Locations in the books - general thread

[Mitchel]

If this has been discussed before, please point me to the thread or URL. Otherwise, I am hoping someone can offer an intelligent explanation for me;

I have a question about the Dark Tower series, which mainly ties into books I and II.

My question is this; Why does the sense of cardinal direction seem to be all messed up in these two books? Here's what I mean...

In Book 1: The Gunslinger, Roland, is on a southeast course after the Man in Black. His southeastern route is referenced to more than once during the story. It is also noted at the end of Book 1 that he has just crossed the Mohaine Desert, which is also odd, because earlier in Book 1, there is a reference made that the Mohaine Desert is west of Gilead, where Roland grew up. In fact, it's when he is describing the possibility of being sent west if he fails to best Cort, that he describes what lies to the west, and the Mohaine Desert is listed among those things that lie to the west. Yet, on his southeastern route from Gilead in Book 1, he crossed the Mohaine Desert to get to the mountains while chasing the Man in Black. How can the Mohaine Desert be to the east and west of Gilead unless it wraps around the south side of the region in a half circle and is huge?

Additionally, while Roland and Jake are crossing the desert along there southeast course, there is a reference made to the setting sun off to their left turning every sweat tear into a painful prism. This also doesn't make sense. If you're walking southeast, the setting sun would not be to your left. It would be to your right and to the rear, unless the sun sets in the northeast - which we know it does not, because at the beginning of book 2, after having his fingers and toe cut off while getting ready to move on, Roland looks back toward the "east from which he had come" and sees the rising sun over the mountains. This makes no sense also, because he didn't come from the east. He came from the west, or the north west, and was travelling to the southeast. So even though the sun is rising in the east as Roland begins to move on in the beginning of book two, it should be rising out over the sea somewhere, and not over the mountains behind him.

Which brings the next contradiction, the fact that he calls the sea the western sea. Again, if you're travelling southeast all though book 1, how do you reach the western sea?

So, he's on the beach, and he decides to turn North along the beach to pursue the tower. Fine, except on page 33 of book 2, as Roland begins his northern walk, it is narrated "the sea to his right and mountains to his left." If he is going north, that means west is to his left and east is to his right. This would be alright if not for the statements about the sun. If the sun comes up in the east, as he previously said, then again, it would be coming up over the water, not the mountains. If he is going north, and the mountains are on his left, then he did indeed come from the west, and not the east like the beginning of book 2 says.

Also keep in your mind that the Man in Black had told Roland to strike west and that the sea was 20 short miles. If Roland did do this, the direction of travel makes even less sense because; He came from the Northwest, traveled southeast, and then struck due west only to go north along the beach again... that's be like going back the way you came.

So what's the deal? Why is King's direction all messed up? Are these just mistakes or am I missing something?

[Merlin1958]

You know for what its worth, I have always thought the directions in the book to be "akimbo". Its one of the few things that left me a bit "off" on the story and begging for maps, cause I often thought things weren't just "right" in that regard.

You have rather succintly illuminated that feeling, but I guess we just chalk it up to "literary Licsense". Blame Robin Furth I suppose LOL

Anyway, thx for confirming a long term suspicion!!!!!

[Sam]

In reality, I think the directions are messed up because we are seeing the progression of an author who at the first of the Dark Tower saga hadn't learned to make better note of what he had written before. Remember that The Gunslinger was originally several short stories that turned into a novel. Each tale built onto the other, but they were written as individual stories. Plus he was still fairly new to writing and probably didn't take very goodnotes on which way Roland was going, so from time to time he made mistakes.

In the stories, it is said several times that the world had moved on and directions were different now. Also that distances had changed. Was it a way to deal with the goofs, sure, but it also added suspense since it ruled out things such as compasses for Roland and his ka-tet.

[ChristineB]

I know I read somewhere about the fact the first couple books were not well edited. This was chaulked up to a small press publication.

It seems things like this are suppose to be found during the editing of a book and are when they are edited well. Not quite so with these books.

And what Sam said as to they dealt with the goofs later by saying the world had moved on. *shrug*

[Mitchel]

Yeah, I suppose using the "world has moved on" argument is a way to deal with mistakes... but personally, I don't think it's a good one. Don't get me wrong, I love the story, but things like that mess with my flow, because they automatically come off as wrong subconsciously, and are confirmed by thinking it through. I also assumed - falsely perhaps - that the story was re-edited in its entirety when book 7 came out and King wrote his new introduction. I'm not criticizing the guy at all, but I hope he knows about this already if for no other reason except so that he knows.

In any case, I should have made an intro post first.

Hi, my name is Mitch, and I'm just some guy from North Dakota who likes Stephen King books. i h8 ppl hu rite lk tis, and I like Samuel Adams Black Lager. Glad to make your respective acquaintances.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

i h8 ppl hu rite lk tis

You would just looove my daughter then. I also can't stand this. I think texting is making our children collectively stupid.

[Mitchel]

i h8 ppl hu rite lk tis

You would just looove my daughter then. I also can't stand this. I think texting is making our children collectively stupid.

I couldn't agree more. It's gotten to the point I can't even read the comments on YouTube without risking the onset of a stroke... they're all so damn... dumb.

And you're right. It's the texting. It seems sad to me that technology has made us so lazy and impatient, our following generation can't even be bothered to capitalize "I" or be troubled to precede "u" with a 'y' and an 'o'.

Anyway... maybe that part of my personality is why things like the direction anomaly, mentioned in my opening post, bother me so much.

But back to the Tower. I'll be keeping my eye out for more of these oddities. I am just now, say 15%, into book 2. As it stands, I am going to pretend that in the beginning of book two, when it says Roland looked "back toward the east from which he came," and saw the sun rising over the mountains - I'm going to pretend that that part was a hallucination and that really the sun was rising out over the ocean. That way, when he heads north along the beach, having the "sea on his right and the mountains on his left" will make some sense.

All will be right in my mind again.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

maybe....just maybe....the sun sets in the east on this level of the tower.

[Coldalarm]

I think one of the above points truly sums it up.

The Gunslinger is a collection of short stories, later patched together as a novel, whereas the Drawing of the Three is the first true novel (as in it was written as a novel, and as a continuation of the story, I think) and that seems to explain it for me. The pace will have changed a lot simply due to this, as short stories tend to be written differently to a novel.

But hey, who knows?

[Mitchel]

The sunset adjusts itself.

Considering my previous posts, listen to this:

Page 195 & 196 in book 2. Roland is talking to Eddie on the beach. Eddie turns to go up the slope where there will be fuel to make a fire. So he's going up, away from the water. At this point, Roland makes the wise crack about Eddies nobility and sense of purpose, and turns back to look at Roland. He gives Roland a terse reply, and turns back toward the slope, but not before Roland saw the last red rays of sunset reflected on his wet cheeks.

So now the sun is setting in the west, but the whole world doesn't make any sense. You can't be going north along a beach with the sun setting to the west over the water, and have the sea to your right (as said earlier). Plus he'd be going back to the way he came then. Back to the north west.

Anyone need an editor? I'm for hire.

Good story so far though - I'm hooked into it. I really liked the whole door thing and the descriptions of how Roland was able to take things back through to his world, like the tooter fish.

[Delacroix]

Later, it's said that directions are as messed up as time. That's an effect of

Spoiler:

the Dark Tower going wrong

.

It's the big excuse for all this incoherences.

[Mitchel]

I have another question.

Are Walter and the Man in Black and Marten all the same people? Is this something I will find out later?

In book 1 the Man in Black swallowed Marten's soul (so it was said), and Walter was a monk???

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

I always thought of these as a dark version of the Holy Trinity. I considered them all the same entity.

[Brice]

Your answers will come later on, Mitchel.

[Letti]

I have another question.

Are Walter and the Man in Black and Marten all the same people? Is this something I will find out later?

In book 1 the Man in Black swallowed Marten's soul (so it was said), and Walter was a monk???

I am sure you don't wanna read spoilers, am I right?
The way to the Dark Tower is paved by many answers (but even more questions).

Welcome to the site.

[overhoser]

I've also long wondered about this...some of the mistakes (such as NYC geography) are dismissed in later books as multiple worlds or shifting directions. But this particular question about the desert, mountains, and sea is actually addressed in the Concordance for volumes 1-4. In that book, there are maps of the journeys. The journey for the gunslinger moves southeast until he gets to the mountains, where it turns straight west. This allows ROland to turn north and have the sea on his left. This really bothered me for a long time, but I recently looked it up in the concordance. I will check again to be sure.

[Mitchel]

I've also long wondered about this...some of the mistakes (such as NYC geography) are dismissed in later books as multiple worlds or shifting directions. But this particular question about the desert, mountains, and sea is actually addressed in the Concordance for volumes 1-4. In that book, there are maps of the journeys. The journey for the gunslinger moves southeast until he gets to the mountains, where it turns straight west. This allows ROland to turn north and have the sea on his left. This really bothered me for a long time, but I recently looked it up in the concordance. I will check again to be sure.

OK, but that means he's going back the way he came, which is just silly.

I know this is relatively unimportant to the scope of the story, but I like tearing it apart for the purpose of discussion - which is what these boards are for, am I right?

I'll tell you what, I am into book 3 now (Wastelands), and I have noticed a few other directional things that don't make sense... but to tell the truth, I lost my sense of direction after Roland, Eddie, and Susannah got to the clearing where they ended up killing Shardik (Mir), the bear.

In my minds eye, Roland almost had to be going southwest to begin with - not southeast - because like I said earlier, when he was talking about the possibility of getting set west before his battle with Cort, he was thinking of what lay to the west... and the dwellers, and the Mohaine desert were among those. So I'm thinking he was going southwest in book 1, made it to the sea, went north (which would mess up the sunrises and sunsets as they are described, I know), and then due west of the clearing where they killed the bear in order to find his portal.

That's as far as I am. But I was wondering if it would be illegal / or any type of infringement for you to post just the map images on here. I'd just like to see those maps... or if they are somewhere online, point me to a link???

If the Man in Black questions are answered later, then good, because I don't want to read spoilers.

Anyway, till later....

[overhoser]

OK, the maps. While the one for the gunslinger solves its issues (for the most part), I'm afraid you'll be disappointed by the one for the wastelands....it does not show the journey from the beginning of the novel to shardik's lair. however, it appears that they must have traveled east through the woods, although it's possible that they continued north. This raises some other questions.

Roland talks about how he had seen maps of his world and the mohaine desert west of gilead to the western sea. He says the distance was about 1000 miles, but since the world is shifting or whatever, it took him twenty years to cross it. so, if ROland treveled west from gilead to the sea and if the travelers moved east through the woods from the sea, they would have had to cross all of in-world, past gilead to get to shardik's lair. otherwise, Roland likely would have encountered it already because it was between Gilead and the sea. Or at least heard more about it. TWL places the trip to Shardik at about 7 weeks, way shorter than twenty years, but long enough to cover 1000 miles moving at about twenty miles per day (a hell of a hike, but conceivable).

So, after all of that, here's my theory to explain it: while the world is expanding at the center (on latitude with gilead), it is narrowing at the top (and maybe bottom). like a circle being stretched in both directions, hence the shifting compass and growing/shrinking land area.

Now, for the maps. If these are illegal, someone let me know and I will remove them. Just in case....these maps appear in Stephen King's The Dark Tower: A Concordance by Robin Furth (2003), pp. 236-239. There is no credit for the drawing, so I'm guessing it was Robin Furth.

These images are big. I couldn't figure out how to specify the image dimensions here and didn't want to edit and re-upload them, so here are links to them:

This is the map for the revised Gunslinger, showing a south-southeast path. the original gunslinger had more of a direct south path:

gunslinger map

This is the map for the wastelands. You'll notice the time in between books 2 and 3 is missing.

Wastelands Map

[LadyHitchhiker]

I had no problem with the whole "world moving on" explaining changes of directions. I loved it.

[overhoser]

I had no problem with the whole "world moving on" explaining changes of directions. I loved it.

I agree, it's a perfectly fine explanation for the shifting directions. But being able to see visuals of what is supposed to be happening is nice, especially when the descriptions seem contradictory. And also, at the point where I think Mitchell is reading, those explanations have not yet been given, with the exception of Roland talking about how long it took to cross the desert.

The question I'm interested in is what are the actual physical changes that are happening....they happen because the world is shifting, but what are those changes? I think the maps illustrate that problem.

In Gunslinger Born there are maps of Mejis and New Canaan. Running through Mejis is the Great Road. I may be mistaken, but doesn't Roland say the road they travel in the the wastelands is the remains of the great road? which means Lud is east of Mejis, which is further evidence that it took him twenty years to travel west to the Western Sea, but he and his Ka-Tet made it all the way back east past Gilead and Mejis in about 4 months tops? So, the shifting may be caused by the world moving on, but the shifting is not consistent...some areas are growing, but others are shrinking.

Does anyone know if there are larger, more definitive maps available, to the extent that that's possible?

[pathoftheturtle]

King said that the DT series was originally inspired by Sergio Leone's westerns, and that he found it charming that his films had sometimes badly messed up American geography. To SK, that only added to the fantastic majesty of those epics, and created an otherworldly backdrop. The like "problems" in TDT were intentional.

Years ago, when I was a nerdy kid, I found a product for Star Trek fans, Mr. Scott's Enterprise blueprints. My father is a fan of that franchise, (he has many of the novels) and I told him that I'd really like to buy those blueprints. He just said, "Why? You can't build one."

A healthy view of good fiction is distinct from the hard approach that many take to reality.

***edit*** (Added 12-08-2009 -- )
Seriously, I think it's almost like saying, "Well, I kinda liked 'Salem's Lot, but I think it was too scary." lol, that's the whole point, ya kennit?
In TDT, you're supposed to feel disoriented when you notice those things, and feel as though absolutely anything might happen next.

[overhoser]

Seriously, I think it's almost like saying, "Well, I kinda liked 'Salem's Lot, but I think it was too scary." lol, that's the whole point, ya kennit?
In TDT, you're supposed to feel disoriented when you notice those things, and feel as though absolutely anything might happen next.

I don't think you're comparative statement about Salem's Lot is anything like this discussion. Nobody has said that these questions cause them to dislike the books or that the books are too anything. In fact quite the opposite. The question asked in this thread is "This particular element of the story is confusing, I want to know more about it."

Based on your line of thinking, why bother to ask questions? Isn't the point of discussing a book to understand what's happening in the book? "It's happening because the author intended it" isn't a very satisfying or useful explanation.

It's a question that makes me want to know more about what is happening in/to Roland's world. The shifting directions and expanding world are an important piece of the story's mythology and I think saying it's like that to make the reader feel disoriented is a shoulder shrugging dismissal of that mythology.

Just because you are not concerned with or interested in this question does not make it a useless question.

[Mitchel]

I am just getting to the part in book 3 where Jake is drawn. I fell behind in reading because I got really sick this week - got the flu or something - or maybe the Man in Black was trying to hold me up...

Anyway, you pretty much said it all, overhoser. I can't disagree with anything you said. The only thing I can say is those maps still seem funny to me. Even in the first one, Roland would have been back tracking and retracing his steps if we were to follow the descriptors in book 1 and 2.

I think I am going to devise my own map... I think I have an idea of how this fits together, and I'll submit it for your critique as soon as I finish....

[Mitchel]

OK, you can use the magnifying glass symbol at the top right of the image to zoom and then drag to pan the image;

http://picasaweb.google.com/mitchel....47868551069938

This is the map I just made.

It seems in book 3 they are still going southeast along the path of the beam. I decided that the 'western sea' is not an ocean, but a large ass sea just like the black sea or something like that... It's called the western sea because it is west of the nexus, west of the dark tower.

Anyway, the map maintains the integrity of traveling SE in book 1 and north along the beach into a clearing, and southeast again in book 3.

If anyone wants to save this image to their machine and do any re-editing, feel free. Just mail me a copy at mitchel.berry@gmail.com

[overhoser]

Mitch - Nice work on the map....it definitely matches what seems to be described, if we throw the cardinal directions out, based on the fact that they are moving anyway. I like your idea of the Western Sea being more like a large lake than an ocean....like the Dead Sea. And I didn't even notice that the woods in both of Robin Furth's maps are the same. So, on your map, they stretch all the way across the top, which makes sense.

And the issue with the location of Gilead can be taken care of if we imagine Roland headed first west, and then SE, placing the events of the gunslinger almost directly south of Gilead, then the great road from Mejis (in W&G) can meet up with the road outside of Lud. The map in Gunslinger Born (which re-tells W&G) says that the desert is South of Gilead. This debunks my theory of how the world is growing/shrinking. I think it's more likely a more random expansion and shifting.

I use the cardinal directions here for our own reference, since they clearly are not relevant and always changing. And while this has no impact on the story, it's kind of neat to think about where everything is in relation to other events. And while the directions change, I don't think relative positions are changing. So the places in the stories can probably be stitched together, at least loosely. Maybe I'll think about doing that when I have more time...

And I understand that this is not reality and doesn't work the same way. But the presence of maps in the books and the way that they apparently fit together I think demonstrates that this question is worthwhile. People make maps of fictional lands all the time.