‘Lost’ Patience

With the final season of Lost just around the corner, a lot of the writers at Christ and Pop Culture have finally found a television show they can agree on. From it’s beginning, it’s dealt head on with issues of morality, spirituality and faith. Most importantly, it’s a show that is thoughtfully and artfully produced, presenting us with a unique plot and real, empathetic characters. Naturally, it’s a perfect show for CaPC writers to discuss in our Water Cooler series.

Leading up to the season premier, we’ll discuss the show so far, and what we might expect in the coming weeks and months. Once the show starts, you can expect regular updates, in which we discuss each episode and its implications.

Previous Installments:
Pre-season: Lost’s Biggest Question.
Pre-season, part 2: Lost’s Free Will Dilemma

Warning! If you are not completely caught up with Lost, you won’t want to read any further.

Ben writes,

Ok guys, I’ve been holding off on the Lost conversation till now. I just didn’t feel I had much to add. But after last night, things have gone a little too far and I want to hear your thoughts.

First, my favorite part of the show was always strong character building. However, it seems that they have completely abandoned realistic portrayal of individual struggles. Instead, they throw characters from one wild extreme to another, not caring about history or perspective or learning over time.

Example A was the idiocy of Sawyer deciding that he is going to kill Jack (or later, let him “suffer like the rest of us”). Really? Your girlfriend dying by her own choice and then affirming her decision suddenly removes all history with Jack, and blames him for not knowing what would happen when they set off a nuclear weapon near an ill-defined power source for an island that can leap through time? Even when your girlfriend said he was right? This sort of foolish, pasted-in emotion is cartoon quality stuff.

Second, the supposed faith vs. science theme is a joke. Merely repeating a variety of circumstances over and over where characters pick one or the other is not an exploration of a theme… it’s just repetition. If I tell you 45 stories of different people deciding whether to have the usual for lunch or to try something new, that doesn’t qualify as insightful exposition of decision making.

And finally, sticking random religious elements into a show is something anyone can do. Actually using those elements helpfully is something else entirely. Was Sayid “baptised”? Who cares? It clearly had nothing to do with real baptism’s purpose. How is that good art?

Ok, one more complaint. The hollow religious icon in the guitar case containing a note was just silly.

Richard writes,

Ben, I think you’re being too hard on Lost, and my primary argument is simply to point out that it’s a television show. Let me explain…

I don’t at all mean that television is by default of a lower quality than books and film. That’s an easy excuse, and if that were the case, I want to spend my time elsewhere. You can get out of television a series of benefits that you don’t get anywhere else, just as you can from books a film.

It is in fact that drastic difference between mediums that I think you may be forgetting, which is particularly unfortunate when you consider the fact that Lost has been extremely successful in taking advantage of its’ own medium. The mysteries stretched out over years, the huge amount of water-cooler conversation, and yes, the ability to get to know and relate to the characters of lost all take advantage of the medium and would not be able to be replicated in film.

It’s understandable that you would see this 2 hour premiere event as a standalone thing, but let’s establish some perspective:

First, as you alluded to, we’ve seen sawyer grow as a person throughout the series, but while you might find it idiotic that Sawyer would slip into kill-mode after the blast and death of Juliet, to me it’s perfectly understandable that Sawyer would have a sort of lapse after what truly is one of the most soul-crushing developments we’ve seen on the show yet. All of the Lost crew were disappointed it didn’t work, but Sawyer lost what appears to be his one true love in the process. And let’s not downplay the significance of Sawyer having a “one true love” in the first place. I think the “lapse” shows as much growth as it does anything.

Second, the faith vs. science thing: I think the “repetition” is frustrating to you because, again, this is a television show, which is episodic and long-running in nature. They’re trying to drive a theme home, and unfortunately since the show has not finished yet, it’s hard to decipher exactly what that theme is. I’m not going to say it’s going to be brilliant, but I do think you go a little too far in calling it “a joke.” To me, the debate has been much more than people picking one or the other, and I don’t really think that’s the focus anyway. Instead, the focus has been the struggle inherent in trying to pick one or the other, and what it does to you. Even when Jack and Locke traded sides, they still struggled and had doubts about those decisions.

Finally, the random religious imagery: What we’re looking for here is clues, not big incredible metaphors. So yes, I think it might be relevant that Sayid seemed to be baptized, especially since he died and rose again afterward. It’s not that the moment was brilliantly artistic. It’s just that it may have some significance for those of us who enjoy trying to figure out what in the world is going on.

The nature of the TV show is that it’s only as good as it’s final season, and we’re just not there yet. I actually really like the concept of the “flash sideways” to different realities, especially since the writers have said that these realities are both equally valid.

Alan, David, what about you guys? Did the premiere delight, frustrate, underwhelm, or confound you? Or all of the above? And where does Lost now stand on the free will issue?

Ben writes,

I don’t think you’re really addressing my concerns by pointing out that it is a television show. I wasn’t complaining about the 2 hour premiere itself, I was complaining about the way the episode fit into the larger context of the show as a whole.

Sawyer’s development, over time, has been toward being calmer and more thoughtful about most things. He has become wiser about assigning blame correctly, and has had an extreme reluctance to see anyone die. To suddenly “lapse and go into kill-mode” is not an intuitive or understandable addition to his story arc- it’s merely an unwieldy construction by the writers, designed to manufacture drama that really shouldn’t be there. And going from, “I need to kill him” to “I want him to suffer by surviving” is actually a really big change that had zero explanation in the episode.

I think TV is a terrific forum for good character development. But when writers radically alter a character’s temperament and character or reactions to stimuli for the sake of drama (rather than as a natural extension of what they’ve built to date), I call foul.

Regarding repetition, the simple point is this: We are not learning anything new over time about faith vs. science. The theme may have been hit upon time and time again, but we know as much about the topic as we did when Jack and Locke first butted heads. I don’t mind calling it a mystery show where the “solution” at the end will resolve what the writers intend the internal truth of this world to be. But I do mind saying that having characters struggle over and over with basically the same decision is somehow an “exploration” of the theme.

I can concede the point about religious imagery. I wasn’t intending to attack you in the slightest; in my mind I was merely thinking of how a friend I grew up with was constantly pointing out to me all the different religious elements in TV shows and movies. The problem was that though he saw these things, he never learned anything from them because rarely do the shows use them for anything helpful. So, for example, he would point out in “Mission Impossible Two” when a particular scene puts the main character in a crucifix position, and he said this was done intentionally. But to what end?

If Lost is using imagery as a clue, that’s fine, I hadn’t considered that. Just so long as they try to use it well, because there are a lot of media that use it poorly and unhelpfully.

I don’t have a problem with the flash sideways construction, and I understand that the show is finding ways to stretch things out. Lost is clearly built like an arch, with the close of season 6 intended as the keystone. But I will say this: A lot of Lost fans have been responding for a long time to criticisms by saying it will all make sense in the end. If that keystone doesn’t hold the entire story together well, we’ll sure feel like we wasted a lot of time.

Richard writes,

I’m going to make this short so other people can talk, but the famed Lost recapper, Jeff Jenson had this to say about Sawyer’s reaction:

Complicating the intensifying friction between Jack and Sawyer was Juliet’s final words. Sawyer gleaned them by forcing Mikes to perform his talks-to-the-dead magic. ”It worked,” Miles reported. Sawyer was flummoxed. What ‘worked’? Sawyer stomped away, bitter. My take on Sawyer is that he really blames himself for losing Juliet — that his little piece of heaven was rescinded because someone upstairs realized he hadn’t earned it, that what in fact he deserves is (eternal) punishment. (Remember, the man was a con man — and he is a murderer.) I think maybe Sawyer betrayed as much in his later line to Kate: ”He deserves to suffer on this rock just like the rest of us.” It was misdirected anger, but that’s Sawyer all over. If he has to pay for his sins, then by golly, everyone else will, too.

He says it better than I ever could, and articulates well some of the reason it seemed believable to me.