Welcome to A Read of the Dark Tower series. Join me each week as I, Constant Reader, tackle the magnum opus of Stephen King’s career for the first time. If you want to discuss in general terms or talk about these first sections, join me by commenting here. If you want to talk spoilers, please head over to Tor.com forums for the spoiler discussion for the spoiler discussion so my Dark Tower-virgin ears won’t hear anything before I read it, which might tempt me into trying to sound more intelligent than I actually am.
In today’s entry, I’ll pick up with sections XI-XV of The Gunslinger’s first big chapter, also called “The Gunslinger.”
Section XI: Gunslinger (whom I shall refuse to call Roland until I’m officially told his name) and Allie are in bed when Sheb rushes into the room with murder on his mind, ostensibly jealous because Gunslinger is shagging his woman. Gunslinger breaks both of Sheb’s wrists with a single snap, then realizes he’s seen Sheb before—in a place called Mejis with a girl named Susan “before the bonfire.” Sheb recognizes him, but says Gunslinger was just a boy, one of three boys. Allie asks about Susan, but Gunslinger won’t talk about her.
What Constant Reader learns: Gunslinger has been in Tull four days now. The dude is obviously strong—Sheb’s hands were dangling at the end of his arms after a single snap. But Gunslinger seems to be killing time, trying to avoid moving into the desert. He realizes his reflexes are growing dull, or Sheb would never have been able to surprise him, and he wonders if the whole complacency-in-Tull thing is a trap set by the Man in Black.
(I’m wondering if Sheb is really jealous, or is under the influence of the Man in Black, about whom both Gunslinger and I are extremely paranoid. Is the whole town under some spell that he wove? But if so, why is Allie relatively normal, or at least relatively sane?)
Gunslinger thinks of the MiB by that name and not by Walter O’Dim, so this underscores that O’Dim is not a real name, or is one of many that the Man in Black uses.
We get another brief glimpse into Gunslinger’s past. Where is Mejis? Who is Susan (obviously someone he loved)? Why was he there with two other boys? What happened on Reap night (which I’m thinking is like Halloween or harvest)? And who is the Coffin Hunter, Eldred Jonas, who also was in Mejis?
A lot of questions are piling up and I’m as clueless as ever.
Section XII: Back to religion again. The bar is closed “for whatever passes for the Sabbath in Tull.” Gunslinger slinks into the church and hides in the shadows, watching the “preacher woman,” Sylvia Pittston, breathe fire and brimstone. She’s a “mountainous” woman who engenders a “sudden red lust” in Gunslinger that leaves him shaky. Unless Gunslinger has a fetish, we assume Sylvia has some kind of supernatural power that lures him. She is preaching about The Interloper and makes several innuendoes that let us know she’s referring to Satan as well as to the Gunslinger. She obviously knows he’s hidden there, listening. Finally, Gunslinger realizes she’s possessed. He thought “suddenly, with terror and absolute surety, that the man who called himself Walter had left a demon in her.”
What Constant Reader learns. Gunslinger is really afraid of the Man in Black, but driven to pursue him by a duty I don’t yet know enough to understand. This whole scene reads like something right out of the Pentecostal playbook—the religious ferver of the crowd, the man who collapses at the feet of the “evangelist,” the swaying and chanting. Hard not to see the mob mentality at work, fueled by religious zealotry, and not realize this is going to get really ugly very soon.
During her rant, Sylvia Pittston refers to The Interloper as “the Antichrist, a crimson king with bloody eyes.” (Uh, Lord Sauron, anyone?) She also talks about The Interloper as the one “who made the machines with LaMerk stamped on them.” That has to be significant because it’s listed right up there with old Satan’s other misdeeds, and Gunslinger picks up on it. But he isn’t sure if it’s “LaMerk” or “LaMark.” Even Gunslinger admits his memory is “capricious.”
Makes me wonder if Gunslinger’s self-doubt and capricious memory are not part of the slipping away of the world, and if whatever machines LaMerk or LaMark made didn’t contribute to the wasteland the land has turned into. He also has another sense of déjà vu—as if he’s heard Sylvia Pittston before. Another memoryfail?
Section XIII: In this short section, Allie and Gunslinger are in bed again. They seem to spend a lot of time there, but what else is there to do in Tull if one isn’t possessed by a demon? Gunslinger finally gets the information he wants from Allie: how long Sylvia has been in town and where she came from (about 12 years or maybe two, because “time’s funny,” and from the desert, far away), and where she lives (in a shack behind the church “where the real minister” used to live).
What Constant Reader Learns: Not much beyond what Gunslinger himself learns. He hears that Sylvia came from the desert and thinks “Southeast,” the direction in which the Man in Black is headed. So did MiB send her? Even though the MiB’s minion Sylvia Pittston doesn’t see people and stays in her cabin except to “preach,” we know Gunslinger’s going to go see her, and it’s probably not going to go well.
Section XIV: Another short section, but a chilling one. Gunslinger knows it’s going to be his last day in Tull, and a storm is brewing. He leaves, presumably for Sylvia’s house, and we are told he only sees Allie alive once more.
What Constant Reader learns: Uh-oh. Last time we had a storm brewing in Tull, the Man in Black was behind it.
I keep having to remind myself that all this is a big long flashback—that this is the story told through Gunslinger’s eyes, as he’s telling it to Brown in his hut at the edge of the desert.
Section XV: Gunslinger arrives at Sylvia Pittston’s shack. The constant wind has died down “and the whole world seemed to wait.” She doesn’t answer his knock, so he caves the door in with one hard kick. Sylvia’s in a rocking chair with a shawl, an oddly domestic picture. She tells Gunslinger he’ll never catch the Man in Black, and Gunslinger realizes MiB “screwed her in every sense of the word.” She claims to be carrying his child, calls the MiB an “angel of God,” and says the MiB told her that the Gunslinger is the Antichrist. So Gunslinger screws her too—with the barrel of his gun—while demanding to know what lay beyond the desert. He is careful not to touch her. Her orgasm seems to loosen her tongue and she tells him the MiB stops on the other side of the mountains to “make his strength.” Afteward, she says he’s killed the child of the Crimson King and orders the Gunslinger to leave, which he does.
What Constant Reader learns: The whole psycho-sexual thing with the gun barrel was disturbingly bizarre. Can we agree on that much?
So, at what point did the Man in Black possess Sylvia, body and soul? Before she came to Tull? Is Sylvia a victim? It’s hard to think of her as such, but once Gunslinger has exorcised her demon with his gun barrel-induced orgasm (hey, did the priest in The Exorcist ever consider this method?), the Gunslinger doesn’t kill her. Maybe he figures she’s already whipped the town into a frenzy against him and there’s no need. I keep thinking she feels like a loose thread he should have tied up, though.
Interesting that Gunslinger denies MiB ever told Sylvia he was the Antichrist, because earlier he’d told Allie that the MiB is many things, but not a liar. So that means Gunslinger is not the Antichrist—no surprise—and that the MiB’s claim to be an angel of God is true. Lucifer was a fallen angel, so that jibes with the whole angel/satan thing.
In the New Testament, in 1 John 2:18, the apostle John writes: “Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.”
Something apocalyptic is about to happen, yes?
That’s it for this week! Next week—same time, same place—we’ll pick up with the last five sections of The Gunslinger’s first chapter, also titled “The Gunslinger.”
Urban fantasy author Suzanne Johnson is annoyed that she’s far past 16 and still hasn’t discovered her secret powers. Her new urban fantasy series, scheduled to begin with the release of Royal Street in April 2012 by Tor Books, is set in New Orleans during and after Hurricane Katrina. Find Suzanne on Twitter.
Mejis, Sheb, Susan, Eldred Jonas and the Coffin Hunters. That part of this story is my favourite part. But that story is told in book 4, Suzanne, so bear patience. :)
(highlight the text below for spoliers — moderator)
Let me spoil you a little, by saying Susan is the love of the Gunslinger’s life…
Been a long time since I’ve read this – glad to get the refresher. Thanks for the read!
I can already tell Susan is The One for Roland, but I’m fearing from the hints so far that her story is not going to have a happy ending. Oh, wait. Stephen King. Redundant :-)
I don’t want to spoil things for you, Suzanne. However, where books 1-3 have a high Mystery/magic/tech level, book 4 is a good old fashioned Western. There is a reason why the Gunslinger is the Gunslinger, and it was a rank. :-)
Fiddler: I don’t know why you keep saying ‘I don’t want to spoil X or Y’ and then giving away spoilers. If you don’t want to spoil, say nothing. Pretty simple.
Oh, it takes a lot to “spoil” for me. I’m so clueless right now, I wouldn’t even recognize a spoiler :-)
@NumberNone:
When I say something that spoils the plot for Suzanne, you have all the right to call me down.
However, I haven’t.
I could say nothing. So could you. And you chose to post here to call me down.
ooooh ooooh. Thanks for posting on Memorial Day, Suzanne! Nice surprise.
I’ve only read the whole series once and a long time ago at that, and I have to say, that, like Malazan, I think rereading is even a better than the first read. There’s a lot of meat in here and foreshadowing. Wow. I had no idea. Excellent.
@NumberNone
And to add to my earlier point, I dare you to actually enter the discussion. Because what I read from you so far seems like whining….
Yes, agreed, Section XV was really odd.
It is. But then, sex tends to be odd in King’s novels (a certain scene at the end of It comes to mind).
Another thing : the Crimson King features in at least one other King novel (one of the mediocre ones, alas). It was one of my first hints that nearly every King book is connected through what I call his Dark Tower Mythos (like the Cthulhu Mythos). He’s the only writer I know who has done that, apart from Lovecraft. The problem with that approach is that it makes you want to slink through the absolute crap King publishes from time to time just to get another piece of the puzzle (*shudders*Dreamcatcher*heaves*).
@pKp…LOL. I may be the only person who actually liked Dreamcatcher. I know this is going to make me want to go back and read SK books I haven’t looked at in years, so I hope you guys will point out when characters like the Crimson King have appeared before. I’m so focused on trying to make sense of this one, I’ll probably miss a lot.
Hi! Enjoying the reread. But.
Put questions of the future aside, I tell ye. Someone else may have pointed this out, but Susan, Mejis, Jonas, all the rest, do not get answers until book 4. If you can, I suggest picking up the unedited version of the Gunslinger, as it paints Roland in a different light (you may believe he is the antichrist in that one).
The Crimson King appeared LARGELY in Insomnia which was practically all about him, and he also appears in The Black House as well. The novels that tie in to The Dark Tower are ‘Salem’s Lot, The Stand, The Talisman, Skeleton Crew, It, The Eyes of the Dragon, Insomnia, Rose Madder, Desperation, The Regulators, Bag of Bones, Hearts in Atlantis, Black House, Everything’s Eventual, and From a Buick 8. But yeah, Insomnia is the Crimson King book.
It is pleasure a going through your post. I have bookmarked you to check out new stuff from your side.
Vishal Mittal Architect
@Fiddler: I don’t see any neeed to get personal. By my lights, you’ve mentioned four things that relate to future developments in the space of two posts. You may not consider them to be spoilers (although you admit that at least one is), but it’s always better to be safe than sorry when it comes to spoilers, don’t you think?
If either you or I feel the need to get involved in the discussion, we could discuss the material read so far. The significance and importance of the religious imagery: the complex layering of flashback on flashback, recall on recall, and how that relates to the recurring motif of the ‘world moving on’ (and whether the poor memories and poor sense of time that many of the participants appear to suffer from might be a clue that the narration is unreliable in places): the fact that some of the material here is stuff that even King might not have been able to get away with in his ‘mainstream’ work at this time: the relevance of the ideas developed so far to King’s contemporary and later works: the influences that shaped this book: the ambiguities in the Gunslinger’s attitude towards the Man in Black, and the shallowness of his relationships with any of the people he’s met so far: even the changes from the original version.
I’ve discussed all of these many times before in other contexts, and so have limited interest in doing so again, but there’s an abundance of things to discuss rather than just making excitable allusions to future events.
Hmmm. @NumberNone says to consider “whether the poor memories and poor sense of time that many of the participants appear to suffer from might be a clue that the narration is unreliable in places.” That’s pretty mind-boggling and something I wasn’t considering. So not only are Roland’s memories not to be trusted, but the narrative itself might be faulty as it’s (except with periodic authorial intrusioin) filtered through Roland and his actions. Gah. *pounds head on desk*
Suzanne@17:So not only are Roland’s memories not to be trusted, but the narrative
itself might be faulty as it’s (except with periodic authorial
intrusioin) filtered through Roland and his actions.
Isn’t that inherent to a story being from anyone’s point-of-view at all ?
Ah yes, Insomnia. Somewhere between now and Book 7 you may be well served to nab a copy (or a decent summary) Suzanne. One of the biggest complaints I’ve heard from some friends regarding Book 7 was a random character being added so late to the story. While Insomnia doesn’t go into huge detail, it does at least introduce that character. My friends hadn’t read it before then.
It’s not a deal breaker though. :)
As for the timeline, us Malazan regulars have a mantra: “the timeline is not important”. Inconsistencies, yes, but the flow of the tale continues pretty clearly. Having time itself misbehave does give SK some liberties though. Never thought about it before…
@thomstel…Actually, I’m staring at the top shelf of my bookshelves, looking at the spine of Insomnia right now. It’s been years since I read it, but I might pull it out for a quick read before I get to the final book. LOL, I have plenty of time. This is gonna take a while!
Fiddler @@@@@ 4: That’s interesting. Book 4 is the one I liked the least.
I’m now trying to remember if Susan et. al was included in the original unedited version of the Gunslinger, or if this bit of foreshadowing is only in the new and improved version. Does anyone know?
pKp @@@@@ 11: I remember Insomnia being one of the first books that really underlined the interconnections between King’s other novels and the Dark Tower series for me as well. The problem is, Insomnia is one of the few King novels I haven’t been able to re-read. I rather enjoyed it the first time (though it was kind of slow) but I just can’t seem to get through it a second time.
SuzanneJohnson @@@@@ 12: Dreamcatcher is the only one of King’s books that I don’t like at all. You’re not the only one who liked it though, I’ve met at least one other who did. :)
And finally, NumberNone’s point about the reliability of the narration is an excellent one. When you’re dealing with a flashback of a flashback in particular, and when you have the character himself telling you that he is growing mistrustful of his own memories, it certainly says something.
I think there’s also a lot of significance in just how much the other characters are having a hard time grasping reality. The difference of 12 years or 2, the weird relationships between the inhabitants of Tull, the talk about Sylvia versus a “real” preacher…it all goes to suggest that the center really is having a hard time holding and when things get that bad, what can be relied upon? Very little, it seems to me.
@toryx
Susan is mentioned in the orignal Gunslinger, but not in as much detail. Mejis, Jonas, the bonfire, and Sheb’s connection are left out, likely because King didn’t know about them at the time.
I love this series… it is hands down my favorite books of all time. Growing up I used to call the complition my bible (back before the 5,6,7 were made). I understand that through the years the first three books were made with slight editions… I’ve moved many times and I don’t know where my copies of the Dark Tower are, but to my knowledge they didn’t originally mention so much about Mejis, Susan, the Big Coffin Hunters, Eldred, or Roland as a boy… these must be in the new[er] copies.
I had the good luck of reading the series “out” of order, coincidentally starting with book 4. The first two lines of the book (don’t worry, it’s not a spoiler) “Ask me a riddle.” “Fuck you.” And boom, I was hooked.
While I’m normally not a member of fan-fiction groups and people that join together and discuss the world inside a fictional universe, I would LOVE to join this thread and discuss Roland and the adventures he experiences in his Quest.
Tricky… Sylvia’s eyes are described in similar terms as the MiB’s…large and dark (revealing her to be possessed). And then the confusion: In her sermon she identifies “a crimson king with bloody eyes” as the Antichrist (Satan)…but after the encounter with the Gunslinger, she says, “You’ve killed the child of the Crimson King.” Did the exorcism free her to accidentally speak the truth?
The Gunslinger describes his memory as “capacious” not “capricious.”