I prefer a straightforward, not so analytical approach to the show. Yes, there are questions but I realized early on with Lynch's stuff in general and Twin Peaks in particular that it's best to just watch and absorb.
Sure, I enjoy the speculations and theories and ideas but you may notice I don't always participate, or at least, not in the way many of you guys delve into the mysteries. What interests me most about the speculations are the ones regarding the characters; what are they up to, what's the story, what's going on there? The plot itself and all its questions, I can happily wait and see.
I agree with Charlie that it's best to treat everyone as a questionable witness, until proven otherwise. In any case, half the fun is not knowing what's coming next.
- I've always thought with Lynchs work that if you sat down with the man and talked it through it would all make perfect sense. I also think he probably doesn't understand why people don't work this stuff out cause it seems straightforward to him.
- I've always thought with Lynchs work that if you sat down with the man and talked it through it would all make perfect sense. I also think he probably doesn't understand why people don't work this stuff out cause it seems straightforward to him.
I fully believe that.
Do you think he's ever sitting around reading these things and is shouting "Oh come on guys, it's not that difficult!"
I thought part of the detective story genre was to have the audience try to second guess the story, mystery. I have always thought the beauty of Twin Peaks was they tried to leave so much unsolved, so that the audience could bring to it something more. None of this meant that there wasn't a concept they wrote to or presented, but that not all threads would be revealed.
This made sitting around discussing it fun. Also the intelligent creative work of the authors meant that trying to discover references and clues was a learning experience. So even though some of these theories may be "wrong" part of this art form is to participate in figuring it out and enjoying our successes and being awed by the obvious things we missed and the deep, deep want to answer that which does not get answered.
So I see these theories and clues games as part of the show. I do try to do it from the framework of what is presented and not what Lynch or Frost would do as if the world was real and I a junior FBI wannabe.
So when I play with theories I am actively engaging with the show, knowing I may well be wrong (usually I am).
So in other words, half the fun is not knowing. But the other half is speculating.
Sometimes, sometimes not and to each there own. But I am enjoying both aspects of this art currently. I also like that the art has expanded beyond the television set with websites and blog posts dropping lines before episodes air.
- I've always thought with Lynchs work that if you sat down with the man and talked it through it would all make perfect sense. I also think he probably doesn't understand why people don't work this stuff out cause it seems straightforward to him.
Given his track record for explaining anything about his movies, save for possibly 10 clues he gave for Mulholland Drive, the chances of sitting down with him to talk it through are hovering right around zero. <wink>
I love that about him, that it's a gift to us all. He's said if he hasn't done it in the piece of art and has to explain it, he hasn't done his job. That to me, anyways is a true artist.
I fully believe that.
Do you think he's ever sitting around reading these things and is shouting "Oh come on guys, it's not that difficult!
Exactly that. And I've said many times before, I see Lynch as a bit of a trickster, throwing things in to keep people distracted, like the Jacobi/shovel thing which a few episodes later turned out being the set up for a joke.
Jefferey M. Thompson- as an aside- I figure 'Nordic types' refer the giant and his friends we haven't met.
Fire walk with