Jake

Twin Peaks Rewatch 38: The Return, Part 4

Recommended Posts

I agree to a certain extent.  The Josie character was problematic on a few levels (submissive Asian woman/dragon lady), but Audrey,  while she was portrayed as beautiful and sometimes in a sexual context, had TONS of agency. She made things happen. She was in control for the most part. There was also several very different female characters: Donna, Norma, Nadine, Lucy, Catherine Martell, Shelly; so no one female character was responsible for representing all women on the show. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no authority on representation of women in media obviously, so take this with a grain of salt, but to my memory, several of the women in the original run of the show were represented with a pretty high degree of interiority and agency, without being routinely sexualized or exploited in obnoxious ways, including Norma (my fav!), Donna, and Catherine. There are other women characters who arguably meet some or all of these criteria but are (like several male characters) fairly one-note or who serve a more specific recurring function either narratively or tonally. The characters I mentioned—and I'm sure other people will have their own opinions—are to me very multi-dimensional, complex, and central to the parts of the story with which they intersect. I don't think you could find comparable examples in the new series so far. Hopefully that changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think season 2 established that Cole has form with younger women with Shelly, no? He was a mid-to-late-30s professional star-struck by a girl 20 years his junior. It was played very sweetly (as I recall) but it was still questionable on paper. His conversation with Denise could be calling back to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Chris said:

I'm no authority on representation of women in media obviously, so take this with a grain of salt, but to my memory, several of the women in the original run of the show were represented with a pretty high degree of interiority and agency, without being routinely sexualized or exploited in obnoxious ways, including Norma (my fav!), Donna, and Catherine. There are other women characters who arguably meet some or all of these criteria but are (like several male characters) fairly one-note or who serve a more specific recurring function either narratively or tonally. The characters I mentioned—and I'm sure other people will have their own opinions—are to me very multi-dimensional, complex, and central to the parts of the story with which they intersect. I don't think you could find comparable examples in the new series so far. Hopefully that changes.

Nailed it. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fairly confident that we'll be seeing more women with agency as the show goes one, who are not already established Twin Peaks characters. There's the female forensics cop in South Dakota who is being set up as an important character, Naomi Watts, Laura Dern, Tammy Preston...

 

The original show was so much more of an ensemble, so it had a lot of space right from the beginning to flesh out all the women. The Return so far has been heavily Cooper focused, so there hasn't been a lot of time to develop new characters. That is clearly shifting though, but right now the balance of the show as far as women is more towards the disposable.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BizzyDQ said:

The way that actress is directed to walk is ridiculous though. Can't she just walk like a person?  The four women murdered and agent Preston's portrayal thus far individually would have probably just mildly annoyed me, but cumulatively it's a lot to take 

 

I do not want to discount your feels/reactions here but I also do not want to make these things out to be undeniable facts, which can only be read one way. I fear that you are making a list of all the "bad" things, as you see them, and once you fill up the page you will be convinced that the show is what you worried it might be. Once you go down a road like that it is hard to turn back, because the cumulative effect continues to grow and block out anything else.

 

Consider, just consider, that there are other factors and ways of looking at this:

  1. Lynch's work, like the majority of work out there, is male dominated, but this is particularly true for the themes that he generally deals with (i.e. evil, aggressive, disgusting people committing horrible, violent, and callous actions - the majority of which are committed by men in the real world).
  2. Lynch is acknowledging the base instincts of most heterosexal men while showing a clear contrast between those who abuse women and those who make an effort to be something better. They are not going to escape being men (Preston's walk is not going to go unnoticed) but they are going to choose how they behave (Albert comments on it, as he shouldn't, while Cole does not, but neither are giving any indication that they are less liking to give her work or expect her to do a bad job or expect anything outside of work from her).
  3. Albert may be insensitive to workplace etiquette (commenting on Preston's walk) but he also knows her well enough to know she gets car sick and does not seem to be indifferent to her suffering, just as he's not indifferent to Cole's desire to see Mount Rushmore, despite his reputation for being a heartless jerk.
  4. Why is Preston's walk "ridiculous?" Have you never known a woman who looks like a runway model and chooses to play it up at some moments by playing the part? Why does it have to be a bad thing here? Maybe she's feeling disrespected and wants them to take a good look at what they will never have. Is it the best choice in the workplace? No. Is it a choice someone might make? Yes.
  5. The action that I loved from Preston is her hand wave in the car when the driver suddenly stops because he thinks the big-wig in the back is sick. Without saying a word she is letting him know that it's not all about Cole and he should keep moving.
  6. One of the four woman murdered (Tracy?) was clearly sent to the glass box room to seduce a really stupid young man. Couldn't you complain about the sexist portrayal of that young man, who doesn't respect the job he has been hired to do and will ignore all the rules at a moments notice just for the opportunity to sit next to a pretty woman? They are both murdered together, and both in a state of undress, after she initiates a sexual encounter (presumably to take advantage of him and get whatever she was hired to find).
  7. Another murdered woman is the wife of the man set up for murder, who is clearly a much more powerful and smarter character than her husband. Why is the fact that Bad Coop shoots her so much worse than the implication that Bad Coop set up her whiny husband for murder?
  8. Another murdered woman's head is found in bed with a naked man's headless body? Why doesn't he factor into your assessment of how men and women are represented?
  9. I saw someone else comment here about how we first see Jade topless. Actually we see her naked but turned to the side, and this is perfectly appropriate for a prostitute character. She is also depicted as totally in control of her situation, not a helpless victim; and kind, even to an idiot like Duggy. As they said on the podcast, she is one of the most real characters we see. Shouldn't that count for something?
  10. How does Cooper get out of the netherworld? Only through the actions/help of women.

I'll stop there and hope this gives you enough things to consider. Is there sexism going on in Twin Peak: The Return? Yes. As there is in the rest of life. But I do not believe that it is uniquely horrid or nearly as one-dimensionally bad as you make it out to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  1. Why is Preston's walk "ridiculous?" Have you never known a woman who looks like a runway model and chooses to play it up at some moments by playing the part? Why does it have to be a bad thing here? Maybe she's feeling disrespected and wants them to take a good look at what they will never have. Is it the best choice in the workplace? No. Is it a choice someone might make? Yes.

As a moderately attractive woman who also happens to work in an industry dominated by old men (agricultural sciences) I can say that is not a choice a reasonable person who wants to be taken seriously by her peers would ever make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BizzyDQ said:

 

  1. Why is Preston's walk "ridiculous?" Have you never known a woman who looks like a runway model and chooses to play it up at some moments by playing the part? Why does it have to be a bad thing here? Maybe she's feeling disrespected and wants them to take a good look at what they will never have. Is it the best choice in the workplace? No. Is it a choice someone might make? Yes.

As a moderately attractive woman who also happens to work in an industry dominated by old men (agricultural sciences) I can say that is not a choice a reasonable person who wants to be taken seriously by her peers would ever make.

 

Or taken seriously by the viewers. I find it very difficult to buy what Chrysta Bell is selling as an actress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BizzyDQ said:

 

  1. Why is Preston's walk "ridiculous?" Have you never known a woman who looks like a runway model and chooses to play it up at some moments by playing the part? Why does it have to be a bad thing here? Maybe she's feeling disrespected and wants them to take a good look at what they will never have. Is it the best choice in the workplace? No. Is it a choice someone might make? Yes.

As a moderately attractive woman who also happens to work in an industry dominated by old men (agricultural sciences) I can say that is not a choice a reasonable person who wants to be taken seriously by her peers would ever make.

 

Because every "reasonable person" thinks exactly like you and always makes perfect choices, never impulsive ones? 

 

I simply tried to give you a number of ways of looking at this. You don't need to agree with everyone of them or any of them. I simply hoped to point out that reasonable people can disagree and maybe, just maybe, the show isn't as sexist as you are making it out to be. I hope you can see some validity in this, rather than simply looking for more things to object to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jamesklambert said:

 

Because every "reasonable person" thinks exactly like you and always makes perfect choices, never impulsive ones? 

 

I simply tried to give you a number of ways of looking at this. You don't need to agree with everyone of them or any of them. I simply hoped to point out that reasonable people can disagree and maybe, just maybe, the show isn't as sexist as you are making it out to be. I hope you can see some validity in this, rather than simply looking for more things to object to.

 

You should also consider taking your own advice. You are expecting other people to consider your frame of reference but considering someone replied to you with her experience as an actual person in the situation you are describing, and you still are acting as though they are the one who needs to reframe their position, maybe you aren't extending the same intellectual flexibility you're asking other people to extend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Chris said:

 

You should also consider taking your own advice. You are expecting other people to consider your frame of reference but considering someone replied to you with her experience as an actual person in the situation you are describing, and you still are acting as though they are the one who needs to reframe their position, maybe you aren't extending the same intellectual flexibility you're asking other people to extend.

 

I'm not going to play this game. I have agreed that there is sexism in the show. I have simply pointed out it is not 100%, clearly "misogynistic," or even overwhelmingly so. I have tried to give several examples of other things that might be considered or seen differently by reasonable viewers. Rather than acknowledging my overall - glass is half empty, glass is half full - argument or 9 out of the 10 bullet points examples I gave, she focused on one and told me again how I'm clearly wrong, because "reasonable people" would only think the way she does. Now you are telling me that I'm not not being "intellectually flexible" because I am daring to say that reasonable people can see it differently?

 

Sorry I bothered to post anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BizzyDQ said:

Hey guys.  I really like the show, but I'm not going to lie, I'm pretty disappointed that the show's portrayal of women hasn't come up in discussion.  After you spent time talking about casual racism with Hawk, there is absolutely no mention of things that could at this point read as blatant misogyny.  

Yeah, we let you down, here. You're right, and I'm sorry.

Folks on Twitter often talk about a "problematic fave," a book, movie, artist, show, musician etc that they love in spite of their clearly backwards point of view on one element or another. For me, Twin Peaks is the most problematic of my most favorite TV shows. The fact is, it is at times racist and sexist. And while David Lynch is a great example of a person who has challenged himself his whole life, even he would acknowledge that he isn't perfect.

I can enjoy Twin Peaks' masterful balance between the dreamlike puzzle of art and the addictive familiarity of serial television, and still criticize the fact that its lurid misogyny has resurfaced-- not 100%, not as a major theme, but as a part of its texture, and one that should not be ignored eve nay its fans. The show has sexist parts, and the casting is pretty white. The depiction of Jade, the only black character so far with a speaking part, evokes the exotic fetishization of black bodies. Then, seconds later, it shows her to be an intelligent, sensible woman who shows compassion to her client while making sure she keeps herself out of trouble. In the space of two minutes Lynch succumbs to old habits while showing his compassion for what women endure. I forgive the former because of the latter, but i forget neither.

 Crime shows, as well, walk a very very fine line, sometimes using murder as a puzzle, sometimes wallowing in the blood, sometimes eliciting titillation of our baser instincts, and often using genre to make pointed critiques about society. What I love about Twin Peaks is that it does one more thing: successfully integrate surrealism into the form of a TV show. Nothing else comes close, and as a person of color who sees almost no one like himself represented in Twin Peaks, I watch mostly for that final thing, that dreamlike puzzle to which I can't help but return. 

We're the kind of viewers that analyze every frame, and that means we're going to find some things wanting. That's okay! Critical viewing doesn't ruin art, it helps it fulfill its purpose. I really appreciate that BizzyDQ  addressed this issue, and I feel responsible for not bringing it up sooner, even in anticipation to the show.

I hope Chrysta Bell surprises us as Tamara Preston. She's not the first professional woman surrounded by men who simultaneously respect her work and indulge their eyes and minds. As the agent who's dig deepest into the secret history of Twin Peaks, perhaps she'll put the pieces together in a way that no one could before, like so many brilliant women do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, jamesklambert said:

 

I'm not going to play this game. I have agreed that there is sexism in the show. I have simply pointed out it is not 100%, clearly "misogynistic," or even overwhelmingly so. I have tried to give several examples of other things that might be considered or seen differently by reasonable viewers. Rather than acknowledging my overall - glass is half empty, glass is half full - argument or 9 out of the 10 bullet points examples I gave, she focused on one and told me again how I'm clearly wrong, because "reasonable people" would only think the way she does. Now you are telling me that I'm not not being "intellectually flexible" because I am daring to say that reasonable people can see it differently?

 

Sorry I bothered to post anything.

