How Was Alex's Death Ben's Fault?
I was listening to the showdown between Ben and Widmore in Widmore's bedroom and Widmore claimed Alex's death was Ben's fault.
WIDMORE: Don't stand there, looking at me with those horrible eyes of yours and lay the blame for the death of that poor girl on me, when we both know very well I didn't murder her at all, Benjamin. You did.
How's that? One argument is Ben's disavowal of Alex led to Keamy killing her, but how would Widmore know about that given the death of everyone who witnessed that?
Here's my new argument. I think Ben taking Alex from Rousseau was his attempt to course correct. Ben had been pulling a Desmond thwarting Alex's death right and left for 16 years. And the universe finally caught up with him. Alex's death at age 16 is Ben's fault because she was supposed to die as an infant when Rousseau went nuts again. I further predict we'll see this during Rousseau's story in Season 5.
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
18 comments:
I'm all over that one! What a fantastic idea. . .just in case that's not what they have in mind, can you call up Damon and Carlton and suggest it?
Although, I just assumed he was saying that Ben could have surrendered himself and Alex wouldn't have been killed.
I thought of that too, but the plan was clearly to take Ben and kill everyone else, so that would be disingenuous of Charles to make that claim.
That's an interesting thought. Especially the part about getting some Denielle story, dangitt!!!!
I also just figured that he meant that Ben tried to play poker with Keamy like he does with everyone, instead of surrendering, but Keamy called his bluff and killed her anyway. Whether or not it was accurate of Wid to say that, I thought that saying it was just an off-hand way to rub that in, since the "rules change" comment might have meant what we've been speculating about how some people might have been off limits to the carnage -- before Keamy did that.
What if giving her back to her mother was Ben's mistake? He took her from Rousseau to save her life in a rare compassionate moment. And she was safe as long as she was with him. But almost as soon as he returned her to her mother's care - she died.
Widmore didn't change the rules then - Ben did. Because he'd turned her back over to Rousseau and she was no longer protected.
I like it. Ben was certainly trying to play it both ways sending Alex away but giving her the card of being his daughter.
good thoughts and comments.
I thought he meant that Ben killed her because he wouldn't surrender, thus saving himself and sacrificing his daughter.
I guess it could go all the way back to Ben taking the Island from Widmore setting that in motion PGT Beauregard. If Ben hadn't taken what was his Widmore would not have had to take it back at the cost of everyone else's lives. I wonder if Ben had been taken by Miles back to the boat before Keamy came to the Island what would have happened. I still think Widmore would have killed them all. So again, it's his fault, not Ben's that Alex died. Why am I expecting honor among thieves?
Of course, if Ben really wanted to protect Alex it seems like he could have taken her back to the mainland and handed her over to someone to raise secretly.
By becoming attached to her and keeping her on the island, he doomed her.
In that way Claire's predicament would almost make sense. The island could tell her that there's no way she can leave the island - but that if she leaves her baby for Sawyer to find the baby can leave. She can't have it both ways - she can't keep the baby and get the baby to safety.
Maybe Ben had a similar choice.
And maybe Pierre Chang did as well.
And Charlotte's parents. . .
Memphish,
Did Ben take the island from Widmore? Who is more evil, Ben or Widmore?
I don't agree with the way Ben secured the island, but perhaps Richard was manipulating the whole thing. There seems to be some sort of power play between Richard and Ben, so I don't think Richard's hands are perfectly clean.
Wish we could get a Rousseau flashback to clarify things.
That, is the $64,000 question PGT! For sure, when two factions are warring, it's often difficult to tell who is more innocent and on the defense, when you don't know which side's agression started the whole thing in the first place.
I think that a lot of Ben's agression and evilness could be on behalf of this "great man" who is a "very unforgiving man". I mean, it even prompted him to turn the wheel at the expense of his own self, saying, "Hope you're happy now Jacob," or someting to that effect. Not that Ben doesn't have it in him to do those bad things, but I think that he is even more inspired to do them under Jacob's watchful regard and vengence.
I hope the h#ll TPTB tell us who Jacob is and what he's all about before the final scene of the entire series. It would be nice to get the info within enough time to chew on it in our minds, while some of the show is still going on. :-(
Neat turn of discussion. It reminds me that we're dealing with writers writing in a post-9/11, post preemptive invasion of Iraq world (which if you aren't watching it Battlestar Galactica deals with in such an interesting way), but I think this means that the question of good/bad when it comes to Ben, Widmore, Jacob, The Island, our Losties, etc. is a complicated question just like the complicated questions we find ourselves dealing with in this world where non-traditional enemies and tactics are the new norm.
Good points. Even in "conventional warfare" it's tough to see who's right and who's wrong when you're the little guy on the front, and the overall strategy is obscured. I still think that Sun Tzu's techniques are valid for the problems we have today, if the politicians would just let the generals do what needs to be done. Terrorists seem to utilize many of his most extreme tactics, whether they know it or not. But...I digress from the subject of Lost. :-o
It's funny, but the discussion of good vs. bad has been a point of topic since the birth of Lost. "you're one of the good ones John" etc...
I would say that both Ben and Widmore are essentially "bad", but I'll probably be proven wrong!
Missing you Memphish.
In war everyone thinks they are the "good guy".Ben and Charles have been going at it for some time now.
Even the best of puppeteers breaks a string occasionally. A master at Ben-ding the rules,Mr.Linus had gotten too far out on that limb.
And his world came crashing down.
Thanks TAV. I'm missing the community too, but not so much that I want to follow the ARG. It's still just too little meaninglessness with no payoff that I won't be able to find out about when it finally hits. Which I hope with the latest clue is starting to happen.
Post a Comment