quote:Originally posted by Damien.m: While watching all the interactions between Jacob and the Losties in the past you'll notice he goes out of his way to touch every one of them. And the shot seems to frame on his touching them. I think he was doing more than just talking to them....
quote:At this point, the writers could pretty much decide to do anything. They could have even ended the series right then, and left the rest up to our imaginations.
Noooo!!! I absolutely hate that kind of story. They can leave some threads hanging, but if they don't tie the major things up they are going to have some seriously ballistic fans.
Well, just so you know, they've made it clear that they're never going to explain how it is that the island moves in space and time. They said it would be like the idiotic "midichlorian" explanation of the Force in Star Wars. The show is about the characters; not about the island. The island does what it does, and we'll never know why. It's just the backdrop for the characters.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Well, just so you know, they've made it clear that they're never going to explain how it is that the island moves in space and time.
They've already pretty much explained that one with the "energy" pockets under the island and the time wheel that Ben and Locke turned. They are right that any attempt at doing more to explain the "physics" of something that is fantasy rather than science would be pretty lame.
They've also said they aren't going to answer all the questions and I'm fine with that as long as they answer the big under lying question. I'm not even sure how to phrase that question, I'll work on it. They also need to bring the stories of the main characters to some sort of resolution.
[ May 14, 2009, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
No one has mentioned the most important part of this past week's episode. The actor who plays Jacob is one of the carpet pissers from The Big Lebowski!
"We know which Lebowski you are Lebowski....you're not dealing with morons here"
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Esau: I don't have to ask. You brought them here. Your still trying to prove me wrong.
Jacob: You are wrong.
Esau: Am I? They come, fight. They corrupt. They destroy. It always ends the same.
Jacob: It only ends once, everything else is just progress.
I interpreted this exchange as being about humanity and the inevitable end of the world as predicted by the Valenzetti Equation and their differing attitudes towards it.
Jacob believes that the numbers can change, that humans (the variables) can change their destiny while the other guy, Esau, feels otherwise. Therefore, Jacob is trying to prove Esau wrong by bringing people to the island to change the outcome, to show that humans are still capable of progress. And that is why Jacob offered Ben a choice, to highlight that humans can choose their destiny.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK. I think I've got a handle on what I mean by the central question.
I this weeks clip show with commentary by Abrams and Lindelof, they say "These people are here for a reason". If they end the show without providing a satisfying answer about what that reason is, I, for one, am going to be seriously pissed off. They also comment that the characters lives are intertwined in ways they don't fully understand. The main characters stories and the way they fit together need to be brought to some sort of denouement. If they do those to things, I have no problem if they leave some nagging loose ends but they absolutely must do those two things.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good points Rabbit, and I think the show took the first steps to answering those questions by introducing Jacob and his interactions with them.
camus, I had a similar interpretation, but more along the lines of the Island as a metaphor for heaven, paradise, the garden of Eden. And that Jacob has faith that humanity is worthy of this place, and Esau believes that humans are irredeemable and will always corrupt and destroy. Yes, choosing their own path is extremely important to Jacob, because he believes they can choose the proper path, like Rose and Bernard have done. They are at peace. I thought their invitation to Juliet was interesting since she is the one that blew up the bomb in the end.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I this weeks clip show with commentary by Abrams and Lindelof, they say "These people are here for a reason".
Yeah, I think they pretty much answered that question with this episode: all of these people are here because it's part of Jacob and Esau's game. Hopefully we'll get more specific than that but even by itself, that does a lot to ease my concerns of silly self-fulfilling circular prophesies.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Strider: No one has mentioned the most important part of this past week's episode. The actor who plays Jacob is one of the carpet pissers from The Big Lebowski!
"We know which Lebowski you are Lebowski....you're not dealing with morons here"
I didn't see that movie, but I did recognize him as the junkie/convict husband of Rita in the show Dexter. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen him play a non-bully before.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yeah, I think they pretty much answered that question with this episode: all of these people are here because it's part of Jacob and Esau's game.
I don't consider that an answer to the question. It's a start, a hint at what form the answer will take -- but it isn't an answer.
[ May 14, 2009, 04:06 PM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Man, I love being caught up on Lost. I haven't been watching the show week by week; my wife and I caught up on the entire season just recently in preparation for the finale. That's the only way I can watch Lost; it's too good at drawing me in and compelling me to watch the next episode. But I've been avidly following this thread and am glad I can finally contribute to it. I've shamelessly cannibalized these thoughts on the finale from my blog since I thought they were worth posting here.
I really like the Jacob flashbacks--they add another layer to the mythology of the show and provide a sense that there's a bigger plan underlying all of the crazy coincidences that brought the Losties to the island. Though I will say, I was surprised to learn that Jacob was an actual person. I figured he was a manifestation of the spirit of the island or some such.
I had one spot-on prediction for this episode, which was that it was Locke (well, his body) in the box. I didn't actually expect to be right--after all, they used that as the big surprise last season--but I couldn't imagine what else it would be. It casts a sinister light over everything that came earlier this season. Who--or what--is walking around in Locke's skin? Evidently it's the same being as Jacob's enemy from the teaser. (I've been internally calling him Esau too--looks like The Rabbit was thinking along the same lines.) My assumption is that he's a manifestation of the smoke monster, and that the other walking dead have all been him too.
This season has accomplished something that I never thought would happen: it humanized Ben. The tables have turned; he is no longer the calculating manipulator, but instead the one being manipulated. The writers have painfully peeled back his inscrutable layers so that I feel like we finally have a glimpse of what really motivates him. Ben is still a despicable person, but he's an incredible character and I can't wait to see what the next season has in store for him.
Which is all to say that I love the present-day events of the finale. As for the adventures of Jack & co. in DHARMA times, I am less than thrilled. The idea of using a nuclear bomb to destroy the site of the Swan always seemed so preposterously stupid that I have a hard time imagining what Jack and the others--and the writers--are thinking. First of all, if there's a bunch of pent up energy wouldn't a bomb be more likely to release it than to destroy it? You can't destroy energy, at least not in any physics class that I took. And then, even if it saves their future selves, won't their present selves die in a horrible explosion? What makes them think that they'll somehow wake up in an alternate future? And if it's possible to create a new future, it will still be a future where they killed a bunch of people and buried the island in radioactive waste, even if they won't remember it.
Normally I'd rather argue about large-scale motivations, but I do have to nitpick one detail around the bomb. Faraday says they have to get it as close as possible to the energy. Really? It's a nuclear weapon, for goodness' sake! I think it can join horseshoes and hand grenades as something where "close" is good enough. I'd imagine it would level the better part of the island.
Anyway, the question remains: what did happen at the end, when the bomb apparently went off? I firmly subscribe to the "whatever happened, happened" theory of time travel, so I think it's obvious that what happened was, as the title suggests, the "incident" that we know occured in the already established timeline. The future has not been changed, and the Losties will still crash on the island in 2004. The more interesting question is, what happened to the DHARMA-time Losties that were at the Swan site? Surely they're alive, but I sort of wonder if the incident pushed them back to 2007. I can think of plenty of reasons why this shouldn't happen, but it would open up new narrative possibilities.
Oddly enough, the storyline I'm most interested in seeing resolved is Claire's. Given Kate's determination to rescue her, we can assume she's still alive. (And we never explicitly saw her die; she just inexplicably walked off into the jungle. And then turned up briefly with Christian in Jacob's cabin, which I still don't know what to make of.) Plus we have Desmond's as-yet-unfulfilled prophecy of her leaving the island on a helicopter. And what's up with the whole "raised by another" fate of Aaron?
I wonder what changes the new season will bring. Jacob is apparently dead. We know a war is coming; before it looked to be between Widmore and Ben, but maybe it is between Jacob (or his followers) and Esau. I'll just have to trust that the folks behind Lost know what they're doing and are ready to wrap things up in just seventeen more episodes.
Random other things that don't look like have been discussed here yet: - What was Jacob weaving at the beginning? Have we seen it anywhere? - I'm guessing the ship we saw was the Black Rock. Why did Jacob bring it there? - What's Illana's story? How did she know Jacob, and what happened to her face just before Jacob came to ask for her help? - Who is it that's been using Jacob's cabin? Maybe Claire, since that's where we last saw her? - It looked like Jacob brought Locke back to life after he fell from the building. Sort of ironic, since the big reveal of the episode was that Jacob DIDN'T bring Locke back to life when his body came back to the island.
Posts: 47 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:they are locked in an eternal struggle, and that's why they can never kill each other and why Jacob says "it only ends once, until then, it's all just progress" and Esau says, "why do you bring them here, all they ever do it pillage and destroy?"
Very Doctor Who...White Guardian vs. Black Guardian. Arguably, isn't the Devil/God struggle ultimately about chaos versus order as well?
I think it was Lindelof who said a supremely ridiculous thing quoted in the clip show: something to the effect of "it's a question of whether or not these characters have their futures predetermined, or whether they're all here for a reason!" How, exactly are those two things opposites? Having a reason, in that sense, is the same as having your future predetermined. Meaning that is foretold is purpose/reason, and the way he was speaking about it made it seemed predetermined. Sometimes I wonder if the writers really care that much about what they're saying.
Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:"I think it was Lindelof who said a supremely ridiculous thing quoted in the clip show: something to the effect of it's a question of whether or not these characters have their futures predetermined, or whether they're all here for a reason!" How, exactly are those two things opposites?
Considering that I have had several multi hour discussions with extremely intelligent people about whether purpose and predetermination were mutually exclusive, I have a hard time seeing this a ridiculous statement. I also can't give any cogent answer to your question in the amount of time I have to spend on the forum, so I'm sorry but I'm asking you trust me when I say this is not at all an idea that should be ridiculed. It was perhaps not worded in the clearest manner, but it isn't stupid.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I might go on a job interview, my reason for being there, and my purpose is to get that job. If I fail in my attempt then it wasn't predetermined that i get that job. purpose and determination are now at odds.
So it depends on how you're defining purpose, and whose purpose. if you define it in a particular way AND assume free will is an illusion, then purpose/reason are the same as determinism. Although, even reason and purpose can be interpreted differently and shouldn't necessarily be lumped together.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:They've also said they aren't going to answer all the questions and I'm fine with that as long as they answer the big under lying question. I'm not even sure how to phrase that question, I'll work on it. They also need to bring the stories of the main characters to some sort of resolution. [/QB]
I have to disagree.
Yes, LOST is a character-driven show, but it's also a mystery built on questions, large and small. When you read a mystery novel, you want to know what happens to the main characters, but even more importantly you want to know "who dunnit?" And once you find out the who did it, then all the events leading up to the reveal have to make sense. Characters must have acted consistently and rationally in light of the new information.
If the island is just a setting - -a maguffin, if you will -- then I daresay the writers have built it up way too much. I know at this point my wife and all our friends are much more interested in the island than we are in the Kate/Jack/Sawyer/Juliet quadrangle or whether Myles ever reconciles with his dad.
Several episodes in the early seasons were built around questions that now appear to be "forgotten", such as:
How did Radzynski and Kelvin Inman survive the Purge?
Who is coordinating the food drops in 2004?
Does Walt have special powers? Why did the Others want to study him? What did they learn? Why does the Island heal some people and not others?
What causes the whispers/voices in the jungle?
Why was Libby in the mental institution with Hurley?
Why did Eloise Hawking send both Desmond and her son back to the island? etc. etc.
In the end, I feel all these questions have to be answered or the story simply won't hang together at all.
Posts: 187 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The way Lindelof worded it, he indicated that pretetermination was mutually exclusive to having a "reason" for being on the Island. I don't see how that can be so. I also hold with the belief that having meaning is NOT necessarily mutually exclusive with there being no predeterminism.
And I've now typed two sentences that I cannot parse on re-reading.
So I will just say that when I heard Lindelof say what he said during the clip show, I laughed at the assumption that the two things were mutually exclusive. Having had many of my own multi-hour discussions with extremely intelligent people about whether purpose and predetermination are mutually exclusive, I'll just say that I don't think that how Lindelof worded the two statements was very useful or helpful, and leave it at that. Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:They've also said they aren't going to answer all the questions and I'm fine with that as long as they answer the big under lying question. I'm not even sure how to phrase that question, I'll work on it. They also need to bring the stories of the main characters to some sort of resolution.
I have to disagree.
