As many of you, I also religiously watch LOST and hunt for any hints/clues to what is actually going on. I think, at this stage, it's really come down to a Big Reveal coming (obviously, since the show's episode clock is ticking and we know how many are left)and one rather commented theory has to do with the multiple time-lines, space-time continuum, etc. views. This is also so exceedingly complex and myriad that if you don't hold an advanced Physics degree or study String Theory I think it will be extremely complicated for the writers to put every little "line" in order to make all things fit, so to speak. I am positing that the whole Space/Timeline theory, while certainly plausible (and many people post how so, with endless ways of it all fitting)it also remains the most difficult for anyone but diehard LOST viewers and perhaps Science Fiction buffs with an already built in "Star Trek"-ian view of Space/Time ! paradoxes, etc.to even comprehend. What I am saying is: while it will be wholly satisfying perhaps to the people who like to play Space/Time Line "connect the dots", it has it's limits and usually in science fiction, anyway, ends with a deus ex machina type of bundle tying up. It's a product of it's own genre:
we like tidy endings, even in SciFi (actually SciFi is harder,we expect more and demand all things "fit", scientifically or theoretically, based on what has already been told to us).
So here is another theory: what if...the Big Reveal is in fact, we have the entire genre wrong? The genre we assume (key term, assume--because nobody is telling us we're off course) is stranded crash survirors, science fiction stuff. It LOOKS like it may be that.
The Writers have given us every thing to let us assume away, without actually TELLING us we're correct (or not). So let's try it a different way, NOT assume, and see what else fits? What other genre can LOST be then?
Here's one nobody seems to notice fits: the genre is known as Metafiction. In short, it is a genre in which the characters in, say a novel, become gradually self-aware that they, themselves are in fact only characters in a novel. That they do not "exist" in the sense that human beings do. All the "characters" on the show are just that: characters. We, the viewers, have a natural assumption that they are "people". And fleshing them out via backstories re-inforces this for the writers (clever bunch). Now the writers need help to pull this off. One, they really need Locke. We already know Locke has become more "self-aware" because he stood up and walked right away. That defies logic, and he knew this right away. Locke (and now Desmond) is ahead of the learning curve: he tells others "Boone was a sacrifice the island demanded" and he tells Charlie re: Eko "the island took him". Locke is more self-conciously aware of what it actually is (the so-called island). The writers nee! d him, to bridge the gap between what they all (the characters) THINK they are, and what they all ACTUALLY are. They also need Jack, because he is the exact opposite, and is the stand-in for us, the viewers. Jack is a character of science/hard fact, not "faith", and thus demands proof. So do we, the viewers. So when LOST gets to this "Big Reveal", it will be Jack's understanding of who and what he actually really is. That is likely going to be the big reveal they are (slowly) building up to.
Here's one very clear one: the shop woman tells Desmond he must "play his part", (notice the wording, his "part") well yes he does, he is a character and if he doesn't, then the "plot" will need re-adjusting. She knows what his part is, but Desmond doesn't. Yet as the episode goes on, he shows signs he, too, is now becoming more self-conciously "aware" of his place, that he can't alter anything because he is un-alterable. He is not his own "creator"; the writers are. He is at the mercy of whatever "fate" his "part" is meant to play. And so is Charlie, and Desmond in effect tells him that.
All the inter-connected things, numbers, characters passing in and out of each other's back stories...this makes total sense, because they are ALL characters of the same story! Obviously if you have 10 characters, say in a play, they have to all inter-connect. You can't bring in a cast of thousands and make them all fit. Plus it would be cheating the genre concept. All genres have built in "rules" (say the genre of a Western: it must have guns, horses, dirt, a saloon, and so forth). So does Metafiction.
Now let's go on to assumptions: this is the writer's best friend and they have milked us crazy with them. Who said it was an island? The writers never did! We ASSUME it is, because we assume the genre. It's a plane crash/castaways/survival genre! Ummm...no. That's what we assume it is. What it LOOKS like. In fact the very first shot of the very first episode is what? Jack...opening his eyes. It is Jack, becoming AWARE. When every character--and it is a running motif--is shown opening their eyes, it is because they are becoming more aware of something. Think of what happens to each right after they do so.
This is why the writers do it so often. They are showing us the characters and how they need to become more "self-aware" or to be really blunt: they need to open their eyes and SEE, learn.
