What's Hot: We Don't Need Another Villain: By Laklost
What's Hot: We Don't Need Another Villain: By Laklost
The audience of Lost has been looking for something since Season One and the night that Claire woke up in the caves screaming that someone was attacking her. We called them the Others because they are mercilessly at cross purposes to our group of Losties from Oceanic 815. We figured that they had a leader and guessed that it was everyone from Tom Friendly to the erstwhile Jacob to enigmatic Richard until we realized by the end of Season Three that it was Ben. Now we seem to be looking for a bad guy -- the person to aim our energy and anger at, the person to defeat in order for our heroes to be free and equal. The advertising trailers for Season Four have suggested that the freighter folks are bringing worse trouble than any we have known on the island thus far. So we've been watching, waiting for a name. Charles Widmore seems now to be on the short list of people to call villain. But I've got news for you. The writers of Lost are screaming at us that there is one villain and his name is Benjamin Linus. No other character in the Lost universe is more of a lying manipulator than he is. No one else has stooped lower to reach his goals. The audience seems prepared to forgive him while they castigate Locke for misguided decisions, Jack for arrogance and Michael for working for personal reasons. I suggest we redirect our judgment where it belongs.
It is inarguable that Ben is a consummate deceiver capable of living out elaborate lies to suit his own ends. We know that he lied about his background. Not born on the island, he lied about this to gain the sympathy and support of the Others in his employ. When we first met him back in Season Two he again lied about his identity, having killed the real life Henry Gale so he could have a story the Losties would believe. He lied to the Others about his relationship to Jacob and we know that he uses that name and authority for his own agenda. His proclaimed protection of the island is another elaborate ruse to stay in power. If he really believed in and trusted the island, would he need to lie to his own people about their ability to leave? No, his staging of the sub for their departures proves that his plans must prevail regardless of what any one person might need or want. He has kidnapped children unashamedly, dismissing as trite any longing those children might have for home or parents. If his aims were pure, would he be capable of mentally torturing people like he has Juliet, Michael, Jack, Kate and Sawyer? We can't dismiss any of his actions in Season Three to some larger purpose. He put Kate with Sawyer to drive a wedge between Jack and his friends. He isolated and abused Jack to get him to work on his spine. These are not larger, magnanimous purposes. These are the actions of an egomaniac.
The main person we have observed Ben manipulating is John Locke. So far John has taken the following actions and realized after the fact that he has done just what Ben wanted him to do: challenged Jack's leadership, blew up the sub, had Anthony Cooper killed, and killed Naomi. We also suspect that Ben getting himself released from the New Otherton dungeon plays right into his hands. The funny thing to me is that instead of the audience being angry at Ben for being a weasel, we are angry at John for his passivity. But right now John is entangled in Ben's version of reality by believing that they share a common enemy in Charles Widmore. We have no reason to believe that the main struggle is between Ben as the island's protector and Widmore as the island's exploiter simply because this is how Ben describes the struggle. He is a liar therefore this description is a lie. If that reasoning seems flimsy to you, I challenge you to accuse Charles Widmore of any more than refusing Desmond his MacCutcheon whiskey and his daughter's affection. This makes Widmore a controlling father, not a villain. The fact of the matter is that Ben because of his selfishly destructive leadership is losing the trust of his followers. Witness Patchy's rebellion of killing the Looking Glass ladies, Friendly's statement that "Ben is losing it" and Richard's claim "We're looking for someone to remind us that we're here for important reasons." The turn in the story is that now Ben needs Locke. He believes he can appeal to Locke's worse nature, his neurotic need for authority and approval, and use Locke's uncanny connection to the island to bolster his cause.
Let's go back to the Swan station for a moment and look at those events with Season Four knowledge. Apparently the reason Ben went to the Swan in the first place was to find Locke and turn the Losties against one another. And it worked spectacularly. Ben allowed himself to be a prisoner while using Walt's capture by the Others as the impetus for Michael to free him. We may fault Michael for not standing up to Ben; but instead of accusing the victim of passivity let's put the blame on the abuser. If Ben were a benevolent leader, could he not have invited Locke to New Otherton and given him a free choice to join the Others or not? If he needed Michael for anything, could he not have used for motivation the beauty of the island's healing powers and Walt's connection to that? If Ben's motivation against Widmore were honestly the good of the island, wouldn't Locke's healing have been the point of connection for bringing at least some of the Losties into his confidence and his side of the battle? I ask these questions searchingly. I'm not trying to dumb down Ben or turn the tiger into a pussycat. I'm trying to prove that fundamentally Ben is an evil genius who is motivated completely by his selfish agenda to remain in power at all costs. There is no inviting with him. There is only mental and emotional torture. There is no free will with him. There is only his judgment of good and bad based on agreement with his plans and goals. There is no gentle persuasion from him. There is only blackmail, coercion and imprisonment. We may expect to see that the reason Sayid calls Ben "Boss" in the future is because he has to serve Ben or lose all he holds dear. Ben can capitalize on Sayid's love for his friends because Ben has neither friends nor love. When he sees affection in someone else, he exploits it for his purposes. Does Ben deserve applause for his cunning? Would someone in real life get your applause for this?
Speaking of Ben's love life, let's next turn our consideration to Juliet Burke. Until this season's "The Other Woman" we have seen Juliet's relationship to Ben as one of student to master. She has been held in close confidence to Ben regarding his illness and the subsequent capture of Jack, Kate and Sawyer. She had the inside track on Ben's continuing search for the fertility problems among the Others. If we thought he was doing her a favor in saving her sister's life, we recently learned the price of her gratitude. Ben, like King David in the Old Testament, sent his faithful warrior Goodwin to the front line of the battle in order to get him killed and out of Bathsheba's, I mean Juliet's life. Now he literally believes that Juliet is his. May I ask respectfully that we pause over that revelation. In Season One when Jin exercised a similar hold over his wife Sun we as an audience condemned him. Using their marriage as a comparison for the sick fascination Ben has for Juliet, should we someday expect Juliet to go free with Ben's heart in the right place for her? Think about it, people. Jin has morally matured as markedly as any of the Losties. Do you think Ben will achieve this kind of unconditional love for Juliet? If I have to answer for you, I will: No. We may take our clue from Juliet who clearly expects that Ben will claim her as his victory prize and will kill anyone who gets in his way. This from a woman who watched her ex get run over by a bus, and who saw with her own eyes her sister healed and the baby born. Ben wields unspeakable power and he intends to prevail. Not only is Juliet "mine" according to Ben, so is the island, the Losties' destinies and anyone who challenges him.
Why are people not angry at Ben for this blatant arrogance but are livid with Jack for the same thing? In regard to their love lives, I consider Ben and Jack to be running in parallel right now. Both men have been severely unlucky in love. Ben lost Annie, Jack lost Sarah. Why do we pity Ben for this, but blame Jack? Yes, both men are control freaks and emotionally immature. But while we seem patient to see what Ben's tragedy with Annie was, we seem equally disgusted with Jack's inability to put his relationships in order. May I suggest that our impatience with the de facto leader of the Losties is as misplaced as is our willingness to grant Ben restitution? Do you not see how our willingness to discover whether Ben's motivation hasn't been for a greater good while we assume the worst of Jack is playing right into the writers' hands to put the audience under Ben's spell? The forgiveness and support Jack deserves passes him over and lands right at Ben's feet. In other words, the audience's sympathy is with cunning, conning Ben instead of with struggling, stricken Jack. Right now we're more fascinated with what Ben will do than what Jack will. The same ploy is used in Milton's 'Paradise Lost' to gain sympathy for the devil. It's working.
Case in point: "Meet Kevin Johnson" 4x08. Like "The Other Woman," a flashback about Juliet which revealed more about Ben's character than it did hers, "Meet Kevin Johnson" caught us up with Michael Dawson but actually revealed to us more about Ben. Personally, I felt completely disoriented after watching this episode, but I quickly realized why. The person calling the shots, moving the chess pieces and gaining from the pain of others was Ben. All of his malevolent characteristics were on display. He lied to Michael about ever being free in New York or anywhere. He lied about the bomb and then manipulated him into following Ben's master plan. To Alex, her boyfriend and mother he lied about keeping them safe. Should we suspect someone else took it on themselves to shoot Karl and Danielle? Again I say no. That wasn't the first or last trap Ben has set (Dharmacaust, anyone?). Why does he get a pass from the audience? Because he has convinced us that he deserves it. This is the mark not only of a villain but of a master villain. It's not enough for you to understand him, he also wants you to cheer for him, to want him to defeat our heroes. I'd say right now he's got most of the audience right where he wants them. Season Four of Lost has been compared to "The Empire Strikes Back," the second installment of the first "Star Wars" trilogy. In that movie we saw not only how powerful the bad guys were, but how worthy their cause seemed, and how exciting it seemed to give up and join them (Lando Calrissian, anyone?). The parallel with Ben, his power and magnetism is not lost on me. My money is still with the rebels, Locke, Jack and Michael even if they now seem weak and passive. They will rise and freedom will prevail. I just hope we're all happy when it do.
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: We Don't Need Another Villain: By Laklost.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://lost.cubit.net/cgi-bin/mt/mttb_xyz2.cgi/759
You hear enough of our opinions on this site! We want to know what our users think! Do you have an idea for an article, review, spoiler material, humorous commentary, parody, or other materials regarding LOST or SWLS? We want to publish your articles on SWLS! Just submit your well written and captivating article to us, and if we like what you have to say, we'll publish it!
I had to come read your article, LAK!
good job as always. Ben is the master villain, and he is at his most dangerous when he seems to be at someone else's mercy. I'm thinking that it wasn't such an accident that he was caught in Danielle's trap when we first met him. That's when he started getting his claws into Locke.
I have to admit... although there's times I'm sure Ben's the biggest villain, sometimes I wonder. Maybe there is a "badder guy" (as my little Sadie would say). We will see.
Hi, I'm new :) But I really like this forum.
As for the article - well laid out. There is no doubt that Ben is simply a mischievous, cold manipulator, and proud of that as well (remember the scene with Juliet when they watch Jack while he was still in Swan). But let me point out a few things.
First, Ben is responsible for deception, blackmail and murder, but he is not responsible for Michael's actions. Michael, desperate as he was, DECIDED to commit murder for a greater good and that was when he really lost Walt. After what happened to their relationship on the island he should have known that a murder and selling his friends was going to throw Walt even further away from him. While Ben is hopeless case of emotionally crippled man with great intelligence, Michael was a man for whom we had sympathy at the beginning and we were happy for him to build a proper relationship with his son. Ben is plain evil, Michael is greatly disappointing and gone astray.
Second, we don't know anything about Charles Widmore. He might turn out to be anything so it's equally pointless to condemn him as to give him credit. Should we do either, we would be doing exactly what Ben wants people to do – jump into conclusions and make decisions. The reason why Ben is so successful in manipulation is that people cannot (or don’t allow themselves to) step back, think the situation through and humbly acknowledge their weakness (which in my opinion is freeing). Having said that we have to remember that “Lost” is clearly playing on global conspiracy theories so I can see no reason why Widmore couldn’t be equally rotten as Ben is. Between them it’s the war of power and possession, not good or evil.
Also, I am much more pessimistic about the good (or redemption) to prevail.
Look at Jack. He had his little redemptions on the island. The most moving scene for me was when Sawyer told Jack about his encounter with Jack's father. Besides Jack learnt a lot about himself on the island. And still he was sucked into emotional black hole after he returned to LA.
And finally – villains are always fascinating. You may hate them, but it’s them who usually pushes the plot forward – and it’s not only the case of “Lost” :) .
Westy185, thank you for that fantastic summary. I'm the type of writer that as soon as I get my thoughts all hammered out and presented, I begin to think that the exact opposite of what I've just written is actually true! So I've been in a bit of a quandry the last few days -- is Ben really that bad? Is the show really about good and bad? But reading your post got me on track. You are right -- the show is steeped in right and wrong actions and most importantly the consequences of both.
100% right and thank you Laklost.
I think it's clear that the basic theme of Lost is the battle between good and evil, often referred to on the show as light and dark. It figures heavily in the first season and most of the main Losties, as shown through their flashbacks, are people who have struggled with this in their own lives.
Always there are moments depicted when these characters are asked to make a choice between good and evil (Jack, Locke, Kate, Sawyer, Charlie, Sun, Jin, Mr. Echo, Ana-Lucia, and Sayid particularly). The complexity of the choices, and the different degrees of control these characters have over their choices, are a credit to the writing team of this show. Coupled with the puzzle of exactly what is going on with the island (electromagnetism, appearances of dead people, smokie, time-travel, etc.) make this one of the greatest shows to ever appear on television.
I think you will ultimately be right, that good, or maybe a better word, redemption, will prevail at the end. Either that, or at least evil will be punished. Throughout the show, whenever one of the main characters chose the evil path, no good came of it. I would think that would continue to the end.
