From the inbox...

This one comes from another long-time reader, Dan:

You really think Daniel’s more of a good guy than Frank? He helped save Desmond in his episode, while Daniel manipulated Frank into risking Desmond’s life so he would have a constant.

That's an interesting point. As I've mentioned in past columns, I'm not entirely convinced that Daniel is good. It just seems like he's being portrayed as TOO harmless and TOO innocent -- to the extent that it's almost suspicious. Part of me expects him to pull a President Logan and reveal himself as some sinister master manipulator.

However, until that actually happens, I stand by my original assessment. Keep in mind, this is all based on what we've seen, which is not much, relatively speaking. My current impression of Frank is that he's a good enough guy, but he's more or less indifferent. If he has the opportunity to help somebody, he'll do it. If something unjust is happening in front of his eyes, he'll try to stop it. Based on what I've seen, I'm not entirely sure that he would go out of his way to help somebody he doesn't know, however.

On the other hand, I believe that Daniel would. I think the difference between Daniel and Frank -- and what makes Daniel more "good" -- is that Daniel's has purer motivations. He's certainly shown more concern for the castaways (particularly Kate, Jack, and Juliet) than his cohorts, and that includes Frank.