Locke's comment to Boone about Sayid............

What is OUR side?

Perhaps he means the survivors as opposed to crazy Danielle and whoever the "others" might be?

Only guessing... I'm a west coaster and haven't seen the eppy so I don't know the context of the quote...

So Locke doesn't want Boone making waves with Sayid because they'll need him on there side? What side - good or bad, me thinks bad.

Wow. I have no idea, but it's got me excited.

If only I had a time machine *le sigh*

I'm not sure... and what was the story behind the compass?? was the compass messed up, or is the island made up of a different magnetic field or whatever...?

first of all, Locke wanted him to let go of Shannon and not freak out at Sayid. then, Locke knows about the 'others', but he doesn't know if they will attack or try to get the people to turn against eachother. then again, they may do so without any 'outside' pressure. having allies is essential

Definite 'The Stand' reference there with the sides. Locke is building his forces up. Charlie is already on his side, so is Boone and Locke sees something in Sayid that he needs too.

I don't get the Stand reference, because, I only tried to read it once, I was 10 and it started to scare me, so I never finished it.....



But that whole thing: What about the fact that Danielle said that people would get sick... And she "had" to kill them, wouldn't that make sides then??


I do NOT know what to think of Locke now, but I certainly do love his character.

I have a very bad feeling that someone is going to kill someone else.

Agree with Toast. He's also subtly going after Walt. He's gathering his forces for....something....

Locke may be building up the forces of good, so to speak. *checking people out, making sure that he trusts them. *Because this is kinda Lord of the Flies -ish, and it's human nature. *They will split into factions. *Locke is just checking his faction out, building it up so that he's prepared for when it happens. * He's now got two very devoted followers: *Boone and *Charlie. Andn I would argue that he's not going after Walt. . . he has him. Just not quite as openly as Charlie and Boone.

It could also mean taking sides agains the "others." *Let's face it,t hey seem kinda evil. *I'd want Sayid on my side too. *After all, he was a soldier.

i wondered about this statement too. *very interesting that locke seems to think they are on "sides"

hmmm...perhaps he's preparing for "the great battle of our time" *cue the orcs*
juuuust kidding. *I really hope he's preparing to fend off the "others". *Not do something evil. *He's too philosophical to be evil. *He's helped Charlie and Boone, and tried to find Claire, but I don't know what he wants with Walt...
He's definitely the most interesting psychological study.

Don't forget that Jack is also in the growing "group," since he was the first to be taught by Locke and the island, in White Rabbit...another lesson about letting go, actually, as they all have been so far. Letting go and moving on.

I think the big question here (besides which group of survivors will be "bad" and which will be "good") is......who is building forces in opposition to Locke's group? Who are the leaders going to be?

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!

8i8

Locke is quietly building a sub-faction of the Survivors in preparation for something upcoming. That he is *fixing* them one by one in the process is simply fascinating. :)

Either Locke teaches Sawyer how to let go, or he could be one of the leaders opposing group, if they do split. what will definately be interesting is which side Kate chooses.

When the pilot reran, Locke's comments about choosing good and evil jumped out at me--and surely it was no coincidence that he was the one with black and white eyes in Claire's dream. *The only other connected to the stones so far I think was Jack.

I'm leaning toward Locke preparing for a showdown against whoever/whatever is making their lives miserable on the island, rather than a showdown against some of the other survivors. I'm just not convinced that Locke is evil, but if it were a showdown against other survivors and Locke is good, that would make others evil. And I don't think any of them are evil either. So it almost has to be Locke & Co. vs. someone/thing else on the island. It's also interesting to me that he's actively going after the "weaker" personalities - he's strengthening them, one by one. Jack, Kate, Sawyer, Sayid, etc., he doesn't have to "strengthen" - they are already strong enough on their own.

Perhaps one clue to taking sides is the idea of a raft introduced next week. Locks side wants to survive on that island. Michael's side wants to leave the island.

petnumber--good post. I think the writers are trying to make us thing Locke is evil or insane, but I think it's too soon to bet on either one. It is interesting that he's going after the weaker people on the island. Obviously, though, he thinks Shannon is no use to him, for whatever reason. Wonder if that decision will ever come back to haunt him...

It might be Locke and Co vs. the Others/whatever else is on the island...BUT...it wouldn't suprise me either if we ended up with a Jack v. Locke situation. When they first looked for Claire, Jack and Locke split into two separate search parties--perhaps that was foreshadowing what was to come. Jack certainly doesn't seem to trust Locke.

This ep was GREAT, btw.

Hello this is my first normal post. I like the idea of a final confrontation with Locke and Jack...of course this is only season one....i heard they have 4 seasons drafted so far (by that i mean a basic outline). Anyway this is bringing another thing into it but in Star Trek 5 (eh not the best one but anyway) one of the characters hijacks the enterprise to bring them to what he belives is God..it turns out its not....perhaps Locke thinks hes doing something good...the island could turn out to be something else than what Locke thought. Maybe Locke will heroicly do something AGAINST the island? Saving the others...then again Locke could remain "evil". Anyone else think Locke and Ethan know each other? Just some thoughts

Charlie's remark that "Lock e is the only one on the island I would trush with my life." definitely has some meaning to me. It could foreshadow that Locke will serve to rescue everyone in a way by making them stronger. Conversely, I could definitely see it being used in an ironic way, that Locke will become evil and Charlie's comment either serving to show an alliance to the dark side or just meant to be ironic in that the one person Charlie trusted with his life turned out to be evil.

TV and movies involve a lot of misdirection. Locke is made to seem questionable so therefor he must be on the good side. I think what he's doing is mentally preparing people because he knows what the Island is capable of. He knows eventually some will go insane and there needs to be a group of sane people against them.

Anyone else got the feeling that the episode-title referred more to the splitting-the-group-up (ind 'hearts' and 'minds') than to anything else?

Question is - can the one survive without the other?

Didn't Locke encourage Jack to be the leader? I still see Locke as on the side of Good, or what he thinks is Good.

Could Locke be shaping up as a new version of Danielle?

I think the separation of the group will not be between 'good and evil' but between those who are satisfied with surviving and waiting for rescue and those who are willing to explore the island to find out its secrets and use those secrets to get off the island. To do this, like others have said, he needs to first get people to let go of their past 'demons' to focus on the task.

Locke seems to realize that he must take active steps to get off the island and that Sayid is one of the most valuable assets on the island to complete this task.

I feel that Locke gave him the 'broken' compass, not to throw him off the, but to peak his curiosity about the island. Thus setting him up to join his side.

I would want Sayid on my side and not just because he's cute. :laugh: He is tough , smart and I wouldn't ever want him 'on the other' side of whatever side I was on. It would just make good common sense to make friends with him.

Maybe Locke is just forming a golf team and there's a big tournament coming up, the Black Rock Open.

I feel that Locke gave him the 'broken' compass, not to throw him off the, but to peak his curiosity about the island. Thus setting him up to join his side.


I seriously think you're right about this- Sayid is a smart guy, smarter than Boone or Charlie. He's not going to follow Locke's path without a genuine reason and desire to do so. Locke is trying to peak that desire.

I seriously think you're right about this- Sayid is a smart guy, smarter than Boone or Charlie. He's not going to follow Locke's path without a genuine reason and desire to do so.

And he might know a way to open the hatch with all his experience...

This is my first post, so if I do something wrong - sorry. But it was reading this post that made me think of this!

This might just be me, but I think Boone and Charlie are both right - they won't SURVIVE without Locke. I think Locke has seen what's going on, what the Island can do for people and to him it's more important to be on the island and have everyone change for the better than to get rescued. So giving the compass that was off to Sayid was on purpose. Not letting Boone tell the others about the hatch was on purpose. So....
Everyone is Lost in the sense that they need to find themselves. It seems most of the people on the island have something they need to find within themselves - they are all running from something (Boone from Shannon; Sawyer from his lawless, scoundral ways; Jack from his Dad; Kate from the feds (and whoever else, Sun from Jin, Charlie from drugs, Claire from her crappy boyfriend and motherhood; Sayid from his military ways) and we'll find everybody else out as we go along.
Locke is one of the main reasons I watch the show and if they make Locke out to be the bad guy, then Abrams just lost a dedicated viewer. When a person isn't automatically built up to be the "savior" good guy, but rather does things to put him in that category (sure he sometimes does things that look "bad", but he always has had a purpose for it!), you can't break that down!

As for this choosing sides, I posted this elsewhere, but I think that Locke knows something about this 'sickness' that Danielle spoke of. I think that one has to face their fears or their inner selves in order to be in harmony with the island. I think those that deny themselves will be the ones that become sick, because the island will continue to torture them and make them insane. I think Locke is picking out the people that will be able to face their fears. This will be important later, as the survivors will inevitably split up (large groups never coexist very well) and I predict a the mentally healthy people following Locke vs. the ones who keep running and become some port of savages.

Good post, WhiteSapphire. You might be right--people who do not face their fears will eventually be taken by the island. On another thread, someone reminded me of Locke's quote---something like "a wound untreated out here will get infected." I think that's going to be a very important line.

At this point is impossible to tell how much does Locke know. We don't even know what he saw when he stared in the eye of the island. (Wouldn't we like to know)
Now he is talking about taking sides? What is he up to? Can he control, or has an "association" with the creature? Is the creature imaginary, not physical?
The pilot looked very dead to me. Did they just imagined the whole pilot death situation?
If so that's why Danielle said there are no such thing as monsters!

Last night's episode left more questions unanswered that any other in the past.

I'm a confused scoundrel!!

As for this choosing sides, I posted this elsewhere, but I think that Locke knows something about this 'sickness' that Danielle spoke of. I think that one has to face their fears or their inner selves in order to be in harmony with the island. I think those that deny themselves will be the ones that become sick, because the island will continue to torture them and make them insane. I think Locke is picking out the people that will be able to face their fears. This will be important later, as the survivors will inevitably split up (large groups never coexist very well) and I predict a the mentally healthy people following Locke vs. the ones who keep running and become some port of savages.


Great analysis. See if my two cents jive with yours.
I hear a lot of people saying that Locke doesn't want to get off the island. I think he has some insight into the fact that the only way they will ever survive on the island is to eliminate their fears, so as not to be destroyed by the island 'disease'. They will have to survive the mental part first before they can find a way off.

Great analysis. See if my two cents jive with yours.
I hear a lot of people saying that Locke doesn't want to get off the island. I think he has some insight into the fact that the only way they will ever survive on the island is to eliminate their fears, so as not to be destroyed by the island 'disease'. They will have to survive the mental part first before they can find a way off.


I agree with both.

Great analysis. See if my two cents jive with yours.
I hear a lot of people saying that Locke doesn't want to get off the island. I think he has some insight into the fact that the only way they will ever survive on the island is to eliminate their fears, so as not to be destroyed by the island 'disease'. They will have to survive the mental part first before they can find a way off.


Interesting. Sort of that people have to be ready before they can move on (or off, as the case my be).
I'm not sure if Locke has it thought out so far yet. What I've seen is a more of a way to happily coexist with the island. I don't think Locke concerns himself with getting off of the island -- remember when Jack asked him if he'd seen any ships on the horizon, and Locke answered, not yet, but he was a very patient man or something to that effect. I think Locke is definitely ready to set up his new society.

Hmm . . .

If so that's why Danielle said there are no such thing as monsters!


Because she's a scientist. To her--if the island presents itself according to the perceptual biases of the individual--the monster would be something you can see under a microscope. Like an illness.

Because she's a scientist. To her--if the island presents itself according to the perceptual biases of the individual--the monster would be something you can see under a microscope.* Like an illness.


Does that imply the sickness is also real? That it can be traced back to some sort of pathogen and is not simply a psychosis?

My theory goes along with what *WhiteSapphire posted. *I wondered *(in another thread) if perhaps 'the others' were survivors/descendants of another incident on the island where the people did NOT face down their inner demons and have been left to their guilt, grief depression or whatever and it has made them insular and paranoid. For all we know the island has been causing ships and planes to wreck in order to get some kind of positive 'good' side minded people *onto the island in order to balance things out but always before the people resisted.

Just a theory.....

Does that imply the sickness is also real? That it can be traced back to some sort of pathogen and is not simply a psychosis?


Yes, and it could be both. A pathogen that causes psychosis...

Does that imply the sickness is also real? That it can be traced back to some sort of pathogen and is not simply a psychosis?


What is psychosis but a chemical imbalance in the brain brought on by the introduction of something from outside? *I don't think it's a mold spoor or anything like that. *Which is the big tragedy for Danielle. *I don't think that whatever is on the island can spread like a cold. *And I don't think whatever it is WANTS to leave the island.

I would imagine that rather than just having two groups of crash survivors, it would make a much more interesting show if it turns out that when we encounter the "others", they seem to be very peaceful and many of the main characters decide to join them. It would make the show interesting if the ones who resist this are written in a rather dark way to imply to us, the viewers, that we have been wrong and the "others" are the good guys. Then later, there would be another switcheroo and we'd find that Locke and his merry men were in the right all along.

It would be very boring, if we don't have some of the good characters go bad at least temporarily.

I just want to know why he wants "sides" i understand there is tension on the island, but wouldn;t it make it worse if Locke made sides? Also, who else does he want on his side? Will he do the same thing with them as he did with boone and charlie?

I just want to know why he wants "sides" i understand there is tension on the island, but wouldn;t it make it worse if Locke made sides? Also, who else does he want on his side? Will he do the same thing with them as he did with boone and charlie?


Maybe he just sees it as inevitable. I know I do. People never really coexist very well in real life.

My theory goes along with what WhiteSapphire posted. I wondered (in another thread) if perhaps 'the others' were survivors/descendants of another incident on the island where the people did NOT face down their inner demons and have been left to their guilt, grief depression or whatever and it has made them insular and paranoid. For all we know the island has been causing ships and planes to wreck in order to get some kind of positive 'good' side minded people onto the island in order to balance things out but always before the people resisted.

Just a theory.....


Now that is interesting....I loved this last episode because it's brought up so many new theories and ideas.

Anyone else got the feeling that the episode-title referred more to the splitting-the-group-up (ind 'hearts' and 'minds') than to anything else?

Also, Boone followed his heart by 'rescuing' Shannon from other men, while she used her mind to set those situations up for the money.

In Locke's case it's his 'mystical/spiritual heart' group versus the 'scientific/logical mind' group. The mysteriousness and otherworldly aspect of the island has been accepted by Locke compared to Sayid's reliance on maps, equations and technology. When Locke gave him the compass Sayid rejected its reading believing it to be defective, but that was Locke's first attempt to get Sayid away from 'Mind' and towards the 'Heart' group.

Whoops, first line only was a quote - rest was from my own warped mind ::)

Did anyone notice that when Locke was sneaking around Sayid he had knife in hand and they zoomed in as he holstered it after Sayid realized someone was there. Makes you wonder what Locke would've done if he successfully snuck up on Sayid. Maybe knock him out and destroy the maps to impede his research? Or maybe its the writers just adding another scene to make us not trust Locke completely.

Could it have been as innocent as "we don't want to make Sayid angry" and therefore 'against us'. Just like at work, you might comment on needing someone on your side - willing to help you out, etc.?

The first thing that I thought of when I heard the title Hearts and Minds was warfare. Whenever there is a battle, whether it's the takeover of a company or with a country, you inevitably hear a discussion about winning the hearts and minds of [insert appropriate group. ] Locke's remark about "sides" seemed very appropriate. However, I really liked what you wrote, Marathon . It's another interesting way of looking at it and I suspect that the writers did have multiple meanings in mind.

Thank You Bliss, I also remember Sayid heard the 'others' voices whispering, after he left Rousseau but then later dismissed them in the cold light of day.

I guess my question would be, if it's a issue of hearts vs. minds, and Locke is trying to lead Sayid to the "heart" side because they'll need him on their side - why do they need him?* If his big claim to fame is in the technological, "mind" side - why do they need him?* Because of that?* Like so many other things on this show, I don't get it.* And I don't understand why anyone wouldn't want to be on "their" side.*

Locke's comment to Boone about Sayid............

What is OUR side?


Could be interpreted a number of ways... deliberately vague and ambiguous.

Could be anything from the suggestions about the dark side / light side theme from Locke's backgammon speech, to Locke simply feeling like they might need Sayid's help with the hatch and a fight between Boon and Sayid would only make it difficult to enlist his help without causing problems.




Re: the compass -

I do think the compass Locke gave to Sayid was a hint for Sayid. Locke "doesn't need it anymore" because no matter where Locke has taken it to on the island, it has pointed to a particular location on the island which he has already identified, perhaps to the very site where Boone and Locke have been digging? In fact, that could be the reason Locke felt so certain that is where Ethan took Claire, because Ethan started going in that direction and Locke felt that had to be where they were going. If that is the case, Locke might feel confident that Sayid will figure out what's going on with the compass and follow it to the hatch, and that by the time he does get there Sayid will be "ready' to help Locke and Boone out, whatever "ready" might mean (I don't think there's anything sinister about it, just that Locke feels that whatever is going on on the island, everyone "on his side" of it needs to be strong enough to grasp it and deal with it, or the results consequences could go bad.)


Yron

About the compass:

I agree that Locke no longer needs it since it may have pointed him to the digging site, this brings up one of my many theorys about the island.

And this one is that the island is a remnant from WW2 and could have been used by either the Axis or Allies (good and evil, black and white, etc)
hence the 'cable' that Sayid found ,which I believe to be telecommunications instead of power, and could lead to the underground complex that
the hatch leads down to. Also one of the few things that can affect a compass is an electrical device that generates a secondary magnetic field throwing
off your compass. It could be one heck of a power source that is creating that 'secondary magnetic field' that is used to power the underground complex.
Could be the reason why north isn't north on the compass. However there are certain minerals, ore, alloys etc that do that too ... ./shrug ???

Did anyone notice that when Locke was sneaking around Sayid he had knife in hand and they zoomed in as he holstered it after Sayid realized someone was there.* Makes you wonder what Locke would've done if he successfully snuck up on Sayid.* Maybe knock him out and destroy the maps to impede his research?* Or maybe its the writers just adding another scene to make us not trust Locke completely.


Now I'll have to go rewatch that scene again!

Also, Boone followed his heart by 'rescuing' Shannon from other men, while she used her mind to set those situations up for the money.

In Locke's case it's his 'mystical/spiritual heart' group versus the 'scientific/logical mind' group. The mysteriousness and otherworldly aspect of the island has been accepted by Locke compared to Sayid's reliance on maps, equations and technology. When Locke gave him the compass Sayid rejected its reading believing it to be defective, but that was Locke's first attempt to get Sayid away from 'Mind' and towards the 'Heart' group.


That makes sense. I couldn't figure out why Locke was giving this "broken" compass. But now I see it was almost like a courting gift (similar to the way Sayid gave Shannon the shoes). Hmmmm

This is one of the comments that stood out to me more than anything in this episode. Up until this point there's been no talks of sides, or us or them. It seemed that given the circumstances and conversation at the time, that he was referring specifically to a "teams" within the group of survivors, and one must ask why. So far the only dangers that they the survivors have actually seen have come from outside the group: the "monster", a kidnapper, Danielle's mention of "others". Only we at home know there's more to be concerned about inside the group.

When considering Locke's side, and whether it's good or bad, think about this. No matter what motivated Locke (be it good or evil intentions) he truly thought it was perfectly okay to hit Boone over the head, hog tie him in the jungle without even water, spread hallucinigenics into his bloodstream and basically leave him for dead in a place that he knows for a fact is filled with crazy attempted murdering kidnappers, wild boars and some sort of "monster". Everything he did had no guaranteed outcome. At no time could he be positive Boone wouldn't be severely injured, kidnapped or killed. Yet he felt it was perfectly okay to do these things and then go on about his day as if nothing had happened and tell conflicting lies about Boone's whereabouts. The kind that could get himself lynched if something happened to Boone and people put two and two together. I think this says alot about Locke's character and current mindset. He believes he is infalliable, that possibly, the island is on his side, and this makes him dangerous whether he intends to hurt or help.

When did Locke start to think they would need sides - only after they found the hatch or before?
I'm curious if while hunting with Ethan, did Locke send Ethan on an experience to teach him something - did he ever feel that Ethan would have been good to have on his side?
He would have had time to get to know him while they were hunting together.
'I hunted with Ethan, I spent time with him. I never sensed anything ...
off. But for everything that I know about hunting and tracking, whoever he is,
he knows more.'

When did Locke start to think they would need sides - only after they found the hatch or before?
I'm curious if while hunting with Ethan, did Locke send Ethan on an experience to teach him something - did he ever feel that Ethan would have been good to have on his side?
He would have had time to get to know him while they were hunting together.
'I hunted with Ethan, I spent time with him. I never sensed anything ...
off. But for everything that I know about hunting and tracking, whoever he is,
he knows more.'




Wow. Thanks for the reminder on that quote.

It does beg the question, why did Ethan choose to hang with Locke in those days?

I think locke and ethan were/ are in cahoots. maybe locke even knew about the kidnapping before hand, but strongly believes in the cause and allowed it to happen.

also, the only evidence we have that locke was not actually in the CIA, Special Forces or something similar is from the weasily little boss that looked at his file. but obviously a file like that could easily be created by an agency like the CIA. maybe his paralysis was a result of his service, and then he was sent back into the general population.

maybe locke is more of a practical type than we have been led to believe.

or maybe he really is the weird little yoda he seems.

either way his character is definitely the most interesting. poor Jack has been really sidebarred lately- maybe because he was supposed to die in the first ep- according to rumors.

I propably am alone here, but I hope this show doesn't turn into one side vs. another. I love these characters and watching them develop, but turning them into "either you're with us or against us" types of people can only be fun for so long, especially if it is a "heart" side or "mind" side. Let's face it, the heart cannot exist without the mind and vice versa. I know some people who are more emotional than others, and I know some people who are more rational than others, but there are two sides to every coin. And this is what is so great about the show; a murderer who has a soft side and has saved several people, a drug addict rock star who wants to be a daddy(sort of), a doctor with daddy issues. These are some of the best characters on tv right now, they carry the show. That is why each episode has a background story on a character, to give us more depth on the character, not to divide them in one group or the other.
Now I know Locke said, "We are going to want him on our side." This would seem to forshadow a battle of good and evil, or hearts and minds, but this is Locke we are talking about. What do we know about Locke? He use to work in a box company, was crazy then (paying a phone sex woman to be his girlfriend). Now he is a survivalist, can suddenly walk, and is still crazy. Locke is the most mysterious character because he is the least developed. He could not be real, be part of the island, or one of the "others." The truth is he could be anything we want him to be (that is why he is the center of so many wild theories) and the writers like it that way to keep us on our toes.
I am excited to see what happens next, but I don't think that we will ever know who is on what side. Also, minor detail, but if there are just two sides of survivors on this island Locke has a long way to go in recruiting people.

(paying a phone sex woman to be his girlfriend).

Has that been clearly established? I've also read theories that she was CSR for the gaming company (of the game he played).

In regards to why Locke and his "side" of folks would want Sayid so badly, esp. since he's so logical and "Mind"-y...I think the more important question is why would they NOT want him...when he would be such a DANGEROUS foe!! I certainly wouldn't want him to be NOT on my side...yowza!

Locke might also see what we see as viewers...that Sayid has a checkered past, things to move beyond, the potential for cruelty and sin (if you will).....and a HUGE frikkin' HEART! The man left "civilization" out of guilt for torturing Sawyer. He helped Nadia. He's a good man underneath it all. Locke just needs to school him--with some help from the island, of course!

8i8

I'm jumping in late here pardon :-\...I posted this on ABC but, it was toast who I 1st saw mention the idea that Locke gathering his warriors so I'm just extending on it:

We've seen Locke do both good things, & questionable ones....I think if it was a case of survivors vs. survivors-why would Locke, an obvious strategist, help fortify his competition? In WR he helped Jack to resume position as leader, & it's been implied Jack could be his competition.. I think the answer is he wouldn't. He's also helped Charlie, now Boone..On the flipside he's misguided, misdirected...Sent Michael south knowing C/C were taken North, he tried to get Jack to go back to camp so he could be the hunter, he directed Sayid to Sawyer, & now he's ? stopped hunting boar for ppl. All of this looks nefarious, but what if doing each of these things, is to teach each person a lesson-force them to deal w.each other.I think it's obvious he's done that in making ppl singly face their own issues... I.e in using pitting up against each other as an "exercise"-after he directed Sayid to Sawyer-the torture ensued. As bad as it was, maybe it was a necessary evil to make Sayid realize how far he had gone. Sayid becomes remorseful & embarks on introspection. And Sawyer, while still self-serving, kinda made a turning point @ CM. He started being a bit more cooperative & redeeming....If Locke is always providing the boar-will they learn to hunt for themselves? I go back to his statement "struggle is nature's way of making us stronger."..A good chess player always safeguards his royal court. So perhaps he really didn't want to lose Jack-a double threat leader/doc in ATBCHDI, & Sayid another strategist. In case something happened to Locke, there would be someone to step up.

I think this all goes along w/the theory of an ultimate good vs. evil thing-Locke being the ring leader of the good and the "others" being the bad....Maybe the stuff being put out there to suggest Locke is up to no good, is to throw us off this overall plot down til last min...Some may ask then why wouldn't allowing* Boone to go up against Sayid be a good "lesson"? Because it doesn't free Boone from his co-dependency w/Shannon, it keeps him indulged in his weakness & nothing is gained from the outcome... A team is only as strong as its weakest link.

I dunno-just my thoughts* :P ;) Thanks for listening :)

Something doesn't fit with those ideas and the misdirection on the boar hunt. If Locke simply wanted people to become more self sufficient with feeding themselves, he could either tell them to hunt for themselves or offer to teach them to hunt.

He's not doing that because he wants them to believe he is still hunting while he uncovers the hatch.

When Boone wanted to tell the Lostaways about the hatch, Locke said, "They're not ready yet."

Boone said, "I don't think I am, either."

Locke said, "That's the problem."

It was a quick exchange, and one I haven't seen commented on yet. Soon afterward, he beaned Boone.

Locke said point blank that uncovering the hatch was more important than hunting for boar. He can't tell the Lostaways he's not hunting because he'd have to tell the secret of the hatch.

He hasn't had time to hunt because all his time in the past few days has been consumed by the hatch (it's 4 miles from camp so there's a lengthy hike, then they needed to clear all the brush... and tkae time to sit and ponder the mystery of the hatch).

Not sure where I'm going with this, but something is very weird. ::heh::

On another note... I think this has been mentioned but Locke may be thinking "our side" is Lostaways vs. the Others, not necessarily dividing the Lostaways.

Good thoughts!

The one thing that stood out to me was the Jack as a leader idea. Even Randall Flagg had Lloyd Henried as a leader while he went off to do other more imortant things. Maybe that's the reason he selected him as his defacto leader?

maybe locke is also not hunting boar in the hopes that everyone will get weaker from the lack of protein. people's minds are more pliable when they're in a weakened state. or, they might be more grateful and willing to listen to him when he finally produces meat again, or they might be easier to fight/attack without their full strength. the diary writer mentioned how she'd been in top shape, but already, with just a few days of no meat she can barely make it up and down the hill. something to think about... if he really was so concerned about everyone's well being, he'd take a few minutes to get some food for everyone instead of spending the entire day staring at that hatch.

Bringing up the mention of The Stand again. I’ve read it several times. I sure wish I had it on hand now to refer to. Going from memory on a few of the characters that come to mind right away.

Frannie Goldsmith: A strong opinionated woman. A possible comparison to Kate? However, Frannie was pregnant and presumably carrying a child immune to the virus, even though the baby was conceived before the epidemic. Could it be Claire?

Nadine Cross: Self centered and not very nice, later goes to Flagg’s side. Shannon?

Stu Redman: If I recall correctly he was a widower, and somewhat of a loner. He struggles with becoming the leader of the group. He later turns out to be just that. Locke? Maybe Jack. We have already heard him discuss with Locke about his issue with leading them.

Mother Abigail: Deeply religious sage. Rose? Or Locke with his vague philosophical advice.

Larry Underwood: Musician, self-serving combined with a shady past with drugs and legal issues. I remember the line “You’re not a nice guy” referred to him more than once. In the course of the events that occur in The Stand, Larry redeems himself. Charlie- kicking his drug habit. Maybe Sawyer?

Randall Flagg: Ethan?

That’s all I have at the moment. ::)

Bringing up the mention of The Stand again. I’ve read it several times. I sure wish I had it on hand now to refer to. Going from memory on a few of the characters that come to mind right away.

Frannie Goldsmith: Frannie was young, innocent and naive. More like Claire. (virgin mother archetype)

Nadine Cross: Self centered and not very nice, later goes to Flagg’s side. Shannon - or Kate. (temptress / jezebel archeetype)

Stu Redman: Jack (reluctant leader archetype)

Mother Abigail: rose (holy woman / mother goddess archetype)

Larry Underwood: Charlie (rdeemed sinner archetype)

Randall Flagg: Locke (holy man - shaman - trickster (coyote) archetype. yes-flagg was a holy man.

writers and creators have said tthat some of the themes and characters are modeled loosly after the Stand, but we shouldn't expect this to be a replica or exact analogy of the stand.

remember, they are pulling refs and materials from a number of different stories in literature.

archetypes found in the stand are not original to the stand - they are archetypes found in stories throughout history and across cultures.

lost is following in that tradition.

I don't know about the other characters, but I remember that one of the producers (Damon I think) said that Charlie was an homage to Larry Underwood and Locke is modeled on Flagg.

Creme - I don't remember Flagg being a holy man in The Stand. I saw him more as a Jim Jones type (using a religious-type persona to gain followers).

in an archetype analysis - both flagg and jom jones were holy men.

they just ended up on the dark side in the end.

I agree with most of what's been said here except for the Nadine comments. I didn't find her self-centered at all. She did some pretty nasty stuff after Larry turned her away but before that she was very motherly and giving to the little boy she found. I think if it weren't for the walking man dreams and the ouiga board message from him she would have never become what she became.

I read a article a while back and will try to find it again and post a link here. It was Lindelof talking about parallels between Lost and the Stand. He basically said what creme did above about some of the characters being based loosly on some of the characters in the stand. He said we'd see a bit of Nick in Jin and a bit of Tom in Hurley. A few others, I'll have to go find it now.

I got an image of Lloyd Henried in my mind with Boone the last few episodes. Especially the way he was halucinating like Lloyd was in his cell before being recruited by Flagg. He then became a loyal follower to Flagg and wouldn't even skip town with the deserters near the end because he knew he could never be as much as we was without Flagg. Boone seems to have that same loyalty to Locke now.

Right on with the Boone-Lloyd connection, toast .

I'd love to see that article.

Ugghhh... It was about 30 pages back on a thread we have up over 200 pages now. Here it is though:

Saturday, August 21, 2004
Herc Chats Up The Co-Creator of Fall's Best New Series, ABC's LOST!!
I am – Hercules!!

ABC’s “Lost” is easily the best new series headed our way this fall. The tale of 48 people who survive a horrific airline disaster only to find themselves standed on a very strange South Pacific island with little hope of rescue, it boasts as one of its masterminds “Alias” creator J.J. Abrams, who co-wrote and directed its brilliant first two hours.
Abrams’ lesser known co-showrunner on the series – and co-scripter on the show’s incredible first two hours – is Damon Lindelof, described to me by one highly respected TV writer as “probably be the next great hope for television.” Thing is, Lindelof’s resume itself doesn’t always inspire a lot of awe. He’s written for three prior series – “Nash Bridges,” “Undressed” and “Crossing Jordan” – that don’t typically set geek hearts aflutter.

The following comprises an email interview conducted between Aug. 16 and Aug. 18. It may behoove those who have not seen any part of the pilot to have a gander at Herc’s five-star review before soldiering on.

AICN: The 83-minute pilot I saw will be divided?
DAMON LINDELOF: The pilot will be cut into two halves and aired separately. Part One will air Sep. 22 at 8PM, part two the following Wednesday (the 29th) at the same time. I won't give away where the first half ends... but suffice to say we think it's quite the nail-biter.

AICN: Where the first half ends?? Is this a secret? Won’t it end the way the San Diego Comic Con version ends, with the hot brunette counting to five? Am I mistaken? Confused?
DL: You are not mistaken nor confused, but the first ep does NOT end in the same place as the Comicon cut. As "Episode 1" is still somewhat a work in progress, we'll just leave it at that for now.

AICN: Will cannibalism be contemplated? How many of the survivors do you think saw “Alive”?
DL: Cannibalism? Of COURSE it's contemplated... but summarily dismissed fairly early on. Most of them HAVE seen "Alive" (and "Gilligan's Island" AND "Jurassic Park"), but fortunately, they're not stranded on a snow-capped mountainous peak. They've got access to fish, wild game (hunting baby, YEAH!) and fruit. But don't be too disappointed -- just because they're not eating each other doesn't mean they can't be EATEN.

AICN: You’re on record as saying there are no dinosaurs on the island. Will we get a look at one of the giant tree-stomping creatures within the first 13 hours broadcast?
DL: The record speaketh true. NO dinosaurs. Will you get a look at the "thing in the trees" in the first 13? I'll only say this -- maybe you'll see it, maybe you won't... but you'll definitely know much more ABOUT it.

AICN: Will the survivors divide up into “good” and “evil” factions, as the survivors did in Stephen King’s “The Stand”?
DL: Love that you referenced "The Stand" -- whenever I mention Mother Abigail or Randy Flagg, Nebraska vs. Vegas and superflus, I have to explain myself. For the record, it's my favorite King book other than the Dark Tower series. In fact, you may have noticed the character of Charlie (Dom Monaghan, the rockstar one-hit wonder) is an homage to Larry Underwood.

So will they divide up? Absolutely. But not necessarily into teams of "good" and "evil."

I'll say this -- it takes a little while to figure out who falls into which of those categories... and once someone's defined as "good," it doesn't mean they'll STAY that way (see: Skywalker, Anakin).

AICN: I see lots of “The Stand” in “Lost.” There’s a fair amount of Stu and Frannie in Jack and Kate. Shannon could easily evolve into Nadine Cross. I get a real Flagg-y vibe from Terry O’Quinn’s character (hopefully this isn’t misdirection). Daniel Dae Kim’s character, with his communication difficulties, is kinda like Nick Andros. But Hurley is funnier than Tom Cullen.
DL: Glad to see you're as big a fan of "The Stand" as I am. We're not misdirecting you on Terry O' Quinn's Flagg-esque (Walter in some worlds) qualities... but hopefully he's got some big surprises in store for everyone.

AICN: What’s the story of your involvement on “Lost”? Was ABC developing a “Survivor”/”Castaway” drama before you got involved?
DL: I don't want to get too into the details of what ABC was up to regarding this concept before J.J. and I got involved out of respect for any other executives and/or writers who may have been involved in that process.

AICN: How did you come to team with J.J.? Why do you guys need each other?
DL: Suffice to say, it was Lloyd Braun (then head of ABC) who came to J.J. with the series concept of "Plane Crashes on Island" in late January of this year. J.J. was INSANE at the time so he said the only way he could even think about getting involved would be to bring in another writer to spitball with.

Enter me.

Let it be said, this was the fanboy dream. I'd been an ALIAS addict for almost three years at this point and had been pushing my agents (and anyone who'd listen) just to get a meeting with J.J.. Ultimately, it was Heather Kadin (an incredibly bright woman who defies the term "network executive) who pitched ME as the person to sit down with J.J. on this concept.
It's sort of a long story, but it's a short one, too -- We met the next day. Had an amazing three hour meeting. Saw the same show -- a character-based MYSTERY/ADVENTURE concept. Working closely together, we banged out a detailed outline over the next few days, turned it over to ABC and crossed our fingers. As this was the VERY end of "development season," there'd be no time to write a script before we started pre-production. That Saturday morning (four days after our first meeting), ABC greenlit "Lost."
Eleven weeks later, we delivered the cut and mastered pilot.
You'll have to ask J.J. why he needs me (hell -- I'm still asking MYSELF that), but as to why I need him? Come on.
Knock the Superman script all you want (and yes, I hated that he didn't blow up Krypton either -- but that's got nothing to do with how inspired a CHARACTER-BASED retelling of the myth is, not to mention the execution) but the guy's a frigging genius.

Yes, Talkbalkers -- pour on the cries of sycophanty and the Grade-A snark that only you are capable of... but it's true. He's the real deal. An outside-the-box thinker who's really trying to innovate... and succeeding.

AICN: What do you suppose inspired Heather Kadin to champion you? Perhaps some hot spec script with your name on the title page?
DL: I suspect Heather suggested me because I'd been hounding her to put me in a room with J.J. for two years and she wanted me to shut the hell up. Aside from whatever rep I gleaned from my five years on TV staffs prior to this, my "calling card" writing sample has always been a little one-act play I wrote entitled "Ollie Klublershturf vs. The Nazis" -- a time-travel comedy that people seemed to dig.

AICN: I believe I’d like to read that play, just based on the title and the neato new show you’re making. Are you a Steve Martin fan maybe?
DL: Huge Steve Martin fan ... but more JERK/MAN WITH TWO BRAINS era. All this BRINGIN' DOWN THE HOUSE crap sucks.

AICN: Will the survivors name their island? In which episode? Will it be something as entertaining as “Moga Moga”?
DL: They will NOT name their island... but that's not to say they won't discover it already HAS a name. And it can't possibly be as entertaining as "Moga Moga."

AICN: I’m guessing the crash, and the location of the crash, was dictated by something more than happenstance. Moreover, I theorize the plan is to make another airliner crash into the island before season four. Am I nuts?
DL: Neither the crash, nor anything else, is dictated by happenstance. As to ANOTHER major crash before season four? Hmmmm. Well, probably not another AIRLINER... but certainly something...

AICN: Why is Emilie de Ravin billed differently than the other cast members? Is it because she’s a filthy foreigner?
DL: Emilie's "Guest Star" billing was just for the temp pilot. She is indeed a regular.

AICN: Did the fact that de Ravin carried Max Evans’ alien spawn on “Roswell” play any role in casting her as a pregnant blonde?
DL: I am ashamed to say I stopped watching Roswell prior to Emilie's appearance, thus any creative collusion is almost certainly coincidental. Did she give birth to a V-baby or something? I know Max wasn't a lizard, but weird shit happens when aliens knock up humans. Hmmm... "When Aliens Knock Up Humans." I should sell that to Fox.

AICN: Leaving aside shows created by you and/or anyone who has ever employed you, what are the finest TV series ever forged?
DL: Finest TV series ever forged: Twilight Zone, Incredible Hulk, Six Million Dollar Man, Hill Street Blues, Police Squad (six glorious episodes!), Twin Peaks, Misfits of Science, X-Files, Profit, Quantum Leap, Buffy, South Park, The Tick (cartoon version), Mr. Show, Dexter's Lab, and the greatest show ever -- The Simpsons (how fucking typical is THAT pick?).

AICN: Will more than 10 percent of the 48 “Lost” survivors perish before the series’ 13th hour? Is the high fatality rate the reason you didn’t name the series “The 48”? On the same topic, was there much freaking out when it was learned NBC aired a reality series titled “Lost” only three years earlier?
DL: More than 10% before the 13th hour? In other words, will FIVE people perish over the first half of the season? Not gonna answer that one. I will say this -- the herd will be thinned, but that doesn't mean people have to die.
We knew about NBC's show from the get-go (hell, I was the only one watching the thing back in 2001)... our concern was always more about WB's "Lost In Space," which could have caused some confusion had it been picked up.

AICN: Was the plane bound from Sydney to Los Angeles? Is Oceanic Airlines preparing the biggest lawsuit in the history of litigation?
DL: Yup. Plane is bound from Sydney to L.A.. Fortunately, Oceanic Airlines doesn't exist... but I'm finding out MANY movies have used it when bad shit happens on a plane ("Executive Decision" being the one pointed out to me). And we thought we were so original. Sigh.

AICN: How old is Hurley?
DL: Hmmmm. Fascinating that you'd ask this. I would say he TELLS people he's 26.

AICN: I think my favorite thing about this concept may be the sheer quantity of survivors. Was 48 your idea or a network mandate?
DL: J.J. and I decided to have 48 people survive because we wanted to stock the show with as many possible story avenues as possible. As I recall, the network tried to talk us out of it.
Greatest thing about the "other" castaways is that they can come forward for an episode, then melt back into the chorus. The popular thinking that their function is purely to be Red Shirts is grossly mistaken. In FACT...
We've always loved the idea that one of our series regs goes traipsing off into the jungle with one of the castaways we've never seen before. The audience is thinking the poor yahoo with one line is gonna die a gruesome and horrible death, but then it's the REGULAR who gets wiped out. It will be done. Watch and see.

AICN: When the creepy Terry O’Quinn character asks young Walt if he wants to “know a secret”? Is he about to impart some really good backgammon strategy?
DL: Yes. Terry's secret is "Don't be afraid to leave blots."

AICN: Beyond the plane’s pilot, and discounting flashbacks, will we meet during the first 13 hours any human beings beyond the 48?
DL: I will not comment on whether or not we'll be meeting any other human beings on the island who were NOT on the plane. But I will posit this -- Who's to say we haven't already?

AICN: Since you've been rabidly scouring Ain’t It Cool News every morning for years, how badly does it burn your *** that we’ve devoted more than 90 posts to “Alias” over the past three years but only one to “Crossing Jordan”?
DL: My *** is not burned by the site's complete and utter dismissal of "Crossing Jordan" -- quite frankly, it's not a genre show. Not to mention, the talkbalk can be brutal, so I'd rather stay below the radar. Guess those days are over, huh?

AICN: Who’s the showrunner on this baby? J.J. is prepping his feature directorial debut with “Mission: Impossible 3,” he says he’s going to restore “Alias” to its former glory, and he’s working on ABC’s bounty-hunter series “The Catch,” which stars Greg Grunberg, his best friend since childhood. Will J.J. be scripting any of the first 11 episodes beyond the pilot? Will he ever return to Hawaii? Ever?
DL: J.J. and I are both running the show. He doesn't start prep on Mission 3 for quite some time, so he's splitting his attention between LOST and ALIAS right now. As for THE CATCH, you'll have to talk to him about it. In all likelihood, J.J. won't actually be WRITING any of the first eleven beyond the pilot, but he's actively involved in the breaking of every story and the supervision of all the scripts. And in his SPARE time, he enjoys windsurfing, cajun cooking and watching makeover shows.

AICN: Are you more gratified or horrified an Internet site is already organizing a “Save ‘Lost’” campaign?
DL: Hey -- does anyone ever start websites to KILL shows? Shouldn't there be a "Cancel Seventh Heaven" website or something? Now THAT I would be into.

thank you!

I'm raising my hand in Stand ignorance because I've never read it-just know about it generally but, can someone fill me in on Stu/Frannie? Was there a romance there?

OT: toast love the avie* :lol2: & thanks for article. Creme/Angie too for character synopsis*.

I don't think Kate sounds like she neatly fits into the Nadine...She seems to have some of that & Frannie because I haven't considered her to be mean or completely self centered. Just defensive sometimes like w/Sawyer.

Well according to the article Kate was modeled loosely after Frannie.

Doesn't make much sense to me, cuz like I said Frannie was really innocent and naive. Kate strikes me as neither. I don't think she's all bad, but she's definitely not all that.

At any rate, like I said I don't think we should take the Stand analogies too much to heart because they are just one part of a tightly woven tapestry of literary references, all of which refer back to very old (sometimes nearly universal) principals in myth and folklore. Archetypes. They are everywhere.

hey creme ;D

Indeed, you could find literary, archetypal & television/movie parallels just about anywhere. Obviously some of them have influenced the show but what is it they say-if you stare hard enough at the dots they'll begin to make a pattern LOL! Still it's apparent they did model the characters along certain lines & for all we know-Kate is innoncent in some ways. I do know they've mentioned her story to be homage to the Fugitive.

I do know they've mentioned her story to be homage to the Fugitive.

Another thing to add to the list. Can't believe I missed that, it's so obvious.

Do you recall where you read that?

oh man o Manochevitz where did I read that? I think it was a quote from either Damon or Fury...I want to say Ain't it Cool News but I can't be sure. :-\ I had seen it repeated though so I'm believing it to be fact.

Has that been clearly established? I've also read theories that she was CSR for the gaming company (of the game he played).


And my own theory is that she might have been a phone psychic - just as much evidence for that as for anything, possibly more (Locke said something to her about the walk-about being his destiny, like they'd talked about. If she IS a phone psychic, and she did suggest the walkabout to Locke as his destiny, that would place her as the second psychic to have arranged for one of the Lostaways to be on that flight - which in turn might suggest that there could be more, or even that something similar had somehow happened to all the main characters, which puts some other things the various characters have said or had revealed about about how they came to be on that particular flight in a new light.)



Back in December, I'd written down a list of the various characters and tried matching them up to various Tarot symbols, just for fun. Two cards with interesting symbolism were The Sun and The Moon, which show two different fantasy visions of the universe: The Moon is dreamlike and emotional, and The Sun is carefully ordered and geometrically precise but equally out of touch with reality: in other words, "Hearts and Minds". The characters I'd assigned to those cards? Shannon for the Sun, and Boone for the Moon. I'd done it then based on their arguements with each other, and the criticisms they'd leveled at each other, but I was uncomfortable with that choice, because in traditional mythology the Sun and Moon are lovers, often the parents of other gods; convinced Shannon and Boone were brother and sister, and confident that ABC wouldn't push anything that would imply incest that way, I dismissed my instincts, and put my virtual foot in my mouth by stating emphatically that Boone and Shannon were not lovers and that 'shipper theory would be proved false. Following "Hearts and Minds", I realize I should go back and look at my original "goofy" conclusions a bit more seriously.

Anyway, as a result of those conclusions, I now think the Hearts/Minds conflict is actually strictly between Boone and Shannon, not between different factions on the island, but a more careful examination of the episode than I was able to give would be able to back up my conclusions. My guess is that Locke felt that neither extreme, heart or mind, was completely ready to discover what he suspects about the hatch (and so the ordeal he put Boone through first: Boone had to learn how to use his "hands" again before he would be ready... in other words to stop running completely on his emotions towards Shannon and everything else and start exercising his neglected mind, which is what Locke really needed from Boone while they studied the hatch.)

My memory isn't very good... didn't Locke tell Boone in the very last scene to follow him so he could show Boone something? And didn't Boone ask Locke why they were taking such a long way around to the hatch, with Locke's reply being that sometimes the shortest route isn't always the best route? If that's what happened, it might suggest there was something on the island between the hatch and camp which Locke is deliberately leading Boone around. That something might be what he took Boone to see at the end of the episode.

One last thing about "Hearts and Minds" - that Michelangelo story was definitely NOT a throwaway sequence, it explains a lot about what's going on, and different parts of that story are reflected all over the place, in more ways than I could ever pick up on, but most importantly I believe there's a suggestion that every one of the central characters resembles Michelangelo - they've all learned not to use their "hands", and Locke seems to think he is guiding them as they re-learn how to use what has been lost. I've just begun reading that transcript, and it strikes me that Locke said that Michelangelo's father didn't understand the boy's divinity - a rather strange way of putting it. I thought at first Locke was only talking about himself, and had then concluded he might actually be an off-his-rocker egomaniac, but put into this new perspective, it puts it all in a new light, that Locke sees the divine in the characters he is guiding.


Yronimos

One last thing about "Hearts and Minds" - that Michelangelo story was definitely NOT a throwaway sequence, it explains a lot about what's going on, and different parts of that story are reflected all over the place, in more ways than I could ever pick up on, but most importantly I believe there's a suggestion that every one of the central characters resembles Michelangelo - they've all learned not to use their "hands", and Locke seems to think he is guiding them as they re-learn how to use what has been lost. I've just begun reading that transcript, and it strikes me that Locke said that Michelangelo's father didn't understand the boy's divinity - a rather strange way of putting it. I thought at first Locke was only talking about himself, and had then concluded he might actually be an off-his-rocker egomaniac, but put into this new perspective, it puts it all in a new light, that Locke sees the divine in the characters he is guiding.

I think this is right on target.

And yes, at the end of HAM Locke did lead Boone off into the jungle after saying, "C'mon I want to show you something." That teaser has not been resolved. The lack of resolution could be due to different writers doing each episode. Maybe we'll find out more during either Locke's or Boone's next episode.

And yes, Locke did say something along the lines of "Sometimes the shortest route isn't always the best route." This line goes right along with one of the themes in the episode, also highlighted in the Michaelangelo story and the pondering over the mystery of the hatch. Throughout the episode, Boone is impatient and wants to take the easy way out. Locke is is the epitome of zen mastery - the sequences are very Luke Skywalker and Yoda in the swamp.