LOST-Theories.com

I agree jaz, interesting that Sawyer was the one to take action and a bullet when Tom and the others took Walt.

The best Michael could do was yell out his son’s name ad nauseum.

Sawyer is also the one who (right or wrong) passes judgment on Tom for taking Walt.

I love the analysis and love to bash Michael. :)

jasprof, mind if I join?

KB—hop on in, the water is fine (except for, ahem, the shahk).

Good point about Sawyer being the one to pass judgement on Tom sham.

I’m re-thinking that last thought about Sawyer jaz.

So the others took Walt. Does that deserve a death sentence?

I was a litle disturbed by it.

Great comparison between this episode and the Pilot jazprof. It never even crossed my mind. But before i get carried away are you a Sawyer fan or are you simply analyzing??

+1 from me

yeah sham, actually I agree with that as well (as you said “right or wrong”). My intuition at the moment is that it’s not going to be a good choice as far as where the character goes next. Instead of having his past resolved by killing Cooper, Sawyer very soon after kills someone else who endangered a child. That doesn’t speak to resolution but obsession—he’s not moving on from his tragedy but repeating it. I think the fact that “Sawyer” kills “Tom” doesn’t bode well either. (cry)

Kind of like, “Be careful what you wish for”.

Sawyer finally found the driving force of his existence and now that is gone.

The word “Hollow” came to mind after watching “The Brig”.

I just hope that what drives him from now on will be good causes.

I think it will. Going back for his friends was a big step in that direction.

thanks KB; I’d have to say both! I hope I’m not letting the fact that I like his character so much interfere with the analysis, but don’t think I could tell if it was. :-) I do find him to be a much more sympathetic character than Jack, and yeah, that is a subjective choice because I can see that both are flawed. Jack’s flaws just bug me more than Sawyer’s.

i beleive when sawyer lost his drive for life (well killed it really) he found somthing new to push him through life… kate. just like jack said to kate that sawyer didnt want to go with her because he was protecting her, rather than just objecting to her going back he went so she didnt have to

Ok I agree that what Sawyer did in this episode can be considered heroic. Look, my issue with Sawyer is that Heroism doesn’t fit his character. The only reason Sawyer’s character made this turnaround is because he gained a following from the female crowd. If you breakdown a conman’s persona, there is noway he’d care for anything but himself.

Sawyer’s main motivation in life was to find Sawyer (Cooper) and kill him.

It consumed him to the point that he became the very thing he hated. I think this was a planned course of action because if you want to find a conman you have to think like one.

However, that is not Sawyer’s true nature. I believe he is good at heart and we have seen many examples of this.

Once that “mission” was accomplished and Cooper was dead, we saw a new Sawyer. Kind of a blank slate. It remains to be seen who he will become.

KB, you should give the character a bit more credit. Sure he’s eye candy for the chicks (like Kate is for us guys). Personally I think the writers have done a great job at making him the quintessential bad boy that everyone loves and can identify with.

Damn, he essentially killed himself.

shamballa, personally i lean towards Sara or Gabriella more than Kate!

Jaz…..love the comparisons betweenSawyer in this episode and Jack in Pilot.

Michael has such an antagonistic reaction to Sawyer and its so uncalled for.

KB…not to start an argument ….but I find it a bit insulting that you think Sawyers character has been established based on his good looks.

He is an excellently written ,complex character.(as is Jack)

As is Locke,Ben ,Desmond ,etc.

Jaz I’m late to this one so I won’t go over the Sawyer angle. What I’m interested in is the Susan, Michael and Walt thing. I know people really detest Mike but I believe he was badly mistreated by Susan and when Walt gets taken by the Others its the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

Michael has already been mentally and physically challenged by the loss of Walt. He loses Walt emotionally at a young age (Walt the toddler is afraid to hug his father because he doesn’t recognise him), he then loses Walt further to Brian (who becomes Walt’s father figure) and then to Australia (where the distance divides them seemingly for good).

When Tom takes Walt Michael completely loses the plot. I mean, wouldn’t you if your child who you had finally bonded with and got back was taken. Again. And this time by such violent means…

This is what ultimately leads to the death of Ana Lucia and Libby in my book. I’m not saying Michael is right to do this anymore than I’m saying Sawyer was right to shoot Tom (damn I couldn’t leave it alone, lol) but I’ve got a LOT of sympathy for the guy.

Good thoughts everyone else, I really love this Group 1 thingie +1

Great discussion everyone and thanks.

Sham, I agree with you on Sawyer’s true nature and the blank slate idea. S4 will be very interesting on that front (I hope).

mrs. , yeah, the brilliance of the show is in this ep. where it can show you someone acting like such a jerk, but also show you why. I thought it was great the way they tied Michel’s losses as a father to Sawyer’s as a son. Interesting that, as you say, all those deaths (Ana-Lucia, LIbby, Tom) stem from this ep.

Wow, you guys are awesome. Jaz, no one does symbolism like you. Great analysis.

Sham, spot on man. Sawyer is the best character on the show.

This may sound brutal, but I had no problem with Sawyer taking out Tom in the S3 finale. There are some forms of justice that make it justifiable. Sawyer was acting like an avenging angel - making Tom pay for separating a son from his father - much like Cooper did to him. Is Sawyer now on a crusade?

Sawyer is now Jack’s archangel.

Great discussion gang! +1

Wow, just rereading the comments, sham’s point about Sawyer killing himself stood out to me. I’m noticing this a lot lately—Des in the hatch, Jack on the bridge, Locke in the pit, and now Sawyer—I think somehow this is necessary, to get rid of one’s “self.” I was going to say necessary to connect with the island, then thinking, but Jack is off the island. What if, however, that moment in the Flashforward is the turning point for Jack in being able to make it back, to reconnect?

sawyer, in my opinion, is the most complex character on the island. His identity is such a mystery, even now. Didn’t the warden call him Sawyer? Isn’t that weird that a prison official would call him by his nickname? And yeah, I think he now has to decide what to do. I hope that killing Cooper, while signigicant, is not the apex of his development on the island. I think he’ll deal with it and come out fine. And I agree with stip that Sawyer is on a mission, and tom got what he deserved. I think sawyer is taking on the role of avenger. good stuff

Jaz: yes, I agree with you. “Get rid of one’s self” - excellent.

And yes, Jack has reached his turning point. From here on out, I see Jack chucking the drugs and alchohol (much like Scott Glenn ripped off his head bandage in Silverado when he reached his decision point to turn and fight) and going on the offensive…

…man, I got goosebumps just typing that!

Lockeko: what do you think about Sawyer as Jack’s Lancelot?

I can see that, but I think sawyer has a darker soul than lancelot. lancelot was basically good, as is sawyer, and lancelot did what he had to do, for camelot and guinevere. right now, I don’t think sawyer is ready to go after kate. he is dealing with his role as the force of retributive justice on the island. Also, he’s kinda in hell right now, and I don’t think he wants kate with him.

Funny, after I read your answer, I took it that you agreed with me more than maybe you realized.

I saw Sawyer and Lancelot’s main connection is the guilt they both feel in relation to their undesirable but uncontrallable attraction to their leader’s woman. Whether Sawyer is READY to go after Kate is at this point immaterial - its the feeling that he is struggling with internally. “Since when do you call me Kate?” is a blatant symbol that Sawyer has turned a corner in his psychological development.

Sawyer runs away from Kate (and back to the beach where there will be a bloody battle - hmmm) much like Lancelot deserted Arthur - because of the guilt. In the end Lancelot returned for the final epic battle - only to fall gloriously in combat.

Man this is a great show. Where else can we go to draw such analogies?

stip, absolutely of course one difference might be that Sawyer might not yet know about jack’s feelings for kate. i’m sure sawyer knows jack likes kate, and there is definitely a good competition going, do you think he knows the extent of jack’s feelings? I like sawyer as lancelot. guess that makes locke Gawain

Heh, If Locke is Gawain does that make Jacob the Green Knight?

Excellent work, jaz, as always. And great discussion.

I can relate strongly to both Jack and Sawyer. In my mind, they’re very much like two sides of the same coin, which is why it’s so easy for them to switch places in the narrative. At the bottom of it, I think commitment is what makes both of them tick, but Jack is committed to mercy (if you will) while Sawyer is committed to justice. I’d agree that Sawyer is at the moment assuming the mantle of an avenging angel, but I don’t think this is a constructive turn for his character. We’ll see how it all develops

I have to also agree that Mike was horribly treated by Susan. And the abduction of his son was incredibly traumatic. But he could still have responded in a way that didn’t alienate everyone else. That was his choice. And it is, frankly, difficult for me to relate to. If I were in the same situation myself, I think I’d be grateful for anyone near me who seemed helpful… like Sawyer was.

Oh… and on the matter of who’s who in the Arthur analogy, jaz is Zoot.

Unless, I’m Dingo ;-)

well I’m Sir Erec in that case, and yes, jacob or ben may be the green knight

Prof, I think it could be constructive. Sawyer is now able to seek justice for others, not just himself.

I see your point, lockeko… but I have a difficult time thinking going about blowing people away with extreme prejudice is constructive… even if they do “deserve it”. :-)

sorry prof I don’t share that problem. Its my version of the golden rule. sometimes you get to be the person randomly chosen to give someone what they have been giving others. I guess you could say Sawyer was the agent of Karma that made sure Ben got what was coming to him. And it was very cathartic for the Losties to finally to come out on top, at least until Mikey shows back up with the militia.

I said ben but meant tom, sorry for the confusion

Well, OK… but what was Tom guilty of, exactly? Just taking Walt? Is that an act punishable by death? What else is he alleged to be guilty of?

Oh man… suddenly I can tell my Jack’s showing and lockeko is about to say…

“See, Prof, you’re not seeing the bigger picture. You’re still living in civilization. But me… I’m living in the wild…”

yeah thats about right. You know I get it that if your ethical code says do not kill, for any reason, then its probably always wrong to kill. I tend to believe in the idea of justifiable homicide. Namely to save yourself or someone else it is ok. And having 3 buddies tied up with guns to their heads probably qualifies. as to not showing mercy. they had been burned going down that road before. “screw me once shame on you, screw me twice shame on me” No shame for sawyer on that one. I’m not trying to convice you, and respect your opinion, I just happen to disagree.

you are so warped freckles, so don’t be too mad at me when sawyer kills ben. I can’t wait.

its ok, I’ll comfort you when you’re vulnerable.

kat- were u kidding about Ben being your hero or was that sarcasm? just wondering :)

kat, that comparison of Charlie to Sawyer, and the terms cold-blooded killer and warm-blooded killer (and actually I do see Sawyer going from warm-blooded killer [Cooper] to cold [Tom—the man had surrendered]) made me think of this. I think Charlie was manipulated into killing Ethan. Charlie was actually messed up for a while after that. Sawyer was manipulated by Locke into killing Cooper (and maybe Locke was manipulated into doing that by Richard or Ben?). Maybe there is some faction at work that is trying to turn them into cold-blooded killers?

Wow Prof and lockeko: I see both of your points. I guess I am on the line. It isn’t a black or white issue. It depends on the situation. I like what you said, Prof, about Jack being committed to mercy. I naturally lean towards mercy. But when Sawyer shot Tom and said that line”That was for taking the kid.” I was like OH Yeah!! Anytime children are involved in something terrible like a kidnapping or abused in any way….I want that person to be punished for it. I am not saying Tom’s punishment should have been death, I don’t know what it should be….

I’m not sure if Sawyer’s character is going to take a turn in a neg. direction like some of you say. I see why you would say that, but I just think we will see a stronger and more mature Sawyer. [I hope he still has his wonderful sense of humor!…nicknames are fun ;) ] I think Sawyer will be more involved with the group, a part of the team, so to speak. Remember he told Kate in season one, “It’s every man for himself” ? Well, I think he has changed his tune and we will see him share Jack’s philosophy: Live together , Die alone. which is a constructive thing. :)

i actually know where you are coming from! Michael Emerson rocks!! There’s something about Ben that I like… Maybe it’s because he’s so intelligent and speaks in a polite calm way. He’s had some very funny lines too! So I like him on one level.

However, I sure did loathe him during the season 3 finale - what he did to Jack (radio scene) Ugh!! I was so glad we got to see Jack beat him up…Oh MAN!! I wanted to punch his freakin’ lights out myself !!! bammmmmm!! {dusts off hands} :)

Seriously thought, a part of me wants to find out that there’s a good reason why he is the way he is….ya know? I want everyone to be good…so unrealistic. I can’t help it that I am an idealist. So Kat - Either your really NOT warped or I AM warped! probably the latter but hey - we’re in good company, right? :)

The post above is addressed to Kat - sorry I thought I typed that!

PG you’re warped too, don’t worry though when Ben gets it from Sawyer, or Locke, or Jack, or Kate, I’ll comfort you too.

Oooohh Really! Thanks Locke! How kind of you….

you’re welcome, of course I only have gentlmanly intentions. Just to clarify. I am a good shoulder to cry on. I’ll even stifle my enjoyment of Ben getting what he deserves

Getting back to our previous discussion, lockeko… and I hear what you’re saying also… I’m just not sure where Sawyer is going with this.

Dropping the nick-names and treating Kate differently doesn’t seem like a very good sign either. When Jack was playing protector to Kate (which I didn’t take as a good thing at all) Sawyer would treat her like a grown-up human being. Now Sawyer is playing protector and Jack is explaining this to Kate as if she should think, “Oh, I see, it’s how you guys show LOVE… and here, Jack, I was always pissed at you for trying to exclude me all the time.” Well… the whole “man shows love to woman by protecting her” line is a load of bull. And I hope the writers think so also or I’ll be a little disappointed in the show, to be honest.

And while I’m at it I don’t want to overlook jaz’s point about how Desmond didn’t ask her if she was his replacement. I also thought this was interesting, although I suspect that he was just expecting a man… for no other reason except all he’d ever heard of working in the Swan were men.

I also took the drop in nicknames as a bad sign—a sign that the playful Sawyer is gone.

Kat, Prof, and JP, I see what you’re saying, and I would just point out that Sawyer’s desire to protect Kate is very in character for both he and Jack. I don’t think it is overly sexist, I think its a love thing. It’s the same reason Rose doesn’t want Bernard on the beach, she loves him and doesn’t want him to get hurt. I also think Sawyer headed to the beach thinking he might not come back at all. I really believe he may have seen it as a suicide mission, a mission to rectify his own actions, which might require his death. I think he still sees Juliete as an Other, so he had no problems taking her. I also think thats why he told hurley he was too fat to go, not b/c he thought Hurley would screw things up, but b/c sawyer did not want to put Hurley in danger. I think sawyer would be less believable if he looked at Kate and said, “lets go save Sayid, Jin, and Bernard.” the desire to protect kate is integral to his own definition of love. The same is true for Jack.

So, knowing how Jack has treated Kate, what does that say about him not even attempting to stop Juliette from going with sawyer.

Lockeko- Thank you very much! It most definitely is a love thing!!! I totally agree with you here!

Prof!!! Are you serious? I could not disagree with you MORE!!! I know a lot of people agree but I absolutely do NOT.

I am shocked you feel that way! You seriously think that by Sawyer and Jack wanting to make sure Kate is safe that they are just full of it? That their act of love by doing whatever they can to keep her safe is a load of bull? I am sorry but when you love someone - you most definitely want to do everything you can to protect them. You do what is in their best interest…..that is all these men are trying to do!! Hello?! Do not even give me this sexist nonsense…that right there is a load of bull. I honestly do not see your logic in that whatsoever.

What do you think their motives are then? You KNOW they love her…and they are not sexist!!! They know Kate can take care of herself….the sexist angle is not an issue here. It’s simple - they are preventing her from being in a dangerous place out of LOVE!!!

I would question a man that let the woman he loves enter into a dangerous situation. Your reasoning is to say, “well I just want to treat her like an adult… she’s equal to me.” WHAT? Are you kiddin me? no no no. A man will take a bullet for a woman he loves. A man will prevent the woman he loves from being anywhere near a bullet if he can! Trust me Jack and Sawyer are not doing this stuff to control Kate or make some ridiculous sexist statement! It is out of LOVE!! Whether Kate sees it that way or not…it’s out of love! I wish you could see that…..

I also think that Sawyer’s transformation is going to be good for the camp. He will be more mature and more aware of how HE can help OTHERS, instead of focusing on how others can help him. He used to be a taker…now he will be more of a giver. He will be more of a team player now.

The only thing that might be different with Sawyer is that he will start to believe that he is not good enough for Kate and want to push her a way. He may not give her his heart anymore and put a wall up…b/c he thinks she deserves better. (I am not saying that I think she deserves better) For example, if Sawyer thinks that Jack is better for Kate; I think he may push her a way so that she will have “what’s best”. (Not that I am saying that Jack is the best for Kate) I am only focusing on Sawyer’s MOTIVE - which comes from a place of love. Does anyone see what I am saying?

PG… I’d like to think I’d do anything I could to protect any person from a bullet. More so someone close to me? Sure. But if I’m going to risk my life for others, possibly getting killed and leaving the woman I love behind, what right would I have to tell the woman I love “No, you can’t come” when surely she’s motivated by the same noble aspirations I am? It’s OK for ME to risk MY life resulting in her being crushed emotionally, but it’s not OK for her to risk hers? And surely her offer to come also includes a desire to watch my back, to be there for me in a time of intense need… perhaps be there for me as I die. What right would I have to deny her that?

Now… if she didn’t want to go… if she wasn’t insisting she go… well that’s another thing entirely.

But if she wanted to go… why would she even have to ask my permission, especially if none of the men in the party needed to?

Sure… sometimes the person one loves needs protection. But when they don’t need it… and especially if they don’t want it… then to insist on giving that protection anyway isn’t an act of love. It’s an act of fear. It doesn’t have to be sexist, but it often is. Whether or not it is in Jack’s or Sawyer’s examples is irrelevant. They think they’re protecting someone they love. But that isn’t what they’re actually doing if she doesn’t want… or need… their protection.

And if there’s any woman on the island who doesn’t need protecting, it’s Kate. The writers took great pains to show us that in the earliest episodes.

Anyway… that’s my opinion.

However… lockeko, I’ll grant your point… Sawyer’s situation might go either way. Even his trip back to the camp… sure, it could have been a noble gesture, or it could have been another death wish. The guy is obviously in limbo right now and there’s no telling which way he’ll evolve.

Sigh….sorry Kat, I’ve settled down now…… I know it’s just a show….

Prof: I owe you an apology, my friend. Not for what I said, but for how I said it. My delivery was not very nice to you. :( I am very sorry for that. I should have been more tactful and less feisty. will you please forgive me?

” Well… the whole “man shows love to woman by protecting her” line is a load of bull.

OK my frustration came from that line right there. It comes across as you think it’s a load of bull for a man to protect the woman he loves. And it is not a load of bull - it is sweet.

I see where u are coming from now….at least now i know there is some sort of logic :) I just don’t see Jack as trying to patronize Kate.

I’m not sure I agree with u either, but I see your point.

Another thing- I never said Kate should not have a choice in the matter. I do agree with you that if she wants to go and help then that’s her choice. I’m sure she has the same noble aspirations as Jack or Sawyer and that is fine. But you it’s not a load of bull for the Jack or Sawyer to want to protect her!!! It’s like you were saying that love wasn’t their reason for not wanting her to go or be in danger….when it was the reason!!! you implied that the “love reason” was bull. What reason do you think it is then?

Kat: You actually made your(his) point very well and I understand where you are coming from. Maybe I just didn’t like the way Prof said it. I’m telling you, that “load of bull” line irritated me…maybe I read it wrong. Oh well, I’m over it. I said what I had to say. And like I said earlier, you stated his side of it very well! bravo! I didn’t get irritated at all while reading your comment! LOL! :) Thanks for discussing this with me Kat! g’nite!

Now I just hope he isn’t irritated with me….oh dear….

Just to add another POV —and not trying to re-kindle the flames of war— did you guys think both Jack and Sawyer see themselves as the losers in the fight for Kate?

I mean, Sawyer keeps —well, not always, but often— giving her some “as if I cared” lines, and Jack tries all the time to get as far away from her as he can. I’m pretty convinced about Sawyer having a poor image of himself, and therefore being absolutely sure Kate will choose Jack giving due time. I’m pretty convinced, too, Jack is so certain Kate has already chosen Sawyer that he even “plays along” with Juliet.

Maybe that’s the reason why they —mostly Jack, but sometimes Sawyer too— react to Kate along the old “I’m-the-guy-you-are-the-girl-so-I-get-the-action” lines…

Occam, I think an interesting line from this season was when Sawyer said to Kate, “You don’t have to use me, just ask.” I think that does indicate some of this insecurity.

I think there’s an important difference between what Jack/Sawyer are protecting Kate from. In Jack’s case, protection I think stems from fear of what he can’t control outside of himself, whereas in Sawyer it’s what’s inside that he’s most afraid of and needs to protect Kate from. Again, one could argue—that’s her decision—but maybe because, well I’ll just speak for myself—this makes it easier for me to empathize with him—those fears about oneself (which everyone has), whereas Jack’s fears which are more external (empiricist that he is) feel more controlling to me.

PG, I agree with Kat.

Occam I see your point and I agree. The both think that Kate will end up being with the other guy. Good point!

Kat- Thanks! I hope you’re right :)

Jaz- Good point about the differences in what Jack and Sawyer are trying to protect Kate from. I still think it’s out of love and not a control issue. It may come across like that to some, but Jacks motives ARE valid nonetheless.

PG, no apology necessary. Of course I’m not irritated with you. I’m not prone to getting irritated in discussions about TV shows. :-)

“…the whole ‘man shows love to woman by protecting her’ line is a load of bull.”

I wasn’t saying here that protecting someone is never a sign of love. I was saying that an appeal to “traditional gender roles” wasn’t going to help Kate appreciate something forced upon her (protection)… something that was neither asked for nor required.

If a woman makes clear that she hates flowers, but a man keeps getting them for her because “that’s how he shows his love”, I don’t think the woman should be expected to overlook the whole thing and just feel lucky he buys her anything at all. If he loves her enough to buy her tokens of his love, he should love her enough to put some thought into what he’s buying. Now, some might appeal to the “traditional” argument that “men just don’t know how to do these things”. But that’s a load of bull, too.

So what I was really speaking to was Kate’s attitude about the whole “protection” thing. She didn’t like it and I think she was right not to like it and, given that, I think Jack was a little bit of a jerk to keep doing it to her. Oh, and let’s not forget when she came to rescue him from the Others he kinda treated her badly even though he’d have done the exact same thing if their positions were reversed.

I agree with jaz’s point re: the differences between Jack and Sawyer… as I agreed with lockeko, Sawyer is definitely in some “middle place” with his feelings. It’s hard to tell where he will go.

I don’t think Jack was a jerk to want to protect her. Labeling him a jerk is a little extreme. I guess we will have to just agree to disagree.

I didn’t say he IS a jerk. I said he was BEING a jerk. And not because he WANTED to protect her, but because he persisted in “protecting” her even though she made it clear she didn’t need or want that. And, I’ll just point out, I also didn’t say he didn’t love her. I just suggested that in the particular instance of trying to protect her when she didn’t need or want protection he was motivated more by his own fears than by love. Had he listened to the love inside of him instead of his fear, he might have trusted her and relied on her as a partner instead of excluding her.

