Wouldn't Jonathan have died anyways?

[Xerox]

I mean, the reason why Jonathan had a heart attack was because of the fight with Lionel,right? Isn't it possible that the same situation would've occured had Clark still continued rolling with the events of post-Lana's death. I would assume that Lionel would confront Jonathan still with the photo and Jonathan would go haywire on him and have the heart attack. UNLESS, the photo that Lionel showed him was a photo taken after what occured afetr the time reversal so in that case there would be no photo. The only thing I could think of in that way would be if somebody saw him stop the bus? Unlikely though, right? So isn't it possible that Jonathan AND Lana would've died had he not used the time reversal.

[HalJordan4184]

No. Not necessarily. In the first timeline, jon stopped to be with Clark. A heartattack doesn't happen because of a certain event. That's a misconception. Heart attacks are dependent on a lot of things. people who have bad hearts, and like 98% blockages of their arteries, and do strenuous work, and fight, and all of that without having an attack. It depends a lot ont he particular stresses of the moment, how you've been feeling, etc. I highly doubt jon would have ahd a heart attack if he had confronted lionel after the first go round. Maybe a slight one if anything. But i doubt he'd have a massive MI, and die. Besides, it was also explained that the universe needed someone close to clark to die, *groan*, and with lana dead, jon didn't have to. So if he was supposed to die anyway, than lana should still have died, as he wouldn't then have died in exchange.

[myankskent]

Originally posted by HalJordan4184
No. Not necessarily. In the first timeline, jon stopped to be with Clark. A heartattack doesn't happen because of a certain event. That's a misconception. Heart attacks are dependent on a lot of things. people who have bad hearts, and like 98% blockages of their arteries, and do strenuous work, and fight, and all of that without having an attack. It depends a lot ont he particular stresses of the moment, how you've been feeling, etc. I highly doubt jon would have ahd a heart attack if he had confronted lionel after the first go round. Maybe a slight one if anything. But i doubt he'd have a massive MI, and die. Besides, it was also explained that the universe needed someone close to clark to die, *groan*, and with lana dead, jon didn't have to. So if he was supposed to die anyway, than lana should still have died, as he wouldn't then have died in exchange.

I'm not sure I agree. If anything, Jonathan would've gone back to the barn more upset after Lana had died. I see the same events unfolding even after the Lana death. If Jonathan went with Clark to the fortress then maybe I can buy the fact that he wouldn't have died, but I think he went to the barn afterwards and he would've already been in a weak state after the death of Lana.

[EricN68]

I agree that his death would have come sometime soon if not then, and possibly from the same circumstance. At least this way a life was saved, and Clark got to see clearly that he's not omnipotent (and neither is Jor-El).

[SVSpector]

If Jonathans heart was that bad...he didn't have much time left anyway. I think that is why they showed him with the pills last ep. to remind us how bad it has become for him.

I still hated to see him go, it's too bad Clark couldn't have used the transference stone to cure Jonathan before he made the FOS.

Goodbye...Jonathan...you will be missed!!

[Rimmer66]

I agree 100% - It was detined for JK to die anyways, they did hint this early on when they gave him a weak heart - it was established long ago with the deal he made with Jor-El. Now when Clark returned back in time he had prior knowledge that Lana would die, and he knew the location so he COULD do something to stop it - however, he did not have knowledge that his father would die and under what circomstances.....therefore he could NOT have saved him. Now as said in the show, attempting to change the course of events will cause a counter balance. Example - your friend has a car accident on a given day...... you go back in time and attempt to warn him and change the course of events - he might be saved from an accident, but he will die anyways, under a different circomstance - he could stay home that day and get mugged, shot or electrocuted, but he will die.

JK would have died anyways that was the deal - would he have died the same way ? Probably, probably not, but he would have died at some point eventually. Maybe had Lana died, JK would not have had a fight with Lionel - he would be overwhelmed by the events and probably would not have bothered seeing Lionel - BUT would have died at some point in a distant future.

