The Secret History of Twin Peaks

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

User avatar
krishnanspace
Posts: 972
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 5:15 am

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby krishnanspace » Tue Nov 29, 2016 8:35 pm

I don't believe that Twin Peaks will wrap up nicely, I welcome mystery. But take Fire Walk with Me for example; an ending that answers so few questions, but it's so moving, and an ending. I think I remember Russ Tamblyn's daughter or something saying how they concluded his story arc amazingly, if I'm correct (?) I just want it to have the ending it deserves. I've never seen a Lynch film with an ending that has disappointed me, I'll finish this topic with that opinion.


I think it will end in a satisfying way.The final scenes they shot in Paris looked like the final closing shot of Tv Series which seemed similar to The Dark Knight Rises with Bruce Wayne finally finding peace and sitting in that cafe and enjoying his life.I am assuming its one of the final scenes.Cant find those photos,if anyone can find them it would be awesome
JumpingMan
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:32 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby JumpingMan » Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:53 pm

If we are either to prove or disprove the hypothesis that there is some element of an alternate timeline, I believe that we should start to map the inconsistencies to the points where they conflict in the series.

If for example we discover that the book only conflicts with facts from series 2, we can assume that series 2 is in fact the start of a confluence beteeen two timelines.

There are actually three timelines at play here
1. The series narrative
2. The book
3. The chronology at which facts are revealed in the series.

We should be able to use two in order to falsify the remaining one.
JumpingMan
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:32 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby JumpingMan » Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:55 pm

Only when we can narrow down the moment of confluence can we find meaning in it. I.e. Is it Cooper's dream, manipulation by dugpa, time travel or deception.
User avatar
laughingpinecone
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:45 am
Location: D'ni
Contact:

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby laughingpinecone » Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:16 am

JumpingMan wrote:Only when we can narrow down the moment of confluence can we find meaning in it. I.e. Is it Cooper's dream, manipulation by dugpa, time travel or deception.

I fully agree. The pieces do, however, appear to be all over the place. Just a few examples off the top of my head:

    Events simply happening differently than in the series: Josie dies one week earlier, different outcome of the Civil War reenactment
    Autonomous inconsistencies: frickin Robert Jacoby, man
    Events that may be chaos theory'd out of the s2 finale: Annie retconned out of existence (therefore, Vivian changes too?), no trace of Windom's presence in Twin Peaks
    Merry background changes for no discernible reason: Laura and her classmates are aged up one year, the Palmers' background is different, the details of Ed and Nadine's story change completely while leading to the same result, Josie's new background is incompatible with the scenes of that guy trying to bring her back to Hong Kong, the Fat Trout Trailer Park is now right outside Twin Peaks

Trudy Chelgren wrote:I don't believe that Twin Peaks will wrap up nicely, I welcome mystery. But take Fire Walk with Me for example; an ending that answers so few questions, but it's so moving, and an ending. I think I remember Russ Tamblyn's daughter or something saying how they concluded his story arc amazingly, if I'm correct (?) I just want it to have the ending it deserves. I've never seen a Lynch film with an ending that has disappointed me, I'll finish this topic with that opinion.

Amen to that! Personally, I think Lynch's endings have only improved as time went on, so here's hoping.
] The gathered are known by their faces of stone.
User avatar
LurkerAtTheThreshold
Posts: 206
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby LurkerAtTheThreshold » Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:10 am

JumpingMan wrote:If we are either to prove or disprove the hypothesis that there is some element of an alternate timeline, I believe that we should start to map the inconsistencies to the points where they conflict in the series.

If for example we discover that the book only conflicts with facts from series 2, we can assume that series 2 is in fact the start of a confluence beteeen two timelines.

There are actually three timelines at play here
1. The series narrative
2. The book
3. The chronology at which facts are revealed in the series.

We should be able to use two in order to falsify the remaining one.








That's an interesting way to break it down:

I think narrattor is also important sidenote to the chronology breakdown.


Someone did something similar when the book first came out, and they were compiling a list of inconsistencies on reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/twinpeaks/comm ... e_alleged/
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0

In a way it's easy.
You've got the timeline of the book, up until season one.

1) The first 180 years
The main inconsistency here is the location of the Town
http://welcometotwinpeaks.com/locations ... eaks-maps/
The big reveals are :early American explorers had the owl ring, saw the black lodge and freemasonic assinations happened.
Douglas Milford saw an alien and hung out with president Nixon
(Narrator's are various primary sources and eye witnesses, supposedly compiled by Douglas Milford, and then we assume Major Briggs)
What we have here, (Aswell as unreliable documents, is the possibility of a third archivist. In this sense, the author of a lot of the writing could be Major Briggs, but like Laura's diary anything could have been changed or edited.

2) Two years in Twin Peaks? (Series versus book)
This is where a majority of the inconsistencies are. What seems significant is there is actually almost no new info here. Only inconsistencies. This does seem to suggest an interfering archivist, as what is the point of resupplying this info otherwise?
Season one and Season Two - Given that half the pilot episode was turned into a dream sequence in the series, and that some interpret Fire walk with me as a dream. It is possible that any part in Season 1 or Season 2 could be written off as dream sequences. Although this would be fairly insulting to fans. Where the black lodge is concerned however, it is almost a lucid dream situation, given that Cooper's first entry into the lodge is in fact a dream, where he first hears Laura Palmers killer from her dream ghost.

3) The missing 25 years
The book does leave a few breadcrumbs here, and feel free to add anything here.
-The dossier is recovered from a crime scene
-Audrey Horne survives the bomb blast in the bank
-Hank dies in jail


4) Season 3
We know shit all except for [SPOILERS] what has been revealed from set, Coop is back, he visits the Palmer house with Larua Palmer's dopple ganger, he travels to Vegas. So many unknowns. The biggest thing we have is that we believe Coop is evil, probably is possessed by Bob, probably killed Major Briggs and stole the dossier.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fRZlfWCrho&t=49s




EDIT:
Also someone made this pretty cool interactive timeline:
http://www.timetoast.com/timelines/1379019
Ghoul
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 1:38 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby Ghoul » Wed Nov 30, 2016 8:16 am

We have NO WAY of telling if the upcoming eps are actually meant to be the ending of it all, though, or if they're planning to continue past S3 (or past S3 and S4 if what they've shot will be split into a couple of seasons) even as we speak. Hell, for all we know, maybe some of the shooting already done is meant to be shown in some future seasons. Why are you all referring to it as if it will be the authors' final word on TP??? No one from the production's side, since the revival was announced, has come out and outright said it will be.
User avatar
Trudy Chelgren
Posts: 178
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 2:07 am

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby Trudy Chelgren » Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:12 am

Ghoul wrote:
Why are you all referring to it as if it will be the authors' final word on TP??? No one from the production's side, since the revival was announced, has come out and outright said it will be.


We weren't. We were just speculating. We're not trying to be that definitive. To me, it just seems highly likely that, if not in season 3 itself, Twin Peaks will be given an ending at somepoint. I just can't see that with the actors' and Lynch's ages, that they will end things expectant for another revival down the line. However nice a prospect that may be, if I were Lynch, at least, I would be conscious of that fact that this time may be only time to really revisit and find a way to sit comfortably with this project ever again. I'm not suggesting S3 will be the only season to come.
User avatar
NormoftheAndes
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:00 am

Re: Trudy

Postby NormoftheAndes » Wed Nov 30, 2016 11:17 am

With Lynch, in his films he generally offers open-ended conclusions rather than closed ones.

At the end of season two, things came full circle but then we were given an ending which only begged questions. I can't see Lynch diverting from this approach immensely in the new season of Twin Peaks.

Realistically, what questions can we be offered simple endings for? Laura Palmer is dead, we know why and the horror of all that. I don't envision Lynch and Frost offering up a revised telling of the story now.

The Cooper/ BOB angle is an interesting one because its so open-ended and unclear. That could just go on and on.

Even though I don't think Lynch is massively obsessed with commercial success, he was painfully aware how FWWM was a commercial flop in the US at least. If the new Twin Peaks doesn't prove successful critically and commercially, Lynch and Frost will certainly not jump to continue into another season of the show with enthusiasm, I'd imagine. Commercial concerns will play a big part in considering if the show goes on beyond what has already been filmed, certainly with some involvement from Lynch.

