Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Discussion of each of the 18 parts of Twin Peaks the Return

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

User avatar
Nighthawk
Posts: 183
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 3:49 am

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Nighthawk » Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:30 am

whoisalhedges wrote:Huh. It never reminded me of the paleolithic Venuses (Venusi? :lol: ) but that's an interesting comparison.

Still, my point is that calling the Experiment "Mother" is an assumption our minds overlay atop the text, rather than something actually stated by the material at hand. And I think that's something Lynch & Frost are more attuned to, that aspect of human nature, than most authors and filmmakers.


To me the association was very strong, perhaps because I've been interested in ancient cultures for a long time. Fertility goddess/mother figurines are among the earliest known works of art, very wide spread geographically and temporally. A common feature linking dozens of seemingly unrelated societies.

The experiment has many of the same traits: it is made of a uniformly colored material, it looks like a sculpture, lacks facial features, and it has feminine body parts (breasts/hips).
User avatar
Ragnell
Posts: 338
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 5:50 am

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Ragnell » Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:39 am

WhiteLodge90 wrote:Who else is craving hardcore to hear this song on a new episode??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKBRyNNW3u0

I know we're not getting TMFAP but I'd love to hear it in ANY weird context in the new show. It's just so damn good and so damn Twin Peaks!


I associate that piece more with Cooper than with TMFAP. Because it first plays during the dream but it also plays elsewhere during the show during Cooper scenes. It's such iconic music, and so tied with Cooper's dreams and intuition that I can't imagine we won't hear it. I'm betting we hear it when he finally "wakes" up from being Dougie.

whoisalhedges wrote:Annie is the big one. She is the REASON Coop went into the Lodge to begin with. Frost knew damn well she won the pageant. I'd entertain the thought of retconning, but... Part 7, there's Annie. So, she is in fact NOT being erased from TP history... just the book. There's a reason. I don't know what it is, but THAT is intentional.


You're getting distracted in the Lana stuff. The bottom line is Annie wasn't in the book, but her scene in FWWM was vital to the show and she is established as existing. That's on purpose. Now, whether that's time shenanigans or due to the Archivist purposefully removing all evidence of her is the question.

Either way, I'm with you guys that Lynch/Frost are inviting us to speculate on time, even if its just Frost cutely covering some errors.

cgs027 wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:People need to remember that this franchise's entire mythology was born out of a crew member being accidentally caught in a shot. L/F are jazz musicians, improvising and riffing and letting the audience experience the result as they will. Too many people are approaching the work like an intricate piece of classical music, and they're setting themselves up for disappointment.


100% agreed, great way to put it. Intuition is a huge part of jazz music, and I think this pertains to the editing of what was a mostly linear script/plot. We all know Lynch works off of moods/cues, so imagine having 18 hours of scenes laid in front of him. He's putting the jigsaw puzzle together as he sees fit, and I can guarantee he's not interested in making sure things are laid out chronologically. Mood and cadence and these more ephemeral things seem to interest him more at this point, so it is what it is (not in a bad way -- just pointing out that there are going to be incongruous elements to these episodes that most likely have nothing to do with time folding in upon itself). That being said -- I do expect some sheer insanity once these coordinates come into play.


I get that this they work on intuition and improvisation, but what I don't get is the idea we're setting ourselves up for disappointment by examining it. I do this all the time for TV, books, and comics. You try to figure out what happens next. The creators will either match your expectation or not. If they match your expectation, they still have to do it skillfully enough that you don't mind not being surprise. If they go against your expectation, they still have to do it skillfully enough that there's value in it beyond pure surprise. So far, when L/F have gone left while I'm expecting right, or right when I'm expecting left, it's been WONDERFUL. They've managed to top my expectations. When they've gone the direction I'm anticipating (I saw the pie in Ep 11 coming soon as the Mitchems started talking about a dream), it's ALSO been WONDERFUL.

I suspect some of the very adamant rejection of alternate timelines is because some people see them as cheesy storytelling. They definitely can be. And I know, when it comes to romantic and family relationships, I can get upset in discussions when someone pushes a plot idea I find uncomfortable or cheesy. And I find alternate timelines to be a little cheesy unless done very delicately.

