Trying to make sense of Charlie's death is quite headache-producing.

Shock-value? Horrible reason to killed off a beloved character
Validating Desmonds visions? The visions did not have to be introduced in the first place.
Showing an emotional hero self-sacrificing moment? The moment would have been very powerful without Charlie's death. Also, current events on the island have squashed that.

So what is the reason to kill off the character?

Disclaimer: The views expressed below are strictly those of a Charlie fan trying to make sense and meaning come out of his death and do not represent the opinions of either the Charlie bashers or the other Charlie fans (people are very passionate about Charlie both ways)

Going back to Claire and Richard Malkin, he was emphatic that Claire raise the baby alone. There still seems to be some mythic importance to Aaron, his survival, and the way that he is reared. Richard was so desperate to get Claire to raise the baby alone that he knowingly sent her on a plane that was going to crash on an island in the South Pacific.

Why is Aaron that special? What would happen if Claire does not raise him alone? TPTB have not addressed this is a while, but such a big deal was made about this they do need to go back and revisit this.

So perhaps Charlie was fated to die because Aaron needed to be raised by Claire alone. Remember in Fire + Water, Charlie telling Locke that he was not Aaron's family. Charlie viewed Aaron as his son (I think rightfully so) and, if they were to get rescued, Claire and Charlie and Aaron would form a family unit, thus making it that Claire did not raise Aaron alone.

The island prevented this happy little scenario from playing out by offing Charlie.

Of course, now that we see Aaron in Kate's possession, that leads to a whole other can of worms, but Charlie's death had to have had some bigger meaning and I think this could be a possible reason.

Of course, I am still pissed about it though. :undecide: At least if we had a reason for it, it would be a mite easier to take.

Trying to make sense of Charlie's death is quite headache-producing.

Shock-value? Horrible reason to killed off a beloved character
Validating Desmonds visions? The visions did not have to be introduced in the first place.
Showing an emotional hero self-sacrificing moment? The moment would have been very powerful without Charlie's death. Also, current events on the island have squashed that.

So what is the reason to kill off the character?

I think we are led to believe it is like in the FINAL DESTINATION film franchise, in which someone who defies fate (is that possible?) by avoiding death when they shouldn't have, ultimately has to pay the piper. I think he did this way back on the plane by getting out of his assigned seat before the crash; he was perhaps "supposed" to die in the crash but was "saved" by his addiction, funnily enough. Fate tried hard thereafter to seal the deal with him. As an aside, by Charlie being dead, DriveShaft's music probably would gain more notoriety, maybe part of him wanted it for that reason? Didn't Naomi even suggest as much to Charlie at one point in a Season 3 episode?

At least if we had a reason for it, it would be a mite easier to take.

Tell me about it...

It would also be easier to take if anything good had come out of Charlie sacrificing his life but it hasn't. Claire and Aaron's aren't getting rescued, they are being ripped apart instead (so much for validating Desmonds visions). Charlie's 'Not Penny's Boat' message did no good either. Hurley chose to follow Locke based on Charlie's warning and he later says that going with Locke was a big mistake. Signaling the Freighter looks like it is gonna result in more people getting killed than saved. And Charlie's ring and list have been ignored too. So why?!?

Reasons that would give me peace of mind...

- I still think the "course correction" might be due to Desmond talking to Charlie in the past and creating a paradox. I still would like a decent explanation for the flashes. The rubbishy Final Destination excuse doesn't work for me. It still leaves the question why was Desmond only seeing Charlie's death (not Ekos, Nikkis, etc). Maybe when Des talks to Faraday about his visions Faraday will make sense of why they were happening.

- Anyone remember Charlie's "you have to save the baby" dreams? Those dreams featured imagery from 'The Baptism of Christ' painting which suggests Charlie (not Aaron) is a Christ figure, as does his literal baptism when John "The baptist" Locke knocks Charlie into the water. The Christ symbolism fits with Charlie sacrificing his life to save the Lostees, but it would also mean a resurrection too (the Charlie in Hurleys FF?). I hope that undead Charlie might play a big role in the FF story and be the one who "saves the baby" by bringing Aaron back to Claire.

- I think the other thing that Charlie might achieve through his sacrifice is that his transmission to Penny could expose the lies of the 06 if she has recorded it. If Charlie helps Penny get back to the island with the real rescue he will have saved some people after all.

I hate the idea of it being a major death just for effect too. If they get rid of beloved characters it ought to be vital to the plot and further the story - Charlie's death has done neither. Since ep1 of S4 everyone has ignored Charlie's death, even the likes of Claire, Desmond and Hurley.

Tell me about it...

It would also be easier to take if anything good had come out of Charlie sacrificing his life but it hasn't. Claire and Aaron's aren't getting rescued, they are being ripped apart instead (so much for validating Desmonds visions). Charlie's 'Not Penny's Boat' message did no good either. Hurley chose to follow Locke based on Charlie's warning and he later says that going with Locke was a big mistake. Signaling the Freighter looks like it is gonna result in more people getting killed than saved. And Charlie's ring and list have been ignored too. So why?!?

Reasons that would give me peace of mind...

- I still think the "course correction" might be due to Desmond talking to Charlie in the past and creating a paradox. I still would like a decent explanation for the flashes. The rubbishy Final Destination excuse doesn't work for me. It still leaves the question why was Desmond only seeing Charlie's death (not Ekos, Nikkis, etc). Maybe when Des talks to Faraday about his visions Faraday will make sense of why they were happening.

- Anyone remember Charlie's "you have to save the baby" dreams? Those dreams featured imagery from 'The Baptism of Christ' painting which suggests Charlie (not Aaron) is a Christ figure, as does his literal baptism when John "The baptist" Locke knocks Charlie into the water. The Christ symbolism fits with Charlie sacrificing his life to save the Lostees, but it would also mean a resurrection too (the Charlie in Hurleys FF?). I hope that undead Charlie might play a big role in the FF story and be the one who "saves the baby" by bringing Aaron back to Claire.

- I think the other thing that Charlie might achieve through his sacrifice is that his transmission to Penny could expose the lies of the 06 if she has recorded it. If Charlie helps Penny get back to the island with the real rescue he will have saved some people after all.

I hate the idea of it being a major death just for effect too. If they get rid of beloved characters it ought to be vital to the plot and further the story - Charlie's death has done neither. Since ep1 of S4 everyone has ignored Charlie's death, even the likes of Claire, Desmond and Hurley.

I would definitely root for your possibility #2. Too much was made of Charlie's relationship with Aaron, saving the baby, and we still do not know the importance of Aaron and why he needed to be raised by Claire alone. Perhaps (fingers crossed) undead Charlie will indeed wind up saving the baby, bringing Aaron and Claire back together, therefore fulfilling the prophecy that Richard Malkin told Claire.

I would definitely root for your possibility #2. Too much was made of Charlie's relationship with Aaron, saving the baby, and we still do not know the importance of Aaron and why he needed to be raised by Claire alone. Perhaps (fingers crossed) undead Charlie will indeed wind up saving the baby, bringing Aaron and Claire back together, therefore fulfilling the prophecy that Richard Malkin told Claire.

If you want some reassurance from Dom himself...

Dom: Damon had said to me he doesn't want to undermine what's happening here with Charlie: What Charlie does gets them rescued, what Charlie does put into motion a series of events where helicopters come to the island and pick these guys up. He is involved in one of the more significant things that happen on the island

I just hope Damon didn't lie to Dom, because from S4 it feels like Charlie's death and everything attached to it has been totally undermined and treated as insignificant. There have been so many broken promises this season. But his suggestion that Charlie sets things in motion for the real rescue (through his transmission to Penny maybe) then maybe Claire's helicopter vision can happen then. It's a real anti-climax though to make Charlie fans wait till S6 for any closure on his sacrifice.

I think we'll have to wait until the very end to see this come about. Damon has described the show as a huge Rube Goldberg machine (think mousetrap) where each person's choices is another piece that moves the action along to the end result. I think we will only understand this is retrospect. As much as I strongly believe the only way the course correcting can be justified is by revealing Desmond created an off island Charlie when he spoke to him, I suspect we will find that Charlie is just a ghost with unfinished business and that Desmond's flashes will never be explained.

Let me clarify something though that is often largely misunderstood. Malkin never said Claire had to raise the baby ALONE. He said only that she herself had to raise him, meaning her influence had to a play a part in his upbringing. The baby could not be raised by others without her there. That doesn't mean Claire was doomed to a life as a single mother or that anyone she got with was in danger of dying. She could have a partner, fall in love, get married, as long as she played a significant role in Aaron's life. Her "goodness" was what was required. Charlie being there doesn't take anything away from that and I don't think he was killed because of it.

Now Kate is very different. If the psychic is to be believed, now that Kate has Aaron and is raising him without Claire, that should be the danger. Of course, the psychic never said if that should happen the person raising him had to die, just that danger surrounds Aaron and there is no happy life for him without Claire. We may see that come to pass, but it doesn't mean danger for Kate.

