Line 1,251: Line 1,251:
The producers stated once that we had seen the Monster in season 2 after the 23 Psalm, but did not know we were looking at the monster. This was confirmed to be the manifestations of Yemi to Eko and Locke. As these manifestations were in dreams, I had added this to the Man in Black's abilities section. --[[User:D Toccs|D Toccs]] 11:33, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
The producers stated once that we had seen the Monster in season 2 after the 23 Psalm, but did not know we were looking at the monster. This was confirmed to be the manifestations of Yemi to Eko and Locke. As these manifestations were in dreams, I had added this to the Man in Black's abilities section. --[[User:D Toccs|D Toccs]] 11:33, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
Where was it confirmed that Yemi appearing to Eko and Locke was the Monster? (For that matter, where was it confirmed that some island appearances of Walt were the Monster, as suggested in the current article?) [[User:Tagmata|Tagmata]] 06:10, June 10, 2010 (UTC)
Where was it confirmed that Yemi appearing to Eko and Locke was the Monster? (For that matter, where was it confirmed that some island appearances of Walt were the Monster, as suggested in the current article?) [[User:Tagmata|Tagmata]] 06:10, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:10, 10 June 2010

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Man in Black article.
General discussion about the article's subject is permitted as a way to aid improvement of the article.
Theories about the article subject should not be discussed here.
(Instead, post your theory to this article's theory page
or discuss it on this article's theory talk page.)

  • Be polite, don't bite, have fun!
  • Admins are here to help
  • More discussion at the Forum
Article policies



4x09-destroyedhouse.jpg This article or section has been nominated for a cleanup
The content on this page may be out of place, overwritten, and/or contradictory.
You can help Lostpedia by cleaning it up.

I have tagged this discussion for cleanup. The talk page is quite long. I've already archived the rename discussion, but much of the other content probably needs to be done as well. Please feel free to create a sub-page and archive discussions that are out-dated.    Jabberwock    talk    contribs    email   - 19:04, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Unknown time period (presumably the 19th century)

If I'm not mistaken (and I very well could be) but isn't the shirt Jacob is wearing in this scene the same one he is wearing in the scene he is killed? Taking that point away I find the type of ship we see to be a pretty shaky indicator of what time period this takes place in. I'm no boat expert but that looks like it could be a ship that was as old as the kind Columbus used or a more modern refurbished/reproduction version. --ISawDivinity 07:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

  • We are encouraged to believe the ship in question is the Black Rock, a slave ship. This gives it a time period (more or less) from about 1450 to 1833. Jack Dutton 20:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Encouraged by what exactly?--ISawDivinity 07:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
  • If it is indeed the Black Rock (which, why wouldn't it be?), then the year would be approximately 1845, given what we know about the Black Rock. --Managerpants 17:39, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
  • This same discussion is going on regarding a similar entry on Jacob's page. We have no actual evidence this ship is the Black Rock, you're assuming it is. I think it's the Black Rock too, but until we have some kind of evidence I think it's premature to take it for fact.--ISawDivinity 18:38, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
  • I don't think anyone's taking it as fact, but I also think it's silly to say that "we have no actual evidence that this ship is the Black Rock." It looks like the Black Rock, and it's the only ship we've ever seen on the show that looks like that. Why would it be anything other than the Black Rock? This is just like when people got up in arms about the statue ("it could be a different statue," even though we've never seen evidence of another statue) or Jacob's nemesis posing as Locke ("he could be referring to another loophole, so we don't know it's him"). I'm glad the writers/producers don't come right out and say everything, because it's not fun to pander to the lowest common denominator. --Managerpants 10:33, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
  • When the episode re-aired (with the text pop-ups at the bottom of the screen), a note identified it as "an early 1800s wooden sailing ship."
  • Information provided in enhanced episodes is not considered canon. --Slimeham 18:06, March 2, 2010 (UTC)
  • This will need correcting, as the latest episode, Ab Aeterno, seems to indicate the Black Rock arrived at the island during a storm, and was immediatly swept inland.--Pictish 11:33, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

Capabilities of the Man in Black

Considering canon information from the latest episode "Dr. Linus" we have seen that the Man in Black posesses telekinetic capabilities (removing the shackle from Ben's leg) as if he was using the Force from STAR WARS. I made a corresponding entry that has been deleted, quite frankly, I fail to see "why"? I'd agree that this should be part of a larger section entitled "Capabilities of the Man in Black" and have therefore added it. Please assist to prevent unnecessary further mutilation as we are in the progress of learning about his capabilities. Thanx for listening and your assistance --SokratesOne 08:10, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

Is the Man in Black responsible for ALL apparitions of Christian Shephard?!

Ever since his "claims" in the cliffside cave, many Losties have started to accept statements from the Man in Black at face value, consider these as canon and seem to have never heard of "grains of salt". The character has now repeatedly demonstrated deception and is lying to pursue his agenda (how about a catalog of deceptions and lies of the Man in Black, volunteers?!). As for the "official" apparitions of Jack's father Christian Shephard we have two categories to choose from:

  • One where the apparition is mute, wearing a white shirt (under his jacket) and white shoes. This mute apparition has only appeared to Jack on the island and in distant L.A.
  • One where the apparition talks and interacts, wears no jacket but a dark shirt and dark boots ('dressed in black'). This talking apparition has only appeared to others than Jack on the island and the not-too-distant Kahana freighter (to Michael).

There are obvious differences between the two apparitions, which set these apart. While I have no objection that the 'dark' apparitions are those of the Man in Black (99.5 % probability), to equally attribute the 'light' apparitions to the Man in Black, too, is unproven, conjectural and at this point remains wild speculation. That the light apparitions occur when Smokey's noise is heard is inconclusive. The "Jack apparitions" of his deceased father may simply have the character of a guardian angel steering Jack clear of harm's way. And according by MiB's own claims he could not have crossed several thousand nautical miles across the ocean to L.A. to appear to Jack as Christian (please picture this in your mind: MiB traveling all that distance just to sit down in a hospital lounge chair, look at Jack and remain mute. At least if he would have said "Why did you leave me behind on the island"?!)

Please rewatch the scene from "The Last Recruit" closely: Jack asks the Man in Black if he has been responsible for (Jack's !) visions of Christian Shephard. Notice that the Man in Black requires a noticable amount of time before giving an answer: Because he has never appeared as Christian to Jack but only to other survivors and checks his and Locke's (!) memory, which provides him with the essential clue how to reply:

(dialogue excerpt from "White Rabbit")

LOCKE: No, crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting sane. So, why are you out here?

JACK: I'm chasing something—someone.

LOCKE: Ah. The white rabbit. Alice in Wonderland.

JACK: Yeah, wonderland, because who I'm chasing—he's not there.

LOCKE: But you see him?

JACK: Yes. But he's not there.

(Deceased) Locke also knew that it had been this encounter between Jack and "him" that would lead Jack to the cave and the fresh water. How did (deceased) Locke know that the "he" Jack was refering to, was Jack's father? Because prior to turning the Frozen Wheel 'dark' Christian told him to "say hello to my son". Locke thus concluded a) that he had met Jack's father (which he later told Jack in the L.A. hospital) and b) that the 'him' Jack was chasing must have been Jack's father. When MiB 'remembered' this he gave Jack the only answer he could, as this had been the only case of a 'genuine' apparition of Christian in front of Jack, MiB could possibly know of...and made yet another unsubstantiated claim (MiB typical).

As for the 'light' apparitions of Christian to Jack we have the following possibilities: a) hallucinations of Jack when in a stressful situation b) apparitions of Jacob as Christian (remaining mute so Jacob doesn't interfere or manipulate) c) like other ghosts (Charlie, Ana Lucia) Christian's can travel to where he wants (unlike Michael who is a prisoner of purgatory, for what he's done), but has decided to remain mute when encountering Jack

I leave it up to volunteers, to accordingly correct the latest 'facts' in the Man in Black main page concerning this issue, or present an official podcast quote from Damon and Carlton which establishes his 'fact' beyond doubt or I'll turn myself into smokey and act accordingly --SokratesOne 13:30, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

I wonder if it is a sure fact that it was the MIB on the Kahana. How could he get there? As smokey he is not able to travel water, in physical form (Christian) he would have needed some vehicle. Additionally, there were some time travel issues that were probably related to electromagnetic energy! It can't be true in the logic of the series. Is it an inconsistency? Gfrast 15:55, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

  • We don't know that to be true. When Sawyer asked MiB about travelling to Hydra as smoke, MiB asked some to the effect of, "If I could do that, would I still be here?" MiB is not known for telling anyone the truth.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 21:26, June 7, 2010 (UTC)


The past discussions about renaming this page have been archived here. If further discussion is required, please do so below, but let's not re-hash old arguments. It's my opinion, based on a conversation with Gregg Nations, and references in the show, that this article remain named "Man in black". He's commonly known by this name, the creative staff refer to him this way, and we can easily create redirects for the other nicknames given to this character.    Jabberwock    talk    contribs    email   - 17:46, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

Breaking the Circle

We need someone to go back and look through the previous episodes. The ash around the house (now known to be Rose & Bernard's cabin, not Horrice's as previously thought) was broken, I get a feeling Locke was the one who broke the circle around the house (but I can't remember clearly). Perhaps Jacob's Enemy was trapped there by Jacob, and the ash was holding him there? (See Hostage Theory) and this also brings up the point that: Ben took Locke to this house, saying Jacob lived there - Had Ben been going to Jacob's Enemy seeking guidance all this time? This would all be such a grand twist of fate if Locke initially freed Jacob's Enemy. Ahrotahntee 08:13, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
What do you mean, "now known to be Rose & Bernard's cabin"? It's a completely different cabin. Marc604 10:41, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I also think it might be safe to say that the guy who said "HElp Me" to Locke was not Jacob, but this guy. He's a trickster.--Xocgx 12:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

  • And on that count, he got what he wanted. Monsterfurby 14:11, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
    • You might think it's safe to say that, but it's not. Until it's confirmed (or even suggested) in the show, it's pure speculation. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions

This issue about who said "Help me" makes sense. I mean, if this "nemesis" can take the identity he wants, he could be Christian. What's more, I strongly believe he is related to the monster, because in 5x12, the monster/Alex told him to obey the false Locke. As John was in the Temple as well, but not next to Ben, or the monster did not turn up earlier in Dharmaville when Ben summonned it and John was by his side, maybe Jaboc's enemy is the monster itself. Or at least, during the time John was away (and later on he came back to Dharmaville), he went to tell the Monster what to do. Anyway, it seems to me that Jacob's enemy/Christian wanted John to move the Island in order to get him out of that place, so when he came back, the nemesis could take his appearance. Then, the question is, why the enemy used the monster to convince Ben to obey John, so he was the one who eventually killed Jacob? Why didn't "John" stab Jacob himself? Well, it may have something to do with the Rules... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chusdegreit (talkcontribs) 2009-05-14T11:02:02.

  • First of all, it should be noted that the brocken part of the circle of ash was pushed in from the outside, in what looks like one delibrate motion. This could not have been Locke picking up a little bit of ash to examine it on his first visit to the cabin or Hurly randomly stepping in the ash while trying to run away from the cabin. Seondly, the person we all thought was Jacob up until now has brown eyes and is therefore not "Jacob's enemy". Also, the brown eyed mystery man was seen in the cabin with Christian, so they were not the same entity. Iburnedthemuffins 14:09, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

It's probably counter productive for me to take the time to question all the assumptions made in this thread but I will just add the contents of two episode for addition to your theory. Please review and take into account the scenes in "Something Nice Back Home" and "Cabin Fever" where Claire interacts with Christian. Taking this specific scenes into account will probably clarify the central question of this thread. Mister vijay 23:01, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

  • If indeed MIB inhabited the cabin, then the oldman that appears as an initial image of Jacob is in fact MIB. Should that be confirmed, then changes must be made to Jacob's wiki entry Aepma 23:08, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

Where to Put Him in Lostpedia?

Well, this character's features caused something new about the Lostpedia concept. Although the character itself is a supporting character portrayed by a guest star, Titus Welliver is not the only who portrays Jacob's Enemy. We've learnt that John Locke is dead, and most probably Terry O'Quinn is going to be the main actor who'll portray Jacob's enemy. So the question is: "can there be a supporting character who is portrayed by a regular cast member?" Paintbox 15:50, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Since "Jacob's enemy" took over Locke's persona, i suppose the answer is "yes". Ben was right: Dead is Dead. dposse 16:22, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
"most probably Terry O'Quinn" This is not true. Don't state your own opinions and say "most probably". Where's your evidence? --Integrated (User / Talk) 01:05, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Well, of course i have to state my own opinion. I don't have the ability to state some other's opinion. Sorry. Here's the information we already have: Jacob's Enemy appeared in six episodes(as far as we know), and Terry O'Quinn portrayed this character in six episodes.(So the percentage is 100% so far) Again, as far as we know another character that O'Quinn portrays is dead. We saw his corpse. And we've learnt that actually there's no resurrection on the island. That means "there is no John Locke anymore - except flashbacks". With these two important information, we can say if Terry O'Quinn will continue show as a regular, the main character he's gonna portray should be "Jacob's Enemy". This is not a prediction, or a theory, just a result of our current information. (Paintbox 13:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC))
  • Where are you getting this information? Can you cite an episode or interview? Mister vijay 15:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
  • No. That way,it would be a spoiler. All i have been trying to do is analyzing the current situation. (Paintbox 15:59, 15 May 2009 (UTC))

Um..... what?? Mister vijay 16:43, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, actually the question was simple. Whether it's a theory, a speculation or not we have a new character never mentioned before. Simply i was asking where to add this new character. Although he's one of the supporting characters, in my humble opinion we cannot simply put him on the "Supporting Characters Portal" because of the Terry O'Quinn's co-portrayal of this character. Until this time no regular cast member portrayed a supporting character, and i just expected a disscussion about what to do in this 'new' situation. I hope i could be able to express clearly this time. (Paintbox 17:08, 15 May 2009 (UTC))

  • Perhaps I wasn't being sufficiently clear. I was referring to your previous post where you claim that John Locke is no more and that Terry has been portraying Jacob's Enemy for the past six episodes or so when I asked for evidence or a source in the canon. You again assert this to be verified in your response. This "theory" is a prime example of every problem mentioned in the theory policy page. It contains Logical fallicies, shoehorning and wishful thinking. Mister vijay 17:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Vijay, actually i thought that you were kidding. You can see on the main characters portal, John Locke's current situation is deceased. We have seen his corpse in the crate. Poor John Locke didn't want to kill Jacob. He can't want, because he's dead. It's clearly confirmed that the one who visited Jacob along with Ben, was Jacob's Enemy appeared in Locke's form. Not John Locke. A totally different character. I just can't understand why do you say that "Locke and Jacob's Enemy are the same characters" while the Locke's body was laying outside, and some other person appeared in Locke's form was encouraging Ben to kill Jacob.Paintbox 18:59, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

So what you and pretty much everyone else is saying is that a character who appeared is over 80 episodes and has perhaps a dozen centric episodes died in 5.07 in the most disgraceful way possible and was replaced by a character with about five lines and introduced in the season finale of the penultimate season and that furthermore this character has been written into the entire series by connecting him with pretty much every unexplained event in the show (look up the definition of shoehorning)? Despite the fact that every episode refers to John Locke as "special" and having an important role, he's now a pawn in a game between Jacob and a character that has no name? How many entries had to be revised to accomodate this theory? Wouldn't it be far easier to simply write "A corpse that physically looks like John Locke and played by Terry Oquinn was shown?" Based on previous plot twists such as the dead bodies the fake flight 815 and the moment when we see two Lockes in the same scene there are far more simple explanations possible that do not contradict the other 101 episodes. If I were a new viewer and had only watched the finale I could understand thinking this but for those of us who have sat through over 100 episodes should really be questioning this "conclusion". Mister vijay 19:03, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

  • "So what you and pretty much everyone else is saying is that a character who appeared is over 80 episodes and has perhaps a dozen centric episodes died in 5.07 in the most disgraceful way possible and was replaced by a character with about five lines and introduced in the season finale of the penultimate season and that furthermore this character has been written into the entire series by connecting him with pretty much every unexplained event in the show?" Unfortunately yes, i exactly say that. I'm hugely disappointed also, but it's a fact that John Locke passed away. And won't be back as long as he doesn't act like a dead. lol. Perhaps Jack was right when he said to Locke "Maybe You're not special. You're just an ordinary old man".(Paintbox 19:30, 15 May 2009 (UTC))
  • I disagree that it is "fact" that Locke is dead. This "cliffhanger" leaves the options open. I noticed that Juliet Burke's page says something like "her fate is unknown". I would have preferred people this to be written. We shouldn't just jump onto this bandwagon in an eagerness for explanations. Yes, we are shown a body but multiple episodes show multiple characters refer to this character as Locke, and his actions, dialogue, etc. are all consistent with the previous Locke. That's all I have to say but I am going to love it when the final season starts, the dead body is revealed to be a fake or from the future, "Jacob's Enemy" is revealed to be a red herring, and all these entries will have to be retracted. I wouldn't go crazy creating all these entries about this character because it's going to get deleted. Mister vijay 20:11, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Locke? Really?

What's with all the certainty that Locke was actually Jacob's enemy/nemesis? It's obviously a possibility, but there are several other possibilities and a huge lack of vital information. We can assume that the same thing that happened to Locke also happened to Christian. Therefore, does that make Christian was also really Jacob's enemy/nemisis? In addition, Locke has been saying from the beginning that he's had a connection with the island. He's had various dreams, such as the Nigerian airplane and Horace building the cabin. Why would an increased "awareness" of the island now mean it's not actually him? Plus, the LOST writers tend to like to have fun with vague terms; so just because Jacob's enemy/nemesis said in the opening scene that he'd find a loophole to kill Jacob doesn't necessarily mean that's the same loophole that Jacob was talking about with Locke even though they appear to be related. Considering all things, there are three possible loophole that he's referring to: Locke coming back to life, Ben returning to the island, and (if it is Jacob's nemesis) Locke finding a way to kill Jacob. All are things that shouldn't have happened but did. A couple other points:

  • This isn't the first time that Locke's avoided killing someone. He also didn't kill Anthony Cooper. In fact, this incident was remarkably similar to that one. Locke kicking Jacob into the fire is similar to Locke wrapping up Cooper in a rug/mat and bringing him back to the Others; it's a finishing touch but someone else dealt the fatal blows.
  • When Locke first emerges in 2007 on the island, not only is he in his funeral clothes but he also has all of his memories up to when Ben strangled him. So are we to assume that no only does this nemesis/enemy have shapeshifting powers but also can read dead people's memories? I know we're talking about LOST here, but that just seems too far fetched. I think within the LOST universe that there may be other explanations.

Regardless, it's obviously a possibility, but until it's either proven through the show or confirmed by the writers/producers, I don't think we should be treating this assumption as fact. --AddictedToLost 18:05, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Interesting, but I desagree. Real John Locke is proved to be dead, as his corpse was inside the cargo box. Also, Jacob asks "John" if he finally managed to find a loophole, but there is no reply, he just looks at Jacob. If the true John had been asked that, he would have answered he didnt know what a loophole is. --Chusdegreit 18:15, 14 May 2009 (UTC)Chusdegreit

As I said, all things considered there are three possible loopholes when Jacob says he "found the loophole". Locke would obviously know that him coming back to life could be considered a loophole, and Locke knows that Ben wasn't allowed to return to the island after turning the donkey wheel. Locke's dead body is interesting, but also consider that it's been proven that the same person can exist more than once at the same time since Locke had Richard go and tend to Timeshift Locke's gunshot wound (actually this has been proven with several other characters). Perhaps a similar thing has happened here. --AddictedToLost 18:20, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

On the idea that it is too far-fetched for the nemesis to read dead people's memories... Yemi (Echo's brother) was impersonated by 'someone/thing'- as were Christian, Alex... maybe even Libby (on the freighter) and Horace (building the cabin). They're all dead with bodies on the island. Jacob's Nemesis needed John Locke's body on the island in order for him to impersonate Locke. These impersonations seem to include access to the victim's memories. If the black smoke can show moments of a person's life (and I've seen it surmised that the black smoke IS the nemesis), then how different would this idea be? --Bdjsb7 18:50, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I can't exactly remember the incident with Yemi, but as far as Alex goes that was more along the lines of the smoke monster creating a hallucination rather than the smoke monster impersonating Alex. As for Christian, nobody's seen his corpse so we don't know if he's being impersonated like it appears Locke is. For that matter, nobody's seen Claire's body either if she's dead. Anyway, I think we've only really seen proof of the smoke monster creating hallucinations instead of impersonating people... but with the smoke monster all bets are off so it may not be as far-fetched as I initially thought. I think that a lot of this was left intentionally unclear by the writers for a reason. I don't necessarily have an issue with presenting Jacob's enemy/nemesis as impersonating Locke, but I think that it should be presented that this is an assumption rather than canon or fact. We won't know for sure until next season, and if the truth goes against everybody's assumptions it wouldn't be the first time in LOST. --AddictedToLost 19:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
  • No one is suggesting that Nemesis is a shape-shifter. He actually make the comment (paraphrased), "do you know what I've been through to get here." That is in response to the loophole question from Jacob. Either way, the new Locke can't be completely this guy. If that was the case, then there would have been no reason for him to take Ben and Richard to the Beechcraft trying to make sure Richard helped Locke's gunshot wound. He wouldn't have really cared. His sole mission was to get back to Jacob and have Ben kill Jacob (probably the loophole was to get a previous leader to do so). I believe that this new Locke is not fully Locke or fully Nemesis.  NEVERGIVEUP  Contribs  Talk  21:29, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I disagree, there was a point in going to the beechcraft. He knew we had to have Richard talk to him, and tell him what he needed to do, otherwise he would get where he was going, and tha false-Locke wouldn't have gotten there. Also, maybe he didn't do it himself because he knew the real Locke would know it wasn't him. I mean, out of everything we've seen Locke do, i think he'd be the first person who would want to meet himself in another time period. -- Roobydo  talk  contribs  00:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I think "Jacob's enemy appeared in Locke's form in the water near the survivors' beach camp" is too strong of a statement to be made in this article. It's a theory without total substantiation.  Robert K S   tell me  05:08, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I have to agree that this would be considered a theory based on what I understand from the policy on this website. Mister vijay 15:34, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

How can this be made anymore clear before its accepted?

Jacob's Nemesis: "Do you have any idea how badly I want to kill you..."
Jacob: "Yes"
JN: "One of these days, sooner or later, I'm going to find a loophole my friend"
J: "And when you do, I'll be right here..."
Then later on in the show, inside the foot of the statue after Ilana tells them they found the body in a coffin on Ajira 316, Sun asks the question for the audience that if that is Locke, who is inside the statue......
Locke "Hello Jacob"
J: "Well you found your loophole"
L: "Indeed I did.. and you have no idea what I've gone through, to be here..."
Its patently obvious, from what we have on screen, that the Locke in the water near the survivors' beach camp on Hydra is one and the same as the one who is in the foot of the statue with Jacob and Ben, and that person is the character from the beginning of the episode, that we call his nemesis. -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  23:12, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. It always kills me when there's this much debate over something that's pretty clear. The producers don't always like to come right out and say something, because why pander to the lowest common denominator? This same thing happened the first time the statue was shown in its entirety from behind. "Well, we don't know that it's the same as the four-toed foot statue, it could be a different one." UGH! --Managerpants 17:49, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
So it could just mean the Locke-a-like and Locke have fused somehow (obviously the thing has Locke's memories). There are many possibilities besides the claim that the Locke-a-like and Nemesis are identical. It should be obvious that this claim of identity is premature. Things are often not as they seem in this show, so I am somewhat nonplussed by the surprise here that we aren't just accepting these identity claims. Charles widmore 01:12, January 7, 2010 (UTC)


I've removed the part about Tawaret as it is entirely based on the claim that she is depicted with a crocodile's head, which she is not. Tawaret is depicted as having a hippopotamus' head. This is yet another case of people trying to change facts rather than let go of their theories. TDiNardo 20:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I actually thought it looked more like a hippo than a crocodile. I don't think we need to worry about who the statue is yet. If they wanted us to know, they'd stop showing it from the back.-- Roobydo  talk  contribs  00:44, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Who said Tawaret had a crocodile head? I was the one who said she had a hippo's head. And I think the statue does too. It might look crocodilian from that angle, but it's probably not. Crocs don't have ears like that. Plus, Michael Emerson said it was Tawaret. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions
Where?-- Roobydo  talk  contribs  21:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
  • FYI Tawarets in the real world have hippopotamus heads (albeit sometimes crocodile backs). Also hippos have four toes. Of course the scuplture artist for Lost could've created a hybrid that does not authentically represent "real" Tawerets. -- Contrib¯ _Santa_ ¯  Talk  19:25, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


How can we assume that the Enemy is pseudo-Locke? Pseudo-Locke might just as well be an entity created by the Enemy, or an illusion made by him, or some unknown subject of the Enemy, made to look like Locke, or the smoke monster made to look like Locke, or, for that matter, something completely unrelated to the Enemy? (Although I personally wouldn't bet on the last suggestion). And even if we agree to regard pseudo-Locke as the Enemy in disguise, how can we assume that "The Life and Death of Jeremy Bentham" was the first time we saw the Enemy? To me it is just as safe to assume that Christians island-appearances is the Enemy, as it is to assume that pseudo-Lockes appearances is the Enemy. I say, for now the only appearance we can be sure of truly is the Nemesis, is when he is played by Titus Welliver. Anything else is speculation. Thus, we should move Pseudo-Lockes appearances and history to Psedo-Locke, Fake John Locke, Faux John Locke, Fake Locke or Faux Locke. -Pierre 22:13, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree that Christian may be the same person as pseudo-Locke, but i think it's pretty clear that Locke is pseudo Locke. I mean, "One day I'll find a way to kill you," and "Looks like you found your loophole" seem pretty intentional to me.-- Roobydo  talk  contribs 
That was supposed to read "'Jacob's Enemy' is pseudo Locke."- Roobydo  talk  contribs  23:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

What about Mock Locke ? :D --Integrated (User / Talk) 23:17, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Hahaha, love it. -- Roobydo  talk  contribs  00:49, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I prefer Un-Locke, as it sounds better, and comes from a literary reference. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions
I like either Un-Locke or Anti-Locke. Iburnedthemuffins 14:24, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I like UnLocke as well for a nickname. --Minderbinder 21:36, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm... Interesting question here... Why is Smokey so much darked when he faces off Eko than in any other shot?

Appearance as Christian and Yemi

I think it's stupid to be talking about whether or not to include The Enemy's apparences as Locke here. It is obviously him, they find out real Locke is dead and 2 seconds later Jacob comments on the loophole obivously reminding the audience of the earlier scene. What I think should be added here is the Enemy's apparance as Yemi and Christian. My evidence : it has been proven DEAD IS DEAD, Yemi said to Eko "You speak to me as if I were your brother". Christian was in the cabin where it is now known The Enemy resided and not Jacob, The entire series of events that lead to Locke's corpse returning to the island was started by Christian telling John to move the island. The last time Christian was seen was also the same night Locke showed up at the Ajira camp. Also Damon and Carlton a quoted as saying "by the end of The Incident viewers will have enough information to theorise well how the show will end." This all seems pretty solid to me what do you guys think? I vote for adding it to the article. --D Toccs 10:12, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

What's your Canon source that he appeared as Christian and Yemi? How do you know The Enemy resided in the cabin? I'm not saying it's wrong, in fact, I think it's completely right, but as far as adding it to the article, let's stick with the Theories page-- Roobydo  talk  contribs  01:00, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Just another thought, It is obvious that the Enemy either is the Monster or much more likely has some form of control over it, which is why "Alex" told Ben to obey Locke, also possibly why he took Ben directly to it instead of letting it come to them. Also the Enemy clearly has access to the person's memories as Yemi, Christian and Locke all display full knowledge of their prior life. I think these things are obvious and we should be discussing more important questions like "If he doesn't pyshically possess the body, what is the process shapeshifting, some sort of duplication? And where are Yemi and Christian's bodies, why would he hide those bodies and leave Locke's in the coffin?" or " What is his exact nature? Is he a pysichal being, Bram and Ilana only refer to him as a thing eg "WHAT they're up against" "SOMETHING scarier than whats in the box" The only character who really refers to him as a person is Jacob" --D Toccs 10:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not saying I disagree with everything you said here, but it is anything but "obvious." There is a lot of assuming going on. Educated guesses are guesses none the less. They are to be kept to the Theory pages, not the main pages. Also, Yemi was confirmed to be an apparition of the smoke monster, not Jacob's nemesis. Now if they turn out to be the same being, than 2+2=4. But, that is only speculation at this point. Again, a lot of speculation turns out to be true, but until that happens, it's just theory.  NEVERGIVEUP  Contribs  Talk  19:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
  • All this is based on the repeated word "loophole"? Everything follows from that? Mister vijay 15:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
  • What do you mean? Of course it's not all based on the word loophole. Did you even read all things i pointed out? --D Toccs 06:11, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad somebody else is seeing that. Samuel or whoever he is, is who we've been calling "The Island" all along. Obviously he has a the attiude for judgement as the monster is known for. He didn't want people to come in the first place because of their wrongs. And then he wants to kill Jacob for what he did. Like you said, everything Christian ever said was to get locke to leave, die, and come back dead, so that Jacob could be killed. The only dead that I wonder if he was not "playing," were the one's Hurley saw off the island. --Usedearplugs 22:29, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey Usedearplugs I never said he was the Island so please don't change the name of my posts. --D Toccs 00:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll address two points made here for now and save the rest for later:

  • 1. You write "The entire series of events that lead to Locke's corpse returning to the island was started by Christian telling John to move the island." Although Christian tells Locke that he must bring all of the Oceanic Six back to the Island this goal is later asserted as a very important objective by several other characters who do everything in their power to bring about this end, they are: Charles Widmore, Eloise Hawking and Ben Linus. What is their association with Titus's character?
  • 2. You also write "It is obvious that the Enemy either is the Monster or much more likely has some form of control over it, which is why "Alex" told Ben to obey Locke, also possibly why he took Ben directly to it instead of letting it come to them." Taking apart the first part that indicates that Titus character, John Locke and the smoke monser are all one entity: The smoke monster has killed several characters and its method of killing is very unique. If you compare the way it has killed the scenes with Terry's character in the 5th season arranged Jacob to be killed they are completely inconsistent with the monster's MO and methods and inconistent with the dialogue used to describe and explain the monster by several characters including but not limited to: Ben Linus, Danielle & her science team, Juliet.Mister vijay 19:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
  • I know the writers have indicated that the Monster can "manifest" or "influence" the manifestation of a person and there is a lot of reference to Yemi going around to support that and now Yemi is being connected to Christian, however, I will call your attention to moments from the trasnscripts from

"The Other Woman": [Thunder crashes] [thunder rumbling] [Juliet wanders alone in the jungle.] [ghostly voices whispering] [ghostly whispering continues] JULIET: Jack? [Juliet turns around to see Harper Stanhope standing behind her, alone in the jungle, watching her. Juliet gasps.] HARPER: Hello, Juliet. Long time no see.

Actually I couldn't find the rest of this scene on the transcript where Harper Stanhope talks aboout Ben being exactly where he wants to be and so on but I know it's somewhere either in that episode or another. Here we have a clear clue or sign that this is connected to the smoke monster. Clues that are noticably absent in the appearences of Christian and Locke.Mister vijay 19:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

  • You write "And where are Yemi and Christian's bodies, why would he hide those bodies and leave Locke's in the coffin?" Yemi's body is clearly shown. Eko confirms that the corpse near the plane is Yemi in 23rd Palm. Mister vijay 19:51, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 **  Actually Yemi's body had disappeared on Eko's second journey to the plane, remeber he got quite upset about it.  --D Toccs 22:00, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • You write "Christian was in the cabin where it is now known The Enemy resided and not Jacob"... In the episode The Incident, Parts 1 & 2 Ilana et al take the crate and go directly to the cabin. Ilana knows where it is, despite previous episodes where the cabin is confirmed both visually and through dialogue to have the ability to move its location. They Ilana group immediatly recognize something is wrong and Ilana enters the cabin and returns to say that Jacob isn't in the cabin and hasn't been there "for a long time" she didn't say he's "never" been there. It's certainly logical to deduce that at some point in the past Jacob did use the cabin for residence but hasn't used it for a "long" time. When Locke sees Christian in the cabin it is at least three years earlier. Three years is a long time by many standards. I'm certainly not claiming that Christian IS Jacob, I wouldn't accept that, but I would like to call your attention to the involvement of Claire in the equation. She has been last seen in the cabin and she could have broken the ash and disrupted whatever purpose it has. Also, to address the claim made in a previous thread on this page that the ash restricts or confines the movements of either Christian or Jacob again look at multiple episodes where both Christian and Jacob appear both off Island and in other locales within the Island.Mister vijay 20:11, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
  • You wrote "It is obvious that the Enemy either is the Monster or much more likely has some form of control over it, which is why "Alex" told Ben to obey Locke, also possibly why he took Ben directly to it instead of letting it come to them."
  • In the scene in "Dead is Dead" referenced above Ben goes to the Temple and confronts the Monster. He sees Alex who gives him certain instructions. Then we see him follow those instructions and when he verbally references the moment in the finale he says "My dead daughter told me to follow you". He doesn't say "The monster told me to follow you". We've already seen in mutiple episodes that Ben has knowledge of the monster he knows what it is, how to summon it, what it's function is, and its ability to manifest as people but he fails to question if this apparition is his daughter. When he sees "Alex" he apologizes to her and accepts her instructions. I'm not saying it's a coincidence that Alex appears when he goes down to meet he monster but I wouldn't confuse multiple identities shown to be unique. Her appearences are influenced by the monster. There are many clues as to how this happens that are consistent with all information given on the monster and that can be directed at the monster entry. So here what you're saying is Alex, monster, Locke, Enemy are alll one identity and Ben has no ability to distinguish between any of them. A simplier explanation would be the monster which the writers have hinted is able to "download" information from people in one of their podcasts, is a conduit for people's consciousness. Through the medium of the monster the people communicate their desires in the same way we use a telephone. The telephone isn't telling us what to do the people are. This is more consistent with representations of the monster that are more in line of an animal than a "person". But all these ideas about the monster should probabaly go to the Monster theory page so that they are consistent with that identity's apeparences and dialogue referencing it. Also, if you see Dead is Dead again the dialogue explains in plain language why they have to go to the Temple instead of summoning it.Mister vijay 21:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Are you suggesting that the monster being a conduit to channeling the dead is simpler than the monster taking the shape of Alex? I disagree wholeheartedly. The smoke may not have formed itself into Alex, perhaps it just made Ben see what it wanted him to, but I'm pretty sure that it was implied that he wasn't Actually communicating with Alex.-- Roobydo  talk  contribs  21:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
  • My guiding principle was stated in a previous post where I said that a hypothesis that introduces the fewest assumptions is most likely correct. I would add that it also must utilize the most amount of actual dialogue from mulitple characters and multiple episodes. You're saying that it was implied that Ben didn't speak to Alex. I practically quote a line from the finale that contradicts that idea, unless you introduce the assumption that Ben really has no real understanding of the monster which is contradicted by multiple episodes. I have a feeling if I sit down and review transcripts of previous episodes where the monster appears I could find further evidence to support the idea that the monster isn't a person with motives but rather something different. Ben doesn't doubt the validity of what he saw in the Temple (ie was it real or not), he doesn't question if what he saw was Alex. It's not a question of what's simplier it's a question of what's most consistent with all the evidence provided in 101 episodes.Mister vijay 21:57, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, I can´t read all the text, but I also believe Christian is a manifestation of the moster, because we already know Smokey can adopt the "skin" of dead people who are in the Island. Besides, Christian is the one who convinces Locke he is the Chosen One by Jacob (when this is not true), so Locke convinces Richard, Ben and the rest of the Others he is actually the new Leader. In this moment, Christian tells Locke to move the Island to get to the real world, where he will be killed (maybe by Widmore, and that's why he is waiting for Locke's arrival?)and Smokey will be able to get Locke's skin; but this time, everyone believes he is the leader and then he is allowed to meet Jacob (and murder him). I mean, Christian seems a very important henchman of "Smokey-nemesis-whatevernameyouwanttogive'im" in orther to find that "loophole", so it sounds logical to assert he is the Monster itself. --Chusdegreit 13:23, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

It's clear now, for sure. He's admitted to appearing as Christian to Jack in the first season, and it's likely that he's all the other appearances of Christian on the island. Those should all be worked into the narrative now, right? Parableman 04:01, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

What's clear??? We have noticed an exponentially increasing probability that the Man in Black is the ultimate deceiver and nothing, and I mean "nothing", he says can be taken at face value. I couldn't help but notice how long it took fake Locke to answer Jack's question. As I mentioned before, I'd agree that the Man in Black has appeared as Christian Shephard when 'dressed in black'. The other apparitions ('dressed in white shirt with white shoes') may have been genuine apparitions of the real Christian Shephard. Fake Locke claims to have been these apparitions, too, mentioning it had been him as Christian leading Jack to the water and the cave, but this may merely be a deliberate conclusion taken from real Locke's memory! If we were to believe MiB's claim, we are facing the following consequences / possibilities:

  • The Man in Black just pretends to be a prisoner of the Island, but has actually managed to get off the Island any time he wants (appearing to Jack in the hospital during night time) OR
  • The Christian in the L.A. hospital was merely a hallucination of Jack, which rises questions regarding the mental sanity of the most probable "candidate" OR
  • Like Hurley, Jack can see dead people, too, but is not yet able to communicate with these (his father and possibly Jacob). Not only would a talk with his father justify his recently developing "leaps of faith" (almost too literal when he jumps of the Elizabeth) but would atone him with his father. Jack now "has what it takes" and with the decreasing possibility that Sawyer will tell Jack about the talk he had in the Sydney bar with Jack's father, it looks like Christian himself needs to tell Jack, that he has been actually proud that Jack had unfaltering ethics.--SokratesOne 07:06, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

This is all theory

Please place section entitled "As John Locke" under theory based on the policy guidelines. Mister vijay 15:18, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

  • Jacob said to him "You found your loophole", it's obviously him. --Blueeagleislander 06:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

-Well This does not proof that they are the same person. Although there are several facts that proof it. And they are explained after every point you have made. (fallowing)

Occam's Razor

I assume you've heard of "Ockam's razor". It's a logical rule that states "The simplest explanation for a phenomenon is most likely the correct explanation." or further more that "the principle recommends selecting the hypothesis that introduces the fewest assumptions". Mister vijay 17:07, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. Our hypothesis indroduces some assumptions, but yours introdruce a bunch of them. You are saying that many thing we saw in the show have a different meaning than the obvious. You are suggesting things that conflict with what we see, you are denying things that the only possible alternative explanation would have to have thousands of assumptions. Stop and think man. And with some effort you might understand it.


Point: 1) The character played by Titus is Jacob's Enemy despite the fact that the refers to Jacob as "my friend" in his dialogue.

  • Counterpoint:1) He also said that he wanted to kill him... and then got to at the end, with Jacob referring to the conversation involving the loophole.
  • Reponse:1) True he said: "Do you know how badly I want to kill you?". This give rise to the theory: they are "enemies" and are enemies for hundreds of years.

Look at the complex relationship between Jack and Locke. In seson 4 he puts a gun to Locke's head and pulls the trigger. I guess they are "enemies" at that point. In season 5 though when asked about his relationship to the deceased he says "friend". This relationship evolved and changed over 5 seasons as the characters evolved and grew. But based on this theory of the relationship between Jaocb and his "enemy" the nature of that relationship remains so much the same for over a hundred years that the conversation picks up exactly where it left off over a hundred years later. This, however, is unverified. You write Jacob "refers" to the conversation he had over a hundred years ago. Why is he necessary referring to that conversation? Why is this so "obvious"? Many different characters can have the same or similar objectives, goals or plans. Many characters say they want to kill Ben, but they are not the same character.

Have you thought that he was being sarcastic? He said "One day I will find a loophole my friend". Just to remind you that the loophole means a way of killing you. "One day you are going to pay for you crimes my friend." That what Sherlock Holmes said to Professor Moriarty, and they were enemies, right? DUH!


Point: 2) This character referred to as "Jacob's Enemy" can change his shape. At best this is unverified. We never see this character visually change his shape.

  • Counter point: 2) The dead body of Locke, and the dialogue verify who that was.
  • Response: 2) The dead body of Locke what? We do not see this character visually change his shape. What dialogue verifies who who was? when? I have no idea what you're saying.

The Incident part 2 shows clearly that the person who we thought was Locke ressurrected by the island or by Jacob is not who we thought it was. Going further, the dialogue between this person and Jacob at the end of the episode do imply that he is the same person from the beginning of the episode or some kind of reincarnation of him. Between that and saying that he can shape shift is not a very big step, even thought that is not very clear yet. You denying it is more assuming than accepting it.

There is some inconsistencies regarding the shape shifting. In "The Substitute", Ilana states, that "He's stuck that way", but in the previous season we saw him in the form of Alex (and propably Christian too). When and why he became stuck ? After killing Jacob ? Pirate87 08:09, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

Well, obviously we don't know for sure yet. But that seems to be the prevalent theory. -- Managerpants  Contribs  Talk  11:47, February 24, 2010 (UTC)
Someone dropped a line on another page that burning the cabin locked (hmm) him into his current human form. It's worth keeping in our hip pockets because Ilana had to have some reason for ordering the fire.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 14:26, February 24, 2010 (UTC)
Didn't Ilana say that he was stuck now that Jacob is dead? Parableman 04:03, April 21, 2010 (UTC)


Point: 3) "He spent many years attempting to find a loophole to kill and defeat his nemesis, Jacob." Which episodes have flashbacks that "reveal" that he spent many years attempting to find a loophole? Since you can't point to an episode that confirms that this also is a "theory".

  • Counterpoint:3) Its in the dialogue!
  • Response: 3) What dialogue? When? Do you want me to make your argument and find supporting evidence because I can't. I have no idea where to look.
  • Sometime in the 1800's, "Jacob's Enemy" is trying to find a loophole to kill Jacob. In 2007, "Jacob's Enemy" finds a loophole to kill Jacob. Much time has passed in between. Ergo, "He spend many years attempting to find a loophole to kill [...] Jacob."  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  22:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Your response is based in 2 logical fallacies: circular reasoning, which is defined by wikipedia as "a logical fallacy in which the proposition to be proved is assumed implicitly or explicitly in the premises" For example: "Why am I the boss? It's because I call the shots around here." Why do you call all the shots around here? "Because I am the boss"
  • Umm... No? I don't assume my conclusion. We know for a fact that he was trying to find a loophole to kill Jacob in the 1800's. We know for a fact that he was trying to find a loophole to kill Jacob in 2007 (and succeeded). The number of years between the 1800's and 2007 is "much time" (subjective, granted, but I think most people would agree). That's pure simple deduction, my friend.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  00:02, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • You write out your reasoning and you assume that the "he" in the first sentence refers to the "he" in the second. You assume that Titus and Terry are playing the same character. There's no visual morphing of Terry into Titus. That's the premise that you're assuming and the position that I'm questioning.Mister vijay 00:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • We're clearly meant to ascribe some association between Locke and Jacob's enemy, whether or not that relation is "taking the form of" doesn't matter. From a storytelling point of view, and the way things are presented narratively, we're meant to believe that Locke has something to do with Jacob's enemy due to the planned killing of Jacob and the loophole. What you call fallacious, I call cohesive.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  01:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, taken from Lostpedia:Theory policy "It is also possible to create statements that appear on the surface to be a theory, but fall short due to a logical fallacy; such statements are sometimes referred to as crackpot theories." For example,

   * The Island chose Locke because he is special.
   * The Island chose Walt because he is special.
   * Locke and Walt are the same person. 

The contents of the actual quote you're referring to doesn't clearly state anything. You've come to your conclusions based on the above logical fallacies.Mister vijay 23:30, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

  • You're wrong Mister. To reiterate above - FACT: he was trying to find a loophole to kill Jacob in the 1800's. FACT: he was trying to find a loophole to kill Jacob in 2007. If you refute those two facts please explain why. If you accept those two facts, can you not say then that he has spent over a hundred years looking for the loophole? If not, why not? --Integrated (User / Talk) 07:24, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
    • I agree 100% w/ Integrated. I think it's really quite funny when people are so focussed on discovering the intriquicies of the show that they read way to far into aspects that are meant to be straight-forward and obvious. It's like the family guy gag when Peter and Brian are sitting at the breakfast table, and Peter looks, suprised, to Brian and says: "Brian! There's a message in my Alphabits! It says 'Ooooooooooo!'" Brian then looks at him, annoyed, and replies "Peter, those are Cheerios."-- Roobydo  talk  contribs  14:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
      • Hahahaha funny stuff :) Yea this reminds me of when Ben said he was going to "fulfill a promise to an old friend" which spelt it out very cut and dried that he was going to go kill Penny, but people refused to believe it. --Integrated (User / Talk) 20:04, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

- The argument used by Mister vijay is funny, but does not apply for the discussion. We are discussing by logic here mate. And your point is logically invalid, what we are discussing is not. Is a logical discussion based on facts. The way we interpret the facts is our problem and we can discuss them in here. Actually MANY unanswered questions from the show are answered here in LostPedia articles based on assumptions way more exaggerated than this.

