Lost finale meta and spec for season 6
Apparently, I wrote some pretty thinky meta in the wake of the finale. 2700 words worth, lol. I did it to work out some things I've been thinking for a while about the show, but I thought I'd share it in case anyone's interested in reading one person's argument why Lost is not going to hell in a handbasket.
This is pretty much a way informal academic essay. Fair warning.
WHAT I AM AND AM NOT TRYING TO DO WITH THIS ESSAY
I am not good with details and mythology, with keeping track of all the crazy twists and turns this show makes. What I am relatively good at, in an academic sense, is narrative, how a story works and what it looks like in the big picture. (It's part of my PhD studies--specifically the modern novel, but I've read a lot of novel and narrative theory history in the last 6-8 months. I'm drawing off that, to some extent. And logic. The great thing about narrative theory is it's actually ridiculously intuitive and practical, when you let it be.)
Normally, I don't do spec with Lost (because I suck at it, honestly). But I suddenly feel like doing spec now, because the things that have been concerning and/or exciting everyone about this finale speak to bigger issues of the show's storytelling rather than the usual wacky bullshit of an episode or multiple-ep story arc. So many people are bothered by the show for its localized insanities, and they have every right to be--Lost is often random and illogical and wacky (as well as unethical and amoral) and requires a lot of suspension of disbelief. But the way the show works in the big picture is more logical, I think--or it's become so--and I hope that will make it possible to talk about where season 6 might be headed.
Bear with me, if you would. The following is not my attempt to be a bossy know-it-all. There's a lot I'm really pretty shitty at in terms of interpretation. And, in fact, some of what I'm going to say here might not be on target. Feel free to call me on it or add your two cents.
It is also not an attempt to in any way deal with all the content-related problems of the show which make it unwatchable for some. For example, the fact that the Quadrangle is willing to WIPE OUT AN ENTIRE ISLAND AND ERASE HAVING EVER KNOWN EACH OTHER simply because they haven't figured out how to sort themselves into pairs, or that WHO'S FUCKING WHO ISN'T THE MOST IMPORTANT THING ON THE GODDAMN PLANET.
*clears throat* Sorry. Anyway, that's not what this is. My ideas here don't take interest in whether the show's writing makes sense in terms of realism or sci-fi logic or morality. I'll leave that for those of you who are way smarter and more perceptive than me at that. This reading of the show only takes into account how it works as a narrative.
I do think the show has distinct problems in so many areas, but it seems in control of its overall narrative--and it has to be: this is not an open-ended or episodic show. In those, you don't need the overall story to tie itself up neatly--in other words, to have closure. It's nice if it does, but it's not necessary. If, for instance, Law & Order suddenly died, we might be interested in what happened to [whoever the hell the newest pairs of cops and lawyers are], but it wouldn't be necessary to feeling like the show was complete. Shows composed of relatively autonomous episodes don't need closure. Shows with interconnecting eps/story arcs do need closure, to the extent that the episodes/story arcs and characters are interconnected.
Regardless of whether they knew the shape of Lost from the beginning (and you can definitely make a case that they didn't), the show is now constructed as an interconnected whole--messy and overly complicated as it may be--and it will need some kind of closure. This is why they were able to set an end date, which implies planning of a real ending, not just a stopping point. So we can predict that if this is a good narrative, it is working toward closure, a closure that will be worked out through season 6.
And we can also predict, if the show as a whole wants to be a successful narrative, that this closure will make narrative sense. Remember: I'm not saying Jack's behavior or the fine points of island mythology or the show's egregious violence will make sense. I'm saying the story will, broadly.
*****
HOW LOST WORKS
If I know one thing about Lost, it's that we might've deluded ourselves when we thought it was a realistic show about character. It looked like one for the first season, and maybe it was one, but the show's moved toward a complicated mythology story, and this is now what it's driving at.
But it bolsters this bizarre and thick tapestry of story by careful use of its characters. Flashbacks and flashforwards provide us individual histories which resonate for the character, and in turn the character's plight often resonates for the whole episode or current story. But all this resonating often means character is subordinated to theme, to abstract ideas like destiny, science vs faith, love, daddy issues, you name it.
Therefore, I believe that every choice the writers make in storytelling is based on two things: what will make the mythology plot the most exciting and what thematic issues they can explore through character and situation. I'd go so far as to say their mythology is a thematic exercise, playing out science/faith, good/evil, free will/fate, etc.
Feel free to argue with me on this supposition. I've offered you no proof. The idea is coming from my gut, and maybe if I spent some time examining it and attempting to offer a real argument, I'd find otherwise. I don't know.
[[[Side note of a rather academic nature: This refusal of the show to entirely commit to its characters as people is infuriating, I grant. We want realism and realistic emotional consistency from characters because that's what novels and TV have taught us. But that's a new phenomenon. For centuries, we were perfectly okay with characters standing for things or at the very least having their realism be not as important as their function in a story.
In narrative theory, we can differentiate between REPRESENTATION and ILLUSTRATION in realistic storytelling. In storytelling through representation, we expect characters to conform to reality. That's how the story means anything at all to us--that it looks like real life, so it teaches us things, bu example, about the world and ourselves. But there's also storytelling through illustration, where we expect characters to simply demonstrate some truth about reality. In that case, characters have to be enough like real people to be recognizable, but their real function is to show some more abstract principle or theme.
We're capable of enjoying stories of both kinds. Hell, we're capable of enjoying stories where characterization isn't realistic at all, not representing or illustrating life. Think of The Odyssey. Odysseus isn't entirely realistic and he doesn't change/grow, but he goes through a lot of shit that's entertaining to witness. Of course, that's just the far end of the spectrum. More often, we get a character who grows and changes and seems perfectly reasonable as a real person but is manipulated by the story because the overall lesson/theme/whathaveyou is what the author is going for.
Maybe that's the problem with Lost. Maybe it wavers between representation and illustration, and that's what drives people crazy, not knowing how to engage with character. I don't know. I'm just saying, it's possible to talk about character not being entirely realistic but still well-conceived and -written. Constructing character this way isn't always a point of artistic failure.]]]
Anyway, my view of what the show values in storytelling--myth and theme--tells me something very important: this thing everyone's afraid of--that the flash at the end of 'The Incident' did exactly what Jack suggested and reverted them back to the pre-crash timeline with no knowledge of the crash and no way to make the crash happen--just does not make sense. Not logistically for the producers of the show, and not narratively. It takes us out of their myth building and restricts them from using their characters to illustrate their pet themes. And, yes, it negates 5 seasons of TV, what they've built and what we've become attached to. Their own creation as well as their viewer engagement is at stake.
As a story arc for season 6, Jack's notion of what the bomb will do would look pretty fucking boring: characters who we know but who are strangers to each other and ignorant of their alternate reality futures get a course correction and resume their lives and live them. They'd be just as fucked up (or not) as they were before. They will have learned nothing about themselves or the world, and we will have felt cheated of that progress they'd made on the island. This just does not sound like a sensible road for the writers to go down--not because they're benevolent gods who want us to be happy as viewers, but because they wouldn't have a workable story to tell.
Without (1) the island as location/time and/or (2) the characters remembering each other because of this experience they've gone through, we simply don't have a story, not one that brings us closure from the past five seasons or that even works on its own (since it would be torn from the context of seasons 1-5).
*****
LOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE FINALE
Since believe either (1) or (2) has to remain true, or possibly both, I've already discarded one general option for the outcome of the finale/season 6: the total reboot of the whole series, minus plane crash. We'll call this option
(a) Pre-crash time/location and nobody knows each other (neither 1 nor 2 true)
Then, of more viable options, we have three left:
(b) Pre-crash time/location but everyone knows each other/retains their memories of the current timeline (only 2 true)
(c) Current time/location but nobody knows each other anymore (only 1 true)
(d) Current time/location and everyone knows each other/retains their memories of the current timeline (both 1 and 2 true)
I believe (b) and (d) are the most likely. But let's think each one through.
(b) If the writers go this route, the get all the benefits of the character growth we've already seen (flashbacks now to the island, to reiterate their thematic points), but we get to see them do new things, encounter new situations. We get to see growth, maybe.
(c) I really don't know how this would work. I don't think it's likely. In fact, it makes me ammend my earlier statement and say perhaps (2) is the only vital thing for season 6. If something like (c) happens, it can't last all season. It can't be where the show ends, just as the time flashing from season 5 couldn't be sustained forever. (Unless we're dealing with something as cruel as the ending of Quantum Leap, which we're not. Darlton know the show is ending, so they won't get stuck with a backdoor finale; and they're way too enamored of their own brilliance in constructing a complex, closed story to ultimately leave things hanging.)
(d) There are a heavenly host of sci-fi bullshit things the writers can do to explain away the flash or make it work for them to keep everyone in current time ('07 or '77) and on the island and knowing each other. And considering even letting the O6 get rescued didn't stop them from returning to the island, I'd say it's a good bet we'll still be there for season 6, or we'll get back there.
*****
GENERAL THEORIES
All this given, let's explore possible theory types for each general category.
(a) Pre-crash time/location and nobody knows each other
i. NEVER CRASH (JACK WAS RIGHT!) -- as stated above, a fucking dull show that doesn't make any sense.
ii. SERIES REBOOT/CRASH AGAIN (MILES WAS RIGHT) -- once again, doesn't make sense: they don't remember what they learned, so we'd get season one all over again; this simply cannot happen [ETA: and now I'm thinking it can't really happen with the logic of the show, not like this anyway. It would have to be that the whole bomb thing was a fakeout: whatever happened happened, including this bomb, so nothing whatsoever changes...except Juliet's dead. *grumps* At any rate, they'd all still be stuck where they're stuck, because that's the path they went down, and I don't see how that's a productive step for the show to take.]
*
(b) Pre-crash time/location but everyone retains their memories of the current timeline:
i. LIFE REBOOT -- I think this is a reasonable option: they go back to LAX but don't get on the plane...because they remember what happened. Then the show gets to be about what they do with their lives with these new lessons learned. Thematically, it's a serious redemption arc kind of story, based on them having earned a second chance. Narratively, it's a chance to keep our favorite relationships going but put them in a new environment, just as the show did when the Oceanic Six went home. Then again, it might be just that boring. Or the redemption might be interrupted by frequent shootouts. IDK.
ii. CRASH DO-OVER -- eponine119 has pointed out that Jack and Daniel's plan might only half work: they might end up on the plane again, retaining their memories and deciding what to do about the crash. Of course, this theory melds into (d), in terms of its outcomes. Both involve eventual island locale and retaining memories. But in terms of where the bomb/time change puts them, I've classified it as (b). Whether they start out in the air again or not, a redo with memories intact seems reasonable--but not the best option for a show that wants to be exciting and surprising. More beach camp time? Going back over some of the same terrain again? Not a smart idea, IMHO.
*
(c) Current time/location but nobody knows each other anymore
I got nothing, you guys. Nothing. Like I said above, that's the best proof that perhaps only (2) is necessary: only them knowing each other, wherever it is in place/time they are. But there are potential narratives that might fit into this slot, so I'm not counting the Lost writers out. They are just that fucking crazy.
*
(d) Current time/location and everyone still knows each other
i. UNSTUCK IN TIME AGAIN/ANOTHER FLASH -- gottalovev has a nice theory on this; I'll point you to her journal for details. I think it's an excellent idea, and it solves the problem of poor Sun (and Ben) stuck in '07 and poor everybody else stuck in '77.
ii. see (b) ii.
iii. ??? -- Maybe the whiteout was similar to the purple flash that happened at end of season two? Which means...naked Scotsmen? \0/ lol What in god's name did that flash mean? I don't remember if it was explained.
