Twin Peaks Usenet Archive


Subject: Re: The Broken Heart Necklace!
From: rlr@toccata.rutgers.edu (Rich Rosen)
Date: 1990-05-18, 18:23
Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks

In article <1990May16.003603.2905@alembic.acs.com>, csu@alembic.acs.com
(Dave Mack) writes:
> > So what you're saying is, there are two veterinarians named Bob Lydecker
> > in Twin Peaks? And the other one, the one who isn't in a coma, is 
> > Killer Bob Lydecker? Yow, now all we need is the beautiful amnesiac
> > heiress who witnessed the whole thing but can't remember it and we'll
> > be all set.

OK, wiseguy... :-)

I was working under the following assumptions:

1) That the Dr. Leydecker who runs the clinic has not been identified as
	BOB Leydecker.

2) That BOB Leydecker, the man that the one-armed shoe salesman identified as
	his friend *and* as the man who had been assaulted who is in a coma,
	has never been identified as the man who runs the Leydecker clinic,
	although he HAS been identified by the one-armed man as a veterinarian.

3) That it has not been established that the doctor who runs the clinic is
	a patient at the hospital who is in a coma resulting from an attack,
	and that no other identifying links have been established between
	the man who runs the clinic and the man (identified for sure as Bob)
	who was assaulted and who is now in a coma at the hospital.

Therefore, the man who runs the Leydecker Clinic could be ANOTHER "Dr.
Leydecker", a man who is related to the Dr. BOB Leydecker that the one-armed
man knows.  They need not be the same person if the things I am assuming to be
true above are correct.  The clinic's Dr. Leydecker isn't at the clinic when
Cooper & co. arrive, but did someone say he's not there because he's in a coma
at the hospital (as opposed to simply saying that he's AT the hospital, perhaps
visiting his brother)?

Obviously any corroboration of the antitheses of any or all of these
assumptions on my part negate the thrust of my little theory, but lacking a
tape of the episode(s) in question, I am only speculating.  The point is that,
as I said in a previous article, it's little things like this, exploitation of
the fact that we the audience/readers jump to conclusions and make assumptions
that aren't necessarily warranted by the real facts, that makes a good mystery.
--
Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen.
		Rich Rosen	rlr@toccata.rutgers.edu


Return