Ana-Lucia is dangerously unstable

[drabauer]

Last May Chance Gardener started a rather controversial little thread entitled "Kate is an Empathic Sociopath." (http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7752) I was one of the few who argued that, based on both DSM-IV definitions of sociopathology and my own experience, that none of the castaways exhibited definite symptoms of emotional disturbance beyond extreme PTS. With Ana-lucia's flashback, however, I believe that lost has introduced it's first dangerously-unbalanced character. Although I feel Ana's psychopathology is obvious, I'll present my reasoning below, followed by my speculation on exactly why the writers might have decided, IMO, to iintroduce such an unstable character at this juncture. Please understand that I am neither pro nor anti the character, but am just trying to get a handle on who she is and why she was introduced in season 2.

Police officers go through some of the most rigorous training in the world to become members of the LAPD. From the recruitment website (http://www.joinlapd.com/academy.html):
If you are selected for the LAPD, you will be sent to the world famous LAPD Academy for eight months of training.. . .
Human Relations includes cultural sensitivity training, sexual harassment issues, media relations, stress management, disability awareness, community relations, tactical communications, hate crimes, missing persons, and domestic violence. . . .Physical Training . . encompasses training in physical arrest techniques, controls, and weaponless defense. . .
LAPD Specific Training includes Advanced Tactical Training, Mobile Field Force Tactics, Patrol Ride-Along, Mobile Digital Computer (in-car computer) Training, Alcohol Abuse, Administration of Discipline, Cultural Diversity, K-9 Operations, Air Support Operations, Bomb Squad, Community Policing and Problem Solving, Spanish Language, Civil Liabilities, and Sexual Harassment Training.

The LAPD has a special program for the recruitment and retention of women (http://www.lapdonline.org/get_involved/lapd_women/lapd_women.htm). As we saw, she had ample resources for psychological counseling, as well as a parent on the force. She would have received extensive training in how to handle the feelings of revenge and anger brought on by her loss. The fact that she killed her attacker in cold blood after receiving additional counseling indicates not just grief and PTS, but a pathological resistance to help and refusal to look at the motivations and ethical consequences of her actions.

This trend continues on the island, where her leadership has, as Bernard notes, kept them alive through brute force and action, but has lacked logic, foresight, and likely endangered all of them further. From an omnisicent point of view, Shannon's death should have been foreseen as the inevitable conclusion of her increasingly irrational approach to the Tailie's plight.

1. Throwing Nathan in the pit and threatening bodily harm had no evidentiary basis and, would that it did, represents the last, rather than first, technique a trained officer would use to obtain said evidence. It further threatened the others as the actual traitor remained on the loose, and was able to formulate a plan to remain anonymous.

2. There was not attempt made to find out more about the others, nor to ascertain their size, location, or M.O. Marching through the jungle was thus foolhardy and lacked a clear specified goal.

3. Cindy might have been Shannon trying to warn them, or indeed might have been held my an attacker at gunpoint, but two of the many reasons that Ana-Lucia should never have shot without warning.

4. Ana terrorized Michael and Jin rather than using their obvious knowledge and natural abilities to aid the group as they made their way forward.

I hold the saintly Eko as well as Bernard and Libby partly responsible for allowing the clearly unstable and paranoid Ana to continue leading them, especially after Eko witnessed her crying jag at the stream. He should have taken over the group at that point, as I believe he had the best understanding that she should not continue to carry firearms. He let his own personal lloathing for violence overrule his judgment, as I believe he now realizes and mourns.

So why have the writers chosen this route?

They clearly wanted to promote dissension, and they seem to have marked Ana as the "Sawyer" of season one, while at the same time promoting a connection between Sayid's past as an army interrogator and Ana-Lucia's aggressive policing. But whereas Sayid pulled back from cold-blooded murder, and Sawyer pulled back from killing the boar as a projection of his guilt over Duckett's senseless murder, Ana becomes only more trigger-happy after her revenge. Whatever guilt she feels when asking Sayid to shoot her was not operative in her actions on the island to that point.

Ergo, I think the writers are setting themselves an extremely difficult path of trying to redeem the character. It seems to me as if they created Ana-Lucia solely to give themselves this challenge; "Look - Sawyer is a con artist and murderer and people love him now! Kate is a murderer and fugitive and yet fans are bewitched by her! Let's try a cold-blooded but hot-to-trot murderess on the cutting edge of sanity, and see if we can make the fans fall in love all over again!"

Is my view overly cynical, or not?

[boonian androphile]

My problem with the Ana Lucia and Sayid conversation is that it happened too quickly and Ana Lucia's desire to be rid of her guilt and Sayid's speech about being already dead both should have happened later, after Ana Lucia should have exiled herself. I was never a big believer in the Sayid & Shannon romance as the characters seemed rather corraled into the relationship, but now that the romance had bloomed, why should a bout of unconsciousness and a stint of being tied to a tree have lessened Sayid's rage? Why make Sayid a saint and Ana Lucia a martyr?---at least so soon? Why not some confrontation in the deep jungle where the peacemakers could arrive and help all come to terms over what turned out to be a horrible accident? This is where the flashback structure limited possibilities.

To redeem Ana Lucia? I think that most of the characters are undergoing redemptions of sorts, but I see her like Sawyer in that Ana Lucia will divert that undisappearing rage into singular heroic acts (like Sawyer trying to prevent the Walt kidnapping). There is also a juxtaposition with Kate as far as the two women characters are concerned. Both start conceivably on opposite ends of the law spectrum and through new island opportunities can meet not so much in the middle but where, in this different environment, their skills can be used to defend the camp---or---fulfill their character destinies, such as Kate following Locke back to the newly opened hatch, or Ana Lucia using her police training without the inconvenience of civilization. Of course Locke is doing the same but maybe a bit more quietly and also conforming more to traditional gender roles and actions: he helps the camp but too follows what he perceives to be his individual destiny. Jack meanwhile loves everyone and loves individuals but sometimes those two "loves" conflict. Everybody has a collective and individual side.

Mr. Eko, Libby, Cindy & Bernard? Yes they enabled Ana Lucia power move on the Tailend side of the island, but up to the Raftians' arrival I dont think that this was a bad decision. A huge number of peers, including children, had been abducted for whatever reason. This is where fight or flight mentality made sense. When the Raftians arrived and were able to communicate their identities well, then trust should have been awarded them. However, the writers did well with the Nathan & Goodwin subterfuge which left Ana Lucia desperately unsure as to whom to trust. Some communication with her group may have been valuable though re Goodwin's death and that AL was basically fighting for her life. But without all the power with Ana Lucia, she doesnt shoot Shannon, whose death served the writers more than the story.

Fatal or minimally dangerous mistakes are being made all around. But if the flashbacks are indeed accurate, even then the characters have hardly been exemplary citizens.

[drabauer]

I agree with most of what you wrote boonian; the final scene between Sayid and Ana did not feel "earned." But I don't understand your last few sentences; could you elaborate?

Some communication with her group may have been valuable though re Goodwin's death and that AL was basically fighting for her life. But without all the power with Ana Lucia, she doesnt shoot Shannon, whose death served the writers more than the story.

Fatal or minimally dangerous mistakes are being made all around. But if the flashbacks are indeed accurate, even then the characters have hardly been exemplary citizens.

[wickedsweet]

drabauer

Thanks for saying what I had been failing at trying to say all along. Your approach to this character is much more effective and appropriate than the emotional view point from which I have been wording my post.

[drabauer]

Thanks wicked. The purpose of my thread was to try to approach the character from an objective standpoint, first, to establish beyond a doubt that she does exhibit signs of mental instability and second, to try to figure out why the writers have inserted, at this point in Lost, a character NOT just unlikeable or prone to violence (both things we've seen in abundance) but one who can be considered to be mentally unstable and paranoid without good reason (as opposed to the paranoia our castaways exhibited about Ethan, etc.). When the others DIDN'T come to the beach, when Ethan was disposed of, the Fusies settled warily down (perhaps too much for some). But Ana is not only paranoid of the others, she distrusts everyone and is clearly a menace. This does not mean that she can't be redeemed, but the writers have clearly, IMO, set her to the "right" of Sawyer and even Kate (until we find out more) for the time being.

[16L43]

All good (and valid) points drabauer, especially concerning the psychological counseling AL would've received. In my own little department (191 Deputies and Baliffs) "seeing the shrink" isn't an option--you're ordered to and you don't get back on the road until you're cleared for duty. I was involved in a shooting (no one, me, or the suspect, hurt)--after the paperwork, the interview with an officer involved shooting team, the county attorney and the corporation council (all to cover the county's ass just in case the suspect decided to sue) came counseling. Twice a week for six weeks until I was deemed good enough to be put back onto street patrol. During those six weeks (I was actually given days off after the shooting because I didn't follow procedure, not with the shooting itself, but I failing to radio in the traffic stop and my unit location) I rode a desk, doing what we affectionately called "bitch work" (every POS job in the department, bitching about it the entire day, hence "bitch work"). After I was back on the road I had followup visits twice a month for an addtional 4 months...

Did I have problems with almost getting shot? I was angry, frustrated with the fact that my colleagues looked at me differently (there's this look cops get after someone's been involved in a shooting, this "could I have done what he did?" glance). The anger wasn't so much at the person who shot at me, the anger was at myself for allowing ME to get myself into the situation in the first place. Could I have handled it differently, did I have to shoot? I asked myself those questions a hundred times in and out of the meetings. I came to accept the fact that the only thing I would've done differently would have been to call for back-up before getting out of the car on the traffic stop...

I'm sure someone, somewhere on the forum will mouth something to the effect of all cops are psychotic, power trippers; we're not. What we saw on "Lost" with AL shooting down the man who took everything from her is a television affectation. In the real world, someone would've put the brakes on the down hill slide she was on, long before she'd taken it that far. If she hadn't accepted the help, it would've more than likely been forced upon her through a civil mental health/hygiene commitment order. In my home state those can last from 96 hours to 90 days...

[Sage_elf 68]

I hold the saintly Eko as well as Bernard and Libby partly responsible for allowing the clearly unstable and paranoid Ana to continue leading them,
I see what you mean but you gotta remember she(Ana) didn't become the crazy leader she was at the end overnight. It took a while it was a slow loss of reasoning. I've been in situations where the intentions of people in the end is so far from where they started it is readiculous. But, the situation changed so slowly the little changes didn't seem so drastic until all of a sudden you're standing there looking back and saying "Man this is all F'ed up" . So, you decide it's time for a change. I thinkEko knew for a while that Ana was losing it, because he was the one who led them into the jungle as a short cut around that penninsula,against Ana's strong protest. Also helping Jin look for Michael. I was glad that they (Eko,Libby,and Bernard) finally crew a pair and stood up to her and left.
I don't know if the writers will try to make her very likable. It makes thing more interesting to have a variety of personalities. In every group of people I know there is always at least one person they could all dislike.

[boonian androphile]

Drabauer:

Sorry if I wasnt clear. Ana Lucia, in front of us anyway, never communicated directly to the others that Goodwin was attacking her and she killed him to save herself. Instead there were winks and nudges which led me to believe that the assumption was that the "Others" had killed him. Of course the non-verbal communication might have had a reference in a private conversation between AL and her friends. But AL, I dont believe, ever says that Goodwin confessed that he had infiltrated the Tailies' camp. Am I right here?

What I meant by "fatally and minimally dangerous mistakes..." is that Ana Lucia isnt the only islander jumping to conclusions, inflicting pain and suffering for an obsessively held idea, etc. Also most of the characters' pasts portray reckless harm to others in a parallel way to events on the island. So I guess that through all my words I am saying that while AL is one scary woman, she isnt alone in her scariness during the flashbacks and on the island. All the Lostians & Tailies must be watched by those who do not want to end up as one of their accidents.

[ManofAdventure]

I prefer the term 'edgy' when talking about Ana's tendancies.

[brewster]

Great, intelligent post and I liked all of the replies here, too.

I think its all a bit simpler than all this. Any woman can tell you that after a miscarrage, deep depression sets in and it takes months to heal and in many cases, years. I can't imagine getting shot four times and having a miscarrage. Coming from a layman, six weeks hardly seems adaquate for such trauma, especially for someone who carries a gun. Who is to blame for this? Ana for lying? Her therapist? Her mother?

I don't think she's psychotic at all. I think she saw an opportunity to use her skills and her reasons for wanting to be a cop to lead the others to safey the only way she knew how. She showed no really poor judgement until Nathan and I'm not convinced she was wrong, just unaware that there were two threats. Eko abandoned her by going mute and she asked his opinion more than once ... also making it clear she needed his guidence. But he remained silent.

Also, nobody has shown more violence than Eko did with Mike and Sawyer.

Her finally crying after weeks of exhausting work, trying to figure out who was the real threat, and having come face to face with it, and the reality that they were stuck there, is not indicitive of psychosis or even a nervous breakdown, IMO. It seems quite normal.

Ana was still very internally and externally wounded, from the shooting, her miscarrage, the murder and a freaking plane crash. She was full of rage but tried to do the right thing, only her rage blurred her judgement more than once. I think Ana is perfectly lucid and sees her errors. She surrended to Sayid. She showed remorse and guilt. She let everyone go. She gave up her gun and weapons.

She also didn't raise eyebrows until she shot Shannon and we know it was due to poor judgement, not because she was imagining things. A true sign of psychosis. It not only freaked everyone else out but it freaked her out, too. That's when she began to lose it. Control. And that scared her most. I think Ana had a breakdown and has already taken the biggest step to begin the healing. She has surrendered.

I agree she is this year's Sawyer. A bad ass with a heart. But I really see her connection with Sayid. I didn't think it was too rushed. I found it gratifying when everything else on LOST takes forever. He immediately saw himself in her and he was tender.

Eco doesn't even think Ana is nuts. She made a mistake. That's when she truly lost it. He must feel guilty himself for not playing a bigger role beforehand.

[6toedjewel]

Is my view overly cynical, or not?

Not overly cynical at all. I agree so much with what you are saying about Ana Lucia. However, I also agree with Boonian about Eko, Libby, ecetera. I suspect that the big difference between Ana L and people like Sawyer and Kate is that their dysfunctional behavior is probably due to sociocultural dysfunction and probably a lack of therapeutic intervention because of their lot in life. However, Ana Lucia seems to emit something deeper. There seems a biological reason for her behavior and thought process and that chemical imbalance is screaming to be medicated.

I will add that I think Michelle R. is doing a great job of acting the part. She is so scary, now that I know that crucial part of her past. I am not in the camp of hating the Ana L character just because I hate Michelle R. I don't hate the actress at all. I don't hate the character either. I like the added danger she adds to the show.

AL is psychotic! Can she become well? I think she could if on medication. It would certainly take more than therapy as we all ready know. Would that be possible on this island? Anything is possible, I guess. Do I think that will happen? No.

She is the first character whose flashback made me trust her less. Instead of thinking - look what she's been through, surely that caused her criminal behavior, I was thinking - this girl has more issues than losing her baby due to being shot. I think we will find out more about her mental state later. Do I think what we find out later will justify her actions? I doubt it. Would I have more compassion for her if I found out she had a chemical imbalance? Yes, I would. But then I would trust her even less. Because that would mean she has less control of her own state of mind.

Then again, I wonder if the writers at the helm - targeting a thirty-something male “gamer” audience at least part of the time, has come up with this hysterical woman out of stereotyping. Woman, who happens to be a police officer, loses her baby due to being shot and goes nuts (and goes nuts the way she does because she is a police officer. And so the message is; women should NOT have those types of careers). That would be so unrealistic. I surely hope it is not like that.

Edited to insert NOT in last paragraph. Accidentaly left it out the first time.

[brewster]

Why is she psychotic? They all heard the whispering and they were all scared sh#t and they all were afraid for their lives. When Shannon appeared out of nowhere AL shot her. Shannon was in the wrong place at the wrong time. AL wasn't out of touch with reality. She merely reacted too soon. Once she realized her mistake she lost it. I can see why.

She is no more psychotic than the rest of them. Jack hallucinated about his his father. H and Sayid tortured Sawyer. Shannon had visions of Walt. Didn't Shannon try to shoot Locke? What's the difference?

[lostmio]

There seems a biological reason for her behavior and thought process and that chemical imbalance is screaming to be medicated.

The biological reason is evolution. She has a highly developed sense-of-danger accompanied by a fight-or-flight response. Good thing to have in the primitive circumstances in which she has landed.

Her finally crying after weeks of exhausting work, trying to figure out who was the real threat, and having come face to face with it, and the reality that they were stuck there, is not indicitive of psychosis or even a nervous breakdown, IMO. It seems quite normal.

Ana was still very internally and externally wounded, from the shooting, her miscarrage, the murder and a freaking plane crash. She was full of rage but tried to do the right thing, only her rage blurred her judgement more than once. I think Ana is perfectly lucid and sees her errors. She surrended to Sayid. She showed remorse and guilt. She let everyone go. She gave up her gun and weapons.


Excellent analysis...

Ana seems to be the most lucid and rational person on the island.

She's not obsessed with toy planes or integers or big sticks, she's not hearing whispers or having visions. She's the only person so far who recognizes and tries to deal with the ever-present dangers and threats, one of which is duplicitious persons.

eta: Posters have been whining for months about how everyone on the island seems to be in a serious state of disconnect, yet when someone comes along who shows awareness of the dangers, everyone goes bananas over what a crazy bitch she is!

[Issek]

Some thoughts regarding the Ana Lucia character:

I believe that all of us, when we judge a person’s actions, filter everything through the lens of that person’s personality, and we do this both in real life and when we encounter fictional characters in books, movies, plays, television, etc. Then, in the case of personalities we dislike, we judge their actions more negatively and thus dislike them even more. Ana Lucia has been deliberately written as a brash, pushy, humorless (for the most part) person. The writers obviously did not mean for us to like her immediately, and they have succeeded, perhaps more than they intended. Let’s take a look at three actions of Ana Lucia that have been used as examples of her “instability,” and compare them to other events we have witnessed on LOST.

(Ana Lucia) Caging Nathan: The TSS had been attacked twice by the inland “Others” and it is clear, from the paper found on one of the attackers, that they had been infiltrated. Ana suspected Nathan because of his long sojourns in the jungle. She dug a pit, knocked him out and threw him into it, isolating him from the rest of the TSS. She checked with the rest of the TSS and learned that no one remembered seeing Nathan on board the plane, including one of the flight attendants. She talked about torturing him, but he was murdered by Goodwin so we will never know whether she would have followed through. Contrast that with: (Jack & Sayid) Torturing Sawyer: When Sawyer was suspected of having Shannon’s asthma medication, Sayid, with Jack’s consent, actually tortured him. Their evidence against him boiled down to: “he is a bad guy and that’s the kind of thing he would do.” He was innocent. The difference is between her intent and Jack and Sayid’s action.

Then there’s: (Ana Lucia) Killing the man who shot her in L.A.: She definitely knew that this was the man who shot her four times and caused (we are to assume) the death of her unborn baby. She did not let the legal process punish him, but took matters into her own hands, even though she is a law enforcement officer. Contrast that with: (Sawyer) Killing Duckett in Australia: Sawyer had been hunting since childhood for the man who “ruined his life.” He held this unseen con man responsible for the deaths of his parents even though his father actually pulled the trigger on both of them. When he was told by a criminal acquaintance that the real “Sawyer” is in Australia, he did not question or investigate the information, but went there and killed the innocent man his one-time partner set up. Or contrast it with: (Charlie) Killing Ethan: Ethan (who probably killed Sceve and abducted Claire and Charlie) was subdued (he had four weapons trained on him) and was no longer a threat; Charlie murdered him at point-blank range.

Finally: (Ana Lucia) Killing Shannon: The TSS had been on a long, exhausting trek, and were vulnerable to attack from the inland “Others.” They were paranoid, but with good reason. Then Cindy disappeared mysteriously. Then the rain became torrential, making visibility difficult. Then the whispers started up, increasing their fear and paranoia. Then Shannon crashed through the jungle and Ana shot her, killing an innocent person. Contrast that with (again) Sawyer and Duckett.

All of the actions described above have a degree of both legal and moral wrongness, to them, yet Ana Lucia seems – to me at least - to receive more than her share of excoriation. I wonder whether if she had a line of snappy patter and sang a few bars of Bob Marley like Sawyer, or if she was a loveable doofus like Charlie, or if she had more of an air of competence like Sayid (even though he is a technical nincompoop), or if she were a likeable but incompetent leader like Jack, if she were any of those things - or maybe if she just weren’t such a strong female character who has shown very little tendency to display traditional womanliness – would she still be judged as harshly as she has been? I don't know.

One of the most satisfying books I ever read involved a character who was horribly, disgustingly, seemingly irredeemably unlikable first. As the story progressed the reader was forced to take a second and a third look at this person’s actions and to come to different conclusions regarding him. Literature (or a program like LOST) that can make a person re-evaluate his or her own thought processes is rare and sublime. That may not be what the writers of LOST intend or are able to accomplish, but Ana Lucia’s character has certainly got many of us thinking, hasn’t it?

A final real-world legal question: In reality, would the person that shot Ana Lucia and, presumably, caused the death of her unborn child, be charged with murder (of the child) as well as attempted murder (of Ana Lucia)?

[lostmio]

I suspect that the big difference between Ana L and people like Sawyer and Kate is that their dysfunctional behavior is probably due to sociocultural dysfunction and probably a lack of therapeutic intervention because of their lot in life.

Well maybe Libby will cure them... :vomit:

[Unnamed Redshirt Number 4]

As the story progressed the reader was forced to take a second and a third look at this person’s actions and to come to different conclusions regarding him. Literature (or a program like LOST) that can make a person re-evaluate his or her own thought processes is rare and sublime. That may not be what the writers of LOST intend or are able to accomplish, but Ana Lucia’s character has certainly got many of us thinking, hasn’t it?


Thinking indeed! I love a good character analysis, and Ana-Lucia is perfect for it.

Great analysis Issek, I agree. :D

[lostmio]

A final real-world legal question: In reality, would the person that shot Ana Lucia and, presumably, caused the death of her unborn child, be charged with murder (of the child) as well as attempted murder (of Ana Lucia)?

Some states have a law on the books that would allow him to be charged. I believe California does.

[Jerii]

They clearly wanted to promote dissension, and they seem to have marked Ana as the "Sawyer" of season one, while at the same time promoting a connection between Sayid's past as an army interrogator and Ana-Lucia's aggressive policing. But whereas Sayid pulled back from cold-blooded murder, and Sawyer pulled back from killing the boar as a projection of his guilt over Duckett's senseless murder, Ana becomes only more trigger-happy after her revenge. Whatever guilt she feels when asking Sayid to shoot her was not operative in her actions on the island to that point.

Ergo, I think the writers are setting themselves an extremely difficult path of trying to redeem the character. It seems to me as if they created Ana-Lucia solely to give themselves this challenge; "Look - Sawyer is a con artist and murderer and people love him now! Kate is a murderer and fugitive and yet fans are bewitched by her! Let's try a cold-blooded but hot-to-trot murderess on the cutting edge of sanity, and see if we can make the fans fall in love all over again!"

Is my view overly cynical, or not?

Just as Ana Lucia should not be trigger happy, let's not be DSM-diagnosing happy either, aight?

Ana Lucia has a sense of 'right' and 'wrong', street-justice if you will. Clearly she was shocked and felt she was the one who did the wrong thing when she shot Shannon. She emphasized 'I shot someone he loved' so she knows what it's like to lose someone/thing you love. It's important that she went to see Shannon's body before coming back to Sayid. Up to that point, she shoved her emotion aside to be strong for the group, in the best way she knew how. When the group abandoned her, there was a sense of being crushed by disappointment and a betrayal of sort. What's the point then? Hence, the release of Sayid made sense. She's very black-and-white in her approach to life... you're either with me or you're against me kinda thing, but it was probably due to a deep sense of mistrust of others than anything else.

If there's a character arc of redemption for Ana Lucia, it's gonna hinge on her ability to trust again.

[granfestival]

Some thoughts regarding the Ana Lucia character:

I believe that all of us, when we judge a person’s actions, filter everything through the lens of that person’s personality, and we do this both in real life and when we encounter fictional characters in books, movies, plays, television, etc. Then, in the case of personalities we dislike, we judge their actions more negatively and thus dislike them even more. Ana Lucia has been deliberately written as a brash, pushy, humorless (for the most part) person. The writers obviously did not mean for us to like her immediately, and they have succeeded, perhaps more than they intended. Let’s take a look at three actions of Ana Lucia that have been used as examples of her “instability,” and compare them to other events we have witnessed on LOST.

(Ana Lucia) Caging Nathan: The TSS had been attacked twice by the inland “Others” and it is clear, from the paper found on one of the attackers, that they had been infiltrated. Ana suspected Nathan because of his long sojourns in the jungle. She dug a pit, knocked him out and threw him into it, isolating him from the rest of the TSS. She checked with the rest of the TSS and learned that no one remembered seeing Nathan on board the plane, including one of the flight attendants. She talked about torturing him, but he was murdered by Goodwin so we will never know whether she would have followed through. Contrast that with: (Jack & Sayid) Torturing Sawyer: When Sawyer was suspected of having Shannon’s asthma medication, Sayid, with Jack’s consent, actually tortured him. Their evidence against him boiled down to: “he is a bad guy and that’s the kind of thing he would do.” He was innocent. The difference is between her intent and Jack and Sayid’s action.

Then there’s: (Ana Lucia) Killing the man who shot her in L.A.: She definitely knew that this was the man who shot her four times and caused (we are to assume) the death of her unborn baby. She did not let the legal process punish him, but took matters into her own hands, even though she is a law enforcement officer. Contrast that with: (Sawyer) Killing Duckett in Australia: Sawyer had been hunting since childhood for the man who “ruined his life.” He held this unseen con man responsible for the deaths of his parents even though his father actually pulled the trigger on both of them. When he was told by a criminal acquaintance that the real “Sawyer” is in Australia, he did not question or investigate the information, but went there and killed the innocent man his one-time partner set up. Or contrast it with: (Charlie) Killing Ethan: Ethan (who probably killed Sceve and abducted Claire and Charlie) was subdued (he had four weapons trained on him) and was no longer a threat; Charlie murdered him at point-blank range.

Finally: (Ana Lucia) Killing Shannon: The TSS had been on a long, exhausting trek, and were vulnerable to attack from the inland “Others.” They were paranoid, but with good reason. Then Cindy disappeared mysteriously. Then the rain became torrential, making visibility difficult. Then the whispers started up, increasing their fear and paranoia. Then Shannon crashed through the jungle and Ana shot her, killing an innocent person. Contrast that with (again) Sawyer and Duckett.

All of the actions described above have a degree of both legal and moral wrongness, to them, yet Ana Lucia seems – to me at least - to receive more than her share of excoriation. I wonder whether if she had a line of snappy patter and sang a few bars of Bob Marley like Sawyer, or if she was a loveable doofus like Charlie, or if she had more of an air of competence like Sayid (even though he is a technical nincompoop), or if she were a likeable but incompetent leader like Jack, if she were any of those things - or maybe if she just weren’t such a strong female character who has shown very little tendency to display traditional womanliness – would she still be judged as harshly as she has been? I don't know.

One of the most satisfying books I ever read involved a character who was horribly, disgustingly, seemingly irredeemably unlikable first. As the story progressed the reader was forced to take a second and a third look at this person’s actions and to come to different conclusions regarding him. Literature (or a program like LOST) that can make a person re-evaluate his or her own thought processes is rare and sublime. That may not be what the writers of LOST intend or are able to accomplish, but Ana Lucia’s character has certainly got many of us thinking, hasn’t it?


:yeah: ALL that.

[granfestival]

Ana Lucia is unstable?

The group has a doctor who .... So far the only somewhat established character who doesn't seem insane is Rose.

OMG, THAT was the funniest post I've read ... I literally laughed out loud.

[LoStMyMiNd]

The biological reason is evolution. She has a highly developed sense-of-danger accompanied by a fight-or-flight response. Good thing to have in the primitive circumstances in which she has landed.



Excellent analysis...

Ana seems to be the most lucid and rational person on the island.

She's not obsessed with toy planes or integers or big sticks, she's not hearing whispers or having visions. She's the only person so far who recognizes and tries to deal with the ever-present dangers and threats, one of which is duplicitious persons.

eta: Posters have been whining for months about how everyone on the island seems to be in a serious state of disconnect, yet when someone comes along who shows awareness of the dangers, everyone goes bananas over what a crazy bitch she is!



Ana heard the whispers also

[brewster]

:thankyous All of the actions described above have a degree of both legal and moral wrongness, to them, yet Ana Lucia seems – to me at least - to receive more than her share of excoriation. I wonder whether if she had a line of snappy patter and sang a few bars of Bob Marley like Sawyer, or if she was a loveable doofus like Charlie, or if she had more of an air of competence like Sayid (even though he is a technical nincompoop), or if she were a likeable but incompetent leader like Jack, if she were any of those things - or maybe if she just weren’t such a strong female character who has shown very little tendency to display traditional womanliness – would she still be judged as harshly as she has been? I don't know.



:worshippy I've been trying to say this all along but have been accused of being passively sexist. Ana is not a women most men like. If she were a guy, I really don't think the haters would treat her so harshly.

[lostmio]

Ana heard the whispers also

Yes, I remembered after I posted it! Doesn't change my point tho, that the psychotic label is unjustified...

[Mysterious Mike]

Her aggression and psychotic behavior could be an asset if directed in the right direction, the others.

[Momofsamty]

Her aggression and psychotic behavior could be an asset if directed in the right direction, the others.

I couldn't agree more!, she is a great protector and will be very useful from here on out in any encounters with the "others" I think she has learned a lesson from this, but I don't think it will change the fact that unfortunatly she is also a loose cannon. I can't wait to see the catfight between her and Kate, as there certainly can't be 2 "Alpha Females" !:catfight:

[granfestival]

:thankyous


:worshippy I've been trying to say this all along but have been accused of being passively sexist.

Not by me! Not sure if you refer to my post about subtle sexsim or not? But if so, I wasn't accusing you (or your comments) of being passively sexist. Just the opposite.

I've been trying to say the same thing as you. In fact, I was using one of your quotes to try to say the exact same thing as Issek -- "maybe if she just weren’t such a strong female character who has shown very little tendency to display traditional womanliness – would she still be judged as harshly as she has been?"

[brewster]

I couldn't agree more!, she is a great protector and will be very useful from here on out in any encounters with the "others" I think she has learned a lesson from this, but I don't think it will change the fact that unfortunatly she is also a loose cannon. I can't wait to see the catfight between her and Kate, as there certainly can't be 2 "Alpha Females" !:catfight:

Talk about sexism. Two strong women equals a catfight? GMAFB. How ignorant. :snake:

[brewster]

Not by me! Not sure if you refer to my post about subtle sexsim or not? But if so, I wasn't accusing you (or your comments) of being passively sexist. Just the opposite.

I've been trying to say the same thing as you. In fact, I was using one of your quotes to try to say the exact same thing as Issek -- "maybe if she just weren’t such a strong female character who has shown very little tendency to display traditional womanliness – would she still be judged as harshly as she has been?"

We are in total agreement and I am very happy I didn't come off as sexist.

[6toedjewel]

Ana Lucia seems – to me at least - to receive more than her share of excoriation. I wonder whether if she had a line of snappy patter and sang a few bars of Bob Marley like Sawyer, or if she was a loveable doofus like Charlie, or if she had more of an air of competence like Sayid (even though he is a technical nincompoop), or if she were a likeable but incompetent leader like Jack, if she were any of those things - or maybe if she just weren’t such a strong female character who has shown very little tendency to display traditional womanliness – would she still be judged as harshly as she has been? I don't know.


I agree that the people who hate Ana Lucia have hated her with a passion not previously witnessed on these boards. Like I’ve said before, I am not an Ana hater. My favorite character is Locke and I think he has received more than his fair share of unfair persecution. So, I understand why some people are getting tired of the Ana bashing. I am really not trying to do that here.

But, Issek, while taking a look at the three actions of Ana Lucia’s instability as you suggested, I did not come to a different conclusion regarding her sanity.

(Ana Lucia) Killing Shannon: I do believe shooting Shannon was an unfortunate mistake. I do not call her trigger happy like so many others do (yet). There is more to learn about what exactly happened there.

(Ana Lucia) Caging Nathan: I did not find it unreasonable for Ana to cage Nathan without any proof of his guilt but that is only because of “them” kidnapping the TSS created an environment that allows me to forgive her for that. What I found disturbing in her character is that she probably would have started to cut off Nathan’s fingers to get the answers she wanted. Unfortunately, people who are getting their fingers cut off may simply tell you what they want to hear even if it is a lie. A police officer does not cut off fingers during interrogation – this would have been immoral, yes – but what I perceive in Ana Lucia is that she is not making choices or thinking of making her choices due to an immoral demeanor but because she suffers from mental disease. Giving her that benefit of the doubt is generous.

(Ana Lucia) Killing the man who shot her in L.A.: There is no reasoning in this world that could convince me that her act of premeditated murder was a sign of her being a strong woman, a good leader, and someone I would trust my life with. This act alone is what has convinced me that she went completely over the edge. If we are wrong about her mental condition – then there is only one other explanation for the murder of her assailant - Ana is a malicious person. I don’t view her as a malicious person (yet – there will be more FB to determine that one way or the other for me). But I do see her as very dangerous and not to be trusted because of a mental disorder. And I don't think calling her psychotic is unjustified. She probably doesn’t even trust herself… Psyhcotic people can border on appearing as normal as any of the rest of us,then at crucial moments the monster of psychosis can rear its ugly head.

I do think some of Ana’s actions on the island may have helped save some of their necks. And, I don’t really think she had to tell everyone that she killed Goodwin. He was one of “them”, and he was coming at her in a threatening manner. He should not have done that. That is why I used to view her as a strong woman and a capable leader. Not any more.

Disclaimer: Michelle R is beautiful and a good actress (I keep saying that so people will know I do actually like having her on the show).

*Edit - changed "excoriaction" to "unfair persecution". I hastily used a word I am not familiar with.

[Sage_elf 68]

Yeah! just 'cause she's a crazy lady doesn't mean we can't like her.

[Issek]

6toed jewel:

Do you feel at all that many of the people on this board had already formed their opinions of Ana before any of the events I described took place, and that these opinions influenced the way they judged these events? Curious, that's all.

What an interesting character! Thanks, drabauer, for starting a reasoned and reasonable discussion.

[6toedjewel]

6toed jewel:

Do you feel at all that many of the people on this board had already formed their opinions of Ana before any of the events I described took place, and that these opinions influenced the way they judged these events? Curious, that's all.

The answer is - YES. I totally agree. And, I don't understand that.

[Badger]

Although executing her assailant was clearly wrong by any moral and legal standard there is not a person alive who would not have entertained the thought, and in some cases have the resolve to do as she did given what had occurred.

In fact I'd almost be willing to bet there isn't a soul on this forum who, perhaps only for a split second, didn't say to themselves "Yes!!", when she killed the SOB who had shot her.

C'mon, admit it. If you say "No, no way did I think that", then you're either not a parent, or you're a saint and I doubt anyone here has sprouted angel wings either.

[drabauer]

I am really overjoyed with the response this thread has gotten. I6L, I found your description of what it's like to actually have been an officer involved in a shooting very moving. And I loved 6toedjewel and Issek's lengthy essays, among others. I'll just respond to a few points.

I was wrong to imply that Ana-Lucia has psychotic tendencies; this is why I termed her "dangerously unstable." I think what she had was a breakdown, and I think it likely her shocking vigilante killing of the shooter was likely the result of depression brought on by both her loss and her fear and guilt at having lost control of the confrontation. Yes lostmio, the suspect could be held accountable in CA for the lost of the unborn child, and CA has the death penalty as well.

I think Issek and others are correct that Sawyer and Kate, among others have been responsible for crimes of equal magnitude, but I find Ana-Lucia's murder the most shocking, as it was committed by an officer committed to uphold the law. Just as we are most shocked by sexual crimes when they involve the clergy, or political crimes that involve the public trust, so we should be shocked by a pre-meditated subversion of the justice system by one sworn to enforce it.

I maintain that the ONLY reason the writers showed us Ana's crime was to suggest that she was emotionally, probably chemically, unstable, and to provide a background for her excessively paranoid actions on the island. And I'm not saying that Ana shouldn't have been worried about the others, and shouldn't have remained vigilant. Nor that Eko didn't bear some responsibility for her spiral downward (which he did). But Ana-Lucia did act out of emotion and fear rather than logic, and to take a shot in the jungle without a clear line of sight was but the straw that broke the camel's back.

I find the question of why Ana-lucia's character was already persona non grata with so many posters more interesting. Here's my take on that:

1) many viewers resent that our castaways have been shunted aside in favor of new characters, and that the relationships developed last season are in limbo while we work through the Tailies' story.

2) Rodriguez has apparently been typecast, and as of yet we don't see any suggestion of another side to her character, or any attempt to play against type. But

3) and most important - she has absolutely no sense of humor! Sawyer's snide remarks won over a lot of people as season 1 wore on, while Kate's quips and mysterious past seemed to promise something more than just a violent criminal archetype. But if Ana-Lucia's character is going to be anything but a bitch goddess, the redemption will have to involve more than surrender to Sayid.

Which brings me back to my original point: why the writers created her in the first place. I think that - having had their way with blue collar criminals and murders of passion in season 1 - they wanted the greater challenge of taking a law maker down the same dark roads.

Ana-Lucia becomes more palatable to me if I view her as a classic Western archetype: the vigilante lawman, who realizes he's gone one step too far and entered a kind of moral limbo where it is difficult to find one's bearing. Once Ana shot her attacker, every other act of violence became easier, until she was in danger of loosing herself altogether (typing up Sayid and threatening her "crew").

If she can pull back from that abyss, perhaps her hard-won knowledge will come in handy later on in the season.

[Badger]

As to why Ana Lucia executed the guy who had shot her causing the death of her unborn child and why she is acting the way she is, in my mind, is fairly straight forward and does not require an academic explanation or even that of a trained psychologist or psychiatrist.

From a writers perspective I think it is evident that she was obviously traumatized by the shooting and hence became cynical. More importantly, she is now a childless mother. This leads to the main point of my post.

After the loss of her own unborn child and recovering physically from any injuries she feels the need to protect any child. As an example when she drew down on the guy carrying the TV set she was OK until the infant started crying. It was obvious to me that this is what set her off so to speak, causing her to draw her weapon. Clearly this was foreshadowing the fact she is still traumatized by the loss of her unborn child and would ultimately lead to further such actions.

She told the psychologist prior to that scene however, when he asked about the couple with the screaming child, that they had moved out but that now it was too quiet.

When they crashed on the island one of her first actions was to save Emma and then, the key moment where she promised the children she would get them home. When they ended up being abducted by the Others she took it personally. She is in effect on a mission now and will stop at nothing to accomplish it.

This is what is driving her and her actions are as a result of it. I believe the writers set this up as a foundation for her character and ultimately her possible redemption.

[6toedjewel]

Ana-Lucia becomes more palatable to me if I view her as a classic Western archetype: the vigilante lawman, who realizes he's gone one step too far and entered a kind of moral limbo where it is difficult to find one's bearing. Once Ana shot her attacker, every other act of violence became easier, until she was in danger of loosing herself altogether (typing up Sayid and threatening her "crew").

If she can pull back from that abyss, perhaps her hard-won knowledge will come in handy later on in the season.

She does not become more palatable to me from this view, but I think it is very elegant. Being in moral limbo like that could certainly drive someone insane. Having all ready crossed the line it will be extremely difficult to return from the abyss. But, I don’t think she’s unredeemable, yet.


In fact I'd almost be willing to bet there isn't a soul on this forum who, perhaps only for a split second, didn't say to themselves "Yes!!", when she killed the SOB who had shot her. .

No, I was thinking – “Oh no – don’t do it.” Then without blinking an eye she gunned him down. Then I thought, “she is sick”. I was so disappointed in her character. I had previously defended her actions. I didn’t want Ana to sink below his level (by the way, we do not know his backstory – could be worse than Sawyers). Perhaps he could have come back from the abyss he was in if his life hadn't been cut short. And, he did NOT know Ana had been pregnant until a split second before her bullets pummeled his body. It is even a possibility that since he was shooting hollow points at her vest that he believed he wouldn't be killing anyone.


C'mon, admit it. If you say "No, no way did I think that", then you're either not a parent, or you're a saint and I doubt anyone here has sprouted angel wings either.

I am a parent, and my children are close to Ana’s age – and the age of the man she shot down. My children are not perfect. But I would never want one of them to do what Ana did, or what the guy did. No, I do not think I am a saint. I do not have angel wings. I would still not cheer Ana on while in the act of not only taking away some other mother’s son (you do not stop loving your children when they are grown even if they are “trouble” because then your worries are 100 fold), but also in screwing up Ana’s own life royally. As a matter of fact, if Ana were my daughter – I would be grieving for her MENTAL and MORAL condition and trying to find help for her ASAP.

[Badger]

What did you think when she refused to positively identify him even after she was told he had confessed?

I knew the second she refused to identify him that she was going to kill him. There was no question in my mind. In fact I said to my wife "She's going to kill him." Hence when she did it came as no surprise whatsoever. She wasn't in that bar by coincidence. She was stalking him.

[6toedjewel]

Don't laugh, but I was just thinking that obviously he was the guy because of the reaction from Ana's mother - and I just couldn't figure out why Ana would let him go scott free. So, even though it was obvious that in the bar she was stalking him, I was surprised at her actions. I was still thinking that perhaps she was simply going to confront him. Silly me... I don't watch very many cop or mob shows. Realistic violence is so much more scary to me than the fantasy- larger than life violence. Lost does a good job of mixing reality with fantasy in my opinion.

[lockeSawyer]

She kill before she think.

[6toedjewel]

No, obviously it was premeditated. I just didn't get that until all was said and done.

[LoStMyMiNd]

Has Ana shown any remorse for any of the things she has done? Her flashbacks don't seem to indicate that she feels remorse, unless lying to Sayid about killing Jason is considered remorse.

[iris]

There is absolutely no defense for Ana-Lucia's behavior. Especially in the flashback. The man who shot her had already been caught. He was in custody waiting for her to ID him. There is no reason to believe that he would not have had the book thrown at him He shot a cop, a pregnant cop, which would certainly carry a hefty punishment. There was no need for any vigilante justice here, especially by an officer of the law. Unlike Charlie's murder of Ethan. There is no criminal justice system on the island. Some would then argue that this validates AL's imprisonment of Nathan. However, she did not know that he was guilty. Everyone knew that Ethan was. I do give AL credit for stepping up to protect the group, be the leader; with that comes responsibility. If you are going to go way beyond accusing someone the way that she did, you had better be right. Realizing her mistake, does she own up to it? At this point it appears that she does not. She never lets the rest of the tailes in on the truth. She just continues to use fear to dominate and control the group. Does she at least internally realize that her tendency to fly off the handle, act first and think later, might be doing more harm than good? No. She continues to bully everyone around her. She insists that she knows best and that they had better follow her and do things her way if they want to survive. Then to top it all, she loses it, shoots Shannon and ties up Sayid. She goes so far over the line that the group finally leaves her.

I understand the writers introducing a character that evokes such strong emotions. What I cannot understand is why the writers have allowed her character to dominate the show. At this point, I think it is impossible to reconcile her with most viewers. All of her dispicable actions have been thrown at us one after the other, never giving us a break or a moment to care about her. The season one group is chock full of people of questionable morality; but we see their remorse, desire to change, and do the right thing. This internal conflict is completely absent from Ana-Lucia. She does not learn from her mistakes, and continues to repeat them.

None of this has anything to do with her being a woman. She has shown time and time again that she has bad judgement and never stops for a second to think things through, before or after her actions. She does make a valiant effort to protect the tailes, her bravery is commendable. However, from what we have seen so far, every call she has made has been the wrong one. Yes she has had something terrible happen to her. So has everyone else. IMO a normal, sane person does not act out in this way.

I think many viewers cannot stand her for all these reasons, plus Michelle Rodriguiz's acting IMO is terrible and one dimensional. I have felt all along that the writers were setting us up and would make us like her and justify her crazy behavior. They tried with her pregnancy, her truly creepy conversation with Goodwin (how could anyone not look good compared to such a scary freak) and her "I'm already dead" moment with Sayid. None of this has worked with me. At this point I'm just trying to have faith in the show. I'm hoping that this is all leading somewhere big, we will be blown away and will have never seen it coming.

[LoStMyMiNd]

Like I said before, her self imposed justice system gives the good honorable cops a bad name. She should have been fired, and maybe she was....we just haven't seen that FB yet.....ugh.....can do without another Anal FB for a while though.

I still don't understand what she was doing working the streets if she was pregnant. How was Jason supposed to know she was pregnant when he shot her? I know that shooting a cop and/or killing cops is a pretty bad thing in this country but for petesake she should have been wearing a Tshirt that said "Don't Shoot Me I'm Pregnant" or working a desk job

[Issek]

This gets more interesting all the time. I agree with drabauer that, from a moral standpoint, the murder (let's not mince words) Ana Lucia committed feels more heinous because of the breach of trust involved; but it also feels less so because of the unborn child that was killed. Each viewer has to resolve that standoff in accordance with his or her belief system. The most interesting thing to me, still, is the reaction people on this forum had to the Ana Lucia character before we were aware of any of her transgressions, and how, or whether, that has colored their judgment of her.

Back in the summer, when I was lurking on this board and amazed at the analysis I found here, there was discussion about the character Michelle Rodriguez would play when it was announced she would become a regular. There were some comments that referred to previous characters she had played; I've never seen one of her films, but it sounded as if she had been cast as a certain type in most of her roles - the same type we see her portraying on LOST, possibly. The reaction to the Ana Lucia character this season is almost, in my opinion because I can't pin this down, as if viewers are considering Rodriguez' previous roles as prelude to her current one. Is that possible?