Norville, you hit the nail on the head when you said, Despots "have a grossly distorted world view in which they really are the good guys, striving for the greater good." We are in complete agreement that this describes Ben. I also agree that Ben is one of the most fascinating characters, but he is not out for anyone else's good but his own. In my opinion, the forums are full of pro-Ben sentiment coupled with disdain for the actual good guys. It's a fun mind game, but it's not how things will shake down in the end.
Laklost... great article. You've obviously thought a lot about this, and I appreciated reading your viewpoints. However, I must admit that I wasn't sure who your argument is directed against. Maybe I haven't spent enough time in the forums, but are there really folks out there who are honestly sympathetic towards Ben?
That Ben is an egomaniac, a dastardly, evil genius who will stoop to any level to achieve his ends (even if he may be equally expert at self-justifying his means), this much I agree is proven on the show. And do I think Ben will get his just rewards (i.e. overthrow, shame, ignominy, possibly death) at the end of the series? Maybe. But do I hate Ben? Heck no--because it's hard for me to hate the character that makes the plot so great. Do I want somebody to just tell Ben to Go To Hell and shoot him? No, because that, for me, would be the end of what is great about Lost. We're hard on Locke when he lets himself be manipulated by Ben, because we want Locke to grow a spine and be the leader he ought to be. We're hard on Jack when he makes a stupid decision, because we don't want Jack to be stupid. But we rally behind Ben, because he's the character who is SO ruling the game, and because he's just so darn GENIUS at his evilness. I mean, the man could convince Darth Vader to do HIS bidding.
If you look at reality, sure despots and tyrants are awful and we want them to be overthrown and justice to prevail. But a despot will very rarely look at his own life and say to himself, "Wow, I'm the most evil person I know!" Instead, they have a grossly distorted world view in which they really are the good guys, striving for the greater good. When Ben says "We're the good guys," that's how I interpret it. We know he's selfish and operating for his own reasons, but I don't believe for a second that BEN thinks he's selfish. And that's what's so interesting to me about his character: what is the the Others' "higher purpose" that he and they thinks they're trying to accomplish? Why do they still follow him? Because as much as I know Ben's evil, I do tend to sympathize with the "other Others" and believe that they (unlike their maniacally manipulative leader) might possibly have some historically good (or at least fathomable) motivation explaining their seemingly unjustifiable actions.
Sorry for going on so long!
The idea of ever rooting for that weasel Michael turns my stomach, I don't believe that Ben will turn out to be the great villain of Lost,perhaps there isn't one. However I don't pity or trust him, I think he is selfish, morally weak (ex. Juliet) a megalomaniac, and at the same time, he truly believes himself to be good and justifies his own actions.( some of which may be good) Maybe the point of Lost is that all the characters are capable of terrible actions when they feel justified, some of them are growing morally and others (Michael) are not.
omg 43 episodes? is that all we have left??
Again another excellent piece Lorie, I bow to your ability for string words together into co-herant sentences!! ;)
(((((((((((((((((((((Lorie))))))))))))))))))
Great discussion and thanks for the nice compliments. Whoever said Michael Emerson needs kudos I am in complete agreement. Only an actor who has busted his chops on Shakespeare villains could handle Benjamin Linus.
I meant this article to do two things - admire and judge the complexity of the Ben's motivations and actions, and to keep us oriented toward our protagonists. And yes, I do believe that Michael will be an integral part of helping the Losties get free - if for no other reason than he is actively in Ben's employ now. I don't know how the writers are going to finish this story in 43 episodes, but it is going to be a wild ride.
While Ben is being portrayed as an 'evil genius' right now, you will come to find out before the end of the show that he is neither evil, nor a genius.
While I don't condone the things he has done or how he went about it, the information that he has is so catastrophic that people who get in the way are merely casualties of war.
I don't think Ben intends to kill or hurt anyone, but is privy to some inside information such as the end of the world or knowledge of the future, which he feels he must protect at all costs. When someone gets in the way, they are expendable for the greater good.
Lakie,
Great piece! I've got no argument for you as far as Ben goes. It was always a gut feeling for me that he was a good guy and I guess I just feel too invested at this point to give up. I think the reason so many of us are willing to accept the things he does isn't because we agree with them but because he is such a phenominal character portrayed so well by a talented actor and keeps us on the edge of our seat waiting to see what he will pull out of his hat next. It's OK to root for the bad guys sometimes (it IS just a show, so that doesn't make us evil!)
I do have to challenge you on a couple of points, though. We have no knowledge yet that Ben had Karl and Danielle ambushed. He does have the motive, but I think it's too soon to assume anything. Also, about Widmore, it might be my gut talking again, but I'm not ready to put him on the side of the good guys just yet, especially after getting a glimpse of the 'crew' he has put together aboard the freighter.
Once again, I'm not ready to join your camp just yet, but great article! I'll be sitting by myself on the beach for awhile longer, until the next wave of episodes washes up and maybe changes my mind.
Am I the only one who has felt bad for Jack since the beginning? Sure he was a workaholic, but it was a flaw focused on saving people... usually people only he seemed able to save. He lost his wife. Was it all his fault? I don't think so. Why no sympathy from anyone?
And Ben? I disagree that he is given a pass. He has been a coniver from Day 1. Why would anyone side with him?
Those two thoughts aside, it is an excellent article. Weel written, well supported.
@ Jugdish
I will say that we saw Widmore beat the crap out of someone.
Who hasn't beaten the crap out of someone in this show yet? Doesn't make you good or bad. Just means there is more story to tell.
Correcting, I mixed up the author of the article and the poster. I usually don't agree with the guy who posted, not the author.
Total support on Ben's profile, He is the most putrid character of the series.
I usually don't agree with you, but about Ben I am 100% supportive.
Still I can't agree with losties rising and winning. "The Economist" took most of the fun from me, because I know it's pointless to hope that Locke freaks out and Ben get killed.
I can't see Widmore like a "good guy" yet, but surely anyone who for a single second believes that Ben is one, should immediately be pointed to here. He is THE EVIL. And I always thought the same things you pointed here.
Very good article...and I think one of the best traits that makes Ben get under your skin is that you find yourself saying 'What if he really is telling the truth?'
And that's why he's such an incredible villain, because even after all he's done, you actually question if what he is saying is BS or truth. Look how easily he was able to get Alex, Danielle and Karl to just leave into the jungle...it was just after he was locked up and no one trusted him.
Amazing the power he has when it appears he has none.
You're my hero Lakie!! Well written, but I expect nothing less from you;) I think Ben is, and always will be, the biggest, baddest villain. I can't wait to see how it all unfolds!!
Thanks for your time to share this with us!
That is very well written. Extra credit for Star Wars and Milton.
I don't think I disagree with anything. You've put him back in his proper place.
I will say that we saw Widmore beat the crap out of someone. At this point I can not agree that it is an other. Just Ben's word on who he was.
As a person who dislikes Ben and have found him despicable (sp) since we first saw him, the actor portraying him should be applauded also! He knows his craft and has evoked this strong emotion from us.
I will say that Charles Widmore is no angel, perhaps a minor villan in all this but still he is second in the list...oh no another list
Beautiful
in regards getting annoyed with jack and wanting to see the light through ben, methinks people are used to quicker satisfaction in a story, not the long haul drag to the end, and being led by a leash and falling for the trick to make us think ben is a goody. not good no, but in an instant gratification society, some may be wanting that, "the answers now, move on to the end of the story" instead of realizing, this is the story! (so well put here by the St. Augustine of Lost!! no disrespect intended).
Indeed similar to Milton, the narrative trickery delights and frustrates, when done best, both at the same time, as we have with Lost.
Thank you Lakkie for striking the flint and getting the olive oil lamp burning, can see a bit more clearly now...
“Your eye is the lamp of your body; when your eye is sound, your whole body is sound, your whole body is full of light; but when it is not sound, your body is full of darkness.” (Luke 11:34)
I agree for the most part, but I found argument with 2 things
"I challenge you to accuse Charles Widmore of any more than refusing Desmond his MacCutcheon whiskey and his daughter's affection"
- how about the obvious beating of the 'other'? or more importantly, the fact that he's sending out a boat with a sinister unknown purpose that clearly will not bode well for the losties?
"My money is still with the rebels, Locke, Jack and Michael"
Michael? Really? He's there at Ben's command... I don't know if I would say he's all that much of a rebel...
Besides that, brilliant!
What a great piece of writing Laklost. Well done. I loved and agree with every word. I have been in the Ben is bad camp all along. I do not believe he has a higher goal or misson. He is manipulating people for his own beniefit,nothing more or less.
Agree or disagree with the points, but that is one hell of an article!!