Zen and the Art of Keeping Sane While Discussing "Lost" with Friends

Posted by Dominic Messier Feb 17, 2009

If you're like myself, you're probably one of those folks who engages in playful discussion on the morning following the latest Lost episode.

Whether it's an erudite argument on the intricacies of time travel and paradoxes, or whether it makes any arcane sense to be able to move an island using what amounts to nothing more than an aged donkey wheel wedged into a rock surface, each fan has his and her theories as to the latest goings on.

However, given the small dosage we are oh so generously granted each week, shedding new light on the web of relationships (past and present), it's very difficult to maintain a rational, moderate discussion with a friend or colleague, when half the pieces of the overall puzzle are missing.

I find myself having this weekly ritual with a good friend of mine (for the sake of anonymity, I shall only say his real name rhymes with Beacon), and slowly my brain starts to misfire, at the latest of his theories and how they relate to the island, its original inhabitants, and the Oceanic 815 survivors.

At first I dismissed his ideas, calling them far fetched and baseless, until he began to point out the smallest tidbits of information and factoids (i.e. why is Charles Widmore so interested in the 1700's wrecked ship's first mate's logbook, at auction?), and soon thereafter I couldn't take those crazy ideas out of my head.

Now, understand, I am somewhat allergic to the ill-conceived idea of SPECULATION by design. In fact I downright hate the word. Especially when it comes to fiction. I mean, most of us (those of us old enough to remember) enjoyed the great hospital show St-Elsewhere in the early 80's. How is it that all of these great stories might have turned out to be nothing more than the imaginations of an autistic child, staring at a snow globe? The lazy writing or a showrunner unable to find proper closure to an otherwise great series? A royal mindjob designed to create gossip? Or even worse? SPECULATION?

The aforementioned conversations are slowly bringing back these notions of a frustrated teen who couldn't understand why a show would turn so sharply into another direction, Newhart-like, explaining that the past several years' worth of tales are nothing more than a really long dream Bob Newhart had, on his previous series.

And so, when Beacon (yeah, good pseudonym, no one will know) gives me about 15 different possibilities as to who Richard Alpert really is, I start shutting off, asking myself whether I'm willing to invest myself emotionally, in what could be nothing more than a red herring, destined to prove false three episodes from now.

True, I could write a dozen blog entries a week, just elaborating on the endless possibilities the show is providing us with, as to its logical conclusion. Word has it that out of the entire show's cast of actors, only Matthew Fox has been entrusted with the true ending of the show, by the producers and creator Abrams.

That lucky bugger. I betcha he's a lot of fun around the watercooler. Mind you, his lips are probably swen shut at the thought of a lawsuit brought on by a bad case of the spoilers.

And so, in any case, I will continue to humor Beacon (brilliant moniker, I tell ya! Gold!) and his zany crackpot theories, in that they may very well come true, and until Misters Abrams, Cuse and Lindelof come forth with more answers than questions, I'll have to enjoy the possibilities, as they turn out to be as much fun as the show itself.

Despite all this, I still hate SPECULATION.

Now to sit back and watch last week's episode again...I swear I found a few more relevant answers...