Matt writes...

Gargoyle Culture & Biology

So, in most social species there is an evolved strategy that encourages gene diversification and limits inbreeding. In lions, for instance, the males leave the pride at maturity to take over a different pride and mate with the females of that group rather than stay and have only their sisters and aunts and female cousins to mate with. In bonobos, it is the females that often leave to join new groups and find unrelated males to mate with.

Now, obviously, in the Gargoyles Universe, up until very recently there was very little genetic exchange between the surviving far flung and isolated clans. But back in their heyday, when the nearest clan to your own was well known and could be reached, was there any sort of social strategy to encourage genetic diversity or has finding a mate among your own rookery siblings always been the norm?

And now that the clans are becoming more known to each other and able to move from clan to clan more easily, will this issue cause more inter-clan mating? Does the mixing of the 2198 rookery eggs have anything to do with this or is that just a symbolic gesture of the Gargoyle Nation?

Esteban writes...

Hey again Greg, I have another question for you

How do gargoyles view homosexuality? More specifically the Manhattan clan sense Lexington is confirmed to be homosexual, but knowing about the other gargoyles would be nice too.

Thanks Greg, I wish Peter David the best and I'll see if I can help.

Masterdramon writes...

Hey Greg! Hope that you're doing well, and that the holiday season is treating/did treat (depending on when you read this) your family happily.

What follows is a paper I recently submitted to my Contemporary Political Theory class at Pomona College, interrelating several of the concepts from the book we discussed that week ("You Are Not a Gadget" by Jaron Lanier) with the notion of namelessness in traditional gargoyle culture.

My professor (unfamiliar with the show, but very intrigued when I explained it to her) really got a kick out of the piece, and I earned a more-or-less "A-" equivalent for it. But as long as I've got it sitting around, I figured you might enjoy giving it a read as well.

[NOTE: You may want to review this post you made on Ask Greg in 2004 beforehand, as it is cited frequently: http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/search.php?rid=387].

Now, without further ado, the essay. It has been edited from the submitted version only by rearranging paragraph breaks...

The 1994 animated television series Gargoyles posits a highly intelligent species which dominated the Earth prior to human genesis and ascendance.

These gargoyles possess a unique culture which predates humanity's by a significant period, but the first on-screen depiction of the gargoyle species takes place in the 10th century, after millions of years of convergent evolution between the two cultures.

Indeed, the pilot episodes depict the essential death of one lingering component of gargoyle culture, at least for the series protagonists: that gargoyles lack personal names. This idea is first discussed in a conversation between two gargoyles and a human boy:

TOM: I'm Tom. What's your name?
GARGOYLE #1: Except for Goliath, we don't have names.
TOM: How do you tell each other apart?
GARGOYLE #1: We look different.
TOM: But what do you call each other?
GARGOYLE #2: (shrugs) Friend.

For context, "Goliath" is the leader of the clan of gargoyles to which the protagonists belong, and their liaison to the humans with whom they share an uneasy alliance; those humans felt incapable of dealing with a nameless entity, and Goliath did not bother to reject the name they selected for him.

Still, he does not use the name in communicating with his own clan until a betrayal by their human allies and a magical curse cause the protagonists to sleep as statues and then reawaken in 20th century Manhattan.

Here they meet and befriend Elisa Maza, a police detective who is both confused by and - for reasons she has trouble articulating - uncomfortable with this traditional lack of names. The following exchange takes place between Elisa and the clan's elderly mentor:

ELISA: Are you coming on the tour…uh, what do I call you, anyway?
GARGOYLE: Must you humans name everything? Nothing's real to you till you've named it, given it limits!
ELISA: It's not like that! It's just that…well, uh…things need names.
GARGOYLE: Does the sky need a name? Does the river?
ELISA: The river's called the Hudson.
GARGOYLE: (sighs) Fine, lass…then I will be 'the Hudson' as well.
ELISA: Great! Hudson it is.

From that point onward, that particular gargoyle is known as Hudson, and only Hudson.

The younger gargoyles who survived the centuries follow suit; the two who conversed with Tom become Lexington and Brooklyn, for example. And Goliath more-or-less fully accepts the moniker afforded him by the Dark Age humans.

As Gargoyles creator Greg Weisman points out, "naming is clearly addictive," and once they are established the convenience they offer makes doing away with them virtually impossible. Thus, for the Manhattan Clan of gargoyles, namelessness largely remains a thing of the past for the remainder of the series.

In "You Are Not a Gadget," Jaron Lanier describes the phenomenon experienced by these gargoyles using the term "lock-in."

As Lanier puts it, "lock-in…removes design options based on what is easiest to program, what is politically feasible, what is fashionable, or what is created by chance." Furthermore, the process "also reduces or narrows the ideas it immortalizes, by cutting away the unfathomable penumbra of meaning."

Despite originally referring to programming language, this is a perfect description of the process that "Hudson" has been subjected to in the previous scene.

Names are a method of defining identity, which necessarily must involve "giving it limits." But in traditional gargoyle culture, identity has greater meaning than that; it is amorphous, and changes with the circumstances.

The gargoyle who first made a compact with the humans at Castle Wyvern is the same gargoyle who mated three times and produced three progeny; he is the same gargoyle who fought the evil Archmage and received a wound that blinded him in one eye; he is the same gargoyle who slept for centuries and once awakened, found himself fascinated with the television show "Celebrity Hockey."

Does one name - Hudson - really encapsulate all of these aspects of his identity?

In-and-of-itself, all it signifies is that the place Hudson awoke in was modern-day New York (a cut line from the episode's script even has Elisa commenting, "Good thing we weren't facing Queens," emphasizing with humor how off-hand and esoteric the choice was).

That name was "locked-in" as the full and entire representation of the character from that point onward, solely because it was politically feasible (it makes dealing with Elisa and later human allies far more expedient), it was fashionable (every other intelligent being in 1994 New York has a name, so why not the gargoyles?), and it was created by chance (quite literally in this case, as the "Queens" quote illustrates).

And the result is that the very meaning of his identity is narrowed. He is no longer capable of being someone at a particular moment, and someone else in the next.

He is always Hudson.

There is an even greater story here, however, which Weisman's later musings have helped to illuminate. As he once observed, "Gargoyles don't seem to have a native language. They acquire human language, perhaps much the same way that they acquire names…And language, in many ways, is just sophisticated naming."

This is a compelling point. As he later notes, a different and arguably much more persuasive response that Elisa could have offered is that the river is called "the river."

Languages are systems for describing objects, concepts, actions, etc. using strict and uniform definitions, confining them to names that society calls words.

But does a name like "the sky" really fully encapsulate the meaning inherent within the depths that humans observe from below? Does it even begin to provoke a holistic understanding of its astronomical, religious, chemical, or poetic contexts?

And even more to the point, what of metaphysical concepts like "justice"? Can a single clear definition even exist for such a weighty and nebulous notion - and if not, does sticking the name "justice" to it not necessarily limit it?

Lanier certainly appears to believe so. As he conceives it, the system of symbology under which all current human languages operate is itself a lock-in; at best, a "middleman" between intent and "directly creating shared experience" that he wants to work to cut out.

His method for doing so is improvements on virtual reality, until researchers develop "the ability to morph at will, as fast as we can think."

Lanier envisions a world where the rather simplistic words "I'm hungry" will not be the only way to communicate the sensation which has brought them on - instead, he sees potential in the power of virtual reality technology to place us in the bodies of others, as a way to intimate the sensation itself.

Humanity would no longer have to be limited to extracting some piece of the concept it calls "hunger," giving it that name, and using it as code so that others who know the symbology of the English language will understand some approximation of that concept.

The concept would simply be understood, and communication would be a straightforward matter of imparting that understanding.

But perhaps there is an even better solution than this - although one that is, unfortunately, largely forgotten.

Presented with the puzzle that gargoyles are highly gregarious and intelligent by nature and yet appear to lack any notion of their own language, Weisman has mused that perhaps, long before human language evolved and became the locked-in method for communication, the gargoyle species possessed "mild psychic abilities that left them with no need to create language."

While emphasizing that he was only asserting a possibility, the communication he imagines - where it was not "words that they intuited (or transmitted or read or whatever) but emotions, maybe images or sensations" - sounds exceedingly similar to what Lanier hopes to achieve through virtual reality.

