“It’s rather chilling to consider that one of the most indelible images in the Star Wars saga is its heroine silenced, stripped down, and in chains. I know a lot of men have positive feelings about this particular costume — in fact there’s an entire episode of the popular sitcom Friends that’s devoted to it — which is why it’s kind of hilariously ironic that Han Solo was blind during these scenes. That is, the one man who is romantically attached to Leia is the one man who never saw her in the golden bikini. Which means Han Solo is more attracted to a mouthy space age shield maiden than he is to a tight female body on display. In fact, if I could be so bold, I would suggest that Han Solo would be more turned on hearing about how Leia strangled Jabba the Hutt to death — using nothing but the chain that enslaved her — than he would be hearing about how his sworn enemy turned the woman he loved into a tawdry plaything.”
being on here 5 years does not make you heauxes a tumblr ancient. im sorry but you have to have been here when ppl still said “creys” and “what is air” and you actually remember this cursed imaged
So wild that instead of guidelines online moving towards no kind of body being considered inherently sexual and inappropriate we’ve gone onto like explicitly admitting that it’s the association of a body w womanhood that makes it inappropriate and dirty
and it’s super skeevy to me that they said it’s ok if the woman is “breastfeeding or post birth” as if a woman’s body is only absolved of its obscenity if it’s performing its “duty” of motherhood
I know there’s a lot of tension after Tumblr’s new policy annouced for December 17th, but reblog this if you aren’t leaving Tumblr so that other blogs can know they aren’t going to be completely alone!
ok, i hesitate to write all this out because it might make no sense at all, but i’m gonna put it out there anyway.
so i was just, not really “rewatching” tptr the other day, but i was going back and just rewatching scenes, and skipping ahead and back and trying to look for certain things out of sequence. and while watching that way, it occurred to me — now, i’m not saying there’s some kind of “twist” or trick or like clue to “getting” season 3… but IF ok, maybe…let’s just say there was like one missing piece to all these “grand, unifying theories of twin peaks” and a reason why we got all these “laura is the antichrist”/“cooper killed laura”/“cooper doesn’t exist”-edgy reddit theories… if there’s one thing that could fundamentally change how we should have been watching s3, knowing David Lynch… it would be something deceptively simple, i think. like, so easy you would think, well, that’s so obvious that it couldn’t be the answer.
but ok. what occurred to me watching all these random scenes out of order, how s3 as a whole had this very…unplaceably strange feeling, scenes that were like self-contained dreams. like…very focused in their detail and specificity…then often never returned to again. I just started to wonder, what if season 3 is like…not actually a continuation of twin peaks? but a show that only LOOKS like it is, superficially? i mean like, what if it doesn’t actually continue the narrative thread of s1, s2, and FWWM?
ok, what do i mean by that still, right? ok well…we mostly agree that at SOME point the reality of s3 must shatter right? the story gets broken at some point, and this seemed to obviously happen in part 18, with what Cooper does, when the entire narrative changes a la Mulholland Drive/Lost Highway. but revisiting s3, and feeling the strange quality the whole season had, i wondered…what if Coop never really leaves the Lodge at all? so everything we see, his journey back to twin peaks, is Coop’s dream (in a way) of what he’s only trying to do the entire time?
i know this is probably just like, a very hot take, and might very well be a meaningless mess by the time its cooled. or maybe i’m just saying something completely obvious? it’s hard for me to gauge on my own because i really don’t know anymore what anybody thinks about twin peaks honestly. but the main pieces for me are: 1) the presence (or absence) of Laura after she goes missing at the beginning.
she haunts the whole season through her missing diary, by appearing to Gordon, and when she’s finally found, she’s not Laura. this ghost of Laura hanging over the show seems to say, “this is not my story.” her storyline has been hijacked, taken over, the continuity of twin peaks from FWWM to tptr is already fractured. “laura is the one” but then, why don’t we ever see her? why does no one mention her except incidentally? and why does she come knocking on Cole’s door crying in a vision halfway through the season?
Cole plays a much bigger role in s3, and the connection between him and Coop is strongly hinted at. but what is that connection? if we look at sunset boulevard and Cole’s namesake, the real Gordon Cole from paramount studios, what is the significance? in SB, Gordon Cole is believed to be someone else working for DeMille…part of Norma’s fantasy of returning to movies – “the old gang back together again” – everything back the way it was…when in fact Cole is an entirely unrelated person to the plot just looking to use Norma’s car. DeMille, and everyone else around Norma, eventually cannot bring themselves to be the one to shatter the illusion she’s created, so they go along with keeping up the appearance of her dream. she never learns the truth of who “Gordon Cole” is. the fact of Cole having such a pronounced role in s3 seems to back up this idea that Cole’s character represents, or at least hints at, through sunset, the idea that there’s a truth or reality to the story which we are never told, and that this is deeply connected to Cooper the entire time.
then there’s the idea that Mike, or the Arm, cannot be trusted and they are seemingly guiding Coop the entire time. and then Mike telling Coop literally “you need to wake up.”
and then, we can still speculate whatever it is that Laura whispers to Coop a second time in the Lodge. and i think whatever secret truth she tells him that we’ll never know, is tied to whatever “idea” Lynch says came to him that inspired s3 in the first place. something i think had to change, to tell him to return to twin peaks, after he said for years that he had no interest “continuing” it. then suddenly, an idea comes, a way back into the story? we know of course it has something to do with “i’ll see you again in 25 years” as far as the timing of s3’s release. but lynch doesn’t tell us WHAT that idea was, of course.
the more time that passes though, it seems more and more like a crucial element of s3 is this disjunction between the cooper and laura threads of tp. i suspect whatever laura tells him has something to do with coop eternally repeating some kind of error, lost in a series of recurring stories of his own making. i hesitate to say “timeline” because i don’t think this whole sci-fi interdimensional “time travel” lens is quite right. i think its more about perspectives and narrative itself. as much as you can say inland empire has anything to do with multiple timelines.
coop’s trying to get back to laura, what he thinks he should do, but of course, our poor Coop doesn’t know what to do, as much as he believes he should be certain. we know the “good” Cooper does find Laura eventually. in one iteration of twin peaks because he’s there with her in the end of FWWM. but this Coop is perpetually half a step off, stumbling around through time and space. Laura finds her angel without him in the end. it’s something she maybe even needs to do alone. what does that mean for cooper though, lost in his own – now separate – story? “One chants out, between two worlds.”
