I recently re-watched Something Nice Back Home, and was struck again by how out of place it seemed that Jack was reading that particular part of Alice in Wonderland as a bedtime story for Aaron ("I wonder if I've been changed in the night. Let me think. Was I the same when I got up this morning? But if I'm not the same, the next question is 'Who in the world am I?'")...hardly the kind of stuff that would help a toddler get to sleep. I got to thinking that perhaps LOST itself is a sort of bedtime story, a story which is being read to us out of order. Maybe Jack shouldn't be expected to make sense of the story because he is in it, and, from his perspective, the ending hasn't been written yet. In order for us to make any sense of the story at this point, we would have to put ourselves in the place of someone who has already read the entire book, and is simply going back to read a chapter at a time to their child as a bedtime story (sort of like re-watching episodes of LOST during the hiatus?).

What is a good bedtime story, really, but the re-telling of an old tale or ancient myth which has been re-framed in a more modern or whimsical setting in order to capture our interest? The two bedtime stories most referenced in LOST are Alice in Wonderland and The Wizard of Oz. Both tell of ordinary people who suddenly find themselves part of a different story, which is occurring in another dimension. The difference between these stories and LOST, however, is that their main characters return from the adventure to find out that it was all a dream or vision, whereas the O6 return knowing that it really happened, and that they cannot continue to pretend otherwise.

We have been given plenty of hints, IMO, that this was not the correct ending to this particular bedtime story, that the O6 were not supposed to leave the island. So what gives?...if the incorrect ending has already happened, and we believe Darlton that there are no "alternate realities", then how is paradox to be averted? Think of it this way...if you were on your way to work or school and you suddenly saw Dorothy, the Tin Man and the scarecrow skipping along the sidewalk as if it were the Yellow Brick Road, you would know something was very wrong. I think this is exactly what has happened in LOST. Mrs. Hawking, Abaddon, and perhaps a few others have discovered that someone has managed to bypass the usual course correction system of the universe (perhaps the security system was not doing it's job?).

Their job is now to try and get these wayward storybook characters back into the storybook where they belong. Fortunately I believe they still have the universe working in their favor. If the final chapter of the book has yet to be written, perhaps there will still be time to get the genie back in the bottle before it's too late for the universe to make one more course correction. But for that to happen, IMO, the O6 must return to the island before the "bad things" that are happening get too out of hand.

I'm thinking that LOST, like Alice in Wonderland or The Wizard of Oz, is a story within a story. The problem is that, from our perspective, it's hard to tell if the chapter being read to us is taking place in Kansas or in Oz. If Darlton are to be believed, however, the final chapter of the book has already been written, and cannot ultimately be changed by either Dorothy or the Munchkins.

Here's my take on it...

Storyline #1 (Kansas): Flight 815 takes off from Sydney and crashes into the Pacific, killing all 324 passengers aboard.

Storyline #2 (Oz): Flight 815 crashes on the island, the island is eventually "discovered" by Widmore's crew, and the O6 are rescued by Penny.

Now, in a good bedtime story, storyline #2 would have been O.K. as long as the "dream" ended before the O6 made it back into the real world. Someone, however, managed to re-write this story, and "bad things" began to happen, both on the island and off (much as things may have run amok had the Mad Hatter and the Queen of Hearts joined Alice on her return trip from the rabbit hole).

How was this story re-written, given that the universe usually takes care of such mistakes? Two Words...Black Swan. Desmond, IMO, is LOST's Black Swan, changing the story in a way that could not have been expected. If Desmond had not arrived on the island in the first place to initiate the system failure, then storyline #2 would not be in play at all. If he had not turned the failsafe key, the island would have remained undetected by Penny. If he had not forestalled Charlie's death, allowing Charlie to disable the jamming device in the Looking Glass, Jack would not have been able to contact the freighter. IMO, both Desmond and Widmore were used by the man behind the island's curtain to insure that Aaron would make it off the island to be raised by another. I'm thinking that Widmore may have been conned into getting both Desmond and the freighter to the island, with the lure of regaining possession of the island. Penny was the lure in Desmond's case, she being the reason he went on the race in the first place, the reason he wanted to get off the island badly enough to follow Kelvin out of the hatch, and the reason he took the risk of turning the failsafe key.

Like any good chess player, I'm guessing that Hawking et. al. will come up with a good counter-move to get the O6 back to the island in time for the universe to correct itself, so that the final chapter of this bedtime story can be written. I'm not sure how Darlton will deal with the part of the story that was never "supposed" to happen...perhaps the lostaways will return to the island far enough in the past to make a few changes, allowing course correction to catch up with them so that they can continue on in storyline #2 while the original flight 815 crashes into the ocean as it was always destined to do. This would fit in with what I've been thinking may be LOST's final scene...Daniel Faraday, mentally unstable following his final trip from the island, sobbing for no apparent reason as he watches the television report about the discovery of the wreckage of flight 815. Or they could go for a more uplifting ending...perhaps Jack reading Aaron a nice bedtime story on the island?

Well, except that Flight 815 was never supposed to have crashed in the Pacific Ocean, because Desmond was never supposed to miss entering the Numbers. So perhaps the reason the O6 have to go back is because, as Jack said, *everyone* is supposed to get off the Island.

Well, except that Flight 815 was never supposed to have crashed in the Pacific Ocean, because Desmond was never supposed to miss entering the Numbers. So perhaps the reason the O6 have to go back is because, as Jack said, *everyone* is supposed to get off the Island.

I guess it would depend on whether the "course correction" happens before or after the crash of flight 815.

.if you were on your way to work or school and you suddenly saw Dorothy, the Tin Man and the scarecrow skipping along the sidewalk as if it were the Yellow Brick Road, you would know something was very wrong.
What I would know is that those are 3 people who know that story and are ostentatiously acting it out. But what if there were 3 people who were not ostentatious about it -- who were acting out a version of that story without making it too clear that that's what they were doing?

Robert

What I would know is that those are 3 people who know that story and are ostentatiously acting it out. But what if there were 3 people who were not ostentatious about it -- who were acting out a version of that story without making it too clear that that's what they were doing?

Robert

Different method of acting.

Methods of acting most often derive from source material.

If you don't know the intentions of the source material (as an outside observer), then you can only assume that the actors are serving the material the best they can. If they aren't being ostentatious, chances are the source material would require such a thing.

What doesn't make sense is illogic within the framework of the source material, requiring a method of acting that is absolutely preposterous. Sort of like if the characters on LOST were hoaxing a plot about the Priori of Sion and pulled a baby from a backpack.

Different method of acting.

Methods of acting most often derive from source material.

If you don't know the intentions of the source material (as an outside observer), then you can only assume that the actors are serving the material the best they can. If they aren't being ostentatious, chances are the source material would require such a thing.

What doesn't make sense is illogic within the framework of the source material, requiring a method of acting that is absolutely preposterous. Sort of like if the characters on LOST were hoaxing a plot about the Priori of Sion and pulled a baby from a backpack.

What would the intention of the source material be for the performer who is acting out the part of a theorist hell-bent on describing a hoax?

To get a writing gig.

[quote=Bicklefitch;2058985]I recently re-watched Something Nice Back Home, and was struck again by how out of place it seemed that Jack was reading that particular part of Alice in Wonderland as a bedtime story for Aaron ("I wonder if I've been changed in the night. Let me think. Was I the same when I got up this morning? But if I'm not the same, the next question is 'Who in the world am I?'")...hardly the kind of stuff that would help a toddler get to sleep. I got to thinking that perhaps LOST itself is a sort of bedtime story, a story which is being read to us out of order. Maybe Jack shouldn't be expected to make sense of the story because he is in it, and, from his perspective, the ending hasn't been written yet. In order for us to make any sense of the story at this point, we would have to put ourselves in the place of someone who has already read the entire book, and is simply going back to read a chapter at a time to their child as a bedtime story (sort of like re-watching episodes of LOST during the hiatus?).


They're in literary libo :D NIce to meetcha:)))))))

Add a purple crayon to this mess and...........:eek2: <---------- the icons here frighten me.

I definitely think Jack reading that specific excerpt to Aaron was important, whatever it meant.:reading:

Aside to stellaknows: I love the icons here. Did you see that there are different categories in the drop down menu? So many brilliant choices!:Laie_98:

I definitely think Jack reading that specific excerpt to Aaron was important, whatever it meant.:reading:

Aside to stellaknows: I love the icons here. Did you see that there are different categories in the drop down menu? So many brilliant choices!:Laie_98:

I don't think I have that drop down menu. *cries*
I'm so new they don't give me many options..

A stitch in time...

I'm not too sure about Lost being a bedtime story, but you really framed Desmond's involvement very well. He has been the main catalyst in this story, the "Black Swan" have you. I wonder if he'll make it back to the island, and if so, what purpose will he serve?

Hi Bicklefitch!

Loved you're theory! really


I never came to think any deeper about that bedtime story.
The things you are proposing are just great, and I can see the possibility.
Desmond has always made it possible for the losties to get back, but I think Desmond "in the storyline" was only supposed to keep on pushing the button over and over 'til his replacement came and took his place....
Which was what Hawking told him: "I know that you are going to get to that Island and you are going to push that button 'cause otherwise, every single one of us is dead"
That was the storyline. And Widmore did agree by "pushing him" with the race thing and that...


However now we get to 2 perspectives:
1.- Either following the storyline is the right thing to do, even though there can be sacrificies...
2.- Following the storyline is just in advantage for Hawking-Widmore-Abbadon team, but bad for the losties and probably for the rest of the world....


Think about it, Ben did not want Locke to keep on pushing the button: "I never entered the numbers, I never pushed that button; and nothing happened..." And now we know he lied..
But why would he??
He seems to be on Hawking's team so, what's happening???
Perhaps, stop pushing the button was right, but turning the failsafe key not???

Hi BickleFitch, Finally.. some time to myself to get LOST in your thread..:) Sorry that I'm such a n00b.. the multi quote thing didn't work out:/

~Their job is now to try and get these wayward storybook characters back into the storybook where they belong.~
^ The waywards are on the loose! I think some of them are even aware that they're a fictional, but are part of an underground. they live amongst them, knowing they are not one of them. IMO, the marshal had been chasing Kate way longer than after she blew up her dad, and Kate's fugitive status began when she went she went awol from her book. In search of what she perceived as a perfect life, her dream was to be real. To be free of her story that had to be lived out over and over and over again.

~I'm thinking that LOST, like Alice in Wonderland or The Wizard of Oz, is a story within a story. The problem is that, from our perspective, it's hard to tell if the chapter being read to us is taking place in Kansas or in Oz. ~
^ What if instead of two story lines, there is one story line that has to be fixed. But there are two characters who became star-crossed within each other. Two, two, two treats in one? A fictional + a natural person = hybrid. If those hybrids start having little baby hybrids, that aren't supposed to exist in the first place, .. oy!

~How was this story re-written, given that the universe usually takes care of such mistakes? Two Words...Black Swan. Desmond, IMO, is LOST's Black Swan, changing the story in a way that could not have been expected.~
^ I agree that someone messed with the black box of cause and effect here. Could it have been Michael when he used the computer in the Swan for something other than entering the numbers? 'The incident' in The Black Swan (from Wiki) was when the the author's book was published on the web and was discovered by a small publishing company unedited. It then became an international bestseller, which turned the small publishing firm into a huge corporation, making the author famous. So what if Michael reaching out to Walt opened up the black box, making the 'island book' visible to the 'real world'?
Maybe each fictional character can live outside of their realm only for the time it takes a candle to burn (they each have their own)... Chemical History of a Candle. Candle in the Wind-------------> Goodbye Yellow Brick Road. Maybe it takes 108 minutes for a candle to burn, but by pressing the button, this time is extended. Repeated even. Whoever put that timer in place shouldn't have (the button is bad). In order to 'fix' what had already been done, Des had to extend the 'other's' (our losties) time out so that they could go back and erase what had transpired.

In the end, I think we'll see a flashback of Jack performing surgery on that 16 year old girl who's nerves were spilling out like angel hair pasta. The operating table will be empty. It was a great story, but it was only just that. A story.

It was a great story, but it was only just that. A story.

Blasphemy! There is no "only" to stories.

Blasphemy! There is no "only" to stories.

LOL, jane eire.. okay, imaginary story,..
:)

LOL, jane eire.. okay, imaginary story,.. :)

Maybe it isn't story, but myth.

Myths never happened, but they are always happening.

Maybe it isn't story, but myth.

Myths never happened, but they are always happening.

Or maybe they're so confused as to what is fictional and what is real. But to them, fictional is real and real is fiction.

*ouch*

Or maybe they're so confused as to what is fictional and what is real. But to them, fictional is real and real is fiction.

Metaphor becomes real, and reality becomes metaphorical.

Metaphor becomes real, and reality becomes metaphorical.

To Kill a Mockingbird would be not only a sin, but a crime.

To Kill a Mockingbird would be not only a sin, but a crime.

Opus.

Opus.

Literally!

My problem with theories like these is that they take a drama, and then remove several dramatic elements for a "big finish."
In this case:
Lost is the drama. By removing the "real-life danger" element, we are given the big finish- it's a story.

That's counter-intuitive to how dramas are produced and written. They start with drama, then increase the drama for a big finish.
Example:
Lost is a drama. It is revealed that they are a computer formula that represents the last bastion of hope for saving humankind. If the characters don't behave exactly as guided, we are all doomed.

Lost is the drama. By removing the "real-life danger" element, we are given the big finish- it's a story.

Evn, you go got me thinkin'. What if there is a "real-life danger" after all!

Maybe Bicklefitch was right the first time and there are two scenarios. What if all of the literature became obsolete. If they were burned, banished, off the face of the earth. Erased from history (A Wonderful Life).

What the world be like then? Wouldn't you consider them really out to save the world a big finish? I can't wait! It's gonna be EPIC!!!


~ I keep pressing your little spoiler button, only to reveal the word spoiler and just got it now that it's your tag. :eek2:

I'm not too sure about Lost being a bedtime story, but you really framed Desmond's involvement very well. He has been the main catalyst in this story, the "Black Swan" have you. I wonder if he'll make it back to the island, and if so, what purpose will he serve?
change the past?

My problem with theories like these is that they take a drama, and then remove several dramatic elements for a "big finish."
In this case:
Lost is the drama. By removing the "real-life danger" element, we are given the big finish- it's a story.

That's counter-intuitive to how dramas are produced and written. They start with drama, then increase the drama for a big finish.
Example:
Lost is a drama. It is revealed that they are a computer formula that represents the last bastion of hope for saving humankind. If the characters don't behave exactly as guided, we are all doomed.


Recently I've been thinking, when is this story told from? What if this all was a real drama and had real life consequences, but now we are seeing someone in the distant future telling it (as bicklefitch puts it) as a bedtime story? So maybe the real events get made into mythology and we start seeing bedtime story patterns in the real events.

My problem with theories like these is that they take a drama, and then remove several dramatic elements for a "big finish."

In this case: Lost is the drama. By removing the "real-life danger" element, we are given the big finish - it's a story.

Evn, you go got me thinkin'. What if there is a "real-life danger" after all!

Maybe Bicklefitch was right the first time and there are two scenarios. What if all of the literature became obsolete. If they were burned, banished, off the face of the earth. Erased from history (A Wonderful Life).

What the world be like then? Wouldn't you consider them really out to save the world a big finish? I can't wait! It's gonna be EPIC!!!

Recently I've been thinking, when is this story told from? What if this all was a real drama and had real life consequences, but now we are seeing someone in the distant future telling it (as bicklefitch puts it) as a bedtime story? So maybe the real events get made into mythology and we start seeing bedtime story patterns in the real events.

Rather than stripping the drama from the show and going in the well-worn direction of postmodern reflexiveness ("it's just a story/book/tv show") they could go the other way... that this is really happening, here and now... that it is, in the most important sense, true.

Myths don't need to have ever happened, for they are always happening.

Rather than stripping the drama from the show and going in the well-worn direction of postmodern reflexiveness ("it's just a story/book/tv show") they could go the other way... that this is really happening, here and now... that it is, in the most important sense, true.

Myths don't need to have ever happened, for they are always happening.

You do realize what you just said was postmodern, too, right? Anything that says fiction is true and blurs the lines between what we see on TV and what we read in a book and what it is really real is postmodern. ;)

However, I agree on one thing--I don't think LOST will go in any sense in a "well-worn direction"...what I was trying to say instead is that "what happened, happened." Everything is true and every choice has major consequences, but it is just told looking back from a future perspective.

This storytelling method doesn't eliminate any of the drama, since we don't know who (or what!) is narrating the story...did some of the people survive to pass down the story, or did the island survive and the story is from the Eye-land's point of view, or is something else telling the story, or are what are seeing merely a memory someone or several someones recorded directly before the end?

You do realize what you just said was postmodern, too, right?

Anything that says fiction is true and blurs the lines between what we see on TV and what we read in a book and what it is really real is postmodern. ;)

Which is a different sort of postmodernism than the variety that says, "Look, I'm a fictional work!" That sort of reflexivity has gotten rather threadbare. To have Ben turn to Jack and say that they are characters in a TV show, well, that would take Lost out of the realm of epic mythology - which is where I think it strives to position itself (fingers crossed!)

I'm not so sure, however, that the suggestion of myth itself as a recurring pattern "in reality" is "postmodern," insofar as that ethos has informed religions the world over ever since, well, ever since we had religion.


However, I agree on one thing--I don't think LOST will go in any sense in a "well-worn direction"...what I was trying to say instead is that "what happened, happened." Everything is true and every choice has major consequences, but it is just told looking back from a future perspective.

Ahh.... I think we have more than one perspective from which the story is told. As we are the midst of the creation of the myth itself, to some extent the story is told in the present. Once the myth is complete, then one may argue that it is told from the future, looking back to the past.

Interesting choice of phrase, by the way... "everything is true."


This storytelling method doesn't eliminate any of the drama, since we don't know who (or what!) is narrating the story...did some of the people survive to pass down the story, or did the island survive and the story is from the Eye-land's point of view, or is something else telling the story, or are what are seeing merely a memory someone or several someones recorded directly before the end?

I think Jacob is the covert narrator of Lost.

Interesting choice of phrase, by the way... "everything is true."

Yes, very mythological, right?

I think Jacob is the covert narrator of Lost.

But how many eyes or minds does Jacob have?

Yes, very mythological, right?

...how many eyes or minds does Jacob have?

How many people are involved in the making and watching of Lost?

My problem with theories like these is that they take a drama, and then remove several dramatic elements for a "big finish."
In this case:
Lost is the drama. By removing the "real-life danger" element, we are given the big finish- it's a story.

Rather than stripping the drama from the show and going in the well-worn direction of postmodern reflexiveness ("it's just a story/book/tv show") they could go the other way... that this is really happening, here and now... that it is, in the most important sense, true.

The idea I had in mind when I started this thread is that this particular story is unlike a typical bedtime story in that it has suddenly come to life. Part of the comfort of a good story is it's familiarity. Each reading (iteration) is an opportunity to remember, or to build on an old memory. Imagine your surprise, however, if, as you were reading a favorite bedtime story to your child, the words literally changed as you were reading them, re-written by the very characters in the story itself. It seems that some of the characters in our story (particularly Ben and Mrs. Hawking) have the ability to jump a few chapters ahead, and are equally stunned at this development. For the most part, however, the characters in this story are simply living out their lives, unaware of their roles in the larger story arc. Now that's drama, IMO.

Although the story may have been told before, it's new ending, from our perspective, is still being written. Because of Desmond's intervention, the O6 were given an opportunity to jump from the pages of the book back into the real world for a dose of "reality" before their return trip through the looking glass. I have a feeling this unexpected voyage may have been just what was needed to "reconstitute" the DHARMA Initiative prior to the upcoming war (perhaps affecting the outcome of the war itself). I'm a little worried about Aaron and Ji Yeon, however. If they don't make it back into the story where they belong I think some bad things could definitely happen.