Friday, May 20, 2011

There'd Be No "Lost" without the Lords



Here are some excerpts of a great piece about the parallels between the TV series Lost and Lord of the Flies from Yahoo!:

...To start with, the characters in both Lost and Lord of the Flies first arrived by plane crash and they landed on a deserted island. Also, although only a select few survived in both fictions, those who did were relatively unharmed.

In Lord of the Flies, only the children survived, with the oldest being about 12 years old. Not a single adult authority was left to help the kids in their survival or their attempt at being rescued. In Lost, there were many adults that survived (in contrast, few kids), but not a single adult authority. The reason this similarity is important is that in both fictions, the emergence of authority from people who didn't previously hold specific authority positions is a major force in moving along the plotline.

In Lord of the Flies, one of the main character's/leader's name is Jack, just as in Lost. If you consider it character-wise, Jack in Lost is more like Ralph in Lord of the Flies. Nonetheless, there's little doubt in my mind that the name Jack was chosen for Lost because of the prominence of the character Jack in Lord of the Flies.

Also, one of the first motivators in both fictions was securing food. In both Lost and Lord of the Flies, wild boar is the main (even only) source of meat and those who hunt it receive special recognition. Even many of the scenes, wherein the wild boar is charging the hunters and knocking them over, seem eerily familiar in both stories.

Early in the show Lost, as in the book Lord of the Flies, the fear of an anonymous monster or beast takes over the survivors. In both stories the fear of a beast makes most of the camp scared of the forest and they choose to stay on the beach to avoid it. In Lord of the Flies, the reader finds out that the beast is just a human, whereas the identity or source of the monster in Lost has not yet been revealed. With the strong similarities so far though, it would come as no surprise if Lost's monster was also of human origin.

Lord of the Flies first used the phrase, "the Others", in reference to an opposing tribe on the same island. The same phrase is used constantly throughout the TV series, Lost. The one major difference is that in William Golding's book, "the Others" were once a part of the original tribe, whereas the source of "the Others" in Lost is only occasionally hinted at.

It may be true though, that "the Others" in Lost are mainly survivors of other plane crashes who were once turned against their fellow survivors and made to join "the Others." This same thing explicitly happens at least once after the development of the two tribes in Lord of the Flies.

Also, something that is continually recurring in Lost is "the Others" killing people from the original surviving tribe. That's exactly how it happens in Lord of the Flies. One main difference is that the TV series Lost has gone on long enough that the killing happens back and forth, whereas in the book Lord of the Flies, the surviving tribe never attempted or succeeded in killing any of "the Others."

Finally, one of the central points of Lord of the Flies is a critique on human society and human nature. It can be equally argued that this is a central point of the TV show Lost. In both, the inherent evil nature of humanity is greatly considered. In Lost, several of the main characters have criminal backgrounds and are murderers. The rest of the cast just seem burdened by varying human weaknesses: pride, insecurity, and vanity.

Also, the ongoing competition between official leadership and subversive attempts at leadership is always a major plot point in episodes of Lost. This was the same driving force throughout Lord of the Flies plot...