not sure if you know, but there is a thread that talks about the whole end of the seriesOriginally Posted by Mad Man
about Roland and the loopI can't make up my mind how should i think about it...
Spoiler:
http://www.thedarktower.org/palaver/...ead.php?t=1778
hope this helps
I know the thread, thanks - it doesn't help 'tho
But lets stay with the thread here
I don't think that Roland is ~40-50 ... I'm not sure from where i get it but i've always thought that he's OLD... i'm pretty sure it's somehow mentioned in the books... the time is weird but i'm sure he's not 40 or 50*just my opinion
I am the one I am the one
The godlike terror train
The superior, artificial brain
Feel free to call me Blaine!
For my part at the beginning I imagined him around the age of 35 but at the end.. hm.. around 55 or 60 - still with foxy and active eyes and strong body.
Roland would have understood.
Roland - the only one... or...?
There are lots of theories about the series. Roland is going around.. Roland is travelling in time.. Roland is going to other levels of the Tower.. Roland is in hell.. and so on. That's why we love this series so much. Or more exactly it's one of the many reasons.
And a question came to my mind... if there are more Eddies and Jakes.. are there more Rolands too? All of them trying to save the Tower? Or are there Rolands who saved and chose Susan and they live happily together ever after?
Or how so? Is there this only one we met?
What do you think?
Roland would have understood.
As we once agreed with Matt, the only way to imagine time-travel - or time-loop - possible and free of at least the basic paradox is to assume that every time someone goes back, he creates a new reality, a new set of possibilities; that is, another timeline that branches off the main one. Thus, it would make another Roland, but the point is, that for me (I argued it in Susannah's threads) it would still be the same Roland, just like the numerous Eddies and Jakes are always the same Eddie and Jake.
I don't know where the loop actually starts. The Roland standing there with all his fingers intact and the Horn of Eld might just as well have saved Susan; as far as chosing Susan is concerned, I am afraid it would have taken a whole other Roland, that is, not Roland at all - someone who just couldn't be a phenomenon produced by the same essense.
great question, as usual!
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Great question yes, and damn hard to answer.
The idea of 'only one' Roland appeals to me, however the hell Gan could make it work that way is hard to know though - but I like to think of it that way.
Jean, if we were to take the 2 "Roland's" - Roland#1 who dropped Jake and Roland#2 who did not, then a question for me is - Why is Roland#2 so conflicted about it? HE didn't drop Jake (There was no Jake to drop!), so HOW can he have that memory? So if it's a clean split and we have 2 Roland's going forward then surely they both have their own histories which cannot affect each other?
but going back to the past doesn't change one's memories of the past. See, you go to yesterday and don't have the breakfast you actually had in line 1; it creates line 2 where you didn't have it, but you remember everything right up to the moment you went back to the future; naturally, your memories of the past extending from April 29, 2009 to April 30, 2009 consist of two versions (version 1: having had this breakfast + all other events right till the point you went back; version 2: not having had it + all other events till the same point; then it's up to you whether to go back again and create yet another, or to go on in this new line). If there's any gift from Gan, I hope it is erasing one of those lines of memories, not to further complicate it for Roland.
(Gan may have overlooked some parts of those memories, though... maybe that is why Roland is sometimes inconsistent in what he says about the past.)
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
yes, I am inclined to feel the same - at least about Roland - despite all previous reasoning. But, then again, the question of what happens to the traveling person when new lines are created is still unclear to me. The person may just disappear from all timelines he left when he went back - it is the first thought that comes to mind, of course, but I had already noticed that it leads to some impalatable implications. I got to think more.
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ah, I think I see where you are now Jean.
In my Roland#1 & #2 case above I was assuming they CONTINUE on separate lines - YOU have those 2 lines coming back together into one Roland (and naturally he would have both memories).
Brice - I tend to agree (& certainly would prefer to think of it so) - only one of each,& not just Roland.
I think part of what makes roland special, what makes him darkle and tinct is that he is singular, according to most of sai kings stories (talisman/ black house particularly) most people have twinners throughout the multiverse, It is the people who dont like roland and the Crimson king and jack sawyer and patrick danville who can make a difference on a cosmic level because of their singular nature
Fitting in with this is the idea that flagg has MANY twinners who are joined in one consciousness, the opposite of roland
if the worlds gonna end then let's get it over with, i got shit to do
In The Road to the Dark Tower, Bev Vincent speculated that Stephen King might be a "Twinner" of Roland, and pointed out some interesting evidence, such as Roland sharing the pain of SK's wounds. I'm not so sure about the idea any more, though.
Right, interesting. What you're saying is not just like Eddie and Jake, though. If it is true that Roland has no other counterparts than those that he makes of himself, and if it is true (as speculated on other threads) that other people do have them in connection with the transmigration of their souls after death, then perhaps the reason that he is excluded is that he maybe never dies.
wait, wait! the "maybe" in that last sentence is crucial. I firmly believe that he does die, or else he is not even human, and that would kill the story for me - anyway, I don't see him having committed anything so horrible as to doom him to the endless hell of loops.
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i agree with flagg, i was unsure of what i thought until i say the explanation if twinner vrs singulars. i agree that roland is singular and that there is only one
with jake and eddie i feel there must be more than one and that they are twinners as there were differences in the new pair that can not be explained by saying they are the same but placed on a different path along the time loop(I may be remembering this wrong as its time for a reread but was it not hinted at that they were brothers?)
i would also hazard a guess that suzannah has a twinner too, as its a rare case for a singular person to exist. even sai king was a twinner in the dark tower. (when suzannah hears that he dies - i believe it was one of his twinners in another reality)
i hope its ok that i have not put spoilers (still trying to get used to not using them in particular threads)
You, who say there is only one Roland - how can it be?
Let's forget time travel a little.
I know it's an interesting part of the question but it's just a part of it. In fact if we forget time travel (for awhile) there is another very important aspect too; the other worlds.
Lots of lots of worlds. Similar to each other and different from each other.
When Susannah went through that door she met Eddie and Jake. For my part I think those two people must have the same genes as our Eddie and Jake of the ka-tet 19 BUT for me they aren't the same people at all. Still I must admit if we look at the gene part there are more Eddies and Jakes.
So... if we consider all the worlds and if we count with the genes... are there more Rolands? I know the Roland who chooses Susan is not the same Roland... but we cannot deny the similarities and the genes.
To sum up: you, who say there is only one Roland do you mean that all the other worlds exist without Roland or do you say there are Rolands but only the genes are the same?
If you still say there is only one Roland - only one even if we count with the genes - how is that possible? In the other worlds Gabrielle has no kids? Or Gilead exists in only one world? Or the whole Deschain family is missing from the other worlds that are similar to Roland's?
I would like to think there is only one Roland. I want to think that. But when I start to think of it the logic says there must be other Rolands too. I hope you can explain there is only one.
Huh, I hope my question makes some sense.
Roland would have understood.
It's more than okay. In this section - DT7 - we use no spoiler tags at all.
Roland would have understood.
your question makes sense letti. but it still hurt my brain.
now i have to go away and think over your arguement as it has turned my thoughts upside down. your right, if roland is only one, does that make stephen and gabriel childless in all other worlds? hmmmmmm
leave this with me and i shall return.
and thank you, this is why i love the site so much. one minute your are safe in your assumptions and the next you have to re think eveything. i love it
I think that suze has twinners but unlike most people, they are inside her
perhaps thats y her fate was different than the singular roland or eddie and jake who are not singular
if the worlds gonna end then let's get it over with, i got shit to do
ok .... now then, having thouht on this while out food shopping. (it made it quite an enjoyable experience)
i think roland is still the only one, and if stephen and gabriel are not childless in other realities then they have a son. but its not roland,
i know there are huge holes in this idea and i am still trying to get a handle on it. i shall return
Letti, it all makes sense. I totally agree with you. But, I wonder how do you explain Jack Sawyer's condition? It is a fact that he is singular. Things you have said about Roland, should also be true for him, too.
That's explained in The Talisman. Jack's nature is specifically related to interdimensional magic. It is also, as you say, the only certain example.
Interesting. And the CK has a mortal and an immortal form. I never really thought of him as singular... but it IS pretty obvious that his "empire" is interdimensional, and he is such a megalomaniac that it's doubtful that multiple CK's could get along. Perhaps he has many mortal forms in different worlds, on different levels, all controlled by the great evil spirit.Really? Uh... I may need to re-read Insomnia soon.
I'm not so sure that we can do that. I think it's entirely possible that the very reason that there are other worlds is because of time travel.
Sometimes I think that Roland is in all times; that there’s a version of him questing for each version of the Tower.
I know. I think the other qualifiers, all of the if-it-is-trues, as-speculateds, and perhaps-es, are pretty important, too. It is quite tentative hypothesis. Brainstorming.Those aren't necessarily contradictions, though: If Roland continues to loop until Judgement Day, that's not the same as endless hell. Meanwhile, the rest of us might be jumping from world to world through a less overt means. The big question is, what would any of that say about Jack?
I forgave Roland. This might sound strange, but I did so because I think that's what Gan would want me to do.
As Matt eluded to back on the first page, Roland is weak, just like all of us. The Tower is his weakness, and he can't break free. My weakness... (here comes some disclosure) is lust. I haven't broken free yet (a darker part of me doesn't want to), but I'm at a point where I can remain self-aware of my weakness.
Roland isn't at that point yet. That point of self-awareness. He was just before he went through the final door, but too little too late.
I want to be forgiven for succumbing to my weaknesses, and therefore I should be willing to forgive others for theirs.
I don't think Roland needs forgiveness from anyone except himself. I basically think the same for the rest of us.
great answer brice, short and to the point,I don't think Roland needs forgiveness from anyone except himself. I basically think the same for the rest of us.
to elaborate from my point of view though, i dont think there is anything to forgive as roland is just being roland, and he would not be the roland that we all followed and fell in love with if he had done anything differently.
i for one know, that if he had changed character and done a few things differently to give a nice happy tied up ending - i would have been really frustrated as that would not have been the roland i followed for 15 years of my life. whereas the things he did that many of you can not forgive him for was part of who he was, so it would be like saying
' i can not forgive you candy for having hazel eyes'
theres nothing i can do to change this, unless i wore contacts - in which case it would be a falsehood. much the same as if roland had changed his ways, it would be a false roland who i would have renownsed.
and if he did need forgiving - i doubt he would ave given a flying f**k what we all thought anyway
Posting Permissions
i have a whole bunch of these questions maddening me and i can't find an explained answer to any of those 
Reply With Quote
