Gender in Twin Peaks: The Return

Moderators: Annie, BookhouseBoyBob, Ross, Jerry Horne, Brad D

4815162342
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2014 9:46 am

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby 4815162342 » Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:35 pm

Troubbble wrote:
Cipher wrote:but I wonder if his fascination with the subject hasn't led to some lack of imagination this season about how women might be portrayed independently from violence, or how a darkness far expanded from the original scope of the series might be portrayed in other ways.


Can't speak for him, but I feel David Lynch is completely uninterested in ideological considerations like this when he's making art.

It's about aesthetic, pure and simple--not ideology. Wish people could appreciate The Return on that level, and let their personal agendas rest for an hour every week.



But, the portrayal of characters (e.g. female characters), is part of the aesthetic of the work (and if it isn't, I disagree with your definition of "aesthetic"). Whether an audience member notices it or not, this kind of thing serves to present a certain view of humanity. I don't see why commenting on that view, or merely pointing it out, is something that should be off-limits. I wouldn't presume to set the boundaries on what aspects of this work should be discussed by you, maybe you could do likewise?

It doesn't matter what Lynch is personally interested in, we're here to discuss what is onscreen. He might say he isn't interested in gender politics, but there they are, over and over again, he might not be aware how pervasive it is.
User avatar
SpookyDollhouse
Posts: 312
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby SpookyDollhouse » Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:48 pm

Can we all agree that Twin Peaks is fiction, and if there are aspects of it you don't like then it's not for you? David Lynch isn't sexist, Mark Frost isn't sexist, if you want to reach and say so then that's on you.

Freedom of discussion and all that, but I'm getting a lil bit tired of every fandom discussion boiling down to these trivial aesthetic morality discourse slapfests, it's been driven so far into the ground now I wonder why I bother looking for any discussion about anything.

BTW I like how the rules explicitly state that politics aren't allowed on this board, but it's suddenly permitted on the basis of very specific topics agreeable by those hanging around. Double standard much?
User avatar
yaxomoxay
Posts: 749
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 4:50 pm

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby yaxomoxay » Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:54 pm

sylvia_north wrote:
yaxomoxay wrote:
Rhodes wrote:


I am not denying the fact that there is violence in Lynch's work. And that this is sometimes directed at women.

But it is unbearable that so many viewers not only LIKE to see "empowered women" (etnic minorities, etc.), but also CRITICIZE the artist does not follow their preferences.

Too much focus is on the wrong questions: does he have a low opinion of women of a low opinion of men (who commit the violent acts after all)? Does he see women as weak? These are interesting question if they are disconnected from an appraisal of his work. But people are making this connection constantly! Even if Lynch WERE a sexist (which is of course totally unfounded), it still would not undermine the quality of his work the slightest.

(We see the same in Game of Thrones, by the way. "Oh, Sansa has to endure more male domination. Oh, she is raped! When will she finally be empowered????" But why wouldn't some characters be consistently dominated, weak and unhappy? This whole idea every character much go through a metamorphosis and there is justice in the end, is responsible for all kinds of Hollywood disasters)


Exactly my thoughts, especially after reading this:

... (stats 98% of men commit violence etc)
So,
I would say that on the subject Lynch is not sexist but a realist.



I see where the conflict is now. Academic discussions - critical theory- is interpreted by laypeople as "I'm criticizing x" as in pointing out wrong things with it and want to change it, not- as has been said at least twice, critical thinking skills. There doesn't have to be a moral value judgment it's literally just observation and analysis. We posit hypothetical alternate scenarios for literally everything in a text, nothing is off limits, because we can. If you took did a bunch of course work and lived/breathe theory for multiple years, it's the hammer for which everything you see becomes a nail. No "great man" gets left alone in academia, it's a damn compliment to be written about so extensively. Some people think giddily playing guessing games is less valid and once the show ends, it is. - BFA, favorite director is Lynch


On a very broad, general look I don't disagree with you. Academic discussion is yrev very important.
THE problem is when things are overcomplicated in the analysis process. More often than not, things are incredibly simple, especially when they're about humans; as TP shows, it's the supernatural that makes things more complex.
The obvious symptom is that when over-complication happens things are brought outside of their true realm of existence. Technically speaking I could write a paper titled:
"The lack of firemen in the world of Twin Peaks," in which I expose how Lynch despises firemen by not making them central of the world of Fire (walk with me), and in which the natural barrier is composed by firemen. Furthermore, Lynch's love for Law Enforcement (Truman, Cooper, Hawk etc.) clearly indicates his love for authority. So the central question is: is Lynch authoritarian?

