Ha! Well all joking aside, my argument is not that Jor-El's 'benign' as such, but rather that he's misunderstood and not as deliberately pig-headedly obtuse as some people feel. Clearly he has an agenda. He wants Clark to understand the consequences of his actions. He wants Clark to accept that he is Kryptonian and has a particular destiny. I don't think Jor-El is evil or stupid. I just don't think he's working in the same framework as humans.
Jor-El and Lionel are clearly paralleled. Both sons struggle against their fathers and that struggle is instrumental in creating their future identities. The irony is that they will both follow their father's prescribed paths for them far more closely than either initially wants. Both fathers can be justifiably accused of emotional manipulation and bullying. But their purposes are not *always* as evil as the reactions of the sons indicates.
The one area where the parallel between Lionel and Jor-El doesn't hold up quite so well for me, is that Jor-El only really addresses one aspect of Clark: his Kryptonian part. Jor-El shows little or no understanding of Clark's human identity. He's probably staggered that Clark developed it! Kryptonians seem such absolutists, he is probably genuinely surprised that his son identifies so heavily as human, especially now that he has lived and died a human life. For this reason, simply because Jor-El has less access to Clark's human emotions, I think he's less destructively abusive than Lionel. (Personal opinion)
However confusion arises as to what degree Jor-El is active in punishing Clark. I maintain there is no evidence to suggest Jor-El can kill people at will and/or control destiny. If he could truly control it, he'd have Clark doing what he wanted already. It seems more like he can see the future and make predictions and can try to guide Clark but he can't control everything. His agency is limited.
The Jor-El/Lionel connection is a fascinating though ambiguous feature of this season. The theory you mentioned is an interesting one. I doubt the writers will spell it out like that. But the ambiguity is interesting. One thing speaking against that viewing would be that when Jor-El inhabited Lionel last time it was quite spectacularly obvious. But, who knows? Could just be a consistency slip-up!
no subject
Jor-El and Lionel are clearly paralleled. Both sons struggle against their fathers and that struggle is instrumental in creating their future identities. The irony is that they will both follow their father's prescribed paths for them far more closely than either initially wants. Both fathers can be justifiably accused of emotional manipulation and bullying. But their purposes are not *always* as evil as the reactions of the sons indicates.
The one area where the parallel between Lionel and Jor-El doesn't hold up quite so well for me, is that Jor-El only really addresses one aspect of Clark: his Kryptonian part. Jor-El shows little or no understanding of Clark's human identity. He's probably staggered that Clark developed it! Kryptonians seem such absolutists, he is probably genuinely surprised that his son identifies so heavily as human, especially now that he has lived and died a human life. For this reason, simply because Jor-El has less access to Clark's human emotions, I think he's less destructively abusive than Lionel. (Personal opinion)
However confusion arises as to what degree Jor-El is active in punishing Clark. I maintain there is no evidence to suggest Jor-El can kill people at will and/or control destiny. If he could truly control it, he'd have Clark doing what he wanted already. It seems more like he can see the future and make predictions and can try to guide Clark but he can't control everything. His agency is limited.
The Jor-El/Lionel connection is a fascinating though ambiguous feature of this season. The theory you mentioned is an interesting one. I doubt the writers will spell it out like that. But the ambiguity is interesting. One thing speaking against that viewing would be that when Jor-El inhabited Lionel last time it was quite spectacularly obvious. But, who knows? Could just be a consistency slip-up!