Locke, the man who would be king.

[Lyonyssa]

Am I alone in thinking that Locke has demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt what a selfishly small individual he really is? He is willing to keep everyone on that island for the rest of their lives just because he doesn't want to leave. Granted, Rose doesn't want to leave either and has conveyed this to Bernard, but she doesn't go out of her way to sabotage very real attempts to get off the island.

Pre-crash flashbacks have demonstrated that he was a gullible, naive ne'er-do-well living a Walter Mitty existance with a mundane job and a wheelchair to boot. Post-crash, he is king of all he surveys. Admired and relied upon by the other survivors. I can understand why he wouldn't want to give all of that up, but the lengths he's gone to, to assure that this doesn't change is hindering them all. I hope that sooner or later these things will be called into question by his fellow losties. Hopefully sooner than later.

[sgtdraino]

Am I alone in thinking that Locke has demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt what a selfishly small individual he really is?

You are not the only Locke hater out there, that's for sure, but I do think you're in the minority. We don't know why Locke did what he did. Perhaps he had a very good reason? The sub, after all, is not the only means of transport. Both Locke and Ben know that Desmond's sailboat still exists. Locke made no attempts to destroy that, and actually helped push Micheal's raft out to sea. I think there was a very specific reason why that sub had to be destroyed.

[Khan]

I don't hate Locke, I think he's a great character and wonderful addition to the show. He's always well acted and well written although they did slip last year by building his season arc too slowly.

Still that doesn't mean I can't see his faults a person, and he has many. His obsessive personality destroyed all of his hopes and dreams. He pushed away a woman who loved him just as he was because he coudn't let go of a father who has proven to be truely evil when he tried to kill him.

He's a person who spent his life seeking his place to belong. He's managed to amass an impressive amount of knowledge on a wide range of subjects and aquired more than a few skills.
Now he's able to be what he always wanted and use every talent he has, from game playing to building things with his hands. This is what he lived for and now he's living it.

But his obsessive myopic way of viewing things has reared it's ugly head. He's not content to let them all get rescued and stay behind by hiding, he's determined the Island wants them all so that's that. He believes in that place, and believes that all of their destinies are there; he actually behaves like a man worshipping a god, willing to do whatever that god wants. He's imposing on them his beliefs, they're going to stay and outsiders stay away rather or not anyone likes it. What the Island wants is all that matters, and forcing that is wrong. He may be connected, he may have a sense of it being important for them to be there, and some of his mission to destroy Dharma/Hostiles may be the best thing for all.

However his selfishiness and unacceptible behavior was revealed was when he knocked Sayid out and tried to blame an innocent person, then made matters worst by arming an enraged Sayid and subtly pushing him to kill the man for his actions. He endangered Boone's life by knocking him out and leaving him tied up, injured and alone all because he had to make sure Boone did not tell Shannon about the hatch. He went along with Sayid torturing Ben he did all he could to make sure Jack couldn't stop it.
So clearly he'll do anything to anyone to fullfil what he thinks is right. How many of us would welcome or tolerate someone who does the things he does to us or someone we care about? If neighbor armed and aimed someone at you for something you didn't do would you brush it off if you survived the stab wound? What if the person was parent, sibling, or your grown child? How would you feel if it was done to them ? Or if you are having relationship problems would you allow a neighbor to knock you out, drug you, tie you up and leave you in a dangerous place to get you to see the "light" so you can keep thier pet project a secret?
We have to look at these people not from a comfortable place in our living rooms, but from the reality TPTB are trying to create. Locke may be on to something, but that doesn't excuse his wrongs, most of us know excessive drinking is harmful, but we can't pull a Carrie Nation and go from bar to bar breaking up every bottle to stop someone from going over board.
He's flaws are deep and serious, just like the rest of the Losties and he needs to get a grip before they destroy him, like they did Eko.

[Steeevil]

I don't think he blew up the sub. So, he didn't sabotage anything (in my opinion).

[Hurley4Prez]

Am I alone in thinking that Locke has demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt what a selfishly small individual he really is?
Yes, but then again, so has everyone else (besides maybe Hurley). Humans are, for the most part, selfishly "small" people.

[Lyonyssa]

I'd like to go on record as stating that I don't hate Locke, like Khan I think he is a deeply drawn character. It is the mysteries and the drawn characters that keep me coming back every week. I simply felt frustrated, as I'm sure all of us have at one point or another and wanted to find out if anyone else shared my observations. Khan, thank you for so eloquently laying out what I couldn't at 2 o'clock in the morning.

[Homer Noodleman]

FRANCINE: My mother stole again from me this week. I don't even keep money in my purse anymore. I've been hiding it. But when she wants a drink -- she stole 30 dollars. I know it may not seem like a lot of money to some of you, but it's a lot to me. And I want it back.
[Locke sort of chuckles.]
MODERATOR: Something you want to say? [Locke gestures to indicate no.] John, you've been coming here for a month now...
LOCKE: I just don't think 30 dollars is worth getting angry about.
MODERATOR: Well, Francine feels like 30 dollars...
LOCKE: Francine feels a little too much, if you ask me. You all do. I mean, seriously -- so-and-so never called me back -- my mother stole 30 dollars from me. I never even knew who my parents were. A couple of years ago my birth mother found me, and uh, she told me I was special. And through her I met my real father. Great news, right? Well, he pretended to love me just long enough to steal my kidney because he had to have a transplant. And then he dropped me back in the world like a piece of trash -- just like he did on the day that I was born. You want your damned 30 dollars back? I want my kidney back!


I've always thought that illuminated what a self-centered putz Locke is very nicely. He's at some sort of therapy session and some woman is describing a situation where her alchoholic mother is sealing money from her. Locke responds by laughing at her, and when called on his obnoxious behavior, he responds by mocking the other people. Then he launches off onto his favorite topic, himself and his wayward kidney. He rants and raves about his problems and all but demands that the others stop thinking about their concerns and all feel sorry for him instead. He showed zero empathy for anybody else's problems. Their problems paled before the issues that the Great John Locke, who occupies the center of the universe after all, was grappling with.

I find it interesting that the writers gave Locke a physical issue before they put him in the wheelchair. They also show quite clearly that he is a credulous imbecile before he ended up in that chair.


LOCKE: Norman Croucher.
RANDY: What? Norman what?
LOCKE: Norman Croucher. Norman Croucher, double amputee, no legs. He climbed to the top of Mt. Everest. Why? It was his destiny.


No Locke, it wasn't Norman Croucher's destiny, it was his determination. It was his strength of character that allowed him to climb that mountain. Norman Croucher probably would have never signed up to ride a tour bus to some ridiculous Australian Dude Ranch of a walkabout, but if he had he certainly wouldn't have left the bus leaving the parking lot foil his ambitions. He wouldn't have wailed "don't tell me what I can't do" and then meekly bought an airplane ticket back to LA.

The wheelchair, no more than the hole in his abdomen where his kidney used to be, isn't Locke's problem. Locke's problem is his complete lack of character -- his shallowness, his hubris and his astonishing lack of judgemnent.

I've said it before, if Locke's redemption ever comes, it will come in that wheelchair. His exchange with Ben, where Locke believed he held the cards because he was walking while Ben was in the wheelchair, is almost certainly to play in an ironic sense when rewatched after the series is over. No Locke, you did nothing to raise yourself out of that chair, and you would be wise to spend some time pondering the strings that are attached to your mobility. A puppet, no matter how much it huffs and puffs, will never control its own movements.

----------

ETA: as for the hating Locke business, check my signature. I don't hate Locke, I mock him. More correctly, I delight in tormenting the pour deluded souls who think Locke is a wise old jungle Shaman and a mighty warrior to boot. As for myself, I quite enjoy the character's enormous and ever evolving Boobosity.

[Susan B Anthony]

Post-crash, he is king of all he surveys. Admired and relied upon by the other survivors. I can understand why he wouldn't want to give all of that up, but the lengths he's gone to, to assure that this doesn't change is hindering them all.

Locke's goal is not to be admired and relied upon by his fellow survivors. I think he enjoyed that position for a while, but blowing up the communications center and the submarine have probably put him at the top of everybody's s*** list. Locke sacrificed the esteem of his peers for his higher goal, which is to serve and protect the Island. If I was a fellow castaway, I might not agree with Locke's loyalties, but to him, it is a higher purpose. We have seen all along that Locke has the makings of a religious zealot. Anything that gets in the way of his higher calling must be sacrificed.

[Brian]

Very well said SBA. I agree completely.

Anyone who thinks that Locke gives a furry rat's rear about making friends on that island is mistaken IMO. I don't think he really gives a damn.

This was shown in S1E22 Born To Run:

JACK: 3 weeks. You've been out here for 3 weeks digging this thing up and you never told me about it?

LOCKE: All due respect, Jack, but since when do I report to you?

JACK: All due respect, John, but you lied.

LOCKE: How long did you have that case full of guns before you decided the rest of us needed to know? You used your best discretion. I used mine.

Yeah, Locke is looking out for himself. I don't know that he's ever stated otherwise. :)

[DaGringo]

Yes, but then again, so has everyone else (besides maybe Hurley). Humans are, for the most part, selfishly "small" people.

Yes but its how small Locke is... Jack gets obsessed with the woman of his dreams, he takes it badly, gets over it... goes to asia picks up a hot chick... Locke gets obsessed with a woman, takes it badly, gets paralyzed, gets obsessed with a phone sex operator, takes it badly, gets obsessed with being a hunter tracker guru prophet, pushes a button (obsessively), decides to stop pushing a button, takes it badly, becomes obsessed with blowing stuff up... takes it badly.
I do not hate the character of Locke, he is what he is supposed to be: a metaphor for how to ruin a life. If he were a real person, I would be disgusted by him.

[sgtdraino]

Still that doesn't mean I can't see his faults a person, and he has many.

As do we all. :)

His obsessive personality destroyed all of his hopes and dreams.

Really? I thought his hopes and dreams were destroyed by a man who stole his kidney, and pushed him out a window! :) The only thing Locke wanted was to (a) help out his Dad with a kidney, and (b) stop his dad from hurting other people. Locke seeks to do good.

He pushed away a woman who loved him just as he was because he coudn't let go of a father who has proven to be truely evil when he tried to kill him.

He didn't push her away. He didn't tell her what he was up to, because he knew she would not understand it. And he was right, she didn't. I still see Locke's actions as part of his process of letting go of his dad, not clinging to him.

He's not content to let them all get rescued and stay behind by hiding, he's determined the Island wants them all so that's that.

How do you reconcile this view with Locke helping push the raft out to sea, Locke knowing and not seeming to care about the sailboat, and Locke attempting to use the computer to contact the mainland?

However his selfishiness and unacceptible behavior was revealed was when he knocked Sayid out

Not really, because the motives behind that behavior have never been revealed. Why'd he do it? You can only guess. The only insight is what Locke himself says, that the Radio Tower is a place too dangerous to lead people to. If Sayid had located it, there's no way Locke would have been able to talk the 815s out of going there. What if many of them ended up getting killed?

and tried to blame an innocent person, then made matters worst by arming an enraged Sayid and subtly pushing him to kill the man for his actions.

:poop: It's true Locke deflected suspicion away from himself, but merely suggesting the possibility of a slow-fuse should not have been enough to send Sayid over the edge. Sayid's own hostility towards Sawyer has more to blame for that attack.

He endangered Boone's life by knocking him out and leaving him tied up, injured and alone all because he had to make sure Boone did not tell Shannon about the hatch.

Boone was never in danger.

He went along with Sayid torturing Ben he did all he could to make sure Jack couldn't stop it.

Yup. He trusted Sayid's instincts, which turned out to be correct.

So clearly he'll do anything to anyone to fullfil what he thinks is right.

That is correct. Locke tries to do the right thing. If the stakes are high enough, sometimes individuals have to take a back seat to the big picture.

How many of us would welcome or tolerate someone who does the things he does to us or someone we care about?

You might not like it when the cop pulls you over and gives you a ticket, but his actions are intended to promote a safer driving environment for the populace as a whole. Your own freedoms are curtailed, for the betterment of your fellows.

He's at some sort of therapy session

There is no arguing the fact that Locke was a different sort of person before his life was reborn on the island. :)

No Locke, it wasn't Norman Croucher's destiny, it was his determination. It was his strength of character that allowed him to climb that mountain.

One might say that it was Croucher's determination and strength that enabled him to fulfill his destiny. :) Maybe you simply don't believe in destiny, Homer. That's cool, that's your prerogative. But it's hard to argue that destiny doesn't exist in the world of Lost.

Norman Croucher probably would have never signed up to ride a tour bus to some ridiculous Australian Dude Ranch of a walkabout,

Hey, even Croucher had to start somewhere. I'll bet there was a time in his life where he did mundane or dumb things too, just like everybody else. It's all part of the journey that is life. If Locke hadn't gone to the Dude Ranch, he wouldn't be living his dream on the island right now.

Locke's problem is his complete lack of character --

"You make people think that you're their family, and then you leave their life in ruins... and I'm not going to let you do it again."

his shallowness,

"I believe in a lot of things."

his hubris

"My story would bore you."

and his astonishing lack of judgemnent.

"It's better if you're (Kate) the first one he sees."

I've said it before, if Locke's redemption ever comes, it will come in that wheelchair.

Wishful thinking for some, I guess. That would be some sucky storytelling, as far as I'm concerned though. Sounds like you'd tell Norman Croucher to redeem himself by staying home and accepting he's just a helpless cripple. We grow by trying to be more than we are.

His exchange with Ben, where Locke believed he held the cards because he was walking while Ben was in the wheelchair, is almost certainly to play in an ironic sense when rewatched after the series is over.

We'll see. :) For the sake of all the disabled fans of the show, I hope you're wrong.

No Locke, you did nothing to raise yourself out of that chair,

He booked a flight to Australia. He did what he could. What would you have him do? His back was broken. The only thing that was going to raise him out of that chair was the island. Locke tried to be more than he was, which is all any of us can do.

and you would be wise to spend some time pondering the strings that are attached to your mobility. A puppet, no matter how much it huffs and puffs, will never control its own movements.

Locke is no more a puppet than you are. We are all to some degree manipulated and influenced by the people around us, but we have our own identities too. Locke is no different.

ETA: as for the hating Locke business, check my signature. I don't hate Locke, I mock him.

Semantics. You think he's an idiot, and you don't like him. Sure he's an interesting character, hard to argue against that, but you fail to recognize any of his finer qualities. You delight in doing your best to tear him down and make him look bad, and that my friend is the very definition of a hater.

More correctly, I delight in tormenting the pour deluded souls who think Locke is a wise old jungle Shaman and a mighty warrior to boot. As for myself, I quite enjoy the character's enormous and ever evolving Boobosity.

I rest my case. :)

Locke's goal is not to be admired and relied upon by his fellow survivors. I think he enjoyed that position for a while, but blowing up the communications center and the submarine have probably put him at the top of everybody's s*** list.

I agree. Locke's tale has generally been one of personal sacrifice, in the attempt to accomplish something good.

Locke sacrificed the esteem of his peers for his higher goal, which is to serve and protect the Island.

Well now, we don't know for sure that it was as simple as that. It has not yet been made clear why Locke (apparently) blew up the submarine.

Anything that gets in the way of his higher calling must be sacrificed.

But if that higher calling is the protection of the 815s, or mankind as a whole, isn't that worth some sacrifices?

Yeah, Locke is looking out for himself. I don't know that he's ever stated otherwise. :)

"I'm doing what's best for all of us."

I do not hate the character of Locke, he is what he is supposed to be: a metaphor for how to ruin a life. If he were a real person, I would be disgusted by him.

You don't hate the character, but he disgusts you? More semantics, hater. If you ever become disabled, I guess you should just sit there and quietly accept your fate, eh? Me, I'm booking a flight to Australia! :)

[GrahamK]

Wow. sgtdraino is certainly a passionate advocate of Locke's plus points! Top marks for enthusiasm.

My position, up front, is that I don't hate Locke. I have immense sympathy for him. But at the moment I don't think he is good for the group as a whole.

Before Flight 815 Locke was an angry and bitter man. I think I'd be angry and bitter if my father stole an organ and then tried to kill me. That's understandable, and shouldn't be held against him. However, let's not be blind to his flaws. He has always had dreadful people skills.

It was his fault Helen left him - not Cooper's. His repeatedly obsessive secrecy drove her away. His behaviour in the anger management session was insensitive to those around him. From the latest episode we also learn he unilaterally decided to skip prescribed therapy sessions. Locke would have been a hard man to like before his accident.

From what we saw at the box company, being in a wheelchair seemed to have helped him (oddly). It seems as if he was able to channel his obsession into doing stuff like the walkabout. (I don't agree with those who dismiss this as a pathetic venture). However, he still lacked people skills to the extent that he built an abnormally close relationship with a phone-sex operator.

Fast forward to the island. Miraculously cured, Locke has a chance to discover a purpose in life - since he clearly has the best survival talents of the group. Someone with greater people skills would have become the natural leader, but Locke manages to find himself sidelined to the point that the only people who listen to him are Walt and Boone. This happens because Locke falls back into his old ways of obsession and secrecy; faults which contribute to Boone's death.

Locke then has his obsessive belief in the island tested by Ben's manipulation and by the discovery of the Pearl. Subsequent events restore Locke's belief, but now it's different. Now he has evolved from an obsessed believer into an extremist zealot.

Initially Locke did his own thing, and by and large was prepared to let everyone else do their own thing too. He'd join in when he felt like it, but isolate himself at other times. Now Locke demands that they all march to his beat.

The C4 in his backpack reveals he knew the Flame was primed to explode, and indicates it was a deliberate act. The murder of Mikhail was a reckless act of someone focussed solely on their short term goal, with no though of further consequences. The destruction of the submarine was an utterly selfish act.

Locke wants to remain on the island, and so in his extreme zeal he cannot accept anyone else leaving; after all, nobody was suggesting that if the sub came and went freely, he'd ever be forced to go. Locke is no longer satisfied with believing the island is paradise - he now has to force everyone else to believe it too.

The question now is; how will this new John Locke react to Cooper? Does he have the strength in his faith to rise above the past and move on from his father? Or will the sight of his nemesis bring Locke's belief system crashing down around him?

[Reduak]

I don't hate Locke, I think he's a great character and wonderful addition to the show. He's always well acted and well written although they did slip last year by building his season arc too slowly.

Still that doesn't mean I can't see his faults a person, and he has many. His obsessive personality destroyed all of his hopes and dreams. He pushed away a woman who loved him just as he was because he coudn't let go of a father who has proven to be truely evil when he tried to kill him.

He's a person who spent his life seeking his place to belong. He's managed to amass an impressive amount of knowledge on a wide range of subjects and aquired more than a few skills.
Now he's able to be what he always wanted and use every talent he has, from game playing to building things with his hands. This is what he lived for and now he's living it.

But his obsessive myopic way of viewing things has reared it's ugly head. He's not content to let them all get rescued and stay behind by hiding, he's determined the Island wants them all so that's that. He believes in that place, and believes that all of their destinies are there; he actually behaves like a man worshipping a god, willing to do whatever that god wants. He's imposing on them his beliefs, they're going to stay and outsiders stay away rather or not anyone likes it. What the Island wants is all that matters, and forcing that is wrong. He may be connected, he may have a sense of it being important for them to be there, and some of his mission to destroy Dharma/Hostiles may be the best thing for all.

However his selfishiness and unacceptible behavior was revealed was when he knocked Sayid out and tried to blame an innocent person, then made matters worst by arming an enraged Sayid and subtly pushing him to kill the man for his actions. He endangered Boone's life by knocking him out and leaving him tied up, injured and alone all because he had to make sure Boone did not tell Shannon about the hatch. He went along with Sayid torturing Ben he did all he could to make sure Jack couldn't stop it.
So clearly he'll do anything to anyone to fullfil what he thinks is right. How many of us would welcome or tolerate someone who does the things he does to us or someone we care about? If neighbor armed and aimed someone at you for something you didn't do would you brush it off if you survived the stab wound? What if the person was parent, sibling, or your grown child? How would you feel if it was done to them ? Or if you are having relationship problems would you allow a neighbor to knock you out, drug you, tie you up and leave you in a dangerous place to get you to see the "light" so you can keep thier pet project a secret?
We have to look at these people not from a comfortable place in our living rooms, but from the reality TPTB are trying to create. Locke may be on to something, but that doesn't excuse his wrongs, most of us know excessive drinking is harmful, but we can't pull a Carrie Nation and go from bar to bar breaking up every bottle to stop someone from going over board.
He's flaws are deep and serious, just like the rest of the Losties and he needs to get a grip before they destroy him, like they did Eko.
Great Analysis:Cheers:

One other thing I think should be mentioned is how he's constantly being conned. Cooper, Eddie, and Ben all have the ability to identify his weakness.. the need to feel a sense of feeling/belonging, and then exploit it.

