Lost 6x07: "Dr. Linus"

[Mallet]

So is Jacob good or bad?

Well lets go "meta" for a bit to see if that can help.

First, there are only 9 episodes and a 2 hour finale left in the series. That's 11 "tv" hours, each of which, because of commercials, is only 41 minutes long. That leaves us with 451 minutes of Lost left.

Lets be generous and say that only 15 minutes of each episode coming up will be spent "off island" in the flashsideways. That cuts another 165 min. off of the total time we will see "on island" events. That leaves us with 286 min of on island Lost. Witch is only 4 hours and 45 min's left to finish off the "main" storyline. 4hrs45min. (Damn!! That's not a lot of time left with our long time (and original personality) Losties).

Second, there is a "good side" and a "bad side" to these events. Black and white. So one side will be good and one side will be bad.

Third, Jack, Hurley, Sun have always been "the good guys" on the show. Sawyer has gone both ways over the course of the show. Same with Kate. The producers have never hidden the fact that Jack is the main hero of the show. it has always been his journey that has had the most attention and screen time.

Fourth, Jacob has always been portrayed as the "good guy". The MIB has always been portrayed as the "Bad Guy"

So what does all of this tell us?

Well, it's a little late in the game to start trying to get philosophical about the nature of good and evil. If this was season 4 or 5 and we were in the current situation I would say there would be plenty of time to have who is really good and bad switch around. But there is less then 5 hours of story telling time left for the writers. I don't think at this late date they will have time to make a big switch on good and bad. The battle lines have been drawn and the sides are being taken. Team Jacob vs. Team MIB.

I also don't think they would have Jack, Hurley & Sun on the team of the "bad guy". That wouldn't make for a good ending.
What will they say? "Hey, yah, the main heroes of the show were tricked and screwed over and actually ended up on the side of evil and helped evil win the day?" I doubt it. This isn't some HBO or AMC tv series. It is ABC. A Disney company. the good guys will win.

Also, with Ben's big redemption episode last week and him staying with Team Jacob clearly shows us that Jacob is the good guy. if Jacob ends up being the bad guy, then Ben's redemption arc will be pointless, because he would have ended up on the wrong side once again and be working for "the bad guy". So if redemption is a big theme of the series, and the everyone gets a second chance stuff, then they can't have Ben's redemption being working for the Bad guy.

So I think from a meta view Jacob and Team Jacob are the good guys.

The MIB is evil and the MIB's followers have strayed to the dark side. Hopefully some of them can be saved and brought back to the good guys team by the end. (I'd like Sawyer to either have a happy ending, or die saving Jack and everyone else.)

 

[Hober Mallow]

I'm pretty sure it was closer to foreshadowing the events at the end of the episode where Smokey offers Ben the opportunity to rule the island once he takes everyone off it. He'd effectively be the Emperor, but would have no one to rule over. Which, fully realizing that, is why he didn't hesitate much when Ilana offered him the chance to come with her.

Hell, he even told us as much with his confession about being power-hungry, though not in so many words.

I also took it to be flash-sideways Ben unknowingly referring to himself. The entire episode was all about Ben's need for power, and its consequences.

Going back to Christian and whether or not he's the smoke monster... In the fourth season episode "Something Nice Back Home," right before Christian appears to Jack, a smoke alarm starts beeping. What more proof do you need?

 

[Jenee]

Neither side is good or bad. They just "are". They are what they are. When you play chess, do you not "kill" the other player's pieces?

Forget about the Losties "being human" for just a minute, forget about Jack vs Sawyer and Kate vs ... whoever; and look at the larger picture. With the introduction of Jacob and MIB, the entire story changed. The story is no longer about the Losties, but about two beings who are not human and are basically playing a game.

The Losties are all pawns at this point. I think Jack has figured this out.

As for Ben's redemption ... Dude, that didn't suddenly happen while he was talking to whatshername, that happened over the course of this entire season so far - actually, started back at the point where Alex was shot.

Regardless, I don't think Jacob or MIB cares about redemption. They're just moving them all over the chessboard.

And now, coolghoul's theory makes even more sense now. They all have fairly normal, fairly happy lives without the intervention of Jacob.

 

[Checkmate]

I can't wait to come back to this post at the end of May.

 

[Legolas]

Neither side is good or bad. They just "are". They are what they are. When you play chess, do you not "kill" the other player's pieces?

Forget about the Losties "being human" for just a minute, forget about Jack vs Sawyer and Kate vs ... whoever; and look at the larger picture. With the introduction of Jacob and MIB, the entire story changed. The story is no longer about the Losties, but about two beings who are not human and are basically playing a game.

The Losties are all pawns at this point. I think Jack has figured this out.

As for Ben's redemption ... Dude, that didn't suddenly happen while he was talking to whatshername, that happened over the course of this entire season so far - actually, started back at the point where Alex was shot.

Regardless, I don't think Jacob or MIB cares about redemption. They're just moving them all over the chessboard.

And now, coolghoul's theory makes even more sense now. They all have fairly normal, fairly happy lives without the intervention of Jacob.

I agree with everything you've been saying. Jacob isnt "good" and MIB isnt "bad". They have jobs or functions. They are playing one big game, and one of the players is tired of playing (MIB). They have rules and MIB is breaking those rules so hopefully the game will stop.

What i find really telling and Sayid mentioned this too, that the same type of offer that jacob made to Dogen, MIB made to Sayid. They both use the same methods in getting what they want done.


Question: Where was Ricahrd at when he was in the jungle? We know he went to the temple because he knew everyone was dead, but when asked where he had just come from he repsonded by saying "you wouldnt believe me if i told you"

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Neither side is good or bad. They just "are". They are what they are. When you play chess, do you not "kill" the other player's pieces?

The key thing is: do the writers think of this story as a game, in which there's no reason for the audience to take sides in who wins or loses, since we don't stand to win or lose anything regardless of what happens in the final episode or are they presenting some variation on "the eternal struggle between good and evil," which means that regardless of whether we personally think "evil exists in the world," we are being told that evil does exist in this particular fictional world, and since it's part of the ground rules, we have to accept it. Maybe we don't believe in magical islands or time travel either, but those are also part of the ground rules that we've accepted are true for this story.

My hunch is that the writers are presenting some variation on "the eternal struggle between good and evil." It's their story, and they have the right to tell us what the ground rules are.

Jacob isnt "good" and MIB isnt "bad". They have jobs or functions. They are playing one big game, and one of the players is tired of playing (MIB). They have rules and MIB is breaking those rules so hopefully the game will stop.

Maybe the writers intend this instead, but the notion of "the eternal struggle between good and evil" has been a popular foundation for fiction for millenia and has a grander-feeling sweep to it, which seems more in keeping with the tone and style of Lost. Having it all be some game where it doesn't matter who wins or loses would feel kinda picayune by comparison and undermine the punch of the finale, which I expect to have a punch that would put Mike Tyson to shame.

But there is less then 5 hours of story telling time left for the writers. I don't think at this late date they will have time to make a big switch on good and bad. The battle lines have been drawn and the sides are being taken. Team Jacob vs. Team MIB.

That's another important factor - with the clock ticking now, the story seems to be ramping up to some kind of Mother of All Battles, which strongly implies a Good/Evil clash of epic proportions. The "game" conclusion would be trickier to pull off in a way that wouldn't make the audience howl, "I wasted six years of my life on THAT?" It's not impossible to do, but I haven't noticed set-up in that direction.

What will they say? "Hey, yah, the main heroes of the show were tricked and screwed over and actually ended up on the side of evil and helped evil win the day?" I doubt it. This isn't some HBO or AMC tv series. It is ABC. A Disney company. the good guys will win.

Yep, underneath all the hooplah, Lost has a very conventional emotional tone to it, often verging on sappy melodrama. It doesn't ask us to have sympathy for the devil, like cable shows often do.

And even in shows like Dexter and Breaking Bad where the main character is "bad," and the whole story questions what good and evil even mean, the main character is never a pawn, because for the main character to not have agency within the story just wouldn't work - we'd lose identification with the character and therefore lose interest. Jack & the gang have to be the ones to force the story to a conclusion - MiB and Jacob can be factors, but the people whose stories we've followed for six years are the ones who will end the game, one way or the other.

 

[Jenee]

we are being told that evil does exist in this particular fictional world

Are we? What many believe is "evil" is very often a matter of perspective.

For instance, Billy Joe shot a man while robbing his castle.

Seems pretty evil, right? Obvious answer is yes.

But, maybe Billy Joe's infant child is in need of medicine and not only can he not afford it, but when he applies to different agencies, he's turned down for making too much money. Where's the justice? So, he knows this drug dealer who keeps large sums of cash in his house - the kind of money no one reports missing. In the middle of pulling the job, drug dealer comes out with his own gun and it's either the drug dealer or a father trying to save the life of his child.

Who's evil now?

 

[Checkmate]

Smokey.

That's who.

 

[Hunter X]

Jenee, I think you missed Temis' point. It's not about whether or not you believe in moral ambiguity. It's whether or not it's a part of the show's ground rules.

For example, there is not moral ambiguity in Star Wars. Yes, you can go to the Clerk's argument (I think it was Clerks) where Luke Skywalker is guilty for the death of millions, some perhaps innocent, by blowing up the Death Star, and impose a moral gray area onto the original movie. But that's not what the story really is. It's a story about the white hats blowing up the dark hats (or helmets, as it were), and that is Good.

On the other hand, you have NuBSG, where the "good" guys, the humans, and the "bad" guys, the Cylons, are given both good and bad traits, and the writers clearly want us to sympathize with all groups by the end, for better or for worse. In BSG, Apollo blowing up the Death Star really would result in a lot of hand-wringing over the fate of the hard-working civilian who lived his life pushing a mop in the lower levels of the Death Star, who was beaten around as a child, treated poorly by his boss and driven to depression until he cheats on his pill-addicted wife, and whether it was right to sentence him to death for the "greater good."

So the question is this: is Lost "Star Wars" or is it "BSG"?


....And yes, I know it'll be neither, fully, but I hope you understand my somewhat hyperbolic examples.

 

[pookha]

Neither side is good or bad. They just "are". They are what they are. When you play chess, do you not "kill" the other player's pieces?

Forget about the Losties "being human" for just a minute, forget about Jack vs Sawyer and Kate vs ... whoever; and look at the larger picture. With the introduction of Jacob and MIB, the entire story changed. The story is no longer about the Losties, but about two beings who are not human and are basically playing a game.

The Losties are all pawns at this point. I think Jack has figured this out.

As for Ben's redemption ... Dude, that didn't suddenly happen while he was talking to whatshername, that happened over the course of this entire season so far - actually, started back at the point where Alex was shot.

Regardless, I don't think Jacob or MIB cares about redemption. They're just moving them all over the chessboard.

And now, coolghoul's theory makes even more sense now. They all have fairly normal, fairly happy lives without the intervention of Jacob.

I agree with everything you've been saying. Jacob isnt "good" and MIB isnt "bad". They have jobs or functions. They are playing one big game, and one of the players is tired of playing (MIB). They have rules and MIB is breaking those rules so hopefully the game will stop.

What i find really telling and Sayid mentioned this too, that the same type of offer that jacob made to Dogen, MIB made to Sayid. They both use the same methods in getting what they want done.


Question: Where was Ricahrd at when he was in the jungle? We know he went to the temple because he knew everyone was dead, but when asked where he had just come from he repsonded by saying "you wouldnt believe me if i told you"

if one accepts god as real and that god is "good" then well god has done curious things.
at times hurley reminds me of job.

 

[Jenee]

Jenee, I think you missed Temis' point. It's not about whether or not you believe in moral ambiguity. It's whether or not it's a part of the show's ground rules.

For example, there is not moral ambiguity in Star Wars. Yes, you can go to the Clerk's argument (I think it was Clerks) where Luke Skywalker is guilty for the death of millions, some perhaps innocent, by blowing up the Death Star, and impose a moral gray area onto the original movie. But that's not what the story really is. It's a story about the white hats blowing up the dark hats (or helmets, as it were), and that is Good.

On the other hand, you have NuBSG, where the "good" guys, the humans, and the "bad" guys, the Cylons, are given both good and bad traits, and the writers clearly want us to sympathize with all groups by the end, for better or for worse. In BSG, Apollo blowing up the Death Star really would result in a lot of hand-wringing over the fate of the hard-working civilian who lived his life pushing a mop in the lower levels of the Death Star, who was beaten around as a child, treated poorly by his boss and driven to depression until he cheats on his pill-addicted wife, and whether it was right to sentence him to death for the "greater good."

So the question is this: is Lost "Star Wars" or is it "BSG"?


....And yes, I know it'll be neither, fully, but I hope you understand my somewhat hyperbolic examples.

Ok, first, and easiest, It was, indeed Clerks (loved that movie), but, not Star Wars. The argument was that blowing up the Death Star in the first movie was a legitimate tactical movement. But, in the ROTJ, the Death Star was still being rebuilt. It wasn't operational and had a skeletal military crew aboard; that the people on board were mostly construction crews and civilian engineers.

But, I get the point.

Second, that's not at all what I got from Temis' post. I think her point was that after 6 years we have an emotional investment in the characters and for them to be reduced to pawns, not even a good vs evil storyline, that that would render the story ... a waste of our time.

I get that too, and that's exactly how I felt at the end of last season. It's like 'what's the fucking point?'

However, this season, we're finding out why Jacob and MIB are playing with the Losties' lives.

These two beings, for whatever reason, are 'sentenced' to live on this island. For some reason that we don't yet know, Jacob keeps bringing 'normal' people to this island - not looking for a candidate, cuz he isn't interested in leaving - it's like he has to bring this people in, possibly because some higher power demands it. We also know ... pretty much from context, that MIB is supposed to 'judge' these people - that his job. But, he's tired of his job. He's tired of judging people and killing people.

Jacob has the easy job and it's easy to make him out to be 'the good guy', whereas MIB's job makes it easy to label him 'the bad guy'.

I don't think it's that easy. So, I'm guessing it's more like nuBSG. But, probably closer to Dogma.

 

[McCoy]

..at times hurley reminds me of job.

It's funny you should say that because since this episode aired I've been thinking the same thing about Ben.

I've also wondered about the whole "Jacob's touch is a gift" statement of Richard's. After Ben stabbed Jacob, as Jacob was dying, he touched Ben's arm. In that moment did he give a gift to Ben? Did he have a last-gasp inspiration on how he could compensate for MiB's loophole? Was his dying thought "I hope I'm wrong about you, Ben" a silent plea that, in spite of Ben's past choices, he will eventually use that gift to fix the damage MiB has caused by arranging Jacob's death? And has Ben's confession to, and acceptance by, Ilana now started that process?

Or maybe I'm reading too much into it because Ben is my favourite character on the show. I always like the complex ones, like Snape in the Potter books. I just hope Ben survives the finale with some reward.

 

[Legolas]

And even in shows like Dexter and Breaking Bad where the main character is "bad," and the whole story questions what good and evil even mean, the main character is never a pawn, because for the main character to not have agency within the story just wouldn't work - we'd lose identification with the character and therefore lose interest. Jack & the gang have to be the ones to force the story to a conclusion - MiB and Jacob can be factors, but the people whose stories we've followed for six years are the ones who will end the game, one way or the other.

The whole "eternal struggle between good and evil" doesn't seem to fit to me. It really does feel like a game. 2 sides..one side is "light" and the other is "dark". They set that up way back in season 1 with the backgammon stones that were found an from what i'v been reading about the game, that's exactly what this show seems to be.

I dunno..we dont know enough about Jacobs motivations to call him good and all we know from MIB's motivations is that he wants the cycle to end.

I think Jack and the gang are exactly pawns...that's been made clear throughout the entire seasons of Lost...it's always been about The Island and the forces on it that are manipulating these people and they're lives to get them to do what they want. The Big Mystery has always been what do these forces/The Island want?

 

[Jenee]

^^right, the Losties have been pawns since October of 2004.

 

[PKTrekGirl]

I voted excellent. Second best episode of the season for me, after Sundown.

 

[Woulfe]

There's one huge problem with the GAME theory....
It might be 4 letters, but none of them are "O"

 

[Jenee]

I only looked at the last two pages in the spoilers thread, so I have no idea what the four letter word is that you're talking about.

 

[Woulfe]

The guys behind LOST have said in recent interviews that the Island is four letters, no A, no E, but there is an O....

They said this because of the sneak peek of this Episode had Ben writing on the blackboard "ELBA" which prompted speculation online that the island on LOST was called that....

The rest is history as one would say....

 

[Jenee]

ah. In that case, I think they were being facetious.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

They probably were. Four letter word with an O is probably "LOST," to be honest.