Home
Log in
BlogHurley's Ignorance: A Defence
+6
eda
MyStarbuckHatesLost
Alaina
TheHolyStickman
solarchap
AngeloComet
10 posters
Page 1 of 1
Hurley's Ignorance: A Defence
by AngeloComet Sat May 24, 2008 7:26 pm
For the first seventeen episodes of Season One of Lost Hurley appears to be completely oblivious to the idea that the cursed 4 8 15 16 23 42 numbers could have caused the crash of Oceanic 815. Eighteen episodes later, in Numbers, Hurley finally mentions to Charlie: "I think the plane crash might have been my fault."
It's a nagging inconsistency and not easily reconciled. Is the reason why Hurley didn't spend the first half of Season One fretting about the cursed numbers and how he must have been to blame for the crash because the writers hadn't thought of it yet? Listen, it doesn’t fill me with any glee to pick holes in the wonderful work the writers produce, but holes as big as this one (no reflection on Hurley’s personal size, you understand) cannot be ignored.
During and after the Numbers episode Hurley witnesses his uncle collapsing dead, a man jumping off a building, and a meteorite slamming into Mr McCluck's (with poor Tricia Tanaka inside!) amongst a multitude of other instances of profound misfortune. Let's face it, Hurley should have been the least surprised person on Oceanic 815 when it went down. Sat in his seat, as the turbulence hit and the cabin was rocked, he should have been thinking, Dude I knew this was going to happen. Yet he remains blissfully ignorant until, oh yeah, he finds Danielle's scrap of paper with the numbers written on it. Then it all comes flooding back. Then he has a freak out.
Right. Sure. It's ridiculous and senseless and, yeah, it's initially hard to disagree. I mean, can you see any other explanation other than it being evidence of the writers coming up with Hurley's cursed numbers later down the line? That, horror of horrors, the writers at the start didn’t have Hurley’s history completely worked out? Dude, come on, say it ain’t so!
So here's the defence. The case for why Hurley can explicably remain ignorant that the numbers are cursed and that the writers didn't just come up with it deep into the heart of Season One.
Kate robbed safety deposit box 815. Driveshaft featured as number 234 on a jukebox. For 16 years Rousseau's distress signal had been playing. The reward for Kate's capture was $23,000. There are more, but I don't wish to bore you.
What do all these have in common? They are all instances of the 4 8 15 16 23 42 numbers appearing in and around the Lost universe, and these all occurred before the Numbers episode. So, in the defence of the writers, here we have a plethora of examples that display they knew all about the cursed numbers from the start. It was Oceanic 8-15 for God's sake! That the numbers were considered from the start should not be in question. Are we in agreement? I hope so. Because all that is left to do is establish why Hurley didn't seem to believe in their cursed properties being culpable for crashing the plane.
Hurley – “But the numbers, did you ever find out anything about them? Do you know where they got their power?”
Danielle – “Power?”
Hurley – “They bring bad stuff to everyone around you. They're cursed. You know that, right? The numbers, they're cursed.”
Hurley says something vital about the curse in the above dialogue. Just think about his ‘bad luck’. He uses the numbers and wins the lottery, but then his uncle dies. A man jumps out of a building as Hurley is being told even his businesses that burned down have made him money. A meteorite hits McCluck's and kills Tricia? So what? Tricia was mean to him and he hated McCluck's anyway. My point is: “They bring bad stuff to everyone around you.”
Bad luck to everyone around Hurley. Not to him. Hurley, as a rule, tends toward good fortune whilst those around him suffer. He crosses a fragile rope bridge just fine, whereas a featherweight Charlie causes it to collapse. (OK, he gets arrested as a suspected drug dealer whilst his mother's house burns down but, come on, that's just a blip, dude!) So he finds himself on board a crashing plane? That, to me, that's bad luck. Yet Hurley has two factors in his defence:
a) He has been told, just prior to boarding by Martha Toomey, that there is no such thing as a curse.
b) He believes in a curse that brings bad luck to people around him, but not to him.
Ergo, the plane crash cannot, in Hurley's mind, be the result of this curse, right? He’s either become convinced the curse isn’t real (hard to do, sure, when you’re in a metal tube plunging out of the sky) or he believes in a curse that harms others but not himself (only, ah, he actually survived the crash and a lot of other people died).
Hmm. This still isn’t stacking up, is it? So far, seems to me, Hurley should definitely have believed in the curse. Bad luck happened to people around him yet not to him. It should definitely, in the very least, if just for a moment, have crossed his mind that he and his curse may have been responsible for the crash of Oceanic 815.
