in which i say a few nice things about the dark tower series ~

[lookingland]

i love the illustration above (by Whelan from The Gunslinger ~ he was the best illustrator for the series, i think).

i'm nearly finished with The Wolves of Calla (book five of the series), but thought i would take a moment (especially in light of the many negative things i said about Wizard and Glass) to talk about what's keeping me reading. because first of all, i'm not this stubborn. if i think a book is wasting my time, i have no qualms about ditching it ~ let alone a whole series.

so here is a list of the things that really work for me in this adventure, quibbles aside:
 

1. King has created a bizarre and interesting cross-world. it's post-apocalyptic in many ways, replete with mutants, but more importantly an emergent civilization that is itself "moving on". the language is lovely: familiar and yet foreign, formal and yet natural. and the landscape is likewise: there seem to be things from our present (and possibly future) that are parts of Mid-World's past. this works without being mysterious and confounding. the people of this new world take things pretty matter-of-fact and what they don't understand, they aren't real fazed about (which makes total sense in a world of magic, right? this is something grossly overlooked in a lot of fantasy, i think ~ wonders are wonders, but would people who live in those worlds really blanch all that much at them?). Roland's reaction to 1983 is priceless. he finds it interesting, but not shocking. just observes it as a traveler would a foreign city full of different customs, languages, and technologies.
2. another part of this bizarre and interesting cross-world is time that flows all over the place in weird ways, it makes no sense to the worlds' own inhabitants, and likewise is a matter-of-fact part of the fabric of this universe. has the gunslinger really been traveling for thousands of years? does it matter? no. it's very well established that Mid-World is a world of possibility and imagination. And while some could argue it's too convenient for the writer, it's established early on in the series, so you can either accept it or go read something else. why get hung up about whether Roland is thousands of years old and was only 14 when his quest began? it's just the way that it is and i think King's handled it well.
3. Roland's Gilead is a now-lost empire built on the premise of Mid-World's version of Arthurian lore. as a result, our protagonist Roland is really, at heart, a knight of old (a descendant of Arthur). his manners are pure chivalry on some levels and that makes him charming and old-fashioned on the one hand, but also totally focused on his quest, loyal to his "line", and prepared to kill or die for what he believes in. Roland as a character is practically perfect in every way. he is consistent, has depth, and a dogged virtue that you can stand behind without flinching. he's not a jerk, he's not a smartass, he's earnest and honest ~ the quintessential hero. and despite this, he is flawed and human and intensely interesting. most books totally fail on this level. i love Roland. i will read on if only for his sake.
4. one of the overwhelming complaints (it seems) against this series is the way it supernovas into meta-fiction (i'm guessing in book 6). perhaps it took knowing this before hand, but i have to say King plays fair about this: all the hints are there from the start. it doesn't feel like it's going to come at us straight out of the blue because he's been hinting at it for at least the last three books (small hints at first, but they are growing larger). maybe some people weren't paying attention and got frustrated or felt cheated that all of the sudden the books seem to be referencing other King books, but i feel like King established a landscape in which all this cross-over is not only possible, but intrinsic to the quest. and i don't feel frustrated that it's been twenty years since i read The Stand or 'Salem's Lot (etc.) and can't remember a thing about them. i may be missing subtle things, but I get the drift of what King's doing here. and like i said, i think he's played fairly with the reader in terms of setting stuff up.

so there: my argument for why i am continuing on with the series despite a lot of kvetching about the last book and a lot of nitpicking i could continue to do (King has some continuity problems, but nothing i would hang him for ~ though i do think there's a wee bit of sloppiness going on). i've really enjoyed Wolves of Calla, so i am buoyant with hope that the series will progress to a satisfactory end at this point.

and of course, if it doesn't, you will certainly hear about it.

more about book five once i'm done....

: D