Early Reflections on the Lost Finale
Monday, May 24, 2010 at 9:10AM 
A friend from my high school days asked me on FaceBook what I thought of the Lost finale. After some pondering last night and then sleeping on it, here are my initial thoughts. I wrote most of this on FaceBook, but decided it might go well here, too.
My friend asked me, "What was 'real' and what was not??!!" Here is my initial answer.
All along the writers had said that the events on the island were not a dream, not hell and not purgatory.
But what threw me was the final scene and then the last shot. The final scene, of course, being that they were all dead and gathered in the church. And then, the final shot showed the airplane wreckage which made me think that perhaps they had all died in the airplane wreck at the very beginning of the show six years ago. That would have been a bit of a cheat to me, but that was my immediate thought right as the show ended.
But after reflecting on things for a couple of hours afterwards, and listening to the initial exchange between Jimmy Kimmel and Matthew Fox on Kimmel's sendoff show last night (ironically, the rest of the actors seemed clueless about much of the show), and then sleeping on it, I believe my initial conclusions were wrong.
If everyone died in the initial plane crash, then the writers simply lied for six years in all of their interviews. Let's assume this is not the case and that the passengers of Oceanic 815 did not die in the crash.
Therefore, everything that happened on the island was "real," but the writers did play a bit of a trick on us in that the flash-sideways of season six, was in fact, a kind of purgatory (for lack of a better word).
Part of the key is to go back and listen to Christian Shepherd's explanation to Jack at the end. "This is the place that all of you made together, so that you could find one another." The people in the church had formed an inseparable bond with each other due to the events that had taken place on the island—a bond that lasted even into death. This was the outcome of Jack's first season speech "We either live together, or we die alone." Because they had chosen to live together, they were now united even in death.
Note that Michael wasn't there. He had betrayed them. We had already learned he was still on the island, like a ghost unable to move on. Ben was invited to the church, but didn't feel like he was quite ready—even though he had been made aware of what was happening. There's really a lot of emphasis on SELF-redemption in the show as opposed to the redemption of Christ, although there was certainly a strong emphasis on elements of Christian tradition throughout the show.
There had been hints to the reality of the flash-sideways existence, though. Eloise Hawking/Widmore, who seemed to be more in the know than anyone, in both the "real world" and the afterlife, was very concerned that her son Daniel not be "awakened" just yet, no doubt because she felt guilt over killing him and wanted more time with him. Why she couldn't get that time together with him in eternity is a question I can't answer.
Plus, all of their lives were a bit idealized based on what they would have hoped for in life. Hurley was lucky, not unlucky. Locke had a good relationship with his father (there was a picture of them together in an earlier episode this season) and his fiance, Helen. Jack was a successful surgeon and had a son with Juliet, whom he got along with well, even though they were divorced. Sawyer was on the right side of the law instead of the wrong side. The only ones who didn't seem to have it so well were Kate and Sayid, but I suppose the particulars could be played with and argued.
Thus, I presume that when the plane left the island with Lapidus, Kate, Sawyer, Miles, Richard, and Claire, it really did leave and they would have lived the rest of their lives off the island. More evidence of this—Hurley told Ben at the church that Ben had made a very good Number 2, which implies they went on to have a full life with other experiences and adventures on the island.
Were the bigger questions of the show answered? Not really. Exactly what was the energy source of the island and what was the island itself? Who originally made all the rules? We don't know. The writers said that they were not intending to answer all the questions.
There had been speculation for years that Lost was based on some kind of ancient mythology, and while there are certainly elements and themes from various mythologies, in the end, the writers seemed to be writing a new mythology for the island all on its own.
So, the energy source becomes something symbolic and not specific.
That will be enough for some viewers, but not for others. Some of the folks who wanted very specific answers will be disappointed. Others, who can live without having every single question answered will be fine and perhaps enjoy some of the debate as to what these things mean.
But what do you really want? One of the most disappointing scenes I've ever seen in cinema was the whole "scientific" explanation of the Force as the result of something called "midichlorians" in The Phantom Menace. I really don't want that level of detail. So, while perhaps I will always have questions over the nature of the island on Lost, I'll have to settle for the fact that it was simply a magical place where the normal laws of physics and time do not apply.
The above is what I have so far. I'm still reflecting. I'm certain there will be discussion for years to come.
