Skip to main content

How Will Lost End?

Let me preface this blog entry with the fact that I have watched Season 1 and probably four episodes of Season 2 and I believe Lost to be one of the silliest shows ever made. I think they had a plan, a la Sopranos, that would play out over a small number of episodes and it would make sense. Popularity caused them to create more ideas and these ideas spun out of control and became what the masses call "brilliant." Let me also point out that the masses are, for the most part, far from brilliant.

So how will this mess end? When I first watched the show I was struck by the silly symbolism. A man named John Locke who represents individuality and self governing, who believes we are innately good, unless faced with evil. Sounds like a famous philosopher named....John Locke! How original. I wondered if they'd throw in a character, maybe, his protagonist and call them Rousseau or maybe Hobbes. Little did I know until recently, but there was a Rousseau. How original. Then there is the whole biblical stuff where a guy names Jacob chooses a candidate to take over for him. It's Benjamin. In the bible, Benjamin takes Jacobs body and as people love to say yadda yadda yadda.

So we have philosophical symbols, religious symbols and of course the titles which pay homage to The Adventures of Alice in Wonderland. So what does it all mean? When I first saw it I thought a few different tales were being told. Maybe it's a modern day version of Alice in Wonderland. I don't think they would go into such a strong religious debate on regular television, so I don't think the ending will have anything as interesting as the true philosophical debate as to whether or not government and public religion is a cause for evil (to contradict Locke's feeling that these are inherent and should be practiced privately). I thought about it over and over and came to the conclusion that the way this all ends is a chess game, between Locke and someone else.

It just seems to me that the real debate is the philosophical differences between the real John Locke and those of say Hobbes or Rousseau. While this might sound offensive to some, if this is the case, I have a problem with the writers thinking the average television viewer would have any concept of their beliefs. This may in fact be why it has been so well received. I did a google search before writing this and apparently a few others (after watching every episode) have guessed that it may indeed be a chess game, with the final line being "check mate." Many believe Hurley will be the main character and he's playing chess with his doctor's in a psych ward and this has all been his imagination. I would hope the producers don't go that route. It's been done already, and better, by St. Elsewhere and Newhart. Like I said, I've only seen the first season and a handful of episodes. I wouldn't know the character Rousseau, Benjamin or Jacob if they sat on my lap.

Or maybe Locke is playing chess against the Angel of Death in a modern day telling of Bergman's The Seventh Seal (which everyone should see because it's brilliant). Maybe they all are doomed from the beginning and it's just playing out as they enter the next world. That might be seen as too easy. I guess nobody will be sure until next week. I won't be sure until well after, as I have no plans to watch the finale. I've made it this far in life without succumbing to the silliness. Why become part of the mindless herd that follows and waits with bated breath for all these monotonous series to play out? I'll be watching a game and I'm sure someone will be sure to call me and text me to tell me I'm wrong. I look forward to it.

Comments

  1. Um Locke , jacob and rousseau are all dead

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

White Privilege

This was a post I wrote on Facebook after surprisingly not seeing any moaning about the Documentary by Jose Antonio Vargas, titled White People Dayyum! I just scrolled my timeline and not a single white person got their feelings hurt by White People. I unfortunately haven't seen it, but the number of fake accounts that popped up on twitter, tells me it was a damn good show. Here's the thing. If someone of color aka non-white says "White Privilege," are you offended? If you said yes, then you are exhibiting white privilege. It has nothing to do with how hard you work or study, how you stayed out of trouble, because here's the thing, that is entirely the point. Somewhere out there, there are 100 Black, Spanish, Native American, Arab, Asian, who worked and studied as hard as you and never got in trouble, but they don't have what you "earned" or achieved. Stop looking at the one person you know who isn't white that achieved as your benchmark. Loo

11 Rules of Life - Bill Gates?

I read this on Facebook this morning.  A friend had posted it and said that every child should have to receive this. I of course read it and started to think.  I immediately wondered who really wrote this, as I rarely see things like this attributed to the proper person.  I immediately found it was written by Conservative Charles J. Sykes when he wrote a book about how America is dumbing down our youth.  I read it twice and started to wonder how true it was.  Below is a link to the actual picture I saw. So let's look at each of the rules and analyze them. Rule 1: Life is not fair — get used to it! - Life is not fair in that we are not all afforded the same opportunities based on race, creed, color, socio-economic background, but in general, those who are afforded the same opportunities to succeed are very often rewarded for their individual efforts.  Sure there may be underlying circumstances, but hard work is proven to pay more often than not and those who strive for succ

Quickie Review - Finding Vivian Maier

While I thoroughly enjoyed the film, especially the first 15-20 minutes, I was a little bothered by the way the film played out. The interviews with the clearly disturbed brother, sister and the mother, who obviously, was in for a cut, didn't need to be in the film. Then the woman who suggested abuse, yet seemed to have her life defined by Maier, as she tried to muster every ounce of emotion and fake guilt. Her friend, more than happy to be party of the charade. People who talk about abuse for the first time, usually don't do so on camera. The fact these scenes were so prominent, shows that they felt wronged that they were not rewarded. Maloof on the other hand, seems to disappear from the documentary during this part, almost hiding away from the fact, he went from complete praise, to even making money off of her, to destroying her personal legacy. He almost mentions the family of boys taking care of her rent, as an afterthought. Her burial spot, never shown, yet a video of her