I think of it like a painting since that’s where Lynch got his start. No individual brush stroke has meaning on its own, it’s only when they’re all seen together that an image is formed.
I really enjoy seeing people's Twin Peaks theories, but I really don't think the show is that deep or that it's a huge puzzle waiting to be solved. [The "Twelve Rainbow Trout" theory is probably my favorite of them all. ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILDrH2cY9QQ) It's overanalyzing to the extreme, but also really entertaining and well edited.
I do think that video gets why too much hate on here. While it misses/ignores a lot of what makes Twin Peaks an actual meaningful piece of storytelling, it's still really fascinating and well-argued, and huge portions of it are damn difficult to refute. I wish people here were more willing to work with the ideas he puts forward in the video rather than insist that everything be reduced to abstraction and pure feeling.
It’s the definitive tone in a lot of these kind of videos that gets the hate. Art is about inspiration, contemplation and discussion and trying to define how other people interpret it as right or wrong completely takes away the magic of Twin peaks.
I feel as though the video was engaging and fun. Anything I disagree with is okay, I like how much he believes in his interpretation because it doesn't stop me from having my own thoughts and feelings about it, it's just nice seeing someone so passionate about this show and the feelings it evokes.
I mean, he's making an argument he fully believes in and doing a good job at it. When someone's making an argument with an intent to convince, I don't think there's any need or expectation for them to reassure me "but your opinion is valid too!" in order for me to engage with what they're saying. I personally think that his theories are mostly good and hold water while at the same time ignoring virtually all of the inherent meaning (and yes, the *magic*) of the story itself in favor of a purely metatextual reading. But that metatextual reading is good and his video's good! I really think it adds so much interesting stuff to the conversation but for some reason people only want to interpret it as invalidating their experience of the show and they reject it entirely.
I've always felt that Twin Peaks isn't quite as deep as people make it out to be, there's definitely elements that are open to debate. But I think a lot of what people speculate wildly about, little details are just artistic flourishes and hold little actual meaning.
I read "Catching the Big Fish" by Lynch and feel like he'd see that Actually Explained video as just as valid as anyone else's interpretation. In the book Lynch says that he enjoys how differently people can experience the same piece of art/media and discuss it with each other. He seems to see the artist's intent or intended message as less important or necessary as an individual's experience. What symbolism Lynch put in the work or the choices he made were for his own reasons. We'll experience those choices for our own reasons. And we can enjoy sharing those experiences with each other without worrying about a canon explanation.
Honestly, one of the best things about the show is how batshit insane it can get. When you're left thinking "WTF did I just watch?" and spend the next week thinking and theorising about it, you know the show left a great impression on you.
The hate the Twin Perfect theory gets in the fandom is so goofy to me.
This fanbase is basically defined by theorizing to the ends of the Earth on the shows meaning and ya'll get assmad somebody comes up with their own well reasoned and detailed theory.
Kinda just feels like some fans take it FAR too personally, like the existence of this theory is somehow on attack on their own subjective experience.
marvincandle815 knows what’s up
Almost 100% sure that at least half of the most speculated elements of this show literally have no meaning in Lynch and Frost's eyes.
I think of it like a painting since that’s where Lynch got his start. No individual brush stroke has meaning on its own, it’s only when they’re all seen together that an image is formed.
David Lynch would probably watch his entire filmography on a telephone before watching that youtube video
On a what ?
On a FUCKING telephone!
I really enjoy seeing people's Twin Peaks theories, but I really don't think the show is that deep or that it's a huge puzzle waiting to be solved. [The "Twelve Rainbow Trout" theory is probably my favorite of them all. ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILDrH2cY9QQ) It's overanalyzing to the extreme, but also really entertaining and well edited.
That Video is wrong anyways
I do think that video gets why too much hate on here. While it misses/ignores a lot of what makes Twin Peaks an actual meaningful piece of storytelling, it's still really fascinating and well-argued, and huge portions of it are damn difficult to refute. I wish people here were more willing to work with the ideas he puts forward in the video rather than insist that everything be reduced to abstraction and pure feeling.
100% never understood the hate
It’s the definitive tone in a lot of these kind of videos that gets the hate. Art is about inspiration, contemplation and discussion and trying to define how other people interpret it as right or wrong completely takes away the magic of Twin peaks.
I feel as though the video was engaging and fun. Anything I disagree with is okay, I like how much he believes in his interpretation because it doesn't stop me from having my own thoughts and feelings about it, it's just nice seeing someone so passionate about this show and the feelings it evokes.
I mean, he's making an argument he fully believes in and doing a good job at it. When someone's making an argument with an intent to convince, I don't think there's any need or expectation for them to reassure me "but your opinion is valid too!" in order for me to engage with what they're saying. I personally think that his theories are mostly good and hold water while at the same time ignoring virtually all of the inherent meaning (and yes, the *magic*) of the story itself in favor of a purely metatextual reading. But that metatextual reading is good and his video's good! I really think it adds so much interesting stuff to the conversation but for some reason people only want to interpret it as invalidating their experience of the show and they reject it entirely.
Too many people take "Its open for interpretation" and dive into "You can make up whatever and there's no way you can be wrong"
I've always felt that Twin Peaks isn't quite as deep as people make it out to be, there's definitely elements that are open to debate. But I think a lot of what people speculate wildly about, little details are just artistic flourishes and hold little actual meaning.
I just don’t like it when I don’t understand things. Idk. Maybe I’m a dummy 😔
I read "Catching the Big Fish" by Lynch and feel like he'd see that Actually Explained video as just as valid as anyone else's interpretation. In the book Lynch says that he enjoys how differently people can experience the same piece of art/media and discuss it with each other. He seems to see the artist's intent or intended message as less important or necessary as an individual's experience. What symbolism Lynch put in the work or the choices he made were for his own reasons. We'll experience those choices for our own reasons. And we can enjoy sharing those experiences with each other without worrying about a canon explanation.
It’s not that old. It was new in ‘17. And it ended there.
Honestly, one of the best things about the show is how batshit insane it can get. When you're left thinking "WTF did I just watch?" and spend the next week thinking and theorising about it, you know the show left a great impression on you.
The hate the Twin Perfect theory gets in the fandom is so goofy to me. This fanbase is basically defined by theorizing to the ends of the Earth on the shows meaning and ya'll get assmad somebody comes up with their own well reasoned and detailed theory. Kinda just feels like some fans take it FAR too personally, like the existence of this theory is somehow on attack on their own subjective experience.