DREAMS OR DELUSIONS

There is a fine line between dreams and delusions.

A dream is a series of thoughts, images, and sensations occurring in a person's mind during sleep. It is a state of mind in which someone is or seems to be unaware of their immediate surroundings. Dreams also include cherished aspirations, ambitions, or ideals; a perception of something or some one as being wonderful or perfect.


But if a dream is an unrealistic or self-deluding it becomes a fantasy.

A delusion is an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder. Or it can mean the action of deluding someone or the state of being deluded, for example,  what a capacity television has for delusion. Delusions of grandeur a false impression of one's own importance can cloud a person's judgement.

In LOST, the characters struggled along this fine line.

Jack had a dream to reconcile with his father. He could never meet his father's expectations. He felt that he was trapped in his father's shadow. He dreamed that his father would one day respect him as an equal. That seems to be a reasonable goal.

Kate had a vague dream about getting out of her boring, dull and suffocating rural Iowa life. However, her dream turned dark when she took the abuse her stepfather had on her mother to an extreme. She then went on a fantasy crime spree to hide from justice. 

Locke had a simple dream. He wanted to be reunited with his parents; to be part of a normal family. But the bitterness of being abandoned by his parents and bouncing among foster families led him to be disillusioned about his fate. He tried to fantasize about having a new life, with a wonderful spouse to being an adventurous outback hero. His outlook crippled him, literally and physically, when he was scammed by his con artist father. 

Ben's dream was from his lack of self-esteem and friends. He was blamed for mother's death. His alcoholic father never cared for him. He took his sorry lot of life for a long time until the island gave him an opportunity to feed a delusion of revenge and power. For Ben to be important and in control of his path, he believed that he had to be in charge, be the leader, to have control over others. He seized on the notions of absolute power against the conventions of normal human relations. He turned into a cold blooded killer and an absolute dictator.

Sayid had a common dream. He wanted to leave his war-torn homeland to live in peace with his true love, Nadia. His focus was to find her. In the end, we are unclear whether Sayid's affection for Nadia was real or imagined to cover up the pain of the tortures he made on others. 

Hurley had a dream to re-unite with his father. To pick up where they left off when he was a child. But that only happened after he won the lottery. His father came back not to love him, but for the love of his new found money. The dream of a happy, healthy and wealthy family turned into a personal curse that led Hurley into mental institutions. 

Sawyer had a mean dream. He vowed to kill the con-man who destroyed his family. His obsession with his revenge turned him into the man he hated - - - a con artist preying on the weakest. He began deluding other people by tapping into their fantasies of romance, wealth or fame. The fact that he was no better than the man who killed his parents made Sawyer believe that he was a worthless human being - - - in need of no compassion, friends, family or goals. Once he killed Cooper, his dream was gone and effectively, the focal point of his life was gone.

If you look to the island as the experimental extrapolation of each characters' dreams or desires, then many of them crossed the fine line. Jack's grief of losing his father before he could reconcile with him led him to madness (but not after showing the world he could be a good leader in a time of crisis.) But Jack's reconciliation only happened in a dream like state of the after life (or a projected version of it).

Kate's island dream was fulfilled because she never really had to account for all the crimes she committed in her real life. Were all those crimes merely unfulfilled fantasies of a young farm girl?

Locke had the opportunity to become the great outback hero, but his own personality flaws crashed and burned his own fantasy leading to his own projected tragic death at the hands of Ben.

Sayid's dream finish was confusing - - - as he re-connected with his long lost love, but then ended up with the exact opposite, Shannon, a spoiled rich girl with no talent and no ambition.

Hurley's island life contained more friends and finding Libby who would love him just as he was - - - but since Libby was seen as a pre-island mental patient in Hurley's day room, was Hurley's happy island ending just another delusion?

Sawyer's island life was only a means to an end. The end of his search for Cooper. And his fantasy revenge was fulfilled when Cooper was miraculously dropped in his lap. Once that occurred, Sawyer was merely a loner only looking out for himself. When he left the island, he had no prospects, no dreams, no aspirations. In one aspect, his life (purpose) died on the island.

Whether the island was a fantasy fulfillment zone is a question that viewers will continue to debate and theorize about. But it was clear that the island was the intersection of character dreams and delusions.

THE JOURNEY

Poet Rainer Maria Rilke wrote, “The only journey is the one within.”

The basic structure of a good story is a good premise, strong character development, action, reaction, conflict, choices and a journey's end.

The quintessential story arc in this generation is Luke Skywalker's journey to become a Jedi. From humble beginnings, a tragedy propels a naive young man into a dangerous adventure across the galaxy in search of truth, purpose and family. But throughout, the journey was within Luke's heart and soul - - - the mixed emotions, conflicts, set-backs and new friendships that affect how he would become a man.

Did anyone in LOST have such an heroic journey?

Sun defied her rich and overbearing father by marrying a poor fisherman's son, but her life did not end well.

Locke tried to rebel against his miserable life without a family, only to be crippled by his own father which led to a lifetime of mistrust and failure. His life did not end well either.

Kate was a bored, troublemaker as a child who kept her selfish ways of manipulating others in the forefront of her personal survival game. She had an opportunity to change (as did all of the characters) but she did not. She could never find true happiness in her life.

Sawyer was a vengeful boy who turned into the man he despised for destroying his family. But when he could have had a chance to led a family, he turned his back and fled responsibility. He took the easy way out because his personal bitterness and torment was his own internal best friend.

Sayid led a life of struggle and burden of responsibility. He did the dirty jobs. It affected his mental state. When he left Iraq and found his true love, it was taken away from him. In his journey to find her, he failed the woman he claimed to be the love of his life - - - and wound up with a woman he had only a short affair.

Hurley was an introvert scarred by his father's abandonment. He felt he was unlucky at life and that he was the sole cause of his own problems. But when he got lucky and won the lottery, a life changing event, he willed himself into more bad luck. In order to keep himself together, he invented his own best friend and checked himself into a mental institution to be safe from the world that brought him only bad luck. Even when he tried to change his life (by finding the meaning of the numbers), his plane crash lands on a dangerous island. He has an opportunity to re-invent himself but he never does. We don't know how much of Hurley's experiences and thoughts were real or imagined as some theories believe.

Jack may have been the closest to a clear path journey. His story starts as being a highly successful surgeon. He is at the top of his profession. He is well respected. He holds life and death decisions in his hands. But his demon is the lack of love from his father. His relationship with his father eats away at his soul to the point of jealousy, ire and mental breakdowns. The fact his father dies in a Sydney alley causes Jack to begin a journey into a downward spiral of personal torment. He becomes the reluctant leader of the survivors. His decision making becomes fragmented between himself as being the leader and good of the group. He decides to hide his island past when he is rescued, causing even more pain and suffering to the people around him. When Locke is killed, Jack has his final mental breakdown - - - the illogical quest to return to the island to fulfill some unknown reason. At this point, objectively he lost his ability to be rational. But since he left enough of the old Jack in the minds of his island mates, they joined him on a fateful journey back to the island. But the resolution on the island did not solve any of Jack's life problems. It was merely murky waters of his own discontent to the point of a suicide pact with the Man in Black as they went down into the Light Cave. Jack did not die a hero's death, but a foolhardy attempt to runaway from his problems. He did not have a personal redemption. He did not find the solution to save his friends. He did not get them off the island or home.  Jack's journey was the reverse path of Luke's. Jack did not find his journey's end with true answers to make his life great.

EVOLUTION

Harville Hendrix wrote, "Nature doesn't care that you are comfortable, only that you evolve."

LOST's creators continually stated that the show was more about character development than solving the myriad of  mysteries the writers threw at viewers.

In a typical character development, a person is put into an unfamiliar, often dangerous situation. The person then has to reflect on what is happening around him. He must determine based upon internal conflicts (experience, dreams, goals, etc) on how to proceed. It begins a journey of discovery, enlightenment, change and growth. Throughout the journey, he is tested, choices made, doubts created, strengths pushed to the limit to reach a final realization of one's self.

Weaved in this journey are themes we call life lessons. They can be coupled with moral tones, vices, bad choices, blind spots, naive behavior or self-destructive tendencies. But in the end, the character has to change, for better or worse, of the journey itself was meaningless. And the reader is left with a bitter taste of wasting time investing in a story with no true end.

Did LOST's main character have great personal development?

That remains an open question.

If we start with Locke as a young boy, we find that his life was a journey of mistakes, bad choices, social awkwardness and inability to find his place in society.

He was a miracle premature baby who survived his mother's car collision in rural, 1950s America. He was abandoned by his birth parents to grow up in foster homes as an outsider. He was smart, but wanted to be a jock. But he was not good enough so he fit into neither group. He became a loner. The more he grew up, the more sullen he became since he was missing the one thing other kids had: a family. So he spent much of his time trying to find a family unit. He would bounce from entry level job to job trying to find a permanent connection. But his deep seeded fears of abandonment and mistrust sabotaged most of his relationships. His fears were realized when he re-connected with his parents only to have his father steal his kidney and cripple him for life by pushing him through a high rise window.

So Locke's past contained so much baggage that he was a prime candidate for a character's "hero journey" of evolution. But did he did a hero's ending?

Sadly, no. Locke's sad life turned into a sad death.

The island "magic" apparently "cured" Locke's paralysis when he crash landed with the other survivors. He took it personally as a sign, a "miracle," a chance to be the person he dreamed he was going to be as a boy. Locke wanted to be a respected, swashbuckling, Outback, adventure-loving leader of men and lover of women.

Everyone on the island had an opportunity to shed their past and create a new self image.

In Locke's case, he started strong as being a hunter-food provider. But when the majority of the castaways gravitated toward the charismatic doctor, Jack, for survival, Locke became upset. He retreated to become a gregarious loner. Sure, he got along with many of the characters but most merely tolerated his ramblings. He never received the respect or admiration he thought he deserved.

He had an opportunity to become the leader of the 815 survivors, but Jack and Sawyer were chosen over him. He had an opportunity to become the true leader of the Others, but he could not bring it upon himself to kill his own father. 

Even when he "sacrificed" himself at ghost Shepherd's suggestion, only then did Sawyer give him faint praise after Locke turned the FDW to reset the island time skips.

When he returned to the States, Locke had several choices. He could have turned his back on the island and its harsh surreality. Or he could find himself back living a lonely existence in his new wheelchair. Instead, he was manipulated by Widmore like he had been manipulated by Ben to do someone's else's bidding. But Locke failed in his quest to get everyone back to the island.

In a seedy hotel room, Locke decided to commit suicide, a coward's not a hero's way out. Before he was about to do the deed, he was interrupted by Ben. Ben convinced him that his life still had value. That he was needed on the island. That he had to go back with him to make everything right. He had to go back to save his "friends." But after Locke slipped with the information on how he could get back to the island, through Mrs. Hawking, Ben strangled Locke whose last thoughts according to Flocke was "I don't understand."

Most viewers did not understand why MIB, the smoke monster, needed to inhabit Locke's corpse or assume his identity in order to overthrown Jacob. MIB did take Locke's memories to begin to manipulate the survivors, including those who let live after the Temple massacre. But if there was still a part of Locke in MIB's use of his memories, image or character - - - Locke failed to fight back or control MIB.

In the end, Locke winds up in the sideways church. He seems happy at the reunion, but how could he be? He sat in a pew alone. There was no one special present for him. Not his late girlfriend. Not his mother. No one. Throughout his life, Locke failed to make a special bond with any one person in order to "move on" in the after life. Locke's journey did not end in a hero's quest or salvation but as a sad footnote.

HEADING DOWN THE ROAD

As October creeps toward Halloween, with scores of creepy clowns popping up along the roadsides of America, the season gets us back to one element of LOST - - - dream theories.

But in this holiday season, nightmares.

One can broadly classify dreamers into two categories:

1. The upbeat, positive daydreamer who fantasizes about a better life for him or her self.

2. The depressed, anxiety ridden, negative sleeper who tosses and turns at night with ghastly visions of danger and horror.

Many scientists believe that dreams during sleep have major conscious contributions to a person's life. They believe that dreams are the mind's computer running simulations of potential events to gauge how the person (sleeper) will react if the simulation comes true. This is part of a probable ancient self-protection mechanism to teach instinct and survival skills.

The human mind is a complex thing which probably has hard wired in itself self-preservation.

So, one could presume that people who have happy dreams are living happy waking lives.

The counter part to that presumption is that people who have nightmares are living unhappy lives.

There is probably a gray area of people who lead mixed waking lives (people who are caught in a rut, dream of better things, or at times fear the worst.)

When you look at the scope of LOST's story lines, most center upon what would consider a negative path. The drama that incorporates danger, death and violence is easier to comprehend and compel viewership.

Each of the main characters on the show had deep seeded concerns about their lives. There were more negative emotions driving character actions than happy-go-lucky personalities.

Many characters had deep, unresolved emotional issues such as abandonment, abuse, social anxiety disorders and irrational fears. Many characters were heading down the road to nervous breakdowns, anti-social behavior or addiction/retreat from society.

So it is no wonder that these characters "wound up" together in the same place.

The place (and what it represents) is a matter for another discussion. But the series may have been an attempt to work through the characters underlying secrets, unresolved conflicts and personal angsts in the form of living island nightmares (real and imagined).

ROUSSEAU

LOST was filled with vague references and illusions to philosophers.

"Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains" said philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who was born in Geneva in 1712.

Rousseau left home at 16 and wandered around Europe for the next 14 years. He moved to Paris when he was 30, and took up with a group of philosophers. He also took up with Thérèse Le Vasseur, a semi-literate laundry maid at his hostel; the two began a lifelong relationship that produced five children, according to Rousseau. He placed all of them into orphanages.

Rousseau was well versed in music, and wrote ballets and operas; he could easily have been successful as a composer, but the stage made his Swiss Calvinist sensibilities uneasy.

One day he was walking to visit his friend and fellow philosopher Denis Diderot, who was in jail, and he had an epiphany: modern progress had corrupted rather than improved mankind.

He became famous overnight upon publication of his essay "A Discourse on the Sciences and the Arts" (1750). The essay informed nearly everything else he wrote, and eventually he would turn away completely from music and the theater to focus on literature. In "Discourse on the Origin of Inequality" (1755) he continued to explore the theme that civilization had led to most of what was wrong with people: living in a society led to envy and covetousness; owning property led to social inequality; possessions led to poverty.

Society exists to provide peace and protect those who owned property, and therefore government is unfairly weighted in favor of the rich.

In it, he wrote: "The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying This is mine, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this imposter; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody."

His work would prove inspirational to the leaders of the French Revolution, and they adopted the slogan from The Social Contract: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.

He grew increasingly paranoid in his later years, convinced that his friends were plotting against him. He spent some time in England with David Hume, but his persecution complex eventually alienated him from most of his associates.

Rousseau's character in LOST has some vague patterns to the 18th Century philosopher.
Rousseau came to the island as part of an exploration crew. She was pregnant. Her husband was an intellectual, a scientist. Their ship crashed on the island, which could only mean that Jacob brought them to it as candidates in his game with MIB. She is the second known candidate brought to the island as a pregnant woman. Jacob's own mother shipwrecked on the island centuries earlier, but she was killed by the guardian.

On the island, LOST's Rousseau lost her child to Ben's Others. In a sense, Alex was "an orphan" because Rousseau did not come back to get her bad (until it was too late). Instead, Rousseau abandoned society and lived on the island on her own. As a result, she grew increasingly paranoid in her plots to attack and counterattack against the Others. It was only after she failed to kill Sayid after capturing him did she begin to change her attitude toward her plight.

She began to work with the 815 survivors. Rousseau led the group up to the radio tower, and on the way met her daughter, Alex. She communicated with her for the first time, and Alex herself seemed curious about her. The two tied Ben up together, and headed on to the radio tower. Danielle stated earlier to Jack that she would help them find rescue, but would not be leaving herself. She said the Island is the only place she knows, and is her home.

At the native's darkest hour, when Widmore's soldiers were laying siege to the Dharma compound, did Rousseau come to terms with her motherhood. Ben was worried about Alex's safety so he begged Rousseau to take her to the safety of the Temple. On December 27, 2004, while she, Alex, and Karl were traveling from the Barracks to the Temple, they were ambushed by Keamy's mercenaries. Both Rousseau and Karl were shot dead. Alex was taken back as a hostage to be killed when Ben refused to surrender.

Rousseau was betrayed by the imposter, Ben, the faux father of Alex. She let her guard down in order to serve Ben's plan of survival. But in the end, it cost her and her daughter's lives. It was the battle of territory, the island, which philosopher Rousseau condemned as being the source of mankind's evil came to pass as Danielle and Alex's demise.

THE FORMATIVE NUMBERS

When one connects the cross Numbers on a clock face, you get the following result:

8, 10, 12, 14, 16 and 18.

These numbers could be important because they form the basis of the formative years of a person's personal growth.

At common law, the age of 7 was deemed the age of reason. A person was expected to know the difference between right and wrong.

The age of 18 confirms adulthood. A person is emancipated from their parent's guardianship. They can join the military, make contracts, get married, etc.

How one what acts and behaves during the time between age 8 and 18 is important. What were the parental guidance? What were the environmental factors? What were the support mechanisms? Did the person learn values, goals and ethics? Did he or she fall in the wrong crowd?

Look at the people devoid of parental love and attention: 

Locke.
Ben.
Sawyer (after his parents were killed).

Look at people who only had the attention of one parent:

Hurley.
Kate.
Shannon.
Walt.
Claire. 
Jin.

Look at people who had a "normal" upbringing:

Jack. 
Sun.
Sayid.

In the "normal" group, Jack had the upper middle class upbringing which led him to become a highly respected surgeon. He was smart, encouraged, had the means and opportunity to get a large slice of the American Dream. But in the end, was he a happy person?

Sun came from a very wealthy family. She was repressed by class status and her Korean culture. The only way she could get attention and feel independent was to rebel against her father in the worst possible way: by marrying a poor man. But even that goal did not make her a happy person.

Sayid grew up in a tight family setting in Iraq. His household was ruled by a strict father and a demanding culture. Sayid did what he had to do - - - such as butchering an animal his older brother could not do - - - which gave himself value to the group. And that need to be valuable in a group was the anchor that dragged his personal ambition and happiness down.

In many ways, the characters brought up by one parent have two common traits: loneliness and selfishness. Hurley was raised by his strict mother after his father left. She was religious and pushy, especially about his social life. That caused Hurley to eat to repress his social life. As a result, his mother enabled him to become a shy, quiet, dependent child who would never want to leave the artificial womb of her home. It is selfish to stay with a parent when, with any personal drive, you should be on your own. Claire had a similar relationship with her mother. Her mother wanted her to settle on a normal path, but Claire had a wild streak. They would fight over trivial matters. The last argument led to her mother's severe and fatal injuries.

You can add bitterness to characters like Kate and Walt. They were given a relatively carefree life, their needs being met by their mothers, but they were not very grateful. Each would act up in a controlled tantrum for attention. Then they were upset when things did not go their way, not understanding that it is the effort you have to put in yourself to get the result you want.

The characters who lost their parents early in the childhood, Ben, Locke and Sawyer, all had one driving trait: criminality. Their moral compasses did not have the bearings that parents instill in their children. Ben was beaten down daily by his alcoholic father who blamed Ben for his own shortcomings and lousy life. Locke's known abandonment was reinforced like a knife blade in his back each day he was in a foster home. Sawyer could only think of revenge after his father committed murder-suicide because of a con-man's trick on the family. Each would cross paths in the criminal world and go with its flow, including Locke - - - in seeking a "family" would have been fine living in a drug selling commune if they would accept him.

They say there is good and bad in everyone. What dominates a person's adulthood comes from what happens when a child is 8 to 18 years old. Each of LOST's main characters personalities were crystallized by events that happened in their childhoods.

SOAP OPERAS

The creator of the anime series, Baccano!, had a line in adapted episode which probably probably sums up LOST: 

Stories never begin, nor do they end. They are comprised of people living. An endless cycle of interacting, influencing each other, and parting ways.

It was a way to try to describe a complex and layered novella series with a wide range of characters. In the end, the confusion comes down to when a drama-adventure series turns into a standard soap opera.

Soap operas were early transpositions of live theater acting to the television audience. A weekday drama airing during the daytime, intended for women (particularly "homemakers"/"at-home moms"), soaps were known for excessively emotional acting and shallow plots and scripts. Soap operas are so-called because the earliest dramas, which originated in the 1950s and 1960s, were sponsored by soap-making companies.

When the LOST show runners continually defended their series from critics, they inferred that the critics did not get it: the show was about character development and not explanations of sci-fi story lines or mysteries.

The one difference between LOST and a standard soap opera is that LOST did have complex plots and scripts, but it had only vague and shallow answers to the mysteries and questions the plot lines posed to viewers. Viewers, who were as rabid as daily soap watchers, spent years trying to figure things out to minute detail. The problem with LOST is that it was not a long running soap opera in terms of fixed characters and slow moving to tedious cliche plots. LOST fans were promised by the creators and writers that it would be different; that if fans kept with them they would get answers to their questions. 

After Season 6 concluded, the show runners claimed that they had answered most of the "big" questions which set off another round of fan debates and arguments. However, Carlton Cuse said afterward, "Very early on we had decided that even though LOST is a show about people on the island, really, metaphorically, it was about people who were lost and searching for meaning and purpose in their lives. And because of that, we felt the ending really had to be spiritual, and one that talks about destiny. We would have long discourses about the nature of the show, for many years, and we decided it needed to mean something to us and our belief system and the characters and how all of us are here to lift each other up in our lives."

Damon Lindelof  explained, "For us, one of the ongoing conversations with the audience and there was a very early perception, was that the island was purgatory and we were always out there saying 'It's not purgatory, this is real, we're not going to Sixth Sense you.' And we felt it too that the show had to become sort of meta in this way. And so the writers said, 'Obviously, there are all these mysteries. But what if we answered a mystery that was never asked, what's the meaning of life and what happens when you die?'"

Damon added that the idea for the "Flash Sideways" world came about between the planning of seasons four and five because "We were out of flashbacks and we were done with flash forwards. So we started to think about, what if we sort of Trojan horsed in a paradoxical sideways story line?"

