gnine, and pointed the person to your lj and stories, but the level of hostility in the challenge made me rethink that, since I didn't want to be responsible for someone blowing onto your lj and ranting wildly all over the place. (Possibly you'd merely find that amusing, but I didn't know, so I tried to err on the side of caution.) Thus I deliberately did not mention you or gnine, for which I apologize. *hangs head* I generally seem to get these things wrong, but it's never on purpose. *goes back to reading your post*
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-21 08:28 pm (UTC)Actually, I find it kind of a hoot that people are so afraid of Lex - do any of them, Chloe or Clark, have any proof at all that Lex has actually killed someone or had people killed on his orders (we know that he has killed at least one person, but they don't they're not watching the show.) Lex can talk a good game, and I guess at this point he might be be more willing to start killing people but has he in the past?!?!? Given everything that has happened to him, I would think that he has shown great restraint on the killing front.
Actually here's a question - so is Desiree a guest of one the various 33.1? At this point Lex must have figured that she was some kind of mutant to get to him so thoroughly. I will grant that they show has never been that upfront about showing us that Lex is a scientist and a thinker of big thoughts, but Lex is a scientist and thinker of big thought as Smallville has been particularly toxic and dangerous for him I can't believe that he would have let that go, or honestly that he should be expected to, just because the other people in Smallville are content to hang around and die when the next mutant takes it into his or her head to go nuts doesn't mean that they are "good" because they don't ask questions and just allow it to happen.
I do think that you are right that what Lex really needs is some oversight or someone that he could trust with his thoughts on the whole thing. I think that originally he thought that Lana would be that person - they were of the same mind at least last season about the dangerousness of the mutated indigenous population - and then when she betrayed him by falling back in with Clark, Lex must have taken that particular hard and as confirmation that he's right to be worried that the invasion will be all about subtle mind control - i.e, why would Lana's mind change so complete so quickly. That might be why he hatched the stupid plot point that makes Lana a damn martyr yet again (as opposed to a woman who has to live with the consequences of adult actions and choices - grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!! I hate the fake baby plot..), he might have thought drastic measures were needed to tie her to him so that he would have the chance to break whatever hold Clark has on her (against her own good judgment).
(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-21 09:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-04-21 11:26 pm (UTC)Because the writers have a really twisted, or alternatively, non-existent moral viewpoint. Clark is good because he's going to grow up to be Superman. Lex Luthor is evil because he's Lex Luthor, and is going to be Superman's Arch Enemy. End of story. They don't need to actually analyze why whatever Clark does is good. Superman is good, so whatever Clark does is good. Same with Lex, Re: evil.
I don't mind shades of gray. I love them, actually. I don't mind TV shows or movies, in which you wonder whether or not someone did the right thing. But this show seems to be saying that Clark and his friends are in the right when they blow up buildings or lie or steal or shoot people. I say, 'seems to be saying', because I don't know if that's what the SV writers mean or not. I just don't know. Do they expect all their viewers to figure it out for themselves, that there is one standard for Lex Luthor, and another for everyone else? Without anyone on the show ever commenting on that fact? I can tell you that most young people aren't that perceptive. Not because they're stupid, but because they haven't had the life experiences. I've had conversations with people over the characters on SV, and the consensus seems to be that Clark=Good, Lex=Evil. And they're happy with those equations.
(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-21 11:44 pm (UTC)Except for Lex. Who is always held accountable no matter what, even if he didn't actually do anything or wasn't involved. *growls*
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-22 02:45 am (UTC)I loved this bit, because you just described almost every superhero (except, obviously, for the scary government sponsored ones). It's good to remember what a tight line all these characters are walking. Lex is hardly the only villain who falls into this questionable moral area. There are quite a few who are fighting for a valid cause, but are just more ruthless than the JLA. And every hero has angsty moments of deliberating about exactly how much of the law to take into their hands. They're constantly sniping at each other about how Batman/Superman/Wonder Woman has gone too far. I love that Batman has a database that contains detailed plans for taking out every single member of the JLA in case they turn rogue and need to be taken out.
You are awesome, and not a Nazi.
(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-22 02:50 am (UTC)I've been called much worse in other fandoms. :) "Serial killer lover" and "rapist apologist" I may be, but I was also right. Spike was redeemed on BtVS, and ended up a hero. *sigh* It was really cool being on the winning side back then. People often forget in fandom that this is all fictional. I'd probably have a very different opinion of Lex's actions if he were a real guy. But he's a comic-book villain. I just... yeah, there's no reason to accuse people of lacking morality because they argue a unique interpretation of a fictional text.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-22 03:22 am (UTC)(no subject)
From:Clark should kiss and pet him until he's good again;
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-22 07:58 am (UTC)Grrr~ I'm still depressed that I over estimated Lana by thinking she should know she might not be pregnant when her body isn't showing any physical changes. Unless she thinks she's that special and won't actually looks like she's pregnant until she's ready to give birth. -_-;
Also, Lex is hot and Clark is pretty, that's all the reason I need to like a TV character.
(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-22 05:52 pm (UTC)Read it. You're brilliant!
What's interesting is that even in the comic book world, where gray does not practically exist, a book like LEX LUTHOR MAN OF STEEL came out. Even the comic book writers (and you don't get anymore canon than that) felt the need to justify Lex's actions and beliefs and show us the readers how un-evil he is. Like you said, he maybe wrong (as opposed to right) and bad (as opposed to good) but evil he is not, and Smallville is fantastically failing to prove (to me, at least) that Lex IS EVIL.
Shelby the dog growling at him does not make him evil.
Being abused every week, physically and mentally by family, friends and strangers, does not make him evil.
Hesitating before killing/hurting someone does not make him evil.
Wanting to protect mankind does not make him evil.
And now I'm preaching to the choir, so I'll stop, lol!
Don't get me started on Clark. Future Superman he is not. And that's why we write, right?
:D
/rant.
(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-22 07:39 pm (UTC)Isn't it weird that I find myself kind of believing both?
I think some of his actions are justified, but by justifying himself for some things, like torturing meteor mutants because they're "bad,"* he's gone onto a slippery slope. No one is truly evil; we all believe ourselves to be, somehow, the victims of our sins, or truly justified by our actions; only the redeemed will admit they did wrong. That said, though Lex may appear justified to the viewer, he's still done some things that are unjustified.
Like, I'll say "he tortured Arthur Curry," and you might say "who blew up his lab," and then I'll say "which was environmentally harmful" and you might say "but Lex was doing that for a reason: protecting earth"- does it truly matter? He still compromised his morals (which we've seen in season 1 and 2 he does have) and the action alone is unjustified. "He tortured Arthur Curry" is, by itself, immoral; when you have to jump through hoops to say what someone did isn't exactly immoral, then you're entering slippery slope territory.
Eventually, more and more things will some justifiable, or maybe sadly necessary, or even just time-saving; yes, in some ways I feel sympathy for him, and I feel he's been vilified by Clark and Chloe, but I can understand, to an extent, their fear of him: Clark knows that Lex knows certain things about him, and he has to be wondering what the purpose of 33.1 is. He hasn't said it out-loud, but I think he fears Lex is preparing for him; otherwise, why use the words "the war has begun?" Lex has kryptonite, had the ship at one point, has meteor mutants and information about Clark, was obsessed with the stones... I think Clark is right to fear Lex. He might not have acted yet, but to Clark it must seem like he's merely waiting to collect firepower before he does. Why Clark hasn't done anything about it yet I can only guess, except that AlMiles apparently want him to emote over the Lexana and fight phantom zoners before he faces his true enemy, which will hopefully happen in season 7.
We can't forget that Lex is a meteor mutant too, and knows that he is one. Besides the sociopaths kryptonite infections seem to cause (which puts into question Lex's already-questionable sanity), it puts into question the morality of 33.1. If meteor mutants are a threat, then Lex himself is one, and he's the one deciding he isn't.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:Lex is Batman!
From:Re: Lex is Batman!
From:Re: Lex is Batman!
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2007-04-23 09:04 am (UTC) - ExpandRe: Lex is Batman!
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-23 04:25 am (UTC)I have to resort to bullet points instead:
- Talk of mutant ethics and politics and use of Nazi analogies should be transferred to the X-Men movieverse. *rolls eyes* Or these Lex-nalysis critics should just write to the writers to expound on their mutant policy in storylines manifesto.
- I have no problems with a private citizen who contain the huge public health and ecological hazard that are the exports from Smallville (mutants and other meteor/Krypton-related products), is efficient about it (despite his illegal methods), and profits from it. I find it hard to care if they want to show that Lex only does it for money and power, when Clark et al. aren't being proactive about SV's mutant problem. Likewise, with the dangers he sees, I would be obsessed and paranoid about it too, because his life in Smallville seems to have been built up towards this.
- The use of Lana: defies logic. I don't understand the fake-baby plot either.
- Confirmation on Lex's mutant status is v. important wrt his 33.1-related motives! Writers, why the fuck was Moira unable to control Lex, huh?
Love your thoughts on SV morality and pointing out Lex's oversight of Clark and Chloe, which just drives the point that Lex's path to villainy seems more certain that that of his path towards evil.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-04-23 04:23 pm (UTC)The only possible way to fix this is that we build a time machine, go back to the beginning of the SV idea, force them at gunpoint to fire the writers, and then hire a bunch of ficcers to write the scripts instead. Honestly can you imagine how different the whole thing would be if we did all write the scripts?
Maybe once I get finished with the BBAU project from Hell I'll find someone as obsessed with SV as I am and together we shall do a massive AU/re-write of SV from the beginning...some people would call that obsessive. I call it theraputic.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:Clark lies, he wants and demands people forgive him and let it go... Lex lies, he is evil!
From: