Re: your observations - you put Human redeemability at the heart of the story, which is certainly a valid and long-standing philosophical dialectic. However, I would also like you to consider this possibility: what if Jacob is trying to prove to the Island that the creation of Humans was not a mistake? In a universe where the Creator is omniscient and omnipotent, what if the Creator itself thinks it has committed an error? Every other animal behaves solely according to its nature - cows graze, wolves hunt - but Humans, endowed with the power of reason and creativity, continually expand their "role", perhaps exceeding what even an omniscient Creator conceived. (Which would make it only "mostly omniscient".) Maybe Jacob is trying to convince the Creator that Humans, even in their unpredictability, will eventually be the salvation of the Island. (Which might be redeemability.)
You point on "the Presto" is spot-on. I believe, if we assume the constructors of LOST to have been storytelling geniuses, their error was in thinking that a TV audience could maintain a line of thinking over several seasons, hiatuses, and interruptions. Those threads of lies, half-truths, and erroneous conclusions, on the part of both the characters in the story and us the viewer, are very hard to hang onto over time. Maybe they intended the series to become a cult-classic and be binged over and over, resulting in a viewership that would "get it". Maybe they themselves got lost in the storyline and failed to properly keep track of the lies they were telling us!
I very much enjoy your conception that LOST is connected to the Bible, and may be intended to be the origins of its principles. Nifty.
By extraordinary coincidence (or *is* it??) I am reading the Silmarillion for the first time right now, actually. It's damn close to impenetrable. Fun, though.
I have some thoughts on Jacob based on what we're shown that aren't as charitable as your take, but that's just my take; we'll get there eventually. I love the theories! Keep 'em coming!
I see the Silmarillion as Tolkien's take on a Middle Earth Bible. Some of it IS pretty dense, but then, have you ever read the Bible? I found a great deal of joy in comparing the two views of creation/existence, just as I have from exploring the Hindu, Buddhist, Zarathustrian, Hebrew, Egyptian, etc. views. Despite all the differences produced by culture, many essential ideas appear in all of them.
Given that I am far behind:
Re: your observations - you put Human redeemability at the heart of the story, which is certainly a valid and long-standing philosophical dialectic. However, I would also like you to consider this possibility: what if Jacob is trying to prove to the Island that the creation of Humans was not a mistake? In a universe where the Creator is omniscient and omnipotent, what if the Creator itself thinks it has committed an error? Every other animal behaves solely according to its nature - cows graze, wolves hunt - but Humans, endowed with the power of reason and creativity, continually expand their "role", perhaps exceeding what even an omniscient Creator conceived. (Which would make it only "mostly omniscient".) Maybe Jacob is trying to convince the Creator that Humans, even in their unpredictability, will eventually be the salvation of the Island. (Which might be redeemability.)
You point on "the Presto" is spot-on. I believe, if we assume the constructors of LOST to have been storytelling geniuses, their error was in thinking that a TV audience could maintain a line of thinking over several seasons, hiatuses, and interruptions. Those threads of lies, half-truths, and erroneous conclusions, on the part of both the characters in the story and us the viewer, are very hard to hang onto over time. Maybe they intended the series to become a cult-classic and be binged over and over, resulting in a viewership that would "get it". Maybe they themselves got lost in the storyline and failed to properly keep track of the lies they were telling us!
I very much enjoy your conception that LOST is connected to the Bible, and may be intended to be the origins of its principles. Nifty.
Have you read the Silmarillion?
On I go to your next entry.
Thanks for reading!
By extraordinary coincidence (or *is* it??) I am reading the Silmarillion for the first time right now, actually. It's damn close to impenetrable. Fun, though.
I have some thoughts on Jacob based on what we're shown that aren't as charitable as your take, but that's just my take; we'll get there eventually. I love the theories! Keep 'em coming!
I see the Silmarillion as Tolkien's take on a Middle Earth Bible. Some of it IS pretty dense, but then, have you ever read the Bible? I found a great deal of joy in comparing the two views of creation/existence, just as I have from exploring the Hindu, Buddhist, Zarathustrian, Hebrew, Egyptian, etc. views. Despite all the differences produced by culture, many essential ideas appear in all of them.