I don't dependency is his only motive, it may not even be a motive of itself. I think he wants to control the situation. Handpicking a leader gives him a different sort of control than if he were leader himself, in some ways. He doesn't have the people looking to him as the leader, which frees him up to do his own stuff. He was able to make sure the people gravitated toward someone competent and fair. And if/when he doesn't want Jack in charge any longer? Well since it is likely people, being what they are, will rebel, it's now set so that they'll do so against Jack. Meanwhile, Locke is sitting pretty as exotic survivalist, who comes through in a pinch, feeds them, etc.

It's like the Tony Robbins of land masses.

So they're all doomed?

I don't think Locke's motivation is making people dependent on him. I think he's paternalistic, and wants to help people, even if they don't really need his kind of help. He is, indeed, manipulative, but Sayid didn't have to take the knife; Charlie didn't have to give him the smack; Jack didn't have to listen; Michael didn't have to let Walt believe that he found Vincent (and isn't it possible that having done that is his real problem with Locke?). He gives them what he believes they need, and they take it because they believe it too. Until he tied up Boone, who had pretty much given himself over to Locke already, he hadn't forced anyone. He may not consider what he did to Boone force, since he just provided the tools (crazy!paste, knife and rope).

Basically.

Yeah, a little x-posty there.

Hee. The funny is, I was replying to the 'doomed' comment. Your post was just serendipity.

If they all wake up in their beds the next morning I am going to be really angry.

The SO still claims (albeit laughingly) that Locke is totally good guy.

Definitely he's manipulative -- he's the one pulling the strings for a LOT of what's happening. When major action gets taken, it's usually got Locke behind it in one way or another. Motive is another thing altogether.

When he did the whole Boone bondage thing, I was thinking that it was pretty irresponsible to leave them tied up in a jungle where there are known predators. Unless he knows the extent and potentially has control of the danger, that is. Locke knew immediately that the danger to Shannon had been imagined -- he should have known that there was a hallucination, but not perhaps what it was, and indeed not that she hadn't come to any harm -- so did he have some sort of insight/tie/control that allowed him to know that?

If they all wake up in their beds the next morning I am going to be really angry.

Absolutely. I would, however, like to see an episode in which one of the characters (perhaps with the aid of Dr. Locke's Crazy-Making Head Ointment) dream/hallucinate that they've been rescued--as long as it's a brief flash, and not a whole episode.

At some point, I'd also like at least one of the characters to freak out about their family thinking they're dead, worry about who's feeding the cat, etc.

This is how things transpired in my head...

Locke and Boone had been going out to the jungle by themselves for how long...a week? They had spent roughly 8 hours a day together for 7-8 days. During that time, I'm sure they talked about a helluva lot and I'm fairly sure Shannon came up A LOT. Locke probably recognized that there were the foundations of an unhealthy relationship, but of course he didn't know about the stepcest.

So after Boone kept pushing to tell Shannon their secret, Locke decided he needed to "free" Boone - for his own good.