“Had he listened to the love inside of him instead of his fear, he might have trusted her and relied on her as a partner instead of excluding her.” I’m afraid that’s going to wind up describing both the men.

UGHHHH!

PG, I’m not panning Jack… I’m just acknowledging his flaws. You… do recognize the guy has flaws… don’t you? :-)

Prof you said- “he was motivated more by his own fears than by love.

His own fear? Fear of what? Her getting killed? That’s a valid fear…no one wants to lose someone they love if they can help it.

uh…yeah i think he has flaws…don’t all guys?

I just don’t see him the way you do. He has a big heart and he cares about Kate. In his mind, it is more important to keep her safe than to make her feel included. I am not saying he is totally right. Like I said to Kat- I see her point with all of that. I just think you are being too hard on Jack. Here’s the difference- I think he often times does the “wrong thing” for the “right reason”. You on the other hand imply that he does the “wrong thing” for the “wrong reasons”. You say he’s being a jerk about it and his motives are selfish too. WRONG. His motives are b/c he loves her and that is the good I choose to see in it. It’s all about perspective. It doesn’t have to be black and white.

Way to go OCCAM! - Way to rekindle the flames of war!! lol! No this is no war…just a discussion. Prof you drive me crazy though!

What’s ironic in all of this is I would want to be treated the way you say Kate should be treated. If I wanted to go…I would go!! And I would want to be trusted that I could handle it…..so I agree with your philosophy of how the girl should be treated- especially a girl like Kate.

I do not like how you criticize Jack though. I would respond to Jack differently than you. If a guy was being very protective of me, as Jack is of Kate, I would not jump down his throat and tell him he is acting like a jerk and that he is full of it. Nooooo!….. I would Lovingly look at him and tell him that I understand that he is just trying to protect me because he loves me and that he is doing what he thinks is best. I would reassure him that he is not wrong for wanting to protect me…but that it is my decision and that’s final!! It would be important for me to let the guy know that I understand where he’s coming from. Making him feel Iike he just wants to control me would frustrate the guy to death because that is not the issue.

I would just want to reassure him that I see where he’s coming from, but it’s my decision and I am going to do what I am going to do - so let’s make the most of it…we’re a team.

Ok, this means no dessert and no TV for you both! ;-)

He started it!

I’m getting a strong déjà-vu feeling… ;-)

And, Paintgirl, you think Jack maybe didn’t Kate to go because he… ahem… suspected Kate was “the Cobra”? runs for cover, while shouting “make way, guys!” XD

DocOcc, that to me is the most interesting point right now. Will the irony be that the woman they are both protective of is in fact the danger?

In the very first episode, Jack was actually able to give Kate the tools to take care of herself (the story about controlling fear—my theme of the day) and then he lost that. Maybe one of the points there is that Jack went from being someone who had learned to deal with fear sometimes to being someone who is being driven by fear more often.

PG—I guess two things in what you said about the way you would treat Jack—if something rubs me the wrong way (like attempts to control) I think my first reaction is likely to be to be p.o’d. Maybe later it could be talked about as you say—but more in an established relationship—for one thing do Kate and Jack even know they love each other at this point. Perhaps what Jack says to her will make a change. Also the fact that he keeps doing it, and she keeps rebelling against it—neither of them shows a steep learning curve. I think that’s where the acting like a jerk and being a jerk gets confusing—repeated pattern looks like “being.”

sigh

I wasn’t advocating poor treatment of Jack. But I’m with kat… I don’t think there was any negotiating with Jack. That’s the whole point. That’s what makes him cross the line, in my view.

So take all of that stuff you’d lovingly say to Jack and imagine him responding by saying, “You’re NOT going and THAT’S final.” Then would you think he’s acting like a jerk?? Because I’m pretty convinced that’s what he’d say.

But, as kat says… this is all just opinion… I’m not really out to anger die-hard Jack fans. :-)

I still think you guys are being way too hard on Sawyer and Jack for their feelings. I will admit that telling Kate, “No, you can’t go.” is somewhat patronizing, but the reason it is said does matter. They don’t want her to get hurt. It’s really that simple. They both respect her, and know that she can handle herself, but when the bad guys have guns, there is a real possibity that someone will die, neither wants that someone to be Kate. I can’t imagine how much it hurt her for Sawyer to tell her she couldn’t go, and I think any anger she has toward him over that is justified; however I don’t think either of them should be criticized for reacting the way they do. Also, another angle is that if the primary mission is to save Sayid, Bernard, and Gin, then maybe Sawyer doesn’t want Kate there, b/c if she is there his focus might be more on her than on saving his friends. Where he won’t blink about placing Juliette in peril, he would if that were Kate. Kate being with Sawyer on a mission would make him less likely to be able to fullly devote himself to the goal. Its like that old adage about your two children being in the pool drowning and you only have time to save one, which one do you save. If Kate stays, that kid is safe and that decision doesn’t have to be made.

Dococ, I hope Kate’s not the Cobra. i don’t think Jack suspects her of being the Cobra either. I hope Jin is the Cobra, and actually speaks English fluently. Maybe he got Paulo’s radio

“neither of them shows a steep learning curve”

Heh. Awesome.

Heh, teacher persona showing.

Maybe I should slip into drummer persona and give Jateyer a lttle bonk on the noggin. See if Ms. Hawkings can talk some sense into ‘em.

someone needs to

but, what if Jack said “you’re not going” and Kate said, “yes I am” and Jack, even though he really doesn’t want her to go, just drops it and lets her go, what does that make him?

