Roland's relationship with his mom... could he...??

[Letti]

A question appeared in my mind as I was reading one of the treads.. it might be meaningless but you might have some ideas about it.
So my question is:
Could Roland have avoid killing his own mom if he had forgiven her?
That I mean is.. that Roland went to his mom's room with lots of anger in his heart. And dark emotions can make us blind to soft things and signs..

[Jean]

it's a very good question, and for me personally the answer is Yes, he could have. I don't believe any reflection in the mirror, any glammer or the most powerful witchcraft can force you to do something that hasn't already taken roots, however slight, in your soul

[Brice]

I'd agree entirely with that.

[LadyHitchhiker]

I know that Roland is a gunslinger but why did he kill his mom? It never made sense to me.

[Brice]

I know that Roland is a gunslinger but why did he kill his mom? It never made sense to me.


It was because he didn't like the belt she'd made for him.

[LadyHitchhiker]

*shakes head* still doesn't make sense to me

[Brice]

Ok, let me make it more clear: He REALLY didn't like it. :lol:

[Darkthoughts]

Brice :rofl:

[Brice]

:D

[LadyHitchhiker]

Well then I should kill my mom for making me wear Natalie's hand me downs.. the horror of hot pink leggings and leopard print at the sensitive junior high age... making me look like a demi-prositute... *shudders* The horror! The Horror!!!!

[Brice]

Well then I should kill my mom for making me wear Natalie's hand me downs.. the horror of hot pink leggings and leopard print at the sensitive junior high age... making me look like a demi-prositute... *shudders* The horror! The Horror!!!!


Seems reasonable! :rofl:

[Jean]

I hate to be a bore

(lying, of course... I love to be a bore...)


but are we still on topic?

[Brice]

I hate to be a bore

(lying, of course... I love to be a bore...)


but are we still on topic?

Sorry for the brief derailment of the thread. It was my fault entirely.

[LadyHitchhiker]

Well Jean i wasn't trying to be off topic, but for me to understand if Roland could avoid killing his mother I needed to know why he did it because even after reading them I don't know how many times it still doesn't make sense to me.

[Letti]

He did it because he saw Rhea and not his mom. He meant to kill the witch (and of course he didn't mean to kill his mom AT ALL) who had helped Susan to reach the end of the path. Roland should have felt that it was a glamour but he didn't.

[LadyHitchhiker]

Perhaps merlyn's grapefruit was an instrument of Gan's as well.

If he had not killed his mother, then that would have been a reason to return home instead of forward on his quest.

[Matt]

Roland hated his mother, plain and simple. He hated that she was so weak and that she would allow that monster to touch her.

The grapefruit was able to take advantage of that.

Many people hate their parents without ever fully realizing it.

[The Lady of Shadows]

why should he have been able to see through the glammer? he was still a child, he wasn't fully over being caught in the pink piece of the rainbow, he had just found out that the person he thought was his heart's love was burned to death because of his actions, and he got to watch the instant replay of it (and perhaps actually live through it, we'll never really know) in the bargain.

yes, he was pissed at his mother. but i don't think he really hated her, at least not truly. hated what she had done, yes. hated who she had become, absolutely. but i think his time in mejis taught him the difference between hating a person and hating their actions. if he had truly hated her he would have just told his father who was supposed to wield that poisoned knife now wouldn't he? instead he didn't. imagine if he had - the satisfaction of watching her hang, or worse.

i think we're all forgetting that roland was still just a boy when this happened. and still partially caught up in the wizard's rainbow, at least in his own mind. it's sad really. because all of that happened because he made the decision not to kill when he could have. and he ended up going on to kill practically everyone in his path ever after.

and you know me, i'm no defender of roland or his actions. but in this instance i feel badly for him. i really feel like he was in over his head - way over his head. and his was still caught up in things he didn't understand and never could understand.

[Letti]

You are absolutely right turtle, there is a lot in what you write but still I have a feeling Roland might have avoided the tragedy if he had been able to forgive his mom.
I don't say he should have forgiven her, Roland was too young and too many things happened around and inside him it's understandable he needed more time to be able to open his heart to his mother again.
All I say is that he would have had some chance to get out of that horrible trap if he had forgiven.

[zemegauser]

I believe that he would have killed his mother even if he did not hate her.

It was his extreme hate for Rhea that made him weak to her "spell", not his hate for his mother... As soon as he saw "her", he went straight for his guns; not even a thought in his mind to stop.

He should have killed Rhea the second he saw her... It was obvious that his threat would do nothing to stop her, and it should have been even clearer after the snakes' attack.

But oh well...:angry:

[BillyxRansom]

He did it because he saw Rhea and not his mom. He meant to kill the witch (and of course he didn't mean to kill his mom AT ALL) who had helped Susan to reach the end of the path. Roland should have felt that it was a glamour but he didn't.

Don't you mean "glammer"?

(WAIT ARE THESE THE SAME THING?) :|

And yeah, didn't King write that Roland saw Rhea instead of his mother? (Didn't I also read that Susannah, or someone, actually wanted to stop him because he was seeing the wrong person??)

[John Blaze]

I think TS has some strong points. There are some other ideas I've had.

Does anyone feel that there might be an undercurrent of Oedipal Complex in Roland's relationship with his mother?

That maybe seeing her with Walter not only pissed him off but made him jealous also?

Also there's the wanting to save her part. If she hadn't hid, and they had actually had it out, do you believe she would have still tried to escape with the grapefruit? Is it possible that he could have convinced her to stay and confess?>

And, if she had stayed and confessed, would Steven have let her live, and taken her back?>

[Jackie]

Sounds like a really good theory to me

[Bangoskank19]

<snip>He should have killed Rhea the second he saw her... It was obvious that his threat would do nothing to stop her, and it should have been even clearer after the snakes' attack.<snip>

I agree. If Roland had killed Rhea in the first place, he wouldn't have been in the situation to think that she was there. Unless the ball could have found a way around that...


<snip> And, if she had stayed and confessed, would Steven have let her live, and taken her back? <snip>

Remember the six words Steven Deschain whispered to Roland? He had already known about his wife doing the nasty with Marten for years, and he hadn't done anything about it for that time, so what's to say he had already forgiven her in his heart and was grieved only by the fact that she was helpless in Marten's clutches?

[Whitey Appleseed]

Roland had an edifice complex and didn't have time for forgiveness. He was kinda quick on the draw, wasn't he...like in the gunslinger, he emptied his revolvers at Walter. He didn't learn from his experience with Susan, or did he? She was committed to another, but he wanted her, so he found a way to do so. He waved at Susan as she watched from the window. He didn't wave to his mother as she watched from her window as they left Gilead.
Seeing his mother in the window made him forget all about the words of his old man regarding the Wizard's Rainbow. There were tears coursing down her cheeks. So what can you say? That Roland has his head up his ass? I wonder what he was thinking about the whole situation, being sent away, probably fuming over that. We know he wanted to stay and join the coming fray. I dunno. shrug.

[jayson]

Roland had an edifice complex

He liked/disliked buildings? :orely:

[obscurejude]

Roland had an edifice complex

He liked/disliked buildings? :orely:

:rofl:

[Brice]

Oh, shit! :rofl:

I disagree that Roland had an Oedipus Complex, or at least that there was any indication of this, but then I think the whole concept of an Oedipal Complex utter bullshit.

[Whitey Appleseed]

Roland had an edifice complex

He liked/disliked buildings? :orely:

Bright Towers Dark Towers.

[Jean]

Oh, shit! :rofl:

I disagree that Roland had an Oedipus Complex, or at least that there was any indication of this, but then I think the whole concept of an Oedipal Complex utter bullshit.
Very well spoken. Bears agree.

[Letti]

Roland had an edifice complex

How (the blue hell) did you get to this conclusion?

[Whitey Appleseed]

Roland had an edifice complex

How (the blue hell) did you get to this conclusion?

Thought it was obvious, Letti, or is The Dark Tower not an edifice? Anyway, cry yer pardon, O great one!...Didn't mean to throw you off your feed.

[obscurejude]

I'm not sure if Roland had an Oedipal complex, but King sure as hell does and I think it slips in from time to time, DT included.

One example, if I'm not mistaken, is when Roland

is on the first floor of the tower and experiencing the emotion of being an infant as he holds his blue navel clip. I think it gives him a hard-on.

[Letti]

Roland had an edifice complex

How (the blue hell) did you get to this conclusion?

Thought it was obvious, Letti, or is The Dark Tower not an edifice? Anyway, cry yer pardon, O great one!...Didn't mean to throw you off your feed.

Okay, I am sorry that I was interested in your thoughts.

[Brice]

Roland had an edifice complex

How (the blue hell) did you get to this conclusion?

Thought it was obvious, Letti, or is The Dark Tower not an edifice? Anyway, cry yer pardon, O great one!...Didn't mean to throw you off your feed.


:clap: Right on! That's a great way to get people interested in your obvious ideas...belittle them. I'd suggest that the only thing making her greater than you at the moment is the fact that she was kind and respectful and held her tongue in response to your post where you rightfully should have done the same.

[Whitey Appleseed]

Roland had an edifice complex

How (the blue hell) did you get to this conclusion?

Thought it was obvious, Letti, or is The Dark Tower not an edifice? Anyway, cry yer pardon, O great one!...Didn't mean to throw you off your feed.


:clap: Right on! That's a great way to get people interested in your obvious ideas...belittle them. I'd suggest that the only thing making her greater than you at the moment is the fact that she was kind and respectful and held her tongue in response to your post where you rightfully should have done the same.

Give me a break. How am I to take the blue hell from another if not the same kind of disrespect you accuse me of? Kind and respectful? Yeah, sure, I can see that...in Letti's second post on the matter.

[Letti]

Brice meant my second post.
For me "how the blue hell" isn't disrespectful when I saw something really eye-catching or strange I asked my questions this way and I got answers we got into interesting conversations.
To avoid the fights and arguments I won't ask anything from you. I wouldn't like to make you feel uncomfortable here. Not because I am angry or something... let me know when you are open to conversations and you don't look for words and expressions to jump on them and attack. So let me know and I will be happy to ask some things because you see lots of things quite differently.

[alinda]

If you knew our Letti, or spent some more time on these boards, you would know that the phrase blue hell is not only endearing, it is also quite correct. We are all here to
share our thoughts on many subjects, and with out the benefit of long standing
friendship, and certain knowledge of idiosyncrasies, I find it useful that when we find a post we do not understand immediately, one can ponder it before a reply. Just my 2 cents worth , now what say we return to the subject of Roland and his mom?

Ryan, do you really think Roland's thoughts/feelings on that first landing were arousal?
I find this theory rather strange, can you please explain it?

[John Blaze]

Oh, shit! :rofl:

I disagree that Roland had an Oedipus Complex, or at least that there was any indication of this, but then I think the whole concept of an Oedipal Complex utter bullshit.
Very well spoken. Bears agree.


WTF are you two talking about?

Are you saying there's no such thing as an oedipal complex? are you saying there's no sicko's out there who want to bang their mom, even subconsciously?

[Jean]

Oh, shit! :rofl:

I disagree that Roland had an Oedipus Complex, or at least that there was any indication of this, but then I think the whole concept of an Oedipal Complex utter bullshit.
Very well spoken. Bears agree.


WTF are you two talking about?

Are you saying there's no such thing as an oedipal complex? are you saying there's no sicko's out there who want to bang their mom, even subconsciously?
To the latter question: no, we are not. We are saying that the so-called "psychology" doesn't know shit about psyche and tries to conceal it between some easy-to-sell concepts that exist entirely as the delusions of psychologists; as it often happens with delusions, the longer they exist and the better their terminology develops, the sounder quasi-existence they acquire.
That's, at least, what bears say; Brice may think differently, but, I'm afraid, essentially to the same effect judging by what he already said.

[Letti]

Anyway Oedipus Complex doesn't have to mean that the kid wants to make love with their own mom or dad (of course it means that too).
When little children are jealous of the parents... for example the little girl around the age of 4 sees that her dad hugs her mom with love. She can become jealous and she wishes if only she could be as important to his dad as his mom is and she would like to step into his mom's shoes. She would like to be the "mom" in their family. It's called Oedipus Complex (or Oedipus Conflict), too.

I have no idea if Roland had it or not (psychologists say most of the children do more or less) but hsi parents weren't close to each other so I don't think he had the chance to be jealous.

[alinda]

Good point as usual Letti. Our parents are truly and uniquely our "firsts" in many ways.
Our first teachers, often our first "loves". I am not sure at all tho' that what Roland experiences isn't simply a fond memory from deep inside him, I think it was more a mystery to him than a turn on. Weren't his feelings stirred by the memory of an aroma?
Of course my memory being what it is, I may want to read that passage again before anyone takes my comment to heart. The title Princess Alzheimers did not come easily :lol:

[Brice]

Whitey, I actually meant at no point including that post where she asks "what in the blue hell are you talking about" did Letti intend or demonstrate any disrespect. I am sure most of us have had plenty of situations in life where friends or even family members have asked us what the hell we meant, or were doing, or thinking without intending any disrespect at all. Still, let's move on from this if we can.







Oh, shit! :rofl:

I disagree that Roland had an Oedipus Complex, or at least that there was any indication of this, but then I think the whole concept of an Oedipal Complex utter bullshit.
Very well spoken. Bears agree.


WTF are you two talking about?

Are you saying there's no such thing as an oedipal complex? are you saying there's no sicko's out there who want to bang their mom, even subconsciously?
To the latter question: no, we are not. We are saying that the so-called "psychology" doesn't know shit about psyche and tries to conceal it between some easy-to-sell concepts that exist entirely as the delusions of psychologists; as it often happens with delusions, the longer they exist and the better their terminology develops, the sounder quasi-existence they acquire.
That's, at least, what bears say; Brice may think differently, but, I'm afraid, essentially to the same effect judging by what he already said.

Brices and Bears agree. :thumbsup:

[ManOfWesternesse]

".. what in the blue hell.." is a byword around here, and Letti's in particular. We take it more as a term of endearment than a personal attack! :lol:


Anyway....
Letti, I honestly think it was simply a case of:- Roland sees Rhea/Roland draws and shoots (no big surprises there)/Roland (at the last instant & too late to take it back) sees that it is his Mother he has actually killed/ End of.
Roland didn't hate Gabrielle enough to kill her, he maybe didn't really 'hate' her at all?, but was of course disapointed in the road she had gone down (or been led down - though I tend to agree with your assessment that she went down it at least willingly in part).
And I got no sense of any Oedipal conflict there?

[obscurejude]

Ryan, do you really think Roland's thoughts/feelings on that first landing were arousal?
I find this theory rather strange, can you please explain it?

I'm no psychiatrist and I don't play one on t.v. :D I meant the oedipal complex in a generalized sense, which isn't limited to the narrow definition that Bruno gave. There remain several passages in King where arousal is associated with a mother figure in some sense, but I'm not suggesting necessarily by perversion.

Think of the dream that Bobby Garfield had about his mother being chased by men with phallic spears.

Several images of Gabrielle come to mind but I am too tired to think of them specifically right now.

There are things that I want to say, but I fear they may come out wrong since I'm so tired, and honestly, not that comfortable talking about Freud due to my lack of knowledge.

Let me think about some more Alinda, and I'll try to get back to you. :couple:
I know what I want to say, but I just can't make the words come out in a way that would do it justice right now.

[obscurejude]

And I got no sense of any Oedipal conflict there?

Roland returned to Gilead, in part, to save his mother but that desire was manipulated to result in her death. Its a stretch, but the tragic irony is certainly there, and its that aspect of Oedipus Rex that Aristotle uses when presenting it as the perfect example of tragic poetry in his Poetics.

Again, Oedipal conflicts aren't limited to sickos wanting to bang their mothers as Bruno put it.

[obscurejude]

For the record, I am in no way, very fond of modern psychology and am advocating absolutely nothing beyond an interpretive lens concerning a small aspect of King. I am going to refrain from bashing psychology, though, because I know of several on the site who study it, and I wouldn't want my comments to be taken the wrong way.

Disclaimer over.

[Darkthoughts]

Letti, I honestly think it was simply a case of:- Roland sees Rhea/Roland draws and shoots (no big surprises there)/Roland (at the last instant & too late to take it back) sees that it is his Mother he has actually killed/ End of.
My thoughts to the word!

I'm sure also that there had been moments in Roland's boyhood when he was atrracted to his mother, the passage that Ryan pointed out in particular. But I don't think you need to read too much in to that, no offense to the guys but I think to an adolescent boy a naked/semi naked woman is a naked woman, on the immediate level the fact of whether you're related isn't initially a consideration :D

[The King of Kings]

Did they ever explain what happened afterward? I read the books really quickly and I can't remember if he ever had to face anyone in Gilead about that happening.

[Whitey Appleseed]

Letti, I'm sure you're a real sweetheart and I by no means meant to belittle you, though apparently it was taken that way...thought I'd quote that ole ka-mai Cuthbert, "cry yer pardon, O great one!"...cause your name is in blue and I figure you must be a great one. Still befuddled with the idea that "edifice" was misunderstood. I'm like Eddie, the only talent I have is being a wise-acre, for the most part. I'm sorry for what I am. I'm often bewildered on-line because I say something and it's interpreted in an completely different fashion than I intended. Whew! I'm glad that's over!

[Whitey Appleseed]

That said, some additional ideas on Susan and Roland. There's an interesting phrase in W&G: She needed to see him at his right size, instead of the one her mind had created for him in her warm thoughts and warmer dreams. W&G/On the Drop/Chap VII/ Sec 6/p258

First time or two through with Roland, I saw him as a giant--he could do no wrong--wadda ya mean he dropped Jake!--that kinda thing. Maybe that's a problem. Maybe if we didn't see him as a giant, a hero that can do no wrong.

For instance, perhaps his fatal flaw is his inability to forgive Gabrielle, that leads, in part, to an obstacle to love. His old man talked to him, Steven spoke about many things over the whore’s bed to Roland. “About Roland’s mother, who was, perhaps, more sinned against than sinning.” W&G/Long After Moonset/Chap IV/Sec 1/p170

An interesting phrase, from King Lear, fwiw, but why does Steven think such a thing? Wasn't he the one wronged?

Later, on the Drop with Susan, during the blood kiss moment, Susan tells Roland: “If you really do love me, don’t let me dishonor myself. I’ve made a promise. Anything might come later, after that promise was fulfilled, I suppose…if you still wanted me…” wg/vii/9/270

They kissed again and she stepped forward.

“She was, at least for the moment, no longer her own mistress; she might consequently be his. He could do to her what Marten had done to his own mother, if that was his fancy.” Wg,vii/9/270
“The thought broke his passion apart, turned it to coals that fell in a bright shower, winking out one by one in a dark bewilderment. His father’s acceptance.
(I have known for two years)
was in many ways the worst part of what had happened to him this year; how could he fall in love with this girl—any girl—in a world where such evils of the heart seemed necessary, and might even be repeated?”

So he obviously saw Marten in himself, yet it didn't stop him. Ka, like a wind.

I think it was interesting, in The Wolves of the Calla, that Roland tells Susan: “If they take you my sh’veen, let it be so.”
“If it goes as I want, they’ll see you little and you’ll see them much.”
Twotc/chap v/overholser/sec one/p157

Maybe the quote helps understand the custom. Maybe not. Shrug. Perhaps there's a message there, as well, for us, the readers. Like the first time through, I saw giants. They could do no wrong. Maybe, like Susan, we need to step back and as King wrote:

"She needed to see him at his right size, instead of the one her mind had created for him in her warm thoughts and warmer dreams." W&G/On the Drop/Chap VII/ Sec 6/p258

Anyway, I'll hazard it again, that there is some kind of doubling going on with Roland and Susan's actions, kinda like Marten and Gabrielle's. Are they exactly the same? No. Not saying that, but Roland did see himself as Marten. The question is, is his fear of love a contributing factor in his choice of the Dark Tower over a life with Susan:


“Inside the ball, I was given a choice: Susan, and my life as her husband and father of the child she now carries…or the Tower. Roland wiped his face with a shaking hand. “I would choose Susan in an instant, if not for one thing: the Tower is crumbling, and if it falls, everything we know will be swept away…As for me, I choose the Tower.” W&g/x/beneath the demon moon/sec 10/p605

[John Blaze]

And I got no sense of any Oedipal conflict there?
Again, Oedipal conflicts aren't limited to sickos wanting to bang their mothers as Bruno put it.

:P

anyways, that was my second post. my first post wasn't like that.

[obscurejude]

That's what she said. :P

[ManOfWesternesse]

...The question is, is his fear of love a contributing factor in his choice of the Dark Tower over a life with Susan:


“Inside the ball, I was given a choice: Susan, and my life as her husband and father of the child she now carries…or the Tower. Roland wiped his face with a shaking hand. “I would choose Susan in an instant, if not for one thing: the Tower is crumbling, and if it falls, everything we know will be swept away…As for me, I choose the Tower.” W&g/x/beneath the demon moon/sec 10/p605
For me, you've posed and answered the question right there.
Roland chose the Tower because he had to, despite his love for Susan.

[alinda]

yep, I think so too. We so often answer our own questions don't we? yep, see ?

[nearlyprescient]

I know that Roland is a gunslinger but why did he kill his mom? It never made sense to me.

Gunslingers aren't perfect. They make mistakes too, especially since they have such heightened reflexes. Anytime you have fast reflexes, you run the risk of your brain not being able to keep up and properly identify threats, even with all of a Gunslinger's training.
I think it also bears reminding that Roland and Cuthbert each shot Alain in the dark. Sure it was an accident but it just shows you that Gunslinger's aren't perfect.

[Woofer]

I know that Roland is a gunslinger but why did he kill his mom? It never made sense to me.

Gunslingers aren't perfect. They make mistakes too, especially since they have such heightened reflexes. Anytime you have fast reflexes, you run the risk of your brain not being able to keep up and properly identify threats, even with all of a Gunslinger's training.
I think it also bears reminding that Roland and Cuthbert each shot Alain in the dark. Sure it was an accident but it just shows you that Gunslinger's aren't perfect.

Also, don't forget there was the glam of the wizard glass that contributed to Roland's misidentification and subsequent shooting of his mom.

[Doe]

Somethings always bugged me when reading about Rolands mother and her affair with Marten....so I ask, what the hell was she thinking? Does anyone have any ideas as to why she would do that?

[haunted.lunchbox]

Somethings always bugged me when reading about Rolands mother and her affair with Marten....so I ask, what the hell was she thinking? Does anyone have any ideas as to why she would do that?

They say the number one reason women cheat is because they are lacking an emotional connection. I can imagine that Roland's father was probably not they type to.... connect.... with women. She was probably lonely, and Marten took advantage.

[Brainslinger]

They say the number one reason women cheat is because they are lacking an emotional connection. I can imagine that Roland's father was probably not they type to.... connect.... with women. She was probably lonely, and Marten took advantage.

Although he loved her, I think you're right. I also think a large part of it was that he spent a lot of time on the trek and involved in a lot of other duties. She was lonely, as you say, and Marten could be very charming...

[Susan Delgado]

Anyway Oedipus Complex doesn't have to mean that the kid wants to make love with their own mom or dad (of course it means that too).
When little children are jealous of the parents... for example the little girl around the age of 4 sees that her dad hugs her mom with love. She can become jealous and she wishes if only she could be as important to his dad as his mom is and she would like to step into his mom's shoes. It's called Oedipus Complex (or Oedipus Conflict), too.

I have no idea if Roland had it or not (psychologists say most of the children do more or less) but hsi parents weren't close to each other so I don't think he had the chance to be jealous.

i sure as hell wanted to marry my dad when i was around kindergarten age. leaving him no choice i told him he must marry me when i grow up.

back on topic; i dont remember the hard-on part when Roland entered the Tower but its been years that i have read DT7.

[Doe]

Somethings always bugged me when reading about Rolands mother and her affair with Marten....so I ask, what the hell was she thinking? Does anyone have any ideas as to why she would do that?

They say the number one reason women cheat is because they are lacking an emotional connection. I can imagine that Roland's father was probably not they type to.... connect.... with women. She was probably lonely, and Marten took advantage.

I suppose that sounds about right, Makes me hate her character though, what with her husband being such and important person within Gilead.

In some respects, I enjoyed it when Roland killed her (In a not so sick and twisted sort of way)

[OchrisO]

Some folks said earlier in the thread that there was no proof of an Oedipus Complex in the story. I disagree. It is even directly referenced.

This is from The Gunslinger, right at the end of Chapter 4 part X:

"He wanted to tell his father not to forget his promise when the time came for Hax to step through the trap, but he was sensitive to his father’s moods. He put his fist to his forehead, crossed one foot in front of the other, and bowed. Then he went out, closing the door quickly. He suspected that what his father wanted now was to fuck. He was aware that his mother and father did that, and he was reasonably well informed as to how it was done, but the mental picture that always condensed with the thought made him feel both uneasy and oddly guilty. Some years later, Susan would tell him the story of Oedipus, and he would absorb it in quiet thoughtfulness , thinking of the odd and bloody triangle formed by his father, his mother, and by Marten—known in some quarters as Farson, the good man. Perhaps it was a quadrangle, if one wished to add himself."

Of course, he is probably referencing the play, or some form of the actual story of Oedipus, but the complex is named after him for a very good reason. So, even if it might not be rooted in firm psychology(which, I got back and forth on Freud), I think that Roland was written to have at least somewhat of an Oedipus Complex.

I also think that he still would have killed his mother, for all things serve the Tower. I have seen/heard of people doing horrible things to their parents over drugs and the pull of the Tower, even when he was young and didn't know what it was, was even more strong than that of the worst drugs for Roland.

[Letti]

I also think that he still would have killed his mother, for all things serve the Tower. I have seen/heard of people doing horrible things to their parents over drugs and the pull of the Tower, even when he was young and didn't know what it was, was even more strong than that of the worst drugs for Roland.

But killing his mom didn't get him closer to the Tower, did it?

[OchrisO]

I also think that he still would have killed his mother, for all things serve the Tower. I have seen/heard of people doing horrible things to their parents over drugs and the pull of the Tower, even when he was young and didn't know what it was, was even more strong than that of the worst drugs for Roland.

But killing his mom didn't get him closer to the Tower, did it?

I feel like it did. One must kill off all the things they truly care about in order to properly follow and focus on such an intense obsession. She was one in a host of both direct and indirect destructions of things that he cared about on his path to the Tower.

I think that there are times when Roland directly kills people or lets them die because they are standing between him and the Tower, but also times when fate/Ka/whatever endeavor to have him kill or see killed nearly everything he loves so that he will be on a very specific path to the Tower.

[Darkthoughts]

Well put Chris, I hadn't really thought about it that way before.

[Letti]

I also think that he still would have killed his mother, for all things serve the Tower. I have seen/heard of people doing horrible things to their parents over drugs and the pull of the Tower, even when he was young and didn't know what it was, was even more strong than that of the worst drugs for Roland.

But killing his mom didn't get him closer to the Tower, did it?

I feel like it did. One must kill off all the things they truly care about in order to properly follow and focus on such an intense obsession. She was one in a host of both direct and indirect destructions of things that he cared about on his path to the Tower.

I must admit it's a damn good point.

[Jean]

interesting indeed; I've always thought it is just the other way

[pathoftheturtle]

interesting indeed; I've always thought it is just the other way:orely: "Just the other way"... ?

[a fan]

no he was tricked there was not a thing he could do and no mater how mad he was there was no hate

[a fan]

That said, some additional ideas on Susan and Roland. There's an interesting phrase in W&G: She needed to see him at his right size, instead of the one her mind had created for him in her warm thoughts and warmer dreams. W&G/On the Drop/Chap VII/ Sec 6/p258

First time or two through with Roland, I saw him as a giant--he could do no wrong--wadda ya mean he dropped Jake!--that kinda thing. Maybe that's a problem. Maybe if we didn't see him as a giant, a hero that can do no wrong.

For instance, perhaps his fatal flaw is his inability to forgive Gabrielle, that leads, in part, to an obstacle to love. His old man talked to him, Steven spoke about many things over the whore’s bed to Roland. “About Roland’s mother, who was, perhaps, more sinned against than sinning.” W&G/Long After Moonset/Chap IV/Sec 1/p170

An interesting phrase, from King Lear, fwiw, but why does Steven think such a thing? Wasn't he the one wronged?

Later, on the Drop with Susan, during the blood kiss moment, Susan tells Roland: “If you really do love me, don’t let me dishonor myself. I’ve made a promise. Anything might come later, after that promise was fulfilled, I suppose…if you still wanted me…” wg/vii/9/270

They kissed again and she stepped forward.

“She was, at least for the moment, no longer her own mistress; she might consequently be his. He could do to her what Marten had done to his own mother, if that was his fancy.” Wg,vii/9/270
“The thought broke his passion apart, turned it to coals that fell in a bright shower, winking out one by one in a dark bewilderment. His father’s acceptance.
(I have known for two years)
was in many ways the worst part of what had happened to him this year; how could he fall in love with this girl—any girl—in a world where such evils of the heart seemed necessary, and might even be repeated?”

So he obviously saw Marten in himself, yet it didn't stop him. Ka, like a wind.

I think it was interesting, in The Wolves of the Calla, that Roland tells Susan: “If they take you my sh’veen, let it be so.”
“If it goes as I want, they’ll see you little and you’ll see them much.”
Twotc/chap v/overholser/sec one/p157

Maybe the quote helps understand the custom. Maybe not. Shrug. Perhaps there's a message there, as well, for us, the readers. Like the first time through, I saw giants. They could do no wrong. Maybe, like Susan, we need to step back and as King wrote:

"She needed to see him at his right size, instead of the one her mind had created for him in her warm thoughts and warmer dreams." W&G/On the Drop/Chap VII/ Sec 6/p258

Anyway, I'll hazard it again, that there is some kind of doubling going on with Roland and Susan's actions, kinda like Marten and Gabrielle's. Are they exactly the same? No. Not saying that, but Roland did see himself as Marten. The question is, is his fear of love a contributing factor in his choice of the Dark Tower over a life with Susan:


“Inside the ball, I was given a choice: Susan, and my life as her husband and father of the child she now carries…or the Tower. Roland wiped his face with a shaking hand. “I would choose Susan in an instant, if not for one thing: the Tower is crumbling, and if it falls, everything we know will be swept away…As for me, I choose the Tower.” W&g/x/beneath the demon moon/sec 10/p605

you rase an itereting point but i think the tower couse him and there was no way to avoid it and that in the end was his down fall

[Jean]

path: you know what I mean - however awkwardly I stated it here and now, I've been stating it elaborately for years

[pathoftheturtle]

Well, I know you, yes, but in all honesty, I've never totally integrated your various statements into an entirely consistent philosophy in my own mind. Literally, the other way around would be "One must kill off such an intense obsession in order to properly follow and focus on all the things they truly care about." To me, both appear overly simplistic as codes of living. However, I suspect that Chris, too, was trying to express more than meets the eye. Just curious about how you all see these points fitting together -- I apologize if I'm over-complicating the thread.