Juliet

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by Audio Pineapple,December 29, 2006 08:33 pm

But I can't believe that Ana would have accepted that they had been taken to a better place. And same with the Other things. If they needed the children and Aaron going to the groups and saying "hello. We want to take the children and care for them and that includes your unborn child" the castaways would probably have attacked first.

I don't think asking for someone to hand over their unborn child is a good thing to do anyway - it's entirely Claire's business how she decides to bring up Aaron. But explaining that the island is a dangerous place and that they can take everybody somewhere much safer, including the child *and its mother*, then maybe they'd have had an audience... and that's assuming their goal is making everybody safer, which doesn't actually seem to be in their remit to me at present. If these people say they'd rather take their chances on the island, surely that's their business. As for their 'needing' the children, that's a different issue altogether: that's Other-centric, not necessarily for the benefit of the kids. You can't just decide you 'need' someone ergo you have a right to hold them captive and do to them as you will.

[Audio Pineapple]

But what if there isn't room to take everyone. If they said "you but not you or you there isn't room so you have to stay on this dangerous island" do you think that the second and third people would just accept it without retaliating in some form?

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by Audio Pineapple,December 29, 2006 08:43 pm

But what if there isn't room to take everyone. If they said "you but not you or you there isn't room so you have to stay on this dangerous island" do you think that the second and third people would just accept it without retaliating in some form?

There's a whole other island and they didn't look pushed for space in their village as well, so actually I doubt that's a problem. Also Ben claims to have the means to take Jack home. And even if it is a problem, I don't see how it comes close to justifying the theft of chosen 'good people' (as listed in, what, Him's version of 'Mein Kampf'?) and a total disinterest in what happens to those they deem bad. At any rate, they can't expect much less than warfare as a consequence. How likely were Jack and Ana Lucia to shrug and assume those people who were taken so frighteningly and suspiciously were simply being removed to a safer place and that no harm could possibly befall them? And with Claire, who we know was drugged and set to be robbed of her baby, allegedly with her own death as a consequence, it looks very much as if they would've been appallingly wrong.

[Kiowa Warrior]

Originally Posted by Murgatroyd,December 29, 2006 05:53 pm

Yes, precisely... though perhaps she's scared that Jack's going to succeed and she doesn't want to take that chance. Or perhaps it's a test for Jack.

Yes, perhaps Juliet was hoping that Ben would eventually just die and not be able to break Jack down in time to treat him, and she was not expecting Jack to discover the x-rays and for the operation to be brought forward so quickly, and so if Jack did decide to operate then she wanted to put him off. If she does have plans to overthrow Ben and become the leader, then Jack's actions would tell her if he could be trusted and of possible further use to the Others.

Originally Posted by Murgatroyd

He does come to his own conclusion about what would've happened, but I can't reveal any more about that bit without spoiling it for you. It's actually a novel that examines the repercussions of someone's not actually killing Hitler but preventing his birth. Definitely worth looking it out, I think.

It does sound very interesting...at first thoughts a world without Hitler would be immediately better off, but I doubt it would be that simple. If I get a chance to read it I'll let you know what I think of it!

[Audio Pineapple]

*hunts out thread*

I feel like I should like her - her flashback was a blatent attempt to make us do so by showing her caring and downtrodden and vulnerable sides but... she just doesn't sit right with me.

And I still don't forgive her for trying to kill Ben.

[E Pluribus Unum]

Originally Posted by Audio Pineapple,February 11, 2007 11:22 pm

*hunts out thread*

I feel like I should like her - her flashback was a blatent attempt to make us do so by showing her caring and downtrodden and vulnerable sides but... she just doesn't sit right with me.

And I still don't forgive her for trying to kill Ben.

Am I the only one who was totally touched by her flashback? She was doing something extremely helpful, and down right risky - trying to help her sister - and then the others (arrogant as they've proved) pull a few strings (knock a few people over, ok 1 but y'know...) and 'con' her into coming on the island..

No doubt she's had to endure Ben's "hospitalities" and while I can't condone her plotting and planning of Ben's death, she seemed to have been pushed to her limit..

I will agree with you about her 'not sitting right' lol. In her flashback she was very...Not sure the best word, quirky? Perhaps 3 years is enough to change someone, but she seems so much more 'in control' on the island.

Though I think maybe she had courtside seats at the 'brainwashing' facility

[under blue skies]

I'm not really sure how I feel about Juliet... I feel the more I see of her, the more I feel uneasy about her. But maybe that's just me.

In her flashbacks, I think I did warm to her a lot more. I really enjoyed the scenes with her sister, and it was nice and "believable" to see her gentler pre-island side.
But saying that, when we were then shown more of her on the island... I don't know, it seemed to emphasise the fact that she has changed. Now, she strikes me as the type of character who just cannot be trusted; I don't know how to read her, and her presence makes me almost nervous.

But although I don't actually like her, I do think she is a wonderful character. There is something mysterious and serenely chilling about her, and that makes for compelling watching.

[The_other_other]

Just dont like her man

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by E PLURIBUS UNUM,February 11, 2007 11:37 pm

Am I the only one who was totally touched by her flashback? She was doing something extremely helpful, and down right risky - trying to help her sister - and then the others (arrogant as they've proved) pull a few strings (knock a few people over, ok 1 but y'know...) and 'con' her into coming on the island..

No doubt she's had to endure Ben's "hospitalities" and while I can't condone her plotting and planning of Ben's death, she seemed to have been pushed to her limit..

I will agree with you about her 'not sitting right' lol. In her flashback she was very...Not sure the best word, quirky? Perhaps 3 years is enough to change someone, but she seems so much more 'in control' on the island.

Though I think maybe she had courtside seats at the 'brainwashing' facility

No, I found it pretty touching. Well. As touched as I could be by someone who makes male field mice pregnant. I'm concerned about how far she would've pushed her ethically dubious methods, but her motivation seemed solely to help her genuinely suffering and consenting sister and other people like her. She certainly didn't want fame and money. But I would've been interested to see to what extent she would've applied her expertise in a wider context, and whether or not consent and the like would've remained important to her. And, d'you know, I actually think they would. I never liked island Juliet, but I don't think I truly dislike (field mouse stuff aside) the flashback version.

[E Pluribus Unum]

Originally Posted by Murgatroyd,February 12, 2007 12:09 am

No, I found it pretty touching. Well. As touched as I could be by someone who makes male field mice pregnant. I'm concerned about how far she would've pushed her ethically dubious methods, but her motivation seemed solely to help her genuinely suffering and consenting sister and other people like her. She certainly didn't want fame and money. But I would've been interested to see to what extent she would've applied her expertise in a wider context, and whether or not consent and the like would've remained important to her. And, d'you know, I actually think they would. I never liked island Juliet, but I don't think I truly dislike (field mouse stuff aside) the flashback version.

I know I may have overlooked her debatable research, and I'm certainly not one for 'sacrificing animals for our gain' - though I do sympathise with the debate from those in the situation like that of Jules and her sister. But as I read your post Murg I began to see a similarity between her and the others. They seem to be pushing the envelope on morals and ethics and all that other business, I wonder if that's why they choose her? Do they 'choose' people who have shown the ability to push there ethical and moral standards? Maybe that's why they were so happy with the plane crash, as there's, well, a plane load of ethically dubious people right there - though it doesn't explain why they didn't try and take the losties sooner...

It's all a muddle.

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by E PLURIBUS UNUM,February 12, 2007 12:23 am

I know I may have overlooked her debatable research, and I'm certainly not one for 'sacrificing animals for our gain' - though I do sympathise with the debate from those in the situation like that of Jules and her sister. But as I read your post Murg I began to see a similarity between her and the others. They seem to be pushing the envelope on morals and ethics and all that other business, I wonder if that's why they choose her? Do they 'choose' people who have shown the ability to push there ethical and moral standards? Maybe that's why they were so happy with the plane crash, as there's, well, a plane load of ethically dubious people right there - though it doesn't explain why they didn't try and take the losties sooner...

It's all a muddle.

Yes, I think there's a lot in that - they saw her as someone who wasn't afraid to ride roughshot over people and ethics in order to get what she wanted, rather failing, I think, to take into account that she was doing all this for the benefit of a suffering and consenting relative. They even believed her when she flippantly said she wanted Edmund (?) run over by a bus... implying that they wouldn't think twice about sacrificing someone in order to get what or whom they want.