Yes, LOST is a character-driven show, but it's also a mystery built on questions, large and small. When you read a mystery novel, you want to know what happens to the main characters, but even more importantly you want to know "who dunnit?" And once you find out the who did it, then all the events leading up to the reveal have to make sense. Characters must have acted consistently and rationally in light of the new information. [/QB]
I don't see that as a disagreement at all. Recognize I was responding to Tresopax's statement
quote:Of course, this is pretty much all random speculation. At this point, the writers could pretty much decide to do anything. They could have even ended the series right then, and left the rest up to our imaginations.
And said that would be completely utterly unacceptable. And then to Lisa's post saying the writers have said they aren't going to answer particular questions.
This is the kind of mystery where I think certain types of questions can remain unanswered and others aren't really important for me to really care.
For example, you ask how
quote:How did Radzynski and Kelvin Inman survive the Purge?
Strider presents a pretty simple answer that is obvious enough that it doesn't really need an explanation. The Dharma initiative people were killed with gas, the hatch was sealed and locked. What's the question?
To me the more interesting questions are
1) Who made the food drops for the hatch after the Dharma initiative on the island was wiped out?
2) Why didn't the Others try to take over the Swan station? Didn't they know about it? Was it too well fortified? Perhaps they just didn't want to have to take on the responsibility to keep pushing the button or maybe Jacob told them to leave it alone. But in the grand scheme of things, I could live a full and happy life never knowing the answer to this one.
On a related note, now that we've seen what Radzinsky is like, can you imagine being locked up in the hatch with him for years? That guy is such an incredible jerk he's virtually a psychopath.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kelvin is the other guy in the Hatch when Desmond shows up on the Island. We know Radzinsky survives because Kelvin tells Desmond Radzisnky was with him in the hatch until he blew his own head off. Radzinsky is also the guy who started drawing the blast door map.
Kelvin also shows up in one of Sayid's flashbacks. He was a US military dude.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Jacob believes that the numbers can change, that humans (the variables) can change their destiny while the other guy, Esau, feels otherwise. Therefore, Jacob is trying to prove Esau wrong by bringing people to the island to change the outcome, to show that humans are still capable of progress. And that is why Jacob offered Ben a choice, to highlight that humans can choose their destiny.
I think this is probably the best explanation - especially given the previous emphasis on constants and variables. But how can the show demonstrate that progress has been made? I suspect Season 6 will have to do that - unless it intends to conclude that Jacob was wrong.
quote:On a related note, now that we've seen what Radzinsky is like, can you imagine being locked up in the hatch with him for years? That guy is such an incredible jerk he's virtually a psychopath.
I'm curious to know whether he changes after the incident. I suspect one of two outcomes: 1) After the incident he realizes it was all his fault and dedicates his life to fixing what he did. This would explain why he stays in the hatch to push the button. 2) After the incident, he remains just as much of a jerk who is still single-mindedly obsessed with his researc at the Swan. So he takes the job pushing the button intending to find out a way to resume his research plan. That could be why he edits out the portion of the orientation video that says the computer should be used only for entering the numbers and not for communication with the outside world. It also may explain why the Dharma folks needed to monitor the Swan from the Pearl. Perhaps they didn't trust Radzinsky not to cause another incident.
quote:Normally I'd rather argue about large-scale motivations, but I do have to nitpick one detail around the bomb. Faraday says they have to get it as close as possible to the energy. Really? It's a nuclear weapon, for goodness' sake! I think it can join horseshoes and hand grenades as something where "close" is good enough. I'd imagine it would level the better part of the island.
Maybe the reason is that Daniel knew the magnetic anomaly would absorb or contain much of the explosion and radiation. Perhaps the nuclear explosion instantly breached the pocket of energy and was contained by the resulting powerful implosion. And perhaps time travel is involved. We don't really know much about how any of that works, so I think the show can reasonably claim that detonating a nuclear bomb right next to the pocket of energy would not destroy the island.
Part of the hatch was shown to be sealed off by concrete and market as "Quarantine". Maybe that part is radioactive, but nothing else was?
Is it also possible that Ben's cancer could be linked to some lingering radiation on the island?
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Strider: Kelvin is the other guy in the Hatch when Desmond shows up on the Island. We know Radzinsky survives because Kelvin tells Desmond Radzisnky was with him in the hatch until he blew his own head off. Radzinsky is also the guy who started drawing the blast door map.
Kelvin also shows up in one of Sayid's flashbacks. He was a US military dude.
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: 1) Who made the food drops for the hatch after the Dharma initiative on the island was wiped out?
This one has been bothering me too, but I think that it's not so much a question as an unresolved plot thread. I assume it is the DHARMA Initiative making the food drops; after all, it's all DHARMA food. More important is the fact that it implies that DHARMA is still an active organization in 2004 and still has access to the island. (Or did, before it moved.) I'm willing to accept all this at face value as long as the 2004+ DHARMA initiative is a player next season.
Posts: 47 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why didn't the Others try to take over the Swan station? Didn't they know about it? Was it too well fortified? Perhaps they just didn't want to have to take on the responsibility to keep pushing the button or maybe Jacob told them to leave it alone. But in the grand scheme of things, I could live a full and happy life never knowing the answer to this one.
To me, that's a pretty big plot hole. Supposedly (according to Eloise Hawking, at least), pushing the button is very important. She refers to it as "saving the world".
I find it hard to swallow that the Others--who seem wholeheartedly bent on protecting the island even to the point of death-- are just going to leave it up to a couple of rogue Dharma scientists keep pushing that button.
Perhaps the Others didn't know about Swan Hatch? But how could they not -- they knew about Pearl Hatch, didn't they?
Posts: 187 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find it interesting that no one is focusing all that much on the point Camus raised above.
To me, that is the most interesting.
If you all remember our speculations in the early seasons - we all thought that these people were brought here fore a reason. To make amends. Jinn had to fix problems in his life. Charlie, John, Jack, Kate, Sawyer - they were all brought together to make amends. To change and grow.
As the story zoomed out, we lost sight of that. But the writers seem to be steering us back there.
The rivalry between Jacob and Esau is about this. I kind of don't like the name Esau for this reason. Because I think Esau has good intentions - he is inclined to protect the Island and its purity. Jacob believes that the Island is a tremendous power and can be used for good - even if that means trusting humanity and their fickle sense of morality.
This is not just another layer (Losties + Dharma + Others + Widmore) - this is the layer that ties the ENTIRE Series together. An island of raw power - to be the ultimate expression of who you are.
It is either a weapon for death and destruction - energies waiting to be harnessed - or an exquisite paradise ala Bernard and Rose.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: I kind of don't like the name Esau for this reason. Because I think Esau has good intentions - he is inclined to protect the Island and its purity.
I think Esau was named after the Biblical Esau.
Posts: 127 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Im aware. But the biblical Esau wasn't a very good person. This rivalry is rooted in a difference in opinion. I think they both have good intentions.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
So far the show's Esau's only goal was to kill Jacob. That doesn't strike me as the greatest of intentions (at least as far as we know so far). I'm perfectly fine with the name Esau until we learn different (or learn, say, his real name).
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: I find it interesting that no one is focusing all that much on the point Camus raised above.
To me, that is the most interesting.
If you all remember our speculations in the early seasons - we all thought that these people were brought here fore a reason. To make amends. Jinn had to fix problems in his life. Charlie, John, Jack, Kate, Sawyer - they were all brought together to make amends. To change and grow.
As the story zoomed out, we lost sight of that. But the writers seem to be steering us back there.
Hey Armoth, quick request, can you quote what you're talking about when you reference someone's post? Particularly if it's been a while. I had to go scour.
Here's what he said:
quote:I interpreted this exchange as being about humanity and the inevitable end of the world as predicted by the Valenzetti Equation and their differing attitudes towards it.
Jacob believes that the numbers can change, that humans (the variables) can change their destiny while the other guy, Esau, feels otherwise. Therefore, Jacob is trying to prove Esau wrong by bringing people to the island to change the outcome, to show that humans are still capable of progress. And that is why Jacob offered Ben a choice, to highlight that humans can choose their destiny.
I actually did reply with this:
quote:camus, I had a similar interpretation, but more along the lines of the Island as a metaphor for heaven, paradise, the garden of Eden. And that Jacob has faith that humanity is worthy of this place, and Esau believes that humans are irredeemable and will always corrupt and destroy. Yes, choosing their own path is extremely important to Jacob, because he believes they can choose the proper path, like Rose and Bernard have done. They are at peace. I thought their invitation to Juliet was interesting since she is the one that blew up the bomb in the end.
but now that i'm reading over his post again, i realize I interpreted wrong. For some reason i first read that as camus talking about a metaphorical connection to the numbers in the valenzetti equation, and didn't pay attention to the literal one. i'm glad you pointed it out, because I think that's really spot on. And I see now that my response is still accurate, but mine is now the metaphorical connection to what's actually taking place. Or maybe a bit of both...like psychology and neuroscience. two ways of describing the same thing.
As for Esau, I think the name is perfectly reasonable to use in the place of a real name if and when we ever get one. Sure there are parallels with god/devil, good/evil, yin/yang, etc...none of them are going to be perfect descriptions. But since there are also parallels with the Jacob and Esau story, and the one is already called Jacob, it's a great placeholder name, understanding the relationship isn't "exactly" Jacob and Esau. works better than "antijacob" or "jacob's enemy" i think.
But I would also argue that the difference is much more than intentions. I agree with what Raymond said. protecting the Island doesn't automatically make you good or say anything about your motives. And murder doesn't endear me to you. We also don't know how constrained Esau is while acting as the smoke monster.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like to think that heaven doesn't have quite so many smoke monsters.
And before anyone suggests that smoke monsters are some kind of human abberation- something that can be corrupted by human interference doesn't sound like heaven, either. Eden, maybe. But I find I resist on a very basic level the idea that the island is really good and pure and it's just the presence of people that makes it otherwise. Everything I've seen suggests the island and those it serves it are like a capricious child, right down to the perfect willingness to pull the wings off of butterfiles.
And while the smoke monster kills people like Ecko and waves through people like Ben, I'm not buying it as puninshment of the wicked, either.
I suspect that either Jacob or Esau is much more closely linked to the island than we suspect- that they're more like the human personification of the island. Maybe both. Certainly with "Locke" apparently needing a surrogate to kill Jacob- and Alex showing up to order Ben to follow "Locke"'s orders- I'm getting a sense of Esau as personification of the smoke monster.
My suspicion is that a lot of the last season is going to be- there have been huge changes, can we figure out which are the result of Jacob's murder and which are the result of the atom bomb hitting the energy pocket?
At least the surge in magnetism before the bomb went off seems to suggest that the bomb was not, in fact, the cause of the pocket's effect or release in the first place.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
An earlier post mentioned that the statue was the Egyptian god Anubis. I thought so at first, but there were a couple moments in the finale where we caught a glimpse of the statue's head. One was the cloth found at Jacob's cabin, which showed that the statue's head was not the Anubis jackal, but a crocodile. The Egyptian god with the head of a crocodile is Sobek, who is a creator god with a somewhat ambiguous nature. Some Egyptians believed he was "a repairer of evil that had been done, rather than a force for good in itself". Another interesting fact is "he was also said to call on suitable gods and goddesses required for protecting people". The ankh in his hands represents his power to undo evil and cure ills.
Richard Alpert responds to the question "What lies in the shadow of the statue" by saying "he who will save (or protect) us all". So how will Jacob save or protect us all? Perhaps by calling to the island the suitable heroes. This is why in the finale he touches the main characters. When the nemesis has Jacob killed, he believes he has won their age-old struggle, but Jacob's last words "They're coming" enrage the nemesis. I think "They're coming" refers to Jack and the rest who are returning to 2007 to ultimately defeat Jacob's nemesis. Who now happens to have the form of John Locke. Season 6 will be awesome!
posted
We've spoken about possible Egyptian God's before, and another one floated about was Taweret. Taweret has the benefit of the connection to fertility and pregnancy. While the body shape is more Sobek or Anibus like, the top of the head is most similar to the Taweret.
I think your interpretation of Jacob/Esau is on the right track.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It has been confirmed to be a statue of Taweret.
From the link:
quote:The statue was confirmed by ABC to depict Taweret, and has since been confirmed again by the solution to a puzzle in the May 2009 issue of Wired magazine, which was edited by Lost co-creator J.J. Abrams.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
That guy is such an incredible jerk he's virtually a psychopath.
