Twin Peaks Usenet Archive


Subject: Re: Various points gleaned from reviewing the TP extant TP episodes
From: curtis@cs.arizona.edu (Curtis Dyreson)
Date: 1990-05-07, 17:11
Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks

From article <2268@nosc.NOSC.MIL>, by douglas@gandalf.nosc.mil (Douglas Dickerson):

> In article <20956@megaron.cs.arizona.edu> curtis@cs.arizona.edu (Curtis E. Dyreson) writes:
>>soap opera done to excess in spots? Take for instance the sandwich
>>scene in the 3rd episode. Was it anything more than deliberate,
>>juvenile, heavy-handed oddness?
>
> OK, you're abusing my favorite scene, so I'll explain why I believe this
> particular segment is central to at least Ben Horne's character, if not TP.
>
> Ben Horne seems to be the analogue to Frank (Dennis Hopper) from 'Blue
> Velvet'. In 'Blue Velvet', Jeffrey's voyeurism leads him to an involvement
> ...

> IMHO, this is a brilliant sketch of a man who indulges his
> appetites at every opportunity in a completely amoral fashion. As we
> subsequently discover, Ben, in partnership with Hank Jennings and Leo Johnson,
> is most likely behind almost all of the badness coming down in TP.

Excellent analysis. It makes a lot of sense. The difference between
Ben's baguette voraciousness and Frank`s "mother" scene in Blue Velvet
is more a difference in quantity of depravity than quality.
Movies are a lot less deprave! I totally agree that the gusto with which the
sandwiches were consumed was sickening and painful to watch. I have no
argument with Lynch's stylistic genius and creative touches in
individual scenes. Many are absolutely fascinating. What I am missing
is the "big" picture. If this scene served notice that Ben was at
the mercy of his insatiable appetites what other scenes reinforced
that view? Did he threaten his daughter Audrey? Did he plot to burn
the sawmill? Actually both, right? Your analysis is beginning to make
even more sense. You seem to have a deep understanding of what's going
on. No doubt you've spent time in Tibet. Perhaps if you have the time,
you'll tackle the following "oddities":

1) The Dream sequence.
2) The Rock Throwing.
3) The Barking Boys in Jail (at the end of episode 1).
4) Mike's explosion at the funeral.

I'm not picking nits, these are major developments. Do they all fit
together? Am I way off base in asserting that individual scenes are
great but they are tacked together loosely (if at all) or according
to some unfathomable plan (e.g. like a Bunuel or Fellini flick)?
Please, clue me (and the net from the articles I've seen) in on the
big picture.

> Doug Dickerson douglas@gandalf.nosc.mil

Curtis Dyreson curtis@cs.arizona.edu

Return