I think we will only understand this is retrospect. As much as I strongly believe the only way the course correcting can be justified is by revealing Desmond created an off island Charlie when he spoke to him, I suspect we will find that Charlie is just a ghost with unfinished business and that Desmond's flashes will never be explained.

I fear where Charlie's death is concerned Darlton did their creative thinking backwards. Damon has admitted he wanted a major death in the S3 finale. So they picked Charlie for the sacrifice, remembered Dom's line that he doesn't mind leaving if he goes out heroically and THEN started to contrive ways to build up to Charlie's death and show off Desmonds new future seeing powers at the same time. I think it is a terrible way to write - the story serving the death rather than the death serving the story. I hope I'm wrong and Darlton will blow me away with a clever twist regarding the flashes but I won't hold my breath. Possibilities are there, but not the writers efforts.

You know some people say Claire will die, but Malkins prophecy will turn out okay because Kate and Jack are the couple in Los Angeles, the "good people". So they could use that line for a Jate adoption. I'd find it very unsatifying though. Aaron has had two parents who have loved him devotedly since the day he was born and those people are Claire and Charlie.

You know some people say Claire will die, but Malkins prophecy will turn out okay because Kate and Jack are the couple in Los Angeles, the "good people". So they could use that line for a Jate adoption. I'd find it very unsatifying though. Aaron has had two parents who have loved him devotedly since the day he was born and those people are Claire and Charlie.

Well if that happens than Jate cannot be Adam and Eve, so they can't have it both ways. Either they return to the island and die there together or they live out their lives and raise Aaron. I don't see them bringing Aaron back to the island to be raised when Charlie died so he could be raised off of it.

If you want some reassurance from Dom himself...



I just hope Damon didn't lie to Dom, because from S4 it feels like Charlie's death and everything attached to it has been totally undermined and treated as insignificant. There have been so many broken promises this season. But his suggestion that Charlie sets things in motion for the real rescue (through his transmission to Penny maybe) then maybe Claire's helicopter vision can happen then. It's a real anti-climax though to make Charlie fans wait till S6 for any closure on his sacrifice.

Thanks, didn't know that, maybe their will be some validation for Charlie fans eventually

Let me clarify something though that is often largely misunderstood. Malkin never said Claire had to raise the baby ALONE. He said only that she herself had to raise him, meaning her influence had to a play a part in his upbringing. The baby could not be raised by others without her there. That doesn't mean Claire was doomed to a life as a single mother or that anyone she got with was in danger of dying. She could have a partner, fall in love, get married, as long as she played a significant role in Aaron's life. Her "goodness" was what was required. Charlie being there doesn't take anything away from that and I don't think he was killed because of it.

That changes things a bit. It also makes me a little sad because I am trying to find some meaning. Hopefully what Cappy said earlier will come to pass.

I fear where Charlie's death is concerned Darlton did their creative thinking backwards. Damon has admitted he wanted a major death in the S3 finale. So they picked Charlie for the sacrifice, remembered Dom's line that he doesn't mind leaving if he goes out heroically and THEN started to contrive ways to build up to Charlie's death and show off Desmonds new future seeing powers at the same time. I think it is a terrible way to write - the story serving the death rather than the death serving the story. I hope I'm wrong and Darlton will blow me away with a clever twist regarding the flashes but I won't hold my breath. Possibilities are there, but not the writers efforts.

You know some people say Claire will die, but Malkins prophecy will turn out okay because Kate and Jack are the couple in Los Angeles, the "good people". So they could use that line for a Jate adoption. I'd find it very unsatifying though. Aaron has had two parents who have loved him devotedly since the day he was born and those people are Claire and Charlie.

A shocking death with a lot of emotion just for the sake of a shocking death is ridiculous. It now does seem clear that the entire Desmond-future-flashes thing was just a plot device to make Charlie's death seem more palatable to fans. Kind of 'let's write a slow build-up to the death, so it seems to be an important part of the story'.

Boo.

Why do I even bother writing letters to them?

I think the real purpose of the season three storyline was to give Charlie fans a heads up that he was going to die. He was the first character where the viewers had advance warning of his death. We were led to believe there would be a twist but I don't think they ever intended one. They were just trying to prepare us because they knew it would be painful. I'm not excusing what they did, if they knew it was going to be that painful they shouldn't have done it, but this is what I think was going on in their minds.

I'm glad we campaigned because it was a terrible time for Dom and we gave him support that was appreciated, but there was never any good of writing to Darlton. I'm sorry I sent him a shirt.

Charlie was never that beloved to me. He had his moments when he could be quite entertaining. But I found him annoying and sometimes, a rather self-righteous little snot. I'm sorry that he's dead. But I don't really miss him that much.

Meh. I wouldn't care if Jack died so I guess we're even.

I think the real purpose of the season three storyline was to give Charlie fans a heads up that he was going to die. He was the first character where the viewers had advance warning of his death. We were led to believe there would be a twist but I don't think they ever intended one. They were just trying to prepare us because they knew it would be painful. I'm not excusing what they did, if they knew it was going to be that painful they shouldn't have done it, but this is what I think was going on in their minds.

I'm glad we campaigned because it was a terrible time for Dom and we gave him support that was appreciated, but there was never any good of writing to Darlton. I'm sorry I sent him a shirt.

I don't think that was their consideration at all. I think they were teasing us with Charlie's death to create hype, especially the way they hyped the finale - come and watch the bloodbath folks! I think Darlton stick with their warped ideas about what they think the fans want rather than listening to the fans. I hate that they pretended they were "open minded" about Charlie's death storyline. I don't believe that at all. I think they just put off the evil moment of telling Dom.

Yeah, Dom also said in his exit interview that it made him feel better when he heard fans saying they thought killing Charlie was a bad idea. I think he felt the same in many ways but he was gratious and accepting because...well, what else could he do? Dom has made it clear he had no power over the descision.

Meh. I wouldn't care if Jack died so I guess we're even.



I don't think that was their consideration at all. I think they were teasing us with Charlie's death to create hype, especially the way they hyped the finale - come and watch the bloodbath folks! I think Darlton stick with their warped ideas about what they think the fans want rather than listening to the fans. I hate that they pretended they were "open minded" about Charlie's death storyline. I don't believe that at all. I think they just put off the evil moment of telling Dom.

Yeah, Dom also said in his exit interview that it made him feel better when he heard fans saying they thought killing Charlie was a bad idea. I think he felt the same in many ways but he was gratious and accepting because...well, what else could he do? Dom has made it clear he had no power over the descision.

I am with you on Jack. I guess my problem is that to kill of a favorite for hype can get big ratings, but not when there is story tied up in.

Claire and Charlie were becoming a family.
Aaron is clearly special in some way.
Aaron biological father abandoned him and his "adoptive" father is killed (maybe that is why I misunderstood Richard Malkin...Aaron has had to fathers leave him in different ways).
There was no reason to kill Charlie story-wise because it did not really tie into anything else. Desmonds flashes only told of death and Charlie's death was not crucial to the story as he could have been just as much of a hero if he survived.

OK...I just went back and rewatched Raised by Another (at least the conversation with Richard.

He said that...This child parented by anyone else, other than you, this child is in danger.

He does not explicitly say that she had to be alone, but that nobody else could act as a parent. Perhaps there is something deeper to this.

Something is going on with the font and bold. I tried changing it, but it is staying this way. Sorry for the annoying size I will try to change it through editing.

I hate the excuse that Charlie had to die to validate Desmond's visions.

a) I think we had seen enough to know Desmond's visions weren't to be taken lightly.
b) With Claire/Aaron's NON-rescue Desmond's visions seem invalid again. They paid off the sacrificial death but not the salvation of Charlie's loved ones and to me that is just awful and appalling. That is the cop out.
c) I think it would have been better for the storyline, themes and heart of the show for Desmond's visions to have been overcome. Since Charlie's death I've just felt like the island is a cruel bullying fate machine and the Lostees have no free will. Michael's episode strongly confirms this. It's horrible. There is no hope whatsoever in the story. No philosophy.

He does not explicitly say that she had to be alone, but that nobody else could act as a parent. Perhaps there is something deeper to this.

Maybe you could also consider that Aaron is Christian Sheppard's grandson. It seems Christian is a big controller of the destinies of the survivors. Maybe he had some issues with Charlie's worthness of his only daughter. Can't think why though. Charlie was a hell of a lot more loving and devoted to Claire than Christian himself.

Maybe you could also consider that Aaron is Christian Sheppard's grandson. It seems Christian is a big controller of the destinies of the survivors. Maybe he had some issues with Charlie's worthness of his only daughter. Can't think why though. Charlie was a hell of a lot more loving and devoted to Claire than Christian himself.

Well, a lot of people feel that smokie is there to judge people and Christian has been seen by Jack, Vincent, and Hurley, so maybe Christian as smokie was judging Charlie in some way and Charlie did not stack up. I hope that this is not the case because: 1-Charlie was worthy, 2- There really is no hope for any of our Losties then.

