As others have noted, “fireman” has two (contradictory) definitions. In modern parlance, it commonly refers to someone who extinguishes fires. But it was also a job title for those who stoked fires (on trains). Which is our Fireman doing?
Although there are very very few deleted moments that didn’t make the show glimpsed in the BTS documentaries, two of these involve the Fireman: he appears in the Red Room asking, “Do you remember?” (tying in to the very fiest scene of the season), and in his own home, he is seen learning to say the word “sycamore” backwards — clearly a reference to Glastonbury Grove, where Dale first entered the Lodges.
Ray/Phillip Jeffries storyline
Moderators: Brad D, Annie, Jonah, BookhouseBoyBob, Ross, Jerry Horne
- Mr. Reindeer
- Lodge Member
- Posts: 3680
- Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm
- Saturn's child
- RR Diner Member
- Posts: 403
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:38 pm
- Location: Blue Mountains
Re: Ray/Phillip Jeffries storyline
Great point. Riffing off this, the 'fire walk with me' note was found on a train carriage, the scene of Laura's death; also present is her gold half heart necklace (seed?)Mr. Reindeer wrote:As others have noted, “fireman” has two (contradictory) definitions. In modern parlance, it commonly refers to someone who extinguishes fires. But it was also a job title for those who stoked fires (on trains). Which is our Fireman doing?
Re: Ray/Phillip Jeffries storyline
It's not a question of liking or not liking the speculation, just that at least in this instance, with the plot points under discussion, I feel some people are wasting their time. They want to find some rational through-line, and to do that, are going totally outside what is on the show. To me that's fan fiction. The Ray/Jeffries/Mr. C/Judy storyline doesn't add up as far as what is on the show. Perhaps that was intentional or just carelessness. People don't seem to subscribe to the latter possibility, so if it was intentional, part of the whole anti-narrative idea, why try to force it to add up?N. Needleman wrote: Again: Tell it to the last 25 years. I think many of these theories have plenty of valid basis based on what we know of the story and mythos, but I've also heard way, way wilder ones over the decades. (There's a guy on the subreddit convinced David Lynch put secret messages about Stephen King's It in S3, for god's sake)
Whichever theory you or I may find wrongheaded, the TP community online and in fanzines has always thrived on this kind of speculation and theorizing. If you don't like it you are in the wrong place. Either way: There is absolutely nothing you can do about it. If you want to bitch about how none of it means anything, go back to the Profoundly Disappointed. Policing our hypotheses is not an option.
I DON'T FEEL GOOD!!!!!
Re: Ray/Phillip Jeffries storyline
Twin Peaks tends to provoke far out speculation and it's not a bad thing, even though it sometimes goes beyond reason. I agree that the discussion should be grounded in what is actually seen on the show or read in the books, in other words - the canon. The problem is that it is difficult to strike the right balance between pure rational deduction and trying to connect the dots between incomplete, and sometimes contradictory clues. It's inevitable that people will veer in one or the other direction.IcedOver wrote:It's not a question of liking or not liking the speculation, just that at least in this instance, with the plot points under discussion, I feel some people are wasting their time. They want to find some rational through-line, and to do that, are going totally outside what is on the show. To me that's fan fiction. The Ray/Jeffries/Mr. C/Judy storyline doesn't add up as far as what is on the show. Perhaps that was intentional or just carelessness. People don't seem to subscribe to the latter possibility, so if it was intentional, part of the whole anti-narrative idea, why try to force it to add up?N. Needleman wrote: Again: Tell it to the last 25 years. I think many of these theories have plenty of valid basis based on what we know of the story and mythos, but I've also heard way, way wilder ones over the decades. (There's a guy on the subreddit convinced David Lynch put secret messages about Stephen King's It in S3, for god's sake)
Whichever theory you or I may find wrongheaded, the TP community online and in fanzines has always thrived on this kind of speculation and theorizing. If you don't like it you are in the wrong place. Either way: There is absolutely nothing you can do about it. If you want to bitch about how none of it means anything, go back to the Profoundly Disappointed. Policing our hypotheses is not an option.
Having just rewatched all of TP:TR, I don't see any "correct" way to describe, for example, Phillip Jeffries' role in the whole narrative. I could describe several cohesive possibilities that comply with all of the known facts, but speculation is inevitable. The same goes for Mr. C.'s motivations, the origin of coordinates, Judy's identity, and a bucketfull of other key threads.
Ultimately, this site thrives on such speculation, often to great effect, so I think we just have to keep each other in check when one goes too deep into an esoteric trip, but it should not be a matter of putting someone down for trying.
Ray/Phillip Jeffries storyline
Meh, people debate Star Wars as if it’s the next religion, and discuss/fight over it quite a bit. And albeit I find SW enjoyable, I don’t understand what’s to discuss. Still, if they like it so be it. It’s not silly, it’s part of the fun.Kilmoore wrote:There is a very clear and distinct difference between speculation about things we've seen on the screen and just pulling things out of absolutely nowhere. This thread is mostly the latter, these theories stand on nothing.N. Needleman wrote: What exactly do you think TP fans did on this forum and many others for 25 fucking years?
TP has its fandom, and as any fandom theorizing and speculating goes with it. For us it’s part of the fun.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk