norwich36 | Smallville 6.19 Progeny

eeep! i'm not watching this season because i so so hate what they're doing with lex (*cough*lexana*cough*), but you kinda made me want to watch this episode! chloe backstory yay! i'll probably just read the recap on television without pity though.

Well, it's very powerful to see it. I don't think I would have had such a visceral reaction to Lex being evil if I had just read a description of it.

That sounds like what I was going through with Mortal and with what Lex did with Lana. I dislike Lana but that was beyond the pale. It was inhumane on every level and regardless of the target it's the type of thing that indelibly impacts my view of a character. It's one thing to hurt people you don't know or care about, it's another to do it the one you love or care about, to utterly break that person. It made me realize why they set up Lexana in the first place (since Clex can't be textual on the show and they wanted something stronger than Lex hurting a friend, they wanted to show what he'd be capable of doing to a lover/fiance/etc).

I do wish Chloe was more strident about forming a plan of action to get the story printed in the end though. I'm interested to see what Lex's next move is. Interestingly enough, I liked him in this episode in the sense that he was owning what he was.

*Is confused* Isn't Mortal the episode where Lex tries to find out Clark's secret by sending the meteor mutants to the Kent house? I'm trying to remember what he did to Lana in that episode.

I think that when Mortal first aired, there was still some ambiguity about whether or not Lex actually set up that situation, at least for viewers who were still basically sympathetic to Lex.

Oh sorry, commas are my friends heheh... I meant: what I was going through with Mortal, and with then then again regarding what Lex did to Lana in Promise. Both episodes, for me, impacted my view of Lex the way you describe above. (I just didn't go on about Mortal because I felt like it would make me a broken record (coming from my last entry)) As for the ambiguity, when the show didn't contradict Clark and Chloe in the next couple of eps (it's not their style imo to let something like that hang, they're pretty heavy handed about reveals) I knew they weren't going to reveal it as someone else's scheme...but yeah, Mortal and Promise were my "Progeny" so to speak :)

Oh, I guess I would have been able to figure that out if I had read more carefully! I guess that since "Cyborg" I've felt that Lex had moved into villain territory, committing acts that were blatantly inexcusable. (And I do think Cyborg and subsequent eps made me reread Mortal as a definite plot by Lex, whereas when it first aired I thought it was still ambiguous).

Clearly, morally speaking, I'm no better than Clark and Chloe since it took Lex being a bastard to characters I actually care about for me to really hate him. :D

Clark didn't actually know Cyborg though (he got to know him through the Lex-spurred crisis itself, when he was on the run) and I remember some being being mad that Clark went to chew Lex out (not to mention those times where the complaint is "Clark believes some stranger over Lex") The thing about Clark and his circle is...Lex didn't let them see that side of him until it hit them in the face. In Scare Clark still believed Lex's spiel about the projects being Lionel's, for instance. I think it's natural to review all the past ambiguities and mishaps when you get undeniable, in-your-face proof about a person.

In Scare Clark still believed Lex's spiel about the projects being Lionel's, for instance.

I've seen no evidence to suggest that the project in "Scare" wasn't one of Lionel's. And I remind you that, although Lex had been exposed to the virus later than the others, and thus had more time than the rest of them, he still chose to use an untested and potentially lethal vaccine on himself rather than using someone else as a lab rat. Not exactly 'evil' of him....

As always this season, I taped the SV episode and watched Ugly Betty, so all I know so far is what I've seen on the internets -- if Moira's power was that she could control other mutants, how did Lex keep her from controlling him? Have they retconned away his mutant healing ability?

His mutant healing ability has never been canonically confirmed, as far as I recall. But yeah, I kept expecting that to happen and it didn't.

She had to have a personal object of theirs to control them, and she didn't have anything that belonged to Lex. That's what I've put it down to now, and also possibly that she isn't aware that Lex has mutant abilities, so she had no reason to try and swipe something to control him. Honestly? Probably clumsy writing/continuation, but I think it's actually reasonably solid reasoning if you put that aside and ignore that Chloe should know about Lex being a potential mutant, and could have thought to try and swipe something of his.

Although then I don't think the case file specified that Moira needed a personal object? Though I'm not sure, I'd have to rewatch and check. So Chloe would have had to know before Lex's men grabbed her, because her best bet probably would've been to go visit Lana and grab something from the mansion. I don't remember them having a chance to grab something of his after Chloe was kidnapped though.

Also, I could be a little fuzzy on the timeline, but I think he went to see Moira post-car accident and his face was healed, when it was cut up when he saw Lana that morning. I'd have to rewatch and double check, but I'm fairly sure it was cleanly healed, and there was a bandage-type thing there when he saw Lana so there was some kind of surface damage. I took that as Lex healing really quickly, because Moira had a short time-frame on being lucid.

Thanks! That makes sense.

Much darker events have happened than they did in Progeny but, from my point of view, this was one of the darkest episodes of SV ever. Superficially, part of my reaction is due to Clark's flat-affect/pained support of Chloe and Chloe's hair being darker and her looking more mature.

Everything always feels inevitable on SV but in this episode it all felt ominous to the nth degree. *fears*

I want to hug all the characters now (except Lex who gets put in the corner for badbadbadness). And I think I may need a hug too. LOL!

Yes, ominous is a really good description. It feels like everyone is locked into their positions, and something bad is going to happen next.

*Hugs*

When Lex played the motherless card as part of his attempt to manipulate Moira, I realized that at this point every single main character on SV has lost at least one parent, which just serves to reinforce the idea that it's not the loss, it's how you deal with it.
Well, how you personally deal with it and your support system afterward. I think Chloe's father protected her from the truth about her mother (what he knew anyway. It's hard to tell what Gabe knows when he's MIA for three years). Lois' dad had a hard time relating to his girls, but he didn't withdraw his love. Martha ~~is suffering from Alheimers~~ is just confusing, and I think if Clark had been younger losing his dad, he'd be pretty screwed. And Lionel... o.O

Oi! I'm relating Chloe and Lex more and more to each other. Moira may have thought she was protecting Chloe, but she was also hurting her a lot. I think I'm reading Moira a little differently than you are, but just from what we saw on screen, I think that both Lex and Chloe are sadly better off without their mothers having an active hand in their lives.

Not only that, but his desire to control Moira made sense--he feels he needs to control the mutants both to reduce their danger to society and to counter the alien threat--I could actually kind of see that in this episode.
I do like the continuity of plot, for sure. I think my belief that Lex has good motivation is why I haven't picked a side yet. I really should be angrier at him, but I'm not (I'm biased for both of them). Though I kind of want to kick him for his confrontation with Chloe at The Planet. Lex never bothers to explain himself, and no one ever really asks him why he does the things he does. Chloe should be asking him WHY WHY WHY, and Lex could definitely try to convince Chloe that his experiments are for the greater good. He gets no cookies for choosing to be mean and snarky rather than explain.

>I think that both Lex and Chloe are sadly better off without their mothers having an active hand in their lives.

i think you're right about that. moira was not a force for good, so to say.

I agree that Lex, unlike most of the other characters, didn't have a loving parent in his life after his mom died, but for me that can only excuse so much.

I'm going to refrain from ranting, because I have Martha issues, but I just have to disagree with you that Clark would have been screwed if Jonathan had died earlier. I do agree that Chloe was definitely better off without Moira, though I don't see her as a completely negative presence because the choice she made actually *did* protect Chloe (whereas the choice Lillian made probably made things worse for Lex, in the long run).

I understand that Lex probably thinks he's defending the earth from an alien invasion, but do you really think that would matter to Chloe, after he has experimented on her and blackmailed her mom? There's no way I'd buy anything he was selling, if that was me.

And even though I think Lex's motives are intelligible--and I'm glad they're actually giving him a motive rather than making him randomly evil--I still can't condone the means he is using. Even if there was a real alien threat (which the viewers know is probably not the case), torturing people, experimenting on them, holding them prisoner and coercing them into his service are not justifiable, in my book.

Sorry, I was overgeneralizing about the Kents. I don't really know how Clark would have turned out if one or the other left, but Martha has been bewildering to me lately.

Well, I agree that a lot of Martha's behavior has been inconsistent, and though I have argued for her right to date Lionel elsewhere, I certainly agree that if this had been happening when Clark was younger it could have been very ominous. I have never doubted, though, that Martha wholeheartedly loved and supported her son, and that really does seem to be an important dividing line in SV; it's almost as if your parents are your destiny, as far as the show is concerned.

See, my reaction was just the opposite: I desperately wanted to bash Moira's and Chloe's heads in, and I was -- and am -- totally on Lex's side. He was perfectly reasonable in his offers to both of them, and he only got tough when he had to. If the war comes, I'm blaming it all on Chloe and her psycho mother.

I probably should have been more careful in my phrasing, since I really *don't* advocate violence, even fictional violence, and I know I get upset when people say they want my favorite characters to die, so I apologize for that.

I completely disagree with you that Lex's offer to Moira was reasonable, though. (I'm not quite sure what you mean by his offer to Chloe). He was holding her hostage and blackmailing her. He endangered her life by putting her in the holding cell with the superpowered mutant to get her to reveal her power, and tried to force her to bring another mutant back to his facility. Why on earth should she have trusted him or his intentions?

I'm not saying that Moira was a shining example of heroism--she was manipulating people to protect herself and her daughter. I find her actions intelligible but not laudable. She arguably endangered Chloe several times by controlling her from afar. I find actions understandable since I can see she felt she had no other recourse, but that doesn't mean I condone them.

In the same way, I can understand why Lex, fearing an imminent alien invasion, feels it necessary to create an army of mutants. His decision is intelligible--I can understand *why* he thinks he must do this, and I'm happy the writers are giving him an intelligible motive rather than making him generically evil--but I don't condone his actions, nevertheless. Kidnapping people, experimenting on them, blackmailing them, holding them against their will and in some cases torturing them are not justifiable behaviors, in my book. I don't condone them from my government officials when they excuse them by saying they need to torture people to defend our country, and I wouldn't be in favor of an involuntary draft, so I'm certainly not going to condone Lex's similar reasoning to justify the fact that he's using people against their will, endangering them and in some cases torturing them.

I'm still trying to figure out what you mean by his reasonable offer to Chloe. Threatening to imprison her? Threatening to do something worse than imprisonment?

First off, Moira voluntarily committed herself, and then went catatonic, none of which was remotely Lex's fault. He went to the trouble and expense of coming up with a drug which could bring her back to consciousness, kept her temporarily confined in case she turned out to be yet another lethal mutant nutcase, and made her a perfectly reasonable business offer: he would continue providing her with the medication (which legally belonged to him, and which she had no automatic 'right' to expect to receive) and allow her to see her daughter, and in return she would help him in controlling dangerous mutants -- something which someone really needs to start doing because, hey, innocent people keep getting killed.

In response to his request, Moira lied repeatedly, initially claiming that she had no mutant powers at all, and then that her powers could only affect her daughter. Lex pointed out that she might well be able to influence other mutants, and she lied (yet again) in claiming that it was only her blood tie to Chloe which allowed such a bond with her (deliberately never mentioning the fact that she needed to be holding something of Chloe's to make it work).

Since Moira refused to voluntarily test her power on another mutant -- something which could easily have been done with no one getting hurt -- Lex had no practical recourse but to force her, and really the only way to do that was to threaten either Moira or Chloe with immediate harm. Since Moira was the one refusing to cooperate, Lex understandably chose to threaten her rather than her daughter, which I consider perfectly fair. (I'm not saying that it was a nice thing for him to do, but with the fate of the human race at stake, I'm frankly okay with it.)

And once it became clear that Moira knew exactly how to control the guy she'd been locked in with, Lex made another perfectly reasonable request: that she help recapture a dangerous psychopath on the loose. Had she questioned whether the guy was a psycho, and asked for proof, I might have sympathized a bit with her hesitation (though, really, I don't think Lex ever lied to her, which makes him infinitely more trustworthy than she proved to be). Instead, she took the clear stance of preferring to let a dangerous man roam free (and kill who knows how many victims) rather than help Lex in any way. He gave her a harmless nudge by reminding her that he could bring Chloe to see her if she were to cooperate, and she pretended to acquiesce, only to order the mutant to murder Lex in cold blood. And I remind you that Moira showed no sign of having been ill-treated in any way (other than in the demonstration she forced Lex to arrange), so it's not as if her life and well-being were threatened and she felt compelled to defend herself.

Only after Lana has wound up in the hospital, thanks to Moira, does Lex resort to threatening Chloe, which I'd call pretty restrained on his part. Someone truly evil would have hauled Chloe in far earlier for leverage, and taken far more pleasure in doing so.

As for Lex's offer to Chloe herself, I thought it was obvious. He offered not to give evidence of her criminal activities to the police in return for her dropping the anti-Luthor rant she couldn't actually prove anyway. (And, since no sane editor would print anything like that without hard evidence, what Lex was really offering was a kind of mercy gesture: he'd let her stay out of jail if she'd quit trying to annoy him.) Rather than do the rational thing and agree, Chloe literally dared Lex to do his worst. Only then did he truly threaten her, and I frankly don't blame him; he's trying to save the human race, and these short-sighted pissants keep hounding him about minutia.

So, regardless of what Chloe later said to Clark, it was not Lex who chose to turn this into a 'kill or be killed' situation -- Chloe chose that option. Lex was perfectly prepared to be reasonable and accommodating with both Moira and Chloe, and each woman turned a fair proposition into a declaration of all-out war. Which, I devoutly hope, is a war Lex will win, and with extreme prejudice. *cheers Lex on*

Why on earth should it be Moira's responsibility to control dangerous mutants? She didn't ask Lex to develop the drug, and he didn't offer it to her in exchange; he simply tested it on her without her will, took over her medical care without her consent, and kept her from seeing her daughter (the person who, by the way, should have the rights to make decisions about her care, legally, since Gabe seems to have been retconned out of existence) until she did what he wanted.
I really, really can't understand how you think that is legally or morally justified.

Since Moira refused to voluntarily test her power on another mutant -- something which could easily have been done with no one getting hurt -- Lex had no practical recourse but to force her, and really the only way to do that was to threaten either Moira or Chloe with immediate harm.

No practical recourse? What the hell? How about: Lex could have left her alone. It's true that if he developed the drug he has no responsibility to give it to her, but likewise she has no responsibility to do what he wants. What you're arguing is that Lex has the right to do whatever he wants to whomever he wants as long as his motive is to protect the earth from invasion? I'm sorry, but I just can't accept that--I actually find it a pretty frightening idea.

And once it became clear that Moira knew exactly how to control the guy she'd been locked in with, Lex made another perfectly reasonable request: that she help recapture a dangerous psychopath on the loose. Had she questioned whether the guy was a psycho, and asked for proof, I might have sympathized a bit with her hesitation (though, really, I don't think Lex ever lied to her, which makes him infinitely more trustworthy than she proved to be).

You see this as a perfectly reasonable request, I see it as a pattern of escalation. Lex refused Moira contact with the outside world until she revealed her power to him. She did reveal her power, albeit against her will, having been placed in a life-threatening situation. (What would have happened if Lex was wrong?) Having proved her power, his next act was to blackmail her into using it for his ends. While, as I said above in comments to someone else, I don't find what Moira did justifiable, I certainly can understand why a person in her situation would see Lex as a threat to her safety.

Only after Lana has wound up in the hospital, thanks to Moira, does Lex resort to threatening Chloe, which I'd call pretty restrained on his part. Someone truly evil would have hauled Chloe in far earlier for leverage, and taken far more pleasure in doing so.