So basically, the show creators admit that they used soap opera techniques of changing course, mixing up the characters, adding strange and disturbing elements in order to keep the audience engaged in the show despite the show's writers running out of original ideas.

And even if the hidden agenda of the show was to ask The Big Questions, what's the meaning of life and what happens when you die,? LOST failed to deliver because there was no clarity on when the main characters died and where did their souls go. Was the island heaven? Was the island hell? Was the sideways world purgatory? Or heaven? Or was the O6 arc purgatory (as in Jack's breakdown and suffering return to the island)? Or was the O6 arc heaven (for characters like Walt who was in a normal family with school friends leading a normal life)? Or was it up to each viewer to impress their own belief system on to the events to come to their own conclusions?

Critics of the final season bring up the "more questions than answers" response to this narrative as proof that the show lost its bearings after Season Two by throwing disassociated concepts at the writers wall to see what would stick.

Fans of the final season are content with the mere fact that the main characters grew into a group of friends at the sideways church. That the loners, misfits and troubled souls could find a measure of happiness in the end, whether it was actually real or an illusion.

HAPPINESS TRADE-OFFS

One of the main themes of life is finding and securing happiness.

But in the quest for happiness, something usually has to give.

In LOST, various main characters were searching for happiness, but most never found it.

For example, Rose and Bernard met late in life. It was a godsend for Bernard. Rose was his world. Until she got cancer. He panicked and tried to find any cure. That led to a strain in their relationship. Rose was a realist. Bernard was an optimistic dreamer. But for Bernard to secure his happiness with Rose, they both had to "die" in a plane crash. That was the only "cure" for Rose's cancer was that she became a spiritual being on the island.

For example, Jack's sole mission in his life was to get the acknowledgement of his skills from his father. As a result, Jack was never happy. He had no friends. He was obsessed with pleasing his father, and getting out of his father's shadow, that it caused him to be paranoid and obsessive in his relationships. His first marriage failed because of an alleged jealousy between his wife and his father. And his relationship in O6 arc with Kate fell a part as well. In order for Jack to be happy, he had to do the opposite. He had to control things. He had to have the final say. He had to be right.

And then there were characters like Locke who spent their entire lives trying to find happiness, but stumbled through it as a fool. His bitterness of being abandoned as a child clouded all of his life choices. It ruined his relationship with the one woman who cared about him and his disabilities. The only way Locke found any sliver of contentment was when he "died" and was reunited with his island friends.

Sociologists have studied this apparent personal paradox. Happiness is something we assume we want, but in reality, we sometimes give it up in exchange for comfort. Unfortunately, we’re often comfortable with not getting what we want, so resign ourselves to that fate. As researchers stated:

Though happiness is of course what we all fundamentally want, for many of us, it isn’t really what we know...it isn’t what we’ve come to expect. It doesn’t feel like home...Getting what we want can make us feel unbearably risky...Self sabotage may leave us sad, but at least safely, blessedly, in control. It can be useful to keep the concept of self sabotage in mind when interpreting our and others’ odder behavior.

Beyond that, next time you’re weighing a decision and thinking about the risk involved, it might help to consider the role of comfort and control.

The concept of self-sabotage fits Locke to a tee. It also fits in Jack's grinding personality flaws of being an unloved, control freak. It also connects Kate's selfishness with her self-destructive behavior when she constantly tries to escape responsibility for her life's decisions. 

Was Jack really happy in the end? I don't think so. Being a martyr and dying in the bamboo field was unnecessary. And when he went to the sideways church reunion, he was more in his own catatonic state than being in a state of happiness. 

BRAIN FOOD

 A new study links what one eats to how one thinks.

A study conducted by researchers at Oregon State University and published in the journal Neuroscience  suggests that high-fat, high-sugar diets have a detrimental effect on what they refer to as “cognitive flexibility,” or the power to adapt and adjust to changing situations. 

The research was performed using laboratory mice that consumed different diets with varying levels of fat and sugar before facing a gamut of tests—primarily mazes and basic puzzles — to monitor changes in their mental and physical function. The researchers paid specific attention to the types of gut bacteria present in each control group.

“Bacteria can release compounds that act as neurotransmitters, stimulate sensory nerves or the immune system, and affect a wide range of biological functions,” Kathy Magnusson, a professor in the OSU College of Veterinary Medicine and principal investigator with the Linus Pauling Institute, said in a statement. “We’re not sure just what messages are being sent, but we are tracking down the pathways and the effects.”

In about four weeks, the mental and physical performances of the rats fed on a high-fat, high-sugar diet started to drop significantly, especially when one or more variables in the test changed. One of the most disparate physiological factors within the groups of mice, and the suspected reason for the decreased brain function, was gut bacteria.

People have been paying more attention to their guts than ever. Yogurt companies are using the term “probiotic” to peddle their sugary treats to would-be health junkies, and celebrities like sportscaster Erin Andrews are now digestive health spokespeople for hire, trying to finally make gut bacteria the hip and cool subject it deserved to be all along. But the scientific community has also started paying keener attention to those trillions of stomach-dwelling microflora as well.

One of the first studies to ever to link gut bacteria to brain function was performed by researchers at the Gail and Gerald Oppenheimer Family Center for Neurobiology and Stress.  They took three groups of women and had one group eat yogurt loaded with supplemental probiotics daily for four weeks, another group eat a substance that looked and tasted like yogurt but had no probiotics, and the third group was given nothing specific to eat. Not only did the sans-probiotic group suffer in cognitive tests, just like the mice did in the recent Oregon State study, but they also faltered in emotion based tests, linking poor gut health to stress. 

“This work suggests that fat and sugar are altering your healthy bacterial systems, and that’s one of the reasons those foods aren’t good for you.” Magnusson said. “It’s not just the food that could be influencing your brain, but an interaction between the food and microbial changes.”

The old wise tale, "you are what you eat," seems to have some scientific foundation. 

This could explain why the LOST main characters, the survivors, were slow to adapt and adjust to the changing situation of survival. The diet they had was sharply diminished from their standard life style until junk food was reintroduced with the Hatch discovery and food drop. One of the nagging issues during the series was that the main characters never asked viewer questions to each other in order to figure out what was going on. It was more action without thinking than thinking of a plan then acting it out. The latter leaders who had better brain food diets such as Ben or Sayid seemed to grasp island situations better than Hurley, Charlie or even Jack.

MAN MEN ILLUSIONS

Many of my friends who were die hard Mad Men viewers felt that the show's conclusion was great. There were several vocal writer-critics of the series end. They did not like the new justification for acclaimed series ending on ambiguities like the Sopranos or even LOST.

But reading more the of back story on lead character Don Draper, I find it hard to connect the dots to the ending. Yes, the McCann advertising agency in real life created that brilliant Coke ad. However, the ad executive who actually did it was trapped in an airport observing fellow passengers passing the time during the delay. The majority of people felt the ending of the iconic commercial was done by a returning Draper to the agency. But that assumption does not follow from what we saw from the Draper character prior to the end.

I had not realized at first that Draper was a con man of sorts. He assumed the identity of a fallen comrade in the Korean war in order to get home. Once back into the states, he assumed this dead soldier's name (and some reputation as being a Purple Heart hero) in order to run away from his troubled past life. These are familiar themes and plot lines in LOST.

In Draper's own mind, his past including his name, was killed in Korea. By erasing his past in such a manner, he was free to become the man dreamed of becoming: a highly successful person with all the rewards of the age - - - wine, women and song.

But big secrets are like one's shadow - - - always there to haunt you when you least expect it.  Apparently, his past would crop up during the series, but he always managed to charm his way to keep it a secret so he could continue his path to wealth and fame.

