|
Post by SpringSummers on Nov 4, 2006 11:50:43 GMT -5
Some thoughts on Juliet and the crossing/double/crossing she's planning with Jack. I'm thinking that perhaps it's a triple-cross. If Jack's seen or read To Kill a Mockingbird, he knows that its central theme is following the dictates of your conscience, that you may be able to continue to look at yourself in the mirror. Perhaps that title was chosen to direct him back towards the course of following his Oath. I like this idea because it puts Juliet back in the camp of being someone who doesn't want to break Jack. Because I'm a hopeful Pollyanna. Whether it's a double, triple or quadruple cross . . . I can't think of how to spin this so what Juliet is doing is OK. She's trying to use and manipulate Jack, now matter how you spin it . . . or at least, no matter how *I* can think to spin it. She may have "noble motives," at least in her mind - ends that justify, to her, her means. The episode was very much about "moral dilemmas." I don't trust Ben or Juliet or any of the Others . . . but I ultimately trust Jack and his strength of character. He may falter and he'll be imperfect, but I think, push comes to shove, he'll stay true to himself, no matter what Ben or Juliet may be up to.
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 4, 2006 12:00:14 GMT -5
Part III Ah, they're addressing the "clique" problem. the computer or Eko? Don't mistake coincidence for fate. Wee bit awkward, there, but I like them referencing it. Thugs again. Yemi compromised with the thugs. Eko sees his brother in a different light. You don't want more lives on your conscience. Smoke monster. With a rattling sound. did it make that before?Locke and company caught up with him. Yes, the smoke monster made that sound when it tried to drag Locke down the hole.
|
|
|
Post by leftylady on Nov 4, 2006 15:32:28 GMT -5
Some thoughts on Juliet and the crossing/double/crossing she's planning with Jack. I'm thinking that perhaps it's a triple-cross. If Jack's seen or read To Kill a Mockingbird, he knows that its central theme is following the dictates of your conscience, that you may be able to continue to look at yourself in the mirror. Perhaps that title was chosen to direct him back towards the course of following his Oath. I like this idea because it puts Juliet back in the camp of being someone who doesn't want to break Jack. Because I'm a hopeful Pollyanna. Matthew, you and I are on the same track. I think it's a test. Refusing the plot is the only way for Ben and the Others to know for sure that Jack would not kill off Ben during surgery. leftylady
|
|
|
Post by Vlad on Nov 4, 2006 15:35:22 GMT -5
It doesn't matter if Yemi is hungry, stealing is still a sin. It doesn't matter if people need vacine, murder is still a sin. Not a theology student, but I did stay in a Motel 6 once. To the best of my knowledge, stealing food if one is hungry is not a sin. It's covered somewhere in the Bible. That is the reason that even today, in Israel, farmers leave one tenth of their crops in the field unharvested for those that need them. I know, at that point it isn't "stealing" but that's the origin of the practice I am to understand. Vlad
|
|
|
Post by leftylady on Nov 4, 2006 15:37:34 GMT -5
The beautiful scene Eco followed Yemi to:
So luscious; so perfect. Red flowering bushes all over. My first thought was the Garden of Eden or Paradise. Sure sign that Eco was going to die.
