Part 12 - Let's rock (SPOILERS)

[Major Briggs]

People are trying REALLY hard to make Audrey relevant to the plot. Jesus.

[Deep Thought]

People are trying REALLY hard to make Audrey relevant to the plot. Jesus.

I wouldn't go that far. If anything I would say Cooper is the Christ figure.

[Saturn's child]

People are trying REALLY hard to make Audrey relevant to the plot. Jesus.

I wouldn't go that far. If anything I would say Cooper is the Christ figure.

+

As Janey told us (twice), Dougie was missing for three days...

[Audrey Horne]

People are trying REALLY hard to make Audrey relevant to the plot. Jesus.

Maybe some people have waited twenty five years to enjoy certain possibilities, and right now it's perfectly fine to do that because they'll never have this moment in time again. There are many parades in these threads, no need to rain on some.

It's not like the character in most likelihood is the mother of a main character fathered cryptically by another main character.

Let us all enjoy our speculation.

[Snailhead]

People are trying REALLY hard to make Audrey relevant to the plot. Jesus.

Those people being Lynch and Frost?

[sewhite2000]

People are trying REALLY hard to make Audrey relevant to the plot. Jesus.

Maybe some people have waited twenty five years to enjoy certain possibilities, and right now it's perfectly fine to do that because they'll never have this moment in time again. There are many parades in these threads, no need to rain on some.

It's not like the character in most likelihood is the mother of a main character fathered cryptically by another main character.

Let us all enjoy our speculation.

This post and some others like it make me experience a little guilt, as if I'm a killjoy who wants to destroy everybody else's fun! However, I really struggle to keep quiet when faced with a theory that I feel with all my soul is going to turn out to be not true. If I just let it pass without saying why I think it's an incorrect theory seems to be tacitly giving it validity or approval.

[sewhite2000]

I know not everybody reads every post on the thread like I do. Some people are still completely baffled by "coordinates+2". I've posted my thoughts on this twice already on this thread, and other people have posted as well, but it seems every new day that goes by, I come back here, and someone new is asking what did that mean? So, I know they haven't gone back 25 pages and read my previous posts.

Diane is using a mnemonic trick - she's either associating letters of the word "coordinates" or its syllables with the numbers on Ruth's arm, as a means of helping her remember them. And then there were two numbers left over at the end. I guess this sort of thing isn't as common as it used to be, as any number of people just have absolutely no idea what she's doing, younger people I suspect. Man, back in the 70s, with New Math and Number Sense, we were being taught to do stuff like this all the time!

[Voided]

Count me in the group that I thought Diane would be a little more craftier ...staying two steps ahead of all around her. I get that plot wise, the FBI Boys have to be on to her, but it would be interesting if she kept catching on to their being on to her and constantly changes how she communicates with the mysterious contact.

Interesting. I am hoping there is a good explanation for how easily the FBI is on top of her every move, especially since she seems to be involved with the zone. Maybe she is just not that bright. Her job was transcribing field agents' notes and getting them coffee, right? I guess a clue that she is competent and intelligent would be if Gordon and Albert start sexualizing her.

Is it possible that Diane may have been possessed by Bob? Bob was apparently extracted from Bad Coop in episode 8. It is after this that Diane starts acting suspiciously. Her behaviour has become mixed, and she seems distant. Maybe Bob is communicating with bad Coop through her....and she doesn't realise.

[Voided]

Inspired by the discovery of the T. S. Elliot book in the Audrey scene and its apparent ruminations on time and space, what is going on with time in this show?

So far the further the show has progressed, the more it has shown us that it is a purely linear story free from alternate timelines or differences in time between sections. As far as I can see, every main story line has crossed paths with the others by this point, ruling out the idea that one is set in the future or past. If anyone thinks this is wrong I'd love to hear.

So why then is there such a focus on time in the script? The repeated use of the dialogue "Is it past...or is it future?" would seem baffling if the whole show took place in the present with a pure linear timeline. Furthermore, has anyone got any closer to understanding what occurred in the Purple Room sequence in Part 3? This fascinates me. Would love to hear others thoughts.

Well, the past or future line originates from the first seasons. Then there's the line about the darkness of futures past....so it could be a commentary on the revival itself.

[Daliz]

A few details I haven't seen mentioned in this thread:
3. More speculation: Clark says "I won't" at the end of his call. On second watching, I wondered if he was promising Tina that he wouldn't tell Audrey whatever it was that he just learned.

You mean Charlie. That's what I thought, yes!

Also I wouldn't think too much into the technology stuff/Mr C's messages being SMS or not, all the hacking and stuff is really unrealistic anyway. Just like in any other TV show or movie

[boske]

Furthermore, has anyone got any closer to understanding what occurred in the Purple Room sequence in Part 3? This fascinates me. Would love to hear others thoughts.

I just rewatched this episode again today and noticed some further things. I don't think this takes place in a lodge or within the Red Room. I think it is like a tear in time, not in another dimension but in no dimension at all. It definitely seems to have some connection to electricity too, so maybe it's *inside* electricity like some believe Jeffries is.

I also think noticed there are distinct differences between Naido and American Girl and what they seem to represent. I get a very positive impression from Naido, she seems very welcoming and protective to Coop. She warns him about the 15 machine and leads him. It appears to me that she sacrifices herself on the roof when she pulls the lever, despite Coops protestations for her not to.

When he returns, almost a doppelganger of Naido is in her place wearing a red cardigan, not a purple dress. She also talks backwards like the Red Room inhabitants, and talks about 'my mother', a potential connection to Mother from episode 8. Unlike Naido who pulls and leads Cooper, American Girl pushes Cooper away 'you better hurry!'

When Coop is sucked into the 3 machine he becomes shrouded in a black smoke that we later see in Dougie when his head disappears in the Red Room and again in episode 8.

Now what any of that means, I still have no idea.


Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

There was a theory in the Part 8 thread that Naido and the American Girl represented Hiroshima. That Naido represented the Japanese civilian victims, and her condition represented the injuries that resulted from the bomb and her weird time and communication problem represented the confusion from being in that attack. And that the American Girl represented the perpetrators of that attack, sitting in her own purgatory for that, which is why she refers to the coming danger as her "mother", because she was born of that act.

EDIT: Here's a couple of the posters who put forward that theory.

This may or may not have been mentioned before, it is hard to keep track of nowadays. Ronette was a prostitute, a harlot, which makes her mother here a mother of harlots, the Whore of Babylon. it does tie in with the rest of the story, the experiment, the test in the desert, etc. Why is Ronette credited in a particular way? Better to not go there. Check out Dr. Amp scenes, maybe there is something in there too...

[sewhite2000]

Twin Peaks does not have a history of being subtle about its possessed characters. You don't have to guess or wonder over a period of many episodes if a character is possessed. I might buy Sarah is possessed - she's acting weird, even for Sarah - but Diane? I doubt it. We would have gotten more obvious clues, I think. Some people have expressed the thought that Evil Coop has the ability to influence or control her actions. I'd be more willing to buy that than possession.

[sewhite2000]

By the way, I don't think there's any indication that this is supposed to be some manifestation of Ronette. I believe it's just the same actress playing a different character, like the new Renault cousin.

[Wonderful & Strange]

Try beginning with the possibility that it's intentional, and you begin to see that intention.

This doesn't sounds like a good way to look at things at all.

"Assume things are the way you want them to be, and things will start to appear to be the way you want them to be."

How is that a path to truth?

It's like some people think Lynch is incapable of producing something that contains mistakes or something that's just plain not compelling to watch.

Carefully reread what I wrote because you're misunderstanding.

In serious art analysis, you do begin with the premise that what the artist has done is intentional. You certainly don't begin with the notion that it's a mistake. Instead, you want to try to understand how it's all working together, even if it's meant to work in tension with other elements. Only after those steps is it fair and reasonable to analyze if it was a mistake.

People who assume everything they personally dislike is also bad, those are the people assuming things are as they want them to be. Ironic.

[boske]

By the way, I don't think there's any indication that this is supposed to be some manifestation of Ronette. I believe it's just the same actress playing a different character, like the new Renault cousin.

That scene cannot be interpreted in a literal manner, it is not the actual mother of Ronette from TP that is banging on the door. The same way that the newest Renault brother maintains (as someone greatly put it earlier here on the site) "the family tradition of sleazy" , I am convinced that this is the very reason we see the same actress. And let us not overlook the color of her sweater, is it not almost Scarlet? That scene has its own peculiar lighting, so the color may be off by a little.