Twin Peaks Usenet Archive

Subject: Re: Various points gleaned from reviewing the TP extant TP episodes
From: (Cisco's Buddy)
Date: 1990-05-06, 15:51

In article <2333@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>, adamk@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Adam Kao) writes...

} I think Lynch is too creative to use a random red herring (who cares
} if Laura has a pet cat?) If he's going to the trouble of writing old
} diary entries, then he's doing it for a real reason, not just to
} confuse us. Lynch loves to drop bizarre hints that *become significant
} later* [...]
} If Lynch bothered to put it on camera, then it's related to the
} current story.  Have faith in Lynch; he's too smart to be random.

First of all, what's so uncreative about being random?

Second of all, Lynch isn't the only creative hand in this series, or even
of the pilot film.

Thirdly, are we then to decide that the fish in Pete Martell's percolator
will turn out to be yet another patient of the Lydecker Clinic, and had
belonged to Leo Johnson before he killed it by using it to beat Shelly
a couple of days before?

As I've quoted before, from Alan Moore about his and Dave Gibbons' graphic
novel WATCHMEN: "Everything means something, but not everything means a
lot."  Just because it's there for us to see doesn't mean it's a clue to
the mystery.

Who knows, it may well become significant later on that Laura had a pet
cat.  Maybe it was a patient at the Lydecker Clinic, and that's where
she met Jacques Renault?

-- "I've got compassion running outta my nose, pal. I'm the sultan of sentiment." --- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, "The Mill", Maynard, MA) UUCP: ...!decwrl!!boyajian ARPA: boyajian%ruby.DEC@DECWRL.DEC.COM