?

Log in

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Intentionally Lost

I mused previously about the naming of the John Locke character on Lost. Now, as of last night, we have Rousseau on the island, as well. So it is intentional! Now we know where all good political theorists go (and all good science fiction/fantasy genre stars, as well: at this point we have Lord of the Rings, Millennium, Harsh Realm, Crusade, and Babylon 5 represented by the cast -- am I missing anything?). Obviously, they don't die or fade away: they end up together on an island. I say good for the political science student-turned-scriptwriter who is obviously having so much fun with this. I'll be anxious to see what the series' final position on humanity's "state of nature" actually is. Clearly, giant polar bears are somehow key. And so, of course, is golf.



In other news, registration is now open for two science fiction/fantasy-related conventions I'm excited about attending this upcoming spring and summer as a guest speaker. The first is MidSouthCon 23 (April 1-3, 2005 in Memphis, Tennessee, USA). Last year was my first MidSouthCon, and I had a marvelous time with the enthusiastic, welcoming group there and the terrific panels and events they sponsored. I'm already looking forward to April!

The second con is HyperiCon 2005: A Speculative Fiction Convention (July 17-19, 2005 in Nashville, Tennessee, USA). This is a new event, desperately needed here in Music City, and it is being organized by a class act group of experienced fans. I hope all who can will take part and help HyperiCon become an annual Nashville tradition.



And now for my quotes of the day, in the spirit of yesterday's post:

"The power of the world works in circles, and everything tries to be round."
Black Elk

"I'm already in
Circles and circles and circles again
The girl's in circles and circles, got to stop spinning,
Circles and circles and circles again..."
from "Cloud on my Tongue,"
Tori Amos

Comments

( 13 comments — Leave a comment )
aelfgifu
Nov. 18th, 2004 10:40 pm (UTC)
Hopelessly addicted to LOST. I noticed the names as well. I hope they use restraint and don't name the huge-ass invisible monster-thingy Hobbes!

See, I JUST used restraint, and did not use the "L" word that rhymes with "viathan."

And I can't wait until little Emile is born!
eldritchhobbit
Nov. 19th, 2004 05:14 am (UTC)
Hopelessly addicted to LOST. I noticed the names as well. I hope they use restraint and don't name the huge-ass invisible monster-thingy Hobbes!

ROFLOL! I keep waiting for it to charge out of the trees and make some hapless castaway's life "nasty, brutish, and short..."

Emile! I love it! :)

This is a great show, isn't it? I was uncertain at first, because I was afraid it would be just a soap opera, but with all the mysteries and back stories and terrific characters, now I'm hooked.



(Anonymous)
Dec. 27th, 2004 08:51 pm (UTC)
Monster
I hope they use restraint and don't name the huge-ass invisible monster-thingy Hobbes!

Perhaps it is called "Calvin."
eldritchhobbit
Dec. 28th, 2004 06:14 am (UTC)
Re: Monster
Bwahahahahaha! :)
faramirgirl
Nov. 19th, 2004 08:37 am (UTC)
Hello
I love the show Lost. Missed it Wed. thto because of things that I had to do at school but it comes on Sat. and I plan of catching it then. Loved your thoughts.
fg
eldritchhobbit
Nov. 19th, 2004 11:34 am (UTC)
Re: Hello
Hi there! :) You're in for a treat, then - I though this was a terrific episode. And if you ever watched Babylon 5, you'll have a double treat! I'm glad to know I'm not the only one who likes this series. Thanks so much for your reply. Have a great day!
faramirgirl
Nov. 19th, 2004 12:01 pm (UTC)
Re: Hello
Good glad to here that. I only wished that I could of seen it Wed. but duty calls at school. It is rough being a student at times. I have seen some shows on the Babylon 5 but have not been keeping up with, it is hard to do so when I am always busy studing and doing homework.
fg
eldritchhobbit
Nov. 19th, 2004 12:10 pm (UTC)
Re: Hello
And this time of semester seems pretty wild and crazy, doesn't it? Hang in there! I was only referring to the original B5 from the '90s, by the way. But if you've only seen that one a couple of times, you'll still probably see what I mean. I better shut up now before I start with the spoilers! ;)
(Anonymous)
Nov. 28th, 2004 05:42 pm (UTC)
Or ...
They could have all died or faded away and now live in a virtual world without true understanding of the nature of their world, their place in this (brave) new world or how their world works. Sayid tossed out a REALLY interesting observation along the lines of we all know something is awry here as we broke apart in mid-air and crashed onto an island yet none of us has a scratch. Equally, Locke has noted that this islands is "magic" and that he has looked into the soul of the island and it is beautiful.

I, myself, suspect their reality is not their reality at all -- ala the Matrix and Harsh Realm -- but rather that it is a reality of another's making, most likely constructed (probably virtually) for the purpose of (judging by events thus far) observing the nature of Humanity and/or the structure of how Humans interact with one another by presenting tests and watching what mayhem ensues. Equally, I tend to think their physical presence may not actually be their bodies at all, but rather the perceptions of their bodies as they experience the constructed reality. Using The Matrix and Harsh Realm as precedents, I lean toward the notion that their physical bodies are located in a testing facility somewhere with their brains/consciousness hot-wired into the simulation; and that probably, death in the simulation would result in death of the physical as well -- the power of positive thinking and all that poppycock. ;)

My current pet theory involves a mid-air alien abduction (X-Files reference, anyone?) of at least Jack, Kate, Locke, Sayid, Sawyer, Sun, Michael, Charlie, Boone & Hurley, all of whom I am mostly convinced are real people (although I still have doubts about both Boone and Hurley). Oh yeah, and Danielle, who I'm also pretty sure is real.

The theory predicates itself on believing these archetypal characters have been (deliberately) isolated from all societal regulation and contact and put in a survival scenario in order to examine their responses to one another (and external stimuli) without the mitigation of the dictates of society or law or culture to interfere with Human nature in the raw. Tangentially (you like that one, Grasshopper?), I think elements from some of these test subjects real lives have been mined from their memories and included virtually in the reality construct in order to give the testers leverage to create inter-relationship stresses that would take too long to create between strangers or via any sort of external stimuli.

I'll explain more in a moment, but your program thinks I'm too long winded, so I'll have to post that stuff seperately.

But for the overall elements that make me suspect a Matrixlike Matrix, among them is:

1) Plane crash where everyone but one either dies or escapes unscathed.

2) 2 weeks of multiple dead bodies in the hot tropical sun without it driving those guys right off the beach.

3) Locke's "magical" recovery.

4) The "invisible" monster that creates external danger in singularity and exploring the unknown, thus creating artificial cohesivity in the group -- a need to work together and stay together rather than just hanging out in the sun and waiting for rescue. And equally, the proof of the invisible monster being the death of the co-pilot, who WAY too coincidentally told them there was no hope of rescue before being hauled out of site and mauled. That copilot was a construct -- the real copilot is wherever the rest of the real plane passengers are -- and the monster doesn't exist.

5)Consistent scenarios that seem to spring out of nowhere to "test" moral integrity and other elements of Human nature and behavior.

6) The completely non-interactive nature of the other survivors. These primaries not only step to the front of pack in terms of leadership, they seem to be the only ones on the island. Everyone else is just a day player -- or virtual constructs fabricated to give the illusion of reality to the subjects of an elaborate experiment.

Or ... it could just be a bunch of castaways on an island with a giant polar bear. ;)

Whatdoyathink?
Dodger
(Anonymous)
Dec. 30th, 2004 01:13 pm (UTC)
Re: Or ...
1) Plane crash where everyone but one either dies or escapes unscathed.

Sayid mentioned this last night on the re-broadcast. But remember the big nasty gash that Jack had that Kate had to sew up? That wasn't exactly a mere scratch. I also remember in the pilot a guy who had his leg cut off and Jack put a tourniquet on it. So, the statement isn't QUITE true.
(Anonymous)
Nov. 28th, 2004 05:51 pm (UTC)
Or ... deux
But back to the character construct stuff:

I think elements from some of these test subjects real lives have been mined from their memories and included virtually in the reality construct in order to give the testers leverage to create inter-relationship stresses that would take too long to create between strangers or via any sort of external stimuli.

