The Dark Tower, Insomnia and Different Levels *Spoilers!!*

[Merlin1958]

I recently finished a re-read of the series and thought why not re-read Insomnia as well. Well I'm almost finished but I was struck by confusion after reading the part where "the levels" are explained by Mr. C & Mr. L to Ralph and Lois. I failed to grasp the correlation of the Tower levels as explained in Insomnia and by understanding of it as detailed in the DT series.

Anybody out there have theories? Given the description in Insomnia what "level" is Roland on? or Midworld itself for that matter? Also, when Roland climbs the Tower he is not described as achieving higher levels as he goes, just as seeing events in his life. Doesn't seem to jibe.

So please discuss and all thoughts on the matters are welcome!!!

[Darkthoughts]

For my part I think of the physical Tower as being a Tower within a Tower. So, you can climb the levels inside the physical Tower as you would levels on any normal building, and they are pertinent to you and your life experiences. But the metaphysical Tower and it's levels are at the same time an intangible place, where the physical Tower exists on a particular level of it.

Did that make sense? I sorta equate it to Buddha being everything and one being at the same time.

[turtlex]

Shite that was impressive, Lisa.

[ManOfWesternesse]

Shite that was impressive, Lisa.

... yeah - but what's she mean?

Merlin - always bear in mind that King presumably saw the same potential conflicts between these 2 Books, and therefore introduced Insomnia into the DT tale and discredited it as being relevant to the quest.

[jayson]

I agree Brian. The representations of the Tower in Insomnia and DT-7 are two different thoughts of King's on a similar concept.

I don't think King intended for them to necessarily fit together perfectly. King has enough issues keeping continuity within the series itself.

Though as Lisa's excellent theory shows, there are interpretations which make them fit together.

[turtlex]

<--- Impressed with Lisa's interpretation and agrees.

( no way i could have explained it nearly as well as she did there )

[pathoftheturtle]

For my part I think of the physical Tower as being a Tower within a Tower. ...

Oh yes, I totally agree. The Tower which the LBDs were talking about was the multiverse itself; the different "levels" are the various realities. Me, I have a theory that all of that is also called "The Dark Tower" because it is created by and centered on the physical tower(s), through the actions of Roland, the CK, and etc. As they darkle and tinct up to higher levels, they're turning the wheel of ka. That fits with what they said about the CK existing on higher levels of the Tower than their own.

We've talked some about this topic on Letti's The Tower thread.

[Wuducynn]

For my part I think of the physical Tower as being a Tower within a Tower. So, you can climb the levels inside the physical Tower as you would levels on any normal building, and they are pertinent to you and your life experiences. But at the same time, the metaphysical Tower and it's levels are at the same time an intangible place, where the physical Tower exists on a particular level of it.

Did that make sense? I sorta equate it to Buddha being everything and one being at the same time.

Agreed.

For my part I think of the physical Tower as being a Tower within a Tower. ...

Oh yes, I totally agree. The Tower which the LBDs were talking about was the multiverse itself; the different "levels" are the various realities. Me, I have a theory that all of that is also called "The Dark Tower" because it is created by and centered on the physical tower(s), through the actions of Roland, the CK, and etc. As they darkle and tinct up to higher levels, they're turning the wheel of ka. That fits with what they said about the CK existing on higher levels of the Tower than their own.

We've talked some about this topic on Letti's The Tower thread.

This is something very interesting, that I would like to explore.

[obscurejude]

One of the things that kind of disappointed me as the series progressed was how unnecessary definite articles became when discussing anything related to the Dark Tower. I agree with what Lisa said and found the discussion in Insomnia similar to Mia and Susannah's in Song. I think Insomnia was an attempt to explain the dueling metaphysical forces of the cosmology of King's universe while the Tower that Roland visits is simply All World's tangible representation. King was clear that the Dark Tower is represented differently in other worlds, particularly the rose in the Keystone and the back of a dog in a nameless world.

The whole thing made Roland's quest lose some of its significance for me, i.e., he wasn't sworn to find the Dark Tower, but a Dark Tower. Just a blade of grass, but not the blade of grass as originally foreshadowed.

[Brainslinger]

I think the Tower Roland finds and the metaphysical Tower (if you like) are the same Tower. It's just the former isn't all the latter is. Or to put it another way, the human mind wouldn't be able to process the totality of the completeness of the Dark Tower, so on any particular world one is presented with something within their grasp. A building, a rose, an ur-dog, etc.

If you've worked with a database system, think of it like a defined view, i.e. something that provides access to some fields of the database but not others. (Probably a poor example. I find myself thinking of that vision the little Doctor's sent the heroes of Insomnia of a man scooping from an ocean, although that actually referred to the amount of energy absorbed from aura's but the simile applies here.)

One thing I noticed about Insomnia is that the reference to levels seems to be describing different levels of functionality and awareness within a specific world. I.e. when the two main characters go up levels, they can see auras and move through solid objects like ghosts, and time speeds up.(Or did it slow down? Been a while since I've read it.)

In the Dark Tower series however, 'level', seems to equate to 'world'. Our world is on one level of the Tower. Mid-world another. Stand-world another, etc. There are even 'balcony worlds' to represent the more fanciful things we imagine, like Sheemie's gingerbread house and (I think, this is just my theory) Flagg's crystal palace. And then we've got the levels of the literal Tower that Roland passed where he saw reminders of days past.

I don't see these different types of level as contradictory though. Remember when Walter explained the Tower to Roland. He stated something along the lines, the Tower is the epitomy of size. It's big. Infinitely so. It connects everything together and ecompasses everything. That means it contains all levels of all types in all dimensions.

[Darkthoughts]

Shite that was impressive, Lisa.

Thanks, I try

I think the Tower Roland finds and the metaphysical Tower (if you like) are the same Tower. It's just the former isn't all the latter is.

Yes, exactly. The physical Tower is the Tower, but because the Tower is omnipresent it's also only a manifestation of itself.

[flaggwalkstheline]

Sai King seems to have thrown in a fair amount of Sufi style mysticism into the DT stories
IE this nugget of wisdom "There are no beginings and there are no endings, there is only when you start observing a thing and when you stop"

[Wuducynn]

Shite that was impressive, Lisa.

Thanks, I try

It's good to know that there's more to Lisa than just a great set of tits.

[pathoftheturtle]

That's the first clue you've noticed? Beep-beep, Matthew.

...The whole thing made Roland's quest lose some of its significance for me, i.e., he wasn't sworn to find the Dark Tower, but a Dark Tower. Just a blade of grass, but not the blade of grass as originally foreshadowed.

Well, if that were literally true, his quest would have ended when he found "a" Dark Tower.
It is a little disappointing that the book series portrayed Roland's true quest only in part, but, then again, you could practically hear between the lines the author whimpering at trying to chew all that he had bitten off. I prefer to just be grateful for what is suggested and all that we were given.

...I have a theory that all of that is also called "The Dark Tower" because it is created by and centered on the physical tower(s), through the actions of Roland, the CK, and etc. As they darkle and tinct up to higher levels, they're turning the wheel of ka. ...

This is something very interesting, that I would like to explore.

Alright. For one thing, with each iteration of Roland's journey, new timelines come into being, and others are eliminated (such as Jake-gets-pushed and Beryl-Evans-wrote-Charlie). This reshaping of the multiverse occurs as a virtually collaborative result of their struggles. That's ka.

Here's a favorite quote of mine that appears to support the "All-Timers" concept as part of DT7:

Destiny of John Cullum
From "On Turtleback Lane," DT7:

…From time to time Roland’s sigul sent him dreams of a field filled with roses, and a sooty-black tower. Sometimes he was visited by terrible visions of two crimson eyes, floating unattached to any body and relentlessly scanning the horizon. Sometimes there were dreams in which he heard the sound of a man relentlessly winding his horn. From these latter dreams he would awake with tears on his cheeks, those of longing and loss and love. He would awake with his hand closed around the cross, thinking I denied Discordia and regret nothing; I have spit into the bodiless eyes of the Crimson King and rejoice; I threw my lot in with the gunslinger’s ka-tet and the White and never once questioned the choice.

Note that Roland has the horn, so this is not merely (so to speak) a vision of the future. It comes down to John from another loop, and/or a higher order of reality.

[obscurejude]

That's the first clue you've noticed? Beep-beep, Matthew.

...The whole thing made Roland's quest lose some of its significance for me, i.e., he wasn't sworn to find the Dark Tower, but a Dark Tower. Just a blade of grass, but not the blade of grass as originally foreshadowed.

Well, if that were literally true, his quest would have ended when he found "a" Dark Tower.
It is a little disappointing that the book series portrayed Roland's true quest only in part, but, then again, you could practically hear between the lines the author whimpering at trying to chew all that he had bitten off. I prefer to just be grateful for what is suggested and all that we were given.

That's why I said "some" significance and not all. "Whimpering at trying to chew all that he had bitten off" is a good way to put it. I've really started to think about the first book as complete in and of itself because it seems to fit in with the others less and less the more I think about it. I'm not suggesting that King should have known how every little detail would work out so early on but I do wish that some of the major themes and foreshadowing had played themselves out a little better. I wish he'd stuck to the poem a bit more... For instance, the Hoary Cripple of the first stanza is clearly what inspired Walter, but as the story progresses he leaves that behind as Walter comes to exist in different wheres and whens with different personalities. I was a little heartbroken when Dandelo came to represent the Hoary Cripple. The poem is largely about the half truths of the Cripple and how Roland is only able to see the tower after coming to realize the grotesque meaninglessness of the universe as represented by the Dark Tower, which was always before him and waiting to be acknowledged. Roland's fear that the top of the tower might be empty is perfectly in step with this.

I could go on for pages and pages, but suffice it to say, that a lot of the existential angst of the first volume became less significant as the series progressed.

[jayson]

Ryan, that is a very interesting take on it and I am coming more and more to realize it's one I agree with in large part. It's not that I don't enjoy the rest of the series, obviously I do very much, but The Gunslinger reads more like myth and metaphor whereas the rest (particularly the final three) seem like King trying too hard to pin down specifics for the metaphysical ideas he had when he began the endeavor. Once he began to tread that path, the inconsistencies were inevitable.

Path's phrase "whimpering at trying to chew all that he had bitten off" is extremely apt in this case.

[Merlin1958]

Ryan, that is a very interesting take on it and I am coming more and more to realize it's one I agree with in large part. It's not that I don't enjoy the rest of the series, obviously I do very much, but The Gunslinger reads more like myth and metaphor whereas the rest (particularly the final three) seem like King trying too hard to pin down specifics for the metaphysical ideas he had when he began the endeavor. Once he began to tread that path, the inconsistencies were inevitable.

Path's phrase "whimpering at trying to chew all that he had bitten off" is extremely apt in this case.

BINGO

I agree 110%

[obscurejude]

Ryan, that is a very interesting take on it and I am coming more and more to realize it's one I agree with in large part. It's not that I don't enjoy the rest of the series, obviously I do very much, but The Gunslinger reads more like myth and metaphor whereas the rest (particularly the final three) seem like King trying too hard to pin down specifics for the metaphysical ideas he had when he began the endeavor. Once he began to tread that path, the inconsistencies were inevitable.

Path's phrase "whimpering at trying to chew all that he had bitten off" is extremely apt in this case.

I tweaked my post a little more as it was the first of my day upon waking. I don't know why I write in the passive voice so often first thing in the morning.

I agree about the details of the later books overriding the mythic themes and implications of the first volume. The way that Browning was super imposed in the last book really bothered me because he was wrapping Browning in that same digression. I'm thinking that I might just start re reading the Gunslinger once a year or so without moving on to the other volumes. That's not to say its better, but only that I prefer it that way upon studying Browning's poetry in my academic career.

[jayson]

I agree about the details of the later books overriding the mythic themes and implications of the first volume. The way that Browning was super imposed in the last book really bothered me because he was wrapping Browning in that same digression. I'm thinking that I might just start re reading the Gunslinger once a year or so without moving on to the other volumes. That's not to say its better, but only that I prefer it that way upon studying Browning's poetry in my academic career.

I've read it a few times without moving on to the rest. It's interesting how it works as well (if not better) independently as it does as part of the greater whole.

[pathoftheturtle]

Well then, why don't you guys go post in that forum.

jk, lol.

You know, the older I get, the more I realize that man is mortal.

Also, things don't always look the same to the old as to the young.
Nonetheless, I'm pretty sure that even King would not call the TDT series an unqualified success.
I'd certainly agree that it's not as good as a whole, as are some of the individual books, when looked at in their own different ways. I have read some better sagas.
Never written any, though. I still find the work quite impressive.

[obscurejude]

I wasn't trying to insinuate that the work wasn't impressive Path, not at all. Further, I think that my posts were on topic as Insomnia dealt with more of the mythos of the Dark Tower like The Gunslinger.

I often enjoy first books by authors because of how ridiculously ambitious they are with ideals. I think its unfair to expect that kind of ideological stamina to continue for 35 years. Its just that after I went to college and then grad school and got the opportunity to really study Browning and King from that perspective, I've realized some of the significant pitfalls to King's "organic" writing style. I don't mean to belittle the man or his works, and I'll continue to read just about anything he puts out. I was just very disappointed with many of the turns the series took towards the end and I've expressed that discontentment elsewhere. The Ves Ka Gan motif along with the numerous other god machines illustrate that sometimes its better to just leave it alone rather than write from the hip after laying out such cosmologically significant themes as found in the first volume.

To be clear, I'm a fan first and a critic second. Its just hard to approach the series the same way I did before my education. I'm hoping that my time off the next year will help me to return to the simple pleasures of fantasy once the dust settles.

[flaggwalkstheline]

You know, the older I get, the more I realize that man is mortal.

quoting mel brooks here: seer to caesar, "remember thou art mortal, remember thou art mortal, remember thou art mortal!"
caesar (Dom Deloise) "Blow it out your ass! More Gold! More Girls! More Wine!"

[pathoftheturtle]

You know, the older I get, the more I realize that man is mortal.

quoting mel brooks here: seer to caesar, "remember thou art mortal, remember thou art mortal, remember thou art mortal!"
caesar (Dom Deloise) "Blow it out your ass! More Gold! More Girls! More Wine!"

...Insomnia dealt with more of the mythos of the Dark Tower like The Gunslinger. ...

See, I don't know if I agree; as I've been trying to show, I do not see DT7 as being totally at odds with Insomnia. However, each and every one of these books really has its own style that only partly relates to any other.
Still, what you're saying is an interesting point. I was just trying to express thoughts of my own; I apologize if my tone made it sound like a personal attack. Thanks for clarifying further, Ryan.

...I've realized some of the significant pitfalls to King's "organic" writing style. ...

For sure. King criticizes younger authors who try to use an outline, but there are some classic works that are much more well organized and pre-planned than any of his have ever been, often without sacrificing creativity at all. His style has produced some interesting effects, though, and seems quite relevant when we think about possibilities in the future of literature.

[obscurejude]

Still, what you're saying is an interesting point. I was just trying to express thoughts of my own; I apologize if my tone made it sound like a personal attack. Thanks for clarifying further, Ryan.

...I've realized some of the significant pitfalls to King's "organic" writing style. ...

For sure. King criticizes younger authors who try to use an outline, but there are some classic works that are much more well organized and pre-planned than any of his have ever been, often without sacrificing creativity at all. His style has produced some interesting effects, though, and seems quite relevant when we think about possibilities in the future of literature.

No offense taken Mike, I just wanted to make sure I was being clear.

I think King's organic style has produced some great things for us. For me, IT remains one of the most impressive works I've read in terms of sheer force and consistency. The book contains deep characterizations and imaginative themes without ever straying from the plot too significantly.

That being said, I think the Dark Tower series does stray quite a bit in plot and consistency as has been already mentioned. I think his original themes were too epic and he let too much time pass between volumes which is a threat to organic styles of writing.

Other writers I admire, like Kafka, were known for possessing a similar style as King's and they all struggled with novels. Personally, I think King works best with the novella format and short stories. Sometimes the longer books work really well, but I'm coming to realize, that many of them don't from certain perspectives. I've been critical of The Stand elsewhere and do not wish to continue that debate here... I just wanted to respond to what you were saying Mike because King's style has much to do with the topic at hand in my opinion.

[pathoftheturtle]

...King's style has much to do with the topic at hand in my opinion.

I agree. Merlin seems to have a better attitude than many who have broached the topic in the past; generally, it's implied that SK failed to live up to his earlier performance. Interesting, though, that Insomnia was left in the dust in our Constant Reader best book award race, finishing at #20 to DT7's #4.

...IT remains one of the most impressive works I've read in terms of sheer force and consistency. ...

Absolutely, it's one (the greatest, IMO) of King's few triumphs of literary structure. Yet Insomnia is mostly a pale reflection of it, muddled further with conventions and themes from a few other past works.
The main complaint over it, apparently, is that the foreshadowing in Insomnia is not capitalized on in the plot of the main series. Instead, we just get more foreshadowing. Well, SK once said something interesting in Danse Macabre, speaking about an

...idea...expressed by William F. Nolan at the 1979 World Fantasy Convention. Nothing is so frightening as what's behind the closed door, Nolan said. ...The audience holds its breath along with the protagonist as he/she (more often she) approaches that door. The protagonist throws it open, and there is a ten-foot-tall bug. The audience screams, but this particular scream has an oddly relieved sound to it. "A bug ten feet tall is pretty horrible," the audience thinks, "but I can deal with a ten-foot-tall bug. I was afraid it might be a hundred feet tall." ...And if what happens to be behind it is a bug, not ten but a hundred feet tall, the audience heaves a sigh of relief (or utters a scream of relief) and thinks, "A bug a hundred feet tall is pretty horrible but I can deal with a hundred-foot-tall bug. I was afraid it might be a thousand feet tall." The thing is -- and a pretty good thing for the human race, too, with such neato-keano things to deal with as Dachu, Hiroshima, the Children's Crusade, mass starvation in Cambodia, and what hppened in Jonestown, Guyana--the human consciousness can deal with almost anything...which leaves the writer or director of the horror tale with a problem which is the psychological equivalent of inventing a faster-than-light space drive in the face of E=MC2.

Clearly, he is conscious of the different levels of meaning in fiction. While he's admitted to "trying too hard" with Insomnia, I'm not so sure about the rest of TDT: let's remember that one of his "epic themes" all along was the nature of rhyme and reason. (magic and science, etc.) It just may be that displaying those "inevitable inconsistencies" was actually a part of the point.