Last week I suggested the theory that the Island in Lost is actually an evil supernatural force and that the walking dead (Locke, Christian, etc…) are not themselves but actually representations of that evil force. This week’s episode, “Some like it Hoth” provides further evidence of that theory.
Hoth is a reference to the ice planet in Empire Strikes Back. As Hurley tells us, the unresolved conflict between Luke and his father, Darth Vader, leads to all sorts of problems as well as a lame Return of the Jedipopulated with ewoks. If only they had worked out those “daddy issues” much suffering could have been avoided.
Similarly, Lost is filled with unresolved daddy issues. Just about every parent/child relationship that has been introduced is a troubled one: Jack and Christian; Kate and her dad; Locke and his dad, Ben and his dad; Sun and her dad; Penny and Charles; and now Miles and his dad. Hurley is the exception. He’s worked things out with his dad and in doing so has changed the negative fate of unresolved daddy issues, just as he urges Miles to do and just as he does in his rewriting of Empire Strikes Back.
The further evidence that the Island is evil is that it appears to demand or favor those who have failed to resolve conflicts with their fathers or have even killed their fathers. Richard told Locke that he would have to kill his father because the Island demanded a sacrifice. Until now I thought he was misrepresenting the will of the Island. But now I can see that Richard is a faithful servant of the Island’s will. And we’ve seen that Ben (who killed his father) was spared by the Island as long as he follows Locke (who is probably just Smokey and who himself arranged to have his father killed).
It’s an inversion of the binding of Isaac. Rather than sparing the son, the evil Island demands the sacrifice of the father.
Other bits of evidence to support my theory — When Charlotte says this island is death, she really means it. And that was the title of that episode. I think the titles are telling us the truth. And what was Eko doing when Smokey killed him? Building a church.
Jay P. Greene's Blog 
For the record, I continue to hold that we do not yet have sufficient information to know whether the Island is evil or good.
Jay, your evidence that the Island is evil could just as easily be evidence that the Island is good.
1) I don’t see this general pattern you’re asserting. Didn’t the Island reward Jack – for example, by guiding him to the caves in season one? Hasn’t it rewarded Kate and Sun? And has the Island rewarded Hurley?
2) Yes, the Island demanded that Locke kill his father. Well, Locke’s father had earned death ten times over, hadn’t he? Obviously in the context of ordinary human life it’s wrong to kill people just because they deserve to die. But the Island is just a little beyond that context, isn’t it? I mean, the ordinary rules of human civilization are there precisely because weilding that kind of authority is something human beings can’t legitimately do. But supernatural powers can – if they’re good!
3) How do you know Richard is a faithful servant of the Island, especially since you seem to be prepared to suspect everyone else (John, Daniel, Miles) of lying or providing inaccurate information even when all the narrative cues we’re getting indicate otherwise?
4) Ben was spared by the Island – on condition that he become Locke’s slave. That’s not punishment?
5) Yes, Charlotte says the Island is death. Why do you believe she’s right when you’re prepared to distrust John, etc.?
6) Supposing she is right, do you consider death evil? How do you reconcile that with your previous praise of LOTR precisely on grounds that it urges us to embrace our mortality? And no fair saying Lost is different from LOTR, because the issue here isn’t what the show says, but what Jay Greene says. Lost and LOTR can have different views of death, but if Jay is going to evaluate them he should do so by the same standard.
7) Smokey killed Eko because Eko refused to obey the Island. That’s only evidence the Island is evil on the assumption that Eko shouldn’t have obeyed the Island – which would only be the case if the Island is evil. So your reasoning in this case is circular. If the Island is good, then killing Eko for not obeying it is good – again, not by human standards, but if the Island is a good supernatural power then human standards don’t apply.
Don’t Jack, Kate and Sun all hate their fathers?
Right, I got that mixed up. But now that I think about it, haven’t the people with bad father relationships been punished as much as rewarded? Isn’t there really no discernable relationship between father issues and “rewards” or “punishments” from the Island?
And remember the popular “purgatory” theory. Sometimes, what seems like a punishment is really a reward.
I’m not suggesting that only people who hate their fathers are rewarded. And remember that in literature the devil regularly offers favors to entice people to sell their souls. As they say, the first one’s free.
I don’t exactly have proof of my theory but it is a consistent explanation for what is going on.
Until the writers change the rules next week. Still, my brother swears you have to watch season 2 in together with this one (or was it season 3).
Smokey killed Eko after he expressed outright to the phantom of his brother he felt no real remorse for the things he had done. And he had done some truly evil things before his “conversion” experience. So, why would that make the island bad? If Eko had decided he felt no remorse for his past behavior he might repeat it once his sense of loss for his brother was gone. Perhaps the island was protecting itself and others from Eko regressing to his past behavior.