DT Typos, Bloopers and Artwork Mistakes.

[Nightfall]

Personally, I'm bugged by how inconsistent the pictures of The Dark Tower are.. for example, these two WARNING! HUGE F*CKING SPOILERS

Spoiler:

If I remember right, The Tower was always described as being in a field of roses, not on a hill as it is on the cover of the paperback DT7
I mean, that covers probably my favorite out of all of them next to the one of Roland standing next to the tower with a rose in one and and a gun in the other, but why must they always swap around how the tower looks?

[Letti]

I don't mind that all the artists have their own Dark Tower in their head. I guess we all have our own versions, too. Yes, the Tower interpretations are quite different but I can say I love them all and none of them are far from the picture in my head.
But it's me.

[Woofer]

Maybe the tower looks different to each person.

[Nightfall]

Good point, I never really thought of that Woofer

Maybe we should make a thread about how we imagined The Dark Tower looking if we all havent done so already

[O Hyperborean Wanderer]

As a white boy who happens to be named Darryl, I noticed the inconsistency to Odetta's confessed sexual history to Eddie right away and it bothered me for a while, until I accepted the possibility that Odetta (and you have to remember she was still Odetta when she said that to Eddie) may have simply lied to Eddie. Just before that time Detta Walker was in control for a lengthy span of time and the brief period of time Odetta and Eddie shared before that was a time of shock and adjustment. I can believe Odetta (not realizing her eventual transformation into Susannah Dean and her true love to Eddie expressed) and perhaps with a touch of Detta's meanness, would have lied. Both as nothing more than empty-worded pillow talk (every boy wants to feel like he was the first) but also as an internal jab of spite (an' sho nuff some graymeat, honky whiteboy). Like a softer version of Detta's roadhouse face scratching.

Pink Shoe Laces . . . heh.

What I'm about to bring up might be a well known thing, though have never read anything about it. Or it is something I don't understand that well because english is not my 1th language.
It is about the rewritten volume 1 and I think a blooper.

In chapter 7 of The Gunslinger and the Man in Black Roland asks what Walter means by glammer. But Walter never mentions glammer earlier.
In the original version there is talk about it, but I think a part of it got lost while rewritten or something. Does anyone know more about it?

This is a seeming typo that reeeally bugged me. And for a long time, too. In the end, I'm convinced it isn't. It's just like when Walter says "Mistuh Norton, he daid." to Allie back in Tull.

That's all I'll say. As Calvin Tower would say, "The joy is in the discovery."

[O Hyperborean Wanderer]

The Donkey/Mule example has been brought to light many times, but I'd also like to point out that David, Roland's hawk, has also seemed to switch bodies.

After hitching up with Jake at the Way Station, Roland casts his mind back to his youth and recalls the smiles and faces of those he knew then, Cuthbert, Cort, Marten. "And there had been the falcon, of course. The falcon was named David, after the legend of the boy with the sling."

(So fell Lord Perth . . .)

On the next page (and every reference to David thereafter) he's described as a hawk.

(God's gunslinger)

Roland seems to have the magical ability to turn his animal friends from one species to another. Either that, or he simply doesn't concern himself with proper animal classifications.

[jumbo72]

it never really bothered me, but as far as artwork, in WotC, there is the picture of Susanna throwing the plates, it shows one on each shoulder, then several going up the middle of the outline of the "wolf" on the barn. On the page just before the artwork (you did'nt even have to look for it, lol), it said that every one of the plates hit in a straight line up the middle of the body "every 2 1/2 to 3 inches, like buttons on a shirt".

And kinda on the subject, is there somewhere i can look at all the artwork? the only hardcovers i have are WotC and DT.

[CyberGhostface]

I suppose this is more of a minor annoyance than anything, but its something that bugs me whenever I reread the Revised.

Original:

"...the good man," the guard was saying.
"In Farson?"
"In two weeks," the guard replied. "Maybe three. You have to come with us."

To those who remember, "Farson" was the name of the town that Hax was going to poison. Later on, Farson became the name of John Farson. So, one of the 'errors' that King corrected when he revised the Gunslinger was changing the name to Taunton. So...

Revised:

"...the good man," the guard was saying.
"Farson?"
"In two weeks," the guard replied. "Maybe three. You have to come with us."

Instead of saying "Farson?" in the Revised, he should have said "In Taunton?" Because as it is, the conversation is different--instead of asking if the Good Man is in Farson, he's asking if the Good Man is Farson, something that he should already know.

Again, hardly a huge issue compared to the mess that Revised made of the other books, but it always came off to me as being sloppy and something that could have easily been prevented.

Speaking of Farson in the Revised, remember how it said that Farson was yet another facet of Flagg? What was that about?

[CyberGhostface]

In Wizard and Glass, Roland's paternal grandfather is Henry the Tall.

In Song of Susannah, his paternal grandfather is Alaric Deschain.

And before anyone asks, Gabrielle's father is Alan Veriss.

So...can anyone make heads or tails out of this?

[jayson]

In Wizard and Glass, Roland's paternal grandfather is Henry the Tall.

In Song of Susannah, his paternal grandfather is Alaric Deschain.

And before anyone asks, Gabrielle's father is Alan Veriss.

So...can anyone make heads or tails out of this?

Shall I go ahead and give you the answer we all know is coming at some point or another? It's because the beams are broken which is the favorite apologist answer for King's errors.

The real answer is that it's one of myriad continuity errors made by King and the editor(s). It's obviously King's mistake first and foremost, but just like Eddie being both 21 and 23 in The Drawing of the Three, it is surely something a diligent editor should have caught. Good catch on your part Cyber

Perhaps Robin Furth will address it in the comics and just make up some ludicrous story where Arthur Eld really does have two fathers, or more likely, she'll just make up a third grandfather altogether.

[CyberGhostface]

Thanks.

I just don't know how it'd be possible to make an error in the last three books, given the Concordance that Furth wrote up--I mean, she had an entry for the prostitute that Jake meets in the third book.

It's extremely thorough--say what you will about her comic work (and I have ), but the Concordances were my best friend when rereading the books. "Hey, who the heck is Wallace Johnson?" *flips through book* "Ohhh, that's who he is..."

[flaggwalkstheline]

perhaps stephen deschains father left his mother after he discoverd that he was gay and thats y roland has 2 grandfathers

Or perhapes Henry the tall is another name that alaric deschain goes by, perhaps his middle name was henry

[ManOfWesternesse]

And before anyone asks, Gabrielle's father is Alan Veriss.

I think this is possibly where it gets screwed up.
My mind (I thought) was at one time clear....
Alaric Deschain was Roland's Paternal Grandfather.
Henry Candor (Henry the Tall) was his maternal Grandfather.
(eg. even Bev's Book supported this describing "... Roland Deschain, son of Stephen and Grandson of Alaric and Henry the Tall, is a descendant of Arthur Eld...." (p.222))

.. then this Veriss name came into it (in the Revised Gunslinger?)

[Brainslinger]

Speaking of Farson in the Revised, remember how it said that Farson was yet another facet of Flagg? What was that about?

I think King was undecided.

Spoiler:

Dt7 clearly states that they're two separate people, and although it was published after revised Gunslinger it was written before.* King should have been able to change that bit before the Revised was published. Maybe that little tidbit just skipped his (and the editor's) attention. or maybe the decision to make them separate people was a sudden ammendment before DT7 was published. (Written first doesn't mean it couldn't have been editted later.)

For and in-world explanation, I took the idea that Walter/Marten/Flagg is also Farson the Good Man more as meaning that he is the main power behind Farson. Farson thinks he is the main power, and he is certainly the figurehead of the rebellion, but ultimately it's old Walt pulling the strings. In a very real sense Walter IS the good man.

Maybe King even made it deliberately ambiguous for that very reason.

*not including the massive amount of text that's the same in the original Gunslinger of course.

[Letti]

Good question. I could never catch such a thing.
Soon I will merge this thread with the general mistake in Gilead.

[Tik]

In Wizard and Glass, Roland's paternal grandfather is Henry the Tall.

In Song of Susannah, his paternal grandfather is Alaric Deschain.

And before anyone asks, Gabrielle's father is Alan Veriss.

So...can anyone make heads or tails out of this?

This is easy....his full name is Alaric Henry Deschain. He is best known via his nickname/alias Henry the Tall.

This was confirmed in The Gunslingers Guidebook and the Guide to Gilead.

Speaking of Farson in the Revised, remember how it said that Farson was yet another facet of Flagg? What was that about?

Flagg is a shapeshifter. Although Farson is a seperate character, Flagg no doubt made himself look like Farson when it suited him.

In essence, Farson is a seperate character AND another facet of Flagg.

[ManOfWesternesse]

This is easy....his full name is Alaric Henry Deschain. He is best known via his nickname/alias Henry the Tall.

This was confirmed in The Gunslingers Guidebook and the Guide to Gilead.

I don't think so Tik - Wasn't Henry the Tall named as Henry Candor at some point?
Also see my quote above from Bev's book - "... Roland Deschain, son of Stephen and Grandson of Alaric and Henry the Tall, is a descendant of Arthur Eld...." (p.222))
??

[jayson]

This is easy....his full name is Alaric Henry Deschain. He is best known via his nickname/alias Henry the Tall.

This was confirmed in The Gunslingers Guidebook and the Guide to Gilead.

I don't think so Tik - Wasn't Henry the Tall named as Henry Candor at some point?
Also see my quote above from Bev's book - "... Roland Deschain, son of Stephen and Grandson of Alaric and Henry the Tall, is a descendant of Arthur Eld...." (p.222))
??

I have to agree with Brian. Additionally, I don't personally hold that anything from the comics "confirm" anything. If anything, as we've seen, they only create further chasms in continuity.

[Tik]

I don't think so Tik - Wasn't Henry the Tall named as Henry Candor at some point?

Nope, he wasn't. I haven't been able to find any reference to the name "Candor" in Wizard and Glass. I have also checked the the various Dark Tower reference books and they all refer to Henrys last name being Deschain which makes sense as it would have to be because Stephens and Rolands last name is also Deschain.

The only name I could find was Cantor but this is Eddie Deans middle name and nothing to do with the Deschain family.

Also see my quote above from Bev's book - "... Roland Deschain, son of Stephen and Grandson of Alaric and Henry the Tall, is a descendant of Arthur Eld...." (p.222))

Simply a small error - it doesn't mention Rolands other grandfather Alan Veriss from the books afterall. There are two examples from the comic guide books in the articles on Roland and Stephen which explicity state, under the list of known relations, that his grandfathers were Alan Veriss and Alaric "Henry" Deschain.

Additionally, I don't personally hold that anything from the comics "confirm" anything. If anything, as we've seen, they only create further chasms in continuity.

I dont think so. I've been able to fit things together with the events of the books easy enough.

[jayson]

Additionally, I don't personally hold that anything from the comics "confirm" anything. If anything, as we've seen, they only create further chasms in continuity.

I dont think so. I've been able to fit things together with the events of the books easy enough.

So in DT-4 when Roland says he's never heard of the Crimson King, he simply forgot that he met him as he did in the comics?

[obscurejude]

I think that's because the beams are breaking and time is funny Jayson.

[jayson]

Ryan ftw!

[obscurejude]

[Tik]

So in DT-4 when Roland says he's never heard of the Crimson King, he simply forgot that he met him as he did in the comics?

Thats exactly what happens. The comics tell us this very thing eg "Roland can provide only the sketchiest of recollections of what he saw."

[jayson]

So in DT-4 when Roland says he's never heard of the Crimson King, he simply forgot that he met him as he did in the comics?

Thats exactly what happens. The comics tell us this very thing eg "Roland can provide only the sketchiest of recollections of what he saw."

Given the backstory given earlier in the comics of the CK's origins, it seems as if the story would be handed down as knowledge through generations of Eld's line. He seems someone the protectors of the Tower might want to have kept an eye on periodically. Roland certainly knows more about him in books 5-7 than he did previously. It's just another example of the change in continuity present through much of the progression of the books. It's always debatable whether it was necessary, but I dislike a lot of it with regard to the comics.