The Secret History of Twin Peaks

[BEARisonFord]

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?

Just out of curiosity, if you heard similar things about S3 prior to it's airing, would you refuse to watch?

[Soolsma]

Just out of curiosity, if you heard similar things about S3 prior to it's airing, would you refuse to watch?

Hell no, I'd watch season 3 if it involved space pirates and retconned the original to a medieval setting.

btw: Is your avatar implying Han shot first?

[I'm the Muffin]

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?

Just out of curiosity, if you heard similar things about S3 prior to it's airing, would you refuse to watch?

Fair question. No I wouldn't, because I'm as much a fan of David Lynch the film maker as I am Twin Peaks the show, and as the new Lynch project--considering I sort-of believed that Inland Empire would be his last work--I'm thrilled to see where his muse takes him next. Whether I'll be able to feel like it's a canon continuation of Twin Peaks is another matter.

[Panapaok]

So we don't care if Lynch doesn't give a damn about continuity because he is a God among us but if Frost includes some discrepancies in his book, then he's sloppy and lazy. Sigh.

[bowisneski]

For those of you on the fence/cancelling preorders here is a list of discrepancies and possible explanations

I'm not going to discuss anything to do with dates, as those could easily be misprints on documents or misremembering sod Briggs, Coop, etc.

Ed and Nadine meet after Ed runs off to Nam, instead of running away in high school
-Ed told Cooper a simplified easy to digest version that still caused him to feel emotion, but he didn't have to open up to a complete stranger.
-history has changed
-gaffe

Audrey goes to TP S&L to expose her father and his Ghostwood plans
-Audrey is distraught to discover her father hasn't really turned around and is just using Save Ghostwood to stop Catherine with the hope of someday getting it back.
-history has changed
-gaffe

Norma's parents
-Coop, author of the file, mistook grandparents for parents
-Vivian was a step parent
-gaffe

Jacobys written plan to have Ben suffer a Civil War defeat
-in the heat of the moment, Jacoby switches ideas and decides to have Ben come out on top
-history has changed
-gaffe

Harry being present when Andrew forgave Josie and when Eckhardt and Andrew had their elevator conversation/Coop knowing exactly what Andrews plan was
-history change
-gaffe whose purpose was a recap

Change of names from Access Guide to Oh, What a Tangled Web...
-both tie in material, leaves wiggle room

Pete playing checkers instead of chess
-Briggs just trying to get across the quaintness of Pete
-Pete played both and Briggs did not know
-history changed
-gaffe

Margaret's brand
-it transformed over time
-change to add consistency
-gaffe

Those were all the major, non date related, ones I noticed.

[Ross]

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?

Just out of curiosity, if you heard similar things about S3 prior to it's airing, would you refuse to watch?

I'll jump in on this. And I'll say that for me it IS an emotional response. How can it not be? In fact I'm sure I'm way too emotionally connected. I think the biggest reason the continuity things disappoint me is that it does make me worry about S3. Something I haven't done until now. I want the creators to know and respect what has come before.

To answer your question, if I knew that S3 contradicted a fair amount of things in the original would I refuse to watch it? Or course not. But would I go into it with far less hope and enthusiasm? Yes.

And I'm not saying there isn't things in the book to enjoy. It's just my take.

[vicksvapor77]

For those of you on the fence/cancelling preorders here is a list of discrepancies and possible explanations

I'm not going to discuss anything to do with dates, as those could easily be misprints on documents or misremembering sod Briggs, Coop, etc.

Ed and Nadine meet after Ed runs off to Nam, instead of running away in high school
-Ed told Cooper a simplified easy to digest version that still caused him to feel emotion, but he didn't have to open up to a complete stranger.
-history has changed
-gaffe

Audrey goes to TP S&L to expose her father and his Ghostwood plans
-Audrey is distraught to discover her father hasn't really turned around and is just using Save Ghostwood to stop Catherine with the hope of someday getting it back.
-history has changed
-gaffe

Norma's parents
-Coop, author of the file, mistook grandparents for parents
-Vivian was a step parent
-gaffe

Jacobys written plan to have Ben suffer a Civil War defeat
-in the heat of the moment, Jacoby switches ideas and decides to have Ben come out on top
-history has changed
-gaffe

Harry being present when Andrew forgave Josie and when Eckhardt and Andrew had their elevator conversation/Coop knowing exactly what Andrews plan was
-history change
-gaffe whose purpose was a recap

Change of names from Access Guide to Oh, What a Tangled Web...
-both tie in material, leaves wiggle room

Pete playing checkers instead of chess
-Briggs just trying to get across the quaintness of Pete
-Pete played both and Briggs did not know
-history changed
-gaffe

Margaret's brand
-it transformed over time
-change to add consistency
-gaffe

Those were all the major, non date related, ones I noticed.

What about Laura being 18 at the time of her death? How/when is that discussed?

[Ross]

Audrey goes to TP S&L to expose her father and his Ghostwood plans
-Audrey is distraught to discover her father hasn't really turned around and is just using Save Ghostwood to stop Catherine with the hope of someday getting it back.
-history has changed
-gaffe

They also outright say that Catherine sold the land to Ben, and show the contract. Even though in the series Catherine blackmailed it back from Ben. It they wanted to just explain that Ben has Ghostwood now instead of Catherine for S3, they could have just said she sold it after Pete and Andrew died. But they make it clear that Ben owned it before the bank incident and reverse Audrey's reason for being there.

[vicksvapor77]

Audrey goes to TP S&L to expose her father and his Ghostwood plans
-Audrey is distraught to discover her father hasn't really turned around and is just using Save Ghostwood to stop Catherine with the hope of someday getting it back.
-history has changed
-gaffe

They also outright say that Catherine sold the land to Ben, and show the contract. Even though in the series Catherine blackmailed it back from Ben. It they wanted to just explain that Ben has Ghostwood now instead of Catherine for S3, they could have just said she sold it after Pete and Andrew died. But they make it clear that Ben owned it before the bank incident and reverse Audrey's reason for being there.

I need to review that section once I have the book and quote parts that don't make sense. It's very unclear, from what I've seen, what is post-show and what is off screen during show.

[Ross]

Harry being present when Andrew forgave Josie and when Eckhardt and Andrew had their elevator conversation/Coop knowing exactly what Andrews plan was
-history change
-gaffe whose purpose was a recap

Coop & Harry even being aware that Andrew is alive.

[bowisneski]

For those of you on the fence/cancelling preorders here is a list of discrepancies and possible explanations

I'm not going to discuss anything to do with dates, as those could easily be misprints on documents or misremembering sod Briggs, Coop, etc.

Ed and Nadine meet after Ed runs off to Nam, instead of running away in high school
-Ed told Cooper a simplified easy to digest version that still caused him to feel emotion, but he didn't have to open up to a complete stranger.
-history has changed
-gaffe

Audrey goes to TP S&L to expose her father and his Ghostwood plans
-Audrey is distraught to discover her father hasn't really turned around and is just using Save Ghostwood to stop Catherine with the hope of someday getting it back.
-history has changed
-gaffe

Norma's parents
-Coop, author of the file, mistook grandparents for parents
-Vivian was a step parent
-gaffe

Jacobys written plan to have Ben suffer a Civil War defeat
-in the heat of the moment, Jacoby switches ideas and decides to have Ben come out on top
-history has changed
-gaffe

Harry being present when Andrew forgave Josie and when Eckhardt and Andrew had their elevator conversation/Coop knowing exactly what Andrews plan was
-history change
-gaffe whose purpose was a recap

Change of names from Access Guide to Oh, What a Tangled Web...
-both tie in material, leaves wiggle room

Pete playing checkers instead of chess
-Briggs just trying to get across the quaintness of Pete
-Pete played both and Briggs did not know
-history changed
-gaffe

Margaret's brand
-it transformed over time
-change to add consistency
-gaffe

Those were all the major, non date related, ones I noticed.

What about Laura being 18 at the time of her death? How/when is that discussed?

Letter written by Jacoby

"(She came to see me the day after her 18th birthday - the point at which she'd be treated as an adult, with no legal obligation on my part to inform her parents;" after this he treated her for "six months".

[BEARisonFord]

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'm just sort of baffled you'd think those tweets were the most appropriate discourse in having a respectful discussion about a creators decision-making process. If anything, it makes someone more reticent to discuss their process or motives.

[Ped]

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.

I get you. But from the way this thread has exploded, the reported continuity issues seem legitimate. I've just had Ross reply to me that he doesn't believe the discrepancies are intentional mistakes or a character reporting a different version of events. He believes they are mistakes and errors. That certainly doesn't fill me with much confidence.

I'll still proudly buy the book and pass judgement after reading, but the folk who are digging up the innacuracies with the show are hard to ignore and I look forward to hear what Frost has to say at the forthcoming Q&A's in the next few weeks.

[bowisneski]

Audrey goes to TP S&L to expose her father and his Ghostwood plans
-Audrey is distraught to discover her father hasn't really turned around and is just using Save Ghostwood to stop Catherine with the hope of someday getting it back.
-history has changed
-gaffe

They also outright say that Catherine sold the land to Ben, and show the contract. Even though in the series Catherine blackmailed it back from Ben. It they wanted to just explain that Ben has Ghostwood now instead of Catherine for S3, they could have just said she sold it after Pete and Andrew died. But they make it clear that Ben owned it before the bank incident and reverse Audrey's reason for being there.

What I came away with was that Catherine sold the mill to Ben in the aftermath of the bank explosion and the date on the contract was wrong. That's why I was staying away from date related things. I may have misread it though.

[Ross]

Audrey goes to TP S&L to expose her father and his Ghostwood plans
-Audrey is distraught to discover her father hasn't really turned around and is just using Save Ghostwood to stop Catherine with the hope of someday getting it back.
-history has changed
-gaffe

They also outright say that Catherine sold the land to Ben, and show the contract. Even though in the series Catherine blackmailed it back from Ben. It they wanted to just explain that Ben has Ghostwood now instead of Catherine for S3, they could have just said she sold it after Pete and Andrew died. But they make it clear that Ben owned it before the bank incident and reverse Audrey's reason for being there.

What I came away with was that Catherine sold the mill to Ben in the aftermath of the bank explosion and the date on the contract was wrong. That's why I was staying away from date related things. I may have misread it though.

I don't think so. I think it was in the aftermath of the MILL FIRE, not the bank explosion. Which is why it was in Ben's hands when Audrey went to the bank. That was my understanding. I'd have to check again to be sure myself.