...take a break from dissecting details and clues for this thread and discuss The Return from an artistic perspective. Lynch, as we know, is an artist - in a literal sense (he's a painter, musician, etc.) When people create it's 1) To make a statement; 2) To give the viewer something to ponder and state themselves. With that said, what things do you feel David Lynch is trying to express with this piece? and what have you taken away personally as an experience?
Apologies is there's an existing thread for this or like it
The majority of my responses are purely emotionally based. Have you read my 5 Stages of Grief thread?
Also, as previously discussed, some of us talked about art and I completely on board with Lynch being an artist and this being a work of art. Doesn't mean that I like the art, but I will never deny what it is.
When I try to separate my own reaction from my respect for Lynch's artistic vision (along with Frost) I appreciate the ending as the culmination of his story as he wanted to tell it. It's their story, and they have the right to take it wherever they think the outcome should be. As a viewer, and fan, it's hard to accept an ending that doesn't yet make sense to me.
Maybe I'll feel differently after reading The Final Dossier, and maybe that was part of their plan (we buy books to get it). Maybe they wanted to set up for a film or Season 4 if someone bites on financing that. I certainly think that is likely given the way they wrote the ending.
I saw an interview that Kyle M. said that even he doesn't understand the ending, and that he would never ask Lynch because he understands that Lynch is very private about those things. So I guess I have to learn to deal with my confusion until something helps me understand it better.
The majority of my responses are purely emotionally based. Have you read my 5 Stages of Grief thread?
Also, as previously discussed, some of us talked about art and I completely on board with Lynch being an artist and this being a work of art. Doesn't mean that I like the art, but I will never deny what it is.
I agree that Lynch looks at this in a pure artistic way and that is why he does not like to discuss his own interpretation. An artist wants to give the observer the freedoms to interpret. I have read Brandys 5 stages of grief post and I really think it sums up quite eloquently the way I felt and I assume many others. Give it a read!
But yes I think Lynch paints an abstract and thrilling picture with his brush for us on the screen. He himself has said as much - that as an artist the ability to make his paintings move was a big draw for him to enter into cinema and then TV.
I personally think he does a beautiful job! No one can come near his technical ability in framing a shot, lighting, his ability to capture a angle that speaks volumes (Beckys ride in the t-top face lifted to the sun was a perfect example and they are all thru his work some obvious some subtle).
Some may get frustrated with the pace his chooses to place his brush strokes - I do. And often my first impression of that particular piece of art may not be kind - I was not a fan of the finale at first. But like in art you often have to give yourself the time to observe and study the painting - often you begin to see different nuances and begin to develop a greater appreciation. And I fell that way about Lynch.
As I have watched the finale a couple more time I pick up on those nuances and I begin to be able to have a better understanding of my articulat interpretation.
No matter what no one looks at things quite like Lynch does - and like it or hate it - just as in art on the canvas - it is a unique and exciting art form that takes you for a ride that brings out emotions good and bad. And I think that is his objective - to challenge, to facilitate debate, to make us the observer of his art form to think and come to conclusions ... and I Love it. Sometimes the emotion is confusion or frustration.... but at least I have the luxury of watching something to elicit's those feelings within me - just like a painting on canvas.
One my takeaways from TPTR is just how formulaic most shows are. Not that I didn't understand that previously, it has become all the more apparent now.
I was really drawn to the structure of the storytelling. It seemed to be in direct opposition to how it all began in season 1. The pilot begins with the central plot/mystery and the sub plots branch out. Season 3 begins with several subplots that gradually focus in on the main plot/mystery. So, there's a nice symmetry from the beginning of season 1 to the end of season 3 (though the epilogue may be a wrench). It's sorta of a reflection of the Big Crunch possibility for our universe (multiverse).
I also like how the narrative appeared to be chopped up and then reassembled with thematic elements taking precedent over chronology, at times, but with the end goal in mind.
I've put down some initial thoughts on themes and statements prior to the finale in a different thread. I intend to add and expound upon them at some point:
http://welcometotwinpeaks.com/discuss/double-r-diner-off-topic/what-is-the-return-about/
Something I'll add to those is memory. The idea of how memories are formed, stored and recalled seemed to be a theme throughout TPTR. Access to memories via fragmented identities seemed to mirror some of the structure of the narrative.
When I try to separate my own reaction from my respect for Lynch's artistic vision (along with Frost) I appreciate the ending as the culmination of his story as he wanted to tell it. It's their story, and they have the right to take it wherever they think the outcome should be. As a viewer, and fan, it's hard to accept an ending that doesn't yet make sense to me.
Maybe I'll feel differently after reading The Final Dossier, and maybe that was part of their plan (we buy books to get it). Maybe they wanted to set up for a film or Season 4 if someone bites on financing that. I certainly think that is likely given the way they wrote the ending.
I saw an interview that Kyle M. said that even he doesn't understand the ending, and that he would never ask Lynch because he understands that Lynch is very private about those things. So I guess I have to learn to deal with my confusion until something helps me understand it better.
And in my interpretation, THAT is a true artist. He's not trying to shove anything down anyone's throat. He created his art, we all do what we want with it.
For those that don't want to click on the link and read through the other thread (I recommend doing so):
Here are some of my thoughts (some of which have already been touched on):
Pace of Modern Life: Scenes like the dude sweeping the Roadhouse floor, after hours, aid in highlighting the lightning-fast pace of modern life. The frustration that some felt watching that scene can probably be likened to, I imagine, being stuck in a traffic jam on the way to work. Why do I feel as if I’m always late? This feeling is encouraged by instant gratification: Instant access to information and answers, online shopping, social media sites, binge watching, etc. (and outdated adherence to Industrial Age conceptions of time and organization – though this is slowly changing). This notion is further enhanced through noir imagery and settings. It’s quite a balancing act to comment on the pace of modern life without indulging in too much nostalgia. But then, I’m not certain how much some of Lynch’s aesthetic choices are pining, preference or commentary.
The week-to-week format also questions how television shows are currently viewed and internalized. The fourth wall breaking further questions how active and engaged viewers are in their viewing experience.
Big Questions: TPTR asks a lot of metaphysical and ontological questions. It also alludes to answers through various schools of thought: existentialism, solipsism, Indigenous religious mythology, occultism, etc. This allows the viewer to investigate differing schools of thought on the matter, and question one’s own view of reality and sense of self, without necessarily leading to the acceptance of New Age conceptions.
(I)dentity (connected to the above): The results of disruptions to, or the altering of, identity formation is a theme that crops up a lot, IMO, and it takes several forms. The obvious examples are Special Agent Cooper, Mr C, bad-Dougie, and presumably good-Dougie. Outside of how the show presents the aforementioned "Coopers," one could think of these as various versions of Dale Cooper as the result of changes to nurture and environment, or Dale Coopers existing in different universes (many worlds-interpretation). Diane is also a great example: The fracturing of her tulpa's identity from og Diane's was intense and thought provoking. However, the more finessed questions on identity are more interesting to me, like Audrey, for instance, or Sarah or even Candie (don’t want to comment further on these until after the finale).
Mystery: Like most of Lynch's work, the Frost and Lynch collaborations are filled with mysteries, the uncanny, and unanswered questions. Also, the idea that an answer actually splinters into more questions and mysteries is a lot like the human thirst for knowledge and a want to know. An obvious analogy would be doing research online: One link to a sourced paper leads to another link that then leads to another leak and dozens of more sources ad infintium. The more one knows, the more one wants to know, but then realizes how little one actually knows
Man, you all are so sharp, and I am serious. So often when I begin to lose the thread of continuity in this series I just employ a technique to distract me, knowing that future rewatching and contemplation (and reading posts here) will fill in the blanks. I focus on the screen in front of me as if it were Lynch's moving canvas. This is an organic technique as Lynch's painter infrastructure telegraphs through the actors and his staging. This happens with hundreds of his scenes. It's even conceivable to turn the sound off entirely sometimes, and watch these canvasses go by, sometimes presenting further effects otherwise unseen (when I'm unwittingly reciting the script along with the actors). There are moments, certain scenes, during which the use of this technique reveals some of the sublime beauty of the (sometimes-maligned) suspended slowness among actors. The thing that convinces me that I'm not just infatuated with Lynch or fooling myself is that this technique seldom works with most film. (Similar exceptions include Fellini, Kubrick, Bergman--obvious examples.)
I did read your 5 Stages post, and I'm definitely going through the same thing, which is partly why I started this post. As much as I love all the analyzing and hypothesizing, it's still a bit much after how heavy the finale was.
Lots of things struck a chord with me, but one thing that's really resonating for me right now are the Sarah Palmer scenes, particularly while she's watching television. I couldn't help but feel like I was watching myself a little. The fact that both programs - the lions feasting, and endless boxing match - are inherently violent. It's strange that for all the violence and ugliness in the world, here I am, glued to the television to escape, only to be craving something that is dealing with the same awful realities. Why is that? Is it a way to cope? Or maybe it's the unfortunate sinister urge as a human beings to find catharsis for the unspeakable side of our subconscious. Maybe that's why we've been so intrigued about the murder of a small town prom queen for 27 years instead of being appalled.
Maybe I need another shot of bourbon hahaha
Maybe I need another shot of bourbon hahaha
Might I suggest a bloody mary. Not my favorite cocktail, but Sarah makes them especially......um......good? I drank heavily Sunday night. That the powers that be that Monday was a holiday.
And don't get me wrong, I still kind of want to Mr. C punch Lynch in the face. But it was not a failure. As I've said before, it would have only been a failure if everyone had just shrugged their shoulders and said "yeah whatever. Moving on."
Artistically speaking, Sarah's scenes are probably my favorite. The sound design, the loops, the framing of those scenes and, of course, Grace Zabriskie. I have a feeling that I'll be studying her scenes a lot in the future.
...still looking for the 5 stages thread...
Gotta link?
Artistically speaking, Sarah's scenes are probably my favorite. The sound design, the loops, the framing of those scenes and, of course, Grace Zabriskie. I have a feeling that I'll be studying her scenes a lot in the future.
Total agreeance with you.
...still looking for the 5 stages thread...
Gotta link?
No but I do have a light ?
Artistically speaking, Sarah's scenes are probably my favorite. The sound design, the loops, the framing of those scenes and, of course, Grace Zabriskie. I have a feeling that I'll be studying her scenes a lot in the future.
Total agreeance with you.
We didn't get to see enough Sarah. 🙁
Fire walk with