Do you honestly think that because someone fails to take pleasure in the acts they commit that harm others that the acts themselves aren't still evil? Even if Lex was correct in his assumption that an alien invasion was coming (and the viewer knows he is incorrect), that still doesn't justify his actions. He's still hurting people, imprisoning them, experimenting on them, blackmailing them and attempting to force them to serve his ends.

Actually, we do not know that there's no alien invasion headed for Earth. Presumably most Kryptonians are dead, but some may have survived (like the minions who turned up earlier to free Zod), and even a handful of Kryptonians would be quite an invading force -- look what Zod and Brainiac managed together. Moreover, there are other dangerous aliens in existence in SV's universe, like the energy-eating alien, and the bone-eating alien and Titan, whatever he was; any of those species, and more, might have invading forces on the way. Lex knows alien life exists, and that it can reach the Earth, and he has more than ample proof that at least some of it is utterly hostile to the human race -- so, yes, under those circumstances, I think that some latitude in following normal rules is called for. The end doesn't always justify the means...but sometimes it does, and saving an entire planet is a pretty significant end. So if Lex has to lock up and study some dangerous people (and he only seems to keep the dangerous ones confined, hence the farmer he merely studied from a distance until it became clear the guy had been killing people), I don't think that's too high a price to pay. Clearly, you disagree, but that doesn't make me -- or Lex -- wrong. Just...pragmatic.

As for Moira having no moral responsibility to help control dangerous mutants...is that like the people who hear someone screaming for help, and tell themselves that, because they're not cops, it isn't their responsibility to do anything about it?

Well, you and Lex could be right about the threat of a possible alien invasion, but I still think the proper recourse to that would be to *persuade* people to fight on his side, not coerce them into it. Since you're trying to speak pragmatically rather than morally, a pragmatic reason not to coerce people is they're likely to turn against you when they have an opportunity (as Moira turned against Lex), whereas if you persuade people that there's a real threat and get them on your side, they're more likely to be loyal. I'm thinking of something like the scenario in Last Best Hope (http://teot.org/svbigbang/s4/Hope.html).

And you might say it would be hard to convince people of the dangers of an alien invasion--but would that really, logistically, be harder than the money and manpower Lex is spending to kidnap, confine, and track mutants? He would certainly have to spend less time tracking down escapees if he got them onboard with his mission.

I don't think someone who has powers is required to use them for the greater good, no. I think if they choose to use their powers for good, that's generally something they should be applauded for, but I don't think they're morally obligated to, especially when using their power exposes them to constant temptation. Moira's power could actually end up being more dangerous than helpful, in the long run.

The evil that was Lex in this episode! *shudders* I've loved him throughout all the seasons, remembering what he was like in the first three, and trying to understand him, but last night...

I was appalled at him keeping the mutants prisoner and experimenting on them. He believes there's an alien invasion? This to me doesn't justify what he's done. He could just as easily justify keeping *Clark* a prisoner with Green K and forcing him to use his abilities for his war, and that would sure not set well with me.

I hated seeing Lex turn into the person he's become, and I know canon demands all this, but it's very hard for a Clexer to continue watching. I do because I guess I'm a glutton for punishment ;) but I happily live in my own little world of AU Clexiness. ;) I approach the final episodes with trepidation and a growing sense of horror! Even Lana, who I am not particularly fond of, sure got a kick last night that *hurt*, and I felt sorry for her.

Next week's episode looks interesting, but knowing TPTB at SV, I'm not holding my breath that it won't be screwed up.

*Waves hello* Nice to meet you!

Yes, I agree with you about Lex easily justifying keeping Clark prisoner; in fact, it seems to me that his torture of Arthur and Victor and Bart symbolically represent torturing Clark, and his experimentation on Chloe is symbolically experimentation on Clark, too--and that can't be a good thing, from a Clex point of view.

I think Clexers are just going to have to do what they have always done: write AUs or stuff set in the past or the future. I still have a lot of investment in fanonical Lex, the one who gets redeemed, and I think the beauty of fanfic is we can always have that Lex, no matter how dark he goes in canon.

It will be nice to get an episode where Clark and Lex get lots of interaction (though let's not say too much more about the ep for folks who are trying to stay completely unspoiled).

Thank you! Nice to meet you, too! :)

You're right about Clexers having to write our own universe, past or future or AU. When I wrote my first Clex fic, it was very happy and still had some of Lex's darkness, but nowhere near what we've seen this season! I figure as the son of Lionel he's going to have *some* darkness somewhere! ;)

I'm sure Lex does his best to persuade people to help fight the coming alien hordes, just as he tried to persuade Moira. I'm also sure he succeeds in persuading quite a number of them, and perhaps in buying the cooperation of quite a few more. But Moira, with her particular ability, was a unique case, and he needed to pull out all the stops in an effort to recruit her. So he tried polite persuasion, and the carrot-and-the-stick routine, but -- to her discredit -- all Moira would respond to were threats, so he finally used those. He didn't succeed (more's the pity for the Earth), but he tried, and I cannot blame him for that. There are a lot more lives than Moira's and Chloe's in the balance, and when/if the aliens come, they won't make sure not to hurt Chloe and Moira just because they refused to help Lex save the world.

I'm sure Lex does his best to persuade people to help fight the coming alien hordes...

You assume, without a doubt, that 1) these are actually Lex's motives and 2) that Lex should be this leader. I see no textual proof that Lex's motives are as altruistic or noble as you're presenting them here; they could very well be entirely self-serving. An army to do his bidding for only his ambitions, the world be damned. Lex has not shown viewers anything to the contrary.
Moreover, given his instability and sociopathic tendencies, I don't think people should be helping him or allowing him to be the leader of these protective measures. Someone who is stable and not a sociopath who's casually torturing, exploiting, and imprisoning other people should be the leader and as Nora explained above (re: moral pragmatism and actually swaying people to your side using *reason*, while respecting their rights, and without brute force) if people are not swayed it's because Lex is entirely the wrong person to lead this and is going about it entirely the wronng way. You can't be tyrannical and sociopathic in your means and expect people to smile and just take it just because you tell them no, really, they should just blindly trust you.

I see no textual proof that Lex's motives are as altruistic or noble as you're presenting them here; they could very well be entirely self-serving. An army to do his bidding for only his ambitions, the world be damned. Lex has not shown viewers anything to the contrary.

You seem to be forgetting the number of times Lex has used his money/influence, and even risked his own life, to help others...though I'll grant you that no one else in the SV universe seems to recall them, either. To mention just a few: Lex helped to rebuild Smallville after the second meteor shower (and possibly after the tornado at the end of the first season, though I'm not as certain of that one), and did the same for Metropolis after Zod's attack, for which he himself was in no way to blame (no matter Chloe's snide crack about 'guilt money'). He helped to save Smallville's largest source of jobs by saving the Luthorcorp plant, putting his own fortune at risk in the process. He walked into a situation where he was overwhelmingly likely to be killed in order to save a group of hostages, most of whom he didn't even know. Lex is capable of great nobility, and it is perfectly in character for him to sacrifice whatever he has to in order to save the world.

You assume, without a doubt, that...Lex should be this leader.

Lex is, quite simply, the only one who has stepped up on this -- the only one who has seen the looming threat and done his best to respond. Is the world supposed to wait until someone else -- someone with a higher approval rating, perhaps -- gets around to thinking about saving it? Lex is the leader here by default: there is no one else. Clark, Chloe and the proto-Justice League are actually part of the problem, given that they're all out undermining Lex's efforts.

