Subject: Re: Maybe I was wrong...(WKLP spoilers)
From: alternat@watserv1.waterloo.edu (Ann Hodgins)
Date: 1991-04-24, 09:05
Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks

In article <8648@idunno.Princeton.EDU> jacobw@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Jacob S Weinstein) writes:
> >
> >Since I posted my comments that we never had a chance to figure
> >out WKLP, I've seen a couple of responses from people more observant
> >than I, pointing out various clues that it  was Leland.  And yet, I
> >still feel my original point holds. In retrospect, of course, there were
> >some clues. Yet there were just as many clues pointing, say, to Harry S.
> >Truman as to Pa Palmer. In the very best mystery stories, when you find
> >out who the killer is, you think, "Of course! I should have known it all
> >along." Maybe it's just me, but I really didn't have that reaction.

   I guess it depends on what kind of game you think your're playing and
what you think the rules are or should be.

I love murder mysteries and only the kind that "play fair" as I understand
it.  I'm not in it for the gore or the drama or the ambience. I enjoy it as
an intellectual excercise so I demand that all clues be laid out and that I
am given enough clues to be able to figure out the problem.  
 
I also enjoy character studies and art movies that are a puzzle of a different
sort, not a challenge to logic and intellect but a challenge to my ability
to understand characters emotionally, intuit and read the action symbolically.
This is the kind of challenge that I find in Twin Peaks. And since it is
a rarer and more difficult challenge than a logical puzzle, I respect it. 
Logical challenges are there too, and an opportunity to enjoy ambience and
drama and the pleasure of using my knowledge of occult trivia.
But the primary thing is spiritual/psychological rather than logical.
 
ann h.