The Shrine

<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '>Not much time, so I'll have to run through this fast (and I'm missing tons of stuff):

First off, I didn't like many of the things he did with this:

- Cheapened classics like "Salem's Lot" by making the vampires there mere low level servants to a guy in a cage outside a tower throwing Harry Potter Sketches. From a "Salem's Lot" point of view, I'm going to pretend like the Dark Tower never happened. *sigh*

- Making the Crimson King just some crazy nutjob cheapened *him*

- Still not much justification for throwing the number 19 out there everywhere (and why does it only become significant in the last 2 books?)

- The Beam/Tower/Center of the universe thing was...well....I dunno. Kinda weak sci-fi for a sci-fi dork but others may differ

- Ka-tet spirtual bond break never really explained ("Oh today guys, we're not Ka-tet and I'm not your Dinh...but other than that, everything is pretty much the same, ok?"). Ok, he explained it, but I was definitely not satisfied with it.

- The Harry Potter Skeetches. Why the fuck?

- And finally, the ending. So he goes back to the beginning,because Ka's is a wheel...but apparently Ka is a broken wheel that happens to only go back to the beginning of book one, rather back to the real beginning...but Ka doesn't mind changing the back story a little by giving the hero a horn (oh and why was this horn a big deal btw?)...and while we're at it, just why does ka care so much about Roland or the fact that he always does the same thing...*sigh*

Did I hate the book? No. But I was disappointed though. Gotta run...</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '><blockquote><i>Making the Crimson King just some crazy nutjob cheapened *him*</i></blockquote>Yeah, I thought that was kinda lame. <i>This</i> is the guy the whole universe has been shitting bricks about? I was expecting a spider monstrosity to rival Mordred.<blockquote><i>Still not much justification for throwing the number 19 out there everywhere (and why does it only become significant in the last 2 books?)</i></blockquote>King was hit by the van on June 19th, 1999. Or was it not June? Anyway, I'm pretty sure that's where the 19 and 99's come from. I imagine the real King was a little caught up in those dates, considering he almost died.<blockquote><i>The Beam/Tower/Center of the universe thing was...well....I dunno. Kinda weak sci-fi for a sci-fi dork but others may differ</i></blockquote>And for the record, I do.<blockquote><i>The Harry Potter Skeetches. Why the fuck?</i></blockquote>The same reason they also have lightsabers. Since this is supposed to be the "real" world (like every other scifi/fantasy story that has used the device), he put in references to contemporary stuff that also happens to be scifi/fantasy work. And since this is supposed to be the "real" world, it's conceivable that eventually someone (a dork, no doubt) will make weapons inspired by their favorite scifi/fantasy worlds.<blockquote><i>And finally, the ending. So he goes back to the beginning,because Ka's is a wheel...but apparently Ka is a broken wheel that happens to only go back to the beginning of book one, rather back to the real beginning...but Ka doesn't mind changing the back story a little by giving the hero a horn (oh and why was this horn a big deal btw?)...and while we're at it, just why does ka care so much about Roland or the fact that he always does the same thing...*sigh*</i></blockquote>Yeah, some wierd things there. I had an icebox moment when I realized how could Roland have done something different at Jericho Hill if he only was sent back to the the beginning of book one? Or did he really live his life over again, and we just picked it up again at the beginning of book one? But the former is certainly what it sounded like. King also hinted that the <i>next</i> time is when Roland will get it right, which means that what we really have is a 5,000 page story about the next to last iteration. So there is still the question of what happens when Roland is <i>done</i>-done.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt Tahoma; text-align: left; '>(didnt read post) NOOO, i just startedit... guess we'll discuss again in a bit.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt georgia; text-align: left; '>Same..Im trying to start reading the series..I cant believe that I never read it. I used to be a huge King fan.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Arial; text-align: left; '><I>Cheapened classics like "Salem's Lot" by making the vampires there mere low level servants to a guy in a cage outside a tower throwing Harry Potter Sketches. From a "Salem's Lot" point of view, I'm going to pretend like the Dark Tower never happened. *sigh*</I>

Yeah, I didn't really mind the fact that the CK was a nutjob (he <I>was</i> sane until Book 5 or so, at least). But was it really too much to ask that he get a bit bigger of a part in the finale? I mean, come on, at least give us a palaver like between Roland and Walter at the end of Book 1. Ka is a goddamn <I>wheel</i>, right? So wheel us the fuck around to something substantial.

<I>Still not much justification for throwing the number 19 out there everywhere (and why does it only become significant in the last 2 books?)</i>

I agree. King could've explained the 19/99 a bit better for how big a part it seemed to play.

<I>The Harry Potter Skeetches. Why the fuck?</i>

Why the fuck not?

<I>So he goes back to the beginning,because Ka's is a wheel...but apparently Ka is a broken wheel that happens to only go back to the beginning of book one, rather back to the real beginning</i>

What's the "real" beginning? The battle at Jericho Hill? The trip to Mejis? Roland's birth? Arthur Eld's birth? They're all arbitrary points. If Ka is indeed a wheel, then how could any sort of "real" beginning ever exist? The beginning of Book 1 is as good a beginning as any other (and considering it's the point when the fictional Stephen King began channeling Gan to write the books, I'd say it's probably better than most).

<I>but Ka doesn't mind changing the back story a little by giving the hero a horn (oh and why was this horn a big deal btw?)...and while we're at it, just why does ka care so much about Roland or the fact that he always does the same thing...</i>

Well, some things are best left to the imagination, but it seems obvious that Roland's true grand mission (what he is being directed by Gan and Ka to do) is not to enter the Dark Tower, or even reach it, but to stop the CK and rescue the Beams. Remember how the characters kept harping on the fact that with King safe, and Algul Siento destroyed, their mission was over and they need not continue? Remember how Roland mentioned that they would be "tempted" on the road to the Tower, and they thought they had overcome the temptation at the CK's castle? The Dark Tower is Roland's forbidden fruit, his final temptation. If Roland is truly worthy of becoming the savior of humanity, then he must forego his own selfish quest for greatness, for power, for wisdom, etc.

I'm not sure what the exact purpose of the Horn of Eld is, but if you read Browning's poem you'll see that the Roland in the poem reaches the Dark Tower but doesn't actually enter it. Instead he blows his horn and he is visited by all his friends whom he lost during his journey. A lot of folks (myself included) theorize that King intended the Browning poem as account of Roland's final "loop" - the true end of the story. The fact that Gan gave Roland the Horn this time before sending him back to the beginning seemed to me like he was saying "Hey, good job on that last time through. You almost figured it out. Take this and maybe this time around you'll understand what you're supposed to do."</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>Hmm. I like your account of the ending.</div>

<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '><i>" Yeah, I didn't really mind the fact that the CK was a nutjob (he was sane until Book 5 or so, at least). But was it really too much to ask that he get a bit bigger of a part in the finale? I mean, come on, at least give us a palaver like between Roland and Walter at the end of Book 1. Ka is a goddamn wheel, right? So wheel us the fuck around to something substantial."</i>

LOL! This is exactly what I mean. You probably articulated my point better. It's not so much that he's a nutjob, so much as his part at the end is so minimal given his influence. In other words, at least make him an *interesting* nutjob (i.e., let him do something besides throw skeetches from a cave)!

If I had to guess, King was probably trying to do something like Sauron and Morodor (remember, Sauron's influence went everywhere, but his power was centered in one location in Morodor just as the CK was trapped in the cage)...but it's just not the same.

</i>" agree. King could've explained the 19/99 a bit better for how big a part it seemed to play."</i>

Kupek mentioned that June 19, 1999 was when King got hit by the van, and that's a good point. But I guess it seems like such a last minute, "Oh won't this be cool!" idea that it comes off kind of hollow to me. If the 19 thing was spread through *all* the books, that'd be one thing. But it just feels tacked on at the end to me.

<i>" What's the "real" beginning? The battle at Jericho Hill? The trip to Mejis? Roland's birth? Arthur Eld's birth? They're all arbitrary points. If Ka is indeed a wheel, then how could any sort of "real" beginning ever exist? The beginning of Book 1 is as good a beginning as any other (and considering it's the point when the fictional Stephen King began channeling Gan to write the books, I'd say it's probably better than most)."</i>

Well, technically, didn't he begin during the time of Roland growing up in Gilead? Those books were in the series too. Why get pushed back to the beginning of book one? I mean, it kinda seems cool that it goes to the beginning of the first book until you realize it makes no sense. :)


BTW, any Jordan fans keep thinking of Jordan's "The Wheel turns as the Wheel wills..." riff during all the ka-as-a-wheel business? What's up with this fate as a wheel theme in all these books? I need to investigate this further.

<i>" Well, some things are best left to the imagination, but it seems obvious that Roland's true grand mission (what he is being directed by Gan and Ka to do) is not to enter the Dark Tower, or even reach it, but to stop the CK and rescue the Beams. Remember how the characters kept harping on the fact that with King safe, and Algul Siento destroyed, their mission was over and they need not continue? Remember how Roland mentioned that they would be "tempted" on the road to the Tower, and they thought they had overcome the temptation at the CK's castle? The Dark Tower is Roland's forbidden fruit, his final temptation. If Roland is truly worthy of becoming the savior of humanity, then he must forego his own selfish quest for greatness, for power, for wisdom, etc.


I'm not sure what the exact purpose of the Horn of Eld is, but if you read Browning's poem you'll see that the Roland in the poem reaches the Dark Tower but doesn't actually enter it. Instead he blows his horn and he is visited by all his friends whom he lost during his journey. A lot of folks (myself included) theorize that King intended the Browning poem as account of Roland's final "loop" - the true end of the story. The fact that Gan gave Roland the Horn this time before sending him back to the beginning seemed to me like he was saying "Hey, good job on that last time through. You almost figured it out. Take this and maybe this time around you'll understand what you're supposed to do." </i>

That makes sense and it holds together more...but I don't understand the lesson that's being taught or why reaching the top of the DT is a bad thing. After all, the DT could have just stayed shut. It even goes through the trouble of creating a fancy security scheme to prevent people from entering. You need to have a piece of Arthur Eld's sword to get in. Also the DT goes out of its way to call Roland there, only to turn around and tell him that "oops, you're not *really* supposed to come here". So the forbidden fruit thing doesn't make much sense in that context. However, I'm not sure if King was really thinking about this when he wrote it. :)

Thus what kupek says still holds water:
<i>"Yeah, some wierd things there. I had an icebox moment when I realized how could Roland have done something different at Jericho Hill if he only was sent back to the the beginning of book one? Or did he really live his life over again, and we just picked it up again at the beginning of book one? But the former is certainly what it sounded like. King also hinted that the next time is when Roland will get it right, which means that what we really have is a 5,000 page story about the next to last iteration. So there is still the question of what happens when Roland is done-done."</i>

Good point.

Kupek:
<i>"The same reason they also have lightsabers. Since this is supposed to be the "real" world (like every other scifi/fantasy story that has used the device), he put in references to contemporary stuff that also happens to be scifi/fantasy work. And since this is supposed to be the "real" world, it's conceivable that eventually someone (a dork, no doubt) will make weapons inspired by their favorite scifi/fantasy worlds.</i>

I think that the real justification was that things that are the author's imagination in one place, actually exist in another place. Thus we have The Dogan by John Slightman, the Dark Tower by Stephen King, and by extension, we have light sabres and skeetches...at least, that's what I think King was going for, but he doesn't quite pull it off. I can buy that the imaginations of author's create worlds, but why would things created by different authors appear in the same other world? Why stop at lightsabres? Why not just go all the way to the Death Star? Now THAT would have been cool. :)</div>

<div style='font: 14pt "Times New Roman"; text-align: left; '>

Not much time, so I'll have to run through this fast (and I'm missing tons of stuff):

First off, I didn't like many of the things he did with this:

- Cheapened classics like "Salem's Lot" by making the vampires there mere low level servants to a guy in a cage outside a tower throwing Harry Potter Sketches. From a "Salem's Lot" point of view, I'm going to pretend like the Dark Tower never happened. *sigh*

I liked Callahan's character development in the last three books, but otherwise I'd agree with you.

- Making the Crimson King just some crazy nutjob cheapened *him*

Yeah, I mean WTF? I liked him a lot better in Insomnia. Granted that wasn't much of a battle either, but at least he sounded like a villan that time. Just as bad is what was done to Walter. He got turned from the big bad Walkin' Dude into some schmuck who gets eaten by a spider-baby (who doesn't put up much of a fight either, unfortunately). Which is a shame, because I was looking forward to a final showdown between him and Roland's ka-tet. Oh yeah, WTF is the link to IT? Some vague references to a turtle aren't what I'd call a link. That's like saying there's a link to The Shining because there's telepaths in there. ;-)

- Still not much justification for throwing the number 19 out there everywhere (and why does it only become significant in the last 2 books?)

Probably the same reason the last 3 books are so divergent from the rest: King picked up a few ideas on the way and just ran with them.

- The Beam/Tower/Center of the universe thing was...well....I dunno. Kinda weak sci-fi for a sci-fi dork but others may differ

I think it'd have worked better if Roland actually encountered God/Gan at the top and didn't just go back to the desert, but that's me.

- Ka-tet spirtual bond break never really explained ("Oh today guys, we're not Ka-tet and I'm not your Dinh...but other than that, everything is pretty much the same, ok?"). Ok, he explained it, but I was definitely not satisfied with it.

- The Harry Potter Skeetches. Why the fuck?

King must've been searching for a modern-day pop-culture reference to throw in. Who knows.

- And finally, the ending. So he goes back to the beginning,because Ka's is a wheel...but apparently Ka is a broken wheel that happens to only go back to the beginning of book one, rather back to the real beginning...but Ka doesn't mind changing the back story a little by giving the hero a horn (oh and why was this horn a big deal btw?)...and while we're at it, just why does ka care so much about Roland or the fact that he always does the same thing...*sigh*

Yeah, that has me curious as well. What exactly does Roland accomplish each time he enters the door at the top of the Tower? I mean, it can't be for nothing, can it?

Did I hate the book? No. But I was disappointed though. Gotta run...

I thought the first half-2/3 kicked ass, what with the battle at Thunderclap and Eddie, Jake, and Oy dying off in the process. And while I didn't necessarily like the ending, I can respect King for having the balls to make it the way he did.

On another note, the whole bit with Patrick Danville was kind of intriguing. The original prediction in Insomnia was that he was going to save the lives of two men, one of whom must not die if the world was going to remain intact. Yet when Patrick finally shows up in the story, it's Roland and Susannah he encounters, and it doesn't really matter at this point whether or not Roland dies, because he's already saved both the Beams and Stephen King, so his mission is done. Now there's a part a few chapters back where Roland is offered a copy of Insomnia, and he refuses saying it was just going to muddle things. Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but I think that's also serving as a message from King to us, saying not to take Insomnia as canon and expect everything to flow smoothly from that book.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt ; text-align: left; '>Get on ICQ damn you.</div>

<div style='font: 10pt verdana; text-align: left; padding: 0% 10% 0% 10%; '>It's been a looooong time since I read Insomnia, I hadn't remembered that part at all.</div>

<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '><i>" I liked Callahan's character development in the last three books, but otherwise I'd agree with you."</i>

I actually liked his character too. I just wished he were some other character if that makes any sense. :) Why'd he have to be the guy from Salem's Lot.

<i>" Yeah, I mean WTF? I liked him a lot better in Insomnia. Granted that wasn't much of a battle either, but at least he sounded like a villan that time. Just as bad is what was done to Walter. He got turned from the big bad Walkin' Dude into some schmuck who gets eaten by a spider-baby (who doesn't put up much of a fight either, unfortunately). Which is a shame, because I was looking forward to a final showdown between him and Roland's ka-tet. Oh yeah, WTF is the link to IT? Some vague references to a turtle aren't what I'd call a link. That's like saying there's a link to The Shining because there's telepaths in there. ;-)"</i>

YES! I forgot about the Insomnia thing, but you're on the money. And I forgot about the Walter thing too, but that's another thing that annoyed me. Come on, the same man who was devious enough to start the downfall of In-world and set off captain tripps and essentially destroy earth was conned by a were-spider (albeit a powerful one). Come on! I wished Roland had killed him too, but I would have settled for a satisfying alternative. Too bad I didn't get that.

And yeah, the IT link. Well there was a spider there. And a turtle...and eeehh...I guess that's about it. For some reason, the turtle (which I assume is Gan or The White or whatever-the-hell) takes an active role in battling evil. Why only here? like you said below, " King picked up a few ideas on the way and just ran with them."

<i>" I think it'd have worked better if Roland actually encountered God/Gan at the top and didn't just go back to the desert, but that's me."</i>

Or at least explained why he was sent back. The closest thing to a logical explanation I see is Guybrush's below and even that falls apapart under closer examination.

<i>" Yeah, that has me curious as well. What exactly does Roland accomplish each time he enters the door at the top of the Tower? I mean, it can't be for nothing, can it?"</i>

Thus the explanation that we are robbed off. And as I said below, it's not like the tower is trying to stop him or anything.

<i>" I thought the first half-2/3 kicked ass, what with the battle at Thunderclap and Eddie, Jake, and Oy dying off in the process. And while I didn't necessarily like the ending, I can respect King for having the balls to make it the way he did."</i>

I thought a lot of it was pointless. Why all the mucking around with forming the Tet Corporation? To accomplish what? I mean it's not like the skeetches, wolves, and other North Central Positronics creations they face are unmade. It's not like it has any affect on the mission. If they destroy the Crimson King, then it's not like these entities can exist to serve his purposes. So why not just concentrate on killing the king and ignore all the rigamarole about starting a corporation, blah blah blah. So to me, there was a lot of running around in the Keystone World for no reason.

Which reminds me, the whole time/alternate earth thing is handled badly anyway. I mean, even temporarily ignoring the glaring things I just brought up, why would it matter if they stop North Central Positronics in the Keystone world? It's not like it stops North Central Positronics in Roland's world, which is the one that matters. And if King has so much control over Roland's world (he can resist Gan, leave clues in the world to help out the good guys, etc), why not just write NSP out altogether? Ah well...

<i>" On another note, the whole bit with Patrick Danville was kind of intriguing. The original prediction in Insomnia was that he was going to save the lives of two men, one of whom must not die if the world was going to remain intact. Yet when Patrick finally shows up in the story, it's Roland and Susannah he encounters, and it doesn't really matter at this point whether or not Roland dies, because he's already saved both the Beams and Stephen King, so his mission is done. Now there's a part a few chapters back where Roland is offered a copy of Insomnia, and he refuses saying it was just going to muddle things. Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but I think that's also serving as a message from King to us, saying not to take Insomnia as canon and expect everything to flow smoothly from that book."</i>

Excellent point! I didn't even think about that. That's one whopper of a plot hole I totally missed! Your explanation for why this is the case is better than anything I can come up with.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Arial; text-align: left; '>No, I think you're definitely right about Insomnia.</div>

<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '>Don't worry. I'll be more than happy to discuss it again then. :)</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Arial; text-align: left; '>Some of the stuff just isn't supposed to make logical sense or fit nicely together like pieces in a jigsaw puzzle. Take the Dandelo/IT connection. King leaves us with several ambiguous links between Dandelo and IT - e.g., the feeding off of emotions, Joe Collins appearance becoming that of a "twisted clown," a stuttering robot whom he calls "Stuttering Bill" after Bill Denbrough (the stuttering leader of the Losers club), the fact that he's captured Patrick Danville who just happens to be from IT's hometown of Derry, the cottage's slight resemblance to that of the house on Dutch Hill in IT, the final transformation into an insect-like creature. Though King obviously must have intended these as "clues" of a sort, no explicit connection is ever made between Dandelo and IT and there remain inconsistencies as well (IT never fed off laughter, for one, and ITs true form was a kind of giant spider rather than an insect). So is Dandelo supposed to be IT? Well, not really...but the two can't be said to be unrelated either. You could say King (the fictional King) knew about Dandelo subconsciously when he wrote IT and so the two ended up surrounded by similar things, but that's about as good as you're going to get. You're not going to be able to wrap up everything in this series in a neat little package - but that's one of the reasons why it's so interesting.</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Arial; text-align: left; '>Oh, shit. There's spoilers for "It" in there if you haven't read it yet.</div>

<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '>I just figured Dandelo was another glamour-being like IT. I don't think they were literally the same being though. Just two of the same kind.

However, I thought the situation surrounding him was silly. "Ah, you see he's an emotion feeding entity who happens to live on the, get this, Plains of EMPATHICA and has a big ol' sign out front that happens to have an anagram of his name written on it (Odd Lane)." *sigh*</div>

<div style='font: 11pt Arial; text-align: left; '>The Stuttering Bill and Patrick Danville-Derry connections especially. Just saying they're the same <I>type</i> of creature doesn't explain those coincidences.

As for the anagram thing, Roland hinted that it was probably one of the rules of the glamour. I don't understand your complaint about the Plains of Empathica though. Why was that silly?</div>

<div style='font: 14pt "Sans Serif"; text-align: justify; padding: 0% 15% 0% 15%; '>

The Stuttering Bill and Patrick Danville-Derry connections especially. Just saying they're the same <I>type</i> of creature doesn't explain those coincidences.

I dI think it's easily explainable if you consider the possibility that Patrick Danville could be from any of the DT multiverse that the the IT creature possibly not unique. I'm not saying it's absolutely true, but when you consider that IT (apparently) died and was more of a spider whereas the creature in the DT was more of a locust (it seemed to me anyway), my theory seems to fit together alright.

As for the anagram thing, Roland hinted that it was probably one of the rules of the glamour. I don't understand your complaint about the Plains of Empathica though. Why was that silly?

I missed the Roland hint about the rules of the glamour. Are glamours cursed to put their names up on signs by their houses in anagram format? Or are you referring to Roland's comment about the glamour adding the "'s" to throw off people? If it's the latter, then my problem comes one step before. I want to know why there's a sign <i>at all</i>? It seems like a clue tossed in out of nowhere simply for the sake of being a clue, rather than having some logical reason (within the boundaries of a story about a castle at the center of the universe) for being there.

Same thing goes for the the "Plains of Empathica". Come on. Just because an emotion sucking entity lives someplace, now it lives on the Plains of Empathica (get it, empathy = empathica?). That's like renaming Translevania "The Castle of Stolen Blood" or calling Canada the "Fields of Suckdom" just because Black Lotus lives there. This is high school level wannabe writing. Seriously. There were some extremely good parts of to this book, but stuff like this sticks out like a sore thumb. The whole thing felt flimsy and rushed.</div>