Assuming the island has some kind of consciousness that Locke is tapped into, I'm starting to think it may turn out that it's trying to con him into keeping everyone there. Given all the Stephen King influences in Lost, that seems to be right in line with those.

[Reduak]

That is correct. Locke tries to do the right thing. If the stakes are high enough, sometimes individuals have to take a back seat to the big picture.

You might not like it when the cop pulls you over and gives you a ticket, but his actions are intended to promote a safer driving environment for the populace as a whole. Your own freedoms are curtailed, for the betterment of your fellows.

But if that higher calling is the protection of the 815s, or mankind as a whole, isn't that worth some sacrifices?

What you're describing is "paternalism". It's where a person believes, much like a parent, that they know better than other people what is best for them, so they make the decisions for the other person/people without getting their input or allowing them to make their own choices.

Your analogy of the police doesn't really hold up because a police force operates as the enforcement arm of a government that's freely elected. If I and enough of my fellow citizens think a law needs to be changed, we can get our reps to change it. We also have the right to go to court and challenge it. The police have to abide by decisions made by the courts and the duly elected officials.

I've always found the role of paternalism a very interesting aspect of Lost. Jack, as a sterotypical doctor, is extremely paternalistic. Docs are trained to think that way b/c they DO know more about how our bodies work than we do and have to make trust their ability to decide what's best. Jack makes decisions that affect all the survivors on the island the same way, and often these have been terrible decisions with major repercussions.

Locke can't stand when anyone else, specifically Jack or Sayid makes unilateral decisions, yet he does the exact same thing. For ex. it wasn't enough for him to stop pushing the button.. He had to make sure Eko didn't either.

Now don't get me wrong, I really love the depth of Locke's character and TOQ does a phenominal job bringing all that out. But I don't just see this as a character flaw. I see it as a huge threat that if not addressed could result in HUGE problems. I mean, how do we know that the instructions Locke are for the best and that he's not just being conned yet again?

[DaGringo]

:D

You don't hate the character, but he disgusts you? More semantics, hater. If you ever become disabled, I guess you should just sit there and quietly accept your fate, eh? Me, I'm booking a flight to Australia! :)

Some of the greatest characters in fiction (Dracula, Hannibal Lecter, Barney the Dinosaur...) are designed to illicit a strong dislike from the audience. It is not a contradiction to loathe them, and yet still be captivated by them... John Locke wasn't pathetic because he was in a wheel chair, but rather because of how he got into that chair. Someone like Christopher Reeve showed true dignity when dealing with a handicap: He worked to try to get out of said chair and never wallowed in self pity. John Locke sunk into the muck, inventing a "Great Destiny" for himself to avoid the fact that he had a kidney and his legs taken away by his own stupidity. I see Locke and I DO get excited... I think "What new gullibilty will he present us today?" So yeah you take that walk about and get nothing out of it (a man has to know his limitations...), you could find me in physical rehabilitation and living a life...:D

[sgtdraino]

Before Flight 815 Locke was an angry and bitter man.

Oh yeah.

However, let's not be blind to his flaws. He has always had dreadful people skills.

I don't know if I'd go that far. He's certainly not the most socially outgoing fellow, but most of the time he doesn't act like an asshole, unlike certain other characters I could name. :)

It was his fault Helen left him - not Cooper's.

I think there's enough blame to go around.

His repeatedly obsessive secrecy drove her away.

It's true that Locke, like the other 815s, seems to almost obsessively keep secrets from other people. But I still think it wasn't the secrecy that did in his relationship, it was the interaction with Cooper. If Locke had been up front with Helen about what he was doing with Cooper, I still think she would have been ticked off, and left him.

Locke would have been a hard man to like before his accident.

I can agree with that.

However, he still lacked people skills to the extent that he built an abnormally close relationship with a phone-sex operator.

I think it was a service more like this:

http://www.thecybershrink.com/index.html

But I take your point. But heck, if I thought there was a real relationship developing with a woman in my life, why not give it a shot? So what if he met her on the phone?

Someone with greater people skills would have become the natural leader,

Not everybody wants to lead, and to be the leader should not necessarily be the highest goal to have. Locke took on the most helpful role he could do.

but Locke manages to find himself sidelined to the point that the only people who listen to him are Walt and Boone.

And Jack, Sayid, Charlie, Shannon, Sawyer, Claire, etc., etc., etc.

faults which contribute to Boone's death.

Boone was the sacrifice The Island demanded. There was no saving him.

Now he has evolved from an obsessed believer into an extremist zealot.

Initially Locke did his own thing, and by and large was prepared to let everyone else do their own thing too. He'd join in when he felt like it, but isolate himself at other times. Now Locke demands that they all march to his beat.

Just like all the other Locke detractors, you are reading motives into Locke's actions which there is no evidence to back up. Did you hear Locke say why he was blowing up the sub? I sure didn't.

The C4 in his backpack reveals he knew the Flame was primed to explode, and indicates it was a deliberate act.

The only deliberate act was Locke pressing 77. Did you hear anything that indicated 77 would cause something to blow up? I sure didn't.

The murder of Mikhail was a reckless act of someone focussed solely on their short term goal, with no though of further consequences.

Time was of the essence. Even moving as quickly as they did, Locke only just managed to destroy the sub before Jack could leave on it.

The destruction of the submarine was an utterly selfish act.

Then you must know, beyond a doubt, why he did it. Please enlighten us, and explain how you know. :)

Locke wants to remain on the island, and so in his extreme zeal he cannot accept anyone else leaving; after all, nobody was suggesting that if the sub came and went freely, he'd ever be forced to go. Locke is no longer satisfied with believing the island is paradise - he now has to force everyone else to believe it too.

Sailboat! :banghead:

One other thing I think should be mentioned is how he's constantly being conned. Cooper, Eddie, and Ben all have the ability to identify his weakness.. the need to feel a sense of feeling/belonging, and then exploit it.

Everyone has weaknesses, everyone is suseptible to being conned. Heck, Sawyer pretty much conned everybody!

Assuming the island has some kind of consciousness that Locke is tapped into, I'm starting to think it may turn out that it's trying to con him into keeping everyone there. Given all the Stephen King influences in Lost, that seems to be right in line with those.

This there may be some truth to. The Island definitely manipulates Locke into carrying out certain tasks, and is not always completely up front with him about it. But do I think The Island told Locke, "Don't let anyone leave the island!"? No, I do not. If it had, he would not have pushed the raft out to sea. If it had, he would have been out to destroy the sailboat as well as the submarine. Locke's actions have not prevented everyone from leaving the island, they have only prevented Jack from leaving that morning.

What you're describing is "paternalism". It's where a person believes, much like a parent, that they know better than other people what is best for them, so they make the decisions for the other person/people without getting their input or allowing them to make their own choices.

You are correct, Locke is very paternalistic. This was an observation I made all the way back in Season 1 (further evidence that S1 Locke is back, yay!). Locke has repeatedly indicated that there are things he knows that the other 815s are not ready for, would not understand properly. Part of Locke's role has been to protect the 815s from themselves.

Your analogy of the police doesn't really hold up because a police force operates as the enforcement arm of a government that's freely elected.

Not necessarily. All kinds of governments have police forces. There is no government on Lost Island, no agreed established authority. The place is anarchy. Duly elected officials wouldn't really work yet, because none of them would have sufficient understanding of the island to make good decisions. The one person with the best understanding of how things work there, is John Locke. But it's a case of being the one sane person in an insane world. John Locke could preach his head off, but nobody is going to believe him yet, because the things he knows are too incredible to be believed. Thus, until that time comes that people are ready to listen, Locke does what he can to keep people who don't know any better from making mistakes.

Locke can't stand when anyone else, specifically Jack or Sayid makes unilateral decisions, yet he does the exact same thing.

If a blind person insisted on driving you around, I bet you'd be nervous about it too. :)

For ex. it wasn't enough for him to stop pushing the button.. He had to make sure Eko didn't either.

Bleh. It's an example, but anything from the time period when Locke was without his faith is not going to be in character. He was off his game.

I mean, how do we know that the instructions Locke are for the best and that he's not just being conned yet again?

We don't, and that's a very good point. Even I acknowledge the possibilty that The Island is conning Locke. The reason that Smokey smited Eko seems warped indeed, and we the audience know that Smokey has not always played straight with Locke in the past. The only thing that I have argued, is that Locke believes he is doing what is best for everyone, and that The Island has given him pretty good reasons why it's important to follow its advice. Life and death reasons. Smart people with the best of intentions get fooled all the time, but in the end, they're still smart people with the desire to do good. That is what I admire about John Locke.

John Locke wasn't pathetic because he was in a wheel chair, but rather because of how he got into that chair.

So, because he confronted his dad about a possible murder, and his Dad attempted to murder him too, he's pathetic?

Someone like Christopher Reeve showed true dignity when dealing with a handicap: He worked to try to get out of said chair and never wallowed in self pity.

I'll bet Christopher Reeve had his bad days too. And his work to get himself out of his chair had about as much affect as Locke's Australian walkabout. Heck, I actually see more similarities in their behavior than differences.

John Locke sunk into the muck, inventing a "Great Destiny" for himself to avoid the fact that he had a kidney and his legs taken away by his own stupidity.

Locke's not stupid, he just got conned. I don't care how smart you are, you can still be conned. I dare say every human being alive has been fooled many times. Locke's biggest mistake is in trusting the wrong people. But sometimes that happens. You can never know, absolutely, how good or bad a person is deep down. So you can either walk around not trusting anybody, and live a paranoid existence, or you can learn to trust certain people... but sometimes be fooled and disappointed by them. Locke is a guy who has had some really hard knocks. Other than that, he's just a regular joe.

[DharmaUdonNoodles]

Locke isn't a small person. He takes things badly or whatever because he takes everything personally. Everything in his life HAS to MEAN something. Whether it defines him or the world in which he is in. I like his character. Without him the story wouldn't be pushed forward...the mystery wouldn't be pushed forward. So what if everyone hates him!

