Season 6's first episode of LOST is less than a week away. I'm expecting to be blown away by some revelations as well as to be frustrated by shortcuts and cop-outs. This state of affairs should make LOST the ideal TV show of all time, incorporating the best and worst aspects of series TV.
I even thought of starting another blog just to take care of LOST questions-- and perhaps reach out to a LOST-specific fandom. But I decided that it was easier to post them here: at this late date, most of the LOST-blogs already have their following.
SPOILERS for everything, of course.
1. Will the writers EVER explain why pregnant women began dying if they conceived on the Island? It doesn't seem like an edict from Jacob that they should die, for it's implicitly a peril Sun faces as well from having conceived there (though she escapes before the hammer comes down). For similar reasons it seems unlikely to be a direct consequence of Jughead's presence: radiation underneath Dharmaville wouldn't affect Sun over on the beach-- although maybe one could blame some freaky interaction of nucelar radiation and the magnetism beneath the Island. The dual explanations seem at war with one another, like the dual explanations Bram Stoker gives for vampirism in DRACULA.
2. In season 3 Richard isn't the least bit concerned about the mortality of pregnant Other women, and seems to think all of Ben's tests are a waste of time. He intimates that he expects John Locke to do something different, but what? And will Richard's plans for Locke ever be resurrected now that Locke appears to be Really Quite Sincerely Dead?
3. Faraday states in Season 5 that people can change time because they are the "variables" in the mathematic equation. This would seem to be a development from his Season 4 observation that Desmond was "special" and somehow not subject to the rules of space and time. So far that "specialness" has eventuated mainly in Desmond being able to "talk to himself" across space-time, but he hasn't actually changed the past, to the audience's knowledge, and his changes to the future were minor, in that he prevented some Charlie-deaths but not The Big One.
4. Does Charlie's vision of Aaron as some sort of Holy Child mean anything? Aaron, like Sun's kid, was pretty much sidelined in Season 5, and in contrast to Walt, Aaron was played as Ordinary Kid. Did the whole schtick about the importance of his not being raised by someone other than Claire mean anything in the larger scheme, or is it one of those things that will get "LOST" in the shuffle?
More later.
Prez - The First Teen President!
4 hours ago
16 comments:
I don't have any answers, of course, but:
Regarding 2, a webisode featured on season 4's blu-ray has Christian's "avatar" talking to the dog, telling it go wake up his son, he has work to do. Cut to the opening of episode 1, season 1 with Jack waking up. This suggests that these apparitions, such as what Locke is now, can actually be the souls or whatever of the original characters. Add to that the fact that Miles can talk to dead people and it seems quite possible that Locke is the real Locke sans original body. These aren't exactly souls or apparitions, since they can effect physical changes. Further support comes from the new promo poster which is a mock Last Supper with Locke in the position of Jesus.
Regarding 3, I don't see how anything but a determinist outcome would be more than a cheat for the show. Desmond's course is pretty clear on this, that he can change some of the contingent circumstances, but a fatalistic telos is always the ruling principle. I'm hoping for a sort existentialist resolution where the central players are needed in the end to make the beginning all happen in a big causative loop. The humans aren't variables, but what fill in the variables in a pre-determined equation. The numbers might change, but the ratio stays the same.
Regarding 1, I suspect that'll be one rule of the island that will be explained.
A little more on variables and destiny:
From Washington Post's Lost Analysis: When we surmised on numerous occasions that maybe this whole time travel thing wasn't quite as simple as "what happened, happened," it appears we were right. Like Faraday, apparently we forgot about the variables. Daniel not only thinks that he and the Losties can chart their own destinies but, more specifically, they can prevent the Hatch button-pushing, stop their own plane from crashing 27 years hence and -- I must assume -- prevent Nikki and Paolo from ever appearing on "Lost."
I'm not buying it (plus I thought the Nikki-Paolo burial episode was great, even better on a 2nd viewing). And I think the showrunners might be providing some supporting commentary for my take on Faraday and "variables":
From an NPR interview with Lindelof and Cuse on their favorite dvds: "This is another phrase we use in Lost, which is, 'Every once in a while, Johnny the Explainer needs to come strolling out of the jungle and tell you what the hell is going on.' But in this case — not to spoil too much — what we love is when Johnny the Explainer is completely unreliable." Think The Usual Suspects, another Lindelof favorite.
Anyway, I can't wait for the new season.
Yeah, I saw that webisode segment. I'm guessing that the producers might've left it out because it tipped their hand re: the apparitions a little too soon.
I'm working on a theory that most of the apparitions on the island may not be actual souls as such but re-creations by either Jacob or "Esau," re-creations that draw on the templates provided by dead bodies. To my recollection neither Jacob nor "Esau" has ever duplicated a living person, which argues some limitations-- possibly self-imposed?-- on their powers. I don't see the LOST guys invoking a STAR TREK kind of sci-fi explanation, though. Given all the Egyptian themes, maybe we'll see the doctrines of the "ka" and the "ba" channeled through quasi-science.
I did my "meliorism" post to expound on a possible alternative to determinism.
It'd be interesting if an unreliable "explainer" turned about to be right, but for the wrong reasons.
To my recollection neither Jacob nor "Esau" has ever duplicated a living person, which argues some limitations-- possibly self-imposed?-- on their powers.
One of them appears as Walt when Locke is lying in the mass grave.
"One of them appears as Walt when Locke is lying in the mass grave."
But that may actually be Walt, or an aspect of Walt, since there are other situations where he appears to be capable of a doppelganger effect. Mrs. Krugh explicitly asks Michael as to whether he's ever seen such an effect (exact language escapes me), and a very wet Walt also manifests, talking backwards a la TWIN PEAKS, to both Shannon and Sayid.
It's possible one of the "gods" was Hurley's imaginary buddy Dave, though. And since the black horse appears both in the real world and on the island, I think that might be Jacob at least one of those two times, if not both.
Yep, committed the same error that I was warning against with the example of Christian. Basically, Jacob or his nemesis (Esau is a likely name, particularly since it's hard to determine who's really the biblical good guy) might be able to transform into smoke or any form belonging to a human who exists alive or dead, on or off the island. And it's also possible that humans alive or dead might be able to project their own apparitions independently of the two central seraphic antagonists and/or the smoke monster. And the smoke monster might be a mere tool of one these two guys, with the ability to take human form in their service, or it might be a manifestation of one of them. I'll be amazed if the rules for all of this are laid out.
"committed the same error that I was warning against with the example of Christian."
I have no idea what you're talking about. Christian is dead, so he conforms to the examples of most of the apparitions: Libby, Alex, Ana Lucia, Yemi, Boone and Horace (both in dreams), and Locke. The only apparitions who are not definitely derived from known dead people are Walt (for whom bilocation has been suggested as an alternate explanation), Dave (who may be entirely imaginary) and the horse (which may never have been a real creature, but which certainly could have died after the first time Kate sees it).
So far there have no duplicate Sayids, Jacks, Kates or Sawyers, so that argues that the "gods" can't or won't assume their identities. Sometimes one living character has dreamed of another living character doing something uncharacteristic, like Hurley dreaming that Jin could speak perfect English, or Charlie dreaming of several people decked out in Biblical gear. But I'd say there's a different tonality of these dreams compared to the ones in which dead people appear. The dreams in which dead people like Horace, Boone and (at first) Yemi appear are more direct; there's more of a sense of a specific message being put across, in contrast to the vague associations found in what seem to be "the real dreams."
I have no idea what you're talking about. Christian is dead, so he conforms to the examples of most of the apparitions
That these apparitions aren't necessarily Jacob or his nemesis taking another's form, that Walt was a projection of Walt. It's possible that none of these visions are actually Jacob or his nemesis, but the avatars of the humans whom they resemble (just sometimes working for the 2 godlike entities). Basically, we have no way of knowing what these apparitions are, or if they're consistently of the same type (e.g., projections of the humans, creations of the island gods). Perhaps Walt is of Jacob's kind. It's going to take a solid resolution to not feel cheated on how these things were used, since there isn't any clear pattern (as I detailed in my previous response).
Libby saw Dave, or at least his slipper.
One more thing about Walt visiting Locke: later, when he sees Locke back in NY, he mentions a dream (which turns out to be Locke's, or UnLocke's, future back on the island), but doesn't say a word about seeing him lying in the grave.
The simulation theory is possible, too, and potentially brings up a good philosophical paradox: if these simulations have all the memories and feelings of those whom they're replicating, are they really different selves?
Alright, now I'm done.
"That these apparitions aren't necessarily Jacob or his nemesis taking another's form, that Walt was a projection of Walt. It's possible that none of these visions are actually Jacob or his nemesis, but the avatars of the humans whom they resemble (just sometimes working for the 2 godlike entities)."
Yes, that's still a possibility, and certainly Hurley believes that he's seeing the real spirits of Charlie, et al. But the revelation that one of the two "gods" can look like a dead guy puts all of the other visions under suspicion. Most of them do seem fairly close to their original models but Yemi's physical manifestation to Eko (whom admittedly no one else sees) is the big exception, since Yemi disavows his masqwerade after he fails to get Eko to make whatever confession "Yemi" wants, with that great line, "You speak as if I were your brother." Unlocke and Unyemi may indicate that all the rest are imposures: Uncharlie, Unchristian (heh) and so on.
"Perhaps Walt is of Jacob's kind."
The only way I can see that being justified (though I don't expect a by-the-numbers justification as such) is if Walt is a multiple personalit who has a Higher Self of which his Lower Self is not aware. This might explain this:
"One more thing about Walt visiting Locke: later, when he sees Locke back in NY, he mentions a dream (which turns out to be Locke's, or UnLocke's, future back on the island), but doesn't say a word about seeing him lying in the grave."
It may be that the Walt who appears before Locke in the pit is a Higher Self who is aware of the larger game being played between two Higher Entities, after the fashion of the game Locke explains to ordinary Walt in the first season. Lower-Self Walt, just living his life in New York, may have undertaken to remember as little as possible about his experiences on the Island, but Higher-Self Walt is still in the game.
Welp, we now know that Locke clearly ain't Locke and that the smoke monster is a function/form of the nemesis. Seems likely that the apparitions aren't all of the same kind.
Oops: Furthermore, that the nemesis actually has all the memories of Locke (such as what he was thinking at the time of his death) opens up the possibility that any apparition could've been due to the island gods.
Just occurred to me: "Locke" can't exactly be the nemesis, either, since Locke was needed in order to kill Jacob. Gaargh!
No, I think "Unlocke" and "Nemesis" are definitely the same. The only reason Nemesis needed to masquerade as Locke was to maneuver Richard and Ben into doing what he wanted them to do. Toward the very end of LAX it's clear that Richard finally understands "who" is behind the masquerade, though he doesn't seem to get the notion until after the Temple shoots off that ash-spreadin' skyrocket. Ben, for his part, seems totally out of the loop with regard to shapechanging god-beings.
I'm wondering if the "loophole" Nemesis mentions has something to do with breaking the rule about two people going into the Big Foot to see Jacob.
I've clarified some of my thoughts here.
Post a Comment