Smoke Monster

Point: 4) This character "Jacob's Enemy" has the ability to steal people's memories. At what point in the series does ANY character steal another person's memory??

  • Counterpoint: 4) Erm, the smoke monster?!
  • Response: 4) The smoke monster can steal a person's memory? A) Ultimately what relevance is that to Jacob's Enemy? B) Can you show me a scene where this happens that mirrors what we see happen in the 6 episodes that "Imposter-Locke-Jacob's Enemy" appears in? Is there really a precedence for this? I want to discuss that theory.
  • Addendum (added later): If I were to want to discuss that theory it would be on the talk theory page of the smoke monster! :) Mister vijay 03:24, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
  • I'm not interested in what "general consensus" says but I think I will listen to Official Lost Podcast transcript/March 21, 2008 where the writers address this issue. In the summary page it says "on the undead door there's only three pictures. One of them is Christian Shephard, and one of them is Yemi. And the other one is..." Carlton: "Kate's horse. Just a picture of a horse. So Kate's horse is undead." But I will have to listen to the entire podcast again to confirm the context of these comments. In any event, this is talk page about "Jacob's Enemy" and I am questioning how so many different entities are now tied together with this character. Other mysterious happenings can be discussed but I would prefer we clearly separate characters and phenomena and not mix them all together unless it's clearly shown or stated in podcasts/episodes.Mister vijay 23:57, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree that characters and phenomena should not be mixed together, but as the show have given us some information that can co-relate characters and phenomena, is good for us to discuss about the points which we can connect them. I think people are going to far saying that the smoke monster IS a person. But the relationship with it and resurrected John Locke is clear.
  • I just wanted to add my two cents. We can safely think that Jacob's Nemesis or Man in Black might be another dead man embodied by smoke monster. So there might be only one nemesis, which is smokey.


Point: 5) Richard who has been on the Island for a "long time" looks at Locke and never questions that this is Locke. While he says "I've never seen a man brought back to life" he also says "If I had to guess it was Jacob who is responsible for this". So now we're bringing in the assumption that Richard is completely misguided despite many many episodes that prove otherwise.

  • Counterpoint: 5) Richard does question this is Locke. He actually says to him "you seem different..."
  • Response: 6) You say he "questions this is Locke". Apparently his objections were not strong enough to convince him to ever contradict Locke's constant question "Am I the leader?" Richard replies "Yes". His actions speak louder than one comment he made. He brought him to Jacob. That's enough for me to say Richard was, under your theory, taken for a fool despite his "knowledge" of the Island.
  • Yes, Richard was fooled. That's the point. He see's Locke, assumes (by Occam's Razor) that it is Locke, and is confused at how Locke came back to life because as far as he knows, that's impossible. Turns out he's right. Doesn't mean he wasn't fooled. That's not a huge assumption to make, it's just what is clearly in the episode.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  22:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
  • As I said above Richard says some contradictory things in that episode but his actions speak louder than his words. The assumption is not that he was fooled it is that despite his close relationship with Jacob, he's not aware of Jacob's supposed "nemesis" nor is he aware of the scope of the power of this nemesis. That's a huge gap in his knowledge.Mister vijay 00:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • I disagree. It's unclear whether even Jacob knew about the full extent of his enemy's powers. It seems likely that he wouldn't be expecting the ability of his enemy to somehow exploit whatever the loophole is (otherwise, why would he need a loophole? Additionally, in the opening scene it seems like Jacob doesn't know what such a loophole could be.) If this is the case, then certainly Richard wouldn't be aware. Either way, it doesn't seem like such a flaw to assume that Richard didn't know about Jacob's enemy (or at least about the notion that he could take the form of Locke.)  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  00:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Well at least we've gotten to a point where we can leave behind the word "obvious" and use a different word instead, "unclear" to characterize this issue.Mister vijay 00:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Is funny that Mister vijay says that we are wrong making those assumptions about "resurrected Locke" being the same person/entity as Titus' character, and being related to the Smoke Monster, which have solid ground in my opinion, and have the audacity of making the assumption that Richard ,"despite his close relationship with Jacob, he's not aware of Jacob's supposed "nemesis" nor is he aware of the scope of the power of this nemesis." Dude THIS is a pointless assumption as you have nothing to support that except for the fact that he did not recognize John Locke as any different person or "thing" than Locke himself. Actually, even say that is a assumption as that is based only in Richard's attitude towards Locke. And I believe that he seemed to be suspecting and concernead about Locke rather than faithful as he always was.


Point: 6) Ben who has been on the Island for 35 years and has knowledge about many of the Island's mysteries also doesn't question that this is Locke. His lines are "BEN: Sun, I had no idea it would happen. I've seen this Island do miraculous things. I've seen it heal the sick, but never once has it done anything like this. Dead is dead. You don't get to come back from that, not even here. So the fact that John Locke is walking around this Island... scares the living hell out of me." He uses the word "FACT" to confirm that John Locke is walking around this Island. Now we saying Ben is misguided despite many many episodes when his knowledge was very great.

  • Counterpoint: 6) That dialogue confirms to me that he is kinda scared and confused as to what is happening.
  • Response: Is he really confused? Look at his words again. Does he really ever suspect that A) That Locke is an imposter. B) That Locke is really the smoke monster. Again I can cite dialogue that counters that idea but his actions speak louder than words. He never seems confused that this is Locke. His confusion/fear stems from other sources. That's another discussion though.
  • Yes he's confused, he admits that he's never seen anything like this before, and to the best of his knowledge, this is impossible. Of course he's confused. He uses the word "fact" because that's what his perception is. Furthermore, the idea that Ben has no idea what he's really doing has been the whole point of his arc for the last half of the season.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  22:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
  • We can go on all day saying "Yes he was confused" and "No, he wasn't confused" but at the end of the day the dialogue and the actions speak for themselves. You say his perception is that it is fact. That's really what I'm getting at. He trusts his gut, his perception.Mister vijay 00:38, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • How does this dialog prove anything? How many times now has Ben fooled us? How can anyone even begin to start trusting Ben? Anything he says or does should not be taken as truth without questions. Ben has fooled everyone multiple times. He is a master manipulator. For all we know the killing of Jacob could be entirely Ben's plan and everyone is just a pawn of his. I do not believe this is Ben's plan at all. I am just saying that we can't leave that idea out of our minds and we definitely can't start trusting Ben. He has never given us a reason to trust him. His words can't be taken as truth. --Ilostmyself 00:26, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Same than the argument about Richard. You are saying that the fact that Ben believed that that person was Locke is a proof that he is misguided and don't know what he is doing. Assumptions, assumptions. We know already that Ben don't know all secrets of the island, he does not know where the monster resides, he have net met Jacob, he was scared out of hell Alex came to him in the monster chamber. Ben did not know everything about the island, and is plausible that he believed that Locke has ressurrected as he knew John was "special". Again, your argument is against yourself.

The Island

Point: 7) The following dialogue was taken from "Follow the Leader": BEN: Your timing was impeccable, John. How did you know when to be here? LOCKE: The Island told me. Didn't it ever tell you things?

  • The conclusion that this person speaking is "Jacob's Enemy" posing as John Locke, we have to assume now that "Jacob's Enemy" has a close relationship with the Island. That the Island speaks to "Jacob's Enemy".
  • Counterpoint:7) Or that using John Locke's memories, he knows what Locke would say, and is in fact lying.
  • Response: 7) There's a lot of possibilities but nothing is "obvious" or confirmed. Maybe he's using Locke's memories, maybe he knows what Locke would say, maybe he's lying, maybe he's omniscient. Let's not discuss theories but rather what's confirmed. Mister vijay 00:42, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

First time you make a good point, but again against yourself. You must have a very low IQ. WHY the hell would "The island told me" be a sign that this person is John Locke himself. What by the mercy of God make you say that the fact that "Locke" said that, it mean that he has a connection to the island and the island speaks to him as a fact? Mate none of us who are discussing the topic said that. You said that. You are assuming that. We don't even know what that means so everything we say about that is theory.


Point: 8) BEN: No, John. And clearly it hasn't told you where Jacob is, or you wouldn't need Richard to show you.LOCKE: You've never seen him. BEN: What? LOCKE: Jacob. You've never seen him, have you?

For this dialogue to make sense you'd have to now assume that "Jacob's Enemy" doesn't know where Jacob is despite evidence to the contrary in the flashback scene that is the only visual evidence we have. Futhermore, for this "theory" to make sense, you'd have to say that "Jacob's Enemy" is "pretending" or lying to Ben.
  • Okay this is somewhat unrelated to this point but at least you call him "fake locke" which implies maybe there's a possibility this is not Titus's character?Mister vijay 00:42, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Counterpoint: 8) Or, only the leader can actually go in to see Jacob, and thats another reason why Ben goes with him, because Ben is in the fact the leader, as Locke is dead.
  • Response: This is just wild speculation. Nothing you say has any evidence to suggest that is the case.

That was a a bit over the top but here we go. The fact that John asks Richard to take him to Jacob does not proof anything for either side. He can be posing as John or be John himself. If he is posing as John, he would ask Richard for Jacob as John did not know where Jacob was. If that was John himself he simply asked it cause he didn't know where it was. But for that to be correct it would bring a lot of speculation as How John knows Jacob is not in the cabin he used to visit, How he knows that Richard knows where Jacob is, Why would he want to kill him.


Point: 9) In the episode "Dead is Dead" Christian Shepard tells Sun to wait for John Locke. For this theory to work you'd have to assume that Christian is misguided or somehow aligned with "Jacob's Enemy" despite many episodes that contradict this idea including his assertion that he can speak on Jacob's behalf.

  • Counterpoint:9) Again. Christian has been seen in the cabin, which is currently being questioned as to whether it was Jacob we saw originally or not...
  • Response: Feel free to question all you want but in the theories page.
  • With one dead character who appears walking around on the Island and has something to do with Jacob's Enemy. It's complete wild speculation that the other dead character who appears walking around on the Island has anything to do with Jacob's enemy. </sarcasm> The idea that Christian Shephard is aligned with Jacob's enemy is the clearest solution we can assume from everything we've seen (including the fact that someone else has been using Jacob's cabin).  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  22:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
  • What you're saying is that since Locke whose dead body is shown and Shepard who has been confirmed dead by podcasts and characters (Jack) there is a connection between them. All right. I accept that. But you further say that Locke is connected to Jacob's Enemy and since Locke is connected to Jacob's Enemy therefore Christian is connected to Jacob's Enemy because they both are confirmed dead. That I reject because I don't connect Locke to Jacob's Enemy because of the reasons I have been citing here that I won't repeat.Mister vijay 00:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Two things. First, Christian could have been lying about being able to speak on Jacob's behalf. Jacob's nemesis is obviously a liar, so it would conceivable for anyone aligned with him to be liars, too. Second, and most importantly, something that hit me last night: what if Christian IS Jacob's nemesis? (Or was, as he's taken Locke's form now.) Christian was dead on Flight 815, but has been seen by Jack and others on the island. Locke was dead on the more recent flight and has been seen "alive." Of course, people found Locke's body, so that begs the question of where Christian's body went to. Perhaps Jacob's nemesis hid Christian's body. In any case, it was an interesting thought I had that I wanted to share. Jinxmchue 05:51, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

Lol. You are quite funny trying to be serious mister, but your arguments are one worse than the other. We did not assume Christian is Jacob's enemy, what we are saying is that based on what we have seen on the show, we can say that there is a relation between them as the events which lead into the murder of Jacob.


Point: 10) To round off my top ten list, "Jacob recognized his nemesis through his disguise." This theory requires the following assumptions: A) Jacob never explicitly makes reference to the physical difference between Locke and Titus. So we have to assume that Jacob doesn't consider this important. Why? Well, it's too obvious to mention.

  • Counterpoint:10) But Jacob did recognise his enemy, and his enemy admitted who he was. It was in the dialogue!
  • Response: Where in the dialogue indicates that Jacob "recognized" his "enemy". When did his "enemy" "admit" who he was? Where in the dialogue?I have no idea what you're talking about. Did we watch the same episode? More importantly, have we just ignored or forgotten about the rest of the series? Someone who watched ONLY this finale would come to this logical conclusions not someone who watched the other 101 episodes. Mister vijay 00:51, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • The following dialogue is from memory, but it's approximately what was said:
Jacob: "So you found your loophole." (positing that Fake Locke is the same guy from the teaser)
Fake-Locke: "Yes I did, and you have no idea what it took to get here." (confirming his identity)
Ben: "Do you two know eachother?"
Fake-Locke: "In a manner of speaking" (further confirming his identity)
  • I can quote mutiple lines from multiple characters in multiple episodes to provide counter evidence but your argument really stands only on this exchange the meaning of which is entirely present only in your comments to the right. If you look above I also cite the same dialogue and give another explanation. Locke has met Jacob in his own past, we see that in that episode in his post-fall experience. That is a far more clear reason then to connect two characters played by different actors in scenes separated by hundreds of years.Mister vijay 00:51, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
  • If you wish to deny the dialogue thats fine, but it was completely obvious to me that the most recent Locke and Jacob's enemy were the same. They even had the reflection of the conversation between Ben and Widmore where we find out Ben cannot kill Widmore as it isn't in the rules, same with Jacob's enemy and Jacob. -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  14:01, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Always this word "obvious". I have no idea what you're saying about the "rules". There's no mention of the word "rules" in the dialogue between Jacob and his supposed enemy. You write "If you wish to deny the dialogue, that's fine." In my points I cited various actual dialogue from a few different episodes. In your response you not only fail to cite actual dialogue but when you refer to dialogue you "conclude" things that are contradicted.Mister vijay 17:07, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Lol (even louder!) - Dude you are a joke! 1- Do you really think Jacob would say "Hey you are not John Locke, you are my nemesis from the 1800's! (That just happens in cartoons dude, when the characters have to narrate what is going on). 2-Yes, you are denying the dialogue. You say that is more clear that that person is Locke himself them Jacob's nemesis. That is forcing things a lot my friend. (you are not my friend, the same way jacob's nemesis meant at the 1800's). You have to make many assumptions to say that this person is John Locke himself. The whole scene implicate that the person is Jacob's nemesis. If is not, it was intentional by the producers. Your arguments cannot support it at all.


With the intention of clarifying what is being said in the "obvious"-"not obvious" discussion above, I made reference to a literary technique that uses comparative methods called "Juxtaposition". Lost will open an episode with a unexplained moment or a moment in time and then return to that moment at the end. This is one form of juxtaposition. When we see two things placed near or next to each other to give them meaning that each alone does not have. We've seen another variation on this used in Ji Yeon where the flashback of Jin is intercut with a flashforward of Sun to lead the audience to believe Jin is a member of the Oceanic Six. What gives the final scene meaning is its placement in the episode in comparison to the placement of Jacob's flashback. So in the story logic of this episode the assertions are certainly obvious and logical. However, my thread was to question the story logic of the series not the finale. But we can agree to disagree. Mister vijay 19:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

That was the smater thing you wrote here. I just disagree that the discussion does not fallow the story logic of the whole show. Actually, reviewing all episodes, I realised how this episode gave sense to many thing that were obscure before. If Jonh Locke is indeed a resurrection, several points of the show are going to lose sense and the relevance of many characters is going to be lost.

Closing Comments

Thanks guy for taking the time to respond to my points and my final comment is this: When I watch shows like "X-Files" and "Heroes" that have characters who can shape shift as a plot device it is clearly shown (ie. we see characters visually morph) and there are clear rules by which limits this ability. In the podcast and the episodes the monster and the appearances of monster related phenomena are talked about in different terms that do not clearly establish the premises talked about in this thread. Within the Lost universe there are many concepts and characters introduced over the course of 5 years but the Titus character was thrown in at episode 102 with 17 episodes to go and this is supposedly connecting multiple entities in the show that previously were said to be different in podcast interviews. In the last 17 episodes I personally would like to see the fate of the characters that were established in the past 5 seasons resolved and explored further. I have little to no interest in seeing Titus return. If Locke is not Locke then fine I accept that but I refuse to accept that this is the same character that Titus played in season finale. Locke may be undead as the podcast suggest Christian is but this is a different and separate explanation. Thanks, again.Mister vijay 01:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

  • After all the talk about Locke being special and how he has a destiny, I also hope that something gets resolved that allows Locke's personal story to continue (say, for example, Fake Locke is still really Locke in mind and spirit, he just has a new outlook on life... sort of like a Trill or something), but given what we've been shown I just think it's hard to deny a connection between Fake Locke and Jacob's Nemesis. Hopefully we'll both be satisfied with how this turns out. My final comment is that, when shapeshifting is being used as a plot device then I agree that it's likely to be shown. However in this case it's being used a mystery, which makes it much more likely that they'd hide it from you. At any rate, like I said, hopefully it's somehow still sort of Locke (shapeshifter, fake dead body, clone or otherwise).  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  01:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I also want the final season to be about the destiny of our characters but we all want to mysterious things to be explained. But I also want it to cover the history of the entities of the island. I would like to know about the egiptians, about the origin of the others, about the island proprierties, the history behind the oceanic flight. This is part of the show since the first episode. And the introduction of a character in season 5 finale, 18 episodes before the end (16 episodes, season intro and finale with double episode), in the context in which he appeared, make it very likely that he will be part of the closure of the show and the whole history of Lost. And this fact is the reason why we believe that this character has a relation with many island mysteries from the past 5 seasons. I think you have to agree that is way more plausible to create a character that have relation with the rest of the story than a random character that was there just as a red-herring for the audience.

Clumsy ways of referring to him in the "As Locke" section

It's not a "form" or a "figure" or even an "entity" doing all those things in the past 10 episodes. It's an impostor posing as Locke while at the same time being a distinct and separate person in his own right. No need to talk as if it's some "it"; in fact it sounds really clumsy and wrong when in context ("the figure shakes Richard's hand", "the form addresses the Others"), when it's basically just the blackshirted dude wearing a Locke mask. He's also very corporeally and physically there; so, not a vision or some other "entity" that would require the use of such elusive terms. Boyen 18:33, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


I suggest that there be some mention of symbolism in this article. There is a lot of black and white references (shirts, cloth) and duality. Also perhaps a mention of the relationship between the two chracters? They seem to be old friends/enemies. Kind of reminded me of Prof. Xavier and Magneto. I don't think they should be referenced in the article but the way they interact suggests a long standing relationship to me. ScatteredBlackAndWhites 17:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


Two items listed under the trivia section section of this page are non-trivia and should be removed, one more egregious than the other:

First... [The opening scene is eerily reminiscent of Massasoit's dilemma upon the arrival of the Pilgrims in 1620. Watching the ship on the horizon, he had to decide to make war or makepeace. His decision to act humanely eventually led to King Philip's War.]

The scene not only isn't "eerily reminiscent" of Massaoit's dilemma, it's has almost nothing in common with it at all other than a guy seeing a ship. No one in the opening scene of the Incident has to "decide to make war or peace". This (at best) belongs under theories.

Second.... [The actions of this individual closely resemble those of the "Un-Man", the demonic spirit controlling Professor Edward Weston in C.S. Lewis' planetary romance Perelandra. In the novel, the Un-Man entered an island planet by taking possession of a dead man, and did not take direct action, but rather worked through trying to persuade another to commit an evil act. This persuasion involved questioning the motivations of a being who had until then been considered an undisputed spiritual authority.]

In this case, the light similarity to the CS Lewis book might be an interesting parallel (and it's a light similarity at best --- seriously an "island planet"?...the poster is stretching to make it sound more similar to Lost than it really is), but it's not, in any sense of the word "trivia" about Lost. It's just some individual's personal feelings/theory.

Both of these should be removed.--Faraday100 15:42, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

  • I agree - I've read that CS Lewis trilogy and feel the OP was stretching to make it sound more similar than it is, as well. As for the Massasoit reference having very little to do with the episode, I agree as well. I mean, you could say the same thing about the original inhabitants of Britain when the Vikings were seen coming ashore, but it doesn't belong in that section AlaskaDave 05:20, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Non-Cultural Refs removed

I've removed the two items referred to in the "non-trivia" thread above because someone moved them into the cultural references section where they both clearly violated the "direct references only" rule.--Faraday100 23:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I removed the following indirect references. --- Balk Of Fametalk 16:15, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

  • Prior to the TV series "Lost" the term "Man In Black" was generally recognized as a reference to a secret government agent that seeked to recover aliens from other worlds on Earth secretly living among humans in the 1997 movie Men In Black. That was in turn derived from a belief by some that in real life mysterious government agents from an unknown government entity went about maintaining the US government's secrets from the people by less than Constitutional means; including lethal methods if necessary.
  • In Stanisław Lem’s sci-fi novel Invincible, people find monsters in a form of black clouds on a distant planet. The clouds turn out to be swarms of insect-like micro-machines, a new form of life, born through evolution of autonomous, self-replicating machines.
  • When the Monster approached Mr. Eko, the sequence resembled the extension of the long column of water from the moon pool in the movie The Abyss. ("The 23rd Psalm")
  • The Outer Limits episode 18 from season 4 was called "Monster" and featured a man named Ford Maddox, who through government experimentation was capable of unconsciously conjuring up a murderous, smoke-like creature using telekinesis.
  • The British television series Sapphire and Steel (specifically the second "assignment", in the railway station) features an antagonistic, amorphous, shadowy entity known as "The Darkness", the appearance of which is frequently heralded by incoherent whispers. This creature has a particular affinity for the spirits of people killed before their time, and causes them to appear before the living to serve its agenda. Other LOST-like traits displayed by the Darkness include time manipulation, psychokinesis, mind possession, and the creation of apparently solid delusions / hallucinations.
  • Doctor Who: The Face of Evil, from the original BBC series (1976), is set in an alien jungle "haunted" by invisible, roaring, psychic entities that hunt down and kill intruders. They are kept at bay by a security fence of sonic disruptors.
  • In book of Holy Quran it is foretold a kind of punishment in the day of judgment, it is mentioned in the 44th Surah of AlDukhan (The Smoke) verse 10-11:"Then watch thou for the Day that the sky will bring forth a kind of smoke plainly visible, enveloping the people this will be a penalty grievous".
  • The Man in Black holds many parallels with Satan in John Milton's Paradise Lost where Satan is portrayed as a protagonist.
  • The "ticka-ticka" sound of the monster before and as it appears is very similar to scenes in the movie The Right Stuff where occasionally a mob of photographers and journalists will comically appear climbing over fences or reaching through windows at astronauts' homes where the wives of the Mercury Seven sit idly by watching the coverage of the latest mission on television. There is a distinct "ticka-ticka" noise in the background, made up of cameras snapping and what sounds like typewriters typing at a constant rate, that increases in volume as the mob increases in size and "attacks", much like the monster's sound increases as it nears and grows to attack.
  • The smoke monster has been compared to the white weather balloon called Rover in the 1960s television series The Prisoner in that both act as a sort of protector and ominous presence.<ref name=EWJensen>,,1550612_20250233_1150029,00.html</ref>
  • In the game "The Legend of Dragoon", the main character makes numerous references to the Black Monster, a creature who initially appears shrouded in black smoke.
  • The late country singer Johnny Cash had "The Man in Black" as his nickname.
  • Similarities with the Edimmu in Sumerian Mythology are striking.
If you hadn't I would have. How did these get here?    Charles Kane     talk  contribs   email   16:51, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

Jacob's Nemesis In The Guise of Jacob?

I've added a question that I don't see being considered and should be. I think that clearly the Nemesis was appearing as Christian, Yemi, and Alex (to Ben in the Temple). He probably was also Young Ben's mom out in the jungle.

But what if he was also appearing as Jacob off-island to our heroes, that all of the off-island encounters with "Jacob" were actually the Nemesis drawing people to the island to use in his now-successful attempt to kill Jacob? I think this is a possibility we should keep in mind.

I removed that because that is a leading question which suggests a theory. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  23:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

None of the survivors had ever met Jacob, so why would his form be of use? ESachs 23:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

  • I agree with this completely. Though Lost is extremely convoluted and has many twists that no one expects, this particular theory makes no sense. Esau appearing as Jacob makes no sense because Jacob's image means nothing to anyone but Richard and Esau himself. Even Ben had never seen or met Jacob. Besides, why would the man who planned to eventually use the image of Locke appear to him in the form of a man he didn't even know? To be completely honest, what you're suggesting is that those scenes of Jacob off-island are a severe case of breaking the 4th wall...Something intended solely for the viewer, and not the story itself. Sorry, man, but that's just not that likely.Piccolo113 02:07, 22 June 2009 (UTC)


Should we use this image or this image in the article's infobox? -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  06:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

  • I vote for the one without Locke in it because I can't imagine the one with him would look nice when it gets shrunk down to fit in the infobox.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  07:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I agree, the one without Locke in it. Anyone who's watched the show knows what's going on and who this guy is (well, as much as we CAN know), anyways. No need to spell it out with the pic.Piccolo113 07:48, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

How got he from the island and when? We have never seen him of course going from the island. and: Why saw nobody Jacob's Nemesis in the airplane? He was behind, but he has no scratch. That are mine questions so far.--Station7 07:13, September 11, 2009 (UTC)

Main Character?

Assuming Terry O' Quinn returns as a series regular in season 6, one would assume that he will be playing Jacob's nemesis, just as he did in the second half of season 5 and as such, doesn't this technically make him a main character? InflatableBombshelter 09:07, December 22, 2009 (UTC)

  • My opinion (and it's just that) is that it's up to how he's credited in the press releases. If they say "Terry O'Quinn as John Locke" then I would say no but if they ever start saying "Terry O'Quinn as [whatever the nemesis' name is]" then we would start considering him a main character.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  20:40, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
    • Press releases from ABC still say "John Locke", but that's probably just for simplicity's sake, 'cause the character's name hasn't been revealed yet. I doubt Locke will make more than a handful of appearances in season six, and if Terry O'Quinn spends the majority of the season playing nemesis then we would have to conclude that the nemesis is a main character by that fact alone. --Golden Monkey 21:12, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
      • If Jack's plan to perform a "reset" with Jughead actually works, to any degree, then Terry O'Quinn very well could return to the show as John Locke, albeit still confined to the wheel chair. Thus, one must not assume that Terry O'Quinn's return for season 6 will entail him continuing to portray Jacob's nemesis. --Jaiotu 04:50, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Main Character redux

Well, it appears that the nemesis is continuing to adopt the John Locke look, even after everyone knows it's a lie. The press releases (well, one so far, not the LA X one) list O'Quinn's character as "Locke" (he played the nemesis, sideways Locke, and corpse Locke). The alternate timeline means that Locke will (likely) still appear consistently in the show, but should O'Quinn's two primary characters be included as "main?"--Tim Thomason 05:16, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

- I believe that "Jacob's Nemesis" should be upgraded to the main character portal. Now that we know with out a doubt that the Smoke Monster, Jacob's Nemesis, and the "resurected" John Locke are the same charcter, and it appears that the character will continue to be portrayed by Terry O'Quinn we need to consider it a main charcter. This character, in all of it's forms, has been in ever season, has manipulated the story line from the beginning, and now is portrayed by a main cast member. Jnorton 19:04, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

- Yes It's obvious that Terry O'Quinn's sole primary character this season is MIB. Locke has been in 4/7 episodes but I think that fraction will just keep getting smaller. On island Locke is dead and buried, and in ALT we've already gotten a Locke episode and a Ben episode so unless wii get an Arnzt episode I don't think he's gonna come up anymore besides the finale. Let's just put MIB back in Main chars. It's not a big deal. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nintendo Warrior (talkcontribs) 2010-03-10T23:13:10.

In-article references

Regardless of what the article ultimately gets named to, someone should definitely edit the article and take out all the references to "the entity". I'd like to propose a logical scheme for the appropriate references. The character should be referred to as "the Monster" (with the article "it") in all descriptions of scenes in which the characters and audience believed it to be merely a Monster. The character should be revealed to as '"Jacob's nemesis" or "The Man in Black" (with the article "he") in all situations when the characters and audience believed him to be a person (which he is). Thoughts? Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions

Entity was an all-encompassing term used to make merging much more fluid. I personally think referring to the entity with two different pronouns makes the article very segmented and not fluid in the least bit. It is the same thing, after all. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  00:24, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
The problem is that "entity" is about the most vague term possible. The problem is precisely that it is an all-encompassing term. Because it is not specifically anything, everything is almost nothing. Its usage when it is not necessary has the same basic problems as the usage of "mailperson" for a mailman. The Monster is not a he, it is an it. The man in black, whatever human shape he uses, is a he -- except when he took Alex's form -- then the character was temporarily a she. You wouldn't say, "Ben's daughter appeared underneath the temple. He came out of nowhere." Articles change with the noun being discussed. When the character in question becomes a different thing, it's appropriate that the article should change as well. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions
  • I agree with Aobozu, refer to him/it both as the Monster and as the Man In Black. "Entity" is such a strange term for either of those characters. LOST-Figg 08:48, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree. Can we please get rid of all of "the entity" references, and replace it with either "The Monster" or "Smoke Monster" when it appears as the monster, and "Man in Black" when it is in human form, or something to this extent? "The Entity" is so vague, and isn't even what he's referred to as on the show or by the producers. The name of the article has been changed to "The Man in Black", so it's time to make the article consistent. --Themorgan 00:12, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree. Someone edited ALL the references to "entity" and changed them all to Man In Black. It sucked, and I created an account here just to change it back. "The Man in Black was referred to by Danielle Rousseau as the Island's security system." - Um, no they had no idea about the man in black, only the smoke monster. "in this chamber was an engraving of The Man in Black facing what appears to be the Egyptian god Anubis," Um, no, it was an engraving of a smoke monster, not a man in black. I have no problem changing the references when it is clearly the man in black in human form, but not when it is clearly a smoke monster. Nintigod 08:03, February 10, 2010 (UTC)
    • Yes I agree wit Nitingod.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  17:25, February 10, 2010 (UTC)
    • No While I agree to a certain extent, referring to it as "the entity" is just as bad as what you're saying!!! "Entity" has no bearing, not in the show or by the producers. The Man in Black=Smoke Monster. Confirmed. Use Man in Black to refer to the Human form, and Monster/Smoke Monster to refer to the black smoke. It's not rocket science people. --Themorgan 23:57, February 10, 2010 (UTC)
      • Umm... yeah, that's what he said. Or at least what I took him to mean when I agreed with him.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  16:18, February 11, 2010 (UTC)
        • I took it that he said he changed all the entries BACK to "the entity" it stands, "entity" occurs in the article well over 100 times. IMO, this is a problem, as the term has absolutely no bearing with the show. The article needs a lot of work. I mean just look at at the the picture captions...they are so wildly inconsistent, from "entity", "nemesis", "man in black", "smoke monster"...this needs to be cleaned up a little, even though I do agree with some of the captions, all references to "entity" need to go. --Themorgan 05:21, February 12, 2010 (UTC)
  • What is the basic point of existence of you know who? (Sounds like we're in Harry Potter!) I submit that it is smoke. If "Smoke Monster" is too judgmental, how about "The Smoke," with the capital "The?" (That distinguishes between it and any other smoke on the Island.)--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 18:08, February 10, 2010 (UTC)

The man in black is not the smoke monster?

On Tuesday's episode of Jimmy Kimmel Live (2/2/10), Damon says "no" to the question, "Is John Locke possessed by the man in black?" I was wondering what your thoughts on this were? [1] It's at 28:41 (Sorry Non-US people!) I know "possessed" could mean that John Locke's body is still alive, but did he just misspeak? Or it was he implying that fake John Locke and the Man in Black are two different characters? --Uncertainty 16:18, February 5, 2010 (UTC)

They were answering the question sincerely. John Locke is not possessed by the Man in Black. John Locke is dead. The guy who looks and acts like John Locke is actually the smoke monster in disguise.  Robert K S   tell me  16:38, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
I don't see how it can be stated definitely that MIB and Fake Locke and Smokey are the same, since it seems they existed exclusively until after Jacob was stabbed by Ben. Perhaps Fake Locke gained control or merged with Smokey after Jacob died, but they must have been exclusive before that fact. --19:22, February 6, 2010 (UTC)Googuse
Precisely what evidence do you have that they existed exclusively before Jacob was killed? Have we ever seen them together? No. We know that Smokey shapeshifts. Ergo, unless they were seen together at the same time, there is nothing to suggest they weren't the same all along. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions
  • In trying to explain the smoke monster and whether he and the MIB are the same, there is a contradiction that I'd like to see explained if someone can: Ben unleashed the smoke monster when Keamy killed Alex (after believing Alex couldn't be killed because of the rules between him and Widmore). This demonstrates some ability to summon the smoke monster on his behalf even if he can't completely control it. Later, in the temple fake Locke apologizes to Ben for having to see him that way (as the vengeful monster). In this instance and when Alex as the smoke monster appeared to Ben, it was the monster who choose when and how to appear. It doesn't make sense that the same smoke monster which would feel Ben's anger and act on his behalf (and apparently wait or be contained until summoned) is the same entity which takes charge in the temple. If they are the same then is the smoke monster evolving and becoming more independent? If the smoke monster is the MIB would the MIB have allowed himself to be used by Ben?--Destinedjourney 00:18, February 16, 2010 (UTC)
  • The Smoke is bound to the leader of the Island people (the term "Others" is getting fuzzier with time); it's also a separate intelligence which is trying to break free. Ben knew the Island could be moved. The Smoke, posing as Christian, told Locke to move the Island in such a way as to make Locke accept Ben's offer to do the work, leaving Locke as leader. The Smoke was now bound to Locke, but Locke was weak. He allowed himself to be convinced that he had to die, first by hearing it from Richard who got it from the Smoke (as Locke) then having it reinforced by hearing it directly from the Smoke (as Christian). Locke died and his body was returned to the Island (Hydra counts), allowing the Smoke to use his image. The last time, Ben didn't so much summon the Smoke as place himself before it for judgment. The Smoke no longer responds to Ben's call. Ben was too caught up in his battle with Widmore to see that he was being used.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 02:12, February 16, 2010 (UTC)
  • Can you explain how The Smoke and MIB could be the same? Your explanation of The Smoke as bound to the leader is helpful. The confusion I see is whether The Smoke which used Locke's image is the MIB and the same entity that allowed itself to be summoned by leaders like Ben. I just don't see Jacob's adversary being summoned by mere mortals, even if they are leaders, of the island. At the same time, Richard recognized the person in Locke and vice-versa as if seeing him for the first time in a long time. That reinforces, to me, the supposition that Richard was seeing in Locke a force which he hadn't expected to see in that way. That would lead one to believe he was "seeing" the MIB in Locke. So is it The Smoke inhabiting Locke or is it The MIB? For the reasons above I don't believe they are the same but do have a connection.--Destinedjourney 02:49, February 16, 2010 (UTC)
  • This is an item I've been working on. Part of it appeared on another talk page:
    • No one lived at "Jacob's Cabin." Jacob lived below the foot of the statue; The Smoke lived someplace else (to be determined). The Smoke is a security system; its job is to guard the Temple. It is not, however, allowed to enter the Temple. The Smoke is not supposed to kill. As punishment for its attack on the French in 1988, a portion of its strength was taken away from it and placed in the Cabin. The Cabin was protected by a ring of ash, which the Smoke, when it is in the form of smoke, can not cross and can not touch. To touch and move the ash, the Smoke needed to replicate a deceased human form. The inhabitants of the Island made sure there were no bodies by sending their dead to sea in a flaming boat. The DHARMA Initiative sent remains Outside to their families (supposition).
    • When Flight 815, crashed the Smoke gained immediate access to Chirstian Shephard's body. He used it to replicate into a human form. As Christian, the Smoke created the path through the ring around the cabin and reacquired his strength. When he charged through the jungle the first night, he was exercising his newly recovered powers, possibly with a little lapse of coordination.
    • In human form, the Smoke can not kill; in smoke form its communication is limited to those who believe, who have faith.
--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 03:07, February 16, 2010 (UTC)

Given that season 5 and 6 Locke is the smoke thing, how does that directly mean that he/it is/was the man standing with Jacob? They both wanted to kill Jacob. They both needed a loophole. But Ben wanted to kill Jacob too; that doesn't mean he is the smoke thing or the man. Since Sayid stabbed New Locke and nothing happened, it's safe to say one might need a loophole to kill Locke as well. By applying the MiB=Locke logic if we could say, given the right conditions, Jack, who may want to kill Locke later and need a loophole to do so, is Sayid, who wanted to kill Locke and needed a loophole to do so. I'm not disagreeing with them being the same, and because I've never questioned it until yesterday I've never noticed any official thing listing the two as one. They could have been careful in the wording and we heard what we wanted to. Maybe there was something I missed, and that's fine. But if not I think we might have skipped a step in our logic.--Mooses05 23:55, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

episode count

What is his episode count? We need that to on the page.--Station7 16:57, February 5, 2010 (UTC)

It's difficult to measure because we don't know which of his appearances were really him. Was he Christian? Was he Dave? Do we count times when the Monster appeared offscreen as appearances? ShadowUltra 19:18, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
  • And the producers said he appeared in the second half of season 2, I recall, must be Yemi/Ana in ? surely. Buffyfan123 07:11, February 7, 2010 (UTC)


woot! teh monster mystery is solved!

Episode appearances

As noted above, we should make a temporary notation of how many episodes this character has appeared in. I propose the following method of determining Monster/MIB appearances up to this point:

  • All of the Monster's onscreen appearances, even ones where it wasn't shown explicitly onscreen. The Monster was still causing trouble and chaos as early as "Pilot, Part 1" despite not being shown onscreen, and those appearances should be included. It will be confusing to mention "the Monster killed the pilot and encountered John Locke" if we don't actually count those as appearances.
  • The Monster's appearance as Yemi in "The Cost of Living", the Medusa spiders in "Exposé", and Alex in "Dead Is Dead". These are the only confirmed Monster transformations and the only ones that can be added right now.
  • The Monster's appearances as Locke beginning with "The Life and Death of Jeremy Bentham". Note the overlap with Alex in "Dead Is Dead", so don't accidentally count them twice.

By my calculations, this puts the total number of known Monster/MIB appearances at 21, which appears to be the same consensus reached on the supporting characters portal. ShadowUltra 00:42, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

Nice workup. I mostly agree, but wonder if the Medusa spider episode is reliably the Monster. I know TPTB said it was, but they've said a lot of things.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 01:50, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

It makes sense (Nikki was given a chance by Paulo to redeem herself and chose not to take it; thus the Monster killed her) and we heard that famous chitchitchitchit-chitchitchitchit noise, which both Nikki and Paulo notice (they start looking around for it). ShadowUltra 02:18, February 7, 2010 (UTC)
  • Didn't the writers claim he appeared after 23rd Plaism and we didn't realize it, If Yemi is MIB in TCOL, then surely he must of appeared in ? as Yemi or Ana Lucia. Its not confirmed, but the producers have confirmed he appeared in the second half of season 2. Buffyfan123 07:13, February 7, 2010 (UTC)
That may be a possibility, but we can't make any assumptions. ShadowUltra 02:49, February 8, 2010 (UTC)

Assuming That Island-Christian Is The MIB (a bit of theory)

If we assume that every time we've seen Christian on the island, it has really been the MIB in disguise, then we should consider all of his actions in a new light. For instance, Christian's image wanted Claire. I saw a theory somewhere that Aaron was the savior of the island, citing Charlie's vision of Claire dressed as the virgin Mary as possible evidence. Perhaps the MIB wants to have Claire for leverage against Aaron, should he return to the island as its savior. This is based off of the assumption that the MIB cares more about the lives that the island has negatively affected than the fate of the island itself. I assume this because of the distaste he expressed towards Jacob when they were on the beach as the Black Rock was sailing in, implying that he feels a empathy for its passengers, although another theory is that he doesn't want people to come to the island because he thinks they will corrupt it. As evidence for my idea though, Christian did lead Jack to the caves which made life a lot easier for the flight 815 survivors. Anywho, back to Christian's actions. He's told both Jack and Locke that they have "work to do," just as Walt tells Locke when he sends him on a mission to stop Naomi from radioing the boat. So if we assume that Walt's image was also the MIB, then we know that the MIB wanted John to stop Naomi, but why? Possibly because he needed Ben to kill Jacob (and Locke), and if Naomi had called in her freighter buddies while the 815 survivors still held Ben as a prisoner, he would be killed. And a funny tidbit: In the episode Something Nice Back Home, Jack sees Christian briefly twice, and the second time is when he hears a smoke detector go off at the hospital in the room where he then sees his father. I just thought it was funny for the smoke detector to go off because I assume that this image of Christian is the MIB, who is also the smoke monster. We might also assume that every vision of a dead person that has been seen on or off the island has been the MIB. For instance, Charlie when he visits Hurley, which makes sense because he tells Hurley to go back to the island, and I could be mistaken , but I think he also says something along the lines of "You have work to do," a phrase that dead people tend to use a lot on this show. --Patches124 08:00, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

  • While I agree that it's likely that Christian is the MIB, I don't think Hurley's visions are of him, since a) Jacob seems to approve of the visions and b) appears in one himself after he dies.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  09:22, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

Remember we have two different Christians on the Island. All of Christians appearances up through "Cabin Fever" had him in the blue suit and white sneakers he was buried in (suggesting a reanimated corpse since the body is missing). All of Christian's appearances since then, to John, Claire, Sun, and Frank, feature Christian in a flannel shirt. I believe this second Christian is definitely a manifestation of smokey, but the original Christian wasn't. Lanpesci 10:09, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

  • Maybe, but there's also the possibility that, while in the form of Christian or other humans, Smoke can change clothes. His more casual appearance would make more sense to Sun and Frank, at a minimum, in the circumstances.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 17:00, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Reasons for killing Eko

I've heard speculation that the show's producers had to fire Eko's actor, which is why they found a quick and easy way to kill him off, namely the Smoke Monster. Thoughts?

Nerdly dood 20:23, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

  • The published version was that he wanted out because he wanted to return to London. I've never heard anything to contradict that.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 21:34, February 7, 2010 (UTC)
    • Correct. The actor who portrayed Eko lost both his parents in sudden accident and wanted out of the contract to return home to London. He has since indicated he would return for the final season if the writers had a way to work the character in. Lanpesci 10:04, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

An old friend who became tired of my company

In the general trivia section there's a line that says "After his death, in speaking to Hurley, Jacob describes the Man in Black as 'an old friend who became tired of my company.'" Is it known for sure that Jacob was talking about the Man in Black or is it possible he was referring to Ben? It does seem a plausible way for him to describe Ben, although it does make for sense for that to be about MIB. I do suggest this line should be slightly more ambiguous. Like: "After his death, in speaking to Hurley, Jacob describes 'an old friend who became tired of my company.' This may be referring to the Man in Black." Unless it's determined that it was distinctly about him, that is. Juhsayngul 19:22, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

  • That's a valid point. If you're confident, change it. You're an editor and you don't need anyone's permission.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 19:30, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

Undo Merge

How do we know that MIB is the monster? He could be a monster, of which he and Jacob are two. In fact, MIB distances from the term monster when Ben calls him one. (Jack Dutton 14:42, February 15, 2010 (UTC))

  • I don't think there are two or more monsters. While I try to argue in-universe most of the time, in this case I think there's an absolute limit on how much more the producers can introduce this late in the game. What I do think is that we've made too many structural changes based on three hours of television without really knowing where we're going. I know we're on a wiki, but I think we need a moratorium on redesign.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 15:08, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
"LA X, Parts 1 & 2" has "Locke" saying "I'm sorry you had to see me like that." He also doesn't deny it when Ben says "you're the monster". cgmv123TalkContribsE-mail 15:15, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
  • All signs currently point to MiB being the monster. The show has made it obvious that he is the monster, and the producers confirmed it on jimmy kimmell. Until something directly contradicts this, which it won't, we should leave the article as is. InflatableBombshelter 15:18, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
    • Lindelof and Cuse on Jimmy Kimball Feb 2- JK: "Is John Locke possessed by the Man In Black?" Lindelof: "Uh... no." JK: "No?" Cuse: "...big bit of information about John Locke, he revealed he is the smoke monster." They confirmed that Locke is the Monster, but state that Locke is not possessed by the MiB- this significantly implies that the smoke monster is somehow a separate entity from the MiB. I think either unmerge, or make the distinction that it still isn't entirely clear they're the same thing. SoLostEleri 18:40, February 17, 2010 (UTC)
      • This was already answered above in a previous section. They are the same. -- Managerpants  Contribs  Talk  18:58, February 17, 2010 (UTC)
      • Wow, what a misinterpretation. When Lindelof denied that Locke was "possessed" by the Man in Black, he clearly meant that Locke was the Man in Black; in other words, the Man in Black took Locke's form, which is different from "possession" in the commonly understood sense. --Ydgmdlu 20:51, February 17, 2010 (UTC)
  • Is the MiB the Monster or is the Monster the MiB? There is subtle difference, I think. What is the native form of the creature? What is its gender? (Does it have a gender?) I didn't mean to suggest that that the character we thought was a resurrected Locke wasn't the Monster or that the Man in Black wasn't the Monster. I think that answer is pretty obvious. I just don't think we're being deliberative enough in the writing of our encyclopedia.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 15:29, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
    • "I'm not a what, Ben. I'm a who." ("LA X, Part 2") And I think it's implicit from the TV Guide interview with Titus Welliver that the character is masculine in gender. [2] He has a name, but we just don't know it yet.  Robert K S   tell me  16:00, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
  • No Let's not undo anything just yet. "He" says he was once a man. If we're patient, we'll find out what's going on.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 21:00, February 17, 2010 (UTC)


Can this paragraph be reworded at all?

The Monster's actions in Boone's dream appeared to be consistent with its behavior outside of the dream, even though Boone had never encountered it. After the fatal attack in the dream, two wounds to Shannon's bloodied body resembled those inflicted to the body of the pilot. The Monster's emergence from underground was also consistent with its attack on Locke that happened 20 days after Boone's dream. ("Exodus, Part 2") According to a Season 1 deleted scene, Charlie told a number of survivors about the entity killing the pilot, so Boone may have heard these details from Charlie. Also, after the survivor's encounter with the polar bear, Boone asked, "Do you think that's what killed the pilot?" The fact that he knew the pilot was alive gives credence to the idea that he knew about the attack. ("Pilot, Part 2")

It reads like a user first making the suggestion that Boone's imagining of MIB is something notable, followed up by users saying "no, no, he knew about the Monster from Charlie". I think it should be rewritten to explain what's going on consistently throughout it. --Dragonclaws(talk) 18:09, February 18, 2010 (UTC)


What about an Aztec reference for Smokey? I stumbled over Tezcatlipoca and Quetzalcoatl on Wikipedia. Tezcatlipoca is often translated as "Smoking Mirror" and is able to perform some sort of shapeshifting... Quetzalcoatl's opposite was Tezcatlipoca, who sent Quetzalcoatl into exile. Part of the legend is that both were not able o kill each other... Djchainsaw007 11:59, February 26, 2010 (UTC)


What are we going to do now about the victims :S

There are too many now, and most of them are unknown. :S :S :S :S :S

--f23456ar 17:40, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

  • Weren't the majority of the freighter mercenaries killed in mass by the smoke monster? Should that mass killing be added to the Victims/Mass section? --Vaholdem33 16:38, April 20, 2010 (UTC)
    • No, somehow they all survived Monster Madness:
"They hide in the nearby bushes and watch as Keamy and five of his men come through, one of them seriously injured." That was Mayhew, who later died on the Kahana (Keamy slitting the doctor's throat seems a little hasty in hindsight, eh) Duncan905 23:19, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

Man in Black's group?

Should we make a page for the Man in Black's group? Similar to Ilana's group and Sawyer's group. Members would include the defected Others, Claire, Sawyer, Sayid, Cindy & kids, and Kate(?).--Mistertrouble189 22:08, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

I guess we should.--Gonzalo84 22:30, March 3, 2010 (UTC)
  • In the bottom listing under MiB it is mentioned that Jin is apart of the MiB's group. This is untrue for certain. He was with Claire but we don't know his whereabouts at this time. It is specualtion to say he is in the group, not a fact.--Phryrosebdeco23 02:59, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

Sundown, Monster Travelling Over Kate, Screams

Did anybody else notice the weird screams coming from the monster in Sundown when it was travelling over Kate? At first I thought it was just the wind passing by, but now I'm not so sure. After Kate jumps into the hole, the camera changes angle to look down at her, then we see another angle looking up at the Monster. A second or two after that, we see a substantial shape fly through the smoke accompanied by a sharp screaming noise. It almost looks like it could be a person in the smoke being hurled along. Anybody else got anything on this?--Terryjb 13:07, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah! I heard it. It's the same scream that the Hurley Bird makes! But here it doesn't say "Hurley", it says something else. That's very interesting, because the Hurley Bird was probably the Man in Black. Actually, the first time we hear it, is in Exodus, when they show the Monster for first time. My english sucks, I know =P but it's because I'm writing fast --f23456ar 15:07, March 6, 2010 (UTC)
I'm so glad you said that! I thought the sound was reminiscent of the Hurley Bird also. I uploaded a large animated GIF on my website (The links are all there), which if anybody wants to use for something, they're welcome. I would prefer it if the Monster and the MiB weren't the same thing, but that's probably wishful thinking. I wrote on my my site about how we've never seen the MiB change (It's always off camera) so all we've got to go on is the word of a man who's motives are selfish, although it has been hinted that the monster can take shapes for a few seasons now. (I uploaded that picture of Eko turning to face the monster and the Monster is actually partially formed for a single frame to mirror Eko's shape). So either the Monster is carrying a victim along, or it's carrying the MiB along with it (Whether MiB and the Monster aren't the same thing, or perhaps they are and it's just a partially formed version of him (or somebody else)). Phew! --Terryjb 16:58, March 6, 2010 (UTC)


We can't be sure that the man in black originated on the island, after all he said "I want to go home", so i've changed from "the island" to "unknown"

--Unionx 19:31, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Other manifestations

Two possible manifestations of the MiB have been overlooked in this article: (1) Christian Shepard, who was a mysterious presence in the first season, & reappeared in the 4th season (with Claire in the shack) & in the 5th (welcoming Sun & Frank Lapidus to the abandoned Othersville); (2) the boar which Sawyer hunted down in the powerful episode "Outlaws" from the first season. Were they or were they not manifestations of the MiB? I think they were. -- Llywrch 20:57, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

connection to the magnetism

Button pushing happened because Dharma hit a "pocket of magnetism," if Faraday knew what he was saying. What if that pocket has something to do with Smokey and/or his trap? (I reached this idea after reading some of the "genie" theories). Then, the destruction of the hatch would have loosed him, in some way, giving him the freedom to begin his trans-chronological manipulations leading to Jacob's death. When Juliet detonated the H-bomb, she stopped this event.

Negative view of humanity

From the article: The Man in Black expressed a negative view of humanity

When did this happen? When did he indicate that he was referring to humanity, and not a specific group of people?

  • In "The Incident Part I," MiB says about the approaching ship:

MIB: "You brought them here. Still trying to prove me wrong aren't you?"

JACOB: "You are wrong."

MIB: "Am I? They come. They fight. They destroy. They corrupt. It always ends the same."

It seems clear that he is speaking in a broader context than just the people on that ship. Both he and Jacob are speaking in a slightly bored, practiced way. It seems like they have had this conversation many times before, arguing about humanity's worthiness/propensity to sin.


Some cleaning and housekeeping

Based on numerous requests for rewrites, I've gone ahead and done some housekeeping and general cleaning up of this article.

Based off the loosely worded "Capabilities" and "Inabilities" sections that recently popped up, I wrote full, detailed "Abilities" and "Weaknesses" sections with subsections for the Monster, shapeshifting, immunities, sonar fence, ash circles, banyan trees, etc. Also, as per a request, I tidied up the "Victims" section, adding "Single" and "Mass" subsections to the "Direct" section in order to add the Temple massacre's unknown number of victims.

One potentially controversial change I made was cleaning up some of the unweildy, oddly-worded references to the character as the "Man in Black," as if someone had just run a Find and Replace search for "Monster." Phrases like "the Man in Black looms above Montand," when the picture clearly shows a giant cloud of smoke, are confusing and oddly worded. Therefore, whenever he's in his Monster form, I called him the Monster or Smoke Monster. When he's doing something as one of his shapeshifting forms or his motivations and thoughts in general are being discussed, he's the Man in Black. I didn't make too many alterations, I just changed references to activities by his smoke form so they didn't sound as weird. ShadowUltra 17:27, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

Banyan Trees...?

Appears Banyan trees have been added under weaknesses of MiB, tho' per my two cents there's not enough evidence to support it. Characters have hidden in them -- e.g. not been found -- and who knows what was going on when the monster flashed lights at Juliet and Kate. The section on Boone and Shannon is irrelevant as it was a hallucination under the influence of drugs. I do not recall Rousseau making any such claim that Banyans were a source of protection -- merely she indicated the group could hide in there. I think this section should be removed. Spiral77 16:13, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

  • The original poster might've put words in Danielle's mouth somewhat, but overall it's consistent in the transcript:

"We hear the sounds of the monster and see Arzt running around. Danielle runs into a bamboo stand.

DANIELLE: - motioning to Kate and Jack - Here, in here.

HURLEY: Dude, we've got to book.

LOCKE: Wait. It's headed the other way.

- The rain stops.

DANIELLE: We're safe now."

I made the post about the non-effect to MIB in 'Recon', and tried to clean it up to use "appears to repel" since we don't have any science to go on, just the related instances where Smokey remained outside the thickets. Trying to keep to a factual presentation of what seems relevant. For example, the black smoke had no problem issuing from an intricate & small vent in the floor when Ben faced it, but if I added it inside the banyan entry would it look like a forced proof. But I *think* that's good proof that Smokey doesn't enter banyan thickets because they're too narrow. That's what this page is for, weighing the merits & significance of what we know. I understand under the banner of 'Weaknesses' it sounds like we're looking for kryptonite, but really it's just putting events on display until we do get some explanations. Duncan905 23:58, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

  • Seems a bit of a weak peg to hang the coat on to me. You may have something in that the monster might want to haul people out of there but could not because the entrance was too narrow. I'd have to go back and check, but seem to recall the Monster did penetrate such a tree when following Kate & Juliet, flashed mysterious lights at them, then took off for unknown reasons. Rousseau's comments could also be interpreted in that banyan trees just make good places to hide. Alternatively the Monster just didn't care. Note in "Recon" as well, MiB walked into one to talk to Kate. Spiral77 03:11, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
    • Agreed it's 'coincidentally effective' each time, but Smokey doesn't go in close to Juliet & Kate, presuming that's what the camera POV meant. Danielle survived alone on the Island for 16 years & was familiar with 'the security system', so I take her direction into the thicket as more than taking cover. Where do you hide from something with no eyes? Maybe instead of "Weaknesses" it should be "Limitations"? Again, not looking for kryptonite, trying to highlight possible clues. Duncan905 04:03, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
    • I believe Robert told Danielle the monster was a security system in "This Place is Death" (S5). Spiral77 22:13, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
      • Correct: "There is no monster. It's just a security system that guards the temple, that's all." Robert of course passed along wrong information which Danielle partially adopted. Sorry I used 'security system' instead of Monster above, I meant Danielle's own experiences in the 15 years after her team was dead. Duncan905 23:05, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

'Recruiting/Influencing' - new section?

I've noticed a correspondence between how MIB (accurately) describes Jacob delivering his touch at moments of people's vulnerability, and his own timing of recruiting or trying to influence people when they are vulnerable:

  • Claire - stole Aaron and blamed the Others
  • Sayid - had undergone resurection, torture, banishment, and was offered anything he desired ('claimed' still unexplained, could be a factor)
  • Richard - Jacob's death, knocked unconscious & kidnapped upon recognizing MIB
  • Sawyer - found alone in a drunken rage at the barracks
  • Ben - found digging his own grave
  • Kate - just attacked by Claire, sobbing alone

if we go on to add other encounters (though not all encounters confirmed as the Monster)

  • Ben/Ben's mother - was running away from 'home' after being blamed for his mother's death
  • Jack/Christian - Christian's recent death, the ordeal of the 815 crash
  • Eko/Yemi - recovering from his ordeal in the bear cave, afraid of the black smoke, spiritual crisis
  • Ben/Alex - was seeking judgment from the Monster, feeling guilt over Alex's death
  • Locke/Christian (cabin) - desperate to save the Island
  • Michael/Christian - facing his death, trying to redeem himself with the sacrifice
  • Locke/Christian (cavern) - just fell & broke his leg, desperate to stop time skips

In 'Recon' we learn that "recruiting" doesn't mean transformation into a mesmerized evildoer, everyone following FLocke only made a choice that suits them at the moment. Cindy speaks up that the group "wants to know what happened", and MIB's response causes some discontent. It's being presented that "recruting" isn't a magic spell - MIB's influence is limited to what people will believe, so he chooses his moments for maximum effect. Anyone else think this aspect of MIB's behavior is worth having a section? It might prove to be his strongest 'ability'. Duncan905 00:35, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

Anyone agree? I think in'Ab Aeterno' we get a full look at MIB's modus operandi: scan, appear as someone known & deceased, manipulate at a moment of weakness. Maybe it could be added as a column to one of the tables of encounters. Duncan905 18:35, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

Sure, go for it.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  04:58, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

Smokey is the Spider????

This page states "In the past the Man in Black once took on the form of a Medusa spider so as to paralyze Nikki." Is there any justification for this at all? Yes, I know the Monster's sound was heard in the vicinity when Nikki was bit, but is there anything that's ever been on the show to suggest that the Monster WAS the spider as opposed to just in the area? If no one comes up with some evidence for this.... I"m removing it.--Faraday100 13:30, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

It was confirmed by Damon and Carlton at the same time the other forms were confirmed-in the March 21, 2008 podcast. --Golden Monkey 13:38, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

Body-snatcher Jacob & what to call "Titus"

Pretty significant accusation by MiB that Jacob stole his body. Needs to be addressed on the Jacob page too, but for now I just listed it in the narrative from 'Ab Aeterno's' timeframe.

Meanwhile, we also have the unexpected physical interaction with MiB and Richard. *If* the MiB was truthful that Jacob stole his body, the Man in Black as portrayed by Titus kind of needs a better designation: his form is almost certainly that of a deceased person, and we have no leads on what their name might be. For the narrative on 'Ab Aeterno' timeframe "in his standard form at the time" sounds clumsy, but how else can we designate that Richard saw three different forms of MIB in a short space? Duncan905 19:12, March 24, 2010 (UTC)


Was Isabella the Man in Black? (from 'Ab Aeterno' page)

I see here that it is a fact that Isabella in the blackrock is in fact the black smoke, I'm sure it's right, but how is that a fact ? Have we a real confirmation somewhere ? --FrenchFlo 13:23, March 25, 2010 (UTC)

MIB, who was said by Dogen to appear to people as someone they lost in order to manipulate them, scanned Richard's memories and then somebody Richard had lost appeared to him, and then MIB used that to manipulate him. See, confirmation within the show itself. What do you want, to see Isabella becoming Smoke? --Golden Monkey 15:51, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
  • moved from the 'Richard' talk page:

I changed the wording about Isabella in the article (Richard/since reinstated). It can't be said conclusively that the version of Isabella who appeared to Richard immediately after the Black Rock crash was a manifestation of the Man in Black. The producers have been careful in the past to distinguish that there are "Island visions" that are NOT the monster. A good comparison would be Ben's mother. Like Isabella she was someone who did NOT die on the Island, and we do not have any evidence that MiB can appear as people who are dead and off-Island (otherwise why the elaborate plan to get Locke's body back to the Island?). Richard himself also made a direct reference to this by asking young Ben if his mother died off the Island, like Isabella. Finally, I think it's fairly evident that the Isabella who appeared to Hurley and Richard in 2007 was not the Man in Black, so it's just as likely that she was the same kind of entity as the Isabella on the Black Rock. Rodimusben 09:36, March 25, 2010 (UTC)RodimusBen

  • Perhaps this discussion belongs on the 'Ab Aeterno' page & can be applied uniformly from there? In any case I'll argue against that. We have enough previous demonstration of MiB's methods: scan as the black cloud, vanish, then appear as Dogen described - someone known to the person, someone who has died - then attempt to influence the person. With confirmed examples like Yemi, Alex & Locke, the only new aspect is that the person died off the Island, like Ben's mother. Ben had no prior interaction with his mother, who stood outside the sonic fence & spoke simply. Isabella was Richard's love of his life, and with powerful memories came a convincing apparition. I do understand there may be deliberate ambiguity with the first out-of-focus shot of Isabella, but Richard is awakening from delirium, and the next shots as she embraces him are clear. The other new aspect is MiB providing an apparition while making smoke monster noises at the same time. This seems entirely possible for a being made of wisps of smoke, which we've seen move in independent streams, to be able to 'multitask'. Isabella claims Richard & she are both dead & in hell, there is little sense to fleeing the devil in hell if he wishes to torment or ummm, kill? someone. It just doesn't make sense for Isabella to leave Richard after finding him. It sets up Richard's belief that the smoke monster took her, which MiB doesn't address until Richard can't understand being told to kill the devil if he's black smoke. Only then MiB starts stretching his story about Jacob/devil taking Isabella, where he at first says "he probably has her."
I'll add in Ben's case that given the armed battles with the Hostiles during Ben's time, there would be opportunities for MiB to visit & scan Ben - if the sonic fence even repels other suggested forms like say a butterfly/white dove/Hurleybird, which could just go over the fence. We've also seen the Monster soaring high above the trees, so my jury's out on the sonic fence as a complete barrier.
Completely agreed that Hurley spoke with Isabella's ghost. Camera shots are identical to his interactions with Jacob. Duncan905 15:41, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
Good god. Do you really think they'll introduce some new ghosty thing halfway into the sixth season? It was MIB. The scene is consistent with a MIB appearance and it ties into his manipulation of Richard. In fact it only really makes sense if it's MIB. Hell, he even scanned Richard's memories before hand! It can't get more obvious than that. --Golden Monkey 15:49, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
Why don't you lose the attitude. These people are free to post their thoughts without your criticism, especially when your own answers are hardly Pulitzer-worthy.
Ofc it was MIB, I never doubted about that, but that's our thought. It's not factual. I just wanted to highlights the words used "is" vs "could be" etc. What could help us in this case it an answer to my previous question too. FrenchFlo 17:18, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
Not to mention the fact that Jacob pretty much FLATLY STATES that Richard seeing his wife was the MiB.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  18:32, March 25, 2010 (UTC)

Ilana said of the MiB he's "stuck like that" referring to his incarnation of John Locke. Unless she's lying or really doesn't know I don't think there's any argument that the modern ghost of Isabella was anything but her ghost. --Lucky Day 22:55, March 25, 2010 (UTC)

At that point MiB was not stuck. At that point MiB was free to appear as anyone/anything it had scanned. Unfortunately for MiB, it did get stuck later. Gteichrow 05:20, March 27, 2010 (UTC)
Pretty certain Isabella on the ship was MiB, and Isabella who spoke to Hurley was the real ghost. Seems unlikely that someone who really was dead could be tricked into thinking they were in Hell. Surely they'd have a pretty clear idea if they were in hell or not ? Also she would have to be unable to tell that Richard was still alive, to believe that he was in Hell with her. Hurley's Isabella seemed to have no knowledge of the conversation on the ship, if she did she probably would have mentioned being wrong about them being in Hell last time they spoke. And if Hurley's Isaballa was MiB, why would she try to convince Richard to stop MiB leaving the island ? Beelzebubbles101 09:36, March 27, 2010 (UTC)
There are strong issues on both sides. The MIB has NEVER appeared in a form other than someone whose corpse was on the island. Richard appears to indicate this is a limitation of his given his conversation with Ben when asked about his mother. At the same time, it seems very unlikely that Isabella would say the things she said if it were really she.FireBones 00:02, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
  • I copied the above from the 'Ab Aeterno' talk page, entries below originated on this talk page:

Isabella talk continued

I think it's premature to definitively say she's the smoke monster too, although it is strongly implied. She could have been a pure hallucination of Richard's, or something else entirely. Tuttlemsm 21:04, March 24, 2010 (UTC)tuttlemsm

  • I couldn't disagree more. How would MiB know about a hallucination? She appeared after the smoke monster scanned Richard. MiB then exploits Isabella's appearance and extends the decption of being in hell, and lies that she is with Jacob and can be retrieved. Duncan905 21:27, March 24, 2010 (UTC)
    • MiB would know about the hallucination because MiB can scan people's minds. My point is that we don't know for a fact that Isabella was the MiB. It is only strongly implied. Do we know for a fact that Jacob doesn't have shape-changing abilities as well? Tuttlemsm 15:22, March 25, 2010 (UTC)Tuttlemsm
      • It's pretty damn obvious that it's MIB. It fits perfectly into MIB's manipulation of Richard. If Jacob had shape-shifting abilities, we would have seen them by now. We're halfway into the final season and we've seen him in the same form in multiple time periods. Comparatively, we've seen MIB in several. Plus, how would MIB know about the hallucination? He scanned Richard's memories before it happened and I doubt he's constantly getting new memories from a person. --Golden Monkey 15:36, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
        • Actually it doesn't work at all in MiB's favour. Richard saw him first as the smoke monster, in which he also killed the crew. At this point Richard associates the smoke monster to the Devil. Why would MiB then come to Richard and say, yes you are in hell? Richard isn't going to help the devil as at this point in his life he is clearly quite religious. And any obvious manipulation falls flat on it's face because Richard ends up working for Jacob. Until we have no proof Jacob can't also shapeshift I wouldn't put this under here. --Interitus 22:54, March 26, 2010 (UTC)
  • It should definitely not be listed as a fact. Nor should it be listed as a fact that the MIB assumes the persona of people off the island. This is the only example where MIB showed up as someone whose body was not on the island. Based on the conversation between Richard and Ben, the limitation about only assuming the form of someone whose corpse is on the island is an important one.FireBones 00:08, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
  • While we don't know the facts, the apparitions of Isabella & Ben's mother are significant & belong in some form, as they fit the pattern of MiB. I'll agree the section that was pulled needs some re-writing to strip out bias. Regarding Richard's talk with young Ben, can you provide the quote please? IIRC, Richard said nothing of the kind. When Ben says she's dead Richard asks if she died on the Island. Ben replies no and Richard looked very taken aback, but when did he say "oh, then that's not the black smoke since he's limited to...?" Ben's story we now know had special significance to Richard personally, and probably helped him decide to accept Ben. Duncan905 17:41, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree that it's pretty tenuous that Isabella is a manifestation of the Monster. MiB has already said "I needed a body" and all the other times we've seen him in other bodies, they've been those of on-Island corpses. Also, we know that Isabella is on the Island as a ghost.  Robert K S   tell me  06:35, May 16, 2010 (UTC)


At the end of season 5, the MIB says "One day I am going to find a loophole" in order to kill Jacob. I thought that it was because of rules that would not allow that to happen, at least easily. However, as we have seen it, the answer, the loophole, did not exactly require a rocket scientist to be found. Rather the MIB could have someone else do it for him. How long did that take MIB to figure out?

Seriously now, the only thing that makes sense to me is that MIB would portray Jacob as someone evil. Then the person deceived would commit the murder without really knowing he was doing something bad; quite the opposite. please share your ideas on that.--Johnnybravo2323 22:04, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

I originally thought it may have something to do with Ben's unique connection to the island (particularly being saved by it which appears to be connected to Jacob or a protector). But anyway while it's possible this is still the case, as we now know, the MIB did try to get Richard to kill Jacob. There was a big thing about don't let him talk to you. So perhaps one of the issues was once Jacob has talked to someone he can talk them out of killing him, so he needed to find someone that would still do it Nil Einne 17:16, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

MIB/Jacob Theory

I think that Jacob is actually bad, while MIB is good. Because if you look at the flash-sideways, a world without the island, or Jacob, most of the people seem much happier. Claire is happy to be with Aaron, Hurley is lucky, Sawyer is a cop who almost found the real Sawyer (or Anthony Cooper), and etc. So, maybe MIB really isnt the devil like everyone thinks, and Richard (who wants to start working for MIB) knows its the right thing to do. Tell me what you think. Ilovelucy225 22:52, March 24, 2010 (UTC)Lucy.

Ilovelucy225, could you please delete the entry above & instead add your input to the Theories page? This page is to discuss what belongs on the article, thanks. Duncan905 00:21, March 25, 2010 (UTC)

bottle of wine: I seem to rember that...

maybe it was dream, however MiB was outside faraday- locke. PerhapsMiB had discovered the man qhodid not turn. Mib was expellwd from Faraday-Locke. Jacob may not get it.


Just a note to thank whomever substituted the new picture of Titus. Perfect moment, as he says "I'll just kill them too." and makes that "How 'bout THAT?" expression. Duncan905 20:05, March 25, 2010 (UTC)

  • The new Terry pic is good too, but I'm a fan of the "wanna go home" glare. Duncan905 20:59, March 25, 2010 (UTC)

Locke and MiB

I also thought I should ask whether Locke's mini picture should be changed to his Season 5 one, as he is no longer a main character, Terry O'Quinn is now portraying the Man in Black, and so I think his picture should be changed to the promotional photo of Terry O'Quinn i for Season 6. Does everyone else agree with this? 01lander 06:16, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

everthing is progress so said Jacob

The body of Locke is now the vessel of faraday. Soon Faraday will release Locke; he has no interest in Locke. John has served his purpose. Jacob is now eating his words. faraday is a ghost who travels through time and space. Jacob, MiB, Widmore, Eloise are in the dead pool. Jacob and MiB end sitting on a cliff, waiting for the battle. Both are helpless, too much "progress". They are not Jugheads, and that's their problem. --Bel the dragon 19:46, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

MIB and the Smoke Monster indeed the same entity?

The article draws a clear parallel between the MIB and the Smoke Monster without stating any reasoning behind that. However, as far as I have not missed anything, there is not yet enough data to say that they are the same entity.

1) MIB has more or less directly claimed to be the Smoke Monster to Richard, Ben and Sawyer. Why he keeps repeating that, regardless whether he is the Smoke Monster or not, is not clear.

2) MIB's transformation to the Smoke Monster or back to a human being has not been shown. This certainly is not a budget issue.

3) No character has witnessed or claimed to have witnessed, his transformation, nor confirmed that he indeed is the Smoke Monster.

4) The Smoke Monster is usually heard and/or seen approaching its targets, and then seen and/or heard to retreat. MIB in his human forms appears from nothing and disappears as quickly. The Smoke Monster seems to be bound by far more earthly rules.

5) The blast door map contains several markings of "Cerberus vents", presumably entry points to an underground network of tunnels that the Smoke Monster uses to move around the island. Hardly needed for MIB to move around.

6) In the scenes where MIB is assumed having transformed to the Smoke Monster, the movements of the Monster do not support the shape-shifting theory too well. In the Season 6 premiere, when Bram and his men attack MIB, he just quickly disappears. Moments later, the Smoke Monster is heard approaching from a distance and entering the chamber. After killing the attackers, we hear the Monster going away. Then, suddenly, MIB appears again. This more looks like MIB calling his pet to do his bidding than him shape-shifting into the Smoke Monster. Compare this how the Smoke Monster moves when he "judges" Ben, and then later Alex appears.

7) In the scene where Isabella's apparition, presumably MIB, is talking to the chained Richard, the Smoke Monster is heard moving outside.

8) Whereas MIB has never killed anyone in any of his human forms, the Smoke Monster breaks havoc easily and has killed countless of men and women, making both of them feel as two entities with different characteristics.

9) It is often claimed that the producers have confirmed MIB indeed to be the Smoke Monster. In the Jimmy Kimmel show right after the Season 6 premier had aired, Lost producer Carlton says that "John Locke ... revealed that he is the Smoke Monster --" (JOHN LOCKE??) to which another Lost producer Lindelof laughed: "And the island is a space ship."

Perhaps I am missing something, but conclusion from this seems to be that while it is possible MIB and the Smoke Monster are the same entity, it also seems possible that they are not. As both possibilities are currently just speculation, they should be treated with caution. --Drieakko 11:02, March 28, 2010 (UTC)

The recent episodes are based on us believing that they are the same thing. Just because there is another possibility, one which hasn't been brought up, doesn't mean we should call what we are led to believe as speculation. Otherwise we should second guess everyting that happened in the show and wouldn't be able to call anything fact. If it does later turn out that they are seperate beings, we're not at fault for saying that they were the same, since it is what we were meant to be believing while watching the show. Just like how it wasn't a mistake to list his appearances as Locke on the John Locke article, before it was revealed that he wasn't Locke or how Jin's article said he was dead, when that was what the show kept telling us. -- Deltaneos (talk) 23:53, March 28, 2010 (UTC)
Well said, Deltaneos. At the moment, we're documenting what's been presented & where there's apparent guidance (or common sense) connecting dots I say we take it for now. In a few weeks everything can get tidied up, but for now I agree with using an Occam's Razor model (with caution) to provide the best possible reading for visitors. Duncan905 16:48, March 29, 2010 (UTC)
MIB and the Smoke Monster are one and the same. Both Fake Locke and MIB have said this directly and indirectly in several Season 6 episodes (LAX, The Substitute, Recon, Ab Aeterno).
  • Flocke transforms into the smoke monster, kills Jacob's body guards, transforms back into Locke (appearance wise) and says to Ben "I'm sorry you had to see me like that." (LAX)
  • Ben says to Flocke "you're the smoke monster?". To which Flocke replies "Let's not resort to name calling" (LAX)
  • A little later Ben tells Ilanna that "Locke turned into a pillar of black smoke and killed them." (LAX, I think)
  • We then see the black smoke traveling around the island (we see the reflection in a window, so we know it is the black smoke) The smoke then stops,becomes physical, picks up a large knife and we see that it is Locke (in appearance). (The Substitute)
  • Flocke turns to Sawyer and says "I am that smoke thing". (Recon)
  • When MIB asks Richard to kill Jacob (after telling Richard that Jacob was the Devil), Richard says "How can I kill, he is black smoke) to which MIB replies "No. I am." (Ab Aeterno)
Either Flocke, MIB, and the Smoke Monster are all the same being/entity (which is obviously what the writers are trying to tell us or wants us to believe).
Or both MIB and Flocke WANT certain people to believe they are the same and go through great lengths to conviently disappear just before the smoke appears and then reappears after the smoke monster leaves and makes sure that they are never seen together and then makes no effort to try to convince anyone other than Richard, Ben, and Sawyer that he is the Smoke Monster. Honestly, what purpose would this serve? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Orpheus2 (talkcontribs) 00:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC).

Indirect victims

Dogen was killed indirectly by the Man in Black, like Jacob.--Lolifer 15:38, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Ben summoning the smoke monster (from a season 6 POV)

From a season 6 point of view, how do we understand when Ben summons the smoke monster which kills Keamy et al. At this point, I still was believing the monster was a destiny/time correcting thing which'd have killed all the people that doesn't belong. Now that we now that the smoke monster is MIB, how can we explain that Ben — which is a Jacob believer — is allowed to summon it, and even, that the smoke monster helps Ben by killing the mercenaries ? I know it has been asked on this page a few times, but I think we need a real topic about it. What are your thoughts ? I can't get to understand. --FrenchFlo 19:53, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

  • I don't think Ben actually "summoned" MIB per se; I think what he did sent out an "alert" of sorts, but MIB can choose whether or not to respond. As to why MIB decided to kill Keamy and his pals... well, it was for the same reason why MIB kills everyone else he kills, I guess. Hard to say what that reason might be, other than simply because MIB is "evil," which isn't much of an explanation. As of now, there's still a lot about MIB's motives that we don't understand. Wstonefi 23:53, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
    • Yes I think the water flushing is either an annoyant meant to get it 'real pissed off', or the plunger's really stoppering an underground tank that releases a big deluge, all but forcing the Monster to break ground, again in a bad mood. Again, not saying water as an element is or isn't that special, just that we've seen many entrances of Smokey that start with rumbles & explosions out of the ground. Duncan905 19:01, April 18, 2010 (UTC)


The case for water against Smokey's all good, but in "The Package" he takes a drink from his canteen as he talks to Sawyer at the end. We've had some 'aversion' to having shots of FLocke eating (although providing a boar) when it's implied or drinking - he tasted the whiskey but didn't drink. Likewise OG-MiB sits idly after preparing the pig for Ricardo, but for all we know he just finished, just like with Jacob on the beach. It's been a great ambiguity, but in this case water's not going to melt FLocke (previous Oz refs notwithstanding). MiB also doesn't have a problem standing in the surf. Sound fair to add sub-points about him drinking & wading in human form? Duncan905 06:07, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

  • I noticed that as well, that we never actually, besides the canteen that I didn't notice until you said something, see him eat, it is always referred to that he has eated or something like that. I dont think that since he really isn't human anymore that he doesnt need human necessities, also he didn't drink the whisky.--Phryrosebdeco23 02:15, April 2, 2010 (UTC)

Summoning wording

"The Monster can be summoned from a secret room beneath Ben's house ("The Shape of Things to Come") -- although apparently it does not always come when called."
Why do we say he doesn't always come when called? I assume the reference is to Dead is Dead, but he did come when called, just in a different form. I vote to remove "although apparently it does not always come when called."--Frank J Lapidus 04:40, April 2, 2010 (UTC)

  • Yes Given we know now that MiB was in Locke's form nearby & 'even Ben' didn't realize, this does look a little backdated. Duncan905 18:45, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Missing history

A substantial bit of page history from Jacob's nemesis is missing. It got lost when someone deleted it to move "Dark entity" to "Jacob's nemesis". Could someone delete Jacob's nemesis and restore it will the full history? And possibly merge it with this page's history? -- Deltaneos (talk) 11:11, April 5, 2010 (UTC)

Christian Shephard

Do we take what the Monster said in "The Last Recruit," that he was all on-Island appearances of Christian, at face value? Or do we wait for more/better confirmation in the next 4-5 episodes? If we do accept the Christian = MiB concept, that's a whole 'nother revamping of the page *and* this site on-par with when we learned he wasn't really Locke. And it could very well be a lie (it didn't seem trustworthy to me, but I might be biased towards other theories).--Tim Thomason 02:48, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

I say we wait until the end of the season until we know for sure that MiB was telling the truth. I think he was full of crap myself, but I admit to being extremely biased. —   lion of dharma    talk    email   02:51, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
  • Apparently people have taken it upon themselves to just do it anyway. Whatever, but you guys better be the ones to revert it all back when it turns out that the MiB was full of it. :-p —   lion of dharma    talk    email   03:01, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that right after I posted this. I guess there's no holding back the thundering horde. I just feel sorry for the site and hope we can fix any big mistakes after the finale. A thing like "Christian is MiB" can seep into dozens of dozens of pages if we don't pay attention and is a very tough thing to add or revert. Even if/when MiB is revealed to have lied, we might not catch all the old edits.--Tim Thomason 03:14, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

  • Unfortunately a lot of people are going to run with the "Christian=MiB" narrative, ignoring the one thing we know for sure about MiB...he is a LIAR. Also there is the problem of Christian's off-island appearances, and the mysterious figure seen in the cabin with Christian in S4 "The Beginning of the End."MarkFunk 03:27, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
  • If Christian is Smokey, then the producers will likely confirm it in the next couple of days ("that scene was meant to confirm the speculation..."), at which point they *should* also explain the one off-Island vision. If Christian is not Smokey, then they'll likely be very, very evasive about answering the question, and it will be explained in an upcoming episode. Remember, the "What's up with Christian?" thing has been a major question since the Pilot and a major force driving Jack's life this whole time. It just seems too convenient that MiB is offering this long-sought-after answer to Jack, the one candidate he seems to want above all others. (And yes, this discussion is present on at least four pages).--Tim Thomason 03:36, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

there's a lot of evidence he's not christian: there's actually *3* off island appearances. 1.) freighter 2.) jack saw him walking through the hospital (could be someone with similar appearance though) 3.) when jack was working late. also, there's the ash circles around the cabin, but christian was inside. and when claire was talking to jin, she referred to her friend and her dad as two seperate people. if we can't stop people from adding the christian stuff, maybe there should be a section against it. Semidelicious 05:54, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

    • Does the Hydra count as on-Island? Christian's voice saying 'let go'? Anyways, I heard that forced-conviction in Locke saying he required a body be on the Island. He attempted to divert Jack with the same tired "...what *matters* is..." but that just annoyed Jack into asking directly, which he was forced to answer directly. I think there's hints where MiB's forced to adhere to a rule. Short of those times, yes, MiB deceives every chance he gets, which is what makes Sayid's ((heavily implied)) deceit so damn sweet. He's vulnerable to his own weapon. Duncan905 07:58, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
  • Claire knows that MIB was Christian. She said so to Jack in the last recruit , "did he tell you he's the one who has been pretending to be our father?". This confirms that Christian's appearances with Claire and in the cabin were also MIB. The Christian in the wheel chamber with Locke referenced the cabin meeting, meaning he is also MIB. This close to the end of the show the producers are answering questions not throwing out red herrings. The only appearance that is dubious is the Christian in the hospital lobby in the FF, which I left on the Christian Shephard page. --D Toccs 00:44, April 22, 2010 (UTC)
  • Perhaps Claire is asking, "did he tell you he's the one who has been pretending to be Our Father?" Anyway, just because Claire asks that question, it does not necessarily constitute confirmation that all appearances of postmortem Christian are MiB. Personally, I still have major doubts about MiB time traveling to pre-1867 and showing himself to Locke as someone Locke never met. EZamor 08:05, April 23, 2010 (UTC)
    • Locke had met Christian in the cabin previous to that flash. It's a valid point to note that MiB is now believed to have assumed a form from the 'relative future', before the body was available. It seems to point to MiB's ability of scanning a person's memories, however, Christian in the cabin didn't discuss his identity as Jack's father with Locke. Not a memory Locke could've provided. This gives weight to MiB skipping through time during the flashes (inferring multiple MIB's at that moment, like Kate seeing herself deliver Aaron), which would also explain MiB's "impeccable timing" in 2007 with Richard, as opposed to "the Island telling" fake Locke things to help him. Duncan905 16:33, April 23, 2010 (UTC)
      • I agee execept Kate didn't see herself deliver Aaaron. Sawyer saw her deliver Aaron. --D Toccs 16:46, April 23, 2010 (UTC)
        • Whoops, brain lapse there. Example should've been there were 2 versions of Sawyer on the Island at the same time. Duncan905 18:59, April 23, 2010 (UTC)
    • Then MiB could learned everything about any time traveling character he might have run into. For example, if Sawyer ever left the area protected by the sonic fence at any point in time between 1974 and 1977, he would have learned everything that Sawyer knew--including Sawyer's perspective of events up through December 2004. If a time traveling MiB ever ran into a past MiB, then Past MiB would gain every memory of Future MiB, as well as the memories of anyone that Future MiB's ever scanned. Right? EZamor 23:18, April 23, 2010 (UTC)

Resurrecting the dead

  • Added this as an 'ability' for now, but merits exploration. Possible he also revived Jack on the beach, does this act open the person for 'infection'? Or is that mumbo jumbo now, dispelled by Claire jumping ship & Sayid likely converted by Desmond? Duncan905 19:21, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
    • Okay, I finally noticed Jack didn't die on the beach, his ears are ringing & he sees FLocke approach. Duncan905 21:59, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

Water as a new form? Sayid/Temple access / travel through Water

Somehow the MiB revived Sayid while within the protections of the Temple. But something was amiss, the Spring water was murky & ineffective. Can it be concluded that MiB was present in the water, filled Sayid's lungs & resurrected him? Sayid didn't cough up any water, he just sat up & spoke. Jacob's ghost twirling a stick in the Spring later adds a little weight, perhaps he's mulling over an exploited flaw in his protections. We're seeing more examples of water tied to MiB this season - he offers Richard water as a greeting on the Black Rock (and after kidnapping him in the OT) and tells Jack the reason he took Christian's form was to provide water. After the initial speculation that water was a barrier, it's looking quite the reverse. Maybe MiB causes (and is) all the sudden rain showers as well. Duncan905 19:21, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

Please post this on the theories page. That idea has not been brought-up or strongly suggested in the show, so it's not worth mentioning on the article. -- Deltaneos (talk) 21:01, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
    • Okay, I agree it's speculation. Once posted there, should I yank this? Want to make sure I edit right on talk pages. Duncan905 22:01, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
    • No, leave it. Talk should not be deleted.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 22:24, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

New wrinkle; I didn't want to delete the new entry about MiB traveling to/from Hydra & the Kahana, but it claims he travels "over" the water. We don't know this, and we have the contrary statement when asked by James; "Because I can't." [change to smoke & fly] We do have evidence of his travel with water in between, so if not "over" then it's "under" or "through". So I modified it to not reference any yet-unseen method, just that he can do it & concluded the proximity to the Island allows it. Duncan905 23:20, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, MiB never says he can't cross water. From The Package transcript:

SAWYER: What do you need a boat for? Can't you just turn into smoke and fly your ass over the water?

LOCKE: Do you think if I could do that I would still be on this island?

What MiB did was dodge the question.

--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 00:17, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

The enhanced text for 'Ab Aeterno' says twice "surge of water" to describe the wave that carried the Black Rock inland & smashed the statue. Signs point to 'yes' on this one I think. The MiB can push his particles through water to effect things he wants, within the radius of the Island. I'll propose a new theory, since it supports MiB being behind 'rain' as well. Duncan905 02:51, April 29, 2010 (UTC)


Should we add Christian to the main picure of MiB?--Renzoo 21:06, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

No. It's not one of his predominant forms. "Titus Welliver" is supposedly his true form and the one used when he's credited as the man in black. The smoke monster is his form most characters associate with him. His John Locke form is what has caused him to be considered a main character and we have seen most of his development, while he is in this form. His Christian form isn't as significant as those and not much more significant than his Isabella, Yemi and Alex forms. -- Deltaneos (talk) 22:09, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
I'm not so certain about 'predominant' - he used Christian's form to manipulate various people over 5 seasons. Still, I vote against changing the 3-shot image. The Titus face is vital to his identity, as is Smokey, and Locke's form is his endgame. Duncan905 22:52, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

Mysterious Boy's in control?

"* Who is the boy that seems to control the Man in Black and Jacob? * Why is a boy able to control both the Man in Black and Jacob?"

I removed. He spooks MiB, and recites a 'rule' but that's about it. Please explain or give instances of 'control'? Especially curious about controlling the dearly departed Jacob. Duncan905 23:39, April 21, 2010 (UTC)

Christian Form in "Ancient Times"?

I realize that with the way the subsections in this article are written that it makes sense to say that Christian appeared during "Ancient Times", however I personally don't think it fits at all in an article about 'The Man in Black'. We're dealing with time travel, and as far as I've seen in other articles the policy for that is for events to be written relative to the characters own personal timeframe. We don't have the events of Jim Lafleur in the 70s preceding James' parents getting shot in Sawyer's article, for instance, because whilst a version of Sawyer existed and influenced that timeline it was before he himself time traveled and experienced those things personally.

In this case, "Christian" repeats himself about asking Locke to move the island, a conversation that hasn't even happened yet, and confirming that this was most certainly The Man in Black post-2004 who was appearing during the time flashes, and in that case shouldn't he be written in the same way? We don't know how he was time traveling when he was with Claire, but by writing it otherwise we're making the assumption that The Man in Black is all knowing and somehow took the form of Christian before his body was on the island, which contradicts all facts which have already been established. The only way this is possible is time travel. And then, to have a time traveling Christian appear in the article before the Titus Welliver incarnation of Man in Black bugs the hell out of me, because we know the Man in Black form precedes Christian. --Slevil 01:08, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

  • I put the following in the UAQs: "Did the Man in Black time skip with Sawyer, Locke and others?" I'm concerned that it's a little awkward and may be labelled as theory begging. If the time shift that resulted in the Well closing up left Sawyer and party looking at the Statue, then the shift was to 1867 or before. So how did MiB as Christian show up? The real Christian was decades from being born, so the MiB couldn't know what he would look like in 2004 if he (MiB) was simply waiting. There are only two possibilities I can think of: Either MiB was following Sawyer and company through time or the time shift that sent Sawyer's group to 1867 or before sent Locke to 2004. I more or less reject the idea that the MiB is travelling back and forth through time as it pleases him. Do we know what happened and how do we explain/integrate what we know?--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 02:15, April 22, 2010 (UTC)
  • MIB oculd of scanned Locke in the wheel chamber and taken Christian's form from Locke's memories. He must have done that to get Isabella's form on the Black Rock. I also agree with the original post tht the appearance should not be in the ancient times section of the article. I've changed it to a section for the Time Flashes similar to how other characters are handled. --D Toccs 02:31, April 22, 2010 (UTC)
    • I mention in the section above, Christian had not revealed his last name or identity as Jack's father to Locke in the cabin, so that was not an available memory to scan. It's got to be MiB, taking the form of a body not yet born. I agree with the possibilities above: Locke didn't flash to the same time as Sawyer & the rest, or MiB himself was skipping through time (willingly, to manipulate or perhaps caught up in the effect) which means there were 2 versions of MiB, just like Sawyer seeing Kate deliver Aaron. I like the idea of him caught by the effects of a bad donkey-wheel push, or deciding to follow along once he'd identified Locke as his best chance to get Jacob. But it has to be reconciled that either the frozen donkey wheel was 'always misaligned' in each time the skippers visited, or that Locke separated & skipped to 2004, and that the effect of aligning the wheel reached back to the other skippers & moved them from pre 1867 to 1977. Duncan905 17:13, April 23, 2010 (UTC)

Too much speculation in this article

Why is there all this writen as if it is canon? The article is FULL of speculation, because MIB's story has yet to be revealed. The producers said they are keeping this top secret to tell more of the mythology of the show, which we have not seen yet, with the exception of Richard's episode. So why is it proper to write this article based on many assumptions, because that's what this article is? Please, someone, help with this. Most of it should be under a heading as "Trivia" or "Speculation". If that's not allowed, which I believe it's not, then why in Jacob's name is the article written as if it's canon? Many people are coming to this site now, and believe it is fact, when this page especially is mostly speculation! Sheesh. Iamlost23 19:20, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

Which parts do you believe are speculation? This page is mostly based on what we were told on the show. Speculation is to be posted on the theories page. -- Deltaneos (talk) 12:14, April 23, 2010 (UTC)
  • Agreed, there's a great deal of care/discussion on points that are ambiguous, I think. Some contributions are naturally stronger than others; uses of "thus" and "therefore" sound like a debate club & merit refinement, sure. There may be doubt about whether the things MiB states are truth (so we use 'claim'), or if being told/shown one thing helps conclude another, but theses are the the words & sights from canon that we're distilling into synoptic narrative & cataloging. More discussion's always welcome - add a new section below for speculative points you'd like to amend. Duncan905 16:04, April 23, 2010 (UTC)


Did I miss something? Who confirmed Dave to be another MIB apparition? --LOST-Malachi 19:22, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

So apparently Tara Bennett, a writer for the Official Lost Magazine and the upcoming Lost Encyclopedia, made some comments on a podcast. [4] But no, at this point, unless it is commentary from Lost producers, it is not canon. And until the Lost Encyclopedia actually comes out, no behind-the-scenes information should be considered canon or endorsed by the Lost producers. -- Graft   talk   contributions  19:24, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
I agree. When the Lost Encyclopedia comes out, we need to have a discussion about whether or not it can be deemed as canon. Until then, we can't take any of her comments as fact.--Baker1000 19:28, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, we'll have that discussion when we get there. But looking at the blurb on the Lost Encyclopedia page, it looks like it's going to be fully endorsed. -- Graft   talk   contributions  20:09, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Emily Linus

Just as he impersonated Isabella without needing a body on the island, wouldn't it also stand to reason that he was Emily Linus that appeared to young Ben in 1973. --D Toccs 09:32, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

  • I agree, MiB would only need an opportunity to scan Ben. And finding a boy with no actual memories of his mother she doesn't have alot to say. It could be why Richard was so interested to learn from Ben that she hadn't died on the Island. Duncan905 15:43, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Indirect victims

I insist. Dogen was killed indirectly by the Man in Black, like Jacob.--Lolifer 13:55, May 10, 2010 (UTC)

  • Yes Sayid confirming to Lennon that he knew Dogen's importance to guarding the Temple is info that only MiB could have provided. We should classify both Dogen and Jacob as "assassinations" carried out under the direction of MiB. Duncan905 17:29, May 10, 2010 (UTC)
    • Well, I kinda agree but remember that "it is their choice", they chose to, they weren't forced to do anything... So that's not really MIB that killed them. I mean, if we consider that as "killing", I think we would have to change a lot of other "murders" ... MIB just gave info and asked things, but they were free to choose whatever they wanted.--Atarada 18:14, May 10, 2010 (UTC)
      • That's why I'm advocating using the term 'assassination' - no question both assassins had a choice. I'd be good with removing as examples of 'indirectly killed' & re-classifying as 2 examples under MiB's "power of persuasion". Duncan905 18:45, May 10, 2010 (UTC)
        • Dogen was killed by Sayid- MiB only issue a command. Jacob, on the other hand, was indirectly killed by MiB, as Smokey kicked stabbed, dying Jacob into the fire. So, I would not count Dogen as MiB victim. --Verdath 16:07, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
          • Dogen was killed by Sayid, MiB issue a command. Jacob was killed by Ben, MiB issue a command. It's the same.--Lolifer 13:33, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
            • MiB did not physically participate in Dogen's murder, but he did in Jacob's. --Verdath 20:41, May 14, 2010 (UTC)

The Man in Black indirectly killed two of Widmore's submarine crew members, as they drowned after explosion caused by MiB's C4. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Verdath (talkcontribs) 2010-05-11T11:07:30.

The water makes him "bleed" darkness

I did not discover this, but a member in the forum did, and it speaks for itself :

We can see Venom-like / Black oil literraly getting out of him.

I think this should be mentionned somewhere. Sawyer told Jack to put him in the water, because he remembered "can't you fly over there ?". Maybe it's (one of) his weakness ? He did seem to take some time to get out of the water. No idea what this means, but it's sure intriguing... --Atarada 10:28, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

The Monster preexists Mib

Why is everyone assuming that "Across the Sea" was the origin story of the Monster? It seems like it preexisted this episode - it appeared to MiB as Claudia. OR at least that's what I got from it. At most, it was ambigious if this created the Monster ofr if the Monster existed befrehand and was manipulating MiB. --NoMereRanger303 02:53, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

I agree. It appears Jacob unleashed the Smoke Monster when he threw his brother down the cave. Maybe we should separate the two characters of The Smoke Monster and Jacob's brother. --Davidjacobs 03:20, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

How do you gather that Claudia was the smoke monster? Alatari 03:45, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
Maybe he was simply speaking with the dead, like Hurley does. Mother said he was "special". Ahkond 18:13, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
Also, according to...somewhere on this site, the writers have said that not all the dead people who show up are the Smoke Monster, even the ones seen by people other than Hurley. MannyF 00:58, May 19, 2010 (UTC)

Also agree. While it isn't certain that MiB and the Smoke Monster are different entities, it was never certain that they were the same, it just seemed probable with the information we had. With the information we have now it seems more probable that they are not the same. Jacob's brother/MiB died in the light and smoke monster was unleashed,--Zmost22 04:13, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

I still think the prevailing evidence is that they are one and the same. MiB tells Sawyer that he was once human and that Jacob is the one that took his humanity and turned him into the smoke monster, which is what we saw in Across the Sea. --User:Jeffcutt72

  • I agree. Jacob's and MIB's adoptive mother also said that going into the light would be worse than death. She didn't say "you die and unleash a Smoke Monster". They gave us numerous hints in this episode that they are indeed the same entity: MIB has no name. Ben said to Locke about the Smoke Monster that they have no name for it. MIB's body was left after the Smoke Monster appeared. Locke's body was left after the Smoke Monster "became" Locke. There's just too much evidence to say that they (Jacob's brother and the Smoke Monster) aren't one and the same.--HaloOfTheSun 04:46, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
    • That's just like saying that because Locke was at some point in his life smokey, that he was always smoky. Similarly, smokey existed before the MiB, but is NOT the MiB, so smokey is not actually Jacob's nemesis, he is an impostor of him, thus the article for the MiB and the article for smokey should be separated.Mik w 15:54, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
    • Either he is the Smoke Monster or the Smoke Monster carried his body out of the cave. The latter seems less plausible. Alatari 05:30, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
      • ... or the body was flushed out by the river. Jacob found the body downstream, not upstream, I think. Ahkond 18:13, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

There are hieroglyphics under the Temple that show the Monster, which surely suggests that the Moster pre-dates Roman times. That said, there are hieroglyphics by the Frozen Donkey Wheel, so it doesn't necessarily mean that anything Egyptian is from Egyptian times. ElessarTom 16:51, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, how about this - "Mother" said she made it so that Jacob and his brother couldn't hurt each other. If the smoke monster isn't Jacob's brother, he wouldn't be bound to this rule. Since we know he is, then Smokey = Jacob's brother. Also, nice catch with the hieroglyphics under the Temple, but if they're just as likely to be a warning, as in "put somebody in the Source and they'll become a smoke monster". MannyF 00:58, May 19, 2010 (UTC)


  • Does he require the presence of a dead body to take on the form of the deceased?

The MiB as Locke told Jack he does. Ilana said he is now stuck as Locke.--Lucky Day | msg 03:09, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

the cave

I wikified four possible names for this cave. island's heart, heart of the island, source, cave of light. I don't think we know enough to connect it to a previously known location. Alatari 05:26, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

MiB's birth year

Perhaps I missed something obvious (entirely possible) but I see someone posted his birth year as 23 AD. We can ascertain it is between 450 BC and 900 AD (years that Latin was spoken as a language), but how do we know it was 23 ad? User:Jeffcutt72

  • This year seems to be popping up in several articles, yet no one seems to know where it was said that that year is correct.--HaloOfTheSun 04:42, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

I think until there is some form of evidence, it should be removed.--User:Jeffcutt72

I don't know either, but it's widespread across the Wiki (on Jacob's page, Claudia's, others), so it must come from somewhere. It's kinda catchy, what with "the numbers," but I didn't hear anything in the episode that implies when it could be, especially such a specific date. 43 years go by in the episode (supposedly 23 - 36 - 66), as the Man in Black spent 30 years living amongst "the People" after leaving Jacob and his mother at age 13.--Tim Thomason 04:46, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
  • Earlier in the season, a spoiler poster posted on the forum that in this episode, we would learn that Jacob and Mib were from the year 23 AD. that is where it is coming from, but it was not in the episode, and it has not been confirmed by Darlton, so Its not Canon. Maybe they took the year out of the episode to spite the spoiler poster. But yeah I like the justification for 450 BC - 900 AD, assuming thats accurate about the Latin being used in those years (MaxMoney37 04:52, May 12, 2010 (UTC))

I was wondering about it when I saw this too. I find it improbable that Claudia's ship would be able to successfully navigate across the ocean to crash on the island in 23 AD. Latin was spoken among the educated as late as the 19th century in some places, so it can't be used to tell. I think that since Claudia and her group were using a large ship and spoke Modern American English (which has been around since about the 18th century) I would assume that the events of "Across the Sea" occurred sometime between 1750 and 1850. If Jacob was born around 1800 he still would have had plenty of time to bring other people to the island before the Black Rock. --Supernik87 04:58, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

    • No, this is definitely incorrect. The English spoken in the episode was clearly a production device so the entire episode wouldn't be in subtitles. That's totally obvious by the way it just seamlessly transitioned to English. Additionally, as someone who study Latin for years, I can tell you that though it was a language known by poeple, it was not a regularly spoken language after 900 AD. The fact that they both engage in Latin seamlessly makes it clear it's at a time when that is the commonly spoken language. There is no chance this episode occurred after 900 AD.
Triremes were pretty resilient. It's possible they navigated the west coast of Africa and got drawn off course. It's a stretch. My closed captioning said it was Latin and I agree it was a plot device to avoid subtitles that they transitioned for our sake. Alatari 05:24, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
  • Im changing it (MaxMoney37 05:00, May 12, 2010 (UTC))
    • They weren't speaking English. The opening scene shows that everyone spoke Latin and it was just "translated" for our understanding (Claudia doesn't flinch when the language is changed). The Island moves, so I don't mind that it is apparently nearby a ship of people from the Roman Republic/Empire/post-Roman Europe. I can't conceive of any way they could mention the date in the episode, but it might (in the future) be mentioned in Untangled (which I haven't seen) or one of the commentaries/podcasts. There's also the point that that the episode takes place over 43 years, and the date 23 AD could be any of the three eras (they would be born in AD 23, AD 10, or 21 BC).--Tim Thomason 05:06, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
    • All they had to do was throw up a caption 23 AD like they did in Ab Aeterno with 1867. There has to be a reason why they didnt do it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MaxMoney37 (talkcontribs) 2010-05-12T00:11:58.

Proposed rewrite of first paragraph

Everything through "antagonistic to his twin brother, Jacob." Seems fine. The rest should be changed post "Across the Sea", perhaps as follows?


Like Jacob, the Man in Black had lived on the Island for centuries prior to the crash of Oceanic Flight 815, though his original human body had long since died. The precise source and nature of his abilities and longevity are unclear. In life, and on some occasions thereafter, he appeared as a middle aged man with dark hair and dark eyes. His current true "body" is that of a flying pillar of what appears to be black smoke. As the pillar of smoke, the Man in Black can fly at considerable speed and can lift men or uproot trees with ease. The pillar of smoke also makes loud, distinctive mechanical clicking sounds, generates electrical activity and can "reflect" the memories or thoughts of people it encounters as images floating within itself. However, the Man in Black can assume, and generally prefers to interact with others in, human form. The only human forms he has been shown assuming to date have been of dead people, though it appears that, as of the events of Season 6, he can only assume the form of John Locke. It is unclear whether he has any means of verbal communication as the pillar of smoke. Not unlike his adoptive mother, he is adept at manipulating and coercing those around him with fear, praise, distortions, false promises and, often, outright lies. Despite a powerful desire and centuries' worth of attempts to do so, he is unable to leave the Island.


First, somebody needs to get on writing an article about the witch (which is what I've taken to calling the Allison Janney character). Second, thoughts? I think it's pretty obvious now that the smoke form is really "him" and that his appearances since then in his old body were just an expression of his ability to assume the forms of dead people. Tear it apart if you like. Of course, I'd much rather somebody just copeid and pasted that into the article where indicated ;). Lemikam 07:29, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

It's still possible he died and was carried out by a separate entity and that he is not the cloud. The entity could always just be taking his place like it did for Lock. Word it to allow that we still aren't sure it's not just an impostor. Alatari 07:38, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
That seems kind of remote to me. I'm not posting anything yet, and people should feel free to shout me down, but it would be awfully elaborate for a to-that-point unheard of entity to escape the light cave at the precise moment of the real Man in Black's death, assume his form, bind itself to the rules that governed the Man in Black in life re: not killing Jacob and also adopt the Man in Black's obsession with escape from the island. To me, that seems like a kind of untenable string of coincidences. I allow that it's possible, but then it's still possible that the whole series was just one big Dallas rip off and Jack is gonna wake up on the plane and this will all have been a dream. It seems pretty clear, to me anyway, that whatever was in the light cave changed the Man in Black somehow, stripped him of his original body and turned him into the smoke monster ... or at least that seems like the only version of the story that makes sense or has any substantial support based on the new information we got tonight. Lemikam 07:59, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
  • In keeping with the general notion that the most important summary components of the character should be included in the first paragraph of their articles, I thought his desire to and inability to leave the island rated a mention. Lemikam 09:05, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

Food and Drink

There a several instances where the MiB has an opportunity to eat and drink but chooses not to. In The Incident he refuses the red snapper offered to him by Jacob. In Ab Aeterno he is feeding Richard roasted boar but is not seen eating anything himself. Finally, he is offered wine in that same episode by Jacob but chooses to smash the bottle.

But in the form of John Locke he is making a big deal out of eating a papaya in The Life and Death of Jeremy Bentham. I am convinced that Jacob is needling him on the offers and it is part of their game.--Lucky Day | msg 04:52, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

  • I wrote about this in my blog about month ago. Okay then, as of the Across The Sea, we know, that Jacob's brother main form is Smoke Monster- therefore, in Incident and Ab Aeterno he has been impersonating himself as a human. So, his Titus Welliver form and John Locke form are equal. I think, it's an inconsistency- why MiB can't eat and drink, but Flocke can? --Verdath 11:13, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

History section

Here's what we came up with in the several hours after teh episode and someone systematically removed it and put in some inaccurate reprisal.

Birth & Origins

Much of the Man in Black's early history, including his origins, are unknown up to the final two episodes. He is the fraternal twin of Jacob born second to a Latin-speaking ship wreck survivor, Claudia. The woman who he called mother is the mid-wife who delivered the two boys. After she had recognized something in the birth's circumstances she had apologized to the real mother as she took her life.

Early life

The boys led a carefree life on the island and spent much of their time roaming the beaches. One day, the Man in Black found a blue box on the beach which contained a game of chits and dice. The Man in Black offered to play with Jacob if he didn't tell their Mother yet Jacob, lacking the ability to lie, returned to her and immediately told of the game. She had left the game for them so with her approval, the boys played this game many hours by the rules Man in Black devised.

Sometime in their adventures the twins saw three men hunting in the woods. They confronted mother and demanded an explanation since she had told them there were no others and the island was all there is. Mother admitted that there were other people, evil people, living on the other side of the island and they should never reveal themselves to these people.

The boys time of innocence ends one day when Claudia appears to visit the twins and Man in Black, being the only one able to see her, takes a walk with her along the beach. ("Across the Sea")

Life with Claudia's crew

Claudia explained to Man in Black the circumstances of his birth and that the isle is not the only place in the world. These revelations caused him to leave his step-mother and go join the surviving crew members who stayed on the other side of the isle. They were attempting to find a way off the island and were studying its secrets. They were the ones who discovered the intense magnetic sites scattered around the island. Under their tutelage Man in Black learned how to hunt and use weapons. Presumably they taught him some crafting and science so he could eventually fashion the wheel.

At this time he still cared for Jacob and they would meet secretly to play a game of chits and dice. Many years he lived with the men and many games later he tells Jacob these men are greedy, petty and vile but they are his way off the island. Man in Black's desire to leave seems to have become his overwhelming drive by this time some twenty or more years after leaving the mid-wife. During their last game together Man in Black told Jacob that they had devised a way to escape the binds of the isle. ("Across the Sea")

Death, Transformation, and Loss of Humanity

Jacob's honesty lead to the tragedy of events that eventually transform the Man in Black. The mid-wife would ask Jacob where he had been after that last game of chits. Jacob would not lie to her and admitted to seeing Man in Black and told her the men had found a way to leave the island. This did not fit into her plans to have one of the two boys take her place as island protector and she confronted Jacob's brother. Jacob's graying brother proudly showed her he had tunneled to the heart of the island and had built a wheel he planned to install as a means to leave. She followed her modus operandi by comfortingly approaching him and apologized as she drove his head into the rock wall. She ended the threat to her plans by assassinating all his companions and destroying their well.

Mother returned to Jacob and took him to the glowing cave, the heart of the island, she had once shown him and his brother. Deciding that he would be her successor and prepared to change Jacob. There had always been a jealousy between the two boys with the root being Jacob was not her favorite and it appeared she had always considered Man in Black as the special boy. She had to convince an unwilling Jacob she was wrong about this and that he was always the one fated to watch over the island's heart. Finally he partook of a concoction she proffered while she chanted in Latin. She told him then that he can never enter the heart because the consequences would be worse than death. She reminded him that someday he would need to choose his successor.

Man in Black awoke in the midst of his step mothers destruction and was dismayed. He returned to Mother's camp to lay a trap with the now burnt board game. The mid-wive didn't appear too surprised and thanked him as she looked down at the knife thrusting out of her abdomen. Man in Black had been taught how to stalk unheard and kill the boars of the island. She was just as easy as the boars and now her time as island caretaker was at an end.

When Jacob returned to see his brother's crime, he attacked and knocked his twin out. As Jacob carried his brother through the jungle, the Man in Black, awoke and reminded him that Jacob cannot kill him. Jacob had no intention of killing him. After they arrived at the island's heart Jacob threw his twin down the stream into the source. Man in Black slid down with the current into the soft yellow light and the island rumbled. As the shaking stopped, the cave no longer seemed to emit the unearthly glow it once did and the Smoke Monster roiled and billowed it's way out of the island's heart and streamed across the sky. Jacob looked on in astonishment and followed it. Eventually Jacob stopped to drink from the stream and discovered his brother's lifeless body. He carried it back to Mother's camp and laid it next to his caretaker mothers body along with a pouch containing one black and one white stone from the game. ("Across the Sea")

Centuries later at that spot they are discovered by The Oceanic 815 survivors and called "Adam and Eve."

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

Yes Aside from grammar, this sounds absolutely right to me. Also, hasn't the use of the definite article "the" when referring to "the Man in Black" become sort of standard? Just calling him "Man in Black" sounds clunky. Lemikam 08:30, May 12, 2010 (UTC) Comment I was told it was way too long and had to be shortened to a paragraph or two. Where are the grammatical errors? The tense is supposed to be past perfect. Alatari 09:11, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

Not the tense, just general grammar stuff: "The woman whom he called Mother" ... "The boys' time of innocence" ... I'm sure there are more. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lemikam (talkcontribs) 2010-05-12T04:17:12.

Transformation or impersonation?

The whole article assumes that Jacob's brother transformed into the Smoke Monster. However this is merely a theory, as the smoke monster could have been in the source, and after Jacob's brother got into the source, the monster got angered and killed him. After that it started impersonating him. I suggest rewriting the article without the assumption that he transformed into the monster. Another theory is plausable. BeŻet 15:26, May 12, 2010 (UTC) No I see precisely no support for this theory and plenty of support for the consensus. Just because one can imagine that it's plausible doesn't mean it's even remotely likely. The standard for treating a question as resolved can't be that not one of us can imagine a plausible alternative. Nothing would ever be finalized. Lemikam 16:58, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

NoWe can make up any number of theories that appear to fit the facts the the fact is that tonights episode was specifically designed to provide some explanations. That MiB emerges as Smokey - a fate worse than death - is one of those explanations, new major mysteries are simply not going to happen. I doubt that we will ever know what the Islandis. What we were shown tonight and for the last few eps - is all we are going to get. MiB will never have a name, and will always be smokey.    Charles Kane     talk  contribs   email   17:38, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
NoThe MiB specifically mentions his crazy mother to Kate in an earlier episode, and has also referred to the fact that he used to be a regular human being. There is no reason to suddenly invent a new character with three episodes to go until the series finale. Everything has pointed to MiB and Smokey being one and the same. The producers refer to him as being the same as the smoke monster. Since it was first revealed that they were the same thing, no character has contradicted this revelation or suggested any alternate theory. This is absolutely nothing whatsoever in the show to suggest anything other than MiB and Smokey being the same person. --Krsont 18:15, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
No Agree with Krsont. The monster claims to be the Man in Black. He said that he was once a man and that Jacob rid him of his body. We should go by what the show tells us. Doubting it is considered the theory.
Charles Kane: he does have a name. This is mentioned in the article. Titus Welliver said that his character does have a name and he knows its importance, but doesn't know what it is. This site is listed as the reference. -- Deltaneos (talk) 18:26, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
    • Thanx for the ref. I read it - sounded as bad as MiB prevaricating. He think it has a name but as of about a year ago he doesn't know it. We have an hour with him and don't get a name at the only time it could matter. Whatever happens from here can we imagine a name given 1500 years ago to someone who has only ever been on a hidden Island that is actually going to resonate or matter'. I can't.    Charles Kane     talk  contribs   email   19:40, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
Yes I think Jacob's brother/MiB died in the light. He's death (Adam). Smoke Monster impersonate him. It's a possibility.--Lolifer 00:28, May 13, 2010 (UTC)
Yes The monster claims to have once been Locke, but he is not at all Locke, and similarly, he claims to be the MiB, but is not the MiB. All your claims at attempted proof that he is smokey are wrong. His memories and wants are emitted as apart of the smoke monster, not as the smoke monster. His body had his memories and wants removed, and similarly, Locke had all his memories and wants removed at death to death, but he is not death itself, he is locke,and the smoke monster isn't useing Locke's Wants as strongly because he doesn't need them to kill people, but smokey's goal is not to get off the island, it is to kill everybody, and it is using MiB as a puppet, because he can easily be thought of as a person who would do the killings, but smokey is not killing those people becasue it lets him get off the island, but because it lets him kill people. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mik w (talkcontribs) 2010-05-12T20:21:42.
No A far more reasonable reading of the situation is that the entity that was the human that was Jacob's brother ceased to exist (died) and was supplanted by the smoke monster, which has all of MiB's memories and characteristics but simply is something else. It sounds like this is what you're saying. I believe, in fact, that this is the consensus about what happened - that this is currently the version of events reflected in the article. What does not make any sense is an assertion that an entity that predated Jacob, MiB and the witch somehow falsely assumed MiB's identity to "trick" Jacob into doing something. If you read the article, it mentions on several occasions that the human version of MiB is dead, but that, in dying, he became this other thing. What I object to is the notion that this other thing is somehow "impersonating" MiB - trying to trick everybody into believing that it's MiB. There is no support for this idea whatsoever. Lemikam 06:27, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

No The whole "Jacob stole my body", and the fact that his lifeless body was found near the/a creek, I feel that he no longer could use his body, he was and is, the smoke monster, he can, indeed, change into any form, and chooses to maintain his previous human form. But he's not really a human anymore, he was transformed. I think the idea of us not seeing him eating in the early 19th century (if I am not mistaken) is because he had no body REAL body to feed and enjoy. As John Locke it is a whole different game, he can and DOES eat because he went through the process (he can't take another form) and now he is as human as he can be now. Just my thoughts!--Phryrosebdeco23 07:38, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

I think one can make a good case in either direction. It's ambiguous. Smokey certainly has been shown to mimic individuals in precise detail even knowing their very thoughts. Other characters have previously referred to Smokey as "the security system" for the Island/Temple which is a bit at odds with MiB's stated goal of leaving. Previously in the series Jacob has implied that MiB is a source of evil (paraphrase) which is a bit of stretch to say about his own brother. On the other hand, the entity has made statements referencing Jacob's theft of MiB's humanity, Mother, etc. -- and would have very little reason to bring any of it up. MiB-as-smokey also appears to have to follow the Rules. Spiral77 10:07, May 13, 2010 (UTC)
"security system" can be explained by assuming the builders of the Temple worshipped the Man In Black as their protector, which is implied by the room under the Temple wall, and the room under Ben's house that summoned him. "Security system" was the way the MiB let them think of him, and why he let them think he could summon them to act as their security system (Ben speculates in What They Died For that the room under his house was really a trick, which seems likely). MiB saw fit to let Rousseau's team think of him that way too because he wanted to make them his new followers. It was another one of MiB's manipulations. --Krsont 19:29, May 19, 2010 (UTC)

Renaming "1867 - The Black Rock's & Richard Alpert's Arrival"

I've renamed this section "continued feud with Jacob". This section covers a feud that lasted for centuries. The Black Rock's arrival was just one day of it. --- Balk Of Fametalk 14:30, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

Shorten the Across the Sea summary!

The part of the article that recaps "Across the Sea" is now some 1,500 words. For comparison, that's more than Jack's history for the entire first two seasons. It also happens to recap in detail scenes that didn't even feature MIB, and the whole thing's in present tense. I'm cutting it down to a couple paragraphs. If readers want to recall the entire story of "Across the Sea" in dramatic fashion, they need merely go to the relevant episode page. That's why the cross-reference links to it! --- Balk Of Fametalk 14:40, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

Main Image(s)

I think the main image in the article should be changed. Ideally it would only be a single picture, despite the fact that he transforms, and perhaps we should argue whether that's a picture of his Locke form or the original one (or even his smoke form). There's plenty of decent ones that would probably look very good on their own as the main image. However, I understand the decision to have all three versions, but I don't get why we've left that particular picture of the original form: he's in the middle of saying something, making a face, and it's too much of a close-up. I just wanted to see what others thought about the image, because I do think we could do better (and have, the previous image was "better" in the sense that the original form did not look so strange). Close-ups can be good, but I'm not sure they're ideal for use as main images. --Sauron18 19:20, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

  • As a final (whatever that means) choice, I would use an image of the character as portrayed by Titus Welliver. That's who he was before he took on the form of other people, most notably John Locke. The Smoke is a kind of combat avatar. However I would withhold any decision until we know his name or decide what we are going to call him.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 23:28, May 13, 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree with you jim except fot the fact that we should wait, hes used John Locke a lot on the show but hes been around for 2007 years my guess is hes been in his own human form for over 95% of that time. -- B1G CZYGS  Talk  Contribs  23:37, May 13, 2010 (UTC)
  • I guess it is better if we wait to see how it all ends. The Titus Welliver form IS the most "unique" and "original" form, not to mention the one with which he most likely strongly associates himself with, but that may change. So let's wait, but I think we can agree that the current image is a bit too messy... --Sauron18 23:55, May 13, 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree, the image should be Titus Welliver, or in any case the Smoke Monster, but not both, and Locke should definitely not be there--Rod|talk 06:07, May 20, 2010 (UTC)
  • Now that the show is over I think we can definitively decide what the main image will be. In my opinion, considering everything, a good image of the Titus Welliver incarnation is the most appropriate. He may have "lived" most of his life as the monster, but he himself identified more with a human body. He may have died with Locke's body, and although this one definitely deserves a lot of coverage, ultimately I'd agree with Jack that to use it as a main image would, in a sense, "disrespect" the actual Locke's memory. So in the end I feel that there are more reasons to use an image of the original form, not just because of the limitations of the others, but also because it's his only truly unique face. --Sauron18 14:09, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
  • I actually think that the current combined image is better than sticking with one face or the other. In Season 6, we saw him most wearing the face of John Locke, but before that we saw him most as the smoke monster, and the Titus Welliver face was his "original" form. Since there are good arguments for any of the three, I think they should all be reflected in the main image. —Josiah Rowe 19:18, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
  • In the final episode Jack says he's insulting Locke's memory by wearing his face, should we really do the same ;P--Rod|talk 03:15, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
    • Just wanted to say that I think the new Titus Welliver picture is much better. I'm still unsure about the other two, but for now, at least, it looks better. --Sauron18 07:42, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
  • I like the 3 image combo, it's messy and complicated like him and the show itself. However, if there is a single image, I would go with Titus Welliver. But I like it as it is. President Kang 00:20, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect Information in introductory paragraph

I don't think Jacob's Brother is The Monster - The Monster was created after his brother's dead body passed through it, yes, but his brother's body is in the cave, and it has remained there for centuries. The article makes out that they are the same person, but I think The Monster simply has MIB's memories. The real MIB is dead. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bluevane (talkcontribs) 2010-05-15T07:40:24.

  • Mother said it was a fate "worse than death" - therefore not death. It is an empty corpse lyig in the cave - it is not MiB. As MiB said (paraphrase} "he stole my body and my soul" - he talks in the possessive "my". He lives, his form is Smokey and whatever body he is "in". I think we should be accepting at face value what the historical episodes are telling us. It is too late for new mysteries.    Charles Kane     talk  contribs   email   12:50, May 15, 2010 (UTC)
  • Also, Mother said that she made it so the brothers could not kill each other, and that MIB could not leave the island. If the smoke monster wasn't Jacob's brother, those rules would not apply to it, but since the rules do still apply to the smoke monster, it's because it IS Jacob's brother, just without his physical body. There's not any actual evidence from the show for the smoke monster being a different entity than MIB, its just pure speculation. On the other hand, all of the evidence that has been revealed in the show indicates smokey and MIB are one in the same. Alienux|talk|contributions 13:10, May 15, 2010 (UTC)
  • Another point is that smokey (in the form of Locke) told Kate that he had a "crazy mother," referring to the adoptive mother that killed Claudia. This indicates (again, with evidence from within the show, not just speculation), that the smoke monster believes that he is MIB. The most logical conclusion is that he actually is, as he believes to be. Alienux|talk|contributions 13:10, May 15, 2010 (UTC)
  • The Smoke Monster and MiB are one and the same. MiB isn't dead because he can't be dead at Jacob's hand. Whoever the OP is (please sign your posts) assertion that information is incorrect comes from a personal belief and has nothing to do with the facts presented by the show.-- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  18:38, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
  • The body wasn't MIB anymore, just meat, to paraphrase Miles. The body left behind was just the physical body; the actual consciousness, the memories, the 'soul' of the Man in Black became or entered the Smoke Monster (depending on whether or not there was already one down in the Source). The Smokey!MIB remembers what happened to human!MIB and acts the same way, so he's clearly one and the same. --Golden Monkey 22:23, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
  • I think this is one of those things that they're going to leave open to interpretation. Personally I like the idea that the smoke monster is just using the body of Jacob's brother, but I can see both sides of the issue.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  00:10, May 19, 2010 (UTC)


I think it is time for us to reconsider some of the things we have been told by TPTB, among them MiB as the Medusa. Artz had Medusas in his collection. Nikki took them and set out to paralyze Paulo. She was successful, but ended up being attacked herself. The involvement of MiB is not necessary for these events to transpire. I know the "NYC taxi cab" sound was heard before Nikki was stricken but, well, so what? That only means he was in the area watching, not attacking. It may be risky to try to get inside the mind of MiB, but what did he have to gain from Nikki's death?--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 18:04, May 16, 2010 (UTC)

You know who is in the mind of the MiB, and therefore it isn't risky to accept what they assert... TPTB. -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  18:42, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
It was said to be Smokey by Damon & Carlton, and we have no reason to doubt it. Why would anyone ever need motives to kill Nikki? MIB 'gained' being rid of both halves of the most annoying duo on the Island instead of just one. --Golden Monkey 22:27, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
Actually the involvement of MiB was necessary, because Nikki maybe was #321 on the Candidates list in the caves, listed under FERNANDEZ. We have seen that the MiB wants to kill every candidate in order to leave the island. --LOST-Frink 03:52, May 18, 2010 (UTC)


It is written that MIB, in its human forms has meet Juliet? When did that occur? I do now she saw him in the episode Left Behind but that was in his smoke form. If someone know, please write or delete her name from the list if she hasn't seen him in his human forms. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gafgarion88 (talkcontribs) 2010-05-20T13:02:35.

Jacob's Nemesis

The first paragraph says that the Man in Black is alternatively known as "Jacob's Nemesis", but I don't believe he was ever called this on the show. The other names on the list at the start of the first paragraph are ones he has been called on the show, rather then just by the fans. As such, this should probably be removed. Any objections? Was he called this and I missed it?--Faraday100 19:42, May 23, 2010 (UTC)

Yes Yeah, since this is just one of many fan nicknames, it should probably be removed from that section. —Josiah Rowe 19:14, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
Yes Samuel isn't a name he's been called either. President Kang 04:00, May 26, 2010 (UTC)

Missing Pieces

It is not listed that The Man In Black appeared in Lost: Missing Pieces, yet he appeared in So It BeginsDrinkincatonmilk 10:03, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

Yes Totally. Christian was MiB. Let's get that fixed, folks! Pronto! President Kang 04:00, May 26, 2010 (UTC)

Well, no. That's left to interpretation. Ghosts exist. Vincent, a dog that is special, that goes look for Jack, both when he arrived and died, was asked to do so... I don't think it's fair to say it was MIB.--Atarada 23:17, May 28, 2010 (UTC)


No I would only put it in trivia section. Nothing more. --Verdath 21:15, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
No This is trivia only. It didn't make the final cut, so it's not canon.    Jabberwock    talk    contribs    email   - 21:42, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
No For reasons already stated. Its interesting, but since not specifically mentioned in the show it seems like something that would better be mentioned in the trivia section. MattC867 23:38, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
No Since it's not used in the series proper, it wouldn't be appropriate to rename the article. However, I'm going to be BOLD (as they say on Wikipedia) and add this to the "production notes" section of the article. —Josiah Rowe 19:12, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
Yes If it was intended by the writers and is in the script, then that's what the page should be named. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JMANO1993 (talkcontribs) 2010-05-25T23:26:35.
Yes It's still his name, thats who he really is. --Steffi955 04:10, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
Could we make sure we have a link to the source? Some folks might be skeptical. 16:06, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
  • It's funny though; if his name really was Samuel in the script, he would be the only character to keep his Casting call name.
No Kristin was wrong. Watch the video where she revealed Samuel was his name in that post-finale Q&A. She answered fan questions from the audience and got answers wrong time and again. She said Samuel was the MIB's name. No that was for the casting call. She said that John Terry voiced the "help me" line in the Cabin. No that was Carlton Cuse. She said that line happened in the same episode we saw Christian on the rocking chair - no they were different episodes. She said it was John Terry's eye in the cabin, no it was Simon_Elbling. This is just the stuff i remember her getting wrong in that ONE VIDEO. Seriously i would trust Kristen as far as i could throw her --Anfield Fox|talk|contributions 23:50, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
No An episode of the Geronimo Jack's Beard podcast said that Titus Welliver's trailer refereed to his character as the Man in Black. I would trust a cast member's first hand account over an entertainment writer who has no involvement with the show. Nicklost 03:07, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
No No way, there's no real source for it. Frankly, I'm surprised it's in the article anywhere other than the trivia section and I'm taking it out. --Minderbinder 17:31, May 30, 2010 (UTC)

Sawyer called him "Smokey"

In the final episode, Smokey was finally called "Smokey" on the show, I so vote that counts for various names he's been called by. Smokey is now canon, folks! That's some fan service. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by President Kang (talkcontribs) 2010-05-24T23:03:52.

Locke/MiB/Smoke Monster

I think for clarity and for simplicity’s sake, we should refer to the version of this character played by Titus Welliver as “The Man in Black”, refer to this character in the form of black smoke as “The Smoke Monster”, and refer to this character in the form of John Locke simply as “Locke”. Despite the impersonation routine, he is still called “Locke” by other characters, even those aware of the fact that he is a doppelganger. More casual fans tend to refer to the Terry O’Quinn character as Locke anyway and may be slightly confused by him being called the Man in Black. Scenes such as this character’s insistence to Sun that he is the same man he’s always been, his possession of John’s memories, emotions, etc. and the cry of “Don’t ever tell me what I can’t do!” suggest a connection that makes this form different from Titus Welliver’s character anyway. It would be best if MiB’s own page referred to him as the Man in Black throughout, but other pages may want to start calling the Terry O'Quinn form “Locke”. I would also suggest removing any comments that state that it is a solid fact that the apparition of Christian Shephard is the Man in Black, since the finale may imply that it was in actuality, a sort of ghost/spirit guide for Jack and the others. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oyashenron (talkcontribs) 2010-05-25T14:31:49.


"The Man in Black has a name that is significant to the show, but the name is presently unknown even to Titus Welliver, who portrayed the Man in Black in "The Incident, Part 1", "Ab Aeterno" and "Across the Sea"" Copied from "Trivia". Needs source. I think it should be very deleted right now, because "Samuel" doesn't make much of a significance. Or maybe it's the fact that he ends up nameless? This can be interpreted in so many ways. Donvercetti 21:54, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

  • I think they meant that his "name" is Adam. --Gibbeynator 13:04, May 27, 2010 (UTC)

MIB is one entity, Smoke Monster is another

After "Across the Sea", we learn that MIB is actually a human being who is Jacob's brother that is killed when Jacob throws him into the Island Source.

What we have been calling MIB this entire time is actually the Smoke Monster in the form of MIB in exactly the same way that the Smoke Monster takes Locke's form or other people's form later. The Smoke Monster is its own thing that takes on the form of MIB and does all of these things listed in this article. MIB, however, is just another deceased individual on the island.

This distinction is important because it also helps to clarify some confusion as to what The Rules are and how they apply. See Talk:The Rules - Distinction between Mother's Rules and Jacob's Rules [5].

This nuance is not the first thing that jumps to mind after the barrage of canon and information that was "Across the Sea", but it is certainly one that has effect in and of itself. It is also probably just better to be as precise as possible, as there are sure to be other facts that are convoluted from this confusion. --SofaKingdom 11:16, May 27, 2010 (UTC)

Yes --Steffi955 04:12, May 28, 2010 (UTC)

No sorry, sir, but you are incorrect. --Jmoore0905 05:34, May 28, 2010 (UTC)

Yes What are you basing "you are incorrect" on? There's more evidence to support this than to refute it.
  • MiB's corpse was found, laid to rest, and later decayed.
  • While the Smoke Monster frequently behaved somewhat like the MiB we knew from Across the Sea, he also behaved like Christian and Locke when he appeared as them. It would seem that he absorbs some of the personality of whoever he manifests as.

What evidence supports smokey and MiB truly being the same person? Mslade 12:58, May 28, 2010 (UTC)

Well Lol, there's the evidence that MIB kills the group of People that came into the Foot of the Statue after ben killed Jacob. He's like to Ben "Sorry you had to see that" that would say that it was MIB as Smokey. There's the evidence that Smokey comes up out of the Cave after Jacob tosses MIB into the Cave. Oh the list goes on, I rather not continue. Don't be a idiot honestly...James has called MIB "Smokey" to as well. He's been referenced to have a Smoke Form by a whole bunch of Main Characters. Smokey would come up in a spot, kill someone and then MIB is suddenly there. MIB has said that he can't "Fly over the Ocean" to someone but I forgot who it was...I think it was Sawyer. AlessiaGallant 07:54, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

I think the OP is arguing that the original MIB who never seemed to be named but we know was Jacob's brother born on the island (as an ordinary human), is different from the smoke monster who takes numerous forms including the MIB (and I presume in the OP's opinion was released upon the death of the brother in the middle of the island). In other words all the appearances of the MIB other then in 6x15 are of the the smoke monster in the form of the MIB. So many of your arguments above don't really apply since the OP accepts that the MIB you see thorough most of the series is the smoke monster.
However this is still wrong, I think it's clearly implied that the smoke monster is the same entity as the MIB in 6x15, simply somewhat changed/perverted by the light. For example, they share the same desire to leave the island and explore the world, with the belief they're being unfairly kept there by the protectors. Also when Jacob and the smoke monster talk and when Jacob talks about the smoke monster and when the smoke monster talks about Jacob, it seems clear that Jacob still thinks of the smoke monster as the same entity who was his brother and the same wit the smoke monster and Jacob.
Nil Einne 17:36, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Rename, Again

Yes Since the producers have confirmed that his true name is "Samuel", I think that Samuel should be the title. Its the official name, regardless of a more common "nickname". Just like Libby's article title is Elizabeth "Libby" Smith or Hurley redirecting to Hugo "Hurley" Reyes.--Gonzalo84 18:42, May 28, 2010 (UTC)

  • When did they confirm it? So far the only source I've seen say that is Kristen, and she is, quite honestly, not the most reputable person when it comes to Lost-related matters. --Bish-Fiscuit 23:02, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
  • No The source is Kristin... I'm not sure we should trust her. Plus, Samuel was the name used in casting the role, so there may be some confusion there. I think it's worthy trivia, but I don't feel comfortable renaming it without stronger evidence. LeoChris 23:11, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
  • No Kristin was wrong. Watch the video where she revealed Samuel was his name in that post-finale Q&A. She answered fan questions from the audience and got answers wrong time and again. She said Samuel was the MIB's name. No that was for the casting call. She said that John Terry voiced the "help me" line in the Cabin. No that was Carlton Cuse. She said that line happened in the same episode we saw Christian on the rocking chair - no they were different episodes. She said it was John Terry's eye in the cabin, no it was Simon_Elbling. This is just the stuff i remember her getting wrong in that ONE VIDEO. Seriously i would trust Kristen as far as i could throw her --Anfield Fox|talk|contributions 23:50, May 28, 2010 (UTC)

No If the producters actually do confirm it, maybe. But a rumor from a gossip website isn't remotely canon. --Minderbinder 17:30, May 30, 2010 (UTC)

Can't directly harm candidates?

While we know he can't kill candidates (or harm them in a way which will directy lead to their death obviously), was it ever clearly stated he can't harm them? I can't really remember and I'm lazy to check. Reason being we know he paralysed one candidate which some might consider harming them. He also dragged Locke although I can't recall if he caused any noticable minor injuries. If it wasn't stated, perhaps either just remove the harm bit or clarify it as something like long lasting physical harm? Nil Einne 17:24, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Christian Shephard Cabin Appearances should be Restored!

-- This is ridiculous. Why has The Man in Black's most blatant appearances as Christian been removed? Lets look for a second what we have in favour of this Christian being MiB:

1.He self-proclaimed that he was Christian on the island.

2.He changed out of the suit he mimiced the body of, just like he did as Locke. An apparition would not have a change of clothes. He also held Aaron.

3.Dead is dead. Why have Christian appear on the island and it not be explained by the end of the show? As a guide that’s never addressed again in the final season? This helps us put together that he was all appearances of Christian Shephard. Even the off island ones; Either he could temporarily reach off the island or it was a hallucination brought about by the island, and if it was the latter, it should still be in this article just like when Locke caused Boone's vision of the monster because (with the smoke alarm going off) it was an obvious foreshadowing to his final confrontation with The Man in Black, not a ghost of Christian which Jack is unable to see.

4.The appearance of Christian to Sun and Lapidus in Season 5 told them to wait for John Locke. If it was an apparition of Christian, why was it helping the Man in Black? Why was the Man in Black expecting Sun and Lapidus and waved out the window when he got there?

5.Claire blatantly said “Did he tell you he was the one pretending to be our father?” I’m sorry, did I miss the scene where Claire was chasing Suited Christian in Season 1? I don’t think so. Did you miss “because my father told me” that the Others had kidnapped Aaron? If Claire had met her reanimated father and not MiB, why not tell Jack? The only explanation is to say the Man in Black "lied" to her off screen, but if that's a lie, why is the one in White Rabbit not considered one too? If Christian has been running around and the Man in Black knows about it, why would the narrative not comment on it again?

6.He told Locke to move the wheel. It was made clear this Season that the Man In Black was involved with the construction of the wheel in the first place, and that it’s purpose was rejected by the island administration. In other words, someone working for the island or Jacob would NOT tell Locke to move the island, it’s why Jacobs mother objected to the wheel's creation in the first place. It's a contraption that shouldn't be there.

7. The Man in Black told Locke he had to die and Christian acknowledged this.

If you ask me, there’s more in favour of him being this Christian than this “Mysterious Man.” or even the Christian in White Rabbit (who went off island and appeared in the sideways). To point out the fact MiB never himself stated he was Christian that time is picking at straws, and I know a lot of fans were bitter about this answer just like some were bitter that Locke wasn't Locke at the end of Season 5, but did that stop Lostpedia from merging The Man in Black with Locke's article based on one "loophole" comment? Decisions like this are making the fanbase look dumber and dumber. --Slevil 09:54, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Christian DID appear to Jack off Island, in the hospital. It's a fact, so all Christian's appearance don't have to be MIB. Though I agree with the rest of your post.--Atarada 14:21, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Appearances in Dreams

The producers stated once that we had seen the Monster in season 2 after the 23 Psalm, but did not know we were looking at the monster. This was confirmed to be the manifestations of Yemi to Eko and Locke. As these manifestations were in dreams, I had added this to the Man in Black's abilities section. --D Toccs 11:33, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Where was it confirmed that Yemi appearing to Eko and Locke was the Monster? (For that matter, where was it confirmed that some island appearances of Walt were the Monster, as suggested in the current article?) Tagmata 06:10, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC BY-NC-ND unless otherwise noted.