"And to the man who would be king
I would say only one thing
la la la-la-la-laa la la la-la-la-laa
Perish the day when they heed what you say
They'll take you away if they don't like what you say
They don't like what you say..."-Libertines

[yoyoj06]

Locke isn't a small person. He takes things badly or whatever because he takes everything personally. Everything in his life HAS to MEAN something. Whether it defines him or the world in which he is in. I like his character. Without him the story wouldn't be pushed forward...the mystery wouldn't be pushed forward. So what if everyone hates him!

"And to the man who would be king
I would say only one thing
la la la-la-la-laa la la la-la-la-laa
Perish the day when they heed what you say
They'll take you away if they don't like what you say
They don't like what you say..."-Libertines

I'm with you on this one. I think Locke believes that everything has to have some level of meaning to it. Without Locke's persistance to keep discovering things and learning things, the show would be at a stalemate because no one has filled that role.

If people hate him, so what. You are allowed to hate important people. I enjoy that people argue over if Locke is good or bad or this or that. It just only adds to the mystery and leaves us pondering.

Locke's persistnace is what lets us move forward.

[Homer Noodleman]

I've always thought that illuminated what a self-centered putz Locke is very nicely. He's at some sort of therapy session and some woman is describing a situation where her alchoholic mother is sealing money from her. Locke responds by laughing at her, and when called on his obnoxious behavior, he responds by mocking the other people. Then he launches off onto his favorite topic, himself and his wayward kidney. He rants and raves about his problems and all but demands that the others stop thinking about their concerns and all feel sorry for him instead. He showed zero empathy for anybody else's problems. Their problems paled before the issues that the Great John Locke, who occupies the center of the universe after all, was grappling with.

I find it interesting that the writers gave Locke a physical issue before they put him in the wheelchair. They also show quite clearly that he is a credulous imbecile before he ended up in that chair.



He's at some sort of therapy session

There is no arguing the fact that Locke was a different sort of person before his life was reborn on the island. :)


This is why Fisking generally sucks as a posting technique. You did nothing more than pick out a simple declaritive sentence from that section of my post, and then respond to that sentence with a non sequitur while ignoring the substance of the two paragraphs.

What next? Are you going to start parsing sentence fragments? Oh, wait you already have...

Norman Croucher probably would have never signed up to ride a tour bus to some ridiculous Australian Dude Ranch of a walkabout,

Would you not agree that the full sentence ( below, with the part you so conveniently left off bolded) gives a rather different meaning than the one you tried to saddle me with?

Norman Croucher probably would have never signed up to ride a tour bus to some ridiculous Australian Dude Ranch of a walkabout, but if he had he certainly wouldn't have left the bus leaving the parking lot foil his ambitions.

My points were, and I'll bullet point them so the whole pesky paragraph structure doesn't get in the way:


at that thereapy session he was being a complete asshole
they used the missing kidney to show it wasn't being in a wheelchair that made him an asshole, he always was one.
unlike Croucher, Locke is a whiney quitter
Being able to walk did not solve his problems, because the wheelchair was never his major problem
his boobery has always been his major problem.

[GrahamK]

Then you must know, beyond a doubt, why he did it. Please enlighten us, and explain how you know. :)

You don't do yourself or your argument any favours with this kind of statement.

Of course none of us can know, beyond a doubt, why the characters on Lost are motivated to particular actions. However, the circumstantial evidence points to Locke discovering that the submarine was the method by which people came and went from the island. (He was told this by Mikhail). Locke then abandons Kate and Sayid to embark on his own venture of blowing up said submarine. The logical conclusion is that Locke wanted to prevent people coming and going from the island.

The rest - either way - is speculation.

I choose to speculate that Locke did this because he believes the island is a paradise which should remain unsullied and on which other island inhabitants should be forced to stay forever; because he is extreme in his faith.

Sailboat! :banghead:

(And I happen to think that given the opportunity he'd have blown the sailboat up too, before you start getting all bold type on me again!)

You choose to speculate that Locke has purer, more altruistic motives.

Of course you think your speculation is right and of course I think mine is right. That's the nature of speculation. Yours is no more supported by evidence than mine.

[Hurley4Prez]

The formatting in this thread makes my eyes hurt! It's the reading equivalent of an acute bout of attention deficit disorder.

[Ralphoid]

I hope that sooner or later these things will be called into question by his fellow losties. Hopefully sooner than later.

If there isnt some other motive, and is all a selfish act, then I believe Locke will turn into the anti-Losties... he's already the anti-Jack. But perhaps there is a deeper con being executed by Locke on the others.

[DaGringo]

So, because he confronted his dad about a possible murder, and his Dad attempted to murder him too, he's pathetic?



I'll bet Christopher Reeve had his bad days too. And his work to get himself out of his chair had about as much affect as Locke's Australian walkabout. Heck, I actually see more similarities in their behavior than differences.



Locke's not stupid, he just got conned. I don't care how smart you are, you can still be conned. I dare say every human being alive has been fooled many times. Locke's biggest mistake is in trusting the wrong people. But sometimes that happens. You can never know, absolutely, how good or bad a person is deep down. So you can either walk around not trusting anybody, and live a paranoid existence, or you can learn to trust certain people... but sometimes be fooled and disappointed by them. Locke is a guy who has had some really hard knocks. Other than that, he's just a regular joe.

1) Yes he is pathetic because of the fact he confronted his Dad when all he had to do was warn the kid and call the cops. Plus, he is just as guilty of the kid's death as whoever murdered him.
2) Reeve PROBABLY did have bad days... Locke had bad decades.
3) Locke is INCREDIBLY stupid. While I agree smart people do get conned, I WILL NOT agree that smart people get conned multiple times by THE SAME PERSON. Locke is the definition of stupidity. FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU; FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME.

[Reduak]

Not necessarily. All kinds of governments have police forces. There is no government on Lost Island, no agreed established authority. The place is anarchy. Duly elected officials wouldn't really work yet, because none of them would have sufficient understanding of the island to make good decisions. The one person with the best understanding of how things work there, is John Locke. But it's a case of being the one sane person in an insane world. John Locke could preach his head off, but nobody is going to believe him yet, because the things he knows are too incredible to be believed. Thus, until that time comes that people are ready to listen, Locke does what he can to keep people who don't know any better from making mistakes.

I was refering to police forces in democratized nations, and you missed my point. It was that a police man (in a democratic g'ment) giving a ticket enforces the law, he/she doesn't make it. Locke is arbitrarily deciding what's right and wrong and enforcing it as he sees fit.



If a blind person insisted on driving you around, I bet you'd be nervous about it too. :)
Exactly my point. Who's to say Locke's the one who can "see" what's really going on.


Locke's not stupid, he just got conned. I don't care how smart you are, you can still be conned. I dare say every human being alive has been fooled many times. Locke's biggest mistake is in trusting the wrong people. But sometimes that happens. You can never know, absolutely, how good or bad a person is deep down. So you can either walk around not trusting anybody, and live a paranoid existence, or you can learn to trust certain people... but sometimes be fooled and disappointed by them. Locke is a guy who has had some really hard knocks. Other than that, he's just a regular joe.

But see, here's the thing. You've mentioned Locke doesn't want a leadership role, but by making decisions that impact the entire group of survivors, that's exactly what he's doing. And probably the most important part of leadership is decision making ability.

Yeah, anyone can be conned, but when someone has been repeatedly played the way Locke has, it calles into question their ability to read people which is a critical part of knowing who to trust and who not to trust. Without that, it calls into question their ability to make decisions.

Don't get me wrong, without Locke's character the show would SERIOUSLY suffer, but if I knew someone like that in real life I would have big problems with him and would not trust that they'd be able to make decisions in the best interest of the group.

[DarthKitty]

1)
3) Locke is INCREDIBLY stupid. While I agree smart people do get conned, I WILL NOT agree that smart people get conned multiple times by THE SAME PERSON. Locke is the definition of stupidity. FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU; FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME.

I believe it would be much easier to not be conned by a stranger twice, as opposed to someone who is supposed to love you unconditionally. I'm not saying that Locke shouldn't be less guarded with this long lost parent, just that it would be easier to not be fooled by someone you don't long to have a relationship with. Basically, he has major Daddy issues (as we all know) and I think that's why it's tougher to see through Cooper's con.

(Did I make any sense? Worked all night and need to go to bed...)

[Homer Noodleman]

Locke is INCREDIBLY stupid. While I agree smart people do get conned, I WILL NOT agree that smart people get conned multiple times by THE SAME PERSON. Locke is the definition of stupidity. FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU; FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME.

Fool me a bajillion times and I'm a BOOB.

----------

rosiedirl -- Cooper is a stranger to Locke.

[DarthKitty]

But it's still his Dad.

I'm not saying he is being smart about Cooper, I think he is so desperate to have a parent, that he is blinded by that same desperation.

[Reduak]

But it's still his Dad.

I'm not saying he is being smart about Cooper, I think he is so desperate to have a parent, that he is blinded by that same desperation.

Agreed!

Locke's problem isn't a lack of intelligence, it's being SO desparate for a parent or a place where he "belongs" that it completely impairs his judgement.

But as I tell my son all the time... You could be the smartest person in the world, but if you don't use the brain God gave you, the end result is you're no better off than the stupidest.

[Brechtel]

Exactly my point. Who's to say Locke's the one who can "see" what's really going on.

I think his point was that Locke says he's the one who can "see" what's really going on. Whether he really can or not, doesn't matter...the point is that Locke believes he has a better understanding of the situation than say, Jack believes that Jack has...which is why Locke thinks he can act unilaterally when others probably shouldn't.

[Reduak]

I think his point was that Locke says he's the one who can "see" what's really going on. Whether he really can or not, doesn't matter...the point is that Locke believes he has a better understanding of the situation than say, Jack believes that Jack has...which is why Locke thinks he can act unilaterally when others probably shouldn't.

His point was to respond to my statement that Locke's character is a hypocrit in that he gets p!$$@!) when Jack and Sayid do not involve him in the decision making process, and then he makes unilateral decisions that affect the whole group. I understand his point, I just completely disagree with it. It doesn't matter what Locke believes..the first time he does something that impacts the entire group without getting input he loses the right to complain when others do the same thing. So what if he believes he has a better understanding of the situation, his fb have shown consistantly poor judgement and inability to make good decisions.

If I'm on that island he better give me a good reason to believe in what he's doing or he's going to be bound and gagged for the duration, and it seems like Sayid's about to that point too.

[sgtdraino]

Everything in his life HAS to MEAN something. Whether it defines him or the world in which he is in.

I can agree with this. Locke is a character who seeks to understand, and thus searches for meaning in everything around him. He believes it's possible that everything on the island happens for a reason (which implies that he understands that not everything in the normal world does).

So what if everyone hates him!

lol. On the contrary, I think the Locke haters are a minority. Locke is one of the most liked characters on the show! :)

If people hate him, so what. You are allowed to hate important people. I enjoy that people argue over if Locke is good or bad or this or that. It just only adds to the mystery and leaves us pondering.

True. I like the ambiguity too, I just don't really understand the points of view of those that do hate him, think he's stupid, think he's selfish, think he's out to harm the other 815s or bend them to his will, when I really don't see any evidence to support that. See evidence to the contrary, in fact.

This is why Fisking generally sucks as a posting technique.

That's a valid opinion. I still think it rox tho. :) I believe it to be the fairest and clearest means of having a debate on a board such as this.

You did nothing more than pick out a simple declaritive sentence from that section of my post, and then respond to that sentence with a non sequitur while ignoring the substance of the two paragraphs.

The substance was to give examples of Locke's loser-ness, but the examples were all pre-island. I was simply conceding the point; Locke was definitely a loser before he came to the island. There's really no need to argue points that we all agree on.

What next? Are you going to start parsing sentence fragments? Oh, wait you already have...

You can attack the format of my argument all you want, I think it's legitimate and I'm stickin' to it. :)

Would you not agree that the full sentence ( below, with the part you so conveniently left off bolded) gives a rather different meaning than the one you tried to saddle me with?

Norman Croucher probably would have never signed up to ride a tour bus to some ridiculous Australian Dude Ranch of a walkabout, but if he had he certainly wouldn't have left the bus leaving the parking lot foil his ambitions.

Who says Locke was letting his ambitions be foiled (besides you, of course)? We don't really know what Locke's plans were, after they refused to let him go on the walkabout. Heck, we don't even know what happened between the time we saw him in that office, and the time we see him at the airport. Just because somebody gets your goat one day, don't mean you can't jump back into the game tomorrow. You don't always have an immediate backup plan, sometimes ya gotta fall back and regroup. What would Norman Croucher have done? Stayed in the tour office and yelled his head off until the cops were called? I don't think so. Now that would be dumb.

My points were, and I'll bullet point them so the whole pesky paragraph structure doesn't get in the way:

at that thereapy session he was being a complete asshole
they used the missing kidney to show it wasn't being in a wheelchair that made him an asshole, he always was one.
unlike Croucher, Locke is a whiney quitterSo, because Locke acted like an asshole at the therapy session, he's always been an asshole? I don't buy that. I think, even in the pre-island flashbacks, Locke has generally been shown to not be an asshole. To be a friendly helpful guy, beset by more than his fair shair of problems. Is Locke sometimes a quitter? Sure! But again, so are all of us. There's plenty of examples where he has refused to quit, both pre and post island.

Being able to walk did not solve his problems, because the wheelchair was never his major problemIt was one problem heaped upon a ton of others.

his boobery has always been his major problem.Bah. Name-calling is the cheapest and weakest form of debate. Your arguments would actually carry more wait if you stopped with the names.

Of course none of us can know, beyond a doubt, why the characters on Lost are motivated to particular actions.

That is correct, but that is not the way your argument was framed. You did not frame your argument as opinion, but as fact. As if you know for certain why he did it.

However, the circumstantial evidence points to Locke discovering that the submarine was the method by which people came and went from the island. (He was told this by Mikhail). Locke then abandons Kate and Sayid to embark on his own venture of blowing up said submarine. The logical conclusion is that Locke wanted to prevent people coming and going from the island.

The only way that can be the logical conclusion, is if you can establish that Locke believes the submarine is the only method of travel. It has already been established that Locke knows there are other means, the sailboat at the very least. Past evidence of Locke not trying to destroy either the sailboat or Michael's raft, and actually actively helping push the raft out to sea, tends to refute your conclusion.

(And I happen to think that given the opportunity he'd have blown the sailboat up too, before you start getting all bold type on me again!)

He had opportunity, just as he had opportunity to destroy Michael's raft. He chose not to do so.

You choose to speculate that Locke has purer, more altruistic motives.

Base on observable evidence, of course.

Of course you think your speculation is right and of course I think mine is right. That's the nature of speculation. Yours is no more supported by evidence than mine.

See above.

1) Yes he is pathetic because of the fact he confronted his Dad when all he had to do was warn the kid and call the cops.

That was, I admit, another pre-island loser move. Not the smart thing to do, though perhaps somewhat understandable. If you thought your mom, dad, or child was going to do something wrong, wouldn't you want to talk to them first, before you decided whether or not to turn them in? I see family on a daily basis who have criminals as family members. Even if they want to, it's hard as hell to do the right thing. No matter what they are, they're still family.

Plus, he is just as guilty of the kid's death as whoever murdered him.

That's ridiculous, and tells me I shouldn't take anything you say seriously.

2) Reeve PROBABLY did have bad days... Locke had bad decades.

Funny, I don't remember "decades" of flashbacks.

3) Locke is INCREDIBLY stupid. While I agree smart people do get conned, I WILL NOT agree that smart people get conned multiple times by THE SAME PERSON. Locke is the definition of stupidity. FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU; FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME.

Know any women with abusive husbands?

I was refering to police forces in democratized nations, and you missed my point. It was that a police man (in a democratic g'ment) giving a ticket enforces the law, he/she doesn't make it. Locke is arbitrarily deciding what's right and wrong and enforcing it as he sees fit.

Arbitrary implies a flip of a coin. I don't think Locke's decisions are that casual. And mostly he let's people do whatever the hell they want. It's only when their actions will have a negative effect on other people that Locke steps in and takes initiative. Face facts: There is no conventional law on Lost Island, and Locke is probably the one with the best understanding of what will and won't get people hurt on the island. Your point is that it's not a position with any official standing, that the 815s have not invested him with the power to curtail their actions. Granted. But if you think of the Island as its own country, and The Island as its governing body, then Locke may well be the high sheriff of island law after all.

Exactly my point. Who's to say Locke's the one who can "see" what's really going on.

Lessee... Walt, Boone, Sayid, and Charlie have all at one time or another expressed the belief that Locke is the one with the clearest vision of the island.

But see, here's the thing. You've mentioned Locke doesn't want a leadership role, but by making decisions that impact the entire group of survivors, that's exactly what he's doing. And probably the most important part of leadership is decision making ability.

The 815's leadership system is flawed (actually nonexistent now that Jack is with the Others). Locke does not want to be the leader, and is probably not cut out to be a long-term leader, and yet he is the one with the greatest understanding of the island. Jack is (or was) the defacto leader, but in no way would he entertain the fantastical notions of John Locke. Thus, you've got a leader with blinders on, and an insightful adviser who knows his advice will not be heeded. And you've got life-and-death decisions that must be made.

Yeah, anyone can be conned, but when someone has been repeatedly played the way Locke has, it calles into question their ability to read people which is a critical part of knowing who to trust and who not to trust. Without that, it calls into question their ability to make decisions.

I really don't think Locke is any more gullible that you or I. For someone who knows how, it is really easy to fool people.

Locke's problem isn't a lack of intelligence, it's being SO desparate for a parent or a place where he "belongs" that it completely impairs his judgement.

But as I tell my son all the time... You could be the smartest person in the world, but if you don't use the brain God gave you, the end result is you're no better off than the stupidest.

Has your son ever fooled you? More than once perhaps? If he did wrong, would you just call the cops, or confront him about it first? It is a hard thing to give up a member of your family, and our judgement is often impaired when trying to assess their behavior.

I think his point was that Locke says he's the one who can "see" what's really going on. Whether he really can or not, doesn't matter...the point is that Locke believes he has a better understanding of the situation than say, Jack believes that Jack has...which is why Locke thinks he can act unilaterally when others probably shouldn't.

I'd agree with this. I'd add to it that I also believe Locke understands more about the island than any of the other 815s. He still might be getting conned by it! We'll just have to see. :)

His point was to respond to my statement that Locke's character is a hypocrit in that he gets p!$$@!) when Jack and Sayid do not involve him in the decision making process, and then he makes unilateral decisions that affect the whole group.

I see it as being more the reverse of that; other people get pissed when Locke does stuff on his own, Locke simply points out that they do the same thing. He is pointing out their hypocracy.

[Loster than LOST]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Homer Noodleman http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/images/002/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1417115#post1417115)
My points were, and I'll bullet point them so the whole pesky paragraph structure doesn't get in the way:
at that thereapy session he was being a complete asshole
they used the missing kidney to show it wasn't being in a wheelchair that made him an asshole, he always was one.
unlike Croucher, Locke is a whiney quitter


So, because Locke acted like an asshole at the therapy session, he's always been an asshole? I don't buy that. I think, even in the pre-island flashbacks, Locke has generally been shown to not be an asshole. To be a friendly helpful guy, beset by more than his fair shair of problems. Is Locke sometimes a quitter? Sure! But again, so are all of us. There's plenty of examples where he has refused to quit, both pre and post island.


I think anyone who bases their opinion of Locke (or any character) on the limited information in flashbacks we have seen might be at risk of being conned themselves by TPTB. Its even hard to form an opinion based on what we see of their actions on the island. There is still so much that we don't see, and that is where the real secrets lie.

Who's the greatest conman? Ben, Sawyer, Cooper??? Nope, I think the best conmen are TPTB. They are very mysterious and they have an endgame they don't want to reveal just yet.

[JohnLocke108]

Locke is teh awesome.

[Hurley4Prez]

^ Agreed. :D

[Bob Sacamano]

Locke is teh awesome.Your sig is teh awesome too.

[lostchick]

Check out this Los Angeles Times article about Lost

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/tv/la-ca-lost25mar25,1,161259.story?coll=la-entnews-tv

[DaGringo]

But it's still his Dad.

I'm not saying he is being smart about Cooper, I think he is so desperate to have a parent, that he is blinded by that same desperation.

But my dear Rosie, that's why Locke is such a fool... The man abandoned him, reappears all of a sudden, and to top it off he needs a kidney. When you want something bad for you, well, you get what you deserve.

[Hurley4Prez]

Check out this Los Angeles Times article about Lost

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/tv/la-ca-lost25mar25,1,161259.story?coll=la-entnews-tv

Thanks for posting that lostchick! :)

Executive producer Carlton Cuse added this, with all the finality he could muster: "The character of John Locke is just the very heart of the show."
That's sig-worthy stuff right there.

