(Group 1: Exodus Part 2) Going Underground
+6 8 Votes
Rate it:
By jazprof
- (Group 1: Exodus Part 2) Going Underground
- Created: Aug 25, 2007
- Last updated: Aug 14, 2008
- After episode: 3.22: Through The Looking Glass
- Status: Current
- Flag this theory:
the final shot would represent a journey away from the surface—consciousness, sensory perception, the natural world—to what lies beneath—the unconscious, intuition, and supernatural.
— jazprof
There were a lot of confrontations in this episode between the Reason-Science-Knowledge camp and the Emotion-Faith-Intuition camp which culminated in the Man of Science/Faith conversation between Jack and John. There were two symbolic moments illustrating in what direction the show is taking that confrontation at the end of Season 1. One was Artzt blowing up, the other is the final shot looking down the ladder. Before the explosion the confrontations tend to show the reason side in charge. Artzt obviously is annoying in his Mr. Know-it-All attitude, though one can also tell this is the only way he ever figured out to try to make himself meaningful or important to others (not very successfully). So the least appealing representative of the RSK camp gets blown up. After that I seemed to notice that emotion, for good and ill, was becoming more dominant. And then the final shot would represent a journey away from the surface—consciousness, sensory perception, the natural world—to what lies beneath—the unconscious, intuition, and supernatural.
Before looking at the whole episode—there were some random details more related to mysteries that I wanted to raise:
- Dark Territory, Black Rock—has anything so far been given a “light” place name?
- Jin’s watch is replaced by a handcuff—the same thing? Think this has been raised before, but I’m convinced the watch is a GPS device.
- Kate is supposed to think she has dynamite in her backpack, and yet she runs with it.
OK, moving on to details about the entire episode illustrating that Reason/Emotion division:
- Claire emotional about dealing with the baby, the threat to the baby, Charlie trying to calm her down. Charlie asks Sayid for a gun—Sayid says he’s too emotionally involved.
- At the Black Rock—Hurley & Rousseau talk about how it got there: “How does this happen?” “Are you on the same island I am?”—the supernatural explanation. Artzt replies with the tsunami explanation.
- Danielle takes off and Locke says he will lead them back—paralleled—there is something similar about the two of them.
[Explosion]
- Sawyer bonds with Michael over “Redemption Song”
- Shannon: “It’s too much.” Sayid: “It won’t be too much if I carry it for you.”
- Jack advises thinking before acting; Locke responds that there is only one thing to do so no thinking required.
- Locke messing with Jack over lifting out the dynamite. Likening it to “Operation” and then saying “bzzzzz”—Jack really operates; Locke plays the game—reality vs. game.
- Rousseau shows up at camp pretending to be panicked about something, gets Charlie to leave, takes the baby.
- Charlie hits Sayid—claiming that if he had had a gun this wouldn’t have happened (which is actually not true).
- Argument over who will carry the dynamite—Jack wants to make a conscious decision, Locke says let fate decide, seems like fate won, but Jack later says he wasn’t going to let drawing straws decide something like that—However I think it is emotion that decided in the end (Jack’s love for Kate).
- Sawyer reading the notes to keep himself entertained. He is a reader of others’ stories—he needs to distract himself from his own story.
- Michael’s description of Sawyer—he is either a hero or he is trying to kill himself. To go back to the Giver/Taker conversation for a second—I think Sawyer is a giver, but it’s difficult to see at times because the giving doesn’t come completely from a positive place (and that’s our usual association with giving). Some of his giving comes from the fact that part of him does want to die. I think that division in his character between the hero and the child who thinks he should have died is really going to be played on in S4.
- Hurley’s description of what he thinks is in the hatch: TV dinners, TVs and cable, cell phones, clean socks, soap and twinkies. A lot of that description is relevant to the hatches generally. Locke says hope is in the hatch—the last thing in Pandora’s box—does this mean they should or shouldn’t have opened it?
- Smokie—Locke looks scared this time—was this the better route into the unconscious?
- Hurley’s FB—two things get Hurley onto the plane—one is money. He pays for the extra seat, he gives $1600 in cash to the guy with the scooter. The other is emotion and faith—he wants to get back for his Mom’s birthday. He asks the flight attendant to let him on “For the love of all that is good and holy.” She does—huge Hurley hug—the man gives good hug.
- Jack/Locke conversation—Jack’s focus is on whether people live or die. Locke says there is something more than survival. They’re both right.
- Sayid & Charlie confront Rousseau, earlier Charlie calls her an animal. Now he says she’s pathetic. Pathetic actually means to arouse sympathy—which Charlie doesn’t have for her, Sayid does. Sayid gets the baby back through sympathy/empathy not through force.
A final question for you guys—mind if we move Group 1 from Friday to Saturday?
And in honor of Michael and Sawyer bonding over Bob Marley, I leave you with this (rip Joe Strummer): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRwmZ2bp_B0
Key episodes
| # | Title | Aired | Central character | Theories |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.24 | Exodus: Part 2 | 5-25-2005 | Charlie | 130 |
Nice interpretation of the episode jaz.
Hurley; I love that big lug. Hurely’s struggle seems to be getting rid of this impending sense of doom. He is (or was) always waiting for the other shoe to drop.
I wonder what direction his story will take now that he has killed someone. At least it was in defense of his friends and not in cold blood like Sawyer’s last kill.
Jaz, perhaps “implosion” would be more accurate? First they grapple with their surroundings (man vs. nature) and then others (man vs. man) and then dive into themselves (man vs. himself).
Hope you had a nice dinner!
great thougths. moving the group to saturday would help me get to watch the episode prior to the posting. but thats just me. great thoughts JP
Hey LE, are you referring to the LOST being moved to Fridays rumor? I think that was debunked by the producers. Not that it would bother me if it did though.
Seriously though. Imagine coming from a civilized existence and being thrust into a situation like our losties.
Most of us would be standing in a puddle of our own you-know-what with a snot bubble forming in a nostril.
Arzty fartsy blows up and it’s par for the course for our beloved losties.
In the real world, someone would have lost it by now. My bet would be on Sullivan going postal.
hey sham, I like the outlining of the conflicts. I did have a nice dinner, thanks. And LE was referring, I think, to me asking if we could move the group 1 posts to saturdays (and then he can watch the group1 eps on Friday night—not the first-run stuff).
Ahhhh, understood jaz. You are the ying to my yang.
ahhh, thanks sham-a-lama :-)
My name seems to be going through a metamorphosis of sorts.
Excellent post and discussion. I don’t really have anything to add, but I do think these episodes were meant to help us get a handle on the fundamental conflicts of the show.
Jaz I liked point 10 a lot. Would the world have been a better place if the box hadn’t been opened? A world with everything good and no evil but also no hope? Aren’t we bound to open the box?
I guess what I was wondering mrs. is by opening the box did they lose hope? I think in Pandora’s Box—all the evils get loosed on the world from the box, but they manage to close it in time to hold on to hope. I don’t know how the symbol’s working there.
I think my favourite part of this episdoe was Hurley’s flashback. I liked the way he never gave up (hmmm hope?).
I don’t think we’re forced to open the box, I just don’t think humanity can keep itself from opening the box. It’s the whole Adam and Eve eating the apple dilemna. They’re humanity makes any other decision basically impossible. So question, has jack eaten the apple by making the call?
isn’t hope independent of the negative events. Isn’t hope faith that the future will be better. Some have it, Hurley, some don’t, Locke. Isn’t it interesting that Locke, the supposed man of faith, has no faith beyond the island.
That’s an interesting distinction between Hurley and Locke. And you’re right it’s very similar to Adam & Eve. Your question about Jack eating the apple—if Kate turns out to be the DA and made it possible for him to get the phone by telling him about Naomi—that would make her Eve? (Yuck, I hate that “woman=original sin” stuff; but I still like Kate with a bigger role that gives the romance a real spin as to what it’s all meant.)
Jaz: I’m only going on memory, but aren’t the numbers flashed before Hurley - like everywhere - before he got on the plane? If so, I took that as a warning to him - to not get on the plane. I always felt Hurley’s coming to the island was not supposed to happen. He doesn’t have the same kind of past filled with sin like many other of the Losties. I just can’t reconcile what his purpose might be.
Regarding the rest of your post, great summary. I thought Artz’s only purpose was to explain how the Black Rock came to be so far inland. After that, there was no need for his character.
Also, what about all the supposed shouting about “destroying the temple” when Kate and Jack are trying to save Locke from being dragged into the Cerebus Vent?
Stip, you are right—the numbers do flash, and when he uses money to make his way onto the flight I thought, well that’s clear that he shouldn’t have gotten on, ‘cause the money is so tainted by bad luck. But then the hug and what he says to the woman swayed me a bit more the other way. Not sure.
Do you think Artz’s explanation is supposed to hold true? Or do you think he might have been wrong? The way his character was treated I thought he might have been meant there to show the inadequacy of the scientific answer. And I forgot to mention something I noticed—this may mean nothing—but there were some skeletons in manacles on the ship, but not that many. If it was a slave ship there would have been many more so that seems to imply the rest got off—why did they leave some behind? OR did the slaves get free and wind up manacling some of the people who had enslaved them?
In the version I watched on TV links, I could hear none of that shouting about destroying the temple—I don’t know why it was different. BTW does anyone have any other ideas about how to watch ‘cause TV links often cuts out on me, or stops working about half way through.
Comprehensive and insightful - someone posted a theory din’t they about the ‘blowing up the temple bit’ but I can’t remember who - like the bit about the watch being GPS gadget.
Jaz: manacled skeletons: if the ship’s hold was full of slaves and they crashed on the island, possibly Magnus Hanso freed them to help with whatever he was searching for? Why were some left imprisoned? Maybe they were the real nasty ones, the ones that wouldn’t behave.
Have you nioticed that the show is going farther back in time as it progresses? We’ve gone all the way back to when Ben was born. I wonder if we’ll get a glimpse of what really happened to the crew of the Black Rock.
Something tells me the ship’s name is NOT coincidental.
Jaz…..regarding Kate=Eve
I think the story of Delilah is also possible.
I suppose we are getting ahead of ourselves with poor Kate….but heres an interesting description of the story of Delilah,if your’e interested
http://www.womeninthebible.net/BIBLE-1.7.htm
Jaz: best method for me was to buy the DVD’s. The additional comments are very insightful - as to director’s intent, style, etc - right up your alley.
Back to Danielle a moment, something Kat said: “if that had happened to Claire, I doubt she would have gone 16 years with no attempt to find Alex. Also, how’d they know to name her Alex anyway?”
I’m suggesting that Alex was not actually stolen from Danielle. What if maybe it was a sacrifice (like Locke was asked to kill his father) she was asked to make for the island?
Maybe Ben asked her to give up her baby thus how she knows him (“he’ll lie…a long time”) and why she elbow whomps him in the S3 finale (one of my favs scenes). She’s been remorseful for 16yrs and when Jack came to Danielle asking for help, maybe they made a deal: Hypothetical exchange Jack to Danielle: “Ben’s been lying to you all these years, help me blow up the others and I’ll reunite you with Alex.”
vat u tink?
kat & Stip—good question and speculation!
Stip, that would create an interesting sort of mirror image of sons killing off fathers, mothers giving up their daughters. (Although in the case of Boone—it is more like a father killing off a son—that’s an interesting difference.) What do you think the lie would have been—what could Danielle have been promised?
elbow whomp—elbow’s the strongest part of the body to hit someone with—that’s gotta hurt!
It would have to be something stronger than primordality for a mother to give up her child. The only thing that makes sense to me is a religious fanaticism. An evil one. It would have to be somewhat irrational to overcome what is one of strongest forces in nature.
We’ve seen the Others practicing strange customs - could they possibly relate back to the ancients and the Temple? What kind of hoo doo voo doo do they worship?
That last line just made me think of a tangent:
“To be is to do” - Immanual Kant
“To do is to Be” - Socrates
“Do Be Do Be Do Be Do” - Frank Sinatra
Stip tosses laptop back to Jazzie.
“Do do that voo doo that you do so well” - Cole Porter
Touche, d’Artagnon!
“a touch, a touch, I do confess”
reminded of Sham’s video—you get me Stip, :-)
Is your book available on Amazon.com?
Stip, did you mean the book I’m working on right now—I’m writing a chapter in a book that’s edited by someone else. The way academic publishing goes it’ll be a while before that’s out. I have articles in a couple of books that are available on Amazon, but they are really expensive—so more the sort of thing I’d recommend finding in a library. And then my other stuff is all in journals. Not sure how best to get the info to you. I’d like to read your stuff too. Any suggestions?
Good morning, friends
so jaz: you’re a writer?
Heya PG—I’m a college prof so I’ve done some academic writing, yeah.
dunno Jaz. I’ll think of something. We all respect each other’s privacy so no need to push it and do something web-foolish.
I think I’ve finally pinned you down: martial arts enthusiast, highly intelligent, likes to wear a suit ;-) computer literate, somewhat agreeable with alternate realities…I say you are secretly Trinity from the Matrix. Shamballa is Jet Black and Kat is Faye Valentine.
Thanks Kat, but here, in this realm, we’re all unique individuals. I think we could find a way to write ourselves into the show somehow. Now wouldn’t THAT be cool?
Jaz: the reason I asked is I remember you saying once you changed the picture in your profile from “the one on the book jacket” which led me to assume you’ve been published.
I’m still trying to establish contacts to becoming a published author. Who knows, stranger things have happened on this site…maybe I’ll find a publisher or an agent willing to represent me!
Sorry to get us off topic….Stip slaps self on hand
Stip, you are reading my mind today! So I’ll just concentrate hard on the titles of those books, mmmmmk? Seriously, I was trying to think of a character I might be in a recent story and Trinity is who I came up with. I’d agree with the other two picks too. We have to have a Cowboy Bebop conversation sometime. The book jacket thing was actually a joke—cause I think that’s the way that picture looks.
Maybe we should have another award for “most likely to get off topic.” There’d be a lot of competition for that one, lol!
Yeah Kat, I did: ISFP and I think that labels me “The Artist” but I don’t like Prince ;-) but I would agree with the analysis, if I am honest.
Does that surprise you?
you can now be the artist formerly known as stip, TAFKAS
Lockeko, dude, you’re incorrigible. We should have been partners in college playing Risk. We would have ruled the world… and carried a 1.9GPA if it had happened.
Some famous ISFP’s: Kevin Costner, Ashton Kutcher, Patrick Duffy, John Travolta, Paul McCartney
…was hoping for Harrison Ford or Clive Owen to be included there, but I’ll take that list for some kindred spirits.
The analysis doesn’t say what type an ISFP would be atracted to though. That would be something of interest.
I believe the match is supposed to have opposite first and fourth traits with the same middle traits? Which would be ESFJ for you Stip.
whats the match for ENFJ, or FNSOB?
Lockeko, its spelled K.A.T.
Dude, I rock…..self proclaimed…all ISFP of me…Idiotic Sanctimonious Foolish Putz of me
thanks dude,
gonna go, nite all!
Nite Stip
Jazzie: Outstanding observations! The discussion throughout this thread were right on as well. I like your observation about Hurley, the numbers and the money. That makes really good sense!