...or stop telling them they suck.

I don't usually post about these things, but this article was just too ripe to pass up:

Nearly 2 Million Teens Depressed, Government Urges Screening for All

There are some interesting claims (such as 6 percent of all kids are depressed), but the best are these:

Because depression is so common, "you will miss a lot if you only screen high-risk groups," said Dr. Ned Calonge, task force chairman and chief medical officer for Colorado's Department of Public Health and Environment.

You'll probably miss a lot if you only screen high-risk groups for cancer too, but that doesn't mean we should mandate cancer screening for every American

The group recommends research-tested screening tests even for kids without symptoms.

Now they kids who aren't depressed are depressed, we (and probably they) just haven't realized it yet.

Instead of telling them they have a condition and prescribing drugs or sticking them in psycho-therapy, maybe we could just stop propogating the "You Suck" Culture. Today's kids are constantly told they're all the same and told they're supposed to feel good for being good at something. The natural progression of humanity is to better itself. Is it any surprise they're depressed? They're made to feel guilty for existing.

The jocks are jerks for being athletic. The nerds/geeks are uncool for being smart. The attractive people are shallow for being good looking. The rebels are assholes for not seeking social acceptance. The passionate people aren't "well rounded" for not liking everything. The normal people are fake for being nice.

Any direction kids turn, they're chastised. I'd be depressed too. Luckily, I was a rebel, and was taught by my father to make the most important statement a man can make:

I think.

The Midside: S5E10 He’s Our You

We’ve officially hit double digits. It’s hard to believe. The second to last season of the greatest television show ever is entering its tail end. I’m writing my tenth column of the season. It’s amazing how quickly things pile up, and how fast time flies. And now I’m having the strange urge to quote Ferris Bueller. Since I hate that movie and it’s most famous quote, I’m going to move on quickly.

(Although, I will admit to utilizing “Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?” especially when teaching. That usage is more an homage to Ben Stein though.)

When you reach this point in a season, story, movie, book, etc, you should probably have a good idea of what you think about most things. I definitely do. You’ve read through a lot of my musing so far this season (and hopefully beforehand), so you probably understand where I’m coming from at this point. Thus, you should be able to understand my “beginning conclusions” that I’ll be stating here.

What are “beginning conclusions?” I am referring to the very early conclusions you can make about something (a show, a book, a person, a situation). I don’t mean predicting what’s going to happen. I don’t mean saying what the definitive vision of a character is. I mean your opinions and feelings on the issue. This stage of “beginning conclusions” is why endings to stories are so difficult to achieve, especially when early parts of the story are so powerful. A perfect example is The Matrix Trilogy. The first movie was so powerful that people were not willing to accept the ending of the third and final movie because they made their “beginning conclusions” before they even saw the second movie.

It’s important to note that the skill of a writer can be partially determined by how he handles this issue. What the writers of LOST have been able to do since the first episode is twist our “beginning conclusions.” They nailed me on it big time in this episode, which is why it’s the perfect time to talk about this concept.

I admit I formed some conclusions early on in the series. I hope they won’t hinder me from enjoying the conclusion of this season and the show. (But some conclusions are necessary to formed early as they are implications of your values.) In this edition of The Midside, I’ll talk about a two of the more important ones: the romantic tensions of LOST and the failings of Benjamin Linus.

BE THERE AND BE SQUARE ANYWAY

One of the things I’ve been thinking a lot about lately is the gigantic romantic mess between Sawyer, Juliet, Kate, and Jack that has come to be known as “The Square.” And you know what? I’m not so sure I want Sawyer and Kate to get back together anymore. I’m not even sure I want the lot of them to travel Back to the Future Marty McFly style. Sure, I don’t like Juliet, but do you know who does? Sawyer. For the first time in his life, he has a life. No, he doesn’t have what most people, like Jack or Ben or probably even you, would call a life, but he has what he wants. He has a nice little house. No one bothers him at home. He has a position where he leads and people listen to his expertise. He has a woman he loves who loves him back. What more could he want? Nothing and he said as much to Juliet.

So why, as fan’s of the character, should we want his life to be destroyed for some overly-romantic reunion with Kate? Is it because they are more right for each other and thus his life will be even better? To be fair, Juliet is a bit down on herself, evidenced by her comment “So it’s over.” Sawyer and Kate are equals. But if we take this perspective, we are assuming the role of the omniscient reader. And in the case of who’s the better match personality wise for Sawyer, we are omniscient and know Kate is the answer. However, situationally, could he find himself a better life and relationship than what he has with Juliet? I don’t think so, but we really don’t know, because, in that instant we aren’t omniscient.

What we do know, however, is that the life with Juliet has a definite and immediate end. The incident and the purge are coming. But don’t all over our lives have a definite end? Maybe the immediate part isn’t true, but would we strive for anything if we just focused on the fact that it would end? Besides, with Sayid’s shooting of Harry Potter, we don’t even really know if the purge is going to happen anymore. Apply this idea to your own life. Are you living, striving for some hypothetical possible perfect romance or are you trying to make the best life you can and find the person that best gives you that? Yes, I am defining the question through what the person does for you, because that’s what you should pick on. Besides, we’re talking about Sawyer. It’s every man for himself. That phrase means take care of you first. So where do I stand on the Sawyer and Juliet life? I’m for it for the reasons stated above. All opposed? That’s what I thought.

Of course, now we have to flip the square around and consider the other half of it, Jack and Kate. I’ve been opposed to this relationship from day one and I’m still opposed to it because neither of them will ever find happiness in it. However, to a certain extent they deserve each other. Let’s start with Jack. My thoughts on his general personality don’t have to be repeated. Let’s turn to “Something Nice Back Home.” His self hatred was so strong it manifested in his berating Kate. Does he really deserve a woman who’s going to be committed and loyal to him? If he finds her, all he’s going to do is bring her down to his level. Take his interactions with Juliet. Say what you will about her (and believe me, I do), but she has been much less annoying since committing to Sawyer. Around Sawyer, she carries the load for herself. Around Jack, she had to carry the load for two, because that’s what happens with someone like Jack who finds his self worth in other people, the other people have to carry his load for him. (Insert lame pregnancy metaphor or counterargument here.)

Likewise, Kate is in that middle ground, always running between her self esteem and self doubt. When she is feeling strong and secure, she runs to Sawyer “the only other person who just don’t fit in” (because, to a certain extent, we all feel like we just don’t fit in because none of us are the characters and types we’re considered to be by most people). When’s she’s feeling weak and doubting herself, she runs to Jack, the societal conception of a “good guy.” By going to Jack, she thinks she can be given self worth, and ironically she finds it there, because she soon realizes how much stronger she is than him, but it’s thanks to herself, not Jack. At that point, she runs back to Sawyer, and the cycle repeats itself because Sawyer scares the crap out of her.

You see, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, Kate is the perfect metaphor for what a lot of women in our society go through. They want to be strong. They want to be independent. However, when they see Sawyer, it’s a very scary thing. He looks at her in a way Jack doesn’t. He looks at her as that strong and independent woman. In other words, in Sawyer, Kate sees everything she’s ever wanted. We all say we want it, but have you ever actually been faced with getting what you want? If you don’t truly believe you deserve it, you might piss your pants. In Jack, she sees everything she’s ever been told she deserves, the doctor, the leader, the altruist. Thus, being with Jack is a lot easier for her than being with Sawyer. Notice how Kate has only ever wanted anything with Jack when she ran from Sawyer, but makes up reasons to hang around Sawyer like “Carte Blanche.”

Of course, it’s important to mention one more thing that complicates matters further: Kate’s father. In “What Kate Did,” we learned how Sawyer reminded Kate of her abusive douchebag father. The difficulty with someone like Sawyer who is straightforward and says what he wants is that, at first glance, he appears to be very similar to the douchebags of the world. This appearance confuses matters even further, especially when someone like Kate has an abusive and/or painful history with douchebags. Everybody may love a Italian/Irish/Jewish/Insert-Ethinicity-Here Guy/Girl (and t-shirts that proclaim it), but nobody loves a douchebag. (Sawyer’s similarity to those douchebags is why he became and was good at being a con artist. His dissimilarity from them is why he lived a tortured existence. See also: Dr. Gregory House, Captain Malcolm Reynolds, Captain Jack Sparrow)

Considering Kate as the perfect metaphor though, makes us more deeply consider the introduction of Juliet into the square, and consequentially realize the brilliance of that introduction. Juliet is always the other woman. The question is why. What does she lack or not understand? She does not have enough self worth to fervently pursue what she wants. To her, the world and other people’s desires are more important than her desires. Consider her conversation with Sawyer in this episode. She wondered to him if it was over when she very clearly didn’t want it to be. She was privileging everyone else’s lives over hers. They were so important they were going to take away what she wanted simply because they showed up and changed the dynamic. This perspective is dangerous because people are always showing up and changing the dynamic. In contrast, Sawyer responded by saying he would take care of it. Yes, everyone else was there, but that was just another variable, another constraint in the rhetorical situation, for him to deal with when trying to achieve what he wanted (because, as I said, the variables/constraints are always in flux). Thus, since Juliet is not being straight forward and up front, she must always wait for someone to come to her, and even then she may not get the entirety person. Maybe she’ll be married and get cheated on (as with Edmund Burke), maybe, conversely, she’ll be the mistress for someone else’s husband (as with Goodwin).

It’s also important to note that these personality and situation types are not necessarily limited to genders or one person. I can think of guys who are like Juliet. I can think of girls who are like Sawyer. Also, people might end up as one character in one situation and another in a different situation. Generally though, I think all four of the characters and the square are a brilliant metaphor for relationships in our society. The question you should ask yourself then is: Which character are you and how has it affected your life? (Me? I’m a complex guy, sweetheart.)

Of course, it’s important to mention that these characters are in the middle of a journey. Once again taking on the role of the omniscient reader, we can say what we think will happen and what the best pairings are. For instance, Sawyer’s journey is more complete than most of the other three characters because he faced his “Big Bad” in “The Brig” in Season Three. He is the more actualized well adjusted version of Sawyer, commonly referred to by the other characters as James. In the long run, I think Kate and Sawyer will end up together and are a strong pairing. They compliment and understand each other. Likewise, Juliet and Jack are a strong pairing, as when Juliet finally takes a leadership position, she can lead her relationship with Jack as well, who will then be secure enough with himself to be the doctor and nothing more. I believe Juliet will learn these things from Sawyer. However, I’m not sure Jack’s character will ever reach his actualized well adjusted form. I think he’ll end up dying, either in misguided self sacrifice or a tragic murder that is the consequence of his misguided beliefs throughout the series.

ALL ABOUT THE BENJAMIN

Any discussion of this episode without an acknowledgement of the shocking ending would be hopelessly inadequate. I’ll be the first to admit I didn’t see it coming. My friend Susan said it was obvious to her after Sayid said he realized what his purpose was. I wasn’t so lucky. I was distracted. Kitsis and Horowitz set me up well. I thought the ending of the episode was going to be Sayid beating up Uncle Rico (Ben’s father) before running off to join the Hostiles. When the van pulled up at the end, I was pretty sure I was right. After all, Uncle Rico drove a van in “The Man Behind the Curtain.” However, Jin stepped out of the van, and I wondered what the hell was going on. You see, Kitsis and Horowitz got me to react rather than think. As a writer, I should have understood they set up an expectation to distract me. I didn’t and that distraction, of course, ended with Sayid shooting Harry Potter, who collapsed in what we assume was his death.

To get the speculation out of the way, I don’t think Ben is permanently dead. My guess would be that the island is going to bring him back to life next episode. For one, we still don’t know how he ended up all bloody before getting on the Ajira flight (though it probably has to do with trying to kill Penny). For two, he seems inextricably tied up with the mysteries of the island. He seems to know whereas most characters don’t seem to know. Besides, Harry Potter could just not be dead for all we know. We’ve seen people get shot and not be dead on this show. Maybe he’s missing a kidney. Although, to be fair to the death side, next episode could be a Ben episode ending in his death the way several flashback episodes have in the past.

In general, this episode shows us how Ben is weaker than he portrays himself to be. There was a key line near the beginning which returns us to our discussion of who is “The Man Behind the Curtain”? Harry Potter asked Sayid if Richard Alpert sent him and then followed with “he’s your leader, right?” This line doesn’t confirm that Alpert is the leader, as Harry Potter doubts it, but it does grant more credence to the idea that he is. I’ve said since “The Man Behind the Curtain” that Alpert is the real leader. So where does this leave Ben?

In my mind there is little difference between Ben and Locke beyond the fact that Ben is a sociopath. Both have horrible relationships with their fathers. Both have self esteem issues. Both became leaders of the Others/Hostiles. How did they become leaders? Both experienced the same two series of events. First, Alpert approached them, Ben in the woods, Locke by handing him Sawyer’s personnel file. Second, they interacted with “Jacob.” Here’s where the father issues come into play. What if Alpert created Jacob as a way to provide a father figure to people who are looking for one, people with special abilities and/or talents that can aid Alpert’s agenda with the island? Note how Walt was taken and then let go. At the beginning of the series, Walt and Michael had an awful relationship. However, after Michael went crazy and saved Walt, their relationship improved. In other words, Walt was looking for a father figure and eventually found his real father. Is that why the Others let him go? He wasn’t useful anymore? Is that why the episode was called “Special”? On the same note, Locke has been told many times throughout the series that he is special. So, If Ben and Locke are similar in this instance, then Alpert has always been the leader of the Others/Hostiles and manipulated them using “Jacob.”

I have to bring up Christian here. Who is he? Is he Jacob? Is he the real leader of the island? His role in this series could destroy my whole fictional Jacob theory. His mere presence casts it all into doubt. However, consider this alternative. What if the two players are not Ben and Widmore, but Alpert and Christian. Maybe Christian showed up in the cabin to tell Locke to move the island because Alpert didn’t want him to move the island. Notice how he said he was speaking for Jacob. Was he using the same technique as Alpert, pretending to be speaking for a more powerful force? His name is Christian Shepherd. Considering all the religious imagery, does this show have a cynical edge towards religion? Jack at times seems like a destruction of the Jesus story technique. Likewise, now Locke has assumed the mantle of the Jesus character, and he is extremely weak.

Alternately, Christian could be under Alpert, or vice versa, and Widmore could be working against them. The only thing we know about the Widmore and Alpert relationship is that Widmore used to be an Other/Hostile. Widmore did say he was once the leader. Was he another father figure-less person manipulated by Alpert? He certainly doesn’t seem to be a person who is in need of a father figure anymore, although, if he is living for the island still, then the island is his father figure.

In the end, I think we’ll discover Ben doesn’t know nearly as much as he pretends. He has mastered the art of saying little and speaking enigmatically when he does. His answers can always be interpreted multiple ways and say little more than is necessary. He’ll end up being just another pawn in someone’s master plan, and we’ll find out he just felt the need to act more important because of his self esteem issues that are extremely apparent when we see him as Harry Potter.

FREDDY ADIEU

I know I didn’t really talk about the specifics of the episode this time, more the greater storyline and philosophical implications of them, but I still feel like it was a fair treatment of the material. I know a lot of people are probably upset the square has become such a large part of the mythology of the show, but it has, so we either have to address it or, I would argue, stop watching the show. Besides, there are greater issues tied up in it beyond “who’s doing who.” I believe I have touched on them this week (with the discussion of personality types in relationships) and last week (with the dichotomy of thinking and reacting). And the writers are doing all of this very intentionally and very subtly.

If you don’t believe me, consider what Uncle Rico said to Harry Potter while berating him: “I’ll tell you what to think.” Knowing what we know about the importance of thinking for yourself, and the writers’ agreement with that sentiment, we see how important it is that one of the few clearly bad characters in the show said such a line.

And if you still don’t believe me, well then, you know what to do:

Shut up, you’re wrong.

The Midside: S5E09 Namaste

This week, I’d thought I’d begin my column with repeated material from an old edition. Then, I’d put some small twist on it and exclaim: “See, it’s an all new column!” Yes, I took the idea from this season. I’m getting really sick of every episode starting with scenes from old episodes. I understand that they’re trying to make sure everyone is caught up, but if you don’t understand how to watch LOST at this point, why should the writers cater to you? We’re in Season Five. You have to watch every episode carefully, which means Tivo it, download it, watch it on ABC.com, or, for you old people out there who’ve just figured out how to use this new fangled thing called the “internet,” VHS it. I use to think I was crazy for watching each episode multiple times. I’m starting to understand that a lot of people do.

This week repeated a couple scenes: the pre-flash Ajira flight footage and the Sawyer and Kate reunion. The latter was so good they had to use it twice. The difference between last episode’s use of the footage and this episode’s use is this episode continued on to the next part of the reunion, the logistics of figuring out what to do with Jack, Kate, and Hurley. Likewise, the former footage was twisted by Frank’s perspective following his conversation with Jack. What I don’t understand is why the episode couldn’t just start in the cockpit with Frank. I think we’re all smart enough to be able understand what’s going on.

Regardless of this small nitpick, I am extremely happy to declare that LOST is back. Since The Life and Death of Jeremy Bentham, the show has returned to the high level of quality that it hasn’t reached since The Constant and Through The Looking Glass before then. Do I think these past three episodes have been as good as The Constant? No, because I have a feeling that when the series is done we’ll all look back at The Constant as one of the best, if not the best, episode of all. However, these episodes have been close, very close.

