Twin Peaks:The Return is the Doppelganger of Twin Peaks

[rugerblackhawk357]

It all makes sense now.

[BHell]

It all makes sense now.

Not sure how serious you are - but some things in The Return indeed seem very doppelgängery. In the town of Twin Peaks itself, many details are a little bit off - and something sinister seems to be lurking in the shadows. But of course, it generally stays below the surface ... just like in the first two seasons.

If we ever really see a Twin-Peaks-Doppelgänger (by that I mean a doppelgänger of the place "Twin Peaks"), it is the town we see in the final episode. I recently posted a theory about that in the part-18-thread (where, I admit, I feel more at ease than out here, where everything gets buried beneath a dozen "(mildly/heavily) dissapointed"-topics).
And while I myself am very sceptical of it as a whole, I do think/hope that at least some of my observations there do have something going for them.

I'm under the impression that what you are suggesting here, however, might go a bit further and see the whole season as a doppelgänger (of the Twin Peaks we are used to). I don't think I see where you are comming from (in case you are completely serious): Most of what happens outside of the town of Twin Peaks plays it straight - no deception, no tense underlying "horror". When there is horror, it's open terror and extremely brutal (Sam and Tracy, the Woodsmen).

In case you are not serious, but jokingly critisizing The Return for not being "peaksy" enough ... well, I personally do not agree. And even if I agreed, I don't think this kind of critique is best described by the doppelganger-metaphore: Because, while it would imply a stark contrast in the core; to be a doppelgänger it would have to be relatively similar on the outside, only slightly "missing the point". And I don't think one could say that's the case: When The Return is like the older seasons, it hits the tone perfectly. When it is not, it doesn't appear to try to be - but is an entirely different animal. Yes, doppelgangers as we know them are noticably different, but not blatanty. Also, the series, in those moments of difference, is not an other extreme opposite to the original (as one could say Mr. C is to Cooper), but going off on some new tangents (think part 8 ).

Oh, well, instead of letting me speculate, could you maybe expand on your initial post?

[rugerblackhawk357]

I'm serious. Hear me out.

Twin Peaks The Return is a deliberate and subversive act by Lynch. Seen as a work of metalogic and 4-D chess, it actually makes sense. Think John Doe in Se7en or The Joker on The Dark Knight. Several things in TP:TR seem purposely inverted from the original series. It would be interesting to make a list of them all. Lynch is playing with the concept of duality to such an extent that this entire opus reflects/\stcelfer that concept. It's actually pretty brilliant. Season One is the legitimate Dale Cooper/murder mystery with a plot and direction. It moves to a natural conclusion with Laura's killer being revealed and all is set right in the world. Season Two is the confrontation between light and dark. Jung's concept of the shadow self is presented and a choice of acceptance or cowardice is given. That last scene, with Cooper looking in the mirror and seeing Bob is the show itself, turned inside out and backwards. Everything after that has to be seen in that context. Season Three has no plot or direction. It is Cooper trapped in the lodge, endlessly walking in circles. The ending embodies that core concept. I am no longer angry. Lynch isn't a troll or lazy director. He is indeed doing something that will be talked about for years.

[BHell]

I'm serious. Hear me out.

Twin Peaks The Return is a deliberate and subversive act by Lynch. Seen as a work of metalogic and 4-D chess, it actually makes sense. Think John Doe in Se7en or The Joker on The Dark Knight. Several things in TP:TR seem purposely inverted from the original series. It would be interesting to make a list of them all. Lynch is playing with the concept of duality to such an extent that this entire opus reflects/\stcelfer that concept.

Ok, I can see where you're coming from. As I said, there are undoubtedly moments of subversion and mirroring in The Return, and many of them are a direct mirroring of the first two seasons. Feel free to make a list. I'd consider it an interesting read (but too much work to compile such a list).
But I reiterate: There are still many scenes that are sytlistic carbon copies of the original, without any subversion. And scenes that are neither - but something very different.

Of course, if we were to go into detail, there would be disagreement on what scene to put onto what "list", but certainly we can agree that all three aspects are present.
That's why I wouldn't call it a doppelgänger as a whole, but that's just nomenclature.

Season Three has no plot or direction. It is Cooper trapped in the lodge, endlessly walking in circles. The ending embodies that core concept. I am no longer angry. Lynch isn't a troll or lazy director. He is indeed doing something that will be talked about for years.

Here we disagree: Lynch as a storyteller has an unconventional way of construing his narratives. That does not mean there's no plot, just that the plot is harder to discern; The Return seemingly has more Lynch and less Frost ("seemingly" because Frost might be more lynchean than we think).
Even if the whole season is Cooper in the logdes - and that can be and has been disputed - that does still require narrative structure. We've had obvious moments of plot and character development. (And I don't deny there were other scenes that were non-narrative, purely descriptive, abstract or simple establishing shots.)
It's just not the same narrative thread we know from the original series. Though, it comes relatively close to what we've seen in Inland Empire.