"LOST" Retrospect: "Oceanic Hypocrisy"

 

"LOST" RETROSPECT: "OCEANIC HYPOCRISY"

Recently, I did a rewatch of the "LOST" Season Four episode, (4.02) "Confirmed Dead". And I had enjoyed it as much as I did during previous viewings. However . . . there was something about Oceanic 815 survivors John Locke and James "Sawyer" Ford that had eluded me during those past viewings.

How can I put this? There seemed to be a great deal of hypocrisy emanating from both Locke and Sawyer in this episode. For example, while questioning Locke's sanity in "Confirmed Dead", Sawyer had pointed out the older man’s murder of Naomi Dorrit, an inhabitant from the newly arrived freighter Kahana, in the Season Three finale, (3.22-3.23) "Through the Looking Glass, Part II". Locke had killed Ms. Dorrit in an effort to prevent her from contacting her associated aboard the Kahana. He had considered them a danger to the island and its inhabitants.

Also, Sawyer had recently committed two murders during late Season Three - Anthony Cooper in (3.19) "The Brig" and Other member Tom Friendly in "Through the Looking Glass". It turned out that Cooper was Locke's father, whom the Others had captured to test Locke for the position of their leader. Unable to kill his father, Locke had discovered from one of the Others, Richard Alpert, that Cooper was also the man who had swindled Sawyer's parents from their money some twenty-eight years earlier. This act had led to Sawyer's father murdering his wife for adultery and committing suicide. Sawyer, who had been eight years-old at the time, spent nearly three decades needlessly vowing revenge. Thanks to the manipulations of both Richard and Locke, Sawyer committed the murder. As for Tom Friendly's murder, Sawyer had killed the man out of pure spite. In the Season Two episode, (2.11) "The Hunting Party", he claimed that Friendly had shot him, when he was aboard Michael Dawson's raft in the Season One finale, (1.23-1.25) "Exodus". In "Through the Looking Glass", he claimed that his murder of Friendly was in retaliation for the kidnapping of 10 year-old Walt Lloyd, Michael's son.

Despite Locke's efforts, Oceanic survivors' leader, Dr. Jack Shephard, managed to contact the Kahana occupants. This led the survivors to split into two groups - those who saw the Kahana as a means to their rescue and those who followed Locke, certain that Ms. Dorrit's associates meant to harm them. Locke led the doubters on a trek to the Others' abandoned compound, on the other side of the island. Sawyer was among them. I know what you are thinking. What does this recap of the late Season Three/early Season Four events have to do with hypocrisy? And why target John Locke and James Ford?

Among those who had decided to follow Locke to the Others' compound out of safety was their leader, Ben Linus. Both Locke and Sawyer already had a personal grudge against the man. Ben had tried to murder Locke in (3.20) "The Man Behind the Curtain" in an effort to prevent the latter from replacing him as the Others' leader. Ben had kept Sawyer, Jack and Kate Austen hostage as a means to receive a much needed operation in early Season Three. When Sawyer had interfered in a slightly hostile conversation between Ben and one of his former followers, the adolescent Karl, the former Others leader made insinuations that Kate (whom Sawyer was attracted to) preferred Jack over the con man. As it later turned out, he was right. In a fit of anger, Sawyer gave Ben a beat down and suggested to Locke they should "execute" - namely kill - Ben, because the latter was being a nuisance. Locke refused, claiming they needed Ben's assistance in dealing with the island's newcomers. But this was not the last of it.

Four of the Kahana's passengers finally arrived on the island via a helicopter and parachutes. One of them proved to be Dr. Charlotte Lewis, a cultural anthropologist. Ben feared that Charlotte might contact the freighter and confirm his exact location to her associates aboard the Kahana. He also feared what the freighter's arrival would mean for the island's other inhabitants. Driven by these fears, Ben tried to kill her by shooting her in the chest with a gun he had stolen from an unsuspecting Karl. At that moment, Locke decided to follow Sawyer's advice. He decided to punish Ben by killing the latter. Sawyer offered to do the job, but Locke decided he must be the one to "clean his own mess". Only Ben’s revelations of his knowledge of Charlotte’s background, the reason the freighter had arrived at the island and his spy aboard the Kahana had saved his life.

