I admit that the following hypothesis is probably wrong, but it has intrigued me all day.
The last few episodes have showed us that something is off-balance in Twin Peaks. We are seeing a number of strange phenomena: past or alternative scenes appear to be unfolding, mismatched reflections, Audrey is in crisis (and no one is talking about her), and Sarah was viewing a looped boxing match. Even some of the FBI/Blue Rose scenes seem to be in a nonlinear fashion.
I think that the fact that there are two Cooper's in the world, and that Bad Cooper has more momentum, is disturbing the normal order of things in the world. I believe that as Bad Coop gets closer to his goals, the first of which is becoming the only Cooper, we are witnessing an alternate timeline slowly emerging, a new reality in which the real Dale Cooper (and Laura Palmer) NEVER existed.
I think that Bad Cooper expects to fully assume the identity and essence of the Dale we know and love, and replace him. Also, I theorize that Bad Cooper wants to travel in time to prevent Laura's birth or create her doppelganger.
Thus I think we are seeing two competing time lines battling each other as we approach the looming Cooper conflict. One timeline is regular while the other incorporates a reality without a Good Cooper.
A key evidence of this is after Cooper thwarts Tony's assassination attempt. In the next scene Becky calls her mother and they agree to have pie. Thus Cooper surviving shifted events to a positive outcome.
I do believe we're being shown a great imbalance in Twin Peaks and the Universe in general, however, I feel this imbalance may be the cause of Bad Coop taking over and not the other way around (he is but one of the representatives of this imbalance, rather than the cause for them).
Also, I don't think time travel is where this is leading us... I think every timeline is especially jumbled up (with mostly the exception of Coop+BadCoop) because of this deep imbalance. I don't think it would make any sort of sense within the mythology of twin peaks to include time-travel at this point of the narrative. It seems like it's much more a story of regaining balance over destruction and chaos.
There seems to be a different situation in the different locations. In Las Vegas where the Good Coop he has managed to create goodness through his actions and everyone seems happy and content. In Twin Peaks the balance is not right and things are going wrong with time glitches, people falling ill, people making mistakes in their lives and chaos seems to be happening. This is gradually getting worse the nearer Mr C. gets. The police brothers seem to be the only ones who seem to be disrupting that balance by throwing away the means of the FBI finding the Good Coop. Though the FBI team now realise there is something in Las Vegas they should be investigating but don't know what there is a good chance they will go to Las Vegas rather than the co-ordinates on the arm in Twin Peaks. But maybe they wont. We will have to see.
I don't think that, overall, the timeline differences are important, other than as a narrative devices, such as the one used in Pulp Fiction.
There's still the fact that scenes are shown without context or exposition, so for all anyone knows, some scenes should come with a "Meanwhile" or, "Last Week" or "Later, the Same Day" caption. That's not an indication of a time shift as such, just the way the scenes are presented.
Taking the scenes with Sarah, for example:
Hawk speaks to Sarah at her door, they hear a noise in the kitchen. Next time we see Sarah, it's night and, after a while she gets up, goes to the kitchen and makes the same sounds we heard in the previous scene. That could be a time shift at work but it could just as easily be a strange coincidence.
Other scenes which don't seem to align with events elsewhere could simply be the scenes being presented in a strange order, rather than a time shift. In any event, with so many plot lines happening, it's quite possible the scenes with Sarah are happening before whatever happens with Mr C, or after, or at the same time.
It's probably safe to assume that scenes involving one main character are being shown sequentially but what happens when two or more characters interact is anyone's guess. Some of the major plot elements could well have been shown before they happened in the show's timeline, as in Pulp Fiction. For all we know, the scenes with Hawk and the Log Lady may happen at or near the end.
The linear format of TV doesn't allow you to see more than one thing at a time, unless you go back to the old 1970s split screen approach, which isn't great for detail and hopeless for simultaneous dialog.
I think there's a combination of scenes being shown out of order and threads being picked up and dropped without context but no "real" time shifts overall. Except possibly the stuff with Sarah. Maybe.
I fully admit that I could be wildly out, though.
The linear format of TV doesn't allow you to see more than one thing at a time, unless you go back to the old 1970s split screen approach, which isn't great for detail and hopeless for simultaneous dialog.
Just curious, 'cause I never heard of this - split screen approach? Did they really do that in the 70's for TV/movies/etc.?
The linear format of TV doesn't allow you to see more than one thing at a time, unless you go back to the old 1970s split screen approach, which isn't great for detail and hopeless for simultaneous dialog.
Just curious, 'cause I never heard of this - split screen approach? Did they really do that in the 70's for TV/movies/etc.?
. . .and also in the film Timecode:
The linear format of TV doesn't allow you to see more than one thing at a time, unless you go back to the old 1970s split screen approach, which isn't great for detail and hopeless for simultaneous dialog.
Just curious, 'cause I never heard of this - split screen approach? Did they really do that in the 70's for TV/movies/etc.?
. . .and also in the film Timecode:
Perfect example. ISTR it was used as a standard device in many Detective/Crime/Thriller movies. As noted, it's made a little bit of a comeback here and there recently.
Can't imagine it'd go well with Peaks, unless you had the floor sweeping guy; most scenes have enough going on, without having to watch multiples.
Just curious, 'cause I never heard of this - split screen approach? Did they really do that in the 70's for TV/movies/etc.?
Hi Micah,
My friend, it is time you saw Woodstock:
It won an Oscar for Best Documentary Feature. =:-O
(Not to mention some pretty good music, too!)
- /< /\ /> -
Like Sam, I also don't believe there is a time-bending going on in Twin Peaks. I think it's a presentation method. The challenging thing for a viewer, I believe, is that from May to the present only a few days have elapsed in Twin Peaks. In the Las Vegas thread it appears to be somewhat longer, but still only seems to be a week or less. The Buckhorn, SD and Mr. C threads are only a handful of days, as well. So three or four parts of the show can all have events from the same day in them, which makes it feel like time isn't moving forward in a normal fashion.
The only wacky theory I have about time is that the Shelly and/or Becky scenes are being shown in reverse order. The rest is just feeling off because of that, and the story pacing, I believe.
I do believe we're being shown a great imbalance in Twin Peaks and the Universe in general, however, I feel this imbalance may be the cause of Bad Coop taking over and not the other way around (he is but one of the representatives of this imbalance, rather than the cause for them).
Also, I don't think time travel is where this is leading us... I think every timeline is especially jumbled up (with mostly the exception of Coop+BadCoop) because of this deep imbalance. I don't think it would make any sort of sense within the mythology of twin peaks to include time-travel at this point of the narrative. It seems like it's much more a story of regaining balance over destruction and chaos.
I don't think any of this is what Tom was saying at all.
Just curious, 'cause I never heard of this - split screen approach? Did they really do that in the 70's for TV/movies/etc.?
Hi Micah,
My friend, it is time you saw Woodstock:
It won an Oscar for Best Documentary Feature. =:-O
(Not to mention some pretty good music, too!)
- /< /\ /> -
Baby Boomer catnip.
Just curious, 'cause I never heard of this - split screen approach? Did they really do that in the 70's for TV/movies/etc.?
Hi Micah,
My friend, it is time you saw Woodstock:
It won an Oscar for Best Documentary Feature. =:-O
(Not to mention some pretty good music, too!)
- /< /\ /> -
whooooah. Awesome. Thanks Ric! I looked up the trailer, nutty (but awesome). Will check it out!
Edit: Reminded me, I am familiar with at least one split screen video (Michel Gondry):
I admit that the following hypothesis is probably wrong, but it has intrigued me all day.
The last few episodes have showed us that something is off-balance in Twin Peaks. We are seeing a number of strange phenomena: past or alternative scenes appear to be unfolding, mismatched reflections, Audrey is in crisis (and no one is talking about her), and Sarah was viewing a looped boxing match. Even some of the FBI/Blue Rose scenes seem to be in a nonlinear fashion.
I think that the fact that there are two Cooper's in the world, and that Bad Cooper has more momentum, is disturbing the normal order of things in the world. I believe that as Bad Coop gets closer to his goals, the first of which is becoming the only Cooper, we are witnessing an alternate timeline slowly emerging, a new reality in which the real Dale Cooper (and Laura Palmer) NEVER existed.
I think that Bad Cooper expects to fully assume the identity and essence of the Dale we know and love, and replace him. Also, I theorize that Bad Cooper wants to travel in time to prevent Laura's birth or create her doppelganger.
Thus I think we are seeing two competing time lines battling each other as we approach the looming Cooper conflict. One timeline is regular while the other incorporates a reality without a Good Cooper.
A key evidence of this is after Cooper thwarts Tony's assassination attempt. In the next scene Becky calls her mother and they agree to have pie. Thus Cooper surviving shifted events to a positive outcome.
I think that sounds reasonable!
Fire walk with