Walter General Discussion: The Gunslinger **spoilers

[jayson]

TerribleT, why did he have to drop Jake? Would it have been so horrible to lose 2 minutes or less? I could never understand why people say he had no other choice. I know it's off topic but somehow I don't get it.
The problem might be in my mind. :)

If I could suggest an answer, though i would like to hear T's as well... I believe by offering Jake as a sacrifice, Walter was bound to palaver with Roland and show him the vision he shows him. Had he not dropped Jake, he'd never had had the palaver and may not have been imbued with the power to draw, or at least not the knowledge of it.

[Letti]

But guys... what was that oh-so-damn-important information Walter gave Roland? Roland would have found and opened those doors without his help, too. For my part I am sure Roland would have reached the Tower without "his help" so I don't really see how Walter helped Roland so much.

[TerribleT]

TerribleT, why did he have to drop Jake? Would it have been so horrible to lose 2 minutes or less? I could never understand why people say he had no other choice. I know it's off topic but somehow I don't get it.
The problem might be in my mind. :)

If you go back and read the passage in the book where he drops Jake, you'll understand that the only way save Jake would be to let the man in black go. It's not a matter of two minutes, it's that the trestle collapses, and they have to go back through the slow mutants to get out of the tunnel under the mountain. They may not even survive that encounter, much less find another way to catch the man in black, and get what he knows. We later find out that what the man in black knows is essential to Roland being able to "draw" Eddie and Detta/Odetta. The MIB also has other info pertaining to Roland's quest.

[jayson]

In addition to what T just said, which I agree with, Walter also suggests to Roland that the act of dropping Jake is related to the creation of the three doors Roland will encounter on the beach. So it is possible that with no dropping there'd be no doors.

[TerribleT]

But guys... what was that oh-so-damn-important information Walter gave Roland? Roland would have found and opened those doors without his help, too. For my part I am sure Roland would have reached the Tower without "his help" so I don't really see how Walter helped Roland so much.

No, the MIB tells Roland of his ability to "draw", and Roland's not aware of it until the palaver with him.

[Letti]

He would have found those doors without his help, too. And he would have opened them all. Did you read anywhere that Walter gave Roland the power to open them? I don't remember anything like that.

[Letti]

But guys... what was that oh-so-damn-important information Walter gave Roland? Roland would have found and opened those doors without his help, too. For my part I am sure Roland would have reached the Tower without "his help" so I don't really see how Walter helped Roland so much.

No, the MIB tells Roland of his ability to "draw", and Roland's not aware of it until the palaver with him.

And do you think he would have passed the doors without this piece of information??
For me the whole Man In Black thing was a big humbug a damn big trap Roland didn't see and went into.

And now I'm gonna open a thread where we can talk about Walter's help and his part in the story and if he helped Roland or not. Okay?
Just give me some moments and I'll move the posts too.
Keep on posting, I will move them.

[TerribleT]

But guys... what was that oh-so-damn-important information Walter gave Roland? Roland would have found and opened those doors without his help, too. For my part I am sure Roland would have reached the Tower without "his help" so I don't really see how Walter helped Roland so much.

No, the MIB tells Roland of his ability to "draw", and Roland's not aware of it until the palaver with him.

And do you think he would have passed the doors without this piece of information??
For me the whole Man In Black thing was a big humbug a damn big trap Roland didn't see and went into.

He would have had to find a way back out from under the mountains, and then back over the mountains to the beach in order to find the doors.

[Letti]

Dear Reader!
Be Careful.
This thread might contain spoilers.




So...
did Walter give any important information to Roland during their little palaver?
And if he did... why the blue hell did he help him? Weren't they enemies?

Sometimes I feel the whole Man in Balck stuff was a big humbug a trap Roland didn't see. I think he shouldn't have chosen Walter, he should have saved Jake.
He would have found his way to the doors anyway.

[TerribleT]

Walter gave several important bits of information to Roland during their palaver. The most important piece of info was his ability to draw. He also told Roland that he would be drawing three companions, that he was the only one able to save the Tower, (because of his slow plodding mind), and where Roland needed to go next in order to find the doors. Walter was bound to give this information to Roland, because of Roland's sacrifice of Jake.

[alinda]

this totally discounts the notion of ka tho'.
And tho' the telling of the tale the way it was
told ( magnificently ) is not a story of what if's
it is a story of why it is. ( imo )

[TerribleT]

I'll be back later to comment :)

[Letti]

Roland could catch the Man in Black because Walter wanted it too. He could have vanished anytime but he didn't. Because he wanted to talk to Roland as well.
If Walter hadn't wanted to be caught Roland would have never been able to talk to him.

[Jean]

I share Nikolett's suspicion that Walter didn't really say anything. It looks like his main purpose was to throw Roland off his course by making him believe something could be achieved by that talk. Consequently, Roland lets Jake drop, I am inclined to think that action put him furthest away from the Tower he had ever been or would be; later his trying to repair the damage leads him to almost losing his mind. That looks like something Walter could have to some degree anticipated, too.

and, Lady Linda... there is no ka.

[Brice]

I share Nikolett's suspicion that Walter didn't really say anything. It looks like his main purpose was to throw Roland off his course by making him believe something could be achieved by that talk. Consequently, Roland lets Jake drop, I am inclined to think that action put him furthest away from the Tower he had ever been or would be; later his trying to repair the damage leads him to almost losing his mind. That looks like something Walter could have to some degree anticipated, too.

and, Lady Linda... there is no ka.

...in the books. In the real world it is everywhere. :P

[Jean]

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

[Brice]

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

Hey, at least I didn't edit your post to make YOU say it. :lol: I did consider it.

[jayson]

Again, I don't think it's a matter of whether or not Roland would have found the doors on the beach if he'd not dropped Jake, but a matter of whether or not there'd even be doors on the beach if he didn't. I can check the book when I get home from work today, but between my interpretation of the last time I read it and my recent read of Bev's "Road to the Dark Tower," I am pretty sure there is something said about how the act of dropping Jake is fundamentally involved with the creation of the doors in the first place. If that is the case, there is no what if. No drop, no doors. No doors, Roland dies from his infection.

As to Letti's question of why did Walter "help" Roland... It seems to me there are some "rules" for how supernatural creatures like the oracle or Walter have to behave in certain situations. The oracle informs Roland of what is to be done with Jake, and by Roland fulfilling that sacrifice Walter is bound to palaver with Roland in the golgotha. Whether or not that meeting helped Roland is up for all kinds of debate, but Walter did what ka made him do at that point.

[Wuducynn]

Interesting that before his palaver with Walter Roland was already shown a vision of The Three he would draw with his vision given to him by the Oracle.

[jayson]

Interesting that before his palaver with Walter Roland was already shown a vision of The Three he would draw with his vision given to him by the Oracle.

Exactly, and was it not fairly clear that the oracle showed him that "the sacrifice" [ie. Jake] was the path to these three?

btw Matt, love the mood today. an angelic crimson king. gotta love it.

[Wuducynn]

Yeah, and we now know that the Oracle was a demon working for Los' so I wonder if she was helping Walter in setting a trap for Roland. The trap being putting him in the position with the idea that either he drop Jake or not reach the Tower.

[Mike Beck]

hmm. it's been awhile since i read it, but isn't there something in book 5 (during callahan's flashback to the desert way station) that gives us some insight into what was going on in walter's head right at that moment?

can't foind me book roight now.

[sarah]

is that a British accent? it is very convincing. :lol:

[Darkthoughts]

I agree with Letti, I think the MIB was just messing with Roland. I think his aim (during the palaver at the Golgotha) was to scare Roland off the quest for the Tower with the overwhelming vision of the immensity of it all.

All he does aside from that is tell Roland's fortune. I don't believe Walter had the power to command the doors - I think that is Gan's doing. After all, it is contrary to Walter's aims that Roland should recruit more gunslingers.

I'm going to dedicate the rest of the day to finding this passage (that I possibly imagined) that says Roland must not drop Jake :lol:

[jayson]

I'm going to dedicate the rest of the day to finding this passage (that I possibly imagined) that says Roland must not drop Jake :lol:

Which will make me go home later and look for the passage that says he must. :shoot:

[Darkthoughts]

Not :P

(Btw, I edited my post while you were replying, but not the part you quoted ;) )

[TerribleT]

My comments from an earlier post...