First of all, don't snidely assume anything about my memory. I remember shit right down to the colors and patterns of their clothing and mannerisms and haircuts in scenes, let alone substantive content and dialogue. Just so you know, insinuating that people have poor memory doesn't make your point any stronger. I can make snide cracks about selective memory. But instead, this : "You seem to be forgetting the number of times Lex has used his money/influence, and even risked his own life, to help others...though I'll grant you that no one else in the SV universe seems to recall them, either. To mention just a few..." What on *earth* does that have to do with this discussion? Shall I proceed to excuse Lana's shadier moments (which can't even begin to compare to Lex's crimes) because she volunteered and did community service a couple of times? Shall I attribute my own motivations to her just because she's done good deeds? What's more a charitable deed by default doesn't mean nobility, there are obviously tons of reasons a PR-conscious billionaire poised to run for office would help a town out. For someone who implicitly accuses the opposing point of view of not being "pragmatic" you choose to be conveniently naive and idealistic when it comes to Lex. If a torturer/murderer/etc does charitable deeds it means nothing to me.

Grand public displays of charity from which one can benefit are dwarfed and stamped out by what Lex's is doing to people secretly, all while reveling in the fact that he's not getting caught and destroying evidence of it.

My apologies if I sounded snide; that was not my intent.

You had commented as follows:

I see no textual proof that Lex's motives are as altruistic or noble as you're presenting them here; they could very well be entirely self-serving. An army to do his bidding for only his ambitions, the world be damned. Lex has not shown viewers anything to the contrary.

I simply pointed out textual proof of instances where Lex's motives seem to me clearly altruistic. If you choose to see them otherwise (though how you otherwise view "Jitters" I can not imagine), that is entirely up to you.

Lex is capable of great nobility, and it is perfectly in character for him to sacrifice whatever he has to in order to save the world.

To be honest, I think the Zod-related 'charity' is probably the only particularly relevant incident to our current point in S6, timeline wise. Yes, I agree that Lex has arguably done some selfless things, but most of them are pretty early on, and as SV is (supposed to be at any rate) about the journey Clark makes to being Superman, and consequently Lex's journey to being his arch-nemesis, I don't see how you can relate those earlier events to now. Especially not to use them as justification for believing in Lex having ultimately good intentions when there's little other canon to support that. The whole point is that they're changing, growing characters, and what happened early on isn't necessarily or clearly going to fit or relate to their later actions.

Not to mention that even if Chloe's crack about guilt money was snide, there is some element of truth there. Yes, it was Zod, not Lex. But it was Lex's choices that put him in that position, and he continued making those choices even when it became clear that Fine might not be particularly trustworthy. No one just randomly picked him out of a crowd and said 'hey you, you'll make a good tool for Zod,' he did place himself in those cross-hairs under his own steam. So, no, I don't think it can be said that Lex trying to help clean up after Zod paints him as being nobel or self-sacrificing, there's a definite element of justified responsibility there for him.

You're also saying that the baby Justice League is part of the problem because they're undermining Lex, and he's the only one who has stepped up? I really can't see your rationale for this. There are other people trying to do things, or we wouldn't have the baby Justice League in the first place. One of Oliver's gripes with Clark has consistently been that Clark 'waits for trouble to land on his doorstep' rather than, and in contrast to how Ollie and the baby League work, seeking out ways in which the world needs saving. As far as I can see, the only way Clark and co. undermine Lex is because they provide a far less grey example of how to 'save the world' which Lex can be compared to and found wanting. That doesn't intrinsically mean they're a bad thing, it just means they help show where Lex goes morally wrong, even if he has good intentions. (Which I'll admit, I doubt he has all that much of them, or if he does have them that they're less important to him than his self-serving ambitions.) A character/s showing up flaws in another favourite character/s doesn't make the first bad in their own right. Yes, they're hindering Lex's ability to act by attacking 33.1, but Lex's actions have caused death, injury, and he has illegially caught/imprisioned people, exercised power without a shred of authority, blackmailed and manipulated people, and performed experiments on live subjects without their consent. I don't think many of those things would be out of place in an alien invasion scenario, so if Lex is justified in trying to take them down or prepare for that scenario, then I don't see how you can argue that Clark and co. aren't justified in taking down Lex for the same thing. Both see others as a threat to the human community as a whole, on a large scale, but one is on more solid group morally in their means and methods. And I hate to say it, but it's not Lex.

And to

norwich36, great post! (Hope you don't mind me jumping in down here. >.>;) I'm also torn between wanting evil!Lex and wanting him to be woobie and widely liked by the other characters again, oh inner conflict. It's nice to see it's not just me. *g*

And to norwich36, great post! (Hope you don't mind me jumping in down here. >.>;) I'm also torn between wanting evil!Lex and wanting him to be woobie and widely liked by the other characters again, oh inner conflict. It's nice to see it's not just me.

Thanks! And it seems like a lot of us are really conflicted about Lex, so it's definitely not just you. And feel free to jump in--I actually love when folks have discussions in my journal, it makes me feel like I'm hosting an SV salon, or something.

Yes, I agree that Lex has arguably done some selfless things, but most of them are pretty early on

Early on or not, they show Lex's essential nature. There's also, as I mentioned above, the more recent incident from "Scare" in which, despite the fact that he'd been exposed to the virus significantly later than everyone else and thus had more time than they did, Lex used an untested and potentially lethal vaccine on himself rather than choose someone else to use as a guinea pig. (And also turned down Clark's urgent offer to experiment on him, which effectively shows up Clark's later insinuation that Lex would do anything for the chance to experiment on him.)

Yes, it was Zod, not Lex. But it was Lex's choices that put him in that position, and he continued making those choices even when it became clear that Fine might not be particularly trustworthy. No one just randomly picked him out of a crowd and said 'hey you, you'll make a good tool for Zod,' he did place himself in those cross-hairs under his own steam.

Fine wanted to work with lethal viruses. Should Lex have let him do that with someone else -- someone who might not have looked beyond the surface or suspected that Fine had a hidden agenda? Lex had every reason to believe that Fine was hoping to destroy the human race with a supervirus; in response, Lex kept an eye on him and a hold on the project and created enough supervaccine for everyone in an attempt to save the entire human race from Fine's machinations. Hardly a selfish or evil plan on Lex's part! And it is in no way Lex's fault that Fine's true goal was to free Zod, since Lex had no way to know that Zod even existed. (Clark and Chloe and Martha and Lionel knew about Zod, and about Fine's intentions toward him, but naturally none of them bothered to give Lex enough of the truth to warn him. I'd say a lot of the blood from Dark Thursday is on their hands.)

Don't forget, either, that Fine's first attempt was to use Clark as Zod's vessel, and that it was Clark who 'placed himself in those crosshairs.' Does that prove that Clark is also 'evil'?

The proto-Justice League sees Lex as the Big Evil, and is working to destroy him (rather inefficiently, as has been said elsewhere) by destroying his 33.1 operations. Lex sees the return of Zod, or someone like him, as the Big Evil and is using his 33.1 operations to prevent that. Considering Zod's stated goal was to wipe out the human race and replace it with his own offspring, I'd say he and others like him pose a far greater risk that Lex Luthor, who clearly has no desire to kill off humanity (hence his making enough supervaccine to save everybody). Moreover, and as I have said before, Lex is apparently locking up only those people who would otherwise be locked up by the authorities anyway for having committed crimes; and doing it Lex's way means that those in captivity may do some actual good toward saving people beyond just not killing anyone while they're locked up. So how is that bad?

To paraphrase a writer I greatly admire, Lex knows that some of what he's doing is unethical, but he's doing it for a greater good -- the survival of the human race -- and, for that greater good, he's willing to get his own hands dirty when necessary. Which, really, is yet another example of Lex's willingness to sacrifice himself for others.

Scare is, what, 4x10? Mid-S4 doesn't really compare to early S6 when Lex is doing the post-Zod charity thing, not to me anyway. That's a quarter of the canon to date of a show intended to focus on the growth/journey or Clark and/or Lex. I agree that it was a very admirable action, but it was too long ago to really cancel out more nefarious actions recently ,in my opinion. And you have to admit, those kinds of gestures and actions from Lex were a lot more common early on in SV than they are now.

Clark and Chloe and Martha and Lionel knew about Zod, and about Fine's intentions toward him, but naturally none of them bothered to give Lex enough of the truth to warn him. I'd say a lot of the blood from Dark Thursday is on their hands.

I think it's interesting that you put it on them for failing to stop Zod, when Clark could have easily done so by killing Lex as instructed.

Don't forget, either, that Fine's first attempt was to use Clark as Zod's vessel, and that it was Clark who 'placed himself in those crosshairs.' Does that prove that Clark is also 'evil'?

I don't think I said that I thought Lex was evil for his role in the Zod arc, I think you missed my point. My point was that I don't think you can say that Lex's charity post-Dark Thusday is noble or selfless, because his choices played a large role in Zod's ressurection, even though that wasn't his intention. I think it parallels Clark's extreme efforts to help in the clean up to the point of practically running himself into the ground, because if he had acted differently (killed Lex to stop Zod) then Zod wouldn't have had the chance to wreck havoc. I don't think Lex is evil, just his charity after the fact isn't selfless but in fact him actually fulfilling a responsibility given his hand in the event.

I'd also argue your determination that no one informed Lex of the potential destruction from Fine's intentions, as I do believe Lionel tried to sit him down and warn him. Also, I don't think they weren't aware of Fine's intention to use Lex as a vessel until after Lex had already been deducted. Lana overhead Clark and Chloe figuring that link out at the planet, I do believe. At which point Clark refused to kill Lex the next time they met, even though Lex was already being pretty destructive under his own steam. Not to mention, Lex doesn't have a 'right' to the truth, especially not to truth from or relating to Clark until it's proven absolutely necessary, which I don't think it was in the case of Fine setting Lex up as the vessel, they worked that out too late. But Lex has proven himself untrustworthy in relation to Clark. See Nixon, the chamber of Clark, the shenanigans in Moral that put Lana and Clark's parents at risk because Lex believes he has a right to do whatever it takes to learn a secret before Clark was ready to share it. Lex may have an ability to do a lot of what he does, but he doesn't always (I might even argue often) have an unquestionable right to do it, even though he can.

Personally I think this is where Lex falls down. He thinks he has the right or authority to do whatever he believes is for the good of all, but no one gave him the right to play God. He isn't an elected government, no one gave him permission to do morally grey things to protect the people, he doesn't actually have any authority to do the things he do. This is why I said the proto-League is a 'less grey' example of saving the world to compare Lex to, because they're also on questionable ground there as well, but they also aren't causing deaths, injuries, or blackmailing, torturing, experimenting on people, or holding them against their will. Which gives them slightly more leverage in the morality stakes than Lex.

Again, I regard Lex's actions in "Scare" as indicative of his essential nature, which is to do what he believes is right and/or necessary, regardless of the cost. I don't believe that's changed at all.

But Lex has proven himself untrustworthy in relation to Clark. See Nixon, the chamber of Clark, the shenanigans in Moral that put Lana and Clark's parents at risk because Lex believes he has a right to do whatever it takes to learn a secret before Clark was ready to share it.

First off, I point out that there is no evidence that Lex sent the mutants after Clark in "Mortal." Yes, it was Lex the lead mutant bumped into in order to turn off his restraining device, but that strikes me as pure coincidence. Lex had every reason to be at Belle Reve on that day; Lionel had just been admitted in a state of catatonia strikingly similar to the state whats-his-name the linguist was in before he abruptly gained superpowers and started running around blasting people, so Lex naturally wanted to get another close look at his father before personally giving the doctor instructions to notify him immediately if Lionel's condition changed. And of course Lex had extra security (including extra cameras with a separate power source) on the kryptonite solution he'd been experimenting with; he had good reason to expect attempts by superpowered mutants to try to steal that solution, and he wanted it kept safe, if possible, and to know exactly who had taken it, if not. After returning to Smallville and being informed that there'd been a power outage and a possible break-in, Lex naturally checked the video footage, and was surprised to see Clark and Chloe breaking in, and further surprised to see Clark apparently injured by the laser when Lex had long had good reason to believe that Clark was far harder to hurt than that. Clark and Chloe promptly leaped to the conclusion that these bits and pieces somehow 'proved' Lex's guilt, but then they also concluded that Lex was the one who had exposed Clark to the 'silver kryptonite' in "Splinter," and they were dead wrong then, too.

And, in fact, Lex has proven himself utterly trustworthy regarding Clark's secret. In the "Shattered"/"Asylum" arc, Lex saw Clark use his powers and yet, aside from his initial startled outburst while drugged out of his mind, he kept Clark's secret the entire month he was locked up in Belle Reve -- despite the fact that Clark had allowed him to be locked up in the first place, and then flatly refused to break him out when he came to visit and Lex begged him for help. Lex kept Clark's secret throughout his imprisonment, even though he could have used it to bargain with Lionel for his freedom. Lex kept Clark's secret, even though he could have used it to bargain with Lionel to keep Lionel from frying his brain. I'd say that's at least as much proof of trustworthiness as Pete's refusal to tell a crazy scientist that Clark was the alien the guy was looking for. Yet Clark not only never trusts Lex with the truth afterwards, but he endangers Lex's sanity and Lex's life in "Memoria" in order to keep Lex from possibly remembering what he'd seen Clark do. If you ask me, it isn't Lex who's untrustworthy -- it's Clark.

Second of two.

I think it's interesting that you put it on them for failing to stop Zod, when Clark could have easily done so by killing Lex as instructed.

Clark might have done so by warning Lex, too, but -- even at the last possible moment, with the fate of the world at stake -- he couldn't bring himself to tell Lex the truth. Clearly, lying is a tough habit to break.

I'd also argue your determination that no one informed Lex of the potential destruction from Fine's intentions, as I do believe Lionel tried to sit him down and warn him.

Lionel has lied to and manipulated and betrayed Lex all his life. Lionel has drugged Lex and poisoned him and locked him up and fried his brain. Lionel has tried to swap bodies with him, leaving Lex trapped behind prison bars in a body dying of liver disease. Lex has no good reason to blindly trust anything Lionel has to say, and Lionel did not bother to give Lex enough of the truth to make it credible and/or useful.

He thinks he has the right or authority to do whatever he believes is for the good of all, but no one gave him the right to play God. He isn't an elected government, no one gave him permission to do morally grey things to protect the people, he doesn't actually have any authority to do the things he do.

If I pass a small fire in dry grass, and I stop to put it out before it can spread and maybe destroy thousands of acres of timber or homes or whatever, am I wrong in doing so just because I'm not an official firefighter? Sometimes you have to step in because the 'officials' aren't there ready to do what needs to be done, but you are; the circumstances themselves give you both the authority and the ethical responsibility. Lex tried to get an official position in the government from which to work, but he lost the election, so he's forced to do what needs doing as a private citizen. No one else is seeing the danger Lex sees. No one else is doing anything about it. If Lex doesn't take these steps, no one will, and the human race will be left defenseless. Clearly, Lex considers that an unacceptable risk -- so he's stepped up to do what needs to be done. He's not evil; he's just taking responsibility.

I only brought him up because you did specifically name Lionel as one of the people who you think Dark Thursday should be blamed for because they didn't tell Lex the truth. I don't really blame Lex for not listening either, but he did try to warn him. Not to mention I think Lionel was still under Jor-El's influence at that point, which was pretty clearly shown to be affecting his behaviour in regards to anything Clark related. I think there's some question there as to whether revealing everything was even in Lionel's power.

Also, I dunno, maybe it's just me but I don't really equate torture and kidnapping and possible murder with a small fire in dry grass. *shrug* And I'd really argue that no one sees the danger Lex does. Clark is better informed about dangerous aliens running around than Lex is, and it's not stated clearly but it's possible that Oliver/the League are now being brought in on it too as it was Ollie that got Clark the heads up on Zoner activity in Combat.

