I actually dreamed about “Lost” last night. Scary. I should definitely talk to my therapist about that.
Anyway, here’s something approaching a thoughtful response to the “Lost” series finale, and actually to “Lost” as a whole. Needless to say, there will be SPOILERS in this post, so if you haven’t yet seen the finale, you can watch it on Hulu. And if you haven’t seen the rest of the series, well, most of what I say won’t make sense anyway.
What “Lost” found
Let me start with what I loved about “Lost.”
First and foremost, Hugo “Hurley” Reyes. Easily the heart of the show, Hurley has been the only character I have never lost hope for, and my hope was not disappointed. As soon as Jacob’s “candidates” were mentioned, I declared that I wanted Hurley to end up as the new Jacob. He was the only one whom I would trust with The Island, and I’m pleased to see that the writers agreed with me.
I loved that it ended with “nobody dies alone”. A major theme of the whole show was the forming and challenging of relationship and of community. As a Catholic, I see shadows of the idea of the communion of saints here, and the idea that none of us ever is utterly alone or disconnected from the rest of humanity.
I was super-pleased to see Sayid and Ben find a kind of redemption. I was particularly worried about Sayid after he lost his emotions, but it’s clear that his growth in virtue over the years was not lost – not entirely, anyway.
I could go on for hours listing all the details and small beauties of the show, but I’ll simply say that I loved the fact that the writers took each and every character (with the possible exception of Kate, who at times seemed little more than the prize that Jack and Sawyer were competing for,) seriously, and gave each one room to grow and develop. I loved that they took the mystery of The Island seriously, and left even Jacob a bit in the dark (so to speak) about the Light. I loved that they took morality seriously, and showed how each character’s choices formed and changed his or her personality. Despite the bizarre and sometimes inexplicable turns of events, the writers basically kept the characters real, and that invited me (and the rest of the viewing public, I hope,) to give the show what Tolkien called “secondary belief”: an honor due only to a really creative (or sub-creative) world.
My problems with “Lost”
That said, “Lost” was far from perfect. And the finale in particular brought out a number of the most serious problems with the show. Being a hyper-critical kind of guy, I just can’t let those imperfections pass without comment.
To start with, the “LA story” of this final season ultimately didn’t hold together for me. I get that it’s a kind of purgatory, but I don’t quite get Eloise Hawking’s warnings to Desmond – does she really know what kind of reality she’s in? And I don’t entirely understand the presence of Jack’s son. Is this a “younger Jack” (like the “younger Jacob” that appeared on the Island)? And what does Ben still have to work through in this “place”? Maybe his relationship with his father? Not really clear.
Most of all, the whole, “This is a place you created together, so that you could find each other again,” just doesn’t make the connection that I think they’re trying to make to their life on The Island. It makes it all feel like a gimmick to get the whole cast back together for a sentimental ending. I think I would have bought, “This is a gift from the Island for the service each of you provided,” or something along those lines, but the way it was is just metaphysically muddy to say the least.
Which actually brings me back to The Island. From the first season, The Island was developed as a kind of living being, with a will and a character of its own. I think the “Across the Sea” episode was intended to draw together the threads of The Island’s own story. But come on … a Light at the Heart of The Island – oooh! I want something a little more.
My main question about The Island throughout the series has been, what is the connection between The Island and the rest of the world? And despite Alison Janney’s explanation that “if the light goes out there, it goes out everywhere,” I just don’t buy it. I need to see that there’s a real connection between the state of the Light on The Island and the state of … hope? humanity? something in the rest of the world. And when the Light is “uncorked” in the finale, well, it turns red, and dimmer, and Smokey becomes mortal, and the Island shakes, and… it doesn’t seem to affect the persons the way it should if the light within them is threatened. Wouldn’t they all have become like Sayid, or like the Smoke Monster? or something?
So, ultimately, I’m left wondering what the whole point of The Island is in the first place. I wonder what really would have been so bad about the Light going out and The Island sinking into the sea. What difference would it make?
So that’s a rather disappointing place to be.
And, in the end…
As with the things I loved, I have tons of nit-picks that aren’t worth going into. Overall, “Lost” was an ambitious and often inspiring show, and I don’t regret a moment I spent watching it. Maybe it failed in its ultimate aim, but the effort was a worthy one on every count, and I have learned a great deal about myself and about telling stories from the show.
And that’s quite a lot for one show to accomplish.



I think that you hit the nail on the head. I was so disappointed that ultimately the island was meaningless other than the fact that it brought them together in one place. I saw no real connection between the island and the state of the outside “real” world. I would have also liked for the authors to give meaning to the series of numbers that were brought up so many times in the show. Despite the fact that I still feel a bit lost, it was a great show. It was entertaining, thought provoking, and creative. I’m going to miss it.
I could comment at length about the internal consistency of Lost — but I won’t, except to say it wasn’t as self-contradictory as Battlestar Galactica.
But regarding the dramatic and personal aspects of the show, I agree with you that the “L. A. Story” was seriously flawed. Some characters in the season six alta-world were just illusions (e.g., Jack’s son), and other characters were probably also illusions even though they correspond to actual people (e.g., Keamy, Anthony Cooper, the staff in Jack’s hospital, and probably Helen). But the show clearly asserted that all the characters who ended up in the church at the end really were the characters they appeared to be, sharing in a common afterlife.
Unfortunately, this only makes dramatic sense in the case of Jack. All his issues, including his relationship with his father, are resolved in the L.A. Purgatory before he enters the church. But what about the other characters? What about Jin’s relationship with his fisherman father and his cruel father-in-law? What about Kate’s relationship with her parents? The whole point of the flashbacks in seasons one, two and three was that these past relationships continued to shape who these people were, even when they find themselves on an island separated from all the people in their past. In that case, it must necessarily follow that their purgatory requires some sort of working out these issues, just like Jack’s did.
Instead, we are told that “the most important part of your life was on the island.” I can believe this about Jack and Hurley and Sawyer. But surely this was not true of Boone! He didn’t even know anyone on the island except for Locke, who was a guru rather than a friend.
Sadly then, as you say, the ending was “show-centric”: assuming that the things which mattered the most to the television audience must be the things that mattered the most to the characters. Another horrific example of this is the babies: The viewers got to know Aaron, and therefore we rightly sympathize when Kate tries to redeem Claire in season six. But we barely saw Ji Yeon (even though Sun spent three years with her), and so we are expected to be pleased when her parents choose to die together rather than have one of them live to raise her.
Larry – BSG wasn’t really about internal consistency, though; it was about a platform for developing political or philosophical arguments. Story always took second place there, almost from the very beginning.
Also, you raise a great point about the babies. I think Sun mentioned at one point that she left Ji Yeon with relatives, so I’m not terribly concerned about her – just as Aaron was left with Grandma – but I’m still a bit disappointed that Sun didn’t say anything in the sub about her. “Thanks, Jin, it’s really romantic that you don’t want to lose me again, but we’ve got a daughter to think about, even if you’ve never met her, and I didn’t come all this way so that she could lose BOTH parents, you know.”
I might have to steal your phrase: “show-centric” – it’s a great warning to writers.