Talk:Lost (2004 TV series)/Story elements

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Due to its length, this section of discussion, which deals with speculative material, was moved from Talk:Lost (TV series)

Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.)

Removed story elements/themes

Luck

Luck plays a key role with a couple characters. Put another way, good or bad things happen to several of the characters in a way that would be highly improbable - possible, but at the tails of a probability bell curve.

  • Hurley is the most obvious example. He has the 'good luck' of winning the lottery, but brings bad luck to those around him, as did another man who used the Numbers for personal benefit. Seemingly 'unlucky' coincidences conspire to prevent him from boarding Flight 815; he overcomes the challenges, but - in retrospect - it might actually have been lucky to avoid the flight.
  • Three pens don't work when Claire tries to sign her adoption papers. Unlucky in the sense that she therefore proceeds on a path that takes her to Flight 815, lucky in the sense that now she is not going to give away her child.
  • In All The Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues, Walt says his step-father Brian called him "the luckiest person he ever knew." It might be considered 'lucky' for the bird he was studying to happen to die outside his window. To the extent that backgammon is domintated by luck, Walt's luck at the game is greater than Hurleys.
  • In a sense, Locke is 'lucky' to be on the island, since it brought his legs back to functional. It was quite lucky for his legs to fail moments before he might have climbed up a cliff to an unstable plane. In Abandoned, Locke is unusually lucky at backgammon.

Coincidence

Other coincidences are highly improbable, and may later turn out to be 'lucky' or 'unlucky'.

  • Sawyer is in the police station while Boone files a complaint about Shannon's boyfriend. Sawyer meets Jack's father in a Sydney bar.
  • Hurley is on TV in Korea when Jin is at Sun's father's employee's house; Sayid is on the TV in Kate's father's office when she is on the run.
  • Hurley owned a box company, and Locke worked for a box company located in the same city (Tustin), and both worked under Randy.
  • Shannon's father is the "Adam Rutherford" struck by the SUV driven by Jack's future wife in "Man of Science, Man of Faith."
  • Too much numbers related coincidences to count (i.e. 815 as flight number, safety deposit box number, two of the Numbers (8, 15), Kate's time capsule was burried August 15, 1989 (8-15 plus 16 years prior to the crash, about the time of the transmission), etc.)

"Lost Love"

In thinking about last night's episode, I realized there was one major story theme that we had overlooked: "lost" love and the attempt to find it again. Many of the main characters had love (either romantic or familial) taken from their lives, the context for which is part of what brought them to the Island.

Romantic:
  • Kate's childhood sweetheart Tom -- killed during her escape
  • Jack's wife Sarah -- situation unknown
  • Sayid's childhood friend/romance with Nadia -- escaped to LA
  • Locke's relationship with (real and substutite) Helen -- situation unknown
  • Jin and Sun's strained marriage -- each had been planning to escape
Familial:
  • Sawyer's parents killed over a con -- sought revenge in Australia
  • Jack's deceased father -- sent to find him and bring him home
  • Michael's estrangement from Walt -- came to Australia to return with his son
  • Locke's betrayal by his father -- sending him on a search for meaning ("leap of faith")

Would this be considered speculative or something that may be appropriate to add to the Themes section? LeFlyman 19:39, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Ehh, I think the theory is a little weak right now, particularly as you're lumping "lost love" with "familial deaths"... It seems like you could package any sort of motivation as a reaction to "loss". -DropDeadGorgias (talk) 20:07, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
I agree that the division between love/family is hazy, but my contention is that the characters are searching for (or trying to make up for) the love they "lost". In comparison, the stated theme of "Redemption" is quite a bit weaker. (e.g. who's actually been redeemed on the Island?) And it's less speculative than the "Philosophy" section, which conjectures/overlays meaning onto the story far beyond the use of philosophers' names. LeFlyman 20:28, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
I'd not make a distinction between the romantic and the familial, honestly. So far, most of the characters have been particularly unlucky when it comes to love, be it romantic or familial. However, a good portion of this is also discussed in the section on fathers, since the fathers, far more than the mothers, of these characters, have been responsible for the worst rejections and failings of love. If the theme of fathers could be expanded to "Personal Relationships", and note how most of these characters suffer from a lack of familial love and failure in romantic love, it'd be on more stable ground. Baryonyx 21:26, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Leg Injuries & Other Themes?

OK... so several characters have had leg injuries... I'm failing to see the greater theme at work here. Anyone else feel that this section is perhaps not in keeping with the intent of the themes section? Baryonyx 08:28, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm with you. This "searching for connections" game can lead to a lot of pointless cruft. Leg injuries do not a "theme" make. One can come up with any number of mind-numbing non-story-related "concepts" and find references to them. Off the top of my head (yes that's a pun):

  • Hair: Major characters have different hair in their flashbacks! (Locke, Jack, Michael)
  • Car wrecks: Characters involved or affected by car wrecks (Kate, Michael, Locke, Jack's wife)
  • Secrets: Characters keeping secrets from each other (Hurley, Charlie, Kate, Locke)
  • Etc. Etc.

addendum: On second thought, "Secrets" might be considered a theme-- but it's a common enough story element that it's not necessarily unique to Lost. I'd make a distinction between thematic concepts which lead the plot forward, and ones that just seem to be similiarities between characters. That's why I proposed "Lost Love" as a theme-- it appeared to be something that was not only shared by main characters but was a major part of what brought them to the Island. -LeFlyman 17:30, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I liked the idea of "Lost Love", just wanted to move it in the direction of building on something we already have (fathers), and expanding it into a true theme involving both family and romance. Are you working on something for that section? Also, do we need more of a discussion before dropping the new sections? Baryonyx 18:14, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
As for the new sections, I think that with a bit of work "Animals" might develop into something worthwhile — perhaps change to "Nature"? — but I think "Leg Injuries" can go. Leg injuries are a theme of "Lost" in the same sense that red-shirts dying was a theme of the original Star Trek: it happens a lot, but it doesn't necessarily mean anything (except the writers getting lazy). But that's just my opinion... —Josiah Rowe 21:51, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm thinking some editors are having difficulties identifying what's meant by "Theme," particularly, as I've also fallen into the usage of simplistic thematic "titles." Themes are a concept from literary criticism, derived from aspects of literary theory, that certain written and performed fiction have a particular, underlying-- and often subtextual-- message which is conveyed and examined through the story. They are similar to parables, but themes may have less of an educational or moral aspect-- they may simply be a reflection of real world concerns. In the case of television shows, a theme may be a general message to the entire series, and/or a specific message to a particular episodes. Themes resonate with audiences, even if they can't quite put their finger on why. Think about the classic and wildly popular 80s sitcom Family Ties: The general theme (reflected in the title) could be summarized as, "The bond between family members is stronger than their individual differences." Specific episodes of Family Ties may have had additional messages, like, "Money doesn't lead to happiness" or "Parents are people, too." Lost is particularly interesting, as its staff writers juggle a number of thematic concepts in each episode. In "Everybody Hates Hugo," for instance, we might consider a theme to be, "Excessive good fortune can destroy friendships." Thus, "Leg injuries" and "Animals" aren't really themes, per se, unless someone can articulate how sprained ankles or mysterious critters underlie some deeper aspect of the story -- they are merely plot devices which may be repeated for the sake of resonance or foreshadowing. (Herein endith the lesson :) LeFlyman 16:53, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

As a followup, I've gone ahead and made the Be Bold decision to change the "Themes" subsection title to "Story Elements" which seems to be more in keeping with what's actually there now. LeFlyman 18:06, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Story elements in "Lost" are very similar in the book from 1970 "A Maze Of Death" by Philip K. Dick

I really don't think that the "injury to leg" motif is notable enough to be on the main page, whether you call it a theme or a story element. I'm preserving it here, though, in case anyone disagrees:

Leg Injuries

Leg injuries have been a recurring theme in Lost.

  • John Locke was a paraplegic before the infamous crash which magically healed him.
  • Kate Austen shot the lead robber in the leg during an elaborate bank heist in New Mexico.
  • Michael Dawson injured himself grieviously including his leg and needed a cane to walk for an unknown time.
  • Hurley's mother suffers from a broken ankle when she steps out of his car to look at her new house.
  • When Hurley goes to Australia to find Sam Toome, he finds his wife without her leg because of Toome's curse.
  • Boone Carlyle's leg is crushed in his fatal fall, Jack considers amputating it before he succumbs to his injuries.
  • A strip of wood pierces Sayid's leg when he triggers a boobytrap in his search for Rousseau.
  • Jack's wife Sarah faced the prospect of being paralysed below the waist due to a car crash.
  • The first survivor that Jack helps in the Pilot episode has his legs trapped under the landing gear of the plane.
  • Jack injures his ankle while running in the stadium where he meets Desmond.
—Josiah Rowe 18:41, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
  • John gets his leg pierced by some metalic thing when trying to open the hatch with the trebuchet.
  • Sayid shot himself in the leg in order to let Nadia escape. jochen 08:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Animals?

How is this a theme? Animals exist... animals are everywhere. I don't think the producers intentionally try to put animals whereever they go. As for Leg Injuries, I think if we can put it into a paragraph instead of a list it's okay. KramarDanIkabu (speak) 18:14, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

I've removed the section. It was, in a word, silly. Pet theory (pun intended) should be saved for fan sites. Here's the excised text:

Animals
Non-human animals play an elusive but likely important recurring theme. First, it is unusual for a tropical island that so very few forms of wildlife are visible. Of course, in "Walkabout" John Locke hunts for wild boar, leading him on his wild odyssey to find the hatch with Boone. Jin exhibits his master skill as a fisherman. Many of the other encounters with animals, however, are seemingly unnatural. A polar bear appears in "Pilot Part 2;" Sawyer and Kate encounter the bear in the jungle and Sawyer shoots it. Why are polar bears on the warm tropical island in the Southern hemisphere, since they are indigenous to the Northern hemisphere's Arctic polar cap? These animals overheat at temperatures above 10°C (50°F). More importantly, these carnivores require an animal food source, which appears to be not very abundant on this island. A polar bear also attacked Michael Dawson in "Special". We see, however, in the Dharma Initiative Orientation video for Station #3—symbolized by the animal, "the swan"—that polar bears were potentially part of a research project (we presume) in the area of zoology. We also learn that Michael gave his son, Walt, a stuffed polar bear toy for a gift before the crash, and in "Special" Walt had found Hurley's comic book, which featured an encounter with a polar bear. The shark that attacks Sawyer has a Dharma Initiative logo branded on its fin, but this logo is distinct from the swan logo found in the Hatch (or Station #3). (Sharks, such as great white sharks, have a typical lifespan of about 25-30 years, establishing the time frame in which the shark may have been branded.) Sharks also have a sixth sense by means of most unusual sensory organs, called Ampullae of Lorenzini, which are able to sense prey's electrical field created by their muscle contractions and also the Earth's magnetic field. (Of course, electromagnetic field research was being conducted in Station #3). In "Special" we learn that Walt also may have a sixth sense of his own in that he can communicate with animals. Shannon had what appeared to be a paranormal communication with Walt, now captive with "the others," through an animal, namely Walt's dog, Vincent.

- LeFlyman 15:39, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I've actually thought about this one as well. Especially when Dharma came about. As most of you probably know by now, Dharma is the way of the higher truths. It's a Hindu and Buddhist thing. To me, there are a lot of Hindu themes in Lost. The main embodiment of Dharma is in Lord Rama, an avatar of Vishnu. Vishnu is considered the Preserver and has 10 avatars or incarnations. Some of these were animals. The first incarnation of Vishnu was a large fish (perhaps the one that they experienced at the raft--we assumed it was a shark, but we never saw any teeth, so we don't know). The third incarnation of Vishnu was the boar. It's also important to note that in one story, Vishnu and Brahma (the Creator) had a challenge of superiority. When Vishnu took for the form of the boar, Brahma took the form of a swan (part of the Dharma symbol in the hatch). Just throwing it out there. Mongrel
  • Gee thanks for cutting this section out, LeFlyman. I admit I was just hacking out ideas for people to add to and craft better. Reconsider why the polar bear is 25% of the episodes. Consider why a Dharma logo is on the shark. Consider the statements from Mongrel as well. Animals have been used throughout literature as a rich source of symbolism and hidden meaning. I think the Animal "Theme" should stand a look by the rest of the viewers of the program. Bakrantz
    • But the thing is, it's not actually a theme now, is it.
  • I don't think it's worth putting in, as it has yet to be acknowledged in the show in any way. Other than that, a lot of these are huge stretches. So far, only the polar bear has been out of the ordinary. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 22:50, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
  • And the shark with the Dharma symbol on it? Was that ordinary? I think it is hard to brand a great white. Rather unusual. Why are they wasting film on polar bears and branded sharks if they aren't a "Story Element"? Zoology, the study of animals, is a subject of the Dharma Init. Hmmm. Just a thought. The producers say that Walt is special and well everytime he is "special" an animal is involved: dead birds, polar bears on two or three separate occasions. Time will tell. Just a coincidence and a red herring--so to speak. The connections will come sooner or latter and put "Animals" on the map. I'll wait until it is completely obvious--I mean when it is "Black & white," before I "destroy" the site again with my musings. Bakrantz
    • Walt's specialness has showed up without animals involved. There was his prediction of the vault being dangerous, the way he always got the best possible rolls in backgamon, and his "astral projection".
    • The point is that Walt has special moments with animals and that fits into the theme proposal. Bakrantz
  • BTW, to beat a dead-horse--Why did that Horse show up on the island and in Kate's back story and why did Sawyer see it? Is there consensus yet on making 'animals' a bonified theme yet. Bakrantz

"Paranormal/Fate"

  • There is a huge underlying paranormal theme I've not really seen mentioned anywhere.
  • The psychic who knew Claire would have to raise her baby alone on that flight.
  • The dream Locke had that showed where the drug smuggler plane was
  • Michael's son who can "make things happen" and seems to know some future events. "Don't open it" "the numbers are bad"
  • The numbers that have been documented to cause bad luck more than can be explained by just chance.
  • Jack meeting Desmond on the island
  • Rose knows Bernard is alive.
  • Sawyer knows Jack's Dad
  • Hugo owns the company Locke works at
  • The simple fact that so many people survived a crash from a plane that was not intact. It definately would not have flown or even glided without it's tail section. More likely it would topple straight down, very fast.
  • Almost forgot the big one: Locke can walk after not being able to for 4 years, with no atrophe!

216.160.48.241 20:10, 17 October 2005

Let's follow Mr. Eko's advice and not confuse coincidence with destiny. There are some strange things going on but Sawyer meeting Jack's dad could easily be coincidence, like Hurley being on TV in Jin's flashback. Several items in the above list could be simple coincidence, but I would add the following as possibilities:

  • Jack's wife regaining the ability to walk after her operation when Jack was convinced she wouldn't
  • polar bears appearing after Walt looks at the comic book with the polar bear in it (twice)
  • Jack's father's body disappearing from the coffin
  • Locke's vision of Boone saying "Theresa falls up the stairs, Theresa falls down the stairs" which turned out to be meaningful
  • Claire's dream about "the Black Rock" and about being attacked
  • Walt touching Locke's arm and saying "don't open that thing"
  • Walt appearing to Shannon and Sayid after the kidnapping

On the other hand, I think it's possible that some important people might have been maneuvered onto the plane deliberately, and maybe the plane was crashed deliberately by operatives from DHARMA or someone else. If Claire's baby was important to DHARMA's research in paranormal powers then the psychic could easily have been an agent putting her on the plane. Farfetched but possible. Let's not assume something is paranormal or supernatural unless there's no other explanation. Ahkond 02:03, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

As an addendum to the above, you have Walt saying not to open the hatch. The numbers are on it. As for bad luck, in opening it, Desmond runs off and now the Losties are stuck with the timer being their problem - bad luck. However, I think we'll see more as Walt seemed pretty terrified of it. Probably the season finale we'll see what happens when you don't make the entries.

