Saturday, March 28, 2009


BURNING DOWN THE HOUSE




We're all familiar with the grandfather of all unanswerable questions: Which came first, the chicken or the egg? This episode asked a different question: Which came first, the chicken



or the chicken sandwich?



Little Sayid Jarrah suavely killed his first victim



about thirty years before little Ben Linus offered it back up to him, all diced and seasoned and neatly cut into triangles. So which came first? Did Sayid break Ben's heart before or after Ben stole Sayid's soul?



The collateral damage of Sayid and Ben's odd coupledom ran the gamut from Avellino



to Andropov,



with god knows how many others in between. Together they were a very efficient Murder, Inc.



Ben made Sayid think he wanted to kill the people that Ben wanted killed and then he recruited Sayid to return to the Future Past where Sayid's revenge could damage Ben in such a way that he'd grow up to be the kind of man who would make Sayid want to kill the people that Ben needed killed.



It's a match made in Heaven. Or in Hell.

In the opening scene, we learned that Sayid had the skill of the kill from an early age. Not that he got any thrill from killing. He did it to save his big, soft brother from their Bad Iraqi Dad. Even at eight, Sayid killed with a gentle soul. It was a job. And let's freaking face it, if you grow up on a farm, and you eat chickens for dinner, then chicken killing is not exactly optional. It doesn't mean Sayid was a born psychopath because he was a farmboy who choked chickens. It meant he was a useful member of his society.



Sayid's Bad Dad insisted on murder as a rite of manhood. Ben's Bad Drunk Dad, on the other hand, demonstrated exactly why his son's rite of manhood was all about murdering him.



We saw that even in mindless utopias like Dharmalala, fathers were free to brutalize their kids. After all the years of being stranded in Authoritarian Hell, Ben was ready to bust loose. The Purple Iraqi who fell from the sky was Ben's ticket out. Young Ben started finding uses for Sayid the very first day he met him.



On this turn around the time loop, however, Sayid was immediately hip to Ben's true nature. On the great karmic dharma wheel of birth and death, Sayid was having a moment of clarity. An epiphany. He recognized right away that this battered child was the same partner he'd been dancing across the globe with the past three years.



Sayid saw his chance to stick out his foot and bring that dharma wheel grinding to a screeching halt. He found himself face to face with one of time travel's most classic dilemmas: If you could travel back in time and kill Hitler as a child, would you do it? Should you do it?



"Kill the nits and there will be no lice!" - Oliver Cromwell

On the one hand, if killing little Adolf could have saved the lives of millions, then it seems like a no brainer. Of course you should kill him. It would be immoral not to! On the other hand, you would be killing an innocent person who would never be able to grow up and commit the crimes for which you just punished him with death. Paradox, clean up in Episode Ten!



Normally it's inconceivable to think of murdering a child. But Ben was not an ordinary child. He was reading way above his grade level, for one thing. We see that Ben's addiction to long, impossible books began at an early age.



At age 12, he had already digested Carlos Casteneda's "A Separate Reality" - just a little light reading about hallucinogenic enlightenment among the Yaqui Indians. Or maybe little Ben hadn't actually read the book. Maybe he just found it lying around the Dharma community center reading room. The Dharmites seemed to be fans of the mind tripping drugs.



They even had a shaman who lived a holy life among his prayer flags, cooking up batches of acid in his teepee.



They had elevated their biggest stoner to druid status.



This is probably as good a good place as any to step out and ask a question about this Dharma subplot. I'm sorry to say this, but it reeks of The Dull. Who takes a magnificent Hawaiian backdrop and writes a story set in dark interiors, in Sears Roebucks living rooms and surveillance monitoring stations? And while we're at it, what genius came up with the idea for those jumpsuits? An entire season of island fashion inspired by kibbutzniks.



Seriously, what were they thinking?

I get that there's some secret mission that the Dharma is working on, something that all the lowly proles don't ever get to know about. I get that this whole bodysnatched clan is remote controlled from the DeGroot's University of Michigan stomping grounds in Ann Arbor, as Radzinsky obnoxiously reminded them.



But god, they are boring! Their little Stepford Town is filled with people who came to a paradise island so they could sit in the dark spying on each other.



And the only alternative to this kind of tv show



is this kind:



They have elevated tiny hands Horace to be their exalted Grand Poobah.



They think with one mind.



Like the friendly neighbors in Shirley Jackson's The Lottery, the Dharma-bots calmly agreed to send an innocent man to his death. Even though they thought Sayid was insane, they were very eager to kill him dead. Even sweet little Mother of Ethan joined in the demonic groupthink.



It didn't matter that he had done them no harm. They were keeping a clean campsite by killing the crazy man before he had a chance to become a spy. They were just being friendly neighbors and citizens. I mean, it's not like they had any free choice in the matter.



"Thoughtcrime does not entail death. Thoughtcrime IS death." - George Orwell, 1984

The dark dystopic underbelly of Dharmalala is starting to lurch into view. In some ways, the world inside the sonic fence reminded me of the people who lived inside M. Night Shyamalan's The Village, in an uneasy Truce with the Monster that lurked outside the ring of yellow trees.



Sawyer knows that there is something rotten in Dharma. Still, he likes the prestige he has in this insular community of paranoids. He's been enjoying being among them but not of them, but after all this time, the lines have started to blur for our boy. He speaks of "my people" a little too territorially. Who are his "people" these days? Does he know?



Sawyer has been going to the Dharma potluck dinners and the penny socials and the cookouts for three long blissfully stupid years. Is he one of them now? Is he loyal to Them or to Us? And which is which exactly?



"All men are enemies. All animals are comrades."- George Orwell, Animal Farm

It seems to be the nature of human beings to separate the world into Us and Them.The Dharma are Us. The Hostiles are Them. As Ben once explained, "The DHARMA Initiative. They came here seeking harmony, but they couldn't even coexist with the Island's original inhabitants." But why? What makes the Hostiles so different? What makes them so dangerous to Dharma?



Sawyer's initial encounter with the Hostile leader Richard was a smashing success, and Richard at least knows that Jim LaFleur is not what he presents himself as. Yet Sawyer has since chosen to enable the Dharma in their bitter standoff with the indigenous people they exiled within their own homeland. Sawyer has made some serious moral compromises in the past three years. He's not going to be able to just think himself free of all the consequences. Fresh off last weeks SmackJack high, Sawyer this week had to deal with the hubris hangover. He had thunk and thunk until he had a perfect plan to ensure Sayid's safety, but the only thing he didn't think about was what if Sayid didn't want to be saved?



He was faced with a version of the classic Trolley Problem. Let's customize it to make it into a Flaming Runaway VW Bus Problem.



If a flaming runaway VW bus were headed towards a house with five people sleeping in it, and you could somehow divert the bus to crash into a house with only ONE sleeping person in it, would you do it?



The hypothetical can be made more difficult. What if the five people you might save were all strangers, but the one person you might kill was your beloved old friend?



To make it even harder, what if you had to personally drive the bus yourself into the house and see the person inside it die?



This is the kind of problem Sawyer was faced with in this episode. To save one and endanger many, or to let one die while protecting some who weren't worthy of his loyalty. Ultimately, he came through for Sayid, as we knew he would, but I hope he's got some books on classical ethics to read. I don't think this is the last time he's going to be faced with this kind of dilemma.



Rip Van Sawyer is slowly waking up from his long nap among the lotus eaters. His gallant speech to Juliet about nothing changing didn't even sound like he was fooling himself. If nothing else, Juliet is a smart chick. She can't be sleeping well knowing that Kate and Sawyer are back in one another's magnetic orbit. Doesn't look like Kate is dealing with it all that well either.



Like Jack and Kate before them, Sawyer and Juliet are being shaken out of their complacency by the big bad wolf of time travel. Sayid may have looked like the villain in this piece, but I think instead Sayid was only trying to be the Brave Little Trimtab. Unaccepting of time's merciless rigidity, Sayid is the one who is forcing the big ship to turn, and all of them will be dragged along the course Sayid has chosen.



The episode, as is typical of this season, was filled with other parallels and echos. Desmond's drink of choice, MacCutcheon whiskey,



turns up in Sayid's hands, right before he is snookered into handcuffs by another beautiful woman.



Ben's dark hood echoed another troubled boy's favorite outfit.



Reflections showed up in the weekly word game. The words over this Moscow doorway, when reflected in a mirror and translated from the Cyrillic alphabet, read as Oldham Pharmaceuticals.



A clevah! shoutout to this episode's very own Oldham the Pharmaceutist.



Like Eko,



Sayid killed out of love and loyalty to a brother.



Ben followed in the future footsteps of another gifted child, Walt, by setting a fire as a distraction to control the clueless grownups.



Of course the most dramatic parallel was this one, a revisitation of Torture Among the Banyans.



This scene was an obvious throwback to one of Lost's all time great scenes.



But this torture scene, sadly, paled in comparison. It's not just that it lacked the obvious hotness factor.



It also lacked...uh, torture. Horace's bit of intimidation with the rose cutters was kind of scary at first,



but looked immeasurably lame when compared to Sayid's weapons of intimate destruction.



And where Sayid's methods were designed to inflict maximum agony,



Dharma torture looked like it was kind of fun.



Having watched them torture Sayid with sugar cube LSD, you have to wonder how they planned to kill him. Tickle him to death?



Sayid ended up tied to a tree just like Sawyer, bound by his own self loathing, obstinately refusing to cooperate in his own rescue. And like Sawyer, who finally confessed that he didn't have the inhalers, Sayid ended up telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.



Of course no one believed him. In the Land of Lies, Truth looks like an imposter. The Dharma had no way of knowing the truth that they had already been infiltrated by a whole host of spies, emissaries from the future who were going to do their level best to completely smash their little utopian eggshell. Sayid from the future, knowing exactly who Ben from the Past will grow up to be, shoots a hole in the fabric of time. Or at least into the fabric of Ben's sweatshirt. What ripples will echo into time because of this one rock being thrown through the looking glass?



If the story follows true to the Lawz laid down in episode one of season five, then Whatever Happened, Happened. Logically that means Ben is not dead. Simply put, it's impossible. We already saw that he grew up and became the man who sent Sayid on his murder spree. The murder spree that caused Sayid's soul to curdle. The curdled soul that caused Sayid to shoot the little boy who only wanted to be his friend. The betrayal that caused the little boy to grow into the man who sent Sayid on his murder spree.



"The only difference between a human being and a stone rolling down a hill is that the human being thinks he is in control of his own destiny." - Spinoza



It's not fair to blame Sayid entirely for Ben's nature, of course, any more than Ben can be made responsible for Sayid's choice to kill. After all, Ben sent the burning bus sailing into a houseful of people before Sayid had the chance to betray him. Even if Sayid had chosen the alternate course, and tried to be a benevolent Big Brother to the little deviant, odds are Ben wouldn't have grown up straight and good. In the Nature vs. Nurture showdown, it's not clear which of these men was born a killer. A case could be made that both had gentle souls that were gradually murdered by the thousand tragic cuts of their sad, blighted lives. Perhaps we are being asked to only understand them both and judge neither. Sayid wore purple throughout this episode, the color of repentance, the liturgical color of Lent. He was sincerely seeking redemption when he chose to murder Ben. He was embracing the ethos of Faith. He had found his purpose. In his own way, he thought he was choosing to save the world. It's not his fault that, in this story, the concept of individual choice is nothing but a big unfunny joke.



"We have to believe in free will. We have no choice." - Isaac Bashevis Singer

This is a concept we Lost fans should all be familiar with. We know next week we have to watch more fun and games on the Dharma Kibbutz. We know that whatever happened will happen again. We know they won't tell us what actually happened until it happens a couple of dozen times. And then we'll get to see that it happened only because it always happened! And yet we'll be chomping at the bit to see it happen. You see? It's true. There is no such thing as free will. We are in fact all fools enslaved by time and space.



It's time we all just accepted it.

35 comments:

Anonymous said...

Brilliant. You really are the best recapper in the business. Funny as hell too :)

Though for once you missed something. You missed your chance to throw your mighty opinion in this inexplicable confusion of "whose door did La fleur knock on"? I still say Kate but all sorts of people have turned into Dharma architects to say otherwise. You did not mention the second porch scene.

Seabiscuit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Seabiscuit said...

Thought-provoking and a blast to read as usual! :)

Yes, this DI storyline has been very, very dull. Sawyer has been the biggest disappointment, no longer the feral, snarky individual, he's been reduced to mere sheep (a reluctant one, but a sheep nonetheless). Jim LaFake needs to take a hike and let the real Sawyer take over again.

I will be rooting for the O6 to get in there and f**k things up, shake Sawyer, Jules, and co. out of their complacency, and make this an interesting show again. Sayid's done a fine job of getting the ball rolling for that. It's Kate's turn next week, and I'll even be cheering on Jack (amazingly enough, LOL). I can't wait!

Anonymous said...

Your comparison to The Village is interesting - a group of people who tried to shield themselves from a fearful, violent world by using fear and violence as controls. Attempting the peaceful utopia doesn't seem to work any better for the Dharma folks. I think it has been at least somewhat idyllic for them, though, again, the arrangement itself is limiting and set up to fail.

lilybelle said...

Hi Fish,
Great recap as always. I liked that the Dharma "torture" scene was so benign, I could actually keep my eyes open and watch it, unlike so many past Lost gross out scenes. Locke getting his leg set comes to mind. :) I fear for Sayid, his soul is just too battered I think, all of the love sucked out of his life. What does he have left, maybe a visit from Smokey? I hope not.
Thanks for all of the interesting ideas and good thoughts. Peace.

Seabiscuit said...

I was wondering about Sayid as well. His story has been in a nosedive as of late. He's gone from warrior-techno-whiz-pwner-extraordinaire to a miserable wretch gunning down unarmed 12 year olds. :/ I sure hope this isn't how his story ends.

Kyle from Kentucky said...

Brilliant as usual. And I too am bored to tears with the Dharma shit. When Sawyer raised his hand I yelled TRAITOR. This guy that I have loved for so long is suddenly so giddy with his dharmatopia life that he almost sides with the people that he knows will die instead of the people he crashed here with?? WTF?

Kia said...

Hey Fish... this post is AMAZING! Like really! I'm thinking about forwarding this to Dark along with all of my friends that NEED to read it :)....

Kyle... I'm sorry, but I was with Sawyer on that one. It seemed like it was going to be either Sayid, or Sayid AND all of our other losties!

Anonymous said...

Sawyer has made some serious moral compromises in the past three years.


Like what?

I keep reading comments about how James sold Sayid out, that he should have come up with another solution to help him...he's going to have to suffer the consequences of his actions...of what, exactly, I'm unsure, and I honestly have to ask, what other solution? Consequences of what? Doing the best he could in the messed up situation he, along with the others that were left behind found themselves in? Trying three different approaches to help Sayid, to finally give him a chance to escape that he doesn't accept? Spit on his wretched, compromised soul, tear up his sappy life in the DI so he can pick up a rifle and bust them all out of that place to go where and do what? So the O6 who all have their own seperate, not back to help those they left behind agendas can throw another monkey wrench in the works? His people? The O6 haven't been his people since they left him and everyone else looking to be rescued that day behind three years ago. Just how loyal is he honestly meant to be to people who never had any attention on returning for him or anyone else? Besides, they're still stuck in 1977, and there's been no indication that the man who knows all about time travel is anywhere around. Ms. Fish, I normally enjoy your reviews, and I realize this episode didn't offer up the best in storytelling, but I can't get on board with the criticism towards Sawyer's character, which, imo, seems to stem from another source completely.


Darbi,

LostTvFan said...

Sorry Fish but I have to agree with Darbi. I posted this comment on a thread at The Fuse called "What Happened to Our Sawyer":

I'm pretty sure I watched this episode and I'm pretty sure Sawyer tried three times to save his 'friend' Sayid. I'm pretty sure his 'friend' said no each time because he didn't want his or anyone else's help -- because he had his own agenda. I'm pretty sure Sayid was hoping to be killed as punishment for his past crimes (much like Sawyer in CM) until he realized he could kill young Ben and perhaps redeem himself. I'm pretty sure Sayid engineered his own fate despite Sawyer's attempts to 'save' him; even if it put him and everyone else at risk. I'm pretty sure TPTB did not intend for the audience to see Sayid shooting a young boy in cold blood as a failure on Sawyer's part.

Sawyer seemed to be trying to keep all the balls he is juggling in the air, with no one ending up being hurt and while not blowing the cover that is keeping them all safe. It is not as if he can make a choice between 1977 and 2007 or one between the people he has come to care about for three years and the ones who just came back after three years.

I don't think Sawyer has crumbled; I think he has done the best he could with the reality of the situation he is actually stuck in. What should he have done instead? Really? While stuck in the place where he is struck, with no other timeline as an option; what could he have done that would have made things better? Defused the situation? Gotten Sayid free without getting them all killed, locked up, or on the next sub out? Write a scenario that works, because frankly I don't see too many choices for Sawyer to make other than the ones he did. I'm certainly not going to blame him for Sayid refusal to listen to reason because he was hell bent on either suicide by Dharma or revenge. Sayid’s sins cannot be laid at Sawyer’s door, they are his alone.

Sayid refused freedom because he had plans for little Ben from the moment he met him. What could Sawyer have done about that? Little Ben set that VW bus loose in the compound so he could free Sayid. What could Sawyer have done about that? Sayid put a bullet in a child’s chest. What could Sawyer have done about that? Sayid refused to answer Sawyer’s questions. What could Sawyer do about that? Kate knows why she came back but not why Sayid did. Sawyer at least asked if Kate knew what Sayid was up to, she didn't. What could Sawyer do about that? Sayid has brought down the house of cards that is the I5 lie and chaos will result. What could Sawyer have done about that? Really?

What could Sawyer have done he didn’t? How could he have prevented what happened? Kept things from spinning out of control? From the promo, it seems that even Kate realizes how much havoc their arrival has caused. While that is not the O4’s fault, it sure as hell isn’t Sawyer’s either.

What happened to our Sawyer? He has become a man who cares about other people. The survivors he was left behind with, the woman he lives with, the people within the DI who trust and respect him and the ones who just came back, the ones he kept a candle in the window awaiting, for years. The ones he never stopped searching for, for as long as it takes. That's what happened to our Sawyer and we should be proud of him.


I watched "He's Our You" again last night and Sayid had six chances to go another direction, including the three Sawyer offered. Sayid didn't want to go back to the Island, even after Locke's visit, even after meeting with Ben at the marina. He tried not to board that plane, to take another instead. He had no interest in 'saving' or 'helping' his friends. What he was interested in was killing a version of Ben that was still a child--despite the fact it was a child, despite the fact that it would make things difficult for his 'friends'. Sayid was on his own revenge mission and you want me to believe that Sawyer has been morally compromised? At least Sawyer still has a soul.

grayslostgirl said...

