First, an initial statement of possible sources of bias: I am a professional academic and an unapologetic LOST enthusiast (you may read what you like into that conjunction). I ordered the LOST Encyclopedia on May 4 and received it on October 12 following a delay from its original listed release date of August 24, so I've been anticipating its release for a while.
Second, an executive summary: as a fan of the show, I'm glad to finally have this "encyclopedia" on my bookshelf and think it an excellent resource. Nevertheless, the presentation of the book is somewhat less polished than I would have hoped, leading me to suspect that a second edition may be in the works. Any recommendation that I can give would therefore have to be a guarded one.
Like the show for which it serves as a reference guide, this book must have been a massive undertaking for everyone involved with little guarantee of pleasing everyone in its audience. I can therefore forgive the omission of some items (no entry for the Hybird, or "Hurley bird," for example) and the lack of linked entries (e.g. "The Hatch: see Swan Station," or "Jeremy Bentham: see John Locke").
My objections to the book's editing begin with the character entries, which are generally sorted alphabetically by first name. I have no problem with organizing an encyclopedia in this way, as this is hardly an academic text and there are a variety of minor characters whose last names are unknown; however, the glaring exceptions to this rule--John Locke, whose entry is filed under "L," and James Ford, whose entry is filed under "S" for "Sawyer"--happen to be among the most important entries in the volume. Finding those entries will only take an extra few seconds of the reader's time (especially since, as mentioned above, there are no linking entries), but the organization comes across as sloppy.
Also sloppy are the various textual redundancies. In the "Man in Black" entry, for example, a text blurb entitled "Jacob's Spirit" calls attention to the fact that "The spirit of a young Jacob repeatedly appeared to the Man in Black while he was acting out his end game as Locke..." One page later, immediately facing that blurb, is another blurb entitled "Haunting Reminders" which calls attention to the very same fact using the very same text, the only difference being in the capitalization of a single word. Similarly, the entry for Magnus Hanso ends with a three-sentence paragraph: the first sentence states that "Hanso's death remained a mystery to the outside world [until] DHARMA Initiative member Stuart Radzinsky documented Hanso's final resting place on the Blast Wall Map"; the second sentence states that "Details of Hanso's death remained a mystery to the outside world"; the third sentence states that (you guessed it) "DHARMA Initiative member Stuart Radzinsky documented Hanso's final resting place on the blast wall map." Again, this book constitutes a relatively massive undertaking and it's understandable that various typos would slip through (and there are a number of those), but given the two-month delay in the book's release I would have expected the editors to catch these obvious artifacts of the rewriting process.
I had initially speculated that the publication delay was a function of the writers' need to rewrite some entries in light of the final episode's controversial revelations regarding the "flash-sideways universe." That was apparently incorrect, as the only reference to the flash-sideways (that I've found, at least) comes at the tail end of Juliet's entry. Instead, all information about that "universe" is relegated to a few text-light and picture-heavy character entries that follow the encyclopedia's index. The entries seem arbitrarily organized (in order: Desmond, Hurley, Ben, Sun, Jin, Sayid, Kate, Claire, Locke, and Jack) and utterly disconnected from the rest of the encyclopedia. To the writers' credit, they call attention to some quotes from the final episode that should help confused viewers figure out where the flash-sideways universe fits into the overall story structure; however, one is left with the impression that someone involved with the book's production was embarrassed by the reception of the final episode and wanted to minimize its influence on the rest of the text. I would certainly hope that delaying publication gave the writers and editors adequate time to integrate this information--if they had wanted to do so. For better or for worse, this storyline is as much a part of LOST canon as anything else and it should have been treated as such.
Finally, there are several minor factual errors in the text--particularly with respect to the descriptions of the philosophers referenced by the show--but those are more nits to be picked than they are problems affecting the book's presentation. Nevertheless, it's an editor's job to pick those nits before publication.
Again, I'm glad to own the LOST encyclopedia and will readily admit that fans of the show (be they dedicated or casual ones) won't be able to find a better reference. The content is top-notch, covering both breadth and depth, as detailed in other reviews. If asked whether or not I would recommend that someone else spend $25 on it (much less the $45 cover price), however, I would only be able to answer that anyone considering doing so should take into account the very real possibility that an updated and cleaned-up new edition may be forthcoming. Of course, I also can't guarantee that any such edition will actually see the light of day. As such, I have no regrets on my part, but less risk-averse fans might think otherwise.
