The Secret History of Twin Peaks

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

User avatar
krishnanspace
Posts: 997
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 5:15 am

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby krishnanspace » Mon Oct 24, 2016 7:16 am

I haven't read the book,but could someone tell me why is Major Briggs collecting the information on Everyone?
User avatar
dugpa
Site Admin
Posts: 1228
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:45 am
Contact:

SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby dugpa » Mon Oct 24, 2016 7:25 am

Or.... Annie is missing leaving Lana as the second runner up. She wouldn't necessarily have to be dead. Incapacitated, missing, unable to fulfill her duties as Miss Twin Peaks...

After all, Lana would have gotten Dwayne and Dick's votes IF there was to be a runner up.

image.jpeg
image.jpeg (85.97 KiB) Viewed 4085 times
vicksvapor77
Posts: 582
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 11:51 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby vicksvapor77 » Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:10 am

Hi guys! As the poster of the Mark Frost comments, I just want you to remember those are not direct quotes, they are paraphrasing, at least what he said about Annie specifically. I was meeting the co-creator of my favorite TV show so my mind wasn't totally working properly haha. But it was very similar to what I posted. Just don't want anyone to freak out about him saying an exact replica of the Judy quote with Annie in her place because I can't remember if it was identical.

The part about Lana winning 1989 Miss Twin Peaks and what he said about someone screwing up with Laura's age are direct quotes, though.
User avatar
Mr. Reindeer
Posts: 2696
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby Mr. Reindeer » Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:10 am

Almost done with the audiobook. Definitely prefer the physical book, although the audiobook contains most of the same info (it even has a lot of the images, on the final disc). The only egregious omission is that Carl Rodd's entire letter is absent from the audiobook (as is TP's corresponding commentary on the Bohemian Grove / Illuminati / owl connection). Certainly not the most important part of the book, but I do love me some Carl.

The narrators are a mixed bag. Morrison (Briggs) and Cariou (Doug Milford?) are both solid; Wersching is often cringeworthy. Horse is phenomenal, both as Chief Joseph and Hawk -- probably the only parts of the audiobook I might go out of my way to revisit in years to come. MacLachlan, as I've already said, is almost defiantly non-Cooperish in his delivery, making me wonder why they even bothered getting him to read that section. Tamblyn gets an A for effort, but his eccentric emphases rarely line up with the content of what he's saying -- it's almost Shatneresque at points. I get the sense that he did one cold reading of each section, and didn't really understand much of what he was reading/saying. Still, it's nice to hear that recognizable voice again.
User avatar
bowisneski
Posts: 229
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 11:51 am

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby bowisneski » Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:11 am

One thing that has been bugging me is why the line about Lana post Season 2 has stuck in my mind and I think I've finally scratched the itch

With Briggs commenting that Lana stayed in town for six months, post Miss Twin Peaks, before dating Trump and marrying a hedge fund manager(I'd assume this is at least a couple weeks worth of time on top of that six months since we know how ok Lana is with quickly diving in), that means that he continued chronicling for at least six months after M*A*Y*D*A*Y. Unless it was NotCoop editing it, or we need to consider there was another archivist post Briggs. It didn't seem like he comments on much else post series and definitely that far post-series. Just thought it was worth mentioning. Why take the time to comment on this and not other more pressing Twin Peaks related things during that six months.


And with all the talk of an alternate timeline, could we be seeing the world that is two nanoseconds behind the Peaks we know and love for at least part of Season 3?

There's a great part of Twin Peaks that's built on sort of an altered reality just behind the reality that is happening. The exact same thing is happening two nanoseconds behind the thing that you're seeing. Or there is another one just in front of it that's exactly the same. For me, that means the Red Room is much more metaphysical. That would explain the two Coopers very easily - there is another Cooper just behind the other Cooper. It wasn't that we consciously put those things in the series, but David and I talked about that. It was a cool thing to think about as you wrote."

And later when talking something about the security camera scene:
"I remember that security camera stuff, and I remember us figuring that out - how you could be on camera. [...] Although it is still science fiction, we didn't want to get into time travel. But, of course, it is time travel. If you go back to what I was saying about those two realities running next to each other, it isn't time travel. They're just sort of here. It was like photographing these realities converging. He is there when he is not there. They are looking at another time."

http://www.dugpa.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1500&start=45
User avatar
N. Needleman
Posts: 2058
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:39 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby N. Needleman » Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:21 am

Briggs/The Archivist covers Catherine, Ben and Lana post-finale. The timeframe for the post-finale material on Ben and Catherine sounds to me like it could be anywhere from six months to a year. Preston makes it clear the Archivist had stopped chronicling at least three years out from 1989.
AnotherBlueRoseCase wrote:The Return is clearly guaranteed a future audience among stoners and other drug users.
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 » Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:30 am

Harry's note (and, consequently, the timing of the archivist lifting Coop's dossier from the Bookhouse) could also be post-finale. It may have been written in the book's version of Harry's alcoholic stint after Josie's death, sure, but addressing a melodramatic written note to Coop sounds weird to me if Coop is right there in town. His wording makes it sound a lot like he's writing to an absent person he may never see again.

(I'm only going by the audiobook, ignore me if the printed book offers additional dating)
] The gathered are known by their faces of stone.
User avatar
bowisneski
Posts: 229
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 11:51 am

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby bowisneski » Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:35 am

N. Needleman wrote:Briggs/The Archivist covers Catherine, Ben and Lana post-finale. The timeframe for the post-finale material on Ben and Catherine sounds to me like it could be anywhere from six months to a year. Preston makes it clear the Archivist had stopped chronicling at least three years out from 1989.

That's only assuming the bill of sale for the Mill is incorrect. If it is correct due to a timeline change or any sort of shenanigans, the only post-series bit about Catherine that comes to mind is he calls her a recluse after the sale of the mill.

And that's what I'm getting at though. If Briggs possibly continued for three years, why does he touch on barely anything between 89 and 91 besides Lana and possibly Ben and Catherine. You'd think he would have spent more time on any new discoveries he made in the following time including anything new from LPA. Especially since it seems like he is a fairly fast writer with the way all of the stuff near the end seems to be written in the semi present. That was just my reading of it.


And that's a good point laughingpinecone. There's no date on Harry's letter and it seems like it could either be written shortly after his discovery of Coops dossier or a bit after. Which raises the question of when Briggs raided the Bookhouse.
Saela
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 7:34 am

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby Saela » Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:36 am

laughingpinecone wrote:Harry's note (and, consequently, the timing of the archivist lifting Coop's dossier from the Bookhouse) could also be post-finale. It may have been written in the book's version of Harry's alcoholic stint after Josie's death, sure, but addressing a melodramatic written note to Coop sounds weird to me if Coop is right there in town. His wording makes it sound a lot like he's writing to an absent person he may never see again.

(I'm only going by the audiobook, ignore me if the printed book offers additional dating)


TP comments that Harry probably wrote it after Coop left town.
User avatar
Clueless
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2016 2:49 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby Clueless » Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:41 am

He describes Catherine as becoming a "recluse" and it's a bit difficult to extrapolate how much time would have passed since the bank explosion for that wording to be appropriate. A few weeks, or even months, out of the public eye after losing family in tragedy seems normal to me and not "becoming the town recluse" But it doesn't make sense to me that Briggs would add small details like that without adding anything more relevant the years following S2
User avatar
krishnanspace
Posts: 997
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 5:15 am

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby krishnanspace » Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:54 am

krishnanspace wrote:I haven't read the book,but could someone tell me why is Major Briggs collecting the information on Everyone?

??
vicksvapor77
Posts: 582
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 11:51 pm

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby vicksvapor77 » Mon Oct 24, 2016 9:07 am

Mr. Reindeer wrote:Almost done with the audiobook. Definitely prefer the physical book, although the audiobook contains most of the same info (it even has a lot of the images, on the final disc). The only egregious omission is that Carl Rodd's entire letter is absent from the audiobook (as is TP's corresponding commentary on the Bohemian Grove / Illuminati / owl connection). Certainly not the most important part of the book, but I do love me some Carl.

The narrators are a mixed bag. Morrison (Briggs) and Cariou (Doug Milford?) are both solid; Wersching is often cringeworthy. Horse is phenomenal, both as Chief Joseph and Hawk -- probably the only parts of the audiobook I might go out of my way to revisit in years to come. MacLachlan, as I've already said, is almost defiantly non-Cooperish in his delivery, making me wonder why they even bothered getting him to read that section. Tamblyn gets an A for effort, but his eccentric emphases rarely line up with the content of what he's saying -- it's almost Shatneresque at points. I get the sense that he did one cold reading of each section, and didn't really understand much of what he was reading/saying. Still, it's nice to hear that recognizable voice again.


Thanks for the post! Has no one figured out whom Shiels is voicing yet? I know many have asked. Young Norma? Audrey? Both?
User avatar
LonelySoul
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2015 6:00 am
Contact:

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby LonelySoul » Mon Oct 24, 2016 9:38 am

vicksvapor77 wrote:The part about Lana winning 1989 Miss Twin Peaks and what he said about someone screwing up with Laura's age are direct quotes, though.



Are you able to elaborate please? Exact quotes? Video/audio of this? What book tour location did this happen at? Etc.
Come hang out at http://www.reddit.com/r/twinpeaks. I'm /u/iswitt, one of the moderators.
User avatar
ForKeeps
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:10 am

Re: SPOILERS: The Secret History of Twin Peaks

Postby ForKeeps » Mon Oct 24, 2016 9:53 am

Predictably vague answer from Frost in a French interview:

"So it is useless to try to read between the lines for clues about season 3?"
"Perhaps. You'll see when it starts"
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 » Mon Oct 24, 2016 10:20 am

ForKeeps wrote:Predictably vague answer from Frost in a French interview:

"So it is useless to try to read between the lines for clues about season 3?"
"Perhaps. You'll see when it starts"

Haha, predictable indeed... I was thinking about this and I realized that, in current jargon, everything happens so much in this damn book that it's near impossible to figure out trends, or even how many newly introduced characters are going to appear in season 3.

Saela wrote:
laughingpinecone wrote:Harry's note (and, consequently, the timing of the archivist lifting Coop's dossier from the Bookhouse) could also be post-finale. It may have been written in the book's version of Harry's alcoholic stint after Josie's death, sure, but addressing a melodramatic written note to Coop sounds weird to me if Coop is right there in town. His wording makes it sound a lot like he's writing to an absent person he may never see again.

(I'm only going by the audiobook, ignore me if the printed book offers additional dating)


TP comments that Harry probably wrote it after Coop left town.

Hah, I remembered my growing sense of dread for dear Harry's fate and not the straight-up confirmation, my bad! Does anyone remember if the book says anything about the Truman switcheroo? Fred was Sheriff, then Frank was Sheriff, then Harry took over in '81 when Frank moved West, then...?
] The gathered are known by their faces of stone.

Return to “Books”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests