Seat on the plane lists his seat as 23A.

Jack's actions in the pilot to the present.

I think its kind of important to look back at the Pilot episode in the light of all thats come to pass since then. Several things really stood out for me looking back now we are 1/2 way through the second season. A lot centres around Jack, since thats who the first episode concentrates on. POSSIBLE SPOLIERS

  • JACK:

Firstly Jack wakes and comes out of the forest (not unlike the others) Its more like he was placed there than fell. Theres no sign of wreckage or anything around him or even damage to the plants he's amongst. He is uninjured, I believe he's cut when the engines explode on the beach, which is no mean feat even if he was somehow brought down safely from on high. He says he blacked out in the plane before the tail section went. So its possible he was sucked out and fell. Maybe the security system saved him? Vincent appears to be ok too. He's out and about from his carrier and is not phased at all by his drop and is even in the same location as Jack. Also Kate appears from the woods, rubbing her wrists. But we don't see her on the beach. Its possible she hid to remove the cuffs first i guess.. but its another one we don't know how she got out alive.


If indeed that is what it is.. and not some sort of intelligence or controlled manifestation of some kind. Maybe the security system is what cut the plane in 3 looking for the people it could use. Maybe it took individuals to the ground. But why leave some in locations other than the beach. It appears intelligent. We just don't know its motivation yet. Did Jack see the 'monster' when they left the cockpit? He was separated from the others and we don't know where he was or he did/saw inbetween him saving Charlie and Kate coming back to find him.


We saw the tailend hit and it appeared to come down violently and unassisted.. possibly the centre section was all that were meant to survive, yet the Others were in position to greet the tailenders within 10 minutes of the crash (as Ana-Lucia said). It seems handy that the hostess went missing before meeting up with the rest. She knew something of the flight and it seems like none of the other aircrew made it down... for any length of time. She provides the tailenders with the same information as the pilot did for the fuselage survivors and helps to keep them on the beach with signal fires burning. She talked to Jack and, while chasing Charlie, wouldn't have had much (if any) time to buckle up and get to the back of the plane.


The flashbacks in the plane might well be real and documentary style, rather than every ones perceived remembering of how things happened from their own point of view... that we just don't know.. everything we see on the plane does match up so far.. but can we trust those events are as they appeared. I noted that Jack changes seats when they hit the turbulence but i don't see any significance in that.

  • TIME:

I think the big thing we have here is that the islanders have no concept of time. When they came down to when we see them alive we do not see any of them inside any part of the craft. All are on the beach or water. None talk of leaving the crafts shell and i believe its said that its a miracle that anyone survived from that height. Its possible there was a period of time between the crash and the 'awakening' of the passengers. It still leaves Bernard, Kate, Jack & Vincent's arrivals somewhat mysterious too.

Jack's 'Flashforward'

Though I understand that the 'flashback's' in the season 3 finale 'Through the Looking Glass' were looking into the future rather than the past how do we explain the fact that when Jack is confronted by the doctor in the hospital Jack makes a comment that goes something along the lines of "Get my father down here and we will see who is most drunk". This surely implies that this scence is a 'flashback' rather than a 'flashforward' as we are led to believe by the producers that Christain Sheperd is indeed dead. Thus how could Christian be alive if Jack is post-island'?


All in all.. i can't help but wonder if Jack is all he appears. Wouldn't it be a kicker if he was connected to the wrong side of the island somehow. Even if he didn't know it. Does he know more than hes saying. Is his 'leadership' accidental? Are his actions all his own? --MRNasher

  • In White Rabbit, the following conversation takes place between Jack and Locke about the tailenders, JACK: "How are they, the others?" LOCKE: "Thirsty. Hungry. Waiting to be rescued. And they need someone to tell them what to do." Just vaguely possible this has a double-meaning. If it turned out Jack was destined to lead some of the Others (with a big "O"), this exchange might seem prescient on Locke's part. --HypnoSynthesis 05:00, 12 January 2007 (PST)

Theory: Jack is a DHARMA

Assume that the airplane was engineered by DHARMA to break up over the island and deposit some DHARMA agents to conduct a covert operation against the Others on the island. Why Jack might be such an agent:

  • Jack lands in the jungle, not on the beach with the other fuselage survivors.
    • Jack was supposed to be in the bathroom near the cockpit when the plane breaks up, but Charlie runs up the aisle just as Jack stands up. Cindy giving him two bottles of vodka was his clue to move to the front.
    • Within hours of the crash, Jack decides to go find the cockpit and locate the transceiver. He intends to go alone, but Kate and Charlie insist on going. He could have suggested that other people go while he stayed to tend the wounded, but did not.
    • He tells the pilot it has been 16 hours since the plane crashed.
    • While the transceiver is in his possession, he allows himself to be separated from Kate and Charlie while being chased by the monster.
    • He could have disabled the transceiver or set it to receive only the distress signal. He later leads the survivors to the radio tower rather than assist in the ambush on the Others, suggesting the further importance of maintaining control over outside communication. He places the call to Naomi's ship and gives his name. He would know if the vessel is DHARMA related, and that those onboard would recognize him.
      • Sayid suggested that Jack lead the survivors to the radio tower and was very bold about it. It was obvious that Jack originally intended on staying and assisting with the ambush on the others until his conversation with Sayid.
  • He acts reluctant to become leader of the survivors, but doesn't refuse. It allows him to maintain some degree of control over the group.
  • His irritation with Locke is actually motivated by his concern that Locke could mess up his mission.
  • His frequent excursions into the jungle are designed to get taken by the Others because he is really there to spy on them.
  • Jack discovers the caves where Adam and Eve are found and where a source of water is located. This might suggest prior knowledge of the island.
  • When Hurley figures out that Ethan wasn't on the plane, Jack initially refuses to coordinate the search for Charlie and Claire with Locke and sets off on his own, despite the apparent danger in the situation.
  • He met Desmond briefly in passing while running in Los Angeles, but clearly recognizes and remembers him when he sees him in the Swan. Perhaps the time traveling Desmond is also a DHARMA (or was in some unseen flashback trying to please Widmore so he could marry Penny)...
  • Jack does not want Henry Gale to be tortured, consistent with wanting to learn more about him.
  • Libby, suspected to be a Widmore or Hanso board member Liddy Wales, is a parallel to Jack in the Tailies camp. She is medically trained and immediately begins treating the survivors after the crash. Is she also a DHARMA? She is the only main survivor we've not seen in her own flashbacks, but was in the mental institution with Hurley where a patient was babbling the Numbers, perhaps on another DHARMA intel mission and she gave Desmond his boat. Who better to spy on the Others' medical research than doctors? Plus Libby is trying to tell Jack something when she dies.
  • Jack ignores Sayid's warnings that Michael was compromised by the Others and insists on undertaking the mission to save Walt which ultimately leads to his capture. If he has prior knowledge of the island's layout or how the Others operate, he would not be threatened by Sayid's plan to scout their camp, knowing it would be unsuccessful.
  • He agrees to operate on Ben and refuses to kill him as Juliet suggests because he needs to learn more about him and what the Others have learned.
  • He wants to gain the release of Kate and Sawyer because it will give him greater freedom to undertake his mission.
  • Although Cindy was a flight attendant, Jack easily recognizes her weeks after the crash when she approaches his cage at the Hydra. He doesn't ask if she's OK, but how she got there. She got there, supposedly by being captured by the Others, while lagging at the back of the pack of the Tailies. If Cindy is also DHARMA, it would be consistent with DHARMA agents trying to set up their capture by the Others. That would also explain the odd comment about having something to watch and why he tells her to go, rather than showing interest in her well-being, perhaps to not arouse any suspicion that they know each other.
  • Jack's tattoo means "He walks amongst us, but he is not one of us."
  • He is unhappy when Kate comes to rescue him, not because he wants to leave the island, but because his mission requires him to live with the Others.
  • He brings Juliet to the beach to keep an eye on her. He grows close to her hoping she will give him information he needs. He is happy to let Juliet retrieve the medicine that will save Claire because it is something DHARMA is trying to learn about.MixMasterMike 22:10, 21 April 2007 (PDT)MixMasterMike
  • He initiates the plan to ambush the Others by having Rousseau retrieve the dynamite suggesting that he has learned what he needs to and is ready to begin eliminating the Others.
  • Christian instructs Vincent to go wake Jack up because he "has work to do." If Christian is connected to DHARMA, this supports that Jack is working with them too.--MixMasterMike 19:35, 30 January 2008 (PST)MixMasterMike
  • Jack's insistence that the Oceanic Six lie has as much to do with protecting those remaining on the island as it does concealing his invlvement with DHARMA.
  • Jack was on the island in the past, but on some level does not remember it. He has been searching for whatever was missing in his life long before Oceanic 815 crashed, notably the time spent in Thailand.MixMasterMike 22:52, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Except we do know he was on the plane -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  21:41, 21 April 2007 (PDT)

