Through the darkness of future past,
The magician longs to see
One chance out between two worlds:
Fire, walk with me.
-Twin Peaks
As all great shows do, LOST’s Season 5 began last night and answered a few questions (that most already knew) and added a whole bunch more. So now, as great politicians do, I will pose questions for myself to answer:
Q: Why is Sawyer so tubby?
A: Despite the amount of ‘Suspension of Disbelief’ required for LOST fans, I’m still dismayed by how doughy Sawyer looks. That said, I guess I have to accept that Sawyer is played by a real human who is not stuck on a mysterious time-jumping island.

Q: Why is Sawyer obsessed with putting a shirt on for most of the episode, and why do they focus on him getting jabbed by a sharp bamboo stick?
A: My best guess is that Sawyer (who was stuck in a giant Skinner Box during Season 2), will now start living through Abraham Maslow’s “Hierarchy of Need” theory. In which shoeless/shirtless Caveman Sawyer can not become truly “self-actualized” until his base needs are met — Food, Water, Clothing, Shelter, Companionship… or as Sawyer would see it — mangos, beer, flannel, a tarp and Juliet(?). In fact, as LOSTwriters are prone to do, I wouldn’t be surprised to see an unsubtle hint, like a character named “Maslow”, show up on the island.

Q: Did I catch LOST using both the titles “3 years Before” and “3 Years Ago” in the same episode?
A: I thought I did… bullshit right? It feels like they’re being aimlessly deceptive.
Q: Does the ability of all characters to jump through time and space revolutionize the show?
A: Prettymuch

Q: Do Tell.
A: It’s a smart move on the writer’s part. Any loopholes that previous seasons have created can now be closed by depicting their preceding events (in the past) that haven’t been shown yet (in future episodes).
Also, it’s a great storytelling tool that allows the viewer to be sympathetic to a character’s implausible plight. In that way it reminds me of the film Memento, where moviegoers observe a hero with no long-term memory in scenes which run backward from end to beginning — thereby projecting the character’s brain issues onto its viewers.
Q: Intriguing. Please go on!
A: If you insist, good sir… by telling the stories of the “past”, “present” and “future” simultaneously, at some level the viewer will be rattled by revelations that the characters themselves are experiencing.
Also, if you care to geek out about physics even more so (like I occasionally try to), good ‘ol Einstein showed that all “time” really runs concurrently. (As well as fixed and unalterable as Daniel Farrady emphatically argues.)
So… viewing LOST in what David Lynch might call “the futurepast”, with all times going on at the same time, is actually just as valid as viewing a story from what we perceive, relatively, as the right way — beginning, middle, and end. Ohhhh, Science — fucking with my brain again.
Q: I feel dizzy and humbled by this new knowledge. Does this have any direct implications within the reality of the show beyond clever and overly-smart script writing?
A: Absolutely maybe! For the first two seasons we’d been watching (what we thought were) real-time events buttressed by compelling (and suspiciously coincidental) background stories that manifest themselves on the island.
The first twist was that Beardy Jack (and later other characters like Sun and Kate) were being shown in what we first thought were flashbacks, then concluded were flashforwards, but know now thanks to Season 5 (and Einstein, I guess) that the correct timing of events is all um…. Relative. I mean, it would be a flash forward or backward only if you view the Oceanic 6′s time on The Island as the “present”. (And now even that’s messed up.)
So, now that we know that they ACTUALLY JUMP THROUGH TIME AND SPACE, all the things that seem like ridiculous happenstance and coincidence could actually be an intricate and calculated set of events put into motion not by chance, but by necessity. (And, as a further mind-fuck, possibly set in motion by their future selves in order to set-right the only future that wouldn’t unravel the Fabric of the Cosmos). And now, if you’re keeping score, we’ve stumbled into Donnie Darko territory. Break out the emo eyeliner.
More on this later… some thoughts on the future/past, and maybe a sprinkling of mind/body and dream/reality concepts. So yeah, stuff you talked about while high, or in your Philosophy 001 class, or possibly both simultaneously.



Posted by BDazzle 









The Digital Switcheroo
May 22, 2009Photo Courtesy of CNL822 on Flickr
Watching baseball last week with all the jitters, smears, and pauses of digital broadcasting, I realized I haven’t officially bitched about the digital switchover. All this info (well, except for the Kanye part) I think is pretty valuable:
Now that people are using digital receivers, we’re realizing that digital TV reception is as bad or worse than analog TV. Those that haven’t gone digital yet (or in some cases can’t even afford to), hear the Networks pitching the switcheroo and it’s like they’re doing you a favor. It’s important to know that TV Networks/the government/Big Businss are NOT just doing it for your benefit.
I’m not one for conspiracy theories, hell, any rant that mentions “the government” usually makes me tune out. But this is true, apparently: The initial digital switch plan (I shit you not) was a delayed reaction to Post-9/11 communication issues. According to Bloomburg…
Broadcast networks volunteered to give their analog frequencies over to emergency police and fire communications. Though, “volunteered” is a stretch. Television networks were well aware that this act, which appears fairly selfless and sensible, had an overwhelming business-minded upside.
Giving up these frequencies and moving to a digital signal would mean that every American that does not subscribe to a cable subscription (~20% of the population, skewed towards the less affluent) must buy a brand new TV, update their televisions on their own dime (that’s 285 million sets as of ’05), or get cable. It was a sweetheart deal all around, exemplified by the nifty bullet points below:
That last bullet is the kicker, because, if you installed the digital converter box you quickly realize that reception can, and does, still suck. What’s worse, broadcast channels that used to come in a little fuzzy on an analog television will not even register through the digital box. No longer do you have the option of watching a fuzzy screen — it’s all or nothing now.
Digital TV is a snob — if it’s not crystal clear, you’re not allowed to watch it. You cannot even manually tell your digital converter to include a channel that is not registering — this is what is happening to CBS (WBBM) on my TV and a friends in Chicago. I wonder if they’re losing ratings because the digital boxes they forced on their viewers refuse to recognize it as a channel.
The funniest part is those antannae… you know the ones you were supposed to be able to throw away… those rabbit ears they made fun of in the “swtch to digital” PSAs earlier this year? Yeah… you have to buy a new one.