Lostmio, I agree with you that having a character that acts when the situation calls for it and doesn't spend an entire episode agonizing about the decision or avoiding it altogether, is a breath of fresh air (I liked Desmond precisely because he was able to make up his mind and do something, I'd still buy him a drink if we ever meet in a bar, somewhere). That sort of thing worked for Hamlet at Elsinore, but it is annoyingly inappropriate in a survival situation.

Remember, let's keep this discussion reasonable, in the highest sense of that word. This kind of exchange of views is the reason I stopped lurking, and I hope that's true for everyone else, as well.

[drabauer]

Ana Lucia committed feels more heinous because of the breach of trust involved; but it also feels less so because of the unborn child that was killed. Each viewer has to resolve that standoff in accordance with his or her belief system.

I can't agree here because women have traumatic miscarriages all the time, most often through no fault of their own, and with no one to blame. That to me is more of a tragedy then a woman who would put her unborn child's life at risk by remaining in the field as Ana Lucia did, or as the increasingly ridiculous Alias has Sydney Bristow do. Therefore I can only read Ana's completely out of line actions as a projection of her own guilt. She obliterated Jason rather than go through the lengthy but necessary court system to try and obliterate her own guilt over the loss, so that she would not have to live with it through the trial and sentencing phase of his conviction. Similarly she tosses Nathan in the pit and threatens bodliy harm to try and get a quick result, to eliminate the idea of danger ASAP, rather than taking the time and care to learn more about what is really threatening them. Her tactics are slash and burn as a projection of the way she has dealt with her emotions since the initial incident, if not earlier (doubtless the writers have more planned for her backstory).

And I have to agree with iris that Rodriguez's acting is dreadful. I see no nuance at all, and the seams of her line readings show as though she had just learned her part. I am rooting for all of the new characters, and I'm not saying Rodriguez shouldn't be on the show, but at this point I am questioning the writer's judgment.

[I like to listen]

Think what you will of me.
When Ana capped her assailant, near favorite FB moment of any character.

What, did you all want Beatrrice Kiddo (aka the Bride) to Hug Bill Vol-3 ?
She was a terrible person, and she was rooted for in her revenge quest.

It's all perspective. The greater good, or the lesser of two evils....

.

[LostInWilderness]

Nice analysis drabauer. You captured what makes Ana unique on the show very well - she is truly a danger to friend and foe alike. This is one of the reasons Ana has generated so much controversy and discussion. I think you give the writers too little credit for introducing her though. Right now Ana is extremely one dimensional, but the writers have shown they can add breadth to characters (Jin, Sawyer) as well as make them one dimensional unfortunately (Jack.) I think Ana is going to bring new conflict to the lostaways, provide a more complicated aspect to the Jack/Kate/Locke dynamic which is already growing stale, plus she has some useful skills the lostaways can take advantage of in their search for Walt and probable conflict with the Tarzans.

I agree with boonian that the scene with Sayid was rushed, and the opportunity for conflict between Sayid and Ana wasted. Further, I think Sayid has been a wasted character being used as nothing more than a plot tool for the writers for a some time. Mr. fixit found lifelong love with Shannon in about a week after seeing nothing the whole time before. That was poorly executed (pun intended,) sappy and unrealistic, then the scene when Ana frees him was equally rushed and unrealistic. Sayid's become the goto character to move other character's stories along.

It seemed to me that Ana made it clear to the other TSS she had killed Goodwin, and Goodwin was the spy for the Tarzans.

There's been a lot of talk about counceling in this thread, but nobody has mentioned that Ana was released back to duty by her councelor. I don't know why; I would never have released her after that interview. Her attitude was terrible - she was dominated by the chip on her shoulder. I can only assume that was normal behavior for her, which is backed up by the interplay between Ana and her mother. I wonder how she ever passed the LAPD psych exam to begin with. I think future flashbacks will show that Ana has always had that chip on her soldier, felt like she never lived up to her mom's expectations and overcompensated with hostility.

Hopefully we'll get some screen time for our lostaways before that though. This is a second reason Ana has generated such intense discussion. She's taking screen time from sweaty Kate. ;)

[Badger]

I am rooting for all of the new characters, and I'm not saying Rodriguez shouldn't be on the show, but at this point I am questioning the writer's judgment.

I've questioned the writer's judgement since the first episode. The entire premise of the show is silly and absurd. Then again that is why most of us like it.

I've stated repeatedly in this and other threads that killing Jason (love the play on the name) was obviously wrong, both legally and morally. No one is questioning that. However, I gave an explanation as to why she acted the way she did and what stimuli seem to continue triggering her responses and what her rationale is. This same basic premise has been used in numerous movies and is really nothing new and therefore it should not come as any great surprise.

For those who missed it a quick outline:

A person is wronged terribly and loses a loved one in an act of violence: An unborn child in this case. (Shot five times at point-blank range)

The person seeks out revenge against their assailant. Feels the courts are too slow or that the perpetrator might escape justice somehow. (Let's perp go so she can administer her own justice)

The person has extreme guilt association and is traumatized and acts to protect anyone similar to the loved one they lost. In this case children. (Any child)

The person promises to protect someone but they are abducted or killed. (Children on beach)

The person reacts strongly to any stimulus that they associate with the heinous act that was committed againt themselves. (Infant started crying so she draws down on TV guy.)

Ana Lucia is effect on a mission and will stop at nothing to accomplish it. Over compensating for the loss of her child by seeking to keep the promise she made to the children on the beach. That is the setup and the foundation for the character.

We've seen it all before. Nothing truly ground-breaking or new. You either understand why she is acting the way she is or you don't. Making value judgements on the character is therefore pointless.

[WayOffCourse]

Kudos to drabauer for starting another of her thought-provoking threads, and for referencing Chance's Kate is an empathetic sociopath---still my all-time favorite.

I think future flashbacks will show that Ana has always had that chip on her soldier, felt like she never lived up to her mom's expectations and overcompensated with hostility.
I agree with LIW here, and I also believe that her insecurity caused her to make her most serious mistake. I don't believe she had told anyone about the baby (and that likely included the father). Please feel free to correct me from the transcripts if I'm wrong.

Not having told anyone would explain 1) why she was in the field while pregnant, 2) why she believed the punishment Jason would receive would not be suffucient (attempted murder on a police officer not carrying the same penalty as the murder of the unborn child) and 3) why she now feels so strongly that she needs to protect other children--because she did not protect her own.

My husband doesn't watch Lost typically, but caught this week's episode. He's no clinical psychologist, but he immediately commented that Ana was severely unhinged. Anyone else curious how our only somewhat less impulsive doc (Jack, that is) will deal with that?

[Badger]

You may be right in that she never told anyone of her pregnancy. If that is true then I can surmise she didn't because she realised she may have been put behind a desk. To her this may have been unacceptable because she had the overwhelming desire to protect and to serve, even at great risk to her unborn child (the risk to herself was plainly obvious and always was).

This was then made evident by the fact she not only wanted to be put back on patrol duty but sought out action and questioned why they were in the "safest" area (No such place. Some are seemingly more safe than others but no place is ever completely safe).

Bad personal judgement, yes, but it tells me she was a good cop who had a strong desire to do her job.

[Momofsamty]

I wouldn't want her patroling the streets of my town, or being the DARE officer at my kids schools.

[LostInWilderness]

Bad personal judgement, yes, but it tells me she was a good cop who had a strong desire to do her job.
Assumptions, assumptions.

[Badger]

Conversely I don't want some coach potato who is afraid to answer the door when the pizza delivery person knocks.

I want people who are motivated and willing to risk their life to protect and to serve. People who have the resolve to carry through with their commitment. I worked with and led people like that daily for twenty years.

Do I want someone who shows a lack of judgement and is a risk to others? Certainly not. But there is a fine line being lunacy and courage.

[LostInWilderness]

Ana is clearly on the wrong side of that line.

[Badger]

Assumptions, assumptions.

Oh PLEASE!!! As if no one on this forum, yourself included, has never made an assumption.

Besides, and call it what you will, I was stipulating to the idea that she MAY have not told anyone about her pregnancy. If not then I was offering one possible explanation as to why.

[LoStMyMiNd]

[QUOTE=Badger]You may be right in that she never told anyone of her pregnancy. If that is true then I can surmise she didn't because she realised she may have been put behind a desk. To her this may have been unacceptable because she had the overwhelming desire to protect and to serve, even at great risk to her unborn child (the risk to herself was plainly obvious and always was).


***I don't know, if she did, in fact, know she was pregnant and still continued to work the streets, then this is a very bad reflection on her personal responsibility to the safety of her unborn child. I wonder why she would do such a thing. She definately has some unresolved issues. Maybe it has something to do with the way a woman is treated on the force and she felt the need to prove herself. At any rate, we probably won't know the exact circumstances until later. She may have a strong desire to do her job, but she is definately not competent to do so in a safe and sane way. Her shrink seriously messed up by releasing her to go back to work.

[LostInWilderness]

Oh PLEASE!!! As if no one on this forum, yourself included, has never made an assumption. Of course. I just thought your assumption and Ana Lucia was wrong. I think all the evidence shows Ana's hostility and the chip on her shoulder drive her to dangerous confrontations as a way to prove herself.

[Badger]

Her shrink seriously messed up by releasing her to go back to work.

I agree with that assesement wholeheartedly. As to why she wanted back on the street I was "assuming".

[Badger]

I think all the evidence shows Ana's hostility and the chip on her shoulder drive her to dangerous confrontations as a way to prove herself.

People take on high risk professions for a number of personal reasons.

Did she want to prove something to her mother, or was she trying to prove something to herself? We can't answer that. Perhaps she wanted to prove to the world she could do the job even though she is a woman. But don't even get me started with that crap.

Note: I think you know where I stand in that regard. ;)

[LostInWilderness]

I agree with that assesement wholeheartedly. As to why she wanted back on the street I was "assuming".
;)

So we all agree her shrink messed up. Do you think her being the Captain's daughter had anything to do with it? I bet she had to live with people saying she got special treatment everyday. I bet trying to overcome that and to live up to her mother's expectations ate her up.

[Badger]

Yes, the fact her mother appeared to be her precinct Captain would certainly play into the psychology of her motivations. It would be detrimental in my opinion and I think we both agree on that. But this is TV and as such as unrealistic. So yes, of course it did.

[Badger]

Let me say this: I have always liked her character because she is interesting and shows great resolve, if not self-control.

I think she is at heart a good and decent person who was so traumatized she lost what self-control she had. Maybe she was over compensating. She has always shown incredible resolve however and that is a quality I admire. It is the raw material I have spoken of before and is what is required to be a great leader, however it needs to be tempered and controlled.

ps: Speaking of tempered and controlled: plastic garbage bags and duct tape along with a dark closet work well when they are little. ;)

[16L43]

;)

So we all agree her shrink messed up. Do you think her being the Captain's daughter had anything to do with it?

Yes her shrink blew it. Big time...

And yes, with her mother being Captain, procedure was circumvented and someone who shouldn't have been carrying a gun on the street was allowed to resume normal duty status. The one good thing (the only good thing) is that in real life (at least where I work) three members of the command staff have to sign off on you before you're allowed back on the street after an "incident".

As a long time law enforcement officer the way her character's written is strictly stereotypical--she's a danger to herself and everyone around her, gunning down the man who did her wrong and (nearly) shooting another man because he wouldn't put a television set down. It's pretty much the standard for writers who don't understand what cops do--to them, anyone who wears blue is a knuckle dragging Neanderthal on a power trip. Ana Lucia fits the bill though for once the knuckle dragging Neanderthal is female. At least that part is refreshing... :rolleyes:

[Badger]

<<Has been a knuckle dragging Neanderthal for a long time. Maybe that is why I understand Ana Lucia's character. ;)

[weddo1]

What I'd like to know is where the Ana in the bar scene with Jack came from. Prior to seeing Collision, I had assumed that the Ana we see on the he island was a result of her experiences on the island. Given what had happened to her prior to boarding the plane however, what was she doing striking up a flirtatious conversation in the airport bar? Presumably, she was a fugitive (I believe this is the case even if she had not been identified as the killer and was not being actively pursued). why did she tell a total stranger her real first name? The bar scene just doesn't make sense.

[brewster]

I'm not making excuses for Ana's over the top personality, nor do I think she's charming. She's humorless and has a huge chip. She probably has father issues on top of the mother issues. Dad probably was a cop and died on duty years ago. Maybe she witnessed it. Suffered mental and/or physical trauma. Her mother probably had other men around while she grew up. She builds up a resentment there. She followed in her parents footsteps full of anger.

OR... maybe she was pretty normal prior to the shooting. What if Ana was told by a medical professional that she was incapable for some reason of getting pregnant in the first place? Some injury or whatever. So she's a cop in a relationship, on the street, responds to a call, confronts an assailant who tricks her into "letting him reach" and he shoots her 4 times. She discovers later at the hospital that she was pregnant and had miscarried.

A miracle baby killed before she even know about it.

We don't know what happened to her after she shot the guy who shot her or how long it's been, do we? Maybe she confessed, had a good lawyer, was let off by reason of insantiy, went through rehab and was released?

I'm just saying anything is possible. And I think she is redeemable, totally, and especially after she helps find the kids. Maybe she'll die saving them, huh? That make a few people happy.

The question I keep asking myself is why was she in Australia?

And I think her shrink and mother both blew it!

[drabauer]

I'm going to jump back in just to reassert what I feel is the most important point of my second post, and that has been largely ignored by respondants. I believe Ana Lucia killed Jason NOT because she thought he wouldn't receive justice, or even out of simple anger. GUILT - her own at putting her unborn child's life in danger, at going back out too early and not being able to handle the pressure, at not living up to her mother's trust in her - all of these things contributed. If Jason had gone through the courts, he might or might not have gotten a lighter sentence; I cannot imagine he would be let off lightly. But Ana would have had to deal with the situation over a long period, which she has shown she has no patience for. No patience for counseling/therapy, no patience for taking time to cool off, no patience for justice.

I don't mind arguing about the extent of her instability, but I want to keep the guilt factor prominent (btw, if I am right she certainly is not psychotic, but more likely borderline in the extreme).

[Badger]

OR... maybe she was pretty normal prior to the shooting.

I tend to think so too. Of course i'm one of the few who does. Or perhaps they let "psychotic, tyrannical bullies with no self-control" on the L.A.P.D. all the time, so you never know. :rolleyes:

We don't know what happened to her after she shot the guy who shot her or how long it's been, do we? Maybe she confessed, had a good lawyer, was let off by reason of insantiy, went through rehab and was released?

I agree, that is certainly a possibility. She seemed pretty relaxed and easily offered her real name, both first and last, to a total stranger.

The question I keep asking myself is why was she in Australia?

Maybe the real question should be: Why wasn't she in L.A.? More importantly why would she want to go back there after what had happened? Perhaps she wanted to turn herself in. ;)

[yung23]

good thread, yet, if so many LADP go through such training,
why are they the worst rated police force ?

they dont have the best rep. do they ?

[brewster]

Badger, when she met Jack at the bar, shooting one down to ease her fear of flying, she seemed otherwise happy and normal. She truly smiled a big one at Jack when she said "See you on the plane". The only other time I saw her smile was when she resuscitated Emma. Remember it?

I guess I just don't see the point in over analyzing this character when we know the writers could change her angle as we go along. Without knowing more about her back story, I think it's rather fruitless. But I guess it's fun.

To me, she's a loose cannon with good intentions. I'll leave it at that for now.

[Badger]

I do remember both scenes clearly and I think I have a pretty good handle on what the characters motivations are. We shall see.

[brewster]

I do remember both scenes clearly and I think I have a pretty good handle on what the characters motivations are. We shall see.


Fill me in. If you want to, that is. :)

[LostInWilderness]

Mile high club?

[6toedjewel]

...I believe Ana Lucia killed Jason NOT because she thought he wouldn't receive justice, or even out of simple anger. GUILT - her own at putting her unborn child's life in danger, at going back out too early and not being able to handle the pressure, at not living up to her mother's trust in her - all of these things contributed. If Jason had gone through the courts, he might or might not have gotten a lighter sentence; I cannot imagine he would be let off lightly. But Ana would have had to deal with the situation over a long period, which she has shown she has no patience for. No patience for counseling/therapy, no patience for taking time to cool off, no patience for justice.

drabauer, I am officially going to back down from the word psychotic now. And, what you have said here does make alot of sense. Although I'm not sure that I feel it is the guilt that makes her so instable and impatient. Well, perhaps on the island, but not during the killing of Jason. Though, I can admit that could be it. The way you have described her lack of patience is right on target.

Now, that I'm backing down from the word psychotic - I think she really fits more into the catagory of Compensatory Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Which, according to the following website, http://www.ptypes.com/compensatory-narpd.html (http://www.ptypes.com/compensatory-narpd.html), "is a pervasive pattern of unstable, overtly narcissistic behaviors that derive from an underlying sense of insecurity and weakness rather than from genuine feelings of self-confidence and high self-esteem." And, yes that sense of insecurity could come from guilt - I'm not sure about how I feel about that yet. I believe that Ana Lucia displays many of the personality traits as described on the link, although I'm not sure I could pick ten. The following five are a good start:

(1) seeks to create an illusion of superiority and to build up an image of high self-worth

(2) covers up a sense of inadequacy and deficiency with pseudo-arrogance and pseudo-grandiosity

(3) alternates between feelings of emptiness and deadness and states of excitement and excess energy

(4) is touchy, quick to take offense at the slightest provocation, continually anticipating attack and danger, reacting with anger and fantasies of revenge when he or she feels frustrated in his or her need for constant admiration

(5) produces (too quickly) work not up to the level of his or her abilities because of an overwhelmingly strong need for the immediate gratification of success

[Badger]

I would argue that anyone who places themselves in a high risk profession has an abundance of self-confidence and high self-esteem. In fact it's virtually a requirement. And I personnally know people who would agree with me, including psychiatrists and psychologists.

Point of fact: I never knew anyone in my former profession who lacked either, but rather quite the contrary.

[6toedjewel]

Badger, aren't you a little glad I am not going to call Ana psychotic anymore? Anyway - I would like to know your take on what drabauer said about how guilt is a major factor for Ana.

By the way, I disagree with an earlier comment that Michelle R is not a good actress. She's as good as anyone else on the show, she just has a different style.

[LostInWilderness]

Ana has low self-esteem. She's compensating. I never thought she was psychotic. I think 6toe is very close.

[Shredder]

The only psychotic behavior I see is the irrational grudge many posters on this forum have against AL. These posters have become immurred in a delusional belief system regarding the ethics, motives and morals of Ana-Lucia's actions. A sane individual would have been awakened from these delusions once exposed to the sound, objective analysis of her actions and comparisons to other, significantly less forgivable actions such as Kate or Sawyer, but our psychotic, AL hating posters remain entrenched in their delusional worlds where Sawyer and Kate are ignored or forgiven and AL is "the first unlikable character" or even completely inapplicable or scientifically incorrect insults such as "insane."

How one could defend the accusations levelled against the AL character is beyond my comprehension, because as I say they are delusions spawned from a psychotic state of mind and as such are not coherant, meaningful thoughts that correspond to anything in reality in any way.

The objective analysis has already been made, and made well, analyzing Ana's actions and then comparing them to the significantly more irrational actions by other characters.

Most species of primate, assuming they are of sound mind, would be able to grasp the fact that the Ana-Lucia character's actions are explained solely by the ordinary concept of justice found in common throughout mankind, instead of by any mental disorders or instabilities. A sense of justice is a part of a correctly functioning being and an especially strong or weak sense of justice has no known connection with mental health. On the other hand we have characters like Hurley attempting to blow up a pantry or Kate drowning a stranger to steal her identity. These actions cannot be connected to a definite rational source and are therefore far more likely to be caused by psychosis or other real mental disorder.

[Badger]

I already posted in this or another thread what I feel motivates Ana Lucia, or is now anyway. There is clearly evidence to support that hypothesis whereas feelings of guilt are subjective and we lack any real evidence to support it, or perhaps I am missing something.

By evidence I'll reiterate: she told the psychologist when he asked if the couple had moved out that yes they had and that it was too quiet, the incident with the domestic dispute where she over reacted after the baby started crying, the scene on the beach when she resuscitated Emma and then promised to get them home. The loss of her own unborn child is what I believe started it and since that time she has replaced that loss with an over zealous protective drive.

The scenes in both the psychologists office and the incident with the TV guy were again, meant as foreshadowing.

I'm sure she does feel remorse and perhaps self-pity or guilt but I don't feel that is what drove her to become a police officer or what is currently motivating her.

I am not saying there is no one who ever became a police officer because they lacked self-confidence or self-esteem because there have been. However, psychological evaluations are a part of becoming a police officer in the first place and they carefully screen for people who lack either. People can, and often do become cynical in that profession, however. Was Ana Lucia? We don't know, although she certainly is now and that is self-evident.

Everything we have seen are issues that I have had to deal with in reality, not myself per se but with others. These are common personality conflicts that must be guarded against or dealt with if need be when dealing with anyone in a high-risk profession.

Obviously, Ana Lucia still had issues due to the psychological trauma she underwent and clearly was not ready to go back on patrol. Her mother certainly recognized that and wanted to assign her to a desk job, which was obviously the logical thing to do.

When Ana Lucia then requested a transfer, her mother allowed her to go back on patrol, although in a low crime area. She may have felt that it was better to keep her around where she could monitor her rather than somewhere else where she couldn't. As a precinct Captain (in addition to being her mom), her mother exhibited a lack of leadership by relenting to Ana's pressuring. As has been said it was unrealistic for her to be back on the force in the first place, but this is a TV show and nothing is very realistic to begin with so it's rather a moot point.

We can't take what we know now and project it into the past and use it as the basis for creating a personality that we have yet to see. Until we see a flashback of what she was like prior to the shooting, which in this storyline is the defining moment in the characters life, we can't make any sort of valid judgment on what she was like at that time; nor can we determine what motivated her to become a police officer in the first place either.

[I like to listen]

Boy this is getting old.

She terminated a scumbag that had it coming.
She made a mistake and offered her life to an unworthy warrior in payment for another debt.

Grasp the code of the warrior.

Post against "The Gladiator"
or the "Braveheart"
or the "Messenger"
or the "Godfather"
or the "Platoon"
or the "The Bride" aka Kill Bill Vol 1&2
or the "Johnny Handsome"
or the High Plains Drifter"
or the "Professional"

Should I continue with a thousand more?

What's the big mystery in the understanding a Heavy or the Anti-Hero in Cinema or television???????????????

Guilt - NO-

Satisfication and revenge.

The ancient formulae for violence.

Once upon a time there were no shrinks or peanut gallery to comment on how horrible or what caused this.....

The world still turned enough, to give us Dr. Phil and Oprah!