*****
CONCLUSION
Anyway, as you can see, I have no theories of my own, just general probability and possibility. The point is, there is no narratively viable way for the show to work if the characters are out of contact with each other and/or never met each other. It would boil down to each episode being an individual showcase of flashbacks and current story, which would fail without the ridiculously complicated fabric of people and places and mythology the show has built. That's why I feel they almost certainly will still know each other in season 6. If for some odd reason they don't, it will not be because they're at LAX, pre-crash. Then, they would get on the plane and start the show over. If at LAX/on plane, they must retain their memories and make an alternate reality of the crash. If still on the island, they will probably retain their memories, but perhaps will not.
I'm guessing that the Incident was the drill reaching the pocket, and blowing it up didn't stop the thing that led to the crash. But perhaps Juliet smashing the bomb does lead them back to "real" time, with faux!Locke and Sun and kickedpuppy!Ben...somehow. I could go on about unsolved mysteries about the explosion and its relationship to the Incident, but I won't. I suck at that. What I hopefully don't suck at is figuring out what must happen for the narrative to make sense--once again, not because the writers love us or because their sci-fi makes any goddamn sense (it often doesn't, but instead is twisted to serve their narrative and thematic goals; see also, Battlestar Galactica), but because stories can only viably work/make sense in so many ways. I've outlined some of that above.
By the way, I'm reasonably sure of two other things:
--The '77 group and '07 group will meet up again. The series will not end with its principal cast separated. (Kind of like we knew the O6 weren't going to stay separated from the island/other survivors for long.) If it does, it's a bitch-ass ridiculous show. Live together, die alone. I'm not joking.
--Destiny is one of the show's most important themes, apparently. Fate vs. free will and all that jazz. This will rule the day in season 6, especially since it's wrapping up the season.
*****
Please poke me if I'm thinking wrong or have not taken something into consideration. And feel free to share your thoughts in general. :)
This is pretty much a way informal academic essay. Fair warning.
WHAT I AM AND AM NOT TRYING TO DO WITH THIS ESSAY
I am not good with details and mythology, with keeping track of all the crazy twists and turns this show makes. What I am relatively good at, in an academic sense, is narrative, how a story works and what it looks like in the big picture. (It's part of my PhD studies--specifically the modern novel, but I've read a lot of novel and narrative theory history in the last 6-8 months. I'm drawing off that, to some extent. And logic. The great thing about narrative theory is it's actually ridiculously intuitive and practical, when you let it be.)
Normally, I don't do spec with Lost (because I suck at it, honestly). But I suddenly feel like doing spec now, because the things that have been concerning and/or exciting everyone about this finale speak to bigger issues of the show's storytelling rather than the usual wacky bullshit of an episode or multiple-ep story arc. So many people are bothered by the show for its localized insanities, and they have every right to be--Lost is often random and illogical and wacky (as well as unethical and amoral) and requires a lot of suspension of disbelief. But the way the show works in the big picture is more logical, I think--or it's become so--and I hope that will make it possible to talk about where season 6 might be headed.
Bear with me, if you would. The following is not my attempt to be a bossy know-it-all. There's a lot I'm really pretty shitty at in terms of interpretation. And, in fact, some of what I'm going to say here might not be on target. Feel free to call me on it or add your two cents.
It is also not an attempt to in any way deal with all the content-related problems of the show which make it unwatchable for some. For example, the fact that the Quadrangle is willing to WIPE OUT AN ENTIRE ISLAND AND ERASE HAVING EVER KNOWN EACH OTHER simply because they haven't figured out how to sort themselves into pairs, or that WHO'S FUCKING WHO ISN'T THE MOST IMPORTANT THING ON THE GODDAMN PLANET.
