I learned everything I wanted to know about LOST from Kurt Vonnegut

The TV phenomenon LOST came to an end last night after six seasons. There’s a great deal of hubbub as to whether the resolution of the show was legitimate, satisfying, or even “valid,” based on the rules of the LOST universe set in place by the show’s creators.

First of all, twelve hours after the eye closed, my head is still spinning. I am still sorting out the implications of the final moments of the show. However, I can definitively say that I am completely satisfied with the way the show ended. I’ll try to explain why in the following paragraphs, but first I’ll explore a little about why so many fans are upset by what transpired in the finale.

Ever since I started watching LOST at the beginning of the second season (I played catch up a week before the season two premiere by NetFlix-ing season one), there’s been a large faction of viewers touting the notion that the creators shouldn’t rely on “religion,” “spirituality,” or “mysticism” to explain the universe they had created. The implication was that that would be a sort of “cop out,” often predicated on the fact that the speaker “doesn’t believe in all that stuff.”

I was always mystified by these misgivings, since the essence of good stories contains at least a little bit of mystery, and–as Kurt Vonnegut observed–all stories follow a well-known pattern in which we expect a sort of “outside intervention” and it is this very transaction between the mundane, “real life” of the characters and the providence of Fate, or God, or Whatever that makes the story worth telling and retelling.

I think part of the problem is the refusal to accept that there may be things that we will never understand. Science is the god of our age and it provides all the answers. Scientists admit, or course, that there are answers that science can’t give us right now, but with the proper amount of time and inquiry, the answers will always come.

I think LOST is predicated on the idea that there are answers that will never come. There are things that will always elude human understanding. Do I think that should curtail our quest for understanding? Of course not. Rather, I think we should see the limits of human reason and understanding not as a boundary that we can not or should not cross, but a vast frontier in which to explore anything and everything within our grasp.

The way LOST ends is not a cop out. It doesn’t fall flat and unresolved. It’s a nod to the limits of human understanding. And I’m OK with that.

EDIT: If you want a sample of the “I can’t believe it was all about religion!” discussion, look here.