Such communication would be consistent with what audience knows about pre-human gargoyle culture, where definition and identity are situational as opposed to consistently codified.

But if that is the case, it leads to a rather lamentable conclusion. As Weisman puts it, "perhaps the very language skills that gargoyles learned from the human race dampened their psychic intuitiveness;" in other words, lock-in of a very particular method of communication (symbology) "locked-out" another method that presented communicative possibilities human technology can currently only dream of.

The initial insistence on not using personal names, then, can be considered a lingering hold-out of a bygone era where every concept was considered unlimited, and every sensation intimated in their full depth.

In dealing with nascent human cultures, gargoyles must have gradually accepted the limiting of concepts like "sky" or "river" because this made interspecies congress significantly more efficient, but they resisted the longest on the limiting of the very depths of the self.

But with the permanent instatement of "Hudson" and the rest, there does not appear to be room to return to the possibilities an unlimited identity presents. Human language has killed them.

Of course, both the gargoyle race and their culture are fantastical constructions, but that does not necessarily mean that humans cannot learn from their fictional example.

While humans do not seem to share these "mild psychic abilities" (although there are some who would vehemently disagree with that statement) that Weisman hypothesizes, that there are methods of sensation and communication which precede language skills is clearly documented.

As with gargoyles, members of the species Homo sapiens did exist well before the development of the earliest known language, and while current understanding of those early cultures is limited at best, there is also a much more immediate example to turn to.

Newborns spend a few years before they learn to define the world around them in the code of words - the sun is an experience to them long before the strictly defined, limiting name of "the sun" is ever applied to it.

The depths of what could be learned from observing children raised without learning language skills, interpreting sensations and intimating them to others via methods of their own device, are boundless; of course, the enormous ethical travesty presented by such experiments means they are not a viable avenue for inquiry.

So instead, humans turn to fiction - attempting to realize through others what that they have long since lost, and yearn to find again.

Greg Weisman has often described gargoyle culture, and pre-human gargoyle culture specifically, as something of a wish fulfillment for him. "I'm such a human," he laments with a written-out sigh, "But I aspire to gargoylosity."

Well, if the virtual reality morphing that so excites Jaron Lanier can indeed allow humans to experience sensation as a pre-human gargoyle (or a pre-language human, or a baby, or even a cephalopod) did/does - if it has the potential to turn the clock back as well as forward, and show what it is like for things simply to be, without the cumbersome and restrictive middleman of naming them - then perhaps that is an aspiration that more humans should share.

Katie writes...

I live with roommates directly across the street from a church and directly above a funeral home. We have a gargoyle in the window facing the church. Is this bad? We've been experiencing weird happenings in the house and get uneasy in a particular area of the house and I'd like to know if removing the gargoyle might help. I know that they're meant to keep evil out of a church and that's why they face away from them, but I wonder if having a gargoyle facing the church is bringing bad vibes to my apartment.

Todd Jensen writes...

When you were writing the "Gargoyles" comics for Slave Labor Graphics, did you ever mentally associate any of the scenes you wrote with the different musical themes from the television series? (I thought of this question after I realized that I was mentally linking Brooklyn's words when he returns from his Timedancing, "Forever... forty years... forty seconds... however you keep time, the dance is finally done" to the music that played in "The Gathering Part One" when Goliath was talking about how Avalon had finally released them from its quest and now they were home.

Greg Bishansky writes...

I have a question about gargoyle justice. Goliath considered dropping Tony Dracon to his death in "Protection," but decided that "gargoyle justice isn't human justice." So, I have to wonder... in what circumstances does a gargoyle arrive at taking the life of another to extract justice? I guess I'm just curious to know where does banishment end, and death begin?

Sydonai writes...

I did my best scouring the AskGreg archives trying to look for this answer and I'm PRETTY sure it hasn't been asked. If it has, I totally apologize. :(

I was re-watching 'Deadly Force' and really got to thinking about Goliath coming so close to doling out 'justice' for Elisa when he thought she had died. My question is this:

1. If a clan member does commit a crime what do his/her clan mates do? I know the trios infraction in the first episode got them a night in the rookery, but what do modern day gargoyles do in order to 'punish' the gargoyle whose committed the crime?

2. If a gargoyle kills a person (justified or not), is their punishment strictly dispensed by their clan, or are they given up to the human authorities?

Derek writes...

You've mentioned before that name designations don't mean much to Gargoyles. Does that extend to things like dates, months and seasons? For example if a Gargoyle clan lived totally isolated from humanity would they bother with any kind of classifications of time as they already seemed to be very attuned this by their biology.

Matt writes...

Hey Greg.

In July 2008, Chip asked you "Do Leo and Una have any biological children, and have we seen them so far in the comics?" and you responded "Lunette is theirs. That wasn't meant to be a secret. Leo + Una = Lunette."

Did you mean that this wasn't meant to be a secret from us or did you mean that Leo and Una and the London Clan themselves are aware of Lunette's biological parentage? You've said in the past that the London Clan continues to raise their young in the Gargoyle Way, but they are not blind. Despite the communal parenting, do they generally have a good idea about which hatchling came from which couple? And was Lunette's name, and it's Leo+Una-like pronunciation more than a coincidence. Was the name given to her because the Clan knew her parentage?

Thanks!

Greg Bishansky writes...

You've said in the past that gargoyles follow a vague religion that is both monotheistic and pantheistic, and that at present Coldfire would be the most interested in it. What are Demona's spiritual viewpoints? Was she ever a "believer." Is she still one, or is she lapsed? The closest we've ever gotten was her not considering a Wind Ceremony for her smashed clan a priority in "Tyrants."

For that matter, what are Angela's spiritual beliefs? She was raised by humans after all.

Greg Bishansky writes...

And now, here's a question about gargoyles, clones, attraction, and gender traits. I really miss the Blue Mug A Guests, this would have been a perfect question for them.
Male gargoyle clones' eyes glow red, and the female clones' glow white. The complete opposite of natural hatched gargoyles. I was just wondering, how would gargoyles who might attempt to mate with clones deal with this?
The only way I can extrapolate is by picturing human women with gender specific traits that only a man would have, or vice-versa. Most heterosexuals would consider such things to be massive turn-offs, unless they're a bit kinky. I know it's not as extreme as a female with a penis, or a male with a vagina. But I'm trying to extrapolate. Maybe like a beard on a woman, or breasts on a man. Okay, that feels a bit off too.
Now, we didn't see Brooklyn get anywhere with Delilah, he probably never even saw her eyes glow. And considering he was just seeing her as a body, an available female, I wonder just how much of a turn-off that would have been for him if he did make even a little progress.
On the other hand, we have Demona who was with Thailog for at least half a year, and assuming she is 100% heterosexual, I am wondering if that would have unnerved her at all. But, she definitely seemed very physically into him, so maybe she has bisexual tendencies, or she's just really kinky, or maybe she just didn't care one iota. I don't know.
What are your thoughts on this?

anon writes...

I realize this may have been answered before, but would the manhattan clan be tolerant of homosexuality? What about other clans?

Matt writes...

In the time long ago when there were gargoyle clans all over the world, how common was mating between members of different clans? Did gargoyles nearly always choose a mate from their own clan or was inter-clan mating fairly common when multiple clans existed in a general area?

Thanks Greg!

Anonymous writes...

Do gargoyles have the same nudity taboos that humans have? I know that Demona cannot go around bare breasted like Goliath does for obvious reasons of cultural modesty in the real world. But what about within the universe of the show?

happyteen writes...

What's Demona's insight towards other forms of life in earth? For example, does she share human's outlook in life that everything in this world is there to be exploit by "superior intelligent" creatures like her kind?

Does she consider human ways of exploiting animals and the enviroment acceptable (she hates us and all we do, but I mean...taking aside its us who are doing it)?

Would you say she is more of a cat or a dog "person"¡

Thanks!!

Eva writes...

Hey, Greg! If you don't remember, we met at the Gathering last year in L.A. (I was the one in the black hat and the striped scarf)

Okay, this may sound strange...
Besides Halloween, can gargoyles celebrate any other holiday?

Laura 'ad astra' Sack writes...

You've said gargoyles find human rascism nonsensical. Do gargoyles have their own sorts of rascisms we'd find nonsensical? If so, have we ever seen its effects? can you give examples?

Dragomir writes...

