I have a sort of positive spin on this. There are fragments of stories for your imagination to play with. I would suggest that part of what makes Twin Peaks so intriguing is this kind of incompleteness. We are provided food for thought constantly, rather than being told what to think. There is an openness that can be disconcerting, particularly in contrast to how narratives tend to provide closure. Here, we get some closure, but a lot of remaining mystery.

And thus, there is still activity on this forum three months after the thing ended, and there are still podcasts going, and articles being written, and it's not going to ever stop entirely. 

I think that might be the deepest sense in which the new Twin Peaks remains Twin Peaks, even

Posted by: Cæmeron Crain

I have a sort of positive spin on this. There are fragments of stories for your imagination to play with. I would suggest that part of what makes Twin Peaks so intriguing is this kind of incompleteness. We are provided food for thought constantly, rather than being told what to think. There is an openness that can be disconcerting, particularly in contrast to how narratives tend to provide closure. Here, we get some closure, but a lot of remaining mystery.

And thus, there is still activity on this forum three months after the thing ended, and there are still podcasts going, and articles being written, and it's not going to ever stop entirely. 

I think that might be the deepest sense in which the new Twin Peaks remains Twin Peaks, even

Thank you.  Always looking for the positive spin and I can't entirely disagree with what you are saying. Maybe something in between the incompleteness and being told what to think.  A little less ambiguity would be greatly appreciated.....by me anyways......

Sometimes I do wonder if Lynch just hates us.  He was so adamant about explaining that Jeffries was NOT a kettle, but leaves everything else.

I think he is an auteur who himself holds to the notion of the "death of the author" - that the creator does not hold any privileged position of interpretation. He doesn't want to explain too much, because he is resisting, or denying the very idea that he is some kind ultimate authority with regard to his own work. It's a weird thing.

What I find myself wondering, sometimes, with some of this stuff, is whether he/they create a story with all of the answers in there and then cut them out, because I could see that. Like, you write a story and then decide we're not going to make this or that explicit, we want it to be open, etc. Or, is it, alternately, a matter of crafting something incomplete directly, and being OK with that? That seems more bizarre to me, or harder to fathom, but I think it might be the more accurate. I don't know.

Posted by: Brandy Fisher

I think I may be having a regressive moment since I am having some agitation towards Lynch/Frost as I think about all the characters that were not addressed in this dossier and were left hanging, new and old.  (Jack, you might be proud of me, my anger is showing)

Becky, Stephen, Gertrude, Red, Carl, Mitchums, Candy/Mandy/Sandy, Wally, Andy, Lucy, Mike (not MIKE), etc etc etc.

And even some mentioned in the book but we still don't know what happened to them after the Freddie/BOB showdown.  Sarah, Shelley, Bobby, Hawk,.......ok almost EVERYONE who resided in Twin Peaks minus the few who's stories were honored. It's like they never existed. Lynch has no responsibility to us.  But doesn't he have a responsibility to his characters?! 

.....sigh.......

I'm definitely not ready for a rewatch yet.

Brandy,

I believe I have written nearly the exact line "that Lynch/Frost have a responsibility to their characters" somewhere in these forums.  In addition to that I started the thread "WHY" about superfluous characters created  for TPTR.

I will agree to agree, Thank you very much!

Jack

I know you did Jack,I just had to put it into what I thought were my own words. It's just a relapse.  I'll get back to acceptance soon.  Already on the path. I was just spending too much time thinking about it as I was getting excited about my upcoming Blu Ray Christmas present.  🙂

Jack I recall you being more adamant about the writer having a responsibility to the reader/watcher. But maybe that's just what struck me the hardest and left the deepest impression.

My biggest issue still remains what I perceived as the ultimate obsoletion of the characters we spent all those hours getting to know and care about.

Posted by: Brandy Fisher

I know you did Jack,I just had to put it into what I thought were my own words. It's just a relapse.  I'll get back to acceptance soon.  Already on the path. I was just spending too much time thinking about it as I was getting excited about my upcoming Blu Ray Christmas present.  🙂

Jack I recall you being more adamant about the writer having a responsibility to the reader/watcher. But maybe that's just what struck me the hardest and left the deepest impression.

My biggest issue still remains what I perceived as the ultimate obsoletion of the characters we spent all those hours getting to know and care about.

 

While the thought of a season 4 is both unlikely and increasingly distasteful, unless Lynch/Frost want to actually give some characters storylines a decent resolution, has anyone thought about the possibility of some spin-offs based on the most interesting characters and developments? 

More importantly, do you think Lynch/Frost have thought of the possibilities?

I doubt I will ever have the level of acceptance that you and other viewers have managed to achieve with that ending...

However, for the sake of my own sanity I have been developing my own theory to go along with the rest of the TPTR fans trying to resolve this in their own way...after the rewatch is complete of course.