I think it's because it's his most accessible work. And it's more accessible because it was on tv so certain things had to be toned down and due to the collaboration with Mark Frost. Also, because it's a tv show it allows more characters to be involved and more storylines to happen, so I guess you could say that there's something in it for everyone. Well, not everyone, but that does help reach a bigger audience.
I really don't think it is more accessible.What is easier to introduce people to: Blue Velvet; Elephant Man; or a two-season TV show with a 90-minute pilot introduction. Obviously, that's just going on length, but in films I think people are willing to put up with some weirdness. There's some strange characters in WAH, but you aren't going to have to watch them for two series. You might not get what's going on in Mulholland Dr. but you can just enjoy the atmosphere for two and a half hours. I think that's harder to accept with a TV show. Anyhow, I have had more success in introducing people to Lynch's films than TP or, God forbid, On the Air.
Which do you consider to be his most accessible work?I think it's The Elephant Man. It has as its subject something that most people will know about and be naturally intererested in (though I'm not sure how much of that is as a result of the film itself). And though it has some dream-like elements it is basically a linear story. Obviously there are lots of other linear stories like Dune, Straight Story, Wild at Heart etc., but they're too weird, or in the case of Straight Story too slow, for most people. Apart from Elephant Man, I think Blue Velvet deals with issues people can relate to, and even if it has strange characters I think you can always tell what the motivations (however perverse) are behind their actions.
Although I stand by my opinion, I guess I understand your point of view. I mean it's certainly a debatable subject, but if we look at things in terms of weirdness or linearity, you're definitely right.