A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

Gargoyle Biology

Archive Index


: « First : « 50 : Displaying #164 - #213 of 263 records. : Last » :


Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : 100 : All :


Bookmark Link

Zel writes...

Ok, now for some tiresome "what if" type questions.
1. What happens if a Gargoyle is injured in thier sleep? Like a deep scratch, because I'm pretty sure a beheading is fatal.
2. If an ear or finger breaks off, will there be an open wound at sundown? A healed over nub? A partially regrown apendage?
3. How much damage can a sleeping gargoyle sustain before they just won't wake up at all?
4. If a severed limb or digit were held in place untill sundown, would the limb "wake up" too? Assuming a clean break and a snug fit.
5. would such a limb finger or nose, or whatever, ever be good as new?
6. While we're on the topic of stone healing, Why did Hudson's eye stay scarred?
7. Do gargoyles have a regular immune system as well? Not sure how that would ever come into play, but to somehow take their petrifying ability away biochemicaly or magicly, would they have normal defences against disease and injury? Do Guatamalan Gargs have to deal with this problem?
I'm suprised these issues haven't come up in the show, I mean, The main six guys were trapped outdoors in the elements for a thousand years. And correct me if I'm wrong but Scottish weather isn't always gentle. Thanks for making a show worth nit-picking over 10 years later, Greg

Greg responds...

Let me lead off by repeating for the umpteenth time that I'm not fond of "what if" or hypothetical questions...

1. This has been answered. Check the archives.

2. Ditto.

3. Ditto.

4. No. Not automatically.

5. Doubtful.

6. There are a number of possible answers: the attack was magic based, Hudson was old enough that he doesn't heal as quickly, the attack happened too close to sunset and some scarring took place BEFORE the healing process could begin, etc.

7. I'd guess they have some immune system.

Response recorded on November 20, 2006

Bookmark Link

Tyler writes...

I was justwondering what are some of gargoyles sex moves?

Greg responds...

You'll have to come to a Blue Mug-a-Guest at a Gathering to ask about that. (This is a PG rated site.)

To find out more about the Blue Mugs or the Gathering, check out

www.gatheringofthegargoyles.com

Response recorded on November 02, 2006

Bookmark Link

Brian writes...

If I could pet a gargoyle's wings, what's the closest thing they would feel like?

Greg responds...

Depends on whose wings.

Response recorded on October 26, 2006

Bookmark Link

The Tigress writes...

Hello Greg,

As a long time Gargoyles fan, I wanted to point out that the way you came up with how Gargoyles climb and can puncture stone/metal..etc with their talons is absolutely fascinating. Even to this day I marvel at how well that was excecuted throughout the show.

My question is how did you come up with the idea of having Gargoyles climb that way?

Greg responds...

I don't mean to sound flip... but HOW ELSE would they do it?

Response recorded on October 20, 2006

Bookmark Link

Othello writes...

Do all Gargoyles, have the same level of Superstrength? or are some, like Goliath Stronger?

Greg responds...

Like human beings, some gargoyles are stronger than others. I'd think GENERALLY, that it's pretty clear visually.

Response recorded on October 11, 2006

Bookmark Link

Daniel writes...

Hey, Greg. Both me and my two brothers picked up the first season on Tuesday. Awesome stuff, just as I remember. Now, my question: How much do the primary Gargoyles weigh in their night form? A couple of humans from the first season (Like Wolf in 'Leader of the Pack' seem able to toss Goliath around when he couldn't possbily weigh less than 500 pounds (Unless you say so, of course). On the other hand, in 'Awakening, Part 5' Brooklyn struggles mightily to carry the injured Lexington, and it seems Lex couldn't be more than around 200. So yeah, clarification would be great.

Thanks in advance for your eventual answer and fantastic series.

Greg responds...

Your welcome for the series. Thanks for buying it. But I'm not going to be much help on the rest, besides pointing out that the conservation of mass rule suggests that a garg's weight doesn't change when it turns to "stone" or vice versa.

I don't have a clue what they weigh, though beyond obvious stuff like the fact that Goliath weighs more than Brooklyn, who weighs more than Lex.

Response recorded on September 21, 2006

Bookmark Link

Watson writes...

Dear Greg-

I've been wondering something about Hudsons' wing structure. Are the "tatters" around the edges of his wings an old injury (like his eye) or just a normal sign of aging among gargoyles?

Greg responds...

Probably both.

Response recorded on September 20, 2006

Bookmark Link

Justin writes...

Dear Greg,
I was wondering something about gargoyle biology. As know from Future Tense, Broadway hasn't fully mutured physically, and will grown more horns as he ages. I was wondering if in some instances gargoyles act the same as other horned animals in the animal kingdom. Like infant gazelles are not born with antlers, they grow as the animal matures, perhaps horned gargoyles like Brooklyn, or any gargoyle for that matter, are hatched virtually hornless?

Thank you for your time.

Greg responds...

I wouldn't take anything from Future Tense as gospel.

Response recorded on September 15, 2006

Bookmark Link

GargFan1995-Present writes...

Two questions about Gargoyles' stone healing:

1.) If a Gargoyle had one of its wings cut off, would the wing grow back in stone sleep or would it be gone forever?

2.) If a Gargoyle had something cut off in its stone sleep (an arm or a finger), would it wake up with or without an arm or at all?

Thanks!

Greg responds...

1. Gone.

2. It depends how catastrophic the injury was, how close to sunset, etc. as to whether they'd survive the trauma at all. But limbs do not grow back.

Response recorded on August 03, 2006

Bookmark Link

Lucas Truman Williams writes...

Are you saying (in your ramble) that Gargoyles have the potential even now to have psychic powers the way Fox even now has latent magical abilities?

Greg responds...

Uh... which ramble was that?

Anyway, I don't think I was saying that.

[Context, guys. Context! It takes me nearly two years to get to your questions. I just don't have THAT good a memory.]

Response recorded on May 15, 2006

Bookmark Link

Puck writes...

Since Kaylle has opened the line of discussion on things related to gargoyle sleep, I might as well ask...

Do gargoyles dream of stone sheep?

Greg responds...

On occasion, who doesn't?

Response recorded on May 02, 2006

Bookmark Link

Kaylle writes...

You know, of course as soon as I was in the same room as you, I couldn't remember any of the questions I meant to ask. And as soon as we got in the car to come home I recalled all of them, but when I sit down to ask them here once again they escape me...

At any rate, the one I do remember is this: We know the gargoyles sleep in stone during the day. But I wondered if they can also sleep like humans/animals do, maybe take a nap during the night if they're just overexhausted or bored or whatever? We have a few instances where they're knocked unconscious, but that's not really the same thing.

Greg responds...

No, Michael Reaves and I had a discussion early on as to whether being knocked unconscious was the same as sleeping, and on his advice, we decided that it wasn't.

Naps... I just don't think they're built that way, biologically.

Response recorded on April 26, 2006

Bookmark Link

Patrick writes...

Gathering Diary - Day 3
Friday, August 6

I woke up around 7:30 am, mumbled good morning to Laurean as she was on her way out the door to the gym, and scored the first turn at the shower since everyone else in the room was still sleeping. Then I napped until about ten minutes before nine, woke up again, and went up to the con suite to see what the plan was for breakfast. Karine led us all to a diner nearby that had pretty good food at pretty good prices, but they also had the slowest service ever and we were running a half hour behind the schedule printed in the program by the time we got back to the hotel.

I was on Art Show setup duty, assisting Cindy, so the two of us headed up to the room on the Mezzanine level and enlisted anyone who was willing to help unload the van and move the art show display materials up to the room. About six people offered to help, so it took only about ten minutes to get everything up from the parking garage and into the room where the Art Show would be. Alan joined in to help with assembly, and the plastic pipe frames went together quickly, until we suddenly realized we were short two to the 90-degree elbow pieces.

Karine gave me some quick directions to the nearest Home Depot, and then I was off on an emergency run. As I learned at The Gathering 2002 in Virginia, there's nothing quite as fun as driving around an unfamiliar area at top speed, searching for a destination you're not quite sure of. But finally I spotted the familiar orange sign, and ran inside to the plumbing section to grab the pieces we were missing. On a hunch, I also grabbed another pack of zip ties for attaching the pegboard to the frames, which should earn me a psychic friends network membership card because when I got back I discovered Cindy had tried to call me on my cell phone - which I didn't have on me - to tell me that they needed more of those, too. So for about 15 seconds, I was a god for saving the day, and then I went back to work getting the remaining display put together.

I spent most of the rest of Friday afternoon in the Art Show / Dealer's Room, helping Cindy with setup and then sitting guard duty at the Auction display table for a spell. I wouldn't have gotten lunch, but Alan asked me if I wanted anything from Subway, so I gave him money and he brought me back a soda and the best roast beef sub I've ever consumed in less than two minutes. Later in the afternoon, I attended Cindy's costuming seminar. I learned how to take care of wigs, and I'm pretty sure I was the only guy in the room except for when the DVD crew came in to do some random filming.

Right after Cindy's panel was over, Karine or Carol informed me that Keith David had been delayed to a later flight, so I would be picking him up around 11:00 pm instead of Karine's husband Adam picking him up around 6:00 pm. I was fine with that, even if it meant having to remain alert enough to drive at that late hour, so I ran upstairs to the con suite to record the revised flight details in my notebook. Before we knew it, it was getting near time for Opening Ceremonies, so I headed down to the ballroom to see if my help was needed with anything. I had been told we were getting a screen measuring 4'x3', so it was quite a surprise to see they'd given us one about three times bigger. Rob and Karine were still trying to get sound and picture to come out of the projector at the same time when I walked in. I'm not sure what button it was that I pushed, but suddenly there was a picture. A few moments later, we found the volume control, too, and everything was ready.

Greg showed up with his stack of videotapes, and I was given the complex job of sitting next to the VCR, loading tapes, and pressing play. For me, Opening Ceremonies seemed to go by in a blur. Karine welcomed the fans and introduced the staff, then Jen presented the Fan Guest of Honor award to Gorebash. Next, Chris Rogers came to the podium to talk about Gathering 2005, and then Liz came up to make some announcements, which was when Abram and Maui "interrupted" for the first Clan Olympics event. After all the chaos had settled, Greg's part of the Opening Ceremonies began. First he played an audio tape containing the voices of Ed Asner, Keith David, and a number of other people associated with the show that Carol had helped compile the week before. Then he showed the traditional series of videos, and ended with the audio tape of the voice recordings for the never-completed "Team Atlantis" episode "The Last."

After Opening Ceremonies, we handed the room over to Jade Griffin for the "Mystery Gargoyles Theater 3000" event and debated what to do about dinner. Half of the staff wanted to trek out into Montreal again, and half of us were too tired to want to do all that walking. As a few of us were discussing it in the lobby, Greg came up to me and said he had good news and bad news. The good news was I wouldn't have to pick up Keith at 11:00 pm. The bad news was Keith's flight had changed again, and he wouldn't be arriving until 6:00 pm the next day, Saturday.

Greg then joined up with the group Karine was leading out into the city, but I decided to give my feet a rest. I joined Jen, Alan, Tim, Christine, and Becca, and the six of us had a late dinner in the hotel restaurant. Tim told us all about his misadventure earlier in the day where he'd been hit by a car while crossing the street. He was mostly okay, but he still made sure to put some alcohol on his injuries in the form of a shot of tequila and two white russians. I stuck with cola because I was drowsy enough already, and I had a pretty good hamburger followed by a nice slice of cheesecake.

After dinner, Jen, Christine and I went back up to the con suite to await Greg's return for the Blue Mug-a-Guest. We were joined shortly by Anthony and Andrea Zucconi and a few other fans who had not hooked up with the huge group that had gone out with Greg to dinner. Exercising the ancient rite of "first come, first serve," we claimed the chairs and left the floor to the latecomers. Greg arrived only about ten minutes behind the scheduled 11 pm start time, and within a short amount of time the room was filled to capacity and then some.

For a Blue Mug-a-Guest, the overwhelming majority of the discussion was pretty tame. A lot of the questions focused on the DVD and what could be done to make sure that Season 1 will sell well enough that we get Season 2, and so on. Some ideas were floated about using the internet to coordinate the fandom's efforts, such as having everyone purchase the DVD from Amazon.com on the same day.

There was one question that was asked about how the fay copulate and reproduce which Greg apparently misheard at first, as he began talking about gargoyle egg-laying. He remarked that the eggs are soft and flexible when they are laid, and also that they start out small and grow bigger. This elicited a "Ha-ha, I was right, I told you so," comment from someone I had debated this same topic with in one of the online comment rooms a few months ago. Not the most mature of reactions, and bad science to boot. It made me wish I'd been able to attend the Gargoyle Biology panel on Sunday morning, because as much as I respect Greg, I still firmly believe that it must be recognized that there is absolutely no precedent at all in the animal kingdom for hard-shelled eggs that grow in size from the time they are laid to the time that they hatch.

Anyway, sorry to digress, but this was still bugging me when I went to bed that night, so I felt it worth mentioning. I can't remember very many of the other specific questions that were asked, though I do recall that when Greg was asked about whether the tip of a gargoyle's tail was especially sensitive, he deferred the question to Christine Morgan. Greg also blew a whole bunch of fanfic out of the water by saying that in his mind, Angela was a virgin when she arrived in Manhattan, and that gargoyles as a species were not promiscuous. I'm not quite sure these revelations are going to slow down any of us who've written stories to the contrary, though.

Friday night finally came to an end at around 2 am on Saturday morning, when Greg got up to answer the call of nature and Karine decided it was time to clear everyone out of the con suite. That included con staff, as well, so I headed to my room to grab a few more hours of sleep.

Greg responds...

Eggs are soft until the first day. Then they harden into stone when the sun rises. I don't recall ever saying they change size. Just that their softness allows for a somewhat easier laying. But who knows? Maybe I did say that. I say a lot of stuff.

Response recorded on April 21, 2006

Bookmark Link

Allan Ecker writes...

This isn't a journal, I guess. It's just a shout-out. It isn't a journal because I didn't get to the Con, but if it had been anywhere within, oh, a 500-mile radius of me, I would have been there, so I feel justified in at least writing that I would have been there. (Heck, if I weren't moving around so much due to internships and such, I'd have gone anyway.)

I just need to give applause to Gargoyles. It was beautiful, cool, and fun, truly a jem of animation. The Shakespearian references layered over deep characterization and even deeper character -development- truly light my heart afire. I'm aching for this DVD. I can garantee that, unless all the copies are snapped up in, say, the first week of them hitting the market (which I honestly hope for, since that will likely mean more would be on the way), I will get it. I have two other friends who will do the same, -almost- as much to show support for the incredible talent (and any applicable forces of managerial mojo) involved in producing Gargoyles as to have DVD-quality sound and picture as opposed to our moldering, commercial-break-laiden, misordered VHS's.

Gargoyles, is, in my humble opinion, the single best animated series American animation has to offer. Gargoyles is better than the sublime Batman animated series and the inspiring X-Men Evolution, both of which have been released on DVD already. It has also done what I previously considered the impossible in unseating Tale Spin from the pinnacle of my Disney Pantheon of Good Shows.

Gargoyles didn't find me until long after it had stopped airing. In fact, you might say I walked in just in time to see this pivotal moment in its growth. I just wanted you to know, Greg, that I will be voting with my wallet (possilby twice) to get Gargoyles the recognition it deserves.

To Greg, and to all who gave Xantos, Goliath, Brooklyn (and of course, PUCK!) life, thank you.

PS, an actual question:

Just how "voluntary" is stone sleep? You mentioned in a recent (well, two years ago by now) response that sunlight was "a powerful psychological cue". Could a gargoyle fight off stone sleep for as long as (or longer than) thirty seconds? Would this have any short- or long-term side effects?

Also, sometimes gargoyles roar after waking, others not. I take this to mean that it is semi-voluntary, like yawning and/or stretching. Is it more or less voluntary than yawning? Will some circumstances make a gargoyle less or more likely to roar upon waking?

Greg responds...

Thanks for all the kind words. Did you get the two DVD sets? Did you make it to Vegas last summer? Are you coming to Valencia this summer? Have you pre-ordered the comic book? Yep, there's a lot for a Gargoyles Fan to be thankful for these days. Hope you and your friends are taking advantage of all that and SPREADING THE WORD!!!

Now to your questions...

1. It's not particularly voluntary. Yes, a garg can hold off stone sleep for a few seconds. Maybe even thirty or so, but not much more than that. No after effects that I can think of.

2. Roaring is optional, I suppose, but it's also common sense to the point of being ingrained. You wake up and you don't know what it is you're facing, so your ROAR to scare the bejeepers out of whatever might be threatening you.

Response recorded on April 19, 2006

Bookmark Link

Jasmine writes...

Why do gargoyles lay egg's? They have
hair so they are mammals?

Greg responds...

They're gargates.

Response recorded on March 06, 2006

Bookmark Link

Tom E writes...

If a Gargoyle had something happen to him when he was stone during the day, like say someone shot at him and the bullet got lodged in there, or a spear went through a wing and was left that way, would it still be stuck that way when night came?

Greg responds...

I guess so. Though there might be some healing already in progress depending on how long before sunset the incident took place.

Of course if the shot or spear or whatever was enough to kill him, it would kill him -- and he would never transform back from stone.

Response recorded on November 14, 2005

Bookmark Link

Audra writes...

Hey Greg. Earlier tonight, when I was in the car with my mom and sister, and my sister was saying how one of her friends moved to Alaska. She said how weird that would be, because in Alaska, half the year it would be dark, and the other half, there would light. If gargoyles lived in Alaska, would they sleep for 6 months, then be awake for the other 6 months? That seems kind of weird to me. Like for the 6 months they would be awake, wouldn't they be tired? I mean because of being awake for so long with no sleep. Would they sleep every once in a while like humans do? I know this is kind of a silly question, but that kind of interests me! What do you think Greg?

Greg responds...

Gargoyle sleep patterns are a biological response -- to the presumed fact, if you believe Sevarius, that in stone form they absorb solar energy -- so it may be that Gargoyles simply can't exist that far north or south. Or perhaps they'd simply adapt. I doubt they'd exist on a six month schedule, but I'm not going to make a definitive decision now.

Response recorded on October 28, 2005

Bookmark Link

Zel writes...

If a gargoyle's finger breaks off at night, and you hold it in place untill morning, what will happen? Will the finger remain stone? Will the gargoyle have an injured but attached finger, or will the finger be fully healed?

Greg responds...

Holding it in place, couldn't possibly help... you could never hold it steady enough. Magic of course, might help. Or some combination of magic and surgery. But mostly, I think it's gone. The finger would remain stone.

Response recorded on October 26, 2005

Bookmark Link

mike writes...

Do Female gargoyles go through the same female things that humans do like pms?

Greg responds...

Some things.

Response recorded on October 18, 2005

Bookmark Link

Scott Mercure writes...

Hello. I have an interesting question that I could not find answered in the archives. What, if any, are the differences between female gargoyles and human females when it comes to pregnency. Do they carry the egg for a length of time (and if so so long?) before laying it? Is it apparent when a female gargoyle is carrying an egg?

Maybe this question seems odd but it is something that's been rolling around in my head for a long time.

Thanks!!

Greg responds...

Gargoyle females carry their eggs for six months before laying them. Toward the end of the "pregnancy" it is indeed apparent.

Response recorded on September 02, 2005

Bookmark Link

Macbeth Or Macduff writes...

Would Gargoyles turn to stone by day , if they are in a cave or another place where you can not see the sun , day or night .

Greg responds...

Yes. It's a biological clock thing. At most, there might be a slight delay...

Response recorded on May 03, 2005

Bookmark Link

The Tigress writes...

I have a question regarding the stone sleep of the gargoyles and the changes in the O-zone layer due to pollution:

Since gargoyles get their energy from the sun's rays while in stone sleep, I was wondering if the difference in the O-zone layer from one thousand years ago up to the present has any positive or negative effects to the amount or the kind of energy the gargoyles recieve? Or if it even has an effect?

Greg responds...

