Risk: A Cultural Thesis for LOST 6.03 “What Kate Does” by Pearson Moore
LOST Theories, Recaps/Reviews, Season 6 View Comments
“Trust me.”
We heard the phrase only once, but we saw the words–in deeds that risked lives–two dozen times in the space of forty-four minutes. Tonight’s episode was one of the richest in the six years of this most compelling of television programmes, for tonight we were obliged to confront dangers of mind, soul, and spirit. This night everyone on-Island and off risked everything–and gained rewards even more precious than a wedding ring kissed by tear-stained lips. This was an episode to savour.
Birth and Rebirth
Aaron has identity even before his birth. This is a disturbing and wonderful and deeply mysterious truth, made more profound by the chilling then comforting presence of Ethan Goodspeed at Claire’s bedside. Apparently, whether Claire gives birth on-Island or off, Ethan must lead the prenatal preparations. This revelation was one of several instances of relational inevitability dramatised over the last three hours. The recurring theme of inevitability seems fresh with each occurrence, seems a necessary aspect of the narrative.
His name must be Aaron. “I don’t know why I said it,” Claire says to Kate. “It was like I knew it or something.” He is Aaron because his own flesh-and-blood mother must raise him. And somehow, we know, even before Claire knocks on the door of the adopting family’s house, there is no way they can adopt the baby. Of course the woman’s husband left her–the world is course-correcting in such a way that Claire, whether she likes it or not, will have to raise the baby herself. That is her destiny, but more importantly, this is Aaron’s destiny.
The most terrible and exciting aspect of this entire sequence of scenes is the fact that every facet of the strange inevitability around Aaron revolves around the truth that he must return to the Island. Yet we know, in the spacetime inhabited by fugitive Kate and pregnant Claire and the pleasant Dr. Goodspeed, the Island is submerged under a thousand metres of water. There is no Island to which Aaron can return, and in this spacetime, he was never even on the Island. Yet the connection to the Island is undeniable. Aaron is tethered to the Island by an umbilical stronger and more real than the one connecting him to his mother.
We believed at first Sayid to have been reborn. In the physical sense, perhaps he is not. If we trust our intuitions about the interaction last week between Hurley and Miles, it seems clear the seer from Encino knew Sayid was never dead, even if he didn’t say so in as many words to Hurley. If he was never dead, he cannot be reborn.
Yet we find ourselves aware of new life in Sayid. When Dogen and Jack have their private talk, the Temple Master tells Jack he must give Sayid the green pill. Jack demands to know the contents of the pill, and when Dogen says Jack must give Sayid the medicine, for the sake of his life, Jack counters with “He already died.” This seems a rare and strange place for a healer to place himself. Jack seems to be hoisting a list of ingredients to a higher plane than Sayid’s life. Dogen expresses concern about Sayid’s “infection”, while Jack insists on broadening his knowledge of herbal medicines, and all the while, a man who miraculously regained consciousness and complete healing of wounds is dismissed as one who “already died.” The strange discussion seems askew, the priorities grossly misplaced.
But this is not the only instance of Sayid’s life being accorded less value than abstract concepts. When Jack presents Sayid with the green pill, Sayid’s response is Biblical: “I only care about who I trust. So if you want me to take that pill, Jack, I will.”
This is breathtaking in its audacity. Neither Sayid nor Jack knows the contents of the pill. Sayid places unrestrained faith in Jack, and now a crushing burden falls on the healer. This is no longer abstract. Sayid may die if he takes the pill. The only useful question at this point in the episode: What is Jack Shephard made of? What value does he place on life, on trust, on knowledge?
As I watch Jack throw the pill in his mouth and swallow, my jaw drops open and I cannot process the event through my shock. The sequence of events remains askew. The problem is not that Jack is placing higher value on Sayid’s life than his own. The problem for me, as I struggle to make sense of this most intense scene, is that Jack is not placing greater value on Sayid’s life. Something else, apparently something carrying an importance more profound even than life or death, is at play.
Jack couldn’t give Sayid the pill. He was planning to do so. He had every intention of doing so. He resolved to tell Sayid the complete truth, and that was what he did. But then Sayid said those words: “I care only about who I trust. So if you want me to take that pill, Jack, I will.”
The Book of Ruth in the Hebrew Bible relates a story about a pagan woman named Ruth who shows kindness to a Hebrew woman named Naomi. When it is time for them to go their separate ways, Naomi encourages Ruth to return to her pagan village.
“Look,” said Naomi, “your sister-in-law is going back to her people and her gods. Go back with her.”
But Ruth replied, “Don’t urge me to leave you or to turn back from you. Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there I will be buried. May the Lord deal with me, be it ever so severely, if anything but death separates you and me.”
Ruth just gave up everything: family, village, her former gods, everything she ever knew–turned her back on all of it, and gave herself over to Naomi and her God. Ruth discovered something of greater value than even her own life.
Jack couldn’t give Sayid the pill. Not because he valued Sayid’s life. He certainly did value the man’s life, and his own. But life did not carry greatest value in this scene. Jack was able to risk his own life by swallowing that pill because he placed greater importance on something other than his own life. Jack placed highest value on the trust Sayid had placed in him.
Sayid and Jack place greater value on their trust of each other than on their own lives.
This is audacious. Rare. This is story that burns deep into the soul, engages every faculty of spirit and sense and wonder.
With the intensity of this scene we begin to get a glimpse into the innermost core of LOST. This is not a show about good versus evil. It is not about free will versus determinism. It is not about time travel or electromagnetic anomalies or spacetime displacement. It is about our very humanity. It is about who we are at the very centre of our conscious selves.
Ruth and Naomi
I was too thick-headed to pick up on the Ruth and Naomi references after the first viewing of the Sayid/Jack scenes. The writers must have known about lab rats like me who spend too much time with beakers and flasks and not nearly enough time with books and ideas, because they were thoughtful enough to give us Ruth and Naomi in the flesh, in the form of Claire and Kate.
Kate is getting back to her roots in both spacetime locations. It is as if she is back among us after three or so years away. Kate is decisive, bold, and maybe most importantly, she has a heart again. It is her heart that drives the scenes with Claire. Whether on the Island or off, Kate has always had a place in her heart for Claire, and this certainly must be taken as yet another instance of her connection to Aaron, and therefore, his connection to the Island.
When Kate opens Claire’s bag and finds the photograph, Kate seems to feel more than shame. If there is only shame, she has no reason to track down the woman and help her. She feels connection. She is driven to connect with this woman.
The interaction between the two women is as rich in its own way as the higher-stakes scenes between Jack and Sayid. Claire ought to be frightened by the reckless fugitive who thinks nothing of pointing loaded guns at anyone crossing her path. Yet Claire feels endeared to the woman and her genuine desire to help. When Claire asks Kate to accompany her to the door of the adoptive parents’ home, we know the connection is firm. And when they dash to the hospital, Claire protects her new friend.
“Would you believe me if I said I was innocent?”
This marked the second time in a single episode that a major character said something that could not possibly have been uttered. It implied too much, it went too deep. Claire doesn’t hesitate. “Of course I would.”
Kate’s silence hits me like a sledgehammer. She cannot possibly claim innocence, because she is not innocent. So she can say nothing.
When I realise what is happening between Kate and Claire I don’t think of Ruth and Naomi. The parallel that hits me first is King David at the Cave of Adullam. It is here that David expresses a keen desire for water from a well in Bethlehem. Unfortunately, the city is occupied by his enemy, and he goes to bed ruing his misfortune. But the next day, three of his lieutenants come to him, water skin in hand. They risked their lives, somehow winding their way through the city and past hundreds of enemy soldiers, and brought up water from his favourite well. David is stunned, left speechless. Having no adequate response, he tells the men he cannot thank them. No thanks from any human, not even from a king, can match the greatness of their deed. He takes the only possible action: he pours the water on the ground as an offering.
Thesis
Aaron has identity even before his birth. Even before he is conscious of anything in life, he has purpose and drive, he has not one but two women watching over him, as well as a kindly doctor who is destined to prepare him for birth. He is destined to return to the Island.
Somehow, Aaron has value even before he enjoys the full measure of life.
Claire and Kate share a bond that supersedes any previous concern. They protect each other, even when in doing so they place their own lives in potential danger. Like Ruth and Naomi, they will never leave each other now. Their bond is stronger than life itself.
Jack and Sayid are willing to give up their own lives, but not their trust in each other. They are bound by realities stronger than life itself.
LOST is about the elements of our humanity that precede and supersede life itself. Our common humanity has a value greater than life. LOST argues that there must be a fertile ground into which we place the fragile seeds of our human existence. This ground is rich in trust, empathy, compassion, respect, and the desire to serve the needs of others. This is our perfection. This is what Jacob seeks for those he brings to the Island, even if he doesn’t know himself the full measure of this perfection.
LOST tells us if we do not form bonds like those of Jack and Sayid, if we do not respect, if we do not have compassion, we will likely end up in Widmore’s camp, wearing the black uniform of Stuart Radzinsky, ready at a moment’s notice to enforce our desires over the needs, even over the lives of others. Or we may end up in the MIB’s camp, seeing in law, discipline, and judgment the pinnacle of human perfection. Or we may end up in the dreamer’s camp–with Jacob, coming to believe that there are no laws, save the seeking after perfection.
LOST is about a world gone awry. The Island is split between the ungrounded followers of Jacob, the harsh law imposed by the MIB, and the occasional self-serving visitors like Charles Widmore and the Dharma Initiative.
It has become a game.
Two sides: One Jacob, one the Man in Black. One says human beings are essentially good, that we seek perfection. One says human beings are corrupt, that we can only be judged for our sins.
In the world of LOST–on the Island–they’re both wrong. Human beings are good and bad. But our humanity is only good. It is our humanity–the fertile soil of our existence as complete human beings–that is worthy above all of our most reverent attention–even to the point of sacrificing health and life to secure for the common good.
PM.
Related posts:
-
LOST Ep. 6.03 Live Reaction/Recap Video: What Kate Does - The Wounds That Heal Us – A Cultural Analysis of LOST 6.01/6.02
- Magnificence: The Cultural Mythology of LOST 1.01 to 6.18
Tags: Episode 6.03, LOST Theories, Pearson Moore, recaps&reviews, Season 6
View Comments to “Risk: A Cultural Thesis for LOST 6.03 “What Kate Does” by Pearson Moore”
Leave a Reply
Sign up on Gravatar.com to display an avatar image beside your name.
Rules for commenting.
- The Admins of SL-LOST will not tolerate any form of discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation or religious beliefs.
- Do not be rude: personal attacks and destructive criticism will get you banned.
- Use only English. Please use correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Once you have published your comment, you have 5 minutes to edit it. Do not double post.
- Spoilers are NOT allowed in comments unless the blog post you are discussing contains promos, sneak peeks or clues given by the cast or the writers for upcoming episodes. Even with a “spoiler warning” notice, your comment will get deleted. Remember: SL-LOST.com is not a spoiler site.
- Please keep your comments relevant to the blog entries.
If you don't follow these simple rules you will be permanently banned from SL-LOST.com.
Rules for commenting.
- The Admins of SL-LOST will not tolerate any form of discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation or religious beliefs.
- Do not be rude: personal attacks and destructive criticism will get you banned.
- Use only English. Please use correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
- Please keep your comments relevant to the blog entries.
If you don't follow these simple rules you will be permanently banned from SL-LOST.com.
February 10th, 2010 at 1:59 pm
[...] This guy actually connects Jack and the Biblical Naomi. Fascinating stuff. Share and Enjoy: [...]
February 10th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
I'm happy you were able to enjoy this episode…..but, I think a lot of this analysis is pretty over-dramatized, and may have missed what little point there was in this episode entirely. The only reason I liked this episode, was that last night we may have learned that questions that WEREN'T answered in the past may actually be answered in this alternate reality.
Sayid did NOT remember what happened before the temple (“Jack, what happened to me”)…kinda like Claire didn't even remember the crash or the month she was on the island after she was kidnapped by Ethan (I also think that's when Claire got the sickness) and had her baby “prepared for birth”. By seeing Ethan again in a similar “birth preparation role” in another spacetime, I think it became clear to the viewer that even though things are different, they will play out similarly. You're right, Aaron will make it back to the island…may even be born there….and, I predict Kate will still deliver that baby. But….Claire WON'T raise it (unless this alt universe is the 'fixed' version of the story).
Also…..HOW DID YOU NOT MENTION……MAC!!!!!!!!! (a.k.a Aldo) HAHAHAHA. I knew there was no taking this episode seriously the MOMENT I saw him.
February 10th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
WOW!, So much about LOST, thank you very much!
I liked “humality” theory. GREAT!
February 10th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
“JohnnyLes” – Dont call it “alternate reality”!
February 10th, 2010 at 3:50 pm
PM,
I would agree with the first comment that your analysis might be stretching, particularly your attempt to make parallels to the Bible. (And I read those stories recently.) Or maybe I just haven't had enough time to process the episode yet.
I was disappointed by the episode. I feel like we didn't learn enough, and with now only 15 hours of the show left (well, more like 630-645 minutes), that concerns me.
I would agree that it is fate for these people to interact with each other, even in the LA X spacetime. When I saw Ethan, I had to figure out how he could even be alive, until I remembered that women and children were evacuated from the Island in 1977. Clearly, Aaron is a special child who has a definitive role to play in the outcome of this drama. After all, he's one of the Oceanic Six (six of your Seven?).
I wasn't surprised to see crazy, hermit Claire at the end of the episode. At first, she reminded of a young Eloise Hawking: curly/frizzy blond hair and a rifle. Then I thought back to the traps that were set, which were clearly hers, and she reminded me of a young Rousseau.
I'm surprised you didn't account for the “infection” or “claiming” of Sayid and Claire. What can that be?
One more thought on Sayid: when he was held under in the spring of the temple, I thought it was going to be a baptism, which would indicate a rebirth and new beginnings. But this is, apparently, a reverse baptism of sorts, if we are to trust Dogen. (Can we trust him? Can we assume he's on the good side of things because he's aligned with Jacob?)
And, PM, one other thing: what's the significance of the baseball?
Brian
February 10th, 2010 at 4:05 pm
How is Aaron supposed to be born on an underwater island? I'd really like to know.
February 10th, 2010 at 4:18 pm
How about his mother travels back in time on her way to the island (like even the original Oceanic 815 may have in the first ep) to a point before the island sunk?
Wouldn't even come close to the most far-fetched thing in the show.
February 10th, 2010 at 4:21 pm
HAH. alright, SORRY! What are we supposed to be calling it again? Because, I honestly dont' see these two story lines “meeting up”. I think this is an alternate presentation of what ultimately will always happen…..OR, it's the beginning of the “end” of the story we see of the “on-islanders”.
February 10th, 2010 at 4:21 pm
Hi JohnnyLes,
Thank you for your comments. I was glad to see Aldo back, too. And especially since he seemed to be nothing more than a foil to show us that Kate is definitely back. Having Action Austen back on the Island is a big plus!
PM
February 10th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
Two other things…… Prediction: Dogen has a dog whistle around his neck (did someone say that here already? not my original thought)…..and a baseball has “108 double stiches”….oh, and Jack liked baseball……other than that. Jesus played baseball in the Bible….duh.
February 10th, 2010 at 4:26 pm
Hi Vahag,
I'm glad you liked the analysis!
PM
February 10th, 2010 at 5:20 pm
Hi Brainjdubs,
Thank you for your comments. It seems from what others are writing the reception to the episode was lukewarm. I'm biased the other way on Kate episodes–she's my favourite character after Locke, so I look forward to Kate-centricity. But I appreciate your point of view, too.
PM
February 10th, 2010 at 5:33 pm
PM,
I do appreciate your insight. I believe that Locke is my favorite character, too, but I've never cared for Kate. I think she is one of the weakest characters in many ways. I also believe the romantic triangle is a forced, unoriginal convention and its inclusion leads to some of the weakest moments of writing on the show. Example: in Season 5, Horace is upset because Amy isn't over her dead first husband. She held on to his ankh necklace and he found it and was upset. He asks Sawyer if three years is long enough for someone to get over a person. Sawyer reflects on Kate and says that three years is enough. In the very next scene Sawyer sees Hurley, Jack, and Kate. That was weak, unoriginal and predictable. If we want sappy love triangles, we can go to many other shows and movies.
February 10th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Hi Brainjdubs,
I couldn't agree more. The under-utilisation of Kate for the last three years and Darlton's insistence on milking the love triangle for a few extra viewers I feel were the biggest mistakes of the series. Kate could have been so much more than a love interest. It seems the writers finally woke up to her potential this season, and I've been glad to see the change in Kate's character for the past three hours.
PM
February 10th, 2010 at 6:55 pm
Wow. I also couldn't agree more…(except for not caring for Kate….I heart Kate). The love triangles on this show was been AWFULLLLL. The Jack, Kate, Sawyer one is really the only moderately believable love-triangle (or at least was in Season 1)…and even that is just NOT interesting anymore.
I couldn't be more thrilled Juliette is dead for this exact reason.
Favorite Characters: Lapidus, Desmond, Naomi, Vincent, annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd ALDO!!!! HAHAH.
February 10th, 2010 at 7:01 pm
I like Desmond and Lapidus, too. I also loved Mr. Eko. Those characters, and Locke, have some soul.
I never warmed to Kate. (My mind can acknowledge that she's beautiful, but I find her characer a put-off.) I also don't like the old, hateful Jin. And I really disliked Michael.
February 10th, 2010 at 8:00 pm
Yeah, this recap was a little over the top but I agree with the main thesis: once more, Jack and the “seven” achieve redemption and prove their moral superiority through altruism, self-sacrifice and humanism. That's why I think that Jack will die in the end.
But… Are you aware that your “Roussean” humanist point won't be proven unless John Locke — the REAL John Locke, the one that everything and everyone left behind, the underdog with the pure heart: the dead one— gets final retribution. And by retribution I don't mean “heroic death”, I mean universal victory and recognition.
February 10th, 2010 at 8:39 pm
hopefully the bond with Claire and Charlie is stronger than anyone's cause i really wish they reunited… i probably will be dissatisfied if they don't meet on the island especially.
February 10th, 2010 at 9:09 pm
I love how the whole “course correction” aspect of the character's lives is coming into play (Claire having to keep Aaron because the adoptive parents had split up). Its been interesting to me since Ms Hawking mentioned it in season 3. Hopefully we'll see more having to do with space-time and everything
February 10th, 2010 at 9:46 pm
Hi Rich,
I fully expect we'll see the real Locke back on the Island by the end of the season, and he'll take charge. If that doesn't happen, I'll be very surprised. But it wouldn't be the first time!
PM
February 10th, 2010 at 10:47 pm
please dont forget the fantasfic scene with “Ford and Austin”, in my opinion on of the MOST tuching.
When Kate cried, oh, looked like she had nothing to cry for, but she did, gotta say I did cry there…
February 11th, 2010 at 12:44 am
claire getting on a plane and crashing on the island back in time just to have the baby seems pretty damned far fetched to me. I highly doubt we are going to see any more time traveling and i couldnt disagree with you more – its painfully obvious this about freewill and destiny and the idea that the universe course corrects for your attempts to avoid destiny which would mean these two timelines will and HAVE to meet up somewhere.
February 11th, 2010 at 12:53 am
Thoughtful analysis. I think Aaron is important only in that he will carry on the Shepard line for the next generation. Think Lost – The Next Generation (along with Sun&Jin's baby girl, Sawyers, Penny&Desmonds Charlie ….)
The current generation is going through the final tests that will award them a place at the game table when the story is reset – and like in backgammon and chess, black or white are only two differenct colors and neither with a value system of “good” and “evil” assigned to the sides.
February 11th, 2010 at 4:58 am
I agree with the comments regarding the romantic subplots. Along with some on-the-nose dialogue, and a few cheats with exposition, these were aspects of the show that haven't worked for me. I never bought into Sawyer-Juliet — so it's been difficult to be emotionally invested in their tragedy. And the moment that Jack said his plan with the bomb was inspired by Kate, I rolled my eyes. I don't have an issue with including a romantic dimension in the show since it covers such a broad spectrum already — but they didn't sell me on the Kate-Sawyer-Jack-Juliet relationships.
And although I'm not a big Kate fan, I feel strongly — from a storytelling standpoint — that there's going to be more of a hook with her. There's been something missing from her character arc from the start. I feel a much needed twist or 3rd dimension to her character coming. Kate does more than “run” — I hope.
February 11th, 2010 at 5:11 am
The man who lost his kidney and legs; who was mocked by co-workers; who was rejected by travel agents; who was hung up on by phone-sex operators — and who was about to commit suicide before being strangled by the man who already shot him once — will be redeemed. He must be. He had his “dark night of the soul” — time for him to pull the sword from the stone — his Act III has begun with his missing bag of knives.
February 11th, 2010 at 12:17 pm
Dave,
You said it better than I did. Locke will be back. Like Christian and Aaron, that suitcase full of knives must, by agreement of all the Fates through time and space, find its way to the Island. And its owner will be there to take possession–and use them!
PM
February 11th, 2010 at 1:08 pm
Yeah , and if Arron is Jacob , so he is super-important.A lot of times I thought Charlie (Desmonds and Penny son) is Charles Widmore. I know seems like its impossible, but in this season I (we) have to be prepared to anything-everything…
February 11th, 2010 at 2:37 pm
Hi Danielle,
Thank you for your kind comments. And I think you're right about the good v. evil issue. Jacob is evil in Cerberus' eyes, and vice versa. This should be an exciting ride over the next fifteen episodes.
PM
February 11th, 2010 at 3:14 pm
Damon? Carlton? Is that you!? You speak with such conviction!
Listen guy, I have NO idea what is gonna happen (neither do you I might add), but I'm merely speculating that it could. “claire getting on a plane and crashing on the island back in time just to have the baby seems pretty damned far fetched to me.” – Really!?! Does it? I mean, cause it may have ALREADY happened on the show! Do you have ANY idea WHEN the original flight 815 crashed? You think it's 2004, but, do we know that for sure!? No, we really do not. There is still PLENTY that hasn't been explained from the very first moment of the show (why did Jack wake up in the middle of the forest unscathed, like 500 yards from the plane, and not seat-belted into his seat?) and I think some sort of time-travel MAY explain it. Could I be 100% wrong? Absolutely. But to dismiss it completely based on absolutely NOTHING factual to the contrary kinda just makes it sound like noise. Feel free to disagree, but don't deny it isn't possible.
“its painfully obvious this about freewill and destiny and the idea that the universe course corrects for your attempts to avoid destiny which would mean these two timelines will and HAVE to meet up somewhere.” Aside from this being a brutal butchering of the English language, I really don't understand your point. So….assuming we know the universe MUST course correct ( i agree), that means that these two timelines MUST meet-up!?! I think you get from A to C by leaving out B. Not trying to claim that isn't possible, but how is that PAINFULLY OBVIOUS (I CAN BARELY MOVE THIS IS SO OBVIOUS!!!) ???? You could be totally right, but here is a possible scenario where you're wrong:
Similar to the movie Sliding Doors (which I haven't seen…so I will not present this plot correctly), It's possible that one small event in the past (in sliding doors, it was a woman making a subway vs. a woman running into somebody and missing that subway) may have radically altered how one's life may have played out. In one scenario (like in sliding doors) it's possible that the woman makes the subway, meets the man of her dreams, marries him, but he dies. In another iteration, the woman misses the subway, and never meets that man. The Universe course corrects itself in this example because the woman wasn't supposed to be with that man in the end in EITHER scenario. So….how do we know that this ALT universe isn't just trying to show us a different iteration of the survivors lives, and how everything would have played out differently (AND similarly) if something different happened? What if the ALT universe is really just showing what would happen if Jack “missed the subway”.
Is it for THAT reason that I think we could see many things play out similarly, and I believe that Aaron being born on an island where EVERY OTHER BABY DIES was very very significant….and MAY happen again. More likely, he faces another large obstacle to being born, but is born anyway.
Maybe you'd like to offer an explanation of why these two timelines “HAVE” to meet up, and exactly what that even means. (Will the stories end the same anyway ('course correction') or will on-island Jack actually meet ALT Jack?)
February 11th, 2010 at 4:08 pm
I find it amusing that you can completely dismiss my opinions based on nothing factual and comment on my grammar when your grasp of the English language is clearly not so masterful. For example: when did i ever totally dismiss your ideas “completely based on absolutely NOTHING factual to the contrary …” and “…deny it isn't possible.” When, in fact, I said: “SEEMS pretty damned FAR FETCHED to me. I HIGHLY DOUBT we are going to see any more time traveling and i couldnt DISAGREE with you more” Using the words/phrases 'seems', 'far fetched', and 'highly doubt' are hardly damning words of fact – please free to use a dictionary, I was simply disagreeing and nothing more.
I would go on to cite instances relevant and actually inside the lost universe such as eloise teaching Desmond about course correction and explain to him him the inevitability of destiny. Or bring up something like MIB/Jacobs conversations and how Jacob often allows the characters to decide things on there own while MIB coerces them to do things with mind games. I would also be inclined to let you know that the film you cited, “sliding doors' i actually have seen and own (FYI, I think it is odd for you to use a source when you have never seen it) – it is a fantastic film and is a wonderful example defending my point of view on destiny and course correction as the two time-lines meet up when they both are in the hospital. The baby dies in one and the mother dies in the other and they are the only thing that is different in the two time-lines – she even sees flashes of the other time-line as they are re-syncing. So no, I do not believe two jacks will meet each other – the two time-lines will find a way to naturally re-sync on some event and the duality will cease to exist.
I would bother telling you all this but clearly you are the only one entitled to their opinion – anyone else is a just an uneducated jerk who has no idea what he/she is talking about. Ill just be moving along now and be sure to avoid reading or commenting on anything Johnny Les posts in my best effort to avoid offending him with possible need to defend his ideas.
February 11th, 2010 at 4:35 pm
I have another theory: Whyt if Penny and Desmond's Charlie is in act the Charlie that we watched drown? I know, this too would be impossible, but it'd be really dramatic if thinking thta Desmond watched his own son die… It wpuld make sense in the “full circle” ideology of LOST. Charlie saves everyone and sacrifices himself – thankful Desmond calls his own son Charlie without knowing that this is goind to be the Charlie he knew (?)
February 11th, 2010 at 4:36 pm
On several occasions I say that you could be totally correct, so, again, I don't know what you're talking about.
Disagreements are usually productive when a counter-point is offered rather than an unsubstantiated opinion. You make a GREAT counter-argument in this post, but didn't do it at all in your original post. So, NO, I'm not the only one entitled to an opinion…I just find it pointless to say, “Hey, I think your wrong” without saying exactly why.
Your synopsis of the film is clearly far better than mine (You find it odd that I cite the film, even though I admit openly I haven't seen it….yet, it's a “wonderful example defending your point”. gotcha), and maybe I should actually WATCH the film before continuing to probe on this topic….but i find this line interesting: “So no, I do not believe two jacks will meet each other – the two time-lines will find a way to naturally re-sync on some event and the duality will cease to exist.” Interesting (really)….so, in the movie…..AFTER they re-sync…. is the baby dead? or is the mom dead? Or both? Or Neither?
You're gonna avoid my posts!??!! OH my GOD! How will I go on!?!? Quit being over-dramatic and have a conversation. It's the most fun part of this show.
February 11th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
Hi Anadiplosis,
I like your insights, and I think they're plausible. JohnnyLes' insights seem plausible to me, too. At this point I feel there's sufficient ambiguity and incomplete revelation of characters and situations that any one of us could be “right” about the behaviour pathways or limits to behaviour of the Island and the main characters. But because of the high level of ambiguity, I think it's possible that even apparently mutually exclusive theories may turn out in the end to be 100% reconciled. That is, even though two purveyors of LOST theories may believe the other guy's theory is incorrect, it may turn out both are correct, even if we might believe right now that one must be correct and the other incorrect. I think the highest probability is that not a single one of us out here has sufficient information about characters, history, and the rules of character and Island dynamics to say with any degree of certainty what must be found true at the end of the series. I posit Locke as leader of a group of Seven because it seems most logical from a storytelling perspective, but I recognise I could be utterly incorrect about even the most important aspects of my model. Regardless, it's going to be a lot of fun to see how it turns out, and I'm glad to be with you and JohnnyLes for the bumpy and unpredictable ride! Thanks again for your comments.
February 11th, 2010 at 5:57 pm
I agree utterly with you pearson, it is very unlikely anyone has enough information at this point with the exception of the writers and producers to really grasp exactly what is going on. From a storytelling standpoint I find les' ideas to be unlikely if simply do to the laziness of the writers it would require to use a deux ex machina to wrap this show. I cannot accept that they show us this 'altnerate reality' for no reason other than 'what could have happened' when there are so many parralels to what DID happen on the island already. Also, arnt there an infinite amount of possible and plausible universes? Why show us just these two if they have no connection. No I am sorry, they are connected and I highly doubt that its in the other way he mentions “time traveling and crashing where the show started” (paraphrased) because IT WAS DEFINITLY 815 that crashed and landed safely in both scenarios and it was IT DEFINITLY HAPPENED in 2004 because know on the island from time clues from people like russeu and ben (I.e the red sox had won the world series and none of the losties had known that yet).
I believe, and could be wrong, that the purpose of the altnerate timeline is both as a storytelling device to show us another side of the characters as well as a greater scale to comment of the idea of destiny vs freewill and I do not see how his theory and the other can co-exist in the end. That being said, – its LOST so who knows, I shall enjoy the ride and cannot wait to see how it all plays out. I will enjoy reading other articles by you, the seven samari/magnificent 7 concept is very clever and fresh take on what's going on.
And to les: I enjoy a good debate as much as the next guy – but I don't waste my time debating when people make personal attacks (I.e. Commenting on a missing word in my sentence structure which occured as a result of me typing quickly on my mobile qwerty keypad and not stopping to proof read the small paragraph). I also am inclined to not bother wasting my time with individuals whom put words in my mouth (I.e. And I'm paraphrasing what you implied I said cuz I never said it, “your ideas are totally wrong and are factually incorrect and could never ever happen in a million years”.)
February 11th, 2010 at 7:12 pm
The only problem with that theory is that we already met Charlie's parents in a flashback…”JUMP IN THE POOL CHAR-LAY!”
I really LOVE the Charles Widmore theory, and I've heard it before. To further that theory, it would make more sense if Des/Penny were “Adam & Eve” and the others took Young Charlie away from his parents at a young age. Then he grew to be the Charles Widmore we know, and have his daugther-mother again later in life. Charles Widmore would be like a living example of Locke's compass. He's caught in a time loop.
