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.
no subject
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.