DocArzt and Friends Logo

Lost Theory – Two Sides of the War

By Koobie,

  Filed under: Lost, Lost Theories
  Comments: 95


While we are pulling the podcast together, I thought I would stop procrastinating and post a well overdue theory article.  It should be a little taste of what Doc and I have in store for you in the next podcast (which should be really really soon).

When we found out that Jacob had an enemy, or maybe a better word choice would be rival, everyone was quick to call him Esau. But how much does the story of Jacob and Esau fit with this rivalry in LOST? When Michael Emerson was asked at the Lost panel at comic con, he gave an extremely cryptic answer, and told us nothing.  Although, good ol’ Ben Linus probably only knows as much as we do at this time.  If the creative staff is dodging these story parallels, why even use the name, Esau, to define unLocke?   Let’s take a look at the story and analyze if unLocke deserves the name Esau.

Two Nations and Stolen Blessings

Isaac (the father of Jacob and Esau) was having some fertility issues of his own.  His wife, Rebekah, was barren. So he went to the temple and summoned the smoke monster… wait nevermind, wrong story. He prayed that she would get pregnant, and what do you know? She did! Shortly after conception, though, her twins fought inside the womb, and this worried her quite a bit.  Anyways, she prayed to God asking for help, and he gave her this interesting quote:

“Two nations are in your womb,
and two peoples from within you will be separated;
one people will be stronger than the other,
and the older will serve the younger.”

I’d like to back peddle for a bit, and allude to a game that John and Walt used to play, backgammon.

“Two players. Two sides. One is light… one is dark.”


Of course, in the case of Jacob and Esau neither one was exactly light or dark (unless you count Esau’s red skin). Anyways, Jacob was born after Esau, grasping firmly on his heel.  Actually, that is how he got the name Jacob, which means “he grasps the heel” or more figuratively “he decieves”.

As they became older, Esau became a “skilled hunter, a man of the county” (a John Locke, if you will). Jacob liked to hang out with his mom back at the tents and became quite the little cook. After a long day of hunting, Esau came back to home base completely famished, and Jacob was praticing his Martha Stewert-like cooking skills on a lentil stew. Esau demanded some food from Jacob.  Jacob agreed to give him the food, but in return Jacob wanted Esau’s birthright. Now the birthright is a pretty big deal. The eldest son gets most of the inheritance when the father dies and has the privilege of his family line to produce the Savior. (Could our Jacob and Esau be battling over the inheritance of the island and the power to save the cheerleader, and subsequently, the world?)

Well, Esau thinks he is about to die and decides his birthright is going to do him much good if he kicks the bucket (or he was quite hungry). Esau sells his birthright to Jacob, and Jacob does a little devious dance. (Ok, well that isn’t in the story, but I imagine him doing some kind of jig)

Years later, when they decided to send the legally blind Isaac to a retirement home, Isaac also decided that it was time to bless Esau. He told Esau to go out and catch him some wild boar to make a tasty meal.  Once Esau did that, he would receive Isaac’s blessing.  Rebekah, being the devious old codger that she was, overheard this, and told Jacob that he can get the blessing all for himself if he acts fast. So Jacob grabbed some goats, Rebekah prepared her own tasty eats, and covered Jacob with the goat skins (since Esau was a hairy guy and Jacob was, well, not).

Isaac, surprised at speedy service, and asked Jacob how he did it so fast. Jacob responded with something witty about working at a Jimmy John’s, and proceeded to show him how hairy he was. Now Isaac was pretty confused by all this and thought something was off when he heard Jacob’s voice instead of Esau’s. Isaac asked Jacob if really was Esau.  Jacob lied to him and said he was, and unknowningly Isaac blessed him:

“May nations serve you
and peoples bow down to you.
Be lord over your brothers,
and may the sons of your mother bow down to you.
May those who curse you be cursed
and those who bless you be blessed.”

(This seems to be just like our Jacob, who is “worshiped” by the others) Jacob received the blessing and scurried off shortly before Esau came in with his boar stew. Esau was ready for his blessing, and told Isaac to grab some grub.  When Isaac realized his mistake, he told Esau that Jacob stole Esau’s blessing and there wasn’t anything he could do to change that. Although, he did have a little bit of a blessing for Esau (If you can even call it that)…

“Your dwelling will be
away from the earth’s richness,
away from the dew of heaven above.
You will live by the sword
and you will serve your brother.
But when you grow restless,
you will throw his yoke
from off your neck.”

lost-smoke-monster-560w(If we take this blessing literally enough, its seems like Esau could be the shapeshifter and/or the smoke monster.) Esau is pretty pissed off at this point and decided he wanted to beat the living crap out of Jacob–or to put it lightly–kill him. Jacob, with the help of his ever resourceful mother, escaped with his life and goes to live with his uncle, Laban (who actually deceives Jacob for a change).

This story, does in fact, have a happy ending (while Lost most likely will not). Some time after this event, Jacob finds out that Esau is coming for him.  In a futile plea for his life, Jacob tries to shower Esau with gifts. However, when Esau sees Jacob, instead of a knife, Jacob receives a hug.  In the end, Esau forgave Jacob.

Ok, now that you endured this strange rendition of the Jacob and Esau story, how can we apply it to Lost?  I think it actually doesn’t shed that much light on our own Jacob and Esau–other than being a framework of the timeless story of rivalry.  There may be some parallels we can draw from this story, such as Jacob’s dominance of Esau on the island.  Jacob may have stolen the power of the island from unLocke, and this could be why unLocke tried (and succeeded) in killing Jacob.  But our story doesn’t end there, it only faded to white…

An Interuniversal Backgammon Board

If we think of the island as one giant backgammon board, as Locke presented it in season one, we would only see half the picture.  Jacob and unLocke have been at war with each other for at least before the time of the Black Rock.  The pieces on the board are the manipulated lives of the castaways.  As we saw in the finale, unLocke had finally found a victory over Jacob by manipulating Ben to do his will.  This victory, however, will be short lived.  Jacob had seen his death coming, and set in motion his plan to increase the size of the board by another universe.

Along with AstroJones, I’m pretty convinced that unLocke is the shapeshifter–or illusionist–that we have been seeing since season one. He may have not even been in his true form when we saw him briefly in the finale.  This manipulative power comes with a price, unLocke cannot kill and may have limited access to the physical world.  He had kept the losties under his sway by getting hold over their emotions, and ultimately manipulating Ben to kill Jacob.

