Lois & Clark Forums Forums Fan Fiction Lois & Clark Fanfic FDK - Nowhere To Run - Part 7

So here is philosophical question for you. How much are our present actions determined by our memories? Does what we remember from our past determine our future actions? And what happens when those memories get all mixed up?

Of course, it’s my personal opinion that Lois’ ‘memories’ just gave her permission to do what she wanted to do, anyway, but this story caused me to ponder the above questions for quite some time. I'm interested to know what you all think.

ML

Naive, naive Clark... Luckily he realized in time that Lois was seducing him to get back to Metropolis.

Philosophy ... great. So skipped out on that and took other subjects instead. But back to your questions: I think that present actions based on memories is determined by what you remember, your experience, feelings, consequences and so forth.

For example, if you have once admitted to cheat on a test and this got you in trouble with the principle or suspended, then your present action in a similar situation will be based on your memory and the consequence of your actions. So, you have a choice to again admit to cheating or you can deny it and see the "new" outcome of your decision (or present action). However, present actions are also based on your morals and values - if you believe that it is better to be honest than to lie, then you will probably be honest, but if you are an honest kind of person, then you probably wouldn't have cheated in the first place.

As for what happens when past memories get mixed up, I guess present/future actions will not add up to who you really are (or before they got mixed up), but be more impulsive, and will give you permission to do (or not to do) things you normally would have or not have done.

Don't know if that makes sense Think I just confused myself ...

Anyhow, great part and can't wait how everything will be resolved! BTW, will Lois find those more current diaries?

ML, you scared the living beetlejuice out of me with this part And is this Wanda coming through?

Did the intensive one-on-one physical therapy really work?



He’s not going to fall for it. Please?

He isn’t falling for it.

So, this personality is either a completely scared young woman who’s selling her body for her freedom or a conniving bitch just using all her assets to get her way. And I’m not sure which is preferable because one isn’t Lois and the other is totally heartbreaking. And Clark’s going to be scarred for life. Poor toys

Now this can sound sooo dirty if I want

Yeah, on the post-hypnotic suggestion bit. He could ask Deter. In a ‘friendly’ way. Maybe use his own eyes to make a not-really-hypnotic suggestion

/nods/ But so far, it’s pretty much the reader’s mind that’s filling in all the dirt

ML, I’m totally scared, hyped, angsted, gut-wrenched out of my mind right now. This is a scarily brilliant story. And most of this is probably just my own evil imagination running wild but it’s still your fault and I need more. Please? Pretty please?

Michael

PS: I hope this FDK makes sense, as far as coherence is concerned.

PPS: And you've now got another full circle. This time with Superstud.

Oh boy! That was good! Really really good! And after all that excitement of Operation Fool (and seduce) Kent, only to have his hopes dashed the next morning, you give us a sliver of hope!

Wonderful gripping stuff! More! More! SOON PLEASE!



Cheers
Elizabeth

man! so glad he was on to her before he did anything "super"!

oy

Wow, ML. You don't pull any punches, do you?

As to your question, I think our actions are based on both memories and feelings, but I definitely think that feelings have the greater hold on us. One can be raised with impeccable morals (Clark Kent, anyone?), but he will still bend the rules to get a story, mislead his friends and loved ones to protect his secret, and spirit away his fiance to a remote island to rescue her from herself. He acted in part due to his memories, but the driving factor to all these actions was a feeling.

Fear, love, hatred, sadness, guilt -- all can have an amazing affect on a persons actions, regardless of their knowledge of good and evil -- or the law.

One might know that cheating is wrong, both by instruction and by experience, but if a child fears the consequences of not doing well on a test more than they fear the consequence of getting caught, they'll do it.

I think that's why I mentioned before that I doubt the legal consequences of kidnapping Lois are a high priority for Clark right now. He'd rather that Lois be well and safe than to avoid a jail sentence. He'd give up his job and his freedom to make sure his love gets better. His love and fears are the motivation, supported in part by his memories of what happened with Luthor.

Now -- back to the story. I still can't quite believe that you did it. Lois really did succeed in convincing Clark that she'd regained her memory and he couldn't resist a seduction by Lois Lane. She's in trouble now, though. Once bitten, twice shy -- Clark is never going to fall for a ruse like that again. He's going to put her through a grist mill of an interview before he believes her.

And yay! for Star. I can't wait to see what happens next.
BJ

Ah, that was beautifully vicious. I must hand it to you, I started to think, during Clark's reminisces about the evening, that maybe something had occurred to Lois -- even if she didn't get her memory back, maybe she remembered *something* about her feelings for Clark. But no...

And that was the most interesting part. Rarely will writers in this fandom write either of these characters as conniving. Of course that leads to your philosophical question, and I'm happy to bite, especially since I don't think the primary purpose of fiction is to entertain, I think it's to explore the human condition.

To wit, does our past predict our future? Do our memories inform our actions? I think there's no question that who we are is largely a product of what we've done and what we've experienced. But what's left when the slate is wiped clean? What is there of personality that exists without conscious memory? I think there is some kernel of identity that precedes most of our life experiences - whether you're going to be outgoing or shy, lighthearted or serious is often apparent in infancy. But perhaps our experiences, good and bad, serve to constrain or amplify our natural impulses.

So does that mean Lois's natural impulses are to manipulate the feelings of others? Or is this brainwashing at work? Good for Clark for recognizing Lois's odd and repetitive speech patterns, so hopefully he'll figure it out. But that still doesn't tell us what -- if anything -- we can glean about who Lois is from this experience.

It's good to remember, too, that once empathy -- the ability to see things from someone else's point of view -- is really acquired around age six or seven, it is ingrained in the brain in the frontal lobe, separate from memory. Amnesiacs don't become sociopaths, but people who suffer frontal lobe damage, like the famous psychology patient, Phineas Gage, do. So unless Lois's brainwashing overrides it, she should develop some sense of guilt over what she's done to Clark (unless she can find a way to justify it because of Clark's kidnapping her). Because she seems to understand how much Clark loves her and seems to believe that they were, indeed, going to get married, she shouldn't be able to go through with this with a clear conscience. Again, Deter's evil brainwashing notwithstanding...

It'll be interesting to see where you go with this, ML. I'm looking forward to it!

Regards,

Rac

Argh.

Get back here.

You're evil!

I buy Lois' actions and even Clark's reactions etc. But YOURS on the other hand...

I didn't think you'd let them go that far. That she'd say something about 'remember our first time' etc and all that and he'd clue in then rather than after.

Wonder if Superman is going to run into Henderson again and if so what will transpire...

All I have to say is get back here .

I found this to be very plausible. I'm not sure what you're asking about crossing the line. If you're asking if this crossed the line from PG-13 into R, then I would easily say 'no' since everything R-rated was off camera, so to speak. If you're asking if the story has crossed the line into what is or is not acceptable to this fandom then I would propose it depends on where you go from here.

I don't believe that Lois has lost her moral compass. She remembers two important things: 1) she's had sex with Clark before and 2) she has slept with a man she doesn't love before. Based on that preconception of who she is she has determined her actions to be moral, even though the end justifies her means. She also is manipulating herself, which Clark pointed out when he asked her how many times they had, had sex last night.

I'm wondering where Star's mores lie. What will she determine is best for Lois' wellbeing? Justice under the law? What her vibes tell her? Will she want to see Lois before she decides?


Elisabeth

As for how much our behaviour is influenced by our memories, I agree with those who say that our basic personality is what realy affects our behaviour. So if we lose our memories, but our basic personality is intact, then we will act according to our basic personality. I like the frontal lobe explanation. Or to put it differently, how our behaviour is affected depends on what parts of our brains are affected.

Lois most certainly isn't above cheating in order to get what she wants, so I don't think that her "Operation Fool Kent" is in any way against her basic personality. But I think it is glaringly obvious that, well, her body remembers her love for Clark, but her conscious mind doesn't. This was brilliantly put:

Yes, what else could make her heart beat this quickly? Maybe her body's realization that it will be allowed to do a most wonderfully delightful thing, namely seduce Clark. Lois's conscious mind is telling her that she should be doing this because it will be a great way to fool Clark to get her off the island. But her body is getting excited and hot because it really, really wants to make love to Clark (and it can't remember that the two of them have never made love before, and it can't remember why they decided to wait until they were married).

Oh, her body so desperately wants what her conscious mind is uninterested in.

I was very glad to see Clark see through the ruse concocted by Lois's conscious mind. But I was almost equally glad to see him see through the true motives of her body:

Exactly.

I was very glad to see Clark realize that Lois always repeated exactly the same phrase to say that she loved Deter and had no interest in Clark. Clearly these words are tied to a strong hypnotic command. Personally I find it hard to believe that it would be possible to brainwash Lois so thoroughly that she would give up her conscious love for Clark so completely and transfer it all to Deter so perfectly, when her body still remembers all the love it has for Clark. I once saw a documentary about a woman who was really and truly "in two minds" about the world around her, but then doctors had found it necessary to sever the connection between her two brain hemispheres. She really did have two minds and two ways of looking at the world, but Deter can't have performed major brain surgery on Lois to affect her in a similar way.

Anyway, this was a riveting, fantastic chapter! I love G-fic where Lois and Clark make love "off screen". And there is no way that I can believe that Lois's mind can convince her body that it wants to go back to Metropolis to do with Deter what it just did with Clark. If Lois's brain hemispheres aren't well and truly separated, then I don't see how her mind can make her body run away from Clark into the waiting arms of Deter.

But you are going to bring Star into the story! Yes! That's a great idea!

Please post more soon!

Ann

I have deleted my comments.

Since Patrick deleted his comment - I will delete mine .

Ah, philosophical discussions. I agree, Ann, that Lois isn't above cheating to get what she wants, but every time she's cheated someone who doesn't deserve it (take Season 1 Lois stealing Clark's story, for example), she feels bad about it. She jumps in without checking the water level, but when things go badly, she feels remorse. Lois may be tough, but I do believe the character is quite bighearted.

So is Operation Fool Kent out of character? It isn't given Lois has no memories. But can she maintain it, given what she is starting to remember about who Clark is? I don' t think so. I think even before she remembers what Clark meant to her, knowing that what he feels for her is real and knowing that she must have had strong feelings for him as well will cause her to feel bad about what she's done. Of course, this is assuming the brainwashing isn't so deep as to prevent her normal response from eventually kicking in.

I do take the point that Lois can't realize at this juncture, the level her manipulation has reached. She honestly believes that she and Clark have had sex before. She also somehow has gotten it into her head that she was the one making that over the top, flowery statement about sleeping with one man, while in love with another. At some point, she will either remember or have brought to her attention by Clark that they'd never slept together before--that they'd consciously decided to wait until their wedding. I'm not sure how she'll take that particular revelation, but again...the 'Lois' response would include remorse.

Actually, Framework, I can see how you could make that argument. So I've gone back and made a couple changes that I think would protect him. As they are at the door of the bedroom, I am inserting the following:

Does that address your concerns?

EDIT TO ADD: I also added this to their discussion the following morning:

Oh, and you'll get more on her thinking at the time when she's taking her shower the next morning that I think might address any lingering concerns you might have.

ML

Wow! What they said. This was intense. More soon. Laura

whew! I'm glad that clark wasn't so devastated from figuring out lois's scheme that he didn't start realizing what was really going on.... one step closer to solving the mystery!

Star! forgot abt. her!! it's gonna be fun! can't remember... was she around in the original series when lois was getting amnesia?

hmmm as for memories... I think it affects so subconsciously.... if we're wounded by past experiences, or have a positive experience, we carry it with us in our current situations, and influences how we interact.

I don't know about memories being mixed up, but I've had the experience of talking over a particular salient memory with a friend, and it's interesting how we remember it differently (each of us taking a particular snapshot)...

MLT,

I have already deleted my comments. Please do not take my comment in to account in anyway.

Sorry to give offense.

Patrick's post was very intreresting, even though he has deleted it now. The question is, however, when is a rape a rape? People are going to disagree about that, because we have different standards. Maybe you know that rapes on a horrific scale are being committed in some war-ravaged parts of Africa. I heard an interview with a soldier from such a part of Africa, and he said that there are two kinds of rape: the "good" kind, where the soldier rapes the woman because he needs sexual gratification (so that he rapes her for his own pleasure); and the "bad" kind of rape, where the soldier rapes the woman in order to hurt or deman her, so that he rapes her to cause her pain. Well, I think most people in the west wouldn't consider it a "good" kind of rape if the man rapes the woman just because he needs sex right then. But what is rape, then, to most people in the west?

Frankly I think people in the west don't generally agree about what exactly rape really is, but we probably agree that if the two people sharing a sex act are consenting adults, then it is probably not rape. But things get more complicated when we consider that one of the persons having sex may not be able to make a good, well-considered choice, and if the other person knows and takes advantage of this fact, then it may be rape after all. I seem to remember a case in Sweden where a psychologist lost his right to practice psychology as a profession, because he had taken advantage of female patients. The women were vulnerable and turned to the psychologist to find help and healing, and when they became attracted to him he encouraged them to have sex with him. The court didn't consider it rape, but it did say it was malpractice, and the psychologist lost his licence to practice his profession.

What about Clark's behaviour on the island where he has taken Lois? First, I don't think we can really use the legislation of today to judge Clark, because his crime (his kidnapping of Lois) was a reaction to a futuristic sci-fi crime, Deter's complete and utter manipulation of Lois's mind and free will. You can't judge Clark without considering his acts as a reaction to Deter's crime, but the legislation of today wouldn't know how to properly deal with such a futuristic sci-fi mind control.

It is of course possible that Deter was able to take control of Lois's mind because she is a woman who loves nothing better than to be manipulated by a powerful man. If so, then Deter's determination to hypnotize and control her may in itself be enough to make her love him and prefer him over Clark. After all, Clark has always allowed her to make her own choices, but she may prefer to have her choices taken away from her by a strong man.

Of course, that is not how I want to see Lois.

The alternative, if Lois really and truly loves Clark, and Deter has managed to control her so completely that she has totally rejected her love for her fiance and transferred it to Deter against Lois's natural will, suggests to me that Deter's ability to control and subjugate other people is quite horribly effective. Please note that in spite of her total rejection of Clark and her insistence that she loves only Deter, Lois is quite well-functioning in other ways. She is determined, smart and unconcerned by her amnesia, since she completely trusts "Max" to cure it. She accepts that she has been engaged to Clark, but she is utterly uninterested in why she wanted to share her life with him. She is thinking and planning like she normally does. In fact she is very much her normal self, except that she has been completely robbed of her natural love for Clark, and she has been forced to love Deter instead.

As I said, there are only two possible explanations for Lois's behaviour. Either she is a very weak woman who doesn't love Clark for himself, but only loves his super strength and his ability to control her if he wants to. But since he doesn't want to force her to do things against her will, she loves a man who does take away her ability to make her own choices.

The other possibility is that Deter has found a way to control people that is so effective that he might be able to take over Metropolis and possibly the world. There have been stories where Clark suffered from amnesia. Suppose that Clark lost his memory and his powers at the same time, and suppose he was brought to Deter for treatment. And suppose that Deter told him that "he loves only Max". I don't mean this in an erotic sense, but what if Deter was planting the suggestion that Clark loved nothing better than carrying out Deter's will? What if Superman became Deter's slave, insisting on always obeying his master's voice?

You may object that Clark would never be enslaved like that, because unlike Lois he can't be manipulated. And that is possible. But if so, that means that Lois can be manipulated and made to do things that she would normally rebel against. But if she isn't this wishy-washy kind of person, then Deter's manipulation must be super-strong.

I think that Clark didn't rape Lois on that island not only because Lois was a consenting adult, but because her body was the part of her that was really and truly "in its right mind", and her body desperately wanted to make love to Clark. I think her body "remembered" Clark, too. Her body knew that it loved him and her body knew that it had been engaged to him because it loved him. Her body was in its right mind. We can argue that Clark should have resisted her seduction of him, because he should have suspected that her mind "was not in its right mind". Well, he wasn't able to do that. He reacted to the honesty of her body and to his own intense longing. And he chose to believe, rather naïvely, that Lois had become herself again. That was stupid of him, but he didn't rape Lois. At least not in my book, the way I define rape.

Ann

You are going to think that I am crazy, but I am going to talk about sense of smell.

Humans do not realize how much our actions are affected by smells. Smells can bring back memories, and smells can control our hormones in many ways. (I won't go into detail on one of the examples because you would all say Ewwwwww!)

Smell plays a part in sex. I don't know how it meshes in with pheromones, but you often hear widows comment that they have kept their husband's possessions around because they can still smell his scent. (Lois has probably done that in a couple of NK-themed fanfics.) We are also biological creatures, who react to conditioning. So being close to your lover/spouse and smelling them, even unconsciously, can trigger arousal.

So it would be reasonable that Lois, being close enough to Clark to smell his body, would react by being aroused. There is also probably some unconscious conditioning having to do with the sight of him too. After all, she is not going to fall into bed with every good-looking man she sees. But she believes they have already been lovers and she has gotten the visual and olfactory (smell) triggers that have brought her to arousal in the past (even if she did not complete sex in the past). As some previous posters said, her body remembers him.

Also, Lois, without her memories of Clark, does have other memories of the past. And her memories of past relationships fall into the category of "men only want one thing." So she assumes Clark is the same as the others, and would not realize how deceiving him into sex would hurt him.

So I don't see this Lois as any more conniving than normal Lois, the Lois who sees nothing wrong with using her lockpicks whenever possible.

I also don't see Clark at fault, because at the time they have sex, he DOES believe that her memories of their relationship and her love for him have returned.

On your original question, ML, a couple of other posters have already posted my opinion. Our memories shape us but they do not change who we fundamentally are.