REebee52
02-06-2009, 02:58 PM
I see a lot of people here angry over the fact that Lana acted like a 'moral compass' in the last few episodes of the show. Of course, there are dozens of other reasons people are upset, but I'm not going to discuss that here.
People are upset that she stopped Clark from killing Chloe when infected by Brainiac, and stopped Clark from killing Lex last night. Now the arguments are twofold:
1). Clark should never have considered killing in the first place.
2). The fact that Lana, who has done so many questionable things in the past, is the one who talks him out of it is absurd.
As to the first point:
When Clark wondered if he should kill Chloe, there were billions of lives at stake, perhaps more at stake than Clark's ever seen. The only other match that I can really think of is the Zod arc, but it never got the point where Clark would have to kill because he had the crystal. So here, the world's at stake, and you have legitimate heroes from the future telling you that you must do it to save the world. To question yourself at this moment is understandable.
Now as for Lex: he was in a fit of fury and lost control. It's something Superman does not have the luxury of doing, but he is human by nature, and losing control is something human's do. He isn't Superman yet, he still has a lot to learn. This showed some of Clark's humanity. And I still believe that when it came down to it, he wouldn't have been able to go through with it.
Now as for Lana as the Moral Compass:
The point of Superman is that he inspires people to be better, better than they thought they could possibly be. Lana has done a lot of stuff in morally murky areas, so how could she say these things to the future man of steel?
Because it was he who changed her. Lana was inspired by Clark tremendously, so much that it changed who she was and how she thought. She came back different: She was stronger, she was proud of what Clark was doing in helping people and didn't hold him back. She was inspired by this great man to become a petter woman. So when this great man had moments of weakness, she reminded him why he inspired her so much in the first place and brought him back to himself. It wasn't that she taught him, or that he 'relearned' what he knew; it's that she reminded him of what he believes in, the very things that pushed her to transcend herself. If he hadn't changed her in the first place, she wouldn't have helped him. So it isn't that she became the moral compass. Clark pointed her in the right way in the first place, she just reminded him of that.
People are upset that she stopped Clark from killing Chloe when infected by Brainiac, and stopped Clark from killing Lex last night. Now the arguments are twofold:
1). Clark should never have considered killing in the first place.
2). The fact that Lana, who has done so many questionable things in the past, is the one who talks him out of it is absurd.
As to the first point:
When Clark wondered if he should kill Chloe, there were billions of lives at stake, perhaps more at stake than Clark's ever seen. The only other match that I can really think of is the Zod arc, but it never got the point where Clark would have to kill because he had the crystal. So here, the world's at stake, and you have legitimate heroes from the future telling you that you must do it to save the world. To question yourself at this moment is understandable.
Now as for Lex: he was in a fit of fury and lost control. It's something Superman does not have the luxury of doing, but he is human by nature, and losing control is something human's do. He isn't Superman yet, he still has a lot to learn. This showed some of Clark's humanity. And I still believe that when it came down to it, he wouldn't have been able to go through with it.
Now as for Lana as the Moral Compass:
The point of Superman is that he inspires people to be better, better than they thought they could possibly be. Lana has done a lot of stuff in morally murky areas, so how could she say these things to the future man of steel?
Because it was he who changed her. Lana was inspired by Clark tremendously, so much that it changed who she was and how she thought. She came back different: She was stronger, she was proud of what Clark was doing in helping people and didn't hold him back. She was inspired by this great man to become a petter woman. So when this great man had moments of weakness, she reminded him why he inspired her so much in the first place and brought him back to himself. It wasn't that she taught him, or that he 'relearned' what he knew; it's that she reminded him of what he believes in, the very things that pushed her to transcend herself. If he hadn't changed her in the first place, she wouldn't have helped him. So it isn't that she became the moral compass. Clark pointed her in the right way in the first place, she just reminded him of that.