'Lost' Dueling Analysis: 'The Variable'

By Liz Kelly

In which Jen Chaney and I return to our favorite pastime life's work, analyzing the best show ever. Please visit our shrine to said show, here at "Lost" Central. Then join us at 3 p.m. ET for a continuation of the discussion in the 3 p.m. ET "Lost" Hour chat.



Daniel Faraday (Jeremy Davies) prepares to meet his destiny. (Getty Images)

Jen: The question that has plagued us all season -- popped up repeatedly in these dueling analyses, frequently appeared in our discussions and prompted more "Back to the Future" references than any of us can count -- was resolved in tonight's episode. And it happened when our jittery but newly purpose-filled Daniel Faraday spoke to one young, chocolate-addled Charlotte Staples Lewis and said these words: "I didn’t think I could change things. But maybe I can."

When we surmised on numerous occasions that maybe this whole time travel thing wasn't quite as simple as "what happened, happened," it appears we were right. Like Faraday, apparently we forgot about the variables. Daniel not only thinks that he and the Losties can chart their own destinies but, more specifically, they can prevent the Hatch button-pushing, stop their own plane from crashing 27 years hence and -- I must assume -- prevent Nikki and Paolo from ever appearing on "Lost." And if that last thing is true, then dammit, they have to try!

Liz: Yep, Faraday got religion and his religion -- apparently reignited by Jack, Kate and Hurley's return to the island -- was his revelation that things can change, despite what his mother and decades of studying relavistic physics led him to believe. Daniel was buoyed by the hope that he could prevent Oceanic 815 from ever reaching the island and thereby saving Charlotte, his supposed raison d'etre. But, riddle me this Jen Chaney: If, as I assume, Daniel was fated all along to be felled by a bullet loosed from his pre-pregnancy mother, well, he doesn't seem to have been able to change his own destiny after all. So how, pray tell, can we hope that his theory will hold true for others?



I think that may be the underlying message in tonight's episode -- that the variables can ping pong around within the strictures of whatever happened and, despite slight deviations from target, well, course correction and all that takes care of the rest. Or am I wrong?

Much more analysis after the jump...

--------

---

Would it move your island to have us take your question first during today's "Lost" Hour chat? All you have to do is send out a link to the chat to your Twitter network including @celebritology in your Twitter message (Ex: Discuss last night's Lost - http://tr.im/k35n @celebritology #lost). Then Submit your question on The Post site, and include your Twitter username for verification. Check back at 3 p.m. ET to see if your question was selected to start the session.



Jen: First, let's pause for a moment and say a little prayer for our dear Daniel Faraday, who I have to believe really did bite it. Why? Because we've been hearing for weeks that a couple of characters are goners. Plus, they tied up most of the loose Faraday ends in tonight's episode, although I would like to see him somehow find his way back to an age-appropriate Charlotte. So maybe there is still hope. But if there isn't, we should still pause. So...



{PAUSE}



Okay, moving forward... I may be incorrectly adding all of this up. But I thought it was noteworthy that Ms. Hawking, who is irrefutably Faraday's mother, told Penny that for the first time, she had no idea what would happen next. That made me think that perhaps she really wanted the Oceanic people to go back to the island because she had some sense that maybe they would show up in 1977 and somehow change things enough to prevent her from shooting her own son. Like her offspring, she seems to have a torn belief in destiny (Faraday was meant to go back) and the notion that it can be tweaked (add those new Oceanic ingredients, and maybe her boy lives).

Liz: I don't know. This is a purely visceral reaction, but I'm getting a "bad guy" vibe from Daniel's mum. She moved beyond the realm of "Bedknobs & Broomsticks" reject and into the ranks of truly interesting characters tonight. And by "truly interesting" I of course mean "potentially diabolical." Could she actually be the opposing force against which Ben Linus continues to fight or, is she, as I think you mused a few weeks back, a third interested party in the coming war and perhaps the leader of the Ilana/Bram "Shadow of the statue" crew?

Of course, I should know better than thinking anyone on this show is purely good or purely bad.

Jen: Right. I see her as having complex motivations, too. But her manipulation of Daniel, even from a young age, to stay focused on his work basically created a situation where he would be inclined to go to the island if he thought it would make her proud. It almost seemed like she had been parenting with a purpose, and that purpose was to get Daniel back on the island.

By the way, I found it interesting that our cliffhanger line at the end of this episode was "I am your son," in light of all that talk in the last episode about "Empire Strikes Back." "I am your son" is pretty much the flip side of "I am your father," no?

Liz: Absolutely. And Daniel actually being felled by the hand of his own mother is pretty much the flip side of Darth Vader's inability to kill his own son.

I do think we should pay close attention to that exchange between Ms. Hawking and the young brace-faced Daniel, though it did raise more questions for me. Ms. Hawking said, "It is my job to keep you on your path," and used that by way of explaining that he could no longer play the piano. How, I wonder, did she happen to know Daniel's path? And what did you make of Daniel's "I can make time" statement? That's a bit different from saying one can change time.

Jen: Yeah, I thought that "make" time statement was a bit loaded. It is different, but I think one (and by one, I mean me) could argue that if Daniel somehow changes time, he is making time in some sense. For example, if Oceanic 815 never crashes, that means the Losties never land on the island, which means there is no "Lost" the TV show ... ooh, what if that's the ending of the series? They don't land after all and the show just ends? Hmmm, food for thought.



Anyway, if there is no "Lost" TV show, that changes time. But it makes time for, say, everyone who watches the show. Think of how many hours we all get back if we didn't spend them not only watching and rewatching episodes, but trying to figure out how the island moves and what the numbers mean. Of course, I would argue that all that time has enhanced my life in some way. And that's the rub for our characters, too. You erase the plane crash, you erase the pain and suffering it caused, including the deaths of Libby, Ana Lucia, Charlie, Greg Grunberg as the pilot and (yay!) Boone, among others. But maybe they needed that plane crash to happen so they could evolve in some way, to redeem themselves.

Liz: Right -- and I think Jack and Kate were getting ready to act out that particular debate for us with Jack picking up where Daniel left off (with the help of his journal) and Kate not at all hip to the idea of erasing what's happened to her since the plane crashed. Makes sense -- if Oceanic 815 lands in L.A. she's a shackled prisoner awaiting trial for murder. And this time she won't be one of the beloved Oceanic 6.

One thing that bothered me about tonight's episode:

When Daniel walks into the Hostiles' camp brandishing a gun (so idiotic) Richard Alpert is puzzled by Daniel's double take and knowledge of the bomb. He (Alpert) says "Am I supposed to know you?" or something like that. And I had the same question -- shouldn't Alpert have recognized Dan as the man who similarly arrived from nowhere in 1954 and helped to contain the leaky Jughead?

Jen: Well, I got the sense that he kind of recognized him but wasn't sure if it was the same guy or not. If we assume that Alpert is living out his years chronologically (which may be a big assumption on my part) then he last saw Daniel 23 years ago. So it might be understandable if he doesn't immediately say, "Hey, wassup, Bomb Guy?"

Liz: Really -- you don't think a guy arriving from nowhere, containing a leaky nuclear warhead and then vanishing would leave a large impression?

Jen: Dude, I don't know about you, but I often forget people I met last week. So, twenty-three years ago? I think he might half-recognize him but not be totally sure. That's plausible to me. Again, assuming Alpert is experiencing time in the traditional, chronological sense, which is the impression we've been given so far.

Liz: I'm not so convinced. It isn't as if there are hundreds of people making trips to the island for an audience with Richard.

Anyhow, a quick reminder that according to the giant "Lost" rumor mill (WARNING -- RUMOR TO FOLLOW), we're due to lose another major character by the end of the season. As Daniel said, "Anyone can die, Jack." And, immediately after this statement the scene cut to Kate. I'm just saying...

Jen: I would also note that in light of the, ahem, allegations surrounding our Desmond, he could go, too. The "Lost" curse in effect. Plus, he was Daniel's constant so there would be some logic behind both of them passing on. (For the record, I really hope these harassment changes against Ian Cusick are false. He seemed like such a sweet guy when we spoke last year. And he was our "Lost" Madness winner!)

