Wow, nice piece of information. Thanks.Originally Posted by Bev Vincent
Wow, nice piece of information. Thanks.
Roland would have understood.
There is a whole thread devoted to rolands/ gunslinger guns. Them not being thouraly described, contridicting terms and features, ect, ect.....
The gun junkies tring to find this worlds closest example....
Another apperntice slinger finding his way to the tower....
As far as Rolands survival skills as mentioned in the sereis, he so far has done nothing terrably wrong. Have not seen the whole comic sereis yet (hence the "so far" part. Most of it is sound advice, althogh be it some dated.
To avois becoming bear sh$%, try makeing yourself look bigger than you are. Do not play dead, bears are scavagers. You do the math..... Raise your arms and make noise.
Other than just plain avoiding pissing off a bear, or avoiding them entirely. Carry a large bore weapon. high powered rifle, pistol abouve .40 cal. Aim for the head, bears have thick skulls, squeeze till it goes click.... Much better than pepper spray! Yogie will have spice to his meal!
Heck the well placed shot to the head worked on Schadarick rather well...
Or dang ol' stay out of the bear's yard, man. Go trompin' through my yard, man, I'd turn on the claws and teeth, too. Talkin' 'bout humans thinkin' they own everything.
It'll take a lot more than words and guns,
A whole lot more than riches and muscle.
The hands of the many must join as one.
And together we'll cross the river.
Puscifer, "The Humbling River"
it did indeed work out well for Roland ands co with shooting shardik! But the above is correct, most animals will not stick around to see what made the ear splitting bang (discharged round), much less if they are grazed/hit by the slug! Sure some will be enraged, but as a rule a few shots will take care of anything(either by scaring away or with a few well placed lead projectiles...always aim for the head, the eyes if you can see them- as very few creatures will continue an attack if they are suddenly missing an eye or two!)
one more piece of survival advice is an oldie but goodie used by natives here ( the Americas) for *waves toward horizon with faraway look* delah!:
to make a simple trap, use a rock, a small stick/twig, and a piece of bait. Set the rock in a way that the only way to get to the bait is to go through the twig holding the rock up. If there is only one 'entrance' to the bait (through the stick propping the rock up) the creature will knock the twig and the rock will ( if it's big enough) will crush your meal for you!
This method obviously takes practice patience and a bit of luck, but is very easy to do with nearly no tools/or no other sources of food (water for seafood/berries/nuts/ etc.)
Friendless, heartless, cold romance? *spoilers*
BIG spoilers
What does this DT VII statement means? It bothers me...
Was Roland really heartless in the start of his journey?
Friendless? What about his first Ka tet?
And which is the "cold romance" he is referring to?
Yeah, I think he was quite heartless (but of course not absolutely heartless). Not when he was together with his first ka-tet, after that. When he was chasing the man in black without stop like a crazy lunatic.
Cold romance? Good question.
Roland would have understood.
Yes... what about that?Cold romance?
Im sorry I didn't use the spoiler thing...
No problem. It's there now, isn't it?Yes... what about that?Cold romance?
Im sorry I didn't use the spoiler thing...
I am sure he doesn't mean the romance he had with Susan.
Roland would have understood.
I'm not sure... The word "romance" is very specific and I don't think it can be used metaphorically. Ahh that really bothers me!
Let's see what the native speakers say.I'm not sure... The word "romance" is very specific and I don't think it can be used metaphorically. Ahh that really bothers me!
Roland would have understood.
You 're right...
They are sleeping now. I hope they will come in in the evening.
You are right it has a specific meaning.. but.. who knows. Oh damn.. now it's on my mind, too.
Roland would have understood.
Maybe not Romance as in the kind between two people.
Romance kind be an idealised concept of something as opposed to romantic love it is full of emotion. His quest is almost romantic in his endless heartbreaking, lonely search for the tower. He is obsesessed by it, fears it and is in awe of it and maybe is infatuated with it. It is cold because it can't love him back and destroyed the only person who can maybe.
Dunno if that helps!
Yes, this, too: Roland is repeatedly labeled deeply romantic, and his romance with the Tower fits the above quotation, I think.
On the other hand, the "loveless mistake for love" part makes me think that somewheres along the way he may have had other romances, in the more personal sense of the word.
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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, in W&G, Roland refers to love as a drug. I would say the "Romance" in this case would be more of a bewitchment, or an addiction. Or that the "romance" between Roland and the Tower is cold because its never reciprocated on behalf of the Tower. Roland loves the object of his obsession but it will never open up to him.
Exactly early on in the gunslinger roland is described as being a romantic
And the "loveless mistake for lover" could be applied to Alice
if the worlds gonna end then let's get it over with, i got shit to do
Oh, I don't think so.
Firstly it wasn't a real romance. It might have meant more for Alice but it was just sex for Roland. Definitely not much more.
Secondly, although it wasn't a romance it was not cold, either.
Last but not least it wasn't an important thing in Roland's life. I don't think he would mention it thinking about such big parts and points of his life.
How could I miss it? Yes, I think this is it.
Roland would have understood.
Bewitched by Allie or other women during his journey? No
By the tower idea?
Yeah, I like this theory, I just don't know if the word "romance" fits here. As the native speakers say, it might
My friend is reading DTVII right now. His idea of the Roland-Susan relationship was that it was a fake childish thing, that would happen to any random good looking teenagers if they met under these circumstances. He even claims that teenagers are dying for something they have mistaken for love (though it's not deep at all) all the time. He said something like "see? that thing with Susan was just a cold romance, SK says so, not me!"
My idea of Susan-Roland is different. I adore them together and I feel it was real love. Had to re-read the whole chapter to see that just a few pages later Roland thinks that
Spoiler:.
I think this proves his feelings were real, and stayed real. Well yeah, I have to protect this Roland-Susan idea in my mind
Roland loved and had a heart before the journey started. I think he loved at least some people- including the members of his first ka tet.
He wasn't heartless, he just lost his heart somewhere between sorrow, loneliness and duty. He found it again with the new ka-tet.
Anyway I tried to explain it as good as I could in English, hope you understand my point.
I agree, lisaki.
I'd like to say much about Roland's character, but for now I'll just content myself with clarifying sematics. Here's some definitions from the Merriam-Webster English Dictionary:
romanticism \rō-ˈman-tə-ˌsi-zəm, rə-\ noun; often capitalized :
1 : a literary, artistic, and philosophical movement originating in the 18th century, characterized chiefly by a reaction against neoclassicism and an emphasis on the imagination and emotions, and marked especially in English literature by sensibility and the use of autobiographical material, an exaltation of the primitive and the common man, an appreciation of external nature, an interest in the remote, a predilection for melancholy, and the use in poetry of older verse forms.
romantic \rō-ˈman-tik, rə-\ adjective :
1 : consisting of or resembling a romance
2 : having no basis in fact : imaginary
3 : impractical in conception or plan : visionary
4 a : marked by the imaginative or emotional appeal of what is heroic, adventurous, remote, mysterious, or idealized b often capitalized : of, relating to, or having the characteristics of romanticism c : of or relating to music of the 19th century characterized by an emphasis on subjective emotional qualities and freedom of form; also : of or relating to a composer of this music
5 a : having an inclination for romance : responsive to the appeal of what is idealized, heroic, or adventurous b : marked by expressions of love or affection c : conducive to or suitable for lovemaking
6 : of, relating to, or constituting the part of the hero especially in a light comedy
romance \rō-ˈman(t)s, rə-; ˈrō-ˌ\ noun :
1 a (1) : a medieval tale based on legend, chivalric love and adventure, or the supernatural (2) : a prose narrative treating imaginary characters involved in events remote in time or place and usually heroic, adventurous, or mysterious (3) : a love story especially in the form of a novel b : a class of such literature
2 : something (as an extravagant story or account) that lacks basis in fact
3 : an emotional attraction or aura belonging to an especially heroic era, adventure, or activity
4 : love affair
5 capitalized : the Romance languages
I think that the idea is about the difference between truly giving (love) and simply wanting to see oneself as a hero. The heartless often do believe that they are good; with no heart, how could one tell what any of the things of the heart really are?
Thank youPlease add your vote to this poll from our DT4 forum --Their Love. (Also, you might like to comment on that thread.)
i dont think Roland is heartless but he's his just a bit slow in realizing what his feeling really is, just like his father described him, he said to Roland..
--" Morals may always be beyond you. You are not quick like Cuthbert or Wheeler's boy. It will make you formidable."
And also we have to consider the way he's been nurtured and also no offense to the guys, its also a male thing to be a bit insensitive, its kinda written in their dna--generally speaking..
As for romance, on my understanding it is something that your heart is gravitated to, it doesnt neccesarily pertain to a person, in Roland's case its more of his obsession to the Dark Tower.. Cold-- because he did everything just to get to the Tower even though he had hurt a lot of people in the process...
Spoiler:Incidentally, this is the reason I relate to Roland more than any other character.
Yes Roland is a hero but he is also a type of lawman. He is like the old stories of the Texas Rangers, with there motto one riot one ranger. But his badge is his guns. Roland even say in the books that it his duty to protect the tower. This is due to him being a gunslinger and of the blood line of Eld. But on the other hand I also think Gan ues him like a temporal antibody, or a stitch even a crutch. His being serves to purposes. 1. To keep the Tower from falling in a time where there are little to no antibodies / gunslingers to fight off the infection (witch he makes more of them by training his Ka Tet and making the Tet co.) 2. An to redeem his self in his own Eyes For in truth is not what madders.
This thought is very far from my thinking. I can't imagine Gan using anyone for anything... why would he? I can't imagine him as a puppeteer.
IMHO if Gan gives us purposes he gives them to give goals and some meaning to our lives.
Roland would have understood.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