I don't know. It hasn't had any effect that the Gargoyles immediately noticed.

Response recorded on April 27, 2005

Bookmark Link

Punchinello writes...

As long as I'm on the subject of clones...
I've noticed you've been fielding questions about the clones unique coloration. I think at least one person made the observation that there were other structural differences as well. Different types of horns or fins. Different types of builds to the extent that you could interpret some skeletal differences. And maybe I'm crazy, but I would swear I remember Lexington's clone having a spiked ball at the end of his tail?

Now, I don't read fiction (even in a cartoon) in a manner that compels me to think the author must have some kind of explanation for this change. I interpreted it as artistic license. The clones looked like creative variations on a visual theme. They were fun. Interpreting the show as reality, set to film, inspires people to demand to know exactly what obscure feature of "gargoyles science" makes this happen though. I don't think I really like the way it's assumed that a clone of an organism would replicate the donor organism in every detail. That's probably another idea borrowed from star trek.

The concencus right now seems to be that the clones features were altered by a side effect of being rapidly aged in tubes. (They do that with beer now, you know.) However, it's occurred to me that there might be a much more plausible and more interesting explanation. The clones features could have far less to do with the fact that they're clones, than it does with the fact that they're clones of gargoyles.

When an organism is being put together at the molecular level, the process is working against certain forces. Most obviously, gravity, but other forces as well. So there are certain mechanical limitations on the way an embryo can form in the womb. Biology confronts that by developing tissue in various ways. From a mechanical perspective, bone tissue develops by an accretionary process which is technically similar to the way a seashell would form. Muscle tissue forms a gauzy scaffold though, and then develops vasculature into the scaffold.

Ultimately, all of these mechanical processes are compelled to action chemically, by the properties of DNA. That doesn't mean that the final result would be identical for every conceivable circumstance though. Many highly ordered, developmental processes and simple, dumb forces impinge upon our development in the womb, besides the chemical synthesis of our DNA. So while my genes inform the shape of my nose, for example, they are not the only thing which begin to inform it. And some structural features in an organism are more rigidly dictated by genetics than others.

Our genes are more of a blueprint for a theme. We're one theme. I'm not suggesting that the variation could be extraordinary, as I don't want to imply that we are less indebted to our genes than we are. The variation I'm talking about amounts to some subtle changes in morphology. These changes would not always be conspicuous, but sometimes they can be glaring. The coloration of domestic cats, for instance, while informed by their genes, is the product of several developmental forces. And when you clone a domestic cat, you usually get a cat with completely different coloration than the donor. You can easily end up with a calico when you clone a black cat.

If it had been a documentary instead of a cartoon show, I would have suspected that you would get unique results from cloning a gargoyle.

Seeing a gargoyle would be professionally interesting to anyone involved in the biological sciences. But seeing a group of three or more gargoyles would be extraordinary. Even though we define species in terms of reproductive isolation these days, we still use morphology to identify them. And gargates exhibit morphology unlike any other reproductively isolated species in nature. I've mentioned before that the most interesting aspect of the gargoyles, to me, is not the "turning to stone thing," but the fact that you have the morphology of Lexington, Brooklyn, Griff, Una, and Zafiro within one reproductively isolated group.

All members of a species exhibit morphological differences. All tigers and giraffes conform to their species respective morphologies to subtly different extents. We don't usually observe the differences outside our own species, but even when we examine our species differences from person to person, barring aberrations, the changes are never more than minor cosmetic distinctions. Mostly it amounts to slightly different fatty tissue distribution in the face or melanin content in the skin. When racial confirmation is examined, it is only in terms of proportional averages of the length of the limbs to the dimensions of the torso. Even where sexual dimorphism is concerned, the primary characteristics are actually variations on the same organs. This applies to almost every animal on the planet.

When we look at the gargoyles though, they look like Darwin's grab bag. When you compare Brooklyn and Lexington, two members of a species from the same regionally isolated set of genes, you see extreme morphological differences. There is simply no way their skulls can be variations on a single blueprint. There are obvious features that they seem to have in common with each other, and with other gargoyles, that help begin to identify the common origin of their morphologies. The way their lower limbs are designed, their tails and their abdomens seem consistent. But their wings are definitely not. These could _never be_ cosmetic distinctions. These are major structural differences. The way their wings connect would necessitate completely different musculature in their upper bodies, and that, in turn, would require differences in their skeletons to provide structure for the different muscle insertions.

When you add Una and Zafiro to this picture, everything we know about the morphology of species is thrown out the window. I couldn't look at this group and reasonably expect that they even have the same number of vertebrae, let alone be members of the same species. They are unlike anything in nature. But that's not bad. It's fascinating. It gets me speculating about what cicumstances such a creature could emerge from.

One region of speculation I've been entertaining, is that if you had a species with these characteristics, it might be because their genes are arranged into a hierarchy which is different from other organisms.There could be a level of organization to the passing down of their genes beyond just sexual recombination. I'm wondering if genes could be organized into a hierarchy of sets of discrete packages. Sort of like a kit of parts. So that their genes might actually contain blueprints for morphologies for each organ, but have these blueprints disassociated from one another.