Themes in general

I removed the following from the "Philosophy" section:

However, it is plenty fair to point out that all the above theories/conspiracies and philosophy mumbo jumbo are quite possibly a mere by product of human's innate urge to find connections in places where there is none.

While the actual sentence is unhelpful, snide and ungrammatical, I think there might be a grain of useful content in there, if we can tease it out. The entire "Story elements" section veers awfully close to speculation, and thus to original research. On the other hand, I think that there's a lot of good material there that's worth keeping, if we can figure out how to justify it. What would be great would be if we could find a way to retain the thoughtful material that's there, but also acknowledge that we really know very little definitively. Any ideas? —Josiah Rowe 04:57, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

  • There is very little in the first three sections of "Story Elements" that is speculative, and when things in these first three show up that are, they're very often edited out very quickly. I will say that some of the observations, especially in the Black & White section, are of dubious value. The last two sections do veer very far into speculation. The philosophy section should only really mention 3 things: 1.) Locke is named for John Locke, 2.) Rousseau is named for Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and 3.) the Dharma logo includes the Bagua map. These are factual... actually speculating that the names or symbolism go deeper than that is a distinct problem in this section, because it is not confirmed. All of this, however, is part of the problem with making an encyclopaedic page while a serialized show like this is ongoing... we're going to be calling into question what is factual and what is speculation, as well as what should even be on the page, for some time. For now, I'd turn a critical eye to Black & White, Redemption, and Philosophy. Baryonyx 05:46, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • As per comments above, clipped this Original Research, as overlayed onto Lost from "Philosophy":

This idea suggests that the island serves as a second chance for those on it (Locke gains use of his legs, Kate gains her freedom, Michael mends his relationship with Walt, etc.). This idea of being "born again" could be alluding to a Christian theme as hinted on in various episodes. John Locke also proposed the following criterion concerning personal identity: "If you remember thinking something in the past, then you are the same person as he or she who did the thinking." Another point of his was that in the state of nature, all men had equal right to punish transgressors; to ensure fair judgment for all, governments were formed to better administrate the laws. Rousseau, on the other hand, argued that man was born weak and ignorant, but virtuous. Only after man develops society does he become wicked. These beliefs of Rousseau led him to create the theory of a Noble Savage. The theory said that a savage raised in the wilds was purer than a man raised amongst civilization. This evidently relates to Danielle's character as a sort of savage living alone in the wild. This is paralleled by the characters on Lost: Locke embraces both nature and the need for organization among the survivors, while Rousseau prefers nature and appears to abhor joining the survivors in their settlement.

... Different variants have been seen, which may reflect philosophical or religious differences: the "Swan" symbol shown in the station occupied by Desmond resembles the yin and yang, suggesting balance, whereas the symbol seen in the shelter occupied by the tail section survivors bears an arrow, suggesting struggle.

- LeFlyman 09:05, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I've just excised an interesting, but yet again speculative addition under the "Black and White" story element:

The black and white stones may refer to the same myth as in Paulo Coelho’s book the Alchemist (1988) in which Melchizedek; “The Old King” gives Urim and Thummim; one black and one white stone, to the main character, Santiago, as guides for his journey towards his destiny. Other references to this book in the series might be Santiago’s profession: He is a Shepard (Jack Shepard) and he is from Andalusia (Ana Lucia). The Alchemist shares the series theme: Personal Legend’s.
LeFlyman 19:00, 6 November 2005 (UTC)


Murder

It seems a lot of people have have killed people on this show. This is so not a complete list but it's what I have off the top of my head:

Homicide:

  • Ana-Lucia killed person who shot her

Accidental:

  • Ana-Lucia killed Shannon
  • person that died because of Jack's father

Suicide:

  • Shannon's brother denied himself treatment

Alison9 01:45, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Also under Homicide:

  • Sawyer killed man he thought swindled his father.
  • Kate blew up her father.
  • Sayid probably killed people as a member of the Iraqi Republican Guard.

Magnet for Fancruft?

As the above suggested "entries" and the new nitpicky additions to the Story Elements section now demonstrate, that section has become a breeding ground for pernicious fancruft. I'm of the opinion that before it gets out-of-hand, the section be reigned in to brief examples, or removed entirely. On reflection, while it makes for interesting reading, the inclusion of Story Elements was likely a bad thing as it is pretty much completely Original Research. I've never come across a source that we can use to validate the particular items included. The section sticks out as a sore thumb of uncited material. Thoughts? —LeFlyman 17:54, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

As yet another example, I just excised this latest re-insertion of crufty addition:

Divisions

Inhabitants on the island are constantly at odds with each other. Usually these conflicts come to closure after time has elapsed. In the first season, there is disagreement whether to move inland to the caves or to remain on the beach. In the second season, the fuselage survivors and those from the tail section clash when they first encounter each other. Throughout the series, an overarching conflict that drives the plots is that between the survivors of Flight 815 and the mysterious Others who have apparently been living there for quite some time.

And more:

Flashback Crossovers

During flashback sequences, we frequently see Lost castaways appearing in minor or major ways in the stories of other characters. Whether these crossovers are coincidence or are meant to indicate that the characters have some sort of common destiny is a subject of speculation.

  • Sawyer has a drink with Jack's father in an Australian bar.
  • Shannon's father is the drunk driver who paralyzed Jack's wife and Shannon walks past Jack in the hospital.
  • When Jin is strong-arming a man on behalf of his father-in-law, the television in the apartment shows Hurley on television being interviewed after winning the lottery.
  • Sayid appears on television in the background when Kate enters a recruiting station to talk to her father.
  • Sawyer is brought into the police department in Australia forcibly while Boone talks to the police about Shannon.
  • Desmond and Jack meet at a stadium years before they meet again on the island.
  • Locke works at a box company. Hurley owns a box company
  • Charlie is in the elevator that Hurley was trying to get into but was full.

(NOTE: these are excised sections for reference only, DO NOT add to them)

--LeFlyman 22:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't see flashback crossovers, a phenomenon that the producers of the show have talked about, as being 'cruft.' It's fairly easy to verify by watching the show, and is also widely discussed on sites that recap each episode.

--Electrasteph

I don't see flashback crossovers as 'cruft' either. Regardless of whether or not the crossovers have overall importance to the plot or theme of the show, they are a recurring story element.--207.172.73.17 14:36, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Names of Characters

There were a couple names on the list of philosophers that were not actually philosophers: Jack Shephard, Shannon Rutherford. I thought it would be better to have a section about the names of characters on the show than a section about philosophy, since characters' names are a very important aspect of the show. Before I had finished making the change someone deleted Jack Shepherd and Shannon Rutherford from the list, but I think they belong there, because clearly their names were not chosen arbitrarily. I also added Ethan Rom's name, an anagram of "Other Man," to the list, because that's significant too. I separated the other material in the philosophy section into a new section, "Dichotomy of Faiths," because I think this alone is a very important aspect of the show. I wasn't exactly sure what to do with the Dharma logo stuff so I gave it its own section even though it probably doesn't deserve it. Thoughts on these changes?--207.172.73.17 03:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

More removed Story Elements/Themes

Excised this Original Research:

Determination
Mostly through the story of Locke, determination is an ever present concept. The concept of never giving up and always pressing on with no hope, and often times being able to achieve anything. Many times Locke uses the phrase "Don't tell me what I can't do!" as a result he is often times the competant survivor on the island. It is even present with Jack as a doctor, as he refuses to give up on his patients being successful, such as with Charlie, and unsuccessful at times, such as with Boone. Even after Sun repeatedly tells him that he cannot save Boone, he yells "Don't tell me what I can't do!"

Remember, Wikipedia is not the place to try out new theories. See: "What is Excluded?"—LeFlyman 06:04, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Yet another fresh example of theme Original Research has slipped in:

Starting over

In Tabula Rasa, Jack told Kate, "It doesn't matter... who we were - what we did before this, before the crash... three days ago we all died. We should all be able to start over." Many of the characters are in one way or another finding a second chance at life on the island.

  • Kate was a wanted criminal on the run before the plane crash. On the island she lives a life free of crime, and has used her skills for the good of other survivors.
  • Locke was a helpless paraplegic before the plane crash, but miraculously regained the use of his legs when the plane crashed. On the island he is often the protector of the other survivors.
  • Before the plane crash, Jack could not accept failure or death. On the island, he has become become more accepting of the death of his father, as well as his own failure to save Boone.
  • Before the plane crash, Charlie was a drug-addict who could not support anyone but himself. On the island, he has stopped using drugs and has done everything he can to take care of Claire and her baby.
  • Claire was ready to give her baby up for adoption when the plane arrived in LA, but on the island she has accepted her baby and taken care of it herself.

Again, while this is an interesting set of similarities, it delves into opinion-based qualifications. There appear to be an almost limitless supply of ways one can indentify/group thematic elements on the show— but unless we aim for some level of Verifiability this article will be over-run with all the excesses that have currently been archived at Talk:Lost (TV_series)/Story_elements. However, if there's a consensus for it, as this section seems to be so interesting for editors to expand, perhaps it may be broken out as a separate article (i.e. Story Elements of Lost or Themes of Lost)— where those who wish to categorise/verify such content can be free to do so without weighing down the main article. —LeFlyman 18:35, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I'm getting ready to fly back home after my holiday vacation, so I probably won't be able to post any thoughts I have very much over the next day or two, but I will note that splitting the Story Elements out should be avoided at all costs. It would be like moving the problem elsewhere, add another page we'd have to police, and probably eventually get merge and redirected back here. I expect there's already significant Wiki-stress for the longer term editors here... I haven't seen several of them in awhile, for example, and we should probably try and find a solution that avoids making things worse. I have come to believe that the best way to proceed would be to try and develop this article in the direction of a featured article. I think this because we've recently been given a template of a much beloved current/recent show being a Featured Article: Arrested Development (Featured on 12/5/2005). That page is pretty sizeable and has a section on themes and whatnot. When I saw it as an FA, I was actually kind of jealous... I know that we have the editor loyalty and the interest in this article to do the very same thing, but we're so mired by the speculative nature of most contributions, we're actually talking about removing themes altogether or various other extreme solutions. Perhaps we should try something like proposing Lost as a collaboration of the week to start with. I don't know.... I certainly never expect the Lost article to look exactly like the AD one, but perhaps if we could get some type of goal for this page going, we'd have people focusing more on improving the page and less on using it as a repository for their own theories and speculations.
On another note, 207.172.73.17... join us! Registration is quite easy and you won't have to be identified by your IP anymore. Baryonyx 20:22, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
I understand and agree with some of the suggestions put forth by 207.172.73.17—and yes, as Baryonyx said, please register! In looking over the Arrested Development article, I must say (not to be competitive) that I think the LOST articles do a better job at being "encyclopedic". While speculation and non-neutrality are difficult to avoid in fan-oriented entries, I think we're already "there" as far as meeting the criteria for Featured Article status. I'd like to see us deal with the issues of verifiability of "Themes" first, but after some tweaks, the Lost articles should be ready to be nominated for FA. —LeFlyman 21:02, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
  • In line with suggestion above, I've placed the article up for Peer Review to get feedback on improvements, with the aim of getting closer to Featured Article status. —LeFlyman 22:09, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I finally registered! So I understand the difficulty with grouping thematic elements on the show in a verifiable way, but to me there is no difference between "Parents and Children" and "Starting Over": Both are lists of similarities that can be drawn between the different characters of Lost, and neither one tries to interpret these similarities or their importance. Just as it is a verifiable fact that many characters have conflicts with their parents and children on the show, it is also verifiable that many characters go through change as a result of being on the island. The same goes for the other deleted section, "Dichotomy of Faiths." The fact that different characters on the show have conflicting viewpoints is not up for debate: It's fact. Perhaps the issue is that there's no way to know whether the producers meant for "Starting Over" and "Dichotomy of Faiths" to be overall themes on the show or if they just happened to use these plot devices multiple times. But then the same is true of "Parents and Children": Maybe the producers had no intention of making that a theme, they just happened to make most of the characters be in conflict with their parents or children. (Did that make any sense?)--Silentword 23:09, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Fresh Original Research for Character names

The fancruft game of finding new and exciting Original Research has once again crept into the Story Elements section:

Christian Shephard's name strongly connotes the concept of forgiveness and redemption.
Gary Troup is an anagram of Purgatory.

Neither of these can be considered verifiable content. The first is pure speculation, and the second reflects an anagram of a name that has no appearance in the SHOW itself, but is of a fictional author of a book published by ABC's sister publishing label Hyperion Press. The character himself will not be in Lost, because he supposedly died in the plane crash. Thus, I'm removing both. And to whomever keeps re-inserting them: please stop.—LeFlyman 18:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Saying Rousseau is named after the philospher is just as verifiable as saying Christian Shepard is connoted with forgiveness and redeption. As well, as I recall, aren't the lostaways going to stumble upon Gary Troup's manuscript in some undiscovered wreckage? I no longer have the source. User:Synflame
  • It isn't as Verifiable-- the creators have stated that the naming of Locke and Rousseau was connected to the philosophers. However, nowhere is there any official source which reflects the "meaning" of Jack Shephard's name, nor Shannon's connection to Ernest Rutherford. Any such interpretation is Original Research because it either is the view of the editor who included it here, or based on some fan site. Wikipedia is not to be used as a primary source, which means such interpretations have no place here. This holds true for anagrams-- unless they are referenced by the creators, they are just speculative. In contrast, "Ethan Rom" has been referenced on the offical Oceanic-Air site as "Other Man." "Gary Troup," however, is not a character in the series; but a fictitious author of an ancillary publication. If he is at some point referenced on the show, then something may be mentioned about him; but so far, it's pure Crystall Ballingto include him here.--LeFlyman 00:04, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Well if "Ethan Rom" being an anagram of "Other Man" is official, why was it removed from the list of names? Because his name is not a story element? In my view it is, and I think it should be put back.--207.172.73.17 22:17, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Literary allusions and references

I'm not sure why the following text was removed:

Epochal literary works are frequently displayed within Lost to add character or thematic subtext to the show.

--207.172.73.17 18:05, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I was about to post regarding the excised section, but you beat me to the punch. I removed the new "Literary allusions and references" section, as it is Original Research to draw a connection between a literary work and "character or thematic subtext to the show", without basing that connection on a verifiable source-- such as in an interview in which one of the show's creators/writers says, "X book was included in the episode as a reference to..."

