Archives

Favorite Poets: T.S. Eliot

I started out an Eliot scorner, but he and I made our peace many years ago. I didn’t understand his poems; I still don’t, but now I can enjoy without understanding completely. Here are a couple of excerpts from Eliot”s play, Murder in the Cathedral.

You think me reckless, desperate and mad.
You argue by results, as this world does,
To settle if an act be good or bad.
You defer to the fact. For every life and every act
Consequence of good and evil can be shown.
And as in time results of many deeds are blended
So good and evil in the end become confounded.
It is not in time that my death shall be known;
It is out of time that my decision is taken
If you call that decision
To which my whole being gives entire consent.
I give my life
To the Law of God above the Law of Man.
Those who do not the same
How should they know what I do?

You shall forget these things, toiling in the household,
You shall remember them, droning by the fire,
When age and forgetfulness sweeten memory
Only like a dream that has often been told
And often been changed in the telling. They will seem unreal.
Human kind cannot bear very much reality.

More Eliot:

Eliot’s Hysteria.

Actor Michael Gough reads The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock.

Macavity, the Mystery Cat.

Favorite Poets: Sir Walter Scott

O Caledonia! stern and wild,
Meet nurse for a poetic child!

~Sir Walter Scott, The Lay of the Last Minstrel

To pair with a Regency romance review, one should feature a Regency poet. Sir Walter Scott was not only the most popular of Regency era novelists, he was also a poet. His most famous poems were The Lay of the Last Minstrel, The Lady of the Lake, and Marmion. Lochinvar is an excerpt from the longer poem Marmion.


O young Lochinvar is come out of the west,
Through all the wide Border his steed was the best;
And save his good broadsword he weapons had none,
He rode all unarm’d, and he rode all alone.
So faithful in love, and so dauntless in war,
There never was knight like the young Lochinvar.

He staid not for brake, and he stopp’d not for stone,
He swam the Eske river where ford there was none;
But ere he alighted at Netherby gate,
The bride had consented, the gallant came late:
For a laggard in love, and a dastard in war,
Was to wed the fair Ellen of brave Lochinvar.

So boldly he enter’d the Netherby Hall,
Among bride’s-men, and kinsmen, and brothers and all:
Then spoke the bride’s father, his hand on his sword,
(For the poor craven bridegroom said never a word,)
“O come ye in peace here, or come ye in war,
Or to dance at our bridal, young Lord Lochinvar?”

“I long woo’d your daughter, my suit you denied; —
Love swells like the Solway, but ebbs like its tide —
And now I am come, with this lost love of mine,
To lead but one measure, drink one cup of wine.
There are maidens in Scotland more lovely by far,
That would gladly be bride to the young Lochinvar.”

The bride kiss’d the goblet: the knight took it up,
He quaff’d off the wine, and he threw down the cup.
She look’d down to blush, and she look’d up to sigh,
With a smile on her lips and a tear in her eye.
He took her soft hand, ere her mother could bar, —
“Now tread we a measure!” said young Lochinvar.

So stately his form, and so lovely her face,
That never a hall such a gailiard did grace;
While her mother did fret, and her father did fume
And the bridegroom stood dangling his bonnet and plume;
And the bride-maidens whisper’d, “’twere better by far
To have match’d our fair cousin with young Lochinvar.”

One touch to her hand, and one word in her ear,
When they reach’d the hall-door, and the charger stood near;
So light to the croupe the fair lady he swung,
So light to the saddle before her he sprung!
“She is won! we are gone, over bank, bush, and scaur;
They’ll have fleet steeds that follow,” quoth young Lochinvar.

There was mounting ‘mong Graemes of the Netherby clan;
Forsters, Fenwicks, and Musgraves, they rode and they ran:
There was racing and chasing on Cannobie Lee,
But the lost bride of Netherby ne’er did they see.
So daring in love, and so dauntless in war,
Have ye e’er heard of gallant like young Lochinvar?

Other than the Caledonian Connection, this video at YouTube has nothing to do with Sir Walter Scott, but we’ve been rather obsessed with Celtic Thunder lately here in Semicolonland. Perhaps you’ll get the Caledonian Call, too. Love those kilts.

Sunday Salon: Books Read in March, 2009

The Sunday Salon.com
I read a LOT of books in March, mostly because I wasn’t blogging, but also because of some personal stuff going on in my life that enabled/forced me to sit in waiting rooms and and other waiting places regularly. I’ve written about most of these books in my Lenten journal, and I’ll be blogging those thoughts and reviews soon.

The School of Essential Ingredients by Erica Bauermeister. Recommended by Megan at Leafing Through Life. I sent my copy of this book to Eldest Daughter in Nashville after I finished it because she likes cooking and stories related to cooking. I think she’ll enjoy it as much as I did.

The End of the Alphabet by C.S. Richardson. Recommended by She Is Too Fond of Books.

Change of Heart by Jodi Piccoult. Recommended at the 3Rs.

The Amazing Potato by Milton Meltzer.

Alas, Babylon by Pat Frank. I’ve been reading a lot of apocalyptic, dystopian stuff lately; this one and several others fit that description.

The Compound –Bodeen. Recommended by Jen Robinson.

Star of Kazan—Ibbotson Recommended by Jen Robinson.

Stargirl by Jerry Spinelli.

Flipped by Wendelin Van Draanen. Recommended by Melanie at Deliciously Clean Reads.

Cutting for Stone by Abraham Verghese. Recommended at The Book Lady’s Blog.

Saving Juliet–Susan Selfors. Recommended by Melissa at Estella’s Revenge.

John Adams by David McCullough. The March Semicolon Book Club selection. If you’re participating in the book club and you posted about McCullough’s biography of John Adams, or even if you’re not doing the book club but you’ve written about this book, please leave a link in the comments. I’ll be posting my thoughts about the book this week, and I’ll be sure to link to yours.

Book by Book: Notes on Reading and Life by Michael Dirda. Recommended by Krin at Enough to Read.

Life As We Knew It–Pfeiffer Recommended by SassyMonkey.

Doomsday Book—Willis Recommended by Lazy Cow.

Maisie Dobbs by Jaqueline Winspear.

Birds of a Feather by Jaqueline Winspear.

Pardonable Lies by Jaqueline WInspear.

When Zachary Beaver Came to Town by Kimberly Willis Holt.

Careless in Red by Elizabeth George.

In the Woods by Tana French. Recommended by Kelly at BigAlittlea. Also recommended at Whimpulsive.

So Brave, So Young and So Handsome by Leif Enger.

22 books read in March.

The best fiction of March: Doomsday Book by Connie Willis. I am now reading the sequel, or book set in the same world, To Say Nothing of the Dog.

The best nonfiction of March: John Adams by David McCullough. I was inspired to not only watch the mini-series, which was very well done, but I’m also reading Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow, for a different perspective on the times.

Favorite Poets: Francis Thompson

“Poetry stands at the center of Christian living. We glorify God by noticing, comparing, and naming in sometimes startling ways. Unlike the eye of science, poetry sees the meanings that bind seemingly bare facts together. The poet sees the world in a grain of sand—the roar on the other side of the silence.”
~Suzanne Clark

Most people are familiar with Thompson’s The Hound of Heaven in which he compares God’s pursuit of a human soul to the hound’s pursuit of its quarry. In the following poem, Thompson writes of the immanence of God in Christ.

In No Strange Land

The kingdom of God is within you

O world invisible, we view thee,
O world intangible, we touch thee,
O world unknowable, we know thee,
Inapprehensible, we clutch thee!

Does the fish soar to find the ocean,
The eagle plunge to find the air–
That we ask of the stars in motion
If they have rumor of thee there?

Not where the wheeling systems darken,
And our benumbed conceiving soars!–
The drift of pinions, would we hearken,
Beats at our own clay-shuttered doors.

The angels keep their ancient places–
Turn but a stone and start a wing!
‘Tis ye, ’tis your estrangèd faces,
That miss the many-splendored thing.

But (when so sad thou canst not sadder)
Cry–and upon thy so sore loss
Shall shine the traffic of Jacob’s ladder
Pitched betwixt Heaven and Charing Cross.

Yea, in the night, my Soul, my daughter,
Cry–clinging to Heaven by the hems;
And lo, Christ walking on the water,
Not of Genesareth, but Thames!

Jesus is Immanuel, God with us. May you see Him, hear Him at your own “clay-shuttered door” and never “miss the many-splendored thing” nor the sound of angel’s wing.

Favorite Poets: Edgar Allan Poe

“The death of a beautiful woman is the most poetical subject there is.”
~Edgar Allan Poe

Since I’ve already posted about my favorite, Annabel Lee, and about The Raven, here’s another poem by Poe on the death of a beautiful woman.

To One in Paradise

Thou wast all that to me, love,
For which my soul did pine-
A green isle in the sea, love,
A fountain and a shrine,
All wreathed with fairy fruits and flowers,
And all the flowers were mine.

Ah, dream too bright to last!
Ah, starry Hope! that didst arise
But to be overcast!
A voice from out the Future cries,
“On! on!”- but o’er the Past
(Dim gulf!) my spirit hovering lies
Mute, motionless, aghast!

For, alas! alas! me
The light of Life is o’er!
“No more- no more- no more-”
(Such language holds the solemn sea
To the sands upon the shore)
Shall bloom the thunder-blasted tree
Or the stricken eagle soar!

And all my days are trances,
And all my nightly dreams
Are where thy grey eye glances,
And where thy footstep gleams-
In what ethereal dances,
By what eternal streams.

Poe Links:
Tricia reviews Nevermore: A Photobiography of Edgar Allan Poe by Karen Lange.

The Bells and tintinnabulation.

My favorite Poe poem: Annabel Lee.

In which I am stripped of my romantic illusions about the poem Annabel Lee by Someone Who Knows (at Wittingshire).

The Edgar Allan Poe Calendar, a blog celebrating the life and work of Edgar Allan Poe.

And I can’t resist including this video of John Astin performing The Raven:

Favorite Poets: Ogden Nash

I love Ogden Nash. He had a common-sense sort of view of the world, and then he wrote about it —in verse. He doesn’t seem to have worried about being profound or a pundit or winning prizes for his timeless and immortal poetry. He often ignored form and rhythm and meter and even made up his own rhyming words when necessary, and yet he wrote poems that pierced to the heart of the matter, as common sense often does.

For instance, there’s this poem in which Mr. Nash volunteers his definition of marriage: humorous, insightful, and eminently debatable.

For pure fun, Custard has always been one of my favorites.

Even the titles of many of Mr. Nash’s poems are a delight and a wonder and a word to the wise:

I Always Say a Good Saint Is No Worse Than a Bad Cold
To A Small Boy Standing On My Shoes While I Am Wearing Them
Cat Naps Are Too Good for Cats
Do Sphinxes Think?
A Plea for a League of Sleep (I plan to send this one to Engineer Husband, who averages five hours of sleep per night and often falls asleep during the day.)

I ask you: aren’t those enticing titles?

And for today’s dose of Nashian Sense and Fun, I give you:

Very Like a Whale

One thing that literature would be greatly the better for
Would be a more restricted employment by the authors of simile and metaphor.
Authors of all races, be they Greeks, Romans, Teutons or Celts,
Can’t seem just to say that anything is the thing it is but have to go out of their way to say that it is like something else.
What does it mean when we are told
That that Assyrian came down like a wolf on the fold?
In the first place, George Gordon Byron had enough experience
To know that it probably wasn’t just one Assyrian, it was a lot of Assyrians.
However, as too many arguments are apt to induce apoplexy and thus hinder longevity.
We’ll let it pass as one Assyrian for the sake of brevity.
Now then, this particular Assyrian, the one whose cohorts were gleaming in purple and gold,
Just what does the poet mean when he says he came down like a wolf on the fold?
In heaven and earth more than is dreamed of in our philosophy there are great many things.
But I don’t imagine that among them there is a wolf with purple and gold cohorts or purple and gold anythings.
No, no, Lord Byron, before I’ll believe that this Assyrian was actually like a wolf I must have some kind of proof;
Did he run on all fours and did he have a hairy tail and a big red mouth and big white teeth and did he say Woof Woof?
Frankly I think it is very unlikely, and all you were entitled to say, at the very most,
Was that the Assyrian cohorts came down like a lot of Assyrian cohorts about to destroy the Hebrew host.
But that wasn’t fancy enough for Lord Byron, oh dear me no, he had to invent a lot of figures of speech and then interpolate them,
With the result that whenever you mention Old Testament soldiers to people they say Oh yes, they’re the ones that a lot of wolves dressed up in gold and purple ate them.
That’s the kind of thing that’s being done all the time by poets, from Homer to Tennyson;
They’re always comparing ladies to lilies and veal to venison,
And they always say things like that the snow is a white blanket after a winter storm.
Oh it is, is it, all right then, you sleep under a six-inch blanket of snow and I’ll sleep under a half-inch blanket of unpoetical blanket material and we’ll see which one keeps warm,
And after that maybe you’ll begin to comprehend dimly
What I mean by too much metaphor and simile.

