The Secret History of Twin Peaks

[Jerry Horne]

[Mordeen]

This is such a magical mystery tour time to be a Twin Peaks fan.

-Mordeen

[Mr. Reindeer]

If I had to guess... sloppy graphic designer grabbed a stamp image they liked without realizing the issue date. Fixed it before publication without realizing the "FIRST MAN ON THE MOON" stamp was also problematic in a timeline sense. Issue Date: September 9, 1969

I disagree with you that this particular snafu can be put down to sloppiness. The issue date of the stamp isn't the BIG problem here; it's that the US didn't even put a man on the moon until July 20, 1969, three months after Norma sent her postcard! The July 20 moon landing date is SO well known -- one of the most significant dates in 20th Century US history -- that there is NO WAY Mark missed it (especially given his tremendous attention to historical detail in the book, even while seemingly not giving a damn about the chronology of his own show).

I'm of the opinion that MOST of the errors in the book are the result of sloppiness. Let's face it, TP's history holds far more continuity errors/disparities than it does brilliantly subtle, laboriously plotted long games. I've gotten invested in far too many properties with creators who ended up knowing their own mythology far less well than the fans did -- and honestly, while I think Mark is a great writer (sections of this book prove that) and an incredibly classy guy (meeting him is a memory I'll treasure for years to come), I don't see anything in his oeuvre to indicate that he has the discipline (or even the inclination) to execute something as complex and subtle as many fans seem to be giving him credit for.

Still, I do think there are a FEW intentional errors in the book hinting at some broader conspiracy, particularly centering around Norma's lineage (and, by implication, Annie). Most of the really egregious/obvious errors fall into this area, and I think Norma's postcard was meant to raise red flags and get people thinking.

[Audrey Horne]

That is almost, if not, the exact same quote he used at the NYC reading. How, where, what, and who's Annie indeed.

[Chester Desmond]

Audiobook listeners, did anyone else hear "Clark Desmond"? I think "the Archivist" narrator made this error once...

Is it me or did that happen?

[qavanw]

Audiobook listeners, did anyone else hear "Clark Desmond"? I think "the Archivist" narrator made this error once...

Is it me or did that happen?

I heard the exact same thing tonight. He definitely said Clark.

[crossoverman]

And I think Clark Desmond is a deliberate mistake, too. There's NO WAY a mistake like that is made in an audio book without it being deliberate. An actor just couldn't get away with that. But, as opposed to the visual clues in the book, an audio "mistake" like the wrong name is a clue into the unreliability of the story you're listening to.

Plus the idea that Mark Frost always thought his character name was "Cyril Pons" is part of the deception; he was always Pons just as Lana was always Miss Twin Peaks 1989. It's a lie because we've seen the original show.

[johndaker]

There's NO WAY a mistake like that is made in an audio book without it being deliberate.

Respectfully disagree with you there. As a long-time audiobook listener who often listens to audio versions of books I know very well, I've heard many mistakes/misreadings in professional productions.

There's even an obviously unintentional goof in this very production: I've only listened through disc 1 of Secret History so far, after reading the full book in print, and at one point the phrase "classical statuary" is misread as "classical natuary." Natuary is indeed a word, though a very rare one, but, since it refers to a birthing room in a hospital, the phrase "classical natuary" makes no sense at all and is clearly a mistake, not a clue.

So while at least some of the "errors" in the book itself are clearly deliberate, I strongly doubt that any discrepancies between the book and the audio version are meaningful.

[bowisneski]

Some interesting answers from Frost over on a Gizmodo Q&A http://io9.gizmodo.com/ask-twin-peaks-c ... 7497676853

I think this one is the most interesting

Evan Fowler
10/26/16 1:04pm
If you could go back and change one thing in preparation for the new book and series, what would it be?

Mark Frost
10/26/16 1:16pm
Not one thing.

And I think these ones have some relevance to other discussions being had

TheArchiv1st
10/26/16 12:28pm
Mark, can we trust everything we read in ‘The Secret History of Twin Peaks’?

Mark Frost
10/26/16 1:18pm
Only you can answer that.

alliterator
10/26/16 12:04pm
How’s Annie?

Mark Frost
10/26/16 1:05pm
Patience.

Scranton's Banana Problem
10/26/16 12:50pm
How cannon is Scott’s book (My Life, My Tapes) - if at all? Did FWWM cancel it out? And how much did you and Lynch contribute to the overall story?

Thanks!

Mark Frost
10/26/16 1:07pm
My Life My Tapes is a good take on Cooper’s life story. I gave Scott an outline, he went from there.

DMSentinel
10/26/16 1:44pm
First off, I want to thank you and David for making something so incredible. In life, I’ve found there are a few pieces of media that truly change how I look at the world, and Twin Peaks has been one of them. Ever since I discovered it, I’ve been obsessing over every little facet of it and trying, mostly in vain, to unravel all the mysteries surrounding it.

Secondly, and this, I realize is a complete longshot, but there’s a ring that Doug Milford is wearing when he dies in Season 2. I haven’t been able to make it out, but is that Owl Cave ring?

Mark Frost
10/26/16 1:58pm
Wouldn’t it be interesting if it was?

WordMan
10/26/16 1:42pm
What made you decide to make the focus of the dossier Dougie Milford? He had such a small role in the show, but after reading the book you find out he was into some heavy shit.

Mark Frost
10/26/16 1:58pm
I’ve been keeping that ace up my sleeve for many years.

[Mordeen]

The reading errors are most certainly just that; errors, unintentional.

For example, a glaring error near the beginning of the book and a part of one of the most important segments.

Page 18, as a part of President Jefferson's personal memoirs, in the audiobook we hear:

"Puzzling references to classical natuary, black lines and a thoroughly incoherent discourse on the "mysterious force B. Franklin stumbled upon."

"Statuary" (the classical statues in the Black Lodge/Waiting Room) is misread as "natuary." It's not even a word, and partially distorts the purpose of that passage in the novel, however unintentionally. Someone reading the book itself and not a manuscript, with old or poor eyes might easily make this mistake. Below is a picture taken through a magnifying lens to demonstrate.

To sum up, don't read into the audiobook mistakes. Focus on the intentional inconsistencies as they appear in the novel.

-Mordeen

[krishnanspace]

Just finished the book and have lots of questions.
1.Instead of wearing the ring its written as worrying the ring.Did anyone else notice this?
2.Milford dies after Brigg's appearance right in the TV series right?
3.What did Milford and Nixon see in that dark room?
4.Is Gordon Cole upto something?
5.When did Philip Jeffries disappear?On one page its written 1986 and on other its written 1987.
6.During the scout days Milford tells the story of a one-armed man to Andrew Packard?IS it Mike?
7.Finally what are your thoughts on Douglas Milford?Is he a good guy or a bad guy?

[OK,Bob]

Just finished the book and have lots of questions.
1.Instead of wearing the ring its written as worrying the ring.Did anyone else notice this?
2.Milford dies after Brigg's appearance right in the TV series right?
3.What did Milford and Nixon see in that dark room?
4.Is Gordon Cole upto something?
5.When did Philip Jeffries disappear?On one page its written 1986 and on other its written 1987.
6.During the scout days Milford tells the story of a one-armed man to Andrew Packard?IS it Mike?
7.Finally what are your thoughts on Douglas Milford?Is he a good guy or a bad guy?

1. When used with an object, the very "worry" means to grab at or fuss over. Not an error.

2. According to the series, Briggs disappears the night of March 15; Dougie marries March 16 and dies that night or next morning; Briggs returns the evening of March 17.

3. It's suggested that Nixon showed Milford and Gleason a captive alien. This is based on actual rumors: http://www.openminds.tv/gleason-ets/5978
http://www.presidentialufo.com/richard- ... wife-talks

4. I'm sure he is REAL HUSH-HUSH.

5. I would have assumed, considering the final edit of FWWM, that he originally disappeared early 1986, "Damn near two years" before the Theresa Banks murder (supposedly February 1988, iirc). Life is full of mysteries.

6. It seems we're made to consider that possibility.

7. I'll have to get back to you...

[edits RE grammar, dates, etc]

[Ross]

5.When did Philip Jeffries disappear?On one page its written 1986 and on other its written 1987.

I assume this is one of the many internal errors in the book. According to the final edit of FWWM, it should be 1986 (two years before he reappears in 1988). The error may have stemmed from the fact that as originally scripted the Jefferies scene was meant to take place in 1989 (same time as Laura's story).

[ForKeeps]

1.Instead of wearing the ring its written as worrying the ring.Did anyone else notice this?

Yeah. It appears in one of the Lewis and Clark letters and I thought maybe it was an old use of the word that I just wasn't familiar with.

[krishnanspace]

I don't know why but I am worried about season 3 a bit. The book was like a proper Sci Fi government conspiracy with aliens and all. Don't want season 3 to go there. Does anyone feel the same?