What I find interesting is that the producers of the show apparently do not appear to understand the murky moral nature of their Jonathan Kent. Likely they regard him to be a rock-solid bastion of goodness.
Which kinda scares me -- I seriously hope they do realize what they're doing, but I'm not so sure they do...
It's easy -- far too easy -- to point a finger at Lionel Luthor and say, "Ew, corrupt," but not so easy to find his opposite in Jonathan Kent. Jonathan is as creepy in his own way as Lionel is. Maybe moreso. Lionel doesn't pretend to be anything other than what he is. He is Machievelli's Prince in the flesh. Jonathan pretends to be a good, moral man, but he isn't really. He's as self-serving as Lionel is, in his own way.
Yes! Exactly! Lionel is completely self-serving (and now evil! :-) ), but Jonathan's supposed to be good. And he's not. He's definitely human, and completely flawed, and definitely an interesting character because of that, but I can't see him as the 'good, salt of the earth, moral father figure' that he's supposed to be. Creeps me out the more I think about this...
no subject
Which kinda scares me -- I seriously hope they do realize what they're doing, but I'm not so sure they do...
It's easy -- far too easy -- to point a finger at Lionel Luthor and say, "Ew, corrupt," but not so easy to find his opposite in Jonathan Kent. Jonathan is as creepy in his own way as Lionel is. Maybe moreso. Lionel doesn't pretend to be anything other than what he is. He is Machievelli's Prince in the flesh. Jonathan pretends to be a good, moral man, but he isn't really. He's as self-serving as Lionel is, in his own way.
Yes! Exactly! Lionel is completely self-serving (and now evil! :-) ), but Jonathan's supposed to be good. And he's not. He's definitely human, and completely flawed, and definitely an interesting character because of that, but I can't see him as the 'good, salt of the earth, moral father figure' that he's supposed to be. Creeps me out the more I think about this...