Oh, yes, Mr. Nash sees straight through that pretentious but admittedly handsome Lord Byron, doesn’t he?

So, let’s not get all pompous and highfalutin about this Poetry Month gig, but rather let’s just celebrate and enjoy it all, even the metaphors and the similes.

Favorite Poets: Aileen Fisher

“Poetry is a rhythmical piece of writing that leaves the reader feeling that life is a little richer than before, a little more full of wonder, beauty, or just plain delight.”
~Aileen Fisher

Read a profile of poet Aileen Fisher by Lee Bennet Hopkins.

Time for Rabbits

“Look!” says the catkin
in its gray hatkin.
“Look!” say the larks and sparrows.
“The pasture is stirring,
the willows are purring,
and sunlight is shooting its arrows.”

“Look!” wind is humming.
“Easter is coming.
Hear how the brooklet rushes.
It’s time for the rabbits
with Easter-egg habits
to get out their paints and brushes.”

from Cricket in a Thicket by Aileen Fisher.

The book Cricket in a Thicket is copyrighted 1963, and I assume my copy was printed prior to 1985, therefore banned by the CPSIA police. The illustrations in the book are pen and ink or pencil drawing by Feodor Rojankovsky, the delightfully talented illustrator whose book Frog Went A-Courtin’ won the Caldecott Medal in 1956.

Z-baby, inspired by Rojan, as he was sometimes called, and by Ms. Fisher’s poem, drew this picture with charcoals:

Zion's Picture:TIme for Rabbits

Celebrate Poetry Month

I can’t resist. I’m back to post about poetry and only about poetry from now until Resurrection Sunday. After that, it’ll be back to poetry plus whatever else I post here: mostly book reviews and random thoughts.

Today is the first day of April and the first day of Poetry Month.
Why have a month devoted to poetry?
Why not?
It sounds like fun to me.

And to these other bloggers:
Farm School’s National Poetry Month 2009: Essential Pleasures

Mental Multivitamin: Do I Dare Disturb the Universe?

Dominion Family: It’s the Most Wonderful TIme of the Year

Mindy Withrow features a Month of Poets.

PisecoMom celebrates Poetry Month with a basketful of books.

Kim at Sophisticated Dorkiness is celebrating the poetry of Billy Collins each Wednesday in April.

Gregory K. at GottaBook gives us Thirty Poets/Thirty Days. Every day in April he’s posting a previously unpublished poem by a different poet. Today, April 1, he starts out with a poem by Jack Prelutsky: A Little Poem for Poetry Month.

The Indextrious Reader: A Month of Poetic Posts.

Poetry Makers at The Miss Rumphius features an interview with a children’s poet each and every day of April 2009.

Savvy Verse and Wit is participating in the Poem a Day Challenge.

Dana of hiddenart is also posting a poem per day in April.

Sylvia Vardell of Poetry for Children is posting “a poetry-book-review-a-day on new 2009 poetry books for kids, with sample poems, activities for kids, and poet interview tidbits.”

Wild Rose Reader is celebrating with book giveaways and spring acrostic poems and who know waht else.

Anastasia Suen invites all “K-12 students to write their own school poems and send them to me so I can post them on this blog.”

At a Hen’s Pace: Spelling Woes.

More later . . . I have to go drive the taxi. If you’ve posted about Poetry Month, leave a comment and I’ll link to you later.

Semicolon Poetry Posts to keep you busy in the meantime.

The Love Letters by Madeleine L’Engle

The Love Letters may be my favorite of Ms. L’Engle’s books. I just re-read it for my Semicolon Book Club, and it did not disappoint. I did notice a few new things this time. (I hadn’t read the book in several years.)

The story takes place in two time periods: a 1960’s present and 17th century Portugal. In the present, Charlotte is in Portugal on an unannounced visit to her mother-in-law, the great cellist, Violet Napier. Charlotte has run away from New York and from her marriage to Patrick, Violet’s son, for reasons that are not clear in the beginning of the novel but that unfold as Charlotte comes to identify with Mariana Alcoforado, a Portuguese nun (b.1640, d.1743) who is the purported author of a book called Letters of a Portuguese Nun.

I realized that in the book, in Charlotte’s story at least, not much happens. The story is mostly about Charlotte’s internal struggles as she comes to terms with the death of her marriage. Mariana’s story has more of a plot, but part of the interest of the novel is in finding out what happened to Mariana. So stop here if you want no spoilers.

The Love Letters is a book about vows and about keeping vows, and about that all-consuming philosophical question of the sixties that has continued to preoccupy people into the twenty-first century: “You think, then, that values change? That there are no absolutes?” And if there are moral absolutes, how do we as imperfect people relate to those laws of conduct and morality?

I think in some ways The Love Letters gives an inadequate answer to those very important questions. Both Charlotte and Mariana come to the somewhat reluctant conclusion that their marriage vows are irrevocable and inextricably bound to their personhood. However, Charlotte’s story, especially, is incomplete. How does one keep one’s vows to, keep loving, a person who is not keeping covenant with you? Mariana at least has God, from whom she has run away, but who has never, even in her darkest hours, deserted her. Charlotte is not even sure she believes in God, but in the end she turns back to Patrick, to her marriage, hoping that God will help her to restore what has died.

“Supposing,” she said, slowly, “you are sitting in a train standing still in a great railroad station. And supposing the train on the track next to yours began to move. It would seem to you that it was your train that was moving, and in the opposite direction. The only way you could tell about yourself, which way you were going, or even if you were going anywhere at all, would be to find a point of reference, something standing still, perhaps a person on the next platform; and in relation to this person you could judge your own direction and motion. The person standing still on the platform wouldn’t be telling you where you were going or what was happening, but without him you wouldn’t know. You don’t need to yell out the train window and ask directions. All you need to do is see your point of reference.”

Charlotte keeps saying throughout the book that she is looking for a “point of reference”. Of course, the only fixed point of reference for human beings is God Himself. Charlotte goes back to Patrick with God as her witness and strength, or else she can’t really go back at all. Am I saying that non-Christians can’t have strong marriages, can’t keep their promises, can’t love? In a way, yes. None of us can bear the pain of loving truly and deeply and vulnerably and sacrificially because our own brokenness and sin get in the way. Only God can enable that kind of love; only He is stable enough to be a point of reference. Maybe He does the enabling in some non-Christian marriages and relationships as a sort of common grace, but I am convinced that it is only He that holds this world together.

The monthly tea for the Semicolon Book Club will be held this Saturday at 3:00 P.M. at my home. We will further discuss The Love Letters by Madeleine L’Engle. Email me at sherryDOTearlyATgmailDOTcom for more information. The book selection for the Semicolon Book Club for March is John Adams by David McCullough.

Other books that may be of interest to readers of The Love Letters:

Mariana by Katherine Vaz. In this novel, a Portuguese-American author gives her version of the story of Mariana Alcoforado.

Certain Women by Madeleine L’Engle. Another book about marriage and keeping vows and in which another historical person, this time King David of the Bible, becomes a point of reference and identification for a modern-day man.

Letters of a Portuguese Nun: Uncovering the Mystery Behind a 17th Century Forbidden Love by Miriam Cyr.

Sonnets from the Portuguese by Elizabeth Barrett Browning. Not because of the Portuguese connection, although that may be what made me think of them, but Ms. Browning’s poems of love are much more controlled and formed than Sister Mariana’s passionate outpourings and because of that, in my opinion, more profoundly passionate.

LOST Rehash: This Place Is Death and 316

Last week, honestly, I was too concerned and upset and hormonal about CPSIA to blog about LOST. I’m still concerned and upset, but I’m past the hormones. So, this week you get a two-fer. My thoughts on last week’s episode, This Place Is Death, and this week’s, 316.

This Place Is Death:

Dare I say, this episode is about Death. Lots of death. the French girl Nadine is killed by the smoke monster. The other three French guys get some sort of evil disease, and Rousseau kills them. Charlotte dies. John Locke goes back to not-Island time and place, and we know that he dies. Sun almost kills Ben. But maybe the Island is Death. Have you noticed that nobody has died off-island, except for Locke? Michael had to go back to the Island, or nearby, before he could die. Lots of people have died on the island, but none of the people who left have died —yet. As for Locke, why does he have to leave the island? He doesn’t really gather up all the Losties and bring them back. Instead, he dies. Does he have to leave the island in order to die?

What does it mean that the Island is Death? Are we back to purgatory? Nope, that theory was denied several seasons ago by the writers. And if the Island is a place of Death, it’s also a place where people are healed, come back to life. Rose at least thinks she’s been healed of her cancer. Locke could walk again. For some people. the island is Death, and for others it’s Life? By the way, I read somewhere that the name on the side of the van Ben is driving in this episode, Canton-Rainier, is an anagram for “reincarnation.” Not a coincidence, but I’m not sure what it means either.

316:

Numbers. The LOST numbers, the “cursed” numbers are 4 8 15 16 23 42. The original plane that crashed was Oceanic Flight 815. Now, the Oceanic Six are returning to the island on Ajira Flight 316. Why not 416, to go with the numbers? Because the numbers “316” mean something new. I googled and 316 is the title of a Van Halen song, an instrumental number that Van Halen named after the birthdate of his son. 316 also evokes the Biblical reference John 3:16.

For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life.

I don’t think the writers are preaching (yet), but that Biblical reference does tie into the whole theme of “believing.” “I wish you had believed me,” read John’s note. Jack’s still not sure he believes. Ben (of all people) comes nearest to preaching when he retells the story of the apostle Thomas who had enough faith to follow Jesus to his probable death, but not enough to believe in the resurrection. Ben’s priceless line, “We’re all convinced, sooner or later, Jack” echoes Philippians 2:8-11:

And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: hat at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

On the one hand, I like all the Biblical and Christian references, but on the other hand, I like my religion “pure and undefiled.” There are also references on LOST to reincarnation, psychics and astrology, numerology, TIbetan Buddhism, and and who knows what else. I hope they’re not throwing everything in there helter-skelter, Matrix-style, and hoping that everyone will fixate on what fits with their belief system and ignore the rest. Or hoping for some sort of religious/philosophical syncretism that doesn’t really work, even in a fantasy. So, I would agree with Ben, that we’re all convinced sooner or later, but convinced of what? It matters not only that one believes, but also WHAT one believes. Or to (loosely) quote the latest episode of House that I also watched today, “Quit saying A truth! A truth! There is only one truth.

We keep being reminded that Ben is NOT a good guy and not trustworthy. Jack asks Eloise Hawking if Ben is telling the truth, and she answers, “Probably not.” Jack asks what is going to happen to all the other people on the plane, and Ben says, “Who cares?” Jack asks Ben how he can read, and Ben lies, for absolutely no reason, saying “My mother taught me me how.” (Ben’s mom died at his birth.) I think Ben went to kill Penny as his “loose end to tie up” because he promised Widmore that he would kill his daughter in retribution for the murder of Alex. Why is Ben on the plane anyway? I think he only kept the Oceanic Six alive and helped them go back because it was HIS only way of returning. I don’t think he was supposed to return; I’m not sure he was “supposed” to be the Leader of the Others. In other words, I think Ben is the fly in the ointment.

By the way, I haven’t read Ulysses, don’t plan to read it, especially not since Ben was reading it on the plane. It must be an evil book.

I can hardly wait to find out the story of how and why Sayid, Hurley, and Kate changed their minds and got on the plane. And what’s Jin doing in a Dharma suit?

Oh, I love the Narnia references, and even the Star Wars and Star Trek nods. Charlotte said the only other language she spoke was Klingon. The underground Pendulum Station was called The Lamppost. Locke returns in next week’s episode(?), hooded and looking just like good old Obi-Wan Kenobi.

Thinklings discussion of LOST 316: “I don’t know how comfortable I am with John Locke being a Christ figure, but that certainly seems to be where they are going with this. How do you feel about that? ”

Rocks in My Dryer: “We learn that Mrs. Hawking and her crew have been hanging out in a bizarre laboratory with a giant swinging pendulum that searches for The Island. I think I may have missed a few important plots elements at this point, because I was distracted by the way all the characters walked right around the pendulum perfectly gracefully, and I wondered when it was going to knock someone over. PLEASE, WHACK BEN!”

SO, what did you think of this week’s episode of LOST? What did it make you think about? Leave a comment, and I’ll link.