The Calvin and Hobbes theory of LOST.

I think it's somewhat inappropriate that my first contribution to this grandiose blog should be so light-hearted as pop culture analysis, but fear not, I'm not usually this way. Most of my time will be dedicated to making points that Andrew Sullivan won't think of for about 6 months.

I won't even attempt to explain LOST to those of you who aren't regular viewers or are not up to date. If you are in the loop, both you and Hurley understand why it's not worth the effort. So here's the disclaimer: the following does not include spoilers because I don't work at ABC, but I will talk about LOST up to date.

OK. So I've been confounded for quite a while why John Locke is John Locke, because he's anything but an advocate of natural rights and social contract. For him, society was formed only by citizens coming together and agreeing to respect each other. And government could then, as a result, only interfere with people's daily lives if they let them, not only because that's just what they might have wanted, but because that's what they were owed as human beings, something much bigger than birds and trees.

The only real way in which the show has really dealt with it was the period when he was returned from the island, in 2007, and was given the alias of Jeremy Bentham by Ben. Hilarious, yes, at least to me, because though Bentham didn't even live at the same time, they pretty much disagreed on everything. Bentham advocated utilitarianism, a notion that left people used and abused because their worth was left in how they could serve society, not who they were. Locke was most definitely used and abused by Ben when he was back off the island, and was left, literally, for dead. But that was because Ben discovered he could never rid himself of Locke: he needed him much more than how he could use him, a (not so) final triumph of Locke over Bentham.

To LOST's Locke, we are special because we're human, as the philosopher would agree, but not because we have rights that must be respected by those around us. In fact, that's all pretty irrelevant because life will lead us to our purpose and whatever crap we have to deal with is all part of the plan. But that's all personal, and nothing we have control over. Socially, as was brought up to me by RVA Ginger, Locke is really more Hobbesian than Lockean. Thomas Hobbes, being the comic counterpart to my favorite theologian, makes a great comparison.

So here we go: Hobbes and Calvin don't correlate to individuals, but bring together the two big themes the show deals with. Hobbes leads us to think about how people interact in society and how we organize ourselves. Calvin leads us to think about how life sometimes takes all our efforts and laughs at us.

Hobbes theorized some grounding for social contract theory that would lead us to John Locke the philosopher, but the point he's well known for today is that the people need a strong leader to bring them together. Is that Jack? Locke? Sawyer? They all seem to think they know what's best for people because they're 1) smart 2) destined or 3) courageous. But in all three cases, something is missing.

At the same time, Calvin leads us to think about destiny. Call it destiny, election, predestination, fate, or Jack's sheer will, the Island seems to take control of people: redeem them, bring them together, judge them. It gives you what you need, and neither death nor time nor space can stop that force. Locke seemed to get all this early, Jack fought it, Sawyer took advantage of it. But now, Locke seems to have withdrawn because his fate isn't what he wanted, Jack is finally seeing how he's not in control, and Sawyer is just trying to do the right thing.

But a conversation Jack had last episode made the point the advocates of the Christian doctrine of predestination, which has recently been deemed an idea that's changing the world right now, have been making a long time. He wondered whether he should save Ben because he needs to live so that time doesn't warp, or whether he needs to let him die because that's why fate brought him back to the 70s--the discussion doesn't matter because whatever ends up happening was what was supposed to happen, right? You have to make a choice, but the choice won't matter. In the end, the Island decides. Or Christian or Jacob or Harry Potter.

So how does this come together? LOST is about a group of people who are, well, lost. Duh. And obviously, again, in more ways than just being stuck on some island. Calvin and Hobbes beg the question: to find ourselves, is it about who we are or what we do? The comic strip didn't answer this, so we'll see if the show does.

Man that was long-winded.