I am a firm believer that you cannot change destiny, you can only make what is best of it and live with it! I think we all have a destiny and knowing ahead of time our future would not make much of a difference, everything happens for a reason.

[firefly2000]

His days have been numbered since season 3. He was going to die. They chose to send him off in a milestone episode and I think it was fitting. JS deserved the 100th episode sendoff more than any other character who might be slated for death and I'm happy with it.

[PeteM]

What I have been saying.

It wasn't Johnathon sacrificing his life for Lana, it was Lana sacrificing (albeit unknowingly) for his.

In both timeline, he was going home to confront Lionel. The only way his life would be saved is if you assumed that because of Lana's car accident he would have stayed with Clark throughout the night and not confront Lionel. But then, he would have died soon after because Lionel was not going away, nor was his heart condition going to magically disappear.

He could have keeled over at any moment from any phisical or emotionally taxing event.

Or he could have died because his heart just gave out.

[KRAM-el]

Listen to the words spoken by MK " there are only so many heartbeats in a life, & your father used his"... etc, etc... This tells me JK was doomed anyway (not to mention the heart condition, et al). So his death balanced NOTHING. And I mean NOTHING. The ONLY true "balance" would have been the loss of Lana or to a lesser extent Martha (someone who would have gone on w/ their life regardless)... Doesn't ANYBODY see through this??? Or were we supposed to assume that JK would have lived into his 80's carrying his bad heart w/ him? NOTHING was balanced here, NOTHING was solved. Once again, inconsistency in the writing... A Smallville trademark. :mad: :( :rolleyes:

[Quadrotriticale]

Yes I hear you KRAM. If JK was to die because of his heart and not because of Jor-El bringing Clark back then someone still needs to die. Why, because nothing was balanced out. Now if Jk's death was to balance things out then Clark is responsible for his Dad's death. In the end it's just crappy writing.

Everyone talks about his heart being weak because of the few hours he was given powers to bring Clark back but you never hear anyone bring up the episode where Clark saved that kid (eric I think) and was struck by Lightning and had his powers transferred. Does that kid have a bad heart now since he had Clark's powers for days at a time? Oh let me guess, he's younger so his heart can take it. Puhlease

[Eh,Man?You-El?]

If it had been a 90-minute episode, Clark would first save Lana wit the time-trael crystal, then Lois, then Lana (again, this time by holding back the bus), then Lex, Then Lionel, then Chloe, Then Martha, and then, in the process of saving Shelby, Jon Kent would (finally) keel over and die.
If it was a two-hour episode, Clark would save Lana a third time, Lois and Chloe twice each, save Jon kent at least once and Clark would STILL fail to see Jon needed saving the second time.

The whole point of te story was that "nature" (AKA The Powers That Be) will ALWAYS swing back to the "balance" of bad CLANA and bad LEXANA for the life of the series.

[PeteM]

Why does everyone take everything Jor-El says like it is Gospel?

He says some stupid fortune cookie axiom about balance and nature and now we have a **** storm of Lana bashing on the misguided notion that his life was sacrificed for her's.

It was nothing of the sort.

This episode just proves to me that SV have terrible writers.

You want to kill off a major character for the 100th episode to make it more dramatic and exciting. Fine. You select Jonathon because now Clark will have to stand on his own without his strongest defender and supporter. Fine. But why the reset. Why have a reveal and proposal that no one but Clark remembers? Why couldn't they just focus the episode on Jonathon dieing? He had a bad heart afterall and they have been foreshadowing his death for the last 2 seasons.

Done probably, his death would have been dramatic and powerful without the other garbage and could have progressed Clark on his journey.

This episode seems to be a repeat of Shattered, where all the characters' relationships are messed up and Clark moping and blaming himself for everything.

For those of you who think this is the death of Clana, you are mistaken. We are just going to have the Clana that no body wants. Prepare yourself for a repeat of Season 3-4 with all of the stupid angst. Clark still loves Lana but will push her away for her safety and maybe out of resentment for his father's death. Lana will still love Clark but will be hurt and confused why he lies to her and pushes her away. And, finally, we got Lex to fill the Jason role.
The TPTB are idiots if they think this is what everybody wants to see. Rather, I think it is the exact opposite.