Now I declare the thread officially hijacked. We were starting season 2 and, zoom!, here we are at the season 3 final. Talk about “flashforwards”… :-)

it makes him a sweetheart

PG I don’t think thats what that makes him, but I can see why that might be an appropriate response. but for the record, I don’t think Jack or Sawyer would ever agree to Kate going.

lol i was just kidding - this discussion sure has been fun

Hey, maybe it’s that weird hobbit guy that keeps posting, but … taking a step back from the “what motivates” either Jack or Sawyer when they are “protecting Kate”… I’d like to ask “what might the fallout be”?

I couldn’t help but think about Lord of the Rings: Return of the King when Eowyn wants to fight, but then defies her father’s wishes. She completely kicked butt… despite her obvious feminine fragility - when she’s faced with a foe no other man had conquered (this is so totally my favorite part of the movie…)

[taking Eowyn by the throat] You fool. No man can kill me. Die now. [Eowyn rises and pulls off her helm, her hair falls down over her shoulder] Eowyn: I am no man. [she thrusts her sword into the Witch King’s helm and twists; he shrieks and implodes]

It seemed to me that somehow this was how the fight was supposed to play out to this end… like she was the only one that could do this thing that ended up being a key victory point in the battle between good and evil…

It makes me wonder when Kate is being “protected for her own good” - what end are the boys sabotaging? Will it be one of those kind of mistakes that can be turned around at a later date, or is it one of those “one shot deals”? That’s the real question.

My opinion… To control, even out of a loving purpose, is not allowing - or having faith in synchronicity or God’s purpose/inspiration within that human being. In a way it’s kind of the ultimate insult. She’s saying “I have faith I want to do it” and the boys don’t want to believe in her - or believe that her faith means something significant; or perhaps they think that their faith in being able to protect her is more important somehow. I think it is both a fear of losing someone they think they love perhaps - fear of an outcome they can’t control because of the possibility that something will happen that they have determined they do not want to live with.

But are they are judging Love on human standards, their own standards - and not asking of themselves what the ultimate standard of love might be? There are a lot of what ifs - maybe they’re convicted and believe that their standard of love = God’s or the ultimate standard, maybe Kate feels equally convicted… what do you do then? How do you determine who is right? I think if we take the God angle here - we’d have to come to the point that God made a perfect world that gave all of humankind a choice. In the garden - God didn’t want them to eat of the tree of knowledge, but much to God’s chagrin, they both did anyway. Did God disown us then? No… but we could never go back to the garden. I think they should have let Kate go…. it would have been an act of faith - not only in her and her abilities, this woman they want to love/possess, but faith in God/Synchronicity and that all things would work together for the good regardless of the outcome.

not letting her go had nothing to do with their faith in her abilities. not wanting her to go had to do with their feelings for her. plus nobody tied her to a tree. If she would have wanted to go, she would have, plain and simple. Nobody stopped her. So what if she was told not to go by Jack or Sawyer. Jack told her before, she ignored him, and went anyway. I think she understood, after Jack told her why and chose not to go back. I just don’t see what the big deal is with jack and sawyer wanting to keep kate out of harm’s way. if the situation were reversed I bet Kate would make the same decision toward either of them

Agent, I like your description because it fits so well with the show’s themes. What they need is hope that “all things…work together for the good” and faith in God/Synchronicity. And in the next episode we see how faith is not about trying to control the outcome. Control is an interesting problem actually for most of the male characters isn’t it? Charley and Hurley with addictions. And Hurley’s fears of the curse. Sawyer and Jack as we’ve talked about above. Jin also in needing to protect Sun, Des, that things have to happen in a particular way. Sayid, fears that violence will erupt either inside himself or outside, and then in trying to control violence he uses torture—letting his own violence escape control. Maybe that’s a message to take away—the effort to control keeps backfiring. Locke of all the men seems to have most success at letting go.

locke knifed naomi in the back b/c jack wasn’t supposed to make the call. I don’t think he has any better grip on the contol issues than anyone else.

hmmm, Locke does say “the way it’s supposed to happen a lot doesn’t he”? I just think of the way he reacts to the rain as a letting go gesture. No, I agree it’s an issue for everyone; I just sometimes see Locke dealing with it better than others. Like when he went for the sub—it was more like he was acting as an agent for another force. And that could prove to be true with knifing Naomi in the back as well.

Exactly Jaz… the other thing I’d like to point out about my perspective is that the role of the writers of the show - the overlooking Synchronicity/God angle are the only ones who know any of the character’s true natures and what is going on. Perhaps Jack/Sawyer’s inclination/nature to “protect” Kate is what was supposed to happen because she is the Cobra and had she gone would have sabotaged their plans. I’m not saying I know the truth of any of the characters - but as Jaz points out, the men particularly all have control issues. So what are these issues tied to? Do they have faith, or are they faithless? Will the result be for the good of all? That’s what I’m asking. I’m not taking sides here about if Jack or Sawyer really loves Kate Painty/Lockeko. How would I know the answer to that I’m not inside their heads - and neither are you (if I can be so bold, and I mean no disrespect).

Alright, so to make this interesting… since now we are talking about how a man should best show love to the woman he loves. How do you think Sayid would respond to Kate wanting to go with him if he was the man that loved her? I think Sayid would respond the way that Prof and Kat would approve of. I don’t think he would be controlling. He would let her go and he would trust her as a partner. Why is that do you think?….do you think that Sayid is more confident in his ability to protect and take care of someone in a dangerous situation? (Although Shannon died while he was with her) I think Sayid is more confident than Jack in knowing what to do and how to protect someone he’s with.

So is it Jack’s lack of trust in Kate to protect herself or more of a lack of confidence in himself to be able to protect Kate in a life or death situation? See, I don’t think it’s so much that he doesn’t trust her. It’s that he is afraid he will not be able to save her…so rather than take that chance - he’d rather prevent the whole thing from happening in the first place and telling her she can’t go. Hmm…

Now how about Desmond? Do you think he would say, “Well, ah-rite sistah’! I bloody trust ya!” lol! Well, actually we can’t use Desmond - b/c he would know if she was in danger due to his “visions”… unless we say, he didn’t have that advantage for this hypothetical question. I think he would be more likely to let her go along and not try to stop her… but I’m not for sure.

pg, just a quick response as I’m off to work in a moment.

