?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
17 February 2007 @ 07:18 pm
6.15 Smallville Freak  
Ugh. What a day. We're on the third day of above-35 degree weather and it's stiflingly dry. I don't cope well
in the heat and apparently neither does my ISP, since it was down for most of today. The good news though is the Bob Bob is eating the stew I made him and had his first walk in the park today (he likes other small dogs but takes great offence at skateboarders).

Anyway, it's taken me a while to untangle my feelings about this latest Smallville episode.

Michael plays director
First things first, I think Michael did a great job of directing. I enjoyed seeing his innovations with the camera work, though he definitely strayed from the fixed-camera Smallville standard. Where I really think he excelled was in coaxing great performances from his co-stars, particularly Allison Mack, who has been seriously underwhelming me this season. The scene in which Clark removed the chip from her was incredibly tense and she completely sold me on it--it's some of the best acting I've seen from her ever. And Michael is evidently very good at directing himself. ;-) In the few scenes he was in, his A-game was definitely on, and his delivery was gorgeous. Bet he was loving being unencumbered by external direction since he's clearly got a very clear idea about how he wants to deliver Lex's lines!

I particularly loved Lex's outburst at Dr Bethany when he came to tell him that his laptop had been 'misplaced'. It's always fun seeing Lex take refuge in humour and deadpan delivery: 'sounds like a real blunder, doctor'. But when the real threat to Luthorcorp was made apparent, Lex shifted just as easily into true indignation with the chilly 'I don't tolerate loose ends, doctor'. The threat to Tobias felt really chilling, though I have no idea what Lex intended. I was really hoping we'd get to see those two interact as I wanted to know if Lex appeared as a meteorfreak to Tobias. Alas that was too much to hope for! In fact, his threat prompted Dr Bethany to kill Tobias--and I'm foggy on whether that's what he intended or not. (Luckily Dr Bethany doesn't know the first rule of fighting blind people--stay quiet, dickhead!)

Despite the lack of clarity on that point, I was pleased overall at learning more about what stage Lex is at vis a vis his meteor rock research. It would make sense if he is indeed building an army that he would be searching for meteor freaks, but this episode also dealt with the question of what he does with the ones who are not deemed 'useful'. It is convincing that he would 'dispose' of them: both because he despises them and because he wants complete and absolute control (he certainly wouldn't want to leave the possibility of them aiding Clark). We also Lex using a man whose wife was murdered by meteor freaks--the doctor is clear-sighted about Lex's true motives but he's still manipulated by him. This is what Lex is starting to excel at: manipulating people despite themselves by preying on their own deepest and darkest fears/urges.

Tobias and truth-seeing
I thought Tobias was a very interesting creation. As someone that can identify meteor freaks, he is an incredibly powerful force within Smallville. In this episode he revealed the truth to three characters with very significant consequences:
- he tells Clark that Chloe is meteor-infected
- he tells Lana that Clark is NOT meteor-infected, and
- he tells Clark that Lana thought he was meteor-infected.
Should we suspect Tobias? It is possible that he could lie, because it's hard to prove the 'truth' of what he sees. However, his statements were played as genuine and sincere. It seems unlikely that he was lying. Tobias also pronounces Clark 'the most normal guy I ever met'. If we take Tobias's word, he appears 'ultra-normal'. At some level that makes sense, because Kryptonite only ever has a temporary hold on him--would he look different at those times? I assume so.

Lana's progression
Lana's growing obsession with the 'mystery of Clark Kent' continues. It's worth reflecting that for for so long Lana remained at surface level infatuation with Clark, a level which Lex blasted through very swiftly. She's finally following in Lex's footsteps in transferring the focus of her obsession (and love) onto the mystery beneath the surface. She's now in the stage where she firmly believes that Clark is 'special'--she's convinced herself that he's a meteor freak, but one who uses his powers benevolently. And, like Lex before her, she's willing to protect him by using the resources at her disposal both generously and manipulatively. She offers Tobias a cornea transplant with no strings attached if he'll cover for Clark.