You would think after their ratings tanked after Shattered, they would learn their lesson. Uggh...

[Arista 07]

The entire point of Clark reversing time was to depict two possible outcomes. During the first, in which he divulges the truth to Lana. Not only does Jonathan's future change, by him pulling over at the scene of Lana's car wreck, but Lois's does as well. Originally, after being told, Lana was with Lois to catch her before she fell while reaching for snacks. The second time around she wasn't there, and Lois nearly got electrocuted. In that regard, no I do not think Jonathan would have died anyway. At least, not near enough to this time frame, where we could deem Clark's actions responsible for the death.

Additionally, yeah Jor-El said there is a balance. He's given that spiel to Clark twice now. And twice someone died in place of him. Why shouldn't it be taken as gospel?

[Quadrotriticale]

Jor-El said a life will be exchanged for yours. I take it he just pulled that out of his a$$ to make Clark feel even more depressed.

[PeteM]

Originally posted by Arista 07


Additionally, yeah Jor-El said there is a balance. He's given that spiel to Clark twice now. And twice someone died in place of him. Why shouldn't it be taken as gospel?

If that was Gospel than Clark has already caused Jonathon's death by being resurrected in Hidden. You didn't need another death. So Jonathon's death was not just a "sacrifice" for Lana but also Clark.

Seems to me 2 for 1 does not equal "balance."

[Arista 07]

Originally posted by PeteM
If that was Gospel than Clark has already caused Jonathon's death by being resurrected in Hidden. You didn't need another death. So Jonathon's death was not just a "sacrifice" for Lana but also Clark.

Seems to me 2 for 1 does not equal "balance."
Did you watch the episode? Only one person stayed dead. However, when Clark modified the past, he, resultingly, modified the future. Lana was the original death. Clark "saved" her. Daddy dearest bit it instead.

Not to mention, I wouldn't take Jor-El lightly in general. Clark would be a fool to think, as Quadrotriticale said, Jor-El just pulled that statement out of his disembodied arse to contribute to Clark's depression.

[kal-el_Girl]

I think that it was time for mr. kent to leave us, we will miss him but he needed to go in order for clark to fulfill his destiny and leave his childhood behind and to become the man of steel that we all love

[PeteM]

Originally posted by Arista 07
Did you watch the episode? Only one person stayed dead. However, when Clark modified the past, he, resultingly, modified the future. Lana was the original death. Clark "saved" her. Daddy dearest bit it instead.

Not to mention, I wouldn't take Jor-El lightly in general. Clark would be a fool to think, as Quadrotriticale said, Jor-El just pull that statement out of his disembodied arse to contribute to Clark's depression.

Yeah math is off. 2 persons died and were resurrected (Clark and Lana). 1 person died and stayed dead (Jonathon).

The only way that is balance is 1 Jonathon = 1 Clark + 1 Lana.

[Summers]

Lionel would have ended up talking to Jonathan either way, and they would have had a rumble since Jonathan has an anger management problem.

Just like the stone arc in S4 the death arc is just as flawed. There are not any logical explainations, and looks more like ratings ploys than anything. Jor-El gave crappy exposition pieces in "Arrival" and "Hidden" that were so evasive it was pathetic. Anytime there is a balance of life in a story that balance is taken away right away. The universe does not wait for no one...........except for AlMiles's rating ploys.

[OutlawAngel]

Originally posted by Arista 07
The entire point of Clark reversing time was to depict two possible outcomes. During the first, in which he divulges the truth to Lana. Not only does Jonathan's future change, by him pulling over at the scene of Lana's car wreck, but Lois's does as well. Originally, after being told, Lana was with Lois to catch her before she fell while reaching for snacks. The second time around she wasn't there, and Lois nearly got electrocuted. In that regard, no I do not think Jonathan would have died anyway. At least, not near enough to this time frame, where we could deem Clark's actions responsible for the death.

Additionally, yeah Jor-El said there is a balance. He's given that spiel to Clark twice now. And twice someone died in place of him. Why shouldn't it be taken as gospel?

Yah know somehow with still me being conffused that made prefect sense :lol:


Originally posted by Arista 07
The entire point of Clark reversing time was to depict two possible outcomes. During the first, in which he divulges the truth to Lana. Not only does Jonathan's future change, by him pulling over at the scene of Lana's car wreck, but Lois's does as well. Originally, after being told, Lana was with Lois to catch her before she fell while reaching for snacks. The second time around she wasn't there, and Lois nearly got electrocuted. In that regard, no I do not think Jonathan would have died anyway. At least, not near enough to this time frame, where we could deem Clark's actions responsible for the death.

Additionally, yeah Jor-El said there is a balance. He's given that spiel to Clark twice now. And twice someone died in place of him. Why shouldn't it be taken as gospel?

Yah know somehow with still me being conffused that made prefect sense :lol:

[Arista 07]

Originally posted by PeteM
Yeah math is off. 2 persons died and were resurrected (Clark and Lana). 1 person died and stayed dead (Jonathon).

The only way that is balance is 1 Jonathon = 1 Clark + 1 Lana.
I sense you're trying to be difficult. For what reason was there a loved one to die, initially? "The life of someone close to you will be exchanged for yours." That was said by Jor-El after Clark was resurrected from death. Lana was the original exchange. However, Clark traveled back in time and undid that, making Jonathan's death the sole death and creating the aforementioned "balance."

Originally posted by Summers
Lionel would have ended up talking to Jonathan either way, and they would have had a rumble since Jonathan has an anger management problem.
Just one question, "Why?" Lois's destiny was changed by Clark not telling Lana; why not Bo's? Is it not possible he could have accompanied Clark to the hospital or waited with him for the police to arrive or try to fend off Lex who saw Clark appear out of thin air and would be asking a million questions? I highly doubt Jonathan would have left Clark alone in that situation.

[Summers]

No, I don't mean on that same day. I mean sooner or later Lionel would have come to ask his favor, and use blackmail to do it. Either the following day, or week. It doesn't have to be that same day. The Lionel and JK confrontation would have happened sooner or later, and as pre-usual JK would fight him. It was basically inevitable to happen.

[Arista 07]

Originally posted by Summers
No, I don't mean on that same day. I mean sooner or later Lionel would have come to ask his favor, and use blackmail to do it. Either the following day, or week. It doesn't have to be that same day. The Lionel and JK confrontation would have happened sooner or later, and as pre-usual JK would fight him. It was basically inevitable to happen.
Just the fact that the confrontation wouldn't be ocurring in the same moment means the end result has the potential to be completely different. After Lana's death and popping a few more heart pills, Jonathan could have been immensely subdued or more wound than ever. We don't know what would have taken place.

ETA: Hell, Jonathan could have died before he even got the chance to meet with Lionel. Perhaps he caught Bessie making it with some brama bull. There are thousands of possible scenarios.

[Summers]

I doubt that highly that considering the fact to AlMiles the mythos is Superman: The Movie :lol:. We know they wanted JK to die since S3, and we further know JS as disapproved of them for a long time now.

The whole episode was flawed as was the death arc itself. Plus heart pills don't work that way. I know aunts and uncles would take heart pills and ended up still having a heart attack ;).

Heck, the whole show it flawed :lol:.

[PeteM]

Originally posted by Arista 07
I sense you're trying to be difficult. For what reason was there a loved one to die, initially? "The life of someone close to you will be exchanged for yours." That was said by Jor-El after Clark was resurrected from death. Lana was the original exchange. However, Clark traveled back in time and undid that, making Jonathan's death the sole death and creating the aforementioned "balance."



I'm not being difficult at all. I just don't feel that Jor-El is all seeing and all knowing. Lana's death was an accident caused by a negligent bus driver. Not because Jor-El can resurrect Clark and can alter fate/reality to where Lana is killed in an accident. That is too mystical/religious for me.


