Talk: Eggtown

guest cast

The press release is out

Ken Leung as Miles, Jeremy Davies as Daniel Faraday, Rebecca Mader as Charlotte, Shawn Doyle as Duncan Forrester, Susan Gibney as Melissa Dunbrook, Traber Burns as judge, Fred Q. Collins as bailiff, Beth Broderick as Diane Jansen, Tania Kahale as nanny, William Blanchette as child

Dharmatel4 00:06, 31 January 2008 (PST)

Dharmatel, do you have a link? Just wondering, I know that these are the guest stars, just want to know the director/writers, all that good stuff. Thanks, Marik7772003 18:19, 1 February 2008 (PST)

Press release is here: http://abcmedianet.com/DNR/2008/pdf/dnr020408.pdf (page 14). Written by Elizabeth Sarnoff & Greg Nations, directed by Stephen Williams. --Compossible 16:14, 4 February 2008 (PST)

I'm really excited Gregg Nations finally helped pen an episode. --Gluphokquen Gunih ▲ 22:43, 10 February 2008 (PST)

Does this mean Leung, Davies and Mader are switching from main cast to guest cast?--Chester Kilburn Talk | Contributions 08:17, 17 February 2008 (PST)

In season 4, each weekly press release has listed Leung, Davies and Mader as guest stars. They also do not appear in the cast photos or the main cast list released by ABC for season four. However, in the individual episodes they are credited as if they were main cast. Some people are very strongly in favor of listing them as main cast on that basis. So what has ended up happening is that we list them in the episodes according to the press releases and then change it after the episode with credits appears. Dharmatel4 20:51, 15 February 2008 (PST)

I see. That had me confused for quite a while, thanks for clarifying.--Chester Kilburn Talk | Contributions 08:17, 17 February 2008 (PST)

Flash Forward

Can the flash forward now be confirmed as Kate since they are running a new commercial, "She is one of the Oceanic 6... how she got off the island... only she knows." I figured that is pretty good confirmation that it's about Kate. (unsigned)

• No. There has to be an absolute confirmation from an official source before it goes up. Dharmatel4 08:37, 20 February 2008 (PST)

• Huh? Two different spots running on ABC and available on ABC.com that *explicitly* mention Kate *and* show her as the focus of the episode are not official sources? (Tpir 10:00, 21 February 2008 (PST))

• Thats still not absolute confirmation. The point of these pre-broadcast articles is to provide the information that ABC provides and no more. The standard is set high to avoid subjective arguments about what a promo spot means. If you want the full details on the episodes, you can find that in the spoilers articles. Dharmatel4 10:30, 21 February 2008 (PST)

• I clicked on recent changes two days ago where this article came up and got spoiled by the Flash Forward headline. Please make sure you remove the summary if it contains a spoiler. --MacCutcheon – Talk? 07:02, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Oceanic Six

• The final member of the Oceanic 6 has not been released, it could well be anoter female character: Rose, Claire, Sun, Cindy etc. --Jazza|talk|Contributions 06:34, 21 February 2008 (PST)

If aaron got of the island would he count as one?--ConnerXcountry57 11:56, 21 February 2008 (PST)

• No, not necessarly. While Kate's lawyer mentions her fame, there is no mention of Aarons fame. Also, due to the fact that Aaron was born on-island he may not be considered an Oceanic Six, since he wasnt technically on the plane. The story seems to be that Kate got pregnant and had the child on the island.Voodoo 19:07, 21 February 2008 (PST)
• I believe this "Jack says that there are 8 survivors of Oceanic Flight 815" should be edited to say "Jack says there were initially 8 survivors of the crash of Oceanic Flight 815." the way it's worded infers that the all 8 are still alive.

• He then goes on to say "but two didn't ma..." (or something like that) before Kate cuts him off and tells him not to say anything else. Two others survived the crash, but later died. --Litany42 06:48, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• I think Oceanic 6 refers to the people that had to live on an island for 100+ days and not necessarily people that survived a crash. Besides, IIRC a trailer for this episode a new member of the O6 would be revealed, which must be Aaron.MeatyDoughnut 06:30, 22 February 2008 (PST)
  • I hate to say this, but the promos are written by ABC, not the producers of the show, and they aren't always right. On the official podcast, they've said that promos have made wrong promises before, and I think this may be another case of that. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up clarifying that the promo promised an O6 reveal, but that Aaron isn't considered one of the O6 so the promo was wrong. --Minderbinder 06:39, 22 February 2008 (PST)

So what is eggtown?

Cuse and Limdelof confirmed: The title "Eggtown" refers to (1) the eggs that Locke is cooking, and (2) the questions surrounding Kate's pregnancy/child. No children's book. No bad bartering deals. No town in Florida. No Great Gatsby. Sorry. --Chuck 13:05, 28 February 2008 (PST)

• Where's the source to that? --     Nusentinsaino     talk    contribs    email   13:11, 28 February 2008 (PST)
  • A time travelers from the very near future. If it is not available now, it will be tomorrow.(Not really a spoiler because not related to anything on the show,)--Chuck 17:44, 28 February 2008 (PST)
    • The truth: It is from the Official Podcast that was/is to be released on ABC.com today (after The Constant). It was recorded before the episode and someone sent me an MP3... I have since found out it was posted on at least one website yesterday...--Chuck 06:16, 29 February 2008 (PST)

After this episode I'm still confused about the episode title. Can anyone shed some light?Voodoo 19:07, 21 February 2008 (PST)

• It's some kind of reference to a trial. I don't understand it fully, but I'm sure it will turn up on the main page at some point. Evil-pineapples 19:15, 21 February 2008 (PST)
• My guess is it's in reference to Locke serving Ben "the last two eggs" for breakfast, and Ben pointing out that Locke is "more Lost than [he] ever was". I'm thinking Jack and Kate are living in "eggtown" in the flash forward (in other words, living in a very fragile state). --Don820 19:18, 21 February 2008 (PST)
• They should have done a callback to season 2 and called it "What Kate Does" --Beardedjack 19:31, 21 February 2008 (PST)
• There have been three theories put out before the episode 1) its an old term for a public trial 2) its an old term having something to do with salesman making bad deals 3) Its a reference to an animated film about an idealic community of naive animals that suffers when an outsider arrives and starts doing crimes. Dharmatel4 19:33, 21 February 2008 (PST)

• Actually, all three would fit here: public trial, deals going down, and the naive animals. Locke asks Sawyer what the others are thinking about his leadership, and Sawyer says "baaaa", implying they are all sheep. In the real world, Locke's kidnapping, imprisonment, and life endangerment of Miles (to name a few) would be considered crimes... --Litany42 06:53, 22 February 2008 (PST)

I was actually thinking of Kate as the outsider who arrives and starts doing crimes. People will forgive her anything, but they really showed her at her worst. Dharmatel4 10:22, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• All three theories have problems -- there is very little support for the underlying history supporting the public trial or bad-deal-making theories and from what I have read about the children's book, the summary is inaccurate.--Chuck 13:15, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• The theory posted about the term's connection with The Great Depression is incredibly persuasive, but we need a source. --Ashrawi 02:28, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• Yes, it makes a lot of sense. All the way through the episode I was thinking "There's a whole bunch of deals going down in this episode!" Most of them are "bad" deals because one of participants simply do not have a choice. --Litany42 06:37, 22 February 2008 (PST)
• I am still very uncomfortbale with the lack of any source for this theory on the title. Before I read it, I thought the "egg" reference referred to the actual eggs being served by Locke and the "egg" inside of Kate and the fact that Kate was nesting in her post-island life... admittedly it is not as clean as the other theory -- but no support has been given for the alleged history behind that.--Chuck 09:17, 22 February 2008 (PST)
• I would contend that the reference added barely supports this "theory" as to the name of the show and I would suggest that all discussion about the reason for the name "Eggtown" be moved off of the main article page -- it is no more than a barely substantiated theory at this point.--Chuck 13:15, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Just FYI, I removed my own entry on the name of the style of grenade. In keeping with the bad German from The Economist, the German Wikipedia site I found had poor pagination.TheBookPolice 13:00, 22 February 2008 (PST)

We just need a reference for the depression-era reference really, it makes sense. The thing about the last two eggs at the beginning is clearly ironic - their hideout is a metaphorical 'egg-town', yet in a literal sense they've run out of actual eggs. That seems to calculated not to be deliberate.Liquidcow 16:40, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• It is just too weird that this piece of information is not common knowledge to anybody and the only source cited for this anywhere else on the web is lostpedia and now the town in Florida that is marginally relevant at best (and says nothing about eggs being a bad trade, etc.)--Chuck 17:23, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Unless someone comes up with a valid source soon, I'm going to remove the name section. Dharmatel4 00:07, 23 February 2008 (PST)

The piece of info was originally placed on the theory page by User:Jackdutton42, maybe you should ask him for his source ... --Hunter61 07:10, 23 February 2008 (PST)

• I'm an English Phd student, and this one of the things that comes up in American folklore. Regions and periods have stories that are not chronicled in books or websites, but dramatically shape many things about the present. Two Egg, Florida is the source of this lead.

Two Egg, formerly Two Egg Town, is a particularly funny twist on the pejorative. Think of watches instead of eggs. "What can you trade for this pack of gum?" "I've got a broken watch." "No. Sorry." "Well, how about two broken watches?"

Allison, Florida became Two Egg Town because of the frequency folks in Allison offered two eggs instead of one. I also want to point out that the town is Two Egg, not Two Eggs. Because "Two Egg Town" would have been such a good inside joke among salesman, Allison was distinguished from the other egg-towns, and ironically is the only remnant of the term. I want to point out that egg trading occured during the 1800's. I don't know who brought up the Depression Era. That is probably a simple mistake. Many, in fact most, of our culture folklore from the 1800's was chronicled during the Great Depression through FDR's public works programs. However, the attributer may have confused the Panic of 1837 for the Great Depression.

Knowing the penchant for writers to use Florida, I do not think this is a stretch. It is precisely the type of cultural curiosity that DL/CC include in all facets of the show. Add to this, in the first scene Locke tries to trade "two eggs" for information, showing a strong link or at least a clue.

In the research business, we have to weigh all things to determine if something unknown is plausible. Does it make sense in the context of the episode? Would the writers have privilege to this knowledge? Do the writer's leave clues that suggest their knowledge? If we can say yes to all three, we can assume some measure of accuracy.