He says "I am sworn by my father's guns, and by the the treachery of Marten" during the prophecy of the oracle, which is also where he is told of his choice to save Jake, or to allow him to die.

Some, gunslnger, live on blood. Even, I understand, the blood of young boys.
May he not be spared?
Yes.
How?
Cease, gunslinger......
I'm sworn by my fathers guns.....


While he is speaking with the man in black, nearing the end of the long dark night, he says, "Understand what? My Purpose? You know that. To find the Tower is my purpose. I'm sworn."

Also during his palaver with the man in black he learns that to continue on his mission he must"Start wwest. Go to the sea...." This, as I've stated before, is also where he learns of his ability to draw, and of the Prisoner, and The Lady of the Shadows, and of his unique mind.

He MUST catch the man in black, in order to continue his quest for the tower. In order to do so, he must sacrifice Jake. It's really not a matter of habit, it's completely a matter of choice, and his internal struggle over this is repeatedly brought to light during The Gunslinger.

[Darkthoughts]

But everything Walter says cannot be believed, he is by his very nature a trickster.
I wonder, if like the little bald doctors, Walter cannot tell an outright lie if asked a direct question - but that he can still phrase the answer in such a way as to make it ambiguous if the question is not specific enough.

I think this quote you used is the best illustration:

Some, gunslnger, live on blood. Even, I understand, the blood of young boys.
May he not be spared?
Yes.
How?
Cease, gunslinger......
I'm sworn by my fathers guns.....

Here I think Walter is being truthful - without divulging the whole truth.

The very act of not letting Jake fall would be considered "ceasing" the quest in Roland's eyes, which Walter intuits all too well, which is why Walter chooses to word the question in this way. Walter knows that this is part of what damns Roland and stops him from finding peace at the Tower, so of course he would want to encourage him to drop Jake (and kill the people of Tull in a similar trap he lays).

But Roland does not specifically word his question - "Can I still reach the Tower if I save the boy?" To which I believe the answer would also be "Yes."

[TerribleT]

I think this quote you used is the best illustration:
[quote]Some, gunslnger, live on blood. Even, I understand, the blood of young boys.
May he not be spared?
Yes.
How?
Cease, gunslinger......
I'm sworn by my fathers guns.....

QUOTE]

That quote is actually from his meeting with the oracle.

[TerribleT]

But everything Walter says cannot be believed, he is by his very nature a trickster.
I wonder, if like the little bald doctors, Walter cannot tell an outright lie if asked a direct question - but that he can still phrase the answer in such a way as to make it ambiguous if the question is not specific enough.

I think this quote you used is the best illustration:

Some, gunslnger, live on blood. Even, I understand, the blood of young boys.
May he not be spared?
Yes.
How?
Cease, gunslinger......
I'm sworn by my fathers guns.....

Here I think Walter is being truthful - without divulging the whole truth.

The very act of not letting Jake fall would be considered "ceasing" the quest in Roland's eyes, which Walter intuits all too well, which is why Walter chooses to word the question in this way. Walter knows that this is part of what damns Roland and stops him from finding peace at the Tower, so of course he would want to encourage him to drop Jake (and kill the people of Tull in a similar trap he lays).

But Roland does not specifically word his question - "Can I still reach the Tower if I save the boy?" To which I believe the answer would also be "Yes."


See, the part that drives me completely insane about that whole line of thinking, is that there seems to be some assumption that if Roland doesn't let Jake drop, and follow the man in black, somehow he'll just accidently stumble his way to the doors. Time was moving in Eddie and Susannah's worlds. If he doesn't get to Eddie in time, Eddie may or may not be alive. Odetta/Detta may not be alive. The idea that somehow he can just blow off this sacfice, and still get to the tower, when soooo much would change just boggles my mind. There is no possible way that he can NOT drop Jake without SIGNIFICANTLY changing the entire story, and everyone here just seems to act like it's no big deal. *shrug* fuck it, he'll find another way to get everything else accomplished, don't drop the boy. It's all conjecture. This one act does define Roland, his quest for the tower, how seriously he takes it, and what he's willing to sacrifice. If he hadn't done what, in his view, was necessary, then he would be betraying his father's guns, and eveything he stood for. I just find it impossible to look at this situation and indulge myself in the fantasy that if only he saved the boy :grouphug: :wub: :projectile vomiting: somehow everything would work out just fine.

[jayson]

I trend towards T's way of thinking on this one. Not dropping Jake would be to "cease" because it would result in Roland not finding the Tower. Again, I plan to re-read that portion of DT-1 to clarify my position, but I thought at some point when he was with the oracle it became clear to Roland's mind that without "the sacrifice" he'd have not been able to draw Eddie & Susannah and do what he did with Mort.

[TerribleT]

I trend towards T's way of thinking on this one. Not dropping Jake would be to "cease" because it would result in Roland not finding the Tower. Again, I plan to re-read that portion of DT-1 to clarify my position, but I thought at some point when he was with the oracle it became clear to Roland's mind that without "the sacrifice" he'd have not been able to draw Eddie & Susannah and do what he did with Mort.

The quote that Lisa sited was actually the one from the oracle.

[Darkthoughts]

I think the quote serves the same purpose even being from the oracle ;)

Yes, if Roland doesn't drop Jake the quest/journey to the Tower would be completely different...but thats the whole point.

What then, in your minds, does Roland need to do to find salvation at the Tower? And if you don't believe he will, what do you make of the final pages of DT7 where it hints so strongly that he shall?

[jayson]

What then, in your minds, does Roland need to do to find salvation at the Tower? And if you don't believe he will, what do you make of the final pages of DT7 where it hints so strongly that he shall?

I think you know I don't think he needs to find salvation. As to the hint that he might, dunno, wishful thinking on King's part? I suppose he could find personal salvation in the event that he were to "retire" and have progeny to whom he could pass on the duty of protecting the Tower. I just don't see the Tower ever being made "permanently" safe, so there is always a need for a Roland.

[Darkthoughts]

Yes...and no :lol: I think I've said before that I agree that the quest for the Tower looks to be a metaphor for the eternal struggle between good and evil. Where we disagree is that I believe the quest is eternal, but the players are not.

I think that one day Roland will find salvation and the CK will be utterly obliterated (having those eyes still lingering there bothers me :unsure: ) but then another two agents of the Random and the Purpose will step up and take their place, with their own story of course - albeit one that ultimately concerns the Tower.

Each quest I believe will last many lifetimes, creating myths throughout all worlds the way these things do.

[jayson]

Yes...and no :lol: I think I've said before that I agree that the quest for the Tower looks to be a metaphor for the eternal struggle between good and evil. Where we disagree is that I believe the quest is eternal, but the players are not.

I think that one day Roland will find salvation and the CK will be utterly obliterated (having those eyes still lingering there bothers me :unsure: ) but then another two agents of the Random and the Purpose will step up and take their place, with their own story of course - albeit one that ultimately concerns the Tower.

Each quest I believe will last many lifetimes, creating myths throughout all worlds the way these things do.

That seems reasonable. I actually kind of like my idea of Roland passing the duty on to his hypothetical progeny, but it certainly doesn't have to always be the Eld as the guardians of the White.

[Darkthoughts]

Unless theres something Rosalita didn't tell us? :ninja:

[jayson]

Unless theres something Rosalita didn't tell us? :ninja:

That's a nice thought.

[TerribleT]

And if you don't believe he will, what do you make of the final pages of DT7 where it hints so strongly that he shall?

It's been a long time since I read The Dark Tower, so I'm going to have to just defer to you on that question at this point. Like I said in a different thread, I'm re-reading the series, and if I can ever find a way to get through the Sodding Wastelands :angry: :pullhair: I will finish the series and see what my feelings are at that point.

[Darkthoughts]

Sodding Wastelands :lol: Was that the working title? :P

[TerribleT]

YES!!! you didn't know?!?!?!?!?!?! Then he decided to do Kansas instead of the UK.

[R.F.]

What I am wondering... if Roland had not talked to the MiB, would he have known what to do with Mort?

[Childe 007]

He didn't know what to do with Mort anyway - it was all "Gunslinger Instinct".

