World of Blue - Archived Forum 2007-2022

wAtChLaR wrote:had to skip to the last few pages...so much disappointment about the books gaffes or whatever you want to call them
THE BOOK IS AMAZING

Yes, I think reading this thread in retrospect is pretty much a headache, as a lot of it is griping before the book came out without any idea of the context. Not until recently, when we're more certain that Frost is playing with certain elements of history, can our discussion about the discrepancies feel useful. Even in the days after the book's release, a lot of the complaining was understandable but it's hard to appreciate that in hindsight.

I think once we started compiling a list of discrepancies (check out the spreadsheet), that's when the discussion becomes more helpful.

You should also listen to the most recent episode of the Red Room podcast; I think that's key to uncovering what's going on with the book, without giving any real narrative answers.

tylergfoster wrote:I did notice one actual typographical mistake in the printed book, I believe in the document from Jacoby about Nadine's psychological state after being shot in the eye, where a little segment about the glasses he wears is duplicated.

Interestingly, this bit is read word-for-word in the audiobook.

Frost just referred to Lana as "Ms. Twin Peaks 1989" as a beat in a longer sentence (a list of descriptions, separated by commas), with no "you may remember" or any conditional side comments.

thepope79 wrote:

tylergfoster wrote:I did notice one actual typographical mistake in the printed book, I believe in the document from Jacoby about Nadine's psychological state after being shot in the eye, where a little segment about the glasses he wears is duplicated.

Interestingly, this bit is read word-for-word in the audiobook.

Frost just played Jacoby's report from the audiobook. He didn't play that segment, he read it, and corrected it.

Dammit, the owls better not seem to be this...

During the signing portion of tonight's event in Seattle, I asked Mark about the possibility of another book after season 3. He said, "There's been talk about that. I'd like to do it because there was a lot we couldn't get into this book. But we'll have to see how the Archivist feels about that..."

tylergfoster wrote:

thepope79 wrote:

tylergfoster wrote:I did notice one actual typographical mistake in the printed book, I believe in the document from Jacoby about Nadine's psychological state after being shot in the eye, where a little segment about the glasses he wears is duplicated.

Interestingly, this bit is read word-for-word in the audiobook.

Frost just played Jacoby's report from the audiobook. He didn't play that segment, he read it, and corrected it.

Yeh, it's clearly an error, and embarrassing that no one at the recording caught it. It was great to hear Russ as Jacoby again, but his eccentric line readings (with very idiosyncratic pauses and emphases) make it pretty clear that he was just reading words off a page without even paying attention to what he was saying.

wAtChLaR wrote:had to skip to the last few pages...so much disappointment about the books gaffes or whatever you want to call them
THE BOOK IS AMAZING

Back from the lodge huh? ;D

Mark Frost & Madchen Amick in Seattle:

tylergfoster wrote:

thepope79 wrote:

tylergfoster wrote:I did notice one actual typographical mistake in the printed book, I believe in the document from Jacoby about Nadine's psychological state after being shot in the eye, where a little segment about the glasses he wears is duplicated.

Interestingly, this bit is read word-for-word in the audiobook.

Frost just played Jacoby's report from the audiobook. He didn't play that segment, he read it, and corrected it.

The date in Jacoby's report for Nadine losing her eye also appears to be about two years different from the date she lost it in Hawk's report.

Une homme solitaire wrote:Dammit, the owls better not seem to be this...


Screen Shot 2016-10-24 at 9.50.17 PM.png

Interesting find.So aliens confirmed for season 3?

I've now read about 4/5 of the book.

It has had wayyyy too much UFO stuff. I'm kinda worried if the 3rd season will have that type of UFO stuff too. I remember being very relieved when they kinda ditched the regular UFO stuff away in the second season and went another direction. Maybe this book does the same in its final 1/5.

There has been lots of cool and interesting stuff in the book, but I got pretty tired of the "regular" UFO stuff pretty early in the book.

Rami Airola wrote:I've now read about 4/5 of the book.

It has had wayyyy too much UFO stuff. I'm kinda worried if the 3rd season will have that type of UFO stuff too. I remember being very relieved when they kinda ditched the regular UFO stuff away in the second season and went another direction. Maybe this book does the same in its final 1/5.

There has been lots of cool and interesting stuff in the book, but I got pretty tired of the "regular" UFO stuff pretty early in the book.

I too have the same worries.But i dont think David Lynch is a Sci-Fi guy who would get Aliens into his art.Maybe the Aliens could be used as metaphors

krishnanspace wrote: Interesting find.So aliens confirmed for season 3?

Not a big fan of the UFO mythology. It's ok for the book because I think they're just looking at the wrong places and not seeing the big picture.
But if turns out to be THE thing in S3 I'll be disappointed.

Rami Airola wrote:I've now read about 4/5 of the book.

It has had wayyyy too much UFO stuff. I'm kinda worried if the 3rd season will have that type of UFO stuff too. I remember being very relieved when they kinda ditched the regular UFO stuff away in the second season and went another direction. Maybe this book does the same in its final 1/5.

There has been lots of cool and interesting stuff in the book, but I got pretty tired of the "regular" UFO stuff pretty early in the book.

Sounds like I''m about where you are. Guess it's time for me to jump in. This has been a mixed bag. The Lewis and Clark, Chief Joseph, Owl cave stuff is golden. Great reading. Andy Packard's camping trip was good.

Then Dougie Milford's UFO, Kennedy assassination stuff was a slog. Felt like recycled Chris Carter. Meh. Then it picked up when it brought Carl Rodd and the Log Lady into it.

The recap of the show's various story lines was fine (Packard's, Martells, Josey, Hurleys, Hornes, Jacoby) and even tied up some loose ends. All well and good. Nice to be back on topic.

Then the Jack Parson's bit was actually pretty good. All the little suggestions that he was the host of Mike were fun.

I'm not a stickler for dates and minor details, so I'm not up in arms about minor discrepancies between the show and the novel. I'm a geek of many banners, from comics to scifi/fantasy and whatnot... and I'm used to franchises that have had a few missteps over the decades having to revise their backstory from time to time. I'm not going to go into that or address those comments. People are entitled to their opinions and I respect that, but it's not exactly thrilling reading for me, so I'm skipping over a lot of this thread. Just not my thing.

So that's my two cents. Take it or leave it.