Finally, I want to say I wrote this on the theory page at least a week before I saw the episode. The fact that the episode reflects the theory is either an unlikely coincidence or a very strong connection. (Jack Dutton 22:47, 24 February 2008 (PST))

• Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Eggtown could be a reference to "The Great Gatsby" by F. Scott Fitzgerald. The novel describes people in "East Egg" as people who were rich from family inheritance, and people living in the "West Egg" as those who earned the riches. Jack, Kate, Hurley, and Sayid could all be parallels of these "eggs." Jack was a slightly well known doctor, and Hurley won a huge lottery. Both could be examples of those in the East Egg, for their fame was already established before the crash. Sayid and Kate on the other hand could be like those living in the West Egg. Although it didn't take much to earn their riches, they both became famous after the crash. The crash, island, and rescue could all be considered the "riches" of the characters. Romulan248

The story of two-egg doesn't even match whats in the article right now. And theorising about what eggtown means isn't appropriate in the article in any circumstances. I'm going to remove the material now. You can either rewrite it to be consistant with the story of two-egg or you can find a better source for the current text. Its also acceptable to put the material about two-egg into trivia. Dharmatel4 23:06, 24 February 2008 (PST)

• I think this is a possible reference: http://www.docarzt.com/lost-news/lost-404-eggtown-why-the-name.php

"Why name this episode Eggtown? Is it because Locke served up the last two eggs to Ben Is it supposed to focus the audience's attention on fertility? Is it supposed to be jab to those of us who comb over video and audio looking for the slightest clue? There is a wonderful book out there called 'The Easter Egg Escapade'. The following is an excerpt from an interview with the author John Michael Williams.

"The Easter Egg Escapade" tells the story of Eggtown, a peaceful village where rabbits and chickens live together in harmony. However, a band of thieving roosters, the Take-Its (led by Terrible Timothy Take-It), live in the murky swamps and forests beyond Eggtown, and they conspire to steal all of Eggtown's Easter Eggs. In order to retrieve the eggs, an unlikely group of heroes, which includes Big Boring Benedict Bunny, Horrible Harriet Hare, Good Gracious Grasshopper, Tiny Tessie, and Boss Baker Bunny, volunteer to go on the perilous journey. The ending features the redemption of Terrible Timothy Take-It and is sure to please pre-teens.

Sounds alot like our Island. And since this episode was about Aaron as much as it was about Kate, choosing the episode title from the setting of a children's book is highly appropriate."

It could be included in trivia section.... what do you think? --erikire 16:25, 25 February 2008 (PST)

• Source: http://www.twoeggfla.com/history.html (which is based on a book: Two Egg, Florida by Dale Cox). -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 20:47, 26 February 2008 (PST)

Who is Aaron's (fake) father?

So, the world thinks 8 people survived the crash and 6 made it back. Clearly, Jack and Kate didn't tell the world that Claire lived and had a baby. In that case, who did they say was Aaron's father? --Beardedjack 19:14, 21 February 2008 (PST)

• Or, Claire lived, gave birth, and later died. Jack mentioned 8 people survived the crash in his story. Claire could be one of the two who didn't survive. Evil-pineapples 19:16, 21 February 2008 (PST)

--- I would tend to believe that they used the "8" to explain situations that would seem impossible given the individuals who make up the Oceanic 6. Following this logic, how could Kate pass off a baby that was already days or more old when they arrived home (to much publicity I would think) other than saying that it was a child born on the island whom she had helped care for. If she established that Claire made it through childbirth and died later Aaron's age would never be questioned. I think we're also going to see Sun as one of the Oceanic 6 and they will use the same logic to explain Jin having survived the initial crash, impregnating Sun and then dying sometime afterwards. Otherwise how would they explain her already pregnant state when rescued (any doctor would be able to calculate conception upon her arrival). I think the "8" help legitimize the 6 who survived without further questions but that's just my theory so far!--Punkyc 08:05, 25 February 2008 (PST)

---

I'm sure other people are already pointing this out, but it seems that Aaron is being presented to the world as Kate's son, not an adopted son. Kate's mother want to see her 'grandson'. I can't imagine she would have been that bothered if Kate had picked up some random waif and brought it home.--Bagpuss 08:53, 25 February 2008 (PST)

• Possibly, but would Kate's mom be that interested in seeing an adopted child? People kept saying the word "son" without any qualifiers... --Beardedjack 19:29, 21 February 2008 (PST)
• Most likely, the eight Jack refers to are the Oceanic Six and Claire and Aaron. Aaron survived but Oceanic Six refers to the people that received settlements and golden passes or otherwise the people that had tickets (Aaron may have received a settlement that would be put away until he's an adult), but Aaron isn't included. With Aaron being alive and none of the Six having an excuse to give birth to him on the Island, then they would have had to admit that Claire survived the crash but they then probably lied and said she died during childbirth so as not to raise questions. The reason Jack included Aaron in the eight is because even though he wasn't born he was in Claire's womb and thus survived the crash. Often times an unborn baby (especially in that late in the pregnancy) is counted as a person in times when a pregnant woman dies or is killed (a double homicide). Kate's Aaron, however, could also not be Claire's Aaron, but rather a child she conceived with Jack and named in memory of Aaron. --macosx 19:31, 21 February 2008 (PST)
  • It can't refer to Aaron becuase they clearly say eight survived the crash. Dharmatel4 19:33, 21 February 2008 (PST)
    • You can absolutely count Aaron. He wasn't born, but he was definitely on the plane. It would make sense for Jack to count Aaron, since he was born on the Island and thus survived the crash. --macosx 19:42, 21 February 2008 (PST)
      • Aaron counts as someone saved, but not as someone who survived the crash - when a pregnant woman crashes her car, they don't say that two people survived. --Minderbinder 06:04, 22 February 2008 (PST)
      • i agree with Minderbinder - the O6 would have to include Kate w/child. I am lead to believe that the eight survivors that Jack referred to includes the known + Desmond + the Korean couple. Claire doesn't make it off the island - hey but that's my chump theory. --Devinma 13:56, 24 February 2008 (PST)
• Claire said she wanted to give the baby up for adoption. What happened to Claire, we don't know. But she could have given the baby to Kate who for whatever reason, accepted it. She may have also died, or Kate could have told them she was pregnant when she was arrested but it was too early for any visible signs and thus she gave birth on the island. Who knows. Time distortion can still make everything fit. But the most logical answer is that something happened to Claire and Kate offered to take care of the baby.Voodoo 19:40, 21 February 2008 (PST)
  • I think you're right about time distortion. Also, Kate's mom makes a point to say she's had 6 months to live for the past 4 years. I don't recall Kate mentioning (or flashing back) to her mom being terminally ill? Or am I just forgetting something...? --Beardedjack 19:53, 21 February 2008 (PST)

You should rewatch Born to Run. dposse 19:57, 21 February 2008 (PST)

Ah yes, good call. It'd be nice if we could use that to narrow down the time period of the flash forwards... perhaps an absolute earliest they could occur? But I'm sure that's impossible. --Beardedjack 20:15, 21 February 2008 (PST)

• I think that Aaron is the Aaron we already know -- the father is that Aussie guy who left Claire in the lurch. One unexplained thing so far is Jack's strange reticence to see the child. If he truly loves Kate as he says when she gets out of prison, what the heck could keep him from her? Just Aaron? No way. The only explanation is that seeing Aaron causes him too much guilt -- I think he ends up causing Claire's death this season somehow. Maybe due to his stubbornness in opposing Locke, he insists that she goes with the freighters, who kill her. That's the only way I can fathom Jack being so scared to see Aaron -- scared enough to keep him from the woman he loves. --Senorverde 23:45, 21 February 2008 (EST)
  • Don't forget that Claire is Jack's half-sister. If he somehow finds this out (possible, with ghost Christian stuck on the island) then that means that he is Uncle Jack to Aaron, and maybe that causes the discomfort for him? Regardless if Claire was dead, that would also fuel his issue. --Rodwell 00:14, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Kate is calling Aaron her son, and Aaron is calling Kate "mommy"...I believe that Claire and Aaron are NOT of the 8 who survived, because it seems that they are trying to say that Aaron is Kate's son (she gave birth to him)...at least that seems to be the story. And if so, then Aaron would NOT be one of the Oceanic 6, because they don't think he was on the plane. (even though we, and the oceanic 6 know that he was)Thelordnyax 22:17, 21 February 2008 (PST)

I agree with that assessment. If the world believed Claire to be Aaron's mother, why would Kate be allowed to keep him? It's not like Claire filled out dharma issued adoption papers on the island. Aaron would probably get stuck with a relative (and no, I don't think that relative would be Uncle Jack). --Beardedjack 05:40, 22 February 2008 (PST)

I don't think the show would have Kate have a child of her own and name it Aaron as well - while anything is possible, I think audiences would consider it a cheat and be annoyed by that happening. I think the explanation is simple - Clare doesn't make it off the island and either stays there alive, or is killed before the rescue, and Kate takes the baby home and says it's her baby as part of the cover story. The timeline doesn't work for that, but I believe it's just more evidence of time dilation on the island, same as walt seeming ly growing too fast. --Minderbinder 06:04, 22 February 2008 (PST)

That's not what we meant, we all know that it really IS Claire's son, but when they got off of the island, for some reason (obiously we don't know yet) Kate took Aaron with her, maybe Claire's dead, maybe they kidnapped him...who knows? But what I was trying to say was that Kate is TELLING everyone it's her son...Thelordnyax 10:56, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Any lip readers around?

During the scene where Miles meets Ben, right after he asks for the money and Ben says "You arranged this meeting so you can blackmail me?", Miles whispers are mouthes something to Ben (Kate is behind him and wouldn't be able to see). It is clearly not audible but it is very visible. So... can anyone read those crazy lips of Miles?--Chuck 12:41, 23 February 2008 (PST)

I watched it again, everything he says is fairly audible... Perhaps your audio cut out acciedently when you first watched it? Jimbo the tubby 14:15, 23 February 2008 (PST)

After Ben says "You arranged this meeting so you can blackmail me?" and before Miles says "It's extortion, if you want to get technical," Miles lips are moving without sound for at least a full second. Sorry you missed that Jimbo -- if you hear a line between those two, please tell me what it is.--Chuck 18:02, 23 February 2008 (PST)

After watching that part like five times I've decided I think he's saying, "Well um." Either he starts to talk and doesn't quite know what he wants to say at first, or when they recorded the audio after they shot the scene he just didn't say that little part. Goldfoot 20:00, 26 February 2008 (EST)

After watching that scene and the past minutes of Miles speaking and how he spell other words, he might said "We got him." also, which might refer to Sayid. --Suxoda 06:37, 1 March 2008 (PST)

Why is the trial in California?

The courtroom of Kate's trial was clearly in California. I thought that Kate had committed most of her crimes in Iowa, unless I've completely lost my mind. I was under the impression that Wayne lived in Iowa, and thought for sure that Kate's mom was in the hospital there. Thoughts? Something I missed? -- WanderingMathematician  talk  contribs  email  19:45, 21 February 2008 (PST)

• Who the hell knows? Some dude in the 'Unanswered Questions' section seems to think there's some deeper meaning to her probation requiring her to stay in California. So maybe she's there for a reason. Evil-pineapples 19:49, 21 February 2008 (PST)

I'm sure someone will profess to have a fuller understanding of our justice system (at least based on what they learn from Law and Order), but I would assume Kate is being charged with federal crimes, in which case the locality the trial is held in is less important. If Kate is a well known celebrity, local Iowans would probably be biased in her favor, which might facilitate a move in the trial locale. Or maybe they're just afraid of putting her on another plane. --Beardedjack 19:50, 21 February 2008 (PST)

Her crimes aren't federal and they would be tried in the state in which they were committed. The only exception is if some of the crimes were committed in different states, then there'd be a decision as to which state to try them all in. --macosx 19:53, 21 February 2008 (PST)

That's not the ONLY exception, as Beardedjack said, if the leaders of the judicial system felt that the Iowans would have been biased one way or the other ('cause they would make up the jury) then they would have it elsewhereThelordnyax 22:19, 21 February 2008 (PST)

First degree Murder and fraud aren't federal crimes? Since when? dposse 19:58, 21 February 2008 (PST)

Believe it or not, murder and its punishments are defined and punished by the states. The only murder that is a federal crime is that of a person elected to federal office and some federal employees. --macosx 20:01, 21 February 2008 (PST)

She had been hunted by a U.S. Marshal, which suggests that she was always wanted for a federal crime (although it's possible that the U.S. Marshal Service might help states catch state crime fugitives if it wants to, especially if the fugitive flees the country - I'm not sure what the law is on that). Also, she robbed a bank. That probably violates lots of state crimes (screwing up the FDIC?). And once she resisted arrest by the marshall, she's in big trouble with the federal gov'ment. However, none of these crimes hinge on her mother's testimony.

• The US Marshals are the enforcement arm of the Federal courts. There are a number of things Kate did that would get the Feds after her, robbing a bank and fleeing arrest across state lines for starters. She has also presumably committed a string of crimes across the country in the course of evading capture, which would probably raise the profile of her case beyond the jurisdiction of just Iowa. As for the trial taking place in California, there is precedent for very high-profile cases to have a change of venue out of the state the crimes were originally committed in. --Sidwood 00:58, 24 February 2008 (PST)

Nothing about the court or the trial makes any sense. Its one of the worst things I've ever seen on Lost. It starts with the ultracheap court set. Then there is the problem that she appears to be on trial in a california state court. Then there is the problem that she is guilty of any number of crimes in any number of jurisdictions. Then there is the idea that the non-cooperation of her mother meant that there was no case. None of it makes any sense. Dharmatel4 20:02, 21 February 2008 (PST)

The courtroom set looked like what real courtrooms look like. The vast majority of courtrooms are not oak-paneled, marble-columned rooms with 30-foot ceilings, despite what you might have seen on TV courtroom dramas.

Dharmatel4, the non-cooperation of her mother WOULD mean that there was no case, because she was going to testify to Kate confessing her crimes to her mother. They really have NO proof, and while her confession to her mother would qualify as hearsay, i think it would qualify as an exxeption, because it's a statement against interest...so yes, the trial did make sense as far as what was going on with her mother...Thelordnyax 22:27, 21 February 2008 (PST)

Kate is from (possibly Ames,) Iowa and most of her flashbacks up until the murder occur there. Ranhalt 20:06, 21 February 2008 (PST)

Which "flashbacks up until the murder" are you talking about? Chronologically, Kate's first flashback was the murder of Wayne.--Nevermore 17:29, 14 March 2008 (PDT)

Dharmatel4, that's because we still do not know the terms of which the Oceanic Six returned to society. We do not know the lies that they told and how the public responded. Her fame and what they said to the public could have alot to do with why she got off with just probation. dposse 20:08, 21 February 2008 (PST)

The only way she could have got off would have been for her mother to testify on her behalf. If her mother had gone up on the stand in her condition and said enough bad things about Wayne, she might have realistically gotten off. But as it was presented, nothing about the trial in the episode was remotely credible or realistic. At LEAST set the trial in Iowa. One state seal would hardly have bankrupted the production. Dharmatel4 20:23, 21 February 2008 (PST)

while I'd agree the venue was all wrong, they made it clear their only evidence for killing Wayne was her confession made to her mother. Without it they had no case. Now as for all the other crimes . . .--Island Hopper 20:29, 21 February 2008 (PST)

The first thing I did when I saw the courtroom was to check the flag and seal to see which state it was. Then I too had the California/Iowa cognitive dissonance, wondering, "If she killed Wayne in Iowa, who else did she kill in California?" Finally, since I have never really liked Kate, I was quite disappointed to see her avoid jail time. Jimpoz 23:31, 21 February 2008 (PST)

Since it has been clear that a federal marshal has been after her since the first or second episode of the show, it seems like her multiple crimes (or at least the combination of them all) are considered federal ones, whether that's accurate in the real world or not. Maybe it's a plot hole since having the trial in Iowa would put her out of contact with Jack and the other O6. The whole thing requires some suspension of disbelief, considering we're talking about survivors of a plane crash that was covered up with a fake plane and who have conspired to lie about what happened. --Minderbinder 06:19, 22 February 2008 (PST)

As I just noted in my edit, assaulting a federal agent is definitely a federal crime. And as Minderbinder points out, the fact that she was pursued by a federal marshal also implies that she is wanted for federal crimes.--Padraic 07:33, 22 February 2008 (PST)

The list of crimes given by the bailiff are a mix of federal and state crimes (assault of a federal officer, grand theft auto, first degree murder). She is remanded to federal custody when bail is denied, yet she is prosecuted by the District Attorney (state official) not a US Attorney. From a storyline perspective, it was necessary for all of Kate's legal problems to be resolved at once. But it wouldn't have been that difficult to avoid making such a mess of it that it makes no sense.--Eyeful Tower 08:22, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Some of her crimes were federal. The mistake made in the show was that not all of her crimes were federal and they would not all be tried in federal court together (or seemingly California state court in the show). The best theory I can come up with as far as her original federal crime was something to do with interstate fraud on Wayne's insurance policy. Her subsequent crimes were all related to being a federal fugitive. The problem I have isn't that it requires suspension of disbelief, its that everything to do with court was poorly plotted and written. Dharmatel4 08:26, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Completely agree. We knew there would be difficulties plot-wise resolving all of Kate's crimes upon returning from the Island. With 3+ years to prepare for it, I guess I've been spoiled and don't expect such sloppy plotting/writing on Lost. --Eyeful Tower 09:19, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• We are also assuming here that Wayne was some drunken hick. If he was, say, in the Witness Protection Program, or somehow worked for the federal government, this could make his murder a federal crime rather than a jurisdictional one. (I don't know all the ins and outs, but there are likely some instances where murder of certain people would be a federal crime.) That still doesn't explain why it would be tried in a California court though. Unless Schwarzenegger somehow becomes president in the Lost mythology and gets a bill passed that subcontracts all federal court hearings to California... --Litany42 13:22, 22 February 2008 (PST)

There is some discussion of this going on below at "Blooper Removal" but just a note here to say that given the fact that a U.S. Marshal was chasing Kate from the first crime of murder - something clearly raised this above the run of the mill murder. Maybe it was the insurance fraud, or maybe it was that Wayne was a federal agent, or somehow protected at the federal level of some sort... I don't know. That's a separate issue from why it would be tried in a CA State court though. Federal and State crimes can be tried in State courts. Even Iowa State crimes (assuming that it was a state murder and not federal murder) can be tried in CA for various reasons, including, if a witness for either side is unable to travel to the judicial venue for some legitimate reason (i.e. cancer treatment or physical ailment) the judge can move the venue - especially when the case turns on that witnesses testimony. --LOSTinDC 14:07, 22 February 2008 (PST)

This conversation is getting a little unwiedly so, I am going to start from scratch: I agree with much of what has been said above. Kate has committed crimes in at least two states -- Iowa and New Mexico (don't forget the bank robbery/hostage holding/shooting). The crimes in New Mexico (occuring in a bank) are more likely federal, although at that point the marshal is already on her trail. NOTEWORTHY: There does not need to be a federal crime for U.S. Marshals to be involved. U.S. Marshals also have a role in coordinating efforts to apprehend state fugitives, particularly state fugitives that are wanted for serious crimes and in multiple jurisdictions. All that being said, there is still no reason a trial for crimes committed in Iowa or New Mexico -- and without any nexis to California -- would be tried in California. Did I add anything to the discussion? I hope so. (Oh, and the word "Marshal" as in "United States Marshal" has only one "l").--Chuck 14:32, 22 February 2008 (PST)

So, isn't this a valid question to the main page? Something like "Why is Kate being judged in California, when her crimes seem to have been commited in other states?" -. Grillage .- 01:13, 23 February 2008 (PST)

In "Through the looking glass" Kate and Jack meet up in california. After season 3 the writers decided that it will be important, to the latter story, that Kate be confined to a state by the law. They had to make this state California to maintain continuity. The reason her trial is in California will either not be explained, or will be inconsequential. (unsigned)

If thats what they thought, they were wrong. Its perfectly possible for a now-california resident to be put on trial in Iowa and then be forced as a condition of probation to stay in their current state of residence (California). Dharmatel4 13:46, 23 February 2008 (PST)

If it's a federal crime, it would not be prosecuted by a district attorney. The LA District Attorney has only local jurisdiction. She could not prosecute federal crimes, or crimes from Iowa. Bank robbery would be a federal crime, but it would be prosecuted by a federal attorney. I can understand a federal marshal's involvement, although it's unlikely. Even if there was too much publicity to provide a fair trial in the Iowa community where the crime took place, they would not get a change of venue all the way to California. --Professor ransom 20:46, 23 February 2008 (PST)

When the Oceanic 6 are discovered they first arrive in the USA through California. On their immediate reappearance they decide to hold Kate in California untill things can be sorted out. Because of her unique postition, lostie/mother, they allow her to stay there to keep things simple.

On the subject of Kate's baby...

There was a bit of foreshadowing in this episode when Claire asks Kate to pick up the baby. Kate is clearly uncomfortable with it, and Claire comments that the last thing in the world she thought she would be good at is being a mother. At the end of the episode, we see Kate being a good mother to Aaron.

Aaron looks to be about 4-years old in this final scene, which gives us a timeline for this flash forward. I would guess that this is before TTLG, because Jack seems kind of sane and sober. But then this raises the question about why he wigged out so many years afterward, desperately trying to get back to the island. And why can't he just go and find it like the freighter did?

• I think Aaron looked younger: maybe two.--Sclacy 09:55, 22 February 2008 (PST)
  • This episode too place prior to Bearded Jack, which took place in early 2007. Therefore, Aaron, whom was born in late 2004, would have to be less than 3 years old, and would more than likely be less than 2 years old. Samhain99 09:59, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Approaching the timeline from the other end, Kate first visits her sick mother in Season 1's "Born to Run," believed to take place in 2002. Kate's mom having "6 months to live for four years", putting Eggtown in 2006, and making Aaron no more than 2.

• That's the biggest, most well-spoken two-year old I've ever seen...! I would accept 3 going on 4 years old, but 2 is a bit of a stretch! --Litany42 10:42, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• Aaron says "Hi Mommy." That is it. Isn't it? Two year olds can say "Hi Mommy" -- many 18 month year olds can say "Hi Mommy" clearly. There is no stretch.--Chuck 08:52, 25 February 2008 (PST)
• The kid that plays Aaron is credit was "Two Year Old Boy", obviously to avoid a spoiler. He is two, though.--Chocky 17:26, 22 February 2008 (PST)
• I'd guess between 2 and 3 as well, especially since the bed appeared to be a toddler bed, or a converted crib, rather than a normal single bed that a four-year-old would be in. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 11:17, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• The point I was trying to make is that the child is too old. Is this a oops or is it intentional, as in the journey off island made Aaron older? Samhain99 11:24, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• How is the child too old? He can easily be a two year old -- even a little younger. He is big, but not abnormally big for a two year old.

• Plus, he was a huge newborn too.Wyz sub10 13:28, 27 February 2008 (PST)

Lastly, Aaron could be the "he" that Kate spoke of at the end of TTLG when she said "he will be wondering where I am". --Litany42 06:43, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• Agreed, that's what I've been thinking. Jimbo the tubby 11:49, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Yup, third that. -. Grillage .- 01:20, 23 February 2008 (PST)

Why does Kate understand why Jack would not want to see the baby? Did Jack do something to separate Claire and Aaron? --Snapper67

Or did Kate do something to separate Claire and Aaron. Dharmatel4 10:13, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• But wouldn't that make Jack not want to see Kate instead? However if Claire does die, Jack witnessed it AND he found out at the same time that Claire was his sister, then it is reasonable that he doesn't want to see Aaron because of the memories of Claire. The upshot, though, is that we do not have enough information to create any reasonable theory here... --Litany42 12:25, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Agreed to that too. That's exactly what I first thought. Also, the kid is probably linked to the big secrets of the Island. He would remind Jack not only of Claire, but also their father, the people who stayed there, the Island itself (maybe he wants to go back so bad after finally seeing Aaron some time later?), some other tragedy that helped them get out and who knows what else. Wouldn't it be possible that Kate has registered Aaron as Jack's son at the doc's request, assuming Claire died and he wanted to honor her and give his nephew a better future? -. Grillage .- 01:20, 23 February 2008 (PST)

• I figured that perhaps Jack's not wanting to see Aaron has to do with the guilt of leaving the others on the island. Aaron probably bearing a resemblance to Claire. And why would the thought of an endangered or abandoned Claire ESPECIALLY disturb Jack? Because she is his half-sister. Presumably he discovers that at some point. The speculation over Christian coming back into the main storyline or even being alive off-island in the flash forwards would point towards this. If Christian is really alive in the flashforwards as was confusingly suggested in 'through the looking glass' you might think that he'd mention seeing his daughter on the list of deceased from 815 and perhaps mention that to Jack. Or if Christian is alive on-island and meets with both Claire and Jack the secret would obviously revealed. --Laika 13:07, 22 February 2008 (PST)
• Or does Jack feel responsible for Claire's death, and see Aaron as a constant reminder of that?--Chocky 17:28, 22 February 2008 (PST)

How do we know that Kate's Aaron is really Claire's Aaron? Maybe Kate named him in honor of her friend's child. Also, when Kate and Jack were alone in the parking deck, why did she refer to him as her's and not Claire's? --NotThatBen

• Well, we don't technically know. We assume there is only one Aaron because it'd be a huge, huge cop-out on the part of the writers otherwise.--Chocky 17:28, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• And that would make it the first time that Lost writers used slight-of-hand? It probably is Aaron, but interesting questions if it isn't as well. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 20:42, 23 February 2008 (PST)

I know how the birds and the bees work, but what prompted Kate to think she was pregnant? Which episode? I don't recall seeing her taking a pregnancy test after hooking up with Sawyer. When did Kate learn she might be pregnant?--Thedisturbance 00:03, 29 February 2008 (PST)

Daniel's "memory problems"

• If anyone has any insight into what the significance of this is, I'd be interested to hear some theories.

Two quick points, though: 1) Did he know what the cards were before she flipped them over? 2) Or is this an exercise is some kind of ESP/clairvoyance/etc., where he didn't have a chance to see the cards before she turned them face down?

Jonesgp1996 08:26, 22 February 2008 (PST)jonesgp1996

• Could he have some form of Dyslexia? I know Dyslexia is with written language, but is there a memory disorder similar to it? dposse 08:36, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• It seems unlikely that it's an ESP test, since she specifically uses the term "remembering" the cards. --Minderbinder 08:37, 22 February 2008 (PST)

*Unless he is supposed to "remember" the "future" reveal of the cards. WCFrancis 10:32, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• He also seems to have trouble remembering the names of suits. The way he articulated his guess lead me to believe he could see the shape in his mind but couldn't find the right word. --Island Hopper 08:48, 22 February 2008 (PST)

On Feb 11, Watch With Kristen said, "In an upcoming episode Removed--spoiler content

• Apparently Daniel has trouble with his short-term memory. (Perhaps this explains why he sometimes seems confused about what's happening around him.) One question is why Charlotte (who didn't know him before the mission) has an interest in his situation and why she believes he might be improving. One possibility is that his problem stems from an accident that happened on the boat and that she's since been monitoring him to see if he's permanently injured or is healing naturally. Another possibility is that his condition was pre-existing but that Charlotte knows about the healing properties of the island and is using Daniel as an experimental subject to test them. --Sclacy 10:08, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• Sclacy's thought jogged my memory (no pun intended), and I looked back at the synopsis for "Confirmed Dead" regarding Daniel's flashback. He's crying but can't remember why. Perhaps he knew someone on Flight 815, and the newscast about the crash had the immediate effect of causing him to cry about the loss he has experienced. However, if he has short-term memory problems, maybe by the time the other person asked him what was wrong, he had already forgotten what he was crying about. Jonesgp1996 13:20, 22 February 2008 (PST)
  • Daniel didn't say that he didn't remember; he said that he didn't know why he was crying.

• Look at Confirmed dead when Daniel was asked his name. There is long pause, he looks up(as people trying to recall things do) and finally answers. At that time I suspected memory loss because he didnt know why he was crying. Then he "word searches" when referring to his pack. Word searching a symptom of mental confusion. Then Miles asks him--dont you remember Naomi gave the code? Daniel didnt remember and had to have the code explained to him in detail. The he is trying to remember 3 cards--we know this is a memory test because she said "Times up". If you dont go back and specifically witness those scenes I mentioned--dont remove my comment--because its quite obvious Daniel has a mental deficiency..thats why he is referred to as a Head case by Naomi. --John Burger 10:41, 24 February 2008 (PST)
  • Something to be healed on the Island perhaps?--Spiral 19:43, 28 February 2008 (PST)

Daniel's "Tarot" Reading

Just for kicks I decided to look at the three cards that Charlotte turned over for Daniel as if it was a Three-Card Reading from a Tarot deck. This is not completely bogus, as playing cards are actually used in lieu of traditional Tarot cards sometimes to do fortune telling. The four suits of the Tarot deck's Minor Arcana are represented by the four playing card suits.

There are several differences between the playing card deck and the Tarot cards. The first difference is that the playing cards only have three "face cards" (King, Queen, Jack), while the Tarot deck has four face cards (King, Queen, Knight, Page), so instead of each suit containing 14 cards, as in the Tarot, the playing card deck has only 13 cards per suit. Another major difference is that there is no Major Arcana represented in the playing card deck. And finally, the last difference is that the playing cards have no "reversed" meaning, which the Tarot cards do - in other words, in most Tarot decks the cards may be either right-side up or upside down when layed on the table, and this difference often changes the meaning associated with the card. Other than that, one may use playing cards in a pinch if someone is just really Jonesin' for a Tarot reading and no Tarot deck is at hand.

The Three-Card Reading is a fairly common method. It's very simple: the first card represents the Past, the second card the Present, and the third card the Future. So, to do the reading, you look at the meaning of each card, and then place that meaning into the appropriate slot - so that the card that is in the "Past" position would indicate what the subject's past influences had been.

Okay, so here is the layout of Daniel's hand (I'm giving the name of the playing card, followed by the corresponding Tarot card name, and the links for each Tarot card are to an online site that provides illustrations from the commonly-used Rider-Waite Deck):

Past: Queen of Diamonds, or Queen of Pentacles

Present: Six of Clubs, or Six of Wands

Future: Three of Spades, or Three of Swords

Here are the definitions of these three cards given as if they were Tarot cards (taken from the online Tarotpedia site's definitions):

Queen of Pentacles: This card has two possible interpretations. Any time a face card shows up in a Tarot reading, it may indicate that it could either be an actual real live person who is close to the subject of the reading, or it could also represent some ideas or influences at play. Or it could be a combination of both. In this case, the Queen of Pentacles would represent a mature woman who is very "earthy", and who probably has a dark complexion or dark hair. If this card represented some influences, they would be:

• Nurturing, generous, resourcefulness
• Devotion to family and community
• Fertility, abundance and prosperity
• Sensuality

Six of Wands: This card represents the following influences:

• Victory, triumph through hard won battles, over stiff competition.
• Receiving praise, acclaim, and laurels for your victory.
• A warning in this card is that with such acclaim can easily come pride. Beware of that becoming prideful.
• Charisma

Three of Swords: This card represents the following influences:

• Cutting to the heart of a matter
• Betrayal in a relationship
• Heartbreak or sorrow. Also, the need to understand your sorrow.
• Severing emotional ties -- hence, a separation or divorce
• Loneliness
• An avoidance or deadening of our emotions or feelings. For example, being a workaholic or tending to over-intellectualize our experiences are a couple of ways to avoid feeling or experiencing our emotions. Thus, beware allowing our intellect to kill our emotions.

So, to do the reading, this would indicate that in Daniel's past there were influences at play that involved either a very earth mother type person, or that he was surrounded by a very warm, nurturing, supportive environment.

In Daniel's present he is undergoing a very difficult test, but he is doing okay at the present. There seems to be some warning, though, of being overly confident from success so far...

Daniel's future does not look too happy. The Three of Swords is a pretty complicated card, having several main influences, including over-intellectualising, distancing oneself from one's emotional or love life through overwork or running away. It also represents loneliness, heartbreak, emotional loss, lack of nurture. In other words, the Future for Daniel represents the complete 180 degree opposite of his Past!

Now, what was interesting to me in that scene was that Daniel got the third (Future) card wrong. Instead of him remembering it to be the Three of Spades, he thought it was the Ten of Cups. So, let's look at the Ten of Cups:

Ten of Hearts, or Ten of Cups

Influences:

• Abundant blessings and emotional well-being or fulfillment
• Joy and serenity of being at one with the people in your life
• A happy, stable relationship or home life
• The attainment of purity and happiness through the integration of your emotional experiences
• The Ten of Cups may signify a happy family.
• The Ten of Cups is a "Stage Card" which may imply an illusion of happiness in a relationship or it may indicate the ideal of a happy marriage or family. It also can say that joy comes from how we view our life, not from what happens to us.

So what this would mean (from my interpretation of it) is that Daniel WANTS his future to be a culmination of happiness, a successful marriage, a nurturing family life, etc. He wants the same thing that he has had in his Past.

BUT...

Instead, what it looks like he's going to be getting is heartache, betrayal, loneliness and sorrow. -- Saukkomies 12:50, 22 February 2008 (EST)

• Great theory! It is certainly a good possibility that the cards are meant to convey something. I'm not a Tarot expert, but it sounds like a good explanation. Not sure what it means in the grand scheme of things though... --Litany42 11:24, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• Perhaps in the "grand scheme of things" it means that Daniel is destined to have heartache, sadness, loneliness, and despair, when what he really wants is a happy family and home. -- Saukkomies 08:32, 23 February 2008 (EST)

• I know there had been some talk recently that Daniel Farraday may have been Ana-Lucia's Danny. She may represent the dark-haired, dark complexion earthy woman referenced by the queen of pentacles. Devotion to community being her profession as a police officer and the fertility a reference at her pregnancy. --CrystalSkull 12:26, 23 February 2008 (PST)

• Hey, maybe so! Of course we weren't shown the head of Daniel's wife in the scene where he's crying in front of the tv. Maybe she's the dark-haired woman...? -- Saukkomies 08:45, 24 February 2008 (EST)
• No, that woman was his caretaker, not his wife.--Bonefishj0e 06:28, 24 February 2008 (PST)
• This could be a way to reference the idea of an alteration in the timeline. If persons from the future (a taller Walt?) could influence the past, it may effect the outcome of the cards. The world says 3 of Spades while Daniel can sense the changed 10 of Hearts outcome? --Bdjsb7 09:09, 25 February 2008 (PST)

Unaswered Questions removal

the following questions should be removed:

• Who are eight initial survivors of flight 815 according to the story told by the Oceanic 6?
  • What happened to "the other two" (if there were 8 survivors but now we have Oceanic 6)?

because it doesn't matter who they are it's just a story made up by Jack. --CharlieReborn 10:10, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Story made up by someone, but it does not necessarily have to be Jack WCFrancis 10:34, 22 February 2008 (PST)

I don't see any reason to remove them, they seem like questions many viewers would ask. And I'll bet the show will reveal the answers. --Minderbinder 10:48, 22 February 2008 (PST)

I say leave them, most people do want to know who the eight/other two are. It would also be interesting to know why they would say those two people did survive instead of saying they died along with everyone else...Thelordnyax 11:03, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• I agree. Perhaps, in relation to the rest of the episode, one of the two who "died" was Claire. --Litany42 11:26, 22 February 2008 (PST)
• Not necessarily, Litany42. If Kate is claiming Aaron is her own son, then the O6 "story" probably does NOT have Claire as a survivor of the crash, just another passenger on the manifest who perished. Stuv 16:06, 22 February 2008 (PST)

My question was repeatedly removed with no discussion. I asked, "Why did the deal require Kate to stay in California?" It was removed because it supposedly isn't unusual to require a person on probation to stay in state. While I understand that, the way the scene was depicted clearly implied that there is significance to that portion of the discussion. Kate's lawyer questioned the provision, indicating that he thought it was unusual. Kate jumped at it. It seemed to be the clincher for her accepting the deal. Is there some better way to phrase the question?--Idledandy 21:47, 23 February 2008 (PST)

I think it's a valid UQ. There's clearly some significance to the terms of the plea deal. The writers are too economical to throw in useless dialogue. If this were the theory page, I'd take the next logical step and predict the future. Robert K S 21:51, 23 February 2008 (PST)

The question seems to be an attempt to highlight a plot point rather to actually seek an answer. People on probation have restrictions put on their movement all the time. Its just not unusual in the real world. That answers the actual question. The problem is that the real unaswered question here is an attempt to highlight what is seen as a signficant plot-point or to second-guess the intentions of the writers. And now in terms of justification, there are theories and interprentations of Kate or the attornies behavior. In order to make the question valid, you need to ask a question that doesn't have an obvious answer that has the appearance of looking for an answer. Dharmatel4 22:22, 23 February 2008 (PST)

As I tried to look at the issue from the opposite perspective, I came up with the same explanation for the question's removal after I posted my last message. So I agree with Dharmatel4. Robert K S 23:13, 23 February 2008 (PST)

So perhaps in light of all of this discussion, the UQ should read something along the lines of: "Why did Kate insist on accepting the 10-year probation deal despite her lawyer's advice not to?" --Litany42 07:12, 25 February 2008 (PST)

Given Kate's history of running, this seems like a setup by the writers of things to come. If the Oceanic Six return (or feel compelled to return) to the Island, she'll have to break the probation.--Spiral 19:45, 28 February 2008 (PST)

Ben's Spy

I was thinking about who could be the spy and it hit me, what if it was michael!--ConnerXcountry57 10:10, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Yes, a lot of people (myself included) hae already discussed this on the Discussion page for "The Economist", but yes, I htink that it is VERY likely...Thelordnyax 11:04, 22 February 2008 (PST)

I first suggested this on the discussion page for Confirmed Dead, so if it turns out to be true, I get the credit! Sithboy 13:20, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Although a far better theory right now is Miles. If you watch and listen to the dialog between Miles and Ben, it is pretty clear they are talking in code and Miles is giving Ben information about what the Freighter folk know or are planning.--Chuck 14:35, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• I second that. I made this point on the theories page - the man on the boat is Miles who is delivering a message to Ben via Kate. Locke has figured this out.Wyz sub10 13:31, 27 February 2008 (PST)

• This is a good theory about Michael being the spy - Ben told him the leave on a specific heading of 270. Ben would know where they were if indeed they were looking for the island. Ben can observe the outside world with ease ( well, used to, in the Flame station). --Devinma 14:14, 24 February 2008 (PST)

Though the man need not be a man. Why not Zoe Bell's character? Tigerlilylynn 16:06, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• Because that is just a random guess. Watch the scene between Miles and Ben again -- they are communicating so much more than the words they are saying! If Miles is not Ben's man on the boat, he is certainly trying to tell Ben something without the dumb chick (Kate) understanding.--Chuck 12:37, 23 February 2008 (PST)
  • I didn't go after the Miles theory and all theories are guesses at this point. What I'm saying is that Ben is Ben (and the writers are who they are) and that is the sort of thing Ben would say. Using man in the sense of units or pawns without a gender connotation and especially to throw off suspicion. I see no reason that Miles has to be the spy and that this had to be code. It could just be Miles scamming again, badly. There was something weird there, certainly, but I'm not sure any of us know anything right now...other than Kate is stupid. What answer was she hoping for that was worth the risk? Either he knew, which was hella likely, or he didn't know and she just alerted him. Drr! Tigerlilylynn 14:18, 24 February 2008 (PST)

I agree it's a fascinating idea that Michael could be Ben's man, but then we'd have to go back to the end of season 2 and find out that more happened than we were shown. It would seem a little cheated or cheap if they said, "Oh, by the way, Michael and Ben made another deal that totally changed the game and we just waited 2 years to tell you." Unless there's more to Michael's pre-crash storyline, it doesn't seem likely.--bq 21:29, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Couldn't Ben have contacted Michael while he was on his boat? That's how I've been imagining things. Merick 13:37, 23 February 2008 (PST)

If Michael and Walt were already on the boat, away from the island, why would he agree tp help Ben?

• We have seen Walt back on the island, that could/would be leverage for Ben on Michael to be a spy. --Devinma 14:14, 24 February 2008 (PST)
  • We have seen what appeared to be Walt, but it's entirely likely that the Walt we have seen is not Walt, but the same energy/entity/whatever that appeared to Eko as Yemi, or Ben as his mother, or Jack as Christian, etc. Michael and Walt left the island, they won. Ben got his tumor removed, Michael and Walt were given a boat. I'm sure we'll see them both again, but I just don't see Ben as having any leverage over Michael after that point.--bq 22:04, 25 February 2008 (PST)
  • We have also seen what appears to be Jacob, but his house moved and/or is not what we thought it was too. ..and Christian Shepard was referred to in the 1st flash-forward, his body was never found. Sure, Yemi, Ben's mom, Kate's horse, Sayeed's cat, Dave....the list goes on. I'm just saying its an idea...--Devinma 18:40, 1 March 2008 (PST)

Door locks

When were the door locks installed in the Barracks homes? I would think that the DHARMA folks would be idealistic enough not to use them. And the attack by Hostiles of the classroom when Ben was a child resulted in a chain and padlock being used to keep Hostiles out. Was Ben's house the only one with a lock on it? Perhaps added by Ben in a moment of lucid paranoia? Or is breaking the window to get in just a dramatic moment so viewers wouldn't ask why Locke didn't lock the door? Am I thinking too much? WCFrancis 10:40, 22 February 2008 (PST)

well, they do have a "sonic weapon fence", so why not throw in a few locks as well. secondly, locks can also be used for privacy, not only security.

Not one egg town but two

A Google of "Eggtown" brings up 63 pages of Lost-related info (the downside of a popular show, I suppose). However I was able to dig up information that relates to the Depression-era, egg town theory.

There is a place in Florida called Two Egg, which supposedly got its name during the Great Depression because people would barter eggs for other items. A travelling salesman who passed through the town on a regular basis took note of it. At some point, either the salesman or the shopkeeper called it a "two-egg town" and the name stuck. They dropped the "town" part and officially called it "Two Egg" in 1940.

This may be the reference -- after all, Locke cooks up the "last two eggs" for Ben. We also learn that in effect, Locke is trying to trade these two eggs for information from Ben. The plan backfires, and Ben actually gets the upper hand on Locke once again.

The whole episode is also about doing deals during desperate times.

Perhaps not solid proof of the reference (and definitely obscure!) but the story of Two Egg overlays nicely with the Eggtown episode title and plot.

Here are some references:

• http://twoeggfla.blogspot.com/2007/10/how-two-egg-got-its-name.html
• http://www.rootsweb.com/~fljackso/twoegg/twoegg.html
• http://www.twoeggfla.com/history.html

--Litany42 10:55, 22 February 2008 (PST)

This does not count as a reference because it has nothing to do with the material currently in the article. Dharmatel4 13:30, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• I agree -- I'm not saying definitively by any means that this is "The Reference", just that it is a possibility. The "references" I included with this discussion are for entertainment value only, and should not be taken as a legally-binding contract by any party. --Litany42 13:35, 22 February 2008 (PST)

The comment wasn't necessarly directed at you. People have attempted to cite this in the article at least twice as a source for the name section. Dharmatel4 00:02, 23 February 2008 (PST)

• I suspect with a reference this obscure, the producers will have to comment on it and/or provide an answer at some point. --Litany42 06:07, 23 February 2008 (PST)

Blooper Removal

The following blooper should be removed:

"Kate was arrested by a federal marshal, faces at least one federal charge (assaulting a federal agent), and is remanded into federal custody; however, according to the court's seal and court officers' uniforms, she is being tried in a California state court."

Individuals can be charged with State and/or Federal crimes in a State court, thus, this is not a blooper. --LOSTinDC 11:16, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Can you cite an example where someone was put on trial for a state murder charge in the courts of another state? Dharmatel4 12:21, 22 February 2008 (PST)

It happens all the time. If you want me to go into Lexis Nexis and do a search, I can. It's not unheard of- for example, if I broke numerous laws in CA, but also broke the law of another State (say Iowa), the two States may file charges and either one could seek to have the cases consolidated. The State with the more numerous charges would have a better argument for having the trial there. Why would they consolidate? - one jury, hearing the same evidence all at once, because the crimes stem from the same string of events, or is based on the same evidence. It reduces the opportunity for one jury to make findings that would conflict with the decisions of another jury. The difference would come in which State laws the jury applied. The jury would be instructed to apply CA laws to certain crimes, and Iowa laws to other crimes.

Here's what we know: she's being charged with a mixture of Federal crimes and State crimes - at least one of which occurred in Iowa; we know that before the crash she is being taken by a U.S. Marshall to Los Angeles - for whatever reason. In this episode it appears that she is being tried in a CA State Court ("People vs. Austen" not "U.S. vs. Austen"; LA County Sheriff, not a U.S. Marshall) however, she is taken into "federal custody". If she is being tried in CA State Ct, there are a number of reasons why she would be tried there instead of Iowa and they would still include the Iowa charge. If a substantial part of her crimes occurred in California, the CA State Ct could seek jurisdiction. Under judicial procedure rules, you can get a change of venue for something as simple as your main witness is unable to travel great distances - especially if that's due to physical ailment. --LOSTinDC 12:45, 22 February 2008 (PST)

We know what the charges against Kate were as per what was given in court. I can't think of any of them that were committed in California let alone a *majority* of them. The murder and associated fraud was in Iowa. The various crimes committed during the hospital shootout were in Iowa. A change of venue from Iowa to the California State courts in a case like this is extremely unlikley. While a change of venue is possible in various circumstances, a change of venue to the state courts of a different state is an extremely, extremly unlikely situation. Dharmatel4 16:23, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Update: Whoever added: "Federal District Courts have exclusive jurisdiction over the federal crimes for which Kate was being prosecuted." Please discuss here before adding. Not only are we discussing whether to remove the blooper completely - but this statement is just false. State courts have jurisdiction over federal crimes. --LOSTinDC 14:10, 22 February 2008 (PST)

You're simply incorrect here. Federal Courts have exclusive jurisdiction over Federal Criminal Cases. There are certain criminal acts for which a person could be charged with in either State or Federal jurisdictions, such as murder of an FBI agent. The case of Timothy McVeigh is instructive here: "The U.S. Department of Justice brought federal charges against McVeigh for causing the deaths of the eight federal officers ... it could not bring charges against McVeigh for the remaining 160 murders in federal court because those deaths fell under the jurisdiction of the state of Oklahoma. After McVeigh's conviction and sentencing, The State of Oklahoma did not file murder charges against Mcveigh for the other 160 deaths, as he had already been sentenced to death in the federal trial." In short, state charge; state trial. Federal charge; federal trial.--Eyeful Tower 15:43, 22 February 2008 (PST)

You're right Eyeful Tower - federal crimes are exclusively federal jurisdiction. I confused it with civil suits under federal law. Sorry about that - I think the current blooper information is accurate now. --LOSTinDC 07:35, 25 February 2008 (PST)

Cards

3-6-Q isnt it 3 6 12 ? Seeing Some Numbers :D --Ar-ras 11:31, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Yes...3, 6, and 12 ARE numbers...but i don't see how they relate to anything else on the show...perhaps you can clarify? Thelordnyax 11:14, 25 February 2008 (PST)

3 = 3 x 1

6 = 3 x 2

12 = 3 x 4 = 6 x 2

--Ar-ras 17:18, 28 February 2008 (PST)

yes, you've got your multiplication down...good job...but has nothing to do with anything and no relevance...Thelordnyax 12:16, 7 March 2008 (PST)

VALIS by Philip K Dick, the novel Locke chooses for Ben to "read it again, you might catch something you missed."

VALIS by Philip K Dick VALIS is a 1981 science fiction novel by Philip K. Dick. The title is an acronym for Vast Active Living Intelligence System, Dick's gnostic vision of one aspect of God... (from Wikipedia). Sounds like the Island

"read it again, you might catch something you missed."

Locke says this to Ben, in reference to the novel. Could this be a suggestion to viewers, a hint we missed something, a reference to LOST's tendency to slip in important details subtly, or perhaps just a shameless plug for ABC.com?

That's kinda what I thought when I first heard it... I'll need to go back and watch it a second time some time soon. Did anyone who's seen it more than once notice something major on a second viewing? Jimbo the tubby 11:46, 22 February 2008 (PST)

I just thought that if I had read book, I would understand Lcoke's shot at Ben. did anyone that did read the book know what he is talking about? --CharlieReborn 12:05, 22 February 2008 (PST)

There are a lot of interesting parallels between VALIS and Lost. The main being the idea that in VALIS, time is an illusion. Other relevant themes include the revelation of information through outside sources that only a few priveledged individuals receive. There are also some intersting parallels between the main character, Horselover Fat (who is really PK Dick), and Jack, namely their impulse to help others, and their despondence over the failure to do so. There's another interesting idea in the idea in VALIS, one that those who eat and drink the physical embodiment of God (the Logos) which is in and of itself a living organism, that an individual will become one with divinity. As is stated on the main page, the idea of the child as an incarnation of the saviour is present in VALIS, and could be extrapolated onto the overarching story. There are also interesting parallels to the character of Richard, in that the saviour is a physical incarnation of knowledge, and is constantly reborn. Furthermore, his students are able to attain immortality. They do so (again by eating a living organism that is actually God/knowledge) and awaken when shown the symbol of the Christian fish. Dick believed that he himself went through this, and was actually living in the First Century CE (around 80AD), and that time was an illusion cast over the world by a demon. I think that this is a subtle implication to look at PK Dick, and is most likely a red herring. VALIS is actually kind of a difficult read, because it tends to ramble, and the fact that Horselover Fat is presented at first as being a pseudonym for PK Dick, but then develops into his own unique character. There's a ton of stuff that i didn't go into, but can if anyone else thinks its relevant --TheTruffleShuffle 19:45, 24 February 2008 (PST)

Seven of Spades In Aaron's Room - Tarot Interpretation

If you followed my previous posting above in this discussion thread I mentioned I was looking at the cards from the perspective that they were Tarot cards instead of regular playing cards. That in mind, someone from another board (the Fuselage) posted a comment asking what would be the Tarot interpretation of the Seven of Spades card in Aaron's room at Kate's house. Lo and behold, this really turned into a great find! Here's my response to this person's question:

"Originally Posted by mrain01 What is the Tarot meaning of the 7 of spades (easter egg in Aaron's room)?"

Oh BOY! I think you really hit on something there, mrain!!

So, as a refresher, here's the screencap showing the Seven of Spades pasted to the painting of the bicycle riding boy.

Here's the image of the Rider-Waite Seven of Swords (which would be the Tarot equivalent to the Seven of Spades).

And here's the meaning:

Taking risks (rationally or irrationally) Partial success; Partial failure Dishonesty; Deceit; Betrayal; Deception; Underhanded tricks; Mischief; Treachery; Sabotage; Theft Taking the easy way out ... Acting shamefully or without honor Running away from, or turning your back on, your responsibilities. (For example, a “deadbeat dad”) Getting away with something wrong or unethical Leveling the playing field Thinking outside of the box Guard your belongings and take precautions--something may come up missing.

So - What my usual reaction to seeing the Seven of Swords is: THEFT. It can also mean Kidnapping. And of course, as said above: taking the easy way out, and acting shamefully and without honor.

WOHO! Is this a clue or what?!?! -- Saukkomies 14:51, 22 February 2008 (EST)

• I could be wrong, but I looked at the screencap, and it looked like a 6 to me.--bq 21:35, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• Yes, it looks like a 6 because you can only see 6 of the 7 spade symbols on the card. However, if you look at it closely you can see that the hand in the painting that is holding the card has its thumb covering one of the spades - the one in the center of the card. You can also see that the written number on the card is a 7, not a 6. So, yeah, it may at first glance look like a 6, but it is a 7, which also perhaps may be a clue to something - possibly that the Oceanic Six is actually the Oceanic 7? Who knows? -- Saukkomies 06:59, 23 February 2008 (EST)

• Looking at the screencap, is that also a playing card partially hidden beneath the seven of spades? Looks like it might be a heart card, no idea what number. Perhaps someone with a 720p/1080p recording can investigate. -- g00nerz 13:07, 25 February 2008 (GMT)

Aside from the card on the picture, I don't think anyone has pointed out that the boy riding the bike image is similar to the image inserted into (or accidentally left on) one of the DHARMA training videos. -- georgiapeachwatcher 16:20, 23 February 2008 (EST)

Another strange painting

When Kate enters Aaron's room a painting is visible behind her in the corridor containing writing in the top, a child (?) standing in some kind of opening and an abstract house in the center part, and a piano keyboard at the bottom. Can anyone make out what language the writing is in or even what it says? Oodles 17:11, 25 February 2008 (PST)

Jack's Testimony & Blooper Removal

Another blooper that should be removed-

"Jack testifies in that the plane wreck was found in the South Pacific Ocean, in Confirmed Dead, the ROV found the plane in the Sudan Trench off of Indonesia, which is part of the Indian Ocean."

Why is this a blooper? Jack's exact statement is - "Oceanic Flight 815, which crash landed on an island in the south pacific" This seems to imply that no one believes that the plane that was found in the Sunda trench, with all "confirmed dead" on board was the actual Oceanic Flight 815... Jack clearly states that the flight crash landed on an island in the South Pacific, not in the middle of the ocean. Which raises the question - what fallout has occurred from that revelation? Does the rest of the world question why that plane that was supposedly confirmed to be 815 - and is now known to not be 815 - was at the bottom of the ocean? --LOSTinDC 13:11, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• Agreed. I think it is pretty obvious now that "the world" at this point knows the details about the plane crash, and that the Oceanic 6 were on an island on the South Pacific. I don't think we can yet say from our point of view that the wreckage at the bottom of the Sunda Trench was faked -- there may be some other explanation based on vile vortices, etc. that hasn't been revealed yet -- but whatever the answer, it seems the world knows it at the point of the timeline. This is further supported by the fact that Kate tells Jack in the underground garage "I don't know how many times I've heard you recount that story now..." (or something to that effect). --Litany42 13:30, 22 February 2008 (PST)
• Jack mentions them being saved out of the water by Kate though, and making it to shore. So maybe he mispoke and they did land in the water and swam to the island? --Frenkmelk 16:37, 22 February 2008 (PST)

• The Sunda Trench is at least 5,000 miles from the assumed, approximate position of the island, so that would be quite a swim... Besides, in Confirmed Dead, the news report says that everyone on board was accounted for, which means something else was going on (probably faked wreckage)! --Litany42 06:16, 23 February 2008 (PST)

• It is obvious from the conversation between Kate and Jack in the parking garage that the testimony Jack gave is part of some made up cover story; therefore, information from the testimony shouldn't be written as bloopers. Conversation:

Jack, slams his vehicle door shut: "Hey"

Kate, turns and smiles: "How did you know I'd be here?"

Jack: "Your lawyer gave me the heads-up. He owed me one."

Kate: "Thank you. For saying what you did."

Jack: "You're welcome."

Kate: "You know, Jack, I've heard you say that story so many times; I'm starting to think you believe it."

Jack, looks around, sighs, and changes subject (or gets to the heart of why he was waiting for her).

-- LOSTonthisdarnisland 20:52, 23 February 2008 (PST)

• I edited this back in. It's clear following the airing of the finale this was indeed an error and a big one. I'm sure it will be dubbed on the DVD. Furthermore in TTLG Jack says "i'm sick of lying".--Anfield Fox 02:03, 2 June 2008 (PDT)

Snipped:

* During Jack's testimony (and in the context of his lie) he says "she tried to save the other two" before being cut off in mid sentence. However in the enhanced and extended broadcast of "There's No Place Like Home, Part 1" it is revealed that three people (Boone, Libby and Charlie) survived the crash but ultimately perished. When he said eight survived the crash he was obviously counting Aaron as one of the survivors despite him not having been born.

The "other two" refers to Libby and Boone, who died quickly as a direct result of the crash (according to the cover story.) Charlie is said to have drowned much later. Idledandy 23:14, 2 August 2008 (PDT)

The Trivia About Sayid-centric Episodes

Seems a little convoluted, no? ESachs 15:56, 22 February 2008 (PST)

-I agree, I think it should be removed. --Redsoxfaneb 18:23, 22 February 2008 (PST)

The Straume-Candle Connection (or lack thereof)

Numerous people have suggested that Miles is the son of Marvin Candle. While I agree that it is possible, and maybe even a good idea, there is zero evidence that this is the case, except the obvious ethnic similarities between the two. This sort of came up in the Confirmed Dead talk, when some thought that Eko was the kid in the picture on Mrs. Gardner's wall. Now, I'll take the high road and assume that it's because of the unmistakably human habit of wanting to see patterns where none exist, instead of, "Look, they're both Asian, they must be related." Either way, maybe we should have another page for each episode, and instead of calling it Theories, we can call it Wild Speculation. --bq 08:51, 23 February 2008 (PST)

Missing episode reference?

In the episode "Greatest Hits" (http://www.lostpedia.com/wiki/Greatest_Hits#Real-time_events) of season 3 Desmond states he had had a flash - one of his visions - and seen Claire and Aaron getting into helicopter and leaving the Island. I guess that is somehow related to what we have seen in this episode. Isn't it? --Tofsla 10:22, 23 February 2008 (PST)

• Not really- we didn't see Claire and Aaron getting in a helicopter.--Chocky 17:09, 23 February 2008 (PST)

And not everything that Desmond sees ends up happening.Liquidcow 09:30, 24 February 2008 (PST)

so this pretty much means Charlie died for nothing.--ConnerXcountry57 15:16, 25 February 2008 (PST)

Only if you consider six or more people getting off the island "nothing". I don't. --Minderbinder 14:25, 26 February 2008 (PST)

• Perhaps in Desmond's vision, he saw a woman holding Aaron get on a helicopter...maybe he didn't see the woman and only assumed it was Claire? This is just a theory and even I don't believe it. As we saw one of Desomond's visions (the one where Charlie got hit with the spear trap) was pretty vivid.

Judge in the court case

Does anyone have a possible anagram for the judge, Arthur Galzethron?? That's a pretty funny name.--Mepris25

How about "Larger Tzar Hunt Ho"--Bonefishj0e 14:37, 23 February 2008 (PST)

The reincarnation of villain Megtron in Transformers: The Movie was "Galvetron". That's about the closest reference I can come up with! Robert K S 14:53, 23 February 2008 (PST)

Why did Kate care what Miles knew about her?

That's the only piece of this episode I'm missing. Regardless of what Miles knew about her, the authorities back in the outside world wouldn't have forgotten about her. So why did she care about Miles's awareness of her fugitive status, and why was she willing to risk so much to get that information from him? Robert K S 16:45, 23 February 2008 (PST)

If they had no idea, she could have made a new identity to evade the authorities. She was afraid they'd lock her up or at least tip the authorities when they were rescued and she would have no chance of escape. --macosx 16:48, 23 February 2008 (PST)

I thought the same thing macosx did. However, when Kate does something I don't understand I always just think "It's Kate, she never does anything rational so no sense in worrying about it."--HaloOfTheSun 16:55, 23 February 2008 (PST)

If the people on the freighter didn't know who Kate was, she could give them a false surname. Up to that point, she wasn't sure whether they knew as anything more than 'Kate' because surnames of the survivors hadn't been used (aside from Locke's). I think she had it in her mind that she could jump ship or have the freighter drop her off at some civilised port before they officially landed back in the States (with media coverage). The authorities would no longer look for Kate Austin if they thought she died in the crash. I agree it's not very rational (anyone could mention that she jumped/got dropped off, which would raise questions), but I think she was grasping at straws to resume a normal life outside the island. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 20:37, 23 February 2008 (PST)

• I agree she was grasping at straws, but it seems pretty obvious that she is trying to figure out what her chances of getting off the island and "hiding" really are. It just makes sense in terms of her deciding whether or not to stay on the island with Sawyer. It also raises the question: if other people went into hiding (besides the Oceanic 6) then why wasn't she one of them? The answer may be that nobody leaves the island unnoticed -- alive, anyway. Doesn't bode well for those who want off the island... --Litany42 06:16, 24 February 2008 (PST)

Another Card in the Painting!

Someone from the Fuselage, who has HDTV, caught that there is actually another second card that is in the painting of the boy on the bicycle in Aaron's room! Here's the screencap. It appears to be a Heart - and also looks like it could be the Queen. Working from this hypothesis, and using the method of analyzing these cards as if they were from a Tarot deck, here's what my take on this is:

whenever a face card (King, Queen, Knight, Page) comes up in a Tarot reading, it may indicate several possibilities. Unlike the numbered cards which basically have a straightforward meaning of certain influences, the face cards can have the same straightforward meaning, or they can indicate a person close to the subject - or even the subject him or herself. Or, to make things even more complicated, a face card can indicate a combination of a person plus some influences at work, too. Heh. I hope that all makes sense...

Anyway, the Queen of Cups is, of course, a face card, so it could mean that there is someone close to the subject (and I'm taking the subject to be Aaron, since it seems as if that's Aaron riding the bicycle), or it could also mean some influences that are in Aaron's life or the life of this other person. It is important to note that, although the person indicated by the Queen of Cups is likely to be a woman, it is not necessarily the case; the person could also be male.

So I'll first describe the person indicated by the card, and then the influences. Again, I'm taking these things from very generic and widely accepted sources so as to eliminate any possibility of misinterpretation (since this would be the same thing, I believe, that TPTB would be using if they're intending these cards to in fact represent something from the plot). The descriptions I'm taking from the Tarotpedia web site, and I'm using the Rider-Waite Tarot Deck for the pictures, since that is THE most widely used deck in North America, and possibly the world.

Queen of Hearts = Queen of Cups:

Influences:

• A communion with others or empathy for them

• Dedication to home and family

• Sensitivity and an empathic nature

• Intuitiveness

Description of a person represented by the Queen of Cups:

Someone (most likely female) who has reddish blonde hair, a reddish complexion, who is very intuitive, sensitive, caring, nurturing and loving, and who places family above everything.

Now, for the position of the Queen of Cups behind the Seven of Swords. There are several ways to look at this. It isn't as straightforward as Daniel's cards - they were obviously layed out to represent a Past/Present/Future reading (or I should say that would be the basic conclusion if it had been a Tarot reading):

1) In a traditional "spread", there are two cards that are layed down first - they are supposed to indicate the two main influences at play in the subject's life at the present time. They may be read several ways: one way is to see them as being two opposing forces in the subject's life, another would be that together they form a synthesis - as if they were in fact one card instead of two, and the other way to read them would be that the subject has two choices in his or her life - two paths to choose from.

2) These two cards represent two separate things that both are connected to the subject (Aaron). Each one describes two major aspects of his life, but are not to be combined together in any way, as is done in the first way above.

3) The third way to look at these two cards is that the bottom card (Queen of Cups) has been "trumped", so to speak, by the top card (Seven of Swords). So in this case the Seven would have cancelled out the Queen. The Queen would be a major influence in the subject's life but then was replaced or cancelled out by the Seven.

So, since there is more than just one obvious way to interpret these two cards, I'll do the best I can with these three ways I mentioned above (and there very well may be another way of looking at this, and if so, I'd love to hear anyone's alternate interpretation). So here goes, these are my interpretations for each of the three ways:

1) In this way of looking at the cards, we see two forces that may either be opposing each other, or are combining to form a synthesis of the two cards. So, if it was opposing, the reading of the two cards would be that there is a force at play in Aaron's life from the Queen of Cups that represents either a person or some influences, and this force is countered with the Seven of Swords. The Queen probably represents either Aaron himself, or Claire (I don't think it would represent Kate, since it would be someone who is blonde, not brunette). On the other hand, it represents that Aaron has a strong sensitive, intuitive nature (it could also mean that Claire has a sensitive intuitive nature). It is a "good" card - one that implies that whoever is represented by it has a lot of insight and love.

So then we have the Seven to deal with - which as we've already seen is not such a "good" card. It represents theft, kidnapping (possibly), betrayal, lies, deceit, taking the easy way out, and cheating. So in this first way of reading the cards this would mean that the subject (Aaron) is being influenced by these two forces that are seeming at odds with each other - on one hand there is this sensitive, intuitive, loving and nurturing influence, and on the other one that has torn him from his mother. Perhaps, though, these two forces are not opposing each other, but are merely just describing his world at the moment.

2) In the second method we look at these two cards as being separate, and although they both describe the influences at play in Aaron's life, are not really connected to each other. So in this way we'd see that the Queen is describing a sensitive, intuitive, nurturing and loving person - perhaps Aaron himself, and the Seven is describing the situation he finds himself in - having been taken from Claire (whether she is still alive or not is irrelevant to this reading).

3) The third way of looking at the cards is the most dramatic of all. In this case I'd say that the Queen represents not Aaron, but Claire. It basically says that Aaron was surrounded by the love and nurturing of his mother, who was intuitive and sensitive, but then he was abruptly torn away from her.

~~

So, what to make of it? Well, that's the tricky part, since it could mean a number of things. I think that it comes down to two separate generalized interpretations:

1) Aaron is a sensitive, intuitive, loving boy who was taken from Claire through a less than honorable way.

~or~

2) Aaron had been in the care of his loving, sensitive, intuitive mother Claire, but was taken away from her through a less than honorable way.

The difference between these two interpretations is who exactly does the Queen of Cups represent - Aaron or Claire. It's rather obvious it is one of them - or perhaps there's a third interpretation which would indicate the Queen might represent both Aaron and Claire... Hmm.. But anyway, that's my own interpretation of it. If anyone has any other way of looking at this, I'd be most happy to hear about it. -- Saukkomies 08:51, 24 February 2008 (EST)

• I like the Tarot connection, but I'm a little uncomfortable with your interpretations. I don't think that Kate "ripped Aaron" away from Claire, or kidnapped him in any way. Kate is obviously uncomfortable even picking up babies -- what is her motivation for snatching one? Claire could easily catch up with her at the trial but doesn't -- does this mean Kate killed her? Why wouldn't Jack be more upset with Kate if any of the above were true? Not to mention the fact that the freighties obviously know that Aaron is Claire's by now (Charlotte already talked to Claire about Aaron), so either there are a lot of people complicit in the kidnapping, or Kate killed quite a few people. If the seven of swords represents lies and deceit, it might simply represent the fact that Kate is not really Aaron's mother. The seven of swords might just represent the episode itself -- there were a lot of lies, deceit, and trickery going on in Eggtown. --Litany42 06:33, 24 February 2008 (PST)

• Yes, this is a possibility. However, look at how the cards are placed in front of Aaron in the painting. This seems to indicate that the cards are refering directly to Aaron. The Seven of Swords is all about theft and betrayal - it's the major aspect of that card. And since it is layed on top of the Queen of Cups (who I take as representing Claire), it means that it has "trumped" the Queen. I just see this as quite plainly saying that Aaron has been stolen from Claire. Of course, this is an interpretation of these cards, but I think this is what TPTB are trying to convey by including them in that painting the way they did... -- Saukkomies 10:06, 24 February 2008 (EST)

• Am I the only one who doesn't see a Queen of Hearts in that capture? Could someone please give idiot-proof directions? --Bagpuss 08:58, 25 February 2008 (PST)

• It seems to be UNDER the other card... There's something red, and heart-shaped.

• I don't see that at all. Looks to me like a hand holding the card with a thumb obscuring part of the bottom of the card and fingers visible over the top of the card. I don't see anything that looks like a queen or a heart.

• It's right here. --Litany42 06:40, 26 February 2008 (PST)
• My imagination won't interpret that as a queen of hearts.--Bagpuss 09:15, 26 February 2008 (PST)

I was skeptical at first, but it does appear to be the top of a queen of hearts, but it looks as though, when you look at it, the queen is on the left and the heart is on the right...when in any standard deck the heart is on the left and the queen on the right...simply an artist error, i guess...Thelordnyax 12:42, 26 February 2008 (PST)

Should be phrased "How did Kate come to be Aaron's mother?"

At the moment the question is phrased as such:

• Why is Kate calling herself Aaron's mother?

Now, this is probably the exact question that came up in everone's mind at the end of the episode. However, it is a premature question.
If you give the facts that were given in this episode some thought, you will come to realize that Kate *is*, currently, taking the role of Aaron's mother

Here are the facts:

• Kate called Aaron "my son" when she and Jack were talking in private. -- meaning that Jack, that has lived through whatever events that led to the situation with Kate and Aaron, absolutely agrees that Kate is taking the role of Aaron's mother.
• Kate's mother calls Aaron her grandson.
• Aaron calls Kate "mommy". -- Aaron himself considers Kate to be his mother.

If anyone has any facts (not theories) to contradict this, please post them below. --CharlieReborn 11:37, 24 February 2008 (PST)

The objection is that Kate is not Aaron's mother. Claire is Aaron's mother. Kate did not "come to be" Aaron's mother. Phrase it differently with taking on the role' or any other way that does not say that Kate *is* Aaron's mother if you don't like the alternative that was offered. Dharmatel4 13:23, 24 February 2008 (PST)

What does the bearded man in the crowd say?

In the first flash-forward of this episode, Kate is getting out of the car to a swarm of people/press. One of the men in this crowd is a surly man with a beard. He shouts something to Kate (4:50 into the e), and I can't quite make it out. Does anybody have any idea what he is saying? --Peglegpete 08:54, 25 February 2008 (PST)

It's actually already stated under Trivia in the article; the man's audio is reversed, and when played back the right way round, it's clear that he's saying "We hate you!".--Bohrok Awakener 11:05, 25 February 2008 (PST)

Michael does not appear in this episode

It says this in the trivia section on at least three episodes this season, that i noticed, including Eggtown. Is this intentional? Hasn't he NOT been in a lot of episodes? I understand that many think he's Ben's man on the boat, but we have no proof that he's been added back to the cast? Thelordnyax 11:35, 25 February 2008 (PST)

Harold Perrineau is credited for every episode in Season 4 so far.--Baker1000 11:52, 25 February 2008 (PST)

He hasn't appeared since season 2. He is listed in the credits because he is considered a regular on the show and as such his contract stipulates he be listed whether he appears in a given episode or not. This was covered a bit in the latest official podcast. --Minderbinder 11:53, 25 February 2008 (PST)

Huh, i dinnae know that...thanks for the info.Thelordnyax 14:03, 25 February 2008 (PST)

• Michael's actor is listed in the credits because it is no secret he is returning to the show. If his name suddenly appeared on one episode it would give away the reveal. Instead he is listed on the credits of every show making the viewer question if this is finally the episode where his whereabouts will be revealed.

General trivia image?

What's the significance of the image of the painting in Aaron's room in the general trivia section? Was there a trivia point that was removed and the image was left there? -- Graft   talk   contributions  14:53, 25 February 2008 (PST)

Time Frame Of Flash Forward In Trivia Section

In the trivia section there is a piece about when the flash forward occurs based on the age of Aaron. I don't think this is a valid argument since Walt grew significantly in his month absence from the island. Goldfoot 18:05 pm, 25 February 2008 (EST)

Walt may have grown faster, but this doesn't mean that he aged three years in one year...he would still be the same age (in years old). It would be the same for Aaron, just because he's grown faster, that wouldn't make his age different...he would still be a "Two-Year Old Boy". Which may explain why most viewers think he's too big for a two-year old. :D Thelordnyax 18:43, 25 February 2008 (PST)

Moved from main article (trivia):

* The flashforward takes place between November 3, 2006, and November 1, 2007, because Aaron was born on November 2, 2004. The credits credit him as a 2-year-old boy. It can also be assumed it took place before Jack goes crazy and grows a beard, so really between November 4, 2006, and about March 2007, taking into consideration the time it took Jack to grow the beard.

This is not persuasive, it is based on facts outside the episode itself and is contradicted by other statements. There is an interview of an actor that contradicts this calculation. (I am not disclosing to avoid too much spoilage.) --Chuck 17:34, 26 February 2008 (PST)

Aaron/O6 edit?

The question of whether Aaron is in the O6 was removed with the edit summary "aaron is not in the oceanic 6, as per the podcast" - what is this referring to? I just watched the newest podcast and didn't hear any mention of Aaron and the O6? What's up with that? --Minderbinder 12:05, 27 February 2008 (PST)

Actually, I think I messed that up... They confirmed that Jack, Kate, Sayid and Hurley as being memebers of the Oceanic Six and that the other 2 had yet to be revealed. I thought that that podcast was from after Eggtown, but I think it was actually after The Economist. But if it had been after Eggtown, then if Aaron had been one of the Six, then he would've been revealed by that episode, and they would've confirmed it. But that's not the case because of the podcast date, sorry for the confusion. Please feel free to re-add the question, I won't take it back down. Jimbo the tubby 12:19, 27 February 2008 (PST)

Swan-branded food in the Barracks

We can see in Eggtown that the Others' food items are branded with the Swan logo (and it doesn't seem to be food from the supply drop that the Losties brought with them). I don't know if it's worth adding to the Unanswered questions list but it does raise some questions especially when considering the long distance between the Swan and the Barracks (Are the periodic supply drops actually intended for the Others? or do the Others just steal the food from the Swan?). Some suggestions?--Oliverdevor 13:45, 27 February 2008 (PST)

The drops are actually for the DHARMA people on the island; evidently DHARMA does not know that their people were killed en masse. The food the Losties received was a misdropped shipment. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 23:37, 27 February 2008 (PST)

A misdropped shipment? How do you know that? I don't recall that being mentioned on the show so far. Is that a speculation or a spoiler? For all we know, the supply drop remains a total mystery. We don't know whether the food the Losties found was an exceptional event or one of the regular supply drops that for some reason were never discontinued.--Oliverdevor 12:22, 28 February 2008 (PST)

The two "lost" crash victims

The story that eight survived the crash and that two subsequently died before rescue is part of the lies Jack is tired of telling. It doesn't matter to the story. This is consistent with comments made by Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelhof in the 02/29/2008 podcast. I removed the unanswered question regarding these two because of this. WCFrancis 12:56, 29 February 2008 (PST)

Of course it's part of the lies, but I don't see why that would keep it from being a question people want the answer to. Jack and company obviously had a fake story, we still want to know the rest of the details of it, even if it is fake. --Minderbinder 13:04, 29 February 2008 (PST)

We may "want" to know to satisfy curiousity, but TPTB were specifically posed this question and they answered it. Therefore, it's no longer an "unanswered question", which are really supposed to be reserved for mysteries we expect to be resolved. Robert K S 21:16, 29 February 2008 (PST)

I agree here. It's one of those really insignificant things where, at least as far as the producers are concerned, an answer is not required. For example, does it really matter who the people were that died when the deck collapsed as mentioned in "Dave"? Does it matter who Shannon's French boyfriend was? Does it matter if the Other woman who died at childbirth in "One of Us" was Ethan's wife? Despite what some fans believe, not everything on this show has a significant meaning. Otherwise, the show would take several more seasons to explain the past of secondary and incidential characters, which are not really relevant to the plot. The bottom line is: The official cover story for the "Oceanic Six" is that eight people survived the crash, and because it's rather unlikely that none of them would have any problems, two of them are said to have died. The remaining six are what matters. "Unanswered questions" are things deliberately set up to evoke further curiosity from the audience. When the producers explicitly state that it doesn't really matter, it's simply a plot device that is supposed to have no further relevance but to serve its immediate purpose. Otherwise we'd really need another season just for guest star backstories. And another one for characters from their backstories. And so on.--Nevermore 05:46, 1 March 2008 (PST)

What's interesting though, is that now that we know that the O6 includes Aaron, who was not born until they arrived on the island - Jack's testimony on the stand here is him messing up the story. If 8 survived the crash, at least five of them we know - Jack, Kate, Hurley, Sayid, Sun. That means there were three others who survived, all three of whom must have died as part of the story. But during his testimony, Jack says "She tried to save the other two-" at which point Kate says "Stop." perhaps this is her trying to stop the testimony before Jack digs himself further into a hole. --LOSTinDC 13:14, 21 May 2008 (PDT)

Sawyer's gunshot wound

"When Sawyer is talking to Kate on the bed, he has no visible gunshot wound on his shoulder"

Is this really a blooper? It's been more than 50 days since Sawyer was shot and we all know that people recover from wounds incredibly fast on the Island. I say it should be removed. --     c      blacxthornE      t     08:22, 7 April 2008 (PDT)

Agreed, I removed it. If his bullet wound shows up again later, then it'll be a blooper... But until then, let's just assume that the Island healed him. Jimbo the tubby 09:22, 7 April 2008 (PDT)

Irrelevant trivia

Removed: "This is the ninth episode featuring off-Island events in Kate's flashes." Why? Because all her flashes are off Island, so why note this one specifically? --Golden Monkey 15:25, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

VALIS

VALIS part of "Cultural references" section seems to reveal book's ending, without tying it to the "LOST". Maybe delete that part if there's no show reference to book's ending? Gevorg89 (talk) 10:39, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Literary techniques

Is this plot twist? Isn't it a blooper, an error? It was even mentioned in that section: "Jack clearly states that the survivors were stranded in an island in the South Pacific, and people around him seem to accept that naturally. However, the whole world first learned that the wreckage of the Oceanic plane was located in a very different portion of the globe" Gevorg89 (talk) 10:50, 13 December 2020 (UTC)