What the heck am I talking about? Well, the air marshall, for one. The only guy who's actually damaged in the "crash" and who creates crushing moral choices for Kate, Jack AND Sawyer? I think he is a construct modeled on a real person (the air marshal who was actually taking Kate in), but the guy on the island isn't one of the test subjects -- if he were, he, too, would have escaped unscathed.

And the black woman, pretty sure. Where the heck did she go? And her statement of her husband still being alive? Doesn't that seem awfully foreshadowing to you?

As for more major characters, I think Walt is a construct. I think there IS a real Walt (who may or may not have been on the plane), but I think (both) the Walt on the island (and his dog) are constructs to observe a parental dynamic with Michael. I am looking forward to Michael's "back story" episode and wonder if we won't see that Walt didn't get on the plane with his dad ... something that might be a "what the F***? -- then who is this?" discovery moment (similar to Locke's wheelchair reveal) that will start the plot-beneath-a-plot elements that I see in the show.

I also think Jin is a construct to put pressure on Sun. I think we might well find that she DID leave him and was on the plane alone, but the construct put him back in her life to explore the dynamics he creates, especially in isolating Sun from the others. I also wonder if Michael and Sun weren't somehow involved pre-crash (those long looks seem oddly intimate, don't they?) but the testers have adjusted that element of their memories, perhaps to see if it will re-emerge or to explore the dynamic of it re-emerging with Jin in the mix.

I'm up in the air about Boone (isn't he too "pretty" and doesn't he prompt a lot of the moral dilemmas into action -- the swimming rescue, the theft of water, the sister's asthma?); but if he IS real, then I'm pretty sure Shannon is virtual. Her princess attitude seems out-of-line stereotypical, and her sudden onset of asthma seemed AWFULLY convenient, especially considering the moral pressure it put on Jack and Sayid in terms of situational ethics.

I hold out possibility that both Claire and Hurley could be constructs as well, although they could easily also be real. Claire doesn't seem "different" enough at this stage to be an archetype, and being pregnant, she presents such a convenient element to prompt protective instincts, that I suspect her; but other than this, she's done nothing to make me suspect she isn't as she presents. Hurley certainly could be an exploration into the bigotries of size, but he could also be a program "help" button to assist in the survival elements of the program navigation by nudging them in the direction of survival so the tests can continue. Push comes to shove though, I tend to think Hurley is real. Claire is 50/50 for me at this point.

Danielle is obviously a surviving subject from a previous test.

That was what I was GONNA say, if your your journal hadn't made me edit it. ;)

Dodger
(Anonymous)
Dec. 28th, 2004 08:02 pm (UTC)
Re: Or ... deux
Great analysis, "anonymous"!

On the other hand, what if it is something else entirely different that we've NEVER seen on TV or the movies that is really behind "Lost"? I mean, what is really outside the "box"? I don't have any idea what that might be. I leave it to those of you with more brains and creativity than me to ponder and post. In the meantime, enjoy the show.
eldritchhobbit
Nov. 29th, 2004 05:36 am (UTC)
Yesyesyes!

Sayid tossed out a REALLY interesting observation along the lines of we all know something is awry here as we broke apart in mid-air and crashed onto an island yet none of us has a scratch. Equally, Locke has noted that this islands is "magic" and that he has looked into the soul of the island and it is beautiful.

I'm with you. In fact, I'll buy your argument wholesale. I've been thinking of this whole thing as potentially something like an inverse Fantasy Island -- instead of people choosing to come to experience what they want, these people have been chosen to come to experience what they need (hence the constructs, as you've explained, etc.). A test? Quite possibly. (I keep flashing back to the original Star Trek episode "Shore Leave," though it's clear there are more complicating factors here.) I love the fact we don't yet know who is the controller behind the curtain. Great stuff. I'm very excited by your theory, and by the fact you're watching this, too. Thanks for finding me, Dodger (or should I say BK)? ;)
( 13 comments — Leave a comment )