The Secret History of Twin Peaks

[dugpa]

"We're not going to talk about Annie. In fact we're not going to talk about Annie at all!"

I'm sure we will find out about Annie. But I suspect we won't know about what happened to Chester Desmond...

[sneakydave]

I've finished reading the book; out of respect for the author I'm going to refrain from discussing main plot points in public until it's been officially released

One quick question - do we find out what the 1991 case referenced in Cole's memo is? I assume it is NOT referencing Laura's death but something else? Not looking for what the case is, just a quick yes or no.

[krishnanspace]

"We're not going to talk about Annie. In fact we're not going to talk about Annie at all!"

I'm sure we will find out about Annie. But I suspect we won't know about what happened to Chester Desmond...

In the google preview i read about Sam Stanley and Chet Desmond

[krishnanspace]

I've finished reading the book; out of respect for the author I'm going to refrain from discussing main plot points in public until it's been officially released

One quick question - do we find out what the 1991 case referenced in Cole's memo is? I assume it is NOT referencing Laura's death but something else? Not looking for what the case is, just a quick yes or no.

All i know is its a different incident and not Laura's

[speedbeatz]

I've finished reading the book; out of respect for the author I'm going to refrain from discussing main plot points in public until it's been officially released

One quick question - do we find out what the 1991 case referenced in Cole's memo is? I assume it is NOT referencing Laura's death but something else? Not looking for what the case is, just a quick yes or no.

Aside from one page, the content of the dossier ends with March 28, 1989. The 1991 incident isn't mentioned outside of Cole's memo.

[sneakydave]

Thanks guys.

Interesting.

I just wish it was next week already.

[Panapaok]

The absolute lack of Annie maybe means that her fate will be addressed in the series. I mean, the last line of the original series is 'How's Annie?' and Lynch brought her back in FWWM, which we know is canon. I don't think they'll just ignore her completely.

[everyeating]

Has anyone else noticed that a lot of these inconsistencies revolve around the year 1984? I don't know about the tattoos, but Ed and Nadine met in 1984, Norma's mother died in 1984, and even the Playing Lynch promotional website for the RR indicated the diner was founded in 1984.

[Jerry Horne]

[djerdap]

Changing, possibly making up history in the year 1984?

Seems like Frost is channeling his inner George Orwell. Great catch! It'd be funny if it's just a coincidence...

[Panapaok]

To be honest, the only one from these discrepancies that truly bothers me, is the Ed/Nadine backstory. I love that scene from the series, one of my favorites. I don't really care about Norma's mother plot line. The tattoo is also a bummer but I can live with that, it's not that important.

[Soolsma]

To be honest, the only one from these discrepancies that truly bothers me, is the Ed/Nadine backstory. I love that scene from the series.

Yes, also that episode is one of the very best, not to mention pure Lynch & Frost. So it would not make sense from a 'we want to change some boring post killer reveal S2 stuff' point of view.

Has anyone else noticed that a lot of these inconsistencies revolve around the year 1984? I don't know about the tattoos, but Ed and Nadine met in 1984, Norma's mother died in 1984, and even the Playing Lynch promotional website for the RR indicated the diner was founded in 1984.

This could very well be something.

Laura Palmer started her diary in 1984, which is also the year Bob started raping her

Wondering if there is a consistency which exists only between TSHOTP and the diary.

[LonelySoul]

What you're about to read is probably a very unpopular opinion.

These discrepancies are actually pretty infuriating to me. Like - just why? Why is it necessary to change Vivian's name? Why the hell couldn't Frost - who wrote an episode with her in it - just stick to what already happened in the series? WTF?!

Also, some of you have speculated that Mark and David are possibly "retconning" out some the less popular season two plots or otherwise reshaping them. Here is where I might get really unpopular. Depending on the episodes, the particular plot or the particular period of time during filming, Frost and Lynch just weren't around. I understand they had other stuff they were doing. But they have to understand that, even if this show was their brainchild/baby, if they can't be bothered to stick around or at least guide from afar (some writers, like Peyton, have said it was very difficult to get ahold of either of them and they just had to run with certain things), then fuck 'em. The show had to carry on. There were contracts and deadlines to adhere to. We might have ended up with some less-than-savory aspects of the show, but that's what we got. It happened. And it has been canon for 25 years.

A timeline shift/other universe seems like a complete cop out. And straight up retconning makes me angry at them. I know readers have only reported these three main discrepancies (which are already annoying enough), but it's possible the series may have more (or others in the alleged volume 2 of the book). If it's true they're trying to erase some stuff that already happened in the show, they can fuck right off. Should've paid more attention to your show.

I allow there could be a good reason for all this. And if that's true and there's something I don't know, great. I welcome it. Otherwise, I'm left feeling cheated.

[Soolsma]

I indeed think that's very harsh. There's been a whole bunch of continuity errors throughout all the TP media we've had so far. Besides, it's just a work of fiction, not the constitution or something.

(disclaimer: it's just a metaphor, not politics)

[LonelySoul]

I indeed think that's very harsh. There's been a whole bunch of continuity errors throughout all the TP media we've had so far. Besides, it's just a work of fiction, not the constitution or something.

(disclaimer: it's just a metaphor, not politics)

I agree. It is harsh. That's how I'm feeling right now though. Immediate reaction upon reading the confirmation of these issues. I can let slide some discrepancies that were in the other books since they were pretty much peripheral to the show anyway. But this book is by Mark Frost himself. He is responsible for the universe's existence. And if he starts messing with stuff that's basically been set in stone for a quarter century for... reasons... then it just makes me mad. Especially when there doesn't appear to be a reason for doing so. (Again, I allow I could be wrong.)

EDIT: To quote a conversation between Norma herself and VIVIAN:

Norma: "Maybe I am [overreacting]. But they’re my reactions. And the hurt I feel is my hurt. And how I react is none of your damn business."