I don't know if this helped

[aruan]

I'm learning the importance of examining the premises closely before attempting to formulate a proper argument. Inherent flaws only make for spectacular steam-blowing. So, while I admit that I am dealing a grave injustice to the characters of Clark Kent and Lex Luthor as currently portrayed on the show Smallville, I will state that this was nonetheless written based on the assumptions that:

-Clark will become Superman
-Lex Luthor will become a villain of the ages

These may sound like foregone conclusions. I hope to convince you that there could well have been another way for things to play out, especially considering the canon Smallville is writing as we speak.


Is the existence of Superman a good thing? This probably isn't part of the mythology FAQ. Our glimmer of hope, our idealist beacon of truth and justice, our heaven-sent savior being called onto the moral carpet? Surely I'm either a heathen anarchist or have been woefully beseiged by the brain worms.

Work with me for a moment.

Clark wants to live among people. He wants to be involved with daily life as a human being, to feel a part of the world that's taken him in. Kryptonian or not, Clark Kent, human being is as valid an identity as Kal-El or Superman - in many ways even moreso. He was raised human, feels human emotions, has the same basic needs for companionship, chooses to take on the same real world problems that living in their world entails. Kal-El is a name from a long ago time in an even further away, a reminder of parents who made the ultimate sacrifice to give him a chance at life. Superman is a role he plays, as one-faceted as his clean-cut good guy image. He keeps the world safe for puppies and rainbows without any expectations of compensation.

So, how and why Superman?

Sane or not, there is a heck of a lot of cognitive dissonance that has to go on in the mind of anyone trying to maintain two separate lives. But even beyond that, living this double life and by necessity keeping half of it under constant smoke and mirrors secrecy puts an inherent strain on his personal relationships. Imagine not being able to completely open up to your friends, coworkers, maybe even your spouse if things were dire enough. Clark hasn't been and never will be completely honest with anyone in his life save his parents.

Which begs the question of why ever would you do that to yourself, Clark? What compels you to put on that ridiculous if ancestrally significant ensemble at any given moment of your life and fly to the selfless, valiant rescue? I've come up with a few. Let's go through them. I'll try to keep the sarcasm to a dull roar.

Clark harbors personal feelings of guilt over the ill effects of the meteor shower in which he landed. He feels that the deaths, the mutations, the general ill repute of the town is somehow his fault. Like wittier people than I have said, you'd think he was Catholic, not alien. I don't think this one merits a rebuke, and certainly not atonement by way of a futile, lifelong quest for forgiveness.

Clark harbors a personal desire to make use of the gifts he was given. On a purely personal note, this is the most plausible explanation from where I'm standing. If I were gifted with some ability (foresight, biochemical genius, superstrength) that could potentially better the world I live in, I would be very strongly compelled to use those abilities to the utmost effectiveness. The question we have to ask ourselves however is this: would Clark still choose to use his gifts for the purposes of Superman were he not aware that he was an alien, that he'd been "responsible" for the meteor shower? Even if things wouldn't change, what right does he have to judge? Imagine how quickly it can devolve into righteous crusading when one is that invincible?

Clark harbors a personal guilt complex the size of the Eurasian landmass instilled in him by the constant preachings of Jonathan Kent about destiny and "gifts" and the notion that he "owes" it to the world, to whoever gave him these gifts, to himself, and to mankind to use them for a higher purpose. Just thinking about this inspires such objective reactions as clawing at my hair and screaming in agonized frustration.

Clark harbors a personal need for validation and acceptance by his adoptive race, and the work of Superman allows him to receive that recognition and affirmation he's lacked all his life. I sincerely doubt the Kents have ever addressed Clark's powers as anything more than liabilities against himself. Wow. That's harsh in all kinds of growing to hate yourself because any slight misstep can be used to exploit you, land you under a scalpel, or worse. Through Superman, however, he can be out in the open, do everything he's had to fear about himself and have people love him for it, embrace him as a hero, idolize him like no football player's ever known.

Is Superman a mode of atonement? A noble attempt at doing the work others can't? An belated quest to fit in? What gets a person out of bed every morning to continually face the worst of mankind?

