PDA

View Full Version : John Farson (spoilers)



Atanóno Fána
12-22-2009, 03:37 PM
So, what do you think of the good man that destroyed Gilead, and indeed the entire Mid-World.
Personally it's my favorite character, its representation in comics, and especially his hairstyle is just perfect. Even feared him alone Roland, and fled before him, but such a Red King more or less not afraid.
But I have one question.
This applies to the knowledge of how to operate machines Old people. I have three different theories, 1, and thus to help Walter / Marten / R.F. 2, is intelligent, but probably more bandit sensitive than expected. 3, through the door into another world which would not be surprising if they went through possibly Eldred Jonas. Maybe all three cases have some truth, but still I'm interested in your opinion.

SynysterSaint
12-23-2009, 08:52 AM
I like the idea of a character such as John Farson because, above the Crimson King and even Flagg, he is the ultimate evil in the series in my opinion. He worked as hard as he could to bring down Gilead and the Inner Baronies and, of course, he succeeded. He has caused Roland more pain than any other villain in the series. I would argue that point in regards to Jonas, as well. Farson was the catalyst to Roland's desolate life, and for that I can never forgive him. But I will admit once more that he does work well as a character.

Malice
12-23-2009, 10:21 AM
I still think King needs to do another book series (I haven't read the comic yet) about the early years of Roland. From him his first days with Cort up to Jericho Hill. I would like to see John Farson explained more and be one of the main villians in a series like that. Along with seeing some of the evil Walter was upto and MORE CUTHBURT!!!

SynysterSaint
12-25-2009, 08:22 AM
MORE CUTHBURT!!!

I agree wholeheartedly!

Atanóno Fána
12-26-2009, 04:01 AM
Perhaps in the upcoming work will be something of Farson, even though most of it will probably be revealed in comics.

pathoftheturtle
12-28-2009, 11:46 AM
I would be interested in learning more about where he comes from and how he thinks.

Atanóno Fána
12-29-2009, 07:28 AM
It's from Desoy or Garland. Me more interested in how good shooter or a warrior, or if not better then General Grissom. Farson knew how to use tanks and robots, or it is rather the head General Grissom?

Atanóno Fána
02-08-2010, 09:15 AM
I have a question. What do you think about hair Farson? It's really his hair appears on most images, or is it on the mask as shown in Treacher 5?

Kronz
02-09-2010, 01:06 AM
I was disappointed that Farson actually turned out to be a character. What I mean, when we read Wizard and Glass the first time, this guy never makes an appearance, even his own men haven't met him, or can't really pin down much about him when they claim to have met him. As I read W&G it seemed much more likely that Farson was made up, or an alias of Flagg, who as it so happens is the only head baddie to show his face in W&G. I guess Walter's appearance is almost red herring in hindsight. Still, I preferred to imagine Farson as some sort of never-seen wizard or general, and the allusions to Wizard of Oz at the end had felt like a hint too (Farson, like Oz, was really just someone pushing buttons behind a curtain). That that didn't end up being what happened is fine, but I remember discussing Farson pre-2003 with a friend and he felt the same way, that Farson was either Flagg/Walter or a nobody puppet.

Now, I've not caught up with The Good Man in the comics so maybe I'll grow to like the idea of him as a legitimately separate character, but I think it's easy to understand why I was leaning the other way before the closing trilogy and comics came out.

Jean
02-09-2010, 02:55 AM
yes, it is very easy to understand and it another time solidifies my strong belief (as if it needed solidifying...) that comics have nothing to do with the book and can only vulgarize, oversimplify and reduce it to something akin to the adventures of Misery Chastain

Sam
02-09-2010, 05:18 AM
The strength or weakness of the Dark Tower comics all boils down to one thing, is it cannon? King has lent his name to the series, and in doing so has accepted (I believe) the series as cannon to his DT saga. If at some time he should decide otherwise, all he need do is write another tale that contradicts it and whammo, the comic series is undone.

As for John Farson, before the comics (which I have not read beyond The Long Road Home) I always thought Farson and Walter to be one and the same.

Kronz
02-09-2010, 06:09 PM
I wouldn't call it canon to the novels yet, I think that it could only really be that if King learned how to write comics and spent his time working on it personally. Another way to think of it is an alternate reality or level of the tower, that old stand by. The main reason I'm buying the comics is to see the art. Dark Tower art is always interesting.

Sam
02-09-2010, 09:28 PM
Well, with the stories being written in part by King's research assistant Robin Furth as well as King giving them his name to use (remember that King WILL have his name removed from bastardizations that he doesn't approve of ala The Lawnmower Man), I think there is a good argument for considering the stories cannon until we hear otherwise.

Atanóno Fána
02-10-2010, 09:07 AM
Farson certainly not puppet. Conversely, even Flagg serves him. Farson not so much serve the King, only has common interests. Flagg on orders Farson had to Gilead to save his nephew and Grapefruit. Strange that Farson calmly came to the gates of the city.
But my question, do you think Farson hair is real or is it on the mask as "doubtful" indicated on the packaging Treacher 5?

Brice
02-12-2010, 06:10 AM
Well, with the stories being written in part by King's research assistant Robin Furth as well as King giving them his name to use (remember that King WILL have his name removed from bastardizations that he doesn't approve of ala The Lawnmower Man), I think there is a good argument for considering the stories cannon until we hear otherwise.

With all due respect to Mr. King and Mrs. Furth neither of them can say it is canon and make it so. My argument for them not being canon is unconcerned with whether King , Furth, or the messiah declares them to be such. It is more important to see whether they are confined to preexisting canon. If they are not consistent with the originally planned series (1-7) then they are not canon even if King offers, his name, fingerprints and dna for their covers. If they are inconsistent than his name only makes them sanctioned bastardizations.

Atanóno Fána
02-16-2010, 04:30 AM
John Farson, his hair is real (it looks at all the pictures) or on the mask (Treacher 5)? What do you think?

Atanóno Fána
02-16-2010, 07:37 AM
Earlier today, an e-mail written by Jae Lee. Farson is said to have blond hair, in fact!!! I hope you made fun of me

Darkle and Tinct
04-05-2010, 03:57 AM
The comics are meant to be canon. So far the series is consistent with the novels -- everything is appearing to fit, except for a few discrepancies that are cleared up by King/Roland.
John Farson is meant to represent another side of the Crimson King's influence -- whereas Flagg/Broadcloak is a subtle manipulator who prefers to spread chaos by influencing others, Farson is the aggressive, immediate side of evil.

Empath of the White
04-10-2010, 04:46 PM
I liked John Farson quite a bit at first. Some of Furth's earlier pieces made him out to be a figure with a sort of savior complex, being that he was taking in the gunslingers cast out of Gilead. So I figured when he actually attacked Gilead, he'd offer its citizens a chance at renouncing the gunslingers. In doing so, he'd be offering them a chance at a new life in his envisioned regime.

Then came the issue where his men just take flamethrowers to the civilians. After that I didn't really care for him as much. It seemed like something done just to make us think, "Wow, what an evil guy!" I would have thought it more disturbing had he torched the ones who held to the rule of the gunslingers.

That said, I did like the idea of using the prisoners as targets to test out the weaponry of the Old People.

I prefer that Farson and Flagg be two separate characters; I enjoy Flagg/Walter/The Ageless Stranger as the manipulator.

Atanóno Fána
04-23-2010, 12:47 PM
Well, no it does not seem to be manipulated by Walter to Farson. It helps him to command the Red King. This is Walter task. Farson but he threatens and commands. Farson is smart and handle myself. Nobody is listening, perhaps even the Red King. Just support it, which is an advantage for both.

19eye-rosecrow-gun
10-18-2010, 01:08 AM
I believe that Farson and Flagg are actually the same. I have read the graphic series. I think Flagg used his dark magic to create a decoy who was under his control to act and talk as if they were Farson. In the books we never actually see an encounter with The Good Man, and in the comics (as I recall, could be wrong) we never see his face (The Man With No Face...). Plus at the end of the comics, it says that the man behind it all is Walter, indicating that he is the true mastermind.

I think any time Flagg and Farson are together is simple trickery of the wizard. Flagg is Farson.

Jean
10-18-2010, 02:42 AM
I am absolutely sure they are two different people, for the obvious reason that the gunslingers' rule (that I am very skeptical about) was doomed to provoke a lot of opposition, and, finally, an organized revolt, which, in its turn, breeds leaders without any help from any special evil forces. The advent of such a figure as Farson was necessary, given the historical circumstances.

Seneschal
10-18-2010, 06:16 AM
I agree with The Tenant. they are two different people. upon reworking the books, if King wanted us to believe that Flagg and Farson were the same he would have specifically made it clear like he did with other incarnations of Flagg.

also, Farson's initials are J.F., not R.F. l

pathoftheturtle
10-18-2010, 10:13 AM
Stephen King seemed to be uncertain about this topic for quite some time.
I'm not so sure that he intended Farson's revolt to imply skeptical governance of Gilead.
Also, I can't really say how crucial questions of his intentions are... but still, I find all of this quite interesting.

fernandito
10-18-2010, 10:16 AM
Even if they're not the same person (I don't think they are), Flagg had such an influence over Farson that it ultimately doesn't matter much.

Jean
10-18-2010, 11:07 AM
For me, a lot depends on this. Namely, the quality of the book I'm reading.

RainInSpain
10-18-2010, 12:19 PM
I have never had any doubts that they are two separate persons. Otherwise, IMHO, it would be overly simple (everything bad that happens has a single source) and at the same time too complex on a different level: magic or not, a villain needs to have accomplices - if only to get another perspective on how to make evil things even more evil, or not to have to pay attention to every single detail of every single plan. So to think that it's just one person, essentially "wearing different hats"... hmmm, that would make Flagg too much of a madman, in the medical sense of the word.

I know this is off-topic here, but as a general observation: *is* there any form of government that is not, in and of itself, a breeding ground for the forces that may/will spell its doom?
The question itself might be rhethorical, but it lends itself to the discussion of whether or not Farson was what he was because of his personal qualities, or just because he happened to be in the right place at the right time.

pathoftheturtle
10-18-2010, 12:48 PM
I have never had any doubts that they are two separate persons. Otherwise, IMHO, it would be overly simple (everything bad that happens has a single source) and at the same time too complex on a different level: magic or not, a villain needs to have accomplices - if only to get another perspective on how to make evil things even more evil, or not to have to pay attention to every single detail of every single plan. So to think that it's just one person, essentially "wearing different hats"... hmmm, that would make Flagg too much of a madman, in the medical sense of the word.
Those points don't necessarily contradict the rest of TDT, though. In any case, it's already established that Flagg did wear many different hats, and I think it's arguable that, whether or not all evil having a single source is or is not more simple than real life, TDT asserts a mythos wherein it basically is all one.

I know this is off-topic here, but as a general observation: *is* there any form of government that is not, in and of itself, a breeding ground for the forces that may/will spell its doom?
The question itself might be rhethorical, but it lends itself to the discussion of whether or not Farson was what he was because of his personal qualities, or just because he happened to be in the right place at the right time.I think that very question was a major theme of The Stand. We've discussed the topic of why Farson was what he was in various places over the years, including this thread (http://www.thedarktower.org/palaver/showthread.php?t=216), which is offically the place to discuss how the society of the gunslingers measures up.

RainInSpain
10-18-2010, 01:23 PM
Then we come to the question (at least I do) about the definition of what it means to have a "single source of evil". Does it mean that every evil-doer is basically another appearance/incarnation/disguise of that single source - like different clothes worn by the same person; or is that single source a mastermind that can attract/enchant/persuade *other* creatures to follow?

(Thanks for pointing me to that other discussion!)

pathoftheturtle
10-18-2010, 01:31 PM
No thanks necessary; I'd love for you to join it. And other folken here, as well, if y'all have anything to say on that.

I guess I raised that question for you by not exactly getting the point that you were making. Having more bad guys in an epic does seem less corny.

RainInSpain
10-19-2010, 03:37 AM
No thanks necessary; I'd love for you to join it. And other folken here, as well, if y'all have anything to say on that.

I guess I raised that question for you by not exactly getting the point that you were making. Having more bad guys in an epic does seem less corny.

Exactly. In a nutshell, I think RF and JF are different persons because I do not see how having them as one would benefit the story.

I guess I was not clear enough because what I wrote was a sort of thought in progress I am trying to systematize my thinking of ka, Gan, the Crimson King et al. and generally the balance of good, evil, and neutral in TDT.
Ill also jump right in with questions into that other thread as soon as Im done reading it.

19eye-rosecrow-gun
10-19-2010, 03:44 PM
You see, the Crimson King is an entity, but he gets his power from the evil of men. His whole existence is based on evil energy. Madmen make the Crimson King powerful. Roland is also an incarnation of survival. Roland is the incarnation of all the people who fight to protect the good.

I still believe its possible for Flagg to actually be Farson. In the last book it is even stated that some people knew Flagg as John Farson, albeit this was written before the graphic novels. Remember, Flagg is a magician who can do real magic. There is little history about Farson. I think whenever Flagg was in farson's presence, the man we see as being Farson is a decoy, someone under one of Flagg's spells.

pathoftheturtle
10-20-2010, 08:17 AM
...I am trying to systematize my thinking of ka, Gan, the Crimson King et al. and generally the balance of good, evil, and neutral in TDT.
I’ll also jump right in with questions into that other thread as soon as I’m done reading it.You see, the Crimson King is an entity, but he gets his power from the evil of men. His whole existence is based on evil energy. Madmen make the Crimson King powerful. Roland is also an incarnation of survival. Roland is the incarnation of all the people who fight to protect the good.Really? Are you sure CK depends on the evil of men, and not the other way around? Still off-topic, I know. I'm sorry that I don't have a handy single link on this. I'm utterly fascinated by the subject. We talk a lot about these issues all over in the DT7 forum, and in Town Commons. I'll keep an eye open, whereever you wanna take it.


...I guess I raised that question for you by not exactly getting the point that you were making. Having more bad guys in an epic does seem less corny.

Exactly. In a nutshell, I think RF and JF are different persons because I do not see how having them as one would benefit the story.
......I still believe its possible for Flagg to actually be Farson. In the last book it is even stated that some people knew Flagg as John Farson, albeit this was written before the graphic novels. Remember, Flagg is a magician who can do real magic. There is little history about Farson. I think whenever Flagg was in farson's presence, the man we see as being Farson is a decoy, someone under one of Flagg's spells.I think it's possible, too. Even if Jean's right and it makes the book's quality less, that doesn't necessarily prove that it's not so. What most benefits the story isn't always done; that's a somewhat separate question. That one, though, does warrant inclusion in this thread, IMO. What do you think 19eye-rosecrow-gun? If they ARE one, does that not detract from the fiction's value?

19eye-rosecrow-gun
10-21-2010, 01:06 AM
I think it's possible, too. Even if Jean's right and it makes the book's quality less, that doesn't necessarily prove that it's not so. What most benefits the story isn't always done; that's a somewhat separate question. That one, though, does warrant inclusion in this thread, IMO. What do you think 19eye-rosecrow-gun? If they ARE one, does that not detract from the fiction's value?

Spoilers....


I don't think it makes the story any less powerful. I just believe this based on the last book and the last comic. Farson never shows his face (from what I can tell) and it is stated that the last man over seeing the destruction on Jericho Hill, the man behind it all is "Walter, or Marten, or whatever you wanna call him..."

As for the Crimson King, yes, I do believe he gets his power from the evil of men. His power comes from the sickness and evil of all worlds, and even the creatures of the prim. He is part man, because or Arther Eld. Thus I believe his evil is that of men.

Flagg was a man who reigned much destruction over a long period of time, and he helped create a new breed of disaster (mordred, which if you say it slowly is MORE DREAD). His power contributed greatly to CK.

My theory is The Dark Tower used CK as something like a dream catcher, to capture all the evil, then cleanse itself by having Roland as its defender, and taking down the Crimson King. Patrick Danville is a little more complicated to describe.

RainInSpain
10-21-2010, 04:12 AM
Spoilers....

I don't think it makes the story any less powerful. I just believe this based on the last book and the last comic. Farson never shows his face (from what I can tell) and it is stated that the last man over seeing the destruction on Jericho Hill, the man behind it all is "Walter, or Marten, or whatever you wanna call him..."



I understand what you mean, and I found a quote that supports what you're saying, so I stand corrected.

This is from The Final Argument that precedes WotC:

"It's Roland's ancient nemesis, Marten Broadcloak, known in some worlds as Randall Flagg, in others as Richard Fannin, in others as John Farson (the Good Man). Roland and his friends are unable to kill this apparition, who warns them one final time to give up their quest for the Tower ("Only misfires against me, Roland, old fellow," he tells the gunslinger), but they are able to banish him."

That being said, I still think that to have evil concentrated in one hands in this case is somewhat detrimental to the story. I'm advocating for having multiple villains, great and small, because that's the way to show more sides of human (and inhuman) nature.
Instead of depicting a single larger-than-life figure that's made the embodiment of all evil, and a few of its cronies, I'd rather see an evil mastermind, lesser villains in its service, then those who've chosen the dark side or think they can use it for their own benefit, and finally, 'cannon fodder' who are not necessary pure evil. It's those who've stepped over to the dark side that interest me most - their reasons and backstory.
After all, characters that are inherently evil are just a bunch of mean bastards, so nothing tremendously interesting about them ;)

Letti
10-21-2010, 11:02 AM
Sorry guys but I think it's needful to change the title of the thread. Even if we have different opinions about it, it can be a spoiler.
And soon this thread will be moved to the Villagers. Don't hate me. :)

RainInSpain
10-21-2010, 11:13 AM
Thanks, Letti!

BTW, I love this new thread name :)

19eye-rosecrow-gun
10-21-2010, 01:11 PM
I don't think Flagg is the embodiment of evil who is an almighty villain. The one who is the embodiment of evil is the Crimson King.

In my personal interpretation, Flagg turned evil because he felt betrayed by his step-parents, his real parents (Merlin and the Moon Goddess), and then he is betrayed by a person who winds up raping him along his journey. When people don't know what trust is they have a very hard time being nice to other people. I think there is a lot of ambiguity to Walter's character, but I believe there is enough to interpret the humanity of Flagg, evil as it may be.

The seeing Eye is a symbol evil men use through out the story to associate their evil with a greater power, so as to say they are doing it for a greater force than their own. Even Flagg says "We are what the tower makes us...". They don't take responsibility for their destruction, and Roland is a conflicting anti-hero because no matter who dies, he will justify their deaths with his symbol: The Dark Tower.

CK lacks substance more than Flagg, and Farson is even worse in this sense (saying he was separate from Walter). It is kind of funny to me how the less substance is in King's characters, the more evil they turn out to be.

RainInSpain
10-22-2010, 07:47 AM
I don't think Flagg is the embodiment of evil who is an almighty villain. The one who is the embodiment of evil is the Crimson King.

In my personal interpretation, Flagg turned evil because he felt betrayed by his step-parents, his real parents (Merlin and the Moon Goddess), and then he is betrayed by a person who winds up raping him along his journey. When people don't know what trust is they have a very hard time being nice to other people. I think there is a lot of ambiguity to Walter's character, but I believe there is enough to interpret the humanity of Flagg, evil as it may be.

<clip>

CK lacks substance more than Flagg, and Farson is even worse in this sense (saying he was separate from Walter). It is kind of funny to me how the less substance is in King's characters, the more evil they turn out to be.

Oh no, it's not Flagg who's an almighty evil. I meant CK.

We get to know very little (and very late in the story in case of Walter/Flagg) about the past of the bad guys. And I think that's why it looks like they lack substance. It seems unfair towards the evil forces to give them so little thought. Perhaps it was intentional - it's supposed to be "the less you know about something bad, the scarier it looks", but does it not turn CK, for example, into some sort of half-imaginary bogeyman?

That's why I wanted Farson to be a separate character - that way, there could be additional reasons for what happened to Mid-World. Right now it looks like a whole world went to hell in a hand basket because some child molester raped a wrong boy long ago in the past.

(Note: Sorry if that sounded insensitive - I'm in no way underestimating the pain that victims of such crimes suffer in RL. I'm only speaking about a character in a book right now.)

pathoftheturtle
10-22-2010, 08:52 AM
I would recommend merging this to "Randall Flagg - discussion of the character and his many guises" since even if we decide Farson wasn't one of them, that question of this topic still is such discussion, but we've got a couple of other subjects going here now, as well. First, the question of how well SK's villians are written and how that impacts his work. Secondly, workings of good & evil in the DT mythos. And I'm thinking at this point that those two might still come together around the issue of responsibilty, if we can agree that King wanted that to be a theme.
...As for the Crimson King, yes, I do believe he gets his power from the evil of men. His power comes from the sickness and evil of all worlds, and even the creatures of the prim. He is part man, because or Arther Eld. Thus I believe his evil is that of men. ...I'm sure that there is a relationship, but does the sickness create the CK's power, or does his power create the sickness? Is his nature such that he needs evil to survive, or does he just like propagating it?

19eye-rosecrow-gun
10-22-2010, 12:09 PM
I will admit that CK has an influence, but only because evil people like to use him as an idol for their wicked actions. I do believe that people are the reason for his power. This is why when Father Callahan looked into the glass and saw the unblinking eye looking at him, he screamed. Its as if all the terror, rage and bad intentions that have ever existed in mankind were directed at him.

We still don't know much about the Crimson King before he went mad. He lived in a castle with servants, and then one day he goes mad. I wonder if he was as evil before that.

Patrick Danville is able to destroy the Crimson King because he can look into his evil eyes and not go completely insane.

HellBeast
10-26-2010, 10:41 AM
I think they are different people. In terms of power, the Crimson King and Walter/Marten basically use Farson as a puppet. Walter/Marten would easily be able to manipulate Farson into actions that he thought were of his own devising but came from the King himself.

Initially, I would imagine that Farson would simply be a charismatic man who would have spoken out against the Gunslingers' regime and thus gained a small number of followers. Let's not forget the Crimson King and His agents would have almost certainly had methods of knowing what was going on in All-World, especially when it comes to the Gunslingers/Affiliation. There were likely numerous outbreaks of unrest, and taking into account the intelligence of the Crimson King et al. he would likely keep eyes on these outbreaks to see if any of them would be likely to gain enough momentum to overthrow Gilead. Once the Farson-led unrest was known, the King would sent Walter/Marten to assist in his rise to power. It's not impossible that Walter/Marten was there with Farson from an earlier stage than I suggest, under a variety of guises. But no, Farson was definitely a separate person in my mind.

19eye-rosecrow-gun
10-26-2010, 09:59 PM
I think they are different people. In terms of power, the Crimson King and Walter/Marten basically use Farson as a puppet. Walter/Marten would easily be able to manipulate Farson into actions that he thought were of his own devising but came from the King himself.

Initially, I would imagine that Farson would simply be a charismatic man who would have spoken out against the Gunslingers' regime and thus gained a small number of followers. Let's not forget the Crimson King and His agents would have almost certainly had methods of knowing what was going on in All-World, especially when it comes to the Gunslingers/Affiliation. There were likely numerous outbreaks of unrest, and taking into account the intelligence of the Crimson King et al. he would likely keep eyes on these outbreaks to see if any of them would be likely to gain enough momentum to overthrow Gilead. Once the Farson-led unrest was known, the King would sent Walter/Marten to assist in his rise to power. It's not impossible that Walter/Marten was there with Farson from an earlier stage than I suggest, under a variety of guises. But no, Farson was definitely a separate person in my mind.

I believe this is quite a possibility, and I do think Farson could be a separate person from Flagg in the sense you are describing.

Krims0nKing
12-28-2010, 05:45 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, I want to see some of your responses to this question.

Is Randall Flagg and John Farson the same person?

I want to see evidence that backs up your claim.


Long days.

RainInSpain
12-28-2010, 06:56 AM
Welcome to the forum, Krims0nKing!

We have a similar thread going on - "They (who? open the thread) are one." (http://www.thedarktower.org/palaver/showthread.php?11338-They-(who-open-the-thread)-are-one.-spoilers) , there is quite a bit of information on this subject in that discussion.

Krims0nKing
12-28-2010, 08:16 AM
I believe Randall Flagg and John Farson are the same person. I believe this because, we all know that Flagg was Martin Broadcloak, Roland's fathers magician back in Gilead. We know that Martin had sex with Roland's mother. Now later on, not sure which book it is, someone is talking to Roland, and I'm not sure how to quote it correctly but they say something like, Roland is just mad because his mother did something perverted with the Good Man and did it with glee. They didn't say she did something with Martin, but with John Farson. C'mon, put it together. Farson is Martin, Martin is Flagg.

Tik
12-30-2010, 03:54 PM
Flagg and Farson were two different characters - Farson has a nephew which Flagg doesn't have, Flagg himself states he isn't Farson in the last DT book, and we actually see them to be different people in the comics.

However, it is more than likely given Flaggs ability to shapeshift that he changed into "Farson" whenever it suited his needs.

As such, even though they are different characters, Flagg was a Farson lookalike at times hence some people mistakingly believing them to be the same person.

childe nolan-d
03-10-2011, 11:29 AM
If this has been posted before, I'm sorry.
What happens to John Farson? I have read all of the books, concordances, and comics ... have I missed something? If I'm obviously neglecting a specific storyline could you please tell me?
Thank you.

Letti
03-14-2011, 02:12 AM
I don't think his storyline is detailed in the books and I haven't read the comics so I cannot help you, sorry. But I do think we don't get much information about him from the books.

Brainslinger
03-14-2011, 06:05 PM
I don't think the comics cover Farson's ultimate fate either. I'll have a look later to check, but I'm sure I'd remember.

I'm pretty sure he survived Jericho Hill, certainly. I suspect he didn't last long after, but that's just a hunch.

Letti
03-15-2011, 01:40 AM
I don't think the comics cover Farson's ultimate fate either. I'll have a look later to check, but I'm sure I'd remember.

I'm pretty sure he survived Jericho Hill, certainly. I suspect he didn't last long after, but that's just a hunch.

And where does this impression come from? :)

Brainslinger
03-15-2011, 09:08 AM
And where does this impression come from? :)

Just the nature of the beast really. Men of violence tend to die of violence, and for all his propaganda spouting democracy, I think he was basically an enigmatic harrier. He might have lived for a good while, but I doubt his empire* lasted long when there was no gunslingers to focus on.

I can imagine them falling to in-fighting or all just moving on with the rest of the world. If Farson himself wasn't picked off by Roland -we don't know for sure they didn't meet again after all - or another of the hangers-on for the affiliation, I wouldn't be surprised if one of his own officers took him out. Or even a certain treacherous wizard...

I can't back this up with facts though, this is just my feelings on the matter.

*Or whatever you'd like to call it.

Roland of Gilead 33
03-18-2011, 09:39 PM
didn't in either W&G or "The Wolve's of the calla' i forget which, it said that it was one of 'the walking dude's identity's?

or am i wrong?

Brainslinger
03-20-2011, 07:37 AM
didn't in either W&G or "The Wolve's of the calla' i forget which, it said that it was one of 'the walking dude's identity's?

or am i wrong?

Do you mean John Farson? It was actually mentioned in the first book The Gunslinger. Wizard and Glass actually suggests that they're not the same. Remember the scene when one of the Big Coffin Hunters (I think it was Reynolds) talks with Jonas about meeting Walter? He states that his face kept changing. When Jonas asks him if it was Farson himself he says something along the lines "Do you remember how big Farson was? This guystayed the same size, only his face changed."

Of course, just because Walter retained the same size then doesn't mean he couldn't change his size, I suppose. I seem to remember Flagg being a large man and Walter being of medium build, but I can't remember for sure.

I think Walter is likely a separate person to Farson, but that he is the true power behind him. So in a sense he is Farson one way or the other.

In the comics they are certainly separate.

Slender
03-20-2011, 09:36 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if the writers of the comics decided to produce a one-shot showing Roland's final revenge on Farson. They've already mentioned the idea of a one-shot where Roland finally catches Rhea and avenges Susan.

Brainslinger
03-20-2011, 02:33 PM
They've already mentioned the idea of a one-shot where Roland finally catches Rhea and avenges Susan.

Cool. First I've heard of this.

childe nolan-d
03-21-2011, 05:57 PM
In re-reading some of the comics and paying attention to some of the formality between Farson and Marten, what if Robin Furth has been deliberately holding off on telling Farson's fate because Farson is actually the Crimson King? I know it's a stretch, and some of the other stated "facts" about Farson would have to be dismissed, but it would be intriguing if that was the case.

Merlin1958
03-21-2011, 06:06 PM
I could never shake the feeling that he was an incarnation of of Flagg, ala the end of The Stand. However that's just speculation and hunch.

Roland of Gilead 33
03-21-2011, 09:31 PM
that's what i was thinking man, i just didn't say it very well did i ? yes i DO recall reading that in W*G i just plump forgot about it that's al

Slender
03-22-2011, 11:58 AM
childe nolan-d – I don't think that's very likely... I always got the impression that Farson was an evil human being who was manipulated by Walter, but your idea completely contradicts that.

Son of Paul
03-23-2011, 06:15 AM
Nah, didn't book 7 reveal Flagg decided to fight with Farson?

Merlin1958
03-23-2011, 03:52 PM
Time to check the concordance!!!!!


lol

Atanóno Fána
03-27-2011, 04:54 AM
Farson is a bandit from the Barony of Desoy (or Garlan). It is much higher than Walter, has long black hair in chaotic knot and red mask. Walter is his advisor, as well as Grissom. A similar role of the Latigo and other chiefs lieutenants. Walter helped Farson, but not manipulated him; Walter filled orders from Farson, as seen in Dark Tower: The Sorcerer. Walter was supposed to manipulate events in Mid-World, help to Farson in to his eventual triumph and the destruction of the Gunslingers.

Atanóno Fána
03-29-2011, 08:22 AM
And absolutely never failed to take the form of Farson. As he says Depape, whether it looks however, is always the same size. And I'd hate to be in the skin of Walter, if Farson learned that Walter impersonates for him. When Walter is confronted, is impotent. Not to speak the fact that the hair would just be like him, not the mask and black dress (I've never seen a change of clothes - minimally not in the Dark Tower). And I believe that the mask and when to dress, just somewhere in the Mid-World does not lie!

Darkthoughts
08-27-2011, 02:23 PM
It seems to be another detail on which King was conflicted at various times of writing. It's hinted that Farson may be RF in The Gunslinger, then in the prologue to WotC King says:


It's Roland's ancient nemesis, Marten Broadcloak, known in some worlds as Randall Flagg, in others as Richard Fannin, in others as John Farson (the Good Man).

However, by the end of the series SK seems to have decided that they are seperate entities, which it seems the comics continue to concur with.

Cass
03-10-2013, 01:04 PM
guys, one question... what happened with Farson after Jericho Hill?

Merlin1958
03-10-2013, 01:08 PM
guys, one question... what happened with Farson after Jericho Hill?


As I recall, and I may be wrong, King, neither fully described the "Battle of Jericho Hill" or Farson's fate.

Bev Vincent
03-11-2013, 02:09 AM
I asked King about Farson when I interviewed him for The Dark Tower Companion. He clarifies his relationship to Walter/Martin.

Bryant Burnette
03-11-2013, 02:18 AM
I asked King about Farson when I interviewed him for The Dark Tower Companion. He clarifies his relationship to Walter/Martin.

Sweet! I look forward to reading that.