David Lynch
The disturbed director of Blue Velvet talks about a few of his favorite things. And pink panties. He talks about those, as well.
Stuff, January 2004
By Dan Bergstein
I accidentally brushed up against your 6 Men Getting Sick sculpture in the Reading [Pennsylvania] Public Museum. Does this means I’ll go to jail?
No. You just got a big blast of cosmic energy there, Dan. That’s all.
What’s your favorite mode of transportation?
I like the idea of a train. The trains in Europe are still really great. To get on a train and see the scenery and travel along like that is pretty great.
Describe what your office is like for our readers, many of whom are interior designers.
My office is very small. It has a lot of thin ply. Do you know what thin ply is? It’s wood that was developed for concrete molds, so it has a very, very thin coating of hard plastic on it. So, it’s great building material, and I have a thin-ply kind of workstation. I’ve got two computers and a scanner and a fireplace and a couch. I don’t type well. So I dictate to someone.
You have a very weird Web site [DavidLynch.com]. Has the Internet treated you well?
Yeah. You know, most people have 56k modems, and they’re not able to really get going on sites that have things moving. But that will change pretty quickly, and my site will blossom even more when that happens. So when things get fast, things will get a lot better for everybody.
Rumor has it that you visit the chat rooms yourself.
Right. That’s really me. I like to go in and talk. At least one couple has gotten married through the site.
What’s in your pocket right now?
In my jacket pocket? Let me just look. I’ll tell you exactly what I have. I’ve got three pairs of sunglasses and a used Kleenex, a picture of a tree frog—jeez, this is old stuff—something about [the band] Blue Bob, a financial report, some lyrics for a song, another pair of sunglasses and—oh, this is a true story—I’ve got a pair of pink panties. I live in Southern California. It’s very bright here, and I wouldn’t think I’d have this many sunglasses, but I keep putting them in my pocket.
May I ask what the panties are for, exactly?
You can ask that, but you’d have to be a member of my Web site to know the whole thing. And I have two finger picks. They were given to me by Reggie Hamilton, a great, great bass player. And I have four pens.
Roger Ebert didn’t like your early films, but he loves your current work. Do you think your movies have changed, or do you think he was confused?
He was very confused. But he’s a good guy. When I met him, finally, and talked to him, I found a person that was much more serious about [studying film] than I’d first thought.
Many of your movies feature curtains. Why, Mr. Curtains?
Well, not every film. There are a lot of curtains in the world. A curtain hides something. It covers something. And just looking at a curtain—mental things start to happen. You know, they say they’re veils of reality, and curtains are cosmic, and I don’t know why.
I saw Mulholland Dr. twice in the theater, and both times people walked out. Would you ever try to stop them from leaving?
No, no, no, no, no, no—never. That’s their privilege. It’s not their cup of tea. I would love to please everybody—that would be fantastic. But I haven’t ever done that yet.
You once lived in Philadelphia, yet you very much hate Philadelphia. Discuss.
I love and hate Philadelphia. I had a great, great, great, great time there experiencing the sickness and the corruption and the filth and the fear and the insanity of Philadelphia. So it was very good to me, but I was very glad to leave that place.
Do you have a prized possession?
My lime-green lamp.
Can anyone tell me about the panties thing? Somebody told me a disturbing story about something he did in a video webchat or something...
Great interview. He carries a lot of shit in his jacket, and it's kinda funny that he's such a bad typist he has to have someone else do it. I don't think Ebert was so much confused as he is fickle. I'm sure Ebert changed his mind because he thought, "Oh, this guy is supposed to be artistic" and then he conformed.
Quote from: Gamblor du JourI don't think Ebert was so much confused as he is fickle. I'm sure Ebert changed his mind because he thought, "Oh, this guy is supposed to be artistic" and then he conformed.
Jeez, chill. Maybe Ebert changed his mind because he finally saw a Lynch film that worked for him, and he was just being sincere.
finally, an interview without that incoherent voice of his.
HA!!!!!!....so that proves it Ono annnd all of the Blue Velvet haters out there.....
you like Ebert are to quick to judgement annd nneed to "unnderstand" his films.....its alright though we forgive you guys.....
I kid you not, and in all sincerity, I wish the Lynch fans could convince me about Blue Velvet. I like Kyle, I loooooove Dennis. But I need a passionate convincer (Neon!?) to help me understand what I'm missing about that movie. Cos it was one of the most blah experiences of my movie watching life, and the Ebert review kinda read my mind at the time...
Quote from: SoNowThenQuote from: Gamblor du JourI don't think Ebert was so much confused as he is fickle. I'm sure Ebert changed his mind because he thought, "Oh, this guy is supposed to be artistic" and then he conformed.
Jeez, chill. Maybe Ebert changed his mind because he finally saw a Lynch film that worked for him, and he was just being sincere.
Nah, well maybe you're right, but I just don't like Ebert too much.
Quote from: NEON MERCURYHA!!!!!!....so that proves it Ono annnd all of the Blue Velvet haters out there.....
you like Ebert are to quick to judgement annd nneed to "unnderstand" his films.....its alright though we forgive you guys.....
It's not that I don't understand them. It's just that I think they're steaming piles of pretentious crap. ;)
Better add the winky, else people won't know I'm kidding. Heh, I don't even know. ;) Whoops, there's another winky. This post is starting to sound like Lynch's work ... I mean, "what the fuck do I mean when I wink?!" That's the thing about Lynch's work, though. There's not a sincere bone in its body. It's too steeped in irony, which is one of the Coen Brothers' problems as well, I've just now realized.
Still, though, that's a great interview. Even though I can't stand the films I've seen of Lynch's, I love reading what he has to say. Breskin's interveiw of him in Inner Views from about 10 years ago was great as well.
Quote from: SoNowThenI kid you not, and in all sincerity, I wish the Lynch fans could convince me about Blue Velvet. I like Kyle, I loooooove Dennis. But I need a passionate convincer (Neon!?) to help me understand what I'm missing about that movie. Cos it was one of the most blah experiences of my movie watching life, and the Ebert review kinda read my mind at the time...
welll..isn't the nnegative review basically saying that the film was okay..... but he didn't like the treatment of isabelle's character....??????
So Now Then.......i will get back to you on that though.....and OnO..you ain't out the water yet either...... :wink:
I think one of the main reasons why I love Blue Velvet is because it terrified me. To me, it's a great work about madness, violence, crazyness, and love and how those things would interact when confronted with each other in their most extreme ways (which, we could say, is easier to see in a Lynch film than it is to see in real life).
I remember Kyle beeing in the closet watching Frank Booth freaking out on Rosellini and I seemed to feel what he was feeling. I'd say it's one scariest films I've seen. And then, of course, it's a Lynch film, with a great soundtrack, great camera work, great performances (Dennis Hopper's is one of my all time favourites) and great characters/situations.
so what's the deal with the panties?
i sense a japanese connection.
Quote from: MacGuffinRoger Ebert didn't like your early films, but he loves your current work. Do you think your movies have changed, or do you think he was confused?
He was very confused. But he's a good guy. When I met him, finally, and talked to him, I found a person that was much more serious about [studying film] than I'd first thought.
I didn't like Blue Velvet, but I also didn't really agree with Ebert's review of it. He did seem fickle in his reasons for disliking that didn't come full circle in understanding it first. There are reasons to disapprove of the movie, but Ebert didn't give them. I really gotta watch Wild At Heart, though.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetI really gotta watch Wild At Heart, though.
you'll hate that one too.
Quote from: Pso what's the deal with the panties?
i sense a japanese connection.
IMDb message board confirms as much as it can that David Lynch took some girl from his chatroom and put her panties in his mouth.
Quote from: David LynchI love and hate Philadelphia. I had a great, great, great, great time there experiencing the sickness and the corruption and the filth and the fear and the insanity of Philadelphia. So it was very good to me, but I was very glad to leave that place.
hey! somebody knows what i'm talking about. :-D
Hey Modern What's wrong with Philly? I love this city so much! Some of the people are complete morons but that's not exclusive to Philly. Idiots are everywhere! Philadelphia is a great city with a lot of history and culture in it. I can't believe you would hate on Philly so much :(
Philadelphia is the fattest city in the US.
Quote from: Chest RockwellPhiladelphia is the fattest city in the US.
oh YEAH it is. its sick.
Quote from: OnomatopoeiaThat's the thing about Lynch's work, though. There's not a sincere bone in its body. It's too steeped in irony
Irony? You dare simplify Lynch to
irony?
I think he's more sincere than most people think... and I think that far too often, when people sense that some one is getting at something they don't quite understand, they say that it must be irony. That's the problem with postmodernism... it's made people numb to indefinite meaning.
Also, it just dawned on me...
why do people think experimental films are pretentious? The establishment is pretentious, the formula is pretentious, the pretense that everything strange must be ironic is pretentious!
gasp
agree ^^^
but i hav a theory that ppl are scared of meaning altogether. anything that proposes an idea foreign or novel to them, and is not fed to them so that they don't hav to THINK about the idea, merely passively react to it, is automatically pretentious/bad. it is pretentious to give the audience any credit, basically.
^^^^^^ i also agree with both of you guys.....
OnO...why ??? say those things ...????
why....????.. films would suck.....if it wasn't for people like lynch..doing his .."ironic-pretentious un-sincere" films.......the multiplexes would be filled w/ garbage like...............this:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.amazon.com%2Fimages%2FP%2FB00005JLYW.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg&hash=39005e42a537d889b904277539036bad1bf98a63)
Quote from: NEON MERCURY^^^^^^ i also agree with both of you guys.....
OnO...why ??? say those things ...????
why....????.. films would suck.....if it wasn't for people like lynch..doing his .."ironic-pretentious un-sincere" films.......the multiplexes would be filled w/ garbage like...............this:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.amazon.com%2Fimages%2FP%2FB00005JLYW.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg&hash=39005e42a537d889b904277539036bad1bf98a63)
I agree with all three of you, especially you Neon...Gosh it is sad that there are people probably out there who watch charlie's angel's continuely...
Quote from: Pubrickagree ^^^
but i hav a theory that ppl are scared of meaning altogether. anything that proposes an idea foreign or novel to them, and is not fed to them so that they don't hav to THINK about the idea, merely passively react to it, is automatically pretentious/bad. it is pretentious to give the audience any credit, basically.
i think people are scared of the moments in films that require of people to empathise with characters on the screen - silent moments when the viewer is actually some kind of participant in the movie because the message isn't recieved without his/her collaboration. If you ask me, art has been
interactive since the beggining. If it's not interactive, it's not art, maybe. I don't mean interactive in computer technology way.
Quote from: SiliasRuby
I agree with all three of you, especially you Neon...Gosh it is sad that there are people probably out there who watch charlie's angel's continuely...
all my cousins furiously shouted at me when I changed the channel while charlie's angels was on tv last christmas.
Did you shout back? Hit them with the remote perhaps?