?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Mama Deb
mamadeb
.:::.:....... ..::...:
Mama Deb [userpic]
Smallville thoughts



Lionel Luther as sexually abusing Lex -

Yes, I've played with the idea in my own fic, and we all cringe when Lionel touches Lex. Or Clark, for that matter, but I've never thought of it as more than fanon. It's a common enough idea in any fandom with a father we hate - XFiles, Harry Potter, The Sentinel to some degree, the fanon view of Tom Paris' father the admiral, and you don't get a worse father than Lionel, so it makes sense.

But after this last episode, I can believe it. We have confirmation that Lionel is a sociopath, a man willing to kill his parents for the insurance money, and not seeing anything wrong with that. This is a man who does not know or care about right and wrong. Okay, we probably could have figured that out from other things he's done - not least being consigning his younger son to an upbringing that makes Harry Potter's look idyllic.

This is a man whom I can believe would use a child sexually without guilt or remorse.

But there are two sides to that, and Lex provided the other. His prime motivation? To get his father to love him. He knows right from wrong, broken though he is. He knows what the right things are, even if he isn't sure how to to do them. This keeps him, for the moment, from doing things blatantly wrong. Yes, I think that can change. :(

But a twelve year old boy who has just lost his mother? If Lionel's having sex with him would get him a moment or two of affection, he'd let him do it.

This still doesn't mean it happened. Lionel may well have no sexual interest in twelve year old boys and he already had the boy under his control. But after this episode, I think it's possible. And it's scary.

As for Chloe - what she did was terrible. I'm not trying to defend her. Much. But she didn't mean to "out" the football player. She was as surprised as everyone else at his answer. She was, however, trying to stir up trouble between him and his girlfriend.

What Chloe had was a wonderful, new shiny *toy*. And it's the greatest toy ever - it's a gift to a journalist. People can't hide from her anymore, unless they physically hide. And she doesn't have to dig or investigate. They just *tell* her. That's intoxicating. And that's exactly how she acted - giddy and drunk with this ability.

And she ruined the life and career of a fine teacher and tore about her family. She probably caused a great deal of hurt to that football player, and probably to the young man of his affections even if he doesn't return them. She hurt that cheerleader (and is it such a big revelation that it's hard to cheer for a losing team?). And she herself...

No one was helped by this truth. No one at all.

Blink. Blink. Blink.

Was that the message of the episode? That truth is bad and some secrets (powers, homosexuality, honest feelings, something done years in the past) should be kept?

Comments

I don't think it's so much that they should be kept, as respecting other people's property.

I don't think that the message was that truth is bad. I think the message was that someone's personal truth should be respected as belonging to that person. IOW, I can tell people that I'm queer, or have powers, or whatever, or I can choose to keep it a secret. However, that's personal, not public information, and the choice should be mine to make.

I think that the issue with the teacher's truth didn't really belong with the rest of them. In some ways, that part of the story showed the other side of the message. The teacher broke the law and someone died as a result. Maybe it was years ago, and maybe she's a fine teacher, but that doesn't mean that she shouldn't have to account for what she did. That's not private information.

Yes, maybe publishing the information ruined the family, but it's not a private secret in the same way as homosexuality.

So, maybe the lesson or message or whatever it was dealt more with journalistic ethics, and figuring out what is public information and what is private information.

No one was helped by this truth. No one at all.

Blink. Blink. Blink.

Was that the message of the episode? That truth is bad and some secrets (powers, homosexuality, honest feelings, something done years in the past) should be kept?


I think that's one possible message, and it would be Clark's message at this stage of his life: truth is bad, only secrets & silence can keep you safe.

But look at it from another point of view: as someone pointed out (on happyminion's LJ IIRC), Chloe is only interested in uncovering other people's secrets, she doesn't look at the big secret in her own life, the loss of her mother. For her, uncovering secrets gives her power over other people.

Lex is the other person in the ep who wants to uncover secrets, to seek out truth. But he's looking for secrets and truth about *himself*. As long as other people know things about him that he himself doesn't know, they have power over him.

This is an example of why I think that, at this point in Clark's character development, he isn't a hero yet, he's an *anti-villain*. He's not standing for Truth&Justice, but for Lies, Secrets, & Silence. Lex, who is seeking self-knowledge and who is not afraid to speak with TruthSerumBreath!Chloe, is not the villain, he's the anti-hero struggling against the forces of untruth -- which in this ep include both Clark and Chloe, both of whom directly refuse to tell him what happened in the Lost Weeks, both of whom tell him ignorance is bliss.