Do the means justify no end?

I can't for the life of me remember why, but I watched the Series finale of X-Files. Having only ever seen a hand-full of episodes, This seems odd. I recall, however, being attracted to the show at the time. Enjoying it when I did watch it. Being intrigued by the mythology. But, never particularly caring enough to watch it. What I remember of that decision came in part from Fox's marketing. In which the "truth would finally be revealed". In retrospect this seems as if it was probably the only reason I took special care to watch the ending. Now, I Deduced, I will finally understand what's going on. Now, I will be there when the answers come out. Now, I will get to be in on everything, without having to go back to the beginning and watch every episode.

The truth would set me free.

Needless to say, I didn't know what the fuck was going on. I felt silly. I was let down. My master plan had been foiled. The next day at school my best friend (a die hard X-Phile) however, shared my discontent. He didn't know what happened either. I played along of course. It was better to appear as if I had seen every episode and had no idea why the show ended the way it did than admit to my posery. And while I still can't consider myself a true X-file fan, I at least am able to understand those who do geek out over the stuff's discontent with the ending. Unsatisfactory and Anti-climactic (So I have been told) the show resolved nothing.

Now, television seems to be a fickle mistress, and long running shows generally seem to hit their stride a few seasons in. And American television's need to continue a show until it runs out of steam generally leaves little spunk and fire for a finale. However, such things are needed, nay, demanded of in show such as X-Files by its oh-so obsessive fans. Closure is important, indeed.

The trend, unfortunately, just seems to be contrary to this notion. With the X-files and Twin Peaks both ending unsatisfactorily, one must question wither or not it is even possible to end a show, that lives on questions, with answers. These aren't movies after all, dealing with an one-hundred plus episode story arch just can't be easy to conclude.

This brings me, of course, to LOST. I can't tell you how many times I've been asked, "do you think there will be a satisfactory ending?" or "do they even know what they are doing?" and (sometime after a new episode is aired with a sigh and the undeniable sound of defeat in their voice), "They just keep bringing up more mysteries... when will we get answers?" Now, I have seen every episode of Lost, and the thing that just keeps pulling me back is the desperate hope that every one of my questions will be answered, and in a satisfactory and awe-inspiring way. I absolutely must understand four-toed statues and smoke monsters, invisible bearded cabin dwellers and Numbers. If I don't get my answers, the last 5 years of my television watching life will have been in vain.

But, somewhere in the back of my mind, a very quiet voice is preparing me for let down. Because, ending or no, there will be discontent. There will be arguing. There will be discussion and engagement. And you have to ask yourself, if I have invested this much already into the questions, why aren't my answers just as valid. Lynch suggested that having no ending to Twin peaks was a more satisfactory conclusion, the ambiguity and the speculation leave more to the audience. And, wither or not this was truly intentional, mysteries left unsolved do leave a lingering attachment. A story un-concluded just begs to be re-visited and poured over, looking for that little clue that will put you ahead and bring you closer to your answers.

One wonders if inconclusive endings are just secret cover-up marketing campaigns to boost DVD sales.

Nevertheless there is something fun to it, despite its cop out appearance. More importantly it gives us a reason to argue and moan, which, seems to be as good a goal as any for a piece of fiction to exist.