Thank you so much.
A deep faithful one.
Hot but light.
I don't understand this question...
Thank you so much.
This is good.Originally Posted by lisaki
I realize now that once I, too, felt it to be true love - when I was retelling the story to my mother, and wanted her to feel W&G was in no way worse than the other books. I wanted her to live through that love as true and big and undying, and I told the story as if it was so, disregarding what I actually thought of it; and you're right, it was a much better experience... in fact, it was great...
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Was it successful? And did your mom feel it was true love?This is good.
I realize now that once I, too, felt it to be true love - when I was retelling the story to my mother, and wanted her to feel W&G was in no way worse than the other books. I wanted her to live through that love as true and big and undying, and I told the story as if it was so, disregarding what I actually thought of it; and you're right, it was a much better experience... in fact, it was great...
Roland would have understood.
It was fantastic. I even thought I overdid it a little and W&G would become her favorite book... no, everything's all right: every book is her favorite, with some prevailing of Wolves.
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How strange it's your favourite, too.
Roland would have understood.
Isn't it? Wonders never cease.
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I completely agree with this.
2:45 am- 11th February 2008- I Finished The Dark Tower
Two excellent posts in a row.What an excellent post.Interesting conversation
Anyway back to the book.
It was true love and here's the reasons:
1. Roland thought it was, over the years. Do we all remember our teenage first love as something special? Some do. Some (including me) don't. When I had to leave that boy I thought I'd never forget him. My mother made me leave him, so it was sudden, forced and sooooo dramatic. I also felt extremely guilty and had him in my mind as a hero at that time. Now many years passed (not thousand but many) and I can't even remember his face. Real love happened to me much later. Roland, on the other hand, considers Susan as his one and real love. If he does so, he is right. Who are we to tell him that he's wrong?
2. I agree that true love is an everyday thing. But this is literature, and not real life. It's an example of pure young love with a dramatic ending. Common in literature. It was meant to be true love. Stephen King tried to write about young deep love. He didn't need a whole 800 pages book to write about a hot light relationship. If we don't buy the concept because we are realists that is our problem, not King's, not Roland's, not Susan's.
3. It was true love because I wanted it to be true love. It gave to me a much better reading experience. As a reader I decide how to "see" a subject which isn't already clear. In this case I think it was.
I love the way you think and write about things. It's a real pleasure to read your words. Not because I agree with most of them but because you have a really nice way to feel about things.
I don't actually agree, technically, with most of the beliefs you have in common, but it's a real pleasure to read the words, just the same. Composed passion.
I think it was a deep and faithful love. I think the tragedy is that they didnt have chance to see if it would have lasted.
***SPOILERS ON TOME 4***
Well, you can take the question backward: what if it wasn't true love? Then a lot of things would lose their strengh. Like when Roland goes through the glass for the first time and sees the Tower. He decides this would be his destiny, he chose the Tower inspite of Susan. If their love was just about playing "love me" in the bushes, this moment would be nearly casual: "Of course you choose the Tower dude, saving the world is something you do once whereas girl-riding is available in every town!". Yet this moment has to be terrible and powerfull. To make it possible, you have to think of true love between them.
The same when Susan dies, if Roland wasn't deeply in love with her he wouldn't be so destroyed on the way back to Gilead. And of course the souvenir of Susan he keeps during the whole first tome wouldn't be that imporant. And if Susan wasn't that important (which is false) Jake wouldn't be either...
The whole 4th tome, the so terrible moment when Susan is brought to the bonfire and all the rest would matter so much if their love wasn't true, deep and intense.
it was the kind of love i'd wish for myself, nuff said. its the kind of love i dream about
I think it was a true love, but it was not a deep love. More because it didn't have the time to deepen. Many loves are hot and true and at first they feel deep, but it isn't until much later, years later, that we understand how very shallow the pool really was in the beginning before we could finish each others thoughts, much less sentences. Roland was devastated by the loss of what could have been, not the loss of what was. This doesn't lessen the loss to the person who feels it, but there is a subtle difference between the two. The loss of what might have been is painful and devastating when it happens, and you do carry those feelings with you for a long time, but you have not lost yourself. You lost the hope of what could have been. And maybe it's because my feelings are biased, but I have experienced both the loss of what could have been and the loss of what was. In the loss of what was, you lose yourself as well. It is a devastation that surmounts all other feelings. Duty, honor, even the Tower are all lost to the devastation. The only thing that may remain is the love that was shared, and even that is not certain as it can be washed away in the horror.
Roland continued. It was not easy and he had to be helped along the way by his friends. That speaks for the love he had for Susan, but he retained himself the whole time. I say again that it was a true love, but not yet a deep one.
Margaret Emmie Mackey Catoe, you are, have been, and always will be my soulmate, and I love you.
Con todo mi corazon, por todo de mis dias. And I always will, in this life and into the next.
August 2, 1947 - September 24, 2010
The poll asks : What was their love like?
Since I don't really like Susan, at all, I'd have to say that to me, their love was just very immature.... and that's not an option in the poll!!
The Man In Black Fled Across The Desert...
...And The Gunslinger Followed.
“I’m always on the Batman rule, sir.” - Kate Kane / Detective Comics 857
"It is the story, not he who tells it." Except to us collectors who have to put limits somewhere. - jhanic
Remember, Remember, The Fifth of November, The Gunpowder, Treason, and Plot.
DO you mean that you don't think that it was even hot?The poll asks : What was their love like?
Since I don't really like Susan, at all, I'd have to say that to me, their love was just very immature.... and that's not an option in the poll!!
Beyond the poll, anyway, what about this? --
Is Roland's whole problem merely that, after the fact, he can't take the blow to his ego that'd come in saying that he never really loved her?
Hot? Um, mostly I was wondering how he could stand to even be near her, she was so whiny and all "save me Roland" .... maybe he just kissed her to shut her up?!?DO you mean that you don't think that it was even hot?The poll asks : What was their love like?
Since I don't really like Susan, at all, I'd have to say that to me, their love was just very immature.... and that's not an option in the poll!!
<clip>
Loved her? I'm surprised he even liked her.
The Man In Black Fled Across The Desert...
...And The Gunslinger Followed.
“I’m always on the Batman rule, sir.” - Kate Kane / Detective Comics 857
"It is the story, not he who tells it." Except to us collectors who have to put limits somewhere. - jhanic
In that case, his problem might be that he has never liked himself, and God only knows if he should.
haha thats good. you're certainly not alone with that opinionHot? Um, mostly I was wondering how he could stand to even be near her, she was so whiny and all "save me Roland" .... maybe he just kissed her to shut her up?!?DO you mean that you don't think that it was even hot?The poll asks : What was their love like?
Since I don't really like Susan, at all, I'd have to say that to me, their love was just very immature.... and that's not an option in the poll!!
<clip>
Loved her? I'm surprised he even liked her.
From this you'll recognize me;
Su... oh my... so damn great to see you. :longDTbuddyhug:
Well, I can see why so many of you don't like Susan but for my part I can understand why Roland has fallen for her. I know you think she was as deep as a puddle but I see some depth in her.
Roland would have understood.
I don't think Roland was after depth at his age and in his state of mind
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He might not have been after depth but it must have been in the hat. I mean I don't think their love would have been longer than 7 days if he hadn't found any value in her.
Roland would have understood.
yaaay hello! i was wondering when you'd notice me here. was hard not to spill the beans.Su... oh my... so damn great to see you. :longDTbuddyhug:
Well, I can see why so many of you don't like Susan but for my part I can understand why Roland has fallen for her. I know you think she was as deep as a puddle but I see some depth in her.
no i think she was deep. deep and smart and funny and and sensitive and so gorgeous you couldnt even look at her. but as my da would say perfect is boring
From this you'll recognize me;
1. You are way too good at keeping secrets. I am still shocked and crazily happy to see you here.1. yaaay hello! i was wondering when you'd notice me here. was hard not to spill the beans.Su... oh my... so damn great to see you. :longDTbuddyhug:
Well, I can see why so many of you don't like Susan but for my part I can understand why Roland has fallen for her. I know you think she was as deep as a puddle but I see some depth in her.
2. no i think she was deep. deep and smart and funny and and sensitive and so gorgeous you couldnt even look at her. but as my da would say perfect is boring
2. I guess we will always disagree on this one. I don't see Susan perfect at all. But I must admit she didn't have many negative features (or they didn't come out in the story) so her character is one of the weakest in the series.
Roland would have understood.
I didn't mean no value at all: I think that strength and integrity was more important for him than depth; maybe even not only at that period of his life.He might not have been after depth but it must have been in the hat. I mean I don't think their love would have been longer than 7 days if he hadn't found any value in her.
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Excellent point. That's really deep.I didn't mean no value at all: I think that strength and integrity was more important for him than depth; maybe even not only at that period of his life.He might not have been after depth but it must have been in the hat. I mean I don't think their love would have been longer than 7 days if he hadn't found any value in her.
Ofcourse not, He was a teenager.
Even gunslingers dont want depth at that age from a female
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
