Talk:There's No Place Like Home, Part 1/Theories

From Lostpedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Could Ben have had a part in Sun's decision to buy Paik industries? Is Sun savvy enough to go through 5 banks to do it? It seems to have Ben's handiwork to me.

Contents

Whispers at Hurley's party

Can anyone get a transcription of the whispers at Hurley's party? There has to be more to that than just the people hiding.


Moved from the theory page to this page

Discussion of Membata and the meaning of "Uncharted"

  • "Membata" is Indonesian for "doubt" or "uncertainty". In the press conference, this island is described on the map as "uncharted," so the island may not even exist even in the world of Lost (it does not exist in the real world) and is just another part of the elaborate cover story. The odds of an island in that part of the world, so close to other islands which are heavily populated, being uncharted in the 21st century are astronomical.
    • I believe they said "uninhabited", not "uncharted". With Google Earth, everything is charted.
      • They said both. Karen Decker referred to the island as "uninhabited," but "uncharted" was written on the map in parentheses under the island
        • Can uncharted simply mean that no one has mapped the entire Island's geography? As in, we know it's here, we have a top side view via Google Earth, but no one has manually (on foot) mapped out the nooks and crannies?
          • Yes that's correct, for example, there are areas of uncharted rainforest. We know there's rainforest there, but nobody has yet made a detailed geographical survey of it. Therefore, it's possible, theoretically, for there to be an Island that we know is there, but it uncharted.
        • A nautical "map" is called a "chart". Uncharted may mean the island is not represented on a nautical chart because it is not worthy of notation. That does not mean it is unknown or undiscovered. If it is away from shipping lanes, etc then it may not appear on the map. On the other hand, these days with sophisticated level of charts it is very unlikely any navigational hazard would be left off a chart so I'd say it is just a handy plot device that I can live with.
          • I looked at the map, and did not see uncharted written there.
            • (You are correct, the screen cap in the main article does not. Around the moment the spokesperson describes a typhoon, a close-up map of the island is shown over her shoulder with the word "uncharted" under the name of the island. Then another map shows both islands with an arrow showing the path of the raft - it also has the word "uncharted")

Guys, this is a very interesting contribution, but it really doesn't count as a theory, does it? I'm moving it to the discussion page. --Salvora 09:23, 17 May 2008 (PDT)

Discussion of The Explosives on the Kahana

  • Didn't Keamy and his men unload the C4 as the captain was pulling his gun on them (or a few scenes earlier)?
    • Truly: no. If you look at the scene again you will realize they were packing and loading things onto the helicopter, not unpacking or unloading things from the helicopter. --Salvora 09:34, 17 May 2008 (PDT)

Discussion of The Other's Clothes

  • A savage group would not be carrying modern infantry weapons.
    • There's nothing savage about advanced weaponry? Let's not get political here.
    • I'm not getting political at all. The mission of the infantry is "to close with and destroy the enemy through fire and maneuver." Warfare is brutal and violent. The original usage in these posts was that the Others dressed in their rustic garb to portray themselves as savages, i.e. primitives.

Moved by --Salvora 09:43, 17 May 2008 (PDT)

Discussion of Why are the Oceanic Six lying about their story?

  • I think it was Matthew Abbadon in the plane with the Oceanic 6. There's someone sitting in the shadows in front of the bulkhead. It has his body shape
    • No, Hurley didn't know Abbadon, when he was visiting him in the mental facility.

Moved from the theory page because it has been pretty much proved the man sitting in the place was a member of the crew. For a discussion of this man check: http://www.lostpedia.com/wiki/Talk:There%27s_No_Place_Like_Home%2C_Part_1#Another_person_on_the_plane For proof check out: http://img388.imageshack.us/my.php?image=losts04e12os0.jpg http://img376.imageshack.us/my.php?image=losts04e122mp6.jpg

--Salvora 12:08, 17 May 2008 (PDT)

Jin talking to Sun on the Kahana

  • Can anyone translate exactly what Jin said to Sun when they discovered the C4 on the Kahana? Sun's face when she was back on deck was pretty terrifying.
  • The transcript doesn't say, so we're left to imagine. It was almost certainly in the realm of, "Get you and our unborn child out here, now!" The exact text isn't important to us understanding the flow of emotions.

Discussion of Flash screen time vs. Island screen time

Usually the Island events get more time than Flash events. On this episode, there is approximately 19:15 minutes in flashes and 20:05 in island events. This may hint that we are now getting to the point when we see off-island events as much as on-island events, as the plot shifts.

  • Even better, when will the role switch and the main storyline is off the island and the flashbacks are from the island post crash/pre-leaving?
    • Probably never. The producers have stated that they know people like the show because it centers around an island. I doubt LOST would ever go in a direction where it is chiefly off-island.
    • Lost is full of "watching for every clue", but this one is reading into it a little too far.
      • Amen to the above.
        • On the other hand, Damon and Carlton have suggested that towards the end of the series people would be asking themselves where the 'present' would be in the next series. While I totally agree that a predominantly off-island plot would be disappointing and unlikely, the flashforwards thus far allude to the fact that you can take the Losties out of the island, but you can't take the island out of the Losties. Potentially the 'present' of the new season will be off-island, dealing with the problematic lives of the Oceanic 6 and, ultimately, Jack's desire to return to the island, interspersed with the continuing story on the island itself. On-island or off, the island will always be central.
          • The 'present' next season might shift to the time after the Oceanic 6 get off the Island, but note that we don't currently know what is going on at the Island at that point in time. Perhaps we will then see events at that time (as the timeline of the show catches up to it) from the perspective of people on the Island. Therefore the 'present' will catch up with what are, this season, future events, but the show will still be, as Damon and Carlton have said, Island-based.
            • Whatever timeline they choose as the new present (if they decided to jump forward to 2008 for example), i wonder how much they can show of the O6's lives off island without being incredibly boring, or have any episode centered on one of these characters. It's been interesting so far to show what hapened to them after their rescue, but having full episodes of Kate's life as a mom, or slowly watching Jack's beard grow... well maybe its just me but i dont see how they could make it interesting (unless they managed to make it more like Sayid's post island story arc and connect them all to widmore and Co.). My point is, post rescue, how are we gonna get any episode centered on any one of the O6 without it being incredibly boring ? I reckon they could shift the story forward, having the new present as 2008/9 with the O6 making it back to the island, and flashbacks would be reintroduced to show how they get there and what hapened to the ones that remained on the island in between the rescue and the "present". New timeline could also help reintroduce the now grown-up walt... or maybe its not the story but the island and everyone on it that is "moved" to that point in the future (according to the theory that the island is moved in time rather than in space). This way they could be back almost as soon as they leave, as they were not supposed to leave in the first place. what do you think ?FabC
      • Once the first flashforward aired, it seemed that "Lost" might mean "lost in our lives," with all the aspects of a soap opera that concept portended, rather than "castaway on an island," but, as long as Locke (and company?) are on the Island, Island time will be the series present. We will eventually begin to see "flashnows." None of us knows who the real good guy is, assuming there is one.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 13:40, 22 May 2008 (PDT)

This section was moved for including a discussion of how the show might develop, but not of the events that happened in this episode. Please, let us keep the theory page clean and tidy! Moved by --Salvora 17:07, 17 May 2008 (PDT)

Sun speaking about Jin's death

Sun was either completely emotionless when answering the reporters question or she was barely hold back a flood of emotion. Later, she also spoke with little emotion when informing her father that she had acquired a controlling interest in his company.

We don't know if Jin is dead or alive. We only know that the date of death on his grave marker is false. The Korean reporter wanted to know if Jin had made it to the Island. In other words, was he one of the early survivors who survived the crash, but died later. Oceanic might have set up three catagories of passengers: Those killed in the crash, those who survived the crash long enough to return to Hawaii, and those who survived the crash but died on the Island. Oceanic could deny responsibility for the deaths of any who died on the Island.

Jin might have died on the Kahana after disarming a substantial portion of the C4. If so, the fact that Sun, her unborn child and Aaron are alive suggests that the explosion was not a complete catastrophe.

We know Kate can communicate by phone with someone, either Sawyer or a person speaking for Sawyer, who can ask her to do something for Sawyer. That does not necessarily suggest that Jin and Sun can communicate. - unsigned, by Gaarmyvet on 18 May 2008 16:16

Is Jin dead?

  • Why is it thought Jin is dead in the flashforward? Isint it Jin who was buying the stuffed toy for Sun???--Nzoomed 01:14, 22 May 2008 (PDT)
    • Jin was not in the flashforward. That was an interlinked combination of a flashforward and flashback. Jin's last words were that he had only been married for two months.
      • Wow! that was quite confusing! ill have to watch it again, sometimes they do that and if your not paying attention, you can be fooled.--Nzoomed 13:30, 22 May 2008 (PDT)

Discussion of The Others' Clothes

    • "Rustic" is the new black.
      • What does that mean?

Moved by --Salvora 05:24, 20 May 2008 (PDT)

Spoilers on the theory page?! Grr...

Why is there a spoiler alert on the theory page? If there is detailed spoiler information, it should be removed. If it's a theory that happened to prove correct (as happens on rare occasions), then it isn't a spoiler (although labelling it as one conveys that it is correct, making it into one). I looked away from the section as soon as I saw it (but not before having read some of the labelled information, since I was scrolling up from the section below), so I'm not sure which it is - I wouldn't recognize correct spoiler information even if I saw it. In any event, it shouldn't be there. I'm putting a spoiler label on the top of the page until this can be resolved (perhaps just by deleting the entire section?)--Hylas 12:03, 24 May 2008 (PDT)

If it's the label I think it is, I put the spoiler label because buried in the middle of the text was a reference to the previews for coming show. Based on your comments, I'll remove the entry.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 12:11, 24 May 2008 (PDT)

Thanks, good to know that's all it was, I was a little worried. :)
Having thought about it some, spoiler creep into the theory pages seems like something that would be almost impossible to manage, because it puts us in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. Removing or identifying the material conveys that it is correct, whereas if we were to just leave a detailed "theory" that is in fact a complete spoiler, people who read it would quickly realize that they had been spoiled when it started coming true word for word.--Hylas 09:05, 25 May 2008 (PDT)

The Clothes

Move - There are multuiple places discussion of the Others' clothing could be placed, but putting the theory under the Others' own page allows one place to make changes and eases attempts to reference the data.

Clothes moved to Others theory page.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 08:35, 1 June 2008 (PDT)

Editing the Theory Page

When I have made edits to the theory page, and have removed stuff, I have posted it here (that is, I have moved it from one page to another, and I have given reasons for that). I have made contributions to the theory page that are not there anymore. Would people be a little bit more respectful and stop deleting just whatever they don't agree to? This is a community place, which means there is a community available to discuss things with. Deleting each other's stuff without proper discussion is very disrespectful to community members who do care about the show and this site, and it is also a very hopeless enterprise: the encyclopaedia is edited constantly, and there is no way it's ever going to be to everybody's taste!--Salvora 08:34, 29 May 2008 (PDT)

I haven't made significant edits to this theory page, but I have been fairly ruthless in paring down Oceanic_Six/Theories to make it concise, comprehensive, and in compliance with the theory policy (It's very brief right now, since most of the theories related to issues resolved with the May 15 episode). I've been approaching it the same way I approach a non-theory article: edits that are likely to be controversial are brought up on the talk page, while others are not. I don't think of it as a talk page, where each contributor "owns" his or her contributions. Debate and discussion in non-theory articles is unlikely to get moved to the talk page; it just gets cleanly struck out, enforcing a strong consenus that it doesn't belong there.
Ultimately, therefore I think this is a symptom of a larger problem: the lack of a widely-accepted and consistently enforced policy for theory articles. Many theory pages, like this one, are a wandering, repetitive discussion which bear no resemblance to the principles set out in the existing policy. When cleaning that up, simply pasting all that content onto the talk page may not be the best solution, as it doesn't have the signatures that make it possible to follow like a talk page discussion, and it doesn't necessarily form helpful discussion on improving the theory page. It's important to keep the talk pages legible, as well.
For non-theory articles, it's quite easy to track changes and monitor what material is deleted. I think this would be true of theory articles if in general we kept them slimmer and more in-line with the policy - specifically, the policy that states discussion of theories should occur on the talk page. We can all, I'm sure, debate the merits of individual theories until blue in the face, but the result is a theory page that is very long, unorganized, largely inaccessible, and very difficult to edit.
Ultimately, I'm arguing for more ruthless cleanup of bloat on theory pages. A leaner, more economical article that focuses on concisely setting out plausible alternative answers to unanswered questions would be much more attractive for Lostpedians to monitor and help improve further.--Hylas 13:26, 29 May 2008 (PDT)
Retrieved from "http://www.lostpedia.com/wiki/Talk:There%27s_No_Place_Like_Home%2C_Part_1/Theories"