*clears throat* Sorry. Anyway, that's not what this is. My ideas here don't take interest in whether the show's writing makes sense in terms of realism or sci-fi logic or morality. I'll leave that for those of you who are way smarter and more perceptive than me at that. This reading of the show only takes into account how it works as a narrative.
I do think the show has distinct problems in so many areas, but it seems in control of its overall narrative--and it has to be: this is not an open-ended or episodic show. In those, you don't need the overall story to tie itself up neatly--in other words, to have closure. It's nice if it does, but it's not necessary. If, for instance, Law & Order suddenly died, we might be interested in what happened to [whoever the hell the newest pairs of cops and lawyers are], but it wouldn't be necessary to feeling like the show was complete. Shows composed of relatively autonomous episodes don't need closure. Shows with interconnecting eps/story arcs do need closure, to the extent that the episodes/story arcs and characters are interconnected.
Regardless of whether they knew the shape of Lost from the beginning (and you can definitely make a case that they didn't), the show is now constructed as an interconnected whole--messy and overly complicated as it may be--and it will need some kind of closure. This is why they were able to set an end date, which implies planning of a real ending, not just a stopping point. So we can predict that if this is a good narrative, it is working toward closure, a closure that will be worked out through season 6.
And we can also predict, if the show as a whole wants to be a successful narrative, that this closure will make narrative sense. Remember: I'm not saying Jack's behavior or the fine points of island mythology or the show's egregious violence will make sense. I'm saying the story will, broadly.
*****
HOW LOST WORKS
If I know one thing about Lost, it's that we might've deluded ourselves when we thought it was a realistic show about character. It looked like one for the first season, and maybe it was one, but the show's moved toward a complicated mythology story, and this is now what it's driving at.
But it bolsters this bizarre and thick tapestry of story by careful use of its characters. Flashbacks and flashforwards provide us individual histories which resonate for the character, and in turn the character's plight often resonates for the whole episode or current story. But all this resonating often means character is subordinated to theme, to abstract ideas like destiny, science vs faith, love, daddy issues, you name it.
Therefore, I believe that every choice the writers make in storytelling is based on two things: what will make the mythology plot the most exciting and what thematic issues they can explore through character and situation. I'd go so far as to say their mythology is a thematic exercise, playing out science/faith, good/evil, free will/fate, etc.
Feel free to argue with me on this supposition. I've offered you no proof. The idea is coming from my gut, and maybe if I spent some time examining it and attempting to offer a real argument, I'd find otherwise. I don't know.
[[[Side note of a rather academic nature: This refusal of the show to entirely commit to its characters as people is infuriating, I grant. We want realism and realistic emotional consistency from characters because that's what novels and TV have taught us. But that's a new phenomenon. For centuries, we were perfectly okay with characters standing for things or at the very least having their realism be not as important as their function in a story.
In narrative theory, we can differentiate between REPRESENTATION and ILLUSTRATION in realistic storytelling. In storytelling through representation, we expect characters to conform to reality. That's how the story means anything at all to us--that it looks like real life, so it teaches us things, bu example, about the world and ourselves. But there's also storytelling through illustration, where we expect characters to simply demonstrate some truth about reality. In that case, characters have to be enough like real people to be recognizable, but their real function is to show some more abstract principle or theme.
We're capable of enjoying stories of both kinds. Hell, we're capable of enjoying stories where characterization isn't realistic at all, not representing or illustrating life. Think of The Odyssey. Odysseus isn't entirely realistic and he doesn't change/grow, but he goes through a lot of shit that's entertaining to witness. Of course, that's just the far end of the spectrum. More often, we get a character who grows and changes and seems perfectly reasonable as a real person but is manipulated by the story because the overall lesson/theme/whathaveyou is what the author is going for.
Maybe that's the problem with Lost. Maybe it wavers between representation and illustration, and that's what drives people crazy, not knowing how to engage with character. I don't know. I'm just saying, it's possible to talk about character not being entirely realistic but still well-conceived and -written. Constructing character this way isn't always a point of artistic failure.]]]
Anyway, my view of what the show values in storytelling--myth and theme--tells me something very important: this thing everyone's afraid of--that the flash at the end of 'The Incident' did exactly what Jack suggested and reverted them back to the pre-crash timeline with no knowledge of the crash and no way to make the crash happen--just does not make sense. Not logistically for the producers of the show, and not narratively. It takes us out of their myth building and restricts them from using their characters to illustrate their pet themes. And, yes, it negates 5 seasons of TV, what they've built and what we've become attached to. Their own creation as well as their viewer engagement is at stake.
As a story arc for season 6, Jack's notion of what the bomb will do would look pretty fucking boring: characters who we know but who are strangers to each other and ignorant of their alternate reality futures get a course correction and resume their lives and live them. They'd be just as fucked up (or not) as they were before. They will have learned nothing about themselves or the world, and we will have felt cheated of that progress they'd made on the island. This just does not sound like a sensible road for the writers to go down--not because they're benevolent gods who want us to be happy as viewers, but because they wouldn't have a workable story to tell.
Without (1) the island as location/time and/or (2) the characters remembering each other because of this experience they've gone through, we simply don't have a story, not one that brings us closure from the past five seasons or that even works on its own (since it would be torn from the context of seasons 1-5).
*****
LOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE FINALE
Since believe either (1) or (2) has to remain true, or possibly both, I've already discarded one general option for the outcome of the finale/season 6: the total reboot of the whole series, minus plane crash. We'll call this option
(a) Pre-crash time/location and nobody knows each other (neither 1 nor 2 true)
Then, of more viable options, we have three left:
(b) Pre-crash time/location but everyone knows each other/retains their memories of the current timeline (only 2 true)
(c) Current time/location but nobody knows each other anymore (only 1 true)
(d) Current time/location and everyone knows each other/retains their memories of the current timeline (both 1 and 2 true)
I believe (b) and (d) are the most likely. But let's think each one through.
(b) If the writers go this route, the get all the benefits of the character growth we've already seen (flashbacks now to the island, to reiterate their thematic points), but we get to see them do new things, encounter new situations. We get to see growth, maybe.
(c) I really don't know how this would work. I don't think it's likely. In fact, it makes me ammend my earlier statement and say perhaps (2) is the only vital thing for season 6. If something like (c) happens, it can't last all season. It can't be where the show ends, just as the time flashing from season 5 couldn't be sustained forever. (Unless we're dealing with something as cruel as the ending of Quantum Leap, which we're not. Darlton know the show is ending, so they won't get stuck with a backdoor finale; and they're way too enamored of their own brilliance in constructing a complex, closed story to ultimately leave things hanging.)
(d) There are a heavenly host of sci-fi bullshit things the writers can do to explain away the flash or make it work for them to keep everyone in current time ('07 or '77) and on the island and knowing each other. And considering even letting the O6 get rescued didn't stop them from returning to the island, I'd say it's a good bet we'll still be there for season 6, or we'll get back there.
*****
GENERAL THEORIES
All this given, let's explore possible theory types for each general category.
(a) Pre-crash time/location and nobody knows each other
i. NEVER CRASH (JACK WAS RIGHT!) -- as stated above, a fucking dull show that doesn't make any sense.
ii. SERIES REBOOT/CRASH AGAIN (MILES WAS RIGHT) -- once again, doesn't make sense: they don't remember what they learned, so we'd get season one all over again; this simply cannot happen [ETA: and now I'm thinking it can't really happen with the logic of the show, not like this anyway. It would have to be that the whole bomb thing was a fakeout: whatever happened happened, including this bomb, so nothing whatsoever changes...except Juliet's dead. *grumps* At any rate, they'd all still be stuck where they're stuck, because that's the path they went down, and I don't see how that's a productive step for the show to take.]
