I'm multi ethnic and I don't have a problem with the casting in Twin Peaks.
That's all I have to say, because I can see this thread is going to go bad, very quickly.
As a multi-ethnic person, what is your view of the pushing of PC into pretty much all film and tv shows lately? Do you think it helps or hinders them?
Also, do you experience much racism where you are?
I'm all in favour of diversity in media; I think PC is a catch all dismissive term usually appropriated by those who are actively against diversity. I don't have any gripe with Twin Peaks, nor do I feel under-represented but that could be because...
I may be multi ethnic but you wouldn't know. Most people believe me to be a typical Celtic/North European white boy, so in the company of exclusively white people, I get to hear all kinds of stuff. The direct times I encountered racism happened when I was much younger and married to my first wife. She has olive skin and we both tan very easily. We had a few times of being called "Fucking Paki bastards", which is strange, since as far as I know, neither of us have any Indian or Pakistani ancestry.
A show conceived, written, nurtured by two white men. Serious lack of strong (or weak) Afro-American characters (there's the Roadhouse MC played by J.R. Starr...and the gent who welcomed us to the sycamore trees many moons ago). At least the original two seasons had some Asian characters (our currently billed sole Asian character is blind/nearly mute). Hawk is native, but solicited as the last of his kind. This would have been the season to change that, but it didn't happen, and the show hasn't received much vocal criticism regarding such (as far as I've read). Twin Peaks is a "white" show (and this is particularly glaring considering the current racial climate of our country).
As far as the white women are concerned, I am curious about them, as I used to dabble in post-modern (post-human?) literary theory/criticism. I'm curious what everyone thinks, through Part 16, about feminism in Twin Peaks as a whole? Women have been raped, slaughtered, treated like meat, but they also appear to be strong, resourceful, vengeful (when they aren't tulpas created by men - e.g. Diane, this episode). Shakespearean, much? The "experiment" was created by man. Sarah Palmer was drugged by a man, every few nights or so. Men run the Lodge, the sheriff station, the Roadhouse. Josie and Catherine were probably the strongest, most influential feminist characters, and this season is void of them. Thoughts?
I'm astonished and a little dismayed that what struck me as a very self-consciously cautious and even-handed post was met with such general disapproval.
Lynch often deliberately provokes his audience. When such provocations invite discussions amongst viewers about what they've seen, it seems to me this would seem be to be an entirely appropriate venue for such discussions...
1) The paradox OP pointed out makes an awful lot of sense to me, raising the question: Can a male filmmaker successfully depict misogyny/violence against women and trauma/survival/resistance in a manner that takes a critical stance toward the former?
Reams and reams have been written about this issue re: Lynch. He's nothing if not consistent in this respect, and it's understandable that this facet of his style--aestheticized violence against women-- remains controversial. In other words, IMO it's an open-ended question, and one worthy of both discussion and respect for the range of responses it might produce.
2) Issues of race/ethnicity and representation are also not new for Lynch. Dorothy Valens and Josie were each characters whose accents contributed to the construction of their seductive/mysterious alterity-- Lynch's fascination with the sexual allure of "the exotic" female is old-fashioned, a subject of controversy for 25+ years, and, as such, legitimately worthy of renewed scrutiny in 2017-- IMO, it's the most outmoded element of The Return.
But, arguably, the moral ambiguity of the gaze of Lynch's camera is crucial to his general critique of (white) nostalgia for the 1950s (and now, I'd argue, the 1980s) that Blue Velvet, Twin Peaks, FWWM and The Return have each made so forcefully.
So, maybe discussing such matters here is not such a bad idea? Maybe there'd be fewer objections if such a thread were opened in the Double RR diner, "Off-Topic" category?
God almighty.
This is exactly why I quit *another well-known Peaks site* and avoid all the rest. And why I waited until episode 10 to join this one. Yes, many fine points have been made already here, and I agree with a number of them. But those sites refused to acknowledge the trap they constructed and could not extricate themselves from.