Des—romantic conflict I see with him is that he might be willing to sacrifice everything and everyone else for love. While in fiction this can look appealing, in real life I just imagine it would be horrible to think that someone else had been sacrificed (Charlie?) for me. And someone who makes their romantic partner the be all and end all—that’s going to spell trouble and there would certainly be control issues.

Sayid—now you reminded me that in terms of his treatment of the opposite sex, Sayid is my favourite character. Rewatching Season 1, I really like how he (and maybe he’s the only one?) treats Kate, at first, as if she might become the leader just as much as Jack. You know, if my plans for world domination ever come to fruition, I’m gonna need that in a man. (ooops, perhaps I have said too much….wait, must consult evil overlord handbook.) But, ahem, back to the fictional world—but Sayid also has big control issues around violence (I guess that’s the difference—his control tends to be around his environment and of himself, Jack’s tends to be of other people and the environment, Sawyer’s is almost all about himself.) Again in real life though—his history I’m sure would affect his romantic partnerships in a very troubling way.

Interesting speculations—but probably also important to keep in mind that all this romance in the characters is in service of the plot and themes of the show (as Agent was saying). And I think the simple description of how romance functions there is that in the kind of Skinnerian behaviorism that is such a part of what’s going on in the plot there seem to be two main emotions being played with and against each other: fear and love.

All I have to say to all your “what ifs” PG would be - Who says Kate needs saving/protected?

I think if she wanted help and loved these guys she’d simply ask for their protection, or if she knew she’d be a detriment she’d refuse to go herself. Obviously, my personal peeve is that everything has to be so “man-centric”. sigh

Everyone obviously has different opinions on what love is and what the perfect romantic relationship would be. Think of the lesbians, dearest I can see you’re on the Jack train. It’s ok with me Peach.

Perhaps it would interest you that when I first watched the show, I wanted Kate to hook up with Jack - but perhaps for different reasons than you. Simply put, it’s what I thought she wanted. I’m a little embarassed to admit that the whole Sawyer choice took me by surprise - only because I wasn’t putting myself, my opinions, or “me” in her shoes. I like Kate, but I’m not Kate. But that’s what’s cool about this show. I now have this little piece of new information - that she does have some desire for Sawyer (enough to bed him down in the least - and in all seriousness, I don’t think that’s a small point to be brushed aside, though I think you still do need to ask why) - and when I rewatch the episodes, it’s like a whole different show. When I looked at the show this way, I saw that Sawyer seemed to have much more sympathy for Kate’s emotions than Jack did. It was always Sawyer holding her when she cried, Sawyer comforting her when she felt bad about a choice she made, Sawyer trusting in her strengths. I’m not saying he did it perfectly or consistently, and I’m not trying to say who’s in love and who isn’t, or whose love is better. I’m saying that this choice she has, will only make sense in light of her experiences - where she is as a person, what she needs to grow and continue forward and feel. I think that this is why we are only given brief glimpses of each character on the show… it could go just about anywhere, we’re always left guessing. It’s brilliant, really.

Another double take I had was when Sun told Jin that she never cheated on him. I have to say this was one of those things I let myself get emotionally wrapped up in because I like Jin and was drawn in by the portrayal of their romance. I, personally, needed to hear that she had been faithful… I wanted that to be true, despite the little hints they dropped about her infidelity and the reasons why. I could see it, but didn’t want to admit it was true because of how painful it would be for me to watch this happen. When I found out later that she had indeed cheated, and consequently lied to Jin about it … I was disappointed, sure, but I realized that this was about where the show was going and there might be something important about it later. The plot is going somewhere and it’s using the strengths and weaknesses of the characters to get there, regardless of me wanting “good things” to happen to gratify my personal feelings. Again… the question isn’t what is love and then “prove it”… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QE61Bz7IHKg The question is - Where are they going with all of this - what do we know about the characters in light of their choices and the other information we have?

I also found it interesting how I initially allowed myself to let the show lead me in a prejudice of sorts against Sawyer, when I thought Kate was annoyed by him and only interested in Jack. I thought they were painting the typical “bad boy” shallow character. I didn’t hate him, but I didn’t allow myself to see the softer side (or brushed it aside as an anomaly) because frankly - I was seeing him through the eyes of everyone on the island. Frankly at this point, I think Sawyer is a softie and that’s always been his weakest point. Will he swing to the other side of the pendulum in dealing with all that his character is going through and harden his heart? … yet to be seen.

I started to realize I didn’t trust the judgement of everyone else on the island… the episode when Locke punches Charlie’s lights out for taking the baby in the middle of the night out of desparation. Everyone looked at him bleeding there on the beach as if he deserved this kind of outburst. Well, given the extreme situation he created, I suppose you might say it should have been expected… but why not have compassion for the kid instead? Maybe if people had trusted him and taken him seriously despite their prejudices, this could have been handled by simply talking to him about his concerns before it went to this extreme. Instead , now we have a situation where Charlie responds in kind to this event with the same kind of violence/distrust and retaliates… angry because he knows deep down inside what he has to say should be as important as anybody else.

Agent- I wasn’t saying Kate needed protection. I was asking how do you think Sayid or Desmond would treat the girl they loved on the island. Would they be as protective as Jack? That’s all I was curious about. I don’t think they would be like Jack. Sayid would be the most likely to notice that someone like Kate doesn’t need protection. He would be the first to get the clue and respond accordingly.

I agree with you on Sawyer too. He is sensitive to Kate and I think he gives her what she needs emotionally. He is a softy - I love that about him. The way he deals with it is funny. Like when he felt sorry for Carl who was crying b/c he missed Alex. He walked up to Carl and punched him… that’s Sawyer. :) I don’t care if Kate ends up with Jack or Sawyer , really… I just have compassion for both guys. I can see why they do the things they do.