Watching all of this unfurl had made me shake my head with amazement every time I had viewed "Confirmed Dead". But it took this last rewatch for me to realize both Locke and Sawyer's hypocrisies. Locke had been willing to execute Ben for attempting to do to Charlotte what he had recently done to Naomi in "Through the Looking Glass" - namely kill someone from the Kahana for his self-preservation and the safety of the island's inhabitants. As for Sawyer . . . he had punched Ben for making insidious comments about Jack and Kate. And he also wanted Ben dead for the attempt on Charlotte’s life. This all reminded me of Sawyer's second reason for murdering Tom Friendly. The con man had claimed he did it for 10 year-old Walt Lloyd’s kidnapping in "Exodus". Yet, Sawyer had never went after Ben for the same reason. And by late Season Three and early Season Four, he knew that Ben was the Others' leader and the one who had ordered Walt's kidnapping. Yet, Sawyer had never went after Ben for that reason.

For years, I never understood why so many "LOST" fans had turned a blind eye to the crimes of most of the Oceanic survivors. Or made excuses for their crimes. I now realize one should consider personal bias toward certain characters as a major reason. But after my rewatch of "Confirmed Dead", I am surprised hardly anyone had noticed the Oceanic castaways' penchant for hypocrisy, including that from John Locke and James Ford in this episode.

"The Death of Tom Friendly"

 

SPOILER ALERT . . . if you have never seen the ABC series, "LOST" and have plans to view it, I suggest you do not read the following article.



"THE DEATH OF TOM FRIENDLY"

Many fans of "LOST" have considered the series' Season Three finale, (3.22-3.23) "Through the Looking Glass" as the best one for years. I would have regarded as one of the best two or three finales, due to how the writers handled Charlie Pace’s fate and that last flash-forward scene between Jack Shephard and Kate Austen. However, my admiration for "Through the Looking Glass" remains muted due to one scene - namely James "Sawyer" Ford’s murder of one of the Others, Tom Friendly.

To this day, I find the fans' positive reaction to Tom's death as puzzling and repulsive at the same time. Tom had led a group of Others to raid the Oceanic 815 survivors' beach camp in order to snatch women capable of childbirth. The Others' tussle with a small group of Oceanic survivors led to their capture of Sayid Jarrah, Jin Kwon and Bernard Nadler. The Others' leader, Ben Linus, had radioed Tom to shoot them. This was a prearranged code for Tom to shoot three bullets into the ground, pretending to kill the hostages and to mislead Ben's captors - the rest of the survivors led by Jack Shephard. Before the situation could evolve any further, Oceanic survivors Hugo "Hurley" Reyes and Sawyer, came to the three captives' rescue with the help of former Other, Juliet Burke. The newly arrived trio managed to kill Tom's companions and unarm him. Tom, with no weapon in hand, surrendered to the Oceanic survivors and Juliet. And following that moment, Sawyer shot him dead, in the heart.

Why did Sawyer kill the unarmed Tom? He revealed to Hurley that he killed Tom in retaliation for Walt Lloyd's kidnapping in the Season One finale, (1.23-1.25) "Exodus". And ever since the Season Two episode, (2.11) "The Hunting Party", Sawyer has blamed Tom for shooting him aboard Michael Dawson's raft, following Walt's kidnapping. Many of the show's fans immediately believed Sawyer's words and cheered him for Tom's murder. I have no idea why so many thought it was great when Sawyer had murdered an unarmed Tom after his surrender. I found Sawyer’s murderous act as nothing to smile or cheer about. I thought it was stupid and vindictive. And I found Tom's death as a pathetic example of Sawyer’s penchant for scapegoating others for his pain and using violence to "settle the score".

What made Tom's murder even more pathetic was that Sawyer had no genuine excuse to kill him. I can understand why Sawyer had initially blamed Tom for Walt's kidnapping. But after becoming aware of Ben Linus in early Season Three, surely, he must have realized that Ben had ordered the kidnapping. To make matters even more ironic, the "LOST: MISSING PIECES" short clip titled "Room 23" revealed that island protector Jacob had ordered Ben to kidnap Walt and prevent the latter from leaving the island. There was no way Sawyer could have learned about Jacob's role in the kidnapping. But as I had earlier stated, he should have realized that Ben had ordered Tom to carry it out. Instead, Sawyer spent nearly two months solely blaming Tom for Walt's kidnapping. The lack of brain power from Sawyer struck me as amazing, considering his intelligence. Yet, Sawyer had never targeted or attacked Ben for the kidnapping. Instead, like the immature idiot he sometimes tends to be, Sawyer solely blamed Tom and made the latter the scapegoat for over a month-and-a-half.

Earlier, I revealed that Sawyer had blamed Tom for shooting him on Michael's raft. Either Sawyer was blind as a bat at the time, or he possessed a truly shitty memory. First of all, Tom had never shot Sawyer. After the Other had expressed his intent to kidnap Walt, Sawyer reached for his gun . . . and one of Tom's companions shot him, leading him to fall in the water. That is correct. Another member of the Others had shot Sawyer, not Tom. Nor did Tom order the man to shoot Sawyer. However, being true to his character, Sawyer blamed Tom and nursed a grudge to kill the latter in retaliation for his pain. What a brainless dick!

Some fans have defended Sawyer's murder of Tom, claiming that Tom could have proven to be a threat in the near future. Murdering someone because they might be a future threat? I am supposed to accept that as a relevant excuse for his murder of Tom? Were fans really expected to sweep aside Sawyer's penchant for violent retribution and inability to exercise his brains? I mean . . . seriously? Tom Friendly may have been a minor villain, but he did not deserve to be gunned down in cold blood in that manner. Especially since he had been unarmed and had surrendered. I have never been a major fan of James "Sawyer" Ford. But I have never really disliked him. Except during late Season Three. I had really grown to dislike Sawyer during this point in the series. And his penchant for scapegoating and violence retribution would eventually lead him to make one of the biggest mistakes of his life.

"LOST" RETROSPECT (1.14) "Special"

 

"LOST" RETROSPECT: (1.14) "Special"

I just watched the Season One episode of "LOST" called (1.14) "Special". It reminded me of how the show runners had pretty much screwed over the Michael Dawson character.

Although I do not regard "Special" as one of the series' best episodes, let alone one of the best about Michael, watching it reminded me of the anger had I felt the show’s fans and their expectations and assumptions about him. One of the criticisms directed at Michael was his inability to be the perfect parent. Some critics actually claimed that Michael did not know how to be a parent. It occurred to me that it was a stupid comment to make. Worse, this comment was indicative of the fans' unrealistic expectations of Michael’s character.

Of course Michael had no idea on how to be a parent. He was new at it, thanks to his ex-girlfriend, Susan Lloyd. Not only did she break up with Michael following Walt’s birth. She also decided that Michael would not play a role in Walt’s life as his father. Even before her death, she had expected her husband and Walt’s stepfather, Brian Porter, to be the one to raise him. One of the more frustrating aspects of the "LOST" fandom toward Michael is that many had expected him to be this one-dimensional character. He either had to be another castaway, loyal to the series’ leading characters; the perfect parent, despite having very little experience prior to being stranded on the island; or turn to the "Great White Hunter" aka John Locke for lessons on parenthood.

And what the fuck was up with John Locke? Teaching Walt how to use a machete … without Michael's permission? What the hell was he thinking, allowing a child to handle a dangerous weapon? And then there was that piece of advice he gave Michael - to treat Walt more like an adult than a child. What the fuck? Walt was ten years old, not fucking twenty-four years old. One, parents tend regard their off springs as children even after they become adults. To a certain extent. And two, Walt was too young and too immature to be treated like an adult at the time.

What I found disturbing about this situation regarding the machete lesson is that when Michael had called Locke out for teaching Walt how to use a machete, the latter turned it on Michael and blamed him for not being the perfect father. This was bullshit. Teaching a ten-year-old boy how to handle a machete without the permission of the latter's father? Treating said ten-year-old child like an adult? If Michael was expected to become a better parent because he had followed Locke’s advice, then "Special" gave the wrong kind of lesson in parenthood. And if I must be brutally honest, so did screenwriter David Fury. In the end, Walt’s encounter with a polar bear pretty much justified Locke’s decision to teach him to use a machete. It seemed as if Fury and the series’ show runners - Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof - believed Locke knew more about raising a child than Michael.

John Locke was not Dr. Spock. He was a man who had the wrong idea on what it really took to become a parent, based on his own damaged relationships with his parents. As for Michael, he was never a perfect parent. But he was never terrible. And despite his flaws, a great deal of his actions were dictated by his desire to protect Walt from the island’s dangers. His lack of perfection was not surprising since a "perfect parent" does not exist. Never really existed in the first place.

Human beings are not perfect. If humans are not perfect, why expect someone - whether in real life or in fiction - to be the perfect parent? Or perhaps many "LOST" fans had harbored such high demands from Michael because he was a black man and not the lead of a television show. Perhaps he was not expected to be as ambiguous and complicated as he proved to be.

"LOST": "Kidnapping a Child"

"LOST": "KIDNAPPING A CHILD"

I was reading this ARTICLE about the girl who had been kidnapped at 11 and found, 18 years later. And it made me think of the numerous child kidnappings that have occurred on "LOST":



*Ben Linus' kidnapping of Alex Rousseau, Danielle's infant daughter. Ben had kidnapped Alex when she was an infant, against Charles Widmore's orders. He pretended to be her father for sixteen years. Eventually, mother and daughter were finally able to reunite. But they were never able to enjoy their reunion, due to them both being killed by Charles Widmore's hired thugs within a few days.



*Walt Lloyd's kidnapping by Tom, at Ben's orders. We all know the circumstances that resulted from that particular kidnapping. Walt's father, Michael Dawson, disappeared for a while to search for Walt. Once he found the Others, he made a deal with them to free Ben, who had become the Losties' prisoner. In order to free Ben, he murdered Ana-Lucia Cortez and accidentally killed Libby. Then he made a deal with the Others to lead Jack Shephard, Kate Austen, James Ford and Hugo Reyes to their camp. Upon leaving the island, Walt forced him to tell the truth about his deal with the Others and his shooting of Ana-Lucia and Libby. Father and son became estranged. And later, Michael returned to the island to atone for his actions . . . and ended up deal in a freighter explosion. All because Ben Linus had ordered Walt's kidnapping.




*Kate Austen's kidnapping of Aaron. Upset over Sawyer's decision to jump from a rescue helicopter and return to the island, Kate decided to claim Aaron Littleton, the infant son of missing castaway Claire Littleton, as her own. She convinced Jack to help her. And both of them convinced Sun Kwon, Sayid Jarrah, and Hurley Reyes to pretend that Aaron was Kate's son. Kate kept Aaron from his grandmother, Carole Littleton, for nearly three years; despite knowing that the woman was alive. And I cannot help but wonder if Carole Littleton would have ever learned about her grandson if Sawyer's ex-girlfriend, Clemmentine, had not convinced Kate to give him up or Kate had decided to do so on her own.

"LOST" - The Island Guru

"LOST" - The Island Guru

There have been countless number of character essays and theories posted by ”LOST” fans about Island Destiny Man – John Locke (Terry O’Quinn). Quite frankly, I have only read a small number of those articles. But recently, I have been watching some of the series’ episodes from Seasons One and Two. After viewing some of them, I have grown aware of a certain trait of Locke’s that I find annoying.

When John Locke’s back story was first introduced in the episode, (1.04) “Walkabout”, viewers discovered that he had been a wheelchair bound employee of a box company in Tustin, California. Viewers eventually discovered that Locke was the illegitimate son of the fifteen year-old Emily Locke and a con artist named Anthony Cooper. Locke spent most of his childhood and a great deal of his adult years longing to be a man of action and someone special. He spent those years honing his skills as a hunter and gathering a great deal of knowledge on so many subjects.

On September 22, 2004, John Locke had traveled to Australia to participate in a ”walkabout tour” that would allow him to ”live in the wilderness” for a certain period of time with a group of tourists. Employees of the Melbourne Walkabout Tours took one look at Locke’s disabled state and refused to accept him on one of their tours. Forced to return home to California, Locke boarded the Oceanic Airlines Flight 815 that would take him from Sydney, Australia to Los Angeles, California. Only he and his fellow passengers never reached United States soil. Instead, they found themselves stranded on a mysterious island in the South Pacific. Locke also discovered that the island had somehow cured his crippled legs. From this moment on, Locke became an acolyte of the island. And judging from his interactions with characters like Charlie Pace and Boone Carlyle, he searched for his own band of acolytes to share his beliefs.

Locke spent most of Season One helping the castaways survive those first 44 days on the island and offer them sage advice. He also had two encounters with a mysterious smoke monster, became the survivors’ “great white hunter”, helped Boone Carlyle deal with unhealthy for his stepsister, Shannon Rutherford, helped Charlie Pace kick a heroin addiction and convinced spinal surgeon Jack Shephard to assume leadership of the castaways. This all changed in the episode, (1.19) “Ex Deux Machina”, when Locke and Boone discovered a Nigerian plane filled with heroin and bodies in the jungle. In that episode, he had convinced Boone to crawl into the plane to examine it. Because he had failed to inform Boone that he had a prophetic dream that the plane would lead to Boone’s death, he lied to Jack about the true situation of Boone’s wounds after the actual accident. From that moment on, the series began to unravel even more of Locke’s less admirable traits. Many fans and even actor Terry O’Quinn have expressed regret that Locke had not remained the wise, self-assured man from Season One.

But my recent viewings of some of the Season One and Season Two episodes have led me to wonder if Locke’s ”self-assuredness” had been nothing more than a façade. Also, that same self-assuredness seemed to have revealed a trait within Locke that I found personally distasteful. Superficially, John Locke’s willingness to help others like Charlie and Boone seemed may have seemed admirable. It certainly did to many viewers. No one has ever complained about his “methods” in helping those two. And for me, his methods in helping Charlie and Boone has made me wonder if John Locke was – like Jack Shephard – a slightly bullying and controlling man.

Charlie Pace
I had first noticed these traits in Locke during the Season One episode, (1.06) “House of the Rising Sun”. This episode’s subplot featured an expedition in which Jack, Charlie, Kate Austen and Locke examined a large cavern as a provision for housing and water for the castaways. While alone with Charlie, Locke took the opportunity to reveal his knowledge of the musician’s heroin habit:

[We see Charlie walking away from caves trying to take drugs out of his pocket, looking behind him. But Locke is coming from the opposite direction.]
CHARLIE: Listen to me, you old git, I'm going in the jungle. A man has a right to some privacy.
LOCKE: Just hand it to me. You're going to run out. My guess is sooner rather than later. Painful detox is inevitable. Give it up now at least it will be your choice.
CHARLIE: Don't talk to me like you know something about me.
LOCKE: I know a lot more about pain than you think. I don't envy what you're facing. But I want to help. [Charlie walks away]. Do you want your guitar?
[Charlie turns and comes back.]
LOCKE: More than your drug?
CHARLIE: More than you know.
LOCKE: What I know is that this island might just give you what you're looking for, but you have to give the island something.
CHARLIE [giving Locke the drugs]: You really think you can find my guitar?
LOCKE: Look up, Charlie.
CHARLIE: You're not going to ask me to pray or something.
LOCKE: I want you to look up.
[Charlie looks up and almost cries when he sees his guitar on a cliff above.]

Judging from the above scene, Locke’s idea of helping Charlie was to insist that the latter hand over the remaining heroin he had left. He insisted. That was Locke’s initial idea of helping Charlie. Knowing the location of Charlie’s guitar, which the latter valued more than anything, Locke then maneuvered Charlie into giving up the drugs in return for the guitar.

In the following episode, (1.07) “The Moth”, Charlie had demanded that Locke return his drugs – which the former agreed to do – ONLY when the former asked for the third time:

[Shot of Charlie running from a boar. Some luggage falls, the boar is trapped in a large net trap.]
LOCKE: Nice work, Charlie. You make excellent bait.
CHARLIE [angrily]: I'm glad I could oblige. Now give me my bloody drugs.

Act 2
CHARLIE: Did you hear what I said? I want my drugs back. I need 'em.
LOCKE: Yet you gave them to me. Hmm.
CHARLIE: And I bloody well regret it. I'm sick, man. Can't you see that?
LOCKE: I think you're a lot stronger than you know, Charlie. And I'm going to prove it to you. I'll let you ask me for your drugs three times. The third time, I'm going to give them to you. Now, just so we're clear, this is one.
CHARLIE: Why? Why? Why are you doing this? To torture me? Just get rid of them and have done with it?
LOCKE: If I did that you wouldn't have a choice, Charlie. And having choices, making decisions based on more than instinct, is the only thing that separates you from him [indicating the boar].

Now I realize that Locke simply wanted to help Charlie. And I realize that he honestly believe that he was giving Charlie a choice. But if that was John Locke’s idea of a choice, he could keep it, as far as I am concerned. I found Locke’s idea of giving someone a choice rather boorish and controlling. He did not simply give Charlie a choice. What Locke did was manipulate Charlie into making a choice . . . but only on his terms. If Locke really wanted Charlie to utilize his free will to make a choice – one way or the other – about the heroin, he should have given Charlie the heroin when the latter first asked. Some fans have argued that Charlie would have never given up the heroin if Locke had handed it over right away. My answer to that is . . . tough shit. Seriously. Charlie should have made the decision to either continue taking the heroin or stop using . . . on his own. Without Locke’s interference or manipulation.

In the Season One finale, (1.24) “Exodus II”, Charlie accompanied Sayid in a search for Danielle Rousseau, a long time castaway who had kidnapped Aaron Littleton in order to exchange him for her own kidnapped daughter. During that search, the pair came across a Nigerian plane with dead bodies and Virgin Mary statuettes filled with heroin. In a weak moment, Charlie took one of the statuettes behind Sayid’s back. It turned out to be the first of many trips in which Charlie ended up filching a statuette or two, until he managed to build up quite a collection. The ironic thing is that Charlie managed to refrain from using heroin in his possession. Claire Littleton – Aaron’s mother, Mr. Eko and eventually Locke discovered in Season Two’s (2.10) “The 23rd Psalm” and (2.12) “Fire and Water’ that Charlie had possession of the statuettes. This, along with Charlie’s frantic concern and actions over Aaron, led Locke to assume that Charlie had resumed using drugs again:

CHARLIE: Hey, John, can I talk to you for a second?
LOCKE: Yeah, what is it, Charlie?
CHARLIE: I take it you heard about what happened last night.
LOCKE: If you mean you taking the baby out of Claire's tent in the middle of the night -- yeah, I heard.
CHARLIE: This whole thing was a big misunderstanding, John. I was sleepwalking. I don't how or why --
LOCKE: Is there something you want from me, Charlie?
CHARLIE: I was hoping you could speak to Claire for me. You know, put in a good word.
LOCKE: Are you using?
CHARLIE: What?
LOCKE: Heroin. Are you using again?
CHARLIE: Kate sees a horse -- nothing. Pretty much everybody's seen Walt wondering around the jungle. But when it's Charlie it must be the bloody drugs, right?

Charlie did lie about having the drugs in his possession. But he had been telling the truth about using. When Locke found Charlie’s stash of statuettes, he reacted in the following manner:

[Back on the Island, Charlie holds a couple of baggies of heroin in his hand.]
LOCKE [suddenly, off camera at first]: I'm disappointed in you, Charlie.
CHARLIE: You following me?
LOCKE: How long have you been coming out here?
CHARLIE: John, you've got the wrong idea, man.
LOCKE: You said you destroyed them all, and yet here they are. How is that the wrong idea?
CHARLIE: I came out here to finish the job. I'm going to get rid of these right now.
LOCKE: Yeah, that's very convenient now that I found you. [Locke goes to the statues with his pack.]
CHARLIE: What are you doing?
LOCKE [putting the statues in his pack]: There was a time when I let you choose whether or not you were going to do this to yourself. Now I'm making that choice for you.
CHARLIE: Oh, you don't believe me? Give them to me. Give them to me right now; I'll destroy them. Look. [He breaks up the baggies in his hand] I'll throw them in the sodding wind. Look, John, I know I lied, alright. [Locke starts walking away] Wait, wait, wait. Remember all those talks we had, you and me? You said everything happens for a reason -- this island tests us. That's what this is, John, at test. This is my test. That's why these are here.
LOCKE: These are here because you put them here, Charlie. [Locke starts to leave again.]
CHARLIE: Wait, John, wait. [Charlie grabs Locke's arm, and Locke angrily breaks free.] What are you going to do? Are you going to tell Claire? You can't. If she sees them, I'm done. She'll never trust me again, and she has to, John. It's about the baby, alright? Aaron's in danger. You have to believe me.
LOCKE: You've given up the right to be believed, Charlie.

Now, I can understand how Locke would be pissed off that Charlie had lied to him about having the statuettes. But the manner in which he took possession of them reminded me of a bullying parent. At that moment, Locke decided that he would do something about Charlie’s drug problem by taking away the heroin without the latter’s permission. Like a parent would act toward an errant child. All Locke could have done was express disappointment at Charlie for the latter’s lies. But he behaved as if he had the right to take the drugs away . . . and ”make the choice” for Charlie to stop using. The sad thing is that Charlie allowed him to get away with such controlling behavior.

Booone Carlyle
By mid Season One, John Locke found another disciple to mentor. It all began when Charlie and a very pregnant Claire had been kidnapped by a spy for the Others – Ethan Rom – in the episode (1.10) “Raised By Another”. In the following episode, (1.11) “All the Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues”, a party that included Locke, Jack, Kate Austen and a wedding planner named Boone Carlyle set off into the jungle in search of the two kidnapped castaways. Eventually, the quartet split into two teams when Kate revealed that she also had tracking skills. Jack and Kate formed one team, and Locke and Boone formed the other. And at this moment, the master/apprentice relationship between the latter pair was born.

This relationship between Locke and Boone lasted approximately eight to nine episodes – between ”All the Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues” and (1.19) “Ex Deux Machina”. During this period, Locke and Boone discovered a steel door to the hatch (Swan Station) that would dominate Season Two. The two men spent several episodes trying to find ways to open the hatch, while lying to the castaways that they were on expeditions hunt for boar. These expeditions were briefly postponed in the episode, (1.13) “Hearts and Minds”, when Boone decided to tell Shannon about the discovered hatch:

BOONE: Look, at least I've got to tell Shannon.
LOCKE: Why?
BOONE: What do mean, why? She's my sister.
LOCKE: Why do you care about her so much?
BOONE: You don't know her man. She's smart, she's special in a lot of ways.
LOCKE: Fair enough.
BOONE: She's been asking me about this. I can't keep lying to her.
LOCKE: You mean you can't keep lying to her, or you can't stand the way she makes you feel because you're lying to her?
BOONE: Both. Whatever. Look, she can keep a secret.
LOCKE: You're sure?
BOONE: Yes, I'm sure.
LOCKE: No, I mean, are you sure you want to do this?
BOONE: I've got to get her off my back. She keeps asking me about this, she keeps asking me about you, about the whole thing.
LOCKE: You're sure you've thought through the ramifications?
BOONE: Yes.
LOCKE: So be it.
[Boone turns around, Locke clocks him with a knife handle.]

After this surprising moment, Locke tied Boone to a tree and used drugs to force the latter to experience a vision quest :

[Shot of Boone tied up. Locke is mixing the stuff in the bowl.]
BOONE: Locke, what is this? Do you hear me? Untie me right now.
LOCKE: Or what?
BOONE: I swear I won't tell anyone about the hatch thing, okay? I promise.
LOCKE: I'm doing this, Boone, because it's time for you to let go of some things. Because it's what's best for you. And, I promise, you're going to thank me for this later.
BOONE: Hey, I don't think this is best for me. [Locke smears the stuff he's been mixing onto the wound on Boone's head.] What is that?
LOCKE: An untreated wound, out here, is going to get infected.
BOONE: You're not going to just leave me here.
LOCKE: Whether you stay is up to you. The camp is 4 miles due west.
BOONE: Which way is west?
[Locke throws a knife into the ground, just out of Boone's reach.]
LOCKE: You'll be able to cut yourself free once you have the proper motivation.
BOONE: Locke!
[Boone is struggling in the ropes, trying to reach the knife.]
BOONE: Help, help!

Locke claimed that he was forcing Boone to submit to a vision quest ”for his own good”. Perhaps helping Boone find closure in his relationship with Shannon had been on his mind. But I find it interesting that Locke had decided to manipulate Boone into this situation after the latter decided to reveal the secret about the hatch. And regardless of whether Locke truly had Boone’s interests at heart or not, he really had no business forcing Boone into that situation in the first place. No wonder the younger man attacked Locke upon returning to the camp.

It all worked out in the end. Locke’s enforced ”vision quest” convinced Boone to leave Shannon alone and allow her to continue her romance with Sayid. More importantly – at least for Locke – the two men continued to maintain the secret of the hatch within the next six to seven episodes. However, Boone never really forgotten Locke’s heavy-handed method of coercing him into a vision question. He made this perfectly clear in ”Ex Deux Machina”:

[The scene switches to Boone and Locke at the hatch.]
LOCKE: I had a dream last night. I asked for a sign and then I saw a plane crash—a Beechcraft [pointing] right out there. It was a dream, but it was the most real thing I've ever experienced. I know where to go now.
BOONE: Go for what?
LOCKE: To find what we need to open this bastard up.
BOONE: Have you been using that wacky paste stuff that made me see my sister get eaten?
LOCKE [laughing]: No, no.
BOONE: Because, John, I've got to tell you—signs and dreams...

In the end, Boone paid a heavy price for becoming John Locke’s protégée . . . assistant . . . or however you want to call him. In the same episode, Locke dreamt of the following - a Beechcraft plane crashing, as well as his mother pointing in its direction; a blood-stained Boone; being confined to his wheelchair and a woman from Boone's past who had died from a fall. As shown in the above passage, Locke did reveal some of his dream to the younger man. Unfortunately, he failed to tell Boone about seeing the latter covered in blood. With Locke’s legs temporarily paralyzed, he urged Boone to climb into the Beechcraft. The younger man managed to briefly contact someone via the plane’s radio (it turned out to be Bernard Nadler from the Tail Section of Flight 815) before the plane fell over and severely injured Boone. Locke managed to regain the use of his legs and carry Boone back to camp. But since he had failed to inform Jack about the nature of Boone’s injuries, the latter eventually died in the next episode, (1.20) “Do No Harm”.

Other Castaways
Charlie Pace and Boone Carlyle were not the only survivors of Oceanic Flight 815 to whom Locke had volunteered his advice. In (1.14) “Special”, he tried to give parenting tips to Michael Dawson on how to handle the latter’s ten year-old son, Walt Lloyd. Being older than Charlie and Boone, and resentful of Locke’s growing relationship with Walt, Michael angrily rejected Locke’s advice. Ironically, I sympathized with Michael. God knows he barely knew anything about being a parent, considering Walt’s mother kept Michael away the ten year-old away from him. But Michael had never asked for Locke’s advice or sympathetic ear. And the older man did not help matters by attempting to teach Walt on how to throw a machete without Michael’s permission.

Locke’s relationship with spinal surgeon Jack Shephard is practically legendary amongst ”LOST” fans. And yet, their relationship had begun on a harmless note when Locke informed Jack that most of the castaways regarded him as their leader. This was Locke’s way of convincing Jack to accept the mantle of leadership. In the end, Locke grew to regret the advice he had given for by Season Two, he ended up clashing with Jack over the leadership of the castaways. Which I did not found surprising, considering that both men shared a penchant for controlling others . . . in their own fashion.

There have been other instances in which Locke inflicted his own will against the desires and choices of others . . . or manipulated others. In ”The Moth”, he prevented Sayid from setting up a signal to help the castaways get rescued. He committed a similar act in Season Three’s (3.13) “The Man From Tallahassee”, when he blew up the submarine that the Others had provided for Jack’s departure from the island. In (3.19) “The Brig”, Locke manipulated James “Sawyer” Ford into murdering his own father, Anthony Cooper. It seemed that Cooper had conned Sawyer’s family of their money back in the 1970s – an act that drove Mr. Ford to commit the double act of murder/suicide. And in the Season Three finale, (3.24) “Through the Looking Glass II”, Locke murdered island newcomer Naomi Dorrit in cold blood to prevent her from signaling her companions from an offshore freighter.

For me, there is one scene that truly symbolized the conflicting and sometimes hypocritical nature of John Locke. In Season Two’s (2.11) “The Hunting Party”, Locke and Jack had discovered that Michael had left the camp in a desperate search to find Walt, who had been kidnapped by the Others in ”Exodus II”. And the two eventually clashed over how to react over Michael’s desperate flight:

LOCKE: Doesn't seem to be -- trail's as straight as the interstate -- the path of a man who knows where he's going. [Locke stares at Jack a moment] Where are you going, Jack?
JACK: What?
LOCKE: Well, let's say we catch up with him, Michael. What are you going to do?
JACK: I'm going to bring him back.
LOCKE: What if he doesn't want to come back?
JACK: I'll talk him into coming back.
LOCKE: This is the second time he's gone after Walt. He knocked me out; he locked us both up. Something tells me he might be past listening to reason.
JACK: What? You think we should just let him go -- write him off?
LOCKE: Who are we to tell anyone what they can or can't do?

What exactly did Locke say to Jack? Oh yes . . . ”Who are we to tell anyone what they can or can’t do?” I found the comment a very ironic comment for John Locke to make, considering his past history with Charlie, Boone and Michael. Judging from the above dialogue, Locke seemed to be a fervent believer in free will and choices. Yet, he seemed incapable of practicing what he was preaching. Despite his belief in free will and free choices, I suspect that John Locke suffered from a malady that afflict many human beings – namely a desire to inflict one’s will or control over others. Power over another is a heady drug and many would bend over backwards or make any excuse to indulge in that desire. A very popular excuse, at least with Locke, seemed to be that he had acted for the greater good on behalf of his fellow castaways – regardless of whether they had asked for his help or not. From what I have seen of Locke’s character over the series’ past four seasons, he reminds of a certain type of character who has appeared in many forms of literature over years. This type happens to an individual who has exercised very little control over his/her life and who has spent most of his/her life being manipulated by others. This has certainly been true of Locke’s character in his relationships with his parents, employers and other acquaintances. Especially his father. This could explain why given the opportunity, Locke never hesitated to make decisions for others without their consent or manipulate them with a Draconian touch that seems rather sinister.

The ironic thing is I have rarely come across any criticisms regarding Locke’s penchant for inflicting his will upon others. Many fans have complained about his willingness to be manipulated by others, especially his father Anthony Cooper and leader of the Others, Ben Linus. Some fans have complained about his obsession over the island and his long-running feud with Jack. But I do not recall coming across any complaints about his actions with Boone in ”Hearts and Mind”. And many have complimented him for the way he dealt with Charlie’s drug addiction in Season One. I wish I could share in this adulation, considering that Charlie did give up his heroin addiction. But I cannot. I believe that Locke – and possibly many fans – was more focused upon the endgame, instead of the journey. What I am trying to say is that Locke seemed so intent upon achieving a goal – whether it was to get Charlie to give up drugs or convince Boone in getting over Shannon – that he failed to realize that such goals required a great deal of work on their parts. I would have been more impressed if both Charlie and Boone had come to the realization that they needed to get over their desires and obsessions on . . . their . . . own, or made the decision to achieve these goals without being manipulated by Locke. But since Locke had decided to interfere in the lives of both men, he pretty much robbed them of their struggles.

After reading this article, one would believe that I dislike John Locke. I do not. Frankly, I consider him to be one of the most fascinating characters on ”LOST”. Like many other fans, I bought into that image of him as this mysterious and all wise man who not only understood the island better than the characters, but also understood them and their situation better than them. What I had failed to realize back in Season One that underneath the persona of the all wise island guru, John Locke was an insecure man whose enthusiasm over being healed by the island led him to interfere and manipulate the lives of some of his fellow castaways. This enthusiasm not only led him to wallow in a delusion that he knew all there was to know about life, it also hid the fact that as an individual, Locke still had a long way to go in achieving self-realization.