  In recent years the quantum foundations community has seen increasing
interest in the possibility of using retrocausality as a route to rejecting the
conclusions of Bell's theorem and restoring locality to quantum physics. On the
other hand, it has also been argued that accepting nonlocality leads to a form
of retrocausality. In this article we seek to elucidate the relationship
between retrocausality and locality. We begin by providing a brief schema of
the various ways in which violations of Bell's inequalities might lead us to
consider some form of retrocausality. We then consider some possible
motivations for using retrocausality to rescue locality, arguing that none of
these motivations is adequate and that therefore there is no clear reason why
we should prefer local retrocausal models to nonlocal retrocausal models. Next,
we examine several different conceptions of retrocausality, concluding that
`all-at-once' retrocausality is more coherent than the alternative dynamical
picture. We then argue that since the `all-at-once' approach requires
probabilities to be assigned to entire histories or mosaics, locality is
somewhat redundant within this picture. Thus we conclude that using
retrocausality as a way to rescue locality may not be the right route to
retrocausality. Finally, we demonstrate that accepting the existence of
nonlocality and insisting on the nonexistence of preferred reference frames
leads naturally to the acceptance of a form of retrocausality, albeit one which
is not mediated by physical systems travelling backwards in time. We argue that
this is the more natural way to motivate retrocausal models of quantum
mechanics.