Please only add/create content which can be sourced. —LeFlyman 18:26, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Can't we just keep the list of literary allusions and references without attempting to draw any connection between them and what happens on the show? --207.172.73.17 19:00, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

In one of the podcasts, Damon spoke specifically about watership down and the third policeman, saying that Mr. Dick's literary backgrounded resulted in him placing specific books in the show for I think quote subtext. I believe he also explained why the Third Policeman worked with regards to the context of the hatch, and watership down with regards to White Rabbit explicitly. User:Synflame
  • If the specific podcast can be attributed/quoted and sourced, then I don't see why those items can't be re-included.—LeFlyman 05:57, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Rather than trying to interpret allusions, just make the factual observation that the reference was made in the show. There is no dispute that Sawyer was reading Watership Down or that Locke made a reference to Gigamesh--and it is highly unlikely either was random or coincidence.24.18.59.229 16:08, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree. The literary references are a motif in the show, regardless of what their meaning is. We don't try to interpret any of the other motifs in the show (numbers, black and white, eyes), so we don't need to interpret this one.--207.172.73.17 16:38, 31 December 2005 (UTC)


Division of Story Elements

I disagree with the way that the story elements are divided. The Philosophical and Metaphysical Elements is subdivided into three categories that have little to do with each other. The names and the Dharma logos may both be philosophical symbolism, but the dichotomy of faiths is an element of the plot, not symbolism. And not all the names are even of philosophers- Rutherford was a scientist, and Ethan Rom's name (it's not currently on the list but should be) is not representative of any famous person but is symbolic because it's an anagram. And if Names and the Dharma Logos are in this category because they're symbolic, shouldn't "Black and White" and "Numbers" also fit under this category since they probably represent something greater? I would suggest either taking away the Philosophical and Metaphysical Elements category and making each of the sub-categories into a category, or dividing the whole Story Elements section into two categories: Recurring Plot Elements (has the subcategories of Parents, Redemption, and Dichotomy of Faiths) and Symbolism and Motifs (has the subcategories of Black and White, Numbers, Dharma Initiative Logos, Character Names).--207.172.73.17 22:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I decided to make these changes. Change it back to the way it was if you have good reason, though I'd like to hear why.--207.172.73.17 22:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

In line with the trend to provide more verifiable content, I've commented out the "Themes" called "Redemption" and "Dichotomy of Faiths" -- if editors can come up with external reliable sources which can be used as a basis for these sections, then they can be re-written to incorporate that information. At the present, the way they read is purely Original Research which we should strive to avoid. I suspect that both of these sections can be sourced, just as sources for the literary references were found discussed in interviews/articles. —LeFlyman 19:37, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Again, please do not re-add the sections until an actual, concrete source can be cited for the material; that doesn't mean "I read or heard it discussed" somewhere. It means "in an interview, on X day, in X magazine, J.J. Abrams said..." or "in podcast X, at X site, Lost writer said..." For more in-depth guide to citing sources, see: Wikipedia:Cite_sources —LeFlyman 02:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't see a source for the "Parents and Children" section. How's that any different from "Redemption" or "Dichotomy of Faiths"?--207.172.73.17 19:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The Parents and Children subsection reflect the relationships of the characters as presented on the show, and does not extrapolate/speculate on the meaning of these relationships, thus do not require sourcing; the other two "themes" overlay philosophical or spiritual theories about the show, without providing a source for those theories. See: How to deal with Wikipedia entries about theories—LeFlyman 02:50, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Black and white

A lot of the items in this section are a bit iffy, but this one seems especially silly to me:

The show's most spiritual characters, Locke and Mr. Eko, are white and black respectively.

It's not as if Locke is the only white character and Eko the only black character. One could make all sorts of meaningless observations along these lines, i.e. Charlie, one of the smallest characters, is white; Mr. Eko, the largest character, is black. I'm not even sure how this is supposed to reflect the motif; if "black and white" are supposed to connote duality, what does it mean if both characters are very spiritual? How are they opposites? android79 01:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. These "symbols" sections are getting really out of hand. Danflave 16:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I removed the Locke/Eko "spiritual" item, plus one about Charlie's checkered shoes, and another about Vincent being "white" (uh, he's a yellow lab, right?) and Walt being black. Just trivial silliness. android79 01:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Parents and children

Am I the only one who is concerned about the "Parents and children" section? I think it is rather unnecessary (or too bloated, in the least). One of the primary aspects of the show is its flashbacks. Because of this, obviously, every single character will most likely have his or her parents featured at some point. Basically, I think people are starting to stretch too much by trying to find a way to fit EVERY character into the "Parents and children" section. Since each character has their own page, I don't think a lot of this info is necessary to put on the main page. I think we ought to parse this down and state that dysfunctional family relationships are a definite theme, and some of the most prominent examples are Jack, Kate, and Locke. It's just turning into a laundry list at this point. Danflave 22:02, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I've cut it down, adding only the specific example of Jin, who seems to be the most prominent exception to this theme. I'm putting the laundry list here for posterity. Perhaps this can be built up from an analytical perspective, using the things listed here as a base.
  • Locke was victim of a wretched betrayal in "Deus Ex Machina" by both his natural parents.
  • Jack's broken relationship with his alcoholic surgeon father Christian was the impetus for him to travel to Australia, at the behest of his mother.
  • Sawyer's mother had an extra-marital affair; his father killed her and then himself after finding out.
  • Michael was absent as a father for most of Walt's life, and it was the death of Walt's mother that reconnected Michael with his son.
  • Kate, after discovering that the abusive man she believed to be her step-father was, in actuality, her biological father, murdered him. Kate was forced into a life on the run after her mother revealed her crime to the police.
  • Claire's son, Aaron, was abandoned by her boyfriend, and she was prepared to give her unborn child up for adoption.
  • Shannon's father died in a car accident, leaving everything to her stepmother (Boone's mother) in his will.
  • Sun's father, a gangster, led Jin into a similar life after Jin decided to work for the man in exchange for Sun's marriage.
  • Jin's own shame at his fisherman father's poverty and upbringing incited him to tell Sun and her family that his father is dead.
  • Ana Lucia was portrayed as being in conflict with her mother, who worked in the LAPD and whose professional seniority provides a situation comparable to Jack and his father. While responding to a robbery call, a pregnant Ana Lucia was shot, and lost her child. Baryonyx 17:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Story Elements with Respect to 09.01.06 Podcast etc

I have returned the dichotomy of faiths for a few different reasons. Firstly, the aforementioned podcast makes it relatively clear that there is a play on faith's theme within the show, this is supported by the "seminal relationship quote," as well as the title "man of science, man of faith." As with pieces of literature and films, many themes are fundamentally clear, however the author or director may never explictly say these things. However, like a Clock Work Orage, it is axiomatic that it speaks of the theme of a dystopia, the fact that Burgess has never said it does not make it a non credible argument. The producers and wirters have said enough, and made enough relaitvely clear to warrant the dichotmy of faiths theme to be accepted as fact.

On that note, the theme of redemption folllows by similar implications. In the third podcast I believe, thorough referrences are made, as well, the inclusion of the tabula rassa, and dialogue within the show makes it abundantly clear that it is a theme.

Character names: In the newest podcast, Damon again clarifies the personified themes of the character names. Explaining the obvious ones, Locke and Rousseau, and saying in close paraphrase, "names like Jack Shephard were specifically chosen to represent him as a guide." This is irrefutable evidence warranting his inclusion, and as well it should be enough to justify names like Christian and Shannon. Considering the fact the producers said they were very careful about name selection ,and that Ernest Rutherford had theories closely connected to electromagnetism, and Christian Shephard is rather obivous considering Jack, this should be adequate.

Finally, in response to the laundry list of parent relationships, I would vote for its reinclusion in the interest of consistancy. Literary referrences and black and white both have lists justifying them, either they should all be removed, or they should all remain. If kept terse, there is no reason why the 'laundry list' cannot be included. This is an encylpodic referrence to lost, and should have some substanciation. User:Synflame 09 January 2006 1:44 EST

I agree with pretty much all of this, except that I replaced 'Redemption' with 'Starting Over' (a section that was labeled as OR and deleted) for a few reasons: 1) The word "Redemption" suggests trying to atone for sins. Most of the characters are not atoning for for their past sins, but they are behaving differently than they did before the plane crash, which is more synonymous with "starting over". "Starting over" is also the concept suggested by the dialogue: Jack told Kate, "It doesn't matter... who we were - what we did before this, before the crash... three days ago we all died. We should all be able to start over." 2) A lot of the material in 'Redemption' was OR. The section said that Locke was leading each of the characters towards their personal redemption, which has no real verification and is only one interpretation. I tried to write "Starting Over" in a way that's not up for interpretation; it might still need some work. 3) This was included in 'Redemption': "This can also refer to the title, giving it a double meaning of people being 'lost' or 'adrift' in life, but finding themselves and getting a chance to make things right on the island." Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't think being lost in life has anything to do with redemption. This seems like OR to me.

Here's the original section of Redemption in case you decide to put it back:

Many of the characters are in one way or another finding redemption and second chances as a result of being on the island. Locke is the first character to do so, when he discovers that he has mysteriously regained use of his legs and brings back food to the survivors; after this, Locke begins to lead many of the other characters towards their own personal redemption: he gathers water for the other survivors, a move which helps encourage Jack to become the de facto leader of the group; he helps Charlie kick his heroin habit; he encourages Sawyer to face his past misdeeds involving an incident that transpired before Sawyer left Australia; he helps Boone let go of his relationship with Shannon; he finds Walt's lost dog and allows Michael to take credit, and then later helps Michael bond with/save Walt when Walt is attacked by a polar bear; and his philosophizing to Shannon encourages her to pursue a relationship with Sayid. In the season 1 finale, Sawyer is heard uncharacteristically singing Bob Marley's "Redemption Song" as he sets sail to find help.
This can also refer to the title, giving it a double meaning of people being 'lost' or 'adrift' in life, but finding themselves and getting a chance to make things right on the island.

--Silentword 22:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Synflame, I'll refer you to the peer review comments. If we have any interest at all in improving the page to the point it could be considered a FA, the lists have to go. I'm all for removing them completely outright, but I want the removal of the one to spark a reasonable discussion of how we integrate such thematic material without resorting to a list. Baryonyx 22:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I have commented-out the sections once again; the content is still un-verifiable, as no specific source has been provided for the "themes" presented therein. The Podcast mentioned above discusses a number of topics; however, the material that had been under Story Elements is not based on that podcast, but rather extrapolates on what some may think the show means -- rather than using the actual, concrete statements of the show's creators. As with any other encyclopedic article, the content presented here must come out of information gathered from some other place; not some new concept, originating here. Appreciation for the importance of "No Original Research" is something that I personally have become more aware of; I suggest that in order to meet qualifications for "featured" status, we aim to be scrupulous is our application of that policy. —LeFlyman 23:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
    • I second Baryonyx and LeFlyman. The lists have gotten totally out of hand. And to comment on what you said, Synflame, yes this is an encyclopedia. NOT a fan site and certainly not a tedious laundry list of every minute detail of the show. An encyclopedia has edited, succinct articles that give an overall summary of a specific topic. Yes, it is important to include the prominent themes of Lost -- but that does not mean we need to include each and every example of how the theme is used. Danflave 04:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
    • And something else that's been bugging me about this flimsy Shannon Rutherford/Ernest Rutherford connection -- where are you getting the fact that ER was notable in the field of electromagnetism? Even his Wikipedia page makes no reference to the word "electromagnetism" or "magnets" -- and my very cursory Google research doesn't come up with anything indicating that Rutherford's primary studies were in electromagnetism. Yes, he was a physicist, and a very famous one at that, but I don't see any reason to connect his name to Shannon. Total original research balderdash. Danflave 04:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
      • Ok, so here's what I suggest about Redemption...since some characters have not quite gotten there, I think we can all agree, it's at least Regret some are feeling (Sayid regrets his days of torture in Iraq and regrets the deal he made that caused his friend to committ suicide, but he has not attempted to redeem himself from this because he does not know a real way. Kate regrets her days of crime, but has done nothing to redeem herself. Sawyer shows flashes of regret for his standoffish attitude, and has done little things to redeem the way he's treated others, but hasn't really redeemed himself). So I think the theme is Regret/Redemption. Perhaps I'm wrong, tell me what you think.JurgenHadley 16:19, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
  • This would still be Original Research. The interpretation/analysis of the motivation or personality of the characters, without being able to cite a source outside of Wikipedia for that interpretation is what makes it inappropriate here. Whether it's called "Regret" or "Redemption" or "Starting Over", it's a novel theory based on our own idea of what the character or story means, rather than something which we can attribute to another place. The "laundry list of similarities" that we can put together may be interesting for fans of the show, but are likely not encyclopedic-- which is the ultimate goal of what we're trying to build here. For other such lists of "similarities" which have been excluded, see the archive: Talk:Lost (TV series)/Story elements.—LeFlyman 18:16, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I've snipped down the Story Elements section and recombined it under a single heading. I've also removed the commented-out text, as no one has yet provided sources for it. Here are the sections excised:

Please provide specific CITATION to a verifiable external published or broadcast source for the following material; otherwise, it is "Original Research" and will be removed

Dichotomy of faiths
The Dichotomy of faiths is a philosophical motif within Lost that is very prominent as of late, and also reflects the theoretical cause of the plane's crash. The conflict between John Locke and Jack Shephard was defined in season 1, and encapsulated in the season 2 episode "Man of Science, Man of Faith." Both Jack and Locke exhibit different views on life itself, in deviations of existentialism. As a doctor, Jack believes everything, including what happens on the island, can be logically and scientifically explained. Locke holds an unbound faith in fate and destiny, believing that they are being tested by impalpable forces that require no tangible explanation. From this original dichotomy, there has developed a second contrast, this time between Locke and Mr. Eko who, as opposed to possessing a general faith in fate, holds a religious faith in God. Both Locke and Eko believe that things happen for a reason. However, they believe the source and reasons for these occurrences to be quite different.

Redemption/Regret
Many of the characters are in one way or another finding themselves regretting past decisions or behaviors, and many are acting on ways to redeem themselves from it.

  • Locke regains the use of his legs, and through hunting and going through the jungle, redeems his desire to do what people told him he couldn't do. This is shown heavily in Walkabout. He also gains stronger understanding of how he is, telling Sun in ...And Found that the reason he is never angry is because he isn't lost anymore. Locke also acts as the agent of change in other characters' redemptions. He helps Charlie kick his heroin habit in The Moth; he helps Boone let go of his relationship with Shannon in Hearts and Minds; he finds Walt's lost dog and allows Michael to take credit in Tabula Rasa, and then later helps Michael bond with/save Walt when Walt is attacked by a polar bear
  • Charlie attempts to redeem himself from his heroin addicition in The Moth. His withdrawl causes him to grow antsy and after accidentally causing the cave in that traps Jack, Charlie volunteers to climb in to save Jack. After going through that ordeal, Charlie tosses his remaining heroin in the fire. However, when he finds the crashed plane containing heroin, he takes one of the statues with him, but does not open it.
  • Sayid goes

This can also refer to the title, giving it a double meaning of people being 'lost' or 'adrift' in life, but finding themselves and getting a chance to make things right on the island.

—LeFlyman 17:41, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Subliminal messages

Can someone provide an example for this: "Other examples include images that only appear on the screen for a split second but, when seen, can help to reveal mysteries about the show." As far as I know, no split second screens, like Eko's images in the smoke, reveal any mysteries about the show. Jtrost 21:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

  • This section is not necessary, as it is not a "Theme," "Motif," or "Symbol." This information is more appropriate on the episode list or character pages, not on the main page. Danflave 21:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree. I was unable to find in the history who started this section, so I didn't know if it had been here long or widely accepted as something that should be included. Jtrost 21:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
    • It wasn't there when I left my message on the Talk page yesterday, since if it had been, I'd have dumped it then. A section of trivial whispers and backward lines from Walt, neither of which are even remotely subliminal messages (since the whole point of such messages is to not notice them on a conscious level), is cruft. The additional connections posted there were OR at best. Baryonyx 22:35, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Familial dysfunction - part 2

Hello everybody. Now that we have watched "the 23rd Psalm", I think that it would be necessary to add a paragraph inside "familial dysfunction" to focus on brothers or siblings, since we had Boone and Sharon with a troublesome relationship, and also Eko and his younger brother in similar fashion. What do you think?

--Charlie144 19:27, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that sibling dysfunction is notable, especially in the case of Charlie and Liam. Jtrost 19:36, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
If someone can do this in a short paragraph, or find a way to succinctly include it in what is already there, then that would be fine IMO. But the section really does not need to grow any longer than it already is. Danflave 19:52, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Agreed with Danflave. A short note about sibling relationships might be ok at some point, but the claim seems pretty weak, and bordering on Original Research, right now: Boone and Shannon, were not actually siblings, per se, and their particular story seems to be at an end; Eko and Yemi were separated by circumstances rather than personal (dysfunctional) issues. Likewise, Charlie and Liam were estranged over the future of the band—and perhaps Charlie's drug use— but we don't have more to go on in terms of their relationship. In short, I'd say it's a hard case to make at this point—although it might be notable that both Boone and Charlie came to Australia, to effect some change from their particular "siblings," from whom they had been separated. —LeFlyman 20:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Interesting point you got there Leflyman, about the separation of siblings and its consequences. Note that Eko was separated twice from his brother, the first time to became a "kingpin" and the second one when he wasn't allowed in the plane and became a "truly priest" being mistaken by the military forces. We'll have to see a second part of his flashblack, to find out why he was on Oceanic 815. --Charlie144 20:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Eyes

I believe there is an oversight (no pun intended) in this section; Sawyer developed vision problems partway through the first season. While this does not relate to the theme as directly as Locke's opaque pupils, I still feel that there is a strong connection between the eye motif and Sawyer's farsightedness. I'm a bit relucant to add it, however, because his glasses are covered in the section on Black & White, so it seems a bit repetetive. On the third hand, even if Eyes and Black & White when Sawyer had the funky glasses, he found a new pair in Maternity leave, so the Black/White duality no longer exists in relation to this issue. Could I get a little feedback on whether this is important enough and unique enough to warrant mention? --Cinder Lizard 02:11, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Dysfunctional family

I hate to quibble, as there has already been much edit warring/revising on this page, but isn't "dysfunctional family" a really broad and somewhat subjective term? For one thing, each family's dysfunction is really just part of the character's backstories, and some of them are gritty, as this is a drama. In particular, Jack's relationship with his Dad is not great, but up until his Dad left for Australia, they seemed to have a fairly average, if strained familial relationship (his Dad even appeared at his wedding, and they practiced medicine together for some time). I think this categorization is just a really stretched attempt to find patterns among the characters. --DDG 20:43, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

The section originally was specific to "Fathers" which is a more source-able (as I recall an article pointed out the "father problems" of the characters); however, it was expanded to encompass the dysfunctional relationships of siblings such as Charlie and his brother, and Mr. Eko and his.

However, in the matter of Jack's relationship, I think it's actually been made pretty clear that Christian Shephard was an exceedingly poor father, and disconnected from his son. In all the episodes he's appeared, he's given oblique references to how the two of them are different. This was most clear in his pleading to Jack not reveal his negligence in operating under the influence, in the pointedly titled "All the Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues":

Christian: I know I have been hard on you, but that is how you make a soft metal into steel. That is why you are the most gifted young surgeon in this city. And this, this is a career that is all about the greater good. I've had to sacrifice certain aspects of my relationship with you so that hundreds and thousands of patients will live because of your extraordinary skills. I know it's a long time coming. What happened yesterday, I promise you, will never happen again. And after all, what I've given. . . This is not just about my career, Jack. It's my life.[1]

It was the critical decision that Jack made to turn his father in (as mentioned by his mother in "White Rabbit") that led to Christian's loss of job and standing, alcoholism and eventual death in Australia. In the recent episode "The Hunting Party," there's even the implication that Christian had an extramarital affair, in the interaction between the two men, when Christian cautions against acting on the attraction between Jack and Gabriela: "Careful. There's a line, son. You know it's there. And pretending it's not... that would be a mistake." Jack's response is, "Guess you would know." To which his father replies, "It may be okay for some people, Jack, but not for you."[2] —LeflymanTalk 02:31, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm still unconvinced. The fact that he's a "bad father" is a purely subjective call. True, they may not have a traditional sitcom father-son relationship, but it's a complete order of magnitude different from the destructive paternal relationships of Kate and Locke. I don't really see a theme here. --DDG 22:24, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
  • You're unconvinced that they have a dysfunctional relationship? I'm not sure how much more clearly the writers can paint it, beyond including in the title, "Daddy Issues", having the father state, "I've had to sacrifice certain aspects of my relationship with you...", and having the son ruin his father's career, sending him on a self-destructive path to his death. That's pretty dysfunctional to me. Please re-watch the episodes White Rabbit and ...Daddy Issues and note how Jack's responses to his father are always filled with veiled insults, to see why their relationship was rancorous.—LeflymanTalk 20:04, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
The theme is that most of the main characters have had really poor family relationships, and, with one exception (Jin), this is the case so far as we've been shown. The central difficulty I see is in the elevation of Jack's relationship with Christian to the same scale of dysfunction as that of Locke, Kate, and Sawyer, by virtue of the fact that Jack is given, with those others, as an explicit example. Further, I think there is some mingling of Christian's moral terpitude into his relationship with Jack, in addition to the prominence of the Jack/Christian relationship because of Jack's centrality as a character. Admittedly, Jack and Christian do not have a good relationship, but given the even greater depravity of people like Anthony Cooper, I don't know that we should be elevating the Jack/Christian relationship to that level by explicating it as we have. Baryonyx 01:14, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
I would argue that while his father may be a good man, Jin's relationship with him, too, became dysfunctional: he claimed his father was dead, due to his shame of him being a fisherman, and cut off all ties to him— unclear for how long, but from the start of his the marriage, until he was about to leave Korea. See: The Jin Game, Reprint of Entertainment Weekly article: Jin has a whole magazine rack of father issues—LeflymanTalk 20:04, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I guess my problem is that the term "dysfunction" is so vague. By this reasoning you could probably find that this is a "theme" in every major TV drama to date. --DDG 16:37, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
The prevalence of "father issues" on Lost has been pointed out by others, both online and in the press; as I noted above, the initial element was expanded to be inclusive of "family" as we are seeing more of the problematic relationship of other characters' with their parents and siblings. "Dysfunctional family" is a pretty straight forward term, and precisely describes the familial situations of the characters. See, for example:
—LeflymanTalk 20:04, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I would be ok if we narrowed the scope to problems with fathers, but my big hangup is that "dysfunctional family" is so vague. I honestly can't think of one modern drama in which each of the people couldn't be classified in some way with "dysfunctional families". --DDG 20:31, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
surely the point is that they are indeed *not* dysfunction, there's clearly hidden love with all of them, that was blatantly never expressed until it was too late. --Streaky 02:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Literary references