Anyway, as I said, I can see where you're coming from but I have to disagree with your interpretation of Lex's motives. And I think categorising Lex as evil is risky business, because evil is a much disputed term. I go more for defined terms. I think he's dangerous, misguided, self-righteous, and with the potential for even greater harm, as is pretty clearly depicted in pre-Smallville canon anyway. But I think we're going to have to agree to disagree there.

I think he's dangerous, misguided, self-righteous, and with the potential for even greater harm

Honestly, that sounds like my description of Clark and the pre-Justice League, especially given that the JL is being lead by Oliver Queen, who -- in SV, at least -- is a sadistic sociopath.

But, yes, we'll have to agree to disagree.

(excuse the double comments, my fingers got away from me :P)

Moreover, and as I have said before, Lex is apparently locking up only those people who would otherwise be locked up by the authorities anyway for having committed crimes.

Just because the authorities should be locking them up anyway, doesn't give someone else the right to step in and try to do their job. There is a system for a reason, because no individual has the right to play God, and one person's view of what the authorities would or should lock someone up for, doesn't always tally with the majority of the rest of their society.

Not to mention, even though Moira believes she's abused her power with Chloe and she does highly questionable things when she feels cornered by Lex, there's no reason to believe that in canon Moira has done anything along those lines of being worthy of prosecution before Lex pushed her. Considering Lex's team has pulled innocent people, who are meteor infected but haven't done anything wrong, off the street (and the show isn't devoted to cateloguing each and every mutant Lex captures) I don't see that you can argue that every mutant Lex grabs is a good thing. We have dubious methods, we have a number of instances of Lex acting without the consent of the infected people involved, and we have him acting without any authority to do so. Perhaps you don't see damning evidence there, but I at least see room for doubt and for questioning.

I think there is validity in believing that a greater person or organisation should 'dirty' its hands for the greater good of all. I don't always agree with it, but I can see the reasoning behind it. However, surely there needs to be checks and limits in place, some kind of accountability, and authority given for these actions in the first place. I see none of that with Lex. And even if you believe absolutely in his good intentions, if he has the right to march in and do what he likes in his quest to save the world just because he is able to do it, then so does anyone else. There's no rules or reasoning that give him the right to do what he does other than that you trust his judgement and motives, and that makes him dangerous, because motives change. Judgement changes. There's no reason that anyone else, without the same motives you agree with, can't walk in there and do the same thing. That in and of itself put Lex's actions into question, in my book, because he will not submit to that kind of rules and believes himself above everyone else. Then to add morally dubious actions on top of it?

I dunno, I love Lex, and I can see why and where you're coming from because a part of me still wants woobie, good Lex and Clex and all that good stuff. But, objectively, he's doing some questionable things and he's doing them the wrong way. He's not good Lex anymore, even if he believes he's doing the right thing. The fact is, he's not just getting his hands dirty, he's slowly but surely causing some extensive harm, and he doesn't appear to be bothered by it. This isn't just a case of being willing to undermine your own ethics for the greater good, this is actually letting your ethics go. And when he's letting your ethics go, you have to question when his motives are going to change. 'The ends justifies the means' doesn't carry a whole lot of weight if one day you stop needing the justify those means. That's where Lex is getting dangerously close to.

Not to mention, even though Moira believes she's abused her power with Chloe and she does highly questionable things when she feels cornered by Lex, there's no reason to believe that in canon Moira has done anything along those lines of being worthy of prosecution before Lex pushed her.

At the time Moira sent Chloe after Lex, all Lex had done was to awaken Moira from a catatonic state and ask for her help. No, he hadn't let her leave; she'd been given an experimental drug, and her powers were potentially dangerous even without the drug, so just letting her walk out would have been dangerous not only to her but to everyone around her. Yet Moira has Chloe run Lex off the road and then bash him over the head and steal his flashdrive; these are, in fact, serious crimes worthy of prosecution, committed at a time when Lex had in no way harmed or mistreated her.

The fact is, he's not just getting his hands dirty, he's slowly but surely causing some extensive harm, and he doesn't appear to be bothered by it.

Actually, we've seen indications that he is bothered by it. He has nightmares. He tells Lionel he's worried about being seen for who he really is. He tells Lana he prays that he doesn't get what he deserves. Lex is suffering the emotional consequences of his actions; he just can't afford to let his own pain stop him from doing what needs to be done. Which, in my book, is pretty heroic.

Yet Moira has Chloe run Lex off the road and then bash him over the head.

Actually, that isn't canon. We don't know exactly what Moira told Chloe to do. She didn't tell Chloe to turn a gun on Lex to get out, and a command to get out for her own safety is a fairly morally safe thing to do. And yet, there was Chloe with a weapon pointed at Lex because he stood in her way. I wouldn't be surprised if Moira's instruction was more along the line of 'Lex Luthor is holding me hostage, find out where I am so you can get me out.' Or whatever.

The only nightmare I'm calling to mind is over the fake!baby? That's kind of a whole seperate issue with me and my opinion of Lex, and I can't see even the slightest excuse if he was behind Lana's fake pregnancy. As for what he's told Lana and Lionel, he doesn't really seem to have the most honest relationship with either. Actually, I'd hazard that his relationship with both seems to be more fraught with lies and manipulation than anything else. He doesn't even appear slightly remorseful during the actual doing of any of these things, and as the Lexana relationship has shown Smallville doesn't have a problem with showing beneath Lex's facade when he turns away from someone he's trying to fool, so I don't buy that he's just hiding his 'real' emotion behind a mask to get the job done. Actions speak louder than words, particularly when those words are to people you're rarely honest with. That's not heroic, that's just doing what you please because you can.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this, because we're clearly coming at it from different philosophies about what is justifiable when our security is endangered.

Hi, please forgive me and have patience with me for a few moments...I'm having trouble following your line of reasoning. So just bear with me.

You're honestly blaming Moira and Chloe for refusing to be cowed by Lex's demands, for refusing to allow Lex to define the remainder of her existence? For refusing to *allow* Lex to threaten and manipulate her while being held against her will, for refusing to divulge secrets about *herself* that she had every right to keep to herself, she deserved to be abused--locked in a cage with another mutant *ordered* by Lex to beat her--and is thus responsible for Lex's imminent war with using his illegally obtained and unethically assembled mutant army (who are essentially slaves themselves)? Moira, a private citizen, was in the wrong for not allowing herself to be used as a weapon by someone she had *no* reason to trust or believe?

Frankly, *we* the audience with the omniscient don't know what Lex's justification is for kidnapping, imprisoning, and torturing other private human beings, nor is that in any way a justifiable means to any of his ends. What makes *Lex* so special that this woman, a private woman who committed no crime, should submit her life and power to him? What gives him a right to hold her against her will and make demands of her, make "pick your poison" type offers? He had no right to see her powers, whether she knew she had them or not. Showing him, helping him, is her right, her decision, and hers alone.

Why are you giving *Lex* the right to define her parameters of existence? Is she not an autonomous being? Are not all the other mutants, for that matter? What kind of "offer" is being held against your will and used as a pawn or to see your own daughter/killed/have your daughter killed? I'm sorry, but this makes absolutely no sense to me.

It's analogous to blaming a concentration camp prisoner for REFUSING to comply with their captor's "offers", refusing to be (further) experimented on, exploited, used as labor/a tool in the side of the war that is *detrimental* to their to their own cause and hope for freedom.

First of two posts, because this got too long:

Given the things Lex has seen with his own eyes, and the things he has learned through investigation, he has every reason to believe the Earth is threatened with imminent invasion by superpowered alien beings with vastly advanced technology. Given the overwhelming nature of this threat, Lex is clearly operating in crisis mode: he has to do everything possible to prepare the human race to face such an invasion, and he has to do it all as quickly as possible, since he has no idea when Zod, or someone like him, will reappear. And Lex is the one doing it because he's the only one who will -- the only one who has recognized this threat and been willing to step up to combat it.