Originally posted by Arista 07

Just one question, "Why?" Lois's destiny was changed by Clark not telling Lana; why not Bo's? Is it not possible he could have accompanied Clark to the hospital or waited with him for the police to arrive or try to fend off Lex who saw Clark appear out of thin air and would be asking a million questions? I highly doubt Jonathan would have left Clark alone in that situation.
[/B]

Jonathan may have stayed with Clark. But then again he might not. Lionel was blackmailing him with something that he felt was so important that he left his election party to meet with him. Jonathan is not the type of man to leave a problem, especially a person whom he most dislike/distrust (Lionel), linger. Likewise, Lionel is not the type of person who would just disappear. They were going to meet. If not that night the next day.

Leaving that all aside, Jonathan had a bad heart. That most definitely is not going away.

His fight with Lionel was not much of one. If that was enough for his heart to fail, he would have died at any moment operating his farm.

[BoSoxJim]

Jonathan Kent's fate was sealed when he made the pact with Jor-El to rescue CLark from the grips of the red kryptonite when he was Cal.

Jor-el gave JK the power to handle CLark but said there would be a price to be paid.

That price being a shortened life. He was on borowed time already.

[Arista 07]

Originally posted by Summers
I doubt that highly that considering the fact to AlMiles the mythos is Superman: The Movie :lol:. We know they wanted JK to die since S3, and we further know JS as disapproved of them for a long time now.

The whole episode was flawed as was the death arc itself. Plus heart pills don't work that way. I know aunts and uncles would take heart pills and ended up still having a heart attack ;).

Heck, the whole show it flawed :lol:.
I never doubted the heart attack or Jonathan's eventual death. I'm merely saying it could have been a result of another incident: Bessie's infidelity; farm-associated chores; stress from being Senator. We can't definitively say that Jonathan would engage in a fight with Lionel, let alone that Jonathan would ever see Lionel again.

[jimmyolsenblues]

do we know what the picture lionel showed jonathan to get the heart attack was? what do you think the picture was?

[liana]

I'm not sure if he would. The whole point of the episode was that someone Clark loved should die as a balance for the fact that he was ressurrected. A ressurrection is something unnatural and there is a price to be paid, that price is someone else's life. It is simple as that.

What happened with Lana is not a ressurrection is a time reversal. In fact her death never happened. That's difference between these two situations. It reminds mean of an Angel Episode called "I will never forget". Someone goes back in time and the original day never happened. There is no price to pay for Lana's life, because her death never happened. No memories for anyone, because it didn't happened. The only one that will remember is the one who travelled back in time.

I have no doubt that the writers intended to kill JK for a long time, probably as an homage to the original superman movie. But, they should have done it right. No strings attached. Not making Clark responsible for his dad's death, wich he was. In this episode they made it clear that Lana was the reckoning, but because Clark anulled the original day and save her, someone else turned to be. The second choice: Jonathan Kent. If he hadn't activelly chosen her to live, he would be alive. Would he die later? No, because according to the story they told, he wasn't meant to. Lana was. When Clark changed the time line, the consequence was someone else's death, his father. And the sad part of this ordeal: he knew that someone else would die. :\

[BoSoxJim]

[i]I have no doubt that the writers intended to kill JK for a long time, probably as an homage to the original superman movie. But, they should have done it right. No strings attached. Not making Clark responsible for his dad's death, wich he was. [/B]

doesn't anyone remember the beginning of the third season?

JKs pact with Jor-el??? or am in bizarro world again?

also, in the movie, clark was sort of responsible for JKs death by egging him into a race which gave him a heart attack.

guess there was no way around it;)

[Deana]

I do not believe Johnathan was destine to die that night. It was Lana. Johnathan stopped to console his son. Johnathan is a tough man. He would've stayed alive to combat Lionel and help his son get through mourning the loss of his girl.

Lana will eventually die too. Johnathan's life being traded for hers will not be overlooked or brushed off because he had a heart condition. His heart condition doesn't make his life any less valuble than Lana's.

[PeteM]

Originally posted by liana

I have no doubt that the writers intended to kill JK for a long time, probably as an homage to the original superman movie. But, they should have done it right. No strings attached.

