The Secret History of Twin Peaks

[DLodge]

Oh yes!! I guess it could be as simple as there being a third Archivist who inserts these details into a sequentially earlier part of the dossier..or just an error of Mark's

[Rami Airola]

What if there is a doppelganger Briggs messing with things?

After all, Richard Beymer had taken photos of Briggs having those white eyes. I wonder if they filmed doppelganger Briggs in Red Room during the filming of the last episode of S2. If they did, I wonder if some of that footage will appear on S3.

[HoodedMatt]

My personal feeling about it all is that there are far too many inconsistencies for it to be anything other than intentional. Also, I don't think any of it will really, truly make any real sense until after we've seen the new season. There may be one or two straight up gaffes in amoung the changes, but I'm still trusting that Mark and David will have done their homework too well for any major cock ups to have got past them.

[dale_coop]

...
Her first mistake was in the assumption that the uppercase "I" was used to replace "1" due to a missing key. Older folks like myself and the Archivist who actually did learn to type on a manual typewriter without the "1" key were always taught to use the lowercase "L" to replace "1" because they are identical.

The pictured typewriter was altered to draw attention to it. The uppercase "I" therefore, to me, must be a clue.

-Mordeen

THANK YOU!
I've been following the forum for a long time, but was always too lazy to make an account. I had to register just to agree that the uppercase i in place of lowercase l was practically screaming off the page "notice me!".

(I was so excited to chime in, that I misspelled Jacques when I made the account. )

I wonder if it was only done to pull off the mirror-image message trick with the bookshelf photo.

Hi guys

I support the "1" "i" theory, but something is bothering me... in the french translated edition of the book (I have), the "1" are "1"... not "i".
Does it mean that the mystery doesn't exist in the french book ? (Erased intentionally by someone ?)

[laughingpinecone]

...
Her first mistake was in the assumption that the uppercase "I" was used to replace "1" due to a missing key. Older folks like myself and the Archivist who actually did learn to type on a manual typewriter without the "1" key were always taught to use the lowercase "L" to replace "1" because they are identical.

The pictured typewriter was altered to draw attention to it. The uppercase "I" therefore, to me, must be a clue.

-Mordeen

THANK YOU!
I've been following the forum for a long time, but was always too lazy to make an account. I had to register just to agree that the uppercase i in place of lowercase l was practically screaming off the page "notice me!".

(I was so excited to chime in, that I misspelled Jacques when I made the account. )

I wonder if it was only done to pull off the mirror-image message trick with the bookshelf photo.

Hi guys

I support the "1" "i" theory, but something is bothering me... in the french translated edition of the book (I have), the "1" are "1"... not "i".
Does it mean that the mystery doesn't exist in the french book ? (Erased intentionally by someone ?)

By far the most likely reason is that the translators didn't get all the necessary guidelines, you wouldn't believe the stuff we're NOT told for most projects.
For every JKR who bothers to warn translators that certain initials refer to a certain character, allowing them to change the initials if they'd previously localised the character, there's a lot of carelessness even in the biggest, most mainstream projects.

[tylergfoster]

On the book page, I doubt it means anything, but you can see an unusual barcode on the back of Double Idemnity: TU-713-084.

[Trudy Chelgren]

Rami Irola wrote:
After all, Richard Beymer had taken photos of Briggs having those white eyes. I wonder if they filmed doppelganger Briggs in Red Room during the filming of the last episode of S2. If they did, I wonder if some of that footage will appear on S3.

He's actually pictured rolling his eyes back into his head. Picky, I know, but there is a distinction I believe. Could still mean something though. I would LOVE it if they did re-appropriate unused footage. That would be a beautiful tribute.

[Trudy Chelgren]

laughingpinecone wrote:
My friends and I are convinced that Windom did not go to Twin Peaks in this version of the events. Pittsburgh got shifted to 1988, there is no mention of him in town, and Coop has a hell of a lot of free time on his hands past the Palmer case.

I may be wrong, but I do remember thinking that Cooper's being attacked by Windom/recovery and arrival in Twin Peaks happened much closer together in the timeline of events in the book that suggested in the series, and I remember reading in TSHOTP that Cooper was shot by Windom. I thought he was stabbed, and that the scene in the final episode where he is bleeding, and Earle STABS him was referencing that event?

Correct me if I'm wrong.

EDIT: No, I was right. Probably mentioned before, but Cooper was stabbed by Windom. Not sure what it means, but I don't think that just because a character is changed or absent from TSHOTP means that they are absent out of ignorance. If anything, I believe the opposite is true. There is something there.

Then again I'm sure that Lynch would jump at the chance to find a creative way of avoiding Windom's presence come S3!

[Jerry Horne]

Briggs was not filmed in the Red Room for ep. 29.

[Mordeen]

Rami Irola wrote:
After all, Richard Beymer had taken photos of Briggs having those white eyes. I wonder if they filmed doppelganger Briggs in Red Room during the filming of the last episode of S2. If they did, I wonder if some of that footage will appear on S3.

He's actually pictured rolling his eyes back into his head. Picky, I know, but there is a distinction I believe. Could still mean something though. I would LOVE it if they did re-appropriate unused footage. That would be a beautiful tribute.

Getting warmer.

-Mordeen

[tausendsassa]

Some of the interpretations of TSHOTP are pretty interesting, but the writer seems like he is having some serious mental issues. Might be reading a little too much into it all. That said, I did find speculation about this countdown timer pretty interesting:

http://www.falseprophet-hq.com/


Do you think this countdown timer could really be linked to Season 3 somehow?
The symbol does look kind of similar to the one on the spine of the new book.

Countdown takes us up to Midnight Jan 27th/28th morning?
Good links, thanks!




I think it's just a red herring. But semi interesting all the same.

The domain of the countdown website is registered to someone in Paris:
https://www.whois.com/whois/falseprophet-hq.com

[N. Needleman]

I don't think it's anything.

[Rami Airola]

He's actually pictured rolling his eyes back into his head. Picky, I know, but there is a distinction I believe. Could still mean something though. I would LOVE it if they did re-appropriate unused footage. That would be a beautiful tribute.

Damn, how I had forgotten that!
It was something I noticed back in the day when those Beymer pictures were released. But for some reason I had forgotten it and now only had a mental image of his eyes being "doppelganger white." Brains work in mysterious ways

I suppose that picture had something to do with drugged Briggs than anything else. Or they were just goofing around without any recalling to any scenes.

Briggs was not filmed in the Red Room for ep. 29.

Thanks for confirming that.

I don't think it's anything.

Yeah, there are discussions about that website on internet forums going back to at least 2012.

[tausendsassa]

I don't buy in to any "conspiracy theory" regarding this countdown either. After I read that blog entry yesterday, I checked the whois for the domain and found it funny that it is registered by someone in Paris, of all places. Probably a registrar in Buenos Aires would have scared me a little

[dronerstone]

I don't the countdown has anything to do with Peaks.
But I suppose we'll have seen another teaser/trailer of some sort by then.