I enjoyed your analysis as always. I wonder if we should keep asking the question of why we think that all those of Oceanic 815 have to be loyal to each other. In the 108 days they were together, there was very little loyalty amongst them. They were strangers with pasts that we slowly learned about over the years. They stayed together for survival and against an unseen enemy...and monsters. I have to question why we expect them to suddenly change loyalties when they have been with the DI, happily for 3 years. They chose to stay and keep looking for Locke, but in this choosing they have built the best life they could in 1977 when their past selves were out there in the world.

I am a non- whatever happened happened person. I like when the past is changed. Maybe the "course" correction is what is happening now. Why do we worry so much about paradoxes in time? I've liked many movies where it had been changed (Frequency, being one of them in which Elizabeth Mitchell just happens to star in) and I didn't question it.

Also,something that suddenly sticks out to me- Groundhog Day. Yes, it's a comedy, but Phil spends many years re-living one day until he gets it right. Maybe the island needs to get it right...or maybe I'm just going on and on to no point.

Anonymous said...

Sawyer hasn't made any moral compromises? I guess cooperating with a bunch of creepy cultists who kill innocents is just something he has no choice in. Because he's just a big sweet angel who can do no wrong.

You have it exactly right, Fish. Sawyer tried and he came through but he hasn't been making the brave choices these past 3 years. He's also been hiding out staying comfy and colluding with cultists. It's great to find a Sawyer fan who realizes the depth of the character comes from his fallibility not his perfection. Some of these Sawyer fangirls are sounding like the flip side of the Jack girls now.

Skaters who are just like Jaters - worship the man and condemn the woman. It's amazing how similar they are and how little self awareness there is on either side.

Anonymous said...

Sawyer tried and he came through but he hasn't been making the brave choices these past 3 years. He's also been hiding out staying comfy and colluding with cultists.

And you know that how? Because we've been shown very little of the three years the I5 have been living with Dharma. And if I recall, didn't the O6 take the comfy lifestyle road, too? What brave choice exactly was James supposed to do in the intervening three years? Take his camp, go back to the beach re-build their camp and just hope they didn't get ambushed and killed by either the DI or the Hostiles while waiting for the never intending to go back to the island O6 and Locke to return? This isn't an issue of not recognizing his fallibilities, or worshiping the man, condemning the woman (Where does that even fit in what's being discussed here?) it's about what both groups did to survive. The DI are a strange bunch, no doubt, in all honesty, what else were the ones who got left behind supposed to do? Was there a safer alternative available for all concerned?

Darbi,

Anonymous said...

I think the problem with some fans is they insist on judging all the characters and putting them in good or bad compartments, even though the writers don't seem to do that at all. You see the same people who want to keep Sawyer blameless have a need to blame Sayid. They need to separate everything into good or bad. You can't watch this show that way in my opinion.

Anonymous said...

Sawyer made the safe choice, just like Jack. What if the DI are the bad guys and the hostiles are actually being persecuted by these people? If you find that out and if you find out that Sawyer knew all about it, then is he still a sweet baby angel? You could see that he knows all about their torture and their methods and he's helping them spy on their own people. So he knows about that, and he helps them, and he doesn't try and find out what's really going on with the hostiles, all so he can stay safe and live like he's living in suburbia USA. Sorry, there's nothing especially admirable about what Sawyer is doing. I love him to bits and he's the best character on the show, but this Dharma episode is going to be a low point for him imo. It's so funny how just because he looks all settled and domestic, his fangirls have decided he's no longer part of the moral questions being asked. You really sell him short.

It is the same thing as what Jaters do. Jack can always be defended and Kate is always a disgusting pig. I'm sure next week you'll find some way to hate on her because she won't help keep James's lies quiet. Nothing matters except safety anyway, right? Sounds like good advice for living in an armed compound run by control freaks who kill the native people.

Anonymous said...

Then I guess I go back to this question...what do you believe the I5, and the rest of the ones who got left behind should have done while waiting for Locke and the O6 to return to keep everyone safe as possible in 1974? What were their other options to keep from turning into conformist with a bunch of cultist?

Darbi,

Anonymous said...

They could have gone to live with the hostiles. They could have tried to learn what the DI are doing and why they live like that. It looks like all Sawyer did was get comfy and start collaborating. If being safe is all that matters, then he did great, but he didn't do anything heroic. He just blended in and went with the program. But then when people came back he had to start dealing with his choices. What if it was Kate instead of Sayid being tortured and killed by the DI? Would that be different or would he still have to make it home in time for dinner with Juliet? Since all that matters is being safe and making sure nothing disturbs the status quo.

If the DI start killing his old friends, does that justify Sawyer upsetting his safe little life? Why was it ok for them to kill hostiles then, or whatever else they've been doing to those people? I think Fish asked a good question about why Sawyer just let it drop about Richard. Why didn't he do more to understand the truce and the hostiles? It's like as long as he had a can of beer and a woman in his bed, he didn't care what kind of people he was helping.

Mike S. said...

I generally enjoy Fish's review.

But im going with Darbi on this one.

LostTvFan said...

Sawyer hasn't made any moral compromises? I guess cooperating with a bunch of creepy cultists who kill innocents is just something he has no choice in. Because he's just a big sweet angel who can do no wrong.

What innocents have been killed by the creepy cultists? Paul was killed by the hostiles, Juliet and Sawyer killed two hostiles and Sayid shot Ben. What innocents have been killed by the creepy cultists?

You have it exactly right, Fish. Sawyer tried and he came through but he hasn't been making the brave choices these past 3 years. He's also been hiding out staying comfy and colluding with cultists. It's great to find a Sawyer fan who realizes the depth of the character comes from his fallibility not his perfection. Some of these Sawyer fangirls are sounding like the flip side of the Jack girls now.

Really. Sawyer has kept his group safe and together while waiting for Locke to return. For as long as it takes. When the O4 did return, he managed to provide cover for three of them and tried to help Sayid. Can you say the same for Jack?

Skaters who are just like Jaters - worship the man and condemn the woman. It's amazing how similar they are and how little self awareness there is on either side.

Who is condemning a woman? What woman? We are talking about moral ambiguity. We are talking about Sawyer and Sayid. We are not worshiping anyone! Where the hell have I or Darbi condemned any woman? I don’t worship Sawyer but I would like someone to take four minutes and tell me what he should have done instead of saying what he did was wrong. Wrong how? Wrong why? Just how could he have handled things any better than he did? Give me some other, better choices he could have, should have made and explain HOW they would have improved the situation.

Instead of throwing around Skaters are worse than Jaters and crap about fan girl worship, how about telling me what you think Sawyer did that was so wrong. So wrong it is worse than shooting a young boy.

Anonymous said...

The most rabid Sawyer fangirls all despise Kate. They fill every message board they can with Kate hate. iT's no different than the average Jater.

No one knows what the dharma have done in the three years Sawyer has been with them, but it's obvious he knows they are scary and dangerous. That's why he's nervous for Sayid. This isn't the first time he's been to Oldham or the first time he's seen how serious they are about executing the natives. Sawyer knows exactly how creepy and bad these people are and he still helps them.

But it doesn't matter as long as he's safe and has a nice boring life to live that looks exactly like the suburban dream. That makes it all ok. I bet the trains run on time also.

And way to miss out on the whole moral dilemma by dismissing Sayid's situation to just shooting a child.

Anonymous said...

I just loved this episode, and your recap for sur! But I think that this time it's more short that it used to be. In fact, I'll take an simple but obvious exemple: you're a skater (everyone knows that), so why didn't you talk about the skate scene at the end?

But Iwas so happy to see finally someone (Sayid) made a mess!
Hey, Sawyer, I love him, but I would like yo say to him: MOVE, DO SOMETHING, BE THE REAL SAWYER damn it!

In the promo of "Whatever happened happened", we can see Sawyer Talking with, or more kinda (but a very just little kinda) yelling at her to shut up and stoping asking questions.
And there I say YES! Here we are, Sawyer and Kate have tensions, like they used to! The Suliet relationship is simply boring!

GO SKATE GO!

a lost french girl (skater in case noby noticed :) )

LostTvFan said...

The most rabid Sawyer fangirls all despise Kate. They fill every message board they can with Kate hate. it's no different than the average Jater.

Sorry dear but I am a Sawyer fan and a SKATER so don't paint me with that brush. I also have the guts to use my own name instead of hiding behind anonymous as so many of you are doing.

What the hell does so called Kate hate have to do with this episode? Kate was barely mentioned in this review and most of the discussion has been about Sawyer and Sayid.

Is dragging Sawyer down necessary to counter the Kate hate you see around every corner? Can't I defend Sawyer without being accused of hating Kate? What, please tell me, does one have to do with the other?

As for fangirls, aren't Kate fans fangirls too? Or are they just so damn special they don't qualify but they get to use condescending names like that for everyone else?

Anonymous said...

They could have gone to live with the hostiles. They could have tried to learn what the DI are doing and why they live like that. It looks like all Sawyer did was get comfy and start collaborating. If being safe is all that matters, then he did great, but he didn't do anything heroic. He just blended in and went with the program. But then when people came back he had to start dealing with his choices. What if it was Kate instead of Sayid being tortured and killed by the DI? Would that be different or would he still have to make it home in time for dinner with Juliet? Since all that matters is being safe and making sure nothing disturbs the status quo.

If the DI start killing his old friends, does that justify Sawyer upsetting his safe little life? Why was it ok for them to kill hostiles then, or whatever else they've been doing to those people? I think Fish asked a good question about why Sawyer just let it drop about Richard. Why didn't he do more to understand the truce and the hostiles? It's like as long as he had a can of beer and a woman in his bed, he didn't care what kind of people he was helping.


The same Hostiles who had just killed Paul, and were about to drag Amy off to do God knows what to her? And then when the O6 returned, and he was possibly still alive, and maybe in a position to help them like he was being head of security with the DI, he would have taken it in the hid for collaborating with the murdering Hostiles, right? Yeah, I can see how that would have been a better option. He and the rest of those left behind could have found out all there was to know about the DI whom the Hostiles are going to wipe out eventually. Truth is, we don't know what James or the rest of those left behind know of the Hostiles or the DI's purpose for being on the island. So, anything other than the fact that they kept themselves under the radar while continuing to look out for the people who were never intending to return for them is pure, unfounded, bitterness filled speculation. But had they gone with the Hosties, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have had time to get involved with Juliet that way, or had a moment to enjoy a beer, or find a measure of peace in his life...since that's what this is really about when you boil the fat off of it. Isn't that right, Anonymous?

Darbi,

Anonymous said...

Sounds like you would make a very cooperative member of any authoritarian group. You don't know half of what's going on but you've got all the judgments lined up. Hostiles, bad. Dharma, good, or at least good enough. Sawyer, all good, always good. You really do see this show as black and white as the dumb Jaters you love to ridicule, don't you?

Anonymous said...

Sounds like you would make a very cooperative member of any authoritarian group. You don't know half of what's going on but you've got all the judgments lined up. Hostiles, bad. Dharma, good, or at least good enough. Sawyer, all good, always good. You really do see this show as black and white as the dumb Jaters you love to ridicule, don't you?

Well, not as black and white as "anonymous" seems to. It seems as if you find it easier to tear down the well thought out assertations of Darbi and Ann, with name calling and snap judgements such as Dharma bad, Sawyer bad. I don't think anyone who is discussing Sawyer thinks that he's some sort of angel, but simply putting forth the question "What should he have done?" And probably what should he have done to merit cutting him some slack in your eyes? Oh yes, NOT getting involved with Juliet. Silly me.

Kerf

Anonymous said...

Sounds like you would make a very cooperative member of any authoritarian group. You don't know half of what's going on but you've got all the judgments lined up. Hostiles, bad. Dharma, good, or at least good enough. Sawyer, all good, always good. You really do see this show as black and white as the dumb Jaters you love to ridicule, don't you?

If it meant keeping myself from getting shot and killed, or sent packing back to some random year in the '70's where I don't belong, or chancing it in the jungle amongst the murdering Hostiles, you betcha' I'd be a cooperative member of an authoritative group. And since my doing so would save the hids of people I waited three years for...I wouldn't be all that gung-ho to see that safe, boring, conformist lifestyle blow up in my and everyone elses face (including the people who returned) until there was another plan to get us all out of the decade we're all stuck in for the time being without anyone getting shot. In the midst of having to make the best of a crappy situation where nothing is every black and white, that's just me.


Darbi,

Anonymous said...

It's like as long as he had a can of beer and a woman in his bed; he didn't care what kind of people he was helping.

If that’s all you saw Sawyer as doing; then I guess the same logic can be applied to Kate. She didn’t care enough to help anyone; as long as she had Aaron and Jack in her bed. Touché.

You don't know half of what's going on but you've got all the judgments lined up.

Neither do you, but you have decided Dharma is bad, so Sawyer is as well. Remember, it is the hostiles (Others) who wipe Dharma out and leave their bodies in an open grave. Their leader Ben wrecked havoc with our Losties, killed 815'ers and kidnapped children, hung Charlie and took a pregnant women. You might want to take a deep breath and see what happens next, but we know Ben's band of brothers held Jack, Kate and Sawyer captive, took Walt off the raft, set Michael up to kill Ana Lucia and Libby and attack the beach camp. They don't look like the good guys to me.

The reason there has been so few deaths in three years is the peace Sawyer brokered with Richard. Another bad move on his part I guess, since in your opinion he has done nothing right.

Anonymous said...

I guess cooperating with a bunch of creepy cultists who kill innocents is just something he has no choice in.

They could have gone to live with the hostiles.

So... are you stating, Dharmites as they were of 1974 are murderous creeps (proof, please, as of 1974?) but hostiles, who are TOTALLY OK with shooting a man for having a picnic having no qualms about shooting his wife too, if not for Sawyer and crew, are totally fine peeps to live with?
Niiice. Someone's getting tangled in their own words a bit here?

Also, sticking various tags on people just because they cannot justify Kate's every single screw-up? what can be more Jaterlike? Do you judge people for who they like and who they don't? Then, generally, how would you judge a person who fully supports a woman whose best solution for any situation always seems to be some sort of a crime?

Yeah, she's all sorts of a reformed and repented gal now, on a long road towards redemption. It doesn't mean she farts rainbows out of her butt and it doesn't mean all who don't like her are insane, not understanding Lost, people with little self awareness who all but spew venom in quantities enough to solve overpopulation problems in China.

Perhaps we should all remember, that arguing about TASTES (including tastes in TV characters) is a serious mauvais ton and stick to that. Darbi and LostFan were arguing about POINTS. not TASTES.

And though points of view Darbi and LostFan expressed may not be welcome or in line on an all-skater board, but Fish, despite of her obvious Skate bias always offers something for ALL Lost fans (which is why so many consider her to be one of the best recappers there is), and supposedly, all are welcome to comment and argue her points, which was exactly what these two posters did, so what makes them people with little self awareness yadda yadda is still unclear.

Instead of making assumptions about other fans, Jaters or Skaters, or Sulieters, or Fanboys, basing on what they currently like on the show, try bring arguments which stand for YOUR point of view. That's what makes a discussion. Other than that?
Senseless trolling.

-Longshot

Anonymous said...

Fish, despite of her obvious Skate bias always offers something for ALL Lost fans (which is why so many consider her to be one of the best recappers there is), and supposedly, all are welcome to comment and argue her points,

That's why you see that Darbi who "normally enjoys" Fish's reviews didn't like this one because it didn't coincide with her unconditional support for everything Sawyer does. And she implied that Fish didn't even know her own mind about why she wasn't praising Sawyer to the skies. Who knows what she was implying probably something about not worshipping at the altar of Suliet.

It's just funny to see that the only thing these shippers care about are their ships and can't appreciate a real critical review unless their ship du jour gets enough asskissing. It's ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

That's why you see that Darbi who "normally enjoys" Fish's reviews didn't like this one because it didn't coincide with her unconditional support for everything Sawyer does.

Oh, puhlease, too much drama. All Darbi said was she cannot get on board with Fish's criticism of Sawyer. Cannot get on board, ya know? Like in, "I don't agree with this point of view". Where exactly does it say, she didn't LIKE Fish's review? That's just a bit farfetched, don't you think? Having a bias makes one read too much into other people's bias?

I don't agree with probably half of Fish's review, but I still think it was one hell of a job done, good, snarky language, as always, neatest literary work and parallels, some very cool points picked up and on the whole a very enjoyable and thought-provoking read.

and this? :-)

It's just funny to see that the only thing these shippers care about are their ships and can't appreciate a real critical review unless their ship du jour gets enough asskissing. It's ridiculous.

Aww, thanks so much for the lols. :-) If you substitute your "ships" for "Skate" "Kate" or "My own sense of entitlement" or "This is how it feels to me and it's all that matters" and "real critical review" for "other not so badly grounded opinions" - is the exact picture of yourself and those anonymous "other shippers".

-Longshot

Anonymous said...

That's why you see that Darbi who "normally enjoys" Fish's reviews didn't like this one because it didn't coincide with her unconditional support for everything Sawyer does. And she implied that Fish didn't even know her own mind about why she wasn't praising Sawyer to the skies. Who knows what she was implying probably something about not worshipping at the altar of Suliet.

Anonymous, yes, normally I enjoy Fish's review, but this happens to be one I didn't agree with completely in regards to the Sawyer character. I believe that's okay to say, and I don't believe the Fish has ever expected unquestionable agreeance regarding her reviews or even her opinions, even from fellow Skaters. But this isn't what your complaint is really about, is it? No, it's about a topic you, and you alone brought into the discussion that really has nothing to do with what was being discussed which was how James handled the situation with Sayid. It had nothing to do with Kate, Skate or worshiping at the alter of Suliet, yet, that's what you made this about. Why is that exactly? What bearing would my support of that coupling have on what what went down between Sayid and James? None that I can see, which is why I never mentioned it. Perhaps you'd like to do the same, since it bears no relevance on our current discussion.

Darbi,

Anonymous said...

I can't get on board with the criticism towards Sawyer's character, which, imo, seems to stem from another source completely.

What did you mean by this then, Darbi? What was the "other source completely" that you were referring to? Fish can't criticize Sawyer's character without having an ulterior motive? Please explain.

Jane Primrose said...

Hang in there, Darbi, you're making a lot of sense.
I note that still, nobody has given a good answer to the question of what Sawyer SHOULD have done, if you believe what he has done is a mistake.
I agree that he's made the best of a bad situation. That's not unconditional support - if I thought he had made mistakes I'd say so, even while still liking the character.

Blogger said...

Did you ever try to maximize your free satoshi collections by utilizing a BTC FAUCET ROTATOR?

Blogger said...

Did you consider exchanging with the ultimate Bitcoin exchange service - YoBit.