WARNING: This blog posting contains mildly explicit language. Viewer discretion is advised.
OMG! OMG! OMG! I was right! “I am smart! I am smart! S-m-r-t! I mean s-m-A-r-t!”
I quote the great Homer Simpson because I was pretty much right about something huge! It’s rare that I display smartness, so I must gloat on these rare occasions.
Are you dying to know what I was right about? Well, if you read my blog and have seen this week’s episode of
Lost, “Ab Aeterno,” where so many
Lost questions were answered, then you would surely know.
As I postulated in
a previous blog posting, Jacob’s job is to contain Evil on the Island in order to keep Evil from overtaking the Earth. This is why Man-in-Black (I gave up on calling him Guy-in-Black)/The Smoke Monster/Fake John Locke feels trapped and wants to escape; he is Evil, and he wants to escape so he and his evilness may roam free through the world, and as Isabella tells Hurley, all the world will be in Hell. Please note that I referred to this as “The Darkness” in that blog posting, as Jacob called it “The Darkness” in this episode. How awesome am I? How awesome are you for reading my blog? Very, on both counts. Very indeed.
I will provide more brilliant insights and predictions in the present blog posting. I am not conceited.
Some Background
First and foremost, if you don’t speak Latin or if you haven’t yet googled, “Ab Aeterno” (the episode’s title)
means “From Eternity.” Obviously, it’s a reference to Richard’s immortality, as well as a reference to the Jacob v. Man in Black feud.
This episode answered questions
Lost fans have been wondering about for an eternity, particularly questions about the oh-so-mysterious Richard Alpert. In April of 2009, I wrote an email to my
Lost-pushing sister about Richard Alpert. You’ll see that I was quite insightful, and quite wrong in one respect, though I brilliantly and insightfully corrected myself. I’m so flippin’ smart.
I read Wikipedia's thing on Richard Alpert (the Lost character). It explains, "he plays a role in the group's hierarchy that has been compared to that of the Panchen Lama in Buddhism by the series' producers.” Clicking on that word reveals that that role is the second highest in Buddhism, just under Dalai Lama. This makes sense, since it seems that someone else is always the leader, like Ben, Charles Widmore, and it seems John Locke is supposed to be next. The first link says that Jacob is the leader of the Others, so maybe that's who Richard is really second to. Maybe Jacob is G-d (I just thought of that now). Jacob means “supplanter,” and Biblical Jacob was the one who fought G-d, and was then given the name Israel by G-d, which means "one who has been strong against G-d."
Getting back to Richard Alpert, the article mentions the person he was named after of the same name. The real Richard Alpert was a spiritual guy in the 1960s and 70s who had some association with a Hindu spiritual leader.
Wow, I’m smarter than I realized. I had forgotten about Biblical Jacob’s interactions with G-d because I was so focused on the Biblical Jacob v. Esau thing. Perhaps my
earlier suggestion that Man in Black/The Smoke Monster was a divine leader before Jacob usurped him might in fact be accurate. The question is, then, is it a battle between Good and Evil, or is it a battle between two divine entities who simply have differing worldviews and differing views of human nature.
Evil from Within Lost
This episode was exhausting to watch, largely because of all the crazy drama and
Lostiness, but also because I was rather distraught to discover that the producers of
Lost blatantly lied to us. They very clearly
stated on
Jimmy Kimmel Live that Fake John Locke is not the Man in Black, but he is the Smoke Monster. “Ab Aeterno” clearly shows us what I believed whole-heartedly to be true before those evil producers lied to me – that The Man in Black is indeed The Smoke Monster, and since Fake John Locke is also The Smoke Monster, it follows that Fake John Locke is The Man in Black. Why did you lie to us,
Lost Producers, why?! Maybe there will be a twist and they will have not been lying all along. Perhaps Man in Black is lying and is not The Smoke Monster. After all, he is an evil bastard, he would lie. Continue reading for more evidence that Fake John Locke is not Man in Black/The Smoke Monster in the section below entitled “Man in Black.”
Identifying Jacob
Jacob is good. I’m maintaining a tiny little bit of doubt just in case they’re still screwing with us, but I think it’s pretty clear at this point. Jacob might be G-d, or he might be some alternate form of G-d – a divine power. It seems like Jacob doesn’t view the words “Hell” or “Devil” as defining Evil, so perhaps he doesn’t view G-d as defining Good. It seems like Jacob views things in terms of Good and Evil in a broader sense that probably encapsulates the Good- and Evil-related beliefs of all the world’s cultures, rather than being restricted to the Christian view of things. I surmised all this from Jacob’s reference to “what [Richard/Ricardo] call[s] Hell.” Additionally, Dogen had also referred to Fake John Locke/The Smoke Monster/Man in Black as “evil incarnate” rather than calling him the Devil, so it seems that Jacob and his followers probably do not subscribe to any particular religious belief. Man in Black/The Smoke Monster blatantly claimed that Jacob is the Devil, although he did leave that to Richard’s assumptions regarding The Smoke Monster. He also blatantly told Richard he is dead and in Hell. Man in Black’s blatant Devil and Hell-centric claims further demonstrates Man in Black’s willingness to tell people exactly what they want to hear in order to get what he wants.
Jacob’s purpose has become clear. He or whoever holds his position exists to contain and detain Evil on the Island, to protect the Island from Evil, and therefore, to protect the world from Evil. Logically, then, Jacob is the Protector, not just of the Island as I suggested
previously, but of the Universe. Jacob is G-d or some other form of Divinity representing Good, defined by some religions as G-d. Jacob represents Free Will; he believes people can and should make their own choices, and he believes he should not make those choices for people, even if people choose Evil. Jacob believes and hopes that people will ultimately choose Good over Evil. Jacob guides people, he helps them, he leads them, but he does not choose for them. Jacob hires Richard to guide people towards Good rather than Evil in ways that might be more direct than Jacob is willing to do himself. Jacob does not want to interfere with people’s choices.
Perhaps what Jacob intends and what Jacob does do not align perfectly. He does not intend to interfere with people’s decisions, yet it’s possible that he might have had profound effects on our special character’s lives,
possibly in the new reality (flash-sideways) and without a doubt in the reality we are familiar with. Jacob brings people to the Island, and he touches people, providing them with special gifts; these things interfere in their decisions. These things might even force them to make particular decisions.
In
my first Lost-related blog posting, I suggested that Jacob and Man in Black might both be evil forces, playing a game with people’s lives just for the sake of playing a game. Jacob provided evidence for this when he explained that he brings people to the Island to prove that people can choose Good over Evil. This is a subtle admission that he is playing with and interfering with people’s lives just to prove a point to a Man in Black, or to prove the point to himself. Jacob brings people to the Island where Evil lives to see if they will fall to Evil temptation. That seems rather evil of Jacob, though his intentions might be Good, and though he might otherwise be Good. Even Divine Good can be flawed.
In light of Jacob’s reason for bringing people to the Island, it’s interesting to think about and see how our special characters as well as our less special characters have faired in the face of Evil temptations. Most of our characters (such as Jack, Hurley, Sun, Jin, and Lapidus) have remained on the side of Good. Some characters have fallen to follow Evil (Fake John Locke/The Smoke Monster/Man in Black), either by choice (Claire and Sayid, sort of), by accident (Kate), or in a possibly hopeless and/or misguided attempt to con the Devil himself (Sawyer). Ben, a man who’s lived
much of his life committing evil acts in the name of Good, came close to turning fully to Evil for power and acceptance, but Good (via Ilana) accepted him. One character almost fell to Evil from desperation and a sense of lost purpose (Richard), but was drawn back by the inherently Good Hurley.
While there is a plethora of evidence that Jacob is G-d or some other form of Divine Goodness, there is at least one piece of evidence that he might not be G-d. When Jacob and Ricardo/Richard were making their deal, Jacob informed Ricardo/Richard that he could not grant him absolution for his sins. If I understand the monotheistic religions’ views correctly, G-d is capable of providing
absolution, either directly, such as in Judaism and possibly Islam (I don’t know very much about the latter), where one will never know if G-d has granted forgiveness, or indirectly, such as in Christianity, where a Priest can speak on behalf of G-d and grant forgiveness. I don’t know much about Buddhism, Hinduism, or other religions, but it seems they all have similar concepts of a Divine entity granting forgiveness. Therefore, if Jacob could not grant absolution for Richard’s sins, does that indicate that he is not divine? Perhaps, or perhaps it simply indicates that Jacob did not believe Richard was deserving of absolution, perhaps due to the nature of his murderous sin, or perhaps because Richard, who insisted the murder he committed was an accident, did not take full responsibility for his actions, and perhaps lacked sufficient remorse. Perhaps this is also why Richard is not a candidate. The six remaining candidates have also sinned I’m sure, but even Sayid, who arguably has sinned the most, took full responsibility for all the torturing he’s done, and clearly has tremendous remorse for it. Perhaps Jacob, as a Divine entity, feels that repentance is more than asking for absolution.
Worst Episode Ever, or Not
In the beginning of the episode, when Richard said they are dead and in Hell, and then again when Man in Black said the same thing to Ricardo/Richard, I was very tempted to write my blog in three words: “Worst episode ever.” Fortunately, Jacob saved me from having to make such a proclamation, proving to Richard that he (Richard) is alive (unless that was an evil illusion, so sneakily evil that only the Devil could pull it off). It would be tremendously unsatisfying if it turned out that the island was Hell and everyone was dead all along. Sure, it would be an interesting view of Hell, and in that sense, it would be far from unsatisfying. Um, so, I guess “unsatisfying” wasn’t the right word. Unsettling – it would be tremendously unsettling. It would also, for some reason, bring to mind the Robin Williams movie that I like a lot,
What Dreams May Come
. Anyway, since I’m going to assume they’re not in Hell, this was a great episode.
Mea Culpa (Latin for “My Bad”)
While I was right about some things, other people were wrong about some other things, and I propagated these falsehoods in a
previous blog posting. Richard did not come to the island from England on his way to Australia, he came to the Island from the
Canary Islands on his way to America, but it is true that he was a convict. We learn in this episode that he had been sold into slavery to avoid being hanged for murdering a man in hopes of saving his wife. If I’m remembering correctly, it was also suggested that the Others’ ancestors came to the island with Richard, but it looks like they came later somehow. Perhaps they came from England and perhaps they were also convicts. Who knows.
Evil Possibilities
I wondered
previously if Richard had sold his soul to Jacob to obtain his gift of immortality and not aging. It appears that he did not sell his soul, though he did agree to do something for Jacob in return for it. One could argue that that is a form of soul selling; after all, he gets to live forever without aging, but it looks like he must live on the island for eternity as Jacob’s liaison. However, this deal was in no way obscured – it was clearly laid out, and Jacob’s proposition that Richard be his liaison initiated it, rather than Richard’s desires for immortality. It was a friendly exchange, where Jacob was providing payment in the form of a gift in return for Richard’s service. Furthermore, Richard’s new job involved helping people to choose good over evil, an inherently non-evil endeavor. A Devil’s advocate might suggest however that perhaps Jacob sneakily led Richard into a trap; that Richard did sell his soul to Jacob without even knowing it. Yes, I know, this is very unlikely, and as I said, that is only what a Devil’s advocate would say. Puns are fun.
While I don’t want them to be in Hell, there is some evidence that they are. Isabella (Ricardo/Richard’s wife) was on the island with Richard before The Smoke Monster killed her or consumed her soul or did whatever it is he does to people. If she is not dead and in Hell, how did she get onto the island? Perhaps the priest snuck her onto the Black Rock.
Man in Black
Man in Black and Fake John Locke both complain about Jacob trapping him and holding him captive on the island, and both mention having been a regular person before. Fake John Locke gave us insight into the life he led as a regular person when he told Kate in “Recon” that he had a crazy mother. As I’ve suggested before, perhaps Man in Black/Fake John Locke/The Smoke Monster isn’t evil; perhaps he was wrongly captured and detained. Of course the evidence for his evilness ha been illuminated rather thoroughly, what with all the killing and so forth, but perhaps he didn’t start out being evil – perhaps he was driven to evil by being held captive for so long. Alternatively, maybe, like Lucifer, he fell from grace and became evil via his own choosing. If that is the case, it is rather interesting that he believes people are destined to choose evil, the very thing Jacob has been trying so hard to disprove.
I find it strange that Richard didn’t recognize Fake John Locke as Man in Black. Fake John Locke speaks and acts very much like Man in Black, with very similar intonational patterns and mannerisms. I wonder if Richard’s lack of recognition might in fact be evidence against Fake John Locke being Man in Black. Maybe those
Lost producers aren’t evil liars after all.
This episode delineated more
similarities between Jacob and Man in Black/The Smoke Monster/Fake John Locke. Man in Black told Richard to kill Jacob in the same way that Dogen told Sayid to kill Fake John Locke. When Sayid did as he was told, Fake John Locke was unaffected and definitely not (re-)killed. Was this a result of Sayid’s new infection? Are Jacob and Man in Black different kinds of beings? Does this provide another piece of evidence that Fake John Locke/The Smoke Monster is not Man in Black after all? Perhaps if Fake John Locke really was the Man in Black, perhaps Sayid’s murdering of him would have been successful.
Both Sayid and Richard were told to kill Fake John Locke and Jacob before the respective entity spoke, for if he spoke, it would be too late. I imagine this not speaking clause might result from both of their abilities to talk people into and out of things, perhaps in a manipulative, Devilish way. This suggests that both Fake John Locke and whoever he represents, as well as Jacob might be evil – or it suggests that Dogen and Man in Black perceive Fake John Locke and Jacob respectively as Evil.
My Brilliant Prediction
I believe that Hurley will be the candidate to take over the role of Jacob. As I mentioned
before, his last name, Reyes, means Kings, suggesting that he is destined to be King of the Universe. I have also discussed his genuine kindness, and other Good qualities. He genuinely wants to help his fellow man, and would do no harm. Speaking of doing no harm, I believe that if Hurley is not going to be the new Jacob, then Jack will be (he’s a doctor, so he took that do-no-harm oath, hence my segue). Jack Shephard, a born leader, is also genuinely kind and also has lots of Good qualities (well, all the candidates do), and Jacob made a point to protect Jack and Hurley in “Lighthouse.”
Anyhoo, getting back to Hurley, I further believe that he has already taken over the role of Jacob in the new reality/flash sideways. Everyone’s lives have improved in that new reality, and I can’t help but think Hurley has more to do with that then simply hiring a bunch of his friends in another reality. Perhaps Hurley is re-writing their lives so that they can be improved, as he attempted to rewrite Star Wars, so that it might be improved, when he was transported to the 1970s. Perhaps they were foreshadowing his Jacobian take-over.
It’s possible that I’m wrong, of course, and one piece of evidence for my potential wrongness is Hurley’s presence, presumably as a mortal, in the new reality. It could be that whoever takes the Jacob role wouldn’t have a mortal life anymore, but then again, perhaps he or she can. Perhaps, in a Christ-like way (let’s pretend we’re all Christian for a second), the new Jacob could exist both as a divine being on the island as well as a mortal being in LA. If, however, this is not the case, and if I am correct in my prediction that the new reality/flash-sideways is the result of the new Jacob, then the new Jacob must be someone who we have not seen in the new reality. However, I believe we have seen all the six non-crossed-off candidates in the new reality. Therefore, my assumption that the new Jacob can exist, whether mortal or not, off the island is very likely accurate. Of course we know that Jacob could leave the island; I wonder if he still existed on the island when he left, or if he simply sojourned off the island. Anyway, my point is, I don’t believe that Hurley’s presence in the new reality is evidence against my prediction that he is the new Jacob, and that the new reality is what Hurley as the new Jacob has woven.
We shall wait and see if more of my predictions end up being correct. It’s fun to be right about stuff, but it should be noted that it’s easier to be right when one suggests every possibility one can think of, thereby increasing the chances of accuracy for at least one of those possibilities. See, I told you I’m not conceited.
, 
from the movie I didn't see (
) and probably other stuff I can't think of right now, seems to lack the passion, the enthusiasm, the emotion, and the musickiness that I personally love in music. What do I mean by “musickiness”? I don’t know, that’s why I made up a word. It's a lot of dull, quiet, singing, perhaps with some potentially profound lyrics, which I only say because I vaguely remember hearing some lyrics that sounded pretty good in the midst of some painfully boring music. I have no problem with quiet, but I do have a problem with nearly monotonous or otherwise repetitive music. Perhaps I'm being too harsh.
, 
song ( 
), and not just because she is the sister of a guy from 
. I could listen to it a thousand times, and, like a good 
. His success continued to grow; a few months ago, he was on The Tonight Show with Conan O’Brien, and now (well, last night) he was on 
, which was obviously 
song "If U Seek Amy"? I learned yesterday from the VH1 Top 20 and from Fox News that it's meant to be "IF u see ka(y) me" --> "F * C K Me." (That’s right -- I’m censoring the explicit language even though I warned you about it.)
and the man from 
should marry each other....They both sing about still being in love with an ex when they're with someone new ("Thinking of You" and "Lips of an Angel").
to sing (in "Just Dance") all about being so drunk on red wine that she doesn't know where she is or how her shirt got turned inside out? So the FCC apparently thinks it's good to encourage stupid kids to smoke the weed and get drunk enough to be date raped, right? But it's not okay to creatively and cryptically spell a profane word, so cryptically in fact, that reasonably intelligent adults don't get it even when it's brought to our attention, because even then we have to really think about it to get it. Britney is essentially censoring herself; it’s excessive for the radio to further censor her. Ironically, bleeping it really just draws attention to the profanity; it draws as much attention as Fox News complaining about it does.
version of the 
.
and 
do exist! Woohoo!