Lex knows, as would anyone who'd stop to think about it, that any such alien invasion won't just target non-mutants. Moira and Chloe are in every bit as much danger as everyone else. This is their war, too, whether they want to acknowledge it or not; unless they somehow manage to sell out the rest of the human race to the invaders in return for being spared, they will be targets right along with Lex and his army and every civilian everywhere. So what Lex is doing is to their benefit as much as it is to every other human's. Lex is not 'taking advantage' of them -- he's trying to prepare them for war. Trying to help them survive.

Moreoever, with Moira, Lex did not begin with demands. He roused her from a catatonic state (for which most people would be grateful), and evidently explained that her powers were needed. Even if he didn't immediately bring up the coming alien invasion, it must have been made clear to her that a large number of the kryptonite mutants were demonstrably dangerous, and that her power could be a vast help in restraining them from harming innocent people. (Also, in Lex's experience, Moira's powers appear to be unique, which does leave her with a certain responsibility for her fellow human beings, since not just anyone can do what she can, which explains Lex's urgency in trying to recruit her help).

As far as Moira having 'committed no crime,' I remind you that, by the time Lex let the other mutant get physical with her, Moira had already caused Chloe to run Lex off the road and then bash him over the head in order to steal his flash drive, which was not only a serious crime (or, really, multiple serious crimes) but was highly likely to have left Lex injured or even dead. So it was Moira who first physically assaulted Lex, at a time when he had done nothing but wake her up and then insist on talking to her about something of vital importance rather than allowing her to simply walk out with an untested drug in her system and a power which could make her a serious threat to the public.

Please address the concentration camp analogy. I want to see how you could possibly justify prisoners (captured, brutalized, and tortured because of their identity) being given "choices" by their captor and *blame them* for not cooperating with their captor.

I'm sorry, you did not address any of my points or questions or issues with your line of reasoning. At all. You proceeded to construct the story in the most implausible and favorable light possible to Lex, irrespective of what we actually saw on screen, and minimizing his crimes beyond reason. What's more, you keep making assumptions about Lex's motivations, rights, his rights in terms of realizing his ambitions, and his right to do as he pleases with other sentient human beings.

Perhaps most importantly, all these motivations and intentions your attributing to Lex are your own, are not textual. Lana, too has been attacked by mutants and by aliens, I'm not going to go ahead and assign unsubstantiated/unspoken motivations to her actions. Lex could very well be developing this army to increase *his own* power. He's talked for more often and far more vehemently about securing power than this "protecting the world" fiction you're attributing to him. Even if he was sincere, it doesn't at all give him license to usurp people's rights. Why him? Why is he so special? His goals don't justify his inhumane methods, I don't care what they are or what you insist they are.

You're, quite frankly, Making Shit Up a lot of the time in the above account of the episode. Prime examples: "Even if he didn't immediately bring up the coming alien invasion, it must have been made clear to her that a large number of the kryptonite mutants were demonstrably dangerous, and that her power could be a vast help in restraining them from harming innocent people." He didn't frame it that way. At all.

and: "In short, Lex tried to recruit a woman who could have been of great assistance in saving the Earth...he was unable to convince her that protecting not just herself and her daughter, but everyone else as well, was more important than her personal anger with him for daring to ask her to step up and fulfill her responsibility to the rest of the human race." All this crap you say about the human race and saving it and the aliens? Was NOT in the episode.

Not that it would give him all the outrageous liberties you're endowing him with, anyway, because even if he did he still has no right to do this to the mutants or to Moira. He's kidnapping innocents that committed no crime. This "they're dangerous" crap by virtue of their identity means absolutely nothing, justifies nothing. It's tenuous, emotionally-driven witchhunting/scapegoating logic.

And this: "If Lex does, at some point, have to eliminate Chloe and/or Moira, I will not blame him -- he tried his best to save them, but he has greater responsibilities" is easily one of the most disturbing things I've ever read and seems straight out of a Third Reich propaganda handbook. Congratulations, you've succeeded in blowing my mind, so I'll just step out of this right now because I can't mask my disbelief and offense at this at. all.

The people in your concentration camp analogy have done no one any harm, yet they've been imprisoned and gratuitously tortured.

By contrast, the people Lex is holding on an ongoing basis have committed serious crimes; Moira is the only one I can think of who might not have been guilty of anything beyond abusing her daughter...at least, up until she sent Chloe to endanger Lex's life by running him off the road.

Moreover, I have seen no gratuitous torture of Lex's captives. He has tested them, certainly, and no doubt pressured some, when necessary, but not beyond reason; so far as I saw, he did nothing unreasonable to Moira. And there's been tagging and sampling of other mutants who were then immediately released (presumably these are the mutants who have not yet harmed anyone), but clearly these subjects are not badly hurt, either, since they're returned to their homes with no traumatic memories and, evidently, no lingering physical pain. Hardly torture. Admittedly, in Chloe's case, it seemed as if she were at least partially conscious during the sampling process, but she didn't strike me as being in physical pain, and I suspect her case was an anomaly, since no practical purpose would likely be served by deliberately keeping the test subjects awake, and Lex has never shown any inclination to pointless sadism. (It is possible that Chloe's particular mutation rendered the usual anaesthic ineffective.)

As for Lex's motivations, they seem perfectly clear to me, given everything he has seen and discovered in the course of the series. It is, of course, your prerogative to see them differently. Sorry to blow your mind.

The people in your concentration camp analogy have done no one any harm, yet they've been imprisoned and gratuitously tortured...

Actually, Hitler and the Nazi party would beg to differ. They believed that these groups *were* actually dangerous and had to be used or eliminated, their enemies and "people in their way" eliminated, and using some of your very lines of reasoning. That's the point. You're justifying all that Lex is doing (using motivations he rarely if ever vocalized, to boot) based on dehumanizing a group of people and reducing them to his objects/tools See where I'm going with this? Using the acts of a few people to justify condemning, using, and exploiting an entire group of people wholesale is unethical and logically fallacious. I don't buy your logic of collective punishment, scapegoating, and re: the entitlement that we should allow "enlightened" folk who've pinpointed the "problem" and have come up with a final "solution". I've not even been convinced of their end to be any where near convinced of their inhumane means. Designating someone the "savior" of the human race, the only entitled and enlightened one, that can do as he pleases based on tenuous evidence and emotionality rings close to a lot of dictators' views of themselves. Flouting hundrefs of years of law and justice, who is Lex to be judge, jury, executioner, and military?

If you don't see what's wrong with what Lex has done with the people he's holding prisoner or seized--people like that kid or Chloe who were minding their own business and a threat to no one--then I've really learned more than I needed to learn this morning about how and why unspeakable atrocities still continue in the world. Don't apologize, obviously I'm still knee-deep in naive, sitting here thinking we've progressed past the point where things like this are still vehemently defended and even supported.

I wasn't planning to apologize, since you're the only one who's chosen to be offensive.

The vast majority of mutants on SV have been demonstrably dangerous; even Chloe and Clark acknowledge this, hence their dismay at discovering that Chloe is a mutant, and Chloe referring to herself as a time bomb. Even so, Lex doesn't simply lock up every mutant he can find. He tags and samples them, yes, and leaves them to peacefully awaken in their own beds the next morning, with no traumatic memories or physical aftereffects, to go happily about their own lives. How is this torture? And how is Lex supposed to find anything to cure those who want/need to be cured unless he does study the problem?

Given what we have seen on SV, Lex has held no one long-term unless that person has committed crimes and poses a threat to the public. (Again, recall the mutant farmer who was merely observed from a distance until Lex discovered he'd been enslaving and killing his workers, at which point Lex ordered him captured.) Would you prefer that dangerous people run loose, instead, to create more victims? Are you advocating anarchy?

