EXACTLY... just what I said... ;-)
"...to put things back to the way they were", BEFORE meeting Kate. Same thing as 'forget about/never be hurt by', right?

It was NOT my 'interpretation of the show'!
That's the point: it was a reply to another poster )Jenn, and HER comment on the final moments, and how it emotionally impacted (some of us more so than others...we're 'girls' and LIKE THAT, you know)....That you didn't 'get' that from our two emotional 'sharing' posts... well, that tells a LOT.
It was NOT an interpretation inviting your critique; in fact, most comments here don't expect, need or want critique or judgement AT ALL.

LOVE your 'running' style, mcd (especially the first 'sentence')...;-)
Thank you, for the dashing save of this (me) damsel in distress!
Can you BELIEVE some people?
Pssshhhhfff....

;-)

It was a rhetorical question, and one that invites comment in a loose, statement-more-than-question kind of way. I'm a writer AND aced every English class I've ever taken, from 1st grade to college, so do not need some self-inflated twit telling ME that MY words "might be poorly constructed".
This is a COMMENT board, not a thesis showcase, and we speak in conversational, sometimes colloquial, 'voice', in defense of my writing style in the afore-mentioned post...
Further, at the TIME, I was being careful (call it habit) not to be overly upfront with details, in case others were still watching the show (which is obvious from several other posts, that some had not seen the ending yet).

No one here needs a second-grade teacher GRADING their POSTS for style or grammatical construction, for Pete's Sake...

shoo, shoo.... PLEASE.

Seriously? That's a STUNNING idea, too... it makes sense, and would SO be like Locke...

Actually, I believe Juliet was from Oregon..Seattle?... when she was first contacted by Dharma..

Okay... so what was 'stupid' about my questions? The time thing (never knowing what happened because it's prevented from happening), or that Juliet, dying in the dark, wet pit, realizes that the undetonated bomb is sitting right beside her and that, at that moment, she is the only one who can finish the job (destroying the island and its destructive powers)??
I don't mind criticism or debate, but I cannot respect a one-liner that means and says NOTHING but allude to the immaturity of its author...

isotope: Did you watch this to the end? Jacob is Jacob, but LOCKE is not Locke: he is the 'adversary' Jacob was talking with on the beach (some hundreds of years before, with a galleon, the Black Rock, in the distance), the guy who expressed how he wished he could 'kill' Jacob, implying there was some reason he COULDN'T....
He said he'd find a 'loophole', and he did.
He may have manipulated/taken the form of MANY bodies besides Locke's in his quest to find a way to get a willing mortal to 'choose' to kill Jacob...

Parallels in history, of course.
Notably Christian history.
Esau was the wicked brother to his twin, Jacob (the 'good boy' of the pair), and furious that his younger brother wound up with his birthright (that of being the 'older' of the two), and that he was to 'serve' his 'younger' brother.
We're all openly wondering about the reason for, the significance of, the pair of men on the beach, some hundreds of years earlier; one we discover is Jacob, the other, unnamed, shares aloud his thusfar impotent desire to kill the other... and that he will 'find a way', a 'loophole', if one exists.

I think Jack is simply in so much PAIN, that, in his desperation to 'rid himself' of that pain he will do ANYTHING to put things back to the way they were, when he only had the relatively benign task of burying his father to deal with...
Grief creates some pretty strange 'rationale' in people's decisions and motives...