Did he really not notice that 8 and 15 comprised his flight number? Probably not. He didn’t notice any of the warning signs. . .
OK. Forget all that stuff. Let’s take a run at this from another angle. What's Hurley got a history of? Mental illness. More specifically, traumatic mental repression. He was involved in a deck accident that killed four people and he subsequently went into a catatonic state as a result. The man has guilt issues. So. He survived a plane crash where over two hundred people were killed and, if he blames himself, the likely psychological contingency for him would be repression. That stands to reason, does it not? That to avoid a relapsing breakdown he would unconsciously ignore the guilt? Ergo, to avoid a relapse Hurley suppresses the notion that he and his curse were responsible. His sub-conscious defence mechanism (given that a catatonic state on an Island of strangers isn’t any use for survival) blocked out the idea of guilt totally.
That, I think, is a compelling argument.
It's only when Hurley is confronted with a piece of paper with the numbers upon it does he have to accept his repression - like the way he had to accept Dave was a figment of his imagination when confronted with the photograph of him and no-Dave. (Indeed, you could argue this guilt is what spurred on the reappearance of Dave on the Island.)
So it was only after eighteen episodes did that confrontation arise, when Hurley had to face the numbers on Danielle's papers and find the maddening parallel between the lottery numbers he believes are cursed and the same series of numbers appearing on a scrap of paper from a “French chick” on a desert Island. That was Numbers. That was episode eighteen. Thus we can explain the apparent carefree, ‘curseless’ Hurley for the previous seventeen episodes!
Dude, I rock.
It's a nagging inconsistency and not easily reconciled. Is the reason why Hurley didn't spend the first half of Season One fretting about the cursed numbers and how he must have been to blame for the crash because the writers hadn't thought of it yet? Listen, it doesn’t fill me with any glee to pick holes in the wonderful work the writers produce, but holes as big as this one (no reflection on Hurley’s personal size, you understand) cannot be ignored.
During and after the Numbers episode Hurley witnesses his uncle collapsing dead, a man jumping off a building, and a meteorite slamming into Mr McCluck's (with poor Tricia Tanaka inside!) amongst a multitude of other instances of profound misfortune. Let's face it, Hurley should have been the least surprised person on Oceanic 815 when it went down. Sat in his seat, as the turbulence hit and the cabin was rocked, he should have been thinking, Dude I knew this was going to happen. Yet he remains blissfully ignorant until, oh yeah, he finds Danielle's scrap of paper with the numbers written on it. Then it all comes flooding back. Then he has a freak out.
Right. Sure. It's ridiculous and senseless and, yeah, it's initially hard to disagree. I mean, can you see any other explanation other than it being evidence of the writers coming up with Hurley's cursed numbers later down the line? That, horror of horrors, the writers at the start didn’t have Hurley’s history completely worked out? Dude, come on, say it ain’t so!
So here's the defence. The case for why Hurley can explicably remain ignorant that the numbers are cursed and that the writers didn't just come up with it deep into the heart of Season One.
Kate robbed safety deposit box 815. Driveshaft featured as number 234 on a jukebox. For 16 years Rousseau's distress signal had been playing. The reward for Kate's capture was $23,000. There are more, but I don't wish to bore you.
What do all these have in common? They are all instances of the 4 8 15 16 23 42 numbers appearing in and around the Lost universe, and these all occurred before the Numbers episode. So, in the defence of the writers, here we have a plethora of examples that display they knew all about the cursed numbers from the start. It was Oceanic 8-15 for God's sake! That the numbers were considered from the start should not be in question. Are we in agreement? I hope so. Because all that is left to do is establish why Hurley didn't seem to believe in their cursed properties being culpable for crashing the plane.
Hurley – “But the numbers, did you ever find out anything about them? Do you know where they got their power?”
Danielle – “Power?”
Hurley – “They bring bad stuff to everyone around you. They're cursed. You know that, right? The numbers, they're cursed.”
Hurley says something vital about the curse in the above dialogue. Just think about his ‘bad luck’. He uses the numbers and wins the lottery, but then his uncle dies. A man jumps out of a building as Hurley is being told even his businesses that burned down have made him money. A meteorite hits McCluck's and kills Tricia? So what? Tricia was mean to him and he hated McCluck's anyway. My point is: “They bring bad stuff to everyone around you.”