As with Lex before her, just when Lana thinks she's stumbled on definitive proof of Clark's secret, a counterargument is produced: Tobias tells her that Clark's normal. This has echoes of Lex seeing Clark get injured just when he was sure he'd proven his invulnerability. The bullet was another echo of revelations past--very similar to the bullets that Lionel may or may not have seen Clark shoot into his own hand.
Lana was very Lexian in her approach to Clark, confronting him with the evidence of the mystery (the bullet, in this case) and waiting to see how he would lie to her. And of course he does--far more confidently than he used to lie to Lex. The practice has paid off!

Lana's 'you'd still be the same Clark Kent' line was confronting to Clark because he'd always feared that she would hate him as a freak. But he's forgetting the real reason he broke up with her--that his secret endangers her. From Lana's perspective this line is still naive--mainly beccause she's still missing the mark. She doesn't know that he's not a meteor freak, but an alien. Though it's just as likely that she'll change her view on aliens to fit Clark into the picture. However, it remains to be seen whether she can keep either secret successfully--the 'fake' truth she thinks she's uncovered or the real truth--Reckoning showed that she couldn't hide the truth from Lex, and she's even closer to him than ever.

Lana notices that Lex's interest in what happened to Chloe is peculiar. And I think it's that that first triggers Lana's suspicion about the abduction. When Chloe then appears a little cagey about discussing the abduction, she suggests that Chloe thinks Lex had something to do with it. There's a little bit of transference there, I think, since Lana herself is suspicious. Lana knows that Lex is lying to her.

There was some clumsy writing in this episode--the worst instance being having Lana espouse a benevolent view of meteor freaks before it was made clear to the audience that she'd changed her tune only because she suspects Clark of being one now. While that was certainly something I'd been wondering if we'd see happen, there wasn't a clear enough causal link made on the show. And that scene was clumsy for another reason--it thrust Chloe into the role of being wholly critical of them, which worked well for the dramatic revelation later but temporarily made both characters seem a little ooc: a case of the writers forcing words into the characters mouths for the sake of the plot.

Lana uses just the same upfront approach with Lex as she does with Clark--she tells him straight out that she saw him meet with the doctor, and then she watches as he lies with confidence. She's ricocheting between one liar and another. She cuts through his rambling and requests the truth. In response he swears on the soul of his unborn child. *chokes laughing* Um, hasn't she clued that it doesn't HAVE a soul yet?! Or that it's not Lex's?! Either way, that oath is worth nix. In any case, Lana's expression in the embrace that follows is one of resignation and sorrow. It's almost as if she's accepted that the world she lives in is entirely made up of lies. And if neither Clark NOR Lex will give her an honest relationship, what is she to do but make the best of what she's got?

Lana has chosen to protect Clark from her fiance. She does not attempt to persuade Lex of Clark's 'goodness', for she knows that's not a path to success. Duplicity is a necessity in protecting Clark. But will it be enough to keep safe not just the secret but Lana herself?

The problem of Chloe
And now I've come to the part of the episode I had most conflicted feelings about. Within the course of this episode I enjoyed the plotting that led to revealing Chloe as a meteor freak. But I worry about the consequences from here and I find myself deeply troubled by how this affects overall Smallville canon. I was unspoiled for this twist and remain unspoiled as to how it will pan out. I hope my fears prove unfounded, but currently I'm struggling to envisage a resolution that I would find personally find satisfying, though I'm sure mny fans will enjoy it.

The term 'meteor-infected' was used a lot this episode--the term 'freak' was avoided. But implicit in its use as the title of the episode was the knowledge that identifying someone as being affected by meteor rocks is a condemnation, a heavy stigma, one even heavier than the 'mental illness' stigma that Chloe has feared as her destiny before now. Now she's facing a darker destiny than ever.

Clark responds to Tobias's revelations with his standard denial. Eariler in this episode, we'd seen that he's using denial to avoid the complicated emotions surrounding Lana's marriage to Lex--and he successfully changes the subject when Chloe brings it up. Clark wants to use denial and distraction in response to finding out that Chloe's a meteor freak as well, saying 'I'm just glad you're back' and telling her about the computer he swiped. His anxiety manifests in non-verbal behaviour, with him staring at her while she attempts to hack the computer. Chloe reads Clark too well though and recognises this behaviour pattern. She tries to address the truth head-on, asking 'I'm some sort of meteor freak, aren't I?' It's often Clark that jumps to conclusions and Chloe that puts the breaks on, but this time it's Clark saying 'we don't know that' because it's a possibility too chilling for him to face.