Part of the cost of keeping such a secret was the divorce to his first wife.

Part of the cost of keeping such as secret was keeping around an associate more ambitious than himself.

Part of the problem of keeping such a secret is that over time it will wear you down. At some point people like you, respect you, love you not for the real you but the illusion that you had created: Don Draper, dapper great advertising giant.

So when his NY ad world collapses around his illusion (with his second divorce, and his small agency being taken over by a heartless giant), Draper reverted to back what he did in Korea - - - he found a way to run away from his problems and responsibilities. In essence, the last couple of episodes was all about Draper killing the Draper persona.

You can tell by the evidence that he started calling himself his old nickname, Dick. It shows that he had discarded his NY life and the fraud that continued to eat at his soul. He could not go back to his hold Dick Whitman life because he killed that off a long time ago (he was officially dead). So this character had now created a man without an identity or purpose; a body without a soul.

So as he wandered out west, bouncing in and out of bed and in and out of trouble, Draper really did not care what would happen to him. In his final phone call to Peggy, to say goodbye, he meant it. He was never coming back to McCann or his old life. It was over. Peggy sensed suicide and she was partially right: Don killed his identity to assume a new one unrelated to his past - - - some new age. transcendent loner.

That is why is it not realistic to believe that Draper suddenly changed his mind to return to NYC and create the iconic Coke commercial of total world peace through soda. That type of illusion was too great for even him to swallow.

This explanation is part of the tone of some viewers who felt "underwhelmed" by the finale. They thought that something unexpected, visual, striking and horrible would happen to Don. Negative expectations are still heightened expectations to viewers. But there was nothing truly negative as most of the story lines were wrapped up in a happy bow. Don's character sitting on a California bluff doing nothing but chanting is the exact opposite of what most viewers wanted to see in the end. But in one respect it is a full circle character arc where the Don persona of being the high profile, respected and wealth ad man is tossed aside to return to a second Dick persona of being a faceless loser and loner who is dropping out of society.

THE LIES WE TELL OURSELVES

Business Insider had an interesting article about the 14 lies our mind tells ourselves which actually hurts us by constantly tries to convince us not to take actions we know are good for us, and stops many great changes in our lives.

It is such a true statement most people do not realize that it is happening to them.

I stumbled across this article by accident. It fits in extremely well into this year's personal motto: "No Excuses. No Regrets." 

The BI author's proposition is that the cowardly mind’s excuses and rationalizations is self programmed because the mind wants comfort, and is afraid of discomfort and change. The mind is used to its comfort cocoon, and anytime we try to push beyond that comfort zone very far or for very long, the mind tries desperately to get back into the cocoon. At any cost, including our long-term health and happiness.

The article then details 14 "mind" excuses which stops a person from acting outside the sheltered norms:

1. I can’t do it
If something seems too hard, we default to decide not to change. It is a manifestation that we don’t believe in ourselves.

2. He/she can do it, but that doesn’t apply to me 
We look for reasons other people can do or accomplish things  but we can’t — a negative reinforcement that we are somehow "different" for an unknown reason.

3. I need my ___
W fill in the blank with a variety of crutches: I need my coffee, my cheese, my soda, my TV shows, my car, my shoe collection … these are things we convince ourselves we can’t live without, so we can’t make a change like exercising, eating healthier, starting a hobby, reading a long book, taking a vacation, or  simplifying our lives. If one really examines those excuses, they are justifications for all  lies. The only things you really need are basic food, water, clothing, shelter, and other people for social needs. Everything else is not a real need.

4. Life is meant to be enjoyed
Everyone agrees with this statement  but the problem is this is used to justify all kinds of crappy behavior. Might as well scarf down junk food because it tastes good, because hey, life is meant to be enjoyed, right? No. You can do without junk food and still enjoy life. You can exercise and enjoy it. You can give up pretty much anything and still enjoy life, if you learn to see almost any activity as enjoyable.

5. I need comfort
As young children, they cling to a security blanket because it gives them the sense of relief and comfort. However, as we grow older we have can push ourselves into uncomfortable situations so that we can learn to believe in ourselves.

6. I don’t know how
This may be true, but everyone can learn. Start with a little at a time, and learn how to deal with this new change. If the problem is that you are a social wall flower, you can do some research online. There are various websites that examine social anxiety.  Ask people how they dealt with it. This is easily overcome with a little effort and practice. In fact, if you do it now, and learn a little at a time, then you’ll be able to do away with this pesky excuse.

7. I can do it later
You can always put off to tomorrow what you can accomplish today. But why should your later self be more disciplined than your current self? A habit of procrastination and actually making is less likely that your future self will be more disciplined. Unless there’s something more urgent or important that you need to do … don’t let yourself slide just because you don’t feel like it. It will lead to more stress and pressure as you create a personal traffic jam of uncompleted tasks or goals.

8. One time won’t hurt
This is so tempting, because it’s kind of true — one time won’t hurt. Assuming, that is, that it’s only one time. One bite of chocolate cake, one missed workout, one time procrastinating instead of doing work. Unfortunately, it’s never actually just one time. One time means your brain now knows it can get away with this excuse, and the next “one time” leads to another, until you’re not actually sticking to something.

9. I don’t feel like it
Feelings can be a defense mechanism. There is an internal resistance to doing something that we think is hard, difficult, new, or potentially hurtful. Letting the excuse of “I’ll do it when feel like it” dictate your life means you’ll never go out and meet new people, learn about new things, write that great American novel you dreamed of as a kid, never build a business, never create anything great, never have healthy habits. It is easy to create a plan that’s doable, and then execute it.

10. I’m tired
Everyone gets tired on a daily basis. It is the biological cycle. We allow that cycle to macro-manage tasks into pigeon holes. When you get home from a long day at work (they call it work for a reason), you may not feel like cooking, cleaning or exercising. You would rather "rest,"  but this is usually the mind trying to weasel out of something uncomfortable. There’s a difference between being exhausted and needing some rest, and being the little tired we all feel every afternoon. One way to combat this is to multitask - - - for example, exercise while watching TV. You may trick your mind that watching TV is relaxing while you accomplish something important off the couch.

11. I deserve a reward/break 
Daily life presents us with many risk and reward situations. But not every completed tasks deserve a reward.  But if you don't curb this rationalization your rule, you’ll always be on a break. You’ll always be giving yourself rewards, and never sticking to the original plan to get a more meaningful reward such as a job well done is its own reward.

12. Wouldn’t it be nice to stop?
This is our mind wanting to run from discomfort, and of course it’s true — it would be nice to stop if you’re pushing into a discomfort zone for too long. The thing is, the implication is that it would be better to stop, because it would be nice … but that’s a lie. It would be easier to stop, but often it’s better to continue pushing through to the end goal. 

13. The result you’re going for isn’t important
Your mind is already sabotaging a goal that you have set for yourself.  If you stick with a process that will be better for you in the long run, then you will be better off. But if you let yourself go just because you are uncomfortable and at this moment care more for your comfort than the goal you set out for, you’ll have lots of problems. The goal isn’t important, but learning to stick to things when you’re uncomfortable is extremely important. For example, if  you’re trying to run a marathon, in the middle of it you may think “It’s not that important that I finish this" because of the pain and effort required to finish. And while the result might not be that important, the truth is that the process and the goal is very important to bolster one's self-worth, self-esteem and peace of mind.

14. I’m afraid
Now, this is the most honest excuse there is — most of us don’t want to admit we’re afraid to pursue something difficult. But it’s also a weaselly way out of discomfort — just because you’re afraid doesn’t mean you can’t do something. For example, Deipnophobia is the fear of dinner party conversations. How do you overcome that fear? You go to parties where you know a few good friends and learn to mingle. When trying something new, everyone worries about failure.  The fear of failure is an early learned experience. Failure has negative connotations in society. But some of the smartest, richest and happy people on Earth will tell you that before success they failed over and over again. It is learning from failure that breeds success. And confidence is the one trait that can extinguish many or all of the mind excuses which holds us back.

EARLY AND LATE

This is an early promotional picture for LOST. It is interesting to reflect on how the early LOST vision as set forth in the photograph panned out in the actual series.

Front and center are Jack and Kate. In the original scripts, Kate was going to be the main focal character of the series. She did not have the criminal back story of the pilot. She was a little older, wiser, married (and may be widowed after the crash). Jack was supposed to be one of the first initial characters to be killed off (purely for dramatic purposes; to show how the island was a dangerous place). But viewers were quickly drawn to Jack, so the network made him the focal character of the series. In many respects, Kate remained the main female lead, but with a more secondary role.

Just behind Jack and Kate, literally having Jack's back is Charlie. Charlie's original character development was going to be Jack's right hand man - - - his loyal friend who would be in the center of most of the action (in some ways Kate morphs into this buddy role for Jack). Charlie's character went from possible loyal companion to lone-sick, drug addicted puppy.

Sawyer stood in the fourth lead role in the photograph. His character had the built-in elements for conflict: cockiness, rudeness, humor, criminal intent, and ballsy personality. He was a primary character who really did not affect the main plot lines. His decisions did not affect the final ending of the series. He was more representative of "leave me alone" survivor than a community builder.

Interestingly, the next group represents the "family element" of the show. ABC billed itself as the family network. Sun and Jin were the allegedly happy newly weds who we would learn were escaping from her demanding father. Whether the language barrier and stereotypical discrimination elements were initially cast for the Korean couple is unknown. But their story seemed to be more filler episodes than an overwhelming key to the solving of any of the island's mysteries.

Now, Walt and Michael could have been huge factors in the island story development. Walt was in fact touted early that he had "special powers." The danger and cruelty of the Others was established when they kidnapped children like Walt. The dynamic of a child reunited with a father he never knew was probably the most complete and compelling story foundation in the series. But that story arc got the short shaft based upon Walt's actor literally growing out his part. Then the writers began to use Michael as some all-knowing McGuyver on construction, boating, etc. to make him an unbelievable character.  The families never made it to the end as a complete unit. Sun and Jin's back story was better than their island story. Walt and Michael's story just fell off the face of the Earth with the muddy main story supernatural elements taking over the plot.

The first of the background characters were Locke and Hurley.  This makes sense in one regard: both were loners. Hurley was supposed to be a successful businessman and Locke a knock-about bachelor who never could get his act together. But once the show began to be filmed, Locke turned into a miracle survivor on his own quest for acceptance and recognition from his peers. Hurley turned into a meek soldier who lent himself for comic relief. Both men were originally not supposed to play big roles in the series. But the viewers were quickly drawn to the excellent acting skills and personality traits to become fan favorites.

Ironically, the next background pair actually wound up together in the end even though their characters were polar opposites. Shannon was the typical rich bitch, spoiled brat persona which would have had a hard time adjusting to the primitive island life. She had little skills (except French) to contribute to any plot. She was cast for eye candy. Sayid was supposed to be another diversity character, with the background that would cast an evil eye toward him. As someone who fought against the Americans in Iraq, he would naturally be considered by the other survivors as suspicious and untrustworthy. The camp needed his skills but the camp leaders could not deal with the politics of accepting an outsider as an equal. Sayid's role grew to be that "go-to" mission specialist in electronics, weapons, rescues, tracking, etc.

Off by himself, which really happened as the series went on, was Boone. Boone initially had a greater role in the series, but with an ensemble cast he was not paired with a dynamic focal character. In the pilot he was put into the role of potential go-getter leader, but was quickly shot down by Jack. Boone was left to gravitate towards Locke's stronger outback character as the Gilligan to the Skipper relationship. In many respects, Boone had the target of being a red shirt in the writer's room.

The last character in the photo was Claire. She was developed as a main character in the original treatments. As a pregnant young woman, her story was a simple tale of an unwanted pregnancy, bad decision making, and a horrible end crash landing on the island. One would have suspected that she could have died in child birth, got the island infection or had mad PPD to become an outcast in the group. But for Charlie's diminished role to Jack's leadership squad, Claire would have been quicklly written out of the series. Still, her motherhood role did not have any bearing in helping the main island themes pan out into interesting reveals. In fact, the Others intense interest in her, her baby, her birth, the infection shots, the kidnapping and her rescue had no impact on the Season 6 story elements.

What is interesting to note from this photograph is Bernard and Rose are missing from it. They were a "family" element more stable than any other pairing on the show. They were the "adults" in the room. In many respects, they were the base line for common sense on the show. But clearly, they were never intended to have any major role in the series.

FRIDAY THE 13TH

Friday the 13th is an unlucky day. It is a superstition passed down from generation to generation, culture to culture.

The number 13 was said to be unlucky because when archeologists researched the Roman Coleseum chambers where the slave gladiators were housed, the best gladiator scratched only 13 victories before his death. Once you got to 13 wins, the next time you would die, hence 13 being an unlucky number.

Why Friday and 13 got a bad rap is probably because in the modern work week, Friday was supposed to be the start of the weekend, relaxation away from work. There is a possible dread that the boss will complicate your life by adding a ton of work on that day, ask you to work on Saturday, or make an unreasonable deadline in which upsets your plans.

In any event, numbers played a role in causing Hurley to have his own bad luck. It was not his curse, but a crutch, an excuse, to smooth over his own insecurities and faults. At times, negative thoughts can instill negative behavior and actions. Even when Hurley won the lottery, his negative thoughts appeared to manifest itself in death, destruction and bad luck all around him.

There is an old saying that a person makes their own luck.

Luck is the success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions or a chance considered as a force that causes good or bad things to happen. Many believe luck is something regarded as bringing about or portending good or bad things, a pre-state of mind.

Some lucky bastards are more lucky than good, and that ticks some people off with envy, jealousy or hatred. Why is this person wealthy, prettier, successful, stress-free, or happy? Why can't I have those things? He or she is not better than me!

You can see how a negative perception of one's self can lead to an internal circular argument that some outside influence, luck, is creating your personal state of unhappiness.

The LOST world was mostly an unhappy world. Every day seemed to be like Friday the 13th. The main characters shadows were their ever present fears, phobias, anxieties and dark behaviors. Over time, these shadows began to eat away at their mental outlook on life. For some, it took them deep in the pit of despair. For others, it took them deep into irrational behavior, like Ben.

But Hurley was the one main character who readily admitted his bad luck, that he himself created bad luck, and that people should not be around him because he was bad luck.  This is the grand excuse of an introvert and loner. A hermit who built excuses to isolate himself from interacting with the real world, with real people, and to make real friends.

Locke had a similar path, except he did admit he was unlucky with family, friends, career or goals. He pretended to be an extrovert and leader, with grand ideas and hopes, but with no means to accomplish them because he could never forge true bonds with other people in order to fulfill his dreams. He built his own isolation from anger about how the world around him did not understand him, that he was smarter, better and more entitled to have the wealth, happiness and prosperity of his bosses. He was more like a hermit crab striking out at others, which reinforced a negative stereotype to others.

So Locke and Hurley created their own bad luck. And they suffered for it because they could not change their own personal outlook on life. Locke never achieved any reformation. Hurley, as best we could tell, found some peace of mind (but apparently only in the after life).

So on any Friday the 13th take heed not what is around you, but what is inside you.

THE UNLUCKY ANSWER

As today is Friday, the 13th, a superstitious day of bad luck, we focus on the one character who could have answered all the LOST questions, Daniel Faraday.

Poor Daniel. He was doomed from the start.

His back story was as hazy as his science.

Daniel was born on the mainland (as there is a birth certificate for him) and was the son of Eloise Hawking and Charles Widmore,  although he did not know the identity of his father (that was left blank on the birth certificate). This is the first unsolved mystery of this character: who was Daniel's real father?

We know that young Eloise and Widmore were co-leaders of a small Others fraction on the Island. Widmore wanted control of "his" island against any outsider, and Eloise seemed to be more focused on survival. How they both got to the island was unknown. But it seems they were both quite protective of it.

During their early adulthood, the time traveling Daniel appears on the island. Eloise shoots and kills "her son" then realizes her mistake. This sets off one of the most important background characters into action.

We know that both Eloise and Widmore left the island before the Purge. Widmore was banished by Ben because Widmore "violated the rules" by having a child (Penny) with an off-islander. Eloise's departure was not told. (She could have been part of the evacuation, or she may have left after killing her son in the time travel arc.)

It would seem that Eloise's sole goal in the series was to protect Daniel. After Eloise and Widmore's relationship soured, Eloise also changed Daniel's last name to Faraday so Charles could not find him. But we know how powerful Widmore was; he knew and found Daniel.

One could speculate that the falling out between Eloise and Widmore was about Daniel and his special abilities. Daniel had "time traveled" to the island. Widmore wanted to get back to the island and seize it as his own. What better means to do so than "time travel." Likewise, Eloise would want to save the time traveling Daniel from her own actions of killing him. As a result, Eloise may have needed to find a man who was a scientific genius. (Clue to last name: Stephen Hawking.)

Eloise needed to unlock the elements of space-time in order to correct Daniel's destiny. So she forced Daniel to give up music to study extreme theoretical science. So Daniel studied at Oxford, earning his doctorate at the youngest age on record. At that time, his girlfriend Teresa Spencer, was deemed to be a distraction. Soon after, Daniel started unauthorized experiments (funded by Widmore) involving time travel. He created a machine in 1996 that allowed a living creature's consciousness to travel through time. He tested it on a lab rat he named Eloise, which signifies an open hostility toward his mother and her constant pressure on him to succeed in this science.

During that same year, Daniel was visited by a stranger named Desmond Hume. Desmond claimed to know about the machine, Daniel initially believed that a colleague was playing a practical joke on him, but when Desmond mentioned "Eloise,"  Daniel's lab rat, he believed Desmond. In his lab, Daniel tested "the Numbers" Desmond supplied to him. He used the machine on Eloise, enabling her to unerringly complete a maze that she would not be taught how to run for another hour. Daniel's blackboard revealed his interest in the Kerr metric as part of his theory of time-transported consciousness. According to Daniel's theory, a being that undergoes time-transported consciousness must identify a "constant,"  something existing in both periods of time travel that can serve as an anchor for the being's consciousness; failure to find a constant results in instability of consciousness, and the resulting stress can lead to brain aneurysm and eventual death. 

Daniel's success led him to ramp up his experiments.  The experiment apparently resulted in Theresa becoming permanently mentally 'unstuck' in time, with her condition deteriorating to the point that she became permanently bedridden, in a coma-like state as a result of his experiments. (Widmore funded her care for her parents silence.) Soon after this accident, Daniel went to America. Daniel began to study at  DHARMA. It seemed that Daniel started to experiment on himself, which wrecked his ability to connect with his own memory. He constantly wrote notes in his leather journal to remember. 

But while in the United States, Daniel's mental state deteriorated to the point in 2004 where he is under the care of a woman (caretaker or some initially assumed a girlfriend or wife). When the news of Flight 815's crash, with film footage of the wreckage shown on the television, Daniel had a mental breakdown which he could not explain. When Widmore arrived, he told him that the wreckage was a fake. He told Daniel that the real Flight 815 had crashed on a "miraculous island," and offered him the chance to go there, promising that it would "cure" him. Several days later, Daniel was playing piano at his home, trying to remember the Chopin piece he was playing when he was ten, when he was visited by his mother. She persuaded him to accept Widmore's offer and go to the Island, assuring him that she would be proud of him if he did so. Daniel agreed to accept the offer.

Daniel brought several critical (we thought) elements to the LOST mythology. First, he brought with him science explanations for the island's mysteries. Second, he brought with him a window to the people pulling the strings behind the curtain (Eloise and Widmore, shadow villains). Third, he brought in intellectually naive character in the mix of amateur action heroes.

But Daniel's story is really messed up.

First, there are the paradoxes that cannot be put in their places. Young Eloise "kills" her adult yet unborn son on the island. This is a classic time travel problem that should have had radical results. Since Eloise has a son in the future, but kills him in the past, why would she "re-live" this pain by actually conceiving him in the future? Some could argue that an adult traveling back into time to meet their death is not a conventional paradox since Daniel was destined to die "someday," and this was the means of his own demise. But a secondary issue is that if Eloise knew Daniel was going to die on the island, why did she do everything in power after killing him to get him to study time travel and go on the trip to the island?

It would seem that Eloise "needed" Daniel to become a brilliant scientist in order to kill him on the island so her own fantasy sideways world dream family situation would come true. In Daniel's death on the island, Eloise could lead a normal, but rich life in the after life. It sounds insane, but that seems to be the whole motivation for the Eloise manipulation of both Daniel and Widmore.

So Daniel had a bounty on his head before he was even born. He was never going to have a real, normal, human life.

Second, if Daniel's theory of mental consciousness time travel is to be believed, was his research adopted by DHARMA to create the full transformation of physical time travel as demonstrated by the turning of the frozen donkey wheel? When Ben turned it, the island began "time skipping" but only with a few individuals. The idea of someone having a "constant" in real and skip times seems to be moot because people have connections in those worlds (i.e. parents, close friends, spouses, children, etc.). If the salvation key is consciously putting a mental image of a person in both time periods in your mind before you time jump, then that seems superficially a magic chant or spell and not science. (The ancient Egyptians Book of the Dead contained various chants and spells to help souls travel through the dangers of the underworld; perhaps Daniel's theory is like these spells.)

If Daniel was already mentally time tripping in the U.S., then why did he need to go to the island? The only explanation was that he needed to "die" on the island in order for his consciousness (some would call it his soul) to reach Eloise in the after life, so she could repress his memories and not "move on" through the next level of existence. This would presuppose that the island is actually an inter-dimensional gateway between the worlds of the living and the dead. For some unknown reason, people dying on the island have their memories repressed when their souls reach the after life. It is sort of a dream state in the sideways world where people, like in dreams, try to subconsciously work out real world problems through various fantasies. 

If the island allowed full body and mind time travel, then there should be no "mental" only time travel side effects, such as the nose bleeds and death that happened to Charlotte. Daniel was nose bleeding before he was shot, so he was going to also die even though his "constant," Desmond, was on the island and in his original time period. So, since there are two sets of rules at play in one time travel sequence, no clear conclusion could be made on what is truly happening on the island. If Daniel's theory is the control, then everyone on the island was time tripping, in a dream like state, in a forehell to the sideways world. If DHARMA and the island's FDW full time travel machine was the control, then only when you met yourself in both time frames could you be paradoxically removed from existence. But that did not happen to Charlotte or Daniel. In face, some time trippers were reincarnated. 

So it gets back to the big mystery of why, throughout all the trauma and manipulation of Daniel's life, did Eloise want, need, desire or demand Daniel to be on the freighter, come ashore, and be killed by her younger self? The only viable answer was that guilt was making Eloise dream up these actions.

For the symbolism of a young woman killing her "adult" child could represent a psychological trauma of Eloise's young life, such as an abortion. If she aborted "Daniel" or lost him during pregnancy on the island, then the series could evolve around a troubled young woman's lost mental state of delusions and fantasies of having the perfect life with her dead fetus. Eloise could have been haunted by her actions so that she could have been institutionalized as a mental patient. As creepy as that may seem, it allows for the fact that science, sci-fi and any other rational explanations for series events be immaterial and irrelevant. The sole factor was keeping her dead child from realizing that his own mother killed him.

BLACK & WHITE

It was a simple analogy: black and white.
It meant there are two things in the world: darkness and light.
It also means that the two represent many things, like good vs. evil; moral vs. immoral; trust vs. distrust; caring vs. apathy; friendship vs. enemy.

When you look at Locke's face above, you notice that he is scarred above and below his right eye. In Egyptian mythology, the Eye of Horus was a scar on the left eye of a sky god. In one story, Set and Horus fought over the throne after Osiris' death. Set gouged out Horus' left eye, which was restored by the magic of Thoth, the moon god. So the dark piece could be the moon and the light piece the sun, Ra, the most powerful god who had to traverse the dangerous underworld each night.

For the left eye of Horus represented "protection, royal power and good health."

But since it was a mirror image on Locke's face, would it represent the opposite?
"Insecurity, servitude and poor health."

In many ways, insecurity, servitude and poor health was Locke.  He was clearly insecure in his own self, his skill set, his dreams and his handling his own expectations. He thought of himself as a great man, but never had the drive to be his own boss or leader. He was boxed in various meaningless tasks like a clerk at a box company, or a pest control specialist. And his poor health, his disability, was direct result of mistrusting his con man father and his inability to defend himself.

In many ways, Locke was set up from the very beginning to be the series Fall Guy. He would never be the true leader. He would never have any true power over other people. And he would not live a happy or healthy life.  He embodied the dark fears of most people's subconscious. Even when things are going well, there is a hint of pending doom, despair or questioning in the back of one's mind. "This has to be too good to be true."  Self-doubt at times turns into real doubt on the road to failure.

It is ironic that Locke was trying to teach Walt, a young black child who had no mother and a stranger as a father, the symbolism of backgammon. Walt would wind up with a better fate than most island castaways: he would find some security with his grandmother, he would have a chance to control his own future, and he was in good health the last time Locke saw him. The time Locke could have tried to convince Walt to give up his new life and return to the island with him. But Locke did not even try to convince Walt to return to the island. It really was the clearest black and white decision Locke ever made in the show.

THE GIRL NEXT DOOR

Kate is one of those polarizing characters.  And there may be a reason for that.  She could have been born under the sign of Leo even though it is believed she was born in mid May to mid-June (a Cancer).

There is one thing that most of the Leo women never falls short of - male attention. She will most probably be the center of attention everywhere and if you are trying to woo her, be ready to get lots of competition. She will be the leader of her group and the other members will always accept her out of choice. The typical characteristics profile of a Leo woman includes qualities like liveliness, ingenuity, elegance, beauty, and sensuality. She is one of those who love, respect and care for their partners, but don't expect her to worship you.

She wouldn't be dominated; rather she has to be restrained. She is a complete woman and she expects you to be a real man. If you meet a Leo girl who comes across as very gentle, mellowed and completely harmless, don't get fooled. Inside, she is as passionate as any other Leo woman. If you are planning to give her a gift; better make sure that it is classy and as per her superior taste. Please be properly dressed while giving the gift. If you are trying to win the heart of a Leo female, give her genuine, decent and original compliments.

While courting her, never forget that she likes class and style. Don't even think of going to the roadside hamburger stall after watching the movie. She is not after money, but shabby surroundings make her pretty uncomfortable. In return, she will also shower you expensive gifts. The lioness may become a little arrogant and proud at times, but these are some of her basic personality traits. She cannot help thinking of herself above the normal masses and please don't tell her she's not.

You will break her big, warm heart. A Leo woman who is respected, loved and cherished will become one of the most agreeable as well as the kindest person on this earth. She will care for the children and help the needy. The lioness is a combination of intelligence, wit, strength and talent, mixed with generous amounts of feminine charm. This is what makes her irresistible. The best way to make her do anything is flatter her and she will even do the tiniest of chores for you. Never stop her from having a career after marriage.

The Leo profile seems to fit Kate's character.

A Cancer woman's profile is significantly different. Men will be a little confused as to what she really is - chirpy, somber or distant? She is all of these and still, she is none of these. Even more confused? A Cancerian woman has mood swings every now and then and these are only a few of her mood swings. However, her basic personality traits remain the same. She is very sensitive, emotional, kind and caring. Now's the catch! Most of her traits will be hidden behind a shell of indifference and aloofness, breaking which will require quite a lot of effort.

You will have to gently coerce a Cancerian girl to get out of her shell and come into the big bad world without it. The best time to do this is in the moonlight, when there are maximum chances of catching her in her true emotions. When in love, she will be tender, womanly, timid and modest. She dislikes criticisms, can't stand rejection and gets deeply hurt by harsh words. Too much aggressiveness on your part may make her a little hesitant. She loves her mother, so you better learn to love as well as respect her too.

A Cancer woman will never make the first moves in a relationship; she only knows how to move backwards or sideways. This is because of two reasons, her shyness and her fear of being rejected. This female has some secrets and she won't like you prying around her personal diary. She is very insecure and will need your constant reassurance. It doesn't matter if she is the current 'Miss Universe' or has men drooling over her all the time, it is your attention and appreciation she would be the most concerned about.

You will have to learn to live with a Cancerian woman’s mood swings, which is not so difficult since she is so good in every other way. She is extremely loyal and will keep you happy with her warm and rich humor. Once she is committed to you, she will remain yours forever and ever. Adultery is not one of her traits. With a Cancerian woman, you will always have to be careful with words. She is very sentimental and can get hurt very easily. Then, she can cry like a 2-year old baby and you will be expected to console her and wipe her tears.

A Cancer female is a great cook and makes better food than a 5-star hotel chef. She is quite careful with money as well. Neither will she be stingy, nor totally extravagant. She has a habit of saving everything that is usable, be it money, old buttons or empty jars. She also saves things that have a sentimental value attached to them, like the sweater grandmother knitted on her fifth birthday. A Cancer female fiercely guards what is hers and that includes you too! However, she is not too possessive or jealous. But, she does not like sharing her love too.

Kate never showed any traits of being a homebody (cooking, domestic chores). She was shown as being out in the wild, on the hunt, on missions, being in the center of the action (which also means the center of attention in the male dominated hierarchy.) Kate was really the classic spunky, cute American girl-next-door. She was part tomboy, part siren. She knew how to charm and how to hurt.
That is part of the confusion of the ending when she winds up back with Jack. Many viewers don't know why that would have happened since Jack had let her go to be free.

But perhaps male viewers of the series got the vibe and frustration of the Kate character because she has the Leo-type personality. It is difficult to figure out such a personality, especially when you are trying to get close to her.  However, it is said that if a man breaks through he will be greatly rewarded with a true, loyal soul mate.