Subject: Re: Comments ...
From: rlr@toccata.rutgers.edu (Rich Rosen)
Date: 1990-05-18, 17:42
Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks

In article <1990May18.223241.20947@alembic.acs.com>, csu@alembic.acs.com
(Dave Mack) writes:
>>> >>> I really think that Leland killed his own daughter.

>> >>At this moment I think you're right, but haven't made sense
>> >>of one key factor.  That last scene with Leland hyperventilating
>> >>in the trees was pretty graphic, despite never showing an
>> >>image of him.

> > Please explain why Leland killed Theresa Banks in the south-west
> > corner of the state the previous year.
> > 
> > Remember, this is the *second* (known) murder in a series by the
> > same person(s). The letter under the fingernail, etc.

On the other hand, the letter under the fingernail may be something that Laura
and Theresa Banks had in common that had nothing to do with the murder.  Yes,
both were murdered and both had a letter under their fingernail, but who says
that the letter was put under each fingernail by the killer?  It could be some
ritual used by the cult, again having nothing to do with the murder.  Right now
I'm most impressed with the notion that Leland killed her after seeing her with
Jacques and Leo, who later found the body and disposed of it.  Someone (e.g.,
Leo) could have put the letter under her fingernail (possibly as he had done
to T. Banks as well, although he might not have murdered her either) as part
of some personal or cult ritual.  If it was Leo, then Leo would be a prime
candidate, of course, but it would be good plotting if despite all that it
turned out not to be him, if we were judging him based on assumptions of cause
and effect that aren't necessarily valid.  The best mysteries exploit this very
tactic, leading the reader/viewer on to make assumptions and jump to
conclusions that are not true, and the more obscure the assumption, the more
intense the resolution.

I don't necessarily believe this at all, but between that Leland theory (that
someone else just posted, sorry I've forgotten your name) and the way
conclusions are jumped to about how things "simply couldn't happen that way",
I wouldn't be at all surprised.  Of course, who among us would be surprised at
anything at this point?
--
"When you told your secret name, I burst in flame and burned..."
Rich Rosenrlr@toccata.rutgers.edu