He Had to catch the Man In Black - He Who is Legion. He Had to Make the Sacrifice - the TRUE Innocent - the stray at the side of the road.

He CHOSE the quest.

And in doing so Chose the Pursuit.

The sacrifice must be made, the quarry must be caught. Whether his name is Walter or Marten or Randall or Linoge or Pennywise or .... Jack Mort... Death - but NOT FOR YOU...

As we have been told time and time agian - it's not the destination - but the journey.

Originally Posted by Darkthoughts

Yes...and no I think I've said before that I agree that the quest for the Tower looks to be a metaphor for the eternal struggle between good and evil. Where we disagree is that I believe the quest is eternal, but the players are not.

Except for Roland.

[Darkthoughts]

I don't think Roland will be stuck in the loop for eternity though ;)

[To The Dark Tower Came]

Some, gunslnger, live on blood. Even, I understand, the blood of young boys.
May he not be spared?
Yes.
How?
Cease, gunslinger......
I'm sworn by my fathers guns.....

I think that this needs to be seen in the larger context of Roland repeating quest. Why does it have to do specifically with Roland dropping Jake? I think he would be spared (along with others) when the cycles of Roland stop. There will be no more drawings of the boy.

[jayson]

Some, gunslnger, live on blood. Even, I understand, the blood of young boys.
May he not be spared?
Yes.
How?
Cease, gunslinger......
I'm sworn by my fathers guns.....

I think that this needs to be seen in the larger context of Roland repeating quest. Why does it have to do specifically with Roland dropping Jake? I think he would be spared (along with others) when the cycles of Roland stop. There will be no more drawings of the boy.

...and there will be no more Tower because that is what his father's guns are sworn to protecting

[TerribleT]

Some, gunslnger, live on blood. Even, I understand, the blood of young boys.
May he not be spared?
Yes.
How?
Cease, gunslinger......
I'm sworn by my fathers guns.....

I think that this needs to be seen in the larger context of Roland repeating quest. Why does it have to do specifically with Roland dropping Jake? I think he would be spared (along with others) when the cycles of Roland stop. There will be no more drawings of the boy.

...and there will be no more Tower because that is what his father's guns are sworn to protecting

Jayson, before you say anything else, I HIGHLY recommend that you go the the "thing at the end" thread and read about Roland reaching the tower.

[jayson]

read it and remember it well from reading it in the book itself. i'm not sure what it is you are trying to get me to cry off of saying, but nothing in that thread changes the way i see any of it. like i have said on numerous occasions, i think the ending is ambiguous and lends itself to multiple interpretations, none of which [other than King's personal version] is any more "right" than anyone elses. i know how i see it. i know how others see it. i enjoy comparing and contrasting the theories, but i don't intend to change anyone's view, nor do i expect my own to change radically. i may see certain things in a light that i had never considered, but ultimately my "answer" to the question of the series is as infinite in possibility as the multiverse.

[To The Dark Tower Came]

...and there will be no more Tower because that is what his father's guns are sworn to protecting

Not sure what you meant by this. :cowboy:

[Wuducynn]

...and there will be no more Tower because that is what his father's guns are sworn to protecting

Not sure what you meant by this. :cowboy:

Yeah, that is kind of mysterious...care to elaborate?

[jayson]

I mean that in my view, the cycles don't stop. The Tower is never protected once and for all. Until there is something else to take Roland's place, Roland protects the Tower. He's the last of the Eld. The Eld are sworn to protect the Tower.

[LadyHitchhiker]

But guys... what was that oh-so-damn-important information Walter gave Roland? Roland would have found and opened those doors without his help, too. For my part I am sure Roland would have reached the Tower without "his help" so I don't really see how Walter helped Roland so much.

Well true, but perhaps it was Walter's ka or anti-ka that he had to speak with Roland before he dissolved to take his new form...

[movieman19]

I just read most of this thread and I must say it is very intruiging.

I think I'm going to agree slightly with R_of_G when he says the cycle will continue. No matter what Roland does there will always be the tower. However, the tower will always need Roland to protect it. The beginning will always be the same with him walking in the desert chasing the MIB and end with him walking through the door in the Tower. HOWEVER, there is one big difference between "cycles". We see the difference here as the horn of the eld. One being at the the end of he picks up and carries the horn of the eld with him. He will have that the next go around. Will this change anything throughout his quest this time?? Who knows.

[LadyHitchhiker]

And if Jake hadn't been dropped, would he have not been okay, and Roland wouldn't have gone temporarily crazy?

[jayson]

And if Jake hadn't been dropped, would he have not been okay, and Roland wouldn't have gone temporarily crazy?

my belief is if he didn't drop jake, he wouldn't have been able to draw the others. i believe the scene with the oracle makes it clear that in order for Roland to be invested with the drawing power there had to be a sacrifice, the sacrifice being jake. so he might not have gone crazy, but who knows what would have happened without the others or what.

[LadyHitchhiker]

Vedddy interesting...

[jayson]

of course i could be wrong. many think i am.

[Father Callahan]

What exactly is Walter's role in the series? In The Gunslinger he is a nemesis, he is trying to stop Roland but at the end instead of fighting or whatever, Walter helps him and they palaver. And I'm not sure of anybody's identity. Are Flagg Marten Farson and Walter all the same person? There is evidence in all books claiming they are and they aren't. It's very confusing.

[Matt]

I consider them all one in the same and I gotta admit, the more I talk about this series....the more I think Walter was trying to help him in his weirdo (self serving) way.

Welcome to the site Father, great to meet you

[jayson]

i think Walter is all of them except Farson.

i thought (a) the revised says that they are different people, and (b) the comics show Walter and Farson talking to each other as different people.

no?

[Father Callahan]

Thank you for the welcome!

It seems to me they are one in the same as well. But aren't there references to Walter bringing Marten to Roland and things like that? How did Roland start chasing "the man in black" anyway

[MonteGss]

i think Walter is all of them except Farson.

i thought (a) the revised says that they are different people, and (b) the comics show Walter and Farson talking to each other as different people.

no?

Yes.

[Matt]

Ooops--didn't see Farson on the list. He would be a different person for sure imo.

[Father Callahan]

But what about Marten and Walter? Isn't there a part in the first book where it mentions Walter betraying Marten and bringing him to fight Roland?

[obscurejude]

I think that might be fixed in the revised edition pere. I'm not sure. The verdict is still out about Marten and Walter in the first three books. I don't think King was sure about it until much later. DT 7 Makes it clear that they are the same person, I think. Read the part where Walter is thinking about Roland before he encounters Mordred.

[CyberGhostface]

But what about Marten and Walter? Isn't there a part in the first book where it mentions Walter betraying Marten and bringing him to fight Roland?

I'm not sure if that was ever said, even before they were retconned into being the same.

It IS very confusing, because King only made this change halfway through the books. So if you read it in order, its like this.

*spoilers*

Revised 1: Walter and Marten are the same. Walter's implied to be alive at the end.
2: Walter's dead. He's also seperate from Marten. I think there's one scene where Roland thinks about three different wizards...Walter, Marten and Flagg! :doh:
3: Walter's still dead. Flagg appears at the end.
4: Roland again makes reference to Walter and Marten as seperate people.
5, 6 and 7: Walter and Marten and Flagg are the same, and everyone acts like they knew it all along.

Would have made more sense to make it a revelation that Roland discovers halfway through the series but hey I'm not writing it...

[KO1]

But wouldnt these inconsistancies be simply explained by Roland not being aware that all these individuals were in fact the same person

[Woofer]

But what about Marten and Walter? Isn't there a part in the first book where it mentions Walter betraying Marten and bringing him to fight Roland?

I'm not sure if that was ever said, even before they were retconned into being the same.

It IS very confusing, because King only made this change halfway through the books. So if you read it in order, its like this.

{snipped for space}

5, 6 and 7: Walter and Marten and Flagg are the same, and everyone acts like they knew it all along.

Would have made more sense to make it a revelation that Roland discovers halfway through the series but hey I'm not writing it...

This is one of my biggest peeves - the merging of Walter, Marten, and Flagg - but I agree it would've been a bit more palatable had it been a revelation.

[CyberGhostface]

But wouldnt these inconsistancies be simply explained by Roland not being aware that all these individuals were in fact the same person

No, because at the end of the first book he knows who they are, then he's back to forgetting them in the next three books, and then he's back to remembering them in the last three with no explanation.

[LadyHitchhiker]

Walter's presence was to provide one of the biggest surprises of SK history...!!!

[CyberGhostface]

And one of the most unneccessary in the long run.

[LadyHitchhiker]

*shrugs* I liked it. I don't think the first book would have been half as readable without him.

[CyberGhostface]

He was already in it in the first book...he just wasn't Marten.

[MonteGss]

But wouldnt these inconsistancies be simply explained by Roland not being aware that all these individuals were in fact the same person

No, because at the end of the first book he knows who they are, then he's back to forgetting them in the next three books, and then he's back to remembering them in the last three with no explanation.

Could you provide examples of how Roland "forgets" that they are all the same in books 2-4? Passages would be good, so I can read them myself and try to figure out your position better. As of now, I am completely lost how you can come the your conclusions.

[CyberGhostface]

Every single time he makes reference to the Walter Trinity in Books 2-4, he makes reference to them being different people. Because obviously when King wrote them Walter and Marten were seperate people in Book 1.

When he thinks about the different wizards he knows near the end Book 2, for example, he mentions Walter, Marten and Flagg. In Book 4, when talking about Rhea in the beginning, he goes "She wasn't as bad as Marten...probably not even as bad as Walter"

That's the biggest inconsistency created by DT1 revised. Other ones include mentions of Roland facing the Beast and Maerlyn even though they were written out of the palaver, although the references to them are pretty small so its easy(ier) to ignore.

[MonteGss]

People will read what they want to I guess.
I've read the series many times and I've never come away from it thinking there were such glaring inconsistencies as you claim. I acknowledge that the original Gunslinger had Marten and Walter as two "separate" people but there never was a time in the rest of the series where I felt as you do. :)

[ManOfWesternesse]

Cyber is right here (Ouch! That hurt! :lol:)
Seriously though - yes. Had King gone on to revise 2,3 & 4 (as we once thought he would do - and as he himself once thought he might?), then of course he would have fixed this to agree with 1,5,6,& 7. But that will never happen now. Personally I'm content enough to ignore the connundrum - it doesn't rank high in the greater scheme for me.

[Wuducynn]

Even in the revised he still thinks of them as separate folk with the caveat thrown in that they might be the same...I'll have to find the part when I get around to it. But its there. I don't really view it as an inconsistancy...nothing compared to the one between Wolves and DT7, that is off-topic of this thread. But thats a REAL inconsistancy and it doesn't bother me.

[CyberGhostface]

People will read what they want to I guess.
I've read the series many times and I've never come away from it thinking there were such glaring inconsistencies as you claim. I acknowledge that the original Gunslinger had Marten and Walter as two "separate" people but there never was a time in the rest of the series where I felt as you do. :)

I'm not reading into anything that's not there already. There are numerous occasions when Walter is referred to as being dead and being a seperate character from Marten.

Is it the end of the world? Of course not. I even managed to look the other way before DT7 came out because I hoped in vain that King knew what he was doing. But in the end...what real purpose was there in resurrecting Walter?

[MonteGss]

People will read what they want to I guess.
I've read the series many times and I've never come away from it thinking there were such glaring inconsistencies as you claim. I acknowledge that the original Gunslinger had Marten and Walter as two "separate" people but there never was a time in the rest of the series where I felt as you do. :)

I'm not reading into anything that's not there already. There are numerous occasions when Walter is referred to as being dead and being a seperate character from Marten.

Is it the end of the world? Of course not. I even managed to look the other way before DT7 came out because I hoped in vain that King knew what he was doing. But in the end...what real purpose was there in resurrecting Walter?

I guess I am interpreting the occasions you speak of differently is all. Besides Roland assuming that Walter and Marten were two different people in the original Gunslinger, I didn't read anything that suggested that in any of the other novels. If anyone has any specific passage that I can go back and refer to, that would help me understand probably.
Otherwise, I guess we will just have to cordially disagree. :)

[CyberGhostface]

I don't have the specific quotes and pages with me but I've already pointed out the scenes and what books they've appeared in.

In Drawing of the Three, its in the Jack Mort chapters, and Roland's thinking of all the different wizards he's known. He mentions Walter, Marten and Flagg.

In Wizard and Glass, its when he's introducing his story to the ka-tet, and he compares Rhea's brand of evil by comparing her to Walter and Marten as seperate figures.

And there are a couple more. I might have the books as text files on my computer, I'll look into them later.

EDIT: I have them. I'll get the quotes up later tonight hopefully.

[Wuducynn]

Like I asked previously, how is Roland thinking of Marten, Walter and Flagg an inconsistancy in the story-line? Walter O'Dim is a shape-shifter afterall and he has different personas.

[Wuducynn]

Oh and in the revised, he wonders about whether they were the same...but isn't sure. Still no inconsistancy there.

[CyberGhostface]

Like I asked previously, how is Roland thinking of Marten, Walter and Flagg an inconsistancy in the story-line? Walter O'Dim is a shape-shifter afterall and he has different personas.

How come then in 5-7 Roland recognizes them as being one person who just goes under different names?


Oh and in the revised, he wonders about whether they were the same...but isn't sure. Still no inconsistancy there.

No, at the end Walter reveals himself to be Marten.

"Marten. You never left. You merely changed."
"At your service."

Its only in the beginning when he talks to Jake is when he's doubtful...but even then he suspects something when he mentions how he never saw them togeether.

The only thing he isn't SURE about when the story ends is whether or not its really Walter's skeleton at the campfire. But even then he's all but positive. "But is it really you? I have my doubts, Marten-that-was." There's no doubt in his mind that Walter = Marten.

[Wuducynn]

Like I asked previously, how is Roland thinking of Marten, Walter and Flagg an inconsistancy in the story-line? Walter O'Dim is a shape-shifter afterall and he has different personas.

How come then in 5-7 Roland recognizes them as being one person who just goes under different names?


Oh and in the revised, he wonders about whether they were the same...but isn't sure. Still no inconsistancy there.

No, at the end Walter reveals himself to be Marten.

"Marten. You never left. You merely changed."
"At your service."

Its only in the beginning when he talks to Jake is when he's doubtful...but even then he suspects something when he mentions how he never saw them togeether.

The only thing he isn't SURE about when the story ends is whether or not its really Walter's skeleton at the campfire. But even then he's all but positive. "But is it really you? I have my doubts, Marten-that-was." There's no doubt in his mind that Walter = Marten.

It sure seems to be that he is not sure who is who at the end of The Gunslinger...whether Marten was Walter or whether Walter was Marten. He just said "You never left. You merely changed." That isn't a tried and true statement of his certainty of anything at that point. Apparently towards the end of the series he is sure that Walter was the true personality behind them.

[Wuducynn]

I do want you to know that I am fully aware that originally King meant for Walter and Marten to be separate characters. But I think within the story it doesn't make it an inconsistancy for them to be all a part of Walter the Sorcerer who was also Legion and Flagg.

[CyberGhostface]

He is aware that Walter and Marten are the same person...maybe not the specifics of Walter's identity crisis, but enough that they aren't seperate people.

Anyway, here are some quotes from II - IV.

First off, the Argument. Which I'll admit by itself isn't a big thing as its no big deal in the end. Still...

Marten, a much greater sorcerer than Walter (who, unknown to
Roland's father, is Marten's ally)

And in the book itself...

The gunslinger had known magicians, enchanters, and alchemists in his time...One of these men had been a creature the gunslinger
believed to be a demon himself, a creature that pretended to be a man and called itself Flagg.... Then there had been the man in black.
And there had been Marten.

More arguments...

...Marten, a much greater sorcerer than Walter...

Walter, the man in black, who pretended friendship with Roland's father
but who actually served Marten, a great sorcerer.

And when Roland thinks about the people he knows...

Neither Eldred Jonas nor the crone on the hill had been of
Marten's stature—nor even of Walter's—
when it came to evil, but they had been
evil enough.

And of course, I'm not including the other contradictions such as Walter being dead when Roland considers him to be alive at the end of the previous book. Now granted, none of these are HUGE inconsistencies. But they always stick out to me whenever I reread them. And its a pointless change as well. I mean, what was so important that Walter had to return? Its not as if King did anything notable with the character.

And keep in mind this is just what I found when I did a quick PDF search. I remember there being more.

[Wuducynn]

He is aware that Walter and Marten are the same person...maybe not the specifics of Walter's identity crisis, but enough that they aren't seperate people.

I just pointed out that Roland saying that is not necessarily saying he is aware they are the same person, from my point of view.




Anyway, here are some quotes from II - IV.

First off, the Argument. Which I'll admit by itself isn't a big thing as its no big deal in the end. Still...

Marten, a much greater sorcerer than Walter (who, unknown to
Roland's father, is Marten's ally)

And in the book itself...

The gunslinger had known magicians, enchanters, and alchemists in his time...One of these men had been a creature the gunslinger
believed to be a demon himself, a creature that pretended to be a man and called itself Flagg.... Then there had been the man in black.
And there had been Marten.

More arguments...

...Marten, a much greater sorcerer than Walter...

Walter, the man in black, who pretended friendship with Roland's father
but who actually served Marten, a great sorcerer.

And when Roland thinks about the people he knows...

Neither Eldred Jonas nor the crone on the hill had been of
Marten's stature—nor even of Walter's—
when it came to evil, but they had been
evil enough.

And of course, I'm not including the other contradictions such as Walter being dead when Roland considers him to be alive at the end of the previous book. Now granted, none of these are HUGE inconsistencies. But they always stick out to me whenever I reread them. And its a pointless change as well. I mean, what was so important that Walter had to return? Its not as if King did anything notable with the character.

And keep in mind this is just what I found when I did a quick PDF search. I remember there being more.

I'm aware of all of these and like I said above, within the story its not a big inconsistancy for Roland at the beginning to be unsure that they are same person and to be more sure as the series progresses. All of those quotes just point to the fact that he wasn't sure and then became more so.

[CyberGhostface]

I don't see how Roland couldn't know at the end of the Revised. The Revised version says that Roland long suspected something was up between the two, and the revelation at the end just confirms it for him. Maybe not knowing if he's dead or if the skeleton is a ruse...but I don't know how Roland could not know that the two are the same. There's nothing to indicate it.

Then in Books II-IV, he's back to thinking that they are seperate and dead. Then in Book 5 he's suddenly aware of them.

It'd be one thing if it was a gradual realization but he goes from Step 3 to Step 1 to Step 6.

It would have been better had King just revealed it in a later book instead of shoehorning it into the first.

[Wuducynn]

I don't see how Roland couldn't know at the end of the Revised. The Revised version says that Roland long suspected something was up between the two, and the revelation at the end just confirms it for him. Maybe not knowing if he's dead or if the skeleton is a ruse...but I don't know how Roland could not know that the two are the same. There's nothing to indicate it.

Suspecting something and knowing it for sure are two different things. To me Roland saying the "Marten. You never left. You merely changed."" just means that he thought Marten was using magic to look like someone else. Not necessarily that he was the same person as Walter.



Then in Books II-IV, he's back to thinking that they are seperate and dead. Then in Book 5 he's suddenly aware of them.

It'd be one thing if it was a gradual realization but he goes from Step 3 to Step 1 to Step 6.

It would have been better had King just revealed it in a later book instead of shoehorning it into the first.

Again, I don't see him as knowing for sure anything about Marten really being Walter, so I don't see it as a shoehorn. So he's not "back to thinking that they are separate and dead" in II - IV just still not sure what the relationship is between them or if they were the same.

[CyberGhostface]

So does Roland think that person who he was chasing was Marten merely pretending to be Walter, and that Walter is somewhere else, or is it vice versa?

Because if anything that just makes the situation more confusing and I don't think that was ever King's intention, to leave doubt in the mind of the reader or Roland for that matter.

[Wuducynn]

So does Roland think that person who he was chasing was Marten merely pretending to be Walter, and that Walter is somewhere else, or is it vice versa?

Because if anything that just makes the situation more confusing and I don't think that was ever King's intention, to leave doubt in the mind of the reader or Roland for that matter.

To me its saying Roland thinks it was Marten all along, looking like Walter. So he's still not sure at that point if they're the same or different or related etc.

[Truth]

can anyone think of a valid reason to bring in Walter to have his story end the way it did besides to clear up a loose end i think Walter O' Dim got shortchanged and could of had a much bigger villainous role in the story

[Brainslinger]

can anyone think of a valid reason to bring in Walter to have his story end the way it did besides to clear up a loose end i think Walter O' Dim got shortchanged and could of had a much bigger villainous role in the story

I don't think he was particularly short changed as a villain in The Gunslinger though. He is kept as an enigmatic presence, probably at his most powerful and manipulative.

If you're referring to Walter's role in the whole series, which I imagine is the case, many people think this. Not everyone who attends this part of the forum has read the other books though, best to discuss that in the
The Dark Tower forum. (http://www.thedarktower.org/palaver/forumdisplay.php?f=36)

[eldsai]

Jeeze ..... no wonder that I was confused about marten/maerlyn/flagg throughout the story

I thought it went Maerlyn/Marten then Flagg/Walter who was Maerlyns underling apprentice guy so then once they were just one I didnt know what was going on.

I believe under Fedic in book 7 a ghost yells to Roland that his mother sucked off John Farson so wouldnt it mean that he was Walter too ?

[Ka-tet]

What did walter do to the people in tull to make them like that, what did he show alice(i think that was her name) when she spoke the word(ninteen i belive)?

Cry pardon if this is obvious, it has been a while and ive only read the serise once, and i am planning a re-read soon.

[Brainslinger]

I think it was mainly the indoctrination of Sylvia Pittston,(or is is Pitston? The big well endowed preacher lady is who I mean>) that made the folks of Tull rise up more than anything. I.e. Walter seduced the lady, possibly bewitching and impregnating her in the process (although I have my doubts concerning the last.), causing her to rally the people of Tull. I'm not sure why they were so easily persuaded mind, so I guess a spell might have been involved there. I think maybe they were bored with their existence, wound up and just needing a shove to set them off somewhere, and the preacher lady gave them a focus. Or it could be a combination of these things. I think the resurrection of Nort might be part of what put them on edge too.

As for what Walter told Allie via Nort, we will never know for certain. There are however, certain events that happen within the last three books which shed new light on the nature of the multiverse. I think maybe Walter told her some of that, and her mind just couldn't take it. Much in the way a certain wandering man found it difficult to cope when thumbing through a certain book and finding out certain revelations concerning himself. I won't spoil it further, but if you've read Wolves of the Calla, you'll know who I mean.

[LadyHitchhiker]

Maybe all he did was tell her that Roland would come into his life, and that made her believe.

[LemurJones]

Well... this is just speculation... but Alice I think was starting to fall in love with Roland.

So maybe he only has to show her one thing... like the man she cares for letting a boy fall, just to talk to a man about a building.

Or maybe he shows her everything bad that Roland has done in the name of the Tower.

Or maybe he shows her a pregnant sixteen year old burning at the stake and calling his name.

Maybe all he did was make her realize that loving Roland means dying sooner, or dying later. In which case, maybe she chose not to go through everything he would do or let happen to her. If it's between being left behind in a murdered town like Tull, having a horrific journey that ends in suffering and death, or ending it quickly... well, I can see why she'd want to end it quickly.

[The Lady of Shadows]

i always thought he told nort everything he told roland when they finally met. then nort told allie when she said nineteen to him. and she couldn't handle it. it didn't bother nort any because he was already dead and after coming back from that, he was a little crazy.

[Letti]

It's a good thread. I think we should give it a more exact title, what do you think? It would be great to see many people there.

So, first of all I think Walter scared the hell out of the people in Tull. They were afraid of him and when Roland appeared... their fear and confusion became even more hysterical.
The fact that he could make Sylvia choose the red was an important point to be able to lead the people there because Sylvia was a woman who could convince and and put pressure on people. Sylvia was his puppet who did the main part of the game.

And with Alice - I think it was just some kind of really hard hypnotism. Child's play for Walter.

[obscurejude]

I think the significance of nineteen and Nort may suggest (if 19 is related to the loop) that Nort was aware of Roland's purgatory. It fits the apocalyptic imagery of the desert. Tull always seemed like the kind of town that Dante might write about. The truth drove Allie crazy.

So much religious imagery in that first book...

[Ka-tet]

Thanks for the posts peeps, some really interesting stuff here!

[The Lady of Shadows]

uh-oh. she said peeps. you know what that means. . . .

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk95/turtlesong/peeps/ultimatepeepshow-1.jpg


i am the peep spammer :lol:

[obscurejude]

Turtlesong, Ka Tet is the guy in the picture. :lol:

Don't worry, we've all made the mistake.

[razz]

wasn't that fat preacher lady from the baronies? i think they mentioned it.

[The Lady of Shadows]

Turtlesong, Ka Tet is the guy in the picture. :lol:

Don't worry, we've all made the mistake.

oh shit, i typed she. cry your pardon ka-tet.

ryan i was looking at your post going "wtf? i don't get it." then i sat back and actually read my post w-o-r-d-f-o-r-w-o-r-d. :idea: god, sometimes i really wonder about me. :lol:

[obscurejude]

:lol:

[Ka-tet]

uh-oh. she said peeps. you know what that means. . . .

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk95/turtlesong/ultimatepeepshow.jpg


i am the peep spammer :lol:

:|....uhhh, thanks ^.^

To Razz:All we know for certain is that she arrived in Tull from the desert. We can only specualte on exactly where she came from.

[The Lady of Shadows]

i have a thing for peeps. it's in another thread. don't ask, just don't ask.

and cry your pardon - did you read the posts between ryan and me? :lol:

[razz]

uh-oh. she said peeps. you know what that means. . . .

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk95/turtlesong/ultimatepeepshow.jpg


i am the peep spammer :lol:

:|....uhhh, thanks ^.^

To Razz:All we know for certain is that she arrived in Tull from the desert. We can only speculate on exactly where she came from.
I'm pretty sure they mentioned her in Wizard and Glass.

[Ka-tet]

uh-oh. she said peeps. you know what that means. . . .

http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk95/turtlesong/ultimatepeepshow.jpg


i am the peep spammer :lol:

:|....uhhh, thanks ^.^

To Razz:All we know for certain is that she arrived in Tull from the desert. We can only speculate on exactly where she came from.
I'm pretty sure they mentioned her in Wizard and Glass.

Maby so Razz.

And i did sai turtlesong.

[BillyxRansom]

I think the resurrection of Nort might be part of what put them on edge too.
wat.


I must've missed this part. Or was it in the revised edition.... (probably not, huh.)

[obscurejude]

I think the resurrection of Nort might be part of what put them on edge too.
wat.


I must've missed this part. Or was it in the revised edition.... (probably not, huh.)

Seriously, you missed that? I don't even know what to say. Are you aware that the main character is a gunslinger? :lol:

[Letti]

I think the resurrection of Nort might be part of what put them on edge too.
wat.


I must've missed this part. Or was it in the revised edition.... (probably not, huh.)

Seriously, you missed that? I don't even know what to say. Are you aware that the main character is a gunslinger? :lol:

:lol:

Anyway I am sure you didn't forget it but there are parts that fall out of our memory.

[obscurejude]

Just giving you a hard time Billy.

[BillyxRansom]

I think the resurrection of Nort might be part of what put them on edge too.
wat.


I must've missed this part. Or was it in the revised edition.... (probably not, huh.)

Seriously, you missed that? I don't even know what to say. Are you aware that the main character is a gunslinger? :lol:

I had just forgotten, that's all. But I read through it again yesterday and remembered reading it, smart ass. :P

[obscurejude]

Hey, Billy, it was just a joke and I read your post at like five in the morning.

No worries. :couple: :lol:

[Brainslinger]

I'm pretty sure they mentioned her in Wizard and Glass.

You're right she was mentioned. I believe it was during a POV of Coral Thorin, thinking about that 'crazy preacher lady' who had passed through. She gets about our Sylvie.

[Ka-tet]

I'm pretty sure they mentioned her in Wizard and Glass.

You're right she was mentioned. I believe it was during a POV of Coral Thorin, thinking about that 'crazy preacher lady' who had passed through. She gets about our Sylvie.

Thats right, i just visited this thread to confirm that myself.

Ive almost finished WAG in my re-read.:ninja:

[fx12345]

I'm pretty sure that Walter revived Nort but hid the secret of te afterlife in his head. Then, he told Allice what the key to unlock Nort's knowledge was (19). I don't think he put a spell on Allice, I think he basically said her curiosity would get the better of her and when she realized the madness she caused, she told the Gunslinger to kill her.

[Matt]

Yep, in the revised version...Nort was Pandora's box.

[LadyHitchhiker]

I can totally understand why Roland would be confused about Walter/Marten's identity by book two. By book two he is infected, and starting to go crazy. No wonder he's unsure about the man in black.

[LadyHitchhiker]

It's still a different thought presented to me than has ever been.

[LadyHitchhiker]

"It's not your bullets I fear, Roland. It's your idea of answers that scare me."

Is this in reference to Roland wanting to shoot Walter? Does just the idea that he thinks he can get answers by shooting Walter, is that what scares him? Or am I missing something?

[Letti]

Where was it exactly, Liz? If you give us some more it will be easier to find the true meaning of the words.

[LadyHitchhiker]

Page 201 in my copy of the Gunslinger.

[Brice]

Shortly before/at the beginning of their palaver...am I right, Liz?

[LadyHitchhiker]

No, this was before he dropped Jake, and before they saw the slow mutants. Before they went into the mountain. Before the handcar escapade. Walter was taunting Roland, and at the same time letting him know that he wouldn't talk to him if he didn't lose the boy.

[Brice]

Okay, I'd need a longer quote, although I think I understand his saying that.

[LadyHitchhiker]

""Gunslinger! How well you fulfill the prophecies of old! Good day and good day and good day!"
(Roland fires three times and misses all three times)
"Woud you kill all your answers so easily, gunslinger?"
"Come down", the gunslinger said. "Answers all around."
Again that huge, derisive laugh. "It's not your bullets I fear, Roland. It's you idea of answers that scares me."
"Come down."
"The other side I think," the man in black said. "On the other side we will hold much council. Just the two of us. Come with me or stay."

[LadyHitchhiker]

Or maybe Roland's idea of answers is to get to the tower so Walter is scared of Roland reaching the tower? (I don't think that's a spoiler but if I need to I can fix it)

[Wuducynn]

I think what he means by that is the idea that Roland would not stop until he reached the Tower no matter how many times he was warned. Roland's "idea of answers" is to not stop no matter what, even if it is to bring about the destruction of everyone around him and to potentially bring about the events that destroy the Tower itself. Wizard and Glass spoiler - A warning we see in Eddie's dream of Roland behind the wheel of the bulldozer points to this in Roland

[LadyHitchhiker]

well if that's true I still don't understand. Why would it frighten Walter?

[Wuducynn]

well if that's true I still don't understand. Why would it frighten Walter?

I think because he is afraid that no matter what he does to try and keep Roland from the Tower it won't work. Remember - Whole series spoiler Walter is under huge pressure to keep him from the Tower until the Red King can bring it down and from his own plans to get their before Roland and before the CK can bring it down

[Wuducynn]

If you come back with a "yeah but I don't get it" after I explained all of that Liz, I'm coming up to Michigan and peeing all over your rug in the middle of the night.

[LadyHitchhiker]

So Walter didn't even word himself in truth; Roland's idea of answers isn't what really scares him, it's the consequences if he cannot discourage Roland from the tower... He's scared of what may happen to himself because of Roland's one-mindedness...

[Wuducynn]

So Walter didn't even word himself in truth; Roland's idea of answers isn't what really scares him, it's the consequences if he cannot discourage Roland from the tower... He's scared of what may happen to himself because of Roland's one-mindedness...

No, he was speaking truthfully I think, like I said Roland's idea of answers is getting to the Tower no matter what.

[LadyHitchhiker]

I still didn't think it would scare Walter since Walter is supposed to be this big bad-ass. I just didn't really picture Walter being scared of much of anything... *shrugs* Maybe my impression of him is too hardcore?

[Letti]

We mustn't forget that Walter loved making jokes. That's his way to hide his real thoughts, feelings or goals.
So many times it doesn't matter what he says because his only goal is to mislead his enemy or to make some gook jokes to have fan.

[LadyHitchhiker]

So you think this was just a joke, Letti?

[Letti]

I think he wanted to get rid of Roland at that moment. Roland wasn't ready to choose him instead of the boy. So first of all I think he tried to give very mysterious answers to make Roland more curious and secondly he tried to win time.

[LadyHitchhiker]

I kind of thought it was too, just him pushing Roland to see if he was ready to give up the boy. To see if Roland was ready for the palaver between them.

Another thing I don't understand is why Jake couldn't join their palaver...

I thought perhaps Walter wanted Roland to sacrifice something important to him to show how badly he wanted the tower.

[Letti]

Jake was the perfect trap for Roland.

[LadyHitchhiker]

But why was it important to Walter to know what he would give up for the tower? Roland's devotion to the quest truly shows Walter how he will not stop, but why is this information important to Walter? Or is he just being cocky and not thinking that far ahead?

[Letti]

But why was it important to Walter to know what he would give up for the tower? Roland's devotion to the quest truly shows Walter how he will not stop, but why is this information important to Walter? Or is he just being cocky and not thinking that far ahead?

It's not the information he needs. He wanted to be sure that Roland would drop the kid.
Jake was a double trap.
On the one hand when Roland drop Jake Roland got farther from the Tower. During his long journey he realises that he needs his ka-tet his friends to reach the Tower. And to be able to enter.

On the other hand in DotT
Roland almost got insane. He saved Jake's life - you know he stopped the Pusher - and he started to have two story lines in his head.
There was a boy.
There was no boy.
There was a boy. I killed him.
There was no boy.
And so on and so on.
Remember?
So I think Walter was sure if Roland dropped Jake he would lose the way to the Tower.

[LadyHitchhiker]

Ooooooooooooooooooooooh..... so

Roland loses Jake, that means he loses it and Walter thinks then he will not be able to finish his journey. Very interesting. I like that idea.

[Wuducynn]

I still didn't think it would scare Walter since Walter is supposed to be this big bad-ass. I just didn't really picture Walter being scared of much of anything... *shrugs* Maybe my impression of him is too hardcore?

So you don't think the idea that Roland would never stop until he reached the Tower, potentially ruining everything Walter has worked for, would make Walter frightened? Just because someone is a "badass" doesn't mean they're not fearful at certain moments.

[flaggwalkstheline]

As I hhave posted b4, walters fate in dt7 proves that he actually ISNT a big badass he just (except for one fatal slipup) convinces everyone that he is which in my opinion makes him more of a badass than if he was some godpowered freak, the same reason the joker is so much cooler than all those superpowered villain

[LadyHitchhiker]

Well maybe my opinions of Walter are more of those of Randall Flagg... I didn't think Randall was scared of anything. His arrogance was one of his strengths and faults. He thought he was unbeatable, so no, I didn't think he was scared of Roland. I thought that even if Walter believed that Roland was able to reach the tower, wrecking his plans, that Walter would think to have a backup plan and so therefore he wasn't really scared of anything. Of course matters didn't always go his way, but I'm not sure how much foresight he really had. But then again, I may have to think more about this.

[Wuducynn]

Well finish your re-read of the series and see if you still hold that opinion of Walter.

[LadyHitchhiker]

I'm working on it ;)

[Wuducynn]

Well what the hell are you doing on here?? You should be reading the series!

[LadyHitchhiker]

I can multitask!!!!!!!!!!! :cool:

[Brice]

Didn't Walter say he feared an accounting or a reckoning in The Gunslinger when Roland and he held palaver?

[Wuducynn]

Yeah, he did. "The ultimate bad-ass" said so.

[Brice]

Well, one doesn't negate the other...as you suggested earlier. In fact sometimes it is one's fear itself that makes them brave or couragous or "a bad-ass"

[Wuducynn]

Well, one doesn't negate the other...as you suggested earlier. In fact sometimes it is one's fear itself that makes them brave or couragous or "a bad-ass"

I know, that was directed to Liz.

[Brice]

Well it's definitely addressing her point as I understand it of Walter/Flagg being a badass and thus not being afraid.

[LadyHitchhiker]

Yes but even him saying so may have just been a mind-game.. or perhaps Walter had grown soft in that incarnation as he moved onto reincarnate to a different character?

[Brice]

Still if he can feel fear in any incarnation than he feels fear.

[Wuducynn]

*sigh*

[LadyHitchhiker]

Again, I'm not convinced in that book that he was truly worried about Roland, but maybe it will appear in my reread of the other books...

[wiccangdess13]

I also think Walter fears Rolands inability to grasp the full picture. He is slow and more black and white/ cut and dry and I think Walter is fearful of how Roland interputs "answers". Does that make sense? It does in my mind :dance:

[BillyxRansom]

My interpretation is very similar to wiccang's. Walter fears that Roland doesn't understand the whole picture.

[Letti]

My interpretation is very similar to wiccang's. Walter fears that Roland doesn't understand the whole picture.

But why the hell would he be afraid of such a thing?

To sum up my thoughts: I have no idea what he meant by that statement but for my part I don't believe any of his words. He is lying and joking even when he is asking. That's Walter.
If he hadn't become the right hand of the Crimson King he would have become a great politician.

[Powdered Water]

Interesting topic. I'm new here so forgive me if someone has already thrown this out.

I've been thinking lately that Walter or any of the random creations of Walter are all a part of Roland, what I mean to say is they were his anti-Roland. And perhaps not even real as in corporeal real. Much like how Roland isn't real. Does that make sense? It's an infinity circle yeah? They spend the whole series on opposite sides: One trying to reach an unattainable goal and the other trying to keep him from getting there. So in the end of the story they both get what they want but they also get nothing. Does that make sense?

[Brainslinger]

I think Walter truly does fear Roland in a way. Evil entities (even those who are powerful) have much to fear.

However, I don't think he particularly meant anything substantial by that statement concerning being afraid of Roland's idea of answers. I think it's one of those terms of phrase that shouldn't be taken literally. Kind of like me say "It's like this, I'm afraid". That doesn't mean I'm actually scared.

I think Walter is just saying "The answers you expect won't be the ones you'll get."

[Wuducynn]

Interesting topic. I'm new here so forgive me if someone has already thrown this out.

I've been thinking lately that Walter or any of the random creations of Walter are all a part of Roland, what I mean to say is they were his anti-Roland. And perhaps not even real as in corporeal real. Much like how Roland isn't real. Does that make sense? It's an infinity circle yeah? They spend the whole series on opposite sides: One trying to reach an unattainable goal and the other trying to keep him from getting there. So in the end of the story they both get what they want but they also get nothing. Does that make sense?

I see what you're saying but I don't agree that Walter is just a part of Roland and not real in a corporeal sense. Do you have some kind of "in saga" evidence to point to for your assertion?

[Wuducynn]

If he hadn't become the right hand of the Crimson King he would have become a great politician.

Good call Letti!

[Powdered Water]

I see what you're saying but I don't agree that Walter is just a part of Roland and not real in a corporeal sense. Do you have some kind of "in saga" evidence to point to for your assertion?

Not really, at this point its just a theory I'm kicking around. I've only read the last 3 books twice each so at this point I may just need to go back re read the whole saga to help me refine my theory. I think part of it may be sound though. Perhaps Walter was in fact a "real" entity in Rolands world but really, what does that mean? Was Roland "real"?

[Matt of Gilead]

Walter's incarnations, RF or otherwise, seem to have their own personalities. Randal Flagg behaves differently than Walter O'Dim, who behaves differently than Martin Broadcloak, etc.

However, I'm not sure what Walter meant by this quote, myself.

@Powdered: As real as any other epic hero doomed to repeat himself for half of eternity

[Whitey Appleseed]

I think it's interesting that in The Gunslinger, Roland's quest present him with moral questions. If the man in black is 'afraid' of Roland's idea of answers, perhaps the answer lies in what Roland's old man said to him, 'moral may always be beyond you.' Like the hawk, who really has no friends, though Roland was able to use him, Roland only knows a single-minded purpose.

I think I've got the same copy as you, Ladyhitchhiker...anyway, that quote is on the same page, the original version. My copy also has the afterword that I'd never read until yesterday, and SK mentions finishing, or working on, the part of the story about Jake around the time he worked on the story about Danny Torrence, in The Shining, escaping a different terror.

There's this idea of 'predestination' present in both works. Roland and Jake are under the mountain, on the handcar, on tracks, a kind of predestination. Later, when they stop and begin that trek up the trestle, they're described as being on a tightrope. That long-dead German philosopher comes to mind, the one with the name that's hard to spell, Nietzsche, and his ubermensch , a kind of superman walking a tightrope high above the crowds down below, about as far as I've gone in understanding Nietzsche. Rather than misquote him--some have said he was interpreted (answered) or misinterpreted (your idea of answers) by those that followed--guess he was writing and thinking his thoughts before Hitler's time.

And then he had this idea of 'the eternal recurrence', that we repeat ourselves, and rather than run the risk of misquoting him again, that phrase, 'the eternal recurrence' is enough to provide something to chew on.

Maybe that idea is a kind of predestination, the tracks of the railcar, or the figurines on the rails of the clock under the glass dome. Couple with that idea, is the characters idea of what should be done, or where he/she sees him/herself in the grand scheme of things...that image as they come out of the mountain is nice...the tracks are worn away, under the sun of reason...are we the masters of our choices or our choices the master of us?

Hope I didn't pull the wrong colored rock out of the bag. I don't know.

[LadyHitchhiker]

Walter's incarnations, RF or otherwise, seem to have their own personalities. Randal Flagg behaves differently than Walter O'Dim, who behaves differently than Martin Broadcloak, etc.

However, I'm not sure what Walter meant by this quote, myself.

@Powdered: As real as any other epic hero doomed to repeat himself for half of eternity

I like this and Whitey's ideas... I love having new ideas for how to interpret my favorite books!!!

[Whitey Appleseed]

I recently read the original. Didn't know it existed until I paid attention reading something else, maybe the revised. Anyway, what struck me about the fight in Tull is what happens to the people toward the end, described on page 86. Yeah, I know everyone has versions that probably are numbered differently, but maybe it helps. Here's the sentence: They halted for a moment, startled, the mob face shivering into individual, bewildered faces.

Did Walter, or Sylvia, have the greater influence on the people. Well, they both had their effect, but I'll hazard that with the sentence quoted, Walter prepped them for the trap. How? Probably had to do with him jumping back and forth over Nort's dead body, spitting looeys on him. Life for your crop. Bewildered is a key word, I think.
Used over and over again in King's stories, it describes a kind of possession, a loss of will, and a feeling of being pushed, or pulled, in directions other than what might happen without the force present.

In the last chapter of The Stand, Flagg is described as bewildered again. In The Shining, Jack is described as bewildered after busting up the radio, after Wendy finds him and breaks the spell. In The Wolves of the Calla, Father Callahan, during his time as the ESP wonder, there's something about seeing them as bewildered dead people, or something...forget the exact way it goes.

So they wake up, kinda, a mob when they attack Roland, and they're bewildered, they become individual faces. And here comes Sylvia, to rally the troops, and they continue. So I'd say it's a combination of Walter and Sylvia.

[Earth's Militant Mind]

I could be wrong of course but I will share my take on not just this quote, but the DT and most of his writing. SK connects many of his stories to his others and many of them take place in Maine where he lives. I believe that much of this puts us on a much more personal plain with Mr. King than we realize. I think many of his characters are incantations of himself in different frames of mind, this may be why he decided to include himself in the story as well.

Now since we all have inner conflicts with ourselves I believe that what the man in black is saying is that he fears Roland succeeding because if he does than that one train of thought may rule with out prejudice and that is what he fears. He knows Roland is going to catch up with him and kill this form of he because this is ka but there are others like him or other forms of him that he wants to see continue after he is gone. So he does not fear death or bullets because he already knows he will die but he fears Rolands success.

Even in the ending King can't bring himself to let Roland win because he knows that to some extent this conflict is necessary to provide purpose in life. I may be streatching it now but I don't think the DT is done with Stephen and there will be more even if we don't get to see it.

That was a great question, hope I made some sense. Who's the HIPPIE now Brice? What?

[flaggwalkstheline]

has anyone noticed how there are so many characters in the dark tower who are minor figures yet seem to be fleshed out enough that they could have their own books just about them (some of them do actually) the tick tock man and gasher and their whole situation, sylvia pitson, sheb the piano player who was in hambry then tull, alice, david quick, the list goes on and on

[Whitey Appleseed]

Yeah, you bet, FWTL. A reader needs to pay attention cause you're likely to see again someone that seems to drop from the pages, if not in the story you're reading, then somewhere else. On one of these threads, some mentioned Brown, and apparently he shows up later in the narrative. Can't say for sure that I remember that, but with many of them, there's subtext that you can wonder about, fill-in-the-blanks so to speak.

[Brice]

I could be wrong of course but I will share my take on not just this quote, but the DT and most of his writing. SK connects many of his stories to his others and many of them take place in Maine where he lives. I believe that much of this puts us on a much more personal plain with Mr. King than we realize. I think many of his characters are incantations of himself in different frames of mind, this may be why he decided to include himself in the story as well.

Now since we all have inner conflicts with ourselves I believe that what the man in black is saying is that he fears Roland succeeding because if he does than that one train of thought may rule with out prejudice and that is what he fears. He knows Roland is going to catch up with him and kill this form of he because this is ka but there are others like him or other forms of him that he wants to see continue after he is gone. So he does not fear death or bullets because he already knows he will die but he fears Rolands success.

Even in the ending King can't bring himself to let Roland win because he knows that to some extent this conflict is necessary to provide purpose in life. I may be streatching it now but I don't think the DT is done with Stephen and there will be more even if we don't get to see it.

That was a great question, hope I made some sense. Who's the HIPPIE now Brice? What?

I never said I was the only hippie. :) Now you may have a hard time convincing Jayson you are one though. :lol:

You made sense, but I do think your analogy is reaching a bit far. It makes sense, but doesn't feel entirely right to me.

[Delah]

The first few times I read the series, I thought that Walter said that Jake had to be sacrificed in order for the doors to be created. But after a few re-readings, it becomes clear that he doesn't say that. He doesn't not say it, either, because he's Walter.

In the palavar (in the revised Gunslinger) Walter tells Roland that he has been invested with the power of Drawing. He doesn't explicity tell him that its because of Jake's death or because Walter/Ka/Gan granted it to him, he just informs him that he has it. Something along the lines of "I have to tell you - cause you just let that kid die - that you have this power. If you hadn't let the kid drop in order to catch up, I wouldn't have to tell you."

The way its worded (and the abundance of magical doors in later books) and the repurcussions of Roland's dropping Jake definitely indicate to me, that Jakes death wasn't neccassary to create the doors or to give Roland the power of drawing. Although it makes a hell of a trap, later. What it comes down to is, Roland traded Jake's life for information. And most of it, while interesting, is absolute drivel. Like Bev Vincent says, the sum of the important information Roland gets out of his palavar with Walter (info he wouldn't get otherwise, at a later time) is: Go west.

I do think it can be read either way, but when you add in the whole cycle of books and the themes Redemption/repitiiton/change -- Jake's death is unnecassary. It is what Roland has to change to break the cycle in this readers opinion.

[BillyxRansom]

I've responded to this already, but I feel I need to clarify my thoughts, which are the same as when I first posted my take. No one else seems to have said this either, as far as I can see. Not to the extent I believe it is, so I'm responding again.

I think what Walter meant is that he pities Roland. It scares him what Roland is capable of doing to himself, as I expect could be the case for anyone who is an onlooker, whether friend or foe, watching someone destroy themselves.

Walter/Flagg is a damned egotistical sonofabitch. So he is confident that Roland will fail, so it is only Roland's own self-destructive outlook that he fears, on behalf of Roland.

Roland's weapons do not hurt Walter, that is true. In fact he believes himself to be infallible, because, as has been stated, Roland hasn't got shit for an imagination.