I think Locke is feeling very possessive of Claire and the baby, himself. His actions don't make much sense to me otherwise.
I was wondering about that, and looking at it from a POV that isn't Locke scheming, just being a normal person. He seemed to be close to Walt- could it be that this is the way his reaction to his abduction is manifesting itself? Perhaps thinking that something like that won't happen on his watch?
Or, after being confronted by the numbers/power of the Others the previous day, possibly hedging his bets, as pointed out upthread, to be a position to have access to Aaron to hand him over.
Also, Locke was in Claire's hallucination/dreams referencing the Others, I think, when she was pregnant.
I am hopinghopinghoping that the mysterious Locke motives actually mean something and are going somewhere, and not just bad writing. I'm feeling burned out from Buffy Season 6/7 characterizations, and remembering hoping that the way they were written (Pod!Giles, for instance) were part of the arc, and then just being let down again and again when it was just shown to be inconsistent writing.
But, the liklihood that the Others are going to come for Aaron once he's not as physically dependant on Claire I think is pretty strong, and I wonder who knows it. The Tailies, are probably painfully aware. Walt being gone doesn't seem to have a huge affect on the majority of the other Lostaways, with the exception of Locke (my speculation) and Michael, both of whom have recently exhibited radical character changes.
Maybe this episode didn't suck as much as I originally thought, because it is making me theorize quite a lot.
I was wondering about that, and looking at it from a POV that isn't Locke scheming, just being a normal person. He seemed to be close to Walt- could it be that this is the way his reaction to his abduction is manifesting itself? Perhaps thinking that something like that won't happen on his watch?
My first interpretation was that Locke was just attached to Claire and Aaron. But the more I thought about it, the harder time I had reconciling that idea, with his complete lack of interest in her kidnapping last season. He was under the hatch's thrall then, of course, but I think he and Boone even let people believe they were looking for Claire, when they weren't.
Of course, he's since gotten to know Claire on a more personal basis, and he may well be predisposed to concern over a fatherless child, too. If we're lucky, his motives are mixed. That level of complexity could make for some good story telling.
Locke is practically worshiping the Island at this point -- I suppose he looks on the others as Heretics with a capital H.
Locke likes to think of himself as a strategist, but I don't think he's very good at it. His back story certainly doesn't make him out to be. If he is planning something I don't expect it to work.
Okay, THAT is hysterical!
Coincidentally enough, Rob's friends Edward Kitsis and Adam Horowitz wrote this week's episode.
I took Ana Lucia's "Are you hittin' that," as a shout-out (intentional or incidental) to Veronica Mars, so it's funny see that VM (which I won't get 'til Saturday) had a little Lost shout-out.
Oh, heh. Darnell.
Oh, heh. Darnell.
Yeah. Ask Rob if Kitsis and Horowitz decided to one-up him, because hearing Jack say it was even more awkward and inappropriate than hearing Darnell say it.
Punching the fucked up defenseless guy, that's really cool and mysterious. What a tosser.
The only thing that might redeem Locke for me... maybe... if it's done well... is if an addict had crossed his path before -- perhaps causing his disability.
Rerun tonight.
From last season.
Next Week's episode of "Lost" will be directed by Roxann Dawson. (formerly Biggs-Dawson)