Jacob saw that this was inevitable, and had a plan to keep unLocke from accomplishing his task.  He manipulated the castaways in a different way, taking them back in time to cause a little fade to white that changes everything.  (Ah yes, I know, a lot of people reading this just groaned and are completely against changing time.  Don’t worry, I’ll explain how that will work out in my next physics article, trust me).  By giving unLocke the pleasure of killing him (which will only keep him off for a while) and creating an alternate universe, Jacob wins this round.  How the battle continues from there is anyones guess, but I’m thinking the pieces of the game will learn of their significance and start picking sides…

Speaking of picking sides, who is the good guy here?  Throughout the series, we have only known about Jacob and it seems like he is the best choice for a protagonist.  This could not be more wrong, Jacob is a murderer and is only in this for himself.  He killed Sayid’s wife just to being Sayid back to the island.  Although, you may argue that if we are changing time anyway, her life will be spared.  Messing with alternate timeline stuff will be pretty tricky.  We have no idea what is in store for Sayid and Nadia when this new timeline comes into play.  They may have never met in this new timeline, and thus Sayid becomes an even more terrible torturer in the process.  Although, it could easily go the other way and they live happily.  This is just another reason why Jacob can’t be our good guy, since he is only altering the universe for his own good.

Since Jacob’s out, we turn to unLocke.  Could he be our hero?  Nope.  This guy is also fighting only for his own good, and will happily take down whoever stands in his way.  Remember Eko?  He used the image of Yemi to manipulate Eko and further his plan along, and the smoke monster destroyed Mr Eko.

Both sides are only in it for themselves.  Who should the losties root for?  Their only hope will be to play the players, and cause this immortal struggle to cease with the destruction of Jacob and unLocke.  I say, Locke will save them all.  John came back on flight 316, John 3:16, its only fitting.  That or I am just a really big Locke fan.

Of Dimensions and Rivers

I hope you guys enjoyed my little rendition on Jacob and Esau, and my take on Jacob and unLocke.  I’ll will be back next week to talk about why its inevitable that we change time (while preserving whatever happened, happened), and a little bit of physics of how thats possible.  As well as more promises of an upcoming podcast.

  • You say “unLocke” is unable to kill, yet you make it clear you believe him to be the shapeshifter, and probably also Smokie. Then you cite later (and I was already thinking it before your wrote it) Eko, who was of course killed by Smokie. Sloppy reasoning. Goes with the sloppy editing.

    Probably most of us are thinking along the same lines, at least to Esau/unLocke. But I think it’s way off to say Locke may be the actual savior. Seems clear to me Dead is Dead. Of course, the timeline alteration (if there was one) may alter his fate as well. A clue, though, provided by the CC promo material indicates otherwise. While the pics aren’t the greatest, it sure appears to me that Locke’s back is turned to the viewers, while all other Losties/Others are full-body forward.

    Locke, sadly, is dead. I say sadly only ’cause it should be Ben Bad Bad Ben (“what about you” [you self-centered prick]) that kicked the bucket.

    I think it will be insurmountably difficult for the producers to not cheat their way out of this. Any alteration in the timeline negates everything – everything- we’ve seen before: character flashbacks most tellingly, but the events we’ve seen transpire. Desmond/Penny. Sawyer/Juliet. On and on.

    While I can’t wait to see what they do, I believe it will be the most disappointing series end ever, surpassing even Seinfeld’s snubbing of his loyal viewers at the end of his show.

    • Koobie

      Yeah, sorry, I didn’t make that clear enough. I meant to say I don’t think there is any connection between the Jacob and Esau story, and my reasoning of Esau being to smoke monster was null. That is because I wrote the two sections a couple days apart and really didn’t relook over the first lol.

      I agree that the series ending will be disappointing, but I’m not sure if any of us will actually say it 😉

      • mcc300

        Most diappointing series ending episode ever? Um, have you ever heard of “St. Elsewhere”. I find it hard to believe that anything will ever top that one.

        Well, maybe the whole grammar discussion in this post.

        • Actually, I appreciated St. Elsewhere’s finale! The autistic boy and the snow globe!


          But you can only do that once.

          • Okan

            Maybe just because he was his brother. So somebody else could kill Jacob.

      • Kermet

        The only reason the ending will be disappointing is because it’s the end. I believe that the final season will exceed our expectations and will appreciated for decades to come as the first complete narrative told over a six season span. Last year while in LA I had the chance to ask Darlton if they were purposefully following Hero’s Journey (it was at the Screenwriting Expo so you can see why I asked). I pointed out that at the end of each season thus far (through 4 seasons) we had seen that the major characters were hitting each of the main points in Hero’s Journey. They answered that it wasn’t set out that way, but that on a subconscious level it was impossible not to do that. I can say that season 5 continued that trend and that I expect the finale to provide something few shows have ever achieved: meaningful closure.

        • Hey, regardless of my snide, cynical, reactionary nature, I’m hoping to be blown away.

          Just, you know, can’t get that dirty Seinfeld taste out of my mouth.

    • DocArzt

      Hey this is blogging, welcome to stream of consciousness land.

      Locke could still be alive because of the time change, but that time change is not supposed to be. I think Jack made a big mistake with major cosmic ramifications, but beyond that I think the theme will be choosing your destiny. Some will want the life of the change, some will want things the way they were – and the argument of fate/destiny/choice will come to its most surreal point. I’m with you that dead is dead, will alternate time-line Locke make the ultimate sacrifice to set things right?

      If they don’t give him that opportunity, I think a lot of fans will be disappointed. There is no reason to think alternate time-line locke will any be any less despondent than the one we know. He will have stuck around to see helen die, after all, never having lived the adventures of the island.

      One thing I’ll bring up, not in response to you, but people do misinterpret this. When Jacob said “What about you?” to Ben, he wasn’t forsaking Ben’s devotion. Ben was never one of Jacob’s players. He never spoke with Ben, and the few interactions he had in the Cabin with Locke were with Man #2, not Jacob. Ben is one of Man #2’s players right down to the knifing, and he doesn’t even know it yet. (Boy is he in for a surprise).

      • Red

        The line “What about you?” can be interpreted in many different ways. Personally I’d like to think that instead of giving Ben the cold shoulder outright Jacob was asking what choice Ben was going to make. Jacob was all about the importance of choices, and he was asking Ben what role he would choose to play in the scenario. Unfortunately (but somewhat understandably) he chose poorly.

