Why No Lost?


log in or register to remove this ad


That was an alright episode - unfortunately tremendously marred by the lazy retcon.

Ben took Rousseau's baby? Meh. If that were the case, she would have popped him one when she first caught him as "Henry Gale" in her net. (And suggesting otherwise would simply be reaching and making things up, AFAIC.)

*sigh*
 

Rousseau's primary secondary* motivation was to get her kid back, and killing Ben wouldn't have done that. In addition, it had been years since Ben took Alex; if that was their only meeting, she might not have recognized him as being the guy (Rousseau was a little bit crazy, after all).

*Rousseau's primary motivation would have to have been survival, to have managed to avoid death by Smoke Monster, time-displaced fellows, off-island interlopers (cf. Desmond, Clancy Brown, Nigerian heroin smugglers, etc), Others, polar bears, dead friends, and so forth, for 15+ years, while all alone.

Heck, given that she did somehow survive all that, she may have had a tete-a-tete with Jacob, Richard, the Monster, or some other entity in the meantime that somehow ameliorated her rage against Ben.
 

Ben took Rousseau's baby? Meh. If that were the case, she would have popped him one when she first caught him as "Henry Gale" in her net. (And suggesting otherwise would simply be reaching and making things up, AFAIC.)

Alternatively, she thought that killing Ben would be sure to end in Alex's death, as he threatened when he took her. In which case, she did the next best thing - turn him over to the "good guys." Hardly "reaching and making things up."
 


Alternatively, she thought that killing Ben would be sure to end in Alex's death, as he threatened when he took her. In which case, she did the next best thing - turn him over to the "good guys." Hardly "reaching and making things up."
Yet, from what I remember, she gave absolutely zero indication that this was the guy who took her baby, not even mentioning "oh guys - btw, he was the one who nabbed Alex. Just sayin', as you go on and on debating as to if he is even a member of the Others in the first place". Not even facial expressions, tone, nothing. (Can anyone go back and definitively see if she expressed any form of recognition?)

I'm going to have to go with "reaching". Sorry.

coyote6 said:
Rousseau's primary secondary* motivation was to get her kid back, and killing Ben wouldn't have done that.
See above.

In addition, it had been years since Ben took Alex; if that was their only meeting, she might not have recognized him as being the guy (Rousseau was a little bit crazy, after all).
Not recognize the guy that stole her baby? Highly unlikely. And note that any time one must explain away logical inconsistencies, flaws, and retcons with "she's crazy" is a significant blemish on the show.

Heck, given that she did somehow survive all that, she may have had a tete-a-tete with Jacob, Richard, the Monster, or some other entity in the meantime that somehow ameliorated her rage against Ben.
That would be the "making things up" I alluded to with my previous post.


*shrug* It was a retcon. While it made for a good, tight episode, it hurt it as a (already scattershot) series. If we're lucky they'll come up with something to make it fit (as Lost is in the enviable position of being able to re-insert what scenes they need when they need it).
 
Last edited:

It was almost certainly a retcon, but I don't have a problem with it; if that was the only time she saw him, then it was a guy she saw once (for what? 90 seconds?), 15+ years before, right after she just woke up, and then she lost her kid. Stress does can really futz with memories, and she certainly seems to be a person that's high-strung. I don't find it unbelievable that she wouldn't immediately recognize Ben as the guy.
 



Remove ads

Top