Last night at 8:58 p.m., my roommate Jess says to me, “You know it’s like 2 minutes until 9, right?” Wednesday nights at 9 I’m always either running to my friends’ rooms to watch “Lost” with them or telling my roommates that they may only speak in the kitchen, their bedrooms, or the bathroom, with the doors closed, at a low volume, for the next 60 minutes or risk death. So she was surprised when she found me lounging on a chair playing Sporcle.
I have to admit, I was kind of excited for this week’s “Lost.” There’s always an initial let-down when you find out that a new episode isn’t airing, but it is also nice to have a break from the intensity. It gives viewers time to reflect on the season so far and it gives me time to sleep on Wednesday nights instead of furiously writing a blog.
But I couldn’t let my devoted readers down completely. I’ve been asking for questions for the past few weeks and here and the ones I received. Obviously I’m just a simple viewer like you all, but I hope my intense devotion to the show and its mythology can help answer some questions or shed some more light on possible answers. If nothing else, you can at least absorb my own opinions.
*Maybe the only way Ben could join Richard is by dying. Now Ben is like Richard…?*
*— Julia*
Julia asked this question before we found out the Ben did not, in fact, die. But I like the idea that whatever happened to Ben in the temple made him ageless like Richard Alpert. Richard said, “His innocence will be gone. He will always be one of us.” I took “us” to mean the Others, but perhaps he meant “us” as in the individuals who do not age. Perhaps in the temple, Richard healed Ben, took his innocence, and also stole him of his mortality. I suppose we won’t find out until we see someone try to kill Ben again (although I suppose you could argue that Desmond tried on that dock, and maybe Ben’s immortality prevented him from succeeding).
*Do you think Jack is connected to Jacob?*
*— Eko*
This is a popular question on “Lost” blogs and among fans in general. As far as Jack being Jacob goes, I’m going to guess that he is not. Since season five’s jump back in time, some have suggested that Jacob is the Jack that got sent back into 1977. I would really like this theory if it weren’t for the fact that one of the Others references Jacob when Alpert decides to help little Ben. At that point in the past, Jack couldn’t be Jacob because Jack was just a Dharma janitor. I’m not sure who I want to link with Jacob more though: Jack or his dad Christian. At this point in the narrative, I’m having a hard time understanding why Christian is living in Jacob’s cabin and can speak for him. Perhaps all of the Shephard men have some sort of connection with Jacob (who might end up being a Shephard ancestor as well?).
*Do you think we will see Desmond again? Last time we saw him it sounded like he was done with the island and was just going to sail around with Penny and his kid for the rest of his life. I personally think he will show up somehow, but I have no idea how or when. Any thoughts?*
*— Mr. Redenbacher*
Desmond will definitely be back. Even if for no other reason than to finish Ben off to ensure the safety of his family. After all, Eloise Hawking, who has been right on all counts so far, told Desmond, “The Island isn’t done with you yet.” Whether Desmond intends to return to the action or not, I have a feeling he will be back on Lost because the island usually gets what the island wants.
*Ben serves a similar function as first season Locke had in that viewers don’t quite know if he has good intentions. I believe he genuinely meant it when he told Michael that “we’re the good guys,” even though several times he seems to work against the best interests of his people.*
*—Pablo*
I know this isn’t a question, but I still wanted to address this crucial dichotomy of good versus bad in Benjamin Linus. At this point in the show, I do not think we can tell if he is either. If we look at him as a sum of his actions, circumstances ignored, he’s clearly bad. Sayid characterized him well when he said, “He’s a liar, a manipulator. A monster responsible for nothing short of genocide.” But since viewers do not know the entire narrative, we do not know if his actions were (relatively) justifiable. It’s like the apprehensive love “Dexter” watchers have for Dexter Morgan: He may be killing people, but since he’s only murdering bad guys, it’s ok. (P.S. If you don’t already, watch “Dexter” – it is gripping, has great stories and characters, and one of the characters, Mark Pellegrino, has been cast in “Lost” too!) As my devoted readers know I hate Ben Linus, but as season five progresses, I find myself wanting him to be good more and more. Not because I like him, but because I think it would be an amazing feat for the writers, producers, directors, and Michael Emerson himself to change viewers like me from adamant Ben-haters into Ben-lovers. It’s all about perception, and I’d love for mine to change regarding Ben Linus.
Also, Doc J from EW pointed me over to a great new “interview”: http://www.bullz-eye.com/television/interviews/2009/lost.htm with “Lost” exec producers Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse that I think all of you should read too! One of the highlights:
*BE (Bullz-Eye)*: In Episode 509, “Namaste,” there’s a woman seen standing behind Sun. Was it a production error?
*DL (Damon Lindelof)*: [_Long pause_] We don’t know what you’re talking about.
Interesting response. Makes me totally think it was on purpose! But after reading the rest of the interview, it makes me wonder about the things I should and shouldn’t be reading into…
Thank you for your questions, Julia, Eko, Mr. Redenbacher and Pablo! I hope I answered them or gave my opinions to your likings. If anyone else has questions, keep sending them in!
See ya in another week, brotha!
