Bad Lex... Is Clark To Blame?

[Lex's Love]

Aah, sarcasm. Where would we be without it? I'll tell you what. I'll follow my original instinct and stick to the other threads. All I did was explain why I got upset before and give my opinion on the subject which I thought this thread was for and you've managed to turn it into a joke. You don't even know me dude so keep your attitude to yourself.

[johnny fogg]

No no, just so everybody knows her point was valid and it was no joke.

Lionel has had as much a hand in Lex's downfall as Clark, probably more.

[Lex's Love]

ok, just for the record. I may have (and most likely did) take what was said before the wrong way. I apologize and would really like for the conversation of Lex's downfall to continue in peace.

Yes, I agree. Although Clark plays a major role, Lionel's part is far more than Clarks ever has been.

[x0SVfAnx0]

if clark had told lex his secret would he have turned bad?

clark constantly lies to lex about his secret and this drives lex to do all sorts of things to find out the secret behind clark......if clark hadnt lied to him and told him would lex have turned bad?

[Kristin's Admirer]

I reckon so as it hasnt really been tryin to find Clark's secret thats drove him bad its been other things like his father. If Lex knew the truth then he'd have Clark doing all sorts of things like assassination and quickly running to the shop to get his scotch, if the 'Im your mate' guilt trip wouldnt work he'd then resort to threatenin to expose him as thats who Lex is deep inside

[goldylocks_k]

Yeh he would have still gone evil.

[The Outlaw]

there's a similar discussion in the forum going on about this topic, check it out for some opinions on your question

http://www.kryptonsite.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=43523

[dexterfan]

i think that clark is part of the reason that lex turned.
that' s just my opinion

[SuperDub2]

Originally posted by Kristin's Admirer
I reckon so as it hasnt really been tryin to find Clark's secret thats drove him bad its been other things like his father. If Lex knew the truth then he'd have Clark doing all sorts of things like assassination and quickly running to the shop to get his scotch, if the 'Im your mate' guilt trip wouldnt work he'd then resort to threatenin to expose him as thats who Lex is deep inside

i agree with you 100% and it actually bothers me to hear people blaming clark! he had every right to not tell him and i believe he was 100% right.

You are a product of your environment with some personality thrown and he hasnt had a very good environment but i tink if he wasnt a luthor hen he wudnt be a bad boy.

[Dannyblue1]

If Clark had told Lex his secret early on, I think it would've totally changed the outcome of the story. The only thing standing between Clark and Lex has been the secret. Without it, they would've forged a friendship that would be pretty hard to break. Having Clark trust him, not being lied to constantly by his best friend, there's no way Lex would be as close to darkness as he is now.

Also, I think Lex would've protected Clark and the secret. We've seen how far Lex is willing to go to protect others. (In "Memoria", "Zero", countless other episodes.) And I think that same need to protect would've applied to Clark. Heck, Lex has gone out of his way to protect Clark even without knowing the secret. If anything, knowing the secret (and having a better relationship with Clark) would've just made him more protective.

And, considering how Lex is, I think he would've becoming downright obsessive about proving himself worthy of the secret Clark entrusted him with, which would mean not exploiting it.

[SteveS]

Nope

These type of threads are always fascinating to me in observing the extent to which self-delusion is possible with people.

No, most emphatically 'no' to the original question. Lex has a troubled background, a troubled present and a much more dangerous and malicious future. (the wishful thinkers always ignore Cassandra's vision)

Lex was never Clark's best friend, that was Pete. Lex took an inordinate interest in Clark after Clark saved Lex's life. He is much older than Clark, comes from an immoral or amoral values system, and a wealthy versus working class background. They could never share enough common ground to be 'best friends.' Lex pursued the 'secret' of Clark for a number of reasons, but none of them altrusitic.

These kinds of questions show just how easily it is for some to be seduced by wealth and charm. Oddly, and it certainly is non-pc, females seem to be in the majority in pushing these fantasies. Possibly it is similar to how groupies are formed.

Whatever, no, Lex would be vastly more dangerous to anyone and everyone close to Clark had he known the secret. Lex lost the battle to be good when his mother died and he was left to be reared by Lionel. ClarkMan is in no way guilty of Lex's evil or criminality. No 'best friend' ever is so guilty, it is the individual themself that makes their own choices, based upon their values and interests. Lex values himself, power and money.

[Dannyblue1]

Re: Nope

Originally posted by SteveS
These type of threads are always fascinating to me in observing the extent to which self-delusion is possible with people.

No need to be insulting.

No, most emphatically 'no' to the original question. Lex has a troubled background, a troubled present and a much more dangerous and malicious future. (the wishful thinkers always ignore Cassandra's vision)

I'd hate to think having a troubled background means you are just doomed. People pull themselves up from traumatic, abusive childhoods all of the time. And that was exactly what Lex had been trying to do for most of the series.

As for Cassandra's vision, what she saw was a result of the life we've seen Lex leading on SV, namely Clark not telling Lex his secret, lying to him constantly, accusing him of everything but being the other shooter on the grassy knoll, etc. But it's possible Cassandra's vision would've been different if Lex's and Clark's relationship had been different.

Lex was never Clark's best friend, that was Pete. Lex took an inordinate interest in Clark after Clark saved Lex's life. He is much older than Clark, comes from an immoral or amoral values system, and a wealthy versus working class background. They could never share enough common ground to be 'best friends.' Lex pursued the 'secret' of Clark for a number of reasons, but none of them altrusitic.

I totally disagree about people from different backgrounds being unable to be friends. Some of the closest friendships I've seen were between opposites.

As for Lex pursuing Clark's secret, it may not have been purely altruistic (then again, who among us does anything purely out of altruism) but it wasn't malicious, either. Lex didn't want to know Clark's secret to hurt him in some way. He didn't even have reason to believe Clark's secret would benefit him somehow. He just wanted to know to know.

Lex is pathologically curious. He can't seem to help wanting to find out the truth, and Clark was hiding the biggest truth of all. And most of the truth he wanted to find out he didn't even know involved Clark directly.

These kinds of questions show just how easily it is for some to be seduced by wealth and charm. Oddly, and it certainly is non-pc, females seem to be in the majority in pushing these fantasies. Possibly it is similar to how groupies are formed.

More insults. A groupie? Come on!

You're saying my opinions are what they are because I'm blinded by Lex's wealth and charm? No, they are what they are based on an analysis of his character, and what I've deduced based on what the writers/producers have said onscreen and off. AlMiles themselves have said Lex might have ended up differently if those around him (including the Kents) had treated him differently. Based on that statement, I can theorize that Lex being told the secret would have had a profound effect not only on his relationship with Clark, but on how he ultimately turns out.

My opinions might also come from watching 12 years of BtVS/ANGEL, where no one is beyond redemption, everyone deserves a second chance, and no one's destiny is set in stone. (And even the higher--and lower--powers only have ideas about what might or might not happen.)

Whatever, no, Lex would be vastly more dangerous to anyone and everyone close to Clark had he known the secret. Lex lost the battle to be good when his mother died and he was left to be reared by Lionel. ClarkMan is in no way guilty of Lex's evil or criminality. No 'best friend' ever is so guilty, it is the individual themself that makes their own choices, based upon their values and interests. Lex values himself, power and money. [/B]

Number one, to say Lex was lost to the darkness the day his mother died is a bit extreme. You could say that if Lex had embraced Lionel's philosophy on that day, but we've seen on SV that that wasn't the case. Man, you seem to be dooming any child with a traumatic past to darkness and heartache, with no hope of ever finding happiness.

Also, no one's saying Clark is responsible for Lex's downfall, but he is certainly (as the producers and TW have said) a contributing factor.

[SteveS]

"Also, no one's saying Clark is responsible for Lex's downfall, but he is certainly (as the producers and TW have said) a contributing factor."

Assuming that is an accurate rendition of what the producers and TW have said, it shows how out of touch Hollyweird is with reality.

This above thread like the one where a poster took a similar tack with Jonathan both try to foist Lex's character development off onto a neighbor, not the self, parent, or anyone close at hand. And it is silliness in the extreme. If my neighbor doesn't say 'hi' to me daily, smile and wave and I choose to rob a bank, it is my neighbor's fault? Of course not, that would be a stupid concept.

In like manner, the desire of many fans to have Clark share his secret is the height of immaturity. The more that are in the know, the greater the danger to Clark and anyone closely associated with him. For every 'lie' that Clark tells Lex in order to keep his reality a secret, Lex tells lies for personal gain. (the little cancer healing possiblity from a character last season).

People can improve themselves if they have the right core inner values. Lex doesn't have those or they are too few and too weak to compensate for his corrupt character, suave though he is. It is the values that cause the change and Clark telling Lex that he is an alien from Krypton would have no effect on Lex's core values of greed for power, pleasure, 'greatness', all devoid of ethics. Clark's ethics of saving lives without asking for reward or greatness can no and will not rub off on Lex.

So, if the producers and TW have said that Clark not telling him 'the secret' contributes to Lex's downfall, it merely shows their philosophy is in sync with one that tends to blame the victim, not the criminal, for the criminal's actions. Silly on a child's level, unjust and stupid on an adult level, as a philosophy.

[Dannyblue1]

Originally posted by SteveS
Assuming that is an accurate rendition of what the producers and TW have said, it shows how out of touch Hollyweird is with reality.

What's out of touch about it? It's a proven fact that the things that happen to a person, how they are treated by others, etc., has an effect on that person.

This above thread like the one where a poster took a similar tack with Jonathan both try to foist Lex's character development off onto a neighbor, not the self, parent, or anyone close at hand. And it is silliness in the extreme. If my neighbor doesn't say 'hi' to me daily, smile and wave and I choose to rob a bank, it is my neighbor's fault? Of course not, that would be a stupid concept.

That's a weird comparison to make. There's a difference between how you are treated by people you barely know, and how you are treated by someone you consider your closest friend, and admire so much that his opinion of you has a huge effect on your psyche.

And no one is blaming Jonathan or Clark for the choices Lex will make. But they are what a psychologist would call contributing factors. For example, most of the people in jail for violent crimes were abused as children. Does the fact that they were abused as children mean they shouldn't be held responsible for their crimes? No way. But that abuse definately contributed to how they turned out.

Or, take a more mundane example. A man is in love with a woman. They dated for a while but, eventually, she realized she didn't love him, and sought happiness with someone else. As a result, the man swears off love, withdraws from friends and family, and spends the rest of his life alone. Is she to blame for not being able to love him and falling in love with someone else. Certainly not. But her not being to blame doesn't mean she didn't effect the rest of that man's life. Not her fault, just how human beings work.

No one in Lex's life (not Clark, Jonathan, etc.) was obligated to give Lex friendship and support. Or even to be nice to him, for that matter. But, if they had, that could've effected Lex in a positive way. The fact that, instead, they gave him distrust and suspicion, effected Lex in a negative way. Logical cause and effect.

In like manner, the desire of many fans to have Clark share his secret is the height of immaturity. The more that are in the know, the greater the danger to Clark and anyone closely associated with him. For every 'lie' that Clark tells Lex in order to keep his reality a secret, Lex tells lies for personal gain. (the little cancer healing possiblity from a character last season).

I have never said, nor do I believe, Clark has ever been obligated to tell his secret. No one deserves to know anyone else's private business. I do believe that Clark telling Lex the secret early on would have completely changed their friendship in a positive way. But I don't hold it against Clark that he didn't.

People can improve themselves if they have the right core inner values. Lex doesn't have those or they are too few and too weak to compensate for his corrupt character, suave though he is. It is the values that cause the change and Clark telling Lex that he is an alien from Krypton would have no effect on Lex's core values of greed for power, pleasure, 'greatness', all devoid of ethics. Clark's ethics of saving lives without asking for reward or greatness can no and will not rub off on Lex.

Once again, for me, it isn't about Clark not telling Lex his secret. That's almost a minor, "what if" type thing. The real issue is the kind of friend Clark has (or hasn't) been to Lex.

I’m not saying Lex is or ever was a saint. He’s made mistakes from the beginning, because Lionel taught him to do things a certain way. But that doesn’t mean he couldn’t have grown out of that behavior, and learned to think a different way, if he’d had the right support. It takes time to unlearn a lifetime of conditioning. Having good examples to follow doesn't hurt. Like I said earlier, people with abusive and/or traumatic backgrounds do pull themselves up and find success and happiness. But they don’t do it alone. They have help, support. There are people in their lives who want to help them, try to show them a better way, and stick by their side even when they make mistakes (which they are bound to do because of their backgrounds, and certain ingrained behaviors and thought processes that it can take years to change). And that’s the kind of support Lex has never had.

If Lex had arrived in Smallville and found someone who would trust him, support him, stand by him, forgive him, etc., his story would have taken a different tack. For a time, it looked like Clark would be that person. But, as it turned out, Clark wasn’t capable of filling that role. Which isn’t really Clark’s fault. It’s not his job to save Lex. But, if Clark had been the kind of friend Lex really needed, would Lex be teetering on the edge of darkness now? I don’t think so.

In fact, I think anyone giving Lex that kind of support would’ve made a huge difference. Clark is just one of the many people that didn’t.

So, if the producers and TW have said that Clark not telling him 'the secret' contributes to Lex's downfall, it merely shows their philosophy is in sync with one that tends to blame the victim, not the criminal, for the criminal's actions. Silly on a child's level, unjust and stupid on an adult level, as a philosophy.

They didn't say Clark not telling the secret contributed to Lex's downfall. They said the way people treat Lex, and the fact that Clark hasn't been the kind of friend Lex needed, is the key. Which I think is true.

[superman05]

i think all the lies that have surrounded lex have made him the person he will finaly become and clark not telling him the truth hasnt helped him one bit