But, funny thing about these guys. Their emphasis on intuition, theme, aesthetics, the overall FEEL of the moment over the actual plot means that I really don't care if they come up with some cheesy plot explanation. Because I think it's going to be beautiful.

But I'm one of those people who expected Dougie gone by Part 6, predicts it every ep, and then finds every new Dougie scene poignant and beautiful, so maybe I'm not in the majority here. Whatever happens, based on what we've seen so far I'm not worried about getting too attached to a theory.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2541
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:10 am

Ragnell wrote:I get that this they work on intuition and improvisation, but what I don't get is the idea we're setting ourselves up for disappointment by examining it. I do this all the time for TV, books, and comics. You try to figure out what happens next. The creators will either match your expectation or not. If they match your expectation, they still have to do it skillfully enough that you don't mind not being surprise. If they go against your expectation, they still have to do it skillfully enough that there's value in it beyond pure surprise. So far, when L/F have gone left while I'm expecting right, or right when I'm expecting left, it's been WONDERFUL. They've managed to top my expectations. When they've gone the direction I'm anticipating (I saw the pie in Ep 11 coming soon as the Mitchems started talking about a dream), it's ALSO been WONDERFUL.


It sounds like you have a very healthy attitude, and there is indeed nothing wrong with speculating and theorizing if you approach it in such a manner. However, I've seen in other fan communities (e.g., Lost) fans creating labyrynthine, elaborate theories where everything in the series will suddenly "make sense" via some MD/Donnie Darko-type twist, and they feel massively let down when it turns out that much of what they were watching was simply to meant to be taken at face value. Similarly, I think fans expecting some sort of twist that will magically explain every single continuity error in TSHoTP or redefine the elements of the show that aren't working for that particular viewer, or who are expecting minor glitches/Easter eggs to pay off in a big way, might well end up feeling disappointed that the reason for most of those things is simply that Mark and David wanted to tell the specific story they're telling. Certainly, I think we're in for many big surprises in the last five hours, but not of the type people have been theorizing about since the book came out in October.
User avatar
Taperecorder
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 7:53 am

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Taperecorder » Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:11 am

Hockey Mask wrote:This is just editing to adjust timing of cars. Nothing more.


I think I might be able to agree with you if not for the musical cue that follows "the glitch". The musical cue is the first note from the music that played when the Woodsmen appeared and began harvesting or healing Bob/DoppleCoop after he/they were shot. Why would that note be played if the scene was just about a lonely old man staring out the window?
-
As above, so below.
-
User avatar
Nighthawk
Posts: 183
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 3:49 am

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Nighthawk » Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:21 am

Mr. Reindeer wrote:
Ragnell wrote:I get that this they work on intuition and improvisation, but what I don't get is the idea we're setting ourselves up for disappointment by examining it. I do this all the time for TV, books, and comics. You try to figure out what happens next. The creators will either match your expectation or not. If they match your expectation, they still have to do it skillfully enough that you don't mind not being surprise. If they go against your expectation, they still have to do it skillfully enough that there's value in it beyond pure surprise. So far, when L/F have gone left while I'm expecting right, or right when I'm expecting left, it's been WONDERFUL. They've managed to top my expectations. When they've gone the direction I'm anticipating (I saw the pie in Ep 11 coming soon as the Mitchems started talking about a dream), it's ALSO been WONDERFUL.


It sounds like you have a very healthy attitude, and there is indeed nothing wrong with speculating and theorizing if you approach it in such a manner. However, I've seen in other fan communities (e.g., Lost) fans creating labyrynthine, elaborate theories where everything in the series will suddenly "make sense" via some MD/Donnie Darko-type twist, and they feel massively let down when it turns out that much of what they were watching was simply to meant to be taken at face value. Similarly, I think fans expecting some sort of twist that will magically explain every single continuity error in TSHoTP or redefine the elements of the show that aren't working for that particular viewer, or who are expecting minor glitches/Easter eggs to pay off in a big way, might well end up feeling disappointed that the reason for most of those things is simply that Mark and David wanted to tell the specific story they're telling. Certainly, I think we're in for many big surprises in the last five hours, but not of the type people have been theorizing about since the book came out in October.