Granted, how I wrote it sucks, but if I had better narrative capabilities I would certainly be able to construct such an argument in a way that would find enough followers. I don't deny the right of any individual/critic to write such paper. Be my guest. What I "deny" (for the lack of a better word) is taking this joyful experience and making it an over thought intellectual exercise trying to read stuff that more likely is not there.
Sometimes writers just write something because they think it's a good story to tell.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
User avatar
dustoff
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:28 am

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby dustoff » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:00 pm

SpookyDollhouse wrote:Can we all agree that Twin Peaks is fiction, and if there are aspects of it you don't like then it's not for you? David Lynch isn't sexist, Mark Frost isn't sexist, if you want to reach and say so then that's on you.

Freedom of discussion and all that, but I'm getting a lil bit tired of every fandom discussion boiling down to these trivial aesthetic morality discourse slapfests, it's been driven so far into the ground now I wonder why I bother looking for any discussion about anything.

BTW I like how the rules explicitly state that politics aren't allowed on this board, but it's suddenly permitted on the basis of very specific topics agreeable by those hanging around. Double standard much?


Who here has called David Lynch, or Mark Frost, sexist? Or, to quote the post above yours, called for "moral censorship?" Or, from another page, "suggested a degree of misogyny" in Lynch's work?

Enough of the straw-man arguments, already.
User avatar
Nighthawk
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 3:49 am

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby Nighthawk » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:00 pm

Agent Earle wrote:God, what a boring and downright cringeworthy subject ... Moral censorship and panic abound. Yuck.


Agreed. There could hardly be anything more detrimental to pure artistic expression than trying to stifle it based on narrow minded ideology. Thankfully, Lynch has creative control over TP, so we get to see all of these wonderful scenes that immediately become classic moments in television lore.
User avatar
dustoff
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:28 am

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby dustoff » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:05 pm

Nighthawk wrote:
Agent Earle wrote:God, what a boring and downright cringeworthy subject ... Moral censorship and panic abound. Yuck.


Agreed. There could hardly be anything more detrimental to pure artistic expression than trying to stifle it based on narrow minded ideology. Thankfully, Lynch has creative control over TP, so we get to see all of these wonderful scenes that immediately become classic moments in television lore.


Again, I'd like to see just one example of this "moral censorship and panic" which apparently "abounds," or of anyone trying to "stifle" Lynch's work. Seriously, just one.
User avatar
SpookyDollhouse
Posts: 312
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby SpookyDollhouse » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:07 pm

dustoff wrote:
SpookyDollhouse wrote:Can we all agree that Twin Peaks is fiction, and if there are aspects of it you don't like then it's not for you? David Lynch isn't sexist, Mark Frost isn't sexist, if you want to reach and say so then that's on you.

Freedom of discussion and all that, but I'm getting a lil bit tired of every fandom discussion boiling down to these trivial aesthetic morality discourse slapfests, it's been driven so far into the ground now I wonder why I bother looking for any discussion about anything.

BTW I like how the rules explicitly state that politics aren't allowed on this board, but it's suddenly permitted on the basis of very specific topics agreeable by those hanging around. Double standard much?


Who here has called David Lynch, or Mark Frost, sexist? Or, to quote the post above yours, called for "moral censorship?" Or, from another page, "suggested a degree of misogyny" in Lynch's work?

Enough of the straw-man arguments, already.


His work has been referred to misogynist on this board and on other places I frequent on the internet. By extension, his work "being misogynist" is implied "he's a sexist" whether or not stated outright, which it certainly has been. I wasn't referring specifically to any post above mine but the discussion at large. I'm not straw-manning anybody bro, take a chill pill.
Agent Earle
Posts: 776
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 12:55 am

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby Agent Earle » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:10 pm

dustoff wrote:
Nighthawk wrote:
Agent Earle wrote:God, what a boring and downright cringeworthy subject ... Moral censorship and panic abound. Yuck.


Agreed. There could hardly be anything more detrimental to pure artistic expression than trying to stifle it based on narrow minded ideology. Thankfully, Lynch has creative control over TP, so we get to see all of these wonderful scenes that immediately become classic moments in television lore.


Again, I'd like to see just one example of this "moral censorship and panic" which apparently "abounds," or of anyone trying to "stifle" Lynch's work. Seriously, just one.


