The official obituary of Jeremy Bentham (John Locke’s off-island pseudonym) mentions that he had a son. [Yes, I am aware that the producers have said that the obit was merely a prop, so these theories are innocent conjecture.]
No one attended Locke’s funeral; however, he had returned from the island and was probably operating in stealth mode under the Bentham alias. He certainly did not want to draw attention to the fact or attempt to explain why he was no longer in a wheelchair…
The only woman we’ve seen Locke in a relationship with was Helen, although he ruined his future with her when he chose to stalk his father. Given the significance of children on and off the island on LOST, it is not out of the realm of possibility that Helen discovered she was pregnant after breaking up with Locke but never informed him. In which case, if Locke did contact Helen upon his return, perhaps that was when he met his son for the first time.
If Helen was covering for him/keeping his Bentham identity a secret to protect herself and their son, it’s possible that SHE placed the obit in the paper but knew better than to show up at his funeral.
Then again, the mention of male offspring could have been a signal to protect either or both of the 815 boys: Walt and Aaron. I would not be surprised to find out down the line that Sayid strategically wrote and submitted the obit (especially since he was the one who sarcastically referred to Bentham’s death as a suicide and may have been involved).
So…do you think that Locke actually had a child, or are you sticking with the official story, that the obit is insignificant?
13 Responses to “(Un)fortunate Son: Locke’s Legit Obit?”
Leave a Reply
This site utilizes the Global Avatar standard developed by Gravatar. To set your avatar, click on the logo to the left.Return To Top
sattellite tv special offers
I’m pretty sure the alleged leaked text of the obituary prop which mentions a son was foiler made up by some poster on the Fuselage who claimed they worked on the show. It always seemed dodgy to me but DarkUFO later reposted it followed by Lostpedia and somewhere along the line everyone accepted it as fact. The visible parts of the obituary as seen in the episode mentions nothing about a son.
It seems to me that so much attention has been paid to detail since the very beginning of this show that there is probably something to it. darlton know we scrutinize everything and they pay attention to the fact that we pay attention. We have an endless repetition of single moms, father issues, children, babies etc. I suspect that we will find there is a “son” or someone in that role and I wouldn’t be surprised to see Helen again either
The Same DarkUFO who insisted for months that Jin was one of the Oceanic 6?
The “son” thing was never in the obit people made that up, probably to lead the trail to michael.
Awesome. Any theory involving Helen I like.
I really want to see her back on the show, both because she is so closely tied to Locke and also because I think Katey Sagal is a great actress. Last week The Lost Flashbacks podcast did a discussion about Locke and there was talk of Helen and how she may play into the show going forward as well. I really think it’d be awesome if she had a visit from Bentham at some point, pregnancy or not.
If they launched another love-story with Locke that’d be great… they clearly loved each other and overall their breakup was kind of weak… I think she still potentially would get back with Locke. Also, after seeing what they did with Desmond and Penny last season I think they could do as good a job, or better, with a Locke-Helen reunion arc this season and forward. (As well as with Sun and Jin if Jin survived)
I appreciate this post, Opinionated, because I too have thought about this very thing ever since finding out Locke was in the coffin, and knowing there was mention of a son in the obit. Like you and everyone else has already pointed out, it’s hard too tell when something is completely in canon. Especially since there have been some prop errors in the past.
However, after reading your theory, something else dawned on me that may give your theory a little more validity. That being: it was established in in Locke’s flashbacks that Helen has always had a habit of reading the obituaries. Now, I could be wrong here, but I’m pretty sure that someone (family, friend etc) has to send the info into the newspaper if they want an obit printed. So, because of Helen appreciation of the obits, I think that it would make alot of sense that she was the one to have taken care of it. Don’t you think?
That being said, if this theory is completely wrong, I still think it;s possible that in the very least we might see Helen again, because maybe she will somehow read the obit, and know it was Locke…
-Libbe
It was not an obituary, it was a news clipping. No one submitted it. It was written by a reporter.
Really Doc, after the “whose not in the coffin” error lets not hark on the mistakes of others.
hehe… well, the point being anonymous… that no-one is perfect. Saying “it is so because I read it on the internet” is sort of an ongoing social in-joke.
Bentham is Aaron’s true biological father.
Constructive criticism Tammy?
Needless to say, I’ve been consumed with some other stuff. Hope to be updating everything soon. SpoilerScoop, alas, will probably not continue.
oh please! not locke and claire. no way no way. gags.
Besides they would have recognized each other.
You would hope anyway, on the other hand bags would have been useful if true. arg sick.
If he has a son I would swear he doesn’t know. Locke knows too well how hard it was to not have a dad. Can not see him doing that to his own child.
Good resources! Thank you for sharing this with us.Iike pandora jewelry.