referendum wrote:mtwentz wrote:
We could start a separate thread on this, but I think the more radical changes flow from FWWM. FWWM changed the mythology more than The Return, IMHO.
1. Blue Rose/Jeffries- Directly contradicts the original series, in which the only reason to investigate the Laura Palmer case was because Ronette crossed state lines.
2. Garmonbozia/Creamed Corn- Completely upended the motivations of Mike/The One Armed Man
3. Electricity- What happened to the owls?
4. Woodsmen/Jumping Man/Convenience Store- Never mentioned in the original, introduced in FWWM.
5. Laura as a spiritual figure- This is somewhat alluded to in the series but further cemented with Laura's decision to take the ring and her visions of angels in the end.
6. Cooper being trapped in the Lodge, as opposed to merely possessed.
The three major updates in The Return are:
1. A nuclear explosion perhaps opening the doors to the Lodge
2. The ability of spirits (Woodsmen, Mother) to do more than just inhabit other beings, but to directly kill humans.
3. The ability of the Lodge to manufacture decoys.
(Right now, I'll leave the Sarah Palmer situation aside until we know more).
So if you look at it in perspective, it was utterly predictable that the mythology and the rules would change, because Lynch did just that with FWWM. That does not mean anyone has to like these changes, I am just surprised that anyone is surprised by it.
hey nice post. I would like to add one other thing as a major update for The Return. The nature of representation. Things like Catherine Martell woman re-appearing as mr nakamura ( sp?) were obvious ' fourth wall' breaks - bob jumping at the camera in an empty room, etc. But this series is MUCH more explicit about that, the Monica Belucci sequence being as far as you can go in that direction, '' who is the dreamer'' - and then Lynch looks over his shoulder to HIS OWN GALLERY SHOW !! This series CONSTANTLY spells out the artifice, mockney cockney boy and michael cera being obvious examples. And all the references to other Lynch works, made and unmade, and his central role as an actor and plot mover. We are 14 hours in, making for HIM to make the connections, and hearing about Tulpas !!
That is new, the artifice being made so explicit. I can see why it pisses people off.
Opinions are divided on this being a new thing. In The Art of The Ridiculous Sublime, Slavoj Zizek says that in Lost Highway Lynch projected the vertical difference between fantasy and the symbolic language it sustains (i.e. reality) onto a horizontal axis in a way that allowed the artifice to become entirely visible; whereas in The Strange World of David Lynch Wilson is at pains to differentiate between the postmodern proscenium-shattering irony of Tarantino and the more modernist, religious romantic irony of David Lynch films.
Personally I think it's a matter of degree. Lynch has, in my eyes, not become more postmodern as such but more romantic, in the sense of a transcendental impulse dominating his work. It's as if he wants to paint us into the picture at every turn, as well as constantly escaping from the frame in a cascade of meta-referencing. He's writing 'tangled hierarchies', like Escher's hand drawing itself: Hofstadter's strange loops. It's almost like a kind of hysteria, a via negativa that seeks to prove he's neither Cole NOR Lynch but something third and unknowable. This mirrors the romantic irony of the fruhromantik movement, who sought to elevate the figure of the creative genius above any one identity, and frequently signed each other's works in disdain of the power of the signature.
I'm not saying this turn is good, or profound, incidentally. Actually, all this is pretty standard and unremarkable fare in art from as early as late eighteenth century up until at least early twentieth century modernism. But it is noticeable in Lynch, and fully describable.
This is the kind of post I can engage with, thanks.