Just Random Questions

Published June 6, 2018 · Updated July 6, 2022

Grace Questions:

1. If this “Grace” (according to IMBD Raj world gal is grace) was in the park in the current timeline, Ford would have known, right?

2. She’s listed as an “expert” or somewhat knowing of the greater game in her character description, therefore wouldn’t she have been invited to and attending the Journey Into Night celebration demonstration? (Ford says to William that it’s the board and the expert gamers who were invited)

3. I’m not cinematic expert, but doesn’t the filter that was used to shoot the Grace scenes look hazy? Almost from another time?

4. If she was William’s Daughter, wouldn’t he know his daughter was in the park? And therefore wouldn’t your first reaction after realizing “the stakes are real now” wouldn’t be to find your buddy Lawrence but maybe find your daughter?

5. If it is Williams daughter why would she be in Raj World and not go straight to West World to seek revenge for her daddy issues?

6. Even if William didn’t know his daughter was in the park, Ford would have. And if Ford knew something like that, would he not just say it to William? Like oh you’re so consumed by this maze game dude your daughter fucking shit up in the other park?

7. Just throwing shit at the wall but if her name is Grace, it conjurs up the idea (for me) of “Mary full of Grace”. Which lead me to finding this tid bit:
The Bible and “full of grace”

The phrase “full of grace” in Greek is “plaras karitos,” and it occurs in only two places in the New Testament; neither one is in reference to Mary.

1. “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only-begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.” (John 1:14).
2. “And Stephen, full of grace and power, was performing great wonders and signs among the people.” (Acts 6:8).

The first citation refers to Jesus who is obviously full of grace. Jesus is God in flesh, the crucified and risen Lord, who cleanses us from our sins. In the second citation, it is Stephen who is full of grace. We can certainly affirm that Jesus was conceived without sin and remained sinless, but can we conclude this about Stephen as well? Certainly not. The phrase “full of grace” does not necessitate sinlessness by virtue of its use. In Stephen’s case, it signifies that he was “full of the Spirit and of wisdom,” along with faith and the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:3, 5). But Stephen was a sinner. (Emphasis added)

Source: https://carm.org/mary-full-grace-and-luke-128

If we’re going with the Bible theories, could her name be indicative of her importance to bringing us to the holy trinity?

8. This is just a reach but, so far we really are only getting two time lines playing out. The days immediately following the massacre and the 11 days after the massacre. Instead of them adding another point of view for that currently time frame, wouldn’t it make sense that the show runners are giving us a new time frame that fills in the 30 year gap from park opening to today? Even bigger of a reach: we still don’t know what the “incident” was that was referenced in season 1 between Teresa and Bernard. We know “Arnold’s” “death” was at year 34. Could this Grace be the telling of the incident that occurred at year 30 (after William and Logan visit the park, before any of this current stuff happens) like the first uprising of the hosts (I also go back to the Logan William visit timeline and how the maze was imprinted almost everywhere and that it seemed like Lawrence and Dolores both were scraping at the edges of the maze starting to become conscious, like an uprising was starting but we did not see the revolt because that comes after William and Logan’s visit and Delos’ major investment in the company) this ones a really shit show but just random threads that having been neatly tied into a bow just yet

Dolores questions:

1. Why did Dolores want the general guy (sorry I don’t remember his name) that she killed and resurrected? The show was clear to show us that he is an original host as he is clearly seen and interacted with during the Logan demonstration. While I get it we don’t know if there were 47 hosts in that room, but we know he was brought along before the park was even opened. Now she wants him dead? How does that fit into anything we’ve been thinking?

2. Dolores clearly is blinded by love for teddy, and teddy is blinded by love for Dolores. Dolores can clearly see Teddy is not “woke” like she. He cannot access his memories very well, if at all, which is why he can’t remember her father. Yet she’s not just taking the gun out killing him and bringing him back. It’s as if she’s trying to get him to willfully unlock, to find his own voice inside his head without having to actually kill him. Maybe love is a bigger force than we’re giving it credit for. Teddy, on the flip side, seems to always been told that he’s blindly following Dolores who is not doing right by him. First Maeve gets his little mind a thinking when she questions if he feel truly free. Then the general makes him question her leadership to the point where he lets them go. Are they two robots who are doing the very human thing of being with someone they love but who brings out the worst in each of them?

3. Did Dolores just confirm to us that Bernard does not have Arnold’s full consciousness in him? She states “you’ve never been outside” meaning he’s never been outside of the park. We know, or at least we can speculate that we saw Arnold, or the visual representation of Arnold in the outside world (with at least young Ford in a hotel room). Bernard can’t access those memories. If you has the full consciousness of someone in a host, would they not be able to access that consciousness’ memories? Again a random thought question but it was an odd statement to make after all they’ve shown us.

4. Is dolores’ attachment to her father a real love? Or just a programmed love? Or does she already know his heads full of the data everyone wants? They’re showing us with Maeve and Hector that while what they say to one another might come from a scripted narrative, they are using those scripted lines to express feelings for someone they were not scripted to be saying them to. For some reason Hector and Maeve’s connection feels real, human, a true relationship. Dolores seems to have that for Teddy, in as much as she could just shoot him and restart him but isn’t, (like Maeve did not program Hector to be woke, she showed him to the tree of knowledge and let him rectify those facts on his own) but Dolores and Dad? She talks to him like the daughter she was made to be, and it should be noted that the last time she really saw him she ran into town to get a doctor because he was breaking down and then ended up being a casualty in the created gun battle to roll back all hosts. Then dad was replaced by mustache dad so it’s like when she bring him to the infirmary and is talking to Bernard about how he’s sick she’s just picking up where she last left off. So I don’t know. I’m torn on if it’s a real love or a fabricated one. The only other part I come back to is her vulnerability displayed when she says “you told me to run. So I did and got my freedom with the pull of a trigger. But then there is war” (paraphrasing because I don’t remember verbatim). It’s like a child confessing to their parents like you told me to do my best so I did but then I fucked up badly and now I’m in over my head and don’t know what to do next. That’s just the feeling I got.

5. Whoever said she was a leader of chaos with no plan, that’s spot on you get the feeling from her rushing to run after her father that she isn’t capable of thinking strategically right now. She has no plan, only a vengeance for killing anything she feels is keeping her from being free. She’s almost like the greyhound in Fords story. She’s been subconsciously chasing freedom for 30 plus years. Now she has the real chance at it and she’s so close and she doesn’t know what to do with it. What will happen when she gets that freedom? Same question for Maeve.

That’s all I got. Sorry for the length.

Gillian

Subscribe Now