The Ana Lucia issue does if anything polarize the posters.

I know who I do not want on my side of the Island.

That I feel is the point, aka When Worlds Collide.

Brilliant plot point for the sake of drama.

.

[Badger]

Good point and I agree. In my opinion they are setting the audience up. They will get people to loathe (or love) a character then slowly redeem them (or cause us to loathe them).

It's classic. I'll bet that once we see what Ana Lucia was like prior to the defining moment I mentioned in my last post, and possibly a heroic action by her at some future time, many if not all will like her almost as much as they currently hate her.

Nope, it wouldn't surprise me at all.

As to the show re-using or borrowing bits and pieces from the past they certainly are. Example: the one-armed man and in this case Kate on the run (The Fugitive).

This is very common and not just in Hollywood. The sum of the parts is greater than the whole. The F-117 Stealth fighter was at the time revolutionary. In reality much of it was off the shelf items and assemblies previously used on other aircraft. The landing gear for example was taken from an F-16. They quite literally did not re-invent the wheel. Programmers often re-use bits of code or even complete subroutines from previous works. Again, no need to re-invent the wheel.

This is creative talent at its best: taking characters, plots and sub-plots we have all seen before in one way or another and re-arranging them in unique and novel ways. It's not cheap, it's genius.

When I look at each character I can see parts of them I have seen before. We've all seen a Locke or Sawyer, the reluctant leader and the heroic doctor. We have all seen the villain turn hero and I think we will again.

[I like to listen]

Badger ,
Stay with that thinking, let those that would sit on the beach eating thier Dharma picnic, while spreading suntan lotion on their skin be surprised what some one with a set can accomplish.

It's about time a cannon showed up, loose cannons just need the master gunner.

.

[lostmio]

I know who I do not want on my side of the Island.
Taking this out of context and twisting it back toward the literal: If I were on that island with all its dangers and weirdness, Ana Lucia and Eko would be MY companions of choice.


Brilliant plot point for the sake of drama.

Last I checked, Lost is a drama (says so on the Emmy). It's not Dr. Phil or Oprah or a group therapy session or a Sunday School class.

[lostmio]

To me, she's a loose cannon with good intentions.

On an island full of other loose cannons, with bad or unknown intentions.

eta: Ana L. is the sole person on the island whom I'm willing to unequivocally state is not a mole.

[lostmio]

I think she really fits more into the catagory of Compensatory Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Which, according to the following website, http://www.ptypes.com/compensatory-narpd.html (http://www.ptypes.com/compensatory-narpd.html),


The fan-fiction forum is a more appropriate place to use a psuedo-psyche website to DSM a fictional character.

[drabauer]

Wow, do you people project much? This thread has gone from an analysis of a fictional character to potshots at other posters, all of whom have invested a lot of time and effort in their replies. I appreciate everyone's comments, but really, many of you are simply not reading critically, and have completely misrepresented my original intent. On the guilt issue - I am not projecting that guilt had anything to do with Ana's character prior to the incident, only afterward. My views have as much to do, ILTL with classic literature and drama as any hollow 2-D archetype of the "heavy" (those guys are classically motivated by guilt as well, revenge is never that simple). And lostmio, I agree with 6toedjewel and find her research eminently suitable for such a topic as this. Why should psychological speculation be considered "fan fiction" and not If I were on that island with all its dangers and weirdness, Ana Lucia and Eko would be MY companions of choice. ?

Stepping back from the fray, Badger and ILTL have answered my original query, which was regarding Ana Lucia's role in the narrative. You guys have simply reiterated what I wrote in the very first post. So we disagree on where the character is coming from, but not on what the hell she's doing in Lost.

And of course everything we think now is subject to change.

[lostmio]

Wow, do you people project much?
Agreed, there's been way too much of this for too long!

[Issek]

Regarding whether the loss of Ana Lucia's unborn child might make the murder she committed seem less heinous, drabauer wrote:

I can't agree here because women have traumatic miscarriages all the time, most often through no fault of their own, and with no one to blame. That to me is more of a tragedy then a woman who would put her unborn child's life at risk by remaining in the field as Ana Lucia did

I have to disagree, if you mean there is absolutely no mitigating effect. I did not and am not saying that exonerates her (we are, in a sense, her jury, and this thread is part of the deliberation process), but I, personally, have to give her some sympathy here. To do otherwise leads in the direction of "she just got what she deserved," and I'm not ready to go down that path. Would you agree that, if she did not knowingly put the child in harm's way, we should be more sympathetic to her?

I agree she has a chip on her shoulder, but that is exactly what I would expect of a small (in stature) latina female who wanted to succeed in a high risk, male dominated organization like a police department.

I haven't seen any of the Rodriguez' other roles, so have no way of comparing the Ana Lucia character to her other performances. I would say that, if her character was designed to elicit strong feelings, pro and con, in the viewers, then she has done an admirable job. Because I am so interested in some of the audience's strong antipathy to the character of Ana Lucia, I also have to wonder whether her physical appearance, certainly not classic motion picture or television star looks, has had any influence on our judgment.

Comments? (and let's keep this civil, please, it's the best thread going on the board at this time.)

Arrrr!
-

edited to delete extraneous word in first sentence.

[Badger]

I agree she has a chip on her shoulder, but that is exactly what I would expect of a small (in stature) latina female who wanted to succeed in a high risk, male dominated organization like a police department.

That statement alone is somewhat of a stereotype. Not all women who are in male dominated fields have chips on their shoulders. That much I can personally assure you.

I also have to wonder whether her physical appearance, certainly not classic motion picture or television star looks, has had any influence on our judgment.

Speaking for myself I don't judge a book (or person) by its cover, with the exception of a few college texts in the past, but I digress.

Again that is alluding to stereotypes but yes, another poster, WildCard I believe, brought it up in another thread. They mentiond the fact that some men were perhaps feeling inadequate. I tend to agree that is a distinct possibility. That is not to say you do, but rather one possible explanation.

[brewster]

First episode of the season, the writers introduce Ana as a brutal bad ass who tossed our friends, Sawyer, Mike and Jin in a pit (after Eko beat them first).

At this point we know who she is but why are both she and this "Eko" so brutal?

Opinions are formed without back story. You know what they say about first impressions.

From a cynical POV you're going to hate her until and unless she proves herself redeemable.

If you're like me, you consider the history of LOST and what has been learned so far about all of the lostaways. There's a reason behind their present behavior.

AL seemed quite jovial in Sydney. What happened besides the crash to make her so harsh? Plus I noted the rest of the group "with" her on her actions.

Next eppie it's revealed that the two strongest and most dominant Tailies are AL and Eko, both shown rescuing people. AL shows concern for all and smiles when she revives Emma. She gets along with everyone and is level headed with a calm that helped Bernard down.

There was no leader the night Eko was abducted. Next morning, Nathan tells them three other men are missing. Eko goes silent. Two weeks pass. Then nine are taken and she combats an Other who dies. The children are gone. Nobody's doing anything about it. Nobody seems capable of doing anything. Nathan is suspicious and no one remembers him on the plane. Goodwin keeps telling her to take it easy. Libby approaches AL about Nathan creeping her out and raises not an eyebrow hair when AL tells her why she's digging the pit.

THIS is when AL steps up and takes charge, like her style or not. Eko has stepped aside and she realizes if she doesn't do something soon, they all will be dead, so she throws Nathan in the pit. She, to me, is no less brutal than most cops I see on TV and in movies during interrogation.

Okay so Goodwin finishes off Nathan who he seems to know is "not a good person". She tells the Tailies "It means they found us", but I think she knew then it was Goodwin.

She insisted on going with him to find a signal. See how hesitant she was to let him use the knife? See how she got it back by pointing out the insignia?

She asks him seemingly normal questions and then, boom. She starts in on his coming from inland, dry, only ten minutes after the crash. He tells her he "heard Bernard calling from the beach". She responds, "The beach."

THAT'S when she made a face that could kill. What was it about that particular answer that made her so furious? Are we to assume the noise of the waves and the wind direction made it impossible to hear from that distance on that day? She didn't hear him until he came out of the woods and onto the beach. Or is there more to that comment?

Whatever the case, it's clear the only one thinking stratigically and clearly is Ana!

On to last week's eppie. Torrential downpours, the whispering jungle, Cindy's disappearance. The Others! Libby looks postively terrified. Then out of nowhere, Shannon appears and Ana shoots her, thinking she's an Other. Seems like it was a pretty easy mistake to make under the conditions.

Seems like anybody would lose it at this point. She's scared, desperate, guilty and now she's done what all cops are afraid of doing. Shooting an innocent person. Her past comes rushing back to her. All her anger, all her mistakes and she freaks.

She thinks Sayid's going to try to kill her and wasn't he when Eko knocked him down? Yes. Cops don't take kindly to anyone trying to kill them for whatever reason. Until Sayid was subdued, I think it was right to tie him until she knew she was safe from his wrath. Can't blame her, can you?

The big question is why wasn't she happy that there were other survivors? Why did she want to remain seperate from their first meeting with the raftees?

Even when she made the decision to find their camp, it was with a plan to procure ammo and provisions because her only prupose since Day 15 has been to rescue the kids. But you'd think by now she she'd welcome support and help. Be glad for Bernard. This is where I find her biggest flaw.

Anyway this is when we discover she took on Jason by herself and shot him 6 times. Any viewers who disliked her by this time now hate her and will use this action as evidence against her.

But I believe her actions proved she was not ready to go back to work. That she was insane at the time with grief. Same passion of a man who goes after the rapist or murderer of his wife.

It's clear AL came started out with the best intentions. The gun "triggored" something within her. I bet she hasn't held one since Jason. It brought it all back. It was her downfall.

I still say she's not psychotic at all. Damaged? Yes.

[granfestival]

Quote: I also have to wonder whether her physical appearance, certainly not classic motion picture or television star looks, has had any influence on our judgment.

Speaking for myself I don't judge a book (or person) by its cover, with the exception of a few college texts in the past, but I digress.

Actually, I make my living designing book covers, and it's surprising how often books are judged 'only' by their cover ... says a lot ... but now I digress ...

In Ana's case, though, I don't know about her "looks" so much influences the judgment against her but definitely the tough demeanor. Seems that's what people hate most about her. I'll bet when she softens, the judgment will lighten up.




*oh, why do I keep coming back to the Ana thread ... it's like the car wreck you can't look away from ...:p Anyway, carry on ...

[Issek]

Regarding my remarks on the "chip on Ana Lucia's shoulder" question, Badger wrote:

That statement alone is somewhat of a stereotype. Not all women who are in male dominated fields have chips on their shoulders. That much I can personally assure you.

I agree completely. I probably should have used the term "ambitious" instead of the chip-on-shoulder expression, and stressed that I was talking about the desire to succeed in her chosen profession, and that her success in that field (probably) would require more ambition, more struggle, than would be required of her male colleagues.

[LostInWilderness]

Actually, I make my living designing book covers, and it's surprising how often books are judged 'only' by their cover ... says a lot ... but now I digress ...

In Ana's case, though, I don't know about her "looks" so much influences the judgment against her but definitely the tough demeanor. Seems that's what people hate most about her. I'll bet when she softens, the judgment will lighten up. Every seen but unread book has been judged by it's cover. ;)

I haven't seen one person say they don't like Ana's tough demeanor - I think you made that up. The criticism of Ana has been very clear. It's her needless brutality compensating for dangerous insecurity and being a danger to ally and enemy alike that makes me want her as far away as possible. To those who want Ana on their side I ask why? Do you like dying like Shannon? Being imprisoned and starved like Nathan? Tied to a tree like Sayid? Having a gun in your face like Bernard and Libby? If that's what you like, stick with Ana. I prefer to have my group safe, not terrorized and poorly led by her.

As far as her character goes, right now she's amazingly shallow and 1 dimensional, but I see lots of potential for the character to grow, and I trust the writers will manage that well.

[Khan]

Every seen but unread book has been judged by it's cover. ;)

I haven't seen one person say they don't like Ana's tough demeanor - I think you made that up. The criticism of Ana has been very clear. It's her needless brutality compensating for dangerous insecurity and being a danger to ally and enemy alike that makes me want her as far away as possible. To those who want Ana on their side I ask why? Do you like dying like Shannon? Being imprisoned and starved like Nathan? Tied to a tree like Sayid? Having a gun in your face like Bernard and Libby? If that's what you like, stick with Ana. I prefer to have my group safe, not terrorized and poorly led by her.

As far as her character goes, right now she's amazingly shallow and 1 dimensional, but I see lots of potential for the character to grow, and I trust the writers will manage that well.
You hit the nail on the head, it's not being a tough girl, it's just sadistic. I've always felt(except for a few) if this character was closer to the original concept of a woman in her forties or a older unattactive guy people would not defend her as much.Since the writers plan to have her be an older woman it's not likely the baby she lost was part of thier storyline. The extreme dislike she has generated is making them do anything to get viewers to feel sorry for her. ML can't play anything, it seems but nasty.

[granfestival]

...I haven't seen one person say they don't like Ana's tough demeanor - I think you made that up. ...


That's a joke, right? Just checkin' cuz it seems like it is, but you never know on here ... jokes, sarcasm, puns ... they're all getting LOST on here. ;)

[Badger]

if this character was closer to the original concept of a woman in her forties or a older unattactive guy people would not defend her as much.

I would. It's that "book by its cover" thing.

[Unnamed Redshirt Number 4]

As far as her character goes, right now she's amazingly shallow and 1 dimensional, but I see lots of potential for the character to grow, and I trust the writers will manage that well.

I disagree. I think she is far from 1-dimensional. If you're interested in my thoughts on this, I started a thread in the Ana-Lucia character forum ( http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10989 ). I tried to form a thread that neither attacked nor defended her, but rather tried to examine her character's motives and complexities. I would love to get more opinions in on the subject. :)

[Navelgazer]

Definitely dangerously unstable.

The way she isolated herself from the other tailenders taking charge and refusing to listen to them - she seems to think she's still at home on a cop mission with her gun. Even ignoring Eco when he tried to get her to listen. She's lost the plot.

Even though the pregnancy thing redeemed her a bit, I think it's seriously unstable to kill someone who caused her miscarriage - especially when she could have had him prosecuted for it as he was there to ID. Sawyer killing someone he thought he knew caused his parents death therefore ruining the rest of his life and having hunted him his whole life doesn't compare, it was a sad mistake. AL was a cop, she had responsibilities and shouldn't have been out for herself or shooting anyone.

Now she's killed Shannon it should take at least as long for anyone to accept her as it did for them to accept Sawyer, which is about 7 episodes. By the time she's hopefully been given evils for a few weeks, and not seen much of on screen, she might be able to sort her head out and show some respect.

Then Sayid should shoot her.

[wickedsweet]

Then Sayid should shoot her.

:spit: :rotfl::rotfl:

[6toedjewel]

I highly recommend Unnamed Redshirt Number 4's thread. It certainly gives a different perspective intelligently and in depth on Ana's character with a definite lean towards compassion for her.

I think I prefer to continue discussion in drabauer's thread for now as I find it more along my style of entertainment.

Unfortunately, there is such an amazing amount of animosity on both sides of the Ana Lucia debate that it is getting difficult to enjoy what is supposed to be entertainment on this board because so many people have been offended by personal attacks of other posters in regard to their opinion about the Ana Lucia character. The fact is, we do not all agree and we don't need to agree. And, I'm certainly glad I have a thread where I can go (for the most part) and find others who write in ways that are interesting and entertaining to me even when I don’t agree with them.

For those who do not find certain opinions entertaining or worth discussing on this thread, I suggest you go to unnamed redshirt's thread. Reading this person's essay is like settling down in an easy chair and sipping a nice cool margarita. She has talent.

[Khan]

I highly recommend Unnamed Redshirt Number 4's thread. It certainly gives a different perspective intelligently and in depth on Ana's character with a definite lean towards compassion for her.

I think I prefer to continue discussion in drabauer's thread for now as I find it more along my style of entertainment.

Unfortunately, there is such an amazing amount of animosity on both sides of the Ana Lucia debate that it is getting difficult to enjoy what is supposed to be entertainment on this board because so many people have been offended by personal attacks of other posters in regard to their opinion about the Ana Lucia character. The fact is, we do not all agree and we don't need to agree. And, I'm certainly glad I have a thread where I can go (for the most part) and find others who write in ways that are interesting and entertaining to me even when I don’t agree with them.

For those who do not find certain opinions entertaining or worth discussing on this thread, I suggest you go to unnamed redshirt's thread. Reading this person's essay is like settling down in an easy chair and sipping a nice cool margarita. She has talent.
I try to avoid personal attacks on other posters so I know what you're talking about. Unnamed Redshirt Numder 4 and I go head to head about AnaL a lot, but I would'nt say anything bad about her. In fact I think she's a great addition to this board. I won't even use Anal when replying to her posts. These are characters,we're not, they don't feel things, we do. So it's nice when we can battle without being nasty to each other. I think this character causes so much trouble because for many she's too abusive that it's ruining the show for them. It's probably just frustration with the lack of favorites and AnaL now being the shows center.

[I like to listen]

Dr. B stated;

My views have as much to do, ILTL with classic literature and drama as any hollow 2-D archetype of the "heavy" (those guys are classically motivated by guilt as well, revenge is never that simple).


Classic literature is a given in your theories, that is just one thing you bring to the table.:)
But "hollow 2-D archetype" is an opinion that contests only the "hollow 2-D archetype" of the Heavy. There are other flavors of heavies in cinema and television. It is the pistachio, the mustard, and Tofu Heavy that are just as valid to a discussion as any "needs to be translated from Greek" antagonist one could project into a premise or reply.

What is a Heavy?
A mindless thug.
Someone that has overcoming inertia.
Someone that has presence.
Someone only 2-D and an antagonist.

It depends on the definition one could use to decribe this type of role.

Broadcast television (except PBS) is more congruent to cinema than to the written classics in context and maybe even content. But I understand everything is a copy of a copy of a copy....traced to the classics.
But there still leaves context for the content no matter the source.

As Cinema, Television projects. So why discount the visaul/audio syntax that the medium provides. Hence my examples derived from cinema.

Maybe in some cases, Lost does not need to be viewed in the microscope of the classics when a lifetime of the violence sits in the room with us each day. Just a thought concerning the unhollow 2-D archetypes of Heavies on the news, sports, drama series, reality series, court tv.. etc to consider as the world turns.

Let me expound on the visual syntax and my reading of the assassination of the assaliant.

Ana waited to he left the bar. She had a belt and thought about the last words he would hear on earth. She relished in the fact that she had control of the situation, because he never knew it was coming. He was an idiot that took his own life for granted because he knew he was guilty, caught and released. So what does he do, what he always does as smirking creep. He doesn't leave the country or beg forgiveness or confess, he goes to his haunt.
He is easily found. He doesn't even recognize the person he tried to destroy.

She confronts him in the open, risking discovery, triple taps him and turns cool and collected to see if Fate has discovered her actions via a witness.
Nope
One can assume that three to the heart is enough, but she walks over to tempt fate and gain satisfaction of her actions by putting 3 more in his head.

Maybe it was 3 in the heart for her child and 3 in the head for herself.
But she killed him twice at least.

Now we get to guilt- What Should she have done normal(?) or abnormal(?) if she lost her baby by trying to earn a living to satisfy her supposed guilt ?

Become a Girl Scout leader?
Join a support group?
Confess to God?
Send money to save The Children?
Build a time machine so it never happens?

If any of these things happened above would the ant-Lucia faction like her any less?

Or is the contention that the guilt grew until she had an ephinay after killing Shannon and that her death would absolve/silence her guilt?

Does it matter if she felt guilt or joy before her assailant's death as it concerns Shannon?

I doubt we will ever see a FB of A.L. going to her assailant's house and offering up her life in return as she did to Sayid. Because it probably didn't happen.

I do not know anyone else feelings, but my guilt gows.
IMO, If guilt were the issue concerning her unborn and then added burden after the revenge she took, then it would of manifested in a different way before she reached the island.

Shannon's death was an unjust slaying in her mind, hence she owed a debt.

Same rule.
An eye for an eye, along with additional despair, caused her request for own execution.

That was the debt she was paying to Sayid- no other other guilt before needed in the A.L. motivational formula--IMO.

I hope this clarifies my past post.

.Eta- for spelling errors.

[spooky]

I think I understand where you're coming from, ILTL. A heavy or anti-hero is of course a story-telling staple, whatever the medium, and however many dimensions the heavy occupies; and I don't really think Ana needs medication. Your reading of the Ana scene in the bar is great. But I don't think it negates that she feels guilt about killing Jason or Shannon, or proves that her rash actions on the island are categorically different than her actions in her FB. We see her both misunderstanding the intentions of "suspects," and mis-using her authority and power, both on and off the island. Sayid says all she has is her guilt and her gun; and I'm inclined to believe him. She may have felt justified in killing Jason, but it's doubtful she had a clear conscience given that she's a cop, her mother is Captain, and Jason was previously in custody.

The main problem I see with your argument about "the heavy" is that someone like The Bride lives in a sort of subculture where revenge is seen as somehow noble -- there's never going to be a cop that takes Bill into custody, or a law that makes him pay for his crimes. Revenge Is justice. They're outside the law, in their story world. But Ana, as a cop in the Lost story world, has essentially promised that she won't use her authority and power in the service of her own personal emotions or gain, but rather in the service of the larger society she protects. I'm not sure about all the movies you suggested as examples, but I don't think they include cops. The only movie with a "heavy" cop I can think of the top of my head is Dirty Harry. And while there may be a sort of cathartic pleasure at hearing, "Do you feel lucky, punk," I think the movie is asking a similar question as Lost: is it okay for a cop to breach the social contract he/she's explicitly entered into re: upholding law and order, even if he/she might be justified on a purely emotional level?

If this was a drama about Ana-Lucia and her personal demons, I might be more inclined to put her in the "heavy" role and let her past play out like taffy. But Lost inherently is about society building, whether it likes it or not, so when Eko talks about revenge and justice in Ana's FB episode I have to give that a lot of weight in terms of Ana's actions both on the island and in the past. We're not supposed to cheer when she shoots the bad guy, imo. We're supposed to wonder how, and if, law and order can function on an island with so many dysfunctional people. Especially, when the people supposedly with the skills to be "leaders" are so emotional and sometimes out of control. Thus, the shot of Ana and Jack gazing at each other in recognition, yet in a sort of Western stand-off position as the last shot of the episode -- implying a tension between their similarities and differences. I think Jack's about to get his mind blown. Again. And, of course, Ana will eventually be redeemed, though we may secretly hate her for it.

[Badger]

Very well said, Spooky. Very well indeed. You mentioned several things things that I have touched on in my other posts.

You said "revenge is justice". I realize you were referring to the comic book world of Kill Bill of course but that is the essence of why Ana Lucia killed Jason. She wanted to exact her own revenge, and in her mind, insure justice. To put it bluntly she had the resolve to do what many people claim they would do, or would want to do. However, most people would not or even entertain the thought of doing what she did.

