Wednesday, February 09, 2005
"After the missing Claire returns with no recollection of what has happened since before the doomed flight of Oceanic 815, Jack and Locke formulate a plan of defense against her kidnapper, the mysterious Ethan, who threatens to kill off the other survivors unless Claire is returned to him. Original US Airdate: 09 February 2005"
I'm always looking for the themes and literary devises in LOST. Tonight's was along the lines of the western. We have guns, circling the wagons and even a reference to Hoss, from the TV show Bonanza. (By the way, what is a bonanza? I had to look it up at Dictionary.com. It is a source of great wealth or prosperity. Another definition is a rich mine, vein, or pocket of ore.) We got the wild West theme for how they are choosing to close ranks on Ethan. I'm not sure of the implications here. We have a new set of rules, guns have been used as a group. Who gets to have the guns? Is it competence that gets you a gun or is it compassion? Did Charlie have either of these?
Then Charlie's story was sort of strange. He was unable to care for his girl friend and so he felt compelled to be strong after he was challenged by Ethan. I'm not sure how I feel about Charlie's decision to kill Ethan. Ethan was a clear threat and had basically committed murder. But on the other hand, he had been apprehended. What threat was he now that he was in custody? But then again, how were they going to maintain their control of Ethan over time.
Some times in my own life I have been like Charlie. I have been told I am weak and I don't want to be weak. Charlie made an existential decision to act. I believe his actions to have been desperate but defining. When challenged with my own weaknesses I have acted impulsively and decisively just to make a stand. A stand for the wrong thing is not healthy. It can be a very messy thing. That does not mean all spontaneous actions are bad but often they are.