[HN Gopher] David Lynch presents 'A Thinking Room'
___________________________________________________________________
David Lynch presents 'A Thinking Room'
Author : andsoitis
Score : 95 points
Date : 2024-04-16 18:06 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.wallpaper.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.wallpaper.com)
| mvkel wrote:
| > a single armchair is surrounded by thick curtains made of blue
| velvet -- a nod to Lynch's 1986 film Blue Velvet.
|
| I feel like Lynch might disagree with this. He pretty
| consistently dissuades people from trying to explain his works.
|
| Also:
|
| > Lynch was adamant that his new foray into design exists
| separately from his film career.
| wk_end wrote:
| From what I've seen, I've more gotten the sense that Lynch
| doesn't like people asking _him_ what the "correct"
| interpretation of his work is, which is slightly different than
| opposing the personal act of interpretation, or discussing it.
| lagniappe wrote:
| Sometimes the essence of something is just 'to be'.
| grimgrin wrote:
| lead me to a different thought, from something I watched
| recently: "Art for No One". I wish I could submit Jacob
| Geller's video of that title, but rules are rules.
|
| art for no one is quite "to be", though
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oqO3FXSecM
| drooopy wrote:
| - "Believe it or not, Eraserhead is my most spiritual film."
|
| - "Elaborate on that"
|
| - "No."
| Rinzler89 wrote:
| giga_chad.jpg
| alfalfasprout wrote:
| Exactly this. He's never (as far as I know at least) thought
| it's somehow _bad_ to discuss how his work might be
| interpreted. He just doesn 't like the idea that there's
| somehow a definitive interpretation of his work that he owns.
| colmmacc wrote:
| Many artists do feel that all interpretations are equally
| valid and that they don't want to stomp on that. But when
| Lynch expands on this, he often connects it to _mystery_.
| Most of his works have a strong sense of surrealism but there
| 's enough realism there too to also sense that there really
| is a central and consistent thematic logic that connects
| everything. It's not just randomly surreal. Often there is
| explicitly meta-textual layer at which a real deeper
| narrative is there; usually critiques of Hollywood and modern
| culture.
|
| Lynch's philosophy is that mystery endures, and that we
| naturally dwell on the mysterious. His mysteries become a
| gift to the viewer/reader, and the vividness of his strokes
| make them dwell for decades. I still dwell on so many aspects
| of Twin Peaks. If he simply gave his own interpretation or
| explanation, that would be that, and the gift would vanish
| like owls in the night.
| riedel wrote:
| I guess he just also very much enjoys being the madman [0] . It
| is fascinating to see the childish fun he has in all the things
| he is doing.
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqZpi8zAqe0
| nicklecompte wrote:
| On the other hand Lynch has always been a bit of a troll, and
| despite his aloofness he is aware of his own celebrity. I could
| see this chair being a way of saying "yes this exhibition is by
| _that_ David Lynch, the filmmaker. "
| jncfhnb wrote:
| I find Lynch's works to be very puzzling to unpack. Most analyses
| which I find compelling have his intentions as a director
| conveyed within each scene independently, and not really within
| the larger narrative.
|
| Whereas most works seem to have a thesis and then explore them on
| different levels, Lynch seems to just throw out ideas in
| different scenes.
|
| I would love to unpack what parts of twin peaks were Lynch's
| design and what parts were not
| wk_end wrote:
| Lynch's work tends to operate on dream logic. And that's how
| dreams often work - there can be coherent ideas - some random,
| and some related to concerns in the real world - and there can
| also be just bizarre, insane, inexplicable stuff.
| vundercind wrote:
| It's a bit like the automatic-writing quality of Bob Dylan
| lyrics (or especially text he'd write for his album covers)
| but in film form. Similar deal where the "text" is obscure
| and seems full of puzzles, and you can make connections and
| draw some conclusions--and certainly a _tone_ , themes, and
| even a point or message may be communicated clearly--but you
| can't count on _everything_ lining up and making logical
| sense.
| MisterTea wrote:
| I have the impression that we are observers suddenly thrust
| into the dream and we, like a detective, must piece together
| the puzzle. This allows everyone to walk away with a
| different view which is a far cry from linear plots where
| everything is wrapped up, concluded - roll credits. Lynch
| makes you think about his work after they conclude.
|
| I know some people who hate his works for this reason. They
| want a neatly packaged story that doesn't require them to
| think.
| robocat wrote:
| I love surrealism, dreamscapes and many forms of nonsense
| and randomness.
|
| I loath anything that feels like it is on the edge of
| making sense. I hate searching for hidden meaning in
| something that doesn't actually have a legible hidden
| meaning. I suspect some of Lynch's work fits in that
| category.
|
| I'm on the engineer spectrum and I just accept that others
| rate things that I never will enjoy. Maybe I should learn
| the appeal of tarot? I vicariously enjoy being around my
| friend that watches movies non-linearly. I don't understand
| another friend who watched a popular old movie thousands of
| times and applied their smarts to analysing it multiple
| different ways.
|
| I don't think I fit your stereotype for people that want a
| nice linear packaged story they don't need to think about.
| But maybe I'm overthinking.
|
| I do enjoy trying to understand what smart friends
| intensely direct their thoughts towards: so I would enjoy
| talking with a friend who loves Mulholland Drive.
| MisterTea wrote:
| > I hate searching for hidden meaning in something that
| doesn't actually have a legible hidden meaning.
|
| Like dreams, no?
|
| It's not about being a pretentious savant who can analyze
| his films for deeper meaning but enjoying them for
| defying the expectations. And you can draw any conclusion
| you like - from hating it to watching it 1000x and
| writing a thesis on it and everything in between.
| xjay wrote:
| Random stuff: David Lynch on what lead him to cast the set
| decorator, Frank Silva, as "Bob" in Twin Peaks:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37P0ukg4io0&t=40s
| rdtsc wrote:
| Lynch is a huge proponent of meditation and even has a
| foundation promoting it https://www.davidlynchfoundation.org.
|
| His ideas and imagery come from there, I would guess. He said
| somewhere that it's like diving deeper down to catch the bigger
| fish. So we end up with quite strange, but very detailed and
| interesting imagery and set of characters.
|
| It's also not completely random. There is some loose internal
| logic and Lynch knows what it is, I feel, but he refuses to
| explain it. It's part of the fun to try to decipher it.
|
| The furniture pieces have some art deco motifs, and look like
| they would fit into the Twin Peaks universe well. Specifically
| thinking of Naido's place or fireman's castle on the purple
| ocean from The Return https://backtotwinpeaks.com/twin-peaks-
| articles/supernatural...
|
| The idea of places and even furniture, specifically, hosting
| spirits is also common in Twin Peaks. here I was remembering
| Josie being stuck in a wooden knob and log lady's husband
| spirit going into a log.
| adultSwim wrote:
| David Lynch is not just a fan of meditation, but of the
| organization Transcendental Meditation (TM). TM engages in
| many similar questionable practices as Scientology, including
| recruiting early career celebrities. Jerry Seinfeld is
| another famous member. I consider it a cult.
| rdtsc wrote:
| Well TIL! I only knew about it generally from watching
| Lynch's stuff, but had no idea it was a cult.
| azakai wrote:
| > Whereas most works seem to have a thesis and then explore
| them on different levels, Lynch seems to just throw out ideas
| in different scenes.
|
| Many interpretations come to the exact opposite conclusion:
| that Lynch starts with a specific idea and then visits it in a
| different way in each scene. They may seem different, but there
| is an underlying theme. At least, if those interpretations are
| right.
|
| Here is an example for Inland Empire:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkk9GWonTyg
|
| Try to ignore that person's overconfidence, he does actually
| make a good case for his interpretation, I think, showing that
| the film can be seen as boiling down to one clear main message.
| (I don't agree with all of his points, but I do think he is on
| to something.)
|
| > I would love to unpack what parts of twin peaks were Lynch's
| design and what parts were not
|
| Reading Mark Frost's books can help there, as likely Lynch's
| influence on them is minimal. But it is still hard to unpack,
| Twin Peaks was really a joint project.
| vundercind wrote:
| I'd agree, his works tend to treat consistent themes and
| messages throughout, as I read them. On that level they're
| almost _hyper_ coherent, clear, and focused.
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| Being "puzzling to unpack" is the point. His works often try to
| put the audience into a state of awe, confusion, wonder or
| other emotional/unconscious mind experiences... which is only
| possible if he can first subvert your rational conscious minds
| attempts to pack it into a simple, logical explanation or
| story. With Lynch, just when you think it's about to make
| sense, he will take an abrupt turn and completely derail that.
|
| Most shows seem to gradually reveal the underlying story/truth
| as they progress. Twin Peaks is the total opposite of that- it
| starts out kind-of straightforward, and gets progressively
| harder to make sense of the more you watch. The owls are not
| what they seem.
| nicklecompte wrote:
| > There is a theory that Lynch himself doesn't always know what
| is going on in his stories. He shoots this down. "I need to
| know for myself what things mean and what's going on. Sometimes
| I get ideas, and I don't know exactly what they mean. So I
| think about it, and try to figure it out, so I have an answer
| for myself."
|
| > Audiences, however, must do their own figuring out. "I don't
| ever explain it. Because it's not a word thing. It would reduce
| it, make it smaller." These days he rarely gives interviews,
| not even during the hugely hyped return of Twin Peaks last year
| - a show that is still debated as either the best or worst TV
| of 2017. "When you finish anything, people want you to then
| talk about it. And I think it's almost like a crime," he
| explains. "A film or a painting - each thing is its own sort of
| language and it's not right to try to say the same thing in
| words. The words are not there. The language of film, cinema,
| is the language it was put into, and the English language -
| it's not going to translate. It's going to lose."
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/jun/23/david-lynch-got...
| tracerbulletx wrote:
| It's the difference between listening to someone explain a
| dream to you and having a dream.
| colmmacc wrote:
| Twin Perfect has over five hours of Twin Peaks explanation on
| YouTube ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AYnF5hOhuM (there
| are follow on videos too).
|
| As a long time Twin Peaks viewer and Wrapped in Plastic
| subscriber, it all resonated for me. The thesis there is
| extremely comprehensive and full of examples and the most
| compelling version I've found.
|
| It may spoil it for some, and if you prefer to leave mysteries
| untouched ... don't watch it, but it also enriched my
| subsequent rewatches of many Lynch films.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-04-16 23:00 UTC)