The Secret History of Twin Peaks

[Ross]

Why some people have such hard time to reconcile with a small retconing to an arguably weaker part of the series? Frost isn't a moron who forgot all about it or too lazy to look those things up. It's clear as the sky that after more than two decades and ahead of the new series, he was comfortable to change a few things.

But the question is WHY? It's not like the changes make the story any "better". A lot of the broad strokes are still hit, it's just that all the details are wrong. What point is there in that?

[PeaksCarnivaleLost]

how bout some kudos for MF?

He brought Carl Rodd back into the fold when he had nothing to do with FWWM. I thought that was a great touch and explanation for "I've already gone places".

The Josie backstory was awesome. Explains why she had no probs putting some slugs into COOP, which I always thought was a touch radical based on what I knew about her. Not anymore.

I'm up to the Blue Book portion (last 20%) -- but I do have one major question regarding the archivist and the Bank Explosion doucment (but JIC I will loop through and see if I missed anything that might answer my own question)

Props to Amazon. My original email was for delivery on 10/20 -- got upped to 10/18 2 weeks ago, then showed 10/17 when it shipped but got a nice surprised when the book landed on a Sunday 10/16 right before football! I walked outside and almost tripped on the package.

I honestly didn't mind any canon switches -- everything seems to be done for a reason. I don't think sloppiness had a part in it. if anything the show details seem to be on firmer ground that before.

Beautiful book though, feels good in the hands and even better in my mind.

[mtwentz]

how bout some kudos for MF?

He brought Carl Rodd back into the fold when he had nothing to do with FWWM. I thought that was a great touch and explanation for "I've already gone places".

The Josie backstory was awesome. Explains why she had no probs putting some slugs into COOP, which I always thought was a touch radical based on what I knew about her. Not anymore.

I'm up to the Blue Book portion (last 20%) -- but I do have one major question regarding the archivist and the Bank Explosion doucment (but JIC I will loop through and see if I missed anything that might answer my own question)

Props to Amazon. My original email was for delivery on 10/20 -- got upped to 10/18 2 weeks ago, then showed 10/17 when it shipped but got a nice surprised when the book landed on a Sunday 10/16 right before football! I walked outside and almost tripped on the package.

I honestly didn't mind any canon switches -- everything seems to be done for a reason. I don't think sloppiness had a part in it. if anything the show details seem to be on firmer ground that before.

Beautiful book though, feels good in the hands and even better in my mind.

If the book is a great read overall, I'm not going to worry about inconsistencies. And if the show is just the best thing to ever hit the small screen, I won't worry about the inconsistencies on the show either.

No more Donna Downers

[vicksvapor77]

I honestly didn't mind any canon switches -- everything seems to be done for a reason. I don't think sloppiness had a part in it. if anything the show details seem to be on firmer ground that before.

How does Laura being 18 at the time of her death impact the show positively? Is it to make the older men somehow "less sleazy"? Does it impact any story points that you can see?

[Panapaok]

Mark Frost will be on Brad's podcast tomorrow to talk about the book, so we might get some clarification on his intentions.

[Ped]

Sorry if this has been mentioned before but I'm only skimming this thread as I'm not getting the book until Thursday and I hate myself enough already for slightly spoiling it.

However, if I can make the assumption that this book is a dossier compiled by "The archivist", then I can presume the book reads through like a hoard of documents, newspaper reports, journal entries, official FBI reports etc, right? Can we not then presume that some of these documents have been filed and reported wrongly? We often read inaccuracies, lies and half-truths in newspapers so why not assume that Frost is compiling this with intentional character mishaps? Like when in the movie Death Proof the Jungle Julia characters says the name of a band wrong (Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick and Tich). The character is never pulled up on the wrong name and when the flaw was put to Quentin Tarantino he said that it's because Jungle Julia is not as clever as she likes to make out. Now I know that this isn't really the same issue but the same line of thought could be put to it.

Would it really be such a wild idea to think that some of the reported errors may be addressed in the new series and corrected upon?

I don't know. I trust user Ross's judgment a lot and to see him disheartened about the book has got me worried a little myself.

[Ross]

Sorry if this has been mentioned before but I'm only skimming this thread as I'm not getting the book until Thursday and I hate myself enough already for slightly spoiling it.

However, if I can make the assumption that this book is a dossier compiled by "The archivist", then I can presume the book reads through like a hoard of documents, newspaper reports, journal entries, official FBI reports etc, right? Can we not then presume that some of these documents have been filed and reported wrongly? We often read inaccuracies, lies and half-truths in newspapers so why not assume that Frost is compiling this with intentional character mishaps? Like when in the movie Death Proof the Jungle Julia characters says the name of a band wrong (Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick and Tich). The character is never pulled up on the wrong name and when the flaw was put to Quentin Tarantino he said that it's because Jungle Julia is not as clever as she likes to make out. Now I know that this isn't really the same issue but the same line of thought could be put to it.

Would it really be such a wild idea to think that some of the reported errors may be addressed in the new series and corrected upon?

I don't know. I trust user Ross's judgment a lot and to see him disheartened about the book has got me worried a little myself.

Thanks. And no, I don't think we can attribute the changes to a faulty narrator (ie the archivist). Many of the continuity issues stem from documents penned by the characters themselves (Cooper, Truman, Audrey, Briggs, Hawk, even Agent TP). There are handwritten notes from Audrey and Truman that make no sense in context with the series.

[AgentCoop]

However, if I can make the assumption that this book is a dossier compiled by "The archivist", then I can presume the book reads through like a hoard of documents, newspaper reports, journal entries, official FBI reports etc, right? Can we not then presume that some of these documents have been filed and reported wrongly? We often read inaccuracies, lies and half-truths in newspapers so why not assume that Frost is compiling this with intentional character mishaps? Like when in the movie Death Proof the Jungle Julia characters says the name of a band wrong (Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick and Tich). The character is never pulled up on the wrong name and when the flaw was put to Quentin Tarantino he said that it's because Jungle Julia is not as clever as she likes to make out. Now I know that this isn't really the same issue but the same line of thought could be put to it.

Would it really be such a wild idea to think that some of the reported errors may be addressed in the new series and corrected upon?

Are you saying that Mark Frost, master storyteller, acclaimed novelist and television visionary, might actually...know what he's doing?

Nah. Surely it can't be that. Let's continue clutching our pearls.

[LonelySoul]

Are you saying that Mark Frost, master storyteller, acclaimed novelist and television visionary, might actually...know what he's doing?

Nah. Surely it can't be that. Let's continue clutching our pearls.

He may. Those of us concerned about the discrepancies have admitted to that. I've done it numerous times.

I've also said that there is currently no reason to believe that based on what is actually inside the book. It may be. But nothing suggests that. Hopefully he discusses things on the Dukes show or something like that.

[BEARisonFord]

Man, I gotta tell you guys... It's a real bummer to see people canceling their pre-orders. Anybody holding out on buying this are robbing themselves from a really rich and fun experience. Frost is such a great writer, and the historical fiction stuff in particular is extremely well written and gives me a lot of the same vibes that the best Twin Peaks stuff has done before. That's exactly what i've waited 24 years for, and i'm pretty stoked. I hope all of you can experience a little bit of that too. If not, I hope some of you can readjust your expectations for when S3 inevitably ruffles the same rigid feathers.

Also, dude who tweeted that garbage at Mark Frost: that is embarrassing, have some tact and delete those tweets.

[LonelySoul]

Also, dude who tweeted that garbage at Mark Frost: that is embarrassing, have some tact and delete those tweets.

That was me. Sure, I was abrasive. I'm legitimately upset over the discrepancies though. If you're not, good for you. I for one would like confirmation from the source if this stuff is intentional or not. Might not have been the most tactful way, but I'm not thrilled with Frost right now. If he's not thrilled with me, so what? He has my money. I'm not deleting them.

[BEARisonFord]

That was me. Sure, I was abrasive. I'm legitimately upset over the discrepancies though. If you're not, good for you. I for one would like confirmation from the source if this stuff is intentional or not. Might not have been the most tactful way, but I'm not thrilled with Frost right now. If he's not thrilled with me, so what? He has my money. I'm not deleting them.

I don't want to derail this thread with this, but would you treat him the same way in person? I get you are frustrated and that's fine, but I would hope you would have a little more respect.

[Soolsma]

I agree it's really disrespectful. You should be happy he gave you Twin Peaks in the first place.

[I'm the Muffin]

Well I'm one of those who has gone ahead and cancelled my order until these discrepancies are explained.

It's not an emotional response (though I'm obviously disappointed). I've been a fan since the original airing, and it's baffling to me if Frost expects people to just not care/accept these inconsistencies. Twin Peaks to me is the show I fell in love with. If it's not consistent with the show... then what's the point?

[LonelySoul]

That was me. Sure, I was abrasive. I'm legitimately upset over the discrepancies though. If you're not, good for you. I for one would like confirmation from the source if this stuff is intentional or not. Might not have been the most tactful way, but I'm not thrilled with Frost right now. If he's not thrilled with me, so what? He has my money. I'm not deleting them.

I don't want to derail this thread with this, but would you treat him the same way in person? I get you are frustrated and that's fine, but I would hope you would have a little more respect.

Yes. I didn't swear at him, I didn't call him an idiot or anything else like that. I simply expressed I was annoyed and disappointed, that I hoped the discrepancies were intentional, I cited specific characters that had continuity issues, asked if we should count it canon and called the issues glaring. But I was snarky. If I were to meet him in person I'd raise the same objections and hope for clarification. I know creators don't want to hear this kind of stuff about their work, but oh well.

I agree it's really disrespectful. You should be happy he gave you Twin Peaks in the first place.

He did, but I'm not sure how that's related to whether or not I'm allowed to express frustration. I don't have to be silent simply because Frost deigns to bestow upon us Twin Peaks.