Talk:Lost (2004 TV series)/Story elements

message: In thinking about last night's episode, I realized there was one major story theme that we had overlooked: "lost" love and the attempt to find it again. Many of the main characters had love (either romantic or familial) taken from their lives, the context for which is part of what brought them to the Island. 
:Romantic:
* Kate's childhood sweetheart Tom -- killed during her escape
* Jack's wife Sarah -- situation unknown
* Sayid's childhood friend/romance with Nadia -- escaped to LA
* Locke's relationship with (real and substutite) Helen -- situation unknown
* Jin and Sun's strained marriage -- each had been planning to escape
:Familial:
* Sawyer's parents killed over a con -- sought revenge in Australia
* Jack's deceased father -- sent to find him and bring him home
* Michael's estrangement from Walt -- came to Australia to return with his son
* Locke's betrayal by his father -- sending him on a search for meaning ("leap of faith")
Would this be considered speculative or something that may be appropriate to add to the Themes section? LeFlyman 19:39, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ehh, I think the theory is a little weak right now, particularly as you're lumping "lost love" with "familial deaths"... It seems like you could package any sort of motivation as a reaction to "loss".  -DropDeadGorgias (talk) 20:07, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I agree that the division between love/family is hazy, but my contention is that the characters are searching for (or trying to make up for) the love they "lost". In comparison, the stated theme of "Redemption"  is quite a bit weaker. (e.g. who's actually been redeemed on the Island?) And it's less speculative than the  "Philosophy" section, which conjectures/overlays meaning onto the story far beyond the use of philosophers' names. LeFlyman 20:28, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd not make a distinction between the romantic and the familial, honestly. So far, most of the characters have been particularly unlucky when it comes to love, be it romantic or familial. However, a good portion of this is also discussed in the section on fathers, since the fathers, far more than the mothers, of these characters, have been responsible for the worst rejections and failings of love. If the theme of fathers could be expanded to "Personal Relationships", and note how most of these characters suffer from a lack of familial love and failure in romantic love, it'd be on more stable ground. Baryonyx 21:26, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Lost Love"

message: How is this a theme? Animals exist... animals are everywhere. I don't think the producers intentionally try to put animals whereever they go. As for Leg Injuries, I think if we can put it into a paragraph instead of a list it's okay. KramarDanIkabu (speak) 18:14, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animals? 

message: * There is a huge underlying paranormal theme I've not really seen mentioned anywhere.
* The psychic who knew Claire would have to raise her baby alone on that flight.
* The dream Locke had that showed where the drug smuggler plane was
* Michael's son who can "make things happen" and seems to know some future events.  "Don't open it" "the numbers are bad"
* The numbers that have been documented to cause bad luck more than can be explained by just chance.
* Jack meeting Desmond on the island
* Rose knows Bernard is alive.
* Sawyer knows Jack's Dad
* Hugo owns the company Locke works at
* The simple fact that so many people survived a crash from a plane that was not intact.  It definately would not have flown or even glided without it's tail section.  More likely it would topple straight down, very fast.
* Almost forgot the big one: Locke can walk after not being able to for 4 years, with no atrophe!
216.160.48.241 20:10, 17 October 2005
Let's follow Mr. Eko's advice and not confuse coincidence with destiny.  There are some strange things going on but Sawyer meeting Jack's dad could easily be coincidence, like Hurley being on TV in Jin's flashback.  Several items in the above list could be simple coincidence, but I would add the following as possibilities: 
* Jack's wife regaining the ability to walk after her operation when Jack was convinced she wouldn't
* polar bears appearing after Walt looks at the comic book with the polar bear in it (twice)
* Jack's father's body disappearing from the coffin
* Locke's vision of Boone saying "Theresa falls up the stairs, Theresa falls down the stairs" which turned out to be meaningful
* Claire's dream about "the Black Rock" and about being attacked 
* Walt touching Locke's arm and saying "don't open that thing"
* Walt appearing to Shannon and Sayid after the kidnapping
On the other hand, I think it's possible that some important people might have been maneuvered onto the plane deliberately, and maybe the plane was crashed deliberately by operatives from DHARMA or someone else.  If Claire's baby was important to DHARMA's research in paranormal powers then the psychic could easily have been an agent putting her on the plane.  Farfetched but possible.  Let's not assume something is paranormal or supernatural unless there's no other explanation.  Ahkond 02:03, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Paranormal/Fate"

message: I removed the following from the "Philosophy" section:
However, it is plenty fair to point out that all the above theories/conspiracies and philosophy mumbo jumbo are quite possibly a mere by product of human's innate urge to find connections in places where there is none.
While the actual sentence is unhelpful, snide and ungrammatical, I think there might be a grain of useful content in there, if we can tease it out.  The entire "Story elements" section veers awfully close to speculation, and thus to original research.  On the other hand, I think that there's a lot of good material there that's worth keeping, if we can figure out how to justify it.  What would be great would be if we could find a way to retain the thoughtful material that's there, but also acknowledge that we really know very little definitively.  Any ideas? —Josiah Rowe 04:57, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: LeFlyman 19:00, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Themes in general

message: It seems a lot of people have have killed people on this show. This is so not a complete list but it's what I have off the top of my head:
Homicide:
*Ana-Lucia killed person who shot her
Accidental:
*Ana-Lucia killed Shannon
*person that died because of Jack's father
Suicide:
*Shannon's brother denied himself treatment
Alison9 01:45, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Murder

message: As the above suggested "entries" and the new nitpicky additions to the Story Elements section now demonstrate, that section has become a breeding ground for pernicious fancruft. I'm of the opinion that before it gets out-of-hand, the section be reigned in to brief examples, or removed entirely. On reflection, while it makes for interesting reading, the inclusion of Story Elements was likely a bad thing as it is pretty much completely Original Research. I've never come across a source that we can use to validate the particular items included. The section sticks out as a sore thumb of uncited material. Thoughts? —LeFlyman 17:54, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Magnet for [[Fancruft]]?

message: There were a couple names on the list of philosophers that were not actually philosophers: Jack Shephard, Shannon Rutherford.  I thought it would be better to have a section about the names of characters on the show than a section about philosophy, since characters' names are a very important aspect of the show.  Before I had finished making the change someone deleted Jack Shepherd and Shannon Rutherford from the list, but I think they belong there, because clearly their names were not chosen arbitrarily.  I also added Ethan Rom's name, an anagram of "Other Man," to the list, because that's significant too.  I separated the other material in the philosophy section into a new section, "Dichotomy of Faiths," because I think this alone is a very important aspect of the show.  I wasn't exactly sure what to do with the Dharma logo stuff so I gave it its own section even though it probably doesn't deserve it.  Thoughts on these changes?--207.172.73.17 03:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Names of Characters

message: I disagree with the way that the story elements are divided.  The Philosophical and Metaphysical Elements is subdivided into three categories that have little to do with each other.  The names and the Dharma logos may both be philosophical symbolism, but the dichotomy of faiths is an element of the plot, not symbolism.  And not all the names are even of philosophers- Rutherford was a scientist, and Ethan Rom's name (it's not currently on the list but should be) is not representative of any famous person but is symbolic because it's an anagram.  And if Names and the Dharma Logos are in this category because they're symbolic, shouldn't "Black and White" and "Numbers" also fit under this category since they probably represent something greater?  I would suggest either taking away the Philosophical and Metaphysical Elements category and making each of the sub-categories into a category, or dividing the whole Story Elements section into two categories: Recurring Plot Elements (has the subcategories of Parents, Redemption, and Dichotomy of Faiths) and Symbolism and Motifs (has the subcategories of Black and White, Numbers, Dharma Initiative Logos, Character Names).--207.172.73.17 22:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: *The Parents and Children subsection reflect the relationships of the characters as presented on the show, and does not extrapolate/speculate on the meaning of these relationships, thus do not require sourcing; the other two "themes" overlay philosophical or spiritual theories about the show, without providing a source for those theories. See: How to deal with Wikipedia entries about theories—LeFlyman 02:50, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Division of Story Elements

message: A lot of the items in this section are a bit iffy, but this one seems especially silly to me:
:The show's most spiritual characters, Locke and Mr. Eko, are white and black respectively.
It's not as if Locke is the only white character and Eko the only black character. One could make all sorts of meaningless observations along these lines, i.e. Charlie, one of the smallest characters, is white; Mr. Eko, the largest character, is black. I'm not even sure how this is supposed to reflect the motif; if "black and white" are supposed to connote duality, what does it mean if both characters are very spiritual? How are they opposites? android79 01:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the Locke/Eko "spiritual" item, plus one about Charlie's checkered shoes, and another about Vincent being "white" (uh, he's a yellow lab, right?) and Walt being black. Just trivial silliness. android79 01:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black and white 

message: I have returned the dichotomy of faiths for a few different reasons. Firstly, the aforementioned podcast makes it relatively clear that there is a play on faith's theme within the show, this is supported by the "seminal relationship quote," as well as the title "man of science, man of faith." As with pieces of literature and films, many themes are fundamentally clear, however the author or director may never explictly say these things. However, like a Clock Work Orage, it is axiomatic that it speaks of the theme of a dystopia, the fact that Burgess has never said it does not make it a non credible argument. The producers and wirters have said enough, and made enough relaitvely clear to warrant the dichotmy of faiths theme to be accepted as fact. 
On that note, the theme of redemption folllows by similar implications. In the third podcast I believe, thorough referrences are made, as well, the inclusion of the tabula rassa, and dialogue within the show makes it abundantly clear that it is a theme. 
Character names: In the newest podcast, Damon again clarifies the personified themes of the character names. Explaining the obvious ones, Locke and Rousseau, and saying in close paraphrase, "names like Jack Shephard were specifically chosen to represent him as a guide." This is irrefutable evidence warranting his inclusion, and as well it should be enough to justify names like Christian and Shannon. Considering the fact the producers said they were very careful about name selection ,and that Ernest Rutherford had theories closely connected to electromagnetism, and Christian Shephard is rather obivous considering Jack, this should be adequate.
Finally, in response to the laundry list of parent relationships, I would vote for its reinclusion in the interest of consistancy. Literary referrences and black and white both have lists justifying them, either they should all be removed, or they should all remain. If kept terse, there is no reason why the 'laundry list' cannot be included. This is an encylpodic referrence to lost, and should have some substanciation. User:Synflame 09 January 2006 1:44 EST
I agree with pretty much all of this, except that I replaced 'Redemption' with 'Starting Over' (a section that was labeled as OR and deleted) for a few reasons:
1) The word "Redemption" suggests trying to atone for sins. Most of the characters are not atoning for for their past sins, but they are behaving differently than they did before the plane crash, which is more synonymous with "starting over". "Starting over" is also the concept suggested by the dialogue: Jack told Kate, "It doesn't matter... who we were - what we did before this, before the crash... three days ago we all died. We should all be able to start over."
2) A lot of the material in 'Redemption' was OR. The section said that Locke was leading each of the characters towards their personal redemption, which has no real verification and is only one interpretation. I tried to write "Starting Over" in a way that's not up for interpretation; it might still need some work.
3) This was included in 'Redemption': "This can also refer to the title, giving it a double meaning of people being 'lost' or 'adrift' in life, but finding themselves and getting a chance to make things right on the island." Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't think being lost in life has anything to do with redemption. This seems like OR to me.
Here's the original section of Redemption in case you decide to put it back:
:Many of the characters are in one way or another finding redemption and second chances as a result of being on the island. Locke is the first character to do so, when he discovers that he has mysteriously regained use of his legs and brings back food to the survivors; after this, Locke begins to lead many of the other characters towards their own personal redemption: he gathers water for the other survivors, a move which helps encourage Jack to become the de facto leader of the group; he helps Charlie kick his heroin habit; he encourages Sawyer to face his past misdeeds involving an incident that transpired before Sawyer left Australia; he helps Boone let go of his relationship with Shannon; he finds Walt's lost dog and allows Michael to take credit, and then later helps Michael bond with/save Walt when Walt is attacked by a polar bear; and his philosophizing to Shannon encourages her to pursue a relationship with Sayid. In the season 1 finale, Sawyer is heard uncharacteristically singing Bob Marley's "Redemption Song" as he sets sail to find help.
:This can also refer to the title, giving it a double meaning of people being 'lost' or 'adrift' in life, but finding themselves and getting a chance to make things right on the island.
--Silentword 22:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *This would still be Original Research. The interpretation/analysis of the motivation or personality of the characters, without being able to cite a source outside of Wikipedia for that interpretation is what makes it inappropriate here. Whether it's called "Regret" or "Redemption" or "Starting Over", it's a novel theory based on our own idea of what the character or story means, rather than something which we can attribute to another place. The "laundry list of similarities" that we can put together may be interesting for fans of the show, but are likely not encyclopedic-- which is the ultimate goal of what we're trying to build here. For other such lists of "similarities" which have been excluded, see the archive: Talk:Lost (TV series)/Story elements.—LeFlyman 18:16, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Story Elements with Respect to 09.01.06 Podcast etc

message: Can someone provide an example for this: "Other examples include images that only appear on the screen for a split second but, when seen, can help to reveal mysteries about the show."  As far as I know, no split second screens, like Eko's images in the smoke, reveal any mysteries about the show. Jtrost 21:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subliminal messages 

message: Hello everybody. Now that we have watched "the 23rd Psalm", I think that it would be necessary to add a paragraph inside "familial dysfunction" to focus on brothers or siblings, since we had Boone and Sharon with a troublesome relationship, and also Eko and his younger brother in similar fashion. What do you think?
--Charlie144 19:27, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that sibling dysfunction is notable, especially in the case of Charlie and Liam. Jtrost 19:36, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If someone can do this in a short paragraph, or find a way to succinctly include it in what is already there, then that would be fine IMO. But the section really does not need to grow any longer than it already is. Danflave 19:52, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

text: * Agreed with Danflave. A short note about sibling relationships might be ok at some point, but the claim seems pretty weak, and bordering on Original Research, right now: Boone and Shannon, were not actually siblings, per se, and their particular story seems to be at an end;  Eko and Yemi were separated by circumstances rather than personal (dysfunctional) issues. Likewise, Charlie and Liam were estranged over the future of the band—and perhaps Charlie's drug use— but we don't have more to go on in terms of their relationship. In short, I'd say it's a hard case to make at this point—although it might be notable that both Boone and Charlie came to Australia, to effect some change from their particular "siblings," from whom they had been separated. —LeFlyman 20:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

text: * Interesting point you got there Leflyman, about the separation of siblings and its consequences. Note that Eko was separated twice from his brother, the first time to became a "kingpin" and the second one when he wasn't allowed in the plane and became a "truly priest" being mistaken by the military forces. We'll have to see a second part of his flashblack, to find out why he was on Oceanic 815. --Charlie144 20:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Familial dysfunction - part 2 

message: I believe there is an oversight (no pun intended) in this section; Sawyer developed vision problems partway through the first season.  While this does not relate to the theme as directly as Locke's opaque pupils, I still feel that there is a strong connection between the eye motif and Sawyer's farsightedness.  I'm a bit relucant to add it, however, because his glasses are covered in the section on Black & White, so it seems a bit repetetive.  On the third hand, even if Eyes and Black & White when Sawyer had the funky glasses, he found a new pair in Maternity leave, so the Black/White duality no longer exists in relation to this issue.  Could I get a little feedback on whether this is important enough and unique enough to warrant mention?
--Cinder Lizard 02:11, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Eyes