Tamara Preston - Chrysta Bell (Spoilers)

[onemoreshadow]

KillerBoB: why are you letting them drag you down into this? You stated your position eloquently, and it stands as the best post of this thread. Do a George Castanza and bow out on top!

When you're right you're right!



Thanks, Ed.

<insert Coop giving a thumbs up> (sorry, I don't have a link) How about a little help out there???....

[4815162342]

Could you be more smug and condescending? Whatever "certain kind of male fan" you think I am, I assure you I am not not.

Ok, good for you. I didn't call you out specifically, just the male fans defending objectification. Your defensiveness suggests I hit a nerve, though. Just for the record, I'm not above this, I have sexist tendencies, I have objectified women. The only difference is that I don't make excuses for it or dismiss it as insignificant and "just the way things are", I think those tendencies have a pernicious effect, and I think art both reflects and contributes to those effects. Thus, I feel the need to address it to some extent.

[BigEd]

Could you be more smug and condescending? Whatever "certain kind of male fan" you think I am, I assure you I am not not.

Ok, good for you. I didn't call you out specifically, just the male fans defending objectification. Your defensiveness suggests I hit a nerve, though. Just for the record, I'm not above this, I have sexist tendencies, I have objectified women. The only difference is that I don't make excuses for it or dismiss it as insignificant and "just the way things are", I think those tendencies have a pernicious effect, and I think art both reflects and contributes to those effects. Thus, I feel the need to address it to some extent.

Ok, good for you. I haven't seen any posts "defending objectification." (I have seen several suggesting that folks aren't particularly concerned about dealing with that issue within a TPs forum)

[onemoreshadow]

Vanity Fair has an interview with Chrysta Bell in which she talks about her character in Twin Peaks. http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/201 ... avid-lynch

I thought this line in particular was interesting, and telling, as it relates to the conversation taking place here re: the supposed disconnect between her character in Mark Frost's book and the one in Lynch's TV show (or 18-part film, if you prefer).

"I loved every minute of reading The Secret History, but I’m kind of way into the whole extra-terrestrial cosmic expansion awareness-type jazz. I loved reading Tammy’s thoughts, but I’d already filmed, you know."

So Bell had already shot her scenes before she read Frost's book. We might have assumed that since the book didn't come out until last October (after filming was completed), but we could have also assumed that Bell might have received early drafts from Frost to help with her character during the filming of the series. Either way, this goes some way toward explaining why she may not seem like the Agent Preston in the book so far, or ever, as the series continues.

Anyway, it makes for an interesting read.

[4815162342]

Could you be more smug and condescending? Whatever "certain kind of male fan" you think I am, I assure you I am not not.

Ok, good for you. I didn't call you out specifically, just the male fans defending objectification. Your defensiveness suggests I hit a nerve, though. Just for the record, I'm not above this, I have sexist tendencies, I have objectified women. The only difference is that I don't make excuses for it or dismiss it as insignificant and "just the way things are", I think those tendencies have a pernicious effect, and I think art both reflects and contributes to those effects. Thus, I feel the need to address it to some extent.

Ok, good for you. I haven't seen any posts "defending objectification." (I have seen several suggesting that folks aren't particularly concerned about dealing with that issue within a TPs forum)

I would count dismissing objectification as a tacit defense, but, you know, forum posts are subject to interpretation like anything else.

[N. Needleman]

I'll just quote myself, I guess:

Engaging with them in their own contexts is not the same thing as ignoring them. We all process differently. I think Lynch's work is both fascinated with women and their sexuality and also often fundamentally feminist and fundamentally messy.

That it cannot be easily catalogued that way due to the violence and trauma he so often deals in - while affirming most of his central female characters and their experiences - only makes the conversation more complex. Nothing about it or his work is black and white.

[4815162342]

I'll just quote myself, I guess:

Engaging with them in their own contexts is not the same thing as ignoring them. We all process differently. I think Lynch's work is both fascinated with women and their sexuality and also often fundamentally feminist and fundamentally messy.

That it cannot be easily catalogued that way due to the violence and trauma he so often deals in - while affirming most of his central female characters and their experiences - only makes the conversation more complex. Nothing about it or his work is black and white.

I have no objection to any of that. It's what I would call fair analysis. I don't think it's black and white either, or I don't think I could tolerate it, let alone be a fan!

[N. Needleman]

Fair enough.

[oldforce]

Feminist or social feminist readings (and many others at once) of Lynch flow from the text.

[Manwith]

I just don't understand the people who act like Preston came across as some super-competent / brilliant agent in the book. She didn't do any detective work at all!

Agreed. It's been a while since I've read the book, but I remember thinking she added almost zero insight

Given the format of the book she couldn't do traditional detective work since her contributionn was limited to librarian esque research. Also she was likely sitting at a desk in Philadelphia not at Twin Peaks where the action was. Also she may not have had a high enough security clearance to investigate the crime scene (Gordon Cole's memo provides no details on where the archive was found)

Under those circumstances I think Agent Preston was very competent. I think the point of the book is that mysteries can't be solved, which is why she can't get anywhere no matter how much research she does. (Only secrets can be solved). But she's depicted as very competent, bookish and smart, it's just the mysteries are unsolvable.

Even Agent Cooper in the original show pretty much fails to solve anything and need to be told who killed Laura Palmer by the ghost of the dead girl herself. He even says F.B.I. methods got him to a dead end and he needs "magic" to solve the case.

Increasingly the idea of "detective work" is for Lynch just a running joke- the scene with the "Senator's Dilemma" and the FWWM "Mother's sister's girl" is meant to be a parody of detective work in my opinion. There's no intent on playing the F.B.I. Agents as normal detectives in a normal universe. The clues make no sense and the detective deduction makes no sense either.

[Mr. Reindeer]

I just don't understand the people who act like Preston came across as some super-competent / brilliant agent in the book. She didn't do any detective work at all!

Agreed. It's been a while since I've read the book, but I remember thinking she added almost zero insight

Given the format of the book she couldn't do traditional detective work since her contributionn was limited to librarian esque research. Also she was likely sitting at a desk in Philadelphia not at Twin Peaks where the action was. Also she may not have had a high enough security clearance to investigate the crime scene (Gordon Cole's memo provides no details on where the archive was found)

Under those circumstances I think Agent Preston was very competent. I think the point of the book is that mysteries can't be solved, which is why she can't get anywhere no matter how much research she does. (Only secrets can be solved). But she's depicted as very competent, bookish and smart, it's just the mysteries are unsolvable.

Even Agent Cooper in the original show pretty much fails to solve anything and need to be told who killed Laura Palmer by the ghost of the dead girl herself. He even says F.B.I. methods got him to a dead end and he needs "magic" to solve the case.

Increasingly the idea of "detective work" is for Lynch just a running joke- the scene with the "Senator's Dilemma" and the FWWM "Mother's sister's girl" is meant to be a parody of detective work in my opinion. There's no intent on playing the F.B.I. Agents as normal detectives in a normal universe. The clues make no sense and the detective deduction makes no sense either.

I agree with everything you've said. But you spend four paragraphs making excuses for why Preston in the book couldn't really show her stuff, and fail to give a single example of an instance that actually gave you the impression that she was competent. Given the obstacles against her, both practically and narratively -- which you concisely listed -- she COULD be a relatively competent agent (I refuse to acknowledge that she could be brilliant, because she really shoulda, you know, read the whole text through to see if the Archivist flat-out revealed his own identity, before wasting time verifying arcane facts about Lewis & Clark's diaries). But I still don't see anything in the text that directly supports that assertion. Whereas, in contrast, Coop DID have many moments of brilliant detective work on the original show despite L/F arguably not being overly interested in that narrative approach.

[Manwith]

(I refuse to acknowledge that she could be brilliant, because she really shoulda, you know, read the whole text through to see if the Archivist flat-out revealed his own identity,

Eh, I think that's just a narrative device. It prevents her from "spoiling" the book for the reader. There's a lot of creative choices Mark Frost made in that book that seems to puzzle fans. (Like whether or not the continuity errors are intentional or the result of a quick publisher turnaround time- it seems to me to be a combination of both) and I think Preston not skipping ahead before verifying things is just a creative choise that's not meant to say anything about her competence level, it's just meant to have her "reading" along with the reader and providing commentary without spoiling anything.

As for her competence, some of the things she verified probably took a fair amount of research.

[Mr. Reindeer]

Eh, I think that's just a narrative device. It prevents her from "spoiling" the book for the reader. There's a lot of creative choices Mark Frost made in that book that seems to puzzle fans. (Like whether or not the continuity errors are intentional or the result of a quick publisher turnaround time- it seems to me to be a combination of both) and I think Preston not skipping ahead before verifying things is just a creative choise that's not meant to say anything about her competence level, it's just meant to have her "reading" along with the reader and providing commentary without spoiling anything.

I agree that it was a conscious device -- Mark is no dummy. A lot of the devices he uses (this one included) feel old-fashioned, almost like something from Victorian literature -- his beloved Sherlock Holmes, or Frankenstein [which i think he has named as an influence on the structure]). It still felt a bit silly/unfortunate to me, but I understand the style he was working within.

Still, even fully acknowledging all that you've said, I find it hard to view the book version as per se competent and the show version as a colossal step down. Giving book Preston the best benefit of the doubt, we have an agent who theoretically COULD be competent (despite sprinkling some unnecessarily snarky/pointless editorializing and pop culture color commentary in her comments), but we really don't have enough info to decide one way or the other that she's good at her job (other than the fact that she apparently did a decent amount of fact-checking).

[BB1977]

Using TP as a narrative device was a snafu on Mark Frost's part, imho.

She is supposed to be a really sharp agent, someone who "has the stuff" and is presumably tested by Cole for higher purposes. Yet what we get is someone tasked with determining the identity of the author asap and completely fails at that mission.
Not only does she not thumb through the dossier to get a cursory overview (which would have led to her reading all about who the author was within a couple of hours at the most). She also doesn't read all the way through it first without trying to verify every little detail (which would have led to her getting to the part where Briggs states his name within a day).
Sure it's a narrative device but it also undermines everything we're told about this character.

As for the actual work she does on the dossier - every halfway capable college student, given the same kind of access TP has, could have done as good a job. Some probably a better one by not using as much of a personal, subjective tone in the official annotations.
Again a narrative device to impart additional color and to keep the readers engaged but again one that damages the character.

Book TP is a somewhat capable researcher who doesn't seem to be able to think too much outside the box or get things done particularly quickly or efficiently.
Tv Tammy hasn't done much more than recapping a case file, wriggling her bum, huffing and being carsick. She did however discover the backwards fingerprint, so there may be hope yet.


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[mtsi]

(I refuse to acknowledge that she could be brilliant, because she really shoulda, you know, read the whole text through to see if the Archivist flat-out revealed his own identity,

Eh, I think that's just a narrative device. It prevents her from "spoiling" the book for the reader. There's a lot of creative choices Mark Frost made in that book that seems to puzzle fans. (Like whether or not the continuity errors are intentional or the result of a quick publisher turnaround time- it seems to me to be a combination of both) and I think Preston not skipping ahead before verifying things is just a creative choise that's not meant to say anything about her competence level, it's just meant to have her "reading" along with the reader and providing commentary without spoiling anything.

As for her competence, some of the things she verified probably took a fair amount of research.

EXACTLY. Everyone is being so damn precious about all this.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk