Sledgeweb's Lost ... Stuff Forum

Episode Discussion (Spoiler Free) => Season 5 => Episode 5x14 => Topic started by: rhythm on April 29, 2009, 11:53:20 PM

Title: Eloise's reasons
Post by: rhythm on April 29, 2009, 11:53:20 PM
I feel sorry for her.  You could tell for most of the episode that she was begrudgingly sending Daniel to his death, even as a child. 

I guess we can assume that Jack & Kate rush in to Village Hostile and explain everything to Ellie, thus putting her on the path we see her on today.  I'm willing to bet that even though she believes that "what happend happend", after Kate & Jack tell her about Daniel and his variable theory- she still hopes that he (Daniel) will be able to change the outcome of events.  Thus, starting the cycle of prodding him to make Physics/Science his sole focus.
Title: Eloise's reasons
Post by: lostlady on April 29, 2009, 11:54:44 PM
Why did she encourage Daniel to go back to the island when she knew she would shoot him before he could do anything? As far as she knows, she shot Daniel, he dies, the incident happens, the button has to get pushed, the plane crashes.... Why did she send him back?
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: rhythm on April 29, 2009, 11:56:51 PM
She had to.  It was going to happen anyway.  Course correction.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: hyperform on April 29, 2009, 11:57:59 PM
I said this in another thread, she had too, just like she had to let the guy with the red shoes die in Flashes Before Your Eyes
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: jamesl on April 29, 2009, 11:59:42 PM
I said this in another thread, she had too, just like she had to let the guy with the red shoes die in Flashes Before Your Eyes

we still don't know how she knew that was going to happen
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: rhythm on April 30, 2009, 12:01:21 AM
I said this in another thread, she had too, just like she had to let the guy with the red shoes die in Flashes Before Your Eyes

we still don't know how she knew that was going to happen
That whole sequence was rather weird.  Still can't determine if it were a dream, a vision from the island, etc.  I mean I can't determine.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 12:06:09 AM
She's a fanatic. And she is insane.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GeoJeremy on April 30, 2009, 12:29:26 AM
I think this thread directly addresses one of the major themes of the series up to this point: destiny vs. free will. Obviously, Eloise's actions throughout the majority of the episode suggest that she believes that one's destiny must be fulfilled regardless of the outcomes. Even if it means having to murder your own child.

My question is so: where does this strict determinism that is so deeply embedded in Eloise's personal philosophy originate? In other words, at some point after Faraday dies, she accepts that she has murdered her own child, and even though she has the means by which to prevent this from ever happening, she refuses to do so. She feels it is more important to fulfill her destiny and to allow her son to fulfill his. Why?

Perhaps we are given hints to her motivations through the conversation she has with Penny. As she says to Penny in the hospital waiting room, "for the first time in a long time, [Eloise] does not know what will happen next." Some event has changed the nature of the game with respect to Eloise's involvement in the "conflict".

I speculate that Eloise's belief in strict determinism is a consequence of her ability to see into the future. Eloise has seen first hand the Course Correcting nature of time (namely, that the universe follows a set path of events, regardless of what may be alter it). It is only natural for someone with such a unique ability and perspective to prescribe to a deterministic set of beliefs. Perhaps it is precisely her highly unusual relationship with time and the universe that influenced her to send Daniel to the island to be killed by her own hands.

P.S. First post. Be gentle.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: lovinlost on April 30, 2009, 12:36:01 AM
I think this thread directly addresses one of the major themes of the series up to this point: destiny vs. free will. Obviously, Eloise's actions throughout the majority of the episode suggest that she believes that one's destiny must be fulfilled regardless of the outcomes. Even if it means having to murder your own child.

My question is so: where does this strict determinism that is so deeply embedded in Eloise's personal philosophy originate? In other words, at some point after Faraday dies, she accepts that she has murdered her own child, and even though she has the means by which to prevent this from ever happening, she refuses to do so. She feels it is more important to fulfill her destiny and to allow her son to fulfill his. Why?

Perhaps we are given hints to her motivations through the conversation she has with Penny. As she says to Penny in the hospital waiting room, "for the first time in a long time, [Eloise] does not know what will happen next." Some event has changed the nature of the game with respect to Eloise's involvement in the "conflict".

I speculate that Eloise's belief in strict determinism is a consequence of her ability to see into the future. Eloise has seen first hand the Course Correcting nature of time (namely, that the universe follows a set path of events, regardless of what may be alter it). It is only natural for someone with such a unique ability and perspective to prescribe to a deterministic set of beliefs. Perhaps it is precisely her highly unusual relationship with time and the universe that influenced her to send Daniel to the island to be killed by her own hands.

P.S. First post. Be gentle.

Welcome, great post!

Why then, however, would Dan say that his mom was wrong?  He knows something that she does not...
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: rhythm on April 30, 2009, 12:36:36 AM
Because of his variable theory maybe?
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Bostonlost on April 30, 2009, 12:50:16 AM
Is she really killing someone that will be born it a couple of years ????


She sends Dan to the Island to die.....how long has she been doing this for?
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: rhythm on April 30, 2009, 12:57:15 AM
Well if this truly is a loop like a lot of us believe...infinitely?
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 12:59:14 AM
She probably had never done it until now. Since this was Dan's present, that must mean Dan had never died at the hands of his mother. It can be said his mother does not remember her killing him, but can foresee his imminent death. I know she told Penny she could not see what the future holds, but it's not above any of the Others to simply lie to people, regardless of the situation.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: norville on April 30, 2009, 01:03:33 AM
Eloise said that for the first time, she does not know what's going to happen now.  I think she means that, her whole life (from the time in 1977 that she shot an intruder into their camp) that she was going to have a son, that he was going to be a gifted physicist, that he was going to travel through time, and that she was going to shoot him in 1977 on the island.  She did all in her power, all her life, to put things into place such that this chain of events would be followed... apparently (as someone else said above) because she is convinced that what happened, happened, and cannot be changed.  So in a sense, until she sent the Oceanic 6 back to the island, she always knew what was coming.  (I don't think she could see the future; she knew only what she had surmised by Daniel's appearance in 1977.)  Now, however, since the Oceanic 6 have been sent back, she no longer has any idea what the future (her future, in 2007) holds.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: rhythm on April 30, 2009, 01:04:43 AM
She probably had never done it until now. Since this was Dan's present, that must mean Dan had never died at the hands of his mother. It can be said his mother does not remember her killing him, but can foresee his imminent death. I know she told Penny she could not see what the future holds, but it's not above any of the Others to simply lie to people, regardless of the situation.

The only reason that doesn't jive for me is that Widmore clearly remembered Locke being on the Island in the 50's.  So if that truly took place, then why wouldn't her shooting Daniel have taken place?
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: rhythm on April 30, 2009, 01:05:50 AM
Eloise said that for the first time, she does not know what's going to happen now.  I think she means that, her whole life (from the time in 1977 that she shot an intruder into their camp) that she was going to have a son, that he was going to be a gifted physicist, that he was going to travel through time, and that she was going to shoot him in 1977 on the island.  She did all in her power, all her life, to put things into place such that this chain of events would be followed... apparently (as someone else said above) because she is convinced that what happened, happened, and cannot be changed.  So in a sense, until she sent the Oceanic 6 back to the island, she always knew what was coming.  (I don't think she could see the future; she knew only what she had surmised by Daniel's appearance in 1977.)  Now, however, since the Oceanic 6 have been sent back, she no longer has any idea what the future (her future, in 2007) holds.

Agreed.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 01:08:34 AM
And this bothers me.

It seems that all those who came from the present (2004 or 2005) are not affected, but the people who existed before them had already been affected by the interactions they had with the "Losties". But if Daniel's mother had never interacted with Daniel before he traveled to the past and got himself shot, how could she remember shooting him before she sent him to the island?

I'm sorry, but this is confusing. And what makes it even more confusing is that there simply is no level ground here.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: HurleysGirl on April 30, 2009, 01:13:40 AM
She probably had never done it until now. Since this was Dan's present, that must mean Dan had never died at the hands of his mother. It can be said his mother does not remember her killing him, but can foresee his imminent death. I know she told Penny she could not see what the future holds, but it's not above any of the Others to simply lie to people, regardless of the situation.

The only reason that doesn't jive for me is that Widmore clearly remembered Locke being on the Island in the 50's.  So if that truly took place, then why wouldn't her shooting Daniel have taken place?

It may be Daniel's present, but his present is taking place in his mother's past.  Therefore (and here is where you really have to bend your mind into a Mobius strip) she shot her son before she had him (her present) but he was not shot until he had become an adult (his present).  When dealing with time travel (and BTW ha, ha Juggy - you were wrong) each person has their own linear time which intersects with others' linear times at different points of time.  OK, it sounds like gibberish but it's late, and it would be easier to understand if I could draw a picture.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: jamesl on April 30, 2009, 01:17:37 AM
And this bothers me.

It seems that all those who came from the present (2004 or 2005) are not affected, but the people who existed before them had already been affected by the interactions they had with the "Losties". But if Daniel's mother had never interacted with Daniel before he traveled to the past and got himself shot, how could she remember shooting him before she sent him to the island?

I'm sorry, but this is confusing. And what makes it even more confusing is that there simply is no level ground here.
i don't understand your question
she remembers shooting killing him because she talks about the scarifice in sending him back
so she knows he's going to die, and she knows how he's going to die
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: HurleysGirl on April 30, 2009, 01:22:50 AM
And this bothers me.

It seems that all those who came from the present (2004 or 2005) are not affected, but the people who existed before them had already been affected by the interactions they had with the "Losties". But if Daniel's mother had never interacted with Daniel before he traveled to the past and got himself shot, how could she remember shooting him before she sent him to the island?

I'm sorry, but this is confusing. And what makes it even more confusing is that there simply is no level ground here.

Ah but there is.  Imagine if the time experienced by all of the Losties who have traveled back to 1977 is a red string with one end of the string being the beginning of their shared experience and the other end of the string is their present.  Then imagine the time experienced by the common others (Ellie, Charles and Richard) as a blue string with the same ends.  If you laid the strings  on a table, the blue string would start on the left and the red string would start before the blue string ends (like this --------======) in a typical linear universe.  But add in the time travel element, and you have to take the end of the red string and loop it back to a spot somewhere on the blue string (1977) - so the blue string would still be straight but the red string would start straight but then loop back.  

Does that help at all???
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 01:27:31 AM
I have trouble reasoning how time flows. If it's not a loop, then at one time it was 1977 and there was no Dan Faraday. There couldn't have been a Dan Faraday because he was not born and he had not gone to the island and he had not gone back in time to get himself shot. I'm sorry if my explanation is confusing, but I'm having trouble coming to terms with what's going on.

If it's a loop, then I get it, Faraday always goes back, he always gets shot, his mother always remembers and always sends him there. If it's not then an original time-line had to exist, one without Daniel or any of the survivors in 1977. I think the more I try to reason the more I lose myself.

It's better not to mind me until I work this one out.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: HurleysGirl on April 30, 2009, 01:33:34 AM
It is a loop if you focus on the constant.  What Daniel was saying was that people, due to the concept of free will, are the variable and therefore it is possible to break some part of the loop (the Incident) and alter the future.  Which is a bit of a paradox, because, if the loop is broken and the Incident does not occur, then 815 does not crash and there is no jumpy purple sky thing and Farriday never returns to '77 to prevent the Incident, which means the Incident occurs, 815 crashes, etc. etc.  Paradox.

OK, now I know I've read too much Heinlein
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GeoJeremy on April 30, 2009, 01:51:31 AM
I've thoroughly enjoyed everyone's interpretations as to the nature of time in the universe of Lost. Here is my take:

The show only chronicles a single iteration of the timeline of the characters. Therefore, if there ever was a 1977 where Daniel Faraday did not exist is of no relevance to us. What is relevant is that in the iteration of the timeline that we are watching, Daniel Faraday is shot by Eloise Hawking when he travels to the year 1977.

Although several iterations of the timeline of these characters are possible, the show Lost only chronicles one of them. If the Losties do succeed in preventing Oceanic 815 from crashing, this does not represent a paradox, because although it may prevent subsequent iterations of their timelines from having to experience the plane crash and all of the events that follow, the iteration of the timeline of the characters that the show is chronicling will not have changed.

This is just my take on how time works in the Lost universe. I believe that the variety of interpretations of the nature of time in Lost stems primarily from our complete lack of experience with the phenomenon in real life, and therefore, we should have as many interpretations as we have posters.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Bostonlost on April 30, 2009, 01:55:05 AM
Then someone explain this:

MS. HAWKING: Never done this before have you?

[Camera reveals Desmond in a second hand shop.]

DESMOND: Is it that obvious?

MS. HAWKING: I can always tell the first timers. Well, then, may I ask your price range?

DESMOND: I'm not a man of means...

MS. HAWKING: Oh...

DESMOND: I hope to -- one day...

MS. HAWKING: I have just the thing. [she shows him a ring] This won't blind any queens, to be sure, but still has the sparkle of life.

DESMOND: I'll take it.

MS. HAWKING: [surprised] I'm sorry?

DESMOND: It's perfect. I'll take it.

MS. HAWKING: No you won't. Give me the ring. Give it here.

DESMOND: I don't understand.

MS. HAWKING: This is wrong. You don't buy the ring. You have second thoughts; you walk right out that door. So, come on, let's have it.

DESMOND: I don't know what you're on about.

MS. HAWKING: You don't buy the ring, Desmond.

DESMOND: How do you know my name?

MS. HAWKING: Well, I know your name as well as I know that you that don't ask Penny to marry you. In fact, you break her heart. Well, breaking her heart is, of course, what drives you in a few short years from now to enter that sailing race -- to prove her father wrong -- which brings you to the island where you spend the next 3 years of your life entering numbers into the computer until you are forced to turn that failsafe key. And if you don't do those things, Desmond David Hume, every single one of us is dead. So give me that sodding ring.
__________________________________________

Has she seen the future here ? or already lived it?
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GeoJeremy on April 30, 2009, 02:07:36 AM
Has she seen the future here ? or already lived it?

Eloise is unique because, as we all know, she has the ability to foresee future events. I do not believe that this is a result of time travelling on her part (but I admit that I cannot altogether rule that out as a possibility), so in my opinion, she has not "already lived it". The only other explanation is that she possesses a special ability to see into the future for a currently unspecified reason.

So my answer to your question is that she has seen the future to some extent, not lived it.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Bostonlost on April 30, 2009, 02:13:32 AM
The time was always a loop (on the show)


If it was a street it looped off and picked back up                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: hyperform on April 30, 2009, 02:17:38 AM
time is relative to everyone who experiences it, it is not a loop, but a straight line for every different person, but everyone has their own line
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Sweet Old Lady on April 30, 2009, 02:18:07 AM
I think Eloise sent Daniel to the island to be healed, not killed.  That's what she told him.  And the sacrifice is that he will never be the same again, just like Ben.  She must remember shooting him, right?  Maybe he didn't die.  Maybe he got templed.  I hope he didn't die.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: this is some crazy stuff on April 30, 2009, 02:21:52 AM
Im sure that this always happened.  She knew that she killed her own son.  Daniel said to Jack that it is there present.  as in everyone that went back to 1977 from 2004/2007.  But Eloise killing Daniel was Eloise past,  her past can not be changed. 
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: jamesl on April 30, 2009, 02:24:47 AM
I think Eloise sent Daniel to the island to be healed, not killed.  That's what she told him.  And the sacrifice is that he will never be the same again, just like Ben.  She must remember shooting him, right?  Maybe he didn't die.  Maybe he got templed.  I hope he didn't die.

I also hope he's not dead

I really hope this is him speaking in this video, and I hope its a real scene that we have yet to see,
not just some kind of fake scene to get people's interest

starts at the 59 second mark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo6Q7gzUjI8

so, it'll be interesting to see how this fits in
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Sweet Old Lady on April 30, 2009, 02:24:55 AM
Im sure that this always happened.  She knew that she killed her own son.  Daniel said to Jack that it is there present.  as in everyone that went back to 1977 from 2004/2007.  But Eloise killing Daniel was Eloise past,  her past can not be changed
But, in her past did she kill Daniel?  She shot him, but how do we know he's dead? (I have hopes that he survives.)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: this is some crazy stuff on April 30, 2009, 02:33:34 AM
ok well she shoots him, I guess we dont know that he is dead or alive now.  Specially since we have seen young Ben get taken to the temple then is magically healed.  But I meant got shot.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Maxor127 on April 30, 2009, 03:13:31 AM
I don't understand Eloise's motivation for pushing her son to his death.  She didn't course correct or let destiny do its work or anything, she willfully controlled his destiny and fate and kept driving him towards this singular goal and his ultimate fate.  I don't understand her reasons for it at all.  If she believes that things can't be changed and the universe will keep course correcting itself, then she wouldn't have needed to sabotage Daniel's life like this.  And despite all of that, what is gained by Daniel's death?  Unless he really isn't dead and he still has an important part to play?
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: KoKoNut on April 30, 2009, 03:21:14 AM
I don't understand Eloise's motivation for pushing her son to his death.  She didn't course correct or let destiny do its work or anything, she willfully controlled his destiny and fate and kept driving him towards this singular goal and his ultimate fate.  I don't understand her reasons for it at all.  If she believes that things can't be changed and the universe will keep course correcting itself, then she wouldn't have needed to sabotage Daniel's life like this.  And despite all of that, what is gained by Daniel's death?  Unless he really isn't dead and he still has an important part to play?

She shoots future son but then gets impregnated by Widmore...(after???)  So is he really dead or is his present self dead and then he is brought back because Ellie gets pregnant with him...I'm not making any sense and now my head hurts. :(
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Maxor127 on April 30, 2009, 03:28:36 AM
He's dead, unless he somehow survives.  Either way, Eloise will give birth to baby Daniel and he'll grow up, end up back at the island, time travel back to 1977, get shot again by his mom, who is pregnant or will become pregnant and she'll give birth to baby Daniel again and the cycle will continue.

I wouldn't be surprised if he's still alive or lives somehow, unless Jeremy Davies has a new movie coming out.  Otherwise, that was a lame death.  I was expecting more from the freighter people and they're dropping faster than the tail section people.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: WartHog on April 30, 2009, 04:11:39 AM
I have a hard time believing any mother would send her son off to be killed by her younger self.  But then again, she had many many years to think about it by this time.

Also realize that Daniel always had that journal with him, the same one we see her giving to him in tonight's episode.  The journal had ALOT of stuff in it, not just calculations, but seemed to have names and dates (likely timelines).  So after Eloise kills Daniel in her own timeline, she has a journal explaining exactly what has lead up to her future son's arrival in the camp at this moment.

I think this episode is really a great demonstration of the Determinism versus Free Choice that the writers have been playing with since the beginning.  We have Eloise on one side who seems to be firmly committed to a certain sequence of events.  She has seen how things will happen (maybe through Dan's journal) and she is resigned to that fate. I think we see it the most when she slaps Widmore for his not understanding the pain/guilt she is in for sending her child to his death.  On the other hand we have Daniel, who is finally convinced that free will and choice can change the timeline.  He even says his mom was wrong.  He not only meant she was wrong in sending them back to the island, but she was wrong in believing that the timeline could not be changed.  Unfortunately for him, he appears to be wrong.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Sweet Old Lady on April 30, 2009, 04:18:07 AM
Well, I for one am in denial.  I believe Richard will take him to the Temple and have the Island heal him.  We've seen people shot and left for dead before.  Locke and Ben, for example.  Locke was murdered by Ben and now he's walking around the island as if nothing happened.  I want Daniel to live.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 04:50:58 AM
Eloise said that for the first time, she does not know what's going to happen now.  I think she means that, her whole life (from the time in 1977 that she shot an intruder into their camp) that she was going to have a son, that he was going to be a gifted physicist, that he was going to travel through time, and that she was going to shoot him in 1977 on the island.  She did all in her power, all her life, to put things into place such that this chain of events would be followed... apparently (as someone else said above) because she is convinced that what happened, happened, and cannot be changed.  So in a sense, until she sent the Oceanic 6 back to the island, she always knew what was coming.  (I don't think she could see the future; she knew only what she had surmised by Daniel's appearance in 1977.)  Now, however, since the Oceanic 6 have been sent back, she no longer has any idea what the future (her future, in 2007) holds.

Agreed.

I haven't read the whole thread YET (I'm going to now) but before I do, I just have to say, well said! well said! excellent post. this is exactly what i got from tonight's episode. it became so clear to me. and it's one of the first things that make sense in all this time travel @$%$^.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: vickilynn on April 30, 2009, 07:26:19 AM
When Eloise shoots Daniel, he tells her he is her son...so that is something she will always remember. If she really cared for him, she would try to shelter him somehow. I really dislike her...she was pushing him and pushing him, knowing he would be shot. Maybe he doesn't die? I don't know. I just know that I thought it pathetic when she is convincing Dan to go on Whidmore's expedition and he asks her if she will finally be proud of him!  :(
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: opgelost on April 30, 2009, 08:55:27 AM
I think Eloise send Desmond back to the island and Dan to the island
and the 06 back, because the past has to happen like it happened
for the universe to exist. And everybody is helping with that, Locke,
Jacob, Richard, Smokey, Christian, Widmore.

But she doesn't want her son to die and had years of time to think and study
and make Dan study his own saving.
Maybe in 2008 she also put people on that Ajiraplane that can be a variable,
like Bram and Ilana, Locke and Sun, who are there for a reason too. Maybe they will get Dan to 2008
and safe him in another time? So the past stays the same, but the future is still open
and now for the first time she has no idea what will happen.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: shadow on April 30, 2009, 09:37:36 AM
It may be Daniel's present, but his present is taking place in his mother's past.  Therefore (and here is where you really have to bend your mind into a Mobius strip) she shot her son before she had him (her present) but he was not shot until he had become an adult (his present).  When dealing with time travel (and BTW ha, ha Juggy - you were wrong) each person has their own linear time which intersects with others' linear times at different points of time.  OK, it sounds like gibberish but it's late, and it would be easier to understand if I could draw a picture.

Not sure about Daniel's birth year, but...
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3374/3488768902_838714433a_o.png)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Falam on April 30, 2009, 09:58:51 AM
When Eloise shoots Daniel, he tells her he is her son...so that is something she will always remember. If she really cared for him, she would try to shelter him somehow. I really dislike her...she was pushing him and pushing him, knowing he would be shot. Maybe he doesn't die? I don't know. I just know that I thought it pathetic when she is convincing Dan to go on Whidmore's expedition and he asks her if she will finally be proud of him!  :(

I think it was made very clear that Eloise believes in destiny and the lack of free will.  That said, Daniel is her son and the reason I think she pushes him so hard is that she pins her hopes that he can, somehow, find the equation or formula or whatever, to actually change destined events.  She knows she has to sacrifice him, but hopes that her years of pushing help him find a way to cheat his own death. 

Of course it doesn't look like that worked...but just a thought.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Novashannon on April 30, 2009, 03:07:06 PM
When Eloise shoots Daniel, he tells her he is her son...so that is something she will always remember. If she really cared for him, she would try to shelter him somehow. I really dislike her...she was pushing him and pushing him, knowing he would be shot. Maybe he doesn't die? I don't know. I just know that I thought it pathetic when she is convincing Dan to go on Whidmore's expedition and he asks her if she will finally be proud of him!  :(

I think it was made very clear that Eloise believes in destiny and the lack of free will.  That said, Daniel is her son and the reason I think she pushes him so hard is that she pins her hopes that he can, somehow, find the equation or formula or whatever, to actually change destined events.  She knows she has to sacrifice him, but hopes that her years of pushing help him find a way to cheat his own death. 

Of course it doesn't look like that worked...but just a thought.
I don't get why people think destiny and free will are opposites.  Look at it this way:  If I go into an ice cream store with my husband and have my choice of a hundred flavors, I will get vanilla fudge.  My husband knows this, and can actually order for me (although he usually doesn't).  That does not take away my free will.  He knows I will order it, but that does not take my choice away.

Just because there is a certain destiny, does not mean we don't have free will.  It just means that whatever we do will lead to the same outcome.  The Losties in the past have the free will to decide what they will do, but whatever they will do in their life in the past (they don't have a preconceived idea of what to do) will be what they have always done in the timesense of those who experienced time linearly.  Since the past is past, whatever they did was always what they did.  Since they don't know what they did till they do it, they still have free will.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: SQUIRT199 on April 30, 2009, 03:24:06 PM
Is she really killing someone that will be born it a couple of years ????


She sends Dan to the Island to die.....how long has she been doing this for?

You are asking as if this act has been repeated over and over but i has not been,

this is what happened, they are showing us what happened in 1977 tyhink of this whole season as a flashback.  It makes it easier for me to do that anyway.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Des on April 30, 2009, 03:24:37 PM
When Eloise shoots Daniel, he tells her he is her son...so that is something she will always remember. If she really cared for him, she would try to shelter him somehow. I really dislike her...she was pushing him and pushing him, knowing he would be shot. Maybe he doesn't die? I don't know. I just know that I thought it pathetic when she is convincing Dan to go on Whidmore's expedition and he asks her if she will finally be proud of him!  :(

I think it was made very clear that Eloise believes in destiny and the lack of free will.  That said, Daniel is her son and the reason I think she pushes him so hard is that she pins her hopes that he can, somehow, find the equation or formula or whatever, to actually change destined events.  She knows she has to sacrifice him, but hopes that her years of pushing help him find a way to cheat his own death. 

Of course it doesn't look like that worked...but just a thought.
I don't get why people think destiny and free will are opposites.  Look at it this way:  If I go into an ice cream store with my husband and have my choice of a hundred flavors, I will get vanilla fudge.  My husband knows this, and can actually order for me (although he usually doesn't).  That does not take away my free will.  He knows I will order it, but that does not take my choice away.

Just because there is a certain destiny, does not mean we don't have free will.  It just means that whatever we do will lead to the same outcome.  The Losties in the past have the free will to decide what they will do, but whatever they will do in their life in the past (they don't have a preconceived idea of what to do) will be what they have always done in the timesense of those who experienced time linearly.  Since the past is past, whatever they did was always what they did.  Since they don't know what they did till they do it, they still have free will.

VERY WELL SAID. Thank you.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: BobBX542 on April 30, 2009, 03:31:21 PM
She probably had never done it until now. Since this was Dan's present, that must mean Dan had never died at the hands of his mother. It can be said his mother does not remember her killing him, but can foresee his imminent death. I know she told Penny she could not see what the future holds, but it's not above any of the Others to simply lie to people, regardless of the situation.

Of course she remembers shooting him. Why do you think she gave Widmore the little speech about sacrifice?? She might as well have said at the end of that, "...as in this example." and then cut the scene to Daniel getting killed by his own mother.

I think that Eloise's choice to let Daniel die falls into the exact same reason that she didn't tell the man in the red shoes that he was about to die. She knew that if she didn't make him go to the island, that there would have been some other, possibly more painful/horrific, way that he would have died. She is obviously a firm believer in fate and destiny, and since it has already happened, it has to happen.

Since we're talking about free will and destiny, I posted this somewhere else, and I figure I'll put it out there to as many places as I can. It seems to me that last night's episode was kind of telling us that since the time travelers were experiencing the past (1977) as their present, and that made them the variable(s) that they can in effect change the past. Like Jack not operating on Ben made Kate take him to the Others, and that's how he became the evil dude he is. BUT, Jack could have operated on Ben and saved him, but no one else on the island could have, because they didn't.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: KoKoNut on April 30, 2009, 03:36:12 PM
She probably had never done it until now. Since this was Dan's present, that must mean Dan had never died at the hands of his mother. It can be said his mother does not remember her killing him, but can foresee his imminent death. I know she told Penny she could not see what the future holds, but it's not above any of the Others to simply lie to people, regardless of the situation.

Of course she remembers shooting him. Why do you think she gave Widmore the little speech about sacrifice?? She might as well have said at the end of that, "...as in this example." and then cut the scene to Daniel getting killed by his own mother.

I think that Eloise's choice to let Daniel die falls into the exact same reason that she didn't tell the man in the red shoes that he was about to die. She knew that if she didn't make him go to the island, that there would have been some other, possibly more painful/horrific, way that he would have died. She is obviously a firm believer in fate and destiny, and since it has already happened, it has to happen.

Since we're talking about free will and destiny, I posted this somewhere else, and I figure I'll put it out there to as many places as I can. It seems to me that last night's episode was kind of telling us that since the time travelers were experiencing the past (1977) as their present, and that made them the variable(s) that they can in effect change the past. Like Jack not operating on Ben made Kate take him to the Others, and that's how he became the evil dude he is. BUT, Jack could have operated on Ben and saved him, but no one else on the island could have, because they didn't.

Bob Help me with a stupid question: so if Jack had saved Ben...would Ben still be evil somehow because of course correction or not.  I am so bloody confused. I have coconut milk for brains so bear with me.  :-\
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Souldrinker on April 30, 2009, 04:20:18 PM
She probably had never done it until now. Since this was Dan's present, that must mean Dan had never died at the hands of his mother. It can be said his mother does not remember her killing him, but can foresee his imminent death. I know she told Penny she could not see what the future holds, but it's not above any of the Others to simply lie to people, regardless of the situation.

Of course she remembers shooting him. Why do you think she gave Widmore the little speech about sacrifice?? She might as well have said at the end of that, "...as in this example." and then cut the scene to Daniel getting killed by his own mother.

I think that Eloise's choice to let Daniel die falls into the exact same reason that she didn't tell the man in the red shoes that he was about to die. She knew that if she didn't make him go to the island, that there would have been some other, possibly more painful/horrific, way that he would have died. She is obviously a firm believer in fate and destiny, and since it has already happened, it has to happen.

Since we're talking about free will and destiny, I posted this somewhere else, and I figure I'll put it out there to as many places as I can. It seems to me that last night's episode was kind of telling us that since the time travelers were experiencing the past (1977) as their present, and that made them the variable(s) that they can in effect change the past. Like Jack not operating on Ben made Kate take him to the Others, and that's how he became the evil dude he is. BUT, Jack could have operated on Ben and saved him, but no one else on the island could have, because they didn't.

Bob Help me with a stupid question: so if Jack had saved Ben...would Ben still be evil somehow because of course correction or not.  I am so bloody confused. I have coconut milk for brains so bear with me.  :-\

It's not even sure that being healed by Richard made him evil (or that he is evil at all imo).
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: TheBrightandTheDark on April 30, 2009, 04:21:40 PM
Bob Help me with a stupid question: so if Jack had saved Ben...would Ben still be evil somehow because of course correction or not.  I am so bloody confused. I have coconut milk for brains so bear with me.  :-\

It's not even sure that being healed by Richard made him evil (or that he is evil at all imo).
Oh good, another Ben advocate! I always like to find more people like us.  ;)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 04:48:48 PM
She probably had never done it until now. Since this was Dan's present, that must mean Dan had never died at the hands of his mother. It can be said his mother does not remember her killing him, but can foresee his imminent death. I know she told Penny she could not see what the future holds, but it's not above any of the Others to simply lie to people, regardless of the situation.

Of course she remembers shooting him. Why do you think she gave Widmore the little speech about sacrifice?? She might as well have said at the end of that, "...as in this example." and then cut the scene to Daniel getting killed by his own mother.

I think that Eloise's choice to let Daniel die falls into the exact same reason that she didn't tell the man in the red shoes that he was about to die. She knew that if she didn't make him go to the island, that there would have been some other, possibly more painful/horrific, way that he would have died. She is obviously a firm believer in fate and destiny, and since it has already happened, it has to happen.

Since we're talking about free will and destiny, I posted this somewhere else, and I figure I'll put it out there to as many places as I can. It seems to me that last night's episode was kind of telling us that since the time travelers were experiencing the past (1977) as their present, and that made them the variable(s) that they can in effect change the past. Like Jack not operating on Ben made Kate take him to the Others, and that's how he became the evil dude he is. BUT, Jack could have operated on Ben and saved him, but no one else on the island could have, because they didn't.

this is what I've been saying over and over. what happened happened might be a rule of time travel but it can't be like this for LOST because otherwise what is their goal and what are we supposed to hope for . if I can't hope for a good outcome then i don't want to be invested. so there has to be a chance for them to succeed and change something. Dan said his mother might have been wrong.  maybe there regular everyday existence and free will choices they make ,on the island in 1977 wont change anything but if they find out the one big thing they could do differently, it could.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Souldrinker on April 30, 2009, 04:57:26 PM
Bob Help me with a stupid question: so if Jack had saved Ben...would Ben still be evil somehow because of course correction or not.  I am so bloody confused. I have coconut milk for brains so bear with me.  :-\

It's not even sure that being healed by Richard made him evil (or that he is evil at all imo).
Oh good, another Ben advocate! I always like to find more people like us.  ;)

Do I get some bonus points for liking Richard too?  :)

And Mrs Hume you can hope that they get back to their own time and survive the incident. That's good enough for me. Also they must be responsible for the evacuation of for example Charlotte and her mum and Miles and his mum , so this is were they suceed without changing anything. ;)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: TheBrightandTheDark on April 30, 2009, 05:03:31 PM
It's not even sure that being healed by Richard made him evil (or that he is evil at all imo).
Oh good, another Ben advocate! I always like to find more people like us.  ;)

Do I get some bonus points for liking Richard too?  :)

And Mrs Hume you can hope that they get back to their own time and survive the incident. That's good enough for me. Also they must be responsible for the evacuation of for example Charlotte and her mum and Miles and his mum , so this is were they suceed without changing anything. ;)
Man, you get like, 500 points for liking Richard too! Especially if you think he might be a tad evil but like him anyway.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 05:09:58 PM
Bob Help me with a stupid question: so if Jack had saved Ben...would Ben still be evil somehow because of course correction or not.  I am so bloody confused. I have coconut milk for brains so bear with me.  :-\

It's not even sure that being healed by Richard made him evil (or that he is evil at all imo).
Oh good, another Ben advocate! I always like to find more people like us.  ;)

Do I get some bonus points for liking Richard too?  :)

And Mrs Hume you can hope that they get back to their own time and survive the incident. That's good enough for me. Also they must be responsible for the evacuation of for example Charlotte and her mum and Miles and his mum , so this is were they succeed without changing anything. ;)

Yes, this is true. You do have a point! a very good one. I didn't think of it like that! duh me. oh boy what's wrong with me? I didn't realize even after seeing Dan die and him saying they could that they actually could die. I just took it for granted that they wouldn't. at least none of our 815 main characters.
 But I just hope that after all this that they don't get into the plane crash again, because then I  know the ending and I'm bumbed.  :(
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 05:13:26 PM
Ben killed people in cold blood. That makes in an evil bastard in my book. And according to LOST's own version of time travel, had Jack saved Ben he would still be the same Ben we know and love (read: hate), because nothing can be changed. Well, not yet.

Watching this show while catching up Terminator and reading Booster Gold is giving me a ****ing headache.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 05:15:14 PM
I think a lot of our lost charactors that we love killed people in cold blood too.
if you ask me who killed who I'll have to get back to you on that cause I'd have to think about it for a sec and or research it.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: TheBrightandTheDark on April 30, 2009, 05:20:15 PM
I'm pretty sure nearly everybody has killed, or attempted to kill, somebody in cold blood. Except maybe Claire, lol! So where does being nice get you? Well, you have to give up your child and be confined to a dark cabin with your creepy dead dead-beat Dad.  :-\
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Souldrinker on April 30, 2009, 05:26:08 PM
The 815 Survivors killed more Others than the other way arround didn't they? ::) Ben also could blow up the freighter , but he didn't because of innocent people on board.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 05:27:51 PM
exactly and everyones hero, Lockey boy, killed Naomi in cold blood with a knife in her BACK PEOPLE! Richard knew about the purge too people. do you think he didn't want it? ha. it's not just Ben. you know, it's the way he acts that people think he is more evil. unlike Kate. she doesn't act like Ben so we excuse her from killing her father   she did it for a greater good like Ben does things. OK let me stop. When I get on the Ben isn't any worse than others rant, i even annoy myself.  ::)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Souldrinker on April 30, 2009, 05:28:58 PM
I liked your points ;)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: TheBrightandTheDark on April 30, 2009, 05:33:17 PM
The 815 Survivors killed more Others than the other way arround didn't they? ::) Ben also refused to blow up the freighter , but he didn't.
They did; I was keeping tally as I was watching it, lol!

I don't want to get into the Ben/Widmore/Keamy/Freighter death...thing...BUT!! Ben wanted Michael to kill people on the freighter, but not the innocent people, but then Ben goes and kills Keamy when he knows it'll blow up the dang ship. On the other hand, Keamy set up all those explosives to kill everybody for only one purpose: If I die, I'm taking everybody with me!!  On the OTHER hand (can I borrow somebody's hand, please? lol), Widmore is the one who sent Keamy, set up the secondary protocol, and put the explosives on the freighter to begin with. So, in my mind at least, they're equally responsible.

Sun killed Colleen, too. Charlie killed Ethan. Shannon tried to kill Locke. Jack put a gun to Locke's head and pulled the trigger. Michael, of course....Ana Lucia shot the guy who shot her in L.A.

So maybe Claire, Hurley, and Libby are the only ones who haven't tried to kill anybody...though Hurley did, accidentally, kill people in the deck-collapsing accident, then his company in Canada burning down and killing 8 people. But that wasn't in cold blood.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 05:33:42 PM
But Ben did blow up the freighter! He killed Keamy knowing quite well what would have happened. And it did not stop him. And he knew very very well Keamy wasn't one to bluff.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 05:36:27 PM
right, well, keamy did just oh ... KILL HIS DAUGHTER!  when he was not emotional he didn't want to kill them if possible. but come on!
 
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 05:37:55 PM
Don't encourage him.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 05:39:52 PM
right. (wait,... are you agreeing? I can't tell, lol)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 05:42:18 PM
What? Am I getting a reputation of someone who never agrees with anyone?

 ??? :-[
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Souldrinker on April 30, 2009, 05:42:37 PM
AND Hurley ran over an Other in the Season 3 finale ;)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 05:46:12 PM
What? Am I getting a reputation of someone who never agrees with anyone?

 ??? :-[

lol oh no :o no, not at all! Just that , that seemed a little too easy!  ;D

yes! even Hurley! cold blood! good one Souldrinker!

Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 05:47:34 PM
No, man. Hurley was acting in defense of friends. James, on the other hand, killed friendly in cold blood. But, then again, he always kill people in cold blood, when they surrender or are tied up.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 05:50:09 PM
well, he was defending them but he wasn't being threatend. so it wasn't self defense, it was for a greater good. hey, I thought you were agreeing. lol
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 05:53:24 PM
Yeah... I tend to be a bit mercurial.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: toadsage on April 30, 2009, 05:54:19 PM
No, man. Hurley was acting in defense of friends. James, on the other hand, killed friendly in cold blood. But, then again, he always kill people in cold blood, when they surrender or are tied up.

no way did he kill tom in cold blood. he shot tom because tom took walt off the raft and then blew up said raft. even though time had passed, he still had a good reason to kill tom.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 05:56:16 PM
Yeah... I tend to be a bit mercurial.

good it's more fun.  ;)

No, man. Hurley was acting in defense of friends. James, on the other hand, killed friendly in cold blood. But, then again, he always kill people in cold blood, when they surrender or are tied up.

no way did he kill tom in cold blood. he shot tom because tom took walt off the raft and then blew up said raft. even though time had passed, he still had a good reason to kill tom.

bam, another good one!
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Souldrinker on April 30, 2009, 05:56:23 PM
Also Tom shot him first on the raft.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 05:58:23 PM
It was cold blood in the sense that it was premeditated and that the person he shot was no immediate threat to himself or others around him.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: toadsage on April 30, 2009, 06:00:54 PM
tom had shown just how dangerous he was with his past actions. he might have posed no immediate threat, but who knows what he could have done in the future. thats why sawyer shot him
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 06:03:36 PM
There's no dispute about why he shot him. But he shot an unarmed man in cold blood. It's just the way it happened. And if he really is so upset about Walt and the raft and everything else, why hasn't he shot Ben, who did a whole lot worse?

Cold blood is cold blood.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: TheBrightandTheDark on April 30, 2009, 06:25:41 PM
Wait a minute, sorry, I need to go back to the freighter blowing up... so Ben is the most responsible, even though Widmore set up the secondary protocol and shipped the explosives, and even though Keamy is the one who set it up? Uh-uh. Nope. I don't buy it. Keamy strapped that device to his bicep because he wanted to make sure that if he died, everybody died. Ben's motive was killing the man who killed his daughter. He would have killed Keamy whether or not it triggered the freighter explosion. So who's motive is more sinister? Keamy. All the way. But I'm still saying they're equally responsible, because if you take anyone out of the equation, the freighter wouldn't have blown.

I didn't think it was Tom who shot Sawyer on the raft, I thought it was one of the other Grogans? lol whoa...tom...sawyer... tom... sawyer....

*ahem* anyway...I think Sawyer did shoot Tom in cold blood. Just like he shot Frank Duckett. There wasn't any passion to it. It was cold and calculating. I agree that Hurley was trying to save his friends, crashing in with the Dharma van was meant to help. Wasn't it Hurley who told Sawyer, "But he surrendered..."  ?
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: rhythm on April 30, 2009, 06:39:24 PM
She probably had never done it until now. Since this was Dan's present, that must mean Dan had never died at the hands of his mother. It can be said his mother does not remember her killing him, but can foresee his imminent death. I know she told Penny she could not see what the future holds, but it's not above any of the Others to simply lie to people, regardless of the situation.

The only reason that doesn't jive for me is that Widmore clearly remembered Locke being on the Island in the 50's.  So if that truly took place, then why wouldn't her shooting Daniel have taken place?

It may be Daniel's present, but his present is taking place in his mother's past.  Therefore (and here is where you really have to bend your mind into a Mobius strip) she shot her son before she had him (her present) but he was not shot until he had become an adult (his present).  When dealing with time travel (and BTW ha, ha Juggy - you were wrong) each person has their own linear time which intersects with others' linear times at different points of time.  OK, it sounds like gibberish but it's late, and it would be easier to understand if I could draw a picture.

Um, hunh?  Were you responding to me or GutzandRage?
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 06:41:54 PM
 and the points keep a comin! lol

she was probably responding to anyone who thinks Ben is the most evil.  We don't think he is any worse than any other person trying to get what they want accomplished. (in lost that is.not in real life lol)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 06:47:27 PM
Who is to say what Widmore ordered. Maybe at one point Keamy decided to run the show himself. After all, he was in the middle of nowhere, and he wasn't exactly in the armed forces. He was a gun for hire.

And, Ben is not the only one to blame, no, but he is to blame. If you want to pass the blame along then no one is responsible for anything.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: TheBrightandTheDark on April 30, 2009, 06:53:23 PM
Who is to say what Widmore ordered. Maybe at one point Keamy decided to run the show himself. After all, he was in the middle of nowhere, and he wasn't exactly in the armed forces. He was a gun for hire.

And, Ben is not the only one to blame, no, but he is to blame. If you want to pass the blame along then no one is responsible for anything.
No, Ben is to blame, I agree. So is Widmore and Keamy. I'm not trying to pass the blame, I'm trying to catch everybody who had a hand in it and spread it out properly.....if that makes sense.  :-\

And the secondary protocol was ordered by Widmore, I believe. Of course, you're right, there's no way to know if five thousand pounds of C4 and a pulse-sensitive detonator were in those orders, but we do know for sure that getting Ben no matter the cost was part of that protocol. And if Widmore just let Keamy loose, then, he had to have known what would happen, too. Even Ben knows what a malicious guy Keamy is, and if Ben knows, I'd bet Widmore knows, too.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 06:54:05 PM
They are all bastards!
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 06:58:45 PM
Who is to say what Widmore ordered. Maybe at one point Keamy decided to run the show himself. After all, he was in the middle of nowhere, and he wasn't exactly in the armed forces. He was a gun for hire.

And, Ben is not the only one to blame, no, but he is to blame. If you want to pass the blame along then no one is responsible for anything.
well that is actually the point! everyone just pins the blame on evil Ben.  Widmore didn't Deny killing or ordering the killing of his daughter or the whole island when Ben confronted him on changing the rules though. if it wasn't for widmore, non of this would be happening. so i blame widmore and him only. and that's what I think of that  humf ;D (lol)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: vickilynn on April 30, 2009, 06:59:03 PM
They are all bastards!

One comment I can agree with (and understand)!
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: TheBrightandTheDark on April 30, 2009, 06:59:16 PM
They are all bastards!
100% agree, Gutz&Rage! Wanna hug it out? lol
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 07:00:47 PM
hiccup, ....did someone say hug?.... hiccup (((Mrs A!!!  ;))))
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 07:00:56 PM
They are all bastards!

One comment I can agree with (and understand)!

Ouch...
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: TheBrightandTheDark on April 30, 2009, 07:03:04 PM
They are all bastards!
One comment I can agree with (and understand)!
Ouch...
Nah, I think vickilynn means in general, not you specifically, G&R...


(((((MRS H!)))))  ((((((G&R!)))))  (((((VICKILYNN!!)))))   Whew, Mrs H, how many drinks have you had? Here, dear, let's try to stand you up straight, lol!
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: vickilynn on April 30, 2009, 07:05:26 PM
They are all bastards!

One comment I can agree with (and understand)!

Ouch...

Oh...I didn't mean the only comment of YOURS that I can agree with (((G&R)))
I keep coming back to these threads and can't get my head around most of the posts...time travel is too convoluted for my brain!
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: TheBrightandTheDark on April 30, 2009, 07:07:34 PM
They are all bastards!
One comment I can agree with (and understand)!
Ouch...
Oh...I didn't mean the only comment of YOURS that I can agree with (((G&R)))
I keep coming back to these threads and can't get my head around most of the posts...time travel is too convoluted for my brain!
Yeah, I have to admit, I was utterly confused last night.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 07:14:21 PM
I'm never serious.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: KoKoNut on April 30, 2009, 07:17:15 PM
I'm never serious.

Are you serious GUTZ??
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: GUTZandRAGE on April 30, 2009, 07:32:04 PM
never...

But does that mean I am serious about never being serious? Or does it mean I'm not serious about anything at all. And is that a Paradox? And if a wood chuck could chuck wood how much would wood would a wood chuck chuck?

*does the wooshy Lost sound*
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: KoKoNut on April 30, 2009, 07:33:17 PM
never...

But does that mean I am serious about never being serious? Or does it mean I'm not serious about anything at all. And is that a Paradox? And if a wood chuck could chuck wood how much would wood would a wood chuck chuck?

*does the wooshy Lost sound*


 :D  You're an enigma GUTZ!!!
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: opgelost on April 30, 2009, 08:27:51 PM
I feel sorry for her.  You could tell for most of the episode that she was begrudgingly sending Daniel to his death, even as a child. 

I guess we can assume that Jack & Kate rush in to Village Hostile and explain everything to Ellie, thus putting her on the path we see her on today.  I'm willing to bet that even though she believes that "what happend happend", after Kate & Jack tell her about Daniel and his variable theory- she still hopes that he (Daniel) will be able to change the outcome of events.  Thus, starting the cycle of prodding him to make Physics/Science his sole focus.

But Dan goes to find Ellie in the hostilecamp, because "she is the only person on this island who can get us back to where we belong."
If he believes that his mother in 1977, before she knows everything that Jack and Kate will tell her, is able to send them back to 2008,
than there must be more in mrs. Hawking than just knowing the future.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Mrs Hume on April 30, 2009, 09:23:16 PM
very interesting. very interesting. humm. you always make me think opgelost.

 I wonder if it is as simple as if he tells her something now (1977) , she will be like Desmond and then suddenly know it in 2007 and be able to do something to help? another theory is on the tip of my tongue but can't articulate it yet...
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: LostGirlDeb on April 30, 2009, 09:26:30 PM
I don't understand Eloise's motivation for pushing her son to his death.  She didn't course correct or let destiny do its work or anything, she willfully controlled his destiny and fate and kept driving him towards this singular goal and his ultimate fate.  I don't understand her reasons for it at all.  If she believes that things can't be changed and the universe will keep course correcting itself, then she wouldn't have needed to sabotage Daniel's life like this.  And despite all of that, what is gained by Daniel's death?  Unless he really isn't dead and he still has an important part to play?

I agree with this thinking but I also think that she maybe had faith in something we don't know about.  Maybe faith in her son to be able to change something so it wouldn't lead to the shooting.  Maybe she sent back the 815'ers for that reason and maybe that is why Dan was saying that she was wrong...I don't know..... I have really enjoyed reading this thread though

And I'm with Sol I don't want him to be dead..that would suck.  He seems to be the only one giving us answers

oh and Hi Hurley's girl!! I also loved your red string blue sting analysis
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: HurleysGirl on April 30, 2009, 09:33:48 PM
oh and Hi Hurley's girl!! I also loved your red string blue sting analysis[/color]

Heya darlin'  I have loved all sorts of alternate reality theories (time travel, six dimensional time space continuum, etc) since I got hooked on Heinlein.  But the only way to wrap my head around it is pictorally.  So the string thing really works for me.  What we perceive to be linear can have all sorts of twists and loops.

Can't say how long I'll be back (been really busy since the move to Mass) but it's fun to see all the new and old faces on the boards!
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Maxor127 on May 01, 2009, 03:05:38 AM
I don't understand Eloise's motivation for pushing her son to his death.  She didn't course correct or let destiny do its work or anything, she willfully controlled his destiny and fate and kept driving him towards this singular goal and his ultimate fate.  I don't understand her reasons for it at all.  If she believes that things can't be changed and the universe will keep course correcting itself, then she wouldn't have needed to sabotage Daniel's life like this.  And despite all of that, what is gained by Daniel's death?  Unless he really isn't dead and he still has an important part to play?

I agree with this thinking but I also think that she maybe had faith in something we don't know about.  Maybe faith in her son to be able to change something so it wouldn't lead to the shooting.  Maybe she sent back the 815'ers for that reason and maybe that is why Dan was saying that she was wrong...I don't know..... I have really enjoyed reading this thread though

And I'm with Sol I don't want him to be dead..that would suck.  He seems to be the only one giving us answers

oh and Hi Hurley's girl!! I also loved your red string blue sting analysis
If that's true, that was the worst case of a mother putting her faith in her child since Heroes last year when Hiro's mom put faith in trusting him with the catalyst.  I guess it all depends on if Daniel is really dead or if he'll pull a Locke/Ben.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: ukslim on May 01, 2009, 06:32:44 AM
Eloise is unique because, as we all know, she has the ability to foresee future events. I do not believe that this is a result of time travelling on her part (but I admit that I cannot altogether rule that out as a possibility), so in my opinion, she has not "already lived it". The only other explanation is that she possesses a special ability to see into the future for a currently unspecified reason.

So my answer to your question is that she has seen the future to some extent, not lived it.

One possibility is that she has no special powers, nor has she time travelled herself, but that a visitor from the future (there are plenty around!) has told her about the future in some detail. This could explain the confusion over Desmond's ring -- she's told he doesn't marry her, but she makes wrong assumptions about the fine details.

But what happens, happens: even when it's Mrs Hawking making mistakes about what she was told would happen.

Further speculation: I reckon Eloise has some quasi-religious belief that if her present deviates from the future that's been revealed to her, the fabric of the universe collapses or something. God help us all! So she feels it's her duty to fulfil the self-fulfiling prophesy, even though it's a sacrifice. I like the idea that she's wrong about this: she doesn't need to work to make what happened happen, but of course she does it because she always did/does.

Very Oedipus.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: rhythm on May 01, 2009, 12:31:02 PM
I feel sorry for her.  You could tell for most of the episode that she was begrudgingly sending Daniel to his death, even as a child. 

I guess we can assume that Jack & Kate rush in to Village Hostile and explain everything to Ellie, thus putting her on the path we see her on today.  I'm willing to bet that even though she believes that "what happend happend", after Kate & Jack tell her about Daniel and his variable theory- she still hopes that he (Daniel) will be able to change the outcome of events.  Thus, starting the cycle of prodding him to make Physics/Science his sole focus.

But Dan goes to find Ellie in the hostilecamp, because "she is the only person on this island who can get us back to where we belong."
If he believes that his mother in 1977, before she knows everything that Jack and Kate will tell her, is able to send them back to 2008,
than there must be more in mrs. Hawking than just knowing the future.


At the risk of sounding contrite: "um, okay..what does that have to do with my post?"
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: BobBX542 on May 01, 2009, 04:17:30 PM
She probably had never done it until now. Since this was Dan's present, that must mean Dan had never died at the hands of his mother. It can be said his mother does not remember her killing him, but can foresee his imminent death. I know she told Penny she could not see what the future holds, but it's not above any of the Others to simply lie to people, regardless of the situation.

Of course she remembers shooting him. Why do you think she gave Widmore the little speech about sacrifice?? She might as well have said at the end of that, "...as in this example." and then cut the scene to Daniel getting killed by his own mother.

I think that Eloise's choice to let Daniel die falls into the exact same reason that she didn't tell the man in the red shoes that he was about to die. She knew that if she didn't make him go to the island, that there would have been some other, possibly more painful/horrific, way that he would have died. She is obviously a firm believer in fate and destiny, and since it has already happened, it has to happen.

Since we're talking about free will and destiny, I posted this somewhere else, and I figure I'll put it out there to as many places as I can. It seems to me that last night's episode was kind of telling us that since the time travelers were experiencing the past (1977) as their present, and that made them the variable(s) that they can in effect change the past. Like Jack not operating on Ben made Kate take him to the Others, and that's how he became the evil dude he is. BUT, Jack could have operated on Ben and saved him, but no one else on the island could have, because they didn't.

Bob Help me with a stupid question: so if Jack had saved Ben...would Ben still be evil somehow because of course correction or not.  I am so bloody confused. I have coconut milk for brains so bear with me.  :-\

Sorry it took me so long to reply, there has been alot to catch up on. In my theory, no Ben would not have been evil after Jack saved him. The entire course of events would have unfolded differently. I would say that maybe course correction would force Ben to become an other later, but the way I see course correction, it has only really affected death, so I don't think that course correction would come into play here.

She probably had never done it until now. Since this was Dan's present, that must mean Dan had never died at the hands of his mother. It can be said his mother does not remember her killing him, but can foresee his imminent death. I know she told Penny she could not see what the future holds, but it's not above any of the Others to simply lie to people, regardless of the situation.

Of course she remembers shooting him. Why do you think she gave Widmore the little speech about sacrifice?? She might as well have said at the end of that, "...as in this example." and then cut the scene to Daniel getting killed by his own mother.

I think that Eloise's choice to let Daniel die falls into the exact same reason that she didn't tell the man in the red shoes that he was about to die. She knew that if she didn't make him go to the island, that there would have been some other, possibly more painful/horrific, way that he would have died. She is obviously a firm believer in fate and destiny, and since it has already happened, it has to happen.

Since we're talking about free will and destiny, I posted this somewhere else, and I figure I'll put it out there to as many places as I can. It seems to me that last night's episode was kind of telling us that since the time travelers were experiencing the past (1977) as their present, and that made them the variable(s) that they can in effect change the past. Like Jack not operating on Ben made Kate take him to the Others, and that's how he became the evil dude he is. BUT, Jack could have operated on Ben and saved him, but no one else on the island could have, because they didn't.

this is what I've been saying over and over. what happened happened might be a rule of time travel but it can't be like this for LOST because otherwise what is their goal and what are we supposed to hope for . if I can't hope for a good outcome then i don't want to be invested. so there has to be a chance for them to succeed and change something. Dan said his mother might have been wrong.  maybe there regular everyday existence and free will choices they make ,on the island in 1977 wont change anything but if they find out the one big thing they could do differently, it could.

Funny thing is that I was die hard on the idea that WH,H, and like Daniel, I wasn't thinking about the anomaly of the survivors.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: MangoBingo on May 01, 2009, 04:25:40 PM
The last thing that Daniel told Jack and Kate, was that he believed his hypothesis about the past being unchangeable to be incorrect...

Jack and Kate are bound to speak to someone about this revelation at some point...

Eloise will eventually learn that her future son believed that the past could be changed...

So, why then set him upon the path which leads to him being killed?

Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: BobBX542 on May 01, 2009, 04:48:10 PM
The last thing that Daniel told Jack and Kate, was that he believed his hypothesis about the past being unchangeable to be incorrect...

Jack and Kate are bound to speak to someone about this revelation at some point...

Eloise will eventually learn that her future son believed that the past could be changed...

So, why then set him upon the path which leads to him being killed?



Because it already happened. Using your theory, if she didn't send him on that path, then she wouldn't have known to send him on that path.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: opgelost on May 01, 2009, 05:21:19 PM
I feel sorry for her.  You could tell for most of the episode that she was begrudgingly sending Daniel to his death, even as a child. 

I guess we can assume that Jack & Kate rush in to Village Hostile and explain everything to Ellie, thus putting her on the path we see her on today.  I'm willing to bet that even though she believes that "what happend happend", after Kate & Jack tell her about Daniel and his variable theory- she still hopes that he (Daniel) will be able to change the outcome of events.  Thus, starting the cycle of prodding him to make Physics/Science his sole focus.

But Dan goes to find Ellie in the hostilecamp, because "she is the only person on this island who can get us back to where we belong."
If he believes that his mother in 1977, before she knows everything that Jack and Kate will tell her, is able to send them back to 2008,
than there must be more in mrs. Hawking than just knowing the future.

At the risk of sounding contrite: "um, okay..what does that have to do with my post?"

That according to me Ellie's path is not only determined by what Jack and Kate are going to tell her, but there is more
that she can do or knows, because Dan says that she can bring them back to 2008, before she ever meets Jack and Kate.

And I was getting back to the subject of the thread and quoted the first post, because all the posts before mine were about the seriousness of GutzandRage.  ;)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: rhythm on May 01, 2009, 05:45:45 PM
lol
I was really confused.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: MangoBingo on May 01, 2009, 06:45:50 PM
The last thing that Daniel told Jack and Kate, was that he believed his hypothesis about the past being unchangeable to be incorrect...

Jack and Kate are bound to speak to someone about this revelation at some point...

Eloise will eventually learn that her future son believed that the past could be changed...

So, why then set him upon the path which leads to him being killed?



Because it already happened. Using your theory, if she didn't send him on that path, then she wouldn't have known to send him on that path.

Um... No. Using my theory (which has always been "what if the past can be changed?") Eloise could have nurtured little Daniel's desire to be a concert pianist, instead of a quantum physicist. Any prior remembrance of shooting her adult son in 1977 would have been nothing more than false memory syndrome.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Novashannon on May 02, 2009, 09:07:49 PM
The last thing that Daniel told Jack and Kate, was that he believed his hypothesis about the past being unchangeable to be incorrect...

Jack and Kate are bound to speak to someone about this revelation at some point...

Eloise will eventually learn that her future son believed that the past could be changed...

So, why then set him upon the path which leads to him being killed?



Because it already happened. Using your theory, if she didn't send him on that path, then she wouldn't have known to send him on that path.

Um... No. Using my theory (which has always been "what if the past can be changed?") Eloise could have nurtured little Daniel's desire to be a concert pianist, instead of a quantum physicist. Any prior remembrance of shooting her adult son in 1977 would have been nothing more than false memory syndrome.
If the ewhatever hap[ened,happened theory is true, then Dan would have had something else happen to turn him to the sciences.  We seemed to see that with the many averted deaths of Charlie.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: BobBX542 on May 04, 2009, 04:21:30 PM
The last thing that Daniel told Jack and Kate, was that he believed his hypothesis about the past being unchangeable to be incorrect...

Jack and Kate are bound to speak to someone about this revelation at some point...

Eloise will eventually learn that her future son believed that the past could be changed...

So, why then set him upon the path which leads to him being killed?



Because it already happened. Using your theory, if she didn't send him on that path, then she wouldn't have known to send him on that path.

Um... No. Using my theory (which has always been "what if the past can be changed?") Eloise could have nurtured little Daniel's desire to be a concert pianist, instead of a quantum physicist. Any prior remembrance of shooting her adult son in 1977 would have been nothing more than false memory syndrome.

Okay, I see what you're saying now, but the problem I see there is that if Daniel were to have become a concert pianist, then why would she have learned that her future son thought the past could be changed??
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: MangoBingo on May 04, 2009, 09:32:36 PM
Okay, I see what you're saying now, but the problem I see there is that if Daniel were to have become a concert pianist, then why would she have learned that her future son thought the past could be changed??

Because the Daniel Faraday we all know still existed, up until the point she shot him.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: MangoBingo on May 04, 2009, 09:43:20 PM
p.s. I was washing some dishes this evening and was wondering about Hawking coercing Daniel into going to the Island and blah, blah, blah - and I had a really good theory - but I've forgotten most of it now. It was something like this...

Why didn't she tell Jack that he'd be in 1977 when he arrived back at the Island?

I was wondering if having Jack and Kate deliver Daniel to the Others camp is a differing turn of events from a pre-established timeline in which she still shot her future son, but in an alternate (now erased) timeline, he died because Jack and Kate weren't nearby.

Maybe Ms. Hawking is trying to change the past slightly and when Desmond was shot, she blamed herself so much because of her "meddling". She might have felt responsible because of a "ripple effect" from her attempts to change that one event. Maybe Daniel lives? Maybe that's why she now doesn't know what the future's going to be, because she's purposefully tried to alter things?
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: vickilynn on May 04, 2009, 10:40:54 PM
p.s. I was washing some dishes this evening and was wondering about Hawking coercing Daniel into going to the Island and blah, blah, blah - and I had a really good theory - but I've forgotten most of it now. It was something like this...

Why didn't she tell Jack that he'd be in 1977 when he arrived back at the Island?

I was wondering if having Jack and Kate deliver Daniel to the Others camp is a differing turn of events from a pre-established timeline in which she still shot her future son, but in an alternate (now erased) timeline, he died because Jack and Kate weren't nearby.

Maybe Ms. Hawking is trying to change the past slightly and when Desmond was shot, she blamed herself so much because of her "meddling". She might have felt responsible because of a "ripple effect" from her attempts to change that one event. Maybe Daniel lives? Maybe that's why she now doesn't know what the future's going to be, because she's purposefully tried to alter things?

Mango...you have the best theories! (Oh wait...different thread :) )
Seriously...I didn't think of the consequences of Jack and Kate being there now. Thanks for the illumination! (I actually thought of you this weekend when I was shopping at Tyson's Corner. There is a store there called MNG by MANGO and it made me think of you!)
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Des on May 05, 2009, 11:23:34 AM

That according to me Ellie's path is not only determined by what Jack and Kate are going to tell her, but there is more
that she can do or knows, because Dan says that she can bring them back to 2008, before she ever meets Jack and Kate.


Perhaps, although I thought Dan wanted to find Ellie because he knew that she would know where Jughead was buried. There could definitely be more to it then that though.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Shivy on May 05, 2009, 01:40:39 PM
Eloise said that for the first time, she does not know what's going to happen now.  I think she means that, her whole life (from the time in 1977 that she shot an intruder into their camp) that she was going to have a son, that he was going to be a gifted physicist, that he was going to travel through time, and that she was going to shoot him in 1977 on the island.  She did all in her power, all her life, to put things into place such that this chain of events would be followed... apparently (as someone else said above) because she is convinced that what happened, happened, and cannot be changed.  So in a sense, until she sent the Oceanic 6 back to the island, she always knew what was coming.  (I don't think she could see the future; she knew only what she had surmised by Daniel's appearance in 1977.)  Now, however, since the Oceanic 6 have been sent back, she no longer has any idea what the future (her future, in 2007) holds.

ITA with this, this is how i saw her statement
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: Shivy on May 05, 2009, 04:30:01 PM
Maybe she had to send him back to get shot because it does lead to saving people on and off the island.  And maybe he needed to get shot so that 815 would crash and the losties would help to save the island (and the universe) in the war that's coming.  She knew Danielle needed to be shot by her in order for certain events to happen for the world to be saved- she made the ultimate sacrafice. 
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: BobBX542 on May 05, 2009, 04:57:16 PM
Okay, I see what you're saying now, but the problem I see there is that if Daniel were to have become a concert pianist, then why would she have learned that her future son thought the past could be changed??

Because the Daniel Faraday we all know still existed, up until the point she shot him.

But she wouldn't have shot him if he didn't go back.
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: MangoBingo on May 05, 2009, 07:26:30 PM
Okay, I see what you're saying now, but the problem I see there is that if Daniel were to have become a concert pianist, then why would she have learned that her future son thought the past could be changed??

Because the Daniel Faraday we all know still existed, up until the point she shot him.

But she wouldn't have shot him if he didn't go back.

Two Daniels... A future Daniel (the Daniel the audience knows) and a new Daniel we've never known. That's the thing with alternate dimensions caused by altering past timelines... They're alternate!
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: MangoBingo on May 05, 2009, 07:28:20 PM
I actually thought of you this weekend when I was shopping at Tyson's Corner. There is a store there called MNG by MANGO and it made me think of you!

That's so sweet!!!

I have no idea what Tyson's Corner is though. Is that something to do with Tyson's Chicken?  ???
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: vickilynn on May 05, 2009, 09:41:38 PM
I actually thought of you this weekend when I was shopping at Tyson's Corner. There is a store there called MNG by MANGO and it made me think of you!

That's so sweet!!!

I have no idea what Tyson's Corner is though. Is that something to do with Tyson's Chicken?  ???

 ;D
Tyson's Corner is a Galleria in D.C. metro area...I did eat a chicken kabob for lunch there, does that count?
Title: Re: Eloise's reasons
Post by: BobBX542 on May 06, 2009, 12:09:46 PM
Okay, I see what you're saying now, but the problem I see there is that if Daniel were to have become a concert pianist, then why would she have learned that her future son thought the past could be changed??

Because the Daniel Faraday we all know still existed, up until the point she shot him.

But she wouldn't have shot him if he didn't go back.

Two Daniels... A future Daniel (the Daniel the audience knows) and a new Daniel we've never known. That's the thing with alternate dimensions caused by altering past timelines... They're alternate!

Ohhhhhhhh, okay, I see what you're saying. I was not thinking about alternate timelines. I was thinking about just the one. Okay then, nevermind all my nay saying earlier. I don't agree with the Alternate timeline theory, but at least now I know what you're getting at.