On this point, I completely agree.

I can't see the logic or the need for Lana to die and for Clark to turn back time. The whole concept was stupid.

Now we have another Shattered, where Clark blames himself for everything and the Clana that no one wants.

I can't see how Reckoning has advanced Clark's progression to Superman at all.

And it is not the death of Clana as so many of you have wished. There has been no resolution. He still loves her and vice versa. It will just be a repeat of Season 3 and 4, with perhaps Lex filling in as Jason.

After their ratings tanked, you would think they would learn their lesson.

[liana]

Originally posted by PeteM
On this point, I completely agree.

I can't see the logic or the need for Lana to die and for Clark to turn back time. The whole concept was stupid.

Now we have another Shattered, where Clark blames himself for everything and the Clana that no one wants.

I can't see how Reckoning has advanced Clark's progression to Superman at all.

And it is not the death of Clana as so many of you have wished. There has been no resolution. He still loves her and vice versa. It will just be a repeat of Season 3 and 4, with perhaps Lex filling in as Jason.

After their ratings tanked, you would think they would learn their lesson.

Just to make myself clear, I don't think Lana is in anyway responsible for JK's death. Clark is. :\ In fact, the whole thing was a terrible bad idea from the start. They should never made Clark propose to Lana, if they didn't want to go with it in the first place. This was a just anothe gimmick to give people what they wanted to see without giving it to them. :\ :\ Pathetic. Then, they added a cheap drama device making Clark responsible for his father's death, hence making him, probably blame Lana in the future for something that it was his choice to do. Cheap. Everything because they are not corageous enough to either really change the story and make them stay together or separate them right: as friends. They are not brave enough to play the card "they are not right to each other so they will be friends" and they are not brave enough to go against superman canon on this. Either way, they should make a choice: break up them right or don't break up them at all. That's all I ask. :mad:

[PeteM]

Originally posted by liana
Either way, they should make a choice: break up them right or don't break up them at all. That's all I ask. :mad:

Exactly. What is the whole point of Clana (first love / first relationship) if not to serve as a means for Clark to deal with his abilities while having a personal life. Show him resolving that issue and then resolve their relationship for good with a meaningful and mature understanding that she has to let him go. A rehash of the secret and lies, but now solely focus on the "its too dangerous for you to know" angle, does nothing for the progression of Clark or the story.

A repeat of Clark blaming himself for everything from the death of Martha's baby to Lana getting hurt in Shattered again does nothing.

If I had a gun I would shoot Al Miles. Season 5 was going so well, ratings dramatically higher, and you turn back SV to Season 3 and 4? How dumb can you be?

[BoSoxJim]

where's Joss Whedon, David Kemper and/or Rockne O'Bannon when you need them??!!! :(

[spideyfan]

I think if Lana did die and stay dead here..JK would have dies this season anyway. JK's death would have been more a turning point for CK->SUpes than Lanas death IMO.

I think doing JK out in the 100th episode by using something that started season 3 (heart condition / deal w/ Jor-El) was a good and classy way for him to go. I think the whole point of this episode is that for Clark, he learned FINALLY, THAT HIS ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES EVEN HE CAN'T FIX.

We will miss you Mr. Schnieder!

[wyrm11]

JK would NOT have died if Clark had not gone back in time (he would have died eventually of course...just not in this moment and in exchange for Clark's life as fortold by Jor-El).

Jor-El specifically told Clark that if he chose to save Lana, Fate would find a way to get what it wanted. And in this case, Fate wanted someone close to Clark to die.

So as soon as he turned back time, Fate was on the hunt. First, it went after Lois, with her falling in a pool of water, but Clark saved her just in time before she was electrocuted. Then Fate went to the next victim...JK and got him.

That's how it unfolded.

[Watching Smallville]

Originally posted by liana
Just to make myself clear, I don't think Lana is in anyway responsible for JK's death. Clark is. :\ In fact, the whole thing was a terrible bad idea from the start. They should never made Clark propose to Lana, if they didn't want to go with it in the first place. This was a just anothe gimmick to give people what they wanted to see without giving it to them. :\ :\ Pathetic. Then, they added a cheap drama device making Clark responsible for his father's death, hence making him, probably blame Lana in the future for something that it was his choice to do. Cheap. Everything because they are not corageous enough to either really change the story and make them stay together or separate them right: as friends. They are not brave enough to play the card "they are not right to each other so they will be friends" and they are not brave enough to go against superman canon on this. Either way, they should make a choice: break up them right or don't break up them at all. That's all I ask. :mad:
You make very good points, liana. To me this is like Lockdown, where Clark is convinced to tell Lana the truth, not because it's the right thing to do, but because he's afraid she'll leave him if he doesn't. Now, Clark and Lana's relationship looks like it won't work out, not because of the dynamics of the two people -- right or wrong -- but because of Jonathan's death. Like you say, it would be nice for the writers to let things stand or fall on their own merits.

[BoSoxJim]

Originally posted by wyrm11
JK would NOT have died if Clark had not gone back in time (he would have died eventually of course...just not in this moment and in exchange for Clark's life as fortold by Jor-El).

Jor-El specifically told Clark that if he chose to save Lana, Fate would find a way to get what it wanted. And in this case, Fate wanted someone close to Clark to die.

So as soon as he turned back time, Fate was on the hunt. First, it went after Lois, with her falling in a pool of water, but Clark saved her just in time before she was electrocuted. Then Fate went to the next victim...JK and got him.

That's how it unfolded.

posted this in the wrong thread earlier:

jk was a 2 for 1 special that was served up by the writers.

2 for 1 meaning that jk owed jor-el his life for saving clark (beginning of season 3) and clark owed a loved one for his resurrection (and finally some action with lana).

it's how TPsTB got away with eliminating only one loved one from the show.

[Xerox]

I'm still not convinced JK was THE death. I think he was destined to die either way. I believe somebody else will die *ahem* Chloe...which was hinted at earlier this season and that JK's death was just a ploy to prospone the real death deal.

This whole deal thing has me confused anyways...if Clark did die and was never resurrected people would still die because everybody almost nearly dies without the help of Clark so to me...there isn't much of a balance stored.

[UpandAtom]

When Lana died, Lex found out Clark's secret. So JK has to deal with the fact that Lex knows the family secret and that Lionel has some photograph. He also has to console his son over Lana's death and become a senator. Jonathan's heart was bad already. All this would've added to his stress and given him a heart attack.

[lookingformylois]

jk had to pay back jor-el from 2 season ago when he allow him to go get clark , this has been set up for 2 seasons

[scoobycookies]

Doesn't matter if JK would have died anyways. The universe could just as easily have chosen Martha to die in place of Lana dying and then JK dies a week later from a Lionel confrontation or JK just dies on the spot due to learning that Martha died.

Clark was just lucky (not that anyone really is lucky here) that the universe was merciful and chose Jonathon over Martha, because there still could have been two deaths here.

[HalJordan4184]

Yes, he had to pay Jor-El back. But they went out of their way (tptb) to tell us, it isn't Jor-El taking the life for Clark's. It's fate. So jonathon dying as a result of his deal, isn't the exchange. As it's not Jor-El's exchange to make. Fate didn't make jonathon owe Jor-El for his life. So either Jor-El didn't collect on the deal, or fate just took Jonathon Kent as the exchange. It wasn't both, because it can't be. They've gone expressly out of their way to make the point clear, Jor-El was not in control of the death in the episode.

[PETER WEST]

Wouldn't Jonathan have died anyways?



Yes, he would have, just not in that Episode.

[Xerox]

Ok, while watching Vengence, I had this new theory. What if Jor-el Possessed Lionel once again and chose to sacrifice Jonathan as the one?

[HalJordan4184]

It wasn't Jor-El's sacrifice to make. He makes that express point repeatedly to Clark. It is the universe finding balance, not him being an SOB. So either fate took Jonathon as the one, or Jor-El just killed him. But that would mean fate is still unbalanced, and there is still going to be a death.