I wanted to express my gratitude to everyone on here for talking about things with me (and others). I love this forum a lot.
I just went through some old posts to copy/paste some things that were posted in the past - mostly by myself, but sometimes by y'all - in preparation for a couple of BlackLodge/WhiteLodge pieces I signed up for over at 25YL. Basically, I was making notes. But it got me thinking about how much everyone on here has helped me develop my thoughts. So, much love. and thanks.
If you're curious, the two topics I am to engage on are: 1) What is the status of the Richard/Carrie stuff?; and 2) Should Cooper have gone back to 1989?
I think those are pretty connected, so if you want, let's discuss.
I wanted to express my gratitude to everyone on here for talking about things with me (and others). I love this forum a lot.
I just went through some old posts to copy/paste some things that were posted in the past - mostly by myself, but sometimes by y'all - in preparation for a couple of BlackLodge/WhiteLodge pieces I signed up for over at 25YL. Basically, I was making notes. But it got me thinking about how much everyone on here has helped me develop my thoughts. So, much love. and thanks.
If you're curious, the two topics I am to engage on are: 1) What is the status of the Richard/Carrie stuff?; and 2) Should Cooper have gone back to 1989?
I think those are pretty connected, so if you want, let's discuss.
I think it goes without saying that going back in time is a VERY bad idea, it was in "Back to the Future," It has been throughout literature, media and critical thought. The butterfly effect was developed for these very reasons and even brain trusts all agree that affecting the past is a bad idea, as it will always corrupt the future. However, and it even pains me to acknowledge this, but the Terminator series hit home with the concept that even going back in time to alter a known event will still translate to that event happening because it was destined.
So if we approach it from that angle, Dale HAD to go back in time, to end up with the pre-destined future that is Season 3. Remember the Oracle in "The Matrix?"Ohh, what's really going to bake your noodle later on is, would you still have broken it if I hadn't said anything?" thus implying the fate was pre-determined. Now that brings us to free will and the notion of changing our own future, if we can go back in time or even if we have knowledge of future events in the present and can thus affect them...
And this leads me to the conclusion that this is an endless argument that I want no part of on either side. Having said that I do NOT believe in coincidences and I firmly believe in fate and destiny.
Thus I just typed all of that out in a furious upheaval of pent up emotions...because I was destined to. But what if Cameron hadn't asked my opinion on Cooper going back in time, would I have typed this post?
Shit, I cannot solve this equation...EVER!
I firmly believe in freedom
The interesting thing for me is that there is a suggestion of pre-determinism, especially in The Final Dossier. Coop changes the micro of the past but not its macro. Laura is not killed, but disappears and yet Leiland still dies (and by his own hand still as well). Coop still visited Twin Peaks and disappeared, suggesting he still found his way into The Waiting Room/Black Lodge. Maybe the Part 18 alternate version of the red room scene from Part 2 occurs in the "Laura's disappeared" timeline, which might go someway towards explaining why Diane was waiting in Glastonbury Grove.
In any case, certain actions seem to occur regardless of someone meddling with time; Laura leaves Twin Peaks (death, disappearing to Odessa), Leiland kills himself and Coop comes to Twin Peaks and enters the lodge. Indelible marks on the cloth of time - to what purpose? The more and more I think about it, I'm not sure The Fireman is an agent of good so much as an agent of balance, sending Laura to even the odds as it were. I could certainly see that being a concept Lynch and Frost could get behind.
I firmly believe in freedom
Ah, but so did Patrick McGoohan ?
I firmly believe in freedom
Ah, but so did Patrick McGoohan ?
"You are number 6!"
"I am not a number...I am a free man!"
The single best episode of television I have ever encountered is when he escapes but EVERY one is in on it.
The single worst was the finale'...I guess you take the good with the bad.
Not a fate or destiny believer myself. But I am firm supporter of self fulfilling prophecies (as well as personal freedom).
Maybe the Part 18 alternate version of the red room scene from Part 2 occurs in the "Laura's disappeared" timeline, which might go someway towards explaining why Diane was waiting in Glastonbury Grove.
This seems right.
Not a fate or destiny believer myself. But I am firm supporter of self fulfilling prophecies (as well as personal freedom).
I'd agree with that for myself totally. But I do believe more and more that The Return explores the ancient religous idea that there needs to be balance between chaos and harmony for the world to work. The idea of the Laura orb being sent to earth made me uncomfortable for a while as I felt it was a messianic symbol, it validated Laura's suffering but only by making her a martyr. Laura may have chosen to die in the end, but she was never a martyr.
But I came across this book the other day:
...and I had a revelatory moment in that the idea of ancient religions/civilisations believing in a balance between chaos and cosmos makes a lot of sense when applied to The Return. Laura isn't some kind of saviour; she's a good soul sent to bring balance when the atomic explosion releases evil that threatens to overwhelm that balance on Earth.
I've yet to read the book yet, but when I have I will report back with any interesting and relevent findings, if any!
I firmly believe in freedom
Ah, but so did Patrick McGoohan ?
"You are number 6!"
"I am not a number...I am a free man!"
The single best episode of television I have ever encountered is when he escapes but EVERY one is in on it.
The single worst was the finale'...I guess you take the good with the bad.
Such a brilliant show. I'm a big fan of the episode Once Upon A Time when Leo Mckern tries to break Number 6 with Degree Absolute. It geniunely drove Mckern to a mini-breakdown! It's like watching an Ionesco play almost, and the fact this was broadcast on ITV, certainly nowadays the most conservative of mainstream English TV channels, still boggles the mind.
I quite like the finale, Fall Out, but then I like Part 18 of The Return so I must be a sucker for punishment ?
consider this...
Laura's mom had the frogmoth crawl inside her.
Leland was possessed by Bob during one summer at his parent's lake house.
Later the two met to reproduce and had Laura.
What if the frogmoth was the good, bob was the bad, and laura herself was the balance?
consider this...
Laura's mom had the frogmoth crawl inside her.
Leland was possessed by Bob during one summer at his parent's lake house.
Later the two met to reproduce and had Laura.
What if the frogmoth was the good, bob was the bad, and laura herself was the balance?
I think since I've read the Final Dossier that I've thought of the frogmoth almost like a seed that grows to Judy-like degrees of evil inside Sarah the more trauma she experiences. Like her Garmonbozia feeds the frogmoth inside her. The Dossier does strongly imply Sarah is inhabited by Judy, and makes reference to a legend where the marriage of Judy and Baal would create hell on earth. Sarah and Leiland = Judy and Baal/Bob? But the end result wasn't hell on earth but Laura and her death, certainly not to take away from the tragedy but still not the apocalypse. So I'm not sure on that count.
I do like the idea of the frogmoth being good and Laura being the balance, just because I love Sarah Palmer so much. Like she needed any more trauma after her daughter and husband both died, now she's got to be inhabited by some kind of infernal bride and mother to the apocalypse?
consider this...
Laura's mom had the frogmoth crawl inside her.
Leland was possessed by Bob during one summer at his parent's lake house.
Later the two met to reproduce and had Laura.
What if the frogmoth was the good, bob was the bad, and laura herself was the balance?
It's possible but I have a hard time buying into Sarah being good after the stuff we saw in TR. She seemed just as insidious as BOB.
consider this...
Laura's mom had the frogmoth crawl inside her.
Leland was possessed by Bob during one summer at his parent's lake house.
Later the two met to reproduce and had Laura.
What if the frogmoth was the good, bob was the bad, and laura herself was the balance?
I think since I've read the Final Dossier that I've thought of the frogmoth almost like a seed that grows to Judy-like degrees of evil inside Sarah the more trauma she experiences. Like her Garmonbozia feeds the frogmoth inside her. The Dossier does strongly imply Sarah is inhabited by Judy, and makes reference to a legend where the marriage of Judy and Baal would create hell on earth. Sarah and Leiland = Judy and Baal/Bob? But the end result wasn't hell on earth but Laura and her death, certainly not to take away from the tragedy but still not the apocalypse. So I'm not sure on that count.
I do like the idea of the frogmoth being good and Laura being the balance, just because I love Sarah Palmer so much. Like she needed any more trauma after her daughter and husband both died, now she's got to be inhabited by some kind of infernal bride and mother to the apocalypse?
I liked Sarah more now than I ever did in 1&2. Evil or not, she's a badass Mutha who won't take no shiznit off nobody. And TP really, really needed a female one of those. But "good?" No.
Thus the Bloody Mary's
I suppose Catherine Martell was a badass in her way, played Ben for Ghostwood and won, and she took no shiz from anybody, but then she doesn't have the likeability factor Sarah does. Catherine is more a case of the character you love to hate. And kudos to her for covering Leiland's grief with an improvised dance. It may be an inappropriate reaction but I laugh myself silly every time
Fire walk with