Good series, though. I'd have to put it in my top ten, if I had one for TV shows. No doubt, it would be fun to "study" in detail once the final series is released on Blu-ray.
Lost in Entertainment
Reader Comments (23)
My thoughts above were just in response to the question, "Was it real or not?" and I didn't go into symbolic interpretation. But this is already taking place this morning on the internet. Ken Tucker at EW.com writes about a lot of the explicit Christian symbolism in the episode in his post "The final 'Lost' Review: sweet, fun, Christian" http://watching-tv.ew.com/2010/05/24/lost-series-finale-review/
Note this comment in particular: "For if there was one thing we can probably all agree upon, in the end, Jack Shephard was a Christ figure whose sacrifice saved many other people. The imagery could not have been more specific: Jack’s questioning and obeying of his father; his leadership of a small group of disciples; his final ascension (in TV terms, in a glowing white light). Even the piercing of his side by Locke/Man In Black was in the part of his body where Christ was speared while in agony on the crucifying cross."
I may be wrong, but I thought Christian Shepard did affirm what Jack ask, about the people in the church being dead. But I thought he said that some died before him, and some died after him, which lead me to believe that they did not all die on the plane. I like the analysis :)
He did just that.
Again, my initial confusion (and evidently that of a lot of people) came primarily from the last shot of the plane wreckage. I don't know if I would have ended with that shot because as a final image, it was a bit confusing.
As far as I understood it, the final shot was Jack's eye closing and the Lost logo. The wreckage was just a reminder that we've come full circle.
Well, sure. I think for a lot of people once we knew everyone was dead and then they showed the wreckage, it simply gave some wrong interpretations.
I'm not wholly unsatisfied with the endings, but I am not certain what to think of the flash sideways. They were certainly a way to mess with the viewer at the beginning of the season, but how important are they in the overall story? Could the time have been better spent on other story lines. I don't know; I'm still processing.
Oh, I don't know. I think you are missing a couple of elements in your analysis, such as the Mother's description of the "light within each man" (suggesting that this was really an inner journey.) Since the island defied logic in many ways, it seems safer to say it was a metaphor or dream.
Further, the creators seemed to take a page from Joseph Campbell regarding the "heroes journey." In fact, it was pretty much a straight transcription.
On the metaphorical level, I think the creators tried to make it universal, not Christian (thus the menorah and Hindu gods and various worship symbols in the small chapel.office). References to Dogen, for example, or the ankh, did not limit the discussion to Christianity. If anything, the theology on the show was closest to Manichaeism.
In retrospect, the show was bloated and had many completely irrelevant and pointless plot developments (for example, what was the point of the entire temple subplot?). In the end, all of the characters lost their personality (Michael Emerson's Benjamin Linus held out the longest) so at the end, the characters of Jack and Sawyer were pretty much in the same space. I do not for a moment believe that the creators weren't basically making it up as it went along. Again, this was bloated, and could have been more effectively made as a 10-20 hour miniseries. I would have also eliminated the many catch-phrases and made the character development deeper.
In term of the creators protestations that they were not depicting a type of "purgatory", I simply don't believe them. The creators misstated facts as recently as http://www.examiner.com/x-30457-Detroit-Movie-Examiner~y2010m5d21-Review-TimesTalksLive-discussion-with-the-creators-of-Lost-Carlton-Cuse--Damon-Lindelof" rel="nofollow">last week; they claimed that Walt would play a role in the end, and that did not happen. Why should we believe them about purgatory?
(Similarly, the subplot of Ji Yeon and Aaron was never developed -- even though it was the major driving point of many characters. The entire mystery of birth on the island was never resolved. Michael's "wandering Jew" status seemed to be more about Walt reaching puberty and no longer being cute, and thus it being expedient to kill him off than any actual scripted plot development." And, what of the numerous references to "hell" and "heaven"?)
While this was more complex than a typical TV show, it was hardly the most complex TV show that has been presented in recent times; The Wire had better character development (and evolution) and a more complex script, for example. It seems to me that J. J. Abrams just has trouble ending his series; this ending of this show deteriorated in the same ways that Alias deteriorated (and that I expect Fringe will deteriorate).
Oh yeah, another thing:
It is pretty hard for me to respect Lost as art when Lindelof and Cuse go around clowning like a bunch of silly junior high school students in their podcasts and far too many media appearances. (Really, making gay jokes on Jimmy Kimmel?) I think they could learn something from Thomas Pynchon (whose Crying of Lot 49 was obviously an inspiration.)
[...] Rick provides a pretty fair assessment of Lost – not, it was not unreal, etc… but if you had paid attention to (the) Christian [...]
There was a comment posted to http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/tgoodman/detail?entry_id=64224" rel="nofollow">this entry was funny and insightful (and no, I didn't write it):
The "This is a character-based show!" defense is a tried-and-true TV gambit, not unlike innocent of murder because of low blood sugar, or because the glove did not fit!
I think it was the epic character study MANIMAL that first offered this defense in the 1980s as a means of eking out another season, but it was Steven Bochco who most famously used the Character-First! plea in his hostile defense of COP ROCK in 1990.
So, make no mistake. Lost has earned its place in the pantheon of these All-About-Characters!! series. Whether it was deciding whether or not to transform into a leopard or a gerbil, breaking out into a show-tune during a violent drug-bust, or asking your audience to PLEASE PLEASE just pretend that the numbers, Walt and Michael, the Others, the Donkey Wheel, Seasons 1-4, and any sense of consistency or coherence NEVER existed, these three fine character-based shows will all hold the same place in the hearts and minds of demanding viewers for many, many years to come.
[...] apparently better (or merely inevitable) direction. .... Thought this commentary was interesting. Early Reflections on the Lost Finale | This Lamp I have a better explanation: you're a fanboy! __________________ ENTj 7-3-8 [...]
[...] I like that link Jennifer posted in another thread, the author even used the same example I did! [...]
Doug, I'm sorry that I'm just now replying. I became extremely busy yesterday and then taught until 10 PM at IWU last night, and I'm just now getting a chance to respond. With your three sets of comments, I feel you were trying to engage in conversation about this, and I have simply been absent.
To respond to a few points (and I'll also respond to your other comments below)...
I'm still of the interpretation that the writers had the overall intent that the events on the island were "real" and not a dream or simply a metaphor. That elements of these events are layered certainly allows for metaphorical interpretation, but I believe it does so without negating their actual reality in the Lost universe.
While you're certainly correct to point out the inconsistencies of Lindeloff & Cuse in regard to what they promised the fans, they have been pretty consistent over the years saying that the events of the island are not a dream or after death state of existence. I have to take them at their word--at least on this count.
In regard to religious imagery, in my earlier comment in which I quoted Ken Tucker, I did not mean to imply that Lost was meant to be interpreted strictly as a Christian allegory. Certainly, their have been syncretistic elements all along and the stained glass windows in the church with various religious symbols verified this. Tucker's comments about Jack as a Christian messiah figure seemed fairly overt once I read his analysis, although I failed to make the connection in the details when I first viewed the finale.
But I would never expect a mainstream television network to present a straightforward Christian message through these events. Again, there was much more emphasis on self-redemption in this show from the very first season. Thus, the significance of that "light within."
By the way, did you notice the donkey wheel in the bottom left corner of the stained glass? This implied that there was a religion of the island all of its own. Of course we'd seen the Temple and such already on the show but without any real significant details. When the name of Jacob was introduced around the third season or so, it almost seemed as if they were worshipping him. But now knowing what we know about him, I'd be more apt to speculate that the religion was around the energy source on the island itself.
While the religious aspects were certainly syncretistic, the show did not seem to promote a straight-out universalism (as I've read some claim) since Michael and a few others were not included in the church.
But perhaps Michael, or even better, Ben are like those souls in C. S. Lewis' The Great Divorce who know they are no longer party of a physical reality but aren't yet capable of moving on to something better.
Were the writers making it up as they go? Yes, and no. From what I understand about the origins of the show, they had a beginning point and an end point planned out from the first pitch to ABC with a rough outline of the middle. Certainly elements of this changed, especially regarding certain characters. Kate was originally supposed to be the hero of the show (it's worth noting that she was the one who fired the fatal shot into Flock). Jack was supposed to die in the first hour. Ben was only supposed to last for three episodes.
But I do feel that some of the writing for the show became sloppy at times, and while I can live with not knowing what the island actually was (I had been speculating all this time that perhaps it was something like the buried alien ship in Stephen King's Tommyknockers), you're exactly right in your criticism of the undeveloped story points. The issues with childbirth was a main plot point from the first season which involved Claire's abduction and and later with Juliet's reason for being on the island to begin with. After season 4, that entire issue seemed to go away never to be resolved.
And yes, Walt was another issue. I can understand that the actor's growth had an impact on his continued involvement with the show, but we never learned what it was that made him special or what kinds of problems he caused the others while they had him.
And, yes, you're right that the writers even recently said that Walt would play a part of the finale. Since the finale was originally supposed to play at two hours and they asked for an extra half hour, I wonder if there is even more footage that got deleted from the final cut.
Some points are minor and don't matter in the big picture. For instance, I've always wondered who made the Dharma supply drops to Desmond and Kelvin in the 21st century if the Dharma Initiative ended in the late eighties. My hunch is that that kind of a question is just inconsistent writing.
Another minor quibble of mine had to do with the Libby character. I liked that character because of her acceptance of Hurley. I really felt a bit put off with the writers when she was suddenly killed--especially when they admitted on the podcast that it was a spontaneous decision. There was certainly more to her character. We had been teased with the fact that she had been in the asylum with Hurley (the events in the flash-sideways are irrelevant in this point), and supposedly, Desmond had been on Libby's privately owned boat when he became stranded on the island. Cuse and Lindeloff had said a while back that they were still going to incorporate her back story and they never did. Again, I thought she was a very interesting character--or at least had potential to be--but they never capitalized on that.
So, again, in the big picture, maybe these examples are minor. But issues like the childbirth problems never being resolved is not so excusable.
This makes me wonder if the decision to have abbreviated 16 episode seasons for the last year was all that good of an idea. There was certainly more story to tell. Or perhaps there could have been better stories to tell than some that actually were told.
By the way, I think you're exactly right about the Joseph Campbell connection. That seemed to be their outline all along.
Yes, besides the fact that I did kind of like Cop Rock in some sick, twisted way, this analysis is right on the money.
And it's funny that my initial feelings toward the finale have changed a bit in the last 36 hours. Since Lindeloff and Cuse had warned us that they weren't going to answer all the questions of the show, I had somewhat prepared myself for this. But in my mind, I was thinking that they weren't going to reveal the more minor stuff like the recent Dharma drops or the name of the Man in Black. But in hindsight, I think I did expect them to answer some of the bigger picture questions.
There's a bit of an east vs. west tension in this kind of story telling. In eastern stories, something can be magic simply because it is (the animated stories of Hayao Miyazaki come to mind). Often in the west, we want to know the WHY of something, although we're often disappointed in the actual answer such as midichlorians or giant underground spiders (It). But through deliberation, sloppiness, or ineptitude, Lost leaves us--meaning those of us in a predominately western audience--with too many unanswered questions. In the end it's unsatisfying.
Having said that, I don't feel it's as bad as the resolution and finale to Battlestar Galactica. When I heard Ron Moore say in the pre-finale special that BSG was always more about the characters than the story, I KNEW at that point it was going to be disappointing. If ever a show was written as it went, BSG was it, but the cracks didn't start to show until the final season.
I do feel the characterization of Lost was extremely well done for the primary characters, but I don't put that above the story. The story was often (but not always) very good. What I think they forgot was that just like the house in the Fall of the House of Usher is just as important as the characters, so was the island in Lost. But we never really got the island's backstory.
There are enough bright spots and connections that I would be willing to watch the series again (one day). I can't say that for BSG after its finale left such a bad taste in my mouth.
The other element of the show in which I've made a turn is in regard to the flash-sideways stories. I suppose that I, like a lot of people, wanted to see the castaways get off the island and live out the rest of their lives. And many of them did. We just don't get to see that part of the story. Instead, we see their reunion in eternity. At first, upon realizing what these stories were, I felt a bit cheated. But I've changed my mind about that, too. This is another parallel with mythology in which stories in ancient times often followed heroes on their journey not just on this world, but also into the next. That seems to be what Lost was doing. I might have traded that for a few episodes that gave us some more of the big picture stories, but I suppose I can't dismiss the flash-sideways stories as being insignificant, especially on a spiritual level which was a major theme of the show.
A minor quibble -- the "donkey wheel" in the stained glass window was the Dharmacakra, "the wheel of Dharma", a common Buddhist symbol. See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dharmacakra&oldid=363569772" rel="nofollow">here, for example.
On the other hand, I've always had the opinion that the "frozen donkey wheel" was supposed to a reference to the Dharmacakra, (thus Ben and Locke were literally "turning the wheel of Dharma") so it is the same thing in the end, it seems.
You must certainly be correct, not just on the symbol, but on the wheel in Lost itself. That was information I did not have. You've enlightened me (pun intended).
I 100% agree with your sentiment. I CANNOT get the wreckage scene out of my head, and KNOW that the producers put it there just to stir things up even more. Possibly the most brilliant part of the finale... but just when we think we sort of have a handle on things (whether they're satisfying or not) we're presented with one final nugget of info, just to ensure that we'll never completely know what happened.
Overall, I'm content with the ending. Granted, I don't think there's any way that all of our questions could be answered --- so when you can't give the people what they want, at least distract them with something that gives them the warm fuzzies.
Worth 6 years of waiting? From a conclusion stand-point I have to say "no", however from a was-it-some-of-the-most-entertaining-television-ever-produced-and-did-I-enjoy-it standpoint, I can't say anything but "YES!"
... now if I can only get that snack machine trick to work ...
Apparently, those final scenes of wreckage were added by ABC to soften the transition to the late night local news. (Recall that the space usually has a "next week on Lost" promo.) The producers were unaware of it until they saw it themselves.
See this http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2010/05/lost-exclusive-abc-sets-the-record-straight-about-the-series-finales-plane-crash-images.html" rel="nofollow">LA Times article.
Does this make it invalid to theorize on the basis of those final shots? I'm not sure. It clearly was not part of the Cuse-Lindelof vision. But, television shows are collectively developed by large groups of people. Cuse-Lindelof (or even the directors of the episodes) did not control everything that went into the show. Thus, I think one can make a case that those final shots were part of the show, even if they were not intended. (However, I'm quite sure that they will be removed from the DVD.)
I have to say that the inclusion of the wreckage scenes made the TV show more interesting and generated much interesting discussion.
Over the past two days, and especially on Monday, the majority of search engine results that pointed to this post had something to do with the wreckage question. I'm glad to see I wasn't the only one initially confused.
With endless editing, it's very difficult to say something is canon and something else is not. I have the BladeRunner Blu-ray after all that has FIVE different versions of the movie. Ridley Scott can claim one of them as his final vision, but does that mean that the narration in the theatrical release can be discounted? I think not.
I agree that those final shots of the wreckage have to be considered part of the finale, regardless of how they originated.
I never watched BSG, by the way, which is why I can't respond to that aspect. But a quick scan of the 'net indicates that you weren't the only one disappointed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eomWspUS8B0" rel="nofollow">Here is an excellent (and funny) video listing the many unanswered questions on Lost.
Seeing all that at once makes it seem like Cuse & Lindeloff had some kind of screenwriting ADD, not being able to finish a plot line without going on to the next one.
The explanation -- and it's a long one -- is at the URL I've linked. I know where Lost came from because I was the one who'd turned Damon Lindelof on to part of the source material in a casual conversation we had a few yrs. before the show, and he made sure I'd eventually realize that was indeed source material. Follow the clues (which include knowledge of a lot of detective & conspiracy literature & shows) and you realize that underneath the ostensible plot, which didn't make much sense, was a hidden one that does make sense. It's a cloak-&-dagger story full of fake science fiction.
Briefly, Charles Widmore and the Michael Emerson character fans knew as Benry vied to replace business magnate Alvar Hanso, with whom they'd both worked, with a stooge who would look like him & assume his identity. Hanso was on flight 815, which crashed and killed everyone on board. Widmore & Benry each assembled a team of doubles of some of the passengers (created by a combination of face database searching & plastic surgery), some of whom had their brains tampered with to think they really were those passengers, & others of whom were just con artists. There was no time travel, just the technology to knock people out & give them brain damage. Each team would emerge claiming to the world that they'd survived the wreck, and would later vouch that they'd seen the Hanso stooge on the flight as well. Many of the events shown on Lost were magic tricks or otherwise not as they appeared.
Remember the slogan of season 2: "They're NOT the survivors. They thought they were."