PDA

View Full Version : Roland: Enemy Of The White And Gan? *Spoilers for the whole series*



Brice
03-01-2008, 01:07 PM
Okay, this one can go alot of different directions so rather than explain myself I'm just gonna' see where it goes for now based solely on the thread title.

It could be interesting...controversial...silly...etcetera.

MonteGss
03-01-2008, 01:08 PM
Let me be the first to say:
:o

Mark
03-01-2008, 01:09 PM
He fought so desperatly for The White though, i don't see how he can be the enemy of it...

Brice
03-01-2008, 01:12 PM
He fought so desperatly for The White though, i don't see how he can be the enemy of it...

If someone can be their own worst enemy can't they be the enemy of their own goals also?

Brice
03-01-2008, 01:13 PM
Let me be the first to say:
:o


Believe me; I was specifically thinking of you Monte when I chose the exact title. I KNEW you'd love it. :dance:

MonteGss
03-01-2008, 01:15 PM
Well...I'll start by saying that I believe he can be the enemy of Gan without being the enemy of The White. Roland being the enemy of Gan doesn't bother me...

Brice
03-01-2008, 01:17 PM
So are you suggesting Gan could be enemy to The White?

MonteGss
03-01-2008, 01:18 PM
So are you suggesting Gan could be enemy to The White?

No. I'm only suggesting it is possible to be for The White and not for Gan. I don't think Gan is anyone's enemy.

Brice
03-01-2008, 01:20 PM
Well, why not then?

Jean
03-01-2008, 01:40 PM
whenever there's an organized force that usurps the right to fight for any good cause - and such is the case with the gunslingers and the white - they end up perverting the idea and spilling the same amount, if not more (historically, alas, I am afraid I have to say more), of blood as is spilled for a bad cause. Gunslinging was bound to go against the white, and Roland, of course, is a gunslinger.

MonteGss
03-01-2008, 01:42 PM
Hmmm, interesting point Jean.
I guess how we each define The White is important in how we might go about discussing/arguing this interesting topic.

MonteGss
03-01-2008, 01:43 PM
Well, why not then?

Gan is no one's enemy because I'd like to think he/she is a silent, impartial observer.

Damn....I keep thinking this over and my thought are running over one another. :lol:

Brice
03-01-2008, 01:47 PM
Well, why not then?

Gan is no one's enemy because I'd like to think he/she is a silent, impartial observer.

Damn....I keep thinking this over and my thought are running over one another. :lol:


Well, I think that's a valid argument for Gan having no enemies from Gan's perspective, but someone else can still be Gan's enemy from their own.

Edit: Oh, and that's exactly what they're supposed to do. :cool: It'll make for interesting conversation.

MonteGss
03-01-2008, 01:48 PM
Well, why not then?

Gan is no one's enemy because I'd like to think he/she is a silent, impartial observer.

Damn....I keep thinking this over and my thought are running over one another. :lol:


Well, I think that's a valid argument for Gan having no enemies from Gan's perspective, but someone else can still be Gan's enemy from their own.

I couldn't agree more. Gan keeps none but I'm sure plenty hold him/her in such regard.

Brice
03-01-2008, 01:57 PM
Well, our enemies from our own perspectives are our enemies...the only ones that really matter, aren't they? It is at least legitimately possible to be Gan's enemy if one believes it. I doubt you'd argue that the CK was Gan's enemy would you?

MonteGss
03-01-2008, 01:59 PM
No, CK believed Gan was his enemy but I do not think Gan thought the CK was his. Again I say damn, that is confusing. :D

Brice
03-01-2008, 02:05 PM
If I think you are my enemy (just an example) and work against you constantly are you not my enemy irregardless of how you feel?

MonteGss
03-01-2008, 02:07 PM
But if I think you are my friend, regardless if you are working against me in every way, isn't that different?

MonteGss
03-01-2008, 02:10 PM
I have another question:
If Roland is an enemy of The White, who is he for/with? Hmmm.

Letti
03-01-2008, 02:12 PM
Okay.
Here is my shot.
Even if Roland is his own enemy as well, he is not the enemy of the White or Gan.
First of all because we all are our own enemies, too. Some people are really good at ruining themselves others can avoid it quite well. But we all make mistakes and we all ruin our own faith.
Enemy is a very strong harsh word with a very deep meaning. Of course if Roland would like to serve the White but spoils his own faith he will make no good to the White still he will not hurt it either. He will not become an enemy. It's possible that he won't serve it well... or he won't reach everything he could... but he will still be a soldier /not a perfect one/ of the White.
Roland is fighting with himself to be able to serve the White.

Maybe I am not convicing. Whenever I feel I can describe my view better I will, my friends.

Brice
03-01-2008, 02:12 PM
No...it makes you confused. If you think I am your friend and I think you are my enemy I believe the negative effectively trumps the positive. I mean you can disillusion yourself that I'm your friend in that situation, but if I'm consistently working against you do you think I'm your friend or enemy from an impartial observer's perspective.

Brice
03-01-2008, 02:29 PM
I have another question:
If Roland is an enemy of The White, who is he for/with? Hmmm.

Why would he need to be for or against anyone, but hisself?

MonteGss
03-01-2008, 02:53 PM
I guess you're right Brice, I had not thought of it that way.
Let me ponder this some...

obscurejude
03-01-2008, 11:11 PM
I think it might be interesting to discuss what gives Gan pleasure i.e. how is he existentially viable? If he is the progenitor of the tower cycle, and the cycle is contingent upon Roland, then I don't see how Roland could be his enemy. Of course, this means that CK and the black also cease to be his enemies in a sense...I mean we have discussed this before in other threads. If Gan's nature is dualistic, then I think the tower is a perfect emodiment because it (the tower) is threatened and preserved continually. This seems like a question about theodicy (justification for the problem of evil) i.e. salvation/redemption is contingent upon the existence of evil.

jayson
03-02-2008, 05:03 AM
If Gan's nature is dualistic, then I think the tower is a perfect emodiment because it (the tower) is threatened and preserved continually.

well somebody finally seems to get my "why Roland NEVER stops looping" interpretation of things. thanks Ryan!

Jean
03-02-2008, 11:50 PM
If Gan's nature is dualistic, then I think the tower is a perfect emodiment because it (the tower) is threatened and preserved continually.

well somebody finally seems to get my "why Roland NEVER stops looping" interpretation of things. thanks Ryan!
I personally think you made yourself very clear, as usual, making your point comprehensible and consistent, so I suspect you were understood, just probably not everyone agreed with your interpretation 100 per cent? My personal point of disagreement was that, while the Tower does need constant protection, it is done by different people every time, the human constituent being at least as important as the divine. (though if we develop it further, probably it should be in the thread where we started it.)

jayson
03-03-2008, 04:13 AM
If Gan's nature is dualistic, then I think the tower is a perfect emodiment because it (the tower) is threatened and preserved continually.

well somebody finally seems to get my "why Roland NEVER stops looping" interpretation of things. thanks Ryan!
I personally think you made yourself very clear, as usual, making your point comprehensible and consistent, so I suspect you were understood, just probably not everyone agreed with your interpretation 100 per cent? My personal point of disagreement was that, while the Tower does need constant protection, it is done by different people every time, the human constituent being at least as important as the divine. (though if we develop it further, probably it should be in the thread where we started it.)

thanks Jean/ i'm used to writing in a little longer form, so when i try to condense myself down to a paragraph or two i tend to think i lose something, but it's refreshing to know i don't in some cases.

Jean
03-03-2008, 04:15 AM
I wouldn't mind reading anything in a "longer form" by you, either! http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k291/mishemplushem/Facilitation/bear_wink-1.gif

jayson
03-03-2008, 04:17 AM
thank you Jean, i shall try to elaborate more in future postings:unsure:

Storyslinger
03-03-2008, 07:21 AM
Roland was his own problem

had he not damned his soul, he wouldn't be force to repeat the circle, thus the Tower would have been saved the first time

Brice
03-03-2008, 07:22 AM
or all of existence would have unfolded.

Spoiler tags are not necessary in here

Storyslinger
03-03-2008, 07:23 AM
yes, very possible.

jayson
03-03-2008, 07:31 AM
Roland was his own problem

had he not damned his soul, he wouldn't be force to repeat the circle, thus the Tower would have been saved the first time

care to elaborate? do we know about the first time? what i mean is, do we have any idea of any events of previous loops? i guess my question is how do you believe he "damned his soul" on his first loop?

Storyslinger
03-03-2008, 07:34 AM
I always thought that the loop was the same as the one described in the series. Jake in the desert on up to reaching the tower. I feel that by not showing the care to take up the horn at Jerico, and by letting Jake drop(which I believe he does every time, he's damned), but depending on the actions that he preforms each loop, (loving and caring for ka-tet), he gets another piece that brings him closer to redemption.

jayson
03-03-2008, 07:39 AM
fair enough, thanks for clarifying!

Storyslinger
03-03-2008, 07:40 AM
Not a problem, it was a little unclear to me, till I wrote it down

jayson
03-03-2008, 07:45 AM
then i am glad i could help :lol:

obscurejude
03-03-2008, 08:41 AM
That's certainly interesting Storyslinger. The only problem is that the Tower was already saved at Blue Haven (or so the consensus seems to be). That's why I posed it from Gan's perspective. The horn is the most ambiguous piece in the whole story in my opinion, and is really confusing. What if Roland was redeemed? Do you really think the cycles would stop? If Gan's existence is embodied in the tower, then reality would be absolutely contingent upon humanity (and particularly Roland). If I'm not making any sense, somebody ask me something specific.

obscurejude
03-03-2008, 09:00 AM
Also along this same thread of thought. If Roland does save the Tower, does that mean that he saves Gan? Is that what is implied by redemption? The Tower is Gan, and its Gan who pushes him through the door after all. My head hurts, this might be a little heavy to attempt with a hangover. Still, I am interested to hear what you all have to say. Great thread Brice.

Brice
03-03-2008, 09:01 AM
Thanks! :)

obscurejude
03-03-2008, 09:02 AM
No, thank you sir. :thumbsup:

jayson
03-03-2008, 09:33 AM
Great questions Ryan. My thoughts are... assuming the Tower as the physical embodiment of Gan, Roland isn't necessarily "saving" Gan, more than he maintaining order and balance. White can't entirely replace Red, nor vice versa, but if one gets the upper hand and "controls" the Tower than things are out of balance. As the World Axis, the Tower must remain equidistant between polar opposites [white and red as order and chaos in this case]. You can't have one without the other, but neither should be allowed to dominate. By "saving" the Tower I mean banishing the CK and Mordred from getting control of it this time through the loop. It's my belief that Roland represents the White in this necessarily constant struggle and that is why he loops, bc balance is attained but needs to be constantly maintained. It is not permanent.

obscurejude
03-03-2008, 12:47 PM
I think thats the major idea behind it Jayson, though you and I seem to be in a minority. Still, what do we do with Roland's "redemption"? I only use the word because that is how SK presents it in the afterward of DT 7. Everyone always evaluates the whole cycle in regards to Roland. What I love about this thread is the opportunity to talk about it from Gan's perspective (or at least thats what we're doing right now).

Also, the "random" and the "purpose" seem to support our thesis as well. Although there are two doctors for the green team and only one for the red...

Thanks for the thoughts Jayson.

jayson
03-03-2008, 12:56 PM
i suppose one could suggest that should Roland attain "redemption" than Gan could choose another to fulfill the role that Roland plays. even the Ck doesn't go back all the way to the beginning so there is grounds for their being some sort of rotation of mythical characters to maintain the balance between chaos and order.

obscurejude
03-03-2008, 01:07 PM
Thats very interesting...Do you think the whole multiverse is inherent with that idea? i.e everyone continues a cycle until they are redeemed?

The idea also makes Gan seem harsh, but that perception of God is at least as old as Job, which historically pre-dates even Genesis.

Jean
03-03-2008, 01:34 PM
very interesting indeed

In RCatholic terms, that would be interpreting the whole world (all worlds) as the purgatory; and I would prefer to differ between the two.

I still think redemption of this kind is for only a few; but redeeming themselves, they, simultaneously, constantly help redeem the rest of mankind - compare Christian saints; also monastic orders; it's not all that direct, of course, and requires more thinking over. In fact, I've always perceived Roland as a [potential, if not actual] saint, but never got around to developing it in clear categories.


i suppose one could suggest that should Roland attain "redemption" than Gan could choose another to fulfill the role that Roland plays.
yes, very close to what I've been advocating all along... only not as much Gan's choice as the man's own

jayson
03-03-2008, 05:07 PM
Jean again we essentially agree, we just have our own metaphors. to you a potential saint, to me a potential bodhisattva. i like to think of roland as the bodhisattva of infinite lead. he kills, it's what he does. what he needs to do is to accept it. it's his being, and in the moments he finds himself in, it's what needs to be done. that's all that can be asked of anyone is that they live in each moment bc that's where eternity is ["beyond" time as opposed to "after" time]. i'm getting rambly, but you always seem to get it.

ryan another great question. the answer i am unsure of. we do see with jake and callahan that death isn't always the end of the line, so perhaps it is a bit loopy for everyone. roland's story may be a bit different in that he "darkles and tincts" which i take as having something to do with his very being with respect to time. callahan and jake aren't like that, but clearly they are the same beings in their new times they were before. am i close?

MonteGss
03-03-2008, 06:03 PM
Wow, great discussions going on in here! :thumbsup:

obscurejude
03-04-2008, 12:15 AM
As close as can be expected Jayson (these are hard questions). Thank you for mulling it over and getting back to me.

Jean, thanks for what you said. I've always thought that King has some Catholic leanings, but authorial intent is a beast that is sometimes better left alone. It seems that a lot of his religious characters are shady if they are protestant and rather virtuous if catholic. As I'm sure you are aware of, there is some really interesting dialog between Callahan and all the characters about religion; particularly between him and Jake, and him and Roland. I've always thought the scene where Jake is given last rights before storming the Dixie Pig was very potent (and touching).

Alright, its really late where I am. I'm going to get some sleep. Great discussion indeed Monte.

obscurejude
03-04-2008, 12:18 AM
I forgot one thing. Jean, while I agree to an extent about what you said concerning human agency, I do tend to see Gan as a harsh arbiter of things. I can't stop thinking about Roland crying out for mercy as he is pushed through the door at the end. While it could be argued that it is for the greater good, I still have problems with it. I really need to go to sleep. Good night folks.

Jean
03-04-2008, 12:29 AM
Jean again we essentially agree, we just have our own metaphors. to you a potential saint, to me a potential bodhisattva. i like to think of roland as the bodhisattva of infinite lead. he kills, it's what he does. what he needs to do is to accept it. it's his being, and in the moments he finds himself in, it's what needs to be done. that's all that can be asked of anyone is that they live in each moment bc that's where eternity is ["beyond" time as opposed to "after" time]. i'm getting rambly, but you always seem to get it.

not as much metaphors as the angles of interpretations; could be pretty literal. The difference (Christian saint vs. bodhisattva of infinite lead) would of course explain why I want to see the personal quest of one man as finite and you as eternal.


Jean, thanks for what you said. I've always thought that King has some Catholic leanings, but authorial intent is a beast that is sometimes better left alone. It seems that a lot of his religious characters are shady if they are protestant and rather virtuous if catholic. As I'm sure you are aware of, there is some really interesting dialog between Callahan and all the characters about religion; particularly between him and Jake, and him and Roland. I've always thought the scene where Jake is given last rights before storming the Dixie Pig was very potent (and touching).
that point about authorial intent is one of my idees fixes... namely, that what author intended or meant or implied doesn't matter at all, it's only what the reader has to do with that counts; so my consistently Catholic interpretation of TDT isn't something I could think he meant, but something I, as a reader, see in what he wrote - or read into what he wrote, which wouldn't change the final outcome in the least. (although I agree, King does show some sympathy for Catholics; more than for some protestant denominations anyway)


I forgot one thing. Jean, while I agree to an extent about what you said concerning human agency, I do tend to see Gan as a harsh arbiter of things. I can't stop thinking about Roland crying out for mercy as he is pushed through the door at the end. While it could be argued that it is for the greater good, I still have problems with it. I really need to go to sleep. Good night folks.

Free will vs. God's will - or, in other interpretations, fate or [any modification of] ka, - is a great subject! would love to take it up with you somewhere, but surely not in this thread? Frankly, I am not sure we're still on topic... http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k291/mishemplushem/Facilitation/0134-bear.gif

(only one thing now: Jesus, too, prayed for the cup to be taken away from him)

jayson
03-04-2008, 03:50 AM
not as much metaphors as the angles of interpretations; could be pretty literal. The difference (Christian saint vs. bodhisattva of infinite lead) would of course explain why I want to see the personal quest of one man as finite and you as eternal.

true, but again in it's all in the definition. remember, i attempted to previously define "eternity" as the existence between moments, beyond time as opposed to after time, so it can be seen as a finite quest as it does not exclude the possibility/probability of death. now in roland's case it seems that it may take awhile for his being to no longer exist within time, but still possible. like i said, in that case Gan could chose another to represent the White and balance out the Red.

Jean
03-04-2008, 04:06 AM
right... I'm still trying to figure it out without turning a man into a myth

obscurejude
03-04-2008, 09:21 AM
Jean, I'm not sure what the topic is for this thread (Brice kind of left it wide open). I would like to talk about human and divine agency as well. Is there a thread already, or should you start one?

Jesus did cry for the cup to be taken in his humanity, but, "This Jesus whom you crucified according to the foreknowledge and predetermined plan of God..." (Acts 2:23)

Jayson, I'd be interested to hear more about the buddhist parallels. Maybe the three of us should start a thread about Religious typologies in the series?

jayson
03-04-2008, 09:54 AM
Jayson, I'd be interested to hear more about the buddhist parallels. Maybe the three of us should start a thread about Religious typologies in the series?

now you're on the trolley. start it, i'll be there [i won't be able to help myself but be there]

Brice
03-04-2008, 10:02 AM
If it's a diversion from topic I'm fine with it. After all that guy who started this thread was pretty damn vague about what exactly this topic is and still hasn't offered much clarification. :lol: However, I'm sure it could make for an interesting topic on it's own also if y'all like.

Jean
03-04-2008, 10:21 AM
I only wouldn't like to talk about everything at once at the same place, or it will be impossible to trace any point in the future

obscurejude: just look around a little, I would be very interested to see what you got to say on all questions touched upon in those of our many discussion threads which you haven't yet visited.

and - the divine in man often contradicts the human in man; you don't have to have dual nature for that

LadyHitchhiker
03-04-2008, 01:11 PM
I dunno... I kinda always figured that if Roland got the quest right he would end up taking over gan's place...

Or maybe he is already part of the machine that fixes the towers and is just doing his job though he doesn't know it?

MonteGss
03-19-2008, 09:42 AM
Great questions Ryan. My thoughts are... assuming the Tower as the physical embodiment of Gan, Roland isn't necessarily "saving" Gan, more than he maintaining order and balance. White can't entirely replace Red, nor vice versa, but if one gets the upper hand and "controls" the Tower than things are out of balance. As the World Axis, the Tower must remain equidistant between polar opposites [white and red as order and chaos in this case]. You can't have one without the other, but neither should be allowed to dominate. By "saving" the Tower I mean banishing the CK and Mordred from getting control of it this time through the loop. It's my belief that Roland represents the White in this necessarily constant struggle and that is why he loops, bc balance is attained but needs to be constantly maintained. It is not permanent.


So Roland is not an enemy of The White then. I love your arguments and thoughts on the loop but to me that says Roland is indeed a friend to the White and Gan.

I love this thread. :)

jayson
03-19-2008, 10:23 AM
So Roland is not an enemy of The White then. I love your arguments and thoughts on the loop but to me that says Roland is indeed a friend to the White and Gan.

I love this thread. :)

i agree with me too. i think roland is representative of the White.

Childe 007
03-27-2008, 04:48 PM
In the context of The Story -

Roland doesn't just champion The White. He is the Living Embodiement of it. He is like unto Jesus Christ/ Buddha/ Mohammed when it comes to the White. He is the White in Person.

Stinga of A-Town
03-27-2008, 08:59 PM
So mayhap we see this all wrong from the get go.
Ka is a wheel yes? We are beaten over the head with this the entire tale, and accept that the whole foreshadowing of Ka like a wheel is for Roland to eventually loop his journey again.- Well to have Ka come full circle - one would have to restart along time before Roland ever enters - back to the beginning and the prim. So what if all along it was the Red and the Crimson King who truly served the will of Ka, trying to bring Ka full circle in destroying all of everything so Ka could roll again. As it could stand now, though - Roland has become the thorn in Ka's side in its natural attempt to complete it cycle. With the constant Roland continuing to succeed in his quest - mayhap sending him back to the desert is all Ka can do to defend itself and its need to continue around to the true beginning.
:orely:

Wuducynn
03-28-2008, 06:07 AM
Well to have Ka come full circle - one would have to restart along time before Roland ever enters - back to the beginning and the prim. So what if all along it was the Red and the Crimson King who truly served the will of Ka, trying to bring Ka full circle in destroying all of everything so Ka could roll again.

This is a first time I've heard this theory mentioned. Very, very interesting Stinga. A lot of folk don't like to think that Los' and his forces could have some kind of integral role in something greater than they understand, like Gan and the White has.

Stinga of A-Town
03-28-2008, 06:39 AM
Not many people are comfortable with death / loss /ect. Although it is seen naturaly everywhere. All things come full circle, death fuels life, life fuels death. And Ka like a wheel right? Well - the wheel in this tale is a bit flat on the bottom. But only on the bottom.

- Not to trash Roland and his tet, I love the story, and all its characters (why else would I be here, right?) but one must look at the motives of both/all sides in order to fully see the picture. Balance in life needs both save and destroy, good / evil ect... One cannot choose a side without first looking at both.
With such strong support and effort from the red, and such a slim chance from the white, it may be Ka's way of moving on.

obscurejude
03-28-2008, 08:18 AM
Ck, we've been mentioned things like this all along. Its called a "free will" theodicy. Again, redemption cannot transpire unless perfection is lost. Therefore, certain events are set in motion to make a fall transpire.

obscurejude
06-08-2008, 10:06 PM
*bump*

This thread hasn't seen any love in awhile and I thought some of the newcomers might like it. Read it from the beginning.

razz
06-17-2008, 03:00 PM
Roland: Enemy Of The White And Gan? *Spoilers for the whole series*
i'm sorry, but what?

Darkthoughts
06-18-2008, 01:57 AM
Read the whole thread! :P

razz
06-18-2008, 04:47 AM
i can't i suffer from chronic DT thread laziness. I hear it's contagious

Brice
06-18-2008, 04:50 AM
Not for me. I read them all. Well, if you ain't gonna' read it why question it. Do you really think we're gonna' encourage you to be lazy by summarizing the thread for you? Anyhow, the title was kinda' a joke, but it was also intended to make you think.

razz
06-18-2008, 04:56 AM
Anyhow, the title was kinda' a joke, but it was also intended to make you think.
how daer you! nobody mekes me think after June 13

Brice
06-18-2008, 04:57 AM
Anyhow, the title was kinda' a joke, but it was also intended to make you think.
how daer you! nobody mekes me think after June 13

Does anyone make you think at all? :P

razz
06-18-2008, 04:58 AM
yeah, Crichton.

Brice
06-18-2008, 05:03 AM
Well then it's obvious I don't. :lol:

razz
06-18-2008, 05:05 AM
funny, that pinks haired thing sitting on top of my computer said the same thing. sorry, i have to grab my medication. back in a few :P

Letti
06-18-2008, 05:06 AM
I think the title of this thread is the best I have ever seen so far. :)

Brice
06-18-2008, 05:07 AM
funny, that pinks haired thing sitting on top of my computer said the same thing. sorry, i have to grab my medication. back in a few :P

Just a guess...it is Ritalin isn't it? :P

Thank you Letti. :wub:

razz
06-18-2008, 05:09 AM
don't thinks so. I'm not alowed dirsct access to the pills. i have to get them from a parent (remember, i'm 17) and apparently reading the bottle will not only counter the effects of the drug, but cause my mind to rise to a higher level than humanity. But it starts with an K

Brice
06-18-2008, 05:12 AM
You don't even know what your taking? :orely: I'd HAVE to know ...17 or otherwise. :scared: I mean I understand them wanting to dole them out to you, but I see no harm in reading the bottle. :unsure:

razz
06-18-2008, 05:14 AM
i used to take ritalin, but it made the voices go away. and bad things happen when the voices go away. I currently refer to the 8th grade science fair
http://philip9876.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/nuclear-explosion.jpg
I was sooo pretty

obscurejude
06-18-2008, 09:44 AM
i can't i suffer from chronic DT thread laziness. I hear it's contagious

Then please resist the urge to quote, bump threads, and derail them. Thanks.

obscurejude
06-18-2008, 08:03 PM
Jean again we essentially agree, we just have our own metaphors. to you a potential saint, to me a potential bodhisattva. i like to think of roland as the bodhisattva of infinite lead. he kills, it's what he does. what he needs to do is to accept it. it's his being, and in the moments he finds himself in, it's what needs to be done. that's all that can be asked of anyone is that they live in each moment bc that's where eternity is ["beyond" time as opposed to "after" time]. i'm getting rambly, but you always seem to get it.

not as much metaphors as the angles of interpretations; could be pretty literal. The difference (Christian saint vs. bodhisattva of infinite lead) would of course explain why I want to see the personal quest of one man as finite and you as eternal.


Jean, thanks for what you said. I've always thought that King has some Catholic leanings, but authorial intent is a beast that is sometimes better left alone. It seems that a lot of his religious characters are shady if they are protestant and rather virtuous if catholic. As I'm sure you are aware of, there is some really interesting dialog between Callahan and all the characters about religion; particularly between him and Jake, and him and Roland. I've always thought the scene where Jake is given last rights before storming the Dixie Pig was very potent (and touching).
that point about authorial intent is one of my idees fixes... namely, that what author intended or meant or implied doesn't matter at all, it's only what the reader has to do with that counts; so my consistently Catholic interpretation of TDT isn't something I could think he meant, but something I, as a reader, see in what he wrote - or read into what he wrote, which wouldn't change the final outcome in the least. (although I agree, King does show some sympathy for Catholics; more than for some protestant denominations anyway)


I forgot one thing. Jean, while I agree to an extent about what you said concerning human agency, I do tend to see Gan as a harsh arbiter of things. I can't stop thinking about Roland crying out for mercy as he is pushed through the door at the end. While it could be argued that it is for the greater good, I still have problems with it. I really need to go to sleep. Good night folks.

Free will vs. God's will - or, in other interpretations, fate or [any modification of] ka, - is a great subject! would love to take it up with you somewhere, but surely not in this thread? Frankly, I am not sure we're still on topic... http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k291/mishemplushem/Facilitation/0134-bear.gif

(only one thing now: Jesus, too, prayed for the cup to be taken away from him)

This is quoted in an attempt to undo what Razz did by unnecessarily interrupting a very good conversation. Remember that scene at the end of the Last Samurai- the highest compliment you could pay a person, well, Razz never has to worry about hearing "I have enjoyed our conversations."

Jean
06-19-2008, 12:00 AM
Obscure*: thank you for getting it back to topic. Razz: I would strongly recommend reading first, and posting next; that seems to be the established procedure.

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k291/mishemplushem/Facilitation/thaku.gif

*and yes, I have enjoyed our conversations...

Woofer
06-19-2008, 03:38 AM
Thanks for the bump, Ryan.

I find the observation on King's portrayal of protestant verses Catholic characters very interesting. I would say, however, that it's a particular brand of protestantism that comes off bad - the evangelical protestants. Mother Abigail, for example, was certainly a sympathetic character. Perhaps he leans toward and/or appears to favor Catholicism more because of the penance/forgiveness aspect of the faith.


Originally Posted by R_of_G
Great questions Ryan. My thoughts are... assuming the Tower as the physical embodiment of Gan, Roland isn't necessarily "saving" Gan, more than he maintaining order and balance. White can't entirely replace Red, nor vice versa, but if one gets the upper hand and "controls" the Tower than things are out of balance. As the World Axis, the Tower must remain equidistant between polar opposites [white and red as order and chaos in this case]. You can't have one without the other, but neither should be allowed to dominate. By "saving" the Tower I mean banishing the CK and Mordred from getting control of it this time through the loop. It's my belief that Roland represents the White in this necessarily constant struggle and that is why he loops, bc balance is attained but needs to be constantly maintained. It is not permanent.

Interesting. Of course if this is an eternal struggle, the next natural question is who or what was keeping the balance before Roland was born? Was it even in peril before Roland's birth? Was there another called to save the Tower? We donít see or hear evidence of this in Rolandís story, but is that by design? As another asked earlier: will there be another White pawn (for he does seem to be a pawn in this interpretation) after Roland achieves salvation?

Since we know the Tower is saved when Blue Heaven falls, Rolandís continuing to the Tower and dogged determination to climb it, to reach Gan (or his placing the reaching of the Tower above human life), could be compared to the builders of the Tower of Babel and their attempt to reach God (or their placing the building of their great tower above human life). Thus, Roland being cast back into a loop at the end could be paralleled to the splitting of tongues the Babel builders received.

I hope that made sense. It's just my early morning first cup of coffee thoughts*.

*I donít often get a chance to give these things the thought they need for good replies.

jayson
06-19-2008, 05:26 AM
Since we know the Tower is saved when Blue Heaven falls, Rolandís continuing to the Tower and dogged determination to climb it, to reach Gan (or his placing the reaching of the Tower above human life), could be compared to the builders of the Tower of Babel and their attempt to reach God (or their placing the building of their great tower above human life). Thus, Roland being cast back into a loop at the end could be paralleled to the splitting of tongues the Babel builders received.

I still remain unconvinced that the Tower was saved after Blue Heaven. The Beam was made safe. This made the Tower safer in the short term, but the CK was still around and Mordred was on his way to the Tower. If Mordred reached the Tower before Roland, or if he managed to kill Roland than he and the CK could have entered the Tower together and I don't see that as being a beneficial thing for the Tower.

Woofer
06-20-2008, 04:25 AM
GAH! R_of_G you are 100% correct. There we see my assumption that the Tower is saved when the Beam is made safe.

jayson
06-20-2008, 05:56 AM
You could be right Woofer. My theory is just that, a theory. There's really no evidence either way. It's all speculation, which is what makes Dt so much fun. :)

The Lady of Shadows
06-20-2008, 03:18 PM
i don't think the tower was saved or made safer. the beam was saved, yes. sheemie practically shouted blue heaven down telling them all that "the beam says thankya" and that it would be fine and could be healed. but neither he (sheemie) nor it (in its boy guise) said anything about the tower being safe or saved.

with mordred on his/its way there, the crimson king hanging out (and i use that term loosely, only out of disdain) on a balcony, and all the perils still in the way (ex. dandelo) i think the tower was still in danger.

in fact, i think it's possible that the tower will remain in danger until roland finally gets it right. and i mean really gets it right. all of it, not just most of it. has the horn, has the guns of his father, has his complete ka-tet. has all the pieces he needs to complete the journey the way it was meant to be completed. he's learning bits and pieces and i think it's possible that important bits and pieces stay with him, but until he gets it right all the way the tower is in danger. just as the beam was in danger until blue heaven was brought down.

but i don't think this makes him an enemy of the white any more than it would make walter an agent of the white. he chose his side long ago, he made a conscious decision to stand and be true and i think he's made some bad decisions but i don't think he's ever wavered from his first decision to stand for the tower. i think the real question is (or should be) is gan the white? or is it more nebulous than that.

jayson
06-21-2008, 05:38 AM
i think the real question is (or should be) is gan the white? or is it more nebulous than that.

i'd say Gan is not just the White, but the White and the Red, the Random and the Purpose, and everything else.

Jean
06-21-2008, 05:42 AM
oh yes, or else we would be stuck with some half-assed Manicheanism

(that's one of the reasons why the Tower is Dark, and the rose red - neither of them white)

jayson
06-21-2008, 05:49 AM
(that's one of the reasons why the Tower is Dark, and the rose red - neither of them white)

I'd never thought of the symbolism of the colors like that but it makes perfect sense now that you mention it. Such a wise bear you are.

fernandito
06-21-2008, 05:56 AM
Brilliant, jean.

pathoftheturtle
05-09-2009, 11:34 AM
If the White means civilization and purpose as opposed to the destructive insanity of the Red, then I'd say that Roland has less trouble with it than Gan does. If Gan has been punishing Roland for losing fellowship, for placing his work ahead of being kind to people, then why doesn't Gan do so? Is Gan intelligent, or just a magical object? Why not speak?

noja888
06-01-2009, 05:23 AM
I believe Gan would not speak because Roland was not yet ready to take his/her/its place in the Tower. Mayhaps the Horn of Eld will reconstruct the Tower in Rolands's image. Did'nt the Roses make a 'Horn' type sound at the end of DT book 7? If Roland took ownership of the Tower, would the current Reality become the new 'Prim' and a new Tower spews forth? Is that why the beasts of the Prim want to destroy the Beams? Turning the great wheel of Ka backwards instead of forwards? :ninja:

Jean
10-11-2012, 10:17 AM
It is remarkable, rather amusing pieceIf you are not a spammer, please post something sensible within 48 hours.

Unless you do, you will be bearmauled.

Merlin1958
10-11-2012, 11:21 AM
It is remarkable, rather amusing pieceIf you are not a spammer, please post something sensible within 48 hours.

Unless you do, you will be bearmauled.

Best of luck with that, Jean!!! LOL

mystima
10-11-2012, 05:13 PM
Thanks for the bump, Ryan.

I find the observation on King's portrayal of protestant verses Catholic characters very interesting. I would say, however, that it's a particular brand of protestantism that comes off bad - the evangelical protestants. Mother Abigail, for example, was certainly a sympathetic character. Perhaps he leans toward and/or appears to favor Catholicism more because of the penance/forgiveness aspect of the faith.


Originally Posted by R_of_G
Great questions Ryan. My thoughts are... assuming the Tower as the physical embodiment of Gan, Roland isn't necessarily "saving" Gan, more than he maintaining order and balance. White can't entirely replace Red, nor vice versa, but if one gets the upper hand and "controls" the Tower than things are out of balance. As the World Axis, the Tower must remain equidistant between polar opposites [white and red as order and chaos in this case]. You can't have one without the other, but neither should be allowed to dominate. By "saving" the Tower I mean banishing the CK and Mordred from getting control of it this time through the loop. It's my belief that Roland represents the White in this necessarily constant struggle and that is why he loops, bc balance is attained but needs to be constantly maintained. It is not permanent.

Interesting. Of course if this is an eternal struggle, the next natural question is who or what was keeping the balance before Roland was born? Was it even in peril before Roland's birth? Was there another called to save the Tower? We don’t see or hear evidence of this in Roland’s story, but is that by design? As another asked earlier: will there be another White pawn (for he does seem to be a pawn in this interpretation) after Roland achieves salvation?

Since we know the Tower is saved when Blue Heaven falls, Roland’s continuing to the Tower and dogged determination to climb it, to reach Gan (or his placing the reaching of the Tower above human life), could be compared to the builders of the Tower of Babel and their attempt to reach God (or their placing the building of their great tower above human life). Thus, Roland being cast back into a loop at the end could be paralleled to the splitting of tongues the Babel builders received.

I hope that made sense. It's just my early morning first cup of coffee thoughts*.

*I don’t often get a chance to give these things the thought they need for good replies.

there has been others that have taken this quest. If you read the last book TWTTK it states that Tim Ross, a boy that becomes a gunslinger that is not from Gilead takes the journey to The Dark Tower. Although it does not say what he goes through he is one of the earlier ones to take the trip.