Jor-El, Prophecy, and Destiny

[norwich36]

I made the mistake of reading the comments on "Reckoning" on the TWOP right beofre going to sleep, and now I can't sleep because I'm arguing with them in my head! So some probably disjointed thoughts on Jor-El and destiny behind the cut; spoilers for "Reckoning."



Basically the impetus for this post was the argument made by many on TWOP that Clark had effectively killed Jonathan by "choosing" Lana over him. Now, as I said in my last entry on this episode, although I'm sure Clark *feels* that way, I don't think it's true--and not simply because I think Jonathan's own choices lead to his death. I'm starting to reconsider Jor-El's "punishment" of Clark.

I'm too tired to go searching for the actual quote, but from the many promos I remember it as "The life of someone you love will be exchanged for yours," or something like that. Now, we all read that as Jor-El punishing Clark for disobeying him. (Well, except bop_radar and supacat, who have been arguing for a while that Jor-El's message was more complicated than that--but I wasn't really convinced before now).

But what if Jor-El's power--to raise a human from the dead--was one of those one-time powers, like the time-travel crystal? Jor-El is not, I hope, omniscient, and can't read the future--which is why I had a hard time coming up with a benign interpretation of his prediction. But he knew that Jonathan's heart had been weakened by taking Clark's powers--and he knows (based on his experiences with Louise) that "human life is fragile, my son." Maybe he *intended* to use his one-time miraculous resurrection powers to bring back Jonathan, if necessary, but since he had to use them on Clark, he knew that at some point Clark would have to face a loss that could have been prevented if Clark had just listened to Jor-El.

That scenario works a lot better with what Jor-El had to say in this episode ("the tide of fate is impossible to stop" and "the universe will find a balance"--which seems almost like karma to me. (Btw, did anyone notice the Buddha on Lex's wall in the first scene between Lana and Lex? It was out of focus, but definitely there). The thing about karma, though, is it's a little more flexible than destiny, because the law of karma says that all of our choices--and all of everybody else's choices--have inevitable consequences, but choice still exists.

So yes, Clark's choices contributed to Jonathan's death--but so did Martha's choice to ask Lionel for money, and Lex's choice to try to blackmail Jonathan, and Jonathan's choices to accept the risks of Kryptonian powers to save his son and to provoke a fight with Lionel Luthor, and his father Hirma's choice to help a stranger, and the stranger's choice to send his son to that family, etc. etc. Jonathan's death is an inevitable consequence of choices made, but it's not a *punishment* Jor-El has sent.

That doesn't mean Jor-El isn't orchestrating some of the choices, because he has a goal for his son, which is probably shaped by the own choices he made while he was on earth. (I wonder: did he get the choice to try to save Louise? And if so, what was the outcome of that?) And this choice Clark has made is a "trial" (did he say it was the last trial? I don't remember--and maybe he was supposed to save the time travel for something important in the future, like defeating General Zod, who I assume is coming at *some* point in the future.) But I suspect we're going to find out his motives are more benign than we've been assuming.

Ok, I'm falling asleep *as I type this*, so I'd better go to bed. I hope this is somewhat coherent!

Comments

[frelling-tralk.livejournal.com]

I don't blame Clark for Jonathons death specifically. But it does make me sad for him to be playing God. He knew if he got Lana back, that another life would be exchanged of someone he loved. It wasn't like it even came down to a choice, because Lana was already dead. By asking for her to be brought back, he was pretty much risking everyone's life, in order to change what had already gone down

[norwich36.livejournal.com]

Well, you're right--by making one decision he changed things and has to accept responsibility for the consequences--but that, after all, is what a hero *does.* When he is Superman he is *constantly* going to be taking actions that will have profound consequences, and some of them are going to be negative ones--choosing to save one person may mean another dies. That's a "reckoning" he has to live with. And he was interpreting Jor-El's prediction as punishment, so you're right, he was making a choice--but as Martha pointed out, it wasn't a choice he was literally given between Jonathan and Lana. It was a choice to act when he could, or not to act--I don't think he can be blamed for choosing action, there.

[frelling-tralk.livejournal.com]

You're right that he didn't choice between Jonathon and Lana exactly. But he did allow someone else to die to save Lana. There was no question that he knew another loved one was at risk if Lana is brought back to life.

I would understand wanting to save Lana if there was still a chance of that, as in her still being around but badly injured say (Like Martha was). But Lana was already dead when Clark made his deal, which is when it became about reversing time, and bargaining with the life of another

[norwich36.livejournal.com]

I guess you disagree with my argument above, that Jor-El isn't really controlling what happens, then?

I know that it's important that Clark *feel* responsible for Jonathan's death, because (a) SV is a tragedy and (B) it's going to set in motion the whole "superheros can't have girlfriends" plot and (c) Clark needs to learn in a very personal way that making choices has irreversible costs. But actually, if anything, the fact that Jonathan is the one that died underscores for me *more* that Clark, ultimately, isn't the one in control of who lives or dies in this scenario, because he was going to have a heart attack at some point in the near future *regardless* of the choice that Clark made in the Fortress. (And I also think, you know, that if in scenario one it was Jonathan rather than Lana who had died, Clark would have still gone to Jor-El and asked for a way out).

[frelling-tralk.livejournal.com]

I guess you disagree with my argument above, that Jor-El isn't really controlling what happens, then?

I see it as the show set it up as Clark being brought back in return for the life force of another, and Lana was the original choice there. While Jonathon did have heart problems, for all we know he may have still lived for years longer. Yet he dies on the same day that Lana is returned to Clark. I think that is directly down to Jor-El

And also, as far as Clark knew, it could easily have been someone like Chloe or Martha whose life is lost. He did take a big chance in asking for Lana's life to be reversed, when Jor-El is there to warn him about balance and basically straight out saying that if you save Lana, someone else you love has to die in her place. That's when I think Clark should have stopped. I guess I'm mostly arguing over the difference between trying to help save someone, and reversing time to change the fate of someone who was already dead, when you know that will put other people at risk

[norwich36.livejournal.com]

I've been thinking about your comments a lot, and also some points raised by latxcvi and some other folks, and it made me go rewatch "Reckoning" and some other episodes to clarify Jor-El's motives and Clark's responsibility. I'm not sure if I've changed my perspective or not, but my new thoughts on it are here (http://norwich36.livejournal.com/12871.html).