Why do people have a problem with The Gunslinger?

[Forge of the King]

I've read on this forum how some people would recommend to people to start reading the DT series starting with Drawing of the Three instead of The Gunslinger. I've also seen that some people simply don't like The Gunslinger.

I was wondering why this is? If you don't like the Gunslinger, why not? It was the first Steven King book I read, and after reading it I continued on and finished the DT series in a matter of weeks. I would never personally recommend somebody to start the DT series with Drawing of the Three. I was hooked from the very beginning. :biggrin:

So, what's wrong with The Gunslinger?

[blavigne]

I personally love it as well as the rest of the series but it is different from a usual Stephen King novel. I think some people are turned off by it being a "western" and it can be a kind of dry read at times.

[Forge of the King]

I'm re-reading The Gunslinger right now. I couldn't imagine enjoying the whole Dark Tower series if I didn't enjoy "Westerns", because so much of it exemplifies the western genre.

[Jean]

I abhor both westerns and fantasy as genres

[Forge of the King]

Jean,

Thanks for the reply. That seems to be what most who don't care for The Gunslinger say.

Also, I am curious about you and bears. How do you relate to bears? (I know that's off-topic, but I just had to ask)

[skyofcrack]

It's a long wonderful prologue to the series and character of Roland. I've read it more than any of the others in the series.

[Jean]

Jean,

Thanks for the reply. That seems to be what most who don't care for The Gunslinger say.

Also, I am curious about you and bears. How do you relate to bears? (I know that's off-topic, but I just had to ask)

Abhoring a genre only means getting bored (or annoyed, or both) by what is written in accordance with its canon, provided that the book doesn't have anything else to it. Like, one might argue that my all-time favorites, TWL and Wolves are, respectively, fantasy and western (or a mixture of both); but there was indefinitely more to them than being specimens of a genre. The Gunslinger, though, taken separately from the further cotext, impressed me as a juvenile literary exercise of a young author who wants to try his hand at this and that. Awfuly talented, but not very interesting.


It's a long wonderful prologue to the series and character of Roland. And this, of course, if true. Now I understand it as a perfect (although rather overdrawn) epigraph to the rest - much like the Browning's poem is its true coda.

P.S. Forge of the King - I relate to bears the most direct way possible: I am one.

[Garrell]

My problem with it is, it is boring, to be direct. I love the rest of the series. Maybe the problem is when I read it years ago, it left me feeling empty. Looking back, as a prologue and knowing the rest of the story it may be somewhat better to me. Also understand that I had been reading It, The Stand, Cujo and such, so the mark was set very high by Stephen himself. The genre was not an issue. Eyes of the Dragon was very different for him at the time and I read it in one reading because it was so great to me.

[Jean]

My problem with it is, it is boring, to be direct. This is, basically, what I was trying to say.

[Ricky]

I hate westerns, which is why I put off reading the DT series for as long as I did. The Gunslinger was definitely a little slow for me, but I loved the rest of the series.

[Merlin1958]

I read it when it first came out (showing my age again!!! LOL) and while it was at the time by no means his best work, it was extremely intriguing and I was dying to read the next. I enjoyed it, but no where near as much as other titles available at the time. TDTT was what hooked me for good, though I don't envision starting there.

[tumbleweed]

I actually read the second one first, then went back and read the first one. Not intentionally. That's how it happened. And I loved it even more so for starting it out that way. I'm not sure Gunslinger would have grabbed me as much if I hadn't been stuck in the mystery of the second one :) And this series is WAY more than Fantasy or Western. I totally agree. Everything King makes is outside of a strict genre, and I love him all the more for it.

[frik]

My problem with it is, it is boring, to be direct. This is, basically, what I was trying to say.

Slow, yes; defintely not boring.

sk

[dubrosa22]

Stylistically the leap from DTI to DTII is quite ridiculous.

I remember really loving DTIs dreary, hipped-out western feel and then in DTII slamming suddenly into full-flavoured 80s King and thinking:
'Wow, I love King's writing, but what happened to the uniqueness of DTI?'

It's like King decided 'ah the hell with all that' and starting writing the rest of DT with his stock-standard prose (nothing wrong with it at all!)

DTII is my favourite DT BTW

[flaggwalkstheline]

dt1, the unrevised version is very standalone, doesnt fit so well with the rest of the series
the revised one however is far superior in that respect

[dubrosa22]

Very true flaggwalkstheline!

The revised edition is much more cohesive with the rest of the series and is stylistically closer - some of the more weighted (clunky?) phrases are rendered more King-like.
I prefer the revised version, and would recommend it over the original to a new reader, but I do have a soft-spot for the oddball original Gunslinger.

[Merlin1958]

Very true flaggwalkstheline!

The revised edition is much more cohesive with the rest of the series and is stylistically closer - some of the more weighted (clunky?) phrases are rendered more King-like.
I prefer the revised version, and would recommend it over the original to a new reader, but I do have a soft-spot for the oddball original Gunslinger.

I have to agree with you both!!!


:emot-cthulhu::emot-cthulhu:

[flaggwalkstheline]

the original gunslinger, bears a stylistic resemblance to the early bachman books, which I ADORE. so I feel that it works on it's own better than the revised in that regard. if a person was just intending to read the gunslinger I would recommend the unrevised.

But I don't know of anybody having "a problem" with either one

[CamiDeschain]

I dont love The Gunslinger. I dont hate it, either, but i think it does have a slow pace and many things take time to make sense. Like Tull, everything sounded weird, they talked about that old man dying and living again as if it was an everyday thing, i was just like: "what am i missing here?"
Once i finished it, i was curious for part 2, but i was definitely happy about what King had mentioned that the other books were easier to read.
I LOVE drawing of the three, i think it's smart, creative and funny as hell, so i also think that The Gunslinger and Drawing dont have much in common and it feels like theres a big gap between them (which there was of course, a big time gap).

I read the revised edition btw.

[pathoftheturtle]

Stylistically the leap from DTI to DTII is quite ridiculous.

I remember really loving DTIs dreary, hipped-out western feel and then in DTII slamming suddenly into full-flavoured 80s King and thinking:
'Wow, I love King's writing, but what happened to the uniqueness of DTI?'

It's like King decided 'ah the hell with all that' and starting writing the rest of DT with his stock-standard prose (nothing wrong with it at all!)

DTII is my favourite DT BTW

King said that he asked to include The Gunslinger on his credits page when Pet Semetary was published, just because he was fond of it, and this led to a demand he hadn't expected. So it makes sense, what you're saying about how he might have decided to do the rest in a popular style.

[pathoftheturtle]

P.S. -- For those of us who wanted more of that DT1 magic, it's nice that SK did at least write "Little Sisters of Eluria." DT4 fell wide, IMO, and so did the majority of comics and other back material so far, but "tLSoE" is way deep and far-out creepy. :clap:

[blavigne]

"tLSoE" is way deep and far-out creepy. :clap:

agreed! Awesomely so!

[mtdman]

I really like The Gunslinger. IMO it's one of the best books of the series, along with Drawing. I'd take the style of Gunslinger over the style of the last 3 books any day.

[beam*seeker]

Being a bit of a traditionalist, I would recommend to read the books in order, starting with The Gunslinger. Then decide yourself whether you like it or not. For continuity's sake, I would read the revised DT1. It just helps the series make sense that way. I think also it is how the author intended them to be read and I assume he has a method to his madness. Say what you like about him, and I am certainly guilty of complaining about his machinations if I don't like them, but he is the GOD of his DT world, so I give him credit to know what he is doing.

Personally, I liked the Gunslinger, although as a general rule I don't care for westerns as a genre and agreed the stylistic leap between the Gunslinger and tDoTT was ginormous, but that is why the first one was revised, to be more continous. I think it is a great book, good as a stand alone. But judge for yourself. I really liked the ending too. (Guess I have a love for the tragic!)

[fernandito]

I love The Gunslinger, it's probably my favorite of the series.

Haters gon hate.

[noal]

I've never read the original version.

Would anybody recommend I pick up a copy or should I leave it be?

[Jean]

I totally recommend the original. I didn't like it, but I think it fits the whole perfectly. If it sounds a contradiction, the book - the whole of TDT - is consistently contradictory.

[noal]

Thanks Jean; I'll go and order it now.

I can't call myself a DT junkie until I have.

Oh, and for the record, I really liked The Gunslinger. It was intriguing and made me want to read more about this strange world(and man).
Tonally it was different but then the whole series is. It's not like he wrote it in 4-5 years; it evolved with the writer as he aged and took longer than even he himself would have expected I assume. But well worth it in the end!

[Dragonston19]

I've read the Gunslinger twice, (started the series once, now finishing it), and I loved it. I could definitely tell that SK was new to writing, as the story didn't have the articulateness that it does now. But I recommend reading it, if you want to start the series.

[pixiedark76]

I enjoyed The Gunslinger "The man in black fled across the desert, and the Gunslinger followed" How could you not love that! I love "The Gunslinger" because it is such a major head trip. When I first read it I did not know whether I was reading a western, or a sci-fi post apocalyptic novel. (Turned out it was both) I love the strange language of the first unrevised version. I think it was a great beginning to a great series.

[Jean]

I enjoyed The Gunslinger "The man in black fled across the desert, and the Gunslinger followed" How could you not love that!
Absoloutely. I love this line, and, in fact, every single line in The Gunsliner - the way I sometimes love a line in free verse. But a novel-long free verse seems way too long.

[mtdman]

Here's the thing about the Gunslinger. The book is sparse. It doesn't yet have King's 'diarrhea of the mouth' thing going on with it. Not a lot of extraneous descriptions, or even a whole lot of character development. It's a pretty solitary book, not a lot of insights into who Roland is, who Jake really is, the Man in Black, etc. It's very much a western, yet also a sci fi/post apocalyptic book. In other words, imo, the book fits the character of Roland at that point in the story. He's a solitary dude, he doesn't have any friends, he doesn't let people get close to him. The book fits Roland.

[Jean]

The book fits Roland.
very true

[BobbyOodle]

I have always loved it, but I think people don't enjoy it as much because it's slower, has less action, less fantasy or Science Fiction aspects, many questions unanswered, and is mostly, a Western.

Don't get me wrong, i loved it. Exactly the way it was.

Also, the only characters that are explored in depth, are basically Jake and Roland.
Roland being an emotionless, weathered soldier basically.
And Jake being a timid, panicky, confused and lost kid.
Both to their extremes, so it seems like an odd choice of characters, but I was glad that King went with making Roland an "anti-hero" protagonist.

[Bryant Burnette]

The Gunslinger is my favorite novel in the series. Both versions are great, but I prefer the original.

[Merlin1958]

The Gunslinger is my favorite novel in the series. Both versions are great, but I prefer the original.

I have come to prefer the revised edition, but then again I find it difficult to pinpoint the differences between the two. In the end, I guess I just go with the revised because King felt that was a better version. IMO

[jhanic]

I guess I'm a traditionalist, but I vastly prefer the original. It has a more surreal feel to it.

John

[rico567]

Here's the thing about the Gunslinger. The book is sparse. It doesn't yet have King's 'diarrhea of the mouth' thing going on with it. Not a lot of extraneous descriptions, or even a whole lot of character development. It's a pretty solitary book, not a lot of insights into who Roland is, who Jake really is, the Man in Black, etc. It's very much a western, yet also a sci fi/post apocalyptic book. In other words, imo, the book fits the character of Roland at that point in the story. He's a solitary dude, he doesn't have any friends, he doesn't let people get close to him. The book fits Roland.

Bingo. This book establishes the character of the main protagonist of the series, whether King had any intentions (or even dreams) of the extended series that the Dark Tower turned out to be. And one can examine the character of Roland through the series* and it falls back on that solitary, obsessed figure pursuing his nemesis across the wasteland. The first book is the sine qua non to the character of Roland Deschain throughout.

NB: I'll not argue versions, revisions, or etc. As I remarked concerning another author, what he does with his work is his prerogative.

*In the interest of full disclosure, "the series" for me ends with Wizard and Glass. I tried to go on, but to no avail, and perhaps someday I'll complete the journey. But not today- today I'm plowing through Principles of Geology by Charles Lyell.

[Jean]

Bingo. This book establishes the character of the main protagonist of the series, whether King had any intentions (or even dreams) of the extended series that the Dark Tower turned out to be. And one can examine the character of Roland through the series* and it falls back on that solitary, obsessed figure pursuing his nemesis across the wasteland. The first book is the sine qua non to the character of Roland Deschain throughout.This, totally. That's why I learned to love the first book in retrospect, as seen through the other six books, although it bored me to tears first time I read it.

[jhanic]

Funny, I actually read the original stories in F&SF when they were published (I had a subscription) and don't remember being especially impressed by them. I enjoyed them, sure, but they didn't make a lasting impression on me at the time.

John

[Bryant Burnette]

Here's something I wrote about The Gunslinger in a blog post once:

" I am somewhat unusual among Towerphiles in that this is my favorite of the books. And yes, in fact, I do prefer the original to the revised version. I have no problems with the revised version, and I love the changes, but there is a sort of rawness about the book -- present in both versions, but even more palpable in the original -- that just utterly captivates me. In some ways, this feels very much like a Richard Bachman novel, which means only that it feels like exactly what it is: early Stephen King, unpolished and ragged but frequently finding the jugular in memorable ways; a powerful talent in search of the proper avenue in which to express itself.

I love the direction Roland's tale eventually took, but I am enough of a masochist that part of me wishes King had never written any further than this first novel. I can distinctly recall reading the book for the first time, and feeling positively epic feelings about who Roland was and what his quest meant and how it would all turn out ... and knowing that really, in all the vital ways, I could never know those things. This was a novel of questions, not of answers; I wanted to know the answers, but in a way, I wanted to never know them. I love that sort of dark, majestic, unresolvable mystery, and as much as I also love King's later resolutions, I still yearn to be that young man devastated by the thought of Roland sitting on that beach, the Tower distant beyond all hope of approach.

Actually, that's really not masochism at all, is it? That's just a yearning for the complex pleasure that is mystery."

[mtdman]

Bingo. This book establishes the character of the main protagonist of the series, whether King had any intentions (or even dreams) of the extended series that the Dark Tower turned out to be. And one can examine the character of Roland through the series* and it falls back on that solitary, obsessed figure pursuing his nemesis across the wasteland. The first book is the sine qua non to the character of Roland Deschain throughout.This, totally. That's why I learned to love the first book in retrospect, as seen through the other six books, although it bored me to tears first time I read it.

Me too. I gave up on it at least once. But after reading Drawing I really came to like Gunslinger.

[Jean]

it's really funny how it all works in the universe. If I hadn't been in hospital at that moment, with absolutely nothing to read except the Gunslinger and the Drawing, I might have never even gotten to the Drawing. But of course Drawing changed the whole perspective.

[mcrow24]

I love The Gunslinger. The prose is awesome in it, IMO. Granted, it is a bit slow and there isn't as much action as the other DT books I've read but I think the value of it is it uniqueness.

[Jessie Snow]

I really like The Gunslinger. But, for different reasons than I like the rest of the series. I like it because it sets the stage for the rest of the series. It's a hook, basically. It's not WOW THAT WAS GREAT, but it's very, very intriguing.

But though it's a short read comparatively, it can be a little slow since you're in Roland's head a lot of the time. As others have said, it is a bit dry. But it's important.

[Zoe]

For me, it's the pacing of The Gunslinger that caused me some issues. First time around, although I'm going back years, I couldn't stand it. Second time (last week), I got into it a lot more, and actually loved bits of it, but I still found that in the second half the pace was a problem. It lost me, but by then I was so keen to catch up to the man in black that I kept going. I think, for me, having the series as a whole to look forward to helped me get through it. Back when all there was was The Gunslinger, there was no extra motivation there.

I'm onto The Drawing of the Three now and can't put it down.

[Jon]

Back then, I had no issues with The Gunslinger. I knew nothing else was coming. It was a stand alone book. In canon, I see the inconsistencies did little damage, IMHO.

[jhanic]

I first read The Gunslinger as the series of novelettes in F&SF (I had a subscription). I grabbed the Grant hardcover as soon as it was published (I just wish I had also grabbed one of the s/l too!) I never had an issue with any of the stories.

John

[fernandito]

Still my favorite of the series.

:)

[Jean]

still my least favorite...

[fernandito]

How dare you have a different opinion than mine.

[Jean]

it may be considered the same, with opposite sign

[fernandito]

http://i.imgur.com/EMrknJP.gif

[jonahwriter]

Interesting topic. For me, I avoided Dark Tower books for most of my King reading and collecting years - read everything else but never the DT books until a few years ago. I don't particularly like fantasy or western genres (though over the years I gained an appreciation for some western movies when I did a seminar on them in university and watching them with my Dad). I just could never get into The Gunslinger for years and years - I'd try and by chapter 2 or 3, it just made me bored really, I just couldn't get the "feel" of it. It was only a couple of hundred pages but I struggled with them when I finally read it more than I did with reading all 1,000 pages of IT - I'd fly through IT over and over, but struggle with The Gunslinger. As someone else mentioned, I felt the pacing of it was off. I did re-read it recently and I've gained an appreciation for it slowly, but DT books 2 to 5 are still my favourite - the 1st and last 2 are the ones I have issues with. I found DT 7 almost impossible to finish weirdly...

[Jean]

I don't particularly like fantasy or western genres<...>I just could never get into The Gunslinger for years and years - I'd try and by chapter 2 or 3, it just made me bored really, I just couldn't get the "feel" of it. It was only a couple of hundred pages but I struggled with them when I finally read it more than I did with reading all 1,000 pages of IT - I'd fly through IT over and over, but struggle with The Gunslinger. As someone else mentioned, I felt the pacing of it was off. I did re-read it recently and I've gained an appreciation for it slowly<...>bears can repeat every word above, except the "years and years" part: luckily, a friend brought to me The Gunslinger when I was in hospital and there was no way around finishing it before he brought The Drawing.

[Roden]

I don't mind western/fantasy/sci-fi/post apocalyptic genres, so I was expecting something a little more... less dull, at least.. from the first DT book. I remember endless streams of dialogue between characters I knew nothing about at that time, I skipped maybe 20 pages or so completely. I'm glad I did that because it got me onto book 2 which was much better. Would I enjoy the first one going back to it? Yep, probably..

The only other time I skipped some dialogue was in the last DT book at the breaker compound, in fact I thought the first 300 pages of that were very poor compared to the rest of the novel/series..

[Jean]

Dialog is the only thing bears never skip. I agree, however, that the whole thing you put inside that spoiler was boring; can't remember any boring dialog in DT1, though (even though I dislike that book)

[WeDealInLead]

I didn't have any problem with it but I know people who have. My co-worker who's an avid reader (fantasy, horror, S.F.) gave up on it. I kept begging him to try a chapter a day. He's bummed out about it not being able to read it. Another co-worker and I keep praising the books but he says he just can't get through it.

[jhanic]

I've also had friends that have trouble starting with The Gunslinger. I recommend that they start with book two--The Drawing of the Three--and then go back to The Gunslinger. This always works.

John

[Jean]

Or you can tell them to do as bears did - leaf through The Gunslinger, yawning, but never forgetting that there's light at the end of that tunnel, and the light is TDotT! Their perseverance will be rewarded.

[Derg Corra]

I never had any trouble reading The Gunslinger. I was hooked from the opening sentence. It also helped that I like the fantasy and Western genres.

[Ben Staad]

I've always loved this book and have never found it boring at all. The world created and time spent with Roland has always been interesting to me on every re-read. I get slowed down with a few of the other books but not this one.


I never had any trouble reading The Gunslinger. I was hooked from the opening sentence. It also helped that I like the fantasy and Western genres.

[littlebambi]

I loved the gunslinger and it's honestly what brought me to read the whole series. It will always be my favorite because If I hadn't picked up that book I would never have fallen in love :)

[SenorEdmonds]

The gun abortion is definitely off-putting to some.

[Jean]

yes, but one there are tons of similar things to be encountered in books of this genre. Like, if one chooses a horror book, one should expect something horrible to be described. Also, unpleasant and, probably, no less off-putting things happen in all King books (at least all of his good books)

[fernandito]

Still my favorite of the series.

[MikeDuke]

I've also had friends that have trouble starting with The Gunslinger. I recommend that they start with book two--The Drawing of the Three--and then go back to The Gunslinger. This always works.

John
When I was younger, I did not know much about the GS saga. I was a King fan for many years before I discovered it. And by mistake, I actually tried what you suggested. I did not know I was part of a larger story. I saw Drawing of the three and started to read it. But t made no sense because I felt like I was in the middle of a story that already started so I put it down. I never read "the original" GS book. I started with the LSOE GS book. And I really liked it. The I moved onto Drawing of the three and it made a lot more sense. Even King admits that the original GS book was hard to get through. That's why he did LSOE. He felt it made it an easier read for people who were just starting out. For me, so far Wizard and Glass was the hardest with the flashbacks. I am really liking Wolves though. I think this will be a much easier read.

[Garrell]

Wolves is one of my favorite King novels ever. The best of the series to me

[ratchet41]

the 1st one i read was the old print of the gunslinger and i don't remember it being slow cause i enjoyed the hell out of it. than a few years ago i read the extended version and that one was slow as hell in some spots. i dunno if my opinion changed cause i hadn't read the book in years. or if the extended version or both of them were just slow books that i don't remember it. but the one that made me fall in love with the series was the drawing of the three which is my favorite one.

that one well that one was one of the 1st ones i've ever read and when i was a kid my brother who is older than me it was always up to him on what books of his i read cause of my age, even though he started reading him far far younger than i did.
which now that i think about it really makes no sense on how young he was compared to me who had to wait until i was older. i mean i read IT when i was 13 for the 1st time he read it when he was 12. but was reading him quite young

but the one that stuck out the most back than before IT was The drawing of the three and it's such for me a perfect book that i read the waste lands in i think it was (1994) for the 1st time before that i had started it a dozen or so times and just never finished it. than with that cliff-hanger ending that pissed me off and prolly everyone else here who read it back when it 1st came out too. well than when wizard & Glass came out that one i had trouble getting through i didn't think it was an awful book at all it was just a long ass book and it took me years upon years to get around to actually finish the damn thing. and it was a few years back i wanna say (2010) when i finally gotta around to reading it again and this time i actually finished it. i could be wrong on the year though i think it was more like a couple years later.

well again i still haven't finished the wolves of Calla. and though i do know how the story actually does end i remember for years when i would read the first 2 books like everyone else here who was reading it back than anyways i would wonder how King would actually finish it. and i dunno if i love the ending or not as some love it and some hate it. when i do get around to reading it i dunno how i'm gonna feel but my brother loves the way it ended. with the film The Dark tower, while i don't hate it that film didn't quite anger me as it did a lot of people. for me the idea of the film as it was announced said it was going to be a sequel to the series and that idea really isn't a bad one.

they could have done so much with that idea instead of what they did end up doing. actually my brother refuses to see it and i can see why he'd hate it if he saw it. in fact i told him so as well, anyways they totally ignored the 1st book and made up their own shit instead of following the book and if they had been smart would have made it closer to the book but tweaked it a bit with changing it a bit since it would have been a sequel and if you know how the series ends i'm not gonna say it here but you get what i'm saying on what they could have done. but they didn't, IT angers me the remake on how much was changed and i hate that ending to the remake with a passion and i don't love it like many seem too, i don't think the film is awful at all i just wish they had followed the book more instead of making up their own shit. and putting the film in (1989) i really hated too

i guess you could say i'm picky cause on how much i love the book i didn't expect it to follow it word for word but they changed just too much of it and i am curious to see the sequel but i'm worried about that too. i'm sorry for going off topic a bit.
i just love these books just so much that's all

[Jon]

the 1st one i read was the old print of the gunslinger




I just realized that I'm not so sure I have read the "new" Gunslinger.

[jebeare]

I remember reading the original Gunslinger the first couple of times through the series, then at some point picked up the revised, illustrated hardback. The first time I read the revised version (which I'm re-reading right now for my 5th trip through Mid-World), I felt like the revisions were awkward and unnecessary. Shoe-horning mentions of Susan, Sheemie, and the rest of the Mejis crew feel artificial, even in my current reading. I liked the more organic reveal of Roland's past in Wizard and Glass during my first read through, although there's a very real possibility that I'm just remembering my first foray into those flashbacks fondly.

I think there's still an old copy of the original Gunslinger boxed up at my mom's house...might have to go back and read it before I move on to The Drawing of the Three...

[Girlystevedave]

I remember reading the original Gunslinger the first couple of times through the series, then at some point picked up the revised, illustrated hardback. The first time I read the revised version (which I'm re-reading right now for my 5th trip through Mid-World), I felt like the revisions were awkward and unnecessary. Shoe-horning mentions of Susan, Sheemie, and the rest of the Mejis crew feel artificial, even in my current reading. I liked the more organic reveal of Roland's past in Wizard and Glass during my first read through, although there's a very real possibility that I'm just remembering my first foray into those flashbacks fondly.

I think there's still an old copy of the original Gunslinger boxed up at my mom's house...might have to go back and read it before I move on to The Drawing of the Three...

I didn't like the revised version when I finally read it years after finishing the series. The foreshadowing felt over-the-top for me.