LOST (TV-series)

[Rodney]

Of course it's more subtle than the movie--I agree. In fact, I could hardly make out the book's title on my screen, suggesting that the reference was very incidental. And it is always possible that someone who likes Rand handed the actor that book as a prop just to give it publicity (unwisely I think). I am just saying what my best guess is. Consider:

Jibes at Rand run through pop culture touchstones ranging from films such as Dirty Dancing, in which a callow character justifies leaving a pregnant woman by citing The Fountainhead"; plays such as Angels in America, in which two lovers beat each other "like a sex scene in an Ayn Rand novel"; and TV shows such as The Simpsons, in which the infant Maggie is remanded to the prison-camp-like Ayn Rand School for Tots; and South Park, in which an adult illiterate hilariously swears off reading thus: "I was happy to be learning to how to read ... but then I read this: [Atlas Shrugged is shown] ... Because of this, I am never reading again." (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/02/06/ING0VB42431.DTL)

Also remember that modern TV goes for the short-range effect. In sitcoms, it is considered funny nowadays to have a character brag about some virtue and immediately have him contradict it in action. John Cleese complained about this in North American comedy, the practice of always going for the cheap, immediate payoff, and not for jokes that are more subtle and that depend on context and nuances of character. Similarly, the short-range significance of Sawyer is that he is almost pyschopathically self-centred. That is the "tag" on him that substitutes for serious meaning in this show, and that (I think) is the reason why Rand's book is shown.

Modern TV writers need and use "tags" a lot. Obviously, the accepted "tag" for AR is wacko advocate of heedless selfishness.

We'll see how this plays out in the show. And if it never comes up again, I think it supports my interpretation. But I would really like to be worng!

Edited March 16, 2007 by ashleyparkerangel

[John Dailey]

Ashley:

~ Worthwhile points. Never thought of your angle about 'tags', nor, unfortunately, had I caught Cleese's commentings about different 'culture'-perspectives on visual-humor.

~ However, though Sawyer is obviously a Narcissist (what con-man isn't?) he's clearly a 'torn' one who has a bit of awareness and turmoil about his accepted 'values' and thereby is a person whom one wonders if he will redeem himself to improvement (or do a contrary, as an unexpected 'sympathetic' character did), or, just stay a random-factor. --- That he had a Rand novel is really expectable: he clearly is an omnivorously-eclectic reader. His next book could've been by Dr. Seuss. Still, like Lord of the Flies, there is obviously an 'intent' on which book he's got in whichever episode.

LLAP

J:D

[John Dailey]

~ Well, finished watching the end of the '3rd Season'. It's reviews nwst, I think it's still as 'fascinating' as when I started watching this addictive (for me) story. So many subjects implicitly brought up, some explicitly handled whilst others still left hanging; some mysteries solved whilst others starting up; the changing agendas of each character affecting the 'plot' (well, 'story-line' anyways), yet ALL coherently (so far) consistent throughout; I'm impressed with the latter, ergo, am waiting for the next Season's episodes re Locke, Jack, Juliet, Sawyer, Kate, Ben, etc.

~ Finally, we now know what happened with Locke...except for his living through Ben's shooting him. I fear 'Jacob' will be an X-FILES supernatural element therein. Ah, well...I'm hooked anyway.

LLAP

J:D

[ValueCritic]

I am watching Lost last night and Sawyer is by a tree reading a book and you can see the title if you look closely ... The Fountainhead!!

Gotta love that !

Think again. I view this as on the order of the mention of the book in the film Dirty Dancing.

Think again, again. "Everything that happens here, happens for a reason."

When Mother said, "when it dies here it dies everywhere", wasn't she talking about identity? What else fits that description? Identity is the source. The river is the stream of individuals who have kept the rational world alive before Jack. The Nameless One (the one with many names) is the collective.

How could this not be objectivism?