I'm suggesting that several DHARMA operatives were put on the plane and the Others haven't figured it out yet.MixMasterMike 22:10, 21 April 2007 (PDT)MixMasterMike

  • jack and julliet are both dharma but neither of them know about each other yet. that would explain juliets willingness to drink the orange drink, that could also be what jack was drinking. cindy could be dharma as well and gave jack the sedative in the alcohol, when jack was in the cage that is why she spoke informally to him, he reacted badly so as not to give his true identity away. julliet may not know about jack being dharma but see's him as a way to get help with what she wants to do (get off the island and report back to DHARMA head office)--Steph1990 06:09, 6 March 2008 (PST)

Jack And The Security System

I believe the security system can be seen in Jack's eyes in the pilot and if I recall this was confirmed by someone on the creative team.. I may be wrong though, has anyone noticed this? I remember hearing the noises from it...—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Man In The Box (talkcontribs) .

The Island Open.

According to the ABC Lost diary of Janelle Granger: Jack did in fact make the putt at the end of S01-09 "Solitary".

Thought that was kinda cute.--MRNasher

Is Jack still a practicing surgeon?

Is there any evidence for this? There is a period in his pre-crash life that seems a bit wide open. From his divorce to heading to Australia, no? I can't remember the sequence of events, anyone?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Carl (talkcontribs) .

come to think of it, yeah... We still don't know either where he got his tattoos... -- Bramme 11:20, 22 May 2006 (PDT)

As far as I can work out, his flashbacks went:

Man of Science, Man of Faith, Do No Harm, The Hunting Party, All The Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues, White Rabbit

So yes, I think he is a practicing surgeon, since Daddy Issues was second to last and was fairly recent. --Andyroo316 20:40, 17 June 2006 (GMT)

Jack probably is still practicing medicine, but not in the US. You have to have major malpractice insurance to practice in the US and after he changed his statement he opened St. Sebastian Hospital up for a huge, possibly public malpractice suit. An insurance company wouldn't insure him after he was responsible for something like that. My theory is that he joined some group like doctors beyond borders. I mean, he never complains about the third world conditions of practicing medicine on the island. He seems remarkable flexible about having little to no medical supplies. As a volenteer to a third world country he would have gotten used to working in this type of situation. If he had come straight from working at an american hospital he would have made at least one comment about the difference. Besides, it might explain how Jack learned to use a gun. --dahollander 8/17/06

Considering White Rabbit was only two months after All The Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues and Jack hasn't hinted that he was fired I think it's a safe bet he was still practing at St. Sebestian's.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ksofen666 (talkcontribs) .

What I don't like about Jack

Jack seems to suffer from a need for the writers to steer the drama. (or maybe I don't know him as well as I think)


Sure, he could have let Zeke tell them everything. But the writers weren't ready for that, so Jack interupts.

Sure, he's hot, Kate's hot, but the love triange needs to be drawn out a few more episodes so he projects his feelings for Sarah onto Kate.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jono4174 (talkcontribs) .

I agree, he's purposedly taking it slow - but why? He and Sawyer should just kiss and get it over with. --skks 08:55, 20 April 2006 (PDT)

I also don't like Jack. See and feel free to post comments. The latest: I think the only reason Jack didn't want Sayid to have a gun is because Sawyer wanted to give him one! --Amberjet11 13:15, 19 May 2006 (PDT)

When did it confirm that he is 37?

As far as I know, Jack's age had been written as just his late 30's until recently. Few weeks ago it is rewrittned that he is 37 and was born in 1967. I didn't miss any episode of season 3 but I can't remember when his age is spoken or shown. Anybody know? Please let me know. Thanks.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:FoxySmile (talkcontribs) .

Theory, Jack as Other??

Jack is an Other?? Come on! He was wet; he was remembered to be on the plane; he was remembered in the airport arguing with the ticket agent over the coffin. Could we please leave this one out? (removed for now) LOSTonthisdarnisland 05:35, 13 May 2006 (PDT)

He wasn't wet, but other than that I agree with you. --Amberjet11 13:16, 19 May 2006 (PDT)
If he was an other why did he act like he did with Juliet and Ben at the beginning of season 3. When he could have just been normal with them --The-Island

Not as silly as jack as Alvar Hanso, can we delete this one too? (Mikey 18:11, 16 May 2006 (PDT))

Agreed... Jack = Alvar Hanso is so out there that it probably doesn't merit mention. He doesn't even look like the picture of Hanso on the website.--Isotope23 09:54, 18 May 2006 (PDT)

.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bhold1 (talkcontribs) .

Claire's brother

Also removed this reference from the top section, which should only contain canon facts (this was already in the list of theories) -- LOSTonthisdarnisland

The top section of the article

To me, it seems like the top section (before the Table of Contents) is getting a bit unwieldly. Shouldn't we move some of it down into the bulleted facts sections? -- Ramirez Selvarn


Am I the only one who thinks the "Jack is Alvar Hanso" theory is WAY out there? If not tell me so we can remove that. --Sauron18 14:09 31 May 2006

  • Some people think EVERYONE is Hanso. :) Shodan1138 12:19, 31 May 2006 (PDT)
  • Alvar Hanso is Alvar the film again, It wasn't Jack. Yes, it is too out there. --Hen-Regale 12:28, 31 May 2006 (PDT)

"Jack's father is still alive and one of the others"  ??? What? Anybody thinks this is a little nonsense? We already saw Christian's body in one of the flashbacks and he WAS dead. If you thought the reason was that the body is not in the coffin in the island, well, it is probably because at the end they didn't let Jack take the body with him on the plane. --Cirilobeto 08:51, 12 September 2006 (PDT)

"Jack and Ana Lucia make love on the plane". In one episode Jack and Ana Lucia meet on the island to have the drink they had planned to have on the plane. This sugests that they never had a chance to have that "date" on the plane. So this theory is not possible. --Cirilobeto 21:40, 1 October 2006 (PDT)

"Refering to the breakouts theory"; the island definately made Jack's fixing enthusiasm worse. Therefore he needed another therapy like a spinal surgery on someone whom he might consider to let it go intentionaly. Also it is notable that the others knew about his wife and his tendencies. --cipura

Jack army is a great idea

Jack army is a great idea.Kill "the others"...—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .

Depends on hoe he wants to use the army. As an offensive tool it would be hopeless. They'd be going onto territory they don't know against an enemy of unknown numbers and capabilities who know said territory like their backyard because hey! it is their backyard. But as a defense force it could work.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tricksterson (talkcontribs) .

Pardon my french but Jack's a pussy, he's a pushover with no strenght of character. Just the way he closed up after he heard about Kate's feelings for Sawyer shows that. Sure, he's a nice guy and all, but if he's leading the army, they're in for a heap of trouble. --skks 14:08, 9 March 2006 (PST)

My theory is that everytime the button is pushed, Jack cries. It seems that in every episode something happens to bring a tear to his eye.

I like what Locke said when they were tracking Ethan, something like "you're a doctor, go be a doctor, let me be the hunter".

--Rayne 08:29, 30 April 2006 (PDT)

Jack's army is a bad idea.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Monicaga (talkcontribs) .

Its a good idea in a normal situation but Lost doesnt do normal, does it.--Lucy 10:51, 15 July 2006 (PDT)

    • The entire issue of Jack's Army is another of the inconsistencies in the plot line that I have written about elsewhere on this site. It was only mentioned once in an extremely brief exchange between Jack and Ana Lucia. No further action was taken. The obvious one to ask about an army would have been Sayid, not Ana. No one else, Locke nor Eko for example, was brought into "the plan". Somehow, I can't envision Jack's Army being a defensive one. But then again, with Ana Lucia gone, it doesn't appear as though this "plan" is going anywhere. Even if Desmond's military experience is added to Sayid's and not diluted by Jack's interference, they could still form an army, but I don't see it happening. --Bkkpm 02:47, 18 July 2006 (PDT)

Technicial Difficulties

For some reason, the Edit tags in the Jack page are not rendering proplerly in Firefox Just as a test I loaded the page in IE6, and it looked fine. This is the only page I've seen with this problem. Anybody else seeing this? The error varies with different widths of the browser. --MikeF74 20:40, 31 May 2006 (PDT)

Its a Firefox rendering issue with some Wiki tags. And there are other pages here with the same issue. Afaik its already listed as a bug vs MediaWiki. --Circeus UTCE 20:57, 31 May 2006 (PDT)

Is Jack still a practicing surgeon?

As far as I can work out, his flashbacks went:

Man of Science, Man of Faith Do No Harm The Hunting Party All The Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues White Rabbit

So yes, I think he is a practing surgeon, since Daddy issues was second to last and was fairly recent.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Andyroo316 (talkcontribs) .

Length of Jack and Sarah's marriage?

Ok Jack met Sarah shortly before he met Desmond in Man of Science, Man of Faith. Desmond was about to go on his trip around the world and we know Desmond was in the hatch for 3 years from Orientation. Sarah mentioned at her wedding in Do No Harm that she met Jack a little over two years ago. Jack's marriage appears to have already ended by the time of All The Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues which according to White Rabbit was two months before the crash.

So does that mean Sarah and Jack were married for less than a year?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ksofen666 (talkcontribs) .


I think this article has been successfully cleaned, so I'm gonna remove the cleanup tag. Any complaints? --Señor Eko 20:53, 22 August 2006 (PDT)

Flashback in LT, DA?

Why is Jack listed as appearing in a Live Together, Die Alone flashback?

He's the guy running up the stadium steps in the background just before Desmond sees Penny/Charles (I forget which it is now) - this would then lead into Jack's flashback in Man of Science, Man of Faith. --Andyroo316 10:59, 12 September 2006 (PDT)


Ouch, anyone want to take this sucker on? --Marik7772003 22:09, 30 September 2006 (PDT) I'll give it a go tommorow, but whether or not i complete it is another question. --MitchellA 13:19 1st October 2006

The first thing which bothers me is the way the centric episodes are bunched together in the infobox. I hate disorganization. Magnoliasouth 22:25, 7 October 2006 (PDT)

Does Jack have OCD?

Please Discuss your views on weather Jack could be diagnosed with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.

  • To be diagnosed with this disorder obsessions must be overwhelming and specific and the compulsions would have to directly alleviate these obsessions. Jack's "fixing" things is much too vague and infrequent to be considered especially since he shows no other signs of the disorder.).--Bastionkane 15:25, 19 October 2006
  • On the other hand Jack's obsessions with who his wife lover is shows a very specific obsession. Compulsions are defined as Repetitive behaviors or mental acts that the person feels driven to perform in response to an obsession, or according to rules that must be applied rigidly. Jacks further behaviors may be mental (counting, spelling, re-evaluation, scheming).--Jasoncarubia 15:07, 19 October 2006 (PDT)
  • The DSM-IV states that in addition to these criteria, at some point during the course of the disorder, the sufferer must realize that his/her obsessions or compulsions are unreasonable or excessive. We can take a stance that Jack is more or less a different individual in comparison to his flashbacks. At some point (which has not yet aired) Jack may have had an intervening event. (Perhaps the motivation to change his behavior is what also left him tatoo-ed).--Jasoncarubia 15:07, 19 October 2006 (PDT)
  • Perhaps Jack suffers from Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD)[1]
    • Obsessive-compulsive Personality Disorder (OCPD) is often confused with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). While the names sound similar, these are two quite different disorders. Those who are suffering from OCPD do not generally feel the need to repeatedly perform ritualistic actions (such as excessive hand-washing), while this is a common symptom of OCD. Instead, people with OCPD tend to stress perfectionism above all else, and feel anxious when they perceive that things are not "right."--Jasoncarubia 15:23, 19 October 2006 (PDT) Reading further into the topic I may strike the OCD theory for OCPD.--Jasoncarubia 15:26, 19 October 2006 (PDT)

Jack Shephard - Paul Shepard, another philosopher?

"The philosopher and essayist Paul Shepard (1925-1996) brought to the environmental literature of the 1960s and '70s the political passion of the time, but a passion matched with a demand for scholarly precision. This anthology from his work, which Shepard himself assembled not long before his death, addresses themes he touched on in many of his books. Many of them deal in one way or another with the disastrous consequences of humankind's increasing detachment from the natural world as a by-product of "the ecological insolence of the last century." In Shepard's view, the natural world--and particularly the world of animals--is the source of human intelligence and the wellspring of the imagination. He examines, for instance, the antiquity of the human eye, an organ essential to the cognitive revolution that distinguishes us from other primates; the origins of language and of literature in the imitation of birdsong; and the lessons animals of many species can teach us about ourselves. Shepard delves into environmental psychology, anatomy, history, linguistics, and a host of other topics to make his arguments, which are strikingly original. They have also been influential in shaping modern environmental philosophy, and this useful collection shows why that should be so." --Gregory McNamee on one of P. Shepard's book.

Some interesting titles from Paul Shepard:

Traces of an Omnivore - by Paul SHEPARD & JACK Turner

The Others: How Animals Made Us Humans - by Paul Shepard

Paul Shepard was an ecologist with a Yale Ph.D. who spent more than 40 years studying human evolution. With The Others: How Animals Made Us Human Shepard, who died in 1996, wrote a masterful book about the relationship we've always had with animals. The idea behind the book, that humans have always depended on animals, and that the dependence has greatly affected what we are, seems simple at first. But Shepard combined prodigious scholarship with eloquent writing to produce a very entertaining and informative look at that special relationship. Among the topics covered in The Others are the role animals have played in myth and folklore, the uses to which humans have put animals, and even the role of animals in the cartoons of Gary Larson.

Nature and Madness - by Paul Shepard

Does any species other than the human befoul its nest, destroy the habitat on which it depends? Strangely, yes; such shortsightedness happens in the natural world all the time. But no species does so with as much conscious awareness, a matter that fascinated the philosopher Paul Shepard. In Nature and Madness he examines the human animal in relation to the natural environment, showing the kinds of psychic disjunctions and troubles that have developed over the generations that humans have been seeking to distance themselves from the world. Shepard locates the source of much of those troubles in the invention of agriculture, an act that gave humans the false idea that nature can be controlled and micromanaged in every detail--an idea that has found modern fruit in such things as dam-building and genetic engineering. Environmental destruction, writes Shepard, is a "mutilation of personal maturity," a failure of emotional development; continuing the metaphor, he adds that "the only society more frightful than one run by children ... might be one run by childish adults." Shepard calls on his readers to establish a meaningful, mature connection with the earth, to cultivate a sense of stewardship and responsibility. It is a welcome call. --Gregory McNamee

So what do you think? --Draconis 18:14, 3 November 2006 (PST)

Links to Other Shows

I know there are several similarities between LOST and other shows. Feel free to comment about links you've noticed. I just got to thinking tonight and came up with these links. Try to follow. I am an avid fan of Grey's Anatomy, another hit ABC show. Grey's Anatomy has a character, Derek Shepherd, who is also a neurosurgeon. Like Jack Shephard, Derek is one of two men in love with the show's lead female character. They both have failed marriages, as well. Just thought I'd speculate for a while.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drool4sawyer (talkcontribs) .


I didn't know where to post this but I really don't like the images we have for our main characters. They are far too clean lol. Are there any more jungely promos? --Princess Dharma (banned) 06:51, 4 February 2007 (PST)


Are we reading too much into Jack filling in his crossword puzzle with a pen? It might just be that a penciled-in crossword puzzle was just too hard to read on-screen...-BearDog 16:26, 6 February 2007 (PST)

Does Jack have a twin or a clon?

Can "Jack" who we saw at the end of Par Avion be another Jack?

1.First of all Jack is not a such a character who can forget all of those he got from The Others, at least I bealive he wouldn't be that close to them ( playing football etc.)

2. Secondly the new tattoo of him doesn't really look fresh as you can see

3. And my theory also explains a little about why some of The Others stared to Jack when he was in a cage (Enter 77).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Onken (talkcontribs) .

After the island

i think the after the island section should be summarized more. for one flashback/forward, it is as long as the season 2 summary. just hit the major plot points and point to the episode article. you know, drugs, alcohol, hero funeral, kate. one paragraph oughta do it. --Semidelicious 20:07, 29 May 2007 (PDT)

  • In that case, why not "unsummarize" the season two summary instead? The more facts, the better, right? --Noseman 2006 14:11, 14 June 2007 (CET)

Jack's Family

Can someone fix the part that says Jack went to get his dad who was in Australia because of Claire's crash. That is completly wrong. The car accident happened years before that trip. --Gluphokquen Gunih 22:59, 14 June 2007 (PDT)


Does anyone else find it ironic that since they got off the island Jack says he 'prays' for the plane to crash when he is a 'man of science'? --LostCat 12:22, 25 June 2007 (PDT)

I don't think he meant it literally. I took it as "hoping" the plane would crash.    Jabberwock    talk    contribs    email   - 12:29, 25 June 2007 (PDT)
  • In the DVD commentary for the episode 'man of science, man of faith' C. Cuse and D. Lindeloff say that most people think the title is referring to the difference between Jack and Locke, in reality it is actually referring to Jack coming to terms with being both. G-Force 05:35, 25 June 2008 (PDT)

Jack as Moses

Naomi jokes about Jack being like Moses. However, the Jack-centric episode Stranger in a Strange Land is also a quote from the book of Exodus referring to Moses. These two facts strongly indicate that Jack is deliberately being associated with the image of Moses by the writers. Jack is Claire's half-brother, making baby Aaron his blood relative: Aaron is the brother of Moses, as Eko explicitly points out. The Exodus titled episodes are also references to the story of Moses. --HypnoSynthesis 02:59, 7 July 2007 (PDT)

  • Moses also took the profession of Shepherd for 40 years. Blackannis 05:00, 7 July 2007 (PDT)

Future Jack Shepard = Gerald DeGroot?

With his beard in Through The Looking Glass, Jack looks like Gerald DeGroot from the Swan and Pearl videos! Maybe, somehow, he goes back in time and the DHARMA initiative is really a selfish means for him to get back to the island and change things for the better! --4815162342108 16:28, 8 July 2007 (PDT)

That is extremely apophenic. Just cos they have the same beard, doesn't mean it's the same person. --Blueeagleislander 22:53, 8 July 2007 (PDT)
I don't think so. Maybe it could have something to do w/ why Jack was so far away from the survivors of 815 after the crash: he didn't come on the plane. --4815162342108 16:37, 9 July 2007 (PDT)
This is pretty twisted logic. Does that make Juliet = Karen DeGroot because they both have blonde hair? Bookhouse88 08:40, 25 June 2008 (PDT)


  • Ask yourself this: why would a man who shaves every day for 90+ days on a deserted island show up in the future with such an epic beard? What could make a man who endured all sorts of adversity both before the crash and during his time on the island, shaving the whole time, decide to grow that beard? Beardedjack 17:39, 5 September 2007
Um...because he's stopped caring about himself. All he wants is to get back to the island. --Sam McPherson 12:19, 23 January 2008 (PST)
Well, it's not like he let his hair get long too. When did he start growing that beard anyway? From the moment he got back to LA? How fast does Jack grow facial hair? Can we use his appearance to pin down a time on the flash forward? Or maybe it's just an homage to Mr. Friendly. --Beardedjack 11:02, 30 January 2008

Memorable quotes

Lately, memorable quotes have been added to all pages of the main characters. Do we all agree these are wanted addditions? In my opinion it is not a bad idea in itself. However, I'd like to see some rules. For example, to be memorable a quote should not be 5 sentences long. I think, each quote should be 1 sentence, not more. I also think that a memorable quote should stand in itself, without quoting part of the contextual conversation as well. Thirdly, I think we should maximize the number of quotes allowed per page. And maybe, someone should think up some nice lay-out that doesn't clutter the page up like it is now? I'd like to hear opinions... --Hunter61 02:37, 10 February 2008 (PST)

I think the quotes should be shorterned quite a bit, to the bits that actual stand out. Like "If we gon't live together, we're going to die alone." instead of the full speach. --   Dee4leeds  talk  contribs  all  02:45, 10 February 2008 (PST)
I'm against the idea in general. Not enough to delete them, but personally, I don't think they belong. We already have famous repeated lines here. However, if they must stay I wholeheartedly agree with your proposed guidelines. If a one-line quote can't stand by itself without providing context, then it's not memorable. Memorable quotes are lines like "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn," or "Go ahead, make my day" because nobody needs to be told who said it or what the movie and/or context was. A 5-10 sentence paragraph is not a quote; it's a script excerpt. I think the folks at did not envision the abuse that their 'memorable quotes' pages have seen when they created the feature. Also, a quote from someone's favorite scene doesn't necessarily qualify as a memorable quote. The more flexible the guidelines are, the more people will get carried away and add whatever they think should be memorable.--Bonefishj0e 06:49, 10 February 2008 (PST)
I vote we delete them. They just seem out of place on this site IMO. Contributions here are more about facts and interpretations of facts. Memorable quotes moves the site in a different direction.--Chickenhawk 07:16, 10 February 2008 (PST)
I agree that they should be deleted. I don't think they belong.--Paidinfull 07:20, 11 February 2008 (PST)
I think they are unneeded, and in their current state way too much for already very long articles that will only get longer with more seasons. They are obviously also subjective in nature, in terms of which ones are representative of the character. As Chickenhawk says, articles here should be about the facts. I think they should be removed; in the mean time, it can be brought up at Lostpedia:Ideas to gauge user consensus before being implemented whole-sale. -- Graft   talk   contributions  07:34, 11 February 2008 (PST)

It seems, I missed out on a previous discussion at the discussion page of Lostpedia:Quotes within articles (proposed). We should continue the discussion there (I'll copy-paste the above) --Hunter61 21:41, 11 February 2008 (PST)

Discussion: Summary subsections

  • This is a proposal to add "summary" or "abstract" sections to the storyline summaries for all characters who have extremely long articles.
RATIONALe: The articles are too long to easily read or digest for the average reader, and have become more of a repository for listing chronological information rather than being an readable encyclopedic article. As illustration: When was the last time you read an entire article in Lostpedia? (Probably happens fairly frequently). Now contrast that with when is the last time you read a character article like "Jack" end-to-end across all four seasons and more than 6000 words? (Probably rarely). Specifically, each on-island season description for Jack is about 1800 words, totaling about 5500 words for 3 seasons! And even Season 4 is already almost 800 words with only 3 episodes. Completeness results in too much length and too little actual readability. However many editors wish to have completeness (this is a separate issue from the problem of some editors paraphrasing the transcript, which is frowned upon as redundant). Therefore as a compromise, the proposal is to add an "Abstract" or "Season summary" subhead at the beginning of every Season header that is too long-- this section must be limited, for example to 150 words. Thus a reader could choose to skim lengthy articles, and search in-depth when desired. -- Contrib¯ _Santa_ ¯  Talk  15:20, 20 February 2008 (PST)
    • I agree. The summaries are too long. This page (and all pages) should be like Ben's. Decboy 09:01, 23 February 2008 (PST) Decboy
    • Absolutely. I would still, however, like to see the information contained on the page, rather than linked to a separate article. Simply adding a header to each section might be enough. Cleanups, though, will probably be helpful as well. User: mr_tee_canada
      • I think that the article should be a little more sectioned off, instead of just by season. This might help users go straight to what they need. And I think there should also be a loose character history summary at the beginning of the article, and then go in-depth through the rest of the article. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E 
  • I agree Jacks page is way too detailed, the season summaries should be shorter. I agree I reckon there should be a detailed season timeline history for each character (going in detail for each episode they appear in) and one which is shorter, and goes straight to the point for there history with important points.
  • IMO we should create new, longer articles for each character in each season. Check any article on a huge subject on Wikipedia and you'll see that there are short summaries of each smaller subject, with separate, longer main articles. For instance, George Washington's article has a section on his early history which is about four paragraphs long, but the main article, Washington's early life, is much longer. Perhaps we could have short summaries under headings (say, "Season 1") with different main articles that go into far more detail (say, a separate article titled "Jack in Season 1"). Or something.--Randnotell 16:55, 26 March 2008 (PDT)
  • Ben's article is a perfect model that all other character pages should take after. Voodoo 13:43, 2 May 2008 (PDT)
    • Oh wait, someone dumbed down Ben's article to fit the Season 1-4 structure rather than subheading important events in the character history. Too bad. Voodoo 13:45, 2 May 2008 (PDT)
  • Do it! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Decboy (talkcontribs) 2008-05-11T08:42:15.

Jack's College

Here, we can see jack clearly graduated from the University of California.

should this be included? --Avindratalkcontribs email  23:52, 24 February 2008 (PST) that same ep Juliet says he went to Columbia. --Blueeagleislander 00:30, 25 February 2008 (PST)
It's probably just a prop error. I would say what was explicitly mentioned on the show as being correct. A mention of the U of Cali wouldn't be a bad thing either. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  18:02, 27 February 2008 (PST)
There's still the possibility that Jack went to Columbia for undergrad and one of the UCs for his medical degree. (Unless the other certificate says otherwise.) Robert K S 19:27, 27 February 2008 (PST)
In Lost: Via Domus there's a file on Jack which states he went to UCLA. Passingtramp 04:51, 2 March 2008 (PST)

In that screencap it looks like it says "Los Angeles" (blurry though) under "University of California", which would mean UCLA.--Theslate 19:14, 6 March 2008 (PST)

Jackson Shephard

According to Jack's file, located on Ben's desk at the Hydra in the final chapter of Via Domus, Jack's name is "Jackson Shephard" - it also gives some more information about Jack and includes Sarah's maiden name. I know that the story of Via Domus isn't considered canon, but I'd have thought this sort of lore would've have come from the show's creative team, along with stuff like the layout of the stations in the game and what is behind the Swan's magnetic wall... at the very least, this should be mentioned, yes? --Bohrok Awakener 11:38, 1 March 2008 (PST)

I think Jackson Shephard should be really considered as being his real name. The game devlopers would not have put this in as a joke. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Qpr22 (talkcontribs) 18:41, 2 March 2008.
His full name is definitely just Jack Shephard, not Jackson Shephard. Not only because Via Domus is non-canon, but because it actually contradicts the show. He is called Jack Shephard at Kate's trial in Eggtown, on the list Ms. Klugh gives to Michael, and at every other occasion when his formal name would have been used on the show. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wstonefi (talkcontribs) 23:21, 2 March 2008.
Guys, in the future, please sign your messages to talk pages using four tildes (~~~~). Seeing as there have already been official indications that Lost: Via Domus should by and large not be considered canon, it would seem prudent to wait to add the "Jackson" and "UCLA" bits to this article only after they're confirmed on the show or through other accepted channels. Robert K S 15:30, 2 March 2008 (PST)
Funny that this comes up today, as I was just listening to the Podcast where Carlton and Damon discuss what is considered Canon, including the game. According to them, the show and the Missing Pieces webisodes are officially canon. All the rest is technically set in the LOST world, but doesn't neccessarily mean it's canon. Also later in the podcast, they say that the game isn't canon. That being said, until someone on the actual series calls him "Jackson", his full name is Jack Shephard.--JoeyBags1138 14:59, 11 March 2008 (PDT)

Main Character

"Dr. Jack Shephard is often viewed as the main character of Lost." I hate this sentence and vehemently disagree. Often viewed by who, exactly? I don't think he's the main character at all. --Xbenlinusx 02:00, 5 May 2008 (PDT)

  • Well if you look at it this way, his character is the character with the most centric episodes, he was the first character to have three centric episodes in one season, and he was the first character to have a flash forward centric episode. Marko 15:10, 8 May 2008 (PDT)
  • I was just about to create a section to discuss that. The thing is : while Jack was arguably the main character for the first three seasons, he seems to have been relegated to a secondary role in season 4. Characters like Ben and Locke have achieved a far greater importance, even Sayid appears to play a more interesting role this season. We'll have to wait and see the finale and Season 5 to see if Jack has definitively been "downgraded", but since so many new characters have been introduced throughout the seasons and the show seems to focus more on the mythology now than in the first 2-3 years, his role had to diminush.--Lauridsen77 12:05, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
    • I don't even think he was the main character for seasons 1-3. Calling him the main character is just flat out wrong and ignorant. --Xbenlinusx 21:21, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
      • OK, first : calm down! Remember I said "arguably", which means "open to debate". Then you cannot deny that, at the very least in the first season, the show seemed to focus on Jack (which is logical since he was the leader) : he had much more flashbacks than the other characters (perhaps too much), had more screen time, was involved in all the important A-missions. Then in season 2, Locke became more important with the discovery of the Swan and the revelation of his special destiny, Ben was introduced, we learned of greater forces in play, and Jack gradually lost the spotlight. But he remained very present in Season 2-3. I think his actual "relegation" happened this year (then again, this can change).--Lauridsen77 12:58, 10 May 2008 (PDT)
        • Regardless, describing him as "the main character" should be removed from this article. I've never viewed him as such. --Xbenlinusx 18:12, 10 May 2008 (PDT)
          • Who, exactly, do you think IS the main character? Jack was the first character to be introduced, he's the leader of the survivors, and he has the most centric episodes out of anyone. Regardless of what you think of the character himself, he's clearly the star player. Scarecrow 21:39, 10 May 2008 (PDT)
            • Scarecrow, there doesn't have to be a main character in a story.

There is no argument here. Jack Shephard is the main character in Lost. If you don't like it, too bad. As stated above, he has the most centric episodes and he is the leader of the Losties. There is no point in arguing over this, he is the main character on the show. --CTS 17:04, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

  • Phrases such as "if you don't like it, too bad" do not constitute rational discussion. This is not a pub brawl.
True. However, he is part of an ensemble cast, and his role has been greatly downgraded this season. He has had a much less prominent role. Also, Matthew Fox's name comes in alphabetical order after the rest of them. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  17:08, 11 May 2008 (PDT)
Overall though, it is quite obvious that he's the main character. Although the show doesn't always revolve around him, he is still the main character of Lost. The first episode of the first three seasons was Jack-centric, and as stated above, the first flashforward was Jack-centric. --CTS 17:11, 11 May 2008 (PDT)
That gets us nowhere. So what if he had the first flashforward, Locke had the first on-island flashback, so what! And the show is all about the Island, not what happend before or after the Island, plus Hurley had this season's first centric episode.--Orhan94 16:38, 2 June 2008 (PDT)
I'd have to say even though I prefer Locke 100x more than Jack, I think that if you had to concider a "main character" for the series, it would be Jack (view above for my previous post why I think so,) although it's nice that this season he doesn't have quiet as big of a spot light that if which he's had in the first 3 seasons; it's nice that they're actually focusing on other people other than him. BTW since you started this whole thing, who do you think should be/is the main character, Xbenlinusx...? Marko 19:31, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

One of the many great things about this show is that it doesn't depend on one character to MAKE the show. The focus successfully shifts from episode to episode while the story (gradually) unfolds. That being said, I think if there IS a main character on the show, it's Jack. He's been in the forefront from season 1. LOST begins with his eye in focus. He has the most connections, and they are sure to figure more prominently now with Christian showing his face a lot more on the Island. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nachosangre (talkcontribs) 2008-05-12T21:42:36.

I'd support removing this line, I don't consider him the main character at all. It's an ensemble show so there is no single main character. Why does the article even need this line? It's more opinion than anything else and not particularly encyclopedic or useful. Why not just stick with the facts and just say he has had more flashbacks than any other character? --Minderbinder 08:31, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

This is the statement I most concur with. --Xbenlinusx 11:13, 14 May 2008 (PDT)
Like him or hate him, Jack IS the main character. It's not an opinion - it's fact. He's appeared in almost every episode, had the most centric episodes, is the de factor leader of the camp survivors and Oceanic 6, usually tends to have the centric episode of a Season premiere and had the first flashforward. It's ridiculous to try and say he's not the main character. --Benn May 18, 2008

Jack IS NOT the main character! Who ever states this? He is not the lader of the losties anymore, Juliet is! (And a much better one at that!) The main characters are Claire, Juliet, Locke, Sayid, Hurley, Ben, Kate, Jack, Desmond, Sun, Jin, Michael, Charlotte, Daniel and Miles. They are all equally the main character in season 4! I hate Jack and is NOT viewed as the main character to me or many other people. If it shouls say this in jack's page, I think it should say so On Locke's, Ben's and Juliet's as I think they are the main characters and therefore they are viewed by me! Especially Juliet. Jack was never the main character to me in any season! So what if he was first to have a flashforward. There are 6 that had one! Someone had to be first! There's a 1 in 6 chance!!! Asof the first episode it was his centric and Kate actually had the first proper flashback! (Not that I think she is the main character either!!) In fact Jack seems to be one of the most hated characters on Lost!!!Bringlibbyandcharlieback 05:38, 6 June 2008 (PDT)

The flashbacks and the flashforwards aren't the show's main focus, it's the Island's storyline, a.k.a. the present, and as far as the Island's storyline goes Jack isn't the main character. Ben (the Others) and Locke (Team Locke) are also leaders of their respective groups, and so were Ana Lucia (the Tailies), Naomi (the freighter team) and Keamy (the mercenairy team), and his leadership abilities are also very unstable (he made a lot of bad decisions, such as the "genocide" towards the Others in the season 3 finale, and bringing the freighies to the Island). This rules him out as the main character as leader.He also never made any big discovery on the Island,Locke discovered the Swan, the Pearl, the Flame and the Barracks.And about number of flashbacks his getting, he's getting less and less every season, cuz he's off island story is over, there's nothing to say here. Sun, Kate, Sayid and Hurley had the same amount of cenric epsiodes as Jack this season, two.--Orhan94 14:33, 29 May 2008 (PDT)
Good points, I agree. "Most flashbacks" is a fact. "Main character" is an opinion. Callling an opinion a fact doesn't make it one. --Minderbinder 15:26, 29 May 2008 (PDT)
Main character is a FACT, not an opinion. So if my opinion is Paulo is the main character, does that mean he is? No. Jack is the main character. --CTS 18:09, 1 June 2008 (PDT)
Why not put something like "Sometimes considered the protagonist or hero of LOST"? Because there is a wide range of opinion on this subject and it is an ensemble cast; however, something about Jack being considered the hero or protagonist I think has been mentioned by the producers--where I could not tell you. They may have said something like, "Jack starts of as sort of the hero". --Billionthlostfan 18:53, 10 June 2008 (PDT)
We can put that in addition to him being the main character. It is NOT an opinion. I thought it was common sense to differentiate between fact and opinion...this is fact. --CTS 20:31, 10 June 2008 (PDT)
O am sorry to say it but Jack is the main character. Who was the firs tperson we saw? Jack. Who has been the leader of the group? Jack. Who go thte first Flashforward? Jack. Who had the first flashbacks in the first three series? Jack. I am sorry to say it but Jack is the only guy who it could be. Also he is the only actor to know the ending. --Rbfskywalker 10:21, 11 July 2008 (PDT)
Firstly, Matthew Fox does not know the ending of the show. He knew the ending of the final episode of Season 4, at the funeral parlor, for obvious reasons. This can be double-checked at Doc Arzt's blog. Secondly, why are you "sorry to say it"? Thirdly, you note that "Jack is the only guy who it could be". This suggests that you believe that there must be a single main character, and Jack is the only one who fits the bill. Not all stories have a single "main character." The fact that Jack and his flashbacks are absolutely central to the story do not necessarily signify that he is the "main character". In fact the term "main character" has little value in interpreting characterizations. It is reductive and redundant in a story with so many important characters. It also undermines the all-important Jack/Locke binary if Lost has a main character.

Proposed compromise

Since there is no consensus as to whether Jack is the "main character", why not describe Jack using a quotation from Lindelof from one of the podcasts in which he called Jack "a great hero". (Does anybody remember which podcast this is from, so that we can source the quote?) :-) Robert K S (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2008 (PDT)

    • The debate on this page about whether Jack is "the main character" or not is somewhat futile. All it demonstrates is that there is conflict about the issue. The repeated suggestion that Jack is the "main character" and that this is "NOT an opinion" but "FACT" is overtly emotive and subjective. It is not a fact that Jack is "the main character" or that indeed there is any such thing as a "main character" in Lost. The term is reductive and more suited to cliff notes than a wiki. Objectively, we can only say that Jack is one of the primary protagonists of Lost, and that yes, he is often considered the hero.

This main character talk is ridiculous. It seems that the people arguing that Jack is not a main character hate him, so they naturally don't want him to be the main character. Howver, Jack is the main character on the show. This is just obvious and doesn't need any proof. If you have watched Lost since the pilot then you know full well he is considered the main chatacter. I personally don't like Jack very much, but that doesn't mean he isn't the main character. The points that support the fact that he is a main character are: he has the most flashbacks, he had the first flashforward, he has been prominently featured on all four season DVDs and promo posters, he was the ifrst character to ever appear on Lost, and it is blatantly obvious he is considered to be the main chatacter. Obviously the show isn't centered around Jack, but out of all the characters, he is definitely the "main" one. -- CTS  Talk   Contribs 10:54, 11 July 2008 (PDT)

  • Firstly, in the above paragraph, you refer to Jack as both "a main character" and "the main character". These differ. No one is disputing that Jack is a main character, or even that he is the hero. Secondly, your arguments are very emotional. I'm sure it is not the case that those who dispute Jack's status as the main character hate him. Jack is one of my favourite characters, but I don't think he is the main character, simply because Lost is not a show primarily about Jack and Jack's life. Thirdly, you insist that this is fact, not opinion, and that "This is just obvious and doesn't need any proof". A fact is not fact unless it is provable. Repeatedly insisting that something is a fact, or that it is "blatantly obvious", does not a fact make. Lostpedia guidelines also reinforce this. Finally, your points in argument do demonstrate that he is a main character, but not that he is the main character. Other characters were prominently featured in promotion. The statement "Obviously the show isn't centered around Jack, but out of all the characters, he is definitely the 'main' one" suggests that you are under the apprehension that all stories have a "main" character. That is not the case. Jack's role in the show as doctor, leader, leading man, etc. certainly sets him apart from the other characters. The significance of his role in the show does not necessarily make him "the main character". The person above who suggested a phrase like "Sometimes considered the protagonist or hero of LOST" was closer to hitting the nail on the head. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sadiemonster (talkcontribs) 15:50, 13 July 2008.
      • CTS, Lostpedia is a democracy. The fact that people differ on this issue must be represented with a compromise in the actual article. For example, you may insist that there is no life on Mars, and you would be almost certainly correct. However, if you were publishing an article about life on Mars, it would be inappropriate not to address the issue that some people believe in life on Mars, and that it has not been conclusively proven that there is not life on Mars. Do you see what I mean? Even if you're correct, a public wiki can't assert something as fact without acknowledging that people differ on the subject. And fiction is not fact, it is supposed to be debated and interpreted. And that debate is supposed to be fun. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sadiemonster (talkcontribs) 15:50, 13 July 2008.
Sadiemonster, I am not suggesting that Jack is the main character because that is obviously not true. Kate, Ben, Sun, Sawyer, and Juliet are all main characters too. My point is that Jack is the most prominent main character on the show. Think about all of Lost's most pinnacle moments; Jack is usually the hero or at the head of most of them. I've said this many times before but Jack has had the most flashbacks, has been in the most episodes, was the first person seen on Lost, and is the leader of the survivors. Surely you can't suggest that Kate or Sawyer or Juliet are more of a main character than Jsck is. I'm not suggesting that the show is always focused on Jack. Jack is the most prominent character on Lost. Also, as was stated above, Matthew Fox (who plays Jack) is the only character to know the show's ending. Throughout all of Lost there are many examples that support him as being the most prominent character. -- CTS  Talk   Contribs 11:51, 13 July 2008 (PDT)
Prominence is a subjective term. Though Jack was the first character seen, and Matthew Fox is the only actor who knows the ending, it's irrelevant. Each character has something special about them that makes them as important as Jack. Sure, Jack is the leader of the survivors (or at least some of them), that's undoubted. But the fact of the matter is, he's had a greatly downplayed role in season four. He's not appeared in several episodes, and only had a major role in about seven of them. If he was truly the main character of the show, Matthew Fox's name would be listed first in the credits. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  11:59, 13 July 2008 (PDT)
Point taken, CTS. However, firstly, Matthew Fox does not know the ending of the show. He knew the ending of series 4, ie., who was in the coffin. This can be confirmed by rereading the original article. Secondly you say "surely you can't suggest that Kate or Sawyer or Juliet are more of a main character than Jsck is". The point is, I'm not suggesting that anyone is more of a main character than anyone else. I am suggesting that this is in fact an ensemble cast, with a number of main characters. Continuing comment below... Sadiemonster 20:10, 13 July 2008 (PDT)
Okay, but if you absolutely HAD to pick one prominent character in the show, who would you pick? The only qualified candidate for that answer is Jack Shephard. -- CTS  Talk   Contribs 13:21, 13 July 2008 (PDT)
CTS, when watching a film, a television show, or reading a book, you don't absolutely have to pick one prominent character in the show. To do so is irrelevant and reductive, like saying if you had to choose, what was the one main reason for World War II? In fact many factors led to World War II, so to try to find one single reason is an exercise with little merit. Your argument is also flawed, because you're setting up a theory first and then trying to make the material fit. You have decided that there is a main character and then decided that Jack is the only one who meets the criteria. That would be like insisting that one of the Losties must be an alien and then hunting for the one that is "the only qualified candidate for that answer" Sadiemonster 20:10, 13 July 2008 (PDT)
Main characters are a bit different than aliens Saddiemonster. I do agree with you that there are many main characters. I suppose you are right that Jack isn't really the most prominent character. All I'm saying is that he's always been at the forefront of Lost in general. Perhaps "chief protagonist" is better than "main character". -- CTS  Talk   Contribs 20:15, 13 July 2008 (PDT)
Sounds better, CTS! Although I would add "sometimes considered the chief protagonist" to reflect the diversity of opinion on this topic.
He's the de facto leader of the survivors, and that's it. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  20:24, 13 July 2008 (PDT)

Jack's Chest

In S4 E10 "Something Nice back home" Jack is shown wearing nothing but a towel. There is no sign at all of any body hair on his chest/abdomen. He looked 'waxed'.

1) I have it in my head that in previous shows Jack has had a copious covering of chest hair shown. Am I imagining that or has something changed?

2) If he did indeed have no body hair, why was Juliet shaving his stomach? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stgeorgeandthehaggis (talkcontribs) .

He is hairless, the logical assumption is that he just got some manscaping done once he got off the island. I have heard Matthew Fox had it done for shirtless scenes in Speed Racer. --Minderbinder 11:08, 14 May 2008 (PDT)
  • Juliet shaved his stomach because that would be standard procedure before an operation regardless of whether the patient appeared to be hairless. There are always going to be short, fine, light coloured hairs over the body. G-Force 05:41, 25 June 2008 (PDT)
    • Firstly, Juliet shaved his stomach not his chest. Secondly, the future scenes in "Something Nice" occur a couple of years after the appendectomy.

Shaving will also clean the area quite well by removing dead skin and such. What puzzles me is that when you see him in the flash forward living with Kate, there doesn't appear to be any sign of a scar G-Force 05:09, 3 July 2008 (PDT)

Jack changes his beliefs

In the future (There's No Place Like Home S3) you can see that Jack believes the island is special. He says he wasn't supposed to leave and that he has to go back. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kalebv (talkcontribs) 2008-06-02T19:38:28.

  • It seems that's the case. Jack, like most characters on this show, have evolved over time. I believe his change in his beliefs came even earlier. On the raft when their rescue boat was approaching, Jack made it clear they needed to lie to protect everyone left on the island. (An almost exact echo of what Locke told him.)-- Lost Locke 20:38, 13 July 2008 (PDT)
Community content is available under CC BY-NC-ND unless otherwise noted.