Lest I be accused, I'm a US 57 year old Anglo-American gay male who resists misogyny with the fervor of every other flippin' feminist in the West Coast, aka Chillaxistan. Someone nicely said it above: live and let live.
Now, that is all. Can we just talk about Twin Peaks before this devolves into political fights, faggots, pussies, and Hitler.
I'm multi ethnic and I don't have a problem with the casting in Twin Peaks.
That's all I have to say, because I can see this thread is going to go bad, very quickly.
And I had no intention for it to do so. I wanted healthy discussion. I posted it to Reddit, and, yes, it went "bad, very quickly". I have always loved the show since its inception, but I can't ignore the fact that life represents art represents life. And the US is a mess, right now.
I'm fed up this, basically. Every show now HAS to include minorities, HAS to worry about how women are portrayed.
Surely if you're shoe-horning in minorities just to not be accused of being white-washed, that doesn't help the situation, as they are nothing more than token characters to appease the SJW crowd?
I.E, 'Better thrown in a Chinese guy, we haven't got any Chinese guys.'
Surely that is MORE racist than simply not casting oneAnd in terms of 'strong female characters'..well, Laura is the chosen one, The Experiment, which is female, is the most dangerous entity on the show, and Janey-E basically kept Cooper alive for the entire season?
A massive part of the show is also about men's violence towards women, how we abuse and treat them like shit. Surely that's a pretty feminist message?
So yeah, kinda bogus, really. And if your idea of a strong female character (Josie) is a woman who murdered, lied and slept with the sheriff simply to keep him off her back, then that makes me question your definition of strong.
Josie rose from complete subjugation, using the learned tools of the master to dismantle the master's house (as well as she could). Yes, she was devious, but she held her ground (again, as well as she was written to do).
political fights, faggots, pussies, and Hitler.
That'll be the new tulpas Mr C's made to throw Cooper off his track?? 😉
political fights, faggots, pussies, and Hitler.
That'll be the new tulpas Mr C's made to throw Cooper off his track?? 😉
That explains so much!
Listen up, I think we all managed to be nice to each other so far, but for the record...
I love you all, don't care who or if you worship, what colour skin you have, where you were born or live, what gender you are or wish to be.
There you go.
A show conceived, written, nurtured by two white men. Serious lack of strong (or weak) Afro-American characters (there's the Roadhouse MC played by J.R. Starr...and the gent who welcomed us to the sycamore trees many moons ago). At least the original two seasons had some Asian characters (our currently billed sole Asian character is blind/nearly mute). Hawk is native, but solicited as the last of his kind. This would have been the season to change that, but it didn't happen, and the show hasn't received much vocal criticism regarding such (as far as I've read). Twin Peaks is a "white" show (and this is particularly glaring considering the current racial climate of our country).
As far as the white women are concerned, I am curious about them, as I used to dabble in post-modern (post-human?) literary theory/criticism. I'm curious what everyone thinks, through Part 16, about feminism in Twin Peaks as a whole? Women have been raped, slaughtered, treated like meat, but they also appear to be strong, resourceful, vengeful (when they aren't tulpas created by men - e.g. Diane, this episode). Shakespearean, much? The "experiment" was created by man. Sarah Palmer was drugged by a man, every few nights or so. Men run the Lodge, the sheriff station, the Roadhouse. Josie and Catherine were probably the strongest, most influential feminist characters, and this season is void of them. Thoughts?
I'm astonished and a little dismayed that what struck me as a very self-consciously cautious and even-handed post was met with such general disapproval.
Lynch often deliberately provokes his audience. When such provocations invite discussions amongst viewers about what they've seen, it seems to me this would seem be to be an entirely appropriate venue for such discussions...
1) The paradox OP pointed out makes an awful lot of sense to me, raising the question: Can a male filmmaker successfully depict misogyny/violence against women and trauma/survival/resistance in a manner that takes a critical stance toward the former?
Reams and reams have been written about this issue re: Lynch. He's nothing if not consistent in this respect, and it's understandable that this facet of his style--aestheticized violence against women-- remains controversial. In other words, IMO it's an open-ended question, and one worthy of both discussion and respect for the range of responses it might produce.
2) Issues of race and representation are also not new for Lynch. Dorothy Valens and Josie were each characters whose accents contributed to the construction of their seductive/mysterious alterity-- Lynch's fascination with the sexual allure of "the exotic" female is old-fashioned, a subject of controversy for 25+ years, and, as such, legitimately worthy of renewed scrutiny in 2017-- IMO, it's the most outmoded element of The Return.
But, arguably, the moral ambiguity of the gaze of Lynch's camera is crucial to his general critique of (white) nostalgia for the 1950s (and now, I'd argue, the 1980s) that Blue Velvet, Twin Peaks, FWWM and The Return have each made so forcefully.
So, maybe discussing such matters here is not such a bad idea? Maybe there'd be fewer objections if such a thread were opened in the Double RR diner, "Off-Topic" category?
Thank you. I didn't expect backlash (I received much when I posed the same question to the Reddit group). Just pointing something out that had struck me when considering it will be over in a week. I guess if you consider the "film noir" revival, it remains true to its predecessors.
I fear wading-in to this, as I think (much like SamX) that it could degrade very quickly, and very badly. But, here goes...
Overall, I feel like the show has done ok. The brutality against women bothers me, but if it is there to showcase how awful it is, and how women remain strong throughout, and rebound from it, then that's a better way to look at it, I suppose.
Regarding ethnicity inclusion: we've had Hawk, Jade, Colonel Davis, Red's henchman, Ruby, Naido, Abbie, the Las Vegas doctor, and the Roadhouse emcee.
Granted, those are small numbers, and the Las Vegas scenes could probably have stood to have more non-white characters (38% of Vegas is non-white), but then I choose instead to focus on who we did get in the show.
Jade: a true heart of gold, helped Dougie/Coop when she could have done less, and sent his key back to the Great Northern. I feel like fans have an affection for her character.
Ruby: Dunno what's up with her.
Abbie: a tiny role, but hey, she could have just as easily been cast as white, but wasn't
Hawk: I mean, c'mon, it's Hawk. One of the centers of gravity in the Twin Peaks universe. 'nuff said.
Red's henchman: An unfortunate thug role, but then if we want true equality, then not every character who is a POC can be an angel.
Naido: Yeah, she's messed-up looking (and talking), but then so are half the characters in the show. What's important here is that she's important to the plot. And she was vital in helping Cooper early on.
the Las Vegas doctor: Another tiny role, but casting that actress was a nice call back to the original show, and again, she could just as easily have been a white actress.
Colonel Davis: a small role, but showed a black man in a position of power and authority. Thumbs up.
Roadhouse emcee: He doesn't appear often, but when he does, it's noticeable. And, truthfully, I find him kind of creepy, but that's because I find the roadhouse to be creepy for the most part. Some weird vibes there.
I dislike the term PC. If we just replace it with "human decency," I think it's better and more accurate.
So, to wrap-up. Yes, Twin Peaks (the show) could be more diverse. But for the stuff it has included, I think it's done well. And many of the female characters have been strong women. It's not a perfect show, but then nothing about life is perfect, so there's that.
Most important of all: I am enjoying Twin Peaks immensely. That's the ultimate litmus test (in my book).
I'm multi ethnic and I don't have a problem with the casting in Twin Peaks.
That's all I have to say, because I can see this thread is going to go bad, very quickly.
As a multi-ethnic person, what is your view of the pushing of PC into pretty much all film and tv shows lately? Do you think it helps or hinders them?
Also, do you experience much racism where you are?
I'm all in favour of diversity in media; I think PC is a catch all dismissive term usually appropriated by those who are actively against diversity. I don't have any gripe with Twin Peaks, nor do I feel under-represented but that could be because...
I may be multi ethnic but you wouldn't know. Most people believe me to be a typical Celtic/North European white boy, so in the company of exclusively white people, I get to hear all kinds of stuff. The direct times I encountered racism happened when I was much younger and married to my first wife. She has olive skin and we both tan very easily. We had a few times of being called "Fucking Paki bastards", which is strange, since as far as I know, neither of us have any Indian or Pakistani ancestry.
I am all for diversity also but unless something is specialising around a certain area or topic, I would prefer shows more to be based in reality than a mythical utopia.
Some polls done recently showed people's perceptions are warped in some areas. It is assumed in the polling results that the percentage of population that is gay is 25%, whereas reality shows it to be around 3.5-4%. Pedophiles are supposed to be around 5% of the population so imagine the outrage if shows suddenly started showing pedophiles in almost every show.
As mentioned by others, certain areas have a predominantly white population, while others are more mixed or favour one race above others. There is an historical argument for why some races are more populous in certain areas and some of it was racism related. It's not racist to have very few ethnic characters in an area where very few live. It's just how things are in reality.
Nobody is denying it still exists and needs wiping out but there is a difference in promoting an ideal and forcing it upon people and currently it seems that anything not conforming to this ideal has to be attacked rather than accepted for what it is.
Diversity is a wonderful thing but SJW's don't get that diversity also means the inclusion of things they don't agree with. What some want is starting to border on fascism!
For the record, I never have, nor never will, had anything against any person of colour, religion or sexual orientation (excluding pedophilia) unless they are harming another person. It's the difference between good and bad, (something Lynch understands).
According to Wikipedia, the town of Snoqualmie's population is 83% white, with the largest ethnic minority being Asian at 9%:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snoqualmie,_Washington#2010_census
Listen up, I think we all managed to be nice to each other so far, but for the record...
I love you all, don't care who or if you worship, what colour skin you have, where you were born or live, what gender you are or wish to be.
There you go.
The first thing that sprung to mind when I read your post was this -
" Now you listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman."
I fear wading-in to this, as I think (much like SamX) that it could degrade very quickly, and very badly. But, here goes...
Overall, I feel like the show has done ok. The brutality against women bothers me, but if it is there to showcase how awful it is, and how women remain strong throughout, and rebound from it, then that's a better way to look at it, I suppose.
Regarding ethnicity inclusion: we've had Hawk, Jade, Colonel Davis, Red's henchman, Ruby, Naido, Abbie, the Las Vegas doctor, and the Roadhouse emcee.
Granted, those are small numbers, and the Las Vegas scenes could probably have stood to have more non-white characters (38% of Vegas is non-white), but then I choose instead to focus on who we did get in the show.
Jade: a true heart of gold, helped Dougie/Coop when she could have done less, and sent his key back to the Great Northern. I feel like fans have an affection for her character.
Ruby: Dunno what's up with her.
Abbie: a tiny role, but hey, she could have just as easily been cast as white, but wasn't
Hawk: I mean, c'mon, it's Hawk. One of the centers of gravity in the Twin Peaks universe. 'nuff said.
Red's henchman: An unfortunate thug role, but then if we want true equality, then not every character who is a POC can be angel.
Naido: Yeah, she's messed-up looking (and talking), but then so are half the characters in the show. What's important here is that she's important to the plot. And she was vital in helping Cooper early on.
the Las Vegas doctor: Another tiny role, but casting that actress was a nice call back to the original show, and again, she could just as easily have been a white actress.
Colonel Davis: a small role, but showed a black man in a position of power and authority. Thumbs up.
Roadhouse emcee: He doesn't appear often, but when he does, it's noticeable. And, truthfully, I find him kind of creepy, but that's because I find the roadhouse to be creepy for the most part. Some weird vibes there.
I dislike the term PC. If we just replace it with "human decency," I think it's better and more accurate.
So, to wrap-up. Yes, Twin Peaks (the show) could be more diverse. But for the stuff it has included, I think it's done well. And many of the female characters have been strong women. It's not a perfect show, but then nothing about life is perfect, so there's that.
Most important of all: I am enjoying Twin Peaks immensely. That's the ultimate litmus test (in my book).
How could you have forgotten Denise in the mix of diverse characters? She was there all those years ago too!
How could you have forgotten Denise in the mix of diverse characters? She was there all those years ago too!
Good catch.
Fire walk with