leftylady
|
|
|
Post by Vlad on Nov 4, 2006 15:39:15 GMT -5
Juliet. <snip> Jesus stick attack to the throat, roll three D-10. <snip> Actually, it's a single D6 for "club." He might qualify for a +1 for a "Bless" spell on the stick, however. And Strength bonus.. he looks pretty strong.. maybe a +1 for STR. So we are looking at 3-8 for Damage. Vlad
|
|
|
Post by Vlad on Nov 4, 2006 15:53:33 GMT -5
Well, once and for all the producers can't say everything that has happened on "Lost" can be explained in a non-supernatural way. Black smoke doesn't wrap itself around people and throw them against trees. Right? I mean, I'm sure I would have seen something of this phenomenon on the Weather Channel by now. Yeah, but notice that no one has ever seen the black smoke but Eko. So it could be explained as a guilt-based delusion of his somehow (possibly enhanced by some kind of drug that's in the food or water, because Eko's not the only one who's had "delusions") . . . that causes him to say, see the polar bear as black smoke . . . It's reaching, yeah, but I do think there's a reason no one else has ever seen the black smoke - that reason being to keep it just barely in the realm of the possibly non-supernatural. Notice how the smoke is nowhere around when Locke & co get there - not a trace. Actually Locke saw it (and was grabbed by it) in season one and Jack saw it at the same time (Remember the famous Locke line: "I wonder what Jack saw." Vlad
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Nov 4, 2006 17:58:30 GMT -5
Although, actually, I think Spring put her finger on it when she said that no one else saw the smoke monster. It could later be explained that polar bear mauling plus running through the jungle and possibly a fall caused by confusion was the culprit. And Eko just thought he saw a smoke monster fist thing. I'm pretty sure Charlie saw the black smoke with Eko at some point during "Psalm 23." Right around the time Charlie asked if Eko was going to beat him with his Jesus stick.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Nov 4, 2006 18:53:06 GMT -5
Although, actually, I think Spring put her finger on it when she said that no one else saw the smoke monster. It could later be explained that polar bear mauling plus running through the jungle and possibly a fall caused by confusion was the culprit. And Eko just thought he saw a smoke monster fist thing. I'm pretty sure Charlie saw the black smoke with Eko at some point during "Psalm 23." Right around the time Charlie asked if Eko was going to beat him with his Jesus stick. I can't remember if Charlie saw the smoke or not - I mean, being there and seeing it are two different things. But let's say Charlie did see the black smoke back then. Someone else seeing black smoke only, is a lot different from someone else seeing black smoke grab Eko and toss him around. I just think the fact that no one else saw the "black smoke attack" was deliberate, and keeps it all outside the "absolutely has to be supernatural" realm. If we can believe that Eko seeing his brother was hallucination/delusion, we can also believe that Eko seeing "whatever was attacking him" as black smoke was also hallucination/delusion. Or at least, I can see it that way. I thought the black smoke acted and sounded suspiciously like the polar bear(s) on the island do. To me, the most "supernatural" thing going on on Lost, is around Hurley and his numbers. I mean, YES, you could see it all as coincidence, so it is not absolutely supernatural. But wow, what are the odds?
|
|
|
Post by Rachael on Nov 4, 2006 22:52:47 GMT -5
I hope so, because otherwise, I totally get why she hates funerals. The big black mist monster is the scariest thing the island has going for it, IMO. Since the roaring Id monster disappeared, anyway. Whatever DID happen to the Treeshaker? Aren't those all the same thing? I think it's unclear; they could be caused by the same phenomenon, but they manifest differently. The Treeshaker/Id Monster roared and shook the trees, scaring the bejeezus out of all of the survivors in the first couple of weeks of the show. The Black Smoke thing is much more elusive and subtle.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Nov 5, 2006 13:41:04 GMT -5
Aren't those all the same thing? I think it's unclear; they could be caused by the same phenomenon, but they manifest differently. The Treeshaker/Id Monster roared and shook the trees, scaring the bejeezus out of all of the survivors in the first couple of weeks of the show. The Black Smoke thing is much more elusive and subtle. Well, it's subtle, except when he's growling, grabbing you and tossing you around.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Nov 5, 2006 13:43:53 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure Charlie saw the black smoke with Eko at some point during "Psalm 23." Right around the time Charlie asked if Eko was going to beat him with his Jesus stick. I can't remember if Charlie saw the smoke or not - I mean, being there and seeing it are two different things. But let's say Charlie did see the black smoke back then. Someone else seeing black smoke only, is a lot different from someone else seeing black smoke grab Eko and toss him around. I just think the fact that no one else saw the "black smoke attack" was deliberate, and keeps it all outside the "absolutely has to be supernatural" realm. If we can believe that Eko seeing his brother was hallucination/delusion, we can also believe that Eko seeing "whatever was attacking him" as black smoke was also hallucination/delusion. Or at least, I can see it that way. I thought the black smoke acted and sounded suspiciously like the polar bear(s) on the island do. To me, the most "supernatural" thing going on on Lost, is around Hurley and his numbers. I mean, YES, you could see it all as coincidence, so it is not absolutely supernatural. But wow, what are the odds? Hmm..maybe there is something in the water. Didn't Ecko see his brother soon after he drank some water and then later, water from the stream? He also looked like he recovered somewhat from his wounds - but that could've been from an adrenaline rush, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Nov 5, 2006 13:49:56 GMT -5
