Lost’s squandered opportunity
After six years and 114 episodes it’s all over. More than 13 million people watched the two-and-a-half-hour series finale of Lost Sunday night, and scores of them are still online or hovering around watercoolers debating what they saw. Some feel they received sufficient answers to the many (read that: many, many) mysteries the show presented and that the emotional conclusion was a worthy sendoff. Others are saying, “Hang all the joyous reunions and tearful goodbyes, what was up with Dharma initiative?!”
From the standpoint of a fan, I enjoyed the closing chapter of television’s biggest roller coaster, but I can’t say I was completely satisfied. (Am I the only one who still wanted Sawyer and Kate to end up together?) However, unlike more naïve viewers, I resigned myself long ago to the idea that every little frayed thread couldn’t possibly be tied up. I was most interested in the fates of the characters I had come to love. On that front, we certainly got answers, and those answers led, in true Lost fashion, to . . . more questions. (Warning: There are, of course, spoilers ahead)
Most intriguing was the nature of the sideways reality. A sort of purgatory, it gave each of the castaways the opportunity to abolish the qualities they most despised about themselves. Instead of a lonely, selfish con man, Sawyer/James (Josh Holloway) became a kind-hearted cop with true friends. Instead of being a murderer, Kate (Evangeline Lilly) was innocent. Instead of a marriage marred by lies and betrayal, Jin (Daniel Dae Kim) and Sun (Yunjin Kim) shared an unblemished love.
In a way, the fake reality offered them the same thing the island did: a chance to become new creations, but without any of the struggle, anguish, or scarring. Yet the reaction of almost every character at being shaken out of this pleasant dream world was exultation. Even Sun and Jin, who were already together and thus had no reunion to celebrate, positively shone with gratitude the minute they realized what their lives had really been like. So the obvious question: Why? Why, when memories of all the pain they had experienced on the island, when memories of their worst selves came flooding back, were they happy? My guess: Because without a true knowledge of their sin they couldn’t really appreciate their redemption and move on to the final gathering place: the church.
Only Ben Linus (Michael Emerson), who in purgatory lived up to the demands of fatherhood in a way he never did on the island, rejects the real world. He is offered forgiveness, but leaving the fantasy means confronting who he really was: a lying, scheming, betraying murderer. Such were some of the others (Kate, Sayid, and Sawyer, to name a few), but only Ben refuses to “let go” and join the celebration.
However, as WORLD has noted before, Lost is not scripted or produced by believers (at least not that I’m aware of), so I didn’t expect a biblically consistent ending. Nor was I surprised that some aspects weren’t as fulfilling as they could have been. Like most supernatural figures created by the minds of men, the more we got to know the island’s protector, Jacob (Mark Pellegrino), the less impressive he became. When he, in a scene reminiscent of communion, shared blessed water with Jack (Matthew Fox) and declared, “Now you are like me,” I thought, “What, unnecessarily vague and a bit of a mama’s boy?”
There is nothing like biblical symbolism for creating epic scale. And it is strange that storytellers of all stripes—screenwriters, novelists, TV show producers—recognize that bastardized Scripture references add a sense of emotional heft and unfathomable mystery to a tale but don’t ask themselves why that is. Lost was certainly awash in them—from character’s names to quoting specific verses—and to the extent that the finale painted a picture of the great Finale, it succeeded.
Disappointing as the scene with the stained-glass window featuring the cross, yin yang, and Star of David (amongst others) was, the dominant symbology of Lost remained Christian to the end. There was no Buddha, no Mohammed in front of that church where our protagonists gathered for their final journey; there was only Christ standing with arms wide open, and for Jack, only a “Christian Shepherd” to guide him.
But the producer’s foolishness in deciding to mix sprinklings of false faiths in with the true not only undercut the spiritual value of the show, it undercut the entertainment value of it as well. The most gratifying supernatural tales (for me that would be Lord of the Rings, The Chronicles of Narnia, and Harry Potter) don’t stop with borrowing biblical symbols and themes; they also borrow story arcs and resolutions. They please all and always, to quote Longinus, because the greatest story resonates within them. Though superior on the television landscape, when Lost made concessions to an “every path leads to God” ideology, it squandered its opportunity to reach that level of transcendence.

















Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top41 Comments to “Lost’s squandered opportunity”
Six years and 114 episodes for what?
I’m not sure that looking to television programs to reach a “level of transcendence” would lead to anything else other than disappointment.
Report comment to moderator
It was a good show Maestro. I could never figure it out and that’s what kept me going back. Most tv programs are foregone conclusions. You know how they turn out.
I will miss Lost next year, but maybe it was best to leave some questions unanswered.
Report comment to moderator
Well, certainly the program was good for sparking conversations. I only watched it this last year because one of my kids moved home and loved it.
Or rather, I looked up from time to time from my book to say, “Oh, here’s another opportunity to complain about how I want to get off the island.”
This is an interesting take, Megan, and I thank you for putting things into perspective.
Report comment to moderator
I wasn’t a big Lost fan, but my wife and daughter certainly were and therefore, I would watch an occasional episode and like most television stories, was able to keep up with the show’s premise. However, I liked the way the writers brought the show to a close. Essentially, they said that all of the sub-plots and questions were meaningless…all that really matters in the end is the relationships with those around us; especially the ones we love. I think we can all (Christians and non-believers alike) take a lesson from that
Report comment to moderator
Lost lost me at the polar bear.
I don’t believe all paths lead to God, but I do believe all paths contain truth, “Because the greatest story resonates within them.” The yin and the yang is a great symbol of balance, the star of David a fantastic reminder of hope and the concept of ’submission’ should not be contemplated by one relgion alone. Just because one does not buy the combination plate, doesn’t mean ala carte items can’t be enjoyed. As C.S. Lewis said, only the atheist is beholden to throw the baby out with the bath water.
Report comment to moderator
I’m not suggestiong it wasn’t compelling television, NJL. Granted I am wholly ignorant of all the conversation, books and blogging that obviously has arisen from it, and perhaps someone has come to Christ because of it, I do not know. I admit that.
However, the very that a television program has so utterly consumed some folks time and attention was the principle reason I avoided it.
Friends of mine were virtually insisting I watch all the seasons on DVD after I’d watched the first few episodes with them. Their enthusiasm was, er, well, a bit over-the-top.
When I saw the first two episodes, I felt that familiar, compelling “pull” I’d feel whenever my favorite NFL team was playing on T.V. – that urge to sit, eat and watch for hours on end and absorb my entire being – heart, mind, soul and emotions – into the visual medium.
In the end it only ends up leaving me disappointed and unfulfilled, even if my team won or my favorite characters live happily ever after.
It is precisely why I do not have a television in the first place. It is a lure for me and a huge waste of time. I cannot watch it in moderation.
Report comment to moderator
Maestro,
Be prepared to be castigated for saying you don’t watch TV.
Report comment to moderator
Freida
No worries.
Report comment to moderator
I admire your admission,Maestro, that you cannot watch it in moderation. You have placed the blame where it lies. It is people who who act holier than thou about never watching who upset some of us.
Report comment to moderator
Maestro,
You don’t watch TV? Do you, like, READ or something?
Around the Super Bowl, I told my highschoolers that I didn’t have a TV. (For me, it’s the money.) One of my (very) outspoken students asked me those questions. Made me laugh…if she could only see my sagging bookshelves!
I think you made a wise decision.
Report comment to moderator
Don’t misunderstand me, KI, I do have my holier-than-thou moments!
I cannot honestly say that watching significant amounts of television has contributed to my well-being to any noticeable degree. If it has I am unaware of it. Not saying it couldn’t or doesn’t, I just don’t notice it.
Report comment to moderator
Sylvie
I haven’t had a television going on three years now. I like it a lot. I’m not as “worried” or “anxious” as I sometimes was. I’ve lost 25 pounds and have read a lot more, yes.
I also swim, go outside more, play golf, walk, pray, write, cook, have face-to-face conversations with friends. There’s lots more time in my days!
Report comment to moderator
I get the same lines of inquiry from my students as well, Sylvie. They are utterly incredulous. One of my kiddos parents knew of this and wanted to get me a television for Christmas, believe it or not.
The 7th grade boy who knows his teacher well told his mother, “Don’t bother Mom. That’s not a good idea. Mr. Ray will just sell it or something.”
He told me he “defended” me!
Report comment to moderator
Well, Sylvie, I watch tv and I read. In fact, I usually am reading while watching, unless I am quilting. TV and reading are not exclusive of one another. However, I am off to do other things right now, at any rate.
FWIW, I think you made a wise decision, also, Maestro. Best not to do anything that you cannot control. After all, one of the fruits of the Spirit is self-control.
Report comment to moderator
I think the reason Lost resonated so strongly with many people is because at it’s core, it was a story about redemption.
Report comment to moderator
Interesting take, Megan.
However, my wife and were completely turned off by the “all roads lead to heaven” pagan ending.
Also, could you explain about the “gratifying supernatural tales” comment regarding Harry Potter?
Report comment to moderator
“Am I the only one who still wanted Sawyer and Kate to end up together?” –Yes, yes you most certainly are.
I am really grateful they went with an ending that could be classified under the heading of “Happily Ever After.” I was bracing myself for more random deaths. I described the ending as Ghost Whisperer meets The Chronicles of Narnia. Ambiguous Unitarian heaven. I understand, though: their fanbase is all over the map. Enough people have been whining about how “Christina” even this was.
BUT…
They answered nothing. Scratch that: they answered one question they had just introduced with the beginning of season 6.
They left out some people in the Purgatory universe: I didn’t see Eko, Michael, Walt… what about them? (We could even mention Nikki and Paulo if we were willing to remember that they existed.) What happens to those (Ben, Danielle, Charlotte, Daniel, Alex, Ana Lucia, Eloise, Charles Widmore, etc.) who remained in Purgatory rather than “moving on?”
About Purgatory: if Kate, Sawyer, Claire and such got off the island, are we to assume they never fell in love again? I suppose. What about Aaron? Both Claire and Kate made it off, they could have raised him, and yet neither mentioned him in Purgatory. Who was Jack’s son? What about Nadia? Sayid was more attached to Shannon, who he knew for like a month, then his girlfriend he had been pining over for years and been with for several months?
About the people who made it off: What kind of life do they get to have? Kate especially: she’s already famous, she’s been claiming Aaron as her son, and now she not only survives another plane crash, but Aaron’s real mother shows up? Sounds like the world would want some explanation.
The island: Here we got nothing. We don’t know what the island is, what the protector is, why pregnant women die, why it heals, moves, travels through time, what the light was, why there were random Egyptian symbols, including what looked like a sarcophagus in the light room, why Aaron was special, why Walt was special, why Jacob brought people besides his candidates to the island, or even what we were promised with the last episode, why “they” died. Jacob seemed to quickly change the subject after promising to tell.
Report comment to moderator
*Christian
Report comment to moderator
Maestro, you watched the NFL on tv?
Now, I prepare to be castigated.
Report comment to moderator
Dont do TV here.
We have VCR and DVD player for the kids.
I think I watched this show once. One of the castaways was a fat Samoan I spoze. Obesity on a deserted isle?
Not too realistic unless we’re talking about the Skipper from Gilligan
Report comment to moderator
I hope I don’t upset NJLawyer, but I have never watched even one episode of Lost.
Report comment to moderator
Sawgunner, the fat guy was not Samoan, but it was funny he never lost any weight.
Report comment to moderator
They should have made that actor pull double duty by putting him on Biggest Loser
Report comment to moderator
I really enjoyed Lost, and I have been checking out the blogs and opinions online about the final episode. It’s interesting to me that on these purely secular entertainment blogs there are some pretty amazing conversations going on about love, redemption, spirituality and Christ spurred on by the final episode of Lost.
I couldn’t wait for World to post something (GREAT article, Megan!) so I could engage in those kinds of discussions with a Christian audience. And yet what we have over here is a discussion about not having television sets, etc.
Just an observation that I found very interesting.
Report comment to moderator
#24
One could argue that “modern” Christianity has permitted the culture to “lead” the discussions, define the terms, etc. By so doing, we forget what sort of effort, environment, engagement is needed to sustain a robust and in-depth knowledge of the Bible.
Television is by and large part of a much larger more fundamental issue regarding the “way” in which we are conditioned to think and understand reality. Just look at the profound impact television has had upon writing. Text messaging, short blog posts, Facebook posts, Twitter, email – all of these entities could be considered as “prodigies” of generations of television. It conditions us to curtail our thinking and our means of expression through the written and spoken word.
Reading, engaging, and understanding Scripture requires a far different sort of effort than watching television. When communicating through the medium of television, much gets “lost” in translation. We become conditioned to the way in which television encourages us to think, feel, act and speak.
As it has been said the medium itself becomes the message.
I am uncomfortable with a television program such as “Lost” (and others) which so dominate the cultural conversation. It’s not just what it’s about but more profoundly about how it conditions us to think.
Report comment to moderator
NJL
I only watch it if it’s on at a gathering, but then only disinterestedly.
Report comment to moderator
I agree with you about “cultural conversation.” However, when we start seeing people as “culture” we’re in trouble. Jesus looked over the city of Jerusalem with love, and wept over it. But then, he sent his disciples house by house to speak to the people of the city to transform hearts and lives.
My only point was that some real people of this culture who Jesus is weeping over and who watched a television show that may have prompted them to ask questions they normally wouldn’t about their lives (and which we have very profound answers to) are having some great conversations with some of Jesus’ followers today about it – but not necessarily here. If they sought out a Christian blog for some of that they would hear commentary about culture, morality, and the obesity of one of the actors they found so endearing. I just found that interesting.
I think we have tended to speak more to the “city,” and have missed the “house to house” strategy that Jesus seemed to put in place. We can’t dominate or control the cultural conversation, nor should we want to. But we sure can point to why people find these cultural stories so meaningful, as they reflect the much larger (and far better) story that we are all living.
Report comment to moderator
I think the way in which we’re communicating isn’t working as well as people think we are perhaps, GMTB. Blogs, TV, the Internet, our cell phone/pod/pad things separate us from face-to-face interaction and real dialogue with one another. They don’t encourage the sort of thinking, meditating and “digesting” (”eat this book”, “eat My flesh”, “drink My blood”) that Scripture requires.
We go from the television to the Internet but remained disconnected from the embodied aspect of the Christian faith. Discussions on line about television programs can only go so far before the necessity of integrating oneself “in the flesh”, “with man as man” comes into play. It is a crucial and necessary aspect of Christ’s teaching. Cyberspace and television and the onset of “virtual” realities diminish this necessity of human presence.
Report comment to moderator
“it is” replaces “we are” above.
Report comment to moderator
Plus we’re talking about the medium of “entertainment” as well, which is somewhat antithetical to the means by which God demonstrated His love toward us.
Report comment to moderator
I wholeheartedly agree with you about communication. But it doesn’t give us the right to be anything less than a disciple in this medium. I think our “follower-ship” of Christ doesn’t change regardless of whether we’re talking on the phone, chatting via internet, or posting things on facebook – it should all reflect our love of Jesus and his people.
And that was my whole point, actually. It had nothing to do about communicating through the medium of entertainment. It had to do with our conversations with one another on this webpage.
Report comment to moderator
And how different those conversations were from those that were supposedly “secular” and exclusively entertainment focused.
Report comment to moderator
First paragraph above in 33 should’ve been a blockquote GMTB from your previous post. Sorry for the confusion!
Report comment to moderator
Good stuff! I totally agree – it’s very cool that we serve a God of incarnation, whose ultimate “Word” was a person. Jesus is the message. And yet, he communicates Jesus in history (Genesis 22:1-18), in creation (Romans 1:20), in written word (2 Timothy 3:16), in teaching and preaching (Acts 5:42), in acts of service and love (1 John 4:9), in the example of his followers (2 Thes. 3:7), and on and on. None of those things are Christ, but they are all used by God to point to him, because in the end, it’s ALL about Jesus. “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life” (John 5:39). There is no life apart from a real encounter with him, no doubt. So I will point others to him every chance (and every way) I can.
What a great discussion. Maestro, you always have really thoughtful and poignant posts on this blog. I appreciate reading your comments on different topics. Blessings!
And may we all be mindful of how (and what) we are communicating Christ to the world on this blog and everywhere.
Report comment to moderator
GMTB
Thanks. We are in agreement. Thank you for mentioning the Scriptures which point to the means through which God demonstrates His incarnate reality.
So when we “point” to Jesus, it is not just with our “fingers” but with our entire being, words, actions, thoughts, deeds, essentially all of our mind, soul and strength – everything we are.
Oh, how short we fall of that, at least I know I do. I can talk a good talk, but my “walk”…
I think communication technologies tend to cater to my propensity for prefering the impersonal. Easy to “blog” Jesus, a bit more difficult to “live” Him.
As the Native Americans said of David Brainerd when they observed his sufferings as he ministered among them, “He not only talk Jesus, he live Jesus.”
Thanks for the chat! Good stuff.
Report comment to moderator
Well, at least the writers tried, and as noted, others are talking about redemption, etc. Maybe you have to start slowly, it may be what sparks a further interest, rather than just gut it.
Report comment to moderator
What do you think the writers “tried” NJL?
Report comment to moderator
GMTB, good observations. Thanks for bringing those ideas out.
Report comment to moderator
GMTB,
I suspect different Christians are called to a different place in the cultural conversation. I have relatives who won’t own a computer, and certainly won’t have internet access in their home. Meanwhile I see part of my “ministry” as interacting on World blog, and others I know choose to be on Facebook.
I’m one of those non-TV watchers. Technically I own a TV, but it stays fairly cool. My housemate finally hooked up the connection to make it compatible with the new TV system a few weeks ago, and I have yet to turn it on. There are multiple reasons for this, the largest being that I simply do not like TV. I can enjoy a made-for-TV movie or a classic show now and then, but the likelihood of a good one being on at a given time is slim, and I’m not going to sit down and flip channels looking for something to watch. So I might occasionally hear about a good show and watch it (or watch it at a friend’s house), or I might watch a movie on my VCR and notice while I’m flipping channels to get to it that a good show is on. But when I do happen to watch a sit-com or reality show made in the last decade, I’m usually appalled by how much worse things have gotten even in the years since I’ve watched TV. (I watched it slightly more in Chicago–about an hour a week.) The commercials themselves are reason enough to leave it off.
In short, I simply can’t see getting past my own dislike of the medium, and my own disinclination to sully my mind with the shows or the commercials, to watch a particular show on the off chance I’ll be able to discuss it in an evangelistic way someday. I do see it as Christians’ obligation to have some awareness of culture–but I don’t see the viewing of certain shows and movies, reading of specific books, attending or listening to certain music groups, etc. as what it means to be an informed Christian. I’m more likely to have read a specific book than most others on here (I’ve read Twilight and the Harry Potter books, for example), but for the most part I’m not working in a secular environment, and my knowledge of specific information (from reading and life experience) is more relevant in most of the places I am than my knowledge of pop culture. For those who work with people influenced by pop culture, priorities might be different. Since I work in publishing, that informs some of my reading decisions, and to stay more informed of what is being published than I am about what is being broadcast.
Report comment to moderator
I liked Lost because I like the historical and philosophical references.
I can relate to Jack Sheppard, because I like to fix things.
I can relate to Hugo Reyes, because I like to eat and know what it is like to not be able to lose weight.
I can relate to Desmond Hume, because I have had visions of the future that came true, and also not the way I thought they would.
I can relate to Sayed Jurrah, because I was a Communications Officer during the Gulf War (even though I was thousands of miles from any shooting).
I can relate to Frank Lapides, because I have a pilot’s license.
I can relate to John Locke, because I have been told I couldn’t do things and didn’t give up either.
I was disappointed in the end, because I felt the “all roads lead to heaven” theme ending contradicted the redemption theme of the series.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!