Don't get me wrong - I am all for being saved from the scum of the universe. General antipathies against certain facets of the human race aside, my survival instinct need not kick in to tell me that I do in fact like it here. But to expect that duty to fall on the shoulders of the last surviving member of a noble civilization who owes nothing more to this planet than any of us, and as much to each of its inhabitants as any other to her neighbor. Depending on your philosophy, that can mean a heck of a lot or nothing at all. But we have no right *expecting* him to take on this colossal, above-and-beyond task, and he doesn't owe using the fact of our yellow sun activating whatever laid dormant in his biology that makes him Super to do any of this "greater good" stuff for us.

To even have to consider the possibility that Clark was guilted into this role by just that fact sickens me. Especially when I consider what it's costing him to do it. Which brings me to...

Is Superman good for Clark Kent? Mostly no. The potential discovery of his life as Superman jeopardizes his own in every waking moment. Is Clark Kent good for Superman? Not in the least. Clark Kent is his weak spot - he has a life as a normal person, ties to the community, friends - these things can all be exploited to hurt or manipulate him. The former is actually be the weaker point because through the persona of Superman, Clark is receiving that validation he (on whatever level) needs. He doesn't have to hide for fear of exposure. There's finally a way he can do all those things Jonathan Kent has instilled in him ever since he was old enough to understand: he has gifts, an obligation to use them, and a destiny to live up to. Crock of shit? Entirely. Difference made to the black hole of guilt within Clark that sucks in everything he does and spits it out as yet another debt to pay off? None. I'm sure he can find a way to feel wrong about that woman killed in the subway by some deranged pickpocket while he was otherwise preoccupied saving that schoolbusful of nuns and schoolchildren. Rational? Left that behind about three exits ago on the Psychosis Freeway.

For the better or worse, Clark does eventually become Superman. But what about the yang to his blindingly stark yin?

While not broken, Lex Luthor comes to Smallville a visibly somber man. From his very first words we discern his uneasy relationship with his father, a man who we come to find out gave a copy of The Will to Power to his ten year-old son (Reaper), makes dinner a pop quiz occasion, and considers any display of emotion weakness. And by the way, he's been Lex's sole parental influence since his mother died when he was twelve years old and his caretaker was blackmailed into leaving. Notoriously rebellious in his early teenage years, bright enough for Yale's graduate-level biochemical engineering program, Lex Luthor is a wordly sore thumb exiled to Smallville's Plant No. 3 for some as yet undisclosed indiscretion.

His introduction into the Smallville setting was nothing less than a stroke of undisputable genius on the part of the show's creators, Gough and Millar. Lex Luthor has become the trump card in the Superman mythology. His presence here will shape his life and destiny as surely as Clark's own. He's never been a variable in the Clark to Superman equation until now, and I think he poses a question mark almost as large as Jonathan Kent himself.

While starting out at arguably opposite ends of the spectrum (black(er) and whit(er) respectively), Lex and Clark are both being painted in intriguing shades of gray.

There is a chance to change both their destinies here.

Lex need not become the uncaring, power-hungry mogul. He may be experienced in the methods of the world but he's still so young, and incredibly fragile in certain spots. Clark could get close enough to know him, to see the man he's had to keep from the world because he's "emotional," "cowardly," a "freak." But Lex would let Clark see, peeling away layer after layer of defenses and slung mud and insecurity together until there's nothing between them that they didn't create. That love didn't create. Clark could help him overcome his demons, slay the dragon of his father, make him the better, stronger man we know now who would ascend to lead with just methods and sound philosophy.

Clark need not exile himself only to turn into the tortured hero. All his life he's been told to keep secrets, never let people see him run fast or jump high, things kids idolize each other for at every age. He's had to live in constant fear of being discovered and what that could mean, the world around him cast in a shroud of lies, direct or by omission. But Lex is different too. He understands being marginalized. He knows the need for discretion intimately, has lived a life of half-truths and broken promises to the point where the you don't even know yourself, not with any certainty about where the shadows and pretense end and you begin. Perhaps Lex would love him even more for the truth, over which his own *parents* have expressed trepidation, fear, and distrust (Metamorphosis, X-Ray). He already loves Clark for the person he is, and I can't imagine him giving vivisection even an initial, curious scientist thought. He could assure Clark that his differences weren't a burden and he didn't have to let them define who he is. They would be there, but they aren't his life. He would protect Clark, allow him to live his life unhindered, out of the spotlight in the kind of freedom only money can buy. He could ground Clark, help him grow into a level-headed, healthy member of society, not some guilt-ridden megalomaniac.

Ready for more irony? I think that it's in fact Clark who jades Lex. Lex may have long ago been tainted by the repressed optimism, practiced cynicism, and instinctive pessimism philosophy of his father, but he's not broken. We've seen that, seen him stand up against his father to fight (literally: Hothead) for his own beliefs - Clark has a very real chance to show him a new world, a different world from the one he grew up in, a world his mother and Pamela both worked to instill a belief of in him that shows in his "emotional weakness," as Papa Luthor calls it. Lex befriends Clark, and if his anteceding gestures were slightly misguided, they were always well-meaning. (As far as something more, I think Lex is perfectly capable of effectively compartmentalizing any sexual attraction he may harbor toward Clark if it means preserving their friendship.) Lex seems to need Clark with an almost frighteningly pathological singularity. Everything else is relegated to personal distractions, business as usual put on hold, his own *life* laid on the line (Jitters) when Clark enters the picture. He's proven over and over that he wants to give Clark the world and the stars beyond, asking for nothing in return except Clark's friendship.

Let's examine that concept. What is friendship? Pared down to the essentials, it's state of mutual love and trust. Ladies and gentlemen, we have reached the crux of our dilemma, the reason why Clark Kent is doomed in a universe with Superman and the explanation behind a struggling boy's path taking the turn toward the Dark Side to become one of the most infamous men history has ever known. Lex as good as has proof that Clark lied to him, continues to lie to him every time he doesn't tell Lex the truth about that day on the bridge. From different incidents and sources, Lex has (or should've, giving his intelligence any credit at all) guessed at many of Clark's other abilities. In his obtuse little ways he keeps dropping opportunities for Clark to level with him, offering his own personal anecdotes in the hopes of some sort of reciprocation, offering anything Clark could want unconditionally (himself included - his staff has obviously been instructed to let him come and go freely on the manor grounds, and he's made it clear that his calls are to be patched through regardless of circumstance, his location to be triangulated to the hundreth of a degree and immediately given should he be out of the office.) Lex has opened up his home, his pocketbook, his heart so readily as to almost be viewed as disconcerting. Yet what does Clark, in his seemingly boundless oblivion do? He seems to take it all for granted (Hug, Crush, Reaper) - that is exempting the offers he foolishly refuses (Rogue) or thoughtlessly jumps at (Cool, Reaper). But the bottom line seems to be that Lex is a Being Other Than His Parents and therefore ultimately to be left as far out of the loop as he can manage (where is the platitude about 'believing in the best of people' and innocent until proven guilty, but I step out of line). He's effectively telling Lex that he's not worthy, that his love is not good enough to accept, much less reciprocate.

While a (tenuous) relationship can survive the Silence Of The Uncomfortable Questions, there's certainly no reconciling Clark being in Lex's life after Superman comes into existence. There is no good way to have any kind of relationship with someone (and this is on both counts if you subscribe to the canon where Lex is evil and is out to control the universe not for greater good plans but to serve as his own selfish Muppet show) who spends every waking moment out of your sight sabotaging your work. Superman will be the rift that finally breaks these two apart, but not the man so much as the reasons behind his coming about.

You see the tragedy is that, for whichever of the aforementioned reasons Superman comes about, his baseline will be Clark's lack of (inability to?) trust in Lex (specifically). Trust he never gave Lex a real chance to earn.

Just as jenn's brilliant A Handful of Dust gave us a world as controlled by a Clark who has had to make do without the faith of the one person he truly needed, the Superman canon will give us a world all but owned by a publicly adored Lex Luthor whose private methods leave something morally accountable to be desired. But being elected to the United States Presidency is still being elected to the United States Presidency, and that begs another fair question - why do the qualities of shrewdness, business know-how, and a seemingly infinitely adaptable wherewithall to land on one's feet get such a bad rap because Lex uses them to get ahead within the system *we* put in place? Do we know what he's working towards, have his goals to Do Bad Things been made clear? Has Lex actually gone out and intentionally tried to destroy the world? Being a scientist carries a certain degree of occupational hazard, but genuinely applying himself to the obliteration of all we know? Which includes himself, it should be duly noted. Or is he trying to gain the allegiance of the world, striving to build an empire that could benefit all its subjects? A world where poverty and homelessness are foreign concepts, where arms have been laid down a system that allows for mutual prosperity through cooperation? This world includes Clark, it merits pointing out. I smell alloy, I smell steel, smell the villain's Achille's Heel, and it is his love of his archnemesis's alter-ego.

The irony here is that by saving this one man, by redeeming him and standing by him when he had the chance to break from everything he'd known, Clark wouldn't have needed to make the choice between the woman on the subway and those kids on the schoolbus because Lex could do it without lifting a single (un)superpowered finger. And not by coercion or bribes or strategic assassinations or power bids either, but using the business methods and connections and capitalist Risk he plays so well now; with Clark by his side he could own the whole of the world with the deed signed by every one of its citizens because he could make it work. I don't see Clark having any sort of success resembling that, and not just because of people's ostensibly decrying him as a false deity behind his back. At best, he's a one-man insurance policy for the bigger things that happen, the stranger things that come along. At worst, he's a liability with a messiah complex running loose and uncheckable to dole out what he deems to be justice. What does Clark have on his side? Brute strength. What does Lex have? Diplomacy. Government. The power to change things, not just plug up the leaks. What do they both need? The one person who truly understands willing to stand by their side and believe in their work and help them make it a thousand times grander.

Hypothetically, could Lex do anything to prevent the creation of Superman? I don't know. I don't know if the mutual strengths they could draw upon, from within themselves as well as the other, could be enough to keep either one from fulfilling their fathers' expectations of them, from becoming victims of their individual self-fulfilling prophecies. However, in the end it comes down to Clark not giving Lex the chance to change both their destinies.


Sigh. There sounds to be much too much chirping still going on for all the stones I've cast here. I'm not even sure this helped to straighten things out for the four-hour zombie fic it was written for.

Thanks to Miranda for helping me sort through some of this stuff, as well as bringing up interesting points (instead of just thwapping me upside the head) regarding a few preconceived notions I really ought to know better about.

Comments

[walkingshadow.livejournal.com]

Lots of thinking done here, and excellent coherence -- especially given the many threads and infinite possibilities. Pity that canon and the show seem to be taking the least rational and most heartbreaking of all of them, but that's a diatribe for another day.

The irony here is that by saving this one man, by redeeming him and standing by him when he had the chance to break from everything he'd known, Clark wouldn't have needed to make the choice between the woman on the subway and those kids on the schoolbus because Lex could do it without lifting a single (un)superpowered finger. And not by coercion or bribes or strategic assassinations or power bids either, but using the business methods and connections and capitalist Risk he plays so well now; with Clark by his side he could own the whole of the world with the deed signed by every one of its citizens because he could make it work. I don't see Clark having any sort of success resembling that, and not just because of people's ostensibly decrying him as a false deity behind his back. At best, he's a one-man insurance policy for the bigger things that happen, the stranger things that come along. At worst, he's a liability with a messiah complex running loose and uncheckable to dole out what he deems to be justice. What does Clark have on his side? Brute strength. What does Lex have? Diplomacy. Government. The power to change things, not just plug up the leaks. What do they both need? The one person who truly understands willing to stand by their side and believe in their work and help them make it a thousand times grander.

Yes. And, yes. And also, yes.

The best and most satisfying stories have the protagonists end up changed for the better by each other's presence and influence, and there's a really, really long and rabid rant in here somewhere, but let's just say for now that I agree *whole-heartedly.* They complement each other, they save each other, they temper and create each other. They will be each other's mitigating factor and saving grace. The Clark Kent/Superman dynamic is a dangerous and complex one, for all the reasons that you've pointed out and then some, but Lex can make it work, and I've got fifty reasons why; but it's four in the morning, so you won't be getting them now, though you can probably fill them in.

For examples in fic remember Te's Past Grief and definitely check out Justine's Sanguinarium: "If you can find out who the hands are," Clark says, "I can stop them."

Good luck with the 4HZF; if you need any help figuring out what exactly they're trying to do, you know my number, and I live to serve.

[i-have-dreams.livejournal.com]

Dude, I just want to win the lottery.

money is fun

[gjstruthseeker.livejournal.com]

But Lex and Clark do that priceless happy thing for me.
If not one then the other, eh?

[gjstruthseeker.livejournal.com]

Do you think puzzling out what others are trying to do when you yourself are a long way from even deciding whether you prefer the land or sea is a smart idea? Sometimes I feel much further down the evolutionary ladder than would allow me higher brain functions. Speculation and what if?s and chaos theory and infinite possibility and potential and humanity are all making my head spin. Writing futurefic is not for the faint of heart.

Thanks for the great lunch and standing offer. Lots of helpful. I really must've missed something in Past Grief. Te is occasionally responsible for my mindsickness as well.


I love a good double meaning. ;)