Bad luck to everyone around Hurley. Not to him. Hurley, as a rule, tends toward good fortune whilst those around him suffer. He crosses a fragile rope bridge just fine, whereas a featherweight Charlie causes it to collapse. (OK, he gets arrested as a suspected drug dealer whilst his mother's house burns down but, come on, that's just a blip, dude!) So he finds himself on board a crashing plane? That, to me, that's bad luck. Yet Hurley has two factors in his defence:
a) He has been told, just prior to boarding by Martha Toomey, that there is no such thing as a curse.
b) He believes in a curse that brings bad luck to people around him, but not to him.
Ergo, the plane crash cannot, in Hurley's mind, be the result of this curse, right? He’s either become convinced the curse isn’t real (hard to do, sure, when you’re in a metal tube plunging out of the sky) or he believes in a curse that harms others but not himself (only, ah, he actually survived the crash and a lot of other people died).
Hmm. This still isn’t stacking up, is it? So far, seems to me, Hurley should definitely have believed in the curse. Bad luck happened to people around him yet not to him. It should definitely, in the very least, if just for a moment, have crossed his mind that he and his curse may have been responsible for the crash of Oceanic 815.
Did he really not notice that 8 and 15 comprised his flight number? Probably not. He didn’t notice any of the warning signs. . .
OK. Forget all that stuff. Let’s take a run at this from another angle. What's Hurley got a history of? Mental illness. More specifically, traumatic mental repression. He was involved in a deck accident that killed four people and he subsequently went into a catatonic state as a result. The man has guilt issues. So. He survived a plane crash where over two hundred people were killed and, if he blames himself, the likely psychological contingency for him would be repression. That stands to reason, does it not? That to avoid a relapsing breakdown he would unconsciously ignore the guilt? Ergo, to avoid a relapse Hurley suppresses the notion that he and his curse were responsible. His sub-conscious defence mechanism (given that a catatonic state on an Island of strangers isn’t any use for survival) blocked out the idea of guilt totally.
That, I think, is a compelling argument.
It's only when Hurley is confronted with a piece of paper with the numbers upon it does he have to accept his repression - like the way he had to accept Dave was a figment of his imagination when confronted with the photograph of him and no-Dave. (Indeed, you could argue this guilt is what spurred on the reappearance of Dave on the Island.)
So it was only after eighteen episodes did that confrontation arise, when Hurley had to face the numbers on Danielle's papers and find the maddening parallel between the lottery numbers he believes are cursed and the same series of numbers appearing on a scrap of paper from a “French chick” on a desert Island. That was Numbers. That was episode eighteen. Thus we can explain the apparent carefree, ‘curseless’ Hurley for the previous seventeen episodes!
Dude, I rock.
AngeloComet- On Jacobs List
- Number of posts : 626
Age : 45
Location : Manchester, United Kingdom
Humor : Dry and witty. Like my women.
Registration date : 2008-05-13
Character sheet
Name: Jack -
Re: Hurley's Ignorance: A Defence
by solarchap Sat May 24, 2008 8:48 pm
Dude, the fact that you are your own prosecutor AND defence is great, the ego as purveyor of the facts and the alter ego as the sceptic. It's a very good discipline AC and is great to read.
I really like the idea of Hurley being confronted twice and that I never noticed it in that context before, plus linking it to the photo of him with no-Dave makes a lot of sense.
I like to believe the writers always had it in mind from the start, especially with the numbers being so apophenically related to the whole story somehow, but then as I read your post, i was thrown into doubt, then back out of doubt! Great stuff mate!
I really like the idea of Hurley being confronted twice and that I never noticed it in that context before, plus linking it to the photo of him with no-Dave makes a lot of sense.
I like to believe the writers always had it in mind from the start, especially with the numbers being so apophenically related to the whole story somehow, but then as I read your post, i was thrown into doubt, then back out of doubt! Great stuff mate!
solarchap- Others
- Number of posts : 263
Age : 53
Location : London
Humor : Lots
Registration date : 2008-05-16
Character sheet
Name: Dirk Diggler
Re: Hurley's Ignorance: A Defence
by TheHolyStickman Sat May 24, 2008 9:07 pm
Yeah I like it. So in that theory you raised an idea that i'd never thought of then you dismissed it, so now 'Everything is in its right place'. Almost like a waste of time, But not. An enjoyable read Angelo.
+1. (Remember the old days)
+1. (Remember the old days)
TheHolyStickman- The Chosen Ones
- Number of posts : 1115
Age : 28
Location : Norfolk England
Humor : Witty
Registration date : 2008-05-18
Character sheet
Name: Roger Gilmour
Re: Hurley's Ignorance: A Defence
by Alaina Sun May 25, 2008 12:37 am
AC Once again proving why I followed you to this site!!!
