Dark Tower Twins, Twinners & Reincarnations (Spoilers all around!!!)

[Brainslinger]

Gordon Bennit! I didn't think it would be that long!

[Empath of the White]

Very interesting discussion. I've just come to this thread (and this section of the board for that matter) so I've been munching my way through these posts.

My thoughts on various things mentioned (apologies if this is long):

There are suggestions that the Territories is part of All-World. Bev Vincent in his book actually states that he believes they are a borderland region akin to the Callas. I disagree. First of all, they suggested strongly in Black House that the borderlands in which they have their palaver are not quite the territories, although they are close.

Whether or not they are in the same world, or part of All-World, I don't know. I thought maybe the Borderlands was in fact a kind of Borderland world (rather than a bordeland geographical region) between the territories and Mid-World/All-World, but I'm not certain. The Borderlands could be part of All-World, but I don't think the territories are. (I often wonder how the flying men brought Sophie to that region. Does that mean it's the same world as the territories or did they travel through a doorway of some sort?)

Also the descriptions of the territories in The Talisman is rather different form Roland's world. Both are potent in their own way, and there are cultural similarities, but All-world is a moving on, everything is stretching apart, literally. The territories, on the other hand, is a tight smaller place. The horizon is literally closer. Its a world, far from moving on.

However the world Jack travels too with the biker lads through the Black House is End-World, certainly part of the same level as Mid/All-World.
As for twinners etc. I am sometimes reticent in using that term in The Dark Tower books, since the relationship between twinners seems to be different. There are multiple versions of the same person across different worlds in both books certainly. And I'm sure they're minds are linked in both series (DT and Talisman/Black House) in some ways, albeit subconsiously. That being said, if the comics are to be considered canon, Vannay, Roland's teacher, used the term 'twinners' to refer to alternate versions. Its as good a term as any I suppose.

However with the Territories, the fate of the twinners is usually linked, i.e. a wound to one person is experienced by their twinner. If someone dies then so does their twinner (with some exceptions like Jack and his friend due to better medical treatment in one world.)

In the DT books though, the twins seem to follow the quantum theory idea of multiple universes, (not that it's exactly the same, King not being an expert in that field) i.e. twinners take different routes, the death of one doesn't affect another etc. In fact if one person dies in one world, strongly suggest that there will be another version alive in another world due to the nature of different routes from different circumstances.

I'm also of the opinion the two Toren brothers are twinners of Eddie and Jake rather than actually them, but on some level they are still the same, as with all twinners. I also loved that ending, and I didn't see it as Susannah opting for second best. The though occurred, but emotionally I still found it satisfying. As the world move on, people have to move on with their lives. When partners die, sooner or later people may find other partners. In Suze's case they were both different and the same at once, and no bad thing in this case. Beside, her dreams and feeling up until then strongly suggest she was meant to be there. And that makes it ok too.

Duplicate Rolands and Flaggs:
I'm of the opinion there is only one Roland. Roland and King are twins of a sort in the sense that there are similarities between father and son but that's a different thing to twinners.

As for Flagg, I thought the idea of flipping twinners causing Flagg's shape-shifting was interesting, but I disagree. When a person flips into their twinner they look like their twinner. So if there was say a Flagg in America and a Walter in Mid-World, and Flagg flipped into Walter, surely Walter would still look the same regardless or whether he was possessed or not. It could be argued as a sorceror, the being with veto might be able to bring his form forward, but I don't think that's the case here.

In my opinion, Walter ability to change has nothing to do with twinners or flipping. He is using glamour. I agree with CK that think that his transformation might be more than just physical, that his mind becomes too, but thats a whole other thing. (I'm not even certain he actually physically changes, but more alters people perception of him... that's another thing.)

I do think Flagg might have twinners in other worlds though, but I don't think that plays a role in his shape-shifting. The date in which the superflu happened is different in the super-flu world visited by the ka-tet in Wizard and Glass to the dates in both versions of the Stand. This suggest they're different worlds (although there are other explanations), and if thats the case the 2 Flaggs are different as it seems unlikely one guys would do the exact same antics in both. Also Flagg's history seems somewhat different in the Stand to Walter of All-world... although amnesia could be cause if they were the same.

1.) I thought this was a Borderland between In-World and Mid-World myself.

2.) This sounds pretty cool. Originally I felt the Territories were either a different version of All-World where the Tower manifested itself as the Black Hotel. However, it is possible that the Hotel was located at a farther region of All-World, in terms of geography, due to the presence of the large fish in the waters near the Hotel which many think to be the Fish Guardian. So the Hotel would be this Guardian's portal.

3.) Yeah, I think Jack and the Thunder Five entered the Discordia Badlands, albeit a different area than where Roland passed through.

4.) I think Flagg being in every world could be attributed to him allegedly being Legion. He's many, and his "many" are scattered throughout the world either on the King's business or looking to get their jollies.

[Darkthoughts]

Bumping this awesome thread!

[Merlin1958]

Bumping this awesome thread!

Trash-Can Man: Bump de Bump!!!!

[Darkthoughts]

I do think that King changed his mind about the rules of twinners somewhere between The Talisman and ubsequent DT books though. If you think about it there's no really truly singular people in Talisman, because Jack did have a twinner to begin with, which then implies that only people with twinners can flip.

[Merlin1958]

I do think that King changed his mind about the rules of twinners somewhere between The Talisman and ubsequent DT books though. If you think about it there's no really truly singular people in Talisman, because Jack did have a twinner to begin with, which then implies that only people with twinners can flip.

Wasn't the fact that Jack was "Singular in nature" (I believe that was the quote) what made him so special? I recall this point being made several times in the book.

As far as King changing his mind, well he certainly did quite a bit of that during the series or at least appeared to. When Parkus and jack have their palaver at the end of Black House, Parkus specifically mentions they must leave before dark in order to avoid the Little Sister's. My understanding is that Roland encountered the Sister's prior to the events of the gunslinger yet, they could see the Big Combine, which was supposedly located in End World. Just Where the F*ck were they exactly? It would seem to indicate a geographical designation rather than a "meta physical" one. Also why did Roland never see the remains of the Big Combine on his way to the Tower?

I probably should go back and read the books, including BH over again, but I swear the answers ain't in there!! LOL

[mystima]

someone mentioned earlier that there were infinite worlds with duplicates (twinners) of other people like lets say for example other Jakes and Eddies. Their lives would be similar but not the same and sometimes they would do things similar and that would say explain this little phenomenon called Deja vu

[Darkthoughts]

Wasn't the fact that Jack was "Singular in nature" (I believe that was the quote) what made him so special? I recall this point being made several times in the book.

Yes, it was made quite often - but I always thought it was a bit of a cheat in a way as Jack hadn't been born singular, he'd had a twinner who died. The only truly singular person we appear to have met is Roland and possibly Pere Callahan, who travelled the Highways In Hiding, but always as himself.

Good point about the location of the Sisters. It's been bought up before and I'm sure Robin Furth has tried to tackle it in the Concordance (not to hand at the moment, so I can't check) I keep meaning to try and put together a map, but it gets so complicated. The usual explanation is that "the world moved on" but it seems like a bit of a cop out somehow!

[pathoftheturtle]

... My understanding is that Roland encountered the Sister's prior to the events of the gunslinger yet, they could see the Big Combine, which was supposedly located in End World. Just Where the F*ck were they exactly? It would seem to indicate a geographical designation rather than a "meta physical" one. Also why did Roland never see the remains of the Big Combine on his way to the Tower?

I probably should go back and read the books, including BH over again, but I swear the answers ain't in there!! LOL

Susannah saw it during her palaver with Mia. And I'm pretty sure that the Sisters simply moved their tent.

Wasn't the fact that Jack was "Singular in nature" (I believe that was the quote) what made him so special? I recall this point being made several times in the book.

Yes, it was made quite often - but I always thought it was a bit of a cheat in a way as Jack hadn't been born singular, he'd had a twinner who died. The only truly singular person we appear to have met is Roland and possibly Pere Callahan, who travelled the Highways In Hiding, but always as himself.

How can you say that Roland is singular? I still don't understand whether alternate versions of him are being split off or woven together, but whether they are appearing or disappearing as he quests, I think it's clear that they have existence on some level.
Further, I don't understand your objection regarding Jack. If every timeline but one were such that he was never born, rather than all other timelines leading to his eventual death, in what way would that be different?

[Darkthoughts]

I'll have to find you some quotes on my reread, but it's stated that Roland is singular a few times. What makes you think that there are more Rolands? Personally I think it would make the whole quest and his redemption very trivial if there were many of him.

My point about the Jack thing was purely semantics, he's not singular by nature because he had a twinner. What you're saying there really only solidifies my point rather than contests it, because you acknowledge he wasn't singular either.

[pathoftheturtle]

...What makes you think that there are more Rolands? Personally I think it would make the whole quest and his redemption very trivial if there were many of him.

Because then it would be like he'd have to keep doing it all over and over again? That's just what I've been saying: the ending is ambiguous in exactly that way, and I think that the whole subject involves deep existential matters. As soon as they learn that many different Earths exist, it raises the question of whether everything is random or what purpose their existence serves. In fact, your argument is much like a pretty old issue in philosophy -- if God controls the entire universe, some feel that it means their lives would meaningless since it implies that we have no free will, yet if we do have free will, some feel that THAT would make their lives meaningless since we cannot control the universe. It appears to me that Roland's quest spreads chaos, Gan creating one reality after another to no end, and if that's the case then any personal benefit the man may accrue is trivial indeed. Unless we little people can also be redeemed or his quest is some kind of metaphor for what we have to go through, then the story is vicious. The question which really needs to be answered, IMHO, is what it is exactly that the Dark Tower literally does for the fate of the world.

My point about the Jack thing was purely semantics, he's not singular by nature because he had a twinner. What you're saying there really only solidifies my point rather than contests it, because you acknowledge he wasn't singular either.

Well, I do agree with some of what you have said, but I'm not actually sure that I wish to reject that definition of being singular. I'm trying to understand what you mean to contrast against it. For my own part, I do not honestly believe that any of the TDT characters are a bit more "really, truly singular" than Jack is (with the possible exception of supernatural beings like the Tower itself) and I can't seem to comprehend precisely how it could even be possible for a human to be naturally singular in a cosmology which features natural multiplicity of humanity in general. Perhaps that would be logical if he were by definition not human, never having been born at all. Doesn't being naturally singular imply existing independent of the regular environment since time began? But maybe alternate worlds were not originally natural, anyway, and the force which must have intervened to make Jack special did so as part of a plan to ultimately restore everything else. ... But in that case, then it should already be as though none of these worlds ever happened. Hm. You know, these paradoxes of twins, twinners, and reincarnation are really quite central to all of the craziness of the series.

I'll have to find you some quotes on my reread, but it's stated that Roland is singular a few times. ...

I think you're mistaken about that. What I do recall are some quotes suggesting that Stephen King may be singular (or that perhaps twinners of Keystone Stephen King exist without "really" existing or something equally unintelligible) so we might have to conclude that this one Roland is also singular simply by virtue of having interacted with that real world. But it still does not follow that these concepts fit together and/or make any kind of sense.

[costanza]

I forget which book it was in and the exact quote but it's something about Steven Deschain refers to Roland as the one that lived. So Roland had a twin brother at one time who died early or at birth or something. I wanted to think that was Jack's twin at one time but it was too far of a stretch.

I do believe there are more things that Roland has to learn before he can finally rest beyond just having the Horn of Eld. For instance, in The Gunslinger, Walter says during their palaver that no one wants to invest Roland with the power of anything, it is simply in him, referring to the power to draw the three. How many other powers does Roland have that he doesn't yet know about? Marten taught him the hypnotizing/back of the knuckles bullet trick, does Roland know more magical thing that he's possibly forgotten?

[Merlin1958]

...What makes you think that there are more Rolands? Personally I think it would make the whole quest and his redemption very trivial if there were many of him.

Because then it would be like he'd have to keep doing it all over and over again? That's just what I've been saying: the ending is ambiguous in exactly that way, and I think that the whole subject involves deep existential matters. As soon as they learn that many different Earths exist, it raises the question of whether everything is random or what purpose their existence serves. In fact, your argument is much like a pretty old issue in philosophy -- if God controls the entire universe, some feel that it means their lives would meaningless since it implies that we have no free will, yet if we do have free will, some feel that THAT would make their lives meaningless since we cannot control the universe. It appears to me that Roland's quest spreads chaos, Gan creating one reality after another to no end, and if that's the case then any personal benefit the man may accrue is trivial indeed. Unless we little people can also be redeemed or his quest is some kind of metaphor for what we have to go through, then the story is vicious. The question which really needs to be answered, IMHO, is what it is exactly that the Dark Tower literally does for the fate of the world.

My point about the Jack thing was purely semantics, he's not singular by nature because he had a twinner. What you're saying there really only solidifies my point rather than contests it, because you acknowledge he wasn't singular either.

Well, I do agree with some of what you have said, but I'm not actually sure that I wish to reject that definition of being singular. I'm trying to understand what you mean to contrast against it. For my own part, I do not honestly believe that any of the TDT characters are a bit more "really, truly singular" than Jack is (with the possible exception of supernatural beings like the Tower itself) and I can't seem to comprehend precisely how it could even be possible for a human to be naturally singular in a cosmology which features natural multiplicity of humanity in general. Perhaps that would be logical if he were by definition not human, never having been born at all. Doesn't being naturally singular imply existing independent of the regular environment since time began? But maybe alternate worlds were not originally natural, anyway, and the force which must have intervened to make Jack special did so as part of a plan to ultimately restore everything else. ... But in that case, then it should already be as though none of these worlds ever happened. Hm. You know, these paradoxes of twins, twinners, and reincarnation are really quite central to all of the craziness of the series.

I'll have to find you some quotes on my reread, but it's stated that Roland is singular a few times. ...

I think you're mistaken about that. What I do recall are some quotes suggesting that Stephen King may be singular (or that perhaps twinners of Keystone Stephen King exist without "really" existing or something equally unintelligible) so we might have to conclude that this one Roland is also singular simply by virtue of having interacted with that real world. But it still does not follow that these concepts fit together and/or make any kind of sense.

Path, I thoroughly enjoy you're in-depth analysis and Philosophical exercises (and I mean absolutely no offense by those terms), but I believe you may be over-thinking the deep thinking offered to us by the author. Did he mean for us to come to terms with our own reasoning of the proverbial "Why"? Yes definitely. Did he deliberately write it to make it an exercise for the Philosophy staff at major colleges? I don't think so. And again, I am not being condescending in the least.

First off, there are a fair amount of "holes" in his overall story. TT as applied to the DT being one. Personally, I favor the "Roland as a Metaphor for Mankind" theory and that would seem to mean he is very singular in nature. Hence the "Loop". If there were multiple "Roland's" throughout the Multi-verse than why make this one repeat it when all possible choices could be explored through different universes? I think that Roland is the embodiment of all versions of "man" throughout the Multi-verse and ultimately determines whether Mankind is evolving toward a "Purpose" filled existence with the potential to become enlightened or, one filled with "chaos" and eventual demise.

Phew!!! LOL

[Darkthoughts]

...What makes you think that there are more Rolands? Personally I think it would make the whole quest and his redemption very trivial if there were many of him.

Because then it would be like he'd have to keep doing it all over and over again? That's just what I've been saying: the ending is ambiguous in exactly that way, and I think that the whole subject involves deep existential matters.

I don't disagree that the DT series is full of existential subject matter, it's what makes it such an amazing story. But, and allowing as you say that there are ambiguities with the ending, to me if each loop were being performed by a different Roland then the theme of redemption is obsolete, because all subsequent Rolands have performed the quest, failed, ended their loop and therefore do not have a chance for redemption. The fact that he was holding the horn was one of the most salient points, it showed that he had made progress on this loop. Plus, why the horror when he has the momentary realisation that he has performed the quest over and over if it was a different Roland each time? Twinners do not share a collective conciousness.

I can't seem to comprehend precisely how it could even be possible for a human to be naturally singular in a cosmology which features natural multiplicity of humanity in general. Perhaps that would be logical if he were by definition not human, never having been born at all. Doesn't being naturally singular imply existing independent of the regular environment since time began?

No, nothing that complicated, we're only talking of what it is to be a twinner or a singular person. King, as the creator of the concept, has said that some people are special because they are singular. meaning they have no other counterpart/twinner self and that therefore, when they flip, they flip physically as their whole entire self because they do not have a twinner body to flip into.

I forget which book it was in and the exact quote but it's something about Steven Deschain refers to Roland as the one that lived. So Roland had a twin brother at one time who died early or at birth or something.

But that would just be a regular twin, not a twinner (ie another you in another universe/level of the Tower).

[costanza]

That's true but the regular twin would also have been of the line of Eld and able to enter the Tower like Roland and the Crimson King.

[Darkthoughts]

Yes, true but Roland would still be a singular person as opposed to Twinners (as first defined in The Talisman)

[pathoftheturtle]

...What makes you think that there are more Rolands? Personally I think it would make the whole quest and his redemption very trivial if there were many of him.

Because then it would be like he'd have to keep doing it all over and over again? That's just what I've been saying: the ending is ambiguous in exactly that way, and I think that the whole subject involves deep existential matters. As soon as they learn that many different Earths exist, it raises the question of whether everything is random or what purpose their existence serves. In fact, your argument is much like a pretty old issue in philosophy -- if God controls the entire universe, some feel that it means their lives would meaningless since it implies that we have no free will, yet if we do have free will, some feel that THAT would make their lives meaningless since we cannot control the universe. It appears to me that Roland's quest spreads chaos, Gan creating one reality after another to no end, and if that's the case then any personal benefit the man may accrue is trivial indeed. Unless we little people can also be redeemed or his quest is some kind of metaphor for what we have to go through, then the story is vicious. The question which really needs to be answered, IMHO, is what it is exactly that the Dark Tower literally does for the fate of the world.

My point about the Jack thing was purely semantics, he's not singular by nature because he had a twinner. What you're saying there really only solidifies my point rather than contests it, because you acknowledge he wasn't singular either.

Well, I do agree with some of what you have said, but I'm not actually sure that I wish to reject that definition of being singular. I'm trying to understand what you mean to contrast against it. For my own part, I do not honestly believe that any of the TDT characters are a bit more "really, truly singular" than Jack is (with the possible exception of supernatural beings like the Tower itself) and I can't seem to comprehend precisely how it could even be possible for a human to be naturally singular in a cosmology which features natural multiplicity of humanity in general. Perhaps that would be logical if he were by definition not human, never having been born at all. Doesn't being naturally singular imply existing independent of the regular environment since time began? But maybe alternate worlds were not originally natural, anyway, and the force which must have intervened to make Jack special did so as part of a plan to ultimately restore everything else. ... But in that case, then it should already be as though none of these worlds ever happened. Hm. You know, these paradoxes of twins, twinners, and reincarnation are really quite central to all of the craziness of the series.

I'll have to find you some quotes on my reread, but it's stated that Roland is singular a few times. ...

I think you're mistaken about that. What I do recall are some quotes suggesting that Stephen King may be singular (or that perhaps twinners of Keystone Stephen King exist without "really" existing or something equally unintelligible) so we might have to conclude that this one Roland is also singular simply by virtue of having interacted with that real world. But it still does not follow that these concepts fit together and/or make any kind of sense.

Path, I thoroughly enjoy you're in-depth analysis and Philosophical exercises (and I mean absolutely no offense by those terms), but I believe you may be over-thinking the deep thinking offered to us by the author. Did he mean for us to come to terms with our own reasoning of the proverbial "Why"? Yes definitely. Did he deliberately write it to make it an exercise for the Philosophy staff at major colleges? I don't think so. And again, I am not being condescending in the least.

First off, there are a fair amount of "holes" in his overall story. TT as applied to the DT being one. Personally, I favor the "Roland as a Metaphor for Mankind" theory and that would seem to mean he is very singular in nature. Hence the "Loop". If there were multiple "Roland's" throughout the Multi-verse than why make this one repeat it when all possible choices could be explored through different universes? I think that Roland is the embodiment of all versions of "man" throughout the Multi-verse and ultimately determines whether Mankind is evolving toward a "Purpose" filled existence with the potential to become enlightened or, one filled with "chaos" and eventual demise.

Phew!!! LOL

I just don't understand why the same people who insist that Roland having counterparts would render his adventures meaningless are not bothered by the idea that they themselves have counterparts. You don't have to go to college to notice that discrepancy.

If the mere fact that TDT features parallel universes is not enough to convince you that SK was trying to get deep about it, just look at the palaver with TMIB in The Gunslinger! He asks point blank questions like "Does God see the sparrow fall when the sparrow is less than a hydrogen atom? And if so, what must the nature of such a God be?" (At least, that's how I remember it off the top of my head.)

... Marten taught him the hypnotizing/back of the knuckles bullet trick, does Roland know more magical thing that he's possibly forgotten?

Not sure how you define "magical," but let's remember that hypnosis is real.

...What makes you think that there are more Rolands? Personally I think it would make the whole quest and his redemption very trivial if there were many of him.

Because then it would be like he'd have to keep doing it all over and over again? That's just what I've been saying: the ending is ambiguous in exactly that way, and I think that the whole subject involves deep existential matters.

I don't disagree that the DT series is full of existential subject matter, it's what makes it such an amazing story. But, and allowing as you say that there are ambiguities with the ending, to me if each loop were being performed by a different Roland then the theme of redemption is obsolete, because all subsequent Rolands have performed the quest, failed, ended their loop and therefore do not have a chance for redemption. The fact that he was holding the horn was one of the most salient points, it showed that he had made progress on this loop. Plus, why the horror when he has the momentary realisation that he has performed the quest over and over if it was a different Roland each time? Twinners do not share a collective conciousness.

Sure, his condition is unique in some ways, but he, too, is not conscious of it most of the time. I think that there is more than one of him only in a certain manner of speaking, and the point I'm trying to make is that he IS mostly like other people: that those who we say are not singular can be said to be not singular only in that same manner of speaking. When Roland goes back in time, the rest of the universe that he's been in goes on without him, right? So, he is either merging with pre-existing Rolands in other universes, or else a whole new universe is created around him each time. Either way, I'm not convinced that these different timelimes are completely unlike the different timelines shown earlier. It's entirely possible that all twinners are connected in essence and subconsciously. There are many doors between worlds, after all, and one of them is death. You're pointing out the dramatic necessity for continuity between Roland's alternates, but does it not matter for others to have that as well? This is one of my major objections to multiverse theory in quantum physics: if this really exists in nature, why should we not share consciousness with these other aspects of ourselves? What would have caused us to evolve such a profound misperception of our environment?

I can't seem to comprehend precisely how it could even be possible for a human to be naturally singular in a cosmology which features natural multiplicity of humanity in general. Perhaps that would be logical if he were by definition not human, never having been born at all. Doesn't being naturally singular imply existing independent of the regular environment since time began?

No, nothing that complicated, we're only talking of what it is to be a twinner or a singular person. King, as the creator of the concept, has said that some people are special because they are singular. meaning they have no other counterpart/twinner self and that therefore, when they flip, they flip physically as their whole entire self because they do not have a twinner body to flip into.

Well, you may be right that he changed his mind about that, but I still don't see how anyone can be born singular unless everyone is. Personally, I believe that the topic of what it is to be a twinner and how that's all supposed to work really is pretty complicated, naturally, but I apologize if some of this doesn't fit this thread.

[Darkthoughts]

When Roland goes back in time, the rest of the universe that he's been in goes on without him, right? So, he is either merging with pre-existing Rolands in other universes, or else a whole new universe is created around him each time.

Seriously Path, I love the way you think! If I say that I think you've over thought something, I often find when I go back and read your posts again that your basic premise is actually quite simple, but that you write in a stream of consciousness type way that needs more thought from the reader than being able to take it at first glance.

That being said, I disagree with you anyway I think that in Roland's particular case, specifically whilst he is on the quest from the Desert up to the Tower, he is trapped in a loop, obviously, but to enable that loop Gan has had to stick Roland in a separate little bubble of time that's tacked on to the ordinary timeline in much the same way that the CK's balcony is tacked on to the Tower. So, within that bubble Roland is really outside of the constraints of time and can travel freely backwards and forwards to no personal effect. That's the way I've always thought of it.

In time travel in general though, I always supposed that if you went back in time the place in the present that you came from would move forward in time as normal while you were gone. People in books and movies generally only get back to the precise moment they left if they have a time machine that can be set to travel back to that moment.

It's entirely possible that all twinners are connected in essence and subconsciously.

Yes, that would make sense to me. It could explain all sorts of things like de ja vu and certain types of dreams.

I still don't see how anyone can be born singular unless everyone is. Personally, I believe that the topic of what it is to be a twinner and how that's all supposed to work really is pretty complicated, naturally, but I apologize if some of this doesn't fit this thread.

Ha, because to me it makes perfect sense - if there are an infinite number of possible universes, then the possibility that people on some of them are singular exists. Back to Roland in particular, it is stated that he is the last remaining human (the CK being excluded from that) of the line of Eld. Seeing as people like Parkus (and indeed Gan itself) have knowledge of other whens and wheres, it seems a pretty concrete statement.

[pathoftheturtle]

Seriously Path, I love the way you think!

Gee, thx.

In time travel in general though, I always supposed that if you went back in time the place in the present that you came from would move forward in time as normal while you were gone.

Well, in time travel, there is no "while" about you being gone. You're beyond time; all linear concepts are suspended. If time continues the same relative to yourself then you have not really time traveled. So if we go there, we'll need to sort out the fundamental paradox of changing the past -- as I said, if Gan really is going to change the past in a way that undoes alternate worlds so that just one possibility exists, then it should already be just as though that had always been. Without parallel timestreams, general time travel requires that the past changes before being changed: that's the very definition of the past. Regardless...

... Roland is really outside of the constraints of time and can travel freely backwards and forwards to no personal effect. That's the way I've always thought of it.

It's not about the constraints of time so much as the nature of parallel universes. If Roland meets his ka-tet more than once, then there has to be more than one of each of them or else they would remember him. And that's just how you define twinners, isn't it? And if Roland does not remember meeting them before, if he lives multiple versions of his lifetime then, again, that is functionally identical to having twinners.

... if there are an infinite number of possible universes, then the possibility that people on some of them are singular exists. ...

Well, it's easy to say that that possibility exists, so long as you don't need to describe at all the mechanics that could make it possible. You're just creating idle paradoxes now. I might as well counter that if anything is possible then the possibility that nothing is possible must also be allowed. "The possibility that there are monsters that like to eat all of the universes where singular people can be born, monsters who are born on another universe with the power to travel over and do so also exists! Nah!"

And to clarify, when I said that the ending is ambiguous, I mean that it's my opinion that the author's whole point in showing Roland still trapped in that cycle is to counter the theme of redemption. I think that we were supposed to feel some doubt about it, and realize that we have to take it on faith.

[costanza]

Apologies for being off topic this whole time. I live in vegas and there are at least two shows involving hypnotists plus the fact that it doesn't work on everyone puts me in the it's not real camp. Plus, Roland learned it from a Wizard.

[Darkthoughts]

It's not about the constraints of time so much as the nature of parallel universes. If Roland meets his ka-tet more than once, then there has to be more than one of each of them or else they would remember him. And that's just how you define twinners, isn't it? And if Roland does not remember meeting them before, if he lives multiple versions of his lifetime then, again, that is functionally identical to having twinners.

I see where you're coming from, but I think Roland's situation is very unique in that his loop is being played out over and over again in a separate capsule of time (as i said in my other post about his loop being stuck just outside of time), he gets to the end of the loop and (unless he redeems himself) it just resets and starts over, so there's no conundrum in why no-one remembers each other because it's just playing over and over. I do think that Roland has the ability to act differently each time and that his subsequent actions can have a knock on effect of letting the other players in the loop act accordingly - but he won't be back in the real timestream until he is freed from the loop.

Well, it's easy to say that that possibility exists, so long as you don't need to describe at all the mechanics that could make it possible. You're just creating idle paradoxes now. I might as well counter that if anything is possible then the possibility that nothing is possible must also be allowed. "The possibility that there are monsters that like to eat all of the universes where singular people can be born, monsters who are born on another universe with the power to travel over and do so also exists! Nah!"

We are talking about a fictional universe you know, of course these possibilities can exist within it!

[pathoftheturtle]

It's not about the constraints of time so much as the nature of parallel universes. If Roland meets his ka-tet more than once, then there has to be more than one of each of them or else they would remember him. And that's just how you define twinners, isn't it? And if Roland does not remember meeting them before, if he lives multiple versions of his lifetime then, again, that is functionally identical to having twinners.

I see where you're coming from, but I think Roland's situation is very unique in that his loop is being played out over and over again in a separate capsule of time (as i said in my other post about his loop being stuck just outside of time), he gets to the end of the loop and (unless he redeems himself) it just resets and starts over, so there's no conundrum in why no-one remembers each other because it's just playing over and over. I do think that Roland has the ability to act differently each time and that his subsequent actions can have a knock on effect of letting the other players in the loop act accordingly - but he won't be back in the real timestream until he is freed from the loop.

So he's not interacting with real people but with amazing simulations? Then how do any of us know that the people we think we know are not all simulations as well? It sounds pretty contrived to me, but it still seems that in a way, it boils down to match my assertion that Roland is singular only in a certain manner of speaking. And whether we use my interpretation of that or yours, it doesn't really contradict the point about Jack, does it? Roland wasn't born in his unique situation. It involved ka and history, like everything does.

Well, it's easy to say that that possibility exists, so long as you don't need to describe at all the mechanics that could make it possible. You're just creating idle paradoxes now. I might as well counter that if anything is possible then the possibility that nothing is possible must also be allowed. "The possibility that there are monsters that like to eat all of the universes where singular people can be born, monsters who are born on another universe with the power to travel over and do so also exists! Nah!"

We are talking about a fictional universe you know, of course these possibilities can exist within it!

Not all fiction is pure fantasy, but you are right, of course. Still feels as though you've missed my point. You can only go so far in discussion of the inconceivable. I can imagine worlds with different laws of physics. But worlds with different laws of logic? They may exist, but I can't even imagine what I could say about them.

Apologies for being off topic this whole time. I live in vegas and there are at least two shows involving hypnotists plus the fact that it doesn't work on everyone puts me in the it's not real camp. Plus, Roland learned it from a Wizard.

Ehn, no offense meant. Maybe we're just not defining it the same way. Like, a couple of guys could get into an long argument about whether or not wrestling is fake and not catch on that each of them was thinking about a different thing. There is a well known industry of entertainment wrestling which definitely is staged... but still, real wrestling does exist. Anyway, hypnosis IRL may indeed be a bit of a tangent here.

If we need to get further into the general subject of special powers, I doubt that the bullet trick makes a good proof that Roland has them, but this one isn't bad --

Walter says during their palaver that no one wants to invest Roland with the power of anything, it is simply in him, referring to the power to draw the three. How many other powers does Roland have that he doesn't yet know about?

I think there may be a better interpretation for Walter's comments, but your idea that opening the doors is a power which Roland was born with is an arguable interpretation. Maybe even correct -- I'm uncertain about the question and have been uncertain enough to start this thread Doors Between Worlds and I think that would be a great contribution.

Also, I don't think we have a thread about which feats performed by Walter/Marten/Flagg are inborn and which aren't. I do believe that he depends on Black 13 occasionally, for example. It would be very interesting to discuss whether any tricks of his are ones that anyone could learn do.

So, yes, a little re-organizing may be called for, but you have no need to apologize as far as I'm concerned. We've all been confused. I think. If I write in such a way that I'm not clear at first glance, it's not because I like to challenge readers: it's because from my point of view, it is their ideas are that sound far out at first.

I do agree that there ARE some powers with which some people are born that others are not, both in reality and in SK's fiction. Obviously that is true of the Breakers and most psychics from his older books. I just don't see being singular as belonging to that that same class because it sounds like a circle of cause and effect to me. This is not an active ability: it's a state or condition. So what's the ultimate sense of a claim that being able to be born with a condition is a condition that one can be born with?

[mystima]

[/QUOTE]So he's not interacting with real people but with amazing simulations? Then how do any of us know that the people we think we know are not all simulations as well? It sounds pretty contrived to me, but it still seems that in a way, it boils down to match my assertion that Roland is singular only in a certain manner of speaking. And whether we use my interpretation of that or yours, it doesn't really contradict the point about Jack, does it? Roland wasn't born in his unique situation. It involved ka and history, like everything does.[/QUOTE]

If it is just simulations does that mean he is some type of "Matrix" of Gan's own making

[Darkthoughts]

So he's not interacting with real people but with amazing simulations? Then how do any of us know that the people we think we know are not all simulations as well?

If it is just simulations does that mean he is some type of "Matrix" of Gan's own making

No, not simulations exactly, possibly living memories - my concept of it is that Gan has taken the period of time in which Roland's quest/loop occurs and has snipped it from the normal timestream, a bit like an editor snipping out a bit of footage. He then loops this bit of footage, but unlike a movie the events are subject to change depending what Roland decides to do each time the loop is played. Obviously Roland's choices could affect how the other people in the loop act. I don't imagine anyone else but Roland gets to a point where they have a realisation of being stuck in a loop because towards the end of it they all "move on" Roland is the only one to enter the Tower after all. I imagine all the other players from the loop are in the normal timestream living their lives, but Roland has been physically removed and doomed to play out the loop until he gets it "right".

The only other scenario I can conceive of is Path's idea of multiple Rolands, but that doesn't seem right to me because it's stated by characters who travel the different whens and wheres that Roland is the last of his line.

Not all fiction is pure fantasy, but you are right, of course. Still feels as though you've missed my point. You can only go so far in discussion of the inconceivable.

No, not all fiction is pure fantasy I agree, but you always equate fantastic concepts to reality which to me seems like you're missing the point. Not everything has to have a concrete explanation in fiction, for instance when you say: " So he's not interacting with real people but with amazing simulations? Then how do any of us know that the people we think we know are not all simulations as well?" you're leaping from a fictional concept in a world where a man leaps into different dimensions and fights monsters with guns made from the mythical sword Excalibur to our real world and trying to make comparisons based on logic. Saying "Sorry, if it's not applicable to our reality or can be explained by existing concepts then it must be false!" doesn't work because that's the whole point of fiction, you either take a basic real concept and go wild with it, or you make stuff up entirely.

[pathoftheturtle]

No, that's not what I'm saying. In my own mind, I was definitely distinguishing between us as we know ourselves and us as our counterparts within the supposed TDT cosmology when I was asking "How do any of us know...?" Sorry I didn't get it onto the page. The operant word was supposed to be "How?" I'm interested in exploring the logic underlying the stories, and I appreciate it that you are here sharing your theories. All fiction is "false," naturally, but I don't know if the whole point of it is as you say. It doesn't have to be consistent to established real-world concepts or even previously existing principles of other fiction, but I do feel that it should at least be consistent to its own premises. This doesn't make it any more true, but it makes it does make it more good in my opinion. Wildly illogical fiction is often just bad fiction. Not always; that can be poetic, though some authors manage to be poetic and prosaically reasonable. All of which is another topic.

I am going to have to crack open my copy of Black House now. I think you're kind of reaching in how you are defining Roland as last of the line of Eld, but I suppose that I should take a little time to process at this point. Anyway, thanks again for these discussions.