Maybe I’m jaded because this episode signals the return of Sawyer’s character that we haven’t seen since Every Man For Himself. Brian K. Vaughn must have decided to start writing characters again like he did in his graphic novel “Y The Last Man.” He penned an incredible scene this episode. The majority of my column will focus on my pure joy at that scene and what it means for the show. If you hate Sawyer, I suggest you stop reading. Although, if you hate Sawyer, I would wonder what about The Midside appeals to you at all.

SAWYER VS JACK: NEW SHERIFF IN TOWN

The main overture of this episode was the divide between Jack and Sawyer and the passing of the torch between them. Everything slowly added to the burden each character was carrying until it finally culminated in the best scene of the season so far when Jack came to visit Sawyer. Thankfully, the scene was essentially a beat down of Jack. The character seems to have seen his moment in the sun. However, I recognize that the writers may be twisting us. I will address the possibility of Jack’s return to power in my analysis of the awesome scene at the end of this section, but we have to build towards it like the episode did.

The first thing that is extremely important to note is that even though Sawyer is in a leadership position, which means other people are following him and living their lives according to what he says, he is still working in his self interest. He is still number one in his mind. In his home with Juliet, he explains his thought process to her: “I don't understand it anymore than you do, but they're here, and I gotta find a way bring 'em in before somebody else finds 'em and they screw up everything we got here.” He’s worried about Jack, Kate, and Hurley blowing their cover and thus getting them kicked out of the Dharma Initiative. Sawyer’s got a nice life going on at this point. He’s head of security. He’s respected and liked. He’s living with a hot and smart woman. Sure, I’m not a fan of Juliet, but there are a lot of good things about her, I guess.

For a lot of the people who hate Sawyer and like Jack, this statement by Sawyer is certainly a major problem. We’re taught that doing “good” or being “good at something” is putting other people’s interests ahead of your own and worrying about the societal “good.” Sawyer is concerned with the opposite, his own good and in the process of protecting his good, it improves life for others. Jack, Kate, and Hurley could’ve been camping in the jungle, but instead are now living in comfort with Dharma. Likewise, contrast this perspective, summed up with the phrase “every man himself,” with “live together, die alone.” The latter phrase sets the premise that if you want to live, you do it as a group, and if you try to be alone, you will die.

To begin to drive home the point, Vaughn wrote a scene with the new plane crash survivors that was extremely similar to the original “live together, die alone” speech in White Rabbit. Frank stood in the middle of the beach while wearing a tie and delivered a speech about what they all had to do to survive. Caesar immediately disagreed and came up with other ideas of what they should do. The delivery of the speech and the rebellion was supposed to bring us back to season one and the early Jack and Sawyer dynamic. It was a brilliant piece of writing on Vaughn’s part.

Sawyer then returned to pick up Jack, Kate, and Hurley. Two quotes show us that the mantle of power has officially been passed:

Kate: “So what are we supposed to do now?”
Jack: “I'm not sure yet.”
Van pulls up.
Hurley: “Sawyer's back!”

Symbolically, the van showing up is very powerful after Jack admits he doesn’t know, especially considering the pure joy that Hurley shows at Sawyer’s return. It’s like the answer literally showed up.

Jack: “What do you think?”
Kate: “I think we should listen to Sawyer.”
Hurley: “I vote for not camping.”
Sawyer: “Trust me. Do what I say and everything'll be fine.”

Jack looks for reassurance, because that’s what he always needs, and a vote in his favor and both of the people he’s with side with Sawyer. Of course, to a certain extent, you have to note the negative situation Jack was in here. Hurley and Kate are probably the two people on the show who like Sawyer the most. Why wouldn’t they side with him? It’s like a Survivor nightmare. You’re bound to be voted out. However, those two characters aren’t the only ones following Sawyer at this point. Juliet, Miles, Jin, and a whole bunch of Dharma listen to him. You could probably argue that the transition of power had already occurred before these lines, but these lines were definitely intended to drive the point home.

Most of the middle of the episode dealt with how Jack differs from Sawyer and how Jack is dealing with his new position. Several things stood out to me. First, Vaughn seemed to make it a point to drive home how unprepared Jack was for everything. Sawyer called him out on his suit not being “island wear.” Considering we, the audience, know he knew he would be returning, the critique does not speak well of him.

He also seemed pretty dazed and distant through much of the episode. It seemed as if all of this was too much for him to handle, so he shut down. Look at the way he reacted to becoming a workman. Say what you want about the old Jack, but he at least would have gotten indignant at what he would have seen as a slight. We don’t know who made him a workman (Sawyer or Juliet) or why (easy place to hide him or he isn’t skilled at anything besides medicine), but we do know he probably didn’t like it. Instead, he sat there and just sort of took. It was kind of tragic, actually.

Second, Jack is insistent upon calling James Sawyer. None of the other characters seem to be. It’s an interesting distinction. What makes it even more interesting is he tried to call him James but Phil chastised him: “But I wouldn't call him James. He hates it.” Even the Dharma flunky who used to play a comedian who annoyed Don Draper on Mad Men is telling Jack what not to do.

Finally, when Sawyer was talking to Phil in front of Sayid, he commanded: “Bring the man some damn food. We're not savages.” This line parallels Jack’s famous season one line: “We’re not savages, Kate, not yet.” The interesting difference is Jack’s use of the phrase “not yet.” Under Jack, they became savages with the way they treated Ben in the hatch closet. Under Sawyer, with Sayid locked up, they aren’t going to act like savages. Did Jack say “not yet” because he believed people would eventually degenerate into savages? If so, why does Sawyer have the positive view of humanity and Jack the negative? Wouldn’t we think the opposite is true?

After all this story was told, it exploded when Jack knocked on Sawyer’s door. I have to acknowledge how much the scene had to suck for Jack. He is no longer leader and both the women he wants are in love with Sawyer. Plus, he hates himself, so he doesn’t really have much to live for. How is he going to react when he finds out how involved his father is with everything on the island? How exactly is he not going to die in this show?

The pair starts talking and the parallels between this scene and the best scene of last season are apparent. Just like Ben slinking into Widmore’s bedroom, Jack has crawled into Sawyer’s living space. The scenes were also shot every similarly. Ben and Widmore’s faces were both half lit and half dark, Jack and Sawyer’s face were both half lit and dark. And that symbolism is the main crux of the scene: who do you agree with, Jack or Sawyer? Interestingly, Jack was seemingly mean to parallel Ben. This observation is especially appealing considering Jack is now basically aligned with him. Are Jack and Ben the bad guys? Has the transition towards the climax of the story begun?

Just like the Ben and Widmore scene, Jack was totally beat down when he tried to call Sawyer out similarly to how Widmore beat down Ben:

Jack: “So where do we go from here?”
Sawyer: “I'm working on it.”
Jack: “Really? Because it looked to me like you were reading a book.”
Sawyer: “I heard once Winston Churchill read a book every night, even during the blitz. He said it made him think better. That's how I like to run things. I think. I'm sure that doesn't mean that much to you because back when you were calling the shots, you pretty much just reacted. See, you didn't think, Jack. And as I recall, a lot of people ended up dead.”
Jack: “I got us off the island.”
Sawyer: “But here you are, right back where you started. So I'm gonna go back to reading my book. And I'm gonna think. Cause that's how I saved your ass today. And that's how I'm going to save Sayid's tomorrow. All you've gotta do is go home and get a good night's rest. Let me do what I do. Now ain't that a relief?”
Jack: “Yeah.”

This exchange features three interesting points:

1. Sawyer critiques Jack’s leadership skills by pointing out how many people died. Jack tries to defend himself by saying he got everyone off the island. Sawyer responds by saying that they’re back on the island now. This part of the exchange basically points out what I’ve said from day one: none of Jack’s plans have ever worked. This fact finally being acknowledged within the show is huge as it means Jack’s plans failing was an intentional piece of writing.

2. Jack responds that he is relieved he no longer has to lead. He is downtrodden and tired. This state of mind also harkens back to season one where Jack tried to convince himself he was the leader. Maybe he’s not the leader he or anyone thought he was. Does his not being the leader mean his character is a failure and the tragic hero? Maybe, but if he finds a sense of self worth over the rest of the series, I would argue no.

3. The most complex point in this scene was the amazing distinction between thinking and reaction. Sawyer thinks. Jack reacts. Notice how Jack has always dealt with issues. He cries. He yells. He doesn’t understand his emotions. He simply feels them. In contrast, Sawyer is a con man who is always in complete control of himself, making every movement intentionally. He knows what he feels and why he feels it. This dichotomy is extremely relevant to a book Sawyer once read: “The Fountainhead” by Ayn Rand. Here’s a key quote from the novel:

Howard Roark: “When you suspend your faculty of independent judgment, you suspend consciousness. To stop consciousness is to stop life.”

The quote is spoken by the novel’s main character, who Damon Lindelof explicitly compared Sawyer to. Extremely briefly, what defines humanity for Rand is our rational minds, our ability to think. Thus if you aren’t thinking, and thinking independently, you aren’t living. Consider how Jack’s reacting was coupled with death in this conversation. He doesn’t think and life quite literally stops. How can we not say that the writers favor Sawyer? Once again, every time I think they might disappoint me, they don’t.

I think (we now know how powerful of a statement that is) it’s important to pick apart this dichotomy of thinking vs. reacting. What distinguishes between the two? Don’t we all react? If so, how do you avoid reacting and start thinking? The main issue here is a matter of perspective. It’s making a decision to approach life from the perspective of thought. Let’s use Sawyer and Jack to contrast. In this scene, Sawyer was reading and Jack chastised him for it. What does Jack do when he is in charge? He immediately launches into the first plan that comes to his mind. The Others took Walt and said don’t cross the line? Let’s make an army!

Changing your perspective to thought makes you step back and say, “Ok, they took Walt and made the line, why? What will we do?” It also means that your reactions will be guided by the perspective. When you think, you know what’s important to you. That hierarchy of values guides your reactions. So, whereas all Jack has is his reactions, Sawyer has his values.

This hierarchy of values goes back to the beginning of the episode where what guides Sawyer is his self interest. It also goes back to my powerful statement of “I think.” Who thinks? I think. You can’t make that statement without talking about yourself first. If you value thought, you are going to value yourself and your self interest above all. What was guiding Sawyer’s decisions in this episode? Protecting the life he has. What was guiding Jack’s decisions throughout the series? His sense of inadequacy. Still, just because I agree with Sawyer and laid all of this stuff out for you beautifully doesn’t mean you like him, or that I’m even right about the writers. And that ambiguity was the last intriguing part of this scene.

Josh Holloway’s performance and the music at the tail end of the scene seemed very dark to me. I might just be acting paranoid due to past experiences where Sawyer-esque characters are treated like the villain or forced to change, but I’m not sure we’re supposed to be behind Sawyer as much as I am. Maybe the writers are setting up Sawyer for a fall of false pride or, still, the “ultimate sacrifice” for others when he has an epiphany that living for yourself is, of course, evil. Man, that story arc would make me so angry. However, I did ask several of my friends and they seem to think the ominous nature of the end of the scene was more supposed to symbolize Sawyer being powerful and having a strong sense of self worth.

Their answer helped alleviate my fears, and I wish I could share their perspective. Hopefully I’ll get there one day. Until then, Sawyer’s awkward wave to Kate to end the scene will just be too much angst for this man to handle.

FREDDY ADIEU

There’s not much else to talk about this episode. Actually there is, but I’d really like you to focus on the ideas I’ve already put forward here. As far as the rest of the important information, I’m going to include a list of questions I’d like the answers to. (And yes, very good, you could change all of these to when questions):

Why was Sayid in handcuffs?
How did Hurley get out of jail?
Where is Aaron (and how are he and Ji Yeon important)?
Why didn’t Sun flash to 1977 with everyone else?
Why is everyone still surprised when she lies even though she has been a liar since season one?
Am I the only one who doesn’t give a crap about Jin and Sun anymore because Sun is a lying deadbeat mother?
Can someone (Hawking, Desmond, Jacob) control time as a whole (see: the runway being built for the Ajira flight)?
Why didn’t I figure out that “We have to go back” was a double entendre concerning space and time earlier?
Why was there a need for a second unsuccessful Punisher movie?
Are the Hostiles and the Others really the same people or is that just a misconception of the main characters?
Is the actress playing Alana putting on an accent or was she putting on an accent in New Amsterdam?
Does being born on the island give you super strength (explaining how Ethan beat up Jack so easily in season one besides the fact that Jack is Jack)?
Where is Faraday? Although, this one probably is better as:
When is Faraday?
Who is John Galt? Although, the LOST version probably is:
When is John Galt?

And if you think you know the answer to any of these questions, well then, the odds are you need to hear:

Shut up, you’re wrong.