Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Probing the origins of Jacob, Not-Jacob
I've poked around the Internet a bit for reviews of last night's episode of LOST, and much to my surprise, people were quite "meh" on it. While I agree with the common assessment that not much was really answered about the show, I did like that the creators at least tried to provide some framework for why there is a rivalry between Jacob and FLocke. There was just a neat, mystical feel to the episode that you couldn't really indulge in if you put it too far under the microscope.
Like the Richard episode a few weeks ago, this LOST focused solely on the relationship between Mother, Jacob and FLocke, with only a brief cutaway at the end. Given how much I liked both episodes, I kind of wish they had used this conventional method of storytelling a bit more often.
Since we knew so little about both the origins of Jacob and FLocke coming in, I'm in favor of the decision to reveal a little - but not all - of the details of their background. Having them essentially wash ashore adds to the mystery of the whole thing, as does the decision to not even try to explain where the heck Mother came from. Likewise, not naming FLocke (or Not-Jacob, as I call him in the title of this entry) adds to the mystical / comic book feel of the episode.
Most LOST fans probably won't be completely happy with this thought of mine, but I imagine the origins of the ancient Island inhabitants - Mother, Jacob and FLocke - will never be truly revealed. Because of this, I think we'll just have to be happy with an expanded knowledge of the more "human" characters like Jack, Kate (boo!), Sawyer and (hopefully!) Miles.
As usual, the great pictures from LOST are from the Lostpedia entry for the episode, which can be found here.