Re: 'Twin Peaks: The Final Dossier' Novel by Mark Frost 10/31 (SPOILERS)
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 6:49 am
Nice little touch - the images on the spines of Secret History and Final Dossier seem to "join up":
a Twin Peaks and David Lynch Electrical Resource
https://www.dugpa.com/forum/
Not specifically, but he was on the Twin Peaks Unwrapped podcast in late September. He said that he and Mark still talk on the phone around four times a week, and they interrupted their usual political discourse to talk about S3 when it was running (Harley had no insider info and approached it solely as a viewer). He said he mostly loved it but found some of Lynch’s indulgences a mixed bag. He particularly loved Parts 8 and 17 (and said he saw a lot of Mark in both Parts), but disliked Part 18. He also read and loved TSHoTP.FlyingSquirrel wrote:Has Harley Peyton ever commented on any of this on his own?
I just presume he was killed by Deputy Cliff. The only thing that really causes any doubt for that is what happened with Ray Monroe.BEARisonFord wrote:Just finished the book the other day, and although it's a little slighter than I thought it would be, I still really enjoyed it. The tragedies of Annie and Audrey were particularly poignant to me and felt tonally in line with what I expected.
I'd still love to know whatever happened to Chester Desmond someday, but at this point I am most definitely not holding my breath.
I too had always assumed it was Deputy Cliff, but apparently the original script had Desmond disappearing when he touched the ring. I also think The Return implies that Desmond disappeared in the same way as Philip Jeffries and Agent Cooper.trismegistus wrote:I just presume he was killed by Deputy Cliff. The only thing that really causes any doubt for that is what happened with Ray Monroe.BEARisonFord wrote:Just finished the book the other day, and although it's a little slighter than I thought it would be, I still really enjoyed it. The tragedies of Annie and Audrey were particularly poignant to me and felt tonally in line with what I expected.
I'd still love to know whatever happened to Chester Desmond someday, but at this point I am most definitely not holding my breath.
I think almost everything point in the direction of Chet visiting the lodge. They cut right from his finding the ring to the Jeffries sequence, someone who took the same ride. WIth all the focus on the ring throughout the rest of FWWM and S3, it would be odd if he had just received a bullet from Cliff Howard. Also it's the Chalfont's trailer not his.mtwentz wrote:I too had always assumed it was Deputy Cliff, but apparently the original script had Desmond disappearing when he touched the ring. I also think The Return implies that Desmond disappeared in the same way as Philip Jeffries and Agent Cooper.trismegistus wrote:I just presume he was killed by Deputy Cliff. The only thing that really causes any doubt for that is what happened with Ray Monroe.BEARisonFord wrote:Just finished the book the other day, and although it's a little slighter than I thought it would be, I still really enjoyed it. The tragedies of Annie and Audrey were particularly poignant to me and felt tonally in line with what I expected.
I'd still love to know whatever happened to Chester Desmond someday, but at this point I am most definitely not holding my breath.
That''s interesting, I thought it was pretty clear he disappeared, considering the freeze frame and fade when he touches the ring. I also remember it specifically stating this in whatever version of the script I read.mtwentz wrote:I too had always assumed it was Deputy Cliff, but apparently the original script had Desmond disappearing when he touched the ring. I also think The Return implies that Desmond disappeared in the same way as Philip Jeffries and Agent Cooper.trismegistus wrote:I just presume he was killed by Deputy Cliff. The only thing that really causes any doubt for that is what happened with Ray Monroe.BEARisonFord wrote:Just finished the book the other day, and although it's a little slighter than I thought it would be, I still really enjoyed it. The tragedies of Annie and Audrey were particularly poignant to me and felt tonally in line with what I expected.
I'd still love to know whatever happened to Chester Desmond someday, but at this point I am most definitely not holding my breath.
Frost and Lynch signed off on all the material back then via close associates and staff writers (Peyton, Engels, Scott Frost), and Frost was heavily involved with some of those products. They were okay with it then and now.Agent Earle wrote:That doesn't mean I have to be content if I see they hadn't mended their ways. Particularly since the tie-in material comes directly from one of the original creators, something which wasn't the case back in the day.
You are more than welcome to do so, it doesn't make it untrue.Xavi wrote:I strongly disagree with all you write.
Be that as it may, they clearly intended for it to be Sarah.First off, as long as "we" could not be absolutely sure about the 1956 girl's identity, it would imply that that girl good be anybody, not even excluding Diane.
Well, first, you're the only person I've ever heard of who thinks that girl is Diane. That's on you, not the filmmakers or the book. Second, it can't be Diane, who is not old enough.This gives the Dale Diane love scene an enormous tension, a huge charge.
I think the Diane/Dale sex scene is about violation and the loss of not only what they once had as close friends - a kind of innocence - but also of their/her own identity. It is also the memory of violation (the Bad Dale raping Diane) not unlike what happened to the young Sarah. I don't think there is a direct correlation between the insect and anything with Dale and Diane, I think it is a thematic resonance. I think something horrible happened to Sarah, and to Diane, and to them.BTW, I don't think the Diane Dale love scene has anything to do with losing innocence, albeit the convergence of two opposite forces; Love and Fear.
I'm surprised if that's so. I've been watching Peyton's Channel Zero anthology series on SyFy, which I highly recommend, and in the latest season (No-End House) I absolutely could not get S3 or Part 18 out of my head.Mr. Reindeer wrote:Not specifically, but he was on the Twin Peaks Unwrapped podcast in late September. He said that he and Mark still talk on the phone around four times a week, and they interrupted their usual political discourse to talk about S3 when it was running (Harley had no insider info and approached it solely as a viewer). He said he mostly loved it but found some of Lynch’s indulgences a mixed bag. He particularly loved Parts 8 and 17 (and said he saw a lot of Mark in both Parts), but disliked Part 18. He also read and loved TSHoTP.FlyingSquirrel wrote:Has Harley Peyton ever commented on any of this on his own?
Here’s the link: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SQIwFaJ7QQkN. Needleman wrote:I'm surprised if that's so. I've been watching Peyton's Channel Zero anthology series on SyFy, which I highly recommend, and in the latest season (No-End House) I absolutely could not get S3 or Part 18 out of my head.Mr. Reindeer wrote:Not specifically, but he was on the Twin Peaks Unwrapped podcast in late September. He said that he and Mark still talk on the phone around four times a week, and they interrupted their usual political discourse to talk about S3 when it was running (Harley had no insider info and approached it solely as a viewer). He said he mostly loved it but found some of Lynch’s indulgences a mixed bag. He particularly loved Parts 8 and 17 (and said he saw a lot of Mark in both Parts), but disliked Part 18. He also read and loved TSHoTP.FlyingSquirrel wrote:Has Harley Peyton ever commented on any of this on his own?
N. Needleman wrote:Frost and Lynch signed off on all the material back then via close associates and staff writers (Peyton, Engels, Scott Frost), and Frost was heavily involved with some of those products. They were okay with it then and now.Agent Earle wrote:That doesn't mean I have to be content if I see they hadn't mended their ways. Particularly since the tie-in material comes directly from one of the original creators, something which wasn't the case back in the day.
True or untrue, I prefer arguments, I prefer speaking and writing on my own terms and do not pretend to express the opinions of others.N. Needleman wrote:You are more than welcome to do so, it doesn't make it untrue.Xavi wrote:I strongly disagree with all you write.
Well, that's just your and Frost's opinion, man.N. Needleman wrote:Be that as it may, they clearly intended for it to be Sarah.Xavi wrote:First off, as long as "we" could not be absolutely sure about the 1956 girl's identity, it would imply that that girl good be anybody, not even excluding Diane.
Since when are you entitled to express the intentions of David Lynch? Did he tell you personally?N. Needleman wrote:Well, first, you're the only person I've ever heard of who thinks that girl is Diane. That's on you, not the filmmakers or the book. Second, it can't be Diane, who is not old enough.Xavi wrote:This gives the Dale Diane love scene an enormous tension, a huge charge.
I did not notice any violation in the Diane Dale love scene at all, nor during Tracey and Sam's love scene. There was willingness from both sides; I would call that pure love, which nears a state of surrender and submission, a moment of losing control, almost like being hypnotised or something ... To use a notorious quote from IE "Strange what love does. So strange."N. Needleman wrote:I think the Diane/Dale sex scene is about violation and the loss of not only what they once had as close friends - a kind of innocence - but also of their/her own identity. It is also the memory of violation (the Bad Dale raping Diane) not unlike what happened to the young Sarah. I don't think there is a direct correlation between the insect and anything with Dale and Diane, I think it is a thematic resonance. I think something horrible happened to Sarah, and to Diane, and to them.Xavi wrote:BTW, I don't think the Diane Dale love scene has anything to do with losing innocence, albeit the convergence of two opposite forces; Love and Fear.
I don't think Mr. C would want the world destroyed, since that would probably leave him nowhere to go other than back to the Black Lodge. It seems like he wants to be independent of Judy, BOB, and any other Black Lodge forces. Anyone else think that perhaps he'd even gained some control over BOB and was drawing on his power, rather than BOB being able to control him at will like he seemingly could with Leland?Mr. Reindeer wrote: I disagree. Reading between the lines, I can see where you’re coming from. But the only “motive” Tammy presents for the Double’s actions is that he is looking for the “Grand Central Station” vortex/portal, and that he desires greater power — perhaps immortality (p. 110). Later she talks about Ba’al, but there is no overtly stated reference to Bob or the Double’s motives in this context, and certainly no indication that the doppel wants to destroy the world.