Chloe vs Clark vs Lex
Apr. 19th, 2002 03:08 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
erilynOn issues of betraying trust, invading privacy, and double standards.
Ok, I've read some of the discussion for this episode now that I've seen it, and one of the hot issues is whether Chloe is the devil incarnate or just short-sighted with regard to her investigating Clark's adoption. Chloe-defenders have often cited that Clark and Lex are not condemned for some of their dubious actions, and that what she did wasn't done maliciously. I think what she did was incredibly stupid and offensive, and I don't think I'm coming to that conclusion just because she's not my favourite character.
Lex investigated Clark secretly (after asking him openly about the accident). This was kinda creepy and not perceived as a good thing, even if Clark didn't have huge secrets to hard, which made it a Bad Thing.
Clark stalking Lana is definitely creepy. His investigating Lex in "Zero" after Lex has asked him to stay out of it, while telling off Chloe, smacked of hypocrisy.
However, these two also have quite a different relationship than Clark and Chloe does, so I do have a different standard for their interaction (and I don't necessarily mean slash by that).
I lost a lot of respect for the character of Chloe because of this episode. What she did was wrong. Why? Let me roleplay for a moment. Say when I was her age, in Year 9 or so, and I got given an assignment to write a 6 page bio on my (not made up) friend D. I've known D for a couple of years, and I know she's adopted (something she's not at all ashamed of or bothered by people knowing). Ok, very similar situation, apart from me not having a crush on D, not being a journalist, and D's not hiding superpowers (as far as I know...). D blows me off once or twice when I try to interview her, so I talk to mutual friends who have known her longer, and maybe her parents. All fine and good. It would never occur to me in a million years to look into her adoption. Even the thought of doing so makes my skin crawl. When she's told us stuff about it, I've listened, but I've never asked her anything unless she brought it up first. You just don't go and poke around in someone's adoption/medical/finacial records. It's a gross invasion of privacy, and I find it very disturbing that Chloe doesn't seem to consider that aspect until Clark get's upset at her. Some have also defended her on the grounds that she hesitated about keeping them. I don't think it does excuse her, as she obviously realises that she probably shouldn't, but goes ahead and keeps them anyway!
You can't excuse her behaviour by comparing her to other characters. What she did was a gross invasion of a friend's privacy, and if I was Clark, I'd have a hard time trusting her for a long time.
I wanna like Chloe, she has some great moments, and if we're gonna have to have Clark with someone (other than Lex), I'd much rather it was her than Lana, but this subplot really pissed me off.
Ok, I've read some of the discussion for this episode now that I've seen it, and one of the hot issues is whether Chloe is the devil incarnate or just short-sighted with regard to her investigating Clark's adoption. Chloe-defenders have often cited that Clark and Lex are not condemned for some of their dubious actions, and that what she did wasn't done maliciously. I think what she did was incredibly stupid and offensive, and I don't think I'm coming to that conclusion just because she's not my favourite character.
Lex investigated Clark secretly (after asking him openly about the accident). This was kinda creepy and not perceived as a good thing, even if Clark didn't have huge secrets to hard, which made it a Bad Thing.
Clark stalking Lana is definitely creepy. His investigating Lex in "Zero" after Lex has asked him to stay out of it, while telling off Chloe, smacked of hypocrisy.
However, these two also have quite a different relationship than Clark and Chloe does, so I do have a different standard for their interaction (and I don't necessarily mean slash by that).
I lost a lot of respect for the character of Chloe because of this episode. What she did was wrong. Why? Let me roleplay for a moment. Say when I was her age, in Year 9 or so, and I got given an assignment to write a 6 page bio on my (not made up) friend D. I've known D for a couple of years, and I know she's adopted (something she's not at all ashamed of or bothered by people knowing). Ok, very similar situation, apart from me not having a crush on D, not being a journalist, and D's not hiding superpowers (as far as I know...). D blows me off once or twice when I try to interview her, so I talk to mutual friends who have known her longer, and maybe her parents. All fine and good. It would never occur to me in a million years to look into her adoption. Even the thought of doing so makes my skin crawl. When she's told us stuff about it, I've listened, but I've never asked her anything unless she brought it up first. You just don't go and poke around in someone's adoption/medical/finacial records. It's a gross invasion of privacy, and I find it very disturbing that Chloe doesn't seem to consider that aspect until Clark get's upset at her. Some have also defended her on the grounds that she hesitated about keeping them. I don't think it does excuse her, as she obviously realises that she probably shouldn't, but goes ahead and keeps them anyway!
You can't excuse her behaviour by comparing her to other characters. What she did was a gross invasion of a friend's privacy, and if I was Clark, I'd have a hard time trusting her for a long time.
I wanna like Chloe, she has some great moments, and if we're gonna have to have Clark with someone (other than Lex), I'd much rather it was her than Lana, but this subplot really pissed me off.