The beautiful scene Eco followed Yemi to: So luscious; so perfect. Red flowering bushes all over. My first thought was the Garden of Eden or Paradise. Sure sign that Eco was going to die. leftylady Or dead already. Funny that Juliet gave Jack a cheeseburger (in Paradise?), too. Where the heck *did* she get the beef and perfectly made and obviously fresh, bun for it? When she said 'I grew the cow, butchered it, milled the wheat", etc., her tone was sarcastic. So, if they're in touch with the outside world, why don't they just send Benry off for an operation instead of going through this whole elaborate idea to take down a plane to bring Jack there. Doesn't ring true.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Nov 5, 2006 13:53:08 GMT -5
It doesn't matter if Yemi is hungry, stealing is still a sin. It doesn't matter if people need vacine, murder is still a sin. Not a theology student, but I did stay in a Motel 6 once. To the best of my knowledge, stealing food if one is hungry is not a sin. It's covered somewhere in the Bible. That is the reason that even today, in Israel, farmers leave one tenth of their crops in the field unharvested for those that need them. I know, at that point it isn't "stealing" but that's the origin of the practice I am to understand. Vlad Interesting. So, if stealing to survive isn't a sin, why is doing murder to survive considered one? (rhetorical question)
|
|
|
Post by KMInfinity on Nov 5, 2006 14:31:34 GMT -5
I agree the issue of Benry getting an operation is a red herring. I too have a feeling the point of all this with Jack at least is to see if they can “break” Jack by eliminating his altruism. I agree with Rich that the plan is to compromise Jack by targeting his medical ethics. Perhaps to “teach” Jack and the Losties that survival comes before morality? That survival is the basis of morality? Sure seems to resonate with Eko’s tale. I think Eko’s death fits the paradigm of the island deaths if the Island is a source of Good "taking those who are ready." I’m thinking his conflict was whether he was right to “kill.” NOT murder, but kill. For awhile, his faith was tested and it seemed the issue was about his religious faith, but instead it was about his “righteousness.” He doubted himself, and felt maybe he had to atone for his killings - but feeling guilty for his killings was actually a LOSS of faith. Once he regained his convictions, and knew in his heart he was right to kill those he had killed, he was redeemed? Except, NOT-Yemi was rather mean if he represented the Island Spirit leading Eko to the next plane of existence. Should epiphanies bring peace? Or was his refusal to confess what cost him his life? Then the epiphany=death paradigm doesn’t work. Most people have been viewing/portraying/posting about the Island as if it were a source of Good. So far, this episode makes me wonder if the Island/the Black Smoke is evil and is killing GOOD people so that they don’t “infect” the Others with goodness. The line from the 23rd Psalm again: Yeah tho I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil. If the Island is to be feared, it is evil? Once again, I have more questions than answers. Lola I agree your pronoun question is important. What, exactly, did Eko say to Locke? “YOU’RE next.” Meaning Eko was telling Locke the individual he was next, and Locke took it to mean “you” plural and so repeated “we”? Hmmmm Or was it intended to be plural by Eko. OK, I think I'm getting the hang of this: Jossverse: Don't have a good relationship. Lostverse: Don't have an epiphany. Simpsonverse: Don't have a cow. LOLOL Some thoughts on Juliet and the crossing/double/crossing she's planning with Jack. I'm thinking that perhaps it's a triple-cross. If Jack's seen or read To Kill a Mockingbird, he knows that its central theme is following the dictates of your conscience, that you may be able to continue to look at yourself in the mirror. Perhaps that title was chosen to direct him back towards the course of following his Oath. I like this idea because it puts Juliet back in the camp of being someone who doesn't want to break Jack. Because I'm a hopeful Pollyanna. So, Juliet is asked by Benry to set Jack up, and does the video, but uses the movie title “TKAM” as her hint that jack shouldn’t believe ether her words OR the video words. Got it. I do think the movie TKAM wasn’t chosen randomly. Not a theology student, but I did stay in a Motel 6 once. To the best of my knowledge, stealing food if one is hungry is not a sin. It's covered somewhere in the Bible. That is the reason that even today, in Israel, farmers leave one tenth of their crops in the field unharvested for those that need them. I know, at that point it isn't "stealing" but that's the origin of the practice I am to understand. Vlad Interesting. So, if stealing to survive isn't a sin, why is doing murder to survive considered one? (rhetorical question) Exactly. It isn’t considered a sin. The word for kill and murder are sometimes incorrectly used interchangeably. Plus, there’s the whole issue of the difference between the Letter of the Law and the Spirit of the Law. Hence all the theological arguments. Thanks to all of your insightful posts, (especially Rob's this week) I enjoy the episode far more after reading the thread and rewatching.
|
|