Comments on: A LOST theory in the wake of “This Place is Death”

By: Dave Belcher

Dave Belcher — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 03:44:03 +0000

Haha…I love the Goonies…Last night’s episode was great, once again.

By: Eric Lee

Eric Lee — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:08:52 +0000

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.

By: Dave Belcher

Dave Belcher — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 23:29:35 +0000

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)?

By: Eric Lee

Eric Lee — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:02:08 +0000

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...

By: Dave Belcher

Dave Belcher — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:19:21 +0000

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.

By: Scott Savage

Scott Savage — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 01:27:19 +0000

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 …

By: Dave Belcher

Dave Belcher — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 21:49:28 +0000

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.

By: Eric Lee

Eric Lee — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 11:29:09 +0000

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!

By: Rusty Brian

Rusty Brian — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 09:20:37 +0000

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?