Greetings Greg,
I've read that Angela and Broadway will/would eventually have three hatchlings of their own at some point in their future. Now, while I am VERY happy for the two lovebirds, I can't help but wonder if their different upbringings and views on parentage & child raising would prove an issue for them. I mean, Broadway was raised in the traditional Gargoyle way and never knew who his actual biological parents were, nor showed any interest in learning who they were, & I've even read that if he ever did find out Hudson is his dad it wouldn't really change anything between them (which is the norm for most garg clans). However, Angela was raised by humans and cares very much about her blood ties with Goliath & Demona, wanting her father to acknowledge their bond & rejoicing once he does & over time their bond deepens, & wishing to bring Demona back into the light because of her connection to her despite being aware of her dark & troubled nature. I guess what I'm saying is, Angela strikes me as someone who'd want to raise her children personally & form a strong mother/child bond with them whereas Broadway would likely treat them the same way any gargoyle of an older generation would treat those of a younger generation. So I guess my question is, would Angela's & Broadway's different upbringings cause some problems for them in their relationship & in raising their hatchlings? Or would Angela convince Broadway to form a real parental bond with the kids as Goliath has formed with her? I can't really see Angela NOT making her blood ties known to her kids while Broadway just keeps quiet about it. Hope my questions make sense, this is my first time doing this, & thankyou for your time.

Laura 'ad astra' Sack writes...

A recent question about the relationship between Hudson and Demona got me thinking...

There was one off note in the question (the rest of the analysis was pretty cool)- Hudson would not have any discomfort at the idea that his rookery children were mated to each other. Given that the chance of multiple births is statistically zero and the strong predilection to marry within ones own rookery there is nearly no chance of biological incest ever happening so there would be no sibling taboo.

I recalled a factotum that caught my attention a few months back- Even the most gung-ho kibutzes in Israel got rid of true communal child raising in the 70's because their children were forming sibling bonds and not marrying. Of the thousands of children raised in the system, about 30 married within their own community and not even one married within his or her age group. (err... I suppose, by definition, two would be the minimum for that....) These children were raised with the intention of being future potential spouses but humans are hardwired not to look at siblings that way, even none biological siblings. A similar problem arises in some endangered animal sanctuaries - I remember a documentary mentioning that if male and female rhinos are housed together they eventually stop mating completely - it may have been anthropomorphizing, but they called it developing a sibling relationship. Obviously there are degenerates and incest does happen, Egyptian royalty was designed with sibling marriage, but we are biologically wired against it even when it is not based on blood and therefore dangerous on a Darwinian level.

It makes sense that Gargates, having evolved as very different species with different circumstances would be fundamentally different at times, but they are so very similar in some ways is it surprising when the differences pop up.

1) Do gargoyles have an incest taboo or does it just not come up?
2) If they do not have it, or, at least no strong one, what do they think of it when it occurs with humans? (I don't mean abuse, rather, for example, if they read about Egyptian kings marrying siblings does it give them pause or it just passes as an oddity.)
3) Are there any other instances that come to mind of there being a basic difference between humans and gargoyles? Not a culturally based one - or if it is culturally, it as outgrowth of their biological reality.

Sorry this last one is so vague. It is hard to think of examples. You once answered that racism puzzles Goliath. It makes sense that a species that seems to have nearly uinlimited skin color possibiilities even within a small and relatively isolated population would think the human skin tone based racism is plain odd. (Granted, gargoyles might have their own version of nonsensicle racism that makes no sense to humans.) I can think of where similar differences would be rooted- they are completely nocturnal, they have wings, the do not share the sleeping experience in any way etc…- but it still seems more the sort of thing that occasionally pops up and surprises you. Maybe...a creature with usable wings would be hardwired against agoraphobia or fear of heights. err. Maybe, not so much, they can still fall if their wings get bound up, so at minimum the concept of falling might lurk somewhere even in their minds.

thanks

Ariell Choy writes...

As humans, we can express ourselves culturally, emotionally and even spiritually through the arts (music, dance, drama, literature, etc). Do gargoyles practice the arts? Do gargoyles even have the capacity to create art? I have always wanted to know since having seen the episode "Kingdom" in which Broadway, Lexington, and Brooklyn return home to the Clock Tower after having attended a rock concert in which Brooklyn proclaims "did you hear that guitarist wail?"

Charisma82 writes...

Did Hudson influence Goliath’s decision at all as to who should’ve been Goliath’s second in command?

If something had happened to Goliath before he had chosen a second in command, I would assume that Hudson would’ve become leader at first, but then would choose someone else to lead since he’s older and believes that a younger leader would be best (which is indicated in the episode Upgrade). If this was the case, who would Hudson have considered becoming the new leader of the clan? Would he have based his decision along the same lines as Goliath, or would he have looked for other qualifications?

Thank you for your time and all that you do,

-Charisma82

Greg Bishansky writes...

And now I have a question on Goliath and religion.

In the VHS version of "Awakening" as the trio glide off to steal the disc, Goliath says "godspeed lads. They'd better not be harmed." In the TV version he just says "They'd better not be harmed."

Since you edited the VHS release, I have to ask. Would Goliath say "godspeed?" Considering what you have since revealed about gargoyle religious beliefs, I was wondering. In your mind, did he say it?

And while I'm here, what's the canon status of the VHS version of "Awakening?" There is some material in it that wasn't in the TV and later DVD version?

Lambda writes...

Hi Greg,
I just realized something very sad. Because gargoyles only age at half the rate of humans, by the time the Trio/Angela and Goliath are in their 40s and 50s respectively, Elisa, Fox, Matt, Xanatos and all their other 'original' human friends will have either died or be quite elderly.

1.How do the gargoyles cope with knowing they will outlive these friends (pending unnatural deaths)? It has to be depressing, especially watching your friends grow old before your eyes.

2. Was this something Elisa and Goliath considered before admitting their feelings for one another?

Thanks!

Elle writes...

The whole 'Gargoyles don't have names' thing has been bothering me for a while.
1. If Demona had been given a chance to choose her own name (not an alias), what would she have chosen?
2.Would she have chosen one at all?
2. The Wyvern clan originally didn't have names. But the Gargoyles in other countries we meet later on all have names. Did they choose the names themselves? Or were they named by their biological parents? Or perhaps the clan as a whole named them?

Random Fan writes...

Anouther question that should reach you by the holiday season. Happy Holidays!
You've gone over the importance of the equanoxis in the garg verse as they are important to garg breeding, but what about the soltices? seeing as how they are the longest and shortest nights of the year do they have any significance to gargs beyond a diffrent time frame?

Random Fan writes...

Hey there again. I have'nt found this so I'm asking. Is Demona so emotionaly attached to Angeala because shes HER daughter or because shes one of her rookery children. It seems like she values the biologic conection, and if thats true then it seems like a hipocrocy to be so bent on the "true" gargoyle and then do something so human, but thats just my misguided oppinion. If you could do something to guide it that would be most helpfull, thanks.

Paul Zimmerle writes...

Why do the Gargoyles never upgrade their equipment with the changing times?
I understand from the archives that Hudson uses his to make up for his age, but, despite the number of times their stony rears were handed to them by technologically/magically superior foes, they never seem to try to even the playing field. Tradition is one thing, but I'm reminded of the famous Churchill quote on the subject of a major overhaul of British naval technology: "The traditions of the Navy are rum, the lash, and sodomy."

Laura 'ad astra' Sack writes...

One last question before bed....

From what little we've seen, it seems that Brooklyn and Katana are parents, not just rookery parents. (All those years with just each other would make it seem inevitable. There are no rookery siblings or other parents.) You wrote that Broadway and Angela ~choose~ to raise their children in the gargoyle style. So...

1. Are there currently any clans who have adopted human parenting, like they adopted human naming? Will there be by the future series?

2. Even those choosing to raise children collectively, are their strong human influences to that thought? (For instance, noting a rookery child looks like you.)

3. Am I correct in my assumption that Brooklyn and Katana are more like human parents in that respect?

4. It has been strongly implied that Elisa and Goliath will in some way adopt. Should they raise a child, would it be as individual or collective parents?

More later, (when I can hopefully decipher my handwriting).

James writes...

Did the Gargoyles have a diffrent title for thier race and just adopted the name Gargoyles from man, or were they always known as Gargoyles

Dean Cain writes...

Here's a question about Lexington, and how Gargoyle culture pertains to him.

According to you, Gargoyles show affection to each other by stroking each others' hair.

Lexington is (As far as I know), the only bald Gargoyle. He is also (As far as the fans know) the only homosexual gargoyle. Did him not having hair factor into him leaning toward homosexuality? Or did that just happen to fall into place?

Todd Jensen writes...

How do gargoyles feel about skin color prejudice among humans? Obviously, it would vary from one gargoyle to the next, but I wondered about that since each gargoyle clan that we've seen shows a wide variety of colors. We know that clans are family units for gargoyles (since the entire clan raises the eggs and the young gargoyles look upon all the older gargoyles as their parents), so it would seem normal for them to have such a broad spectrum of coloring in the family. And I wondered whether, under those circumstances, gargoyles might find the human attitude of looking upon humans with a different color as outsiders and "not-us" as, not just wrong, but almost alien and incomprehensible.

Clark Cradic writes...

Do gargoyles posess a written/spoken language all there own or do they just adopt ones similar to the local humans?

Clark Cradic writes...

I've loved this show ever since I was a kid. In fact you could say this show helped me get through elementary school cause I'd rush to get my homework completed so I could go right the tv when I got home to watch the newest episode. Now that I'm older I still get this wonderful since of nostalgia when I watch this and start asking questions about the Gargoyles I never thought of as a kid, specifically their biology and culture since I loved those electives in high school.

1. Are gargoyles more likely to get certain traits and characteristics if they're from a specific clan? If so, is it just genetics or do they aide them in their territory? If not, does that mean that all gargoyles are generally the same with just different looks that are just for show?

2. How do gargoyles see the sun? Do they see it with a sort of reverence like Demona and Hudson did in The Mirror, or do they see it more of a curse due to their vulnerability?

3. Are there any diseases only gargoyles can get?

The Flaming Tortoise writes...

Hi Greg,

Good to see this place open again!

My question is basically, how do Gargoyle populations sustain themselves? With females having (almost always I've believe you've said) a maximum of three eggs, and as you said in reference to why gargoyles practice communal parenting: "Perhaps this is the result of the high Gargoyle mortality rate. " would it not be an intense struggle to just maintain a clan's population?

And with this in mind, even considering that in modern day mortality rates for gargoyles has probably dropped significantly, wouldn't the practice of the London clan of limiting each pair to two eggs total be very risky for the continuation of their clan?

Thanks for you time

Demonskrye writes...

Hudson has or had a biological child in Goliath's generation, the Trio's generation, and Bronx's generation. That means that Goliath and the Trio would have considered him one of their rookery fathers and Hudson regards them as his rookery children. (I'm guessing he regards Bronx somewhat differently, though correct me if I'm wrong.) So why do we never hear Goliath or any of the Trio calling Hudson "father" or him referring to any of them as "son"?

Curious writes...

I have two questions about gargoyle homosexuality:

We know there are homosexual male gargoyles, but are there any lesbians?

How do homosexual gargoyles fit into the gargoyle social structure? Do they face any difficulties socially because of their sexual orientation, either similarly or unexpectedly different from humans?

Demonskrye writes...

This is more of a Wyvern Clan culture question than a hypothetical one.

After Goliath sends the Trio and Bronx to the rookery and Demona questions his decision to punish them (out of their earshot like a good second, as you noted in the commentary), Goliath tells her that he will make it up to them somehow. If the Wyvern Massacre hadn't intervened, what are some things Goliath might have done to make it up to the Trio and Bronx?

Nina writes...

Hello Greg,
First of all, thank you for such an intelligent, brilliantly-written series.
Secondly, I have a question regarding Broadway and Angela's kiss in The Journey. I'm sorry if this has been answered before, but I don't recall finding anything related to it in the archives.
Anyway.
You've stated (I believe in the DVD commentary) that gargoyles don't kiss to show affection, but rather wrap their wings around each other and stroke each other's hair. So why do Broadway and Angela kiss? I've had a number of theories, myself:
1. being younger, Broadway and Angela (especially Angela) have been heavily influenced by the tendencies of humans, ie. ways of displaying affection. I mean, Angela must have seen Tom macking on Katherine a few times back on Avalon, right? Not to mention the fact that the eggs were raised in an unconventional (human) way.
2. To show the pair actally kissing would have truly established them as a solid couple in the minds of viewers. It's also a lot more heart-wrenching to see them kiss with Brooklyn watching them.
3. It WAS The Goliath Chronicles, and the writers weren't aware of all the nuances in the world of the gargoyles.

Well, I've probably gone and answered my question, in there. But thanks for taking the time to read through this, anyway!
You and Gargoyles truly are the bees' knees.

Lizzy writes...

Not so much a question as an add-on. One question on the Gargoyle FAQ asks why Gargoyles do not kiss as humans do. While it is true that kissing is a human custom, it is not universal; some cultures view kissing as gross or bizarre. In ancient Inuit tribes, couples would share affection by leaning close to each other so they can feel the warmth of each other's breath. That is where the original term "Eskimo kissing" comes from. In Bali, couples will lean close to each other and gaze into each other's eyes as a show of intimacy. (This has changed as Westernization moved in.) Kissing was not a custom in many Asian countries until relatively recently, when American culture became very popular. The Sirinio in Bolivia and the Thonga in Africa do not kiss as they see it as a sharing of dirt and saliva.

Brenden Thoreson writes...

Hello Greg, long time fan of gargoyles, and most of my questions about the Gargoyles universe have been answered by browsing the archives but these questions.
I see from the archives that Angela and Broadway will raise their children in the traditional gargoyles fashion, and I am assuming that Brooklyn and Katana will try to do the same. But this has led me to some interesting questions about the relationships between generations of gargoyles in the same clan.

I have seen that from the first episode that gargoyles from the same rookery generation call one another rookery brother or rookery sister, or if there are close bonds just brother and sister. So my first question is do gargoyles have the same endearing names for an older or younger generation with in the clan, for example rookery mother, rookery father, rookery son, rookery daughter, or some other term like those? Yes I do know that Goliath's generation calls Hudson My Mentor, I am assuming that is so only because he was the leader and teacher of the clan before Goliath.

Another is I have noticed that Hudson has a stronger relationship with Goliath then any other of Goliath's rookery siblings, or at least just the ones we have met so far. I am assuming this is do to, that Hudson saw Goliath's potential as a successor and paid special attention to him to prepare him for the role. I have also noticed that gargoyles in one generation develop strong ties with a few siblings like Coldstone's and Goliath's relationship. My next question is do stronger relationships develop between certain hatchlings and certain members of the parenting generation or members of another older generation of gargoyles?

But in Mark of the Panther Goliath, who is having trouble dealing and even understanding Angela's unusual need for parents and her attachment to him after she finds that she is his biological daughter, says to Elisa's mother Diane "gargoyle hatchlings belong to the whole clan, I cannot hold one hatchling over the others." So are these kinds of relationships, I have asked about in the previous paragraph, taboo, shunned, frowned upon, or generally accepted as a part of the growing up process of young gargoyles, or are they just Goliath's personal words do to the fact that he is the clan leader?

Thanks for even putting up a general questions website, not many writers do that or post the site on there publications. I apologize for my long winded questions but it just the way I write. Just to let you know Gargoyles has been a huge influence in my own stories and don't worry I have absolutely no fan fictions of Gargoyles and I have never understood why people have to do them, they don't make sense to me any ways.
I can't wait for Brooklyn's little trip, especially the clan's reactions when he gets back five minutes later, they will be priceless. I might have to scan the images in and use them as a desktop. I just can't see Time Dancer done in six issues like I heard the spin offs will be done in, too much happening from what I have found on Ask Greg. Well I guess that is why it is third in line and thanks again.

Chimaraz writes...

Is the practice of raising eggs communally based on tradition for Gargoyles, or is it more of an instictual biological imperative? The answer we usually get is that it's the Gargoyle way, but is it the Gargoyle way because they're told they've always done it that way, or is it the Gargoyle way because instinct tells them that if they lay an egg in the rookery, all eggs in the rookery are theirs? It is the most sensible course of action, based on their reproduction, but did the practice arise because of how they reproduce universally as a species, or do they reproduce universally as a species because of how they practice parenting?

... Chicken or egg?

juan writes...

hi mr weisman again.

I was wondering what kind of beliefs do gargoyles incorparate from peoples religions into theirs

Anon writes...

Dear Greg -- I would first like to just say what a wonderful series you created and that I'm happy new stories are being made after all these years!

My question relates to the concept of monogamy in Gargoyle culture --

You had stated that Gargoyles are both biologically and culturally inclined towards monogamy, including, for the most part, remaining alone after a mate dies, etc. You also said at one point that affairs, cheating, divorce, etc. are quite rare, though wires do on occasion get crossed and such things do happen, so...

1. Obviously every clan and every individual within a clan is different, but if two gargoyles were cheating on their mates with one another, how would the other clan members, in general, react? Would they consider it clan business or personal business? Would the two 'cheaters' be treated any differently either socially or 'officially' by the clan leader? Would cheating on one's mate be considered a banish-able offense? I'm speaking of an affair where both cheaters consent to the relationship and not an Othello-Desdemona-Iago situation.

2. Similarly, how would a clan typically react to two mates 'divorcing' one another? Would one have to leave the clan -- would both? Likewise, would it be considered the entire clan's business or personal business?

I apologize that I'm asking for generalizations (I know after years of reading Ask Greg that you don't much care for those!) but hopefully you can answer anyway because I'm very curious about this.

Thank you and all the best!

Tanya writes...

As answered in a previous question, Gargoyle females (can) bare eggs at 'biological ages 25, 35, and 45'. What about the males; what's the age limit for their potency? Also, does age difference play a great role in choosing a mate or is it mostly love and good genes? Finally, how common is it to take a new mate after a previous mate has passed away?

Anonymous writes...

*I hope this doesn't sound like story suggesting*

Was Nashville concived before or after Katana and Brooklyn's mating ceremony?

Matthew writes...

We know that there is faerie magic and mortal magic. Mortal magic seems mostly to be used by humans. Is it less common for gargoyles to study magic than humans? If so why?

Broadway's Angel(a) writes...

You said in your FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) archives that Broadway and Angela would probably raise their children the gargoyle way, "children of the clan, not individuals," by not favoring biological children over the rest of the clan's children, but does that mean they won't identify their own biological children. I believe that if they didn't recognize their biological children, they wouldn't have been so particular about the naming of their own children (Artus, Gwenyvere, and Lancelot) after Arthurian characters in reference to Broadway and Angela's connections to Arthur, Broadway being inspired to read from hearing about the Scrolls of Merlin and Angela living on Avalon where Arthur slept. So, do Angela and Broadway recognize their biological children but attempt to parent all clan children instead of favoring their biological children, or is the naming of all their children after Arthurian characters coincidence?

Jarrod writes...

Hi Again Greg!

In Gargoyle Society, You have stated that Clans would use Banishment as a form of Punishment. You have stated that Iago was Banished before the Massacre, but then came back to the clan, and I believe you have mentioned that it was because he set Othello against Goliath over Desdemona. Did Gargoyles who were banished, and without a clan have a lower chance of survival than those in a clan? Would clans let other nearby clans know about those who were banished so that they would not assist them during their Banishment. (Of course this would only apply if there were nearby clans.) Would Temporarily Banished Gargoyles always return to the Clan at the end of their sentence? Or would the majority stay away and find a new Clan, Home, or Protectorate? What sort of things would constitute a Banishable Offense?

Thanks for Reading, Writing, and Answering!

tyler writes...

how do gargoyles decide the clan leader? and y is the leaders mate usally second in command? ( by this i mean clans like avalon or ones without current leaders to chose)

Greg Bishansky writes...

This is more a ramble reply to Alex Garg's post, but I definitely think this is a fascinating subject, and could make a great Ask Greg discussion.

Honestly, at this point, I don't think anyone in the Manhattan Clan cares much about any of the clones. Any of them. What was the first thing said when Thailog appeared to perish and the clones had no where to go? "We can't just bring them back to the Clock Tower can we? I mean, they kind of give me the creeps."

Right there, the Manhattan Clan wanted nothing to do with them. Wanted to pretend they didn't exist. Let Talon take them to live in a sewer. Out of sight, out of mind. Not that the reaction is not understandable, it is. I think we'd all be uncomfortable around clones of ourselves made against our will and knowledge. It's a fundamental violation of our individuality.

Did any of the Manhattan Clan go down to see them between "The Reckoning" and "Invitation Only"? I'd be very surprised if the answer is yes. The one time they do go down, they want something. Goliath is following Elisa's request to attempt to date Delilah. Brooklyn... just wants to make a play for the only available female he's aware of. They were down there both for selfish reasons.

So, yeah, all of their talk about free will probably was less for the clones' sake, and more towards the Manhattan Clan's hatred for Thailog. They hate Thailog, so naturally they don't want the clones to be helping him. At this point, do they have any other reason to care?

Lexington's only real concern when Brentwood chooses Thailog is how it makes him [Lexington] look. Not concern for Brentwood's safety, or eventually having to face him as an enemy. Lex thinks it makes *him* look bad.

I know this is a pretty serious indictment of the Manhattan Clan. I love them, they are heroes, there's a lot to admire in each and every one of them. But, they're not saints. Which is fine, they're more interesting this way... if I wanted a group of pure goodie goods, I'd read a Silver Age Justice League of America comic book.

Alex Garg writes...

This is something that had I wanted to bring up in the Culture/Biology panel at the Gathering, but we ran out of time. Besides, it feels a little better to be able to ask this question now that "Bash" has broad exposure (although it's still new enough to constitute a SPOILER warning).

Gargoyles and Free Will.

A theme of Gargoyles since the introduction of the clones has been just how much control they have over making their own decisions, particularly given that they were programmed to obey Thailog. This comes to a head in "Masque" and "Bash," where the clones are bombarded with the "Free Will" message to the point where they can finally make their choices, but what's most curious to me is the pressure that they receive from the Manhattan Clan.

It doesn't surprise me that Maggie would bring it up in "Masque" - she was born and raised in a democratic society, so the idea that people have free will and the right to self-determination is ingrained in her psyche - but for Goliath and Lexington, and Angela to a lesser extent, to make the case for it in "Bash" was more surprising.

Goliath and Lexington both come from an era where there was no broadly applied concept of a person's right to self-determination. On the human side was the reign of the Catholic Church (and I'm writing very generally now) which in terms of ethics framed the argument for free will in such a way that while humans have the *capacity* to choose between different courses of action, our *obligation* is to obey God's commands; the fact that they did not was why we were expelled from the Garden of Eden. Therefore, under those circumstances, we don't really have a choice - God's infinite wisdom overrides our mortal judgments. That dogma then went on to inform the monarchies of the day, Scotland not excepting, where kings ruled by Divine Mandate. The idea that a king could be overthrown for unjust rule wasn't introduced until St. Thomas Aquinas, an act which prior to him (and even well after) would have been viewed as taking up arms against the will of God; and even then it was the laws of the Church which would be the standard by which a king would be considered ruling in an unjust manner, not the opinions of his subjects.

The gargoyles' "government" also has no apparent nod to free will or self-determination. Goliath became the leader because Hudson said so, Brooklyn became second-in-command because Goliath said so, and in each case the other gargoyles appear to acquiesce unconditionally to these decisions. Even in mating, you mentioned in the panel that gargoyles aren't necessarily choosing mates as much as they are naturally drawn to one another - even in human rituals it's a subject of debate over just how much "choice" we have in when and with whom we fall in love.

While you've said that gargoyles are free to pursue their own hobbies and curiosities, it doesn't strike me that alone is enough to constitute an understanding of free will in the sense of making determinations about leadership in the way that the clones were being pressured to choose between the Labyrinth and Thailog.

So from what we saw in "Bash," where Lexington demands to know why the clones are choosing to help Thailog, and where Goliath says that "choice must extend to those who choose unwisely" - which is a very different concept than a basic, arbitrary choice between right and wrong - I have to ask: Where have Goliath and Lexington gotten the understanding to ask those questions?

Angela also presents an interesting case, because while she was raised by humans, she was raised by humans for whom it can't be assumed would have had the same understanding of free will as you and I do having grown up in a democratic society as it applies to personal choice, much less in making decisions of leadership. So is her command to Delilah founded more on her hatred of Thailog, or is she also making a case for free will; and if the latter, what informs that for her?