I only wish I had the memory you do for what has happend in every episode
I only wish I had the memory you do for what has happend in every episode
Alaina- Others
- Number of posts : 136
Age : 48
Location : North Carolina
Registration date : 2008-05-16
Character sheet
Name:
Re: Hurley's Ignorance: A Defence
by MyStarbuckHatesLost Sun May 25, 2008 10:35 am
Good points AC.
Either suppression or suppression combined with a not-to-discriminating intellect. He, as a character, might find it hard to see the subtle difference between bad things happening to him and bad things happening to those around him. I would think that he would lump all of these things into the catch-all of "bad luck"
But, to play devil's advocate. He was falsely arrested, HIS chicken shack was destroyed, Starla left him for his friend Johnny, he had a number of bad things happen to him that almost kept him from reaching the airport for his flight into hell. So bad things did happen to him, not just to those around him.
The other Losties would most likely have not made any connections to the numbers since they encountered them BEFORE they knew that they may have any significance and in smaller doses. Hurley, on the other hand, got all of the numbers all in one shot, all together so he should have recognized them as they randomly popped up in his life (i.e. flight #815)
Hurley, however, would be the kind to lump ALL of the bad luck into one catagory so I think your tack on this is the correct one.
Either suppression or suppression combined with a not-to-discriminating intellect. He, as a character, might find it hard to see the subtle difference between bad things happening to him and bad things happening to those around him. I would think that he would lump all of these things into the catch-all of "bad luck"
But, to play devil's advocate. He was falsely arrested, HIS chicken shack was destroyed, Starla left him for his friend Johnny, he had a number of bad things happen to him that almost kept him from reaching the airport for his flight into hell. So bad things did happen to him, not just to those around him.
The other Losties would most likely have not made any connections to the numbers since they encountered them BEFORE they knew that they may have any significance and in smaller doses. Hurley, on the other hand, got all of the numbers all in one shot, all together so he should have recognized them as they randomly popped up in his life (i.e. flight #815)
Hurley, however, would be the kind to lump ALL of the bad luck into one catagory so I think your tack on this is the correct one.
MyStarbuckHatesLost- On Jacobs List
- Number of posts : 681
Age : 61
Location : Winston Salem, North Carolina U.S.A.
Humor : check out TheFlatSpin.com and you'll be sorry you asked that.
Registration date : 2008-05-14 -
Re: Hurley's Ignorance: A Defence
by eda Sun May 25, 2008 3:52 pm
Angelocomet, they should include your episode and other analyses as little booklets in Lost dvd box sets, lol.
I've always wondered whether the writers knew what they were doing, especially with the numbers, from the start. Then I read a few articles which convinced me that they didn't. So I believe that the error you are pointing to was indeed an error, and they probably thought they could get away with it using the same excuses you propose.
Here are 2 related extracts from an interview the writers had with Stephen King :
'Stephen King: How much did you know when you started?
J.J. Abrams: I was going to ask you that about The Dark Tower.
King: Not a whole lot.
Abrams: We didn't have much time to know anything, because it began the way it will end, which is...
Damon Lindelof: In chaos. [Laughter]
Abrams: Well, no — as commerce. It was a network saying, ''We want a show about people who survive a plane crash, and we want the final product in 12 weeks.'' Damon and I, who had never met until ABC brought us together, began writing an outline. After five days, there was one. They greenlit it, and we started writing scenes just to cast the thing. We would meet actors. We would write characters based on the actors, and it went from there. During the period of preproduction, production, and postproduction, we worked on a bible of the series. Ideas have fallen by the wayside or haven't happened; some ideas actually have. But for the most part, it was a leap of faith. It was beginning something that had a lot of big ideas, and believing in an ending.
King: That's the way I work. I just start writing a story. It doesn't make any f---ing sense to me.
Abrams: I'm so happy to hear you say that! A leap of faith — that, to me, is the essence of the show. Just embrace the absolutely over-the-top absurd nature of the story. Because when that kind of story is told with respect for the characters, the story, and the audience, you'll buy into it. That's my favorite thing about your work. You could argue that it's pulp stuff, but told with conviction. '
'Lindelof: My father was into the Illuminati and the number 23, so he was a big reader of Robert Anton Wilson. So there was some intentionality behind it, but we had no idea, no grand design behind the Numbers. But suddenly, the No. 1 question stopped being ''What is the Monster?'' and went to being 'What do the Numbers mean?'' This isn't to say that the Numbers don't mean anything. We just had no idea it had this potential to get totally out of control. '
I've always wondered whether the writers knew what they were doing, especially with the numbers, from the start. Then I read a few articles which convinced me that they didn't. So I believe that the error you are pointing to was indeed an error, and they probably thought they could get away with it using the same excuses you propose.
Here are 2 related extracts from an interview the writers had with Stephen King :
'Stephen King: How much did you know when you started?
J.J. Abrams: I was going to ask you that about The Dark Tower.
King: Not a whole lot.
Abrams: We didn't have much time to know anything, because it began the way it will end, which is...
Damon Lindelof: In chaos. [Laughter]
Abrams: Well, no — as commerce. It was a network saying, ''We want a show about people who survive a plane crash, and we want the final product in 12 weeks.'' Damon and I, who had never met until ABC brought us together, began writing an outline. After five days, there was one. They greenlit it, and we started writing scenes just to cast the thing. We would meet actors. We would write characters based on the actors, and it went from there. During the period of preproduction, production, and postproduction, we worked on a bible of the series. Ideas have fallen by the wayside or haven't happened; some ideas actually have. But for the most part, it was a leap of faith. It was beginning something that had a lot of big ideas, and believing in an ending.
King: That's the way I work. I just start writing a story. It doesn't make any f---ing sense to me.
Abrams: I'm so happy to hear you say that! A leap of faith — that, to me, is the essence of the show. Just embrace the absolutely over-the-top absurd nature of the story. Because when that kind of story is told with respect for the characters, the story, and the audience, you'll buy into it. That's my favorite thing about your work. You could argue that it's pulp stuff, but told with conviction. '
'Lindelof: My father was into the Illuminati and the number 23, so he was a big reader of Robert Anton Wilson. So there was some intentionality behind it, but we had no idea, no grand design behind the Numbers. But suddenly, the No. 1 question stopped being ''What is the Monster?'' and went to being 'What do the Numbers mean?'' This isn't to say that the Numbers don't mean anything. We just had no idea it had this potential to get totally out of control. '
eda- Others
- Number of posts : 123
Age : 40
Location : istanbul
Registration date : 2008-05-15
Re: Hurley's Ignorance: A Defence
by katesawjack Sun May 25, 2008 4:32 pm
This is all I have to say AC! My time is now 9:27am May 25,2008,but as you have a head start on this :
I didn't want to be late in wishing you this.
I didn't want to be late in wishing you this.
katesawjack- On Jacobs List
- Number of posts : 634
Age : 81
Location : Home of Indianas' Law Enforcement Academy
Humor : Yes
Registration date : 2008-05-15
Character sheet
Name: Miranda Eowyn
Re: Hurley's Ignorance: A Defence
by TheHolyStickman Sun May 25, 2008 9:18 pm
What does the button on the far right do?
TheHolyStickman- The Chosen Ones
- Number of posts : 1115
Age : 28
Location : Norfolk England
Humor : Witty
Registration date : 2008-05-18
Character sheet
Name: Roger Gilmour
AngeloComet- On Jacobs List
- Number of posts : 626
Age : 45
Location : Manchester, United Kingdom
Humor : Dry and witty. Like my women.
Registration date : 2008-05-13
Character sheet
Name: Jack -
vincentthedog- On Jacobs List
- Number of posts : 963
Age : 49
Location : Mass,USA
Humor : God is a comedian, playing to an audience too afraid to laugh. - Voltaire
Registration date : 2008-05-15
Character sheet
Name: Vlad Táltos -
Re: Hurley's Ignorance: A Defence
by Lojozz Mon May 26, 2008 3:43 pm
AC we've argued this many times and I think you give the writers a get out of jail card with this so well done. I don't think they thought ok Hurley would have to supress this otherwise he'd be catatonic, but it does just about work so I'm gonna leave it.
Lojozz- Moderator
- Number of posts : 388
Age : 53
Location : Manchester
Registration date : 2008-05-13
Character sheet
Name: Joe -
Re: Hurley's Ignorance: A Defence
by neoplasm Fri May 30, 2008 1:25 am
I just always thought he'd kept it to himself until then. Hurley is a manly man, barring his size. Carrying a heavy burden and therefore fragile in many cases, but he kicks ass at sports.... I dunno... I don't think he needs such a defense. Though it was an enjoyable read anyway.
neoplasm- Flight Attendant
- Number of posts : 8
Age : 52
Registration date : 2008-05-16
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum|
|
|