But in a nutshell...what the shopwoman tells Desmond is spot on. It's the first time a character on LOST directly tells another one who or what they may actually be. Look at Jack, and what his tats translate into: The "one who walks among us but is not one of us". That's accurate. Because he isn't a person. He SEEMS to be one, we assume he is. He ACTS as one might. But he really isn't. He's a character unaware of it. And this, btw, is the explanation for how a character can exist in both past and present, and yet not be able to alter anything about themself. It's not time travel.
It's because he's already been scripted. He can't alter that. No character ever can. Not their past nor their present.
Theory by EntropicDysntary
we like tidy endings, even in SciFi (actually SciFi is harder,we expect more and demand all things "fit", scientifically or theoretically, based on what has already been told to us).
So here is another theory: what if...the Big Reveal is in fact, we have the entire genre wrong? The genre we assume (key term, assume--because nobody is telling us we're off course) is stranded crash survirors, science fiction stuff. It LOOKS like it may be that.
The Writers have given us every thing to let us assume away, without actually TELLING us we're correct (or not). So let's try it a different way, NOT assume, and see what else fits? What other genre can LOST be then?
Here's one nobody seems to notice fits: the genre is known as Metafiction. In short, it is a genre in which the characters in, say a novel, become gradually self-aware that they, themselves are in fact only characters in a novel. That they do not "exist" in the sense that human beings do. All the "characters" on the show are just that: characters. We, the viewers, have a natural assumption that they are "people". And fleshing them out via backstories re-inforces this for the writers (clever bunch). Now the writers need help to pull this off. One, they really need Locke. We already know Locke has become more "self-aware" because he stood up and walked right away. That defies logic, and he knew this right away. Locke (and now Desmond) is ahead of the learning curve: he tells others "Boone was a sacrifice the island demanded" and he tells Charlie re: Eko "the island took him". Locke is more self-conciously aware of what it actually is (the so-called island). The writers nee! d him, to bridge the gap between what they all (the characters) THINK they are, and what they all ACTUALLY are. They also need Jack, because he is the exact opposite, and is the stand-in for us, the viewers. Jack is a character of science/hard fact, not "faith", and thus demands proof. So do we, the viewers. So when LOST gets to this "Big Reveal", it will be Jack's understanding of who and what he actually really is. That is likely going to be the big reveal they are (slowly) building up to.
Here's one very clear one: the shop woman tells Desmond he must "play his part", (notice the wording, his "part") well yes he does, he is a character and if he doesn't, then the "plot" will need re-adjusting. She knows what his part is, but Desmond doesn't. Yet as the episode goes on, he shows signs he, too, is now becoming more self-conciously "aware" of his place, that he can't alter anything because he is un-alterable. He is not his own "creator"; the writers are. He is at the mercy of whatever "fate" his "part" is meant to play. And so is Charlie, and Desmond in effect tells him that.
All the inter-connected things, numbers, characters passing in and out of each other's back stories...this makes total sense, because they are ALL characters of the same story! Obviously if you have 10 characters, say in a play, they have to all inter-connect. You can't bring in a cast of thousands and make them all fit. Plus it would be cheating the genre concept. All genres have built in "rules" (say the genre of a Western: it must have guns, horses, dirt, a saloon, and so forth). So does Metafiction.
Now let's go on to assumptions: this is the writer's best friend and they have milked us crazy with them. Who said it was an island? The writers never did! We ASSUME it is, because we assume the genre. It's a plane crash/castaways/survival genre! Ummm...no. That's what we assume it is. What it LOOKS like. In fact the very first shot of the very first episode is what? Jack...opening his eyes. It is Jack, becoming AWARE. When every character--and it is a running motif--is shown opening their eyes, it is because they are becoming more aware of something. Think of what happens to each right after they do so.
This is why the writers do it so often. They are showing us the characters and how they need to become more "self-aware" or to be really blunt: they need to open their eyes and SEE, learn.
But in a nutshell...what the shopwoman tells Desmond is spot on. It's the first time a character on LOST directly tells another one who or what they may actually be. Look at Jack, and what his tats translate into: The "one who walks among us but is not one of us". That's accurate. Because he isn't a person. He SEEMS to be one, we assume he is. He ACTS as one might. But he really isn't. He's a character unaware of it. And this, btw, is the explanation for how a character can exist in both past and present, and yet not be able to alter anything about themself. It's not time travel.
It's because he's already been scripted. He can't alter that. No character ever can. Not their past nor their present.
Theory by EntropicDysntary