Read between the lines. Surely you can manage.
User avatar
The Gazebo
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:34 pm
Location: Norway

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby The Gazebo » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:11 pm

yaxomoxay wrote:THE problem is when things are overcomplicated in the analysis process. More often than not, things are incredibly simple, especially when they're about humans; as TP shows, it's the supernatural that makes things more complex.


Yes! A common saying is that natural sciences take complex phenomena and try to make them easy to understand, while the humanities take easy subjects and make them as complicated as possible (I say this as a frustrated, former student having written pages upon pages of postmodernist drivel I made up to suit my own conclusion).
User avatar
dustoff
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:28 am

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby dustoff » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:12 pm

SpookyDollhouse wrote:
dustoff wrote:
SpookyDollhouse wrote:Can we all agree that Twin Peaks is fiction, and if there are aspects of it you don't like then it's not for you? David Lynch isn't sexist, Mark Frost isn't sexist, if you want to reach and say so then that's on you.

Freedom of discussion and all that, but I'm getting a lil bit tired of every fandom discussion boiling down to these trivial aesthetic morality discourse slapfests, it's been driven so far into the ground now I wonder why I bother looking for any discussion about anything.

BTW I like how the rules explicitly state that politics aren't allowed on this board, but it's suddenly permitted on the basis of very specific topics agreeable by those hanging around. Double standard much?


Who here has called David Lynch, or Mark Frost, sexist? Or, to quote the post above yours, called for "moral censorship?" Or, from another page, "suggested a degree of misogyny" in Lynch's work?

Enough of the straw-man arguments, already.


His work has been referred to misogynist on this board and on other places I frequent on the internet. By extension, his work "being misogynist" is implied "he's a sexist" whether or not stated outright, which it certainly has been. I wasn't referring specifically to any post above mine but the discussion at large. I'm not straw-manning anybody bro, take a chill pill.


"Has been referred to," "Is implied..." blah blah blah. I'm talking about the current conversation here. Stop using the passive voice and respond -- citing actual, textual evidence -- to the discussion at hand, not the made-up one in your head.

There's a difference between "reading between the lines" and making shit up.
Cipher
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:20 pm

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby Cipher » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:13 pm

yaxomoxay wrote:On a very broad, general look I don't disagree with you. Academic discussion is yrev very important.
THE problem is when things are overcomplicated in the analysis process. More often than not, things are incredibly simple, especially when they're about humans; as TP shows, it's the supernatural that makes things more complex.
The obvious symptom is that when over-complication happens things are brought outside of their true realm of existence. Technically speaking I could write a paper titled:
"The lack of firemen in the world of Twin Peaks," in which I expose how Lynch despises firemen by not making them central of the world of Fire (walk with me), and in which the natural barrier is composed by firemen. Furthermore, Lynch's love for Law Enforcement (Truman, Cooper, Hawk etc.) clearly indicates his love for authority. So the central question is: is Lynch authoritarian?

Granted, how I wrote it sucks, but if I had better narrative capabilities I would certainly be able to construct such an argument in a way that would find enough followers. I don't deny the right of any individual/critic to write such paper. Be my guest. What I "deny" (for the lack of a better word) is taking this joyful experience and making it an over thought intellectual exercise trying to read stuff that more likely is not there.

You sort of addressed this on your own already, but while you would be more than welcome to make that argument, it would have to live and die on the strength of its analysis and how much other people find merit in what you're presenting. You could absolutely make that a serious post if you were so inclined. In fact, if you have a serious argument about how the show works that hasn't been brought up yet, I'd encourage you to go for it!

In the meantime, serious posts discussing gender portrayals (not to condemn, but to analyze and address) have gained traction among multiple posters; the flow of conversation here will sort out the merit of any given analysis on its own.

Certainly if you did try to seriously present that argument, my response wouldn't be "No one should talk about firemen or authoritarianism," but "I'm not sure that reading holds up," if I felt strongly enough about it to weigh in.

Sometimes writers just write something because they think it's a good story to tell.

As someone who does write seriously, and is often around other writers, I would challenge you a bit on that. There are certainly who people write, and read (or in this case view) solely for disposable thrill, but there are just as many, and certainly those who most inspire Lynch, who do so because storytelling is their means of communication. For that matter, this is a man who has said in interviews that he was most inspired by the work of non-narrative or narratively experimental filmmakers. Lynch himself regularly (or even solely) engages in narratively obtuse, deeply personal art.

Why tell a story? It's an important question. Why make art? Usually it's to inspire emotions and ideas in the audience too complex to be affected through other forms of communication; narrative is a powerful thing.