I think Charlie's death was the saddest moment of the season. I think Aaron is special. He was born on the island. Desmond vision can still come true. Maybe Claire dies on the way and that is how Kate gets Aaron.

I don't think we should judge the writers or Dalton so quickly. So far the story has been extremely well thought out and planned. I have a feeling we don't know the full scope of Charlie's death or the impact it will have on the story. Layers of story are unfolding and building upon past seasons. I have faith that we will be rewarded for hanging in there and letting the story unfold. I'm hoping everything will make sense as we move along...kind of like a Rubik's cube...right before you make the final moves that put it back in order..the cube looks totally jumbled...then all of a sudden it falls into place and every piece is back in order.

I don't think we should judge the writers or Dalton so quickly. So far the story has been extremely well thought out and planned. I have a feeling we don't know the full scope of Charlie's death or the impact it will have on the story. Layers of story are unfolding and building upon past seasons. I have faith that we will be rewarded for hanging in there and letting the story unfold. I'm hoping everything will make sense as we move along...kind of like a Rubik's cube...right before you make the final moves that put it back in order..the cube looks totally jumbled...then all of a sudden it falls into place and every piece is back in order.

No offence, but I really don't see how or why any Charlie fan or Charlie/Claire should have any faith in Darlton. They have robbed many fans of their favourite character, their favourite couple...and for what? The 'Not Penny's Boat' message that was used as a plot device in S4ep1? Charlie's death has had zero impact on the characters. He gave his life to save them but they couldn't even be bothered with a funeral for him. Charlie's girlfriend and best friend forgot about him and started enjoying themselves as soon as they arrived at their new comfy homes. Desmond has seemingly put the flashes behind him and is too busy trying to reunite with Penny to give Claire the list or care about her and Aaron getting rescued.

And Kate has Aaron in the future. The writers have already ensured that Charlie FAILS in the main aim of his sacrifice - protecting Claire and Aaron. Even if Claire and her child are eventually reunited and rescued (and Charlie's sacrifice plays some part in the real rescue) their lives will have been ruined. Claire will have lost a boyfriend she could trust, Aaron will have lost a loving father figure, Claire will have missed Aarons first steps, first words, the first few years of his life, Aaron will be attached to Kate as his mother figure...realistically they will be scarred for life. Charlie died to protect them and instead they will endure years of suffering.

The writers haven't left us fans anything to hope for.

And Kate has Aaron in the future. The writers have already ensured that Charlie FAILS in the main aim of his sacrifice - protecting Claire and Aaron. Even if Claire and her child are eventually reunited and rescued (and Charlie's sacrifice plays some part in the real rescue) their lives will have been ruined. Claire will have lost a boyfriend she could trust, Aaron will have lost a loving father figure, Claire will have missed Aarons first steps, first words, the first few years of his life, Aaron will be attached to Kate as his mother figure...realistically they will be scarred for life. Charlie died to protect them and instead they will endure years of suffering.


This got me thinking. Despite Charlie's heroic efforts in the LG, his mission to save Aaron, Claire, and have a general happy ending for everyone was doomed from the start because it went against the will of the Island. I'm an adherent to the whole mystical island of destiny element of the show, so this will have to be taken in that context.

As we see from the FFs, Locke was right and Jack was not supposed to make the call that brought the Freighter people to the Island. Charlie was an integral part in the successful completion of Jack's plan, but originally, he wasn't meant to be. If Desmond's flashes are to be believed, Charlie would have died in the lightning strike and not have been around to make the erroneous assumption that turning off the LG would lead to Aaron and Claire being together. After Desmond saves Charlie the first time, the Island tries numerous times to kill Charlie so that he wouldn't be around to make the fatal mistake of turning off the LG's equipment. But each time, the Island was thwarted by Desmond, who acted on his visions. Although Charlie and Desmond obviously didn't know that the turning off the signal would be a huge mistake, it was the inevitable consequence of going against Charlie's destiny of dying before he had that opportunity. Since Charlie really had hoped the best for Aaron and Claire as well as everyone else, it would have been better for him to have died in the lightning strike when he was supposed to have died.
I suppose that someone else could have taken Charlie's place in the LG, but only he could have figured out the code from the hint that Bonnie gave him.


The only good thing that I can imagine that will come as a result of his death is that his ghost helped Hurley set a series of events in motion for the eventual return of the O6 to the Island. It seems like Jack's encounter with Hurley at the mental hospital slowly drove him to see that they have to go back. Their presence there might be required for some greater good later on in the show. So in that sense, his death may have served some kind of greater purpose than isn't apparent right now.

After Desmond saves Charlie the first time, the Island tries numerous times to kill Charlie so that he wouldn't be around to make the fatal mistake of turning off the LG's equipment. But each time, the Island was thwarted by Desmond, who acted on his visions.
.

I hadn't thought of it in those terms before, but you make an excellent point.

If Desmond's flashes are to be believed, Charlie would have died in the lightning strike and not have been around to make the erroneous assumption that turning off the LG would lead to Aaron and Claire being together. After Desmond saves Charlie the first time, the Island tries numerous times to kill Charlie so that he wouldn't be around to make the fatal mistake of turning off the LG's equipment. But each time, the Island was thwarted by Desmond, who acted on his visions. Although Charlie and Desmond obviously didn't know that the turning off the signal would be a huge mistake, it was the inevitable consequence of going against Charlie's destiny of dying before he had that opportunity.


That could be true, but one could also have the opinion that it was the Island giving Des the visions so that he could save Charlie until he turned off the jamming device. I am not sure yet which side the Island is on. If we believe that it (the Island) has the ablility to cause someone to survive after what should have been a fatal car crash (Micheal) then why couldn't it protect itself from one person being able to turn a switch. Just seems kinda weak to me. The Island is supposed to have all this power, but can't protect itself? I don't buy it.

That could be true, but one could also have the opinion that it was the Island giving Des the visions so that he could save Charlie until he turned off the jamming device. I am not sure yet which side the Island is on. If we believe that it (the Island) has the ablility to cause someone to survive after what should have been a fatal car crash (Micheal) then why couldn't it protect itself from one person being able to turn a switch. Just seems kinda weak to me. The Island is supposed to have all this power, but can't protect itself? I don't buy it.

You could argue that the Island wanted him to turn the switch, but that seems rather counter-productive given what we know from Locke. This could be open to interpretation, but I think that it is pretty clear that the Island communicated with Locke that the Freighter should not be called. He was lying in a pit of bodies dying of a gunshot wound when Big Walt suddenly appeared and told him that he had work to do. If that's not a manifestation of the Island, I don't know what is.

To answer your question about how Michael could survive a car crash or be prevented from shooting himself, it seems like the Island's power operates as an extension of fate. Surviving a car crash like that is certainly possible, but the chances of that are slim. Same goes for the gun. Guns can jam, not fire, etc. but what are the chances of that happening a few times in a row? They aren't very good, unless fate made it so. That kind of power seems like a passive power. I'd say that the Island made an attempt at protecting itself from this threat by trying to kill Charlie 3 times, but each time it was thwarted by free will via Desmond acting on his visions. How free will vs fate comes into play is another issue, but we've seen people making choices that runs parallel to the Island's designs, like the pilot letting Hurley on the plane.

The Island might simply not be able to protect itself in a more active manner, like having smokey shoot across the water and body slam the Freighter. Why it didn't take steps via fate to prevent the Freighter from reaching the general vicinity of it in the first is beyond me right now. I guess it could have had the Freighter's engines break down or simply sink. But you have to remember that if it wasn't for Desmond's visions and Charlie acting in accordance with them, the switch would have never been turned off and the Island wouldn't have been in danger in the first place. The Island trying to kill Charlie would be a passive way of exerting fate to protect itself from the Freighter.

Going back to Claire and Richard Malkin, he was emphatic that Claire raise the baby alone. There still seems to be some mythic importance to Aaron, his survival, and the way that he is reared. Richard was so desperate to get Claire to raise the baby alone that he knowingly sent her on a plane that was going to crash on an island in the South Pacific.

Why is Aaron that special? What would happen if Claire does not raise him alone? TPTB have not addressed this is a while, but such a big deal was made about this they do need to go back and revisit this.



I agree. However I was thinking about the Eko flashback when he met Richard Malkin. Malkin told Eko he was a fraud. He also told him he'd tricked a girl into getting on a plane to give her baby up for money. I feel like the writer's might have intended for this scene to shoot down the whole Aaron is special thing.

I guess that would mean that Claire was tricked into getting on the plane but the crash was just something that happened. But that can't be right because it just seems too weird that Malkin knew she was pregnant and that her boyfriend Thomas wouldn't be there for her.

It seems pretty fishy for Malkin to make a big deal out of Claire keeping her baby. Remmeber when he first read her and refused to tell her what he saw? He even refunded her $200. For a scam artist who needs money and then turns it down is highly unlikely imo.


It would also be easier to take if anything good had come out of Charlie sacrificing his life but it hasn't. Claire and Aaron's aren't getting rescued, they are being ripped apart instead (so much for validating Desmonds visions). Charlie's 'Not Penny's Boat' message did no good either. Hurley chose to follow Locke based on Charlie's warning and he later says that going with Locke was a big mistake. Signaling the Freighter looks like it is gonna result in more people getting killed than saved. And Charlie's ring and list have been ignored too. So why?!?



Why indeed. The whole point of Charlie's sacrifice was saving Claire and Aaron. Seeing as how in the future Kate has Aaron, we assume that Claire did not make it off the island or she died. So there goes that happy little unit. Desmond's not exactly hanging around to make sure that Claire and Aaron get on the chopper either. he didn't even try to stop her when she left with Locke. I mean, he stayed cause he obviously felt safe to but why didn't he say anything to her?

Charlie's ring and letter are like his final words to Claire and Aaron. In a way I feel like because Kate has Aaron in the future, Claire's fate may not be what we want it to. I think there is a great possibility that she may die. So maybe they figure that if she's going to die what's the point in bringing up Charlie's list or the ring. Charlie and Claire have nothing to do with Aaron in the future. Sad, sad, sad.

Pisses me off. :mad:

You could argue that the Island wanted him to turn the switch, but that seems rather counter-productive given what we know from Locke. This could be open to interpretation, but I think that it is pretty clear that the Island communicated with Locke that the Freighter should not be called. He was lying in a pit of bodies dying of a gunshot wound when Big Walt suddenly appeared and told him that he had work to do. If that's not a manifestation of the Island, I don't know what is.

To answer your question about how Michael could survive a car crash or be prevented from shooting himself, it seems like the Island's power operates as an extension of fate. Surviving a car crash like that is certainly possible, but the chances of that are slim. Same goes for the gun. Guns can jam, not fire, etc. but what are the chances of that happening a few times in a row? They aren't very good, unless fate made it so. That kind of power seems like a passive power. I'd say that the Island made an attempt at protecting itself from this threat by trying to kill Charlie 3 times, but each time it was thwarted by free will via Desmond acting on his visions. How free will vs fate comes into play is another issue, but we've seen people making choices that runs parallel to the Island's designs, like the pilot letting Hurley on the plane.

The Island might simply not be able to protect itself in a more active manner, like having smokey shoot across the water and body slam the Freighter. Why it didn't take steps via fate to prevent the Freighter from reaching the general vicinity of it in the first is beyond me right now. I guess it could have had the Freighter's engines break down or simply sink. But you have to remember that if it wasn't for Desmond's visions and Charlie acting in accordance with them, the switch would have never been turned off and the Island wouldn't have been in danger in the first place. The Island trying to kill Charlie would be a passive way of exerting fate to protect itself from the Freighter.

This post reminded me of a debate I had in Catholic School. It was about the difference between the presentation of God in the Old Testament and the New Testament. The NT God is kinder, gentler, more caring, He guides people into the righteous path. Now, the OT God is very different. He was wrathful, a punisher, He browbeat people into following a righteous path and was merciless when challenged. However, the OT God could not make people do what He wanted. Both the NT and the OT dealt with free will.

Perhaps the island is like the OT God. Punishes, judges harshly, but ultimately deals in free will.

I agree. However I was thinking about the Eko flashback when he met Richard Malkin. Malkin told Eko he was a fraud. He also told him he'd tricked a girl into getting on a plane to give her baby up for money. I feel like the writer's might have intended for this scene to shoot down the whole Aaron is special thing.

I guess that would mean that Claire was tricked into getting on the plane but the crash was just something that happened. But that can't be right because it just seems too weird that Malkin knew she was pregnant and that her boyfriend Thomas wouldn't be there for her.

It seems pretty fishy for Malkin to make a big deal out of Claire keeping her baby. Remmeber when he first read her and refused to tell her what he saw? He even refunded her $200. For a scam artist who needs money and then turns it down is highly unlikely imo.



Why indeed. The whole point of Charlie's sacrifice was saving Claire and Aaron. Seeing as how in the future Kate has Aaron, we assume that Claire did not make it off the island or she died. So there goes that happy little unit. Desmond's not exactly hanging around to make sure that Claire and Aaron get on the chopper either. he didn't even try to stop her when she left with Locke. I mean, he stayed cause he obviously felt safe to but why didn't he say anything to her?

Charlie's ring and letter are like his final words to Claire and Aaron. In a way I feel like because Kate has Aaron in the future, Claire's fate may not be what we want it to. I think there is a great possibility that she may die. So maybe they figure that if she's going to die what's the point in bringing up Charlie's list or the ring. Charlie and Claire have nothing to do with Aaron in the future. Sad, sad, sad.

Pisses me off. :mad:

There is no way (IMHO) that Malkin was a fraud with Claire. There are too many signs that point to him being right on the money, Remeber Eko's "Do make mistake coincidence for fate?" Let's flip it "Do not mistake fate for coincidence." Malkin knew.

I can't even comment anymore on Charlie's sacrifice being for nothing if something happens to Claire. Too mad still.

:rant: :rant:

As we see from the FFs, Locke was right and Jack was not supposed to make the call that brought the Freighter people to the Island. Charlie was an integral part in the successful completion of Jack's plan, but originally, he wasn't meant to be. If Desmond's flashes are to be believed, Charlie would have died in the lightning strike and not have been around to make the erroneous assumption that turning off the LG would lead to Aaron and Claire being together. After Desmond saves Charlie the first time, the Island tries numerous times to kill Charlie so that he wouldn't be around to make the fatal mistake of turning off the LG's equipment. But each time, the Island was thwarted by Desmond, who acted on his visions. Although Charlie and Desmond obviously didn't know that the turning off the signal would be a huge mistake, it was the inevitable consequence of going against Charlie's destiny of dying before he had that opportunity. Since Charlie really had hoped the best for Aaron and Claire as well as everyone else, it would have been better for him to have died in the lightning strike when he was supposed to have died.

This doesn't help with the shows bad karma. It makes it worse. So you're suggesting Desmond and consequently Charlie were punished by the universe for changing fate? Well, in Desmond and Charlie's defence they had very good humanitarian intentions. They wanted to save lives, achieve rescue and were prepared to give their own lives for this heroic cause. Even if they were "wrong", Charlie made good choices and a selfless sacrifice. And for this he is killed for no reason and the loved ones he died to save will suffer instead. That is really rather twisted.

Locke of course will do anything fate or the island tells him. He will throw knives into women's backs and forces grenades into prisoner's mouths in the name of the island. The island in turn will pat Locke on the head and heal him of all his injuries. I don't really care any more whether Locke is right or wrong. His methods are inhumane and disgusting. There is nothing heroic about the way Locke is going about his selfish island journey.

The karma is back to front on the island. Good things happen to wicked people and horrible things happen to heroic selfless people. Funny thing is Locke was a good person in his back story, but his life sucked. Then Locke started killing people and blowing stuff up and now he's invincible.

This post reminded me of a debate I had in Catholic School. It was about the difference between the presentation of God in the Old Testament and the New Testament. The NT God is kinder, gentler, more caring, He guides people into the righteous path. Now, the OT God is very different. He was wrathful, a punisher, He browbeat people into following a righteous path and was merciless when challenged. However, the OT God could not make people do what He wanted. Both the NT and the OT dealt with free will.

Perhaps the island is like the OT God. Punishes, judges harshly, but ultimately deals in free will.



That's an interesting comparison. Although the Island's judgements might be harsh, like with what the smoke monster did to Eko and all, the Island could seem more like the NT God. After all, Eko refused to repent and professed that he was proud of all the things he had done. Only after that did the monster take him out.

There is no way (IMHO) that Malkin was a fraud with Claire. There are too many signs that point to him being right on the money, Remeber Eko's "Do make mistake coincidence for fate?" Let's flip it "Do not mistake fate for coincidence." Malkin knew.


I'm totally with you on this one. No way he was a fake.

This doesn't help with the shows bad karma. It makes it worse. So you're suggesting Desmond and consequently Charlie were punished by the universe for changing fate? Well, in Desmond and Charlie's defence they had very good humanitarian intentions. They wanted to save lives, achieve rescue and were prepared to give their own lives for this heroic cause. Even if they were "wrong", Charlie made good choices and a selfless sacrifice. And for this he is killed for no reason and the loved ones he died to save will suffer instead. That is really rather twisted.

I didn't mean to imply that the Island was punishing Charlie and Desmond for changing fate, simply that it was a natural product of their choices. In trying to kill Charlie with the lightning strike and several other times, I think the Island was exterting it's passive control over fate to make sure that Charlie wouldn't be around to go on his ill-fated (but heroic) mission to the Looking Glass. I don't think of that as punishment.


Locke of course will do anything fate or the island tells him. He will throw knives into women's backs and forces grenades into prisoner's mouths in the name of the island. The island in turn will pat Locke on the head and heal him of all his injuries. I don't really care any more whether Locke is right or wrong. His methods are inhumane and disgusting. There is nothing heroic about the way Locke is going about his selfish island journey.

I gather you're not really into the whole mystical island of fate aspect of the show, but you have to admit that it has been there since the beginning. As the audience, we are supposed to assume that there is some kind of high power at work and that John Locke is trying to follow that power. It might seem selfish (I don't think that it is) but maybe what we learn about the Island later on might lead you to change your mind.

Also, I don't see much difference in what Locke did to Naomi and what Charlie did to Ethan. Both were cases of someone killing another because they thought that person was a threat. The only difference of course, is that Big Walt told Locke to do it.


The karma is back to front on the island. Good things happen to wicked people and horrible things happen to heroic selfless people. Funny thing is Locke was a good person in his back story, but his life sucked. Then Locke started killing people and blowing stuff up and now he's invincible.

Just because bad things happened as a result of Charlie's actions like Aaron ending up with Kate, that doesn't mean his actions didn't have some merit for his own soul.

Disclaimers
I was never a big Charlie fan- could take him or leave him, but there is no doubt that he was a major character of the show. I also never bought into the whole Claire-Charlie being in love. The main reason for this goes back to S1. If I were Claire and some freak (Ethan) kidnapped me and did God knows what to me and when I somehow made it back to my camp, I found out that Chaaahlie had been playing golf instead of looking for me night and day, I don’t think I would have went for the dude. But, hey, maybe that’s just me. But, I believe TPTB wanted us to believe that they were in love, so I cut them slack on that- then, this season, Claire is over his death in about 2 seconds and happily doing the laundry. I can’t win.

Opinion
I just finished watching the first three seasons on DVD (been watching an episode here and there since before S4 began). Charlie’s death still seems to be utterly pointless to me, unless DM needed off the show for another project (but from reading other posts on this thread, it doesn’t appear that was the case). I said to my wife after we watched TtLG, “That part (Charlie dying) was SO stupid. Never mind the ridiculously stupid idea to have Bonnie ramble on for about two minutes telling Charlie the code is the same as Good Vibrations from the Beach Boys, instead of, uh, just repeating the code again- slowly this time. Never mind Patchy rising from the dead (again)- once the grenade blew out the window, why didn’t Charlie just go to the other side of the door and close it behind him? Or, better yet, don’t even worry about the door- do you know how long it would’ve taken to flood that entire hatch from just that little window being blown out?” Possible Answers: To keep Des out of harms way? Because Charlie thought Des’s vision wouldn’t come true (Claire and Aaron being rescued) if he didn’t drown? I know it’s just a TV show, but I wouldn’t sacrifice myself just based on the notion that some other dude’s vision might not come to pass. My vote, therefore, would have to be TPTB killed him off for primarily for dramatic effect (then, will tie him into some plot in S6 to try and placate the Charlie fans). Stupid, I know, but what are you going to do?

One more thing: if (that’s if) they kill off Claire so Kate can end up with Aaron, who will care? I’ve actually always liked her character (as a tertiary character) and I think EdR is one of the two best actresses on the show (along with YK), but she’s been on the show this season for about 12 minutes (doing stupid things like fetching Sawyer coffee and offering to play good cop/bad cop with Locke to get answers out of Miles). So if they kill her off at this point, it will have as much emotional impact as Karl getting killed off. I’ll say, “Who cares? Good for EdR- now maybe she can use her breakthrough from LOST and pick up another series or a supporting role in a movie.”

If they do kill off Claire, then TPTB are really going to be up against it for the final two seasons (to come full circle on Aaron and make him vital to the show). Even with my limited knowledge of sci-fi, I know that babies are almost always huge to the overall outcome of a show or movie- especially ones that are born against all odds on an Island like this (e.g. Luke and Leia Skywalker from Star Wars- that TPTB seem to love so much). We’ll see.
100%
OK...I just went back and rewatched Raised by Another (at least the conversation with Richard.

He said that...This child parented by anyone else, other than you, this child is in danger.

... Something is going on with the font and bold. I tried changing it, but it is staying this way. Sorry for the annoying size I will try to change it through editing.

My two cents…
I’ve had technical problems from time to time as well (probably user error on my part), so I started typing out my posts in MS-Word and then copy/paste them onto the Fuselage. Arial 10 in MS-Word seems to give the normal font (Arial 2) on the Fuselage.

Also, I don't see much difference in what Locke did to Naomi and what Charlie did to Ethan. Both were cases of someone killing another because they thought that person was a threat.

I didn't wholly agree with Charlie killing Ethan but there is a lot of difference. Charlie knew Ethan was a threat based on Ethan hanging him from a tree, threatening to kill everyone in the camp and his repeated attempts to kidnap a pregant traumatised Claire. Locke killed a woman he had never met, who had never harmed/threatened him or anyone else on the island. Even if Naomi was secretly a threat, you can't judge and execute a person before they have committed any crime against you.

there is some kind of high power at work and that John Locke is trying to follow that power. It might seem selfish (I don't think that it is) but maybe what we learn about the Island later on might lead you to change your mind.

Well, even if I learn the island is trying to save the planet from destruction and Locke is helping it to save the world, I won't say - "Now I've learned that I'm totally okay with Locke shoving a bomb into Miles mouth." I am not saying the island's ultimate cause is wrong. It is Locke and the islands methods that I can't ever excuse. I won't abandon my humanity and say that murder, torture and cruel/unusual punishments are okay if you are doing it for a good cause. That's Abu Ghraib mentality.

If I were Claire and some freak (Ethan) kidnapped me and did God knows what to me and when I somehow made it back to my camp, I found out that Chaaahlie had been playing golf instead of looking for me night and day, I don’t think I would have went for the dude. But, hey, maybe that’s just me.

Hey Marc. I've been reading your posts and agree with many of your issues. However I have to nitpick the above statement. While Claire was kidnapped, Charlie wasn't playing golf (that episode came before Claire's kidnap). Charlie was recovering from being hung and almost killed (for trying to protect Claire). The very night Claire returned Charlie was suggesting to Jack they go out and search for her. I agree that Claire wasn't in love with Charlie, but I think Charlie was in love with Claire. Of all the things you could criticise Charlie over, I think "Charlie didn't do enough for Claire" is rather unfair. Charlie gave his life for Claire (and risked himself for her many times before, including in S1).

But I agree with you the writers killed Charlie primarily for dramatic effect. Damon has said they wanted to do a heroic sacrificial death. So I guess they got the heroic sacrifice idea first and then worked backwards creating a story for it. That is why Charlie's death feels so contrived and lacks meaning or necessity after the death has taken place. And yes, it is stupid.

Disclaimers
I was never a big Charlie fan- could take him or leave him, but there is no doubt that he was a major character of the show.

Well I'll disagree with you on this, cause I loved Charlie (cept for the kidnap Sun moment). :rip:

I also never bought into the whole Claire-Charlie being in love.

Here I am totally 100% in agreement with you, although my reasoning is a little different than yours. I have watched this show since its premiere and have re watched every single episode multiple times, including all the preceding season before a new season begins; and if there is one thing I'm certain of it's that Charlie/Claire love was completely and totally a one way street. Charlie consistently came off as that insecure guy that would build attachments in his life to be bigger than they actually were (been there).

Claire certainly cared for Charlie and appreciated all he did for her, but she never had any romantic feelings for her. Did they ever even hold hands on the show, let alone kiss??

And people complain about Claire's reaction to learning about Charlie's death as though she should have great morning over losing her 'grand love', this was not her reaction, her reaction was one of guilt. Why guilt? Because she feels guilty for the way she had used Charlie, as a babysitter, as a surrogate father, and had allowed him to continue to do these things for him even knowing that she had no romantic feelings for him. She led him on to help make her own life better.

Was her 'using' of him malicious in nature... maybe/maybe not?... but I tend to see it as more that she didn't want to break his heart and didn't know how to deal with his infatuation.

In the end, Charlie sacrificed himself nobly and honorably for Claire and for his friends, but please don't try to tell me that they were the 'great couple' of the island. I only hope that his death wasn't just a ratings gimmick and that Claire & Aaron do get on that helicopter one day. :frown: :mad:

Just my :twocents:

Hey Marc. I've been reading your posts and agree with many of your issues. However I have to nitpick the above statement. While Claire was kidnapped, Charlie wasn't playing golf (that episode came before Claire's kidnap). Charlie was recovering from being hung and almost killed (for trying to protect Claire). The very night Claire returned Charlie was suggesting to Jack they go out and search for her. I agree that Claire wasn't in love with Charlie, but I think Charlie was in love with Claire. Of all the things you could criticise Charlie over, I think "Charlie didn't do enough for Claire" is rather unfair. Charlie gave his life for Claire (and risked himself for her many times before, including in S1).

But I agree with you the writers killed Charlie primarily for dramatic effect. Damon has said they wanted to do a heroic sacrificial death. So I guess they got the heroic sacrifice idea first and then worked backwards creating a story for it. That is why Charlie's death feels so contrived and lacks meaning or necessity after the death has taken place. And yes, it is stupid.

I’m sure I could be mistaken about the timing on the golf- going back and forth over the various seasons can make them run together, so to speak. I agree with you that at least Chaaahlie tried to protect her. I just had a major issue with that plot in S1- that not one person was looking for her. They should have had someone looking for her, for real (not Boone lying to Shannon when he and Locke were really just working on the hatch). Maybe I’m just too much of a Boy Scout (actually, I never was a real Boy Scout), but I would have spent everyday and night looking for her. How would you live with yourself- not to mention, what else is there to do all day, everyday? What man in real life would just say, “Some freak just abducted a pregnant girl and tried to kill Charlie. Oh, well. Wanna play some golf, or whatever?” This is something that always annoys me with shows and movies- why can’t TPTB just ask, “If this were really happening, wouldn’t someone go looking for her?” No, let’s just take the easy way out and not bother with how people in real life would act. I was willing to cut TPTB slack back in S1, because the pros by far outweighed the cons. Now, that is no longer the case- for me.

I also agree with you that Charlie was the one who needed a family, etc., so he was definitely more taken with Claire and he enjoyed being a surrogate father for Aaron.
100%
Well I'll disagree with you on this, cause I loved Charlie (cept for the kidnap Sun moment). :rip:



Here I am totally 100% in agreement with you, although my reasoning is a little different than yours. I have watched this show since its premiere and have re watched every single episode multiple times, including all the preceding season before a new season begins; and if there is one thing I'm certain of it's that Charlie/Claire love was completely and totally a one way street. Charlie consistently came off as that insecure guy that would build attachments in his life to be bigger than they actually were (been there).

Claire certainly cared for Charlie and appreciated all he did for her, but she never had any romantic feelings for her. Did they ever even hold hands on the show, let alone kiss??

And people complain about Claire's reaction to learning about Charlie's death as though she should have great morning over losing her 'grand love', this was not her reaction, her reaction was one of guilt. Why guilt? Because she feels guilty for the way she had used Charlie, as a babysitter, as a surrogate father, and had allowed him to continue to do these things for him even knowing that she had no romantic feelings for him. She led him on to help make her own life better.

Was her 'using' of him malicious in nature... maybe/maybe not?... but I tend to see it as more that she didn't want to break his heart and didn't know how to deal with his infatuation.

In the end, Charlie sacrificed himself nobly and honorably for Claire and for his friends, but please don't try to tell me that they were the 'great couple' of the island. I only hope that his death wasn't just a ratings gimmick and that Claire & Aaron do get on that helicopter one day. :frown: :mad:

Just my :twocents:

I see where you’re coming from, but I don’t see it as Claire manipulating Chaaahle, etc. and having guilt over his death. I believe the TPTB wanted us to believe they were in love, but Claire had reservations (trust issues), because important men in her life (daddy and Aaron’s daddy) abandoned her. I think TPTB just didn’t execute the love angle properly- needed some more heat (like Sayid and Shannon). There were a couple of signs of affection: they did kiss a couple of times (once for sure at the end of S2, after the hatch exploded- initiated by Claire) and Claire also took his hand at the funeral of Libby and Ana Lucia. But, I’m not sure these examples equate “being in love.” I held hands with and kissed many girls (in grade school / high school) and women before getting married many years ago- but I didn’t love any of them (maybe thought I was in love once or twice). Like I said, though, I cut TPTB some slack on this because everything has to be rushed a little on a show. That’s why I was really fed up with them when they had Claire (and even Hurley) get over Charlie in about two seconds. They did it right in TBotE, but then- nothing. Even something as simple as the following, would have appeased me (taken from my original critique of Forced and Contrived (aka Eggtown):

“If you want the audience to believe that Claire truly loved him, you can’t kill him off and then just have her smiling and doing the laundry a couple days later. Instead, maybe have her crying, kind of in a daze, while hanging the sheets and she doesn’t realize Aaron’s crying. Kate then brings her out of her daze and then Claire picks up Aaron and… as you were- continue scene so Claire can still say, “You should try it sometime” (which was the whole point of the scene- for the ending). Come on, give us something.”

I forgot to mention in my last post, another reason I believe Charlie’s death was primarily for dramatic effect (and for ratings) was (also taken from my original critique of Eggtown):

“This so-called plot twist (Kate having Aaron) appears to be just as stupid as the original idea that the creator’s had to kill off Jack in the Pilot (for those who don’t know or remember: when Kate and Charlie went back for Jack after being chased by the monster, Jack was supposed to be the one lying dead up in the tree, instead of the airline pilot). That would have been a stupid stunt, just for shock purposes and that is precisely what the ending of this episode felt like. Luckily, the ABC executives forced the change that kept Jack alive in the Pilot. Unfortunately, they couldn’t save this episode.”

Hmmm if they had killed off Jack in the pilot who would have been the "leader"? I choose to believe that Claire and Hurley did mourn Charlie deeply if only off camera because TPTB had too much other story they were trying to include.

Not to mention that they often shoot too much footage and have to cut out stuff that they don't need to continue the story. Hmm maybe I will go ask Jorge if they did shoot anything that got cut......

One factor that might become important is the fact that Charlie's story is NOT over. We see "dead, but also here" Charlie taking a part in future events by actively trying to persuade Hurley to return to the island. (This is assuming Ghost Charlie is an actual being or force with his own will; he may instead be some aspect of Smokey, or he may be Hurley's half-crazed guilty conscience.)

We don't know at this point whether Ghost Charlie will have any further involvement with the Oceanic 6, but it's possible that Charlie's destiny (to sacrifice himself to save Claire and Aaron) will yet be fulfilled. Perhaps Charlie's death (if death it was) in the Looking Glass was just a step that led him to becoming Ghost Charlie and THEN fulfilling his destiny. Perhaps he had to die in the Looking Glass to become this sort of ghost who takes an active role in the world of the living--or perhaps any of the island deaths that Desmond foresaw would have led to the same result.

One factor that might become important is the fact that Charlie's story is NOT over. We see "dead, but also here" Charlie taking a part in future events by actively trying to persuade Hurley to return to the island. (This is assuming Ghost Charlie is an actual being or force with his own will; he may instead be some aspect of Smokey, or he may be Hurley's half-crazed guilty conscience.)

We don't know at this point whether Ghost Charlie will have any further involvement with the Oceanic 6, but it's possible that Charlie's destiny (to sacrifice himself to save Claire and Aaron) will yet be fulfilled. Perhaps Charlie's death (if death it was) in the Looking Glass was just a step that led him to becoming Ghost Charlie and THEN fulfilling his destiny. Perhaps he had to die in the Looking Glass to become this sort of ghost who takes an active role in the world of the living--or perhaps any of the island deaths that Desmond foresaw would have led to the same result.

Maybe. But it's a shame that he himself never had the chance at happiness, the love and family that he always craved. He deserved that. Knowing he died for a girl that didn't love him is pretty unsatisfying, even if he succeeds in the end. The credit will go to the living who perform the actual rescue and Charlie will be even more forgotten than he is right now. We may see his hand in it but few others will.

One factor that might become important is the fact that Charlie's story is NOT over. We see "dead, but also here" Charlie taking a part in future events by actively trying to persuade Hurley to return to the island. (This is assuming Ghost Charlie is an actual being or force with his own will; he may instead be some aspect of Smokey, or he may be Hurley's half-crazed guilty conscience.)

We don't know at this point whether Ghost Charlie will have any further involvement with the Oceanic 6, but it's possible that Charlie's destiny (to sacrifice himself to save Claire and Aaron) will yet be fulfilled. Perhaps Charlie's death (if death it was) in the Looking Glass was just a step that led him to becoming Ghost Charlie and THEN fulfilling his destiny. Perhaps he had to die in the Looking Glass to become this sort of ghost who takes an active role in the world of the living--or perhaps any of the island deaths that Desmond foresaw would have led to the same result.

Maybe after Kate and Jack get back to the island the series ends with Claire being reunited with Aaron and they get on a helicopter together and leave then...........

Maybe. But it's a shame that he himself never had the chance at happiness, the love and family that he always craved. He deserved that. Knowing he died for a girl that didn't love him is pretty unsatisfying, even if he succeeds in the end. The credit will go to the living who perform the actual rescue and Charlie will be even more forgotten than he is right now. We may see his hand in it but few others will.


The problem is that at this point, I can't see ANY "happily ever afters" among the Lostaways.


Kate, who LEAST deserves it, seems to be sitting pretty at this point. But what does it mean that Aaron can't be "raised by another"? If he's the Antichrist or Messiah or something, motherhood is going to become pretty complicated once Aaron is past the cherubic tot stage. (And then there's the whole Jack disapproval thing.)

Sun is a widow (or "widow"), but she has a healthy child and plenty of money. Yet going back to Korea and into the shadow of Paik may not have been a wise move. I think Jin was right about that.

Hurley and Jack seem pretty self-assured right after they return to the world, but later fall apart.

Sayid has sold his soul. He's the worst off of anyone. Back in Season 1, I hoped that we would in the end see Sayid and Shannon make a good life together. But I can't see ANY redemption for Sayid at this point other than to sacrifice himself heroically for "the greater good."

As for the Left Behinies back on the island, I foresee great storylines for them over the next couple of seasons. I fully expect Claire to become a force to be reckoned with now that she's a mother whose child has been torn from her--she's the new Danielle.

Claire and Sawyer would make a pretty good tag team, I think. Juliet would be an interesting foil for Sawyer, too. But I have always expected Sawyer to end his days with the heroic sacrifice. I think something similar may be in store for Juliet, too. I don't see either Sawyer or Juliet ever leaving the island.

Locke may get his wish to become one with the island, but he's on a very, very destructive path. He'll get his comeuppance.

Ben is a psychopath. Does he suffer? Is he even capable of suffering? Yes--if something bad ever happens to his daughter.


I used to want and expect happy endings for all my Lostaways. Now the story has become so dark, I don't know how they'll pull it off--for anyone.

Maybe. But it's a shame that he himself never had the chance at happiness, the love and family that he always craved. He deserved that. Knowing he died for a girl that didn't love him is pretty unsatisfying, even if he succeeds in the end. The credit will go to the living who perform the actual rescue and Charlie will be even more forgotten than he is right now. We may see his hand in it but few others will.

I don't think that it matters all that much that Claire didn't love him. Sure, it would have been nice for his character, but I think (and I think his character would agree) that performing that self-less act was much more satisfying than having a relationship with Clarie. Too bad it was a mistake.

The only thing that I find disconcerting about his actions is that it seems like he killed himself because that was what was supposed to happen. Was Desmond's vision the premonition or the reason?

I choose to believe that Claire and Hurley did mourn Charlie deeply if only off camera because TPTB had too much other story they were trying to include.Not to mention that they often shoot too much footage and have to cut out stuff that they don't need to continue the story.

My problem with this excuse is there has been plenty of slow fillerish material in S4. What was more important? Scenes where Claire and Hurley mourn or hold a funeral for their closest friend of 3 seasons OR scenes where Claire makes coffee and Hurley watches Xanadu? If there is time to throw horseshoes at pegs there is time for mourning. Without it the writers have cheapened two great relationships that they spent years developing.

Perhaps Charlie's death (if death it was) in the Looking Glass was just a step that led him to becoming Ghost Charlie and THEN fulfilling his destiny. Perhaps he had to die in the Looking Glass to become this sort of ghost who takes an active role in the world of the living--or perhaps any of the island deaths that Desmond foresaw would have led to the same result.

Personally I thought as soon as they started Charlies "you're gonna die" story that Charlie either living or dying in a straightforward way would be unimaginitive and anti-climatic. A clever writer would find a third option that isn't stictly living or dying but a completely unexpected twist - like at the moment of Charlie's death another curtain is pulled aside and you realise his "fate" wasn't all that it seemed. It's something JKR did rather well with her hero in the last Harry Potter book. Maybe they're doing something to this effect with the "dead but here" Charlie, but if this is the case then FF-Charlie needs more focus and an interesting explanation, because right now he just seems like one of the very many faces in Losts ghostly chorus.

I don't think that it matters all that much that Claire didn't love him. Sure, it would have been nice for his character, but I think (and I think his character would agree) that performing that self-less act was much more satisfying than having a relationship with Clarie. Too bad it was a mistake.

I agree it wasn't about Claire's feelings, it was Charlie's love for both Claire and Aaron that caused him to do what he did and he wouldn't necessarily regret it, mainly because sadly he never valued his own life very much. Yes it was heroic, but being a martyr was also one of his issues. He never matured beyond that.

The only thing that I find disconcerting about his actions is that it seems like he killed himself because that was what was supposed to happen. Was Desmond's vision the premonition or the reason?

From where I stand it looked like a self fulfilling prophecy. Charlie locked himself in because after seeing near death after near death predicted by Desmond, he bought into it. He believed that what Desmond said would happen and indeed had to happen in order for the helicopter to come. There was also the stress factor to consider, the fact that Charlie was staring down his own mortality day after day and didn't want to die for nothing. He took an opportunity where he saw it and believed it would do the most good. I find that terribly tragic however. Had Desmond said nothing about what would happen, he likely would have fought harder to save himself.

Hmmm if they had killed off Jack in the pilot who would have been the "leader"? I choose to believe that Claire and Hurley did mourn Charlie deeply if only off camera because TPTB had too much other story they were trying to include.

Not to mention that they often shoot too much footage and have to cut out stuff that they don't need to continue the story. Hmm maybe I will go ask Jorge if they did shoot anything that got cut......

The leader was supposed to be Kate (ala Alias). Thank God the ABC suits called that one right- making Jack the hero (probably the 1 in a million for the suits vs. the creative talent). Regarding mourning off camera and not having enough time to show everything, etc., I’d be willing to give TPTB slack on that, if they did the following:
1) Show just a small scene like I described, with Claire hanging the laundry (remember, that overall scene was in the show anyway), so why not just have her a little bummed, then still have the line about Kate having a baby for the end of the show (which was the whole point of the scene)?
2) Not waste entire episodes: Eggtown, The Other Woman and Ji Yeon. That would free up a LOT of time!
100%
Maybe. But it's a shame that he himself never had the chance at happiness, the love and family that he always craved. He deserved that. Knowing he died for a girl that didn't love him is pretty unsatisfying, even if he succeeds in the end. The credit will go to the living who perform the actual rescue and Charlie will be even more forgotten than he is right now. We may see his hand in it but few others will.

I agree with pibbsneaker on this- it doesn’t matter if Claire loved him (again, I think she was supposed to have loved him, but TPTB failed miserably on the execution of this). Plenty of people do heroic things for strangers in real life- even Charlie came to the aid of Sayid’s girl (Nadia??) in the alley in Greatest Hits.
100%
I don't think that it matters all that much that Claire didn't love him. Sure, it would have been nice for his character, but I think (and I think his character would agree) that performing that self-less act was much more satisfying than having a relationship with Clarie. Too bad it was a mistake.

The only thing that I find disconcerting about his actions is that it seems like he killed himself because that was what was supposed to happen. Was Desmond's vision the premonition or the reason?

That’s why I had such a problem with the way they killed off Charlie. He should have died because there was no other choice. The only plausible explanation IMO is Charlie did it because he was afraid Claire and Aaron wouldn’t be rescued if he didn’t drown in that hatch. I’m sorry, but there’s no way would I lay down my life based on some other dude’s premonition. For all I know, he doesn’t have all the pieces to the puzzle. Not to mention, a much bigger point: once Penny said it wasn’t her boat, if I loved Claire, I definitely would have closed that door to the communications room behind me (after Patchy blew the grenade), got into my scuba gear, grabbed any weapons I could carry, and got back to her ASAP to try and protect her. If I know I’m going to die anyway (due to the universe course correcting, etc.) and I believe some bad dudes are going to be storming the Island, I’m going to kill as many of them before they kill me to protect the one I love. It’s tactically smart, more dramatic and as an added bonus- romantic! Again, maybe that’s just me.

That’s why I had such a problem with the way they killed off Charlie. He should have died because there was no other choice. The only plausible explanation IMO is Charlie did it because he was afraid Claire and Aaron wouldn’t be rescued if he didn’t drown in that hatch. I’m sorry, but there’s no way would I lay down my life based on some other dude’s premonition. For all I know, he doesn’t have all the pieces to the puzzle. Not to mention, a much bigger point: once Penny said it wasn’t her boat, if I loved Claire, I definitely would have closed that door to the communications room behind me (after Patchy blew the grenade), got into my scuba gear, grabbed any weapons I could carry, and got back to her ASAP to try and protect her. If I know I’m going to die anyway (due to the universe course correcting, etc.) and I believe some bad dudes are going to be storming the Island, I’m going to kill as many of them before they kill me to protect the one I love. It’s tactically smart, more dramatic and as an added bonus- romantic! Again, maybe that’s just me.


It certainly isn't Darlton. :drowsy: They took the least imaginative course as if they didn't have any more time to devote to the story. This show always seems like its in a hurry to get somewhere it never quite reaches.

It certainly isn't Darlton. :drowsy: They took the least imaginative course as if they didn't have any more time to devote to the story. This show always seems like its in a hurry to get somewhere it never quite reaches.

I agree, wholeheartedly. I have often used the old, “Hurry up and wait” line to describe LOST. They rush through certain plots, give us a tease here and there and then it’s like, “Okay, we don’t have anymore time for that story, we need to kill someone off again this week. So, whom should we kill? Who has the Q-scores?”

I agree that Charlie should not have died. I have a couple of thoughts on this:
1) Charlie was in a place called "The Looking Glass". I wonder if there is an Alice in Wonderland element here and unbeknownst to us, he has gone to an alternate world. This could explain his visit to Hurley and that other guy seeing him. Plus, "Alice in Wonderland" was part of the "others" book club readings.
2) I don't believe it was Charlie's "destiny" or "FATE" to die in the Looking Glass anymore than I believe it was Desmonds "destiny" or "FATE" to push buttons in a hatch for three years. I believe Charlie had to go to the Looking Glass because he was the musician and he could unblock the code, but the whole death part was lame. Nor do I believe the whole course correction thing that happened when Desmond time traveled is "real". I think the psychic lady is in on a future pre-determined by Whidmore (because of all their time travel whether physical or telepathic), and when Oceanic Flight 815 crashed because Desmond didn't press the buttons, it changed this pre-determined future. Then when Desmond time traveled and changed some of the events in that travel, talking to Charlie on the street, getting hit with the bat, and actually buying the ring, psychic lady tried to get him to make everything be the way it had been so that this pre-set future would get back on course.
The writers need to find a way to bring Charlie back--end of story.

From where I stand it looked like a self fulfilling prophecy. Charlie locked himself in because after seeing near death after near death predicted by Desmond, he bought into it. He believed that what Desmond said would happen and indeed had to happen in order for the helicopter to come. There was also the stress factor to consider, the fact that Charlie was staring down his own mortality day after day and didn't want to die for nothing. He took an opportunity where he saw it and believed it would do the most good. I find that terribly tragic however. Had Desmond said nothing about what would happen, he likely would have fought harder to save himself.

I find it tragic as well. His decision to die in the Looking Glass and buying into Desmond's visions is certainly at odds with his faith.




That’s why I had such a problem with the way they killed off Charlie. He should have died because there was no other choice. The only plausible explanation IMO is Charlie did it because he was afraid Claire and Aaron wouldn’t be rescued if he didn’t drown in that hatch. I’m sorry, but there’s no way would I lay down my life based on some other dude’s premonition. For all I know, he doesn’t have all the pieces to the puzzle. Not to mention, a much bigger point: once Penny said it wasn’t her boat, if I loved Claire, I definitely would have closed that door to the communications room behind me (after Patchy blew the grenade), got into my scuba gear, grabbed any weapons I could carry, and got back to her ASAP to try and protect her. If I know I’m going to die anyway (due to the universe course correcting, etc.) and I believe some bad dudes are going to be storming the Island, I’m going to kill as many of them before they kill me to protect the one I love. It’s tactically smart, more dramatic and as an added bonus- romantic! Again, maybe that’s just me.

Aside from the door thing, my biggest problem with how he died is that if he truly believed Desmond and had any inclination to save his life, all he had to do was put on the scuba gear before he turned off the transmission. I guess since he didn't he just bought into Desmond's visions and decided to end his life.

I agree that Charlie should not have died. I have a couple of thoughts on this:
1) Charlie was in a place called "The Looking Glass". I wonder if there is an Alice in Wonderland element here and unbeknownst to us, he has gone to an alternate world. This could explain his visit to Hurley and that other guy seeing him. Plus, "Alice in Wonderland" was part of the "others" book club readings.
2) I don't believe it was Charlie's "destiny" or "FATE" to die in the Looking Glass anymore than I believe it was Desmonds "destiny" or "FATE" to push buttons in a hatch for three years. I believe Charlie had to go to the Looking Glass because he was the musician and he could unblock the code, but the whole death part was lame. Nor do I believe the whole course correction thing that happened when Desmond time traveled is "real". I think the psychic lady is in on a future pre-determined by Whidmore (because of all their time travel whether physical or telepathic), and when Oceanic Flight 815 crashed because Desmond didn't press the buttons, it changed this pre-determined future. Then when Desmond time traveled and changed some of the events in that travel, talking to Charlie on the street, getting hit with the bat, and actually buying the ring, psychic lady tried to get him to make everything be the way it had been so that this pre-set future would get back on course.
The writers need to find a way to bring Charlie back--end of story.

:biggrin: Here, here!

I live in hope that the Looking Glass isn't just a cute name and its rabbit hole symbol might actually mean something. Considering the Orchid station, the white rabbits and the suggestions of wormholes, portals and teleportation...there are some very exciting possibilities and ways to bring Charlie back, even if it is an alternate Charlie from the other side of the looking glass, etc. But, you know, Charlie has always been married to 'wasted potential' thanks to Darlton so who knows.

I find it tragic as well. His decision to die in the Looking Glass and buying into Desmond's visions is certainly at odds with his faith.

I'm not so sure about that. Christ himself knew prophetically that he had to die to save his people, so maybe Charlie put his faith in that? It does baffle me that Charlie had so much trust in Desmond though, especially after Desmond lied to him about his Catch-22 vision and almost got Charlie killed by Rosseaus trap. I'd be cynical after that. But Charlie has always been too easily led ever since his FBs with Liam. And when it comes to Claire/Aaron he thinks with his heart not his head.

Personally I really love the theory about Des altering the past when he ran into Charlie, creating an alternate Charlie and the course correction was just the Universe trying to "re balance the equation", if you'll pardon the Matrix quote, by eliminating the extra Charlie. I'd love to see Charlie (even 2nd Charlie) to make a return to the cast of Lost, alive and well.
:charlie:

Personally I really love the theory about Des altering the past when he ran into Charlie, creating an alternate Charlie and the course correction was just the Universe trying to "re balance the equation", if you'll pardon the Matrix quote, by eliminating the extra Charlie. I'd love to see Charlie (even 2nd Charlie) to make a return to the cast of Lost, alive and well.
:charlie:

:hug:Oooh...don't even get me started on what an excellent twist this would be and how much it would restore my lost faith. With that one twist we would have...

a) a meaningful explanation for Desmonds flashes of Charlie's death.
b) a mindblowing explanation "I'm dead but I'm also here."
c) Dom returning in an important role as a revolutionalized Charlie.
d) Charlie rewarded for his sacrifice (so karma has value).
e) a very poetic sense of Charlie going through the looking glass.

If the duplicated Orchid bunnies offer an explanation for two Charlies, it could also explain Charlie's disappearing act, since that 2nd rabbit did appear out of nowhere. To me that's better than Charlie being a ghost. He just wasn't a very ghostly at all. Hurley/other patient could see him, he slapped Hurley, he had new clothes, a haircut, etc. He seemed more time travellerish than spiritual.

I know there are people who are sick of death fake outs (and believe me I feel your pain!). But even if you are against Charlie coming back to life, I wouldn't consider this twist to be that sort of "cheat". Charlie's drowning in the station would still remain an unchanged fact. He would just be dead and alive. Which by lost standards isn't more far fetched than its other mad supernatural scifi elements.

I was devoted to the Desmond/Charlie story last year and I really don't like being left with the nasty feeling that Desmond convinced Charlie to give his life for a misleading or false vision of Claire/Aarons rescue. But if they show that Desmond changed the course of Charlie's life, putting Charlie in a position where he could set the real rescue in motion - that would be a breath of fresh air.

I was devoted to the Desmond/Charlie story last year and I really don't like being left with the nasty feeling that Desmond convinced Charlie to give his life for a misleading or false vision of Claire/Aarons rescue. But if they show that Desmond changed the course of Charlie's life, putting Charlie in a position where he could set the real rescue in motion - that would be a breath of fresh air.

Even apart from the real rescue, it would be a satisfying outcome just to see that Desmond talking to Charlie on the street that day didn't ruin his life, but actually changed it for the better. That Charlie (if it's the one that paid Hurley a visit) seems more successful, happier, more confident, and I bet he never became a heroin addict if he didn't have the underlying issues that led to it. Desmond could actually have been Charlie's Wonderwall after all, giving him a new and better life.

Even apart from the real rescue, it would be a satisfying outcome just to see that Desmond talking to Charlie on the street that day didn't ruin his life, but actually changed it for the better. That Charlie (if it's the one that paid Hurley a visit) seems more successful, happier, more confident, and I bet he never became a heroin addict if he didn't have the underlying issues that led to it. Desmond could actually have been Charlie's Wonderwall after all, giving him a new and better life.

Wow! I was just about to express virtually that same sentiment, although you probably said it far more eloquently. :clapping:

Well hopefully the 'rock god' can have a Revival (pun intended).

I fear where Charlie's death is concerned Darlton did their creative thinking backwards.
I think the entire creation of Lost was done in reverse order. Damon, Cusey, and probably lots of other people in Hollywood loved Watchmen and lamented the fact that nobody had succeeded in adapting it to to the screen, although there'd been attempts (another has gotten underway since). They didn't own the rights to it, but figured that if they ever got a chance, they could do a tribute to it by concocting a show with a similar premise and style of present'n. Then somebody sold ABC on a show, brought them aboard, and they figured how to adapt the idea to the general desiderata (survivors on an island, strange things happening).

So there had to be a grand hoax, and you needed these people ostensibly stuck in some remote place. They had to get out of there without the world's finding out where they'd been (to prevent its being examined), and somehow without even themselves knowing where they'd been. The plot was worked out backwards in time and ostensible causality from there. In order to end up this way, you needed that. In order to have an excuse for that, you needed the other. To provide an excuse for the other, etc.

Charlie's ostensible death fits in fine with all that. He's not really dead, but his ostensible final acts provide an admittedly very lame excuse for why the islanders weren't known to the outside world (ostensibly radio jamming, which is contradicted by other parts of the story). If the story is lame in their world, that's fine because it provides clues for us to solve it.

Robert