Speaking for myself only, I think half the fun in watching TP is trying to anticipate where it is going to go. Most of the time my predictions are going to be wrong, and that's perfectly fine. It will not diminish my enjoyment of the show unless the way that the plot develops turns out to be underwhelming. Not because it's different from what I've envisioned, but just because it's not interesting or contrived. So far I think we've had several masterclass episodes, with 7 and 8 still being tops for me, and 12 as the low point.
User avatar
Taperecorder
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 7:53 am

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Taperecorder » Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:25 am

Mr. Reindeer wrote:...or who are expecting minor glitches/Easter eggs to pay off in a big way, might well end up feeling disappointed that the reason for most of those things is simply that Mark and David wanted to tell the specific story they're telling.


For what it's worth I don't think most people are expecting the Big Ed glitch/easter egg to "pay off in a big way". I think most if us just see it as another layer of things being very much off in Twin Peaks.
-
As above, so below.
-
User avatar
Nighthawk
Posts: 183
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 3:49 am

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Nighthawk » Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:32 am

Taperecorder wrote:
Hockey Mask wrote:This is just editing to adjust timing of cars. Nothing more.


I think I might be able to agree with you if not for the musical cue that follows "the glitch". The musical cue is the first note from the music that played when the Woodsmen appeared and began harvesting or healing Bob/DoppleCoop after he/they were shot. Why would that note be played if the scene was just about a lonely old man staring out the window?


It's more than that. First we see Ed in his typical brooding fashion, sitting alone at the gas farm counter, eating a can of soup. Then he stares intently at something directly ahead. The scene is shot from behind the counter, so we can see what Ed is looking at. That's where the "glitch" appears, except that it is not really a glitch. Ed's reflection moves out of sync with his physical body for several seconds, it's not just a jump-cut skip. His immobile figure in the frame, as well as a car passing by in a perfectly normal manner, indicate that the reflection anomaly is not accidental.

Like I said before. I don't think that this scene in itself means much, but I do think that it is intentional. We can expect to see more anomalies happen in the next couple of episodes. Perhaps we have missed some already?
User avatar
Saturn's child
Posts: 380
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:38 pm
Location: Blue Mountains

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Saturn's child » Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:45 am

Nighthawk wrote:We can expect to see more anomalies happen in the next couple of episodes. Perhaps we have missed some already?


I know the Tammy door glitch has been repeatedly addressed already, if not somewhat dismissed, but I feel it's at least fortuitous that it occurs at the same portal Cole has his Laura vision.
whoisalhedges
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby whoisalhedges » Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:54 am

Taperecorder wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:...or who are expecting minor glitches/Easter eggs to pay off in a big way, might well end up feeling disappointed that the reason for most of those things is simply that Mark and David wanted to tell the specific story they're telling.


For what it's worth I don't think most people are expecting the Big Ed glitch/easter egg to "pay off in a big way". I think most if us just see it as another layer of things being very much off in Twin Peaks.

Exactly.

As for myself, I don't think I "know" a damn thing about what's going to happen. I think we just have a layering of anomalies - something is wrong in Twin Peaks, something related to time and its linear progression. I have absolutely no clue what it is specifically, but I have no doubt that whatever it is will be (and is being) magnificently handled by the auteurs in question.
User avatar
Novalis
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:18 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Novalis » Sat Aug 12, 2017 9:01 am

Taperecorder wrote:
Mr. Reindeer wrote:...or who are expecting minor glitches/Easter eggs to pay off in a big way, might well end up feeling disappointed that the reason for most of those things is simply that Mark and David wanted to tell the specific story they're telling.


For what it's worth I don't think most people are expecting the Big Ed glitch/easter egg to "pay off in a big way". I think most if us just see it as another layer of things being very much off in Twin Peaks.



I'm the kind of person who considers Glitch Art beautiful, so for me these faults, bugs and defects, whether motivated or unmotivated, are absolutely significant. I recognise of course they may be entirely inconsequential to the plot, but the plot is hardly ever what has held my attention with Twin Peaks, or indeed most of Lynch's work. I'm certainly not hooked into the idea that everything has to mean something. I love Asemic Writing for example; here it's the opacity of the form, the fact that it doesn't transparently communicate anything but brings the materiality of the signifier as such to the foreground. A lot of Lynch's devices do the same, especially his experiments in sound design.
Last edited by Novalis on Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
As a matter of fact, 'Chalfont' was the name of the people that rented this space before. Two Chalfonts. Weird, huh?
whoisalhedges
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby whoisalhedges » Sat Aug 12, 2017 9:37 am