February 11th, 2010 at 8:12 pm
If i had made a personal attack, I'd be faced with potential BANISHMENT from the SL-LOST board! C'mahnnn guy, read the Terms of Service and live by them! I think you're just a little cranky. Don't mistake a personal attack with one's inability to decipher your run-on sentence.
Pearson, I totally agree with you as well. It's wayyy to early to speculate with any confidence, but as you so poignantly articulated….speculation is really the most fun part of the show. Gotta love the ride! This won't even be relevant after the show is over. I'm making the most of the next 4 months.
So anadiplosis, since you seem to be so certain about what “DEFINITLY” did or did not happen, why don't you explain to me HOW, even hypothetically, these two stories may “meet up”. Keep in mind, having a similar resolution/conclusion is NOT the same as these stories actually meeting up. But, maybe that's what you meant. Use any example. Seriously, this idea intrigues me….I just don't understand how it's even possible. But, that's LOST for you. Your CONVICTION just surprises me.
I, personally, believe that these two universes are NOT interconnected in and of themselves and won't “meet up” per se….but are being used as 1 of 2 potential things. 1) Either as a narrative tool to show that even if things happened differently “it always ends the same” or 2) we're actually witnessing the “progress” necessary to make it “end” differently, and this “alt” universe may actually be what's implied at the very end of the show. Again….I, and everyone who has ever theorized on this show, could be TOTALLY wrong, but hopefully I was able to explain my point of view…..now maybe you can explain yours.
February 11th, 2010 at 9:12 pm
What the heck, your two ideas are now totally different from what they had been previously and now mimick my two ideas as articulated in the previous post. I am glad you have changed your mind and now agree with me. And yes – having the same resolution is exactly the same as the two stories meeting up and exactly what I mean when I say the universe is course correcting for destiny. I cannot wait to see what actually happens but yes I can speak with conviction to say what happened because I have watched every episode from seaons 1-5 between 5-10 times each. So yes, I can speak with conviciton as to what happened because it did. As to what WILL happen, now that is to what there is speculation and we have to use to speculate is what HAS already transpired.
Ps I am glad you decided to comment on the idea personal attacks but declined to defend your action of putting words in my mouth. Could it be that you realize you had been wrong for doing that also and had nothing to say.
February 11th, 2010 at 9:19 pm
EDIT: your first idea* is now different and similar to mine – whereas your second idea still remains a lame deusexmachina type ending and I highly doubt the writers of lost would put themselves or us in that kind of situation.
February 11th, 2010 at 9:47 pm
I realy dont think that Penny would ever come to the Island, (nir Desmond), but Des have to come back in some way.
February 11th, 2010 at 10:11 pm
I didn't comment on putting words in your mouth, because I still have no idea what you're talking about. I just assumed it was as baseless as the claim that I personally attacked you…so, that's why i ignored it.
But anyway….I haven't changed ANYTHING. You're the one who just completely mis-used the phrase “meet up”. I DO NOT agree with you and think that these two stories “HAVE to meet up”. I think they will just resolve similarly (“end the same”) OR one could be the version of “progress” that Jacob was suggesting and be completely different. I don't need to get into a deep discussion of semantics here, but I understood “meet up” to mean that these two timelines will somehow CONVERGE into a SINGLE story/timeline….and I had a hard time grasping that theoretically….especially as being painfully obvious. Thus the argument began….
So, if this was a misunderstanding on my part, i'm gonna go ahead and PERSONALLY ATTACK your poor choice of words to describe your stance as the culprit. When you say these two universes are going to “meet up”, you imply that Alt Jack and Island-Jack are gonna run into each other, having had marginally (or substantially) different pasts.
Furthermore, I think it's misguided to assume that just because you've seen every episode 5-10 times you can speak with conviction about what has happened. I'm strongly believe that we still have things to learn that will shape our understanding of what we've already seen….. But, since you're the expert with the high view-count, explain to me: In the very first scene of the show, how did Jack wake up in a jungle, with no damaged trees above him, roughly 500 yards from the plane, almost completely unscathed, with no airplane seat near him. It's the first episode, so…. you've probably seen that one 20 times even! Then maybe after you admit that you DON'T KNOW how that happened, you can explain to me how you KNOW for certain what year in time it was ON THE ISLAND when they landed. Having a tape from 2004 isn't exactly a bullet-proof explanation. THEY CAN TIME TRAVEL WITH VHS TAPES!
Bottom line: we don't KNOW anything. Keep an open mind.