[DaGringo]

I can agree with this. Locke is a character who seeks to understand, and thus searches for meaning in everything around him. He believes it's possible that everything on the island happens for a reason (which implies that he understands that not everything in the normal world does).



lol. On the contrary, I think the Locke haters are a minority. Locke is one of the most liked characters on the show! :)



True. I like the ambiguity too, I just don't really understand the points of view of those that do hate him, think he's stupid, think he's selfish, think he's out to harm the other 815s or bend them to his will, when I really don't see any evidence to support that. See evidence to the contrary, in fact.



That's a valid opinion. I still think it rox tho. :) I believe it to be the fairest and clearest means of having a debate on a board such as this.



The substance was to give examples of Locke's loser-ness, but the examples were all pre-island. I was simply conceding the point; Locke was definitely a loser before he came to the island. There's really no need to argue points that we all agree on.



You can attack the format of my argument all you want, I think it's legitimate and I'm stickin' to it. :)



Who says Locke was letting his ambitions be foiled (besides you, of course)? We don't really know what Locke's plans were, after they refused to let him go on the walkabout. Heck, we don't even know what happened between the time we saw him in that office, and the time we see him at the airport. Just because somebody gets your goat one day, don't mean you can't jump back into the game tomorrow. You don't always have an immediate backup plan, sometimes ya gotta fall back and regroup. What would Norman Croucher have done? Stayed in the tour office and yelled his head off until the cops were called? I don't think so. Now that would be dumb.

So, because Locke acted like an asshole at the therapy session, he's always been an asshole? I don't buy that. I think, even in the pre-island flashbacks, Locke has generally been shown to not be an asshole. To be a friendly helpful guy, beset by more than his fair shair of problems. Is Locke sometimes a quitter? Sure! But again, so are all of us. There's plenty of examples where he has refused to quit, both pre and post island.
It was one problem heaped upon a ton of others.
Bah. Name-calling is the cheapest and weakest form of debate. Your arguments would actually carry more wait if you stopped with the names.



That is correct, but that is not the way your argument was framed. You did not frame your argument as opinion, but as fact. As if you know for certain why he did it.



The only way that can be the logical conclusion, is if you can establish that Locke believes the submarine is the only method of travel. It has already been established that Locke knows there are other means, the sailboat at the very least. Past evidence of Locke not trying to destroy either the sailboat or Michael's raft, and actually actively helping push the raft out to sea, tends to refute your conclusion.



He had opportunity, just as he had opportunity to destroy Michael's raft. He chose not to do so.



Base on observable evidence, of course.



See above.



That was, I admit, another pre-island loser move. Not the smart thing to do, though perhaps somewhat understandable. If you thought your mom, dad, or child was going to do something wrong, wouldn't you want to talk to them first, before you decided whether or not to turn them in? I see family on a daily basis who have criminals as family members. Even if they want to, it's hard as hell to do the right thing. No matter what they are, they're still family.



That's ridiculous, and tells me I shouldn't take anything you say seriously.



Funny, I don't remember "decades" of flashbacks.



Know any women with abusive husbands?



Arbitrary implies a flip of a coin. I don't think Locke's decisions are that casual. And mostly he let's people do whatever the hell they want. It's only when their actions will have a negative effect on other people that Locke steps in and takes initiative. Face facts: There is no conventional law on Lost Island, and Locke is probably the one with the best understanding of what will and won't get people hurt on the island. Your point is that it's not a position with any official standing, that the 815s have not invested him with the power to curtail their actions. Granted. But if you think of the Island as its own country, and The Island as its governing body, then Locke may well be the high sheriff of island law after all.



Lessee... Walt, Boone, Sayid, and Charlie have all at one time or another expressed the belief that Locke is the one with the clearest vision of the island.



The 815's leadership system is flawed (actually nonexistent now that Jack is with the Others). Locke does not want to be the leader, and is probably not cut out to be a long-term leader, and yet he is the one with the greatest understanding of the island. Jack is (or was) the defacto leader, but in no way would he entertain the fantastical notions of John Locke. Thus, you've got a leader with blinders on, and an insightful adviser who knows his advice will not be heeded. And you've got life-and-death decisions that must be made.



I really don't think Locke is any more gullible that you or I. For someone who knows how, it is really easy to fool people.



Has your son ever fooled you? More than once perhaps? If he did wrong, would you just call the cops, or confront him about it first? It is a hard thing to give up a member of your family, and our judgement is often impaired when trying to assess their behavior.



I'd agree with this. I'd add to it that I also believe Locke understands more about the island than any of the other 815s. He still might be getting conned by it! We'll just have to see. :)



I see it as being more the reverse of that; other people get pissed when Locke does stuff on his own, Locke simply points out that they do the same thing. He is pointing out their hypocracy.

1) Johne Locke doesn't search for meaning in anything; he INVENTS a meaning to everything. See the episodes how he so fanacticly pushed that button and then he how all of sudden he decided that was stupid and had to stop... Its easy to push Locke's button... And YES! He most fanaticly does believe that everything happens for a reason on the Island AND that it REVOLVES around him, THAT'S HIS PROBLEM! YOUR problem is that you make the Lockian leap that he doesn't believe that before arriving on the Island, when you have all the proof to the contrary: How when Mommy showed up and told him about Dad, DESTINY! How going to Australia for the Walkabout was DESTINY! Man what a LOSER.
2)They may be a minority... But they're growing all the time..
3)You don't understand the haters, cause you gloss over everything that's presented about Locke that doesn't suit your vision of Locke. VERY Locke of you.
4)What ambiguity are you talking about aside from your arguments? You LOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE Locke, for he can do no wrong....
5)Of course you would love fisking; only have to answer whats convenient...
6)He is a loser on the island as well, see the button pushing incident, getting boone killed, his easy manipulation by Benry (Man, Locke is really a jealous individual...).
7) You have NO argument... You just tout Locke's supposed rebirth on the Island. Well if Locke was reborn on the Island he would be DEAD. Every redeemed character on Lost DIES.
8)What do YOU mean his ambitions weren't foiled? He was on a plane back home when it crashed and he WASN'T happy... Remember the Hurley airport flashback, all pissed off he was gonna be carried onto the plane, defeated looking? Do you even WATCH the damn show?
9)If you talk about someone's alcoholic mom, and deny that situation any importance because YOUR situation is MUCH worse, MUCH more IMPORTANT... well your an asshole. I think Locke should be used as a synonym for asshole... Hey you! Don't be such a Locke... something like that.
10)It was one problem heaped upon a ton of others. Of HIS OWN MAKING.
11) Only a cheap form of debate if you don't have a point to back it up... I see plenty of backup in this thread.
12)Locke's motivation is the clearest on the island... he has a destiny...
13)It doesn't matter if it was the only transportation, if its the only one at hand... wheres the damn sailboat... wanna comeback to Other Central to get it, and even then you site the raft... he probably figured those guys on it had no chance of making it home, and probably right too, it would be a long trip. But I never said Locke was a good person did I? The silboat? he was to busy in the hatch obssessed with the button to do anything about it. Plus leaving Kate and Sayid to their fates is an asshole thing to do.
14)Base on observable evidence, of course.... CAN YOU CITE ANY PLEASE. So much for your "arguments"
15)see above (What's good for the goose...)
16)Again with the pre-island loser... HE IS A LOSER ON THE ISLAND AS WELL. If my mom stole my kidney and was planning a crime, I'd say, "F you I'm calling the cops." plus cooper if, IF, he is Locke's father well he abandoned him at childhood and is OWED NOTHING by Locke the fool.
17)"That's ridiculous, and tells me I shouldn't take anything you say seriously" you say? I say it shows you are dense and can't see that I mean Morally not legally... Locke was to into himself to help out that family. Kid died cause of that selfishness, just like Boone.
18) You have no sense of humour and sound rather like Locke. Maybe not decades but long enough to go from hairy to cueball.
19) Abuse is not conning... and for you to try to make that argument, means you've run out of arguments. Shame on you. To be abused is akin to brainwashing, to be conned over and over by the same guy is akin to not having a brain.
20)No arbitrary means he is doing what he wants, affecting other people's lives when he was not appointed to do so. And if you say the island appointed him, well nobody appointed the island either. Screw the Island.
21)No they said he sees visions, and all were rather spooked by him except Walt, who is a 10 year old, no one said he tals to the island, cause only Locke THINKS he talks to the Island. Boone died for those visions. Sayid, like Jack, thinks Locke is a stupid asshole. Charly really hates Locke. So I don't know what you were thinking with this; Whats your point?
22) Yes its non-existant... these people are still not making plans for long term life on the Island, so who gave Locke the power to do it for them?
23) said the easily fooled person... Locke has conned YOU.
24)I just don't understand your posts... Non sequitur is not enough...
25) I think his point was that Locke says he's the one who can "see" what's really going on. Whether he really can or not, doesn't matter...the point is that Locke believes he has a better understanding of the situation than say, Jack believes that Jack has...which is why Locke thinks he can act unilaterally when others probably shouldn't.
You agree with that plus you think its right. SAD.
26) You see what you want to see.

I won't be responding anymore to your posts. They are boring, badly thought out, and really, really reminding me of certain Zealot from the show. SPOOOOOKY.

[meljo93]

I think Locke is responsible for (the kid) Peter Talbot's death.
He is the one who told his father that the kid came to him, was on to him.
When his father asked him what he told the kid, he changed the subject and never answered.

I believe that if Locke would have told him that he said the donation was annonomous, Peter would be alive.
I also believe if Locke would have called the police right after talking to Peter, he would be alive.
I also believe that if Locke had done nothing after talking to Peter, he would be alive because "Cooper" wouldn't have known Peter was on to him.

Locke isn't the one who killed the kid, but he was responsible for him getting killed.

[Reduak]

Arbitrary implies a flip of a coin. I don't think Locke's decisions are that casual. And mostly he let's people do whatever the hell they want. It's only when their actions will have a negative effect on other people that Locke steps in and takes initiative. Face facts: There is no conventional law on Lost Island, and Locke is probably the one with the best understanding of what will and won't get people hurt on the island. Your point is that it's not a position with any official standing, that the 815s have not invested him with the power to curtail their actions. Granted. But if you think of the Island as its own country, and The Island as its governing body, then Locke may well be the high sheriff of island law after all.



Lessee... Walt, Boone, Sayid, and Charlie have all at one time or another expressed the belief that Locke is the one with the clearest vision of the island.



The 815's leadership system is flawed (actually nonexistent now that Jack is with the Others). Locke does not want to be the leader, and is probably not cut out to be a long-term leader, and yet he is the one with the greatest understanding of the island. Jack is (or was) the defacto leader, but in no way would he entertain the fantastical notions of John Locke. Thus, you've got a leader with blinders on, and an insightful adviser who knows his advice will not be heeded. And you've got life-and-death decisions that must be made.



I really don't think Locke is any more gullible that you or I. For someone who knows how, it is really easy to fool people.



Has your son ever fooled you? More than once perhaps? If he did wrong, would you just call the cops, or confront him about it first? It is a hard thing to give up a member of your family, and our judgement is often impaired when trying to assess their behavior.



I'd agree with this. I'd add to it that I also believe Locke understands more about the island than any of the other 815s. He still might be getting conned by it! We'll just have to see. :)



I see it as being more the reverse of that; other people get pissed when Locke does stuff on his own, Locke simply points out that they do the same thing. He is pointing out their hypocracy.

I don't disagree that Locke is connected to the Island or to some psychic consciousness that's calling itself the Island or that he's doing what he believes he's being called to do. The thing is, and you and I may have to just agree to disagree on this, I'm not yet convinced whatever or whoever he's connected to is good. Think about it.. Boone got killed b/c of Locke's Island connection, Eko got saved from the bears only to face Smokie's wrath b/c of it too. Shannon got killed b/c she ran off into the jungle after a vision of Walt and the wispers had AL completely freaked out. Hurley was lured into almost killed himself because of Island-induced creepyness and would have if Libby hadn't interveened.

Given Locke's history of repeatedly being conned, the Island may just be using him to do it's dirty work. Twice Locke has been "reminded" that the Island has given him back the ability to walk, once right before Boone's death and again in his airport havid. So the Island keeps it's minion in "Locke step". Sounds a lot like temptation and selling of the soul to me.

And that's why Locke has no business making unilateral decisions that affect the entire group.

[Khan]

sgtdraino in quotes



Really? I thought his hopes and dreams were destroyed by a man who stole his kidney, and pushed him out a window! :) The only thing Locke wanted was to (a) help out his Dad with a kidney, and (b) stop his dad from hurting other people. Locke seeks to do good.
Yes I can understand him helping out his long lost father with a serious medical crisis. But once he knew what kind of man he was he wouldn't let go, he's beyond normal pain over parent's betrayal, he's obsessed with gaining his dad's love to the point of nearly getting himself killed.


He didn't push her away. He didn't tell her what he was up to, because he knew she would not understand it. And he was right, she didn't. I still see Locke's actions as part of his process of letting go of his dad, not clinging to him.
He did destroy the relationship. He chose his "have to win, I have to make this man acknowledge me" mindset over someone who really loved him.


How do you reconcile this view with Locke helping push the raft out to sea, Locke knowing and not seeming to care about the sailboat, and Locke attempting to use the computer to contact the mainland?
The chances of that raft making it was very slim, and the chances of any rescuer finding the Island if they did make it even slimmer. He played the odds. It was clearly a Dharma computer, he wouldn't expect it to dial the nearest nation's version of 911, he knew it would connect to them and it's clear to everyone they're a closed organization.


Not really, because the motives behind that behavior have never been revealed. Why'd he do it? You can only guess. The only insight is what Locke himself says, that the Radio Tower is a place too dangerous to lead people to. If Sayid had located it, there's no way Locke would have been able to talk the 815s out of going there. What if many of them ended up getting killed?
Oh please, how in hell would he know the tower is too dangerous? Smokey or whatever the monster was came to the edge of the beach, he had no idea what was out there and whatever might be could come into camp at moments notice. The best thing is to get off that creepy Island and that's what they were trying to do.


:poop: It's true Locke deflected suspicion away from himself, but merely suggesting the possibility of a slow-fuse should not have been enough to send Sayid over the edge. Sayid's own hostility towards Sawyer has more to blame for that attack.
Sayid did not ask for a knife, there is no excuse for or way to whitewash what Locke did. What if someone did that to you , your child, a sibling etc. would you just overlook it. Say thier deception had no meaning? A small harmless thing? According to that way of thinking if I have a hostile relationship with my neighbor, and I hit someone violent over the head to prevent them from doing something harmless they believe is saving thier life and the lives of others. All I have to do if they suspect me is deceive them, but I shouldn't stop there , I should manipulate them into going after my neighbor that I know had nothing to do with it. While I'm at it I should hand them a weapon, that way it's sure my innocent neighbor gets hurt and I walk away clean. And after all of that I'm still as innocent a little lamb?
Damn and here I was taught morals, have lived by a code of honor, and believe there is such thing as right and wrong but none of it means a thing according to your theory.


Boone was never in danger.
We've been over this before , what if someone you loved was tied up and left in a jungle with at least one monster and bears, and those are only two of the dangers they knew about. There was no reason to not think there might not be many more. I'd bet you wouldn't rest until you found them and got them out of thier predicament. If that had been your father, brother or son that someone did that to would you be so accomendating?

You might not like it when the cop pulls you over and gives you a ticket, but his actions are intended to promote a safer driving environment for the populace as a whole. Your own freedoms are curtailed, for the betterment of your fellows.
Police Officers have rules and regulations to follow, as do citizians. Of course there are bad ones, but that's not the point.
The point is, if I'm speeding or in some way a hazard it's my fault. This is not some random person deciding to do what he thinks is best with me. If the law says 65 and you go over it then that's what he has to react to. If it says 25, it's the same thing, it's not not his personal choice. They just can't say "Hmmm I think everyone should go 15 on the highway on my watch because I like low speeds". Your example does not apply to Locke's arbitrary behavior toward those around him.

[sgtdraino]

14)Base on observable evidence, of course.... CAN YOU CITE ANY PLEASE. So much for your "arguments"

Okay, I can see that it is pointless and impossible to have a meaningful debate with you.

I won't be responding anymore to your posts.

Thank you, I appreciate it. :)

I think Locke is responsible for (the kid) Peter Talbot's death.
He is the one who told his father that the kid came to him, was on to him.
When his father asked him what he told the kid, he changed the subject and never answered.

I believe that if Locke would have told him that he said the donation was annonomous, Peter would be alive.
I also believe if Locke would have called the police right after talking to Peter, he would be alive.
I also believe that if Locke had done nothing after talking to Peter, he would be alive because "Cooper" wouldn't have known Peter was on to him.

Locke isn't the one who killed the kid, but he was responsible for him getting killed.

It is true that if Locke had taken different action, Peter's death might have been averted. However, that does not make him responsible for Peter's death.

Our actions affect others in all kinds of countless ways, in ways we cannot predict. Suppose you're driving in your car, turn right, and crash into a drunk driver, who is killed. If you had turned left instead of right, that driver's death might have been averted, but that doesn't mean you're responsible. The defining factor is one of culpability. Would a reasonable person believe that you should have known that turning right would have resulted in killing a guy? Of course not.

Now, Locke should have simply squeeled to Peter and the police about his dad, but by failing to do so, should he have known that Cooper would kill Peter? I think I'm a pretty reasonable fellow, with ten years in law enforcement, and I'll tell you that I did not peg Cooper as a murderer until the moment he lunged at Locke. To me, he just didn't fit the profile. Especially under circumstances where Cooper knew his son would suspect him, and where he had the opportunity to make a quiet exit. Generally speaking, even murderers will only kill when they feel their backs are against the wall.

The thing is, and you and I may have to just agree to disagree on this, I'm not yet convinced whatever or whoever he's connected to is good.

Oh, me neither! I just think that Locke believes it is good. For me, the jury is still out.

Given Locke's history of repeatedly being conned, the Island may just be using him to do it's dirty work. Twice Locke has been "reminded" that the Island has given him back the ability to walk, once right before Boone's death and again in his airport havid. So the Island keeps it's minion in "Locke step". Sounds a lot like temptation and selling of the soul to me.

The Island is definitely an old testament type of god, that's for sure. You may be right! But, you also may be wrong. I don't think there's enough information to judge The Island as a force for good or evil yet.

And that's why Locke has no business making unilateral decisions that affect the entire group.

Depends. If Locke turns out to be right, if The Island's motives really are benevolent, then there might really be life and death reasons why Locke must carry out The Island's plan, or end up with a bunch of dead 815s, or perhaps even the end of humankind. If Locke turns out to be wrong to put his faith in The Island, if it turns out to be nuts or evil, then it becomes a question of "should Locke have known?"

It's a bit like a soldier following the orders of his superior officer in war. You're only guilty of war crimes, if a reasonable person should have realized the orders were wrong to carry out.

Yes I can understand him helping out his long lost father with a serious medical crisis. But once he knew what kind of man he was he wouldn't let go, he's beyond normal pain over parent's betrayal, he's obsessed with gaining his dad's love to the point of nearly getting himself killed.

I don't know about love, I still think he's obsessed with understanding his father, as he is with understanding everything else. I don't think he wants his dad anywhere near him. That doesn't mean it's easy to turn him in, though.

He did destroy the relationship. He chose his "have to win, I have to make this man acknowledge me" mindset over someone who really loved him.

Agree to disagree. That is simply not how I read his actions.

The chances of that raft making it was very slim, and the chances of any rescuer finding the Island if they did make it even slimmer. He played the odds. It was clearly a Dharma computer, he wouldn't expect it to dial the nearest nation's version of 911, he knew it would connect to them and it's clear to everyone they're a closed organization.

Agree to disagree. I don't think the raft's chances were that bad. If Jin and Michael kept proper bearing logs, it shouldn't be that tough to backtrack their course to the island. They had the sailboat after they were aware planes still drop food, so obviously someone knows where the island is and how to get there. No attempt to destroy the boat, even though dynamite was an easy option at the time. I don't think it's clear at all that the computer would have dialed The Others and not DHARMA, who are clearly at odds. Closed organization? They still drop food. And before Locke blows the sub, Ben makes him aware that nobody can find their way back to the island anyway, a fact backed up by the nonfunctional sonar bouy that Locke tried at The Flame. Locke is fully aware that the only thing blowing up the sub accomplishes, is preventing Jack from leaving that morning.

Oh please, how in hell would he know the tower is too dangerous?

The Island told him, of course. :)

Sayid did not ask for a knife, there is no excuse for or way to whitewash what Locke did.

Locke gave him the knife to deflect suspicion away from himself. Certainly he insinuated it was possible that Sawyer could be the guilty party. But you do think Locke intended or knew that Sayid would attack and torture Sawyer? I do not. If you do, then that's just another thing we'll have to agree to disagree on. There's no way to prove one way or the other.

What if someone did that to you , your child, a sibling etc. would you just overlook it. Say thier deception had no meaning? A small harmless thing? According to that way of thinking if I have a hostile relationship with my neighbor, and I hit someone violent over the head to prevent them from doing something harmless they believe is saving thier life and the lives of others. All I have to do if they suspect me is deceive them, but I shouldn't stop there , I should manipulate them into going after my neighbor that I know had nothing to do with it. While I'm at it I should hand them a weapon, that way it's sure my innocent neighbor gets hurt and I walk away clean. And after all of that I'm still as innocent a little lamb?

But what if what Sayid was doing was not harmless, but would have instead resulted in the deaths of every 815? Sure, Sayid meant well, but he has no idea what's at that tower. I think Locke was given information by The Island that going to the tower would mean lots of horrible death. Locke could of course tell everyone about this, but who the hell is going to believe something he learned in some vision? Especially that early on in their stay on the island? Nobody. So, Locke did what was necessary.

Damn and here I was taught morals, have lived by a code of honor, and believe there is such thing as right and wrong but none of it means a thing according to your theory.

I'm saying that actions have different meanings depending on motive and context, and this show loves to mess around with our perception of things. To have the context be different than what it seemed. It's like that early Jin episode, where he seems to be this violent nasty sort, working for the mob, when really he hates his job and is doing everything he can to prevent people from being killed.

We've been over this before , what if someone you loved was tied up and left in a jungle with at least one monster and bears, and those are only two of the dangers they knew about. There was no reason to not think there might not be many more. I'd bet you wouldn't rest until you found them and got them out of thier predicament. If that had been your father, brother or son that someone did that to would you be so accomendating?

All I can say is, from what we saw in the episode, Boone was never in any danger. I think Locke, due to his island insights, knew this to be the case.

Police Officers have rules and regulations to follow, as do citizians. Of course there are bad ones, but that's not the point.
The point is, if I'm speeding or in some way a hazard it's my fault. This is not some random person deciding to do what he thinks is best with me. If the law says 65 and you go over it then that's what he has to react to. If it says 25, it's the same thing, it's not not his personal choice. They just can't say "Hmmm I think everyone should go 15 on the highway on my watch because I like low speeds". Your example does not apply to Locke's arbitrary behavior toward those around him.

But what if the Island has a speed limit sign enforceable on pain of death, and Locke is the only driver that can see the sign?

[Cluck You]

Locke is a man driven by a seperate set of goals than the rest of the group. He is determined to execute the will of the "island" (assuming it is in fact the island that is guiding him) at all costs because he feels it has to be done. That being said, who is to say he is unintelligent, selfish or even evil? When a person is driven by a higher calling they will make choices that they truly believe to be with the best interest of the given situation. If you don't share that same vision it will of course be confusing.

Locke never intentionally hurt anyone, even people who intentionally hurt him never received any kind of retribution. If anything he has tried to help many of his fellow survivors make better decisions. How does a man who makes a cradle for a pregnant woman, help a heroin addict kick his habit and fight to stay clean have bad "people skills". This is the same man who attempted to track Ethan when Claire was in danger.

To say he lacks confidence is ridiculous. A man in a wheel chair attempting to do a walkabout in the Australian Outback does not lack confidence. A man who traverses dense jungle that is home to mysterious a giant killing machine and, not to mention, wild animals does not lack confidence in himself. A man who confronts his own father, presuming him to be a murderer, with the hopes of saving the lives of others does not lack character. Who made it possible for the 815's to eat meat? I can't see how you fail to see these things.

The writers have done an excellent job at keeping Locke a mystery. He has been courageous, unselfish and insightful on many occassions, other times mysterious and even dowright creepy. It's quite obvious that he has an agenda of his own. An agenda he feels holds priority of any other concerns because it is that important. Does that make him evil or selfish? I disagree. If you had a child that wanted something that you knew might hurt them, you might take some drastic measures to protect them from it. In your childs ignorance, they might see you as being irrational, unfair or dare I say even selfish. Locke believes he is doing the right thing, and thus his sense of right and wrong and reality for that matter have changed accordingly.


I think it's impossible to look at Locke objectively and come to the conclusion that he is evil or a bumbling fool. You may not like his choices on the island, but until you understand them it's unfair of you to come to such harsh conclusions.

I can think of a few people who were called idiots, evil, insane and suffered as a result of their beliefs. Some of them turned out to be right in the end...

I don't hate Locke, he isn't my favorite character either. But I willl say he quite fascinating to say the least.

[Reduak]

Locke is a man driven by a seperate set of goals than the rest of the group. He is determined to execute the will of the "island" (assuming it is in fact the island that is guiding him) at all costs because he feels it has to be done. That being said, who is to say he is unintelligent, selfish or even evil? When a person is driven by a higher calling they will make choices that they truly believe to be with the best interest of the given situation. If you don't share that same vision it will of course be confusing.

Locke never intentionally hurt anyone, even people who intentionally hurt him never received any kind of retribution. If anything he has tried to help many of his fellow survivors make better decisions. How does a man who makes a cradle for a pregnant woman, help a heroin addict kick his habit and fight to stay clean have bad "people skills". This is the same man who attempted to track Ethan when Claire was in danger.

To say he lacks confidence is ridiculous. A man in a wheel chair attempting to do a walkabout in the Australian Outback does not lack confidence. A man who traverses dense jungle that is home to mysterious a giant killing machine and, not to mention, wild animals does not lack confidence in himself. A man who confronts his own father, presuming him to be a murderer, with the hopes of saving the lives of others does not lack character. Who made it possible for the 815's to eat meat? I can't see how you fail to see these things.

The writers have done an excellent job at keeping Locke a mystery. He has been courageous, unselfish and insightful on many occassions, other times mysterious and even dowright creepy. It's quite obvious that he has an agenda of his own. An agenda he feels holds priority of any other concerns because it is that important. Does that make him evil or selfish? I disagree. If you had a child that wanted something that you knew might hurt them, you might take some drastic measures to protect them from it. In your childs ignorance, they might see you as being irrational, unfair or dare I say even selfish. Locke believes he is doing the right thing, and thus his sense of right and wrong and reality for that matter have changed accordingly.


I think it's impossible to look at Locke objectively and come to the conclusion that he is evil or a bumbling fool. You may not like his choices on the island, but until you understand them it's unfair of you to come to such harsh conclusions.

I can think of a few people who were called idiots, evil, insane and suffered as a result of their beliefs. Some of them turned out to be right in the end...

I don't hate Locke, he isn't my favorite character either. But I willl say he quite fascinating to say the least.

I don't question his courage, his intelligence or his motives.

I question his judgement. (and I think TPTB want us to question his judgement)

Poor judgement + ability to impact other people's lives = Human tragedy, and the bigger the ability to impact those lives, the more epic the tragedy

[IMLOSTRU?]

I believe you will all be surprised at the end of the series how unselfish and brilliant Locke is. I lost faith in him last season, but if you examine the clues carefully you will see he may be the only one who saves them all. I would list them here, but it would be better for all of you who hate him, to be turned by his actions not by my words.

You can't use a key without a Locke. Remember that.

[Khan]

I don't think there is a much Locke hatred in this thread or the forum for that matter. Right after Patchy's happy little home went bye bye due to whatever it is he did there was more anger about his decisions, but that's died down. He's actually gained fans with his badass Clint Eastwood routine with the Others. If you want to see real character hatred read the posts about Jack.

Most of us who criticize his behavior don't hate him at all, we simply see the flaws and mistakes he's making as he stumbles his way through whatever is happening with him and the Island.

They're all bedeviled by thier private demons and often act out of selfish motivations, some more than others. Locke has fallen on the more selfish side in spite of why he thinks he's doing it. Like the rest he's a mixture of good and bad, but he indulges his personal problems at the expense of everyone in his quest to win the living game he's playing.

[Cluck You]

I don't have any argument against the fact that at times Locke makes decisions that don't appear to be the best. But that's just it, they don't appear to be good. He is referred as the Man of Faith by the writers and as such I would expect he will make decisions that he himself may not understand or that don't work out as he wanted them to. Locke is, in my opinion, the vessel of a greater cause whose actions will undoubtedly be misundertood more often than not.

[DaGringo]

Just out of curiosity, from seeing the posts in this thread... How many of you think it would be neat to poll how many forum members define themselves as strict believers of whatever faith they belong to, moderates, agnostics, and atheists? Might shed some light as to the strong reactions the "Man of faith" provokes?

[Hodgepodge]

Moving to the Terry O'Quinn - Locke forum for further discussion.

[Island Hobo]

Wow, you guys fight about Locke a lot.. I just think he's cool and he'll always be my favorite character, he's human and still comes off as really awesome to a lot of people but they don't make him seem invincible.

In my opinion Locke's a good guy, he rocks and that's all I need to think about it. So can't we all just agree to disagree and like our favorite characters without ripping others apart.

[ILoVeLoCKe]

:D I never realized he created so much controversy! I'm with you HOBO I think he is great I really believe he is the answer to many of the questions. I think the show was written for his character.

I just love him and can't get enough of LOCKE. But I also enjoy seeing what everyone thinks.

[sgtdraino]

They're all bedeviled by thier private demons and often act out of selfish motivations, some more than others. Locke has fallen on the more selfish side in spite of why he thinks he's doing it. Like the rest he's a mixture of good and bad, but he indulges his personal problems at the expense of everyone in his quest to win the living game he's playing.

This is the thing that I'd argue with. Misguided or not, I think Locke has been shown to be motivated to do what he thinks is best for the 815s as a whole. His motivations are almost never selfish in nature. Many of the things he's done "for The Island" have actually costed him personally; the loss of Boone, the distrust of Sayid, alienation from the other 815s. What selfish benefit did blowing up the sub get Locke? Nothing. On the contrary, he's now (presumeably) hated and despised by Jack, and anyone that listens to Jack.

Granted, I don't have a clear picture of what Locke is thinking at present. Surely he doesn't think he can trust Ben and the Others. What was the deal with his talk with Kate? Did he mean it? Or did he know the room was being surveilled? What happened with Cooper? Why's Locke's hand bandaged? TMFT was cool as hell, but didn't really reveal much (if anything) about the current thought processes of John Locke.