This section is becoming very long. I think we should limit it to just a few examples and be very strict about exactly what can be added in there just like we are with the rest of the article. Anyone agree/disagree? Jtrost (T | C | #) 03:15, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. As the show progresses, this section will grow exponentially. I also want to point out that while it's quite obvious that "Henry Gale" is a Wizard of Oz reference, it still is technically OR at this point. I haven't read any actual sources where the producers or writers cite this as their source for the name. Danflave 18:23, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Here is a condensed version I made. It's something to work off of:
Literary works are frequently displayed or referenced on the show, a point of interest to many fans who try to connect them to Lost's mythology. [3] Some books parallel the strife of the survivors, such as when Sawyer is reading Watership Down, an account of a group of rabbits trying to find a new warren. Later he reads A Wrinkle in Time, a novel involving rescuing a lost father and Christian undertones about a universal battle between darkness and light. [4] Literary works may also foreshadow upcoming events. In "Special", Walt looks through the comic book Green Lantern / Flash: Faster Friends, which his father takes away and throws in a fire, revealing a panel containing a polar bear. A short time later, a polar bear attacks Walt.
When Desmond leaves the hatch, he packs The Third Policeman. Craig Wright, who co-wrote the episode, told the Chicago Tribune that, "Whoever goes out and buys the book will have a lot more ammunition in their back pocket as they theorize about the show. They will have a lot more to speculate about — and, no small thing, they will have read a really great book." [5] Biblical references have been pointedly used by Mr. Eko. He relates the story of King Josiah (from 2 Kings, chapters 22 and 23) to Locke, and he recites the 23rd Psalm with Charlie.
Jtrost (T | C | #) 19:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
J-tro -- Looks good, I'd add maybe a tiny bit more, but for the most part, I think shorter is better. Danflave 19:58, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

A few (or more) words: I think the Literary references section could do with some pruning, however I do feel that too much "compression" can lose story context, and some lesser points that express more depth. For example, I consider it noteworthy to mention that Sawyer's excessive reading leads to his farsightedness, and likewise believe the "White Rabbit" material is important to include, as it was also the name of an episode and specifically attributed to a literary work by Locke. However, I would not suggest we make any claims to the meaning of such references. In the above rewrite, for example, we should be careful in making assertions like, "Some books parallel the strife of the survivors," and, "Literary works may also foreshadow upcoming events"— such statements border on Original Research. This may be a fine line, but when I first converted the section to prose, I intentionally avoided including such connections, because they involved a leap in reasoning beyond the level of presenting the bare facts. We can leave it to the readers to draw their own conclusions. Of course, if an external source can be found which makes the claim, it can be provided with a citation.

Additionally, I'm of the opinion that including "Henry Gale" as a reference to The Wizard of Oz is purely speculative (sort of like how the "Black Rock" was somehow assumed to refer to Peter Pan.) In the book, that name is never given for Dorothy's "Uncle Henry":

What is Uncle Henry and Aunt Em's last name?
Nobody knows for sure. They are never given a last name in the books. In The Movie, Miss Gulch refers to Uncle Henry as "Mr. Gale," but in Return to Oz, Dr. Worley calls Aunt Em "Mrs. Blue." Since these references come from movies, and not the books, they're considered to be apocryphal, and the question is still unanswered.[6]

Thus, the most accurate thing that might be said is that the name "Henry Gale" was considered to be the name of Dorothy's uncle in the movie adaptation of The Wizard of Oz; however, that's not exactly "literary" and making such a connection also seems fan-crufty.

And finally, I'm beginning to feel the "Wikistress" of reading so much repeatedly injected trivialities with the constant reversions here, and in the other Lost-related topics, plus coming across newly fan-encruftified articles like Oceanic Flight 815. I don't feel like we're getting much further to featured status with improvements to the article(s), but spinning our wheels adding and subtracting the same content repeatedly. So I'll be taking a break from editing the Lost articles for a while-- at least until the next episode. I'd like to see the "Wikipedia is not a fan site" proposal get some more input and traction, but as it stands, it seems that new editors are determined to prove that wrong.—LeflymanTalk 01:59, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I knew that article was out there... I just never stopped to look at the beast it had become. It is a beast no longer. Hopefully, it'll stay in its new compressed form, but I'm not holding my breath. At this point, I'm also considering a nice long break, which I've in many ways already started, so I definitely understand your feelings, Leflyman. Baryonyx 10:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Leflyman, the reason that I included some sentences that you said bordered OR is because I think that we need to synthesize the text. Otherwise it'll be nothing more than a list that's in prose form, which in my opinion doesn't look or read very well. Jtrost (T | C | #) 13:20, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
  • As I noted, if the article is to be held to the standards of WP, unless such synthesis can be cited to a published source, they really shouldn't be here. To quote the "nutshell" of the No Original Research Policy: "Articles may not contain any unpublished theories, data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas; or any new analysis or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas."—LeflymanTalk 16:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Leflyman that now isn't really the time to have some of those statements in there. They give a tone of scholarly research to a show that isn't yet in any college coursebooks. When the academe takes up Lost for study (and it one day might), there will be some type of critical concensus on the meanings of the books in the context of the show. At this point, before the show is half or even a third completed, it meets the OR standard. How about something like this (which is mostly Jtrost's, but some changes):

Literary works are frequently displayed or referenced on the show, a point of interest to many fans who try to connect them to Lost's mythology. [7] Some of the books are seen being read by the characters. One of the earliest such references was the comic book Green Lantern / Flash: Faster Friends, which Walt is first seen reading very soon after the crash. This particular comic would reappear throughout the first season, until it was destroyed when Michael threw it into a fire. However, of the main characters, Sawyer is the one who has been seen reading the most, a habit he picked up on the island that eventually led to his hyperopia. The first notable book he was reading was Watership Down, an account of a group of rabbits trying to find a new warren, which Sawyer read after finding a copy lying on the beach. Later, he reads A Wrinkle in Time, a novel involving rescuing a lost father and Christian undertones about a universal battle between darkness and light.
Other books have been briefly glimpsed on screen, or alluded to in conversation. There are several quite notable such occurences, including mentions of Heart of Darkness, Lord of the Flies, The Turn of the Screw, and An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge, but three in particular stand out. The earliest of these is Alice in Wonderland, which is referenced by John Locke in "White Rabbit" In that episode, Locke converses with Jack, who believes he may be going crazy chasing someone who is "not there." Locke refers to this as "the white rabbit", and makes his first declaration of the special nature of the Island, "Is your White Rabbit a hallucination? Probably. But what if everything that happened here happened for a reason?"
Another prominent conversational reference has been the Bible, particularly in connection with Mr. Eko. He relates the story of King Josiah (from 2 Kings, chapters 22 and 23) to Locke, and he recites the 23rd Psalm with Charlie. The third major reference of this type has even been commented on by the producers: Desmond's packing of The Third Policeman when he flees the underground bunker in "Orientation. Craig Wright, who co-wrote the episode, told the Chicago Tribune that, "Whoever goes out and buys the book will have a lot more ammunition in their back pocket as they theorize about the show. They will have a lot more to speculate about — and, no small thing, they will have read a really great book." [8]

I think this removes all or almost all of the OR which has so frequently opened us up to inclusions of theory, speculation and OR. Baryonyx 17:17, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I kind of think the shortened version loses something from the original- the literary references seem out of context, and thus less important. I suggest either keeping the section as it, despite being quite long, or shortening the section to a very short paragraph that does not include any examples, and then distributing all these examples to the trivia sections of the episodes that they belong in.--Silentword 16:39, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I like your version, Baryonyx. Jtrost (T | C | #) 16:50, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Here is an idea: just make a chart that shows two things: the title of the book as a link to the book's page, and the title of the show it was in. It's simple and complete.

Lost and Dan Simmons Ilium/Olympos

I have a new theory as to where the story of Lost may be heading. I believe there's a direct connection to the themes presented in Dan Simmons Sci-Fi series Ilium and Olympos. I first thought of it while watching part one of the season finale aired on May 24th 2006. As Sayid, Jin and Sun were sailing along the island, they saw the four toed remains of the statue. This reminded me of the statues on "Mars" that was being looked after by the Little Green Men (LGMs). Furthermore, Penelope is the name of Desmond's love in Lost. Penelope is Odysseus's wife who waited 20 years for his return from The Trojan_War. Ilium and Olympos was pretty much entirely based around that exact war with interdimensional twists etc etc. Based on this, I believe the characters on Lost are not in the same time or even the same universe as what is shown. Granted, this is similar to the Purgatory idea. The answer is no answer. Please discuss this, I'll get back here shortly.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lost_(2004_TV_series)/Story_elements&oldid=1161093481"