      • Heidi

        Michael Emerson said at CC: Ben used the knife (notice he did not say “killed Jacob”) because of Jacob’s bad attitude.

      • Sorry, but disagree heartily on this one. As Heidi pointed out, Jacob’s response was a clear statement ABOUT Ben and his self-centered feeling of importance.

        Relativism. Here we are again. I’ve said this a million times, but Ben is a bad man. A very very bad man. Argue all we want about the psychological causes or reasons or EXCUSES (the word all my teachers and most bosses choose to use) for Ben’s badness, it doesn’t make the psycho any less psychotic.

        And I have been pointing out a while now that perhaps the Island is not necessarily “good.” While others are arguing – or positing – whether Jacob is “good” or not, the producers are being deceptive with the audience if he is not the “good guy.” All comparisons to the biblical Jacob/Esau lesson aside, the characters are drawn dark and light: creative and destructive. Unless the producers/writers (just what do we call “Darlton”) are messing with stereotypes, our perceptions of good and bad and the icons and motifs that inform those perceptions, Jacob has to be a good guy – or at least have good intentions.

        Does he manipulate someone to make the choice He believes will fulfill what his belief of goodness might be? Absolutely. Who doesn’t manipulate others to do that? The lower and lower-middle classes denigrate manipulation as some kind of evil even though they use it daily. Smiles, handshakes, nods of the heads, hugs – it’s all manipulations. We all each and every one of us manipulate every day!

        So I’m accepting Jacob as the good side of those utilizing the Island’s power. Now, whether Jacob/unLocke have built up some deluded beliefs about the Island and their so-called “rights” to do wield its power, I won’t say. As I sit here trying to puzzle out a Sudoku puzzle I realize I just have to guess at some point where the 3 and 7 goes on two lines that will unfortunately affect the outcome of numbers on the other lines.

        We can only filter the information of our perceptions so much until all we’re really left with is a choice between this or that.

        And “blogging” does not excuse slopping editing – specially by professional writers, gentlemen. Not trying to be rude, but point out that people do notice that kind of stuff and for all those mild-OCDers out there it is a dangerous thing to do!!!


        • Red

          I think you have me there. I agree that Ben is a bad man, not the selfless servant to the island that he thinks he is. I believe that’s why he got cancer in season three, as a sort of punishment. Now that I think about it Ben’s cancer in a roundabout way sort of led to his lose of power with the Others, sending him in a downward spiral through seasons 4 and 5.

          • Okan

            Actually We do not know yet if Ben is good or bad !

          • Okan

            I mean maybe Ben has been doing all of those things for something good.

            I was almost convinced when he said Jack “We are the good guys”

        • redondofuentes

          “… Ben is a very, very bad man…”

          hmm. For starters, good job koobie on the recall of the biblical account… more here for anyone who wants a first hand account for them selves… beginning at Genesis 25:19 .

          If this is indeed as inspired by the biblical text, I think we need to go back to some of the speculative conversation around Ben’s name from years ago. Benjamin the 12th of the original 12 tribes, second son born to Rachel – Jacob’s most loved wife. Rachel was barren, but prayed to the Lord for a son (almost as a competition with her sister Leah and Jacob’s other concubines). She died in childbirth with Ben. She wanted him named Benjamin, to mean “son of my troubles” (island fertility troubles?). But Later, Jacob renamed him to mean “son of my right hand”. Hmm, biblically, Benjamin was Jacob’s most preciously loved son.

          Would the writers overlook that part of the Biblical narrative? Would Jacob really be that insensitive? Is Ben just a tool? Or does the loving father (that Ben has been desiring to have) have something better in store for his “son?”

          Well, back to the bible… The tribe of Benjamin gets pretty off-track (and that has been covered here before). But maybe that’s what we have been, are and will be seeing. If the writers of lost are tracking with the bible semi-accurately, then what is the show about? We’ve all said it before…

          but first… a question… what is God’s greatest “achievement” in the bible? Creation? Well that is only 1 book out of 66, and actually it is only a few chapters. The formation of his people/nation? Nah… that’s a couple more chapters, maybe a book or two… Trials of his people? I wouldn’t really call that crowning.

          It’ God’s PLAN for redemtion! Redemption, redemption, redemption! Now will all be redeemed? nope… Any guarantees for Ben? nope… but there’s hope…

          Read Revelation 7 Benjamin is mentioned, and Ezekiel 47-48 Benjamin is allocated land just beneath the Holy city of Jerusalem. He’ll get his inheritance, despite his very, very bad-ness…

          hmm… a good question to ask is who/where is Joseph, the trial tested savior of Ben?

          • First, anyone know how religious, or seriously The Darlton take religion, and which one that is?

            Second, don’t know if it’s true or not but I’ve read that Ben’s character was not meant to be as substantive as it stands presently. SO the Ben part of the story would seem irrelevant.

            Finally, Jacob didn’t sound too fatherly: “What about you, Ben?” And that land “beneath” the holy city – that don’t be sounding so good. Sounds like Dante’s Purgatory!

            Thanks for that Ben connection, though. Interesting. And makes me wonder how much of those stories about changes to the Lost story are real, the ones about because of the great actors…etc. etc.

            As a writer, I almost always have a beginning and end to a work before I start on one, and rarely does filling in all that middle change an end. But then, Hollywood tends to compel change, doesn’t it!!

          • Okan

            I do not think that this show deeply relates to any religion but Ancient Egypt.

          • redondofuentes


            I don’t think it is either so much… I believe what we we saw in the finale was a preview of the current state of what we are seeing on the island. different people have been drawn to the island for different successive purposes. The egyptianishes contributed what they were brought for… black rock peeps for their part… dharma for its part… lostaways for theirs… 316ers for theirs… like the man talked with jacob about… he has kept(continued) bringing people there… what the man in black lacks is jacob’s vision of why and for how much longer.

            it’s like chess, stacking your pieces for plays to come…. er, or should I say backgammon.

            The egytians were just pieces. It looks like the board is, or is just about set for whatever the final play is (which might also be to deadlock mr. black for stasis).

            A quick glance at doc jensen’s supercomputer reveals some interesting details about backgammon… one of which is:

            “The objective is to remove (bear off) all of one’s own checkers from the board before one’s opponent can do the same.”

            and other good reading


    • Heidi

      And by the way, The universe always self corrects.

      • So said the Lord Heidi!