*
(b) Pre-crash time/location but everyone retains their memories of the current timeline:
i. LIFE REBOOT -- I think this is a reasonable option: they go back to LAX but don't get on the plane...because they remember what happened. Then the show gets to be about what they do with their lives with these new lessons learned. Thematically, it's a serious redemption arc kind of story, based on them having earned a second chance. Narratively, it's a chance to keep our favorite relationships going but put them in a new environment, just as the show did when the Oceanic Six went home. Then again, it might be just that boring. Or the redemption might be interrupted by frequent shootouts. IDK.
ii. CRASH DO-OVER -- eponine119 has pointed out that Jack and Daniel's plan might only half work: they might end up on the plane again, retaining their memories and deciding what to do about the crash. Of course, this theory melds into (d), in terms of its outcomes. Both involve eventual island locale and retaining memories. But in terms of where the bomb/time change puts them, I've classified it as (b). Whether they start out in the air again or not, a redo with memories intact seems reasonable--but not the best option for a show that wants to be exciting and surprising. More beach camp time? Going back over some of the same terrain again? Not a smart idea, IMHO.
*
(c) Current time/location but nobody knows each other anymore
I got nothing, you guys. Nothing. Like I said above, that's the best proof that perhaps only (2) is necessary: only them knowing each other, wherever it is in place/time they are. But there are potential narratives that might fit into this slot, so I'm not counting the Lost writers out. They are just that fucking crazy.
*
(d) Current time/location and everyone still knows each other
i. UNSTUCK IN TIME AGAIN/ANOTHER FLASH -- gottalovev has a nice theory on this; I'll point you to her journal for details. I think it's an excellent idea, and it solves the problem of poor Sun (and Ben) stuck in '07 and poor everybody else stuck in '77.
ii. see (b) ii.
iii. ??? -- Maybe the whiteout was similar to the purple flash that happened at end of season two? Which means...naked Scotsmen? \0/ lol What in god's name did that flash mean? I don't remember if it was explained.
*****
CONCLUSION
Anyway, as you can see, I have no theories of my own, just general probability and possibility. The point is, there is no narratively viable way for the show to work if the characters are out of contact with each other and/or never met each other. It would boil down to each episode being an individual showcase of flashbacks and current story, which would fail without the ridiculously complicated fabric of people and places and mythology the show has built. That's why I feel they almost certainly will still know each other in season 6. If for some odd reason they don't, it will not be because they're at LAX, pre-crash. Then, they would get on the plane and start the show over. If at LAX/on plane, they must retain their memories and make an alternate reality of the crash. If still on the island, they will probably retain their memories, but perhaps will not.
I'm guessing that the Incident was the drill reaching the pocket, and blowing it up didn't stop the thing that led to the crash. But perhaps Juliet smashing the bomb does lead them back to "real" time, with faux!Locke and Sun and kickedpuppy!Ben...somehow. I could go on about unsolved mysteries about the explosion and its relationship to the Incident, but I won't. I suck at that. What I hopefully don't suck at is figuring out what must happen for the narrative to make sense--once again, not because the writers love us or because their sci-fi makes any goddamn sense (it often doesn't, but instead is twisted to serve their narrative and thematic goals; see also, Battlestar Galactica), but because stories can only viably work/make sense in so many ways. I've outlined some of that above.
By the way, I'm reasonably sure of two other things:
--The '77 group and '07 group will meet up again. The series will not end with its principal cast separated. (Kind of like we knew the O6 weren't going to stay separated from the island/other survivors for long.) If it does, it's a bitch-ass ridiculous show. Live together, die alone. I'm not joking.
--Destiny is one of the show's most important themes, apparently. Fate vs. free will and all that jazz. This will rule the day in season 6, especially since it's wrapping up the season.
*****
Please poke me if I'm thinking wrong or have not taken something into consideration. And feel free to share your thoughts in general. :)