Thursday, May 03, 2007

Leadership on Lost Island

Lost has ended it's "meh" streak and gotten hot as of late, building towards what I suspect will be a bloody Mexican stand-off between The Others and The Survivors. Last night's episode was equal parts exciting and worrisome. For example: Original Recipe Sawyer was identified and killed like the irredeemable jerkface he was. HOWEVER, James Ford Sawyer has now resolved his unfinished business, which on television means it's time to die. Hopefully ABC knows a good, hot thing when they have it and will keep JFS around.

Another example: Ben promises to teach Locke the history of Craphole Island (which I really hope doesn't involve a boring lecture on the ramifications of the Industrial Revolution in the South Pacific.) HOWEVER, this probably means one, minor question will be answered so that 10 new ones popping up in its place.

But what really nags at me lately is the issue of leadership on the island. The Lost creators are decidedly retro in their choices of Premiers of Craphole Island. (Yes, I think of them as premiers rather than say, governors. They are close to Australia, after all.) Jack seems to have been replaced by a sullen, secretive doppelganger with a penchant for overly-Botoxed women, so who will take his place? The only likely replacements are all... menfolk.

Locke is frolicking in the jungle. For some reason, despite clearly being the smartest person on the island, people overlook Sayid. A few weeks ago, Hurley suggested to Sawyer that he step up. Desmond also has an authoritative air about him, sort of like my co-blogger Jeanette. Perhaps Desmond and Jeanette should co-teach a class on the drinking habits of the Scotch-Irish. But I'm getting off track here. Why are the women of Lost never once considered, by the writers or the characters, for possible leadership roles?

Every time Kate gains some valuable knowledge, she immediately runs and tells Jack in an increasingly pathetic bid for approval. We've seen through Sun's flashbacks that despite a pampered background, she could be quite formidable when called upon. Yet she remains mostly in a traditional submissive role. The other women aren't even worthy of consideration: whiny Claire with her "BAY-BAY!", the absent Rose... is there anyone else? Oh, that's right: the strong, powerful women from last season (Ana Lucia and Libby) were killed off.

Get with the times, Lost. In a post-Buffy television landscape, it wouldn't hurt to put all those big strong men on the back burner and let a lady run the show for a while. I can see it now: Kate and Juliet, as representatives of their groups, creating a peace treaty over gossip about how Natasha from Top Model is totally a mail order bride.


Jeanette said...

I appreciate this post because it is well written and mentions me...but...what?

Mark said...

I enjoyed the post and your thoughts on leadership on the island are interesting but Sayid? Mr. "I'll Fall Back On Torture Whenever It Is Convienent?"

ZeitDerHeldin said...

The REAL question is, why can't we just bring back Xena, Warrior Princess and have her run for president instead of Hillary "I want to turn back the clock and un-do my voting for the war" Clinton?
To sum up: Xena > Buffy > Lost, Xena > H. Clinton.

Alanna said...

Mark: True, Sayid is awfully quick to shove bamboo shoots underneath people's fingernails, but isn't he better than Jack, who, when he's not crying, is being self-rigteous, secretive, and bringing an enemy into the camp?

Stef: Wait, did you seriously just say that Xena is superior to Buffy? Aw HELL no.

ZeitDerHeldin said...

Seriously, how many vampires did Buffy ever have to take on at one time? Okay. NOW. How many warlord footmen did Xena knock out per five minute battle scene?
Also, I believe Xena's skirt was shorter.
I rest my case.

Mark said...

I'm still don't think he would make a good leader, but he does have the potential for much more interesting flashbacks. Jack is on a perpetual daddy issue loop, while Sayid is a globe trotter who runs in much more interesting circles.