As for why Lex is the one doing these things, as opposed to someone else -- I say again that he is the only one who has seen the problem and stepped up to deal with it. You might as well ask who appointed Clark to rescue people. Like Lex, if he sees the need, he steps in. Does that make him 'evil' by your standards, as well? Clark has certainly killed, if that's where you draw your line, and he has contribued to many people being locked up, as well. The fact that he lacks the means to establish his own holding facility is hardly relevant.

The people in your concentration camp analogy have done no one any harm, yet they've been imprisoned and gratuitously tortured.

By contrast, the people Lex is holding on an ongoing basis have committed serious crimes; Moira is the only one I can think of who might not have been guilty of anything beyond abusing her daughter...at least, up until she sent Chloe to endanger Lex's life by running him off the road.

Moreover, I have seen no gratuitous torture of Lex's captives. He has tested them, certainly, and no doubt pressured some, when necessary, but not beyond reason; so far as I saw, he did nothing unreasonable to Moira. And there's been tagging and sampling of other mutants who were then immediately released (presumably these are the mutants who have not yet harmed anyone), but clearly these subjects are not badly hurt, either, since they're returned to their homes with no traumatic memories and, evidently, no lingering physical pain. Hardly torture. Admittedly, in Chloe's case, it seemed as if she were at least partially conscious during the sampling process, but she didn't strike me as being in physical pain, and I suspect her case was an anomaly, since no practical purpose would likely be served by deliberately keeping the test subjects awake, and Lex has never shown any inclination to pointless sadism. (It is possible that Chloe's particular mutation rendered the usual anaesthic ineffective.)

As for Lex's motivations, they seem perfectly clear to me, given everything he has seen and discovered in the course of the series. It is, of course, your prerogative to see them differently. Sorry to blow your mind.

Second of two posts.

Do I think Moira had a right to ask to see some evidence (like proof that the escapee was indeed a violent psychopath) before deciding Lex was sincere in his goals? Certainly...but she never bothered to ask. She clearly didn't care about seeing proof. She didn't care about innocent people getting hurt. She was perfectly prepared to let a psychopath roam the countryside, killing at will, rather than lift a finger to help -- and when Lex verbally pressed her on that point, she did her best to have him killed -- despite the fact that Lex had used no lethal force, and had threatened no lethal force. The worst he had done was to respond to her repeated lies and probable assault (via Chloe) by letting someone bat her around, just a little, and scare her a little more. (There's no doubt in my mind that the mutant Lex put her in with had already been ordered not to hurt her badly. There would, after all, be no point in killing her, especially if she could still be recruited.)

As for the initial offer Lex made Chloe, it was essentially a gift. Chloe has no right as a reporter to print a story for which she has no proof. She also has no right as a person to endanger the entire human race in order to settle a personal grudge. Lex has as yet done nothing worse to her than to reunite her with her mother, which was exactly what she'd wanted. (The fact that her mother slipped back into catatonia afterwards is not Lex's fault; he would have provided the medicine to keep her conscious if Moira had chosen to be even slightly cooperative.) Yet, for purely petty reasons, Chloe is willing to undermine Lex's efforts at readying the world for Armageddon -- and, yes, I do hold her responsible for that, even if she's too blind to see that that's just what she's doing.

In short, Lex tried to recruit a woman who could have been of great assistance in saving the Earth, but she turned out to be dangerously unbalanced and homicidal, and he was unable to convince her that protecting not just herself and her daughter, but everyone else as well, was more important than her personal anger with him for daring to ask her to step up and fulfill her responsibility to the rest of the human race.

If Lex does, at some point, have to eliminate Chloe and/or Moira, I will not blame him -- he tried his best to save them, but he has greater responsibilities. Or, to put it another way, when you can't fit everyone into the life boat, you get in as many as you can, and let the rest take their chances, because it's better that way than by overcrowding and sinking the boat and letting everyone drown.

and I found myself actually wanting Chloe to shoot him.

Me too. All season I've felt sort of a disconnect with Lex's character, but in this episode he was everything I had been saying I wanted him to be - scary, effective, villainous, for once not self-pitying - and I hated it. I didn't - don't? - hate Lex quite as much as Lionel in Asylum, but it's very close.

Even if his motivation isn't entirely selfish - which this episode thankfully did nothing to contradict - I can't agree with his methods. I just can't. Smallville's textual Lex is a sociopath. I didn't like that implication in "Reunion", but now I can't help but agreeing.

It was one of the best episodes of the season, though. I mean, it was extremely effective, so it has to be. But I'm not sure I can take watching a whole season of this Lex.

this episode he was everything I had been saying I wanted him to be - scary, effective, villainous, for once not self-pitying - and I hated it.

Oh, I know exactly what you mean. Be careful what you wish for, I guess.

I'm not sure I can take watching a whole season of this Lex.

Yeah. This is why I'm concerned about the way the Lexana went. If they had made it a real romance (rather than Lex, apparently, trapping her into marrying him by creating the fake pregnancy), at least we could have continued to see the human side of Lex and that would have made it somewhat easier to watch. This was just....awful. I don't WANT to hate Lex.

At the very least, we need some eps solidly from within his POV so we can at least understand his motives or something.

If I wanted to watch a whole season of this Lex, I would be watching "Dexter".

Lex needs a minion as a sound-off piece, so we can see what his motivation is. But it would have to be damn good to convince me to cut him some slack again. It would have to be smart and it would have to make sense.

Oh, a minion would be good. Maybe Mercy or Hope?

I'm rooting for Lana against Lex and Lionel too. But I think I retain the ability to totally love on Lex-the-villain since I spent much of this episode very happy that he is in this position--I just feel it's about damn time, and I liked the fact that it injected real tension between the protagonists--Chloe versus Lex? Awesome!

it's not the loss, it's how you deal with it
*nods* That's a good point, and a good reminder at this time.

Oh, sure, real tension. Dramatically, good, I get that.

(inner five year old)

WAAAH. I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO CHOOSE SIDES. I don't want Lex to be a big meanie! He was mean to Chloe's mommy! That's not nice!!!

(/inner five year old)

Clearly I'm too emo about this for actual analysis or anything. :D

Heeee hee! *pats* I know, I know, it's very hard. ;-)

Personally I'm enjoying feeling sympathy with Clark and not wanting to smack him upside the head any more. It feels refreshing to be on Team Good in Smallville these days. Especially sine I seem able to comfortably cheer Lex on as well--in that 'oh, Lex, you are my favouritest arch-villain ever' kind of way!'

Oh, yeah. Clark was great in this episode--especially the ending!

I wasn't all that thrilled with the mechanics of the A-plot, but overall I thought that this episode was truly excellent in a lot of really core, fundamental, Supermannish ways. Because the war is starting, and Clark was wonderful and warm and caring, and Lex was chilling and scary and excitingly bad. The two antagonists were exactly what they needed to be. Smallville needs a really strong villain, and Lex certainly has stepped up to the plate that had been occupied by Lionel in earlier seasons.

Oh, yes, they're definitely falling into their iconic roles right now, and that is good to see.

I've voiced my concerns for Lex's increased villainy before. And when I posted my own review, I really didn't address that, except to say how much he's becoming Lionel's son in that regard.

But I do think that he's becoming increasingly unsympathetic. And that worries me, considering how much I write him, try to crawl into his head. Any redemption for him now, if at all, will happen in DCU not in SV.

I surprised myself, I think, at how mad I got at Lex in this episode. Usually I can distance myself more and enjoy him being a badass.

I am so glad, I didn't miss this post of yours, despite hardly reading meta anymore.
its been a blast reading through the comments and replies by jakrar and juxtoppozed :D

very interesting points being raised, but I guess, as you said, there are not just oceans but probably universes between certain philosophical POVs.

Yes, that was quite a passionate debate, wasn't it? But I agree with you, there do seem to be universes between different people's POV on this subject.

Smallville 6.19 Progeny

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

reposting to fix typos

Re: reposting to fix typos

Re: reposting to fix typos

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Last post, really this time.

Re: Last post, really this time.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject