5 - completely satisfied
4 - satisfied, but have some minor problems with the ending
3 - satisfied, but have some major problems with the ending
2 - not satisfied, although there are things I liked about the ending
1 - completely dissatisfied
T, I suspect you know what I''m going to say, but here it is anyway...
I see no evidence that Roland's loops are the same. All the speculative theories about whether or not they are are all very interesting, but I still see nothing definitive that says they are the same. Clearly the next one starts in a way familiar to us, but we don't know if that's where his last one started, only where we met him during that loop. Matt knows I do not think Roland is damned. I don't even think he is "stuck" in the loop. I see it more the way Zone put it, this is what Roland is made for. I said it in one of the other threads like this one, but it bears repeating, I don't personally like the view that Roland is damned to a series of do-overs to fix his mistakes to escape some form of cosmic punishment. to me it sounds too much like trying to beat a videogame - "pick up horn, don't drop boy, turn left at Tull." I don't see these events as "mistakes" Roland made, more than decisions he made, often agonizing ones. I think I've said it more clearly in other threads when it wasn't so early, but I think you get it.
You got the gist of what I'm trying to say. There's tons of speculation, despite a lot of evidence to the contrary, that somehow Roland will be saved if he doesn't drop Jake, or doesn't waste the residents of Tull. There's not any real solid evidence to suggest that this loop will be anything like previous ones, but that speculation is way off base. *shrug*
It's stressful being an other. ~ Juliet
I believe there ought to be a Constitutional Amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. ~ Crash Davis
I read this thread and thought it would be good to put down the end thing everyone's talking about so that it could be referred to.
Here is the end of the Dark Tower, Roland of Gilead that was, who finds himself at a door...
Spoiler:
That above is pure evidence to this loop, that it is a loop, and some kind of repeating lesson for Roland to get right, here is after he has passed through the door:
Spoiler:
These few lines he hears from his past, from the people who've helped to shape Roland, for good or ill are the key, I believe to the entire previous six books. I believe this is why King wrote his warning of an "ending". Because this passage is laying out the underlying why of Roland's cycle.
This is Roland's doom, to ceaselessly repeat until he learns the lessons the voices speak of, until he learns the three keys to his release...The Stone - Roland that is, heartless and hard pressed towards his goal. The Rose - symbol of the Tower, the lessons, the path to the end of suffering, The Door - the way from his cycle of suffering onto the rest of his life, when he learns to stop. When he learns that he must not be like his mother described, serious, always moving toward one thing or another.
"...quiet as despair, I turn’d from him..."
Posts made by user To The Dark Tower Came
are his opinion. Any feelings of anger, angst,
or weltsmertz please see a licensed mental
health professional immediately.
I think for those who (like me) think that the less shit Roland does, the quicker he gets to the Tower and the safer the Tower is, it's still the same whether or not the loop is the same (which I am not sure of, either). Just read these cases (Jake and Tull and, to my mind, quite a few others) as metaphors or "situations where he choses to sacrifice people". Whatever the loops consist of, such situations are very likely to occur.
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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is so helpful to have that there. Thanks for typing it out TTDTC
The kindness of close friends is like a warm blanket
"...quiet as despair, I turn’d from him..."
Posts made by user To The Dark Tower Came
are his opinion. Any feelings of anger, angst,
or weltsmertz please see a licensed mental
health professional immediately.
I'm feeling REALLY sheepish at this moment, but thank you VERY much for taking the time to post all of that. It truly ends much of the debate that has been going on for such a long time over all of this. Sometimes I get to talking about a subject and in my mind I'm thinking, "I really need to do some research to make sure I know what the hell I'm talking about". This entire debate has been one of those cases. I kept thinking, "you really need to go back and re-read the end of the book before you jump into this too much." To all who have been so concrete in your belief that Roland should not have dropped Jake, and that he will continue in this loop until he finds redemption, I cry your pardon, to name a few, this list includes Letti, Jean, and Matt. I'm sure a lot more have weighed in during the discussion, so if it applies to you, please add yourself to the list.
I really hate this though, I don't like it even a tiny little bit. To me, Roland has always been a larger than life character, who represents a perfect balance of diplomat, warrior, pragmatist, teacher, loyalist, and knight. He's always represented so much of what I think is right. One of the primary reasons I've always felt that was was because he dropped Jake. Not because I think that the act itself was anything to be proud of, but because he stood true to his obligation to his promise, despite his personal feelings about that act. The fact that the act was troubling to him is detailed throughout the series. At many other stages throughout the books Roland has to stand true, and he does exaclty what would be expected of a Gunslinger. In my opinion, as I've stated in previous theads, it was one of the ultimate acts of selflessness. He chose duty, over personal feelings. Roland is one of my all time favorite heroes, and to have him demeaned to a character from Ground Hog days does the tale, and Roland a disservice.
It's stressful being an other. ~ Juliet
I believe there ought to be a Constitutional Amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. ~ Crash Davis
I'd safely say none of us had a complete & clear recollection of the passage in question - I know for sure mine was damn fuzzy (& I'd read the Book 3 times so far).
Damn, I'm getting an appetite for another re-read!
"...quiet as despair, I turn’d from him..."
Posts made by user To The Dark Tower Came
are his opinion. Any feelings of anger, angst,
or weltsmertz please see a licensed mental
health professional immediately.
yanno..I'd totally get into this discussion..but then I'd totally get wrapped up in it and my stubborness would only cause me to rant and rave and think too hard and make my brain hurt..so I'm just..gonna wathc..say thankya
I think a lot of people go through the books and then start to romanticize Roland. They really really want him to be the hero, the stand up guy who wins the day and then gets his reward at the end.
But when you read King's warning just before the section I posted, I think he's warning us that justice is not always coming. My favorite example of this comes from watching the movie "Arlington Road". If you haven't seen, it's about a man and his son who live on Arlington Road when new neighbors move in. They seem a tad off and so he delves deeper...
Read this if you're one who doesn't really mind knowing the end of said movie, or my thoughts...(lol)
Spoiler:
I've never seen Roland as the hero of the series. He can be heroic, true, and a diplomat, and other things you mentioned. But behind it all is one simple, unyielding thing: attaining the Tower. But because he gets no justice for his "heroism" there is a feeling of irritation. Roland is only these things, almost unfailingly through the series when it furthers his drive towards the Tower.
Even without that, there is something deeper. Tied with his push to the Tower, it is Roland's lack of the qualities that would make him a complete man. He's a great gunslinger, capable of all those things you've mentioned, but those things lack humanity. They lack imagination, or humor, or compassion. Roland takes his duty his Eld bloodline not just to heart, but to soul, so much that it pushes the rest out. He's so wrapped up in the words protector/ defender of the White and Tower that he's missed the meaning of them.
The White is all that is good in all of us...not just good itself. When you defend that you defend love, and community, and comradery, laughter, all of it. Roland takes duty far to seriously, and misses the point. Hence he tried to climb the Tower, tried to face that which no one can without being selfish about it, and was sent to learn his mistake...again and again until he no longer needs to.
I don't think of it as Groundhog's Day, but more like Defending Your Life. When he no longer has the need to attain the Tower, he will be a complete man, and move on to peace.
"short posts..." what is this you speak of???
"...quiet as despair, I turn’d from him..."
Posts made by user To The Dark Tower Came
are his opinion. Any feelings of anger, angst,
or weltsmertz please see a licensed mental
health professional immediately.
From the movie A Few Good Men...
Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whose gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.
It's stressful being an other. ~ Juliet
I believe there ought to be a Constitutional Amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. ~ Crash Davis
The point that I'm trying to make with the previous post is that as a "defender of the White", you sometimes have to trade the things you love, and defend, in order to defend them. But they, like the Tower, must be defended. This calls to mind RofG's quote about the Tower never really being safe as well. Maybe this is just a soldier's point of view, and that makes some sense to me, as a soldier, you don't have the very liberty that you defend. You're required to wear what you're told, eat when your told when your told to eat it, sleep when your told, room with who your told to room with. I wonder if maybe having that experience makes me much more sensitive to things like the debate about smoking, and whatnot. I've actually had those basic liberties taken away (albeit voluntarily), so when anyone infringes on my freedom the least little bit, it's a big deal to me. While it's sad, and maybe a little contradictory, I think it describes Roland, and soldiers in general. You have to trade some of the very humanity that you speak of, to become a defender of it, and you have to do so willingly, and knowingly. He remains heroic in my mind for this reason.
It's stressful being an other. ~ Juliet
I believe there ought to be a Constitutional Amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. ~ Crash Davis
Hmmm...I am not sure I can go too far with that T. As you know, I'm a vet as well and I believe the secret is not trading your humanity for it even if you are placed in that situation.
It is only our humanity that makes us human and as time goes on, I believe that may be what this story is all about.
The kindness of close friends is like a warm blanket
I guess I only figured it was the same loop because of the way it conisides with the first book.
S'ok, but you don't think commiting murder, even on behalf of your country, requires you to trade a piece of your humanity? I just think the notion is horribly idealistic, and romantic, and lacks any base in reality. I'm coming to believe that you are correct, that the story is about Roland redeeming himself. I'm just not happy about it, and I disagree with the basic premise. I think Roland's acts, although abhorrent to some, are noble to me.
It's stressful being an other. ~ Juliet
I believe there ought to be a Constitutional Amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. ~ Crash Davis
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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Very well said, Jean...
This is my blog/page:
www.facebook.com/thespermwhaleandbowlofpetunias
This is my donation page:
https://www.razoo.com/br/causes/Maje...h-Resorption-1
I don't think soldier's work comes under "murder" category, at least not for me. I also agree that not all killing is murder.
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 don't think of it in terms of humanising or dehumanising T.
'Murder' is by definition "the unlawful premeditated killing of one person by another" -Oxford English Dictionary - & broadly similar in others.
Personally I do differentiate between that definition & (say) the killing by a soldier in Army A of a soldier in Army B in a war.
Or indeed the killing, in self or another's defence, by one person of another in a civilian setting.
These things are indeed 'killings' but not (imho) 'murder'.
That 'unlawful' in the definition being the differentiation for me.
But it is only an opinion of course & I am well aware that some prefer to classify all human-human killing as 'murder'.