        Seriously, in the context of the show, scientific theory, fictional stare decisis?

        That’s a conceit to say that. In the context of the show, according to Eloise Hawking this is true, but her son Daniel Faraday thinks maybe not.

        We’ll see.

        Personally if there is a fate then we are all just the imaginings of some insane God. That is not to say behaviors and choices cannot be so accurately analyzed that the future is predictable.

        Either way, the Darlton have the final say on this issue…for Lost, anyway!


      • Ament

        “The universe has a way of…course correcting”

        When Miles asked Faraday about speaking to Chang he said exactly what Eloise was doing her entire life to Daniel. “I was just making sure he does what he is supposed to do”. Faraday did exactly what he was supposed to do and the moment Eloise shot him destroyed his variable theory. Daniel went back to the island because of the picture and found the camp which lead to his death because Kate lead him there, the picture was supposed to happen.

        • But was the explosion, the nuke, supposed to happen? Some seem to think it means things were changed, that it negates the hatch and the button pushing and all those connections (Desmond?).

          I’m starting to think, though, that what happens happened. You can’t change the future. Er, the past.

          Uh oh, I’m so confused.

        • Ament

          If it exploded. The fade to white scene can be taken so many ways. Let’s say the nuke exploded and it did work Sun, Ilana, Bram, Ben, and the rest of Ajira wouldn’t be there at all..unless they WERE showing multiple time lines. Also if it did work, Jacob would be alive because any events leading to his death would be voided.

          My opinion is that it did detonate but not strong enough to complete the job, which is why the computer was installed to control the electro-magnetic build up and release it’s build up in energy every 108 minutes. Desmond’s key was to another bomb, maybe the rest of jughead, which ultimatly finished the job.

          We know what happened to Des and his mental time travel due to being in the proximity of an electro-magnetic explosion as our losties were. The thing is in the past he was convinced by Eloise to not see Penny, he could have changed the course of everything right then and there but it was his choice. When he woke he knew he screwed up. Our losties are going back in time as Desmond did, we will see S1 and S2 characters because of this so the writers saying we will see some old faces will be true, but briefly just enough to say goodbye as they die again.

          • neoloki

            How brief do you consider brief? rumors of 3 eps. for some. A lot of story there.

          • Okay, couple of interesting suggestions there: One, maybe the fade to white wasn’t an explosion. Has to be considered, but like you I think it did.

            The second is that the O-6 are consciousness time-traveling. It doesn’t seem that way because of the view of the events that we’re given. They don’t seem disoriented in these ’77 episodes. But it is an interesting suggestion.

            The Darlton have also said the DI will not be too important, at least to the extent they have been, in the final season. S-6 may well be a fast-forward of the 90 days (?) the Losties were actually on the Island and the three years of S-5 never happened.

            But more likely to a 2009 crash. And frankly, that doesn’t work for me. Although I hope they some how make it work, convince me that somehow the past five years…happened!?!

    • lmsprouse

      While I may possibly agree with the whole Jacob and Esau theory, I can’t help thinking about what Daniel says…”You can’t change the future.” But, what if you could change the past? If you had one shot? Whatever our heroes decide to do works. What about the orientation vids? The Swan vid was on reel to reel, indicating circa 1970’s, right? Dr. Chang was wearing a prostetic arm. In The Pearl, the vid was on video tape, circa 1980’s, Chang had full use of both arms. That would be like your arm growing back and that doesn’t happen.
      Now, think about “Flashes Before Your Eyes”…was Desmond seeing the future in his flash-back, or was it a memory? We assume Charlie doesn’t know Des because they haven’t yet been on the island. But what if they changed the past? They changed the past, Des remembers, but some survivors were saved.
      In Charlie’s case, his entire life changed…no Drive Shaft…no reason to go to Australia in the first place. I believe this because if Des would have seen Charlie otherwise singing “Wonderwall” on a street corner, his first thought would have been “I know him, he’s a musician for Drive Shaft.” But no one knew Charlie.
      Maybe it was before Drive Shaft exsisted, but Liam and Charlie worked there entire life to be famous.
      –Flashforward–Desmond had a memory of Daniel visiting him in the hatch. A sudden memory, one he never had before. That should, at least make my theory believeable.

  • Wally

    John Locke once said “all roads lead to the hatch” and no matter how many times the board gets reset or no matter what road in life our losties take will lead them right back to the hatch.

    And no matter what Desmond does “you are gonna die Charlie” The end game will always be the same but the journey may be quite different.

    So no matter what it “always ends the same, with destruction and corruption, when people are brought to the Island”……”it only ends once and anything before that is just progress.”

  • Delores M.

    I mean no disrespect, but the author of this article should really have had someone edit it before it was posted. It’s FILLED with grammatical mistakes, which is jarring and distracting, making it difficult to focus on the content. I highly recommend that someone proofread this person’s future stories before they are posted.

    • JD

      This isn’t the nytimes. I doubt doc arzt has a full editing staff. Who cares.

      • You don’t need a full editing staff, perhaps, but it wouldn’t hurt if the writer would have at least looked over his piece after he wrote it. He straight up admitted he didn’t look at it again after he wrote it (a few comments up). It doesn’t have to be AP style, but people only take you as seriously as your words, and these words need some work.

        Once again, with all due respect…

      • neoloki

        I agree JD. People need to recognize or diagnose their OCD.

  • Kermet

    I believe that “what happened, happened” and we’ll see that in the alternate timeline that those who went back to 1977 will struggle with knowing those events. So none of what happened will be nullified. In fact, it will be essential to their decisions. I think we all realize that if each character had information other characters had things would be different. So now I’m interested in seeing how things play out once our characters reunite, re-experience those things that happened, and have the knew information to deal with upcoming events. I really think episode 601 will begin the way I thought the series will end – ECU on Jack’s eye. He awakes in his suit, sees Vincent, fishes out his tiny bottle of liquor, runs through the woods past the bamboo (without shoes hanging from them) and onto the beach. Everyone is there, just like the pilot, only two people are missing – Lock and Sun. Those who were in 1977 we’ll start to piece things together while trying to keep the other survivors from thinking they’re insane. The true battle of Free Will vs. Fate, Science vs. Faith, Light vs. Dark begins as characters choose to whether or not to let this new information impact their decisions. Imagine, Jack knows about the hatch and that Boone died while trying to find a way to open it. Would Jack make the same decision to sacrifice Boone? Of course, you’ll get into issues of some actors not comging back and it’ll be interesting to see how’d they write around that, but that’s where I think this is going.

    • Heidi

      You are saying the comic con videos are completely not valid? Just a diversion to throw everyone off?

      • Kermet

        Pretty much. There’s soem validity to them. I mean, clearly Kate still tried to murder her step-father and Hurley still won the lottery, but the clue seems to be that things are a bit off. If they decide to have everyone spend the first half of the season off the island and remembering being on the island it’ll just be S5 all over again to me (“We’ve got to go back”) and I don’t think they’re going to do that.

      • Completely red herrings, yes. In fact, you can’t even call them red herrings because they will not be a part of Season 6. Just bogus stuff to play with people’s expectations.

        I hope.

      • Ament

        The Oceanic commercial had to have some meaning.

        • Kermet

          Not necessarily. The meaning could be as simple as having them crash in 2009 instead of 2004.

          • If so, then it still negates everything we’ve seen before, character flashbacks specifically, but all events as well.

            A waste of five years. Like wasting, what was it, nine years with Seinfeld only to have him snub his nose at the audience.

            I’m hoping that doesn’t happen. While I like the idea of the O-6 having all those memories of a different past, other major characters and their arcs will have been negated – Claire, Charlie, Desmond and Penny, countless others.

            Still somewhat jarring to say the least.

            What about they simply time-correct? The O-6 back to the present time where they belong. Jacob’s death has happened (maybe).

            Now what the Island needs is a new Jacob, someone to replace his yin – or yang, if he was bad (I don’t think that).

            That’s the coming war we’ve been told about.

          • Kermet

            Not if those who were in 1977 remember crashing in 2004. If there’s an alternate reality where they didn’t crash at all, you have – five years wasted. If there’s an alternate reality where they crash in 2009, you have – five years wasted. Either way, it seems that the alternate reality makes the last five years seem wasted. Not to me. I can see various ways where Claire, Charlie, Desmond, and Penny have their arcs “changed” but not negated. Because they (or someone) will know how it had originally ended.

          • Talk about your loops! (In regards to your last post – for some reason only so many ‘reply’ buttons are allowed per response!)

            Just because Jack and Sawyer and Kate and Sayid and Hurley and Jin and Miles are a part of those old lives/flashbacks in relationship to the original Losties, they, for me, are no longer relevant.

            I want to believe, really I do. But I can only stretch that so far.

            Please inform us how you think those arcs are not negated by change. Perhaps a “free” post could enlighten us – if you have the time and Doc be willing!

    • JD

      Cool theory. Everyone is running around the crash site and Hurley, Sayid, Kate, Jack and Sawyer are just standing there looking around in complete shock (realizing that they’re living this again). Rose dies because Jack was too distracted to save her. Etc, Etc…

    • Ament

      I agree, literally repeating season 1 with “what we know now” insight is redundant and honestly wasting our times…. but if you watch the pilot episode with the “what we know now” mindframe you can kind of see those expressions specifically in John and Jack. Both woke up dazed, confused, but not shocked or even panicked. John was happy as hell that he can walk again…except look at it again maybe he’s wiggiling his toes and is happy as hell because he’s well…alive. He told Walt a secret that was never announced just assumed. Perhaps what we’ve been watching IS the loop and season 6 will end the cycle or just string us along to constantly rewatch the show, like a loop. One good quote from S1 to remember…”We all get a second chance”. I know Jack said to Kate but doesn’t John say this line to someone as well? Another good quote was John’s “THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO WORK!!!” or Desmond’s “See you in another life”. I mean could S6 be S1 or maybe just show us the missing pieces? Many thoughts and possibilities that I’m looking forward too.

      • Kermet

        I don’t think it would be redundant, especially if Sun and Locke are not at the crash site. I think a) we’ll start to understand the whispers even better and b) it would be interesting as hell to see Jack forced into Locke’s roll and actually understand why Locke made the decisions he did or any of the characters revisit the decisions they made. It wouldn’t be an exact repeat. For starters, Jack and Sayid wouldn’t torture Sawyer because they already know he doesn’t have the inhaler.

        • Well, I like the loop idea (we’ve heard that before, recently) and giving us the missing pieces we’ve not seen.

          What happens happened. The blast could be the reason for the hatch (50-50). So nothing’s changed but Juliet and Locke’s deaths.

          And Jacob’s.

  • Kermet

    As an aside – haven’t written on here in a while…but grammar has never been the strongest point on this blog and it’s never affected me (and I’s got me a degree in English!). The fact is that most bloggers are more concerned with their ideas being expressed than their punctuation. They’re not writing a hundred page narrative that requires the readers undivided attention. It’s like sitting at a party and listening to a good conversation. Will you stop listening to the speaker simply because they said “ain’t”?

    • DocArzt

      Message over mechanics.

      • But poor mechanics makes the message unclear. This Lost stuff is hard enough to consider and evaluate without having to struggle through poorly written sentences.

        And if mechanics don’t matter, take four lug nuts off one wheel of you car….


        • ElPrez

          Will you seriously just shut the bleep up? Seriously, people are trying to have a conversation here. Go somewhere else if this isn’t up to your standards. Seriously, I’m here to read about LOST. I had no problem understanding it, then again I don’t let my anal nature get in the way of enjoying life like you do. I’m sorry your standards are so impossibly high that everybody pisses you off, okay? No do you feel better? Good. Shut up.

          • What’s your prob, bud?

            This is a PERSONAL attack and I hope the DOC addresses it. If anyone should leave, it should be you.

            Knock it off.

        • Kermet

          Handsome – To some. Most of us got the message. And we seem to understand texts we receive on our cells that avoid grammar like Ben avoids the truth.

          Here’s my point – I’ve been reading Doc’s blogs since S2 and someone always wants to complain when there’s grammar issues because for some reason they think that this free service should be running at a professional level. Professional means money. If you want every post edited then cough up some cash the same way you do for publications that have staffed editors. Otherwise, accept the free service as it is. None of the bloggers are making money on their posts (I did it during S3 and S4) and so when they get their initial draft done they’re done. They’re not expecting some publisher to read their post and say, “I’ve got to hire this person.” They’re expecting fans to read their post and debate the message. And it seems we got it despite the typos. Unlike your car analogy, the post still works with two lug nuts and drunk a driver. 🙂

          • Kermet

            And I’m not worried about the typos in my post either because you didn’t pay to hear my opinion. I gave it freely. 😉

          • Well, I’d thought this thread was done.

            Not arguing the point. I proof – quickly – even my shortest posts and surprisingly ere now and then. But if asked to post for high-traffic “blog” I’d take lots more care doing so. And as mentioned before, discussing Lost requires careful consideration and clear meaning. An article like this is not quite a blog even though some might think so, and certainly not when written by professional writers.

            I was a bit flippant and reading it again my original post is a bit rude. It helps when in person I say something like that ’cause I smile and try to segue back on point.

            I apologize for all the disruption to, like we all agree, a great Lost site.

            Well, except to ElPrez. He can kiss my flabby old you-know-what. Or his own. I mean, a name like ElPrez, you know his shit don’t stink so it’s probably okay kissin’ his own behind.

            Seriously, back to the drunk driver.

  • THinIL

    Esau a shapeshifter? Maybe, but unlikely. If he could easily change into Locke or others, then Jacob would have been killed many moons ago.

    Alternate reality? Absolutely. Permanent alternate reality for Season 6? Maybe, but unlikely. Fringe and Star Trek both deal with JJ Abram’s thoughts on alternate realities. And in both cases, characters retain their sense of self and information from their own pasts (plus they have “Jacob’s touch”, which can be given any number of explanations by the writers). My guess is that S6 opens with flight 815 landing and the Oceanic 6 characters all remembering their past but choosing initially to keep it to themselves until some plot line forces them to reconcile and join forces.

    • If the nuke worked, then the hatch is gone. No button.

      So what caused the crash?

      Someone done painted themselves into a corner. Nothing Darlton does with this can make sense.

      I think the only thing that is predictable is that the O-6 will all be flashed to the present – before or after Jacob’s murder, dunno.

    • Red

      Even when ‘Esau’ was posing as Locke he still couldn’t harm Jacob himself, he had to get Ben to do it. It’s just some kind of rule, like how Ben couldn’t kill Widmore outright. I think that’s why there was a rule set up that only one person at a time could speak to Jacob (which apparently was only Richard), although no one knew then that that was the reason for the rule.

      • Jacob/Richard’s rule might have been to protect Jacob.

        The Jacob/Esau rule might well be a code-of-honor type thing, or a family blood type of issue, but could be something more, like matter/anti-matter’s reaction when coming into contact with each other.

        Of course, that family blood thing didn’t stop Cain.

  • Kermet

    I don’t think Esau is a shapeshifter. Didn’t Darlton say that we’ve never seen Esau as any other character on the show? I recall a fan asking that question and the answer being no.

    • The question was about Jacob, not “Esau”. Jacob has not been seen in any other form! 🙂

  • DocArzt

    Note the overlap?

    • Delores M.

      That graph may be slightly clever, but it’s pretty irrelevant to this discussion. Those complaining about the poor editing aren’t writing articles for this site. There’s a very big distinction between the standards an article should maintain, and those that apply to people writing follow-ups. No one writing follow-ups is trying to pass himself or herself off as a writer. If the author of this story claims to be a writer, then typos SHOULD matter to him. Grammar and punctuation are the tools of the trade. A writer not caring about either is like a chef not caring if he’s using the proper ingredients, or a mechanic not caring if he has the right tool for the job. It’s sloppy and unprofessional, and this site SHOULD care about it if its staff want to be seen as journalists–because credible journalists don’t write like that.

      • Thank you.

        Money is made from this site. I would hope. And if not then it legitimizes payment from some other source (EW). These guys are pros and I expect a little better for a major post.

        I realize when you are the only one editing what you’ve written mistakes happen. But a pro knows techniques to minimize errors. Like, let it sit a while and then reread it. Read it aloud. Run spelling/grammer check.

        Just saying.

        I know the rush from believing you’ve written something incredibly brilliant creates a rush to share.

        Have a beer instead.

        But just one. Otherwise your edit might make things worse!


        • DocArzt

          Sorry but you are both wrong. Anybody who complains about grammatical errors who cannot express their complaint with proper grammar is in fact throwing a stone through the wall of their glass house.

          On the subject of what people claim to be here, or what standards we should be held to, here is the final word: we are fans of LOST who are here to express our ideas, and not on anybody’s payroll. So in my mind, our minimum expectations are good ideas, enthusiasm, and honest intent. If you expect more, go buy the Blue Book of Grammar and bask in the beauty of its grammatical correctness.

          The bottom line is, if you are obsessing over the grammar at the same time you are disagreeing with the point of the article it comes off more as a desperate attempt to steal authority than any valid criticism. Sorry, but that is what it looks like. It makes you look like an inadequate debater.

          • “The bottom line is, if you are obsessing over the grammar at the same time you are disagreeing with the point of the article it comes off more as a desperate attempt to steal authority than any valid criticism. Sorry, but that is what it looks like. It makes you look like an inadequate debater.”


            I’d like to think I’m an inadequate debater on the simple basis of a lack of intelligence. Hate to confuse the issue with grammatical correctness.

            You know, I had someone at Zoetrope read a script of mine, wrote back with this psychological analyses of my scene-cuts from a fight to a sexual encounter, telling me what a sick-f*&% I was writing that way. I’ve since seen the same kind of scene-cuts in other films.

            Lot of us sick-f*&^s out there, I guess.

            Seriously, Doc, I apologize for all the ruffled feathers. I was seriously perturbed by the sloppy writing. I don’t think I was trying to prop up my disagreement with the writer’s point by attacking his muse, but who knows, I’m not a shrink.

            And we are all hypocrites, even beyond issues of grammar. I’m the first to admit that, believe me, I am. I have no issues, even as an English teacher, with ignoring some grammar rules for the sake or writing style. However, the post at issue here, I’m sorry, it could have been polished a bit. I appreciate the “time” as an excuse to post it: I check the site daily for new articles! The philosophical issues surrounding the Lost experience are informing and entertaining and I appreciate all contributions – as long as they are not personal attacks. And I hope I don’t personally attack others when I disagree.

            Debates should be lost on merit, but as our current political situation in America shows, that’s not always the case. Style wins over substance more than it should.

            Rather than trying to embarrass me on the issue of “grammar,” perhaps you could have emailed me that you wanted to delete that part of post and request to keep such opinions to myself. It seems I’ve stirred up a hornet’s nest – and one idiot’s nest – and distracted from the issue of the article’s discussion.


            Have a nice day.

      • Kermet

        Why should they care? Who is setting this standard for blogs? The fans or the writers? Because we’ve seen the writers don’t care. And the majority of the fans keep coming back. So who is setting the standard and why should we care?

        For example, if I send a draft to a friend and want feedback on the content but he criticizes my grammar my response is, “I didn’t want feedback on my grammar. I wanted feedback on my content. That’s why I gave it to you.” If I send a draft to an agent then I don’t want feedback. I want to sell it. So that draft will be the best draft I can make it. You see, on a fan blog, the audience is the same as the friend I ask for feedback on the content. The writer isn’t asking, “What do you think about the way I wrote this?” but is asking, “What do you think about what I’m trying to say?”

        And one last thing – if you’re not paying to access this site, where do you think this site is getting its money from? If you think it’s making a lot of money to staff writers (let alone editors -hahahaha) then you might want to check into the business side of running a blog.

        • There are ads on this site (thankfully mostly Lost-related). Is it break-even or profit or loss, dunno’. Some bloggers do quite well. Probably about the same percentage of writers or actors that can live on their professional earnings and not spew coffee at the remaining Starbucks.

          Some bloggers blog to support other endeavors, PR if you will.

          Others get paid by supporters or employers, again, PR.

          Dunno’. Frankly, don’t care.

          As a writer I understand your friend/feedback. That’s why I always told them, ignore grammar, typos and spellings, yeah, that’s good, thanks. But if the content is good enough they’ll make those minor corrections and move along with the work. They’ll tell you what was really swell, point out one or two minor quibbles and bring up the typo stuff only to let you know.

          But JFC, aren’t we beating a dead horse here!?!

          • Kermet

            last word 🙂

  • Delores M.

    I couldn’t disagree more about the grammar aspect. Avoiding typos DOES matter if a site wants to be taken seriously from a journalistic and editorial standpoint. AICN is a perfect example of why. Its writers clearly have no understanding of grammar, punctuation or style, which has reduced that site to a cesspool. I only commented on the poor editing on this story because I consider this the best LOST site on the Web–I simply want to see it remain that, and to be taken seriously. If it’s filled with errors, however, then it won’t do either.

    • Koobie

      Don’t worry the article has been edited, I just pushed it out really fast because of time. Let’s talk about the actual content rather than my first drafting skillz or lack thereof lol

      • “Don’t worry, be happy.”

        I’m betting this is a generational misunderstanding. People raised on Lion King and those raised on Tom Brown’s Schooldays probably have opposing values.

        It’s all good.

        It is what it is.

        And I hope that last sentence was meant to show how easily it is to mix things up when one texts more than they type. A joke, right?

        • ElPrez

          So you are looking down on all of us then, is that it? Y’know what, let me say what is going through everybody’s mind who isn’t commenting: you’re a condescending dickhead and the intelligence level of this conversation – with or without typos – went subterranean the second you started flapping your trap about this s***.

          [ed by doc: watch your language tough guy]

          • Everybody? Hmm, seems other’s have commented on the mechanics of this article, as well as its thesis.

            Grow up.

            Have a beer.

            Or better, lay off the beer. Or whatever it is you’re drinking…or smoking.

            You know, don’t ask don’t tell.

    • You know, I met Knowles at a screenplay confab in Austin back in ’95. His site reflects who he is, perfectly. I think what Harry achieved is incredible and proof the American Dream is viable and God bless him. Wish him nothing but the best.

      But I quit visiting AICN a decade ago, it was so irritating. And occasional visits via links from other movie sites show things haven’t changed over there.

      • Kermet

        And ask yourself, how could Harry’s site be so successful which such poor grammar? It’s been around for over a decade, right? Again, who’s standards are we applying when it comes to FREE blogs?

        • Free? Hmmm. Harry’s made a ton – his LIFE – off that site, as have others. Well over a decade, he’s done alright. Can’t deny I wouldn’t mind the connections he’s made.

          Still, certain rules of grammar can be set aside for the sake of style. But a total lack of concern for simple grammar rules goes to something else.

          Who reads AICN?

          Fanboys. Lovers of film, television and whatever else AICN is into now. I didn’t bring ’em up. And it’s a poor example to cite to waylay an argument of expectations in regards to the written word.

          But you’re right. Whose standards do we apply? Free or not, the standards one sets says a lot about them. I’ve already addressed the enthusiasm a piece elicits in its creator. I understand.

          Point taken.


          • Kermet

            When I say “Free” I mean that you did not pay to access the site. That seems to be the point we agree on. When it comes to grammar rules and usage ask any linguist and they’ll tell you that written language is changing as rapidly as spoken language. Emoticons would be af fine example of changing text (almost as if we’re reverting to hieroglyphs). I agree that when you’re trying to make a clear and concise point that using the most widely accepting grammar style is the best practice. However, we are still talking about a fan site and not a publication. We’re talking about a theory meant to merely entertain fans and provoke debate. And since, as I’ve pointed out (and Doc has supported with his own comments about the goals), this site has never been about professional publication then readers attempting impose such standards is absurd. However, I will concede the fact that I appreciate fans who want their favorite sites to strive for higher standards. I believe someone else has already pointed out a more diplomatic way of acheiving that.

    • docarzt

      Delores, I certainly appreciate your sentiment, but let’s get some perspective: we are a fan site, nothing more. AICN has much more to answer to than we do, they have many millions of readers and are looked upon as a major player by the industry. At the same time, I can sort of appreciate how Harry did not rush to make the site into something more respectable just because it became popular. We hope to continue to be your favorite, and hopefully we’ll even get the grammar right once in a while and impress you with our word-smithing. 😉

    • Kermet

      And yet AICN still gets a crapload of visitors to their site. And you just answered my question about who’s standards are being applied. 😉

  • l-i-v-i-n

    this was a poorly written post. this theory has been around since the moment after the finale ended, and i think anyone who is at all in touch with the lostverse has read plenty on this, and read enough.

    i always look forward to reading the main posts on this page, and it is the best lost blog around. hands down. this post and the recent one claiming locke lives, however, have been subpar trash.

    but hey, everyone slips up now and again. look at jack!

    keep up the work Doc, looking forward to your commentary on the new season.

  • pacemaker

    The grammar in the articles bothered me, sure, as well as the glanced over editing. However, wouldn’t it have been best for you, Handsome Smitty, to take your own advice, and simply e-mail Kooble your gripes? Your and others’ criticisms may have been intended to be constructive, but they weren’t. Typos in anything public always make me wince a little, but I would never point out to a friend that an item on his new restaurant’s menu is misspelled in FRONT of other people.

    If we have arguments on this site, it should be about LOST. I would love to see grammar to be as close to perfect as possible on this site, but it’s about the discussion, not syntax.

    So, Handsome Smitty, Delores M., and others who are annoyed by the grammar, why not volunteer to edit articles for the site? Maybe I’ll give it a go, too, if Doc would have us.

    Anyway, keep up the great job, Staff Of If you feel like minding y’all’ses grammar a little more, by all means! If not, just please continue to be the best Lost blog out there.

    • pacemaker

      Despite the above seeming like one back-handed compliment… just to be clear, grammar is about something I care not.

      • Well, with a name like “Pacemaker,” one can’t afford to stress out about much of anything, I suppose.

    • Hindsight, bro. Hindsight.

      For some of us, thinking before acting, well…whatever.

      Point taken.

  • preztige2k6

    If Locke and Losties died in the past, then they will be re-born in the future, like the first time they were born.

    • Locke definitely died in the future.

      I don’t believe the blast could have killed anyone other than, sadly, oh-God-how-I-already-miss-her, Juliet. Although it could have killed everyone. We don’t know the outcome, yet.

      But my feeling is, the only logic I can apply – as if logic is applicable here – is that the explosion caused a simple time-correction, putting the O-6 back together in the future, or present, whatever we’re calling it.

  • bps

    I disagree that Jacob killed Nadia. You could say that Jacob chose to keep Sayid from the same fate, but allowed fate to take its course with Nadia. Is that the same as killing her? I don’t think so, but I know some will say it is. If two people are on the path of death, and you’re able to save one of them, does that make you a murderer? Good question.

    • I agree.

      Although I don’t think this way, I’m applying this in the context that is Lost: Nadia was “meant” to die anyway. Like Charlie, when is only a matter of particulars (although in Charlie’s case it had much more meaning the way it finally happened, for him and the story).

      What Jacob did, that informs us if his goodness, was to keep Sayid from being manipulated by Ben. I think. Ben, who may or may not have been manipulated by Esau/unLocke, all along.

      And she died in as happy a state as before, so her personal development is unchanged.

      I think.

  • JaySin420

    So I’ve been wondering about when Alpert told Sun that he remembered watching them all die 30 years ago. I guess that means he didn’t see them again when 815 crashed 30 years later b/c it doesn’t happen?

  • neoloki

    Damn, I have a headache. Post upon post about grammar!? Why? I have an idea for the people who find the grammar distracting. Obviously, your awareness of the grammatical mistakes makes you equally aware of how to correct them. So, if you find the article how to understand because of poor grammar but still want to read it,copy and paste the article onto your word processor, fix the mistakes and then read the damn thing. Now if you want to contribute to the site you could even send it to the author who then could post the corrections. In the end this all can be done behind the scenes without subjecting the rest of us to an asinine argument.

    As for Lost, I think the series finale will be reflective of the quality in the previous 5 seasons of Lost. In other words it will be satisfying. If their is one thing the TPTB are aware of it is what’s expected of them considering the sub-par(in some peoples opinions) conclusions of other t.v. series. With this at the forefront of their approach and with the appropriate sense of responsibility, they will do the best they can.

    As for current events, I am going with a tangent universe a la Donnie Darko, which is created from and at the point of the jughead explosion. The first 3 eps of season 6 will be correcting this “problem”. After, we will get down to Island WAR with no flash anything.

  • stweedle

    The thing about UnLocke being a shape shifter or the Smoke Monster argument that gets me is this: if UnLocke is the monster, why was he (Locke)surprised when Ben told him that the smoke monster, as Alex, told him to listen to whatever Locke told him to do. If UnLocke is the monster he would’ve known this, he told Ben himself. When Ben mentioned his dead daughter told him to do whatever Locke said, he seemed surprised even making a comment to the effect of good now I don’t have to convince you to kill Jacob.

    • Well, I’ve watched the season finale three times recently, and unLocke often seems surprised about things (the look on his face when they reach Jacob’s home at the statue’s foot). That is something I noticed as well. It could be that Jacob’s doppleganger has a limited knowledge of certain aspects of the Island.

      It may also be that he is surprised at the stupidity of Ben and others. Ben may have been repeating what someone told him, or more likely an application of his own interpretation of Smokie and other aspects of the Island. UnLocke may also be surprised at Ben’s accurate guess – or at Ben’s error. It could explain some of those surprised looks. He may well be Smokie and surprised at Ben’s ignorance. We don’t know how Ben has any of his information.

      I am of the belief that both Ben and Locke have been victims of unLocke’s manipulation during the entire events of Lost. Ilayna mentioned that someone else had been using Jacob’s cabin, for instance, and then burned it.

      How Richard could not have been aware of unLocke’s presence or involvement, I’m not sure. We still don’t fully understand his role or just who he is in the Lost scheme just yet. More and more he seems to be a Watcher type figure: He designates the Others’ leader, and allows them to make decisions, but then also overrides some, or at least questions them in order to influence a change. But then, he knows where Jacob truly resides and obviously has met him.

      Although, Richard didn’t go in with unLocke and Ben, did he.

  • Jack Daniels

    Me not understand about this story and stuf. Locke is Jakob, Easel is smoke monster, Tom Cruz is Ethan Rom. Aaggh! Hey, I think Jack Bender did a great job with Star Trek. I liked The Adventures of Brisco County Jr., but Diagnosis Murder sucked. What are Cuselof thinking? If Evangeline Lilly is going to be on ‘V’ then how can she and Juliet get together in the alternate timeline? Did anybody actually like M:i-II? Shame JD Abrams, shame! Oh, and what the hell was with that annoying Australian guy. Bloody Ossies! Colour, centre. What’s with all you Jack haters, hah! Besides, Scott Wolf is a great actor. White Squall, anyone? Keri Russell wasn’t in Alias, Jennifer Garner was in Felicity, geez! You know what I like about David Chase

  • the dude


  • Very informative text. I’ve found your blog via Yahoo and I’m really happy about the information you provide in your articles. Btw your blogs layout is really messed up on the Kmelon browser. Would be great if you could fix that. Anyhow keep up the great work!

  • Almost everything you desire is around waiting for you to ask. Every little thing you want also wants you. But you need to take action to obtain it