No one is diminishing a work by investigating its patterns and messages, successful or otherwise. I'd say it would be diminishing a piece more to pretend such elements don't exist.

SpookyDollhouse wrote:Can we all agree that Twin Peaks is fiction, and if there are aspects of it you don't like then it's not for you? David Lynch isn't sexist, Mark Frost isn't sexist, if you want to reach and say so then that's on you.

But it is for me, and they aren't sexist. That doesn't mean they can't misfire on gender portrayal in one project.

If that even holds true in this case; I'd much rather anyone who wants to enter the conversation actually debate the reading, rather than the conversation itself.

This conversation would have been contained to a handful of posts every few pages if people were comfortable just not engaging in discussions that don't interest them, by the way. Breadcrumbing for backwards shots or the plot-level significance of Andy's Rolex seem off the mark for me, so those posts just get scrolled over.
Last edited by Cipher on Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:23 pm, edited 9 times in total.
User avatar
Nighthawk
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 3:49 am

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby Nighthawk » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:14 pm

dustoff wrote:
Nighthawk wrote:
Agent Earle wrote:God, what a boring and downright cringeworthy subject ... Moral censorship and panic abound. Yuck.


Agreed. There could hardly be anything more detrimental to pure artistic expression than trying to stifle it based on narrow minded ideology. Thankfully, Lynch has creative control over TP, so we get to see all of these wonderful scenes that immediately become classic moments in television lore.


Again, I'd like to see just one example of this "moral censorship and panic" which apparently "abounds," or of anyone trying to "stifle" Lynch's work. Seriously, just one.


It's there if you read through the thread. I won't bring up a specific example as it is best to just let the topic die.
Agent Earle
Posts: 776
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 12:55 am

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby Agent Earle » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:14 pm

The Gazebo wrote:
yaxomoxay wrote:THE problem is when things are overcomplicated in the analysis process. More often than not, things are incredibly simple, especially when they're about humans; as TP shows, it's the supernatural that makes things more complex.


Yes! A common saying is that natural sciences take complex phenomena and try to make them easy to understand, while the humanities take easy subjects and make them as complicated as possible (I say this as a frustrated, former student having written pages upon pages of postmodernist drivel I made up to suit my own conclusion).


Wow, I've never heard of this saying. What a nifty way of putting it! Will be using it in the future fo' sure. :)
User avatar
dustoff
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:28 am

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby dustoff » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:17 pm

Nighthawk wrote:
dustoff wrote:
Nighthawk wrote:
Agreed. There could hardly be anything more detrimental to pure artistic expression than trying to stifle it based on narrow minded ideology. Thankfully, Lynch has creative control over TP, so we get to see all of these wonderful scenes that immediately become classic moments in television lore.


Again, I'd like to see just one example of this "moral censorship and panic" which apparently "abounds," or of anyone trying to "stifle" Lynch's work. Seriously, just one.


It's there if you read through the thread. I won't bring up a specific example as it is best to just let the topic die.


You "won't" because you can't.
User avatar
SpookyDollhouse
Posts: 312
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Part 10 - Laura is the one (SPOILERS)

Postby SpookyDollhouse » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:18 pm

dustoff wrote:
SpookyDollhouse wrote:
dustoff wrote:
Who here has called David Lynch, or Mark Frost, sexist? Or, to quote the post above yours, called for "moral censorship?" Or, from another page, "suggested a degree of misogyny" in Lynch's work?

Enough of the straw-man arguments, already.


His work has been referred to misogynist on this board and on other places I frequent on the internet. By extension, his work "being misogynist" is implied "he's a sexist" whether or not stated outright, which it certainly has been. I wasn't referring specifically to any post above mine but the discussion at large. I'm not straw-manning anybody bro, take a chill pill.


"Has been referred to," "Is implied..." blah blah blah. I'm talking about the current conversation here. Stop using the passive voice and respond -- citing actual, textual evidence -- to the discussion at hand, not the made-up one in your head.

There's a difference between "reading between the lines" and making shit up.


I'm not talking about the current conversation on that page, I'm referring to the subject as a whole. You're already at "this isn't happening because I don't see it" phase of the game and in my experience, all you get for playing is a bag of ad-hominem and you've already got yours open! I haven't made a single thing up sir:

dustoff wrote:not the made-up one in your head.


This is intensely ableist and rude, idk why you're taking this so seriously my dude.

Return to “Season 3 (2017) The Return (Spoilers)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests