Flight 815-ers Unite discussion

I just re-read this book for a myspace book club called Saywers Book Club... and wanted to share my thoughts on it as far as how I see it pertaining to Lost.

In this book, three little children and three old ladies (who are not actually old ladies, but stars who've died) tesser - time travel -from one galaxy to another to find the childrens father, who is fighting, and losing, a battle against a very Evil alien entity.

What struck me most within this novel was the special-ness of the three children. This reeks of Walt, right?! But that is not the only link I saw.

I was thinking about all the info Ive read on other lost forums where people beleive that Walt can Astral Project himself. Now, im not a huge sci-fi fan, and i could have this totally wrong, but tessering is a manipulation of the fourth and fifth dimension, according to the novel, which is basically traveling by bending time. IS this sort of like Astral Projecting? Leaving one place, to go to another, and returning before anyone knew you were even gone?

The old ladies in the book have trouble sometimes when they tesser and dont always make it back correctly, or all the way.

In any case, I was thinking of this tessering and came to the conclusion that is possibly what Walt does. Think back to the episode when Shannon and Sayid were in the tent, and Shannon sees Walt, but he is dripping wet and speaking backwards. Another example would be when Locke was lying in the Dharma Pit after Ben shot him and Walt visits him. To Locke, Walt appeared "Taller" (remember from that moment on he refered to him as "Taller Walt")

So what do you think? Do you see a connection, or am I grasping at straws here?

No that's a pretty good idea as to how Walt appears to be where he shouldn't be.

And I do think there is something special about how time works there and that they are aware of how to use/manipulate it to their advantage.Something that may come natural to Walt.

I thought the definition of the "good" side was interesting. Jesus was good, but so was Buddha, Michaelangelo, etc... anyone who had contributed to the light side was considered "good". The concept of good isn't neccessarily a religious one in Wrinkle in Time as much as it is an overall good or bad contribution with ones life.

I wonder how that plays into Ben's list of who is good? I know that someone mentioned this before, but does that then mean that Ben and the Others are good?

This is a question that I find myself coming back to again and again.For someone who is on the side of "good"Ben's done a lot of questionable things.

But the same can be said of Locke who is stepping outside the boundaries of right and wrong based solely on faith and his gut feeling.

Is good not just something we percieve? For someone like Ben, whose prioritys may be different than say... Jack... Ben sees good as something Jack would perceive as bad.

Are we speaking of good in terms of good and evil?Right and wrong?

Ben doesn't seem to suffer a lot of anguish when others suffer from his actions nor is he terribly disturbed when others die from his actions.I guess Good for me is summed up with the question does he have a conscience?Is there ever a struggle with what needs to be done.

As irritating as Jack can be sometimes he does have a conscience.He cares what happens to people.He may not have all the facts but he cares for peoples welfare,not something Ben or even Locke seem to trouble themselves with.

So I think it's fair to say that the idea of good can be more than an individuals perception.

I know this is rather a lengthy answer but I really liked the question!

Yes, right and wrong being good and evil. And that is where I always start thinking, who are we to say what is good or right? Think about the war we are currently involved in. Obviously we believe we are fighting for the cause of good. on the side of whats right. But what about the guys on the other side of this war. You cant tell me they are fighting thinking "hey, we are the bad guys here"... They too feel they are in the right. on the side of good. and they see us as the ones who are wrong, or evil....

So I look to the people on the island the same way. Ben sees this situation he is involved in as a war for the island. And he feels that in order to protect it, to do what is right, people will have to suffer. He has already stated that, when he blew up the freighter.

To everyone else, that seems pure evil, right! I mean, hell, to me, for a long time, that is how i saw it. Then the more I got to know of Ben and what makes him tick, the more I saw, ok... hes messed up in the head, sure, but he knows what he belives in, he thinks he is right, and he will do ANYTHING to make sure it happens.

Sorry, I really went on a rant, but I find Good vs Evil and Right and Wrong a tough line to draw in the sand...
:)

Tho Sherry, I absolutely see your point as well!

It's interesting that you thought of the war.I thought of the Crusades and all those good intentions used to such evil purposes.It's the manipulative quality for me that smacks of evil.But I do see your point, the concepts of good and evil are so easily blurred when intentions become involved.

I grew up with someone very evil and for me the distincton was made by as I said earlier,a complete lack of conscience or remorse.

I think that the war was evil in that it was for the wrong reasons,but those who went to fight went believing it was the right thing,because they had been manipulated into believing that was so.

So there is a distinction between bad stuff going down without the intention of it being bad,but there is bad where things are manipulated knowing it's bad and not caring like some of the politicians have been guilty of.It's all about intent and conscience,and that to me is the definition of evil.

That's my two cents worth I guess,but in terms of Ben I can only remember his reply to John when John said that all on the ship will die and Ben's response was pretty nonchalant.I had been a little on the fence about him going back and forth between good guy bad guy but that kind of settled my mind that he doesn't feel a lot of disress with some of his actions.

Thanks for such a thought provoking question,even if I have it completely wrong I've enjoyed stretching my brain a little and thinking of something with more depth than what should I make for supper! :)

haa haa.. here too. Its interesting how one question can bring out so much.. huh?

You've gotten me thinking as well, as far as true good and true evil, personal intentions removed. I tend to tunnel vision... and see things from one perspective. You've broadened my views here, so thanks :)

Lol i have been thinking the same and reassessing what it is I believe so thanks for the new perspective.

I don't know what everyone's definition of good would be, but I know what my definition of evil is. I don't think that any one political or personal point of view can be considered good or evil, but I surely think Charles Manson is evil. Now, he might not think so- but his believing in his own good intentions doesn't in fact make him good.

I think it's in this way that Wrinkle in Time separates good and evil; or, light and darkness. How is a star good, except that it shines it's light on darkness? That's not a moral goodness but a goodness of purpose or function towards a greater (universal) good. Just as someone like Manson can be said to work towards the destruction or detrement of the greater good, and is therefore not considered good regardless of how he perceives himself or his intentions.

That's what makes it difficilt to define though,because everyone has a different idea of what evil is.I doubt very much that Manson had any good intentions,but he was certainly able to manipulate others to do some horrible things without remorse,I would say that Manson would in fact fit my idea of what evil is as well.

I was thinking today that evil is rather like pornography,you know it when you see it,except that argument doesn't quite hold up either as there is a great gap between what is evil and bad for one person then for another.

I do think it's a more complex issue than is first apparent which is why I've been fascinated and mulling it over for the day

Walt tessered? I thought 'twas Jacob messing around with the 815ers.

Oh and IT is kinda like Jacob, don't you think? The way IT got a grip on Charles (Locke?)...
and IT used to speak through the red-eyed man (Ben?) then it switched to Charles.

Plus the black cloud...

good discussion...

sigh...these discussions of good and evil are hard for me...I believe that "Thou shall not Murder (kill)" is a basic ruler or guideline to define evil...most religions have rartionalized and strayed from this to justify the wars They wanted to wage...
for example...the crusades weren't really about religion, they were about money...the knights that didn't die became rich...yet they claimed it was "for God"...I wonder how God feels about that?

I think "A wrinkle in time" brings us back to some basic non BS ideas of good and evil...and love being the defining yardstick of Good..

Lost, however I would wish it differently, is more ambiguous than the book...really "good" and "evil" are all mixed up...

most of the characters have murdered someone, all the while feeling justified, yet we are allowed to see these character's humanity and that each has some good in them...

I can only think of walt, hurley, rose, bernard,alex,carl and vincent (lol) that haven't murdered someone...(there may be others, but definately more murderers here than in your average population)
I didn't add jack cause I'm not sure if letting shannons father die to save Jack's future wife counts...

anyway...I would venture a guess that the main point that we can take away from the book as relating to lost is the time travel aspect...the 4th dimension

Jack killed somebody at the very beginning of the series: the Marshal. Remember? The Marshal asks Kate to kill him, Kate gives Sawyer the gun, Sawyer misses the Marshal's heart, then Jack goes in and "ends his misery." So maybe Jack came to the Island without ever having killed anybody (which is doubtful considering that he is a spinal surgeon), but he definitely killed before the end of the third day on the Island.

As for Walt--he's done some crazy things. Remember how all those birds kept dying around him in Australia, then his mom died? I'm not saying that he intentionally killed her, but it's kinda interesting, don't you think?

Hurley had some seriously bad luck right after he won the lottery. There was probably somebody who died because of him. Maybe that's not murder in the sense that he intentionally killed somebody, but it's a connection. The fact that he's later crazy enough to be institutionalized suggests that maybe somebody did die as a result of his bad luck.

Bernard, I think, killed somebody when the Losties re-took the beach toward the end of Season 3, but I'm not sure.

Finally, we don't know enough about Rose, Carl, or Alex to say whether they killed anybody or not. As far as we know, they have clean hands.

oh, Hurley brought down a pier someplace after, causing some people to die. He was too heavy for it or something and the guilt of thier deaths caused him to have nervous breakdown (but obviously not enough of one to loose the excess weight.. ahem) Dont forget, when the trap was set for the others to take the pregnant women, Hurley came to the rescue plowing the Dharma van into a couple of others and killing them.

Jin and Bernard also took one or two out with the shotguns that same nite.

Jack ALMOST killed Locke... pulled the trigger but the gun wasnt loaded. I wonder if that should count.

ooo I forgot about all those things....well I guess that leaves vincent LOL...

sooo maybe there is some truth in the theory that the losties are there to give them a chance at redemption...on the ABC lost message boards that was a going theory but the producers nixed the idea of pergatory

Nanner, I tryed the Lost group on MSN but it just got too weird and off topic... ha ahaa... i gave it up awhile ago. I cant juggle too many groups or i get lost and left behind :(

See, no matter what the producers say I still think the purgatory idea makes sense. Especially now that we have dead people resurrecting on the island a la Christian.

I have so many groups I actually forgot some of them lol...I'm in facebook...flixter...myspace...yahoo 360...and more I have no idea about anymore...but I never did try the Lost group on MSN...I am a member of MSN but never joined any groups ...

between you guys and me...the producers are jewish (or at least the 2 main ones) , so I doubt they believe in purgatory...but I think there is some kind of second chance thing going on...whatever it is, I think it'll be in the hebrew scriptures (old testament) :)

walt is like that kid in a wrinkle in time i ahven't read in since fourth grade... um charles wallace or soemthing right?