Chloe points out: 'Every single meteor freak I've ever run into has ended up dead or in Belle Reve'. Or on Level 33.1, we might add. supacat reminded me there's at least one meteor freak on the run--the mindwiping guy from Season 4--but we struggled to think of any others. Clark is not able to offer much comfort to Chloe. If he's her personal bomb squad, then the possibility is thrown out that he may have to 'defuse' her by killing her one day.

The scene where Clark uses his heat vision to remove the tracking device in Chloe was very powerful. But it was also uncomfortably masochistic on Chloe's part. I couldn't help feeling that this might be foreshadowing her story arc. It's also a masochism that is kept hidden from Jimmy--she denied that it hurt just as she denied she had feelings for Clark--because it doesn't matter, and also to stop him worrying. And if this is the case, if Chloe's story is going to be one of self-sacrificing martyrdom and voluntary 'death' (symbolic or real) at Clark's hands, then this casts an uncomfortably dark shadow over Chloe's entire life. I sincerely hope this is not the way the show is going, because I genuinely enjoyed the early Clark-Chloe relationship in the days of her high school crush. While I don't ship them now, I don't want the innocence of that early relationship to be overshadowed by a romanticised eternal masochism. In terms of gender politics, this is as repugnant to me as the ultra-objectification of Lana.

So what are the other possibilities? The one I really really thought they were going for was to reveal that Chloe's power is computer hacking. COME ON! It's so FRIKKING OBVIOUS!! It is NOT normal for high school girls to hack defence networks, dammit! Even in this episode Jimmy says 'Chloe's the one with the mad techno skills' and Clark refers to 'pulling off a miracle'. I so thought they were going there. So I found the final scene between Clark and Chloe baffling in its blindness to the obvious. Is the show really going to ignore the opportunity to retrospectively make sense of Chloe's 'superpowers'? Arrgh! If they HAD gone down that path, I could have got behind it--especially if we'd seen it cause some introspection on Chloe's part. For example, Clark could have argued that it was a benevolent power, but Chloe may have been forced to think about the ways in which her behaviour may actually be a violation of others--and how she justifies what she does--a moral journey which would also be useful for Clark, who felt it was fine to swipe a suspect's computer in this ep. (Though I enjoyed seeing his creative use of powers and quick-thinking, I do think that's pretty muddy water for Clark--far more in character for, say, Oliver...)

So I don't want to see Chloe martyred, I don't want her to kill herself, go mad or be killed by Clark. But I also really don't want her to become a superhero. This would seriously mess with Smallville canon. It's way too late for the show to prompt a rethink on the status of meteor freaks--if they can be redeamed or 'saved' then this makes their past deaths/mistreatment appalling in the extreme. And if some magical 'remedy' is discovered, I will be seriously PISSED that the only prompt to find one was when Clark's best friend became one.

There's another reason I really don't like the Chloe-as-superpowered idea. Her appeal as a character has always lain in how ordinary she is. And that is not an insult! She is one of the first characters that many viewers of the show identify with, especially the female viewers. She's 'cool' but she's realistic enough for people to relate to. She has love troubles, she doesn't have a perfect life, she has ambitions but struggles to realise them--she's always been a great viewer avatar. Give her superpowers and she's something else. It also changes her dynamic with Clark. It equalises them in a way that I think is unneccessary and unproductive for the show. Chloe as trusted secret-keeper is less 'special' if she's also got a secret to keep. The relationship becomes more like the one that Clark has with Oliver. It doesn't add anything new to the show--and it also means that the only 'normal' humans on the show are the love interests: Lana, Lois, Jimmy. I dislike that because I've always liked the 'best friend' Chlark relationship.

Can you tell I'm struggling with this?! ;-) I'll be really keen to read other people's thoughts because I'm sure they'll have different views. I wish I could find a silver lining on this one.

Stray thoughts
- The scene of Chloe's abduction was genuinely creepy--and very like a cliched alien abduction. If that was intentional, it's interesting that it's not the REAL alien who's abducting those on Earth and experimenting on them, but a fellow human (and potential meteor-freak).
- It's handy that Clark has a back-up billionaire pal now--everyone needs one of those to help your friends out of trouble. But nice to know that he and Ollie are still in touch! ;-)
- It was fun to see Clark employing a creative use of powers to swipe Dr Bethany's computer, but this is somewhat murky territory for Clark--it was quite Oliver-like, I thought, to justify stealing someone's computer simply because you suspect them of a nefarious purpose.
- I wish I could believe that Lana had an alternative to hanging with Chloe for her Bachelorette Party. It was cute seeing the girls having fun together, but it also felt a bit sad--Lana's life is a very lonely one. This makes me doubly glad that she's nurturing her friendship with Chloe.
 
 
Current Location: sofa of comfiness
Current Mood: uncomfortableuncomfortable
 
 
 
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!bop_radar on February 17th, 2007 11:08 pm (UTC)
Re: it made me split my comment in half!
Yes, I knew you would! *twirls* And I WANT you to! Because this threw me for such a loop! I am lost!

Your arguments are excellent and I'm really glad both you and serenography are pointing out that a rethink on the meteor mythology would work for you. I'm not quite there myself yet, but its good to explore the possibility.

It's interesting that you say this gives Chloe a plotarc that's not tied to Clark. I had the opposite reaction--to me, this binds her to Clark more than ever. They've got mutual secrets now, not to mention a masochistic pact. Chloe's been in Clark's most intimate circle for ages--now she's still in it, but with bonus superpowers. To me, that's making her more 'special' than Lana or Lois, and I just wish the show didn't feel they had to do this. Though you're right--evidently I'm in the minority who LIKE Chloe as normal.

I don't think it's as big of a retcon as making unsouled Spike a good person in Buffy, because there have been plenty of mutants with good intentions--maybe all they've needed was a benevolent billionaire doing research to help them control the side effects of their powers (Oliver, who apparently took his first step in that direction with Tobias).
Oh, we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Because I think it's as big or bigger. Jossverse was more succesfully morally ambiguous for me--there were demons that were friendly. But Spike turning good still threw me out of the later seasons of Buffy. I was always uncomfortable with them, even though I loved Spike and loved the idea. I just never felt it was well enough justified within the show's canon/world-building, and this really really feels the same way. And I think it's feeling bigger because I don't actually think it's a good thing for Chloe, whereas I liked it for Spike.

As for them just needing a benevolent billionaire--well this makes me just soo ragey and uncomfortable--because if that was the case, why didn't we see that possibility held out before? And what does it say about all those freaks Clark casually KILLED? Besides which, if Smallville had always intended to take this direction, I think they would have shown us early on the possiblity that Lex could have helped but didn't. Then it would have greater resonance that now there IS a billionaire willing to help. This connects with nothing for me, it feels like such a loose thread in the Smallville tapestry.

it makes symbolic sense to me that the show should re-examine whether or not mutants really *are* evil. Maybe, like Jor-El, they're just misunderstood!
Now, the symbolism argument I LIKE. I like a lot. Push that one some more and maybe you'll win me over... seems like I'll need to be won over if I'm to continue to enjoy the show this season. *sigh* *clings to this idea*

I certainly don't think this particular retcon is *more* disruptive than the Jor-El retcon.
Now you're just teasing me! Because OMG the two could not me more different! You forget that I don't view Jor-El as a retcon AT ALL! I ALWAYS saw him as benevolent--the prejudice on the part of the Kents and the viewers was obvious to me and I always believed that he would be proved to be a force of good. It was so obvious that that's what the show was setting up for YEARS. Since Season 2! Retcon? Pfft! I don't think so! Whereas I haven't seen anyone claiming through the seasons that Chloe was a meteorfreak. And we've never had a hint of it on the show before--EXCEPT where the computer hacking is concerned, which is why I could have got more behind it had they built on that. GRRR.
Nora Norwich: luminous Clarknorwich36 on February 17th, 2007 11:30 pm (UTC)
Re: it made me split my comment in half!
Yes, obviously I AM teasing you with the Jor-EL comparison. :P But I also think that to everyone except you and supacat, the Jor-El retcon looks just as jarring as this retcon of Chloe.

I actually think that on "Buffy" Spike was the first "good" demon; all the other good demons were introduced after Spike started to be more grey than black. (I'm not talking about the soul arc, precisely--more like when he was chipped). It's true that "Angel" introduced neutral demons earlier on, as part of the moral ambiguity of their whole noirverse, which deliberately contrasted to the black-and-white morality of the early season Buffyverse.

And I understand your point that if mutants can be cured, it morally problematizes the way Clark has been interacting with them--but it's NOT like Buffy in the sense he's been going around deliberately killing them. He's only killed mutants when they were in the act of endangering people and he couldn't figure out another way to stop them (and generally their death has been accidental). And we've *already* been introduced to the idea that mutants can be cured: the whole Alicia arc. Presumably the only difference between what's been happening in the realm of treatment in Belle Reve and what Oliver Queen could do is that Belle Reve seems to have been under the control of Lionel Luthor, whose intentions were not benevolent toward mutants. So it really *does* make a difference that there is a billionaire in the wings who can *successfully* stand up to Lionel (which, let's face it, Lex never could until he went evil).
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!bop_radar on February 18th, 2007 03:51 am (UTC)
Re: it made me split my comment in half!
You're right--Buffyverse and Angelverse were differentiated, but that became muddier when they started 'darkening' the Buffy universe as well post-high school, so it's blurry territory. And they are the same overall 'verse.

He's only killed mutants when they were in the act of endangering people and he couldn't figure out another way to stop them (and generally their death has been accidental).
See, that actually makes it worse to me--because its thoughtlessness and limited understanding, rather than a particular educated stance. I find it easier to be compassionate to a soldier whose been taught to kill the enemy because they don't know any better but whose stance changes when offered conflicting evidence about the 'evilness' of the enemy than a blundering 'hero' who causes death willy nilly and just assumes that it's 'alright' because there was some immediate peril. As a once or twice off emergency, that's fine. But Clark's never spared a thought for all the lives he ruined--he's repressed that part of his life. So much so that visiting Belle Reve was hugely confronting to him--facing his subconscious, his repressed truths. And even after that he remained indignant at the 'freaks' who had a vendetta about them. Did he ever face them or try to reason with them? Apologise? Offer them help if they changed their ways? No, he just repressed because he'd labelled them 'evil' based on limited interactions. His interactions with Alicia were more positive, so she didn't get categorised the same way by Clark. But Alicia did not prompt him to rethink the others. It's always frustrated me, but I've accepted that's just not the Smallville way. But now mid season 6 suddenly Chloe prompts a rethink? I sincerely hope not because that's privileging one character, a writer favourite, over all the other character and story arcs that have gone before.

For now, I think the best thing for me is to just not think about the possibilities any more and wait to see how it's executed. Because despite my first initial response, I do think it could be executed in a way that works--I just can't quite imagine/envisage it yet myself. I'd really love if they tied it into the universe a bit tighter--for example if they linked it to Chloe's fear of mental illness, or if they DO end up acknowledging her hacking skills. When it becomes less of a suddenly-stamped-on characteristic I will (hopefully) settle down. :-)

And thank you for arguing your point passionately--I am VERY glad that others enjoyed this twist because obviously it needs to work for someone. Because Chloe's not my favourite character I came at it differently with other concerns, but look it's good they're doing something with her, because she does need some direction for her character. Fingers crossed!
Nora Norwich: luminous Clarknorwich36 on February 18th, 2007 04:06 am (UTC)
Re: it made me split my comment in half!
But Clark's never spared a thought for all the lives he ruined--he's repressed that part of his life. So much so that visiting Belle Reve was hugely confronting to him--facing his subconscious, his repressed truths. And even after that he remained indignant at the 'freaks' who had a vendetta about them. Did he ever face them or try to reason with them? Apologise? Offer them help if they changed their ways? No, he just repressed because he'd labelled them 'evil' based on limited interactions.

