Twin Peaks Usenet Archive


Subject: Re: Penn 6-5000
From: dmb@wam.umd.edu (David M. Baggett)
Date: 1990-04-25, 23:14
Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks

In article <1990Apr25.010412.29450@chinet.chi.il.us> 
		dawn@chinet.chi.il.us (Dawn Hendricks) writes:
> >This comment encouraged me to finally get in here and say something.
> >
> >Look, no offense, folks, but you're reading entirely too much
> >into Lynch's work.
> >

In the message you quoted, I wasn't reading _anything_ into Lynch's work.  
I was simplying stating that I believe he (or someone working with him) 
_carefully selects_ music, props, etc. to get his point across.

I suppose you think someone working on the show said, "Hey Mr. Lynch
what music should we have playing on the record player", and
Lynch responded, "Oh anything, it doesn't matter."

> >"Lynch is too artsy to just toss things in here".
> >Not true.  Sometimes, the best stuff in film is stuff that means
> >ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.  Sometimes, there is NO meaning.  The artist's
> >intention is to laugh hysterically while knowing that millions of
> >folks are straining and losing sleep at night to "find the meaning",
> >insisting that there MUST be some meaning to everything, when
> >there really isn't.  Dada?

Twin Peaks is clearly intended to be satirical.  That doesn't mean,
however, that Lynch haphazardly throws together the stories.  I
really think all this stuff with Leo, "Pink Pussycat", "Kitty's
got a new collar", etc. were put in there to confuse the hell out
of people like us who sit around coming up with theories.  But it
wasn't accidental.  Even if he's doing it so he can get a good laugh,
he sure isn't doing it by accident.

> >Anybody who can pull out so many conflicting emotions at one time
> >is one talented artist, that's for sure.

Then why do you think he's so reckless in constructing scenes that
he wouldn't bother selecting the music for a scene with any purpose 
in mind?  Mind you, I said "purpose", NOT "symbolic meaning".

> >Of course, it IS kind of fun trying to figure out the "meaning"
> >to all of this stuff in Twin Peaks, but let's not get carried away?

What possible harm can it do?  If Lynch's point is (as you seem to
believe) to get everyone all stirred up about this, I'd say he's
doing a pretty good job, wouldn't you?  

Dave Baggett
dmb@cscwam.umd.edu


Return