Touching on the same vein: Since 1996 would be the first U.S. election year that the gargoyles have really been exposed to - it seems to me that in 1994 the Manhattan clan was more curious about their new physical surroundings than cultural; and it was a midterm election anyway with much less media hype than a presidential cycle - what do the gargoyles of the Manhattan clan make of democracy, given their less than democratic heritage?

Bazell writes...

"Gargoyles protect." It's fairly straight-forward, but how did this cultural tradition begin? As the credo exists throughout the world, it was obviously some instance that happened very early in the evolutionary history of the Gargate species. Was it a pact made by the original gargoyle clan with a single human or community? Is it a biological urge (doubtful though, i.e. Demona, Thailog)? Or is it a tradition orally passed from generation to generation from the earliest of times by a single, extremely noble gargoyle/clan?

Bazell writes...

I've noticed since first watching the show that most gargoyles do not use weapons. Demona does (which is understandable since she has witnessed- and perhaps taken part in- the development modern technology), as does Thailog (also understandable since he is the polar opposite to Goliath and uber-evil). However, Hudson is the only "old school," shall we say, gargoyle who consistently carries a weapon. What is the history between Hudson and this blade? Is it unusal that he carries it, or have we just not seen enough gargoyles to see others who choose to utilize weapons?

Derek writes...

Will we ever see the biological parents of Demona, Goliath, Lexington or Brooklyn in the comics in Flashbacks?

Bazell writes...

Do Gargoyles have there own unique appreciation for artistic asthetics? I have noticed that the Manhatten clan has developed a true appreciation for human literature (like SHakespeare), but do they have there own asthetic disposition for other art forms such as music or painting?
I'm sure that, just like with literature, they've learned to enjoy the human endeavors in art. Also, I'm sure that each individual has his or her own opinions when it comes to what they enjoy, just like everyone else, but have the Gargoyles ever (or will they ever) developed an artistic culture of their own? Or do they, in general, have a unique opinion as to what constitutes art? For example, I could imagine that battle styles could be a sort of art form within clans.

dph writes...

1.Before humans made contact with gargoyles, did gargoyles have a unique (non-written)language unto themselves?

2.Before gargoyles made contact with humans, did gargoyles have a unique written language unto themselves?

Personperson123 writes...

What do gargoyles eat?And would they kill or hurt humans?

Purplegoldfish writes...

Do gargoyles generally hold mating ceremonies, or do they more or less elope? In "Vows," Goliath and Demona facilitated their own union-would there have been a more official ceremony later attended by the clan?

Adam writes...

Hi Greg. It's great to see Gargoyles back. Anyway, I have a question about when the Wyvern Clan split between 988 and 994. What I would like to know is why didn't the departing Gargoyles take any of the eggs with them? The new clan would have missed out on an entire generation of the clan. Or did they do something like take more of Bronx's generation(978) with them? I guess that would make sense. Thanks.

Dusk Rider Q writes...

This is less serious than my last post.

It had occured to me the other day while watching the Green that the Guatamalan clan and all the other clans take names. Some of them such as the Griff's clan have had contact for some time with humans, but what's Zafiro excuse. Is it only a Wyvern Clan tradition, not a gargoyle tradition across cultures, to remain nameless?

Anonymous writes...

Is there any significance to loincloth color for the gargs? Goliath and Hudson, both leaders, have brown, whereas the Trio has blue.

Danny Dyche writes...

Have you thought of how you would handle traditional gargoyle namelessness should you make "Dark Ages"?

Anonymous writes...

How often do gargoyle clan leaders name their mates their seconds? Wouldn't it make more sense to have a younger second, not a contemporary?

Makhasu writes...

You've said that gargoyles predate humans. Were there ever any gargoyle cities, civilizations, or unique cultures?

Makhasu writes...

How do gargoyles view their beaked brethren like Brooklyn in terms of physical beauty?

Makhasu writes...

You've said that gargoyles show affection by stroking hair. What do they do if their mate is bald like Lexington and Broadway?

Charisma82 writes...

Sunday, June 25, 2006: 3RD DAY OF THE GATHERING OF THE GARGOYLES

So how is everything going? Good I hope. Only one more day of Gathering of the Gargoyles. I'm sure everyone is having a great time out there at the gathering. Everyone must be really busy trying to get to everything there. Just curious, but how many sessions are going on out there? Do people have time inbetween sessions to do anything else? Did you do any sight seeing in L.A.? I hear that next year the gathering will be in Tenessee near the Smokey Mountains. That would be so cool to go to. There must be a lot of sight seeing to do for the next gathering, that is if you have time to get away from the convention. I've been to Tennessee once up in the Smokey Mountians. I barely remember it, but the few pictures I have in my mind are of very beautiful scenery. I can picture the mountains with dark clouds around the top of them. Maybe I can get a plane ticket and head out there next year not only for the gathering, but to recharge my memory of the scenery. I think that if there was another gargoyle clan out there in the U.S. (besides the Manhattan clan), they should be located in a place like that. The mountains would be great cover, and there are little towns all around in there that they could protect if they felt the need to. I'm really hoping that I can convince someone to go with me now that I'm getting myself psyched for the Smokey Mountains.

Since the gathering is almost over for 2006, I might as well get your opinion on it. Did you think that the turn out was better or worse this year than other gatherings? Did a lot of voice talents from the Gargoyles show come to the convention? By the way, how many of these gatherings have you attended? I know that this one in 2006 is the 10th annual one, but did you go to the first few, like the 1st or 2nd gathering? Who exactly started these gatherings (don't just say fans, please)? Do you think that more talents from the show will come to next years (2007) gathering?

Well, now that I've questioned you out, I might as well mention a few things that happened today since this is sort of a journal of what's going on during the gathering. Today is Sunday, so of course church. After that, we (my family) had tacos and I slept for a couple of hours. I woke up to find nothing great on TV or on TIVO. Later, my parents and I watched some murder mystery movie where some woman was being tricked into thinking she was crazy by her husband and best friend so they could get rid of her and get all her money that she'd made. It was interesting. Not as good as it would have been to be at the gathering (I had to throw that in there).

When I mentioned church, it got me thinking. I know religion is a touchy subject for a lot of people, but I was wondering if any gargoyles were religious in some way. If they are, do they practice human religions or do they have one of their own? I could see a clan living in a big church building with the stain glass windows and such, with them posing on top on the steeple or roof during the day and then protecting the town at night. I can just imagine the picture in my head. It would look rather gothiky though.

Now that's my ramble/journal for today. Just one more for tomorrow. I'm sure you'll miss my long talks about nothing (probably not). I hope all is well, and thank you for your time.

Charisma82

Adam writes...

How will the others in the clan react to Lex being gay? Angela and the other boys may be more accepting, but Hudson and Goliath struck me as "old school" in terms of acceptance. (well, not Goliath as much. He is dating a human for christs sake!) Just curous.

Rain writes...

Gargoyles don't 'marry' (at least not as humans do)from what I've gathered. Most people demand that marriage comes before children, or at least what their idea of what marriage is. I have friends who liked the show and bought the dvd (although they aren't the hardcore fans that would attend a Gathering..I tried LOL) and if hatchlings started appearing without any 'wedding' taking place beforehand I know for a fact that they would stop watching out of moral beliefs. Many conservative viewers would likely follow suit. So onto the question..(if new eps are ever made) do you see gargoyles observing a ritual of some sort that could replace a wedding in the mind of a more conservative viewer?

Man Mountain writes...

Hey greg, love the show and see you in Vegas! Now for my question...
Gorlois is the Atlantean name for Gargoyle. So how is it used? What is the singular and plural? Are Gargoyles Gorloien? Was the Captain of the Guard Gorloisian or Gorloien since you said he was (WAS.. traitor) Gargoylean (if thats a word)? This has been gliding about my brain since I found out about "Gorlois." I realize I'm asking you to mix english and atlantean, so do what you can. Thanks for answering this and all our questions!

PS: If you could mention to Goliath and the others that we in the SF Bay Area would be happy to host a fledgling Gargoyle clan. We've got tall buildings, lots of room to glide, great weather, and lots of wind. Oh, and tell them not to worry about earthquakes, all our buildings are retrofitted and earthquake safe. I guess by Samson's time there isn't one here, but I'm still hoping nothing is set in stone.. at least till sunrise. Thanks!

Demona Taina writes...

Hi Greg! I couldn't make it to Montreal this year, but I've made up my mind to go to Vegas. Thank you so much for the DVD; I'll buy several copies when it comes out! Now, on to my questions... This is something that's been puzzling me for a while, and I couldn't find it anywhere on the archives. I'd be so happy if you had the answers.

1. In the episode Reawakening, after Coldstone and Goliath fell into the river and Goliath was losing consciousness, he holds on to Coldstone's forearm. Is there a deeper meaning behind that? Was it:

a) a warrior wrist-shake
b) a cry for help
c) asking forgiveness
d) an unconscious reaction

If the answer is a, b, c, or d, why? If none of the above, what? I'm just so curious about that scene. It's so deep and moving; definitely one of the best scenes in the entire series.

2. When Goliath and Coldstone are in the river, Hudson is heard in the background saying "A gargoyle can no more stop protecting the castle than breathing the air," it slowly trails off. Was Goliath thinking that and it trailed off as he lost consciousness? Was Othello? Or does it have a deeper meaning?

I would be so grateful if you had the answers! Thank you so much, and I look forward to meeting you in Vegas!

Spore writes...

Do gargoyles believe in corporal punishment?

WingedBeast writes...

I've got a number of questions about Gargbeasts and their relation to the Clan. It always seemed to me that the Gargoyles had a deeper connection to their Gargbeasts than we humans tend to have with our "lesser" beasts. (Though, where dogs are concerned, I don't get how a creature that is naturally caring and loyal can be considered lesser to anything.)

1. Are Garg-Beasts considered siblings, parents, and sons/daughters by the rest of the Gargoyles in a clan? Would Goliath consider Bronx a Rookery Son and the Trio consider him a Rookery Brother?

2. Do GargBeasts and Gargoyles nurse each others offspring? (Evolutionarily, I can see the advantage in this, as it provides a greater variety of anti-bodies to the hatchlings.)

3. While I have serious doubts that a Gargbeast can ever become a Clan leader, are they ever in positions of authority or rank over the sentient Gargoyles?

J writes...

In "Future Tense" when Broadway is "killed" Goliath says "Goodbye, my friend". This surprised me. Wouldn't Goliath think of Broadway more as his son? The word "friend" just seemed awkward to me in context of the relationship between Goliath/Broadway. What are your thoughts?

Hardwing writes...

1)Well based on the fact that Goliath rested on the highest tower of the castle and Demona, Hudson and a gargoyle I couldn't identify below him, I assume it was tradition that the gargoyles took their sleeping places after their status in the clan, correct?

2)Had the other gargoyle resting beside Demona(not Hudson) any special status in the clan? Or for Goliath?

Siren writes...

Okay, I looked in the Gargs Custom archive and in FAQ. I cannot find a direct question and answer for what I am wondering recently. Perhaps you did answer it and I missed it somewhere. If I did, I apologize. Let me know and I will do a better search. But here's my questions.

1.)Do gargoyles have a ceremony similar in anyway to a wedding ceremony as humans do?
2.) I remember Goliath and Demona watching a wedding and Demona broke the Phoenix Gate and gave Goliath half as a token of her love, similar to the wedding rings, but was this normal of gargoyle customs?
3.)Or did they simply announce their mate-for-life and go on with their lives?
4.)Or could that even be different from clan to clan?

I doubt very much the ceremony would be as lavish and pomp as human weddings are, but it would probably have been a lot less stressful and a lot more romantic

Entity writes...

When gargoyles scale a battlement, they like to just throw their talons into the rock like there is no tomorrow, chipping away at the solidity every time. They do this night after night, and my question is, how were Wyvern's walls, battlements and towers still standing after years of this abuse? This may seem like a question meant to stump you on an aspect of the show we were invited to turn our cheeks to, but I have got to say, almost 10 years later I'm eating perogies and I start jabbing my plastic fork into the Styrofoam container and wonder... this just isn't going to go away! I need to know!

Lovel writes...

Hi Greg, this is my first time posting a question am almost reluctant to do it because of the amazing volume of questions that all the other Gargoyles fan post. I guess it's just an amazing testament to the show.

First off I wanted to express my love and admiration of the show. I have been a fan since the show first came out and I was about 10 or 11. The best part of watching the show now is that all the subtle nuansces and social commentary that was slightly lost on me as a child is fully realized and appreciated in me as a college student.

Second, I wanted to say that I spent the last 3 days LITERALLY reading all the archives I could to find an answer to my questions....Some I found answers to and some I thought up as I was reading some of the other questions posted by other fans. Which is why I wanted to say what a wonderful resource this website is...so having said that it prompts this announcement "THANK YOU GORE FOR HOSTING THIS SITE!!"

Now, on to the questions. Okay you are probably going to flip when you read this one....yes it is yet another "Gay Gargoyle" question...so sue me I'm gay and it's a topic that staunchly interests me. I wanted to ask if a Gay Gargoyle would imprint upon his or her mate just as a Straight Gargoyle would? I only ask this question because I figured the answer would be "yes" since in all your other responses about Gay Gargoyles you indicated that there would be no difference between Gargoyles, Straight or Gay. But I figured that since this is your universe and that since you are the author of said universe that it would be highly unethical of me to assume something without asking the creator.

Now that I got my first question out of the way, I wanted to ramble alittle of how much my appreciation of Gargoyles has grown from reading the questions in this forum. I never knew any of the subtlies that existed in the show such as the stroking of hair and horn, the tradition of not naming things, the practice of the whole clan being the Fathers and Mothers to all the rookery children, and the wonderful Wind Ceremony that you went into detail here in the forums. This all highlights the amazing differences between Humans and Gargoyles. This intensely intrests me now that I'm in college and am a Anthropology student,(yes I do realize the oddness of the situation, a Anthropology student getting a kick out of studying culture that isn't that of man). I particularly love the not naming tradtion in Gargoyle society. Both of my parents are deaf so growing up my first language was Sign Language, not English. This put me in a unique position of knowing 2 names for everything, and knowing 2 different ways of expressing my own name. One being that of my spoken English name "Lovel" and the other being the expressed gesture of my Sign Language name (which I can't even express in writing becasue it is something you have to see instead of read). So when I read your response to a ramble of one of the fans that Hudson would have been put off by the odd tradition of giving the sky a name when it already has a name, and that he would think it odd of giving himself a name since he is already known as "Friend,Father, Mentor, Old Friend etc." This delighted me when I read it since it made me reflect on how my name is not really who I am and I never identify it as "ME". When I try and think of who I am I think in adjectives, kind, friendly, smart, jolly, the last thing that comes to mind is my name. I also enjoy knowing that I can also think of myself as a gesture instead of a spoken word or a sound. Having said all of that,(thanks for putting up with it for this long), my second question would be, How would a Gargoyle refer to the great Hudson in a story? To clarify you once repied that a Gargoyle would refer to another one in a story as "The one of Broadshoulders". This made me wonder how would the clan refer to Hudson in a story. For that matter how would Golaith be refered to in 2198? Would he be refered to by his human name of Golaith or would he have a Gargoyle "name" to which they would refer?

Thank you for your time and I appreciate everything you have done for all us fans. I also want to thank you for coming up with such an amazing universe and introducing it to everyone here. Thanks

--Lovel

matt writes...

we know that gargoyles were once widespread around the world and much more common than today. we also know that gargoyles are extremely territorial and protective, so my questions are:

1. was there ever a time, in early gargoyle history, that wars between Gargoyle Clans were fought?

2. if so, were wars fought over territory? differing beliefs? something else?

3. if there were not any wars were there any minor battles between Clans or have Gargoyle Clans always had peace between them?

4. was there ever a time when two or more Clans shared strict borders between their protectorates or were the Clans pretty well spaced out even thousands of years ago?

5. how many Clans existed at the peak of the Gargoyle Species? closer to 1000? 10,000? 1,000,000?

James Sconawah writes...

Is Gabriel Coldstones son? If so then does that make his love his mother?

Anonymous writes...

Prior to the rise of humanity, did gargoyles ever develop agriculture or animal husbandry on their own?

Babs writes...

Since I can't get any sleep and was watching re-runs of Gargoyles. I remember someone asking how do Gargoyles show love do they kiss ?, and I believe the answer was that they pet eachother, (please correct me if I'm wrong) but I do recall Goliath kissing Demonas hand, and Angela and Broadway giving a kiss to eachother. Can you explain the differences for me, or just tell me if they do kiss ?
Danke for answering

Ruth Lang writes...

OK, this page is a great idea, and I'm glad I finally found it.
I've been trying to work out how GOliath's loincloth is tied. All the others (except Hudson,who has trousers) have their loincloths just over front & back, nothing going underneath to keep things secure. ANd I just can't make a single piece of cloth fold around the way Goliath's seems to be. I'm sure it has be only one piece, because that's the way Scots did most of their clothes.
I'm going to have to spend a lot more time on this place and see if anyone else has come up with my theory on gargoyle sex etc, based largely on what they wear, or rather how. ANd figure out who all those characters are in the age list, I've seen all the episodes now but half of them I can't recall hearing of. What Othello & whatshername in Legion? COldstone's mate doesn't have a name, they're characters in something of Shakespeare.

Starrynight writes...

Hello Mr. Weisman,
I am writing in relation to a thought I had about Gargoyle culture and society after taking a Anthropolgy class this summer. The earliest human civilzations such as the Maya and the Egyptians built large buildings and monuments out of stone.
1. Did gargoyles ever built any kind of stone buildings or sheltors besides their rookeries by excavating caves?

2.If gargoyles did in some form hue stone to make a monument. Would it have possibly have been for there unique god which you have alluded to before?

2. Early weapon making among humans began with one of man's earlies ancestors Australopithecus. Like chimpanzes today they used tools to get food. They used stones to break open roots. The techinques of more advanced tools like arrow heads and flint knives did not begin until the next human ancestor arrived called Homo erectus. Did gargoyles ever develope any kind of weapon making or use of objects such as rocks to better inable themselves with technology in order to survive in harsh enviornmental conditions?

matt and others in the Comment Room writes...

we were wondering if a gargoyles urge to protect is a natural urge or something they are taught by older generations to do, or a combination of both?

Jacob writes...

Hi Greg,
did Gargoyles ever play music or are they uninterested in it?

Siren writes...

I was wondering with Gargoyles' names. Now, according to the show to date, in 994 A.D., it was still the habit, at least of the Wyvern Clan, not to name gargoyles. Save Goliath. And even after then, to my knowledge, Demona's small clan of gargoyles did not have names.
Come present day, the Manhattan Clan all adopt names, even more traditionalists like Hudson. When the Avalon Tour came around, we come to find all the clans give names to the gaargoyles. (Of course, the Avalon Clan has names because they were raised by humans.) So through the centuries, has all the gargoyles changed their minds about naming eachother? Did the gargoyles name themselves or do the humans normally name them?

matt writes...

in "The Price" after Hudson's statue was destroyed was the Clan in effect beginning to perform the Wind Ceremony on Hudson when they were standing around talking about him?

also, in the credits of that episode there was a mention of parts of the episode being inspired by material in the comic books (presumably the Gargoyles comic books) any idea what thats about? i have a few of the comic books and i have no idea what the credits are referring to...

Vanity writes...

Gargoyle customs-

It has been well established and I would think we all are well aquainted with the notion that Gargoyles didn't use names. Not for themselves as humans did and that the eventual use of names was influence and need of conformity from/by humans.

However you have said that gargoyles kept their myth, history and traditions alive by oral revelation from one generation to the next.

How where they able to tell sagas of things great leaders had done if they had no name of which to tell? (Try to tell your children about Napolean and all the things he did and all the people in his life without using his name)

It would be all too generic and vague for any real value. Did gargoyles never realy have great leaders? Did they consider the clan as a whole more important than the decision making of the leader?

Thanks

and further note-my post on the guitar tab--well the on the outro the difference in the type size from the field box to the post page made it look wrong. so here is the outro again.

E-6--6--6--6---6--6---6-------1---6---6---6]
B------------4------1---1---1-------]----CONTINUE
G
D
A
E

E--6h5h6h8---9h11h13h12---13h14---14h17---18
B
G
D
A
E

Vanity writes...

Questions regarding gargoyle sex and sexuality.

1) Do gargoyles reckognize their own sexiness, do they reckongnize that they may or maynot be sexier than another gargoyle?

2) Do gargoyles just instinctively know (or practice) sex or are they taught in some manner?

3) What is/are the function(s) of the female gargoyles' breasts? (Milk, motor oil, chiefly sexual)

4) Do tails play a role in sexual activity? If so how?

5) Do gargoyles practive pre mate-bonded sex, or generally stay virgin up to chosing a mate?

6) Oral sex?

7) Is rape a problem for gargoyles? Either by eachother or by humans whilst they are young.

8) Which would you consider more sexually active male gargoyles or female?

9) Goliath told Elisa that when she was human he hadn't realized how pretty she was. What physical traits in humans can potentially attract the eye of :
A- A male gargoyle to a human female?**
B- A female gargoyle to a human male?**
**no need for great specificity here, merely general qualities that may be attractive to a gargoyle

10) Do they suffer STD's?

note: I am not trying to be cute, I consider these serious questions, I however realise that question (4) is somewhat well...wrong, but I believe in its legitimacy.

Vanity writes...

When early man first met a Gargoyle was he just compelled to kill it? Did early man's superstitious and early proto-religous notions convince him that gargoyles must be evil? I would think that early man would be scared of the much more physically dominant gargoyles, however; mammoths proved no match for early humans. Of course I'm also curious as to gargoyles' reaction/response when early man first starting walking about.
Which specie of man first encountered gargoyle (Homo neanderthalis, Homo erectus, Homo sapien..ect..)?

Archeologists have definately found early man developing weapons crafted of wood and stone and bone. This would help offset the physical inequality between man and goyle. When did gargoyles borrow or invent tool making for themselves. Being 'rational' beings I would think it wouldn't take long for them to realize that the spears humans threw at them really hurt!!

I hate to ask a billion questions like this but....

You have said that gargoyle evolution predates mammalian evolution so Gargoyle evolved before man. So given the seemingly headstart in evolution how could they just let man rule the world.

Why does it seem that given the rough lives of gargoyles, which they had no better that early man; did they not invest themselves in art, music, and architecture. When even some of the earliest men developed tools, made art, evidence of instruments presumed by archeologists as perhaps made for music. They began religous elements as burying the dead and trying to preserve the elderly. (Evidence of this espicially advanced in Homo neanderthalis, of which old men have been found with multiple injuries{perhaps gargoyle induced} indicating his being taken care of by the neanderthal family even at the high risk way of life that the neanderthal lead). What accounts for early man's eagerness to "learn-adapt-evolve" where gargoyles seemed content just to use or mimik man's achievements?

Justin writes...

Greg,

I have questions about "full" clans.

1) Now a full clan in definition is a group with common family ties in some form. So would clans ever reach a setup where not every gargoyle knows the gargoyle? I.E a clan with say 500,000 members?

2) Will the Manhattan clan ever exceed a population of a 1 million? or more?

3) If three is yes than will some eventually move into the city and leave the castle?

thanks

Jared Jones writes...

Hello. I am a big Gargoyles fan and I was wondering something, what would/does happen if a Gargoyle is no good at fighting enemies or protecting a castle or home? Or if a Gargoyle didn't want to fight. Thanks for your time.

F7 Addict writes...

I finally got to see Bushido. I must compliment you on the effect caused by facing opposite the sun. I never realized just how used to their position relative to the sun I was. The backdrop when they turn to stone threw me. Sweet!

Benjamin Gilbert writes...

"A gargoyle can no more stop protecting the castle than breathing the air."

You've said (or implied) that Castle Wyvern was built while Hudson was the clan leader. So protecting the castle can't have been a deep-seated, traditional, imperative practice for the Wyvern clan. Sure, there was the normal gargoyle territorial instinct, but there wasn't a _castle_ to protect.

1. Did Hudson (or another clan elder?) invent that saying out of whole cloth? If so, why? Why did he feel the need to word this saying _so strongly_ for a practice less than a generation old, and repeat it to the hatchlings until they were sick of it? (Certainly the Trio seem to have heard it enough.)

2. If not, where did the saying come from, and why did Hudson latch onto it as strongly as he seems to have?

matt writes...

do gargoyles have any special terms or names for the years or the parts of the year that they mate, lay eggs, or eggs hatch?

Cha-cha writes...

1.Where there any other clans in Scotland around 994?
2.Was(and is it)uncommon for a gargoyle to mate outside the clan?
2a. If not, would that gargoyle belong to both clans or have to choose just one?