![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
LaT pointed to this page, which made my jaw drop two separate times. [ETA: LaT correctly points out that the first reviewer, Neal, says a bunch of things with which I agree, and that she doesn't agree with his wacky views about the feminist agenda of the producers.]
But Neal hated the episode because it was so "feminist," in combination with "Spell," because in his reading the show argued that women's sexuality is good and fun and women are never responsible for their choices and men are evil dogs if they like sex.
Yes, "evil slut" is apparently a good thing in the show's universe -- Neal thinks that the producers want us to admire sexy Countess Lanabelle's sexual agency, despite Lana's condemnation. And he thinks we're supposed to sympathize with Shannon. (I guess he kind of has a point here, since we're told that she's right about Lex almost as often in the episode as we're told that Lana is Beautiful.) But, feminist? Of all the reasons to hate an episode of Smallville, feminism has to rank up there with "the actors aren't pretty enough." He also seems to think that women sleep with Lex just because he's rich. Yeah, keep thinking that, Neal.
But wait! There's more! Search down for Rebecca's review. (On behalf of Rebeccas everywhere ... I'm really sorry.) She loved the episode! A perfect ten! And Clark was so nice to Lex at the end, giving him another chance!
This is why we're never going to see Clark recognize his share of the responsibility for how Lex turns out. As long as a significant viewer population accepts at face value the show's statements about who's good and who's bad, the people responsible for the show will never take the position that Clark is any more responsible for what happened these past years in SV than he was for the meteor strike in the first place; Clark will feel equally guilty about both, and the audience will be supposed to understand that neither is his fault.
But Neal hated the episode because it was so "feminist," in combination with "Spell," because in his reading the show argued that women's sexuality is good and fun and women are never responsible for their choices and men are evil dogs if they like sex.
Yes, "evil slut" is apparently a good thing in the show's universe -- Neal thinks that the producers want us to admire sexy Countess Lanabelle's sexual agency, despite Lana's condemnation. And he thinks we're supposed to sympathize with Shannon. (I guess he kind of has a point here, since we're told that she's right about Lex almost as often in the episode as we're told that Lana is Beautiful.) But, feminist? Of all the reasons to hate an episode of Smallville, feminism has to rank up there with "the actors aren't pretty enough." He also seems to think that women sleep with Lex just because he's rich. Yeah, keep thinking that, Neal.
But wait! There's more! Search down for Rebecca's review. (On behalf of Rebeccas everywhere ... I'm really sorry.) She loved the episode! A perfect ten! And Clark was so nice to Lex at the end, giving him another chance!
This is why we're never going to see Clark recognize his share of the responsibility for how Lex turns out. As long as a significant viewer population accepts at face value the show's statements about who's good and who's bad, the people responsible for the show will never take the position that Clark is any more responsible for what happened these past years in SV than he was for the meteor strike in the first place; Clark will feel equally guilty about both, and the audience will be supposed to understand that neither is his fault.
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
I do think the show, and Clark, was specifically condemning Lex's sexual adventures. Especially considering the emphasis the show has put on Clark and Lana's (preposterous) virginity, Lex's behavior is cast as evil just because he has casual sex.
I agree Lex was shown as the guilty party. I'm not sure the show ever clearly spelled out the reason. I know the Kents, Clark and Chloe were all shocked by Lex's behavior, and for no really good reason, but was that really what Lex was concerned with in the last scene? It seemed to me that he was frightened about what was happening to *him*.
And yes, Clark in that scene was far too self-righteous. I guess it's a sign of how badly this show has mishandled its core relationship that I saw that scene as a big improvement over recent events.
At this point, I think SV is a classic case of a story in which the characters have overtaken the plot. TPTB started out with a stock hero and a stock villain, and when they fleshed out those two characters, they discovered that neither one fit the molds for which they were designed. Ever since, TPTB have been trying to re-tool those characters by twisting and turning them, however improbably, into the roles that these characters are "supposed" to represent.
And the result? You get the ridiculous "virginity" of Clark and Lana, and the improbable "evil" of Lex.
At this point, I'd like to take TPTB at their word when they said, 'way back in Season 1, that SV had nothing to do with comics canon. I'd like to see them make a truly bold move to re-create the characters of Clark and Lex into something more than the traditional "hero" and "villain." As shown on SV, Lex is far more human than Clark, and far more sympathetic. If the show ignores that, it's throwing away the best thing it's got.