Smallville's Lex: destined to fall?
I've always argued that Lex must inevitably fall on "Smallville". What is fascinating about Lex is 'how' his journey towards evil has evolved.
I recall plenty of posts on message boards throughout the Net whose authors absolutely, positively couldn't bear that Lex Luthor (historically, Superman's nemesis) was going to become bad.
The question I asked then was: why should a character as great as Lex become just another sidekick, or do-gooder Scoobie (ie Buffy the Slayer's team of talented ... and not-so-talented gang of lackeys). It would be a waste of character potential.
It's evident that Lex on Smallville was written to travel a parallel journey to Clark's -- though they would be going on opposite directions. Each had a path to greatness, but what that 'greatness' entailed was unknown to them at Season One.
I'm confident that by the end of Season Four, no one will be able to argue that Lex cannot fall. That doesn't mean he was bad since Day One, or damned by birth. On the contrary, Lex has made many conscious choices along the way. While the lack of support/trust from people like Lionel, Jonathan Kent and especially Clark Kent have all contributed to Lex's eventual fall, he is not a robot. I can't accept the theory that Lex is a mere observer to all the mishaps that affect him -- as if any Luthor could be just a puppet of other peoples' whims and motivations.
Because of his Luthor heritage (or, in spite of, depending on your spin), Lex had choices. He's made them, and -one day- he will have to live with their consequences. I've read the Lex apologists' arguments that seem to absolve Lex of just about everything he's ever done ... and they're quite prepared to blame his mental break in 'Shattered' and/or Clark's lack of faith in him for Lex's subsequent bad behaviour.
If we're going to argue that Lex's character goes through emotions and conflicts that other human beings go through, that means he must also cope with the responsibilities of free will. His Luthor background is an aggravating factor, but any "Law and Order" fan will tell you that just having a screwed-up family life doesn't necessarily mean that you're not guilty.
Has Lex had opportunities to steer clear of the path that would lead to his fall? Yes, he has and he has, on occasion, resisted those darker impulses. Smallville, however, is not re-inventing the entire wheel, and some parts of the Superman legend remain intact. It's doubtful Smallville's producers were going to make Lex Luthor just 'one of the gang'.
Both Clark and Lex have been on journeys of discovery: about themselves, their values and their destinies. Lex said their friendship would be "the stuff of legends". We knew it was never meant to be, but neither Clark nor Lex recognized that. The tragedy in Smallville is that their friendship could have been saved.
If either of them were more willing to compromise on values that define them (Clark's sense of justice, Lex's ambition), they just might have had a workable -imperfect- friendship. On a show where Clark would one day embody the best of humanity, such compromise was not to be.
The powers-that-be could be faulted for other issues, but on the divergent paths of Clark Kent and Lex Luthor they seem to have a clear vision.
For Clark to seize the mantle of heroism, Lex -as his foil and counterpoint- will have to choose his own, opposing path. On this fundamental theme of destiny, there could never be any compromise.
I recall plenty of posts on message boards throughout the Net whose authors absolutely, positively couldn't bear that Lex Luthor (historically, Superman's nemesis) was going to become bad.
The question I asked then was: why should a character as great as Lex become just another sidekick, or do-gooder Scoobie (ie Buffy the Slayer's team of talented ... and not-so-talented gang of lackeys). It would be a waste of character potential.
It's evident that Lex on Smallville was written to travel a parallel journey to Clark's -- though they would be going on opposite directions. Each had a path to greatness, but what that 'greatness' entailed was unknown to them at Season One.
I'm confident that by the end of Season Four, no one will be able to argue that Lex cannot fall. That doesn't mean he was bad since Day One, or damned by birth. On the contrary, Lex has made many conscious choices along the way. While the lack of support/trust from people like Lionel, Jonathan Kent and especially Clark Kent have all contributed to Lex's eventual fall, he is not a robot. I can't accept the theory that Lex is a mere observer to all the mishaps that affect him -- as if any Luthor could be just a puppet of other peoples' whims and motivations.
Because of his Luthor heritage (or, in spite of, depending on your spin), Lex had choices. He's made them, and -one day- he will have to live with their consequences. I've read the Lex apologists' arguments that seem to absolve Lex of just about everything he's ever done ... and they're quite prepared to blame his mental break in 'Shattered' and/or Clark's lack of faith in him for Lex's subsequent bad behaviour.
If we're going to argue that Lex's character goes through emotions and conflicts that other human beings go through, that means he must also cope with the responsibilities of free will. His Luthor background is an aggravating factor, but any "Law and Order" fan will tell you that just having a screwed-up family life doesn't necessarily mean that you're not guilty.
Has Lex had opportunities to steer clear of the path that would lead to his fall? Yes, he has and he has, on occasion, resisted those darker impulses. Smallville, however, is not re-inventing the entire wheel, and some parts of the Superman legend remain intact. It's doubtful Smallville's producers were going to make Lex Luthor just 'one of the gang'.
Both Clark and Lex have been on journeys of discovery: about themselves, their values and their destinies. Lex said their friendship would be "the stuff of legends". We knew it was never meant to be, but neither Clark nor Lex recognized that. The tragedy in Smallville is that their friendship could have been saved.
If either of them were more willing to compromise on values that define them (Clark's sense of justice, Lex's ambition), they just might have had a workable -imperfect- friendship. On a show where Clark would one day embody the best of humanity, such compromise was not to be.
The powers-that-be could be faulted for other issues, but on the divergent paths of Clark Kent and Lex Luthor they seem to have a clear vision.
For Clark to seize the mantle of heroism, Lex -as his foil and counterpoint- will have to choose his own, opposing path. On this fundamental theme of destiny, there could never be any compromise.
posted by President Luthor at 5:31 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home