I am a Jack fan- b/c he would be my choice if I had to pick….that’s all.

PG I respectfully disagree. I think Sayid would not want Kate to go with him. Especially after what happened to Shannon. I am glad that we are on the same page about Jack and Sawyer though

Ok, gotcha PG, thanks. Yeah, I’m going to move on here with some more thoughts… So - why does Sawyer want everyone to see him as no good. It seems obvious (as Kate points out) that he puts a lot of effort into doing this. Is Sawyer “up to no good”, is he to his root just evil, or is this some sort of imperfect coping skill that’s developed in response to his early life drama - is it related to what he needs to do to pursue his quest for revenge?

Let’s ponder the “coping skill” angle - Why does Sawyer go on a quest for revenge? Maybe because he’s been afraid to deal with the loss of his parents in a healthy way. He’s a victim - feels this love has been stolen perhaps, and wants some retribution in the name of justice(?). But the very thing he’s done to protect himself or what he loves has not saved him or healed his hurt, and in fact does not allow him to love because he cannot trust. In essence, he is the quintessential self fulfilling prophecy - he becomes what he fears/loathes… and we see he doesn’t like it… loathes himself because of it (doesn’t trust himself).

I think we’ve seen he’s capable of compassion - though somewhat selectively at times, interestingly enough to those who treat him with some manner of respect first when it comes to his stash… but when it comes to the greater good, he is self sacrificing also. He put himself on the line for Walt on the raft and then Michael. etc. I don’t think he’s to his root just evil, or beyond hope. Perhaps he is keeping people away from him with his bad boy act because he doesn’t trust himself and he’s trying to protect everyone from Sawyer.

When Jack was gone and Hurley “tricks” Sawyer into being nice to everybody (forcing him to drop his bad boy act), how does he react when he finds out it’s a trick? He doesn’t punch Hurley out … he had a smile on his face, like there was some sort of realization that there is a different way. (Furthermore, Jack didn’t steal his thunder when he came back… I don’t think he was interested in the “power” he would have over everyone.) I think this was an epiphany for him. First it was possible to have people like him, and then that he actually liked it. He decided at that point to “trust” Hurley, maybe because he could see that Hurley tricked him to help him out - and because Hurley in a way admitted to him that he believed in/trusted Sawyer enough to suggest he be the leader in Jack’s absence. I think this is what allowed him to be open to, and trust his own feelings for Kate and things developed.

I do liken the killing of Cooper to “Sawyer killing himself” in a way. The question that remains for me - is does this represent the dying of the “revenge seeker”, and thus enabling Sawyer to go on with a new path in his life? Or… was this the final expression of his self-loathing and finally giving up and giving in to believing that there is no hope for him?

I’m not sure if I can say which is the case… I will point out that while this is still a mystery, there is always a possibility that somewhere in his history that we haven’t seen - he could be up to something “no good”. Even if he has been enlisted to help with some “dastardly plan” - its success will hinge on which Sawyer remains at the end.

Agent I think you have given a good analysis of the crux of Sawyer’s internal battle. Has he finally made peace with his demons and exorcised the control they had over him; or has he given up, and given in to the downward spiral of despair. I also like the idea that we have more to learn from Sawyer. I think him being a “double agent” would be out of character for isalnd Sawyer, but probably very consistent with pre-island sawyer, provided that there was some advantage to him agreeing to double cross the losties. I think he would double cross them if Ben promised safe harbor for Kate.

When he and Michael are bonding on the boat—Michael says that he thought the reason Sawyer wanted on the boat is that he’s either a hero or he’s suicidal (to which Sawyer replies “I’m no hero”). In classic tragedies the hero is often the “revenge seeker,” can’t get out of that cycle of violence—which is why I didn’t like the end of S3 for Sawyer. Maybe there’s a pattern of reaching a point of despair through trying to play the hero—Des in search of honor, Jack calling the ship leading to the moment on the bridge,…and then there’s a possibility of becoming something different—the kind of hero Hurley was conning Sawyer into being.

L-E, you may be right that waht happened to Shannon will have changed Sayid, but since Shannon and Kate are so different on the “able to take care of self” scale. I wouldn’t be completely sure of that—in other words, if Sayid has grown more protective after Shannon’s death, I don’t think the protection would be just for women or just because someone is a woman. He treats Kate like an equal member of the team when there’s that attempt to get Jack from the others as I remember. And maybe the core of the whole protection thing isn’t so much about protection, it’s about making generalizations based on stereotypes.

Jaz, I agree 100%. I guess I still have trouble that Jack and Sawyer based their decisions on stereotypes, I really think it was based on love and a desire not to see her get hurt. I’m probably just wrong. Sayid sees Kate as a team member. Jack and Sawyer see Kate as a beloved, I think that matters, regardless of sex

Did anyone notice the Dharma logo on the sharks tail-fin? Haven’t heard anyone mentioning that and thought it was interesting.

Did Dharma create some kind of genetically enhanced sharks to patrol the waters? I’ve never seen a shark that big!

Just a Lost newbie observation…

I noticed that the first time I saw it too, I still have absolutely no explanation for it (or the polar bears). The only glimpse of an explanation was in some Dharma background where they briefly mentioned the word Zoology and then moved on. So, I suppose that explains that they definitely are responsible for that shark and the polar bears, but why? What purpose do those bears serve? Merely as a thematic symbol of magnetism and an insignificant plot mechanism or is it something more? Is Walt responsible? Is the shark meant to protect anything at all or is it just a forgotten experiment from the 70’s?

I’d like to add, in case no one has brought this up yet, Jack and Sawyer are reflections of the two sides of Kate. One is responsible, merciful, compassionate (for her mother, the men she’s truly loved in her past) and the other is manipulative, conning, secretive (her bank jobs and gun hiding). It’s fun to watch Kate struggle with her inner conflicts and see them reflected in two love interests as exterior conflicts. Very interesting…