The point being: it is that resolve, that sheer determination of will, that is the basis, the raw material for being a great leader. Not merely good, but great.

Yes, she is obviously traumatized and in my opinion acting out of a need to protect children as a result of what happened to her. This was pointed out several times and used as foreshadowing.

[merry slug]

Drabauer, I also tried to start a thread that looked at AL objectively ("What has Anna done right?"). It looks like you've had more success than I, altho emotions seem to inevitably get in the way ;).

As LIW points out, she's a polarizing character - I wonder if TPTB are aware/pleased they've generated so much discussion...?

[I like to listen]

Spooky and Badger,

Nice points in both posts.
The Kill Bill example was to be a reference to someone bad that is rooted for anyway when conducting less than humane actions against the less then humane.

I think though that a clue such a Tabula Rasa as the first title may imply that the social contract is a blank slate much as baby has a blank slate at birth.

A libertarian contract would be different then socialist contract or another divergent governing structure of law.
It is safe to say those with power make the laws in the real world.
As we know this power can be obtained many ways and takes many shapes now and in history.

Suppose the social contract on Craphole Island will be formed the same way. By those with the power.

Who exibits the power on the island ?

Do the morals and laws of Iowa, Chile, China or the LA PD need apply.
Even in a world where feet have trodden in front of every governing hut or place of worship a million times in community, strife still abounds.
The real world is less then perfect and it has had time to sort out community.
The island is beyond less then perfect, it is insane.

IMO different social contract, different leadership.

Maybe that is why we now have a renegades from law and order, yet care.
Maybe that is why some speak of faith yet do not pray.

Maybe that is why imposing any comparison of what is right in theory does not seem to work on an Island so wrong.

That said why change the blank slate.

What was Rosseu's social contract or Desmonds?

Maybe that is clue for how to survive the place. Seperate yourselves. Be alone.

If the Others are bad.
They are also a group.
Alone has no Other.
Equals Survive.

.

[Warthawg1]

My problem with Ana Lucia is she is proving to be the exact sterotypical Michelle Rodriquez character we all feared. Her sometimes irrational behavior has been badly written, and her tough girl stuff is over the top imho.

She single handedly made me not like this past episode. I thought her deciding to run off into the jungle by herself was a stupid and poorly written notion, and I thought her interaction with Sayid seemed forced and unnatural.

I also think that having a mom as her police boss, and being put back on the force was completely unbelievable. I hope I didn't hijack the thread from it's intended direction, but I really have little else to say about Michelle, or the character of Ana. I suppose they were trying to make her season two's version of season one Sawyer, but little of what they have tried to do with her character has worked for me.

[merry slug]

Wart, as always you're a beacon of logic on a dark tumultuous sea of roller-coaster emotions. :tree:

[Warthawg1]

You're too kind MSlug

[Khan]

If this was a drama about Ana-Lucia and her personal demons, I might be more inclined to put her in the "heavy" role and let her past play out like taffy. But Lost inherently is about society building, whether it likes it or not, so when Eko talks about revenge and justice in Ana's FB episode I have to give that a lot of weight in terms of Ana's actions both on the island and in the past. We're not supposed to cheer when she shoots the bad guy, imo. We're supposed to wonder how, and if, law and order can function on an island with so many dysfunctional people. Especially, when the people supposedly with the skills to be "leaders" are so emotional and sometimes out of control. Thus, the shot of Ana and Jack gazing at each other in recognition, yet in a sort of Western stand-off position as the last shot of the episode -- implying a tension between their similarities and differences. I think Jack's about to get his mind blown. Again. And, of course, Ana will eventually be redeemed, though we may secretly hate her for it.
Society building is going to very important if they continue to make this about a group of people who have no choice but to live together to survive.
I've been waiting for them to face the situation of one of thier own being dangerous. Without set laws and a system of enforcement everyone is at risk from the person who lets his/her true self run free. Look what happened to the people in the dome during hurricane Katrina ,rapes and murders. The castaways are even more at risk because the leadership has not dealt with the realities they face. It's ironic that the most dangerous(not counting the Others) would be in law enforcement.

[Unnamed Redshirt Number 4]

For those who do not find certain opinions entertaining or worth discussing on this thread, I suggest you go to unnamed redshirt's thread. Reading this person's essay is like settling down in an easy chair and sipping a nice cool margarita. She has talent.

:awwhug: Talk about a confidence booster! Thanks 6toedjewel!

[merry slug]

:awwhug: Talk about a confidence booster! Thanks 6toedjewel!

What's the name of this thread?

[Unnamed Redshirt Number 4]

What's the name of this thread?

"Ana-Lucia is not a two-dimensional "tough chick,"" of course, I'm in the process of trying to get it renamed to "Ana-Lucia Character Analysis." The link is here. http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10989

ETA: Done. I think you can do it yourself by double-clicking in the dead space to the right of the title. -LIW

ETA (Redshirt): Thanks LIW!

[Unnamed Redshirt Number 4]

You can't this is Dr Bauer's thread

merry slug asked for the name of my thread. The non-judgemental Ana-Lucia analysis thread. Just thought I'd get the link out (since we were talking about it) so that we wouldn't hijack any more of this one.

[spooky]

LIW[/B] points out, she's a polarizing character - I wonder if TPTB are aware/pleased they've generated so much discussion...?
I didn't even realize until today how emotional people were getting about her. I don't really find her compelling enough to like or dislike that much. Like Warthawg says, the character seems too formulaic, and her story too predictable. I was seriously hoping she would run off by herself, though. Not because I hate her, but because she's boring so far. I kinda hope she does become completely unhinged, that would be surprising and cause some good drama.

[LostInWilderness]

I pretty much agree Spooky, but Ana killed Shannon, and that was very emotional for a lot of people. TPTB did everything they could to make her hated, but like you, I think she's just too shallow to be that interesting. I think this will change.

Even though I don't the find the character very interesting right now, the debate sure is. ;) I also think she will shake up the stale Jack/Kate/Locke dynamic which is a good thing for the show.

[Issek]

The thing that has fascinated me about the character of Ana Lucia, almost since it was known she would become a regular on LOST, is the reaction to her (and, to some extent, to the actress that plays her) on this board. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve enjoyed the story, too, but the real action is right here. To begin, I was surprised at the intensity with which many posters expressed their dislike of Ana Lucia. When she shot Shannon (whom I remember being quite unpopular in this forum, at least until Boone’s death) the virulence increased, then when her backstory was shown, the words posters used in some of the threads practically etched themselves into my monitor with their virulence. I don’t think any other character on the program can boast a psycho-scatological nickname (or is it scato-psychological?). The ‘B’ word was used abundantly. It was almost as if posters felt they could justify the depth of their dislike for Ana Lucia by the viciousness of their responses here. They cited examples of Ana Lucia’s depravity to justify their positions. When other posters pointed out that other characters on LOST had acted just as wrongly as Ana Lucia, and with less provocation, the posters – on both sides of the like/dislike Ana Lucia divide – started resorting to personalities.

Amazing, I thought, as far as I’m concerned, likes and dislikes are a matter of personal taste and no one has to justify their tastes to anyone. If you don’t like the character of Ana Lucia, say so. If you think Michelle Rodriguez is a terrible actress, say so. If you state, however, that your dislikes or likes have a rational foundation, it is irrational to call into question the IQ/ancestry/whatever of someone who would debate you about that foundation. Pointing out contrary examples to show how maligned Ana Lucia has been should be done just as civilly. I felt, and still feel, that something beyond mere dislike or like is going on here. I can’t even speculate about what that something is, yet. I’ve thrown out a few possibilities, all roundly denied. I hope the discussion continues so we can try to figure some of this out.

I personally feel that Ana Lucia and the rest of the tailenders have been good for the show. I think that the writers were brilliant to end the FB showing her murder of Jason (hope that’s the right name) where they did. They could not have stirred up more interest in her than they have done. (I have in mind a resolution to that FB that I think would be brilliant, but this isn’t the place for fan fiction, I’ll just say I will be interested to see Ana Lucia’s first encounter with Hurley). If I’m wrong, and she turns out to be a horrible, ratings-crashing-through-the-floorboards, mistake, I’ll admit that without a problem, also.

[LostInWilderness]

I agree that people started polarizing when Michelle Rodriquez showed up. To this day I have no idea who she is, so it doesn't bother me one bit.

[Badger]

I felt, and still feel, that something beyond mere dislike or like is going on here. I can’t even speculate about what that something is, yet.

Perhaps for the same reason many people are often so adamant in believing their home team is superior to the visiting team.

As viewers we have in effect adopted the fusiliers as "our team" and like them some feel as attached to them and their plight as though they were living with them. Now they have introduced another group who, to the viewers, are strangers who we have not come to know nearly as well. They are the visiting team and the animosity shows. Particularly where one of the visiting team for whatever reason stands out more than any of the home team players. And in the case of Ana Lucia nobody stands out more, whether or not they are seen as good or bad.

[drabauer]

I wish I could be as sanguine as you Issek about the decision to add this character at this time. Not only the boards but many critics are second-guessing the character and the decision to focus so much time on her. Of course, time will tell. I wish I could answer your query as to why the character/actress has stirred up so much enmity (apparently my earlier attempts weren't what you were looking for). I hesitate to see it, but there is a diva love/hate culture out there, the Dynasty-loving fan looking for the sexy powerful woman's downfall. But I really don't want to play the gender card, or anything else. I think it's a combination of typecasting, a protective feeling about "our" castaways, and the inkling that all fans had, long before spoilers, that one of our own would bite it at the hands of the new character.

[Badger]

I believe gender definitely plays a part. Gender has often played a key role in an audiences like or dislike for a particular character depending on how that character was portrayed.

In the case of Ana Lucia she is not seen as the 'norm' for her gender. And because of this it will, and did, evoke stronger emotions, especially since she killed one of "our" people.

[LostInWilderness]

They are the visiting team and the animosity shows. Particularly where one of the visiting team for whatever reason stands out more than any of the home team players. And in the case of Ana Lucia nobody stands out more, whether or not they are seen as good or bad.
The first time we saw Ana on the island, she doublecrossed our lostaways. She continually, needlessly brutalized wounded Sawyer and bullied everyone else. And her decisions and actions went downhill from there. She showed a pattern of needless, sadistic brutality to our lostaways, she threatened and endangered her own group, she murdered a man in cold blood, and she killed Shannon. Her actions themselves are more than enough to account for people's dislike. There doesn't need to be any additional reason.

And no lostaway has a comparable poor record. Some of them have done 1 terrible thing Ana did, but nobody has done anywhere near all the terrible things she did. Kate doesn't constantly bully and brutalize the lostaways. She hasn't killed any. Sawyer doesn't constantly brutalize the lostaways, and he hasn't killed any. Sayid hasn't killed or shown a pattern of brutalizing the lostaways. And he showed remorse for torturing Sawyer, and paid the price at Danielle's hands, something Ana has yet to do. When Boone died, plenty of people became Locke haters, but he sure as hell didn't shoot Boone in the chest. There is no valid comparison for Ana to any other lostaway. Drabauer did a wonderful job of pointing that out.

The writers rehabilitated Sawyer and Jin. I expect they'll do the same with Ana, but they set the bar a hell of a lot higher this time.

[Badger]

No Lostaway has a comparable record?

You don't call Charlie executing a guy brutal? nevermind the fact he was in captivity and being held at gunpoint or may have been an Other. You don't call Sayid and Jack torturing Sawyer brutal? You don't call Sawyer executing the WRONG GUY brutal? As if that would have made any difference.

No valid comparison my a$$! Oh, wait, none of them were women, that's right.

No, they didn't do any of those things repeatedly and hence no "pattern" of said behavior. However, the fact remains they did do them. If Ana Lucia had done only ONE of those things I doubt feelings toward her would be significantly different than they are now. But of course that is pure speculation and something nobody in this forum EVER does.

The fact she is a police officer and happens to be a woman certainly plays into some peoples perception of how they feel she should act, whether they realize it or not. If anyone thinks gender has no bearing whatsoever on how a character, or even a real person for that matter is perceived, they are sorely mistaken.

I am not claiming it is the sole reason some people feel about her the way they do, I am saying it is most certainly part of the reason. To deny it, is to deny human nature and specifically how gender plays into the psychology of ones perception and often what are stereotypical beliefs.

I agree that they will attempt to redeem the character Ana Lucia. In fact I believe they are setting her up as a villain simply for this reason. I'll put it this way: a lot of people may be eating crow at some point. I hope they like it.

[6toedjewel]

On the guilt issue - I am not projecting that guilt had anything to do with Ana's character prior to the incident, only afterward.

Okay, I'm not sure why I am so stubborn sometimes, but of course you are probably right on about Ana's guilt.

You know, what is tricky about the Ana Lucia character for me is the way they presented her. At first I liked her. I thought she was strong and loved it that she was not a stereotypical woman. I also forecasted in my own mind that when her flashbacks were aired the audience would then be able to forgive her for the Sawyer beatings, and shooting Shannon. I thought that because the writers have always had a way of redeeming the abrasive characters through their flashbacks. But Ana's flashback with Jason had the opposite effect on many - not just me. And those who didn't like her to begin with, disliked her more. For those who say this is the writer's intention, I have to agree.

I see a curious and intentional change in the writers MO. First she is seen sweet and seemingly normal at the airport bar with Jack, then we see her beating Sawyer in another episode. The next episode she's in, however she is both abrasive and endearing IMO, because she is trying so hard to protect the tallies and lead them to safety, so when she shot Shannon I figured we see some twist that would help us forgive Ana in the next epi. I thought - wait for a flashback with her - that's where we'll begin to really understand her... And then she is shown shooting Jason over and over (because he caused her to miscarry) in a FB. And so here, not only do we have a reason to be disgusted with her but we also have a reason to pity her all within a few seconds of time. What are the writers trying to do? Ana's likeability and abrasiveness is "unstable" every time I see her. That flip-flopping of a likeable Ana to an unlikable Ana is probably, IMO to get the audience into the "unstable" vibe with her character.

In the future, will they redeem her just to show her in another scene where she has more blood on her hands? In one scene will she be a heroine and in another a villain and continue this type of endless loop showing Ana Lucia's likeable and unlikable traits without resolution? Its like listening to a song where the style changes drastically from rock in one stanza to a fox trot rhythm in the next, then an endless loop of the two until it fades out. That style of writing is not only making Ana seem unstable but is helping the viewers experience that instability. That type of writing might be innovative and brilliant from an artistic standpoint. - but, I’m not sure I will like it if they do that to us forever.

[Badger]

I thought - wait for a flashback with her - that's where we'll begin to really understand her.

In my mind at least it did help me to understand her. I now know what motivates her and more specifically what the stimulus is that triggers some of her actions.

[boonian androphile]

The primary differences that I see between Ana Lucia and the Lostians are 1) Ana Lucia's newness does take time away from characters to whom we have developed varying degrees of loyalty, and, more importantly, 2) the way that her character has been written, there has been no opportunity for nuance, so that we dont see a balance between the hard-edge decision maker and a more human AL. All the first years have been given an opportunity to show their human side, to evolve to some extent out of character traits that we dont find admirable. AL really has not. The writing above all else is responsible for this dilemma. AL and her peers have been so chronologically condensed that AL's roughness especially slaps us in the face. Look at the interesting but ultimately flawed tale of the Tailenders. I like the staccato presentation as such, but in the end we see snapshots when we should see paintings. True, their days were ultimately more harrowing, but the AL-Eko moment of compassionate intimacy hinted at how some of the Tailenders time was spent---talking not fighting. We needed more of that. In terms of the Tailend side of the island, we never really got that opportunity for subtlety and slow motion that the pacing of the Lostians were awarded. But now all are reunited. And presumably we shall see threads and motifs drawn out over a period of time. But at what cost? We basically end up seeing the general story line of season 1 replayed in season 2. What we really want is a newer story, not the same story repeated. And of course Shannon's death stands out one of the two biggest blunders of the year. Adrift is of course the other. At least Boone's death made more sense in the overall fabric of season 1. And no season 1 episode really has inspired more ire than Adrift. At least from me.

[Badger]

I read an article the other day that can somewhat explain the psychology of why Ana Lucia mistakenly shot Shannon.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051127/ap_on_re_us/armed_off_duty

Here are a couple quotes from the article:

"According to the FBI, 43 police officers have been killed since 1987 by friendly fire. Some were caught in crossfire, or killed by firearms mishaps. A handful, like Young, were mistaken for criminals and shot by fellow officers."

"Threatened officers instinctively focus on the perceived threat and tune out other information that could be crucial to split-second decision making, Klinger said. That's why it's important to have protocols in place to identify each other, he said."

What protocols were in place on the island that could have prevented Shannon's death? None. Ana Lucia acted in the belief she and her group were in imminent danger, just like the officers noted above did.

[I like to listen]

So many divergent yet thoughtful views on the subject of Ana.

All valid points.

To finish the sentence "Time will tell ...." I'll add - who was right.

Let me say, IMO 50% is in bonnian's post. It shines of wisdom by avoiding content of the Ana story for context of the problem in LOST fandom.

I like the staccato presentation as such, but in the end we see snapshots when we should see paintings.

IMO, brilliant analogy, and post.:thumbs_up

But as far as content of the Ana character please defer to the most humble posts understanding her motivation as Ana, aka "The ones who support her and can expliain her motivation." :wizard: ;) There is the other 50%.

Of course, "time will tell if we were wrong"


************************************************** **
Note to self - Start a club called "Proud to be Polarized, the group that sees it clear"

Everyone can join.:celebrate

.

[merry slug]

I was seriously hoping she would run off by herself, though. Not because I hate her, but because she's boring so far.

Exactly, Spooky - this was my first impression of her choice to leave, also (thanks for reminding me)

I guess I'm just ready for some episodes that have little or nothing to do with her.

[wickedsweet]

BADGER SAID
In the case of Ana Lucia she is not seen as the 'norm' for her gender

6TOEDJEWEL SAID
I thought she was strong and loved it that she was not a stereotypical woman.

Could either of you explain to me what the "norm" or a "sterotypical" woman means in this day and age? I have to say that I beleive women have become as diverse as men and that for the most part this has been seen in entertainment as well. In fact if anything I think that the "strong kickbutt" female has become as normal in TV and movies as the more "traditional" woman portrayed as a stay at home weakling who needs a man for protection type that had once been considered the "norm".

6toedjewel I realize you weren't making the people don't like Ana because she's tough argument so my defense against that idea isn't geared towards you but to those who seem to think the dislike of Ana is based in part because of her gender.

I really find the argument that people don't like Ana because she's a "tough" woman to be insulting. There are so many ideas of strong women in entertainment that people love, from Sidney on Alias to the women of Law & Order and C.S.I., to Lara Croft and so on, that I think this argument just doesn't hold water.

IMHO Ana would be just as vile were she a man.

[Ida Monster]

Hi everyone.

I'm happy to see that there can be some rational discussion about the character of Ana Lucia without all the extreme, relenting hate/love I've seen in other recent posts. Watching the closing scene of "Collision" where Jack and Ana are facing each other had me thinking about how, where, or if Ana will ever fit in with the main group of survivors. She's so guilt-ridden, depressed and past the point of caring anymore that she's past the point of wanting to be dead, she feels as though she already is. At present, she is the single most tortured soul on the island. Will she ever come about? Will she have to worry about retribution from Sayid if she ever does? Will she always be viewed as an outcast because of her actions? Most likely, by at least some of the survivors. She will need to make a decision on how and where to survive based on acceptance by the group.

This brings me to one speculation that the writers might be setting her up to become like another Danielle Rosseau, if not replacing her. Both of the characters lost a child. In a way, both killed other members of their "team", Rosseau, reluctantly and Ana accidentally, both remorsefully. I wouldn't doubt it if she grabbed one of the rifles and ammo from the Swan hatch and trudged off alone into the jungle to live alone in a dug out shelter.

Pathos makes great theatre.

[Badger]

Could either of you explain to me what the "norm" or a "sterotypical" woman means in this day and age?

It's a matter of both perception and statistics. Note that at no time have I ever said I feel women should not be allowed to, or are incapable of performing, what have historically been and are still considered 'male dominated professions', that it is wrong, or that I do not support it. In fact quite the contrary as I will show shortly.

Perceptually speaking many, if not most people, consider it out of the ordinary for women to be in certain fields. That is not a sexist remark! It's a fact. For example, female police officers while commonplace are still not the statistical 'norm'. There is a much greater percentage of male vs. female police officers.

I championed allowing qualified women in combat roles, specifically fighter aircraft, within the USAF and one of my own daughters happens to be one today.

Given this fact I will say it again: make no mistake, I was in no way claiming women are not capable of performing equally well in what were and still are considered male dominated professions, just that it has never been and is not to this day considered the 'norm'. That is all.

[Badger]

As to whether or not Ana Lucia will grab a weapon and ammo along with a pair of jeans, all of which she demanded and traipse off into the jungle to live like a hermit, akin to Danielle, I don’t think so.

I find it difficult to imagine they would have cast Michelle Rodriguez only to have to disappear and then make only the occasional cameo appearance. I am not claiming Mia Furlan is not a good actress but that she is perhaps not as well known or as recognizable as Ms Rodriguez.

I feel she may have some difficulty integrating with the castaways although that could lead to conflict, which in my opinion is probably what TPTB want. The mere fact the character is getting as much attention as she is has to effect how the creative team views her role. I believe they want conflict as it gets people talking about the character and therefore the show itself, not that people don’t already but the more the merrier so to speak.

She may live somewhat segregated from the main group, perhaps in her own shelter only intermingling when necessary but no, I don’t feel she will vanish into the jungle.

[wickedsweet]

Note that at no time have I ever said I feel women should not be allowed to, or are incapable of performing, what have historically been and are still considered 'male dominated professions',

I never took it that way. I'm just not sure what the sterotypical idea of a normal woman is today.

Perceptually speaking many, if not most people, consider it out of the ordinary for women to be in certain fields. That is not a sexist remark! It's a fact. For example, female police officers while commonplace are still not the statistical 'norm'.

While it may not be the norm it certainly isn't shocking or groundbreaking for a woman to be a PO. I don't think anyone looks at a female PO and thinks Wow, how'd that happen.

I was in no way claiming women are not capable of performing equally well in what were and still are considered male dominated professions, just that it has never been and is not to this day considered the 'norm'

Maybe it's a matter of generation but with the exception of professional sports, and thank God that's changing as well, I don't think anyone's surprised to find a woman working in any field now, even if it is a tradionally male career.

All that aside, I still hold that Ana being female has little to do with wether or not people agree or disagree with her actions and how they fit into LOST.

[Badger]

I never claimed it was surprising or that one would be surprised to see a female police officer for example, just that it was not the 'norm', and it isn't. That is an indisputable fact.

[Jessica Fletcher]

She continually, needlessly brutalized wounded Sawyer and bullied everyone else.

And couldn't you see how Sawyer got all turned on everytime AL treated him badly? :D
Are we seeing different versions of the show?

[Badger]

All that aside, I still hold that Ana being female has little to do with wether or not people agree or disagree with her actions and how they fit into LOST.

Please see my post #133 above before reading the following....


A characters gender absolutely has an effect on how the audience perceives and reacts to the characters actions and reactions. You can dispute this all you want but the fact remains gender bias and perceptions definitely have an effect on the audience. Any filmmaker will tell you this.

If the character currently portrayed by Michelle Rodriguez were a male they may be hated just as much, but the overall expectation would be different.

[6toedjewel]

Something stereotypical is a conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image. One that is regarded as embodying or conforming to a set image or type. If I were characterizing by a stereotype I could say that : “Elderly American women are stereotyped by blue hair and polyester clothes.” It isn’t even true for the majority, but it conjures up a stereotypical image.

Ana does not conjure a stereotypical image – unless the underlying message is that women should not be in the police force because they are hysterical when confronted with dangerous situations. That would be stereotypical. Let me be clear – I do NOT like stereotyping. Do I think Ana was hysterical when she shot Jason? No, obviously she did not behave in the hysterical stereotype. She was quite collected when she did what she did. But, in another scene where she held an unarmed man at gunpoint for stealing his girlfriends TV, that was almost sterotypical.

In stereotyping, NOT in my opinion, men are leaders – not women. I was glad to see Ana was not going to be stereotyped in that sense. That is what I was saying. I agree with Badger also:

It's a matter of both perception and statistics. Note that at no time have I ever said I feel women should not be allowed to, or are incapable of performing, what have historically been and are still considered 'male dominated professions'
and

Given this fact I will say it again: make no mistake, I was in no way claiming women are not capable of performing equally well in what were and still are considered male dominated professions, just that it has never been and is not to this day considered the 'norm'. That is all.

Edited to add: I also, do not want to be sterotyped as an Ana hater just because I think the character is unstable.

[Badger]

No, obviously she did not behave in the hysterical stereotype. She was quite collected when she did what she did. But, in another scene where she held an unarmed man at gunpoint for stealing his girlfriends TV, that was almost sterotypical.

There are two independent thoughts here. I will address each seperately.

The "hysterical stereotype" in my opinion doesn't really exist. For that reason I don't consider it a stereotype at all. There have been documented instances, and in some cases caught on video, of people quite literally executing those who had killed loved ones for example. At no time did any of them appear to be acting in a hysterical manner. I'm not saying it doesn't or has never happened, just that I have never seen it. Therefore I am not sure it is really a stereotype.

The fact is most are emotionally drained and as Ana Lucia put it "I'm already dead". They often act in a purposeful, calculated fashion and are not at all hysterical. I guess that would be the stereotype if one exists.

Ana Lucia's overreaction to the TV guy was as a result of the baby crying which in my opinion acted as the stimulus for it. That is not a stereotype either but rather the result of psychological trauma. I have personnally witnessed people react adversely to stimuli as the result of psychologically traumatic events.

Do all people who suffer from PTSD for instance react adversely to stimuli that reminds them of what traumatized them?, no. But I wouldn't call it a stereotype if they did.

Edited to add: I also, do not want to be sterotyped as an Ana hater just because I think the character is unstable.

I like the character Ana Lucia and am not an Ana hater whatsoever, quite the contrary, although I agree that she is psychologically unstable.

[wickedsweet]

A characters gender absolutely has an effect on how the audience perceives and reacts to the characters actions and reactions. You can dispute this all you want but the fact remains gender bias and perceptions definitely have an effect on the audience. Any filmmaker will tell you this.

All I can say is that in this case, Ana being female does not influence why I like or dislike her or what my expectations of her behavior are.



Something stereotypical is a conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image

I understand what a sterotype is. I do not know what a sterotypical woman is.

Ana does not conjure a stereotypical image

What sterotypical image would that be?There could be countless different steeotypes to which your reffering, which are you speaking of particuraly?

Perhaps I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the she's being judged so harshly because she's a woman debate because I expect people to make decision or take action based on their experience and temperment and not because of their gender, I no more expect a woman to behave a certain way or be a certain profession than I would a man nor fault them for their choices because something is expected of their gender, because I don't expect any certain behaviour from either gender nor do I personally know many people who would. The argument is some what foreign to me.

[Badger]

All I can say is that in this case, Ana being female does not influence why I like or dislike her or what my expectations of her behavior are.

Da Nile is not only a river in Africa. ;)

You say that but I am not sure you're really aware of your perceptions. That might sound absurd, as in how can I claim to know what you perceive. The point is: Ana is not a male and therefore you can only claim you would not think differently if the character were a male, but you can't truly know that.

You may hate anyone who acts the same as Ana did. However, gender has other, often more subtle effects on ones perception of them.

It's human nature to perceive genders somewhat differently given the same or similar situations.

[Warthawg1]

I think what is going on here is the stereotypical previous roles Michelle Rodriquez has played. The moment she was announced as joining, many noted she had played the exact same bad ass woman in everythng she h ad ever been in, and then when she showed up; she was the exact same stereotypical bad ass woman.

Lost is a show that has been successful by introducing unique and multi dimensional characters, but now they've introduced a pretty one dimensional person (so far). The disappointment is in a lack of surprise about her role.

[Badger]

But what if someone had never seen or heard of Michelle Rodriguez before her apperance on LOST, and therefore could not have any preconceived notions of what she would be like?

Then again there probably isn't anyone who hasn't heard of her who watches LOST. ;)

[wickedsweet]

You say that but I am not sure you're really aware of your perceptions. That might sound absurd, as in how can I claim to know what you perceive. The point is: Ana is not a male and therefore you can only claim you would not think differently if the character were a male, but you can't truly know that

I can reasonably claim how I would feel based on my past behavior and perception habits. It's a reasonable guess.

It's human nature to perceive genders somewhat differently given the same or similar situations.

To a certain point I agree but human nature is tempered by expereince and knowledge and enviroment. I've been lucky enough to live in an enviroment filled with very diverse people of both genders so I don't have hard and fast rules on their behaviors and was somewhat surprised when it became an issue in the Ana debate. That is more a reflection on my lack of experience with a certain way of thinking and I was surprised that it was still prevalant. I'm just curious as to a way of thinking that I've had limited exsposure to and trying to understand how it relates to this debate. I now see that while I didn't realized that people still hold to outdated ideas (and I'm not pointing fingers) of what it means to be female that some do and I will keep that in mind in the future when enjoying this discussion.

[WaywardK8]

Then again there probably isn't anyone who hasn't heard of her who watches LOST. ;)
I'd never heard of her before she was on the show, and I'm not a big fan of her character... but I'm not afraid to admit that, were she a man, I'd probably be a bit attracted... so sue me, I'm biased.

[Badger]

Sue you? Heck no! I'm in love with you! :rotfl: ;) Reason being: you said you'd like the character if she were a man.

See Wickedsweet?, proof at last. ;) :celebrate

[wickedsweet]

but I'm not afraid to admit that, were she a man, I'd probably be a bit attracted... so sue me, I'm biased

OK, if she were a hot guy I could be biased as well.:o

[WaywardK8]

Yeah, she's just the female Sawyer, IMO... but not nearly as sexy.

[Badger]

Oh man! Do I have to take a screenshot? Ye who hateth the character regardless of gender? ;)

Sorry, but I couldn't resist.

[wickedsweet]

See Wickedsweet, proof at last.

:D Ok, but I already admitted that sexism could relate to Ana but that I was surprsied by it and curious to learn more about the reasons behind it. You win the world is full of sexist pigs and were all a little prone to it.;)

ETA my sexism is really more of a proclivity to be attracted to hot guys regardless of their carachter flaws does that make me sexist or fool for hot guys?

[WaywardK8]

The way we think about gender is so ingrained in our culture and upbringing that we scarcely think of it as having any impact on us. Societal norms teach us things that quickly become our natural way of viewing the world that it's nearly impossible to step outside of those boundries and see things without them.

[wickedsweet]

Societal norms teach us things that quickly become our natural way of viewing the world that it's nearly impossible to step outside of those boundries and see things without them.

I was raised in the counter culture movement so I really have not been that exsposed to gender types in the traditional ways. I was curious, my aplogies that I inflicted my lack of knowledge upon this thread.

[Badger]

No apology required, Wickedsweet. You're a good sport and I couldn't help but tease you a bit. :)

[wickedsweet]

You're a good sport and I couldn't help but tease you a bit.

:thankyous

[SpidermanHouston]

I remember how many people use to say Shannon was unstable. She tried to kill Locke in cold blood on purpose without even knowing if he killed Boone on purpose. People spoke negatively about her. Then we see her flashbacks and then people felt sorry for her. "Why did they have to kill her?" "She was a good person." They suddenly forgot she tried to kill Locke and she would have done it if it wasn't for those meddling castaways, Sayid, Jack, and Kate.

[spooky]

the way that her character has been written, there has been no opportunity for nuance, so that we dont see a balance between the hard-edge decision maker and a more human AL.
I enthusiatically agree with your post. I imagine it was a bit of a dilemma trying to figure out the best way to introduce these new characters. No matter what, I think it was bound to be clunky exactly for the reason you state -- there's not much time for nuance. But I can overlook some of the less-than-elegant story mechanics if I get good characters out of it. Eko has a lot of promise, but Ana's been really predictable, so far. Eko is like glimpsing a castle from a winding road; Ana is like seeing a Walmart from an I-80 off-ramp.

[Lost Rayhne]

One of the things that gets me is there is no connection between the Tailies. You just don't get a feeling of camraidry between them. I have a feeling that, despite the 48 days they've spend together, they know nothing about each other. I think Libby and Bernard will fit in well with the main group. Eko is an all new mystery man and Ana will live on the fringe. God help her if she tries to boss around any of the main group like she does/did the Tailies. (I keep thinking, what's going to happen when she sees someone in the group using her belongings. They were probably salvaged with the rest of the stuff.) I just hope they get the guns and machete away from her before they let her into the camp. This woman is just not stable and may use either at the slightest provication.

[athywithak]

Re: post some pages back by Weddo1 - I think if we are to explore the psychology of AL we must not overlook her airport connection with Jack. It wasn't just a pickup thing - she heard him in line at the counter, she knows he has suffered a loss and she approaches him to tell him the worst is over. Their connection is about dealing with death (and then there's the mile high club too, maybe) and she is the one reaching out to help him with something she clearly didn't have a lot of help with herself.

On other matters:

I agree with LostMyMind and Brewster that we have not yet been told if AL knew she was with child before she was shot, although it might be in keeping with what we know about her bravado to go out on the street even while pregnant. We also don't know if she intended to keep the baby, even. What if she doesn't feel guilt because she was on the street while pregnant - then what motivates her?

There are indications that she was normal and stable before the shooting - her partner's friendly banter, she is well liked by the rest of the force (cake)...and this may have influence decisions to reinstate her (which I agree would not happen in the real world).

Warty- like a few others here I have no knowledge of MR's previous roles, so it isn't always a factor, but sure could have contributed to the zietgeist.

AL shooting Jason I am OK with - I was the victim of a crime who went through the whole year-long legal process only to have the guy get off on a technicality - and I agree with several, including Eko, that she shot Shannon in a confusing moment, as a mistake. It's her actions after the heat of the moment that have me agreeing with drauber's original post. They have all been listed many times, so I won't.

I am happy to see this character that I don't like added to the show.

my 42 cents

K

[Warthawg1]

But what if someone had never seen or heard of Michelle Rodriguez before her apperance on LOST, and therefore could not have any preconceived notions of what she would be like?

Yeah ok granted.. but see.. I am not talking to people who had never seen or heard of Michelle before her appearance on Lost. I am posting this on a LOST message board where many of the people who don't like her character were here and participated in the message threads about her before she joined the show.

[LostInWilderness]

No valid comparison my a$$! Oh, wait, none of them were women, that's right.
I don't appreciate that comment Badger. I made myself perfectly clear, but I'll provide a quick summary just for you. All of our lostaways have done terrible things, but except for Sayid, who as I mentioned has expressed regret paid penance for his actions unlike Ana, none of them have the laundry list that Ana Lucia does; she's done as many terrible things as several lostaways combined. Plus not one of our lostaways has killed another lostaway. Ana has that distinction totally to herself. That's all it takes for people to dislike her.

Your projection of sexism is your personal problem. It's insulting and uncalled for, and I'll thank you not to do it to me again.

But what if someone had never seen or heard of Michelle Rodriguez before her apperance on LOST, and therefore could not have any preconceived notions of what she would be like?

Then again there probably isn't anyone who hasn't heard of her who watches LOST. ;)
As I mentioned earlier in this very thread, I had never heard of Michelle Rodriquez. I have still never seen her in anything besides Lost.

This isn't that hard. Several of us have pointed out that Ana-Lucia, a character we had no investment in, took a lot of screen time from characters we were already interested in. That's one reason for people to dislike her.

I have also pointed out we have seen Ana do more terrible things in 3 episodes than we've seen any one lostaway do in 1 and 1/3 seasons, and we've seen very little else - no contrition, no paying for her misdeeds, though I certainly expect to see another side of her. At least I hope so.

And she killed Shannon. They showed that twice to really rub it in and make people mad.

Those dismissing these obvious reasons for negative perceptions of Ana to project sexism on others might want to take a long look in the mirror.

I agree with Spooky that this one dimensional characterization makes Ana boring right now. I disagree with her about hoping Ana runs away though, becuase I want her to shake up the Jack/Kate/Locke dynamic that I think has become stale.

Yeah, she's just the female Sawyer, IMO... but not nearly as sexy.
You must be talking about Ana's sweet southern charm, and the way she makes funny nicknames about people, and the great, funny oneliners she has, and that easy smile she loves to flash. I can see the similarities.

[brewster]

The first time we saw Ana on the island, she doublecrossed our lostaways. .

I don't see this. 40 days of struggling to stay alive and out of harms way, having lost at this point 18 of the 23 they started off with and some guy washes ashore with a broken hand cuff. When they secure him, he escapes and runs to two more wash ashores, who Eko brutally beat with a big stick. How is it that Ana double crossed them?

And no lostaway has a comparable poor record. .

Kate drowned a woman to steal her identity, shot all three of her partners in crime, and caused the death of her soul mate as well as the nice guy at the bank, all for a toy plane.

Ana killed the man who shot her four times and killed her baby. It's called revenge. Heroes do it all the time.

When Boone died, plenty of people became Locke haters, but he sure as hell didn't shoot Boone in the chest. There is no valid comparison for Ana to any other lostaway.

No, he didn't shoot Boone in the chest, but his intentions were very questionable, love Locke as I do, where Ana's intentions were purely to protect.

As to the inqueries and wonderment at the pro versus anti "Ana Lucia passion" on the board .... I personally refuse to make the knee jerk judgements the writers want me to. I know there's more and I can't wait to learn about it.

The writers rehabilitated Sawyer and Jin. I expect they'll do the same with Ana, but they set the bar a hell of a lot higher this time.

You're right, however, Jin and Sawyer hadn't yet shown any real concern for anyone but themselves until we learned more. They neither showed any goodness, really at all.

Ana has been acting on good intentions from the start, regardless of the one thing that I really didn't like - her brutalizing Sawyer. Ana already has redeemed herself to me. Ana's intent has always been good. Just flawed a little. :scratchch

[SpidermanHouston]

Kate drowned a woman to steal her identity

Kate drowned a woman?? That's new to me.

[Lost Rayhne]

Ditto. And if I remember correctly, she was using the bank robbers for her own ends, shot them (no indication that they were killed) to save the bank manager's life. We have no indication that she has directly killed anyone. Her boyfriend died, yes, but she gave him the option to get out of the car.

[juanbong]

Drowned a woman? Where, and when does this take place?

[Unnamed Redshirt Number 4]

Kate drowned a woman to steal her identity,

I believe that Joanna (that was the woman's name wasn't it?) drowned without Kate's help, but Kate used that incident to her advantage by attempting to steal her identity. They never said that Kate was involved in any way with Joanna's actual death.

[LoStMyMiNd]

And couldn't you see how Sawyer got all turned on everytime AL treated him badly? :D
Are we seeing different versions of the show?


No I guess I missed the bulge in his pants.:)

Seriously, though, I did not perceive Sawyer to be turned on by AnaL

[Unnamed Redshirt Number 4]

No I guess I missed the bulge in his pants.:)

Seriously, though, I did not perceive Sawyer to be turned on by AnaL

I caught that Ana Lucia was a bit admiring of his spirit and badass attitude. Not sure about Sawyer feeling the same way though.

[brewster]

Several of us have pointed out that Ana-Lucia, a character we had no investment in, took a lot of screen time from characters we were already interested in. That's one reason for people to dislike her.
Many of us have actually enjoyed the past two episodes more than any so far save a couple. Many of us got bored reviewing Jack again this year. And Michael again. Those two epiodes were usless as far as the back stories went.

Plus the last three episodes explain what happened to the Tailies and introduce Bernard, who we've been hoping was alive, and two dynamics, Eko and AL. They were not all about Ana at all.

I have also pointed out we have seen Ana do more terrible things in 3 episodes than we've seen any one lostaway do in 1 and 1/3 seasons, and we've seen very little else - no contrition, no paying for her misdeeds, though I certainly expect to see another side of her. At least I hope so.
Hmm. I believe Ana has saved more lives than Jack so far since the crash. Outside of being overly rough on fusies, I don't see what else she did that was so horrible, except shoot Shannon by accident.

As far as her back story, it was indeed perhaps the most dramatic, but not an iota darker than Kates. Kate just happens have a softer seeming outside demanor.

And she killed Shannon. They showed that twice to really rub it in and make people mad.
Some people. Half maybe. It's all been far too blantent to manipulate me.

Those dismissing these obvious reasons for negative perceptions of Ana to project sexism on others might want to take a long look in the mirror.
That sounds like a pretty harsh statement and I don't think I have done that myself, but rather have debated the biased versions of her with my own. LOL. I do think in half the cases, Ana haters would not hate a man in the role as much, because men can and do get respect, from other men in particular, for being vengeful and bad ass in movies. They are also more easily forgiven for being so than a woman. This is not an insult, it is a fact. It is not sexism, it's reality. It goes both ways, too. Effeminate men are poorly judged for behavior a woman would be praised for.

Someone else in this thread said there are many steriotypes of women. True, but AL is a tough woman who can take on men. Just like Kate. But AL acts far more like a man while Kate remains feminine in her demeanor.

I second that AL is not a steriotypical woman in that she is not particualry feminine in her actions.

I agree with Spooky that this one dimensional characterization makes Ana boring right now. I disagree with her about hoping Ana runs away though, becuase I want her to shake up the Jack/Kate/Locke dynamic that I think has become stale.
I find her more interesting than a number of fusies. I can't wait, either, for her to stir things up with the boring Kate/Jack thing. I'm betting Locke gets to have a few revealing conversations with her, too!

Sorry to pick at your particular post, but you post things of which I most disagree. I see her faults. I do. But I also see her virtues. I do with all of them. Some of the posts her are so black and white, like her/hate her.

[brewster]

Sorry about my Kate mistake. I read about in anther thread. My point is that Ana's past is not much darker, if at all darker than Kate's. For whatever her motivation, good or not, Kate has caused a death or two of her own.

My big question is this.

Is it forgivable for Kate to rob a bank, shoot three of her fellow bannkrobbers, and be responsible for the death of that nice bank manager, yet unforgivable for Ana to shoot someone by mistake while trying to protect the innocent?

[Lost Rayhne]

Kate isn't a cop, expected to uphold the law and act/react responsibily.

[wickedsweet]

Did the bank manager die? I thought Kate killed her acomplices in order to save the bank manager.

[brewster]

Kate isn't a cop, expected to uphold the law and act/react responsibily.

Ana did act/react responsibly and uphold the law to the best of her abilities. Intent is everything. I aready explained the conditions making it an easy mistake to make/

I see no deceit, selfish motivation or deviation in Ana. Exhaustion, frustration, and fear, yes. 18 out of 23 are gone. She shot Shannon by mistake. It happens to cops and soldiers. Even the best of them. The military shoot down thier own planes by accident. "Ana Lucia made a mistake", said Eko.

[brewster]

Did the bank manager die? I thought Kate killed her acomplices in order to save the bank manager.

I'm not sure. I think one of her accomplices shot and killed the back manager and she shot, eventually, all three accomplices during the struggle. Someone here just said she was saving the bank managers wife, but I don't rememeber that part.

[Lost Rayhne]

Actually, I was refering to her shooting Jason.

Ana shooting Shannon was a mistake, I concede that. Her actions before that (the way she treated not only the Rafties but her own people) and after that are my problem. She totally went psycho and flew completely off the handle. She had no right to treat the rest of the group like that, especially not Sayid. She was thinking only of herself and to hell with everyone else.

[wickedsweet]

The episode is Whatever The Case May Be
I just Fast fowarded to the end and realized 3 things
1)Sawyer looks amazing without a shirt
2) My mom's right my niece does look like Kate
3)And the bank manager is not killed or even shot. Kate shots her partners (doesn't appear to kill them, they're still alive last we see of them) in order to save the bank manager's life.

ETA I just realized 2 more things, Charlie really does get on my nerves and I'm really going to miss Shannon.

[Unnamed Redshirt Number 4]

The episode is Whatever The Case May Be
I just Fast fowarded to the end and realized 3 things
1)Sawyer looks amazing without a shirt


:pant: :itmdrool: :worshippy :love2:

[Badger]

Is it forgivable for Kate to rob a bank, shoot three of her fellow bannkrobbers, and be responsible for the death of that nice bank manager, yet unforgivable for Ana to shoot someone by mistake while trying to protect the innocent?

That's a good point. Kate acted with malice of forethought, intent. The bank manager died as a direct result of Kate's actions, eg: robbing the bank, which is homicide in the commission of a felony. Whereas Ana Lucia reacted to a perceived threat. They are incomparable, both morally and legally.

[LostInWilderness]

Kate and Ana are great characters to contrast.

Kate got Tom killed because she wouldn't surrender, but she certainly never shot anybody in cold blood, and she admits and feels tremendous remorse at her mistake. Ana killed Jason in cold blood, won't admit, and shows no remorse.

Kate argues against and finally stops Sawyer's torture. Ana sadistically abuses Sawyer while he's wounded and helpless, and imprisons Nathan and starves him prior to torturing him.

Kate sets up a brilliant bank heist in which nobody is supposed to get hurt (except Kate being punched,) and when her partners try to kill the manager, Kate wounds them to save his life. Ana shoots Shannon without establishing Shannon is a threat.

Kate sacrificed her freedom to save the life of the farmer in Tabula Rasa. Ana ties up Sayid and shoves a gun in her own allies' faces.

Kate has never killed, injured or threatened one of lostaways. Ana bullies and threatens her own group, let alone threatening and killing allies.

I think Kate is capable of more evil than anybody on the island (and I authored the thread on her causing Joanna to drown,) but as far as we know she hasn't been as bad as Ana. Plus we've seen Kate laugh, be playful, be adventerous, drink and swim with Sawyer, have fun with Jack and Sun, and be empathetic with everyone. Plus, there's a still a mystery surrounding Kate. She's a fabulous character; she's been an enigma since the first moment she's been on the screen.

We haven't seen Ana laugh, have fun, be empathetic, sacrifice, or any of those things. In the short time since Ana has been introduced, TPTB have kept her very 1 dimensional and entirely predictable.

This contrast between two strong, capable women certainly illustrates why Kate is very popular and Ana is very unpopular.

[Lost Rayhne]

The bank manager didn't die!!!

That's a good point. Kate acted with malice of forethought, intent. The bank manager died as a direct result of Kate's actions, eg: robbing the bank, which is homicide in the commission of a felony. Whereas Ana Lucia reacted to a perceived threat. They are incomparable, both morally and legally.

[Badger]

I can't recall whether or not the bank manager died. I was taking other posts as fact wherein they claimed he had died. I never said Kate shot him. Her accomplice did.

The fact remains he was shot during the robbery. That makes it entirely different than what Ana did. See below.

Repost:

I read an article the other day that can somewhat explain the psychology of why Ana Lucia mistakenly shot Shannon.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051127/...armed_off_duty (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051127/ap_on_re_us/armed_off_duty)

Here are a couple quotes from the article:

"According to the FBI, 43 police officers have been killed since 1987 by friendly fire. Some were caught in crossfire, or killed by firearms mishaps. A handful, like Young, were mistaken for criminals and shot by fellow officers."

"Threatened officers instinctively focus on the perceived threat and tune out other information that could be crucial to split-second decision making, Klinger said. That's why it's important to have protocols in place to identify each other, he said."

What protocols were in place on the island that could have prevented Shannon's death? None. Ana Lucia acted in the belief she and her group were in imminent danger, just like the officers noted above did.

How many times have I used the term "perceived threat" in the last 19 pages??

[LostInWilderness]

I think you're playing fast and loose with the facts again Badger. I believe Kate shot her accomplices to keep them from shooting the manager. She saved his life.

[J Nuts]

What protocols were in place on the island that could have prevented Shannon's death? None. Ana Lucia acted in the belief she and her group were in imminent danger, just like the officers noted above did.

How many times have I used the term "perceived threat" in the last 19 pages??

^^agreed. plus it makes for a more interesting series, but i know a lot of people dont wanna hear that about shannon dying (sorry)

yeah i read a similar article in the seattle post intelligencer (its actually how i found this site) about anna. excuse my french, but she is bitch, though

[Badger]

I will have to go watch the episode again. I am not playing loose with them, others did. However, I am not blaming them, I am blaming my lack of recall.

The point remains. Someone, including Kate's accomplices, were shot. I don't recall if anyone died.

[Lost Rayhne]

I just checked the transcript. The bank manager does not get shot. Period.

[wickedsweet]

I can't recall whether or not the bank manager died. I was taking other posts as fact wherein they claimed he had died. I never said Kate shot him. Her accomplice did.

As I just stated a couple of post ago. I just finished Whatever the Case May Be. The bank manager WAS NOT shot. Kate's partner threatened to shot the manager. Kate shot her partners to save the bank manager. The manager was not shot, the 2 partners are still alive and talking at the end of the flashback.

[LostInWilderness]

You're point is gone. There's no moral equivalence between shooting armed men to save an innocent life and killing an innocent person because one failed to identify her as a threat.

[Badger]

Whether she is a bitch or not is beside the point. I have never claimed she was an angel. I have only stated she acted in the best interests of the group. Her methods leave something to be desired, I agree. But the intention does not.

I have always maintained she has the raw material with which to be a great leader: resolve, and a willingness to step up and take charge. Bernard for example does not appear to have any of those qualities. And frankly, neither does Eko. His profound and deep religious convictions when combined with the fact he chose not to speak for 40 days are proof of that. He is a good guy, yes, but not a leader. That does not mean he cannot offer sound advice however, which he did.

[Hurley4Prez]

AL is hot. Kate is hot. Neither were appealing to me as a character at first.
What were we talking about? :D

[Badger]

"No moral equivalence"? I beg to differ. She robbed a bank! That alone placed people in harms way. Yes, she shot her accomplices to protect the manager. However, the fact remains she shot them while committing a felony. Her motivations and intent, although I agree were good and morally just in that regard, do not preclude the fact they would not have been shot in the first place had they not robbed the bank.

[wickedsweet]

"No moral equivalence"? I beg to differ. She robbed a bank!

In order to steal a toy plane, not to steal money and with the understanding that no one was to be hurt. When her partners deviated from the plan and threatened the bank manager she acted to protect the manager.

However, the fact remains she shot them while committing a felony

Ana committed felony murder by shoting Jason in a cold premediated act with "the malice of forethought"

Her motivations and intent, although I agree were good and morally just, do not preclude the fact they would not have been shot in the first place had they not robbed the bank.

Ana's murder of Jason would not have happened had she done the moral and lawful thing and simply ID'd him when the PD had him in custody.

[Lost Rayhne]

Well said, Wicked!

[Badger]

I was not referring to the fact Ana shot Jason. More on that in a second. I was talking about the fact Kate robbed a bank. That is morally wrong, period. People were shot because of it.

Now, Ana executed Jason, yes. It was wrong. I have never said it wasn't. I have only offered an explanation as to WHY I believe she did.

The point being: you can't compare the fact Ana shot Shannon accidentally with what Kate did. That is all the debate was about.

[wickedsweet]

badger
below is the quote that started the Kate/Ana debate

Kate drowned a woman to steal her identity, shot all three of her partners in crime, and caused the death of her soul mate as well as the nice guy at the bank, all for a toy plane.

Ana killed the man who shot her four times and killed her baby. It's called revenge. Heroes do it all the time.

I thought we were all comparing Ana's crime to Kate's.

[Badger]

It doesn't matter. The two acts were totally different, both morally and legally. Kate robbed a bank intentionally and because of it people were placed in harms way and ultimately injured, shot.

On the island Ana shot Shannon accidentally because of a perceived threat. You can't compare the two morally, or legally speaking, at all!

[wickedsweet]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It doesn't matter. The two acts were totally different, both morally and legally. Kate robbed a bank intentionally and because of it people were placed in harms way and ultimately injured, shot.

On the island Ana shot Shannon accidentally because of a perceived threat. You can't compare the two morally, or legally, speaking, at all!

No you can't, it's apples and oranges, which is why I think it's pretty clear the debate was about Ana killing Jason and Kate shoting her accomplices. Why won't the Ana lovers ever just say "OK, you got a point"?Just one time:(

[brewster]

You're point is gone. There's no moral equivalence between shooting armed men to save an innocent life and killing an innocent person because one failed to identify her as a threat.


It's not a moral issue, though.

Kate caused her unfortunate event to take place, for whatever reason. It was unlawful, involved guns and she had bad judgement choosing accomplices.

Ana shooting Shannon in the torrential rain, deep in the jungle while under attack of the Others (the whispering and Cindy's disappearance) was not immoral. It was a mistake.

They were both mistakes only Kate planned the event that caused hers.

[Lost Rayhne]

Okay, you can't keep bring up what Kate did before she was on the island and not bring up what Ana did before she came to the island.

[Badger]

From what I read, the debate was concerning the fact Kate shot her accomplices which was the moral thing to do, nevermind the fact they robbed a bank. I agree, Kate did the "right thing" by shooting them in order to protect innocent people. Fine.

Ana accidentally shot Shannon in order to protect herself and the group from a perceived threat which is also morally justifed, as well as legally.

Kate would certainly go to prison with possible consideraton being given to the fact she acted to protect the manager, whereas Ana would probably not. This is based on ONLY those two incidents.

The fact Ana executed Jason after refusing to positively identify him is completely seperate and was both morally and legally wrong, which I have stated repeatedly.

[Badger]

I came in late and responded to the fact the two incidents (Ana vs. Shannon and Kate at the bank) were being compared.

I'll make it simple: I rule that Ana's actions prior to the island are inadmissible. ;)

Silly isn't it. Of course I would then have to rule that Kate's actions prior to the crash are also inadmissible.

[Hurley4Prez]

I think we're all throwing stones when we know there isn't an innocent on the island. Okay, maybe one; Vincent.

There are a few characters that seem "less" culpable. That's Hurley, Claire and Rose. Anyone else is fair game as far as our "judgement" goes.
Thank Buddha I'm not a character on this show... I'd be crucified! :O

[Lost Rayhne]

So therefore Kate's actions before the island are also inadmissible.

Can't have it both ways, old son ...

[Badger]

See my post again. I edited it to say: "Silly isn't it. Of course I would then have to rule that Kate's actions prior to the crash are also inadmissible."

Again, I was not the one who originally made the comparison.

[brewster]

Ana is not a bad person. She is not clinically psychotic. She took the law into her own hands against a creep cop shooter back home. Wrong, morally. But on the island she did nothing immoral.

[Lost Rayhne]

See my post again. I edited it to say: "Silly isn't it. Of course I would then have to rule that Kate's actions prior to the crash are also inadmissible."

I posted before you added that. :D But, as you can see, I agree, cousin.

[Badger]

Ana is not a bad person. She is not clinically psychotic. She took the law into her own hands against a creep cop shooter back home. Wrong, morally. But on the island she did nothing immoral.

I agree wholeheartedly :)

[BartHatesCharlie]

But on the island she did nothing immoral.
Yeah, it's not immoral for wanting to leave Sawyer behind for the vultures and rodents to munch on.

[Lost Rayhne]

Or tieing someone to a tree and then threatening others with a gun.

[Badger]

The fact Ana executed Jason was not only morally wrong as Brewster said, which we all agree on, it was also legally wrong. However, I think many if not most or all of us can empathize with her actions. That is all I have ever maintained.

[Badger]

Yeah, it's not immoral for wanting to leave Sawyer behind for the vultures and rodents to munch on.

It's not a moral judgment, it was a tactical decision on her part. Spec Ops operators (and I am NOT claiming Ana is or ever was) know going in that if they should become incapacitated and therefore no longer mission capable, they cannot be allowed to compromise the mission. That is all I will say on the matter.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few...or the one.

[Lost Rayhne]

Sympathize, yes. Condone, never. Not when she had the alternative of IDing him and putting him away.

[Hurley4Prez]

cousin.
If you were being "cute", you'd have used the term brother.
I know you guys are family because of that. You guys are a cool family.
I wish mine would do more than just watch. :)

[Lost Rayhne]

What mission? They were just trying to reach the main group, whi would not have been very happy about the Tailies leaving behind one of their own to die.

At this point, Ana is just thinking of herself and her needs. She would have left any of them behind, even those she had been 'leading' (more like bullying and browbeating) to get what she wanted.

[BartHatesCharlie]

It's not a moral judgment, it was a tactical decision on her part. Spec Ops operators (and I am NOT claiming Ana is or ever was) know going in that if they should become incapacitated and therefore no longer mission capable, they cannot be allowed to compromise the mission. That is all I will say on the matter.
Even when they were so close to camp, she didn't want them to take Sawyer back to the doctor. What a great tactical decision. Don't want to compromise "the Iraq guy tied to a tree" mission.

[Lost Rayhne]

If you were being "cute", you'd have used the term brother.
I know you guys are family because of that. You guys are a cool family.
I wish mine would do more than just watch. :)

Errrrrr ... I'm not going to explain this ...

[Lost Rayhne]

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few...or the one.

I prefer 'All or none' myself ...

[Badger]

I was referring to when they were still nowhere near the main camp. Sawyer was a hindrance at the time and was clearly slowing them down, as Ana said. Heartless? perhaps. But she was correct in her thinking. You cannot make moral judgments on something like that while sitting in the comfort of your living room watching a TV show!

Unless and until you have been in a survival situation you cannot make the claim that what someone did or did not do was morally wrong. She was thinking and acting to protect not only herself, but the group as a whole. I cannot fault her for that and neither should anyone else.

These types of decisons are real and have been made in the real world.

In my opinion, and I think it's fairly obvious, the writers purposefully had her say that knowing it would enrage and cause the audience to question her judgment. They knew it would result in polarizing the audience. But tactically speaking, she WAS correct.

In the same way she could not allow Bernard to use the radio and risk compromising their position to an unknown hostile force. Again, correct tactical thinking. Yes, it could have been the other survivors, and as we know it was. She did not know that and assumed they were dead. She could not take the risk.

Furthermore, I would not allow anyone to compromise my safety and the safety of the group as a whole. You don't have to like it, just know that I would do whatever it took to insure it. And I do mean whatever.

[BartHatesCharlie]

I was referring to when they were still nowhere near the main camp. Sawyer was a hindrance at the time and was clearly slowing them down, as Ana said. Heartless? perhaps. But she was correct in her thinking. You cannot make moral judgments on something like that while sitting in the comfort of your living room watching a TV show!

Unless and until you have been in a survival situation you cannot make the claim that what someone did or did not do was morally wrong. She was thinking and acting to protect not only herself, but the group as a whole. I cannot fault her for that and neither should anyone else.

These types of decisons are real and have been made in the real world.
Well, I was reffering to when they were near camp. You cannot decide if her tactical decisions are correct while sitting in the comfort of your living room watching a TV show! You cannot make the claim that what someone did or did not do was morally correct either.

[Badger]

I can and I am. I have been in situations where I had to do just that.

Hence: Furthermore, I would not allow anyone to compromise my safety and the safety of the group as a whole. You don't have to like it, just know that I would do whatever it took to insure it. And I do mean whatever.

[Hurley4Prez]

Errrrrr ... I'm not going to explain this ... Dude, I totally apologize. I really thought you guys were fam from that comment. I'm pretty much retarded anyways, so ignore my bloviated assumptions. :o

EDIT: I am trippling the retard factor now that I've had time to think. I really apologize for assuming shit I don't know. Bad habit.

[wickedsweet]

I think we're all throwing stones when we know there isn't an innocent on the island. Okay, maybe one; Vincent.

I have the feeling that Vincent has been up to some pretty freaky stuff, don't trust that cute little doggie smile of his, I'm telling you, brother.

[brewster]

This contrast between two strong, capable women certainly illustrates why Kate is very popular and Ana is very unpopular.

Kate's easy to like. Ana isn't. But I see other diminsions in Ana others who hate her so vehemently don't or won't. Ana was animated and perfectly jovial at the airport bar. She smiled a big one at Jack. She was warm, tender and protective to the children. There were numerous times she showed concern for her fellow survivors during the first 40 days.

I condone her throwing Nathan in the pit. If he wanted to eat he would have talked. About anything. It looks as though he didn't bother trying to convince her in any way that he wasn't an Other. Twelve were kidnapped and there were only seven of then left out of 23. That's pretty damned threatening and no one else there was doing anything about it.

Kate has never been under any pressure to protect the group. You don't know if she would have snapped or not under similar circumstances.

I like both Kate and Ana Lucia and appreciate the contrast like I do spice in my recipes. I'm glad everyone isn't just pretty to look at and passive.

Ana's full of dimensions that are just beneath the surface. Michelle Rodrigues can indeed act as well as the rest. Being typecast is not a sin nor is it something to be ashamed of. I can't wait for her to show a warm, loving side, which I am positive will happen in future episodes.

But now that we've been filled in about the 48 days, I'm as ready as the rest to move along into the show. I want to know more about the mysteries of the Island and more about the Others.

[BartHatesCharlie]

I can and I am. I have been in situations where I had to do just that.

So if it was someone you loved and cared about, you would leave him or her behind and let him or her die not knowing if there is a real danger? these people were not special ops, where anyone can be sacrificed. Jin and Michael cared about Sawyer. If it was one of her tailenders, she would have not let him behind. Remember, she didn't want to leave Cindy behind. She was going to go after her herself. Not very tactical.

[Lost Rayhne]

Oh yes, I have no doubt she would have left a Tailie behind just as fast as she would have Sawyer. Her only concern at this point was herself.

So ... was beating up on an injured man, stomping on a bullet wound, a 'good tactical decision'? Keeping in mind that this occured after she established they were fellow survivors and undoubtedly had something to do with the wound going bad. Was tieing Sayid to a tree and threatening the rest of the group a 'good tactical decision'?

I doubt this woman could ever make a good decision. I haven't seen much evidence of it as yet.

[Badger]

If they can be carried, then yes. But if that person is endangering the group then as a leader you have to make that decision. This is TV however, and they did that for dramatic effect. Of course a certain amount of compassion is also required. I am not claiming they would do that on a TV show, just that I understand her thinking and rationale.

[wickedsweet]

I doubt this woman could ever make a good decision. I haven't seen much evidence of it as yet.

I'd say the facts support this statment. The facts are that under Ana the tailies number's dwindled, innoncent people were imprisioned and starved, and innocent woman was shot. So far Ana's best hasn't measured up to very much.

[BartHatesCharlie]

Oh yes, I have no doubt she would have left a Tailie behind just as fast as she would have Sawyer. Her only concern at this point was herself.

She didn't want to leave Cindy behind. She tried to go after her herself. Because she cared about Cindy because they were together for 48 days. She didn't know Sawyer, so she didnt give a crap about him.

[Badger]

Yes, it's called establishing the pecking order. She accomplished precisely what she set out to do, which was establishing dominance through intimidation.

Not what I would do, or anyone I know, but this is TV.

[Hurley4Prez]

I have the feeling that Vincent has been up to some pretty freaky stuff, don't trust that cute little doggie smile of his, I'm telling you, brother.
LOL.:p

Either way, I believe people had better let their preconceptions go when it comes to AL.
She's been introduced as a complex character for a reason. Like Sawyer, she's not at all what most people have assumed. She's gonna rock, yo!
Can't wait to see. :D

[LostInWilderness]

"No moral equivalence"? I beg to differ. She robbed a bank! That alone placed people in harms way. Yes, she shot her accomplices to protect the manager. However, the fact remains she shot them while committing a felony. Her motivations and intent, although I agree were good and morally just in that regard, do not preclude the fact they would not have been shot in the first place had they not robbed the bank.
You don't see the difference between shooting armed men to save an innocent, and shooting an innocent for no reason? When Kate's situation got out of control, she protected the innocent. When Ana's situation got out of control, she killed the innocent. Kate intended no innocent get hurt, and none did. Ana threatened all the innocent people in her own group.

Furthermore, Kate's bank robbery was cool television. Her complex motives and her choices as she manipulated her accomplices, then was forced to shoot them was jaw-dropping TV. We didn't know what was happening or what would happen next. Kate is vibrant, fun, funny, slick, focused. She's a tremendous character. Ana's predictable trigger happy response was just mediocre TV with the huge negative aspect that she killed Shannon, a character everyone had come to find interesting. Ana is a brute. There is no nuance. She's not interesting right now.

[Badger]

You don't see the difference between shooting armed men to save an innocent, and shooting an innocent for no reason?

I certainly do. Robbing a bank automatically makes her guilty of anything that happens during the robbery. Whether she intended to shoot them in oder to protect the innocent is irrelevent, legally speaking. Morally and ethically, not to mention legally, she was also wrong in that she robbed the bank to begin with.

I already said she shot them to protect an innocent person. But the fact of the matter is she would not have had to had they not robbed the bank in the first place.

Ana did not shoot Shannon "for no reason" as there was clearly a perceived threat of imminent danger which is a reason. Acting in self-defense and defense of the group while not in the act of committing another crime (I'm referring to the bank robbery here) is morally and ethically ok, as well as legally allowed depending on circumstance, whereas robbing a bank is none of those things.

Furthermore, Kate's bank robbery was cool television. Her complex motives and her choices as she manipulated her accomplices, then was forced to shoot them was jaw-dropping TV.

I agree with that opinion. However, I also feel, and this is my opinion, that Ana is equally interesting. The character has certainly stimulated considerably more debate as of late than Kate has or possibly ever has at any one time.

[I like to listen]

LIW said,
Ana's predictable trigger happy response was just mediocre TV with the huge negative aspect that she killed Shannon, a character everyone had come to find interesting. Ana is a brute. There is no nuance. She's not interesting right now.

Somebody please post the prediction made that Ana would be trigger happy, that has a date proir to the episode airdate of Shannon being shot. Wait, LIW the burden of proof is upon you. :)

I would like proof of this wizardy, before I default that, truly I must be a nobody.
SINCE I NEVER THOUGHT
....Shannon, a character everyone had come to find interesting. ...

Take a trip to the character forum and explain how Ana Lucia has many more post in a shorter time than the Shannon forum. Please do not tell me it was the ezhack, as Shannon forum still has a head start on the Ana Lucia regardless of the hack.

With all due respect, LIW, define interest objectively not subjectively.

Shannon don't let the door hit you! Gee whiz we discovered plywood under the veneer. Now she is great.

I prefer solid oak, myself. Lost traded up if you want to argue it that way.

Even if one feels that she is brute, victimizers gernerate the most drama, not the victims all being equal. So now we another flavor of drama, vs loosing some smooching with Sayid. Not hard choice for me!

Of course this IMO.:shhh:
.

[ItsAGame]

I just think they are building up her Beeitchy personality so they can later make her a likeble character later on. They WANT us to hate her at this point.


Its all in the script...The writers want to dazzle us all once again.

ala Sawyer n Jin but Ana will be a greater character change

[Badger]

I agree. The word "redemption" with regards to Ana Lucia was mentioned in this thread alone in the following posts:

#18) If there's a character arc of redemption for Ana Lucia, it's gonna hinge on her ability to trust again.

#35) But if Ana-Lucia's character is going to be anything but a bitch goddess, the redemption will have to involve more than surrender to Sayid.

#36) I believe the writers set this up as a foundation for her character and ultimately her possible redemption.

[I Like Freckles]

I have now waded through 20+ pages of this thread and a few others on similar topics and have convinced myself of 2 things:
a) There is not a single A-L thread that remains readable for more than about 10-20 posts.
b) Some people are severely fact averse in their arguments.
c) There might be a causal relationships between b and a.

Let me start by saying that I agree entirely with ILTL. Ana Lucia is an interesting character. The Days of Our Hatch routine over on the Fusies side of the island is in need of a bit of a swizzle stick. We haven't had any good tension from this group since Orientation. Hurley's ep was fun, but it was fluff. And ...and Found and Abandoned were building blocks, not the payoff.

Some might recall that after Abandoned aired, I (and a few others whose names have been omitted to protect the not so innocent) argued that based on the visual evidence available at the time, we couldn't say beyond a reasonable doubt that A-L had actually shot Shannon. Clearly, that is no longer the case. But now I'm perplexed by the number of people who seem to be arguing that her actions on Day 48 were somehow justifiable. Or that Kate’s actions at the bank robbery were legally or ethically worse than A-L’s killing of Shannon.

I certainly do. Robbing a bank automatically makes her guilty of anything that happens during the robbery. Whether she intended to shoot them in oder to protect the innocent is irrelevent, legally speaking. Morally and ethically, not to mention legally, she was also wrong in that she robbed the bank to begin with.
Not actually true. Based on what we saw in the bank, if tried before a jury Kate would likely be found guilty of conspiracy to rob the bank and bank robbery. Had her accomplice actually shot the bank manager, she'd also be guilty of murder just as though she had pulled the trigger. For that matter, if any of the bank customers had been accidentally killed by a stray bullet, she and all of her accomplices would be rung up on felony murder charges. She’d likely be charged with assault with a deadly weapon for shooting her accomplices to prevent the death of the manager, but she’s got a fantastic affirmative defense to that one. Put the bank manager on the witness stand with any degree of competent defense lawyering and there's not a jury in the land that would convict her. Defense of others is a viable affirmative defense. Clearly, she doesn't have clean hands here, but a) she caused no deaths, and b) her actions actually prevented a cold-blooded murder.

I already said she shot them to protect an innocent person. But the fact of the matter is she would not have had to had they not robbed the bank in the first place.Well, that's all fine and dandy, but your're conveniently omitting a key distinction. Bank robbery is a felony, but it's not murder. Or even manslaughter. And Kate's actions clearly prevented a murder.

Ana did not shoot Shannon "for no reason" as there was clearly a perceived threat of imminent danger which is a reason. Acting in self-defense and defense of the group while not in the act of committing another crime (I'm referring to the bank robbery here) is morally and ethically ok, as well as legally allowed depending on circumstance, whereas robbing a bank is none of those things.There are some parallels between Kate's shooting of her accomplices and A-L's shooting of Shannon. In both cases, the legal defense at issue is self defense or defense of others. Both of those defenses require a three pronged test:
a) Did the shooter subjectively believe that her actions were necessary to prevent or mitigate an imminent threat of death or severe bodily harm to herself or others.
b) was the subjective belief reasonable under the circumstances.
c) was the level of force used objectively reasonable under the circumstances.

In Kate's case, (a), (b), and (c) are clearly met. Jason (the bank robber boyfriend) cocked his weapon and stated that he was going to "clean up" (kill the manager). Kate then used only the force necessary to prevent the murder. She shot her accomplices in the leg. All of them were still alive at the end of the episode. Note that she is still on the hook for conspiracy and bank robbery. But the shootings of her accomplices? Not on your life.

Contrast that with A-L. She might be OK on (a) in that I think she was scared sh*tless. However, she is might in trouble with regards to trying to prove prong (b) and IMO she's completely screwed on prong (c). She had never heard the whispers before (as far as we know), so while they are certainly freaky, they don't seem to automatically indicate that one should shoot at the first tall leggy blond one sees in the rainy jungle. Had the Tailies heard the whispers as a precursor to a prior attack, she'd have a better case. In any event, based on what she and her group had been through in the previous 47 days, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt on (b).

Where she really gets into hot water on proving a justifiable homicide (self defense) is the level of force used (c). Never during the previous attacks did the Tarzans use any kind of projectile weapon. Or for that matter any weapons of any kind that we see. It was all close quarters, snatch and grab type stuff. And in reality, none of them actually committed any act of violence (other than the actual kidnapping) against the people that they grabbed. None of the Tailies was murdered on the beach during either raid. And the Tarzans seemed to need to rely on sneak attacks and numbers to achieve their goals -- they lost 3 of their number in exchange for dragging off a total of 12 people. That's not a fantastic ratio for an attack with the advantages of numbers and complete tactical surprise.

So, what exactly is A-L's justification for 10-ringing Shannon from 10-15 feet away the moment she caught a glimpse of her in the rainy jungle? She had already told Michael that one bullet wasn't going to do her any good. Certainly not if you fire it before even being able to see what you're shooting at. We now know that she has killed out of revenge before. Mistakenly killing the wrong person while trying to be a vigilante is not an excusable homicide. It is pretty strong evidence counter to an assertion that she fired out of fear or an attempt to protect her group. I think the writers pretty clearly showed us in the past few eps that A-L is motivated by feelings of guilt over letting the Tarzans take the kids. Just like Dr. Amy has suggested that her guilt over putting her fetus in harms way led to her gunning down her Jason in cold blood. Hell, she's still in this mode even AFTER the shooting. Clearly, she took Sawyer's Rambina comment to heart -- I assume she wanted a bunch of ammo and guns because she intended to go hunt down the tarzans and get the kids back.

In short (I know, way too late for that), self defense is a state of mind-based affirmative defense. And the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove it by a preponderance of the evidence. I don't think A-L could carry this burden based on what we know about her past (yeah, evidence of that cold blooded revenge shooting would absolutely be admissible hearsay in the Criminal Court of Craphole Island) and about the actual facts and circumstances of Shannon's death.

-ILF

[Badger]

She had never heard the whispers before (as far as we know), so while they are certainly freaky, they don't seem to automatically indicate that one should shoot at the first tall leggy blond one sees in the rainy jungle.

Yes she had, just after Cindy's mysterious disapperance.

b) was the subjective belief reasonable under the circumstances.

It sure was. As witnessed by the fact she had heard the whispers just after Cindy disappeared and that others in her group had been abducted twice before. Not to mention she was forced to kill Goodwin in self-defense after he indicated to her he was responsible, or knew about, the abduction of the others in her group.

As to (c): it's my ruling that the defendents actions were objectively reasonable given the totality of the circumstances and that this court must find that the defendent actually entertained the suspicion and that the suspicion was reasonable under the circumstances.

Certainly not if you fire it before even being able to see what you're shooting at.

We don't know that she didn't see Shannon. She may indeed have but not recognizing her felt she was an "Other" and reacted reflexively.

Mistakenly killing the wrong person while trying to be a vigilante is not an excusable homicide.

She wasn't acting as a vigilante as she was not acting to uphold any law. She was acting to protect herself and the group.

Ref:

Philosophers, like French (2001), frequently equate vigilantism with vengeance. However, Ana Lucia was clearly not acting in a vengeful manner.

"Morally sanctimonious" behavior aimed at rectifying or remedying a "structural flaw" in society. (Brown 1975)

Again, Ana Lucia was not acting to rectify or remedy a "structural flaw" in society.

Just like Dr. Amy has suggested that her guilt over putting her fetus in harms way led to her gunning down her Jason in cold blood.

That is presumptuous and calls for speculation. To wit: we do not know whether or not Ana Lucia was aware she was pregnant at the time she was shot by Jason. She stated she was pregnant at the time but that was after the fact.

As to burden of proof, yes it is up to her to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that (a), (b) and (c), as you outlined, were met.

And:

(yeah, evidence of that cold blooded revenge shooting would absolutely be admissible hearsay in the Criminal Court of Craphole Island)

The Lostaways, to our knowledge, are unaware of that incident and hence it could not be admitted.

I think the writers pretty clearly showed us in the past few eps that A-L is motivated by feelings of guilt over letting the Tarzans take the kids.

I am not certain what the writers intentions were. I am of the belief, as was shown by obvious foreshadowing which I have mentioned several times before in this and other threads, that Ana Lucia actions are as a direct result of psychological trauma, eg: possibly Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and she is motivated to protect children, both pre and post crash. This was evidenced in part by the fact she overreacted when she heard the baby crying when at the domestic dispute call. And later, on the beach, after resuscitating Emma she promised she would get them home.

In my opinion children in danger are the stimulus for her actions, brought on by the loss of her own unborn child. This is not guilt per se but rather the overwhelming desire, in fact self-imposed need, to protect them.

But why the desire?

Again, we do not know whether or not she was aware she was pregnant at the time she was shot by Jason. If she wasn't then she could not have felt guilty for being on the street at that time.

Granted, if she found out prior to being shot that she was pregnant, then yes guilt would likely be a motivating factor.

In either case it remains to be seen.

The bottom line is: we are not talking about a court of law here, we are talking about a survival situation where they are faced with an unknown hostile force of unknown size and capability. She acted in the best interests of herself and the group.

Although the "Others" had not employed ranged weapons of any kind to her (and our) knowledge that does not preclude the fact she had to defend herself against Goodwin and only by sheer luck managed to impale him on a sharp stick!

Given that incident alone she was justified in using deadly force, ie: the pistol, to defend herself and the rest of her group from a perceived threat.

Given what they had been through if she were a bit trigger-happy I cannot fault her. Anyone who has ever been in combat will tell you she was justified in her actions, myself included.

As to the bank robbery the fact remains, she robbed the bank. Had she not, neither the manager nor anyone else, would have ever been in danger because of it. Would she be culpable for shooting her accomplices? Yes. Would she have a defense? Yes, of course. However, that does not preclude the fact she still robbed the bank and as a direct result acted to protect the manager.

Now, put the Black's law dictionary back on the shelf. ;)

[LostInWilderness]

Ana did not shoot Shannon "for no reason" as there was clearly a perceived threat of imminent danger which is a reason.
You keep throwing around the term "perceived threat" like it has some magical immunity quality. It does not. Ana can't just perceive Libby as a threat and shoot her. Ana cannot just perceive Bernard as a threat and shoot him. Nor can she just perceive Shannon as a threat and shoot her even though you wish that was OK. The geeky, out of place girl stumbling through the jungle hollering for Walt obviously wasn't a threat a to anybody.

Somebody please post the prediction made that Ana would be trigger happy, that has a date proir to the episode airdate of Shannon being shot. Wait, LIW the burden of proof is upon you.
Interesting, arbitrary standard. It was predictable during the buildup to the episode/scene that Ana would kill/shoot Shannon.

Take a trip to the character forum and explain how Ana Lucia has many more post in a shorter time than the Shannon forum. Please do not tell me it was the ezhack, as Shannon forum still has a head start on the Ana Lucia regardless of the hack.
Controversy. Shannon had little. She was mostly disliked at first, and them mostly liked after her Boone/Locke/Vincent/Walt transformation. She was never controversial like Ana-Lucia.

[Badger]

Nor can she just perceive Shannon as a threat and shoot her...

She most certainly can and she obviously did. Read my last post.

It isn't as though she said "Oh, you're Shannon? Well I think you're a threat" and then shot her!

Let me put it quite simply: If I had been in her position, me that is, not her, I very likely would have done the same thing.

Did you read my post with regards to the police shooting other cops accidentally due to "perceived threat"?

That means it is not a term I came up with. I didn't pull it out of my &*#!

[wickedsweet]

ILTL SAID

Somebody please post the prediction made that Ana would be trigger happy, that has a date proir to the episode airdate of Shannon being shot

While I'm not LIW I found that to be an interesting challenge. The closest thing I could find was in the MR will ruin season2thread in the MR forum. The following post was dated on 7-15-05.

Boy I can't wholeheartedly agree enough. She will totally ruin the show with her attitude and bad ass behavior. And I bet she kills someone. Maybe Jack

Not eactly calling her trigger happy but a pretty good indicator of what alot of people were predicting with AL.

[I Like Freckles]

Yes she had, just after Cindy's mysterious disapperance.
Oh. You mean like right when she yelled "RUN!!!"? In other words, about 30 seconds prior to her shooting Shannon? That's a circular argument if I've ever seen one.

Philosophers, like French (2001), frequently equate vigilantism with vengeance. However, Ana Lucia was clearly not acting in a vengeful manner.And your basis for this statement is what? I'm not being philosophical. She has killed in vengeance before. Not at all a stretch to assume she did it again. Was it cold-blooded and premeditated this second time? Unlikely. I doubt she had the time to form the requisite intent. But we're talking about instability here, aren't we? She's got issues. And those issues are clearly rooted in feelings of loss, guilt, powerlessness, etc. We saw her nearly snap on what was basically a routine domestic disturbance call in which she had no real personal stake after she returned to duty. Someone with those kinds of issues isn't likely to be in a more stable place after going through what A-L has for the past seven weeks. Especially if she has made it personal, which she clearly has.

Again, we do not know whether or not she was aware she was pregnant at the time she was shot by Jason. If she wasn't then she could not have felt guilty for being on the street at that time.

Granted, if she found out prior to being shot that she was pregnant, then yes guilt would likely be a motivating factor.Come again? Of COURSE she could still feel guilty. Guilt is not exactly the most rational of emotions. It's not a leap of any kind for her to feel responsible for the fetus' death even if she didn't know she had it prior to being told after the shooting.

As to the bank robbery the fact remains, she robbed the bank. Had she not, neither the manager nor anyone else, would have ever been in danger because of it. Would she be culpable for shooting her accomplices? Yes. Would she have a defense? Yes, of course. However, that does not preclude the fact she still robbed the bank and as a direct result acted to protect the manager.Culpable? (def.: "Deserving of blame or censure as being wrong, evil, improper, or injurious. Blameworthy") Uh. Hello? If you mean that she is “responsible” for shooting her accomplices, then yes, you are correct. She clearly shot them on purpose and with intent. And that intent was clearly to protect the innocent. But you lost me on the whole “wrong, evil, improper, or injurious” thing.” By your logic, a burglar who shoots his accomplice in the leg to stop the accomplice from raping a woman who was working late and alone in the building they were burglarizing would be “culpable” for the shooting.

And legal liability aside, Kate has the moral high ground on A-L by a LONG margin. We may of course find out something that shatters this assertion tonight, but as of now, Kate has never to our knowledge intentionally caused the death of another person. Is she reckless? Yeah. Certainly. But a murderer? Hardly. A-L cannot say the same thing now, can she? Kate has her flaws, but acting rashly and in a knee-jerk, “shoot first, ask questions later” manner is not one of them.

Although the "Others" had not employed ranged weapons of any kind to her (and our) knowledge that does not preclude the fact she had to defend herself against Goodwin and only by sheer luck managed to impale him on a sharp stick!

Given that incident alone she was justified in using deadly force, ie: the pistol, to defend herself and the rest of her group from a perceived threat.

Given what they had been through if she were a bit trigger-happy I cannot fault her. Anyone who has ever been in combat will tell you she was justified in her actions, myself included. Where to begin here? First off, you appear to have completely missed my point here. She shot Shannon at a range of AT LEAST 10 feet. Probably more than that because Sayid is about 10 feet from A-L as he gets up to confront her before Eko clocks him and Shannon stumbled around a bit after the shooting. We know that Shannon wasn’t moving terribly quickly at the time of the shooting. She was doing her “I’m a hot blond” jog-wiggle, not a sprint. And A-L was stationary. That’s a really poor display of threat identification. In Hollywood, everybody is capable of making the perfect non-lethal leg wound to merely incapacitate an assailant. While this clearly isn’t true in real life, it’s telling that the writers didn’t allow A-L this magical superpower even though we know she’s a damn good shot.

Given the attack by Goodwin (another unarmed person, btw), and JUST the attack by Goodwin (an encounter she handled successfully with the proper level of force WITHOUT the pistol, mind you), you’re actually trying to argue that she was justified in shooting any unidentified person she happened to encounter in the jungle whom she did not recognize simply because it was raining, some voices were whispering, and she was scared and traumatized by a pretty bad 7 weeks? Come on. Really? I mean, you’ve made some borderline absurd assertions already in this thread, but that could be the best one yet.

You might not be able to fault her, but that doesn’t make her non-“culpable” her. She has a demonstrated history of poor decision making skills. She was an instable hot head prior to even reaching the island. And that instability has now needlessly claimed an innocent life on the island.


Black’s law dictionary? Don’t own one, sorry.

[Badger]

Oh. You mean like right when she yelled "RUN!!!"? In other words, about 30 seconds prior to her shooting Shannon?

They all heard the mysterious whispers just after Cindy vanished, which is what I was referring to. It was nowhere near the time she shot Shannon.

I said:

Philosophers, like French (2001), frequently equate vigilantism with vengeance. However, Ana Lucia was clearly not acting in a vengeful manner.

To which you replied:

And your basis for this statement is what? I'm not being philosophical. She has killed in vengeance before.

and:

We now know that she has killed out of revenge before.

My point being: she was not acting as a vigilante.

If you mean that she is “responsible” for shooting her accomplices, then yes, you are correct.

Yes, that is exactly what I meant.

Kate has the moral high ground on A-L by a LONG margin.

Given what we know currently, yes, I agree. However, we have not seen all of Kate's flashbacks yet and have no idea just what she is wanted for, now do we?

you’re actually trying to argue that she was justified in shooting any unidentified person she happened to encounter in the jungle whom she did not recognize simply because it was raining, some voices were whispering, and she was scared and traumatized by a pretty bad 7 weeks?

Not "any unidentified person" but rather a perceived threat. Given what they had been through, Shannon was a perceived threat. Make no mistake about it. And yes, I know that term irks some people. Sorry, but it's a fact.

While this clearly isn’t true in real life, it’s telling that the writers didn’t allow A-L this magical superpower even though we know she’s a damn good shot.

As to Ana's shooting skills? Frankly from what I saw on the indoor range she is a mediocre shot at best. I shoot better groups off-handed, at night, wearing NVGs (night vision goggles).

[wickedsweet]

Not "any unidentified person" but rather a perceived threat. Given what they had been through, Shannon was a perceived threat. Make no mistake about it. And yes, I know that term irks some people. Sorry, but it's a fact.

Maybe it's a fact the AL perceived Shannon as a threat the argument is wether that perception is warranted in regards to the level of force used.
You seem to think that the use of deadly force was indeed called for I don't. I think Ana was to quick to pull the trigger and has a proven track record of acting in a rash manner with poor results. Shoting Shannon is another example af Ana trusting her flawed instincts at the exspence of another's welfare. As of right now Ana has proven that she should not be trusted with a weapon and should at the very least be closely monitered for the good of the entire group

[Badger]

With regards to the level of force used by both Ana Lucia and that used against the Tallies, I have already answered that question in my last two posts, in detail.

[Lost Rayhne]

Yes, it's called establishing the pecking order. She accomplished precisely what she set out to do, which was establishing dominance through intimidation. Establishing the pecking order is all well and good but stomping on a bullet wound isn't, especially when you're thinking of dragging the poor bastard through the woods on a journey of unknown length. She already had the psuedo-phallic symbol. Why didn't she just wave that in Sawyer's face to establish the pecking order?

[Badger]

I agree that her actions in that regard were uncalled for. However, this is TV and it was done for dramatic effect.

I could go into great detail on why Ana could be a great leader v. for example Bernard, but I won't as I have already done so previously.

[Lost Rayhne]

I like Bernard but he is, to excuse the expression, a wuss. :) Out of the Tailies, Ana is the only one that would work as a leader. I'm just saying she's not a very good leader. Okay, maybe she could be a great leader but at this point and time, the woman is totally off her rocker and shouldn't be allow sharp objects and things that go bang.

[Badger]

Nothing sharp, motor driven or that can start a fire? Strange, they told me the same thing. ;)

The question is: who are "they"? :eek:

During WWII, while visiting a field hospital supporting the 3rd Infantry Division in Sicily, General George Patton talked to a number of wounded men. However, when he came to one young man who had no visible injuries and who was in the hospital for treatment of what was then called "combat fatigue" (now known as PTSD), he slapped the soldier several times in the presence of doctors, nurses, orderlies and patients calling him "nothing but a God-damned coward" and threatening to have him shot for cowardice.

"Gentlemen, from this moment, any soldier without leggings, without a helmet, without a tie, any man with unshined shoes or a soiled uniform...is going to be skinned." --Gen. George Patton

You have to wonder whether or not he meant it. Just like we wonder whether or not Ana Lucia meant it when she said she was going to cut off Nathan's finger the next day.

I guess he was a poor leader too.

[azteclady]

*clearing my throat cautiously*

After spending way too long reading the entire thread (and probably forgetting more than it's good for me when about to reply on such a controversial topic), I'll straddle the fence as prettily as I can and say that, as far as I'm concerned:

a) Ana Lucía IS unstable - based both on her flashback and her 'confession' to Sayid about Jason's murder, and her unnecessarily brutal behaviour towards Nathan, Jin, Michael and especially Sawyer.Some of us (the audience) can relate to her desire for revenge, some of us can empathize and/or sympathize with her carrying out said desire, some of us can do neither. Regarding her behaviour towards Nathan: there were probably less drastic means to get the truth out of him - I'm deferring to those who've actually worked in law enforcement, but aren't there interrogation techniques out there that would trick the suspect into spilling his guts? Something akin to what Ana Lucía finally did with Godwin..? As for Sawyer, while it's true that his cockiness and smartass mouth can get on anyone's nerves, stepping on his wound went way beyond the force necessary to get him to fall in line.
b) Given what we (the audience) know about her life pre-Island, and what has happened to her group since the crash, her shooting Shannon first and asking questions later seems justified to me (I believe it's Badger who posted the "perceived threat" thing)From the moment they left the bunker, Ana Lucía was excruciatingly aware of the danger of being found by the Others - who had already reduced their numbers by over 78% (do the math). On top of that, having Eko (tracker, strong man, proven capable fighter) leave the group to help Jin find Michael would have been added stress. Then the whispers, trekking with a small party dragging a gravely wounded man through unfamiliar but conceivably dangerous territory, Cindy's disappearance, heavy rain, and an unknown woman popping out of nowhere... Well I can certainly see where the mistake could have been made by anyone - and by that I mean not only any of the people currently in the island, but anyone in comparable circumstances.

c) Whether Ana Lucía knew she was pregnant before the shooting and chose to stay on the streets, or was completely unaware of her pregnancy until told at the hospital that she'd lost the baby, is irrelevant insofar as feeling guilty about it, and therefore having any perceived dangers to children become a trigger for unstable and potentially violent behaviour.Caveat: the following is anecdotal but I know for a fact it's not unique nor rare:
Between my two successful pregnancies I suffered an early miscarriage. I couldn't have been more than 4 to 5 weeks pregnant, and had in fact just begun to suspect the pregnancy when I miscarried. It was, from what the lab and the obstetrician said, an unviable pregnancy and therefore the best possible outcome for the baby itself. Yet to this day (some 15 years later) I feel somewhat guilty and wonder if there was something I did or didn't do that could have prevented the miscarriage. Now, try to extrapolate that feeling into Ana Lucía's situation:you have a profession in which, just by virtue of showing up at work, you are conciously and willingly putting your own life at risk - then, after an incident (for lack of a better term!) in which you effectively survive by the skin of your teeth, being told that you put your unborn child (that most helpless of beings) directly in harm's way, and that that decision cost it its life. Wouldn't you feel guilty?

Oh, and as far as liking or disliking the actress vs the character she plays, I'd never heard of her, nor seen anything she's been in, before that scene with Jack at the airport. I don't much care for what little I've seen of her so far (yes, I've sinned, I haven't seen every single second of LOST this season - so sue me! ;)), yet I find myself disliking, of all things, her accent.

ETA: typos still make me sick:vomit: - the downside of being anal-retentive-obssessive-compulsive
(Have I mentioned just how much I'm enjoying the new smileys????)

[Badger]

Azteclady, you summed that up nicely. Thank you.

[Lost Rayhne]

I've lost track of who has what viewpoint ... :) I think what we need to do is agree to disagree and respect everyone's opinion. This, on a whole, has been a wonderful and thought-provoking discussion.

[Badger]

From this point on if anyone disgrees with me I will skin them alive personally. Is that understood!?

Wait, that's Ana Lucia. ;)