Novalis wrote:I'm the kind of person who considers Glitch Art beautiful, so for me these faults, bugs and defects, whether motivated or unmotivated, are absolutely significant. I recognise of course they may be entirely inconsequential to the plot, but the plot is hardly ever what has held my attention with Twin Peaks, or indeed most of Lynch's work. I'm certainly not hooked into the idea that everything has to mean something. I love Asemic Writing for example; here it's the opacity of the form, the fact that it doesn't transparently communicate anything but brings the materiality of the signifier as such to the foreground. A lot of Lynch's devices do the same, especially his experiments in sound design.

Agreed.

When it comes to the "glitches" in TPTR (and TSHOTP, but that does have to be considered slightly differently at least, as Lynch was uninvolved) I think there are three kinds, and they are ALL present:

1) evidence of "something" going on in-universe, particularly in Twin Peaks itself
2) an artistic choice made by Lynch (and/or Frost)
3) mistakes

I think there have been some mistakes. Miriam's last name on the letter? The crew said that was a prop error. Serendipitously, it worked - but we were told it was a mistake. I'm sure there have been others.

When it comes to #1, actual temporal anomalies, my thoughts are very close to this article: https://25yearslatersite.com/2017/07/19 ... rt-jacoby/ I don't think what we're looking at is some kind of Star Trek/P.K. Dick alternate timelines, I just think it's these little "timequakes" for lack of a better word.

And with artistic decisions, often made in editing: I don't think Diane wearing green while putting coordinates into the phone, "Dougie" having a catch with Sonny Jim (who is wearing the same outfit he wore in Part 5), Bobby finding something from the Major "today," or perhaps most controversially Hawk's going to Glastonbury Grove in Part 2, are instances of time jumping forward and back. I think those scenes were placed where they are during Lynch's editing his "18 hour movie" into 18 parts, into television "episodes." I think he made these choices for thematic, emotional, dramatic reasons. Sometimes (especially with Lynch) the medium is the message; he often structures his films for a very specific reason - and that reason is intuitive, not plot-dependent.

I'm not the most eagle-eyed viewer. I didn't catch ANY of the wardrobe "malfunctions." I didn't catch Ed's reflection until it was shown to me. But I've still seen a LOT of things being shown "out of order."

TIME as it's traditionally understood isn't the only thing we're dealing with here, either. I'm still in the camp (I might be the only person who thinks this, in fact :lol: ) that in the past 2 parts we've seen "Schrödinger's Audrey" - nobody in Twin Peaks has seen her. The only character we see interacting with Audrey is Charlie. So, as far as I'm concerned, she is unobserved; and as such, she both woke up from her coma and did not. I'm FAR from the only person to look at Lynch with a wink toward quantum mechanics; Martha Nochimson wrote a whole book about it. But I am the only person I know to consider Audrey Horne in TPTR to be in an unobserved, and thus simultaneously dead and alive state. How that's gonna break down, I haven't the faintest. But until she talks to someone whom we have EVER seen outside that room, her reality in unobserved.
User avatar
Dreamy Audrey
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Dreamy Audrey » Sat Aug 12, 2017 9:56 am

whoisalhedges wrote:I think there have been some mistakes. Miriam's last name on the letter? The crew said that was a prop error. Serendipitously, it worked - but we were told it was a mistake. I'm sure there have been others.

Has that ever been officially confirmed, though? As far as I know someone tweeted it had been confirmed, but there was never an official source.
User avatar
Novalis
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:18 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby Novalis » Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:09 am

whoisalhedges wrote:
Novalis wrote:I'm the kind of person who considers Glitch Art beautiful, so for me these faults, bugs and defects, whether motivated or unmotivated, are absolutely significant. I recognise of course they may be entirely inconsequential to the plot, but the plot is hardly ever what has held my attention with Twin Peaks, or indeed most of Lynch's work. I'm certainly not hooked into the idea that everything has to mean something. I love Asemic Writing for example; here it's the opacity of the form, the fact that it doesn't transparently communicate anything but brings the materiality of the signifier as such to the foreground. A lot of Lynch's devices do the same, especially his experiments in sound design.

Agreed.

When it comes to the "glitches" in TPTR (and TSHOTP, but that does have to be considered slightly differently at least, as Lynch was uninvolved) I think there are three kinds, and they are ALL present:

1) evidence of "something" going on in-universe, particularly in Twin Peaks itself
2) an artistic choice made by Lynch (and/or Frost)
3) mistakes

I think there have been some mistakes. Miriam's last name on the letter? The crew said that was a prop error. Serendipitously, it worked - but we were told it was a mistake. I'm sure there have been others.

When it comes to #1, actual temporal anomalies, my thoughts are very close to this article: https://25yearslatersite.com/2017/07/19 ... rt-jacoby/ I don't think what we're looking at is some kind of Star Trek/P.K. Dick alternate timelines, I just think it's these little "timequakes" for lack of a better word.

And with artistic decisions, often made in editing: I don't think Diane wearing green while putting coordinates into the phone, "Dougie" having a catch with Sonny Jim (who is wearing the same outfit he wore in Part 5), Bobby finding something from the Major "today," or perhaps most controversially Hawk's going to Glastonbury Grove in Part 2, are instances of time jumping forward and back. I think those scenes were placed where they are during Lynch's editing his "18 hour movie" into 18 parts, into television "episodes." I think he made these choices for thematic, emotional, dramatic reasons. Sometimes (especially with Lynch) the medium is the message; he often structures his films for a very specific reason - and that reason is intuitive, not plot-dependent.

I'm not the most eagle-eyed viewer. I didn't catch ANY of the wardrobe "malfunctions." I didn't catch Ed's reflection until it was shown to me. But I've still seen a LOT of things being shown "out of order."

TIME as it's traditionally understood isn't the only thing we're dealing with here, either. I'm still in the camp (I might be the only person who thinks this, in fact :lol: ) that in the past 2 parts we've seen "Schrödinger's Audrey" - nobody in Twin Peaks has seen her. The only character we see interacting with Audrey is Charlie. So, as far as I'm concerned, she is unobserved; and as such, she both woke up from her coma and did not. I'm FAR from the only person to look at Lynch with a wink toward quantum mechanics; Martha Nochimson wrote a whole book about it. But I am the only person I know to consider Audrey Horne in TPTR to be in an unobserved, and thus simultaneously dead and alive state. How that's gonna break down, I haven't the faintest. But until she talks to someone whom we have EVER seen outside that room, her reality in unobserved.


From the sounds of it I really have to read Nochimson's Swerves. I got a lot out of her Passion of David Lynch.

It's really interesting, this Schrödinger's Audrey scenario. I chose 'other' in the Audrey's Situation poll because I couldn't make my mind up whether she was dead or alive, comatose or awake, delusional or sane. It never struck me as a possibility before, but now that you've mentioned it, maybe she simply is under-determined, i.e. in an unresolved superposition. :lol:

I also smile to myself that Charlie threatening to end her story 'too' plays a lot like a Romantic-Irony Lynch insert, reflexively referencing the way a lot of other secondary characters have had to be axed in this season. Ludwig Tieck eat your heart out.
As a matter of fact, 'Chalfont' was the name of the people that rented this space before. Two Chalfonts. Weird, huh?
whoisalhedges
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby whoisalhedges » Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:11 am

Dreamy Audrey wrote:
whoisalhedges wrote:I think there have been some mistakes. Miriam's last name on the letter? The crew said that was a prop error. Serendipitously, it worked - but we were told it was a mistake. I'm sure there have been others.

Has that ever been officially confirmed, though? As far as I know someone tweeted it had been confirmed, but there was never an official source.

Not sure, I think I only saw the one source.

In any case, Lynch is known as a one or two take director. In 18 hours, on a tight shooting schedule, with DKL at the helm? Sure there are screwups!

I'm just saying there are NOT a dozen screwups per episode. Some are intentional. ;)
User avatar
boske
Posts: 445
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 4:15 am

Re: Part 13 - What story is that, Charlie? (SPOILERS)

Postby boske » Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:14 am

Back to Mr. C for a moment: when asked how he had gotten the ring while in prison, he said that it had been given to him by somebody who had looked like a guard. Who else was at the prison then? Albert, Gordon?

Return to “Parts Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests