Subject: Re: Lynch - CRITICISM!!!
From: long-morrow@cs.yale.edu (H. Morrow Long)
Date: 1990-12-04, 10:03
Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks

In article <28197@megaron.cs.arizona.edu>, gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary Newell) 
expells:...
|>  This lack of adequate plot development seems to show up in the episodes 
|> where the viewer is hit over the head with a barage of little facts
|> all at once (the Leland did it episode and the last episode (why Leland
|> did it) are good examples of this). It is as if they are saying "well, we
|> really have to wrap this thing up - now what haven't we dealt with yet?
|> We'll put all that stuff in the last 10 minutes and be done with it".

This is called a 'style'.  You may or may not like it but why do you have
this incessant desire to force TP into a conventional mold?

|>  That is not to say that the show is without any merit. The unique and
|> interesting images are often "worth the price of admission" so to speak,
|> but the show could be better if it was more careful with its plot and
|> less focussed on simply being bizarre. IMHO of course.....

Does real life have a 'plot'?  Does 'Art' have to have a 'plot'?
Aren't you tired of all of the formulaic sitcoms and soap operas on TV?
Real Art should upset you (not numb you like 99.99% of television today).
Many European films seem plotless to Americans (because they don't follow
the traditional sexist action adventure schema : boy meets girl, boy loses
girl, boy is involved in a car/boat/spacecraft chase, boy gets girl back) -
they just look like a series of disconnected visual images/symbols/events.
Lynch/Frost never promised anyone a mystery/detective-story/soap-opera/
space-opera/sitcom/romantic-comedy or any other genre.
Relax.  And keep an open mind.


- Morrow