 

All I'm saying is that you are expecting other people to conform to your view in a way you are not offering to do yourself. She replied to the bullet point with which she has specific firsthand experience. That seems pretty fair to me. You obviously don't have to agree, but by the same token I don't know why you seem to think your perspective somehow carries a weight that other people's don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Chris said:

 

All I'm saying is that you are expecting other people to conform to your view in a way you are not offering to do yourself. She replied to the bullet point with which she has specific firsthand experience. That seems pretty fair to me. You obviously don't have to agree, but by the same token I don't know why you seem to think your perspective somehow carries a weight that other people's don't.

 

BizzyDQ came into this discussion talking about, “things that could at this point read as blatant misogyny.” I simply tied to point out that those things could also be read as NOT blatant misogyny and there are other elements of the show that should be considered.

 

BizzyDQ’s statements since then have been very absolute. It is, “ridiculous,” for the actress to be directed to walk that way. She was not walking, “like a person,” and it is, “not a choice a reasonable person who wants to be taken seriously by her peers would ever make.” There is no room for any other view here; she is simply right, period.

 

I don’t see anything similar in what I have said. I have simply trying to point out how there is another way to see it. That a reasonable person can see it another way and still be reasonable. The only position I have asked her, and other to “conform” to, is that it is not as cut and dry as she makes it out to be. Why do I think that my position, “somehow carries a weight that other people's don't?” Because my position isn’t an absolutist one. And I really don’t understand why you fail to see the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jamesklambert, might I recommend you step away for a little bit and reflect on why you feel this way. You are not coming across very favorably right now, especially considering you're 1. newly posting to the forums and 2. Singling out the arguments of one of only a couple women who have been present in this conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, antikewl said:

This is interesting. Someone has cut together footage of the Glass Box and Purple Room scenes, across all of the episodes, side by side.

 

http://welcometotwinpeaks.com/theories/glass-box-dale-cooper-naido-footage-synchronized/

 

 

 

I wanted to post this too.  Everybody watch this; the way it all lines up is kind of amazing.
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, jennegatron said:

jamesklambert, might I recommend you step away for a little bit and reflect on why you feel this way. You are not coming across very favorably right now, especially considering you're 1. newly posting to the forums and 2. Singling out the arguments of one of only a couple women who have been present in this conversation.

 

Wow. Just wow. 

 

I'm not "feeling" something; I'm making a fairly straightforward argument. When Person A says there is only one way for "reasonable people" to see X and Person B says that reasonable people can see X differently and still be reasonable, then Person B is not being unreasonable or unfair. And Person B doesn't need a time out to think about feelings. 

 

I suggest that others stop turning this into a narrative about me that isn't supported by what actually happened and, again, I wish I hadn't bothered to post in the first place. I came here to post about some ideas/questions that no one has responded to (see my first post) and ended up falling into this argument because I dared to say that the show isn't as clearly sexist as some make it out to be. 

 

P. S. I "singled" out one woman's arguments because I was being asked about (or reprimanded) about the points being made between myself and that woman. How is that wrong, bad, or negative?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2017 at 0:44 AM, Gregalor said:

I really really hope that Cooper's coffee spit-take was the violent awaking of Normal Coop, the coffee bringing him to his senses.

 

Wow, my reaction to that scene was the total opposite.  It seemed like Lynch was teasing us with the prospect that one sip of blessed coffee would finally bring back the Cooper we've all been waiting for.  Instead he spits it out as if his system can't even tolerate swallowing the stuff anymore and utters a brainless "Hiiiiii!" that seemed to confirm the taste of coffee hadn't helped him a bit. Like one of those horrible beats in a movie where the hero reaches for the thing we think will save her and it's gone or she drops it or it breaks in her hand.

 

But I hope you're right.  Everything Kyle MacLachlan has been doing so far has been incredible and I really can't wait to see what he does with Special Agent Dale Cooper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jamesklambert, I'm not going back on my statement,  but apologize if I came across as referring to you as unreasonable.  That was not my intention. I will point out though that women using their sexuality to get ahead in male dominated industries is something that rarely exists in the real world, and on the occasions it does happen, it pretty much always backfires resulting in your male colleagues objectifying you even more and your female colleagues resenting you. You tend to learn this pretty quickly,  so I stand by that it is not a decision a reasonable woman would make. Whether or not it is a reasonable directorial decision is another question all together. I think no, but I can see room for interpretation and am still very willing to let Mr. Lynch prove me wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BizzyDQ said:

Jamesklambert, I'm not going back on my statement,  but apologize if I came across as referring to you as unreasonable.  That was not my intention. I will point out though that women using their sexuality to get ahead in male dominated industries is something that rarely exists in the real world, and on the occasions it does happen, it pretty much always backfires resulting in your male colleagues objectifying you even more and your female colleagues resenting you. You tend to learn this pretty quickly,  so I stand by that it is not a decision a reasonable woman would make. Whether or not it is a reasonable directorial decision is another question all together. I think no, but I can see room for interpretation and am still very willing to let Mr. Lynch prove me wrong.

 

I have to admit, I kind of disagree with what you're saying. I almost didn't want to admit that for fear of people taking two women disagreeing with each other out of context, so I'm going to try and really carefully explain what I mean.

 

Our society prizes attractiveness in all genders, but you can make the excellent case that it is most prized for women. Of course, any woman who is even remotely attractive is in danger of being accused of trading on the attractiveness, which is just one of the many paradoxes that makes living in a patriarchal society so impossible to navigate. Your both blessed and damned for meeting the arbitrary beauty standard. A lot of women confront that paradox and try to just opt out as much as they can. Unfortunately, since we do live in a sexist society, you can never really opt out of it unless you find a way to fully insulate yourself from said society. However, some women choose to opt into that dynamic and try to receive as much benefit from a terrible situation as possible. And that means using the "power" (false power, but it's still something) that comes with being considered attractive to their benefit.

 

Now I don't really feel comfortable saying definitively if women using attractiveness is a good or bad thing, and I also don't feel comfortable assuming a woman's intention and saying that she definitely is trading on her looks for some kind of reward. But that's something that does happen in real life. It also happens a lot of TV/movies, especially when a man is writing the woman. It happens a lot on the old Twin Peaks show; many of the women who earlier were praised for their interiority can also be cited as directly/indirectly benefiting from their beauty. Does that make them bad? No. Does the fact that it's a male writer creating these female characters make this whole mess even more complicated? Hell yes.

 

So those are my thoughts. I still think the show could be a little better about women and that it's currently underserved by the fact that none of the women introduced so far have had any time for development. I really believe that will improve as the season goes on though.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Urthman said:

Wow, my reaction to that scene was the total opposite.  It seemed like Lynch was teasing us with the prospect that one sip of blessed coffee would finally bring back the Cooper we've all been waiting for

 Yeah, I agree I think it would have been really shitty and cheesy if coffee had brought him back. I really thought that's what was coming though and thought "please no" and then was so surprised.  I really love that whole scene. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Urthman said:

 

I wanted to post this too.  Everybody watch this; the way it all lines up is kind of amazing.
 

 

 

That reminds me. Where did that security guard get to, anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Urthman said:

 

I wanted to post this too.  Everybody watch this; the way it all lines up is kind of amazing.
 

 

 

That's really amazing! Thanks for posting. I'm generally skeptical of this kind of thing but I think there's definitely something there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the extent that that is deliberate, I wonder who is behind it. I didn't take Lynch to be into that kind of precision and game-playing, but perhaps I've misapprehended his nature. Or perhaps the intention is not for people to actually watch them side-by-side, but for it to have some kind of subconscious resonance. 

 

Then again, I wonder how much licence has been taken by the person who compiled that video, given that Cooper's perspective is split over two episodes. Did that lead to there being some leeway in the timing? Not that I don't think that there's something there; I'm just wondering. 

 

Some of the similarities are definitely striking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of musings:

 

1) There are many mentions of and allusions to gaming: One-Eyed Jacks, Windom Earl's chess playing, the dark scene at the Vegas casino, and now we've seen Cooper at the Silver Mustang. This may be a massive jump, but is it possible that Lucy's use of the word "Indian" instead of "Native American" could be an indicator that Hawk's heritage might have more to do with a stereotypical heritage than an actual heritage a la gambling?

 

2) The color gold: Dougie turns into a gold marble.  Gold painted shovels. The gold ring (albeit with the green stone).  Are the things manufactured in the Black Lodge forged of gold?  Is Jacoby anticipating a war with the Black Lodge and forging his own gold things? ( I realized he had painted his mask with gold as well, which made me think of armor).

 

3) What would be the purpose of revisiting the entirely new but old Bill Hastings / Leland storyline?  Does Bob lives there?  Will there be more letters found under fingernails?  Will the police team there ever find Ruth's body?  Does it matter?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now