However, in terms of offering some sort of Lynchian ending, what has already been shot will at this stage be most the arena for that - since he is directing EVERY episode. So this is not like the previous seasons, it's pure Lynch coming out of his writing with Frost so that's a conclusion of sorts that we could only have dreamed of before we knew Twin Peaks was returning. :D
User avatar
SpookyDollhouse
Posts: 312
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:22 pm
Contact:

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby SpookyDollhouse » Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:30 pm

I think the new eps are going to dive deeper into the rabbit hole with unexplained things we know of, and by dive deeper I mean make us ask more questions. Deepen the mystery. A completely closed-off mystery and world is not Lynch's favorite thing. While I feel this is probably gonna be it and more of an ending, it's probably gonna be open-ended too. Not as much as the show or FWwM. But close. OR it's gonna be even more mind-blowing. I'm hoping for the latter. It's not gonna be clean and easy folks!
User avatar
Ped
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 8:11 am

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby Ped » Thu Dec 01, 2016 4:56 am

I've just got round to finishing the book this week due to loads of other commitments. I've not had the time to trawl through this whole thread but I've not saw what I'm about to put to you so sorry if this has been mentioned previously.

The whole "Where's Annie" thing. I'm taking from this book that Bad Cooper has tampered with the dossier and tried to erase from Annie from history. He's murdered her or she is on the run from him. Norma's past has been tampered with to make it look like she doesn't have a sister at all. Either that or Annie has gotten hold of the dossier and tried to erase herself from history and she is on the run from Bad Cooper. Does this seem plausible?

Another thing, did we ever find out in the series why Annie has the Blackburn surname? To me the whole Lindstrom/Smythe/Niles/Blackburn is easy for a writer to play with and what appears to be a glaring mistake can be put down to a broken family with step-fathers, half-sisters remarriages etc.

All in all, I loved the book. The book I most recently read before TSHOTP was Going Clear by Lawrence Wright, the Scientology book. This had L.Ron Hubbard staying at Jack Parson's house just like in the dossier and it was strange to read a fictional account with the ring twist. It was such a creepy coincidence and it was strange trying to separate fact from fiction. I have no doubt Frost has read this book and was inspired by it. The Robert Jacoby death date is the books biggest gaffe for me. Yes it's subjective but it does look like a genuine authors mishap rather than tampering or the archivists mistake.
Where we're from, the birds sing a pretty song, and there's always music in the air.
wpc77
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 12:00 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby wpc77 » Fri Dec 02, 2016 10:48 am

Someone wrote "It is possible that any part in Season 1 or Season 2 could be written off as dream sequences. Although this would be fairly insulting to fans. "

I think the easiest answer is that the entirety of season 2 was a dream, except for perhaps the senior droolcup/Giant sequence with Coop at the start of Season 2. After that, perhaps Coop is having a detailed dream while he sits in a prolonged coma healing from the bullet wound. The vast majority of the information in the book about the town that is inconsistent with the tv series came from season 2.

I don't like that explanation, but it would make sense. EDIT - for example, Ed explains the Nadine backstory in the first episode of season 2. We don't see Annie or Norma's mom and dad until season 2. Albert tells Cooper about Windom Earle "flying the coop" in the second episode of season 2. We don't hear about Thomas Eckart until season 2 and that's when Josie's backstory is detailed.
User avatar
laughingpinecone
Posts: 725
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:45 am
Location: D'ni
Contact:

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby laughingpinecone » Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:16 am

wpc77 wrote:Someone wrote "It is possible that any part in Season 1 or Season 2 could be written off as dream sequences. Although this would be fairly insulting to fans. "

I think the easiest answer is that the entirety of season 2 was a dream, except for perhaps the senior droolcup/Giant sequence with Coop at the start of Season 2. After that, perhaps Coop is having a detailed dream while he sits in a prolonged coma healing from the bullet wound. The vast majority of the information in the book about the town that is inconsistent with the tv series came from season 2.

I don't like that explanation, but it would make sense. EDIT - for example, Ed explains the Nadine backstory in the first episode of season 2. We don't see Annie or Norma's mom and dad until season 2. Albert tells Cooper about Windom Earle "flying the coop" in the second episode of season 2. We don't hear about Thomas Eckart until season 2 and that's when Josie's backstory is detailed.

Except the book details quite a number of events that take place in s2's time frame (eg miss Twin Peaks), some of them even through Coop's own writing (eg Josie's death). Beside being the cheapest trick in the book, I mean. I wouldn't see it as insulting to fans so much as being insulting to their own previous work...
] The gathered are known by their faces of stone.
User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 787
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 12:53 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby Gabriel » Fri Dec 02, 2016 11:36 am

wpc77 wrote:Someone wrote "It is possible that any part in Season 1 or Season 2 could be written off as dream sequences. Although this would be fairly insulting to fans. "

I think the easiest answer is that the entirety of season 2 was a dream, except for perhaps the senior droolcup/Giant sequence with Coop at the start of Season 2. After that, perhaps Coop is having a detailed dream while he sits in a prolonged coma healing from the bullet wound. The vast majority of the information in the book about the town that is inconsistent with the tv series came from season 2.

I don't like that explanation, but it would make sense. EDIT - for example, Ed explains the Nadine backstory in the first episode of season 2. We don't see Annie or Norma's mom and dad until season 2. Albert tells Cooper about Windom Earle "flying the coop" in the second episode of season 2. We don't hear about Thomas Eckart until season 2 and that's when Josie's backstory is detailed.


Yeah, I've suspected for a while that the show's creators might 'remould' the series into something closer to their original concept. Plenty of season two got put together without the oversight of Lynch and Frost and I wouldn't blame them for wanting to give the first couple of seasons' storylines a 'haircut' and work with the material they want. Of course, if Annie was a character in a dream of Cooper's, that means Laura was sharing his dream in FWWM.

Also, Jefferies' time travelling could be an issue? Since Jefferies presumably returned to the place from which he came in the Missing Pieces, he would no longer be missing and the future timeline in which we saw him with Dale, Albert and Gordon would be defunct. Could season two be in the timeline where Jefferies is missing and the book and season three in the timeline where Jefferies returned?
wpc77
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 12:00 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby wpc77 » Fri Dec 02, 2016 12:10 pm

laughingpinecone wrote:
wpc77 wrote:Someone wrote "It is possible that any part in Season 1 or Season 2 could be written off as dream sequences. Although this would be fairly insulting to fans. "

I think the easiest answer is that the entirety of season 2 was a dream, except for perhaps the senior droolcup/Giant sequence with Coop at the start of Season 2. After that, perhaps Coop is having a detailed dream while he sits in a prolonged coma healing from the bullet wound. The vast majority of the information in the book about the town that is inconsistent with the tv series came from season 2.

I don't like that explanation, but it would make sense. EDIT - for example, Ed explains the Nadine backstory in the first episode of season 2. We don't see Annie or Norma's mom and dad until season 2. Albert tells Cooper about Windom Earle "flying the coop" in the second episode of season 2. We don't hear about Thomas Eckart until season 2 and that's when Josie's backstory is detailed.

Except the book details quite a number of events that take place in s2's time frame (eg miss Twin Peaks), some of them even through Coop's own writing (eg Josie's death). Beside being the cheapest trick in the book, I mean. I wouldn't see it as insulting to fans so much as being insulting to their own previous work...


The events of season 2 could still have unfolded in a different format once Coop awoke from his coma, or in part during it, after he slept for a few days.
Ghoul
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 1:38 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby Ghoul » Fri Dec 02, 2016 2:14 pm

Gabriel wrote:
wpc77 wrote:Someone wrote "It is possible that any part in Season 1 or Season 2 could be written off as dream sequences. Although this would be fairly insulting to fans. "

I think the easiest answer is that the entirety of season 2 was a dream, except for perhaps the senior droolcup/Giant sequence with Coop at the start of Season 2. After that, perhaps Coop is having a detailed dream while he sits in a prolonged coma healing from the bullet wound. The vast majority of the information in the book about the town that is inconsistent with the tv series came from season 2.

I don't like that explanation, but it would make sense. EDIT - for example, Ed explains the Nadine backstory in the first episode of season 2. We don't see Annie or Norma's mom and dad until season 2. Albert tells Cooper about Windom Earle "flying the coop" in the second episode of season 2. We don't hear about Thomas Eckart until season 2 and that's when Josie's backstory is detailed.


Yeah, I've suspected for a while that the show's creators might 'remould' the series into something closer to their original concept. Plenty of season two got put together without the oversight of Lynch and Frost and I wouldn't blame them for wanting to give the first couple of seasons' storylines a 'haircut' and work with the material they want. Of course, if Annie was a character in a dream of Cooper's, that means Laura was sharing his dream in FWWM.

Also, Jefferies' time travelling could be an issue? Since Jefferies presumably returned to the place from which he came in the Missing Pieces, he would no longer be missing and the future timeline in which we saw him with Dale, Albert and Gordon would be defunct. Could season two be in the timeline where Jefferies is missing and the book and season three in the timeline where Jefferies returned?


God, what a horrible, borderline undigestible hodgepodge it will be, if S 3 will indeed play out that way. That reads more like something that some third-rate movie school sophmore student would've dreamt up in his fanboy fantasies than a work that a renowned artist like David Lynch would put his name under.

Return to “Books”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest