The lighthouse mirror contraption with all those gears would have been right at home in it.
This observation aside, last night's episode saw more Ragle Gumm action when Jack looked at his appendectomy scar and asked his mother when the procedure was done. You'd think a surgeon would remember when he'd been operated on. In this case it was Juliet in 2004 with the scalpel. Or, as mom would have it, when Jack was 7 or 8.
He's also developed a major streak of narcissism this season. Always looking in the mirror is our Jack. Unsurprisingly he finds a copy of Alice in Wonderland in his son's room which draws us back to the season 1 episode "White Rabbit" which was Jack-centric. In that story, we learn about Jack being told by his Christian that he (i.e. – Jack) didn't "have what it takes" as well as seeing Jack claim his father's body. "White Rabbit" showed us that he did have what it takes to be the leader of the bunch of airplane crash survivors while "Lighthouse" demonstrated he has what it takes to get past his daddy issues and be a good father.
This sideways/alternate timeline is seemingly devoid of Oedipal issues but all that glitters is not gold. Fathers and their progeny just get along too well, in the main, for any kind of meaningful story about redemption to be hashed out in it. It's way too lovey dovey and it will end.
How about that lighthouse? Did you notice that house of Oriental architecture that Jack saw as the dial turned?
Can a Dogen-centric story be too far behind? He did say he was brought to the island just like everyone else so it would seem that he knows it was Jacob that is responsible for everyone being there, himself included. Speaking of Jacob, he sure didn't seem to mind that Jack took an amber spyglass to his mirrored remote viewing station. Why should he? His chosen ones are already on the island thusly eliminating the need to keep an eye out for more candidates. He tells Hurley that Jack is important and that he, Jack, is on the island to do something but that he must figure it out for himself.
I think that something Jack has to do is die. But not some willy-nilly death. Jacob also tells Hurley he had to get him and Jack away from the Temple because it is about to be laid siege to by someone bad. (Mostly likely Claire.) Jack has to die in a certain way or after he accomplishes something. (He's got work to do.) But his death is required.
And then there's the feral Claire. I loved that macabre Aaron stand-in doll lying in the crib.
Plus her nameless "friend" turns out to be Esau. A little Stockholm Syndrome, to say the least. It should be interesting to see her approach the Temple next week and demand the return of her son. It could get bloody.
2 comments:
I've seen all the episodes so far, but you've been much better than me at keeping up with what's going on. I don't understand the dual story at all - is it what would've happened if Jacob never entered the characters' lives, or does it interact with the island story somehow? On a simpler topic, I figured "someone bad" is Esau and Claire is just one of his tools.
I don't think that this alternate timeline is "real" in the way the previous ones were. I think it shows what would happen if Jacob failed to bring them to the island. Do you remember when Mrs. Hawking told Desmond at the jewelry store that it was his destiny to go to the island to push the button - otherwise everyone would die? I think this new alt timeline is like the one where Des doesn't push the button and everyone dies. They're all connected as Jack has deja vu with Desmond on the plane, Kate recognizes Jack, etc.
Somehow humanity's fate is at risk. Des isn't button pushing and the Valenzetti Equation is about to come due.
Post a Comment