In the wake of the most recent episode of LOST entitled “This Place is Death” (Season 5, episode 5), an idea occurred to me while listening to the recap of the show on the most recent Jay & Jack LOST Podcast. Because all of what follows assumes that the reader has seen all the episodes up to this point and would thus contain SPOILERS for those who have not caught up, I will place the bulk of the post below the fold.
The impetus for my theory comes from Ben’s remark toward the end of “This Place is Death” where he is driving with Sun and Jack and he, in good Ben-fashion, has a hissy-fit, stops the van, and says, “What I am doing is helping you. And if you had any idea what I’ve been doing to keep you safe, to keep your friends safe, you’d never stop thanking me!”
If you recall, at the beginning of Season 4, Sayid is working with Ben as his hitman, killing various people: Mr Avellino on the golf course, and Elsa in “The Economist” who was working for Widmore, plus who knows how many others at Ben’s whim. So, it is probably not much of a stretch at all to link these events, and it was probably the intention of the writers to make us recall the events from Season 4 with Ben’s remark.
The new bit of information that we now have, however, is that Ben is working with Eloise Hawking, who we first saw in season 3 in “Flashes Before Your Eyes” (incidentally, this was first aired exactly two years ago today of the writing of this post, on Valentines Day 2007). This episode centers around what happens to Desmond immediately after he turns the key in the final episode of Season 2. He flashes back to various times, and at one point meets Ms. Hawking at a ring shop where Desmond is shopping for an engagement ring for Penny. She convinces Desmond not to buy the ring or else a series of events will not take place. Soon thereafter, Ms. Hawking explains that a man who was wearing red sneakers was killed by a scaffolding because it was his fate. If she were to warn him about the collapsing scaffolding, he would have been killed another way. Ms. Hawking explains that the universe has a way of “course correcting” itself so that things eventually work themselves out in a set fashion. We see this logic unfold throughout the remainder of Season 3 with regards to Charlie’s eventual death in the final episode, even though Desmond did everything he could to prevent Charlie’s fateful demise.
With this in mind, I now have to wonder, is Benjamin Linus trying to “cheat” the fate of the universe? My theory is that Ben was using Sayid in an attempt to do such a thing. We also know that Ben’s aims in Season 4 have to do with DHARMA and Ben’s rivalry with Charles Widmore, but these things may not necessarily be that different, viz., perhaps the ‘universe’ wants Widmore to succeed? Perhaps Benjamin was using Eloise Hawking to make her fancy calculations in an effort to actually escape the actual fate of the island so that Ben could bend the unfolding of events to his usual selfish motives?
The writer/producer Damon Lindelof has talked about Ms. Hawking as a kind of “temporal police[wo]man.” But then what are her motives? If her motives are just to police the universe’s temporality, then what about her son, which we all assume now to be Daniel “George McFly” Faraday. But it seems that up until this point, it would seem that her assumption is that her son may be missing, dead, or stuck in time loops on the island, which is why Faraday had to bother Desmond in the very first episode of Season 5 (“Because You Left“) to tell him to find his mother … but the time-shift happens so we do not know what it was Desmond was supposed to do exactly. Do Faraday and his mother share similar motives?
Either way, my guess it that whatever Ms. Hawking’s motives are, Ben Linus’ motives most likely do not square up with hers, because we always know that Ben ultimately operates in his own self-interest. Even Christian Shepherd (is this Jacob?) asks Locke, “Since when did listening to him [Ben] get you anywhere worth a damn?”
Clearly, there are still a lot of holes, or at least variables not yet known here, but my theory boils down to: Ben, working with Ms. Hawking, knows what the fate of the island is, and Ben is most likely trying to subvert the plan of the ‘universe’ for his own misguided ends.
My friend and colleague Jeff reminded me of a big unanswered question that, if answered, would shed an incredible light on this theory: what ultimately happened to Sayid’s relationship to Ben? What led to Sayid telling Hurley, “Whatever Ben tells you to do, you do the opposite”?
Perhaps the decisive cunning of Ben is that he actually knows how things will ultimately turn out, but he’s clever and wicked enough to devise ways for the outcomes to finally be the same while causing events along the way to maximize his own benefit and desires. If this is the case, it would make sense of the increasing ambiguity of whether Ben is actually doing things for an ultimate ‘good’, even though the way in which he does it is always deceptive.
Will Desmond be the ultimate key to undoing Ben’s plans? Faraday said that the “rules” do not apply to him and that he is “miraculously” unique.
Thoughts?
Hi Eric, thanks for this post!I think that much of what you say here is very possible. I think that you’re especially right about Ben’s motives. To further this point, think about Ben’s relationship with Locke. He’s clearly not happy about Locke being the new leader of the ‘Others,’ when Locke is told to move the island Ben takes over and does it, now they are all supposed to go back and Ben is heading up the charge. But who is they? I see no reason why Ben is part of the group that needs to go back. I think that Ben has seen so much crazy stuff, that he either doesn’t know or doesn’t care about the universe course correcting and the inability to change what happens. I think Ben’s trying to get back to the island and to be in charge again. (I do think that some of Jay & Jack’s listeners are correct about Widmore being the chosen one for a while, until Ben, hence the grudge. Now Locke is the chosen one-perhaps-and Ben is in a rivalry with both Charles Widmore and Locke. Ultimately, though, I think that either Aaron or Walt is the true heir to the islands powers. Walt is my guess about that. And finally, on the Ben talk, I believe it was he that killed Locke/Bentham. Why, I have no idea, but I think he did.Thanks again. Did you see my recent LOST blog on my movie review blog?
Rusty, thanks. Yes, I did see your blog entry and have given it a few more thoughts since then, and have now dropped a comment over there.
All this talk about who is the leader of the ‘Others’ now makes me wonder. If Widmore was the leader at one time, and Ben was, and if Locke was chosen to be one and then to sacrifice himself, who is the leader now? Because, we know that Locke/Bentham is dead, at least in non-island time (would that now be the end of 2007?).
Also, we have yet to find out how Locke gets the name Jeremy Bentham, so there is still some more story to be told there as well.
Since you mentioned that you have listened to Jay & Jack’s LOST podcast, have you listened to enough of the recent episodes to hear them talk about Matthew Fox (Jack) knowing how the show will end? One theory about why he knows this is because they have already filmed that episode. And the reason they have already filmed that episode is because it involves a young Walt, which they could only get if they have already filmed it because he is now “big Walt.” Hah!
Eric, So good to see you talking about Lost, one of my favorite things to talk about! couple of things….Rusty, do I remember right that Ben tells Locke that anyone who moves the island cannot return? It seems like that’s the way he puts it to John. And if my memory is serving me correctly, then do you think this is sort of the “will” of the island, so to speak, or is it merely more Ben rhetoric? I am not sure, but it is interesting to consider two things: First, Ben does not have a limp while “off” of the island — his back is not slowly deteriorating once again now that he is “off” the island. Recall that he tells Locke that he [John] is worried that if he leaves the island he’ll be right back in that wheelchair — and thus must he blow up the sub…and in such a way that this is actually “what Ben wants” as Alex shortly after tells Locke (and this gives some sort of indication that secretly by manipulating John to blow the sub, Ben was securing his own tumor-free safety the island was affording him). But, what does it mean that Ben is fine off of the island, especially if he “cannot” return? And secondly, also recall that Richard tells Locke that he must “die” to help everyone (including himself, as dead!!) return to the island. Is this an indication that Ben himself must die to return? Or simply that he will not be going with…the latter seems to me to be quite questionable, as possessive as Ben is of the island. Also, Eric, I am not sure that the writers want us to see the universe as “course-correcting” in necessarily the same way that Eloise (and others) see it. Yes, Charlie does eventually die no matter Desmond’s efforts…but, it is interesting how he dies. He chooses to. In other words, there was a moment — and I believe Charlie says this to Desmond — when there is recognition that they can leave the station without Charlie having to die. Now, it could be interpreted that Charlie recognized that the universe does in fact have a way of course-correcting itself and thus he was only putting off the inevitable, and so that his own choice was a way of affirming the nature of the universe (and the universe itself “takes account” of his choice as a part of its course-correcting). However, it could equally be argued that Charlie only dies by choosing to do so, and by choosing to do so has not in fact supplied the universe with its wishes, but exactly contravened them in giving exactly what it “wanted” (so to speak). All of this is to say, I think you could be right about what Ben’s intentions are, but it seems to me that we will learn that Desmond in fact is miraculously unique because he will recognize that you can in fact change the future. Or something. Perfectly willing to be wrong, though — as this show so often proves to be the case! Peace.
This is a great conversationm my favorite reading this week yet. I just want to add that in this last episode (maybe the one before) we were reminded that Christian Shepherd (or Jacob, not sure yet) told LOCKE, not Ben, to move the island. I am sorry If this was mentioned earlier, I only quickly scanned the post and responses. However, I do think this adds something interesting to Ben’s motives and intentions. Perhaps he is still operating within the Islands good graces. Perhaps John has become the sacrifice the island demanded and that there is a sort of corse correcting going on meaning that he island is moving because Ben moved the island, not Lock. Now that it’s moving, John has to correct. There are still holes in this, of course. But perhaps …
Scott, yes, yes…On the other hand, if Christian speaks on behalf of the island (because on the behalf of Jacob), as he claims, then I think Ben is not “still operating within the island’s good graces”…because Christian seemed sort of frustrated with Ben, as Eric noted. Locke as a “sacrifice the island demanded” is interesting — though I still wonder why it is Jack, Kate, et. al., would need to bring his dead body back to the island…surely he’s not still simply dead.
Dave, that’s an absolutely fantastic insight about Charlie on multiple levels. First, it’s obviously right, and I can’t believe I didn’t think of it. Second, there’s something very Christological about it, too. Christ knew what was coming, yet he still completely chose the cup that was given him. The logic of it completely breaks out of the metaphysics of Stoical (or otherwise) fate.
Scott & Dave, the whole Christian Shepherd thing is really interesting. Somebody on the latest Jay & Jack podcast (the one after the episode mentioned in the post body) offered an interesting theory about Christian and Jack in how they react to the island: they theorized that Christian may have actually been on the island before he became a drunkard, and it may have actually been his departure from the island in the first place that lead to his debauchery. Jack seems to have reacted in much the same way when he left the island, becoming a drunk himself, as well as addicted to painkillers. Perhaps, because they share similar genetics, that they react to island-departure in similar manners?
If this is true at all, why was Christian Shepherd on the island before? We know that he flew in the general area of the island (wherever it is) to see Claire’s mother in Australia.
The “not still simply dead” comment made me wonder if Locke got a strong dose of that Medusa spider venom from that throw-away “Exposé” episode. Maybe he isn’t really dead after all? Perhaps that’s too far-fetched, though…
That insight about a certain parallel between father and son, Christian and Jack, is brilliant. I completely hadn’t thought of things on quite that level there, but I really think that’s (if not right) really quite compelling. The spider venom thing is hilarious…leave it up to Carlton and Damon to throw in something from a throw-away episode…although, isn’t the Medusa only local to the island (it seems like I remember Arnst saying that)?
I can’t remember if Arnst said something to the effect of the spider’s locality, but: if the Medusa spider was only local to the island, how would people know about it? He either had to name it right there on the island himself or else you get that funny issue like on The Goonies:
Chunk: Wait a minute. If he killed all his men, how did the map get out?
Mikey: My dad said one of the guys must have gotten out with the map.
Haha…I love the Goonies…Last night’s episode was great, once again.