But why is that his job? Seriously, even Superman doesn't do that. He doesn't pursue the sort of long-term structural solutions that will prevent people from *needing* to be rescues; he's more like a fireman/paramedic, that deals with emergency situations. I'm not sure that it is--or should be--Clark's job to reform the mutant population of Smallville. He's not a doctor, he's not a scientist, he doesn't have the money or skills that are necessary to do the kind of work that would be necessary to save them. Maybe he could be drawing more attention to their problems, yes--exposing what Lionel's doing, so that drawing attention to them wouldn't be inherently dangerous to them.

I assume that's why the other half of Superman's mission is Clark Kent, reporter: because Superman really can only *be* a rescue worker. It's Clark Kent journalist who can expose the structural social problems that exist in the hopes that society will do something about them. And to the extent that he's been working with Chloe in her investigations, he's done a little bit of that. But I'm honestly not sure what you think he ought to have been doing, otherwise. Who could he have sent them to for help, without endangering them further by calling Lionel's attention to them? We've seen that Belle Reve was worse than useless. He was a teenager--what are the boundaries of his responsibility, here?
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Bop_radar TWbop_radar on February 18th, 2007 05:59 am (UTC)
Re: it made me split my comment in half!
he's more like a fireman/paramedic, that deals with emergency situations. I'm not sure that it is--or should be--Clark's job to reform the mutant population of Smallville.
Woah! Slow down! I'm not sugggesting that! I'm talking about the fact that Clark has never shown even a flicker of regret or doubt about his approach with meteor freaks. He's never wondered 'what if they could be helped?' It's his lack of empathy with the average freak that I'm taking issue with--I'm not suggesting that a high school kid should launch a full-scale mission to 'save' them.

If, say, someone was attacking a friend of mine and I rushed in and saved my friend by breaking the guy's knee. (And let's face it--Clark's done a LOT worse than that!) And then the police arrived and he got removed. And I found out after he was a serious crim. I'd still feel bad about breaking his knee! I'd still have a moment of 'omg, am I that person?' and I'd hope that he got the help he needed to stop assaulting people, not just locked away and punished. And if I was a high school kid I'd be even more confronted by the experience. But we never saw Clark struggle with that. It was always presented in clear black and white. Start 'greying' the meteor freaks now and young!Clark doesn't look so hot on the empathy front.

With Superman it's different--he's an adult who has made a conscious decision that the best way to make a difference is to handle the emergencies. AND there is the infrastructure there to support him--not to mention the help of fellow Justice Leaguers. But this isn't the case with high school Clark in Smallville--he's not deliberately using his powers for precise purpose and with control; he's haphazardly using them to protect 'his own'. The show's never problematised that, even if I wished they would. I think it could be a great thing to explore! I'm not averse to the grey area at ALL. I just think, IF it's introduced now (and I'm not even sure it will be), it's ridiculously late in the day and they missed a lot of opportunities along the way to show Clark struggling with such issues as 'just how much force is acceptable' or 'how can you tell when someone is really irredeemable?'--they could have easily built that in. They could have easily textualised the fact that there was no other alternative, sad as that might be, at that point in time. (Because I'm not arguing that there WAS--I'm just saying we never saw Clark pause to question that.) That way, they could have built Clark's path to maturity along the lines of him justifying the emergency use of his powers and seeking an environment that did offer the safety net that best accompanies that action.

