The Official End Thread

[Wuducynn]

I spent a lot of time with the series, and even I didn't have to endure the wait that some had. I can't even imagine

Being one of those who grew up with the series since Drawing of the Three came out in the stores, it is hard to express the feelings of finally realizing I was holding the last book of my beloved Dark Tower series in my hands, let alone the ending.

[Ruthful]

Capital idea, Jean!

[Darkthoughts]

I thought King was going to be the Tower around the time of WotC, for much the same reasons as you outlined. But you'll remember that he tells Roland and Eddie he is not Gan, merely a vessel for Gan's voice

[Storyslinger]

But, isn't the tower a creation of Gan, so he could still be the tower, right?

[Darkthoughts]

Gan is the Tower

[Storyslinger]

Right,so then it couldn't be King

[Storyslinger]

I spent a lot of time with the series, and even I didn't have to endure the wait that some had. I can't even imagine

Being one of those who grew up with the series since Drawing of the Three came out in the stores, it is hard to express the feelings of finally realizing I was holding the last book of my beloved Dark Tower series in my hands, let alone the ending.

That is just what I'm talking about, all those years, then finally coming to an end. It was a hard thing to accept

[Ruthful]

I guess I fit somewhere in the middle in terms of delayed gratification. I started reading TDT sometime in the mid to late-90s, so there was a brief gap between my beginning the series and Book IV-which is still my favorite-but I also experienced the huge drought in the late-90s to early-aughts. Then Stephen King was run over by a drug-addled hillbilly in '99-who the hell hikesuphill on the shoulder of a deserted road-and I was like "oh shit, this doesn't bode well." But then he recuperated and completed the series and everything was gravy.

[Storyslinger]

Yeah, I think a lot of DT fans went "Oh Shit!" when he got hit. We all feared that the series would go unfinished

[Jean]

Gan is the Tower

I am not sure. I think he transcends. But, then again, for me "Gan" is only a way (created by Mid-World local mythology) to say God.

[fernandito]

Isn't it stated somewhere in the text that Gan IS the Tower?

[Kyonn]

Gan is the Tower

I am not sure. I think he transcends. But, then again, for me "Gan" is only a way (created by Mid-World local mythology) to say God.

Its says in book 7 (don't have time to look up the actual passage) that the Tower is a physical manifestation of Gan.

[fernandito]

There we go, book VII.

[Jean]

manifestation does not equal the manifested, not especially can physical manifestation equal what transcends the physical world, or creation equal the creator. Then, I would beg to differ between the mythology (what is believed in Roland's world) and what we can infer from those, often contradictory, often (as it is the case with the lore, especially in a world that has moved on) confused, blurry, partly lost and mixed up, beliefs; moreover, they are very often voiced by people who either can remember only vaguely, or are liars.

Sorry if I am confused and vague myself, I'm three-quarters asleep. I don't think there's anything among the main concepts of the saga that couldn't be the point of a serious discussion, and I don't think its riddles will ever be solved to everyone's satisfaction, or all its concepts defined. It's about as complex as the universe itself, as far as it is possible for a piece of literature. ::falls asleep::

[fernandito]

so.....in other words, you disagree.

[Kyonn]

manifestation does not equal the manifested, not especially can physical manifestation equal what transcends the physical world, or creation equal the creator. Then, I would beg to differ between the mythology (what is believed in Roland's world) and what we can infer from those, often contradictory, often (as it is the case with the lore, especially in a world that has moved on) confused, blurry, partly lost and mixed up, beliefs; moreover, they are very often voiced by people who either can remember only vaguely, or are liars.

Sorry if I am confused and vague myself, I'm three-quarters asleep. I don't think there's anything among the main concepts of the saga that couldn't be the point of a serious discussion, and I don't think its riddles will ever be solved to everyone's satisfaction, or all its concepts defined. It's about as complex as the universe itself, as far as it is possible for a piece of literature. ::falls asleep::

Sorry "physical manifestation" was just a term I used. the book says something like "Gan is the Tower and the Tower is Gan". It's in book 7, at the end. Its something Roland realizes either right before or right after entering the Tower, When the Tower/Gan is speaking to him.

[fernandito]

It's also stated that the Tower is not made up stones , but of Gan's "flesh".

[Wuducynn]

The Dark Tower is the physical manifestation of Gan. The Dark Tower is also the multi-verse...now Gan is the being that brought corruption to the perfection of the chaos of the Prim and Los' is the champion of those who want to bring down the Tower and bring back the perfect chaos and darkness that was.

[DTrose19]

I was both sad and content . . . it was a confusing time I sat there for nearly an hour just trying to figure out how things could have been different and crying over parts of the book ( yes crying over a book, I think people here may understand that more than a bunch of high school rednecks) but mostly just wishing it wasn't over.

[Jean]

manifestation does not equal the manifested, not especially can physical manifestation equal what transcends the physical world, or creation equal the creator. Then, I would beg to differ between the mythology (what is believed in Roland's world) and what we can infer from those, often contradictory, often (as it is the case with the lore, especially in a world that has moved on) confused, blurry, partly lost and mixed up, beliefs; moreover, they are very often voiced by people who either can remember only vaguely, or are liars.

Sorry if I am confused and vague myself, I'm three-quarters asleep. I don't think there's anything among the main concepts of the saga that couldn't be the point of a serious discussion, and I don't think its riddles will ever be solved to everyone's satisfaction, or all its concepts defined. It's about as complex as the universe itself, as far as it is possible for a piece of literature. ::falls asleep::

Sorry "physical manifestation" was just a term I used. the book says something like "Gan is the Tower and the Tower is Gan". It's in book 7, at the end. Its something Roland realizes either right before or right after entering the Tower, When the Tower/Gan is speaking to him.

I will find that place as soon as I can; anyway, my main point is that whatever Roland realizes - whatever is said directly by him or anyone else - can never be taken at its face value. It's a book of errors, mythology, and quest for, among other things, the truth (overcoming the lies) and freedom of will (overcoming the lies of ka), which is not ended yet. It is not a philosophical treatise on the nature of Gan and universe; we have to glean the necessary information and think for ourselves. My observations of the context make me believe that Gan is not identic to the Tower, and the following:

It's also stated that the Tower is not made up stones , but of Gan's "flesh".

is sure a metaphor, so often used in the religious context when we have to speak of the unspeakable (=lying far beyond our human experience expressible in words), but I am afraid it would require a separate thread to discuss further.

[Darkthoughts]

Jean!! *shakes finger at Jean* Why must you always disagree and make me go and look things up?


SPOILERS FOR THE GUNSLINGER BORN COMICS COMING UP!






In the DT comics, it's elaborated on and this is what they say:

And what about you, Gabby, asked Vannay. Can you break your perpetual silence and tell us who Gan is?
The Dark Tower, Roland told him. The Tower is Gan, and Gan is the Tower.

When the architects, electricians, and builders arrived in End-World, they were amazed by what they saw. Not only was the Tower more imposing than they had realized, but what they had taken for stone was actually hardened flesh.

But despite the horror and the havoc, the Tower survived. Listing to one side on his cracked foundations, Gan let one drop of his blood fall from his flesh.

(This creates the rose, which then sings the other roses into existence.)

[Jean]

seems like I have to quietly tiptoe out of the conversation... I never read comics, and never understood why they should be considered canon. I have the book to go by, and - the below is strictly my opinion! - the book never was as vulgar in treating the subtle relations of deity and creation as those passages. Even they are open to interpretation, though (because if we took them literally, the whole metaphysical construction wouldn't work), but not having read the comics I don't feel competent enough to offer any interpretation of the text above. I really don't understand, though, why they should be considered part of the saga. The book is written and finished; there may be comics, movies, ballets and T-shirts; what does it all have to do with the canon text? (the previous line is written by someone who has no idea what comics are, grew in a country where they were quite uncommon, and is totally ignorant of their idea, so should be taken as a private, incompetent opinion.)

[Darkthoughts]

I would never call your opinions incompetent, dear bear

The comic part of the comics (if you understand what I mean - the picture parts in other words) deal mainly with the young gunslingers and their WaG tale. But at the end of each comic are histories and legends of Roland's world - which are really interesting. They are written in normal format - I think you'd like them, if you want I could type them out and pm them to you

[Jean]

I wanted to say, "please please do!" - but type? I don't want my ladyfox to spend her days typing. There must be some other way I'll try to find, now that you got me interested in them.
However, to what extent are they canon and can be referred to for confirmation of our points of view?
(to everybody: sorry to be off-topic, but it's only for a moment)

[Darkthoughts]

Robin Furth (she who authored the Concordance, which King originally hired her to do for his own use when writing the rest of the series). King is very closely involved in the comics, there are some interviews with him in the backs of the issues.

Don't worry, it's not a huge amount of typing, a couple of pages in the back of nearly each one - I'm going to do it anyway Jean, so stop protesting