I was just thinking about The Dark Tower again (yeah, even though it's been weeks since I finished reading it) and something just occurred to me. Call me crazy if you want, and maybe I am just grasping at straws, but tell me what you think....

One of the few things that bothered me about The Dark Tower was Patrick Danville. Not his existence in the storyline, I don't mean that, nor even the fact that the prophecy in Insomnia didn't play out exactly (or the fact that the Calvins suggested it might not be entirely accurate--which is basically a retcon).

What bothered me was how little we see such a crucial character to the story. We first see him as a very young child in Insomnia, from the point of view of others for the most part (like a minor character), until we learn of his true significance. Then we don't hear of him again until the final volume of The Dark Tower, where he does really little more than erase the Crimson King (thus fulfilling his destiny). He isn't even introduced until late in the volume, during the last leg of Roland's journey.

Now, again, my beef isn't with the idea that his existence might be a too-convenient deus ex machina, but rather with the fact that we learn so little of his story. We don't know when or how he came to be imprisoned by Dandelo, nor do we learn what happens to him (alone of all the characters) after Roland reaches the Tower. Why?

My thought is still just a preliminary thought (and rather outrageous) so I wanted others' opinions on it--but what if Patrick were effectively representing a Robert Browning figure?

Think about it--it's not until the last part of this volume that Stephen King starts taking direct inspiration from the Browning poem "Childe Roland to the Dark Tower Came" (the point of origin for inspiring the epic), rather than simply making use of its tone and themes. Dandelo is even referred to as being the "hoary cripple" at the beginning of the poem. And who does Roland encounter after this (and who is the last one remaining with him until he reaches the Tower--where the poem ended)? Patrick Danville.

Patrick is an artist--admittedly he draws rather than writing poetry, but the magic his art produces means that it hardly matters, as it amounts to the same thing. His art cannot be distinguished from reality. Perhaps, then, his role (other than the prophecy from Insomnia about destroying the Crimson King) is to serve as an outside, objective observer of what happens to Roland on the last leg of his journey. This would certainly explain why he has so little to do other than the obvious.

Also, his drawing of Roland, the Tower, and the Red King in Insomnia doesn't include himself, even though he's with Roland when he reaches the Tower. Perhaps because he thinks of himself primarily as an outsider? Even the fact that Patrick is mute in The Dark Tower (an odd decision--I was honestly hoping to hear him speak!) might play into this idea, since Robert Browning is dead and thus can no longer speak, write, or create in any way.

Of course, there are discrepancies (like Robert Browning wasn't mentally deficient as Patrick became), and I don't know if Stephen King had that on his mind as early as Insomnia. For that matter, I don't even know if the idea occurred to him at all, I'm just speculating. But certainly it also serves another omission I noted--namely that it mentions Robert Browning as a previous medium for the telling of the tale (before Stephen King), but we don't get to see Browning (except through his poem) as we saw Stephen King in the final volumes of The Dark Tower. If I'm right, and Patrick Danville is a substitute Browning figure, this would clear up that omission as well.

Anyway, just my musings. Any thoughts?