As the noted dead white guy William Wordsworth wrote: "We murder to dissect."
Taking stories apart to examine how well they live up to our ideals of justice and inclusion does indeed seem to be a fact of contemporary life, but I think it's an unfortunate one... as the story never really feels whole again after that.
I think this is a valid concern that's been articulated elsewhere and has shaped how I watched this season. Calling this concern "PC" or "SJW" (eyeroll) is a way of dismissing something that's kind of hard to miss, especially when you look at his other projects.
Lynch has himself spoken of his leaving a bucolic Northwest childhood to go to Philadelphia in the late 1960s, a time of intense turmoil in the city, and has said that Eraserhead voices the sense of despair and alienation that he felt back then.
I don't really think much of the demographic argument - an artist who flouts realistic conventions in every other way surely could make the universe whatever way he wants it to be, and put actors of whatever color into the different roles. (I mean, we are literally arguing here about whether or not Diane and Naido are the same person despite the fact that they look nothing alike. This is not "realism," people!)
I find it easier to accept that as a very isolated, interior-focused artist, Lynch's vision is really about taking apart and rearranging the myths of the traditional nuclear family. In some ways, the show has a devastating critique of masculinity and violence. In others, it holds up a notion of "decency" even at the same time that it shows how little valued that notion really is in our society.
If Lynch has shown us anything this season, I think, it's that this show represents his "dream-logic," and you can go along with it, or not. His work is meant to provoke debate in exactly this way. And it doesn't lend itself to easy answers.
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).
Thanks for this thoughtful response.
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."
That is EXACTLY what came to my mind as well! 😀
Such a brilliant quote. One of my favourite scenes from the show. So sad he won't be around for more seasons.
Posted by: Badalamenti Fan
Issues of race/ethnicity and representation are also not new for Lynch. Dorothy Valens
What has Dorothy Valens (Isabella Rossellini) to do with "race issues"? She looks pretty white to me: (central) Italian, German and Swedish origins. No one here in Italy would consider her other than a white woman, just like Sherilyn Fenn and Lara Flynn Boyle. Anyway this "ethnic" issue must be something very yrev 😉 American since here an Italian is not considered anything else than a "white person", though, of course we're (like all humans) of mixed ancestry. And yes, racism and all race issues are definitely BS.
Interesting question/observation, Kyle Anderson. Although they are all too often taken to be natural and self-evident, race and ethnicity are neither. I appreciate your pointing out as much by contrasting how Dorothy was/would have been perceived in Italy with how American scholars and critics have interpreted her (typically, by presuming a "mainstream" or native English-speaking, presumably "white" viewer...)
You might be interested to know that many U.S. historians (notably, Noel Ignatiev) have argued that poor, Italian- and Irish-American immigrants were racialized as "non-white" by more established, city-dwelling populations of the late 19th-c. (ahem...e.g., the English and their ancestors)
In the twentieth century, film actresses with both European and non-European "foreign" accents were frequently cast to add "exotic" intrigue/sex appeal to their roles... Such characters/actresses are, for instance, ubiquitous in the "femme fatale" role of detective noir,... which is what, I suspect, Lynch was evoking with the character of Dorothy Valens.
So, yes, I think one can recognize Dorothy and Josie share more than a little in common in terms of how their accents and "foreign-ness" contribute to their perceived sex appeal, mystery and "danger."
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
Yes, but this season only takes place minimally in TP.
So, yes, I think one can recognize Dorothy and Josie share more than a little in common in terms of how their accents and "foreign-ness" contribute to their perceived sex appeal, mystery and "danger."
As far the accents are concerned, I can't speak about it because almost all movies and TV series in Italy are dubbed. Even the Cockney-speaking Freddie Sykes was dubbed with a plain, standard Italian, just like Dorothy Valens in Blue Velvet. Probably there would be better strategies to mark the difference between a character speaking in standard American or British English and one with a different accent (Italian accents won't work, except in comedies).
So, yes, I think one can recognize Dorothy and Josie share more than a little in common in terms of how their accents and "foreign-ness" contribute to their perceived sex appeal, mystery and "danger."
As far the accents are concerned, I can't speak about it because almost all movies and TV series in Italy are dubbed. Even the Cockney-speaking Freddie Sykes was dubbed with a plain, standard Italian, just like Dorothy Valens in Blue Velvet. Probably there would be better strategies to mark the difference between a character speaking in standard American or British English and one with a different accent (Italian accents won't work, except in comedies).
Fascinating-- the difference in dubbing never occurred to me! Clearly, I am also guilty of presuming that other members of this forum have viewed the U.S./U.K. releases of these films/tv series... yikes. My apologies for taking this for granted, and thanks for setting me straight!
Can I also just chuck into the mix that I think a bit of the 'touchy-ness' of this subject relates to the different terminology used for different races in different countries?
I'm sure somewhere on here, there was an objection to use of the word 'black'. Now, if it was someone I knew to be from the US, I'd use African-American, but if I didn't know where they were from, I'd stick with black - if the need for some kind of descriptor was necessary. If you called somebody African-British, they may well wonder what you were talking about...
Obviously if someone states their ethnicity as *preferred option* you'd go with that; but these are the genuinely-used terms.
http://www.universities-scotland.ac.uk/raceequalitytoolkit/terminology.htm
It also gets more confusing as e.g. Scottish Asian tends to refer to folk of Bangladeshi/Indian/Pakistani heritage - as opposed to the countries of the Orient.
This has probably been as clear as mud...
The big difference between Albert and yours truly is that I'm firmly in the "Punch More Nazis" camp.
Lynn is right about the confusion of terms. Black is the preferred non-derogatory term here for people of primarily African ethnicity, Asian is for folks from in and around the Indian subcontinent and Oriental for Far East origin. I guess anyone else would be "Other", although most demographic surveys here have an option for Irish, too.
I'm puzzled how this "racial" scheme is important for Americans and Britons. Here in Italy I've never seen a governmental paper/survey/etc asking whether I'm "white/yellow/black" or "European/Asian/African" and so on. Even ID cards or census papers do not have a field about skin colour (only height, eyes and hair colour). This is because the majority of Italian were (until a few decades ago) overwhelmingly (South) European and even the darkest Italians were considered (in Italy) "white/European." Italians who went abroad were shocked about papers considering them not white/European. We didn't care to introduce Black or Asian characters in films since they were less than 1% of the population (there were instead people of Northern European origins often considered the same "race" as Italians and giving them very Italian fictional names).
I'm puzzled how this "racial" scheme is important for Americans and Britons. Here in Italy I've never seen a governmental paper/survey/etc asking whether I'm "white/yellow/black" or "European/Asian/African" and so on. Even ID cards or census papers do not have a field about skin colour (only height, eyes and hair colour). This is because the majority of Italian were (until a few decades ago) overwhelmingly (South) European and even the darkest Italians were considered (in Italy) "white/European." Italians who went abroad were shocked about papers considering them not white/European. We didn't care to introduce Black or Asian characters in films since they were less than 1% of the population (there were instead people of Northern European origins often considered the same "race" as Italians and giving them very Italian fictional names).
I have lived in 7 different states in nearly every region of the U.S, both from a urban and rural perspective. Offense is found everywhere (In some regions the accepted term would be African Americans, in others that is considered an insult, black being the preferred term, and still in others any identifier is take with a sour taste). There are also many Native Americans (another term liked by some and insulting to others, same with Indians) that would remind you they are Cherokee or Creek, not one group of common people. We do love our differences in this country.
Sometimes I feel too boring for this world.
I'm puzzled how this "racial" scheme is important for Americans and Britons. Here in Italy I've never seen a governmental paper/survey/etc asking whether I'm "white/yellow/black" or "European/Asian/African" and so on. Even ID cards or census papers do not have a field about skin colour (only height, eyes and hair colour). This is because the majority of Italian were (until a few decades ago) overwhelmingly (South) European and even the darkest Italians were considered (in Italy) "white/European." Italians who went abroad were shocked about papers considering them not white/European. We didn't care to introduce Black or Asian characters in films since they were less than 1% of the population (there were instead people of Northern European origins often considered the same "race" as Italians and giving them very Italian fictional names).
I don't think what you describe is unique to Americans and Britons. My understanding, for instance, is that 'exoticism' in the traditional artistic sense is a worldview that took root in all corners of Europe and North America, by which I mean a fascination with the perceived mystery, intrigue and--almost without fail-- sexual allure of a person marked as different by their perceived race or ethnicity. Parisians of the 19th century found the "mystery" of who lived beyond the Pyrenees fascinating enough to inspire Merimee's and Bizet's character of Carmen, for instance, the lusty/lustful cigarette-factory working woman. In other words, the practice of deriving alleged "racial" or "ethnic" differences from regional or cultural differences (and vice versa) is not uniquely bound to the "black/white" colorline of U.S. history... Verdi's "Aida" might be a worthy example of how a nineteenth-century Italian imagined a similarly "exotic" Ethiopian princess...
Posted by: Badalamenti Fan
Issues of race/ethnicity and representation are also not new for Lynch. Dorothy Valens
What has Dorothy Valens (Isabella Rossellini) to do with "race issues"? She looks pretty white to me: (central) Italian, German and Swedish origins. No one here in Italy would consider her other than a white woman, just like Sherilyn Fenn and Lara Flynn Boyle. Anyway this "ethnic" issue must be something very yrev 😉 American since here an Italian is not considered anything else than a "white person", though, of course we're (like all humans) of mixed ancestry. And yes, racism and all race issues are definitely BS.
Interesting question/observation, Kyle Anderson. Although they are all often taken to be natural and self-evident, race and ethnicity are neither. I appreciate your pointing out as much by contrasting how Dorothy was/would have been perceived in Italy with how American scholars and critics have interpreted her (presuming a "mainstream" or native English-speaking, presumably "white" viewer...)
You might be interested to know that many U.S. historians (notably, Noel Ignatiev) have argued that poor, Italian- and Irish-American immigrants were racialized as "non-white" by more established, city-dwelling populations of the late 19th-c. (ahem...e.g., the English and their ancestors)
In the twentieth century, actresses with both European and non-European "foreign" accents were frequently cast to add "exotic" intrigue sex appeal to their roles... Such characters/actresses are, for instance, ubiquitous in the "femme fatale" role of detective noir,... which is what, I think, Lynch was evoking with the character of Dorothy Valens.
So, yes, I think one can recognize Dorothy and Josie share more than a little in common in terms of how their accents contribute to their perceived sex appeal and "danger."
"You might be interested to know that many U.S. historians (notably, Noel Ignatiev) have argued that poor, Italian- and Irish-American immigrants were racialized as "non-white" by more established, city-dwelling immigrant populations of the late 19th-c. (ahem...e.g., the English and their ancestors)"
I ignorantly brought this up to a fellow Afro-American student in one of my seminars, as she was telling me that white female scholars should not be allowed to theorize on Afro-American literature. I was angry about her comment. And she half-shouted, "But we are always the comparison!" I didn't realize until years later how deaf I was to her correct assessment. I apologized profusely years later.
And yes, racism and all race issues are definitely BS.
I no longer feel safe or welcome in this space.
You say something interesting and intelligent and then ruin it with statements like this. Why do you think you have the right to assert that?
Yes, it probably is "an American thing" at the moment.
Fire walk with