Am I making sense at all? For example, there has never been on Smallville the equivalent of the Faith plot arc where recklessness and the adrenelin rush that comes from killing resulted in the accidental death of an innocent human (non-freak). Not even anything approaching that. There was ONE episode where Clark was sued for breaking a guy's neck but it was played as comedy and the guy was written as 'a bastard anyway' because he was faking. It's things like this that make me feel that Smallville has never intended to seriously address the morality of killing or physically impairing meteor freaks.
Nora Norwich: Chloe woenorwich36 on February 18th, 2007 06:53 am (UTC)
Re: it made me split my comment in half!
Ah, ok, if your point is that Clark is often careless in the way he uses his powers against the mutants and he should really stop and consider that, I agree. And it would have been interesting if they had done a "Faith" type arc examining this. Especially because the time when he was causing the most serious injuries/death to mutants was mainly season 1, when he was so young himself. You would think it would affect him, and you're correct that we really never got to see that. I think in many ways the show cheated by making almost every one of the mutants already have murdered someone before they encountered Clark, and so the deadly force he often ended up using (even when accidental) was seen to be justified. I do agree with you that they should have had Clark question that at some point, especially when dealing with the less homicidal mutants.

Though I think the time for that would have been season 1 or 2. Because apparently I'm feeling obsessive today--I just wrote a very long post that categorizes every FOTW who has died, turned murderous, or both, and there are definitely patterns. In season 1 and early season 2, there are lots of murderous mutants and a lot that end up dead, though Clark is not usually the direct cause of their death. Beginning season 3, there are simply less mutants overall, and we start getting some examination of the consequences of Clark's actions--e.g. the anger of Ian et al in "Asylum." But ever since season 4, it seems like there is a pattern that they've been pulling away from murderous mutants for the past two years, even before Alicia arc, and especially afterwards. If that's the case, I wonder if they've had this plot arc in mind for a while (maybe not for Chloe, specifically, but just a re-examination of the meteor mutants themselves).

I'm about to post this long list of mutants + speculation as soon as I proofread it. Oy vey. I was going to catch up on BSG tonight, not make lists of mutants! Obsession, it's more than a perfume.
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!bop_radar on February 18th, 2007 07:29 am (UTC)
Re: it made me split my comment in half!
I think in many ways the show cheated by making almost every one of the mutants already have murdered someone before they encountered Clark, and so the deadly force he often ended up using (even when accidental) was seen to be justified.
Same! And I agree that the time to introduce such a concept was season 1 or 2. I remember watching, waiting for this to happen and it just ... never did. I'll be REALLY interested in your post about all the mutants because this plot twist led me to long for such a list myself. The more thoroughly grounded the speculation the better. And to be honest, I'm so often bored by the freaks that I haven't been tracking what becomes of them--I've always been more interested in what they symbolise than their endpoint. But now all of a sudden their endpoint has become really important! So YAY! I fully back your obsession! I wouldn't have had the energy for such a post myself, but it's SO GREAT that someone made it!
Naomi: Clex shirt rip by star_dragonfrelling_tralk on February 18th, 2007 01:44 pm (UTC)
Sorry to butt in, but
Start 'greying' the meteor freaks now and young!Clark doesn't look so hot on the empathy front.

I think that's consistent with how SV portrays Clark though, and who Clark is. He's always been very black and white in his dealings with others, and I'd argue judgmental as well. I think his upbringing, and Jonathon Kent, had a lot to do with that.

We do get the episodes like Stray and Fragile with Clark being really sweet and emphatic. Even with Alicia, he did try to give her reforming a chance in Unsafe, once told she had been released as cured. But with morally ambiguous people like oooh say Lex *g*, I don't think Clark ever really understood him, and that's what caused a lot of controvery in fandom, as some got really frustrated with Clark, and others defensive of him...

Extinction did have it brought up that a lot of the meteour mutants can live normal lifes, but are just under Clark's radar. He had a bit of a moral crisis with Jonathon over it, and it might have been interesting for the show to have Clark seek out such people to be friends with. But I guess the idea was that they were like Clark in wanting to hide their powers, and live a normal life. It was generally the more unbalanced ones that were open with their abilities, and therefore came to Clark's attention.
K, Bop or Boppy--take your pick!: Clark identity crisisbop_radar on February 19th, 2007 12:00 am (UTC)
Re: Sorry to butt in, but
Oh, I agree with you! I just hate that the writers may be choosing a path that will rub our noses up against that fact all over again at a time when I thought we were finally seeing Clark mature and develop a less bigoted approach. The Zoners plot is so much more positive for Clark (and less divisive for fandom!) because it's based on him taking responsiblity for his actions.