Here's a new article I've come across today. I can't claim to understand all of it, but someone might find it interesting ?
http://www.3ammagazine.com/3am/twin-peaks-islamic-process-theogony/
I've read things on that site before, and found them generally to be good; usually interviews.
Parts of this struck me as quite interesting, but it also feels like he free-wrote a draft and threw it out there without edit.
This idea that it was all the dream of the dead man in Carrie's house is interesting to think about.
Yeah there is a lot to think about here, but please just start with this:
And then everything else starts to fall into place.
I am a big fan of "word economy," if you can say it with less and mean more or equal too, then the rest is superfluous.
The last thing I need is someone to make Twin Peaks more of a mystery...
Jack
Yeah there is a lot to think about here, but please just start with this:
And then everything else starts to fall into place.
I am a big fan of "word economy," if you can say it with less and mean more or equal too, then the rest is superfluous.
The last thing I need is someone to make Twin Peaks more of a mystery...
Jack
I'm not sure what you mean exactly, in citing that entry on 'metaphysics' - were you pointing to the second, pejorative, definition?
I'm cool with the metaphysics, and was kind of excited at what I thought the article was trying to do at the beginning, but he ultimately references so many things that it becomes hard to see how it is supposed to hang together.
I get the feeling that it would be really interesting to talk with him about this stuff, but I also have the bona fides to say that piece at least needs some editing. If others struggle to understand what he is saying, at least a good part of that is his fault, in this instance.
I thought it was an interesting article, and was genuinely excited by the start but by the time I got to the end I wasn't sure what point the writer was trying to make. And I don't think that's because the writer doesn't have one, the writing just needed more clarity within it. Still, I thought it was worth sharing.
Cæmeron, I agree 3am is a good little website, although I must admit to preferring their articles & interviews to their fiction and poetry, which is what I used to read the site for in the first place.
Yeah, I think we agree. The point seemed to be that Lynch presents a process ontology, which OK, but the piece never seemed to truly land on a thesis, or provide a fundamental insight through the lens of all of this stuff.
I did think it was funny when he said there might be Aristotlean universals, as I recall using the example of coffee, and mentioning the coffee in the Lodge, when I wrote a paper on Aristotle years ago.
Yeah there is a lot to think about here, but please just start with this:
And then everything else starts to fall into place.
I am a big fan of "word economy," if you can say it with less and mean more or equal too, then the rest is superfluous.
The last thing I need is someone to make Twin Peaks more of a mystery...
Jack
I'm not sure what you mean exactly, in citing that entry on 'metaphysics' - were you pointing to the second, pejorative, definition?
I'm cool with the metaphysics, and was kind of excited at what I thought the article was trying to do at the beginning, but he ultimately references so many things that it becomes hard to see how it is supposed to hang together.
I get the feeling that it would be really interesting to talk with him about this stuff, but I also have the bona fides to say that piece at least needs some editing. If others struggle to understand what he is saying, at least a good part of that is his fault, in this instance.
Hmmm, Ok yes, lets just focus in the second "pejorative" part of the description then:
Just to play devil's advocate, and I'm certainly not trying to convince you to like the article because ultimately I didn't think it was successful, but...when discussing some of the themes/ideas in Twin Peaks, is "reality" really relevent? I'm thinking of Lodges and Lodge spirits/Coop time travelling etc. The more esoteric side of Peaks. Spirituality being a matter of faith, and philosophy in it's way too, it shouldn't discount the worth of these ideas. The problem is how they're expressed and discussed.
Just to play devil's advocate, and I'm certainly not trying to convince you to like the article because ultimately I didn't think it was successful, but...when discussing some of the themes/ideas in Twin Peaks, is "reality" really relevent? I'm thinking of Lodges and Lodge spirits/Coop time travelling etc. The more esoteric side of Peaks. Spirituality being a matter of faith, and philosophy in it's way too, it shouldn't discount the worth of these ideas. The problem is how they're expressed and discussed.
I completely agree, but trying to express theories on esoteric ideas is a slippery slope at best, and one that I would not use layers of metaphysical or more esoteric ideas upon.
I learned a LONG time ago that half of 8 is not always 4, if you just cover half of 8 you will see a number 3, but you can't explain this concept without having the numbers, 8, 4 and 3 which are rigid, unforgiving mathematical, numerological concepts to expand on. Trying to expound on an esoteric concept by using more esoteric and metaphysical concepts with large words that are unbound by semantical principles is just FLUFF for lack of a better word. Both you and Cameron have more MEAT and SUBSTANCE in your writing than this article.
Once again that is all In My Opinion, so it is unsubstantiated by anyone but me...
Jack
Well, so, I have already agreed that Marshall's piece here is a bit sloppy. I get that part of what he was trying to do, though, involved a notion of aesthetic, as opposed to rational/logical thought. I found this interesting.
Metaphysics is the study of the ultimate nature of reality, or of Being - however you want to put this. The pejorative sense stems from a line of thought that suggests we can't know about that, and then moves in the direction of demeaning attempts at speculation.
Regardless, on this level - metaphysics as involving questions about the nature of Being - it seems unavoidable that Twin Peaks raises metaphysical questions. But, if you are going to bring in ideas from the history of philosophy, this should either serve to elucidate Twin Peaks/provide an interesting new way to think about it, or it should be a matter of using Twin Peaks as an entry point into the philosophical ideas in question. Marshall seems to do neither, or tries to do both in a way that gets muddy.
I am somewhat tempted to try and reach out to him and see if he wants to talk to discuss this stuff. I think it could be really interesting if he were properly held to task.
I'd be really interested to see that discussion Cæmeron ?
Metaphysics is the study of the ultimate nature of reality, or of Being - however you want to put this. The pejorative sense stems from a line of thought that suggests we can't know about that, and then moves in the direction of demeaning attempts at speculation.
I can see where you would think I am "demeaning" however truly I encourage all attempts at deciphering this living thing we all call "Twin Peaks." However I just make my stance at the point of making it more confusing than it already is, and I second that stance when you apply terms and 10 cent words that lead down black holes of a reality that may or may not exist.
There are so MANY anchor points in 'Twin Peaks" mythology to attach to, do we really need to create a confusing "Metaphysical," conceptual and loosely based possible, yet not probable explanation for the mythology?
I actually love the fact that someone is trying to tie this into a belief system outside the realm of western civilization, knowing the whole time that this concept was created within the ideology of western civilization. Maybe the writer has english as a second language, which makes him or her more proficient than I, as I only understand a few western languages and 1 asian language enough to get around town. I certainly couldn't put the pen to paper and create a dissertation on something as abstract as "Twin Peaks" in another language.
But having said that, if you are going to delve into "Twin Peaks" you better have your ducks in a row and a lot of proof or substantive qualities behind your argument.
But again, this is all just my opinion and the only one who can substantiate this claim is me.
Until I encounter a movement based on my principles...then watch out! We are taking over the world and your city is NEXT!
Tongue in cheek...
Jack
fdgf
Good point, well made.
fdgf
Good point, well made.
I concur!
Fire walk with