As i'm trying to understand how BOB possessing people works, do we know what happened to him exactly after leland killed himself? What really happened to BOB then? Shouldn't it be more or less the same as what happened when Mr C got shot??
Bob made Leland to hit his head on the wall/door, then he left Leland's body, i think what happened with Evil Coop is different, 1st because he is a doppleganger and 2nd because Ray maybe shot him to death while Bob was inside him
but do we know where did bob go after he left Leland's body? was he allowed to just go back to the lodge? did he want to? Are rules different for dopplegangers?
Maybe this is irrelevant but I'm trying to make a little sense out of all this and see if "the rules" where the same all along.
As Ella said above, Bob after leaving Leland was roaming to find a new person to possess. As for if he likes being in the BL, i dont think so.
I dont know if there are other rules about the dopplegangers, i just assume in the case of Leland it was Bob's choice to leave him, in the Evil Coop's case he was gunned down by Ray, so that's why the Woodsmen appear and tried to fix him.
Oh I'm sorry i didn't see Ella's post! 🙂
It's just that things are very confused in my head ahah...
If i understand correctly from season 1&2 : after Bob leaves Leland he is free to go back and forth to the black lodge until he finds another person of interest to possess (because he's a spirit)
As opposed to flesh and blood people who need to wait a specific time and place (when jupiter and saturn ...) to enter the black lodge
Then season 3 : Doppleganger is going to be "called back" to the black lodge at a very specific time as well. This is also the time where the good Cooper can finally leave the lodge (not before, not after right?).
So why is it that Bob can pretty much go inside and leave the lodge whenever he wants and not doppleganger Coop? I guess it's because if dopplecoop went back then the good dale could go free... but I'm still trying to understand why after 25 years Mr C is being called back. This is why I'm talking about different rules for spirits like Bob and dopplegangers.
Also, do you think Bob was trapped in Mr C or did he choose to stick with him until the last episode where he was taken out by the dugpas/woodmen? Because if he was trapped, then it will also be a different "rule" compare to when he possessed Leland.
Bing?!?!
yes!!! absolutely!!!! I believed before I saw her face in the golden orb that LAURA was much more important to TWIN PEAKS than what they made of her....she is the centre of the mystery...she is the heart of the story
she was sent to stop evil that is obvious....but Bob stopped her .... Cooper needs to go back and do something different! change something so that Laura can win.
Laura refused to allow Bob to take over her body as he did Leland. Mike helped her by throwing the ring in to her which she puts on & Bob kills her via Leland because his plan is thwarted. Why the ring has such power we don't know. After her death it an angel communicates with her & she is smiling ( end of FWWM ).
" but I'm still trying to understand why after 25 years Mr C is being called back. This is why I'm talking about different rules for spirits like Bob and dopplegangers."
A time cycle of the two worlds being open to each other. The doppelgangers like Dougie use energy to create a physical vessel that can come into our world. Bob is a demon or spirit entity, not physical.
Häxan, Ella, and Moonchild :
I've read Häxan's linked Oppenheimer article and I'm curious if you all agree to the content, unrelated to Twin Peaks.
Isn't the writer criticizing Oppenheimer for feeling bad about the deaths in Hiroshima-Nagasaki? Basically saying : kill if you have to kill, life's suffering is illusion and everyone gets reincarnated anyway.
Uhm, no, I can't say I got that vibe from the article. I think the author was going for a "Beyond Good and Evil" approach - which is not the same thing as being dismissive of what Oppenheimer meant.
Actually, the "Beyond Good and Evil" approach was one of the interpretations I was offering, with that article: if we are reading the craziest shit ever shown on tv correctly, BOB is born of the bomb (or, at least, a new "cycle of BOB" begins with the bomb) but the 'birth' of BOB is also the reason for the... let's say 'creation' of Laura. Oversimplifying it: we can't really define "light" if we don't know what "darkness" is.
Häxan, Ella, and Moonchild :
I've read Häxan's linked Oppenheimer article and I'm curious if you all agree to the content, unrelated to Twin Peaks.
Isn't the writer criticizing Oppenheimer for feeling bad about the deaths in Hiroshima-Nagasaki? Basically saying : kill if you have to kill, life's suffering is illusion and everyone gets reincarnated anyway.
Uhm, no, I can't say I got that vibe from the article. I think the author was going for a "Beyond Good and Evil" approach - which is not the same thing as being dismissive of what Oppenheimer meant.
Actually, the "Beyond Good and Evil" approach was one of the interpretations I was offering, with that article: if we are reading the craziest shit ever shown on tv correctly, BOB is born of the bomb (or, at least, a new "cycle of BOB" begins with the bomb) but the 'birth' of BOB is also the reason for the... let's say 'creation' of Laura. Oversimplifying it: we can't really define "light" if we don't know what "darkness" is.
But the article really said that.
I mean, trying to justify the deaths of millions by saying all is illusion - nothing is ever ended, is wrong. Tell that to Hitler. If there is immortal soul, still the time you suffer when you live, you feel the full effects of the suffering. It's apathetic, how do you make progress if you don't try to get rid of problems? Learn not to repeat mistakes.
It's true that without knowing what bad is like, we won't know how valuable good is.
But.
I think if we have good without ever having bad whatsoever, it's still better. Because bad has its effects, while good has its own effects also. If there's no bad, nobody gets those bad effects, they only get the effects of good. They just don't have an idea in their head of the value of all this absence of suffering. But they don't ever suffer.
Ehh, it's a difficul point you are making. Theoretically, I'd say that you'd be right... in a very very idealistic version of the world: Good is Good, Bad is Bad, so it's Better if you can have all Good and no Bad.
But, you see, I read your point and the first thing I think of is the atomic bomb: a terrifying monstruoisty that should've never, ever, being invented. Also, the thing that -- de facto -- ended WWII, the bloodiest, more brutal conflict that ever torn humanity apart.
Good? Bad? Homicide is definitely bad. However, if someone showed up in the early '20s and shot Hitler in the face...
Today, we can discuss about this because of the terrible things that happened, analyze what 'good' and what 'evil' come of them and even go into "yeah, but maybe there was another way to stop WWII"
When it comes to 'good' and 'evil' is not just that we need one to understand the other (and do our individual best to avoid it): it's more that you can't have one without the other. Destruction is an inevitable part of every and any creative process. Flowers grow out of manure -- and so on and so forth, you get my point.
We go down a very big philosophical hallway with discussions like this. The nuclear deterrent has caused peace through fear this you have a sort of balance between good and evil per se. However all ancient texts of all religions have acts of unnecessary violence in them proving that mankind has always had a propensity to be evil with stories of good deeds alongside. It's the yin/yang of taoism, god/satan of Christianity and even in Newtons third law of physics.
Yeah, when I read that ella's OP was about 'Nature of Evil' my first reaction was: oh, boy! Where do we go from that title?!
I agree with you -- eventually, it can all be boiled down to a dualism as old as mankind, and just about as much complex and multi-layered.
Pretty much everyone knows that Lynch is all about dualism but I often times think he is also all about the resolution of dualism, the transcendence of dualism -- "All in One, One in All" again.
And, yes, I realize that going into the 'Beyond Good and Evil' aspect of things opens the door to an entire other very big philosophical hallway, which eventually leads into Nietzsche, Buddhism, Heisenberg and a touch of the string theory (my grasp of which is next to nonexistent, by the way).
It's all good fun 😛
The philosophy of duality is the question of is good and evil a choice, are we hard wired to be good or evil or is there some sort of external factors that cause the behaviour i.e. God or in twin peaks the lodges and their inhabitants.
This is why I love this show, no other forum would be having discussions like this directly about what they've just watched.
No atomic bomb was used to stop Hitler or had anything to with fighting the Nazi at all. I fail to see any ambiguity in this case. They are probably the most unbalanced concentrated evil that mankinds has so far produced. That's my opinion on real life.
As for Part 8, the one thing I didn't feel challenged about was this purely negative perception of the bomb. OK, the explosion zoom had its horrifying beauty somewhere in the mix, but apart from that, I took it that the bomb was what harmed the balance of the spitting of Mother and brought up a dark anomaly, which is that BOB orb, clearly (I guess) out of place with the shiny eggs. Of course this was not the beginning of all evil, but rather a moment when good and evil stopped coexisting in balance and/or ambiguously.
. . .or the success at White Sands, and other events, opened gates to another "dimension" where several beings of its species cane through . . (?)
A laynan understanding of quantum physics makes this plausible . . .
- on a much more prosaic level, it might be worth also considering the nature of parasites, and how they can possess a body & alter its behaviour. They need to leave that body & find a new host before their original host dies.
A good one to look at is the lesser liver fluke (co-incidentally, it infects Formica ants 🙂 ):
https://www.damninteresting.com/a-fluke-of-nature/
By the way - your behaviour may be being controlled by your cat:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2082105-explosive-road-rage-like-anger-linked-to-parasite-spread-by-cats/
Fire walk with