Liz: Was I the only one thinking "don't lean too close over that bed, Penny!" It's distracting. Enough said.

Jen: Well, I didn't think that.

Liz: But, take heart: not all brushes with the law spell doom for our "Lost" cast. Daniel Dae Kim survived a DUI charge.

Jen: And Cusick isn't accused of drunk driving. So that's a positive sign, if one can call it that.

Liz: Moving right along, do you think Faraday successfully planted a seed of doubt in Pierre Chang's mind?

Jen: Yes, I do. The whole Miles/Chang thing will come to a head before the season ends. I feel pretty certain.

Speaking of sons and fathers, we haven't mentioned an important reveal (or confirmation) from tonight's episode. Widmore is Daniel's daddy!

Liz: That's right -- more daddy issues. Poor Dan didn't even know, it seems. And it was obvious that Widmore and Ms. Hawking had a less than cordial off-island relationship. And I guess that makes Dan and Penny half-siblings, at the very least.

Jen: Right, which makes even more sense that Daniel sees him as his constant since there is a link between Desmond and Daniel's own lineage. And speaking of constants...

I noted something significant about the note that Eloise wrote in that journal she gave Daniel as a graduation gift. She said, "No matter what, remember I will always love you."

That reminded me of what Penny wrote in the letter she left for Des in his copy of "Our Mutual Friend," a letter he read toward the end of season two just before (irony alert!) he decided not to push the button in the Hatch, thereby causing the plane to crash. Her words: "Please don't give up, Des. Because all we really need to survive is one person who truly loves us." Different word choice but a similar sentiment.

Liz: Ooh, nice parallel.

I wanted to take a sec to thank my pal Matt Dawson for pointing out the Wired magazine on Daniel's couch that touted articles about "invisibility," "time travel" and "the impossible gets real." The esteemed Mr. Dawson -- a canny "Lost" analyzer in his own right -- thinks this was nothing more than a shout out to show creator J. J. Abrams, who edited last month's issue.

Jen: Yes, I noted that craftily planted issue of "Wired" for the same reason. It tied in nicely with the seamless transition from the "Lost" opener into an extended ad for "Star Trek." Geez, J.J. really wants us to see his movie, huh?

I actually thought that opening was very clever from a marketing perspective. By the way, here's a link to an article about the Abrams issue of "Wired," which may or may not have some clues about "Lost" in it. Apparently, Damon Lindelof is playing dumb:

Liz: So Jack finally made his move, breaking out from under Sawyer's rapidly backfiring leadership. And we're left, again, with two disparate bands of Losties.

Jen: Speaking of Sawyer, I felt kind of bad for Juliet. She is clearly being a realist and knows that her idyllic time with Sawyer is over, but you could see (courtesy of Elizabeth Mitchell's fine performance) that it's breaking her heart.

Liz: Agreed. If Sawyer isn't able to accept it, she is. Though I did see her hackles go up when Sawyer called Kate "Freckles," so I wouldn't attribute 100 percent of her motivation to being a realist. At least a teensy bit of it was a desire to send Kate off on an errand and far away from her James.

Jen: No, I actually didn't see it that way at all. I thought she gave Kate the fence password because that signified the end of their ability to keep their situation under wraps. Her hackles definitely went up, but I actually thought that moment showed that she was manning up and saying, "Okay, this is the situation. Let's just get the ball rolling."

Liz: Hmmm. I dunno. Remember, Sawyer had used his best conman pitch to sweetly say, "Come on, come with us, Freckles." Maybe we should debate this, talk about the Jack vs. Sawyer gangs and the whereabouts of Sayid and the Ajira folks (who we didn't see tonight) at 3 p.m. ET.

In the meantime, carry on the conversation below and make sure to vote for this week's best line...

---



Next week on "Lost": "Follow the Leader" - Jack and Kate find themselves at odds over the direction to take to save their fellow island survivors, Locke further solidifies his stance as leader of "The Others," and Sawyer and Juliet come under scrutiny from the Dharma Initiative.