From a gene's eye view, it might appear that they were not using gargoyles as a vehicle to perpetuate themselves, but rather, a certain variety of gargoyle tails. Or a certain variety of gargoyle skulls. And each package of genes was pursuing it's reproductive agenda independently of the others, even while multiple packages end up becoming the blueprint for a single gargate.

So I'm thinking... maybe... if external pressures can be a determinant in how genes get expressed in an animal, leading to different tissue distribution in a persons nose or something, then maybe external pressures can have an effect on which "package" gets used for a tail or a set of horns in gargates. Maybe the spiked ball on the end of that clones tail (assuming I was not imagining it) is an alternate package for a tail structure which is as much a part of Lexington as the one we're used to seeing.

The point is that for tissue to take on structure as sophisticated as a spiked ball or a pair of ibex like horns, there would need to something predicating it. It couldn't just happen by accident. So I would be inclined to suppose that some feature of gargate physiology is responsible for such major morphological changes, when cloned, and that their physiology would be unique in that the expression of genes for such radical changes are as much a matter of chance as the extremely minor variations other organisms are subject to.

I have not even begun to consider how a species can exhibit morphological features which seem to be specific replicas of other creatures which they are not related to. How do you get a lion headed gargoyle?

That's sure to be an interesting thought experiment.

Greg responds...

And I'll be very interested to read what you come up with on the subject. Your posts are always fascinating. I love your "package" explanation. As I'm sure you know, I'm no scientist, but Sevarius is... so when he says the discoloration is a result of the age acceleration process, I tend to want to believe him (at least when he has no motivation to lie).

And another thought to keep in mind is that Brentwood was aged beyond Lex's age. Would Lex start to look more like Brentwood as he aged? Don't know, frankly.

But the other physical differences in the clones, as well as the multiple physical differences between gargoyles both inter-clan and intra-clan is nicely explained by the package-theory.

Good fun work!

Response recorded on April 01, 2005

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

Gargoyle Beasts

ok, i've been wondering about this for a long time. you've established the Gargoyle reproductive cycle and how it works and i must say its a really well constructed system. its great how a couple produces their last egg and in the following rookery their first child has its first child. works out very well.

on the other hand, you havn't given as much information on how the Gargoyle beast reproductive cycle works. you've said that Gargoyle beasts can produce children after only one generation has passed. for instance, you said that even though Bronx hatched in the rookery right before Angela's he can already mate, and Boudicca is old enough to mate with Bronx. you've also said that Gargoyle beasts can not only start breeding sooner, but also produce more than three offspring as Gargoyles do. and obviously, Gargoyle beasts have pups in the same 20 year intervals.

so my questions are, what is the Gargoyle Beast breeding cycle? how many offspring does a typical Gargoyle Beast pair produce if conditions are normal and healthy? is a pair still birthing pups in the same rookery as their older children are?

thanks alot Greg!

Greg responds...

I think you've more or lessed gleaned the short answer, here.

Beasts mature faster than Gargoyles do. But the cycle and life span are exactly the same. Thus a Beast couple is capable, generally of having one more egg than a gargoyle couple born at the same time would be.

That is, they are capable of having an egg in the cycle immediately following their own hatching.

In any case, I think that's right. I don't seem to have the brainpower at the moment to double check all the math.

Response recorded on February 03, 2005

Bookmark Link

Marz J.S. writes...

I looked at the FAQ page & I don't think this was asked. I was wondering, I'm curious to this, do female gargoyles have periods? You know, a monthly visiter? I've always wondered. Thank you for your time.

Greg responds...

It wouldn't be monthly, since they're not fertile that often.

Response recorded on December 03, 2004

Bookmark Link

Vinnie writes...

Do you remember the episode "Metamorphosis". In it Servarious theorizes that Gargoyles store solar energy during the day. However no one ever found out if it was an acurate theory or not, could you expand on this?

Greg responds...

I tend to buy into Sevarius' explanation, but we intentionally did not make it definitive, and I don't have the scientific background to defend or attack the theory. But I like it personally.

Response recorded on November 30, 2004

Bookmark Link

Maelgrim writes...

How much can Goliath and Demona actually lift? thier strengths seem inconsistant as in one episode Demona yanks a rock bigger then she is out of the floor yet Eliza can overpower her! as for Goliath he has to many inconsistancys to list here !

Greg responds...

I'm hoping that we achieved a basic consistency, and that factors like momentum and surprise and whether she's human or not and grip and adrenaline and whatever all explain whatever basic inconsitencies you observed.

But I'm not going to attempt to come up with a number that either character benchpresses.

Response recorded on November 01, 2004

Bookmark Link

ross writes...

where do gargoyles come from

Greg responds...

Eggs.

Response recorded on September 09, 2004

Bookmark Link

some REAL rambling...

Okay, this is not GREG SPEAKING FROM THE MOUNT...

This is just me thinking aloud. (Well, not really aloud. I'm sitting here typing.) I don't even know if I like these ideas. They're definitely not canon.

But the following notions occured to me today...

Gargoyles don't seem to have a native language. They acquire human language ... perhaps much the same way that they acquire names. Naming is clearly addictive. And language, in many ways, is just sophisticated naming.

Clearly gargoyles are just as intelligent as humans. Before humans developed tools, Gargoyles were at the top of the food chain. They may not have created/invented as much "stuff" as humans have, but they also had way fewer needs. Necessity being the mother of invention, they had less motivation for inventing sophisticated shelter, clothes, tools, etc. But that in and of itself isn't a comment on their brain-power.

So why no need for language and names?

When it comes to naming, gargoyles clearly felt that names were superfluous if not somewhat limiting, if not downright harmful to the spirit. Humans must define things. Gargoyles know that things just are.

We are friends. What other name do we require, etc.

It fits in with their animistic/monotheistic view of a higher power. A higher power that requires no name.

Does beg a question, though if you go back far enough.

Does the sky need a name? Does the river?

Elisa responds: "The river's called the Hudson."

But she could have responded: "The river's called a river."

Did the gargoyles have a language that they ABANDONED in favor of human words -- even if those human words were Atlantean (like the term "Gorlois", the true Atlantean etimology for "GARGOYLE")?

Or perhaps...

Gargoyles are so attuned to the earth. They have biological clocks that match the seasons. They have relationships that require no names, until those names have been imposed.

Is it possible, that gargoyles once... long ago... had mild psychic abilities that left them with no need to create language? It wasn't words that they intuited (or transmitted or read or whatever) but emotions, maybe images or sensations.

Maybe it was tied to magic. Not that Gargoyles are magical creatures, but if magic was free-flowing before the Will-O-The-Whisps evolved into the Children of Mab (or whomever) and somewhat confiscated that power for their own, perhaps that magic was just part of the Earth that gargoyles were so attuned to, and allowed for some psychic congress.

Or perhaps, it is a biological ability -- based on biio-elecricity and brainwaves -- that has faded with disuse. Perhaps the very language skills that Gargoyles learned from the human race dampened their psychic intuitiveness, much as Fox's natural magical abilities were stunted by her human upbringing.

Either way, it suggests that this ability could be latent.

I'm NOT saying that the gargs we know are psychic. They've all been fooled enough, even by the INTENSELY emotional Demona (who would theoretically be broadcasting as well as receiving) to bely that notion.

But I wonder if this isn't an interesting area of speculation.

If you see me at the Gathering THIS WEEKEND, it's a topic I'd be interested in discussing.


Bookmark Link

Stanley writes...

One more about the stone form...

I noticed that often times there are shots of the rising sun, but the Gargoyles remain flesh until the light rays actually hit their body. This seems to imply that it is the actual physical impact of the sun rays on their bodies that turn them to stone. But by that token, a gargoyle hiding inside a dark room with no windows would remain flesh during the day. So instead, do they have some sort of biological clock, in tune with the rotation of the earth? But that seems even too complicated for a gargoyle. I'd like to hear anything you had thought out concerning the specifics of this idea.

Greg responds...

Again, I've answered this before. I don't know what you could possibly mean by "too complicated for a gargoyle".

They do indeed have a biological clock, a pretty intense one that adjusts for the seasons, etc. Like all of us with a biological clock, one can defy it -- briefly. But an actual visual cue like the sun hitting you is a powerful psychological trigger that makes it difficult to beat the clock.

Response recorded on August 04, 2004

Bookmark Link

Seneth Somed writes...

Greg,
After reading a few posts in the archives concerning
whether a gargoyle's weight changes during stone sleep, I
thought about it, and I figure they stay the same weight.
For example, in the very first episode Goliath hauls five
stone gargoyles from the Viking camp to the top of the
castle. Yeah, Goliath's strong, but could he carry a ton
of uneven weight several miles, then up several flights of
stairs, then do it four more times without getting winded?
Maybe I should ask you, so

1. How strong was Goliath? Could he lift a ton? Maybe
two? Ten?!?

A better example of a stone gargoyle's weight is Broadway
turning to stone midair. Seems more plausible for a 350
pound statue to survive such a fall than a 1500 pound
statue. But enough speculation.

2. Do gargoyles stay the same weight when in stone, or do
they gain weight?

3. This has probably been asked before but... do gargoyles
change to stone through their whole bodies, or do they just
have a stone shell?

Thanks for your time. You really show some dedication by
doing this. I hope it pays off. I still can't wait to see
what happens next.

Greg responds...

1. I'm not good with numbers.

2. I don't see how they could gain weight -- laws of conservation of mass and all.

3. They change throughout into a stone-like organic substance.

Thank you.

Response recorded on July 09, 2004

Bookmark Link

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?

Greg responds...

I'd guess both.

Response recorded on June 16, 2004

Bookmark Link

Babs writes...

Ok im not gonna ask to many questions, I know your probably going crazy from all the other questions that everyone else is asking. I was reading through the archive and FAQ's to hunt to see if what I was going to ask was already answered and over 2-3 hours later when I lost all felling in my butt(shut up ;p) and my eyes about to pop out; to my dismay I didnt find the answers, unless my dumbass just didnt see them which that is probably more likley. We'll here they are
1) hmm how can I put this (no not a sex question) I was wondering what the Gargoyles skin is?... uh ours is flesh , lizards are scales, bears are fur. Now some Gargoyles you can tell what thier skin is just by looking at them, so I guess this is leaning more towards the Scotish Clan. Depending on what breed of animal they are the skin would be more harder to puncher.
2)Darn forget what episode , We'll it's the one when Owen stuck his hand in the pot of life and it turned into stone, I took notice in the rest of the shows his hand pretty much stayed in the same postition, but when watching "Broadway goes to Hollywood" he was holding a book with that hand. So my question is can he move that hand as if it wasn't stone or was that just a glitch in that episode ?
3)Regarding to question #2. When Owen turns into Puck his hand is not stone anymore, since they are 2 different people im guessing that when he's Owen he has a different body and Puck the same , but they still do share the same body, is that Pucks magic changing his hand to flesh for teaching shake ?, you can just say , sure whatever you think for this one. I don't quite know what I just asked either.

I'm one of those people that analyze everything kinda goes with the territory with having a slight case of O.C.D, ya notice things that no one else does, but kinda miss the things that are right in the open.
Danke for taking the time to answer my questions.
Gargoyles Forever !

Greg responds...

1. We always referred to it as "hide".

2. "The Price". I didn't work on "Broadway Goes To Hollywood", but that clearly is a mistake.

3. They aren't two different people. Owen is an identity that Puck can assume. When Puck returns to being Owen, he recreates the stone hand -- all part of his bargain with Xanatos.

Response recorded on June 11, 2004

Bookmark Link

DPH writes...

Since you have updated your timeline since you last answered the question about Angela and Ophelia possibly being "in heat" in 2008 (02-02-00), I thought I would ask that question again since that part of the timeline might have changed.

1)When is the earliest time that Angela and Ophelia could have laid an egg?

2)Will Angela, Ophelia, or both of them be capable of laying an egg in 2008?

Greg responds...

The earliest for either is 2008 and, yes, both are potentially capable of laying eggs in that year.

Response recorded on May 26, 2004

Bookmark Link

Another Angel writes...

If the gargoyles were not to know who their parents were... how did they prevent inbreeding?
Oh, and the Gathering was so much fun this year- can't wait for 2003!

Greg responds...

I've answered this before. Sense of smell helps. Also most (though not all) gargoyles breed among their generation, procluding a mating with any biological siblings.

Hope you enjoyed 2003. I'm looking forward to 2004.

Response recorded on May 24, 2004

Bookmark Link

Will writes...

Dear Greg, I was wondering how can the gargoyles gilde , like 5 feet away from lava?

Greg responds...

Hot air?

Response recorded on May 20, 2004

Bookmark Link

Joseph writes...

what would be the science behind how goliath and his clan glide,and climb almost anything except solid steel?

Greg responds...

Who said they can't climb solid steel?

I don't know the science. They glide on their wings. They climb with their claws. Do you need more science than that?

Response recorded on April 23, 2004

Bookmark Link

Faieq writes...

A while ago I noticed a short ramble of yours entitled 'While I'm thinking of it...' It was rambled on Monday 4th March 2002. I won't repeat the whole thing here, however the beginning started off with you repeating an exchange between you and Aris Katsaris concerning the date Angela and the other eggs on Avalon would have hatched and underneath your response you wrote;

"With all this in mind...

I know I've established -- both here and in my own head (particularly with regards to G2198) that eggs hatch on the Spring Equinox.

But does anyone remember whether (and where) I've established what month the eggs are laid in?

I can't recall if this has come up yet.

Anyone know? And would this solve my problems at all?"

Recently I remember another question previously submitted on Friday October 13th by Aris Katsaris that may help you.

"Aris Katsaris writes...
A small tidbit that you revealed through the last contest was that the hatching of the eggs takes place in March 21st - the Spring Equinox, that is.

Now, I always felt it would be on an equinox or a solstice- those are the only dates that make sense really... Is the laying of the eggs also done on the Spring Equinox (ten years earlier ofcourse)?

How about the egg's conceiving? Have you decided how much time is spent between the eggs's conceiving and laying?

Greg responds...
That's interesting. Maybe.

As for conception, maybe I'll make it a six month term and put it on the fall equinox.

The truth is I chose March 21st because it's my son's birthday. But sometimes things in the Garg Universe just seem to come together. It's cool that way.
recorded on 10-20-00"

From your above response I assume that the eggs would be laid on the spring equinox, with the females being fertile on the fall equinox from the previous year.
I don't know whether this would clarify any problems over when the eggs hatched, but I hope it helps.

Greg responds...

I agree, it helps. Thanks.

I also don't know if it fixes my math problems, but I'm hopeful. And I like the idea of females being in heat at the fall equinox and laying their eggs in the spring (and the eggs hatching ten years later in the spring). For a race, that is so attuned to the bio-rhythms of their planet, it just feels right.

I don't think that literally all the eggs are conceived on the EXACT same night. Same with laying. Same with hatching to some extent too. There's probably something like a three night window for these things (say, two nights on either side of the equinox).

Response recorded on April 16, 2004

Bookmark Link

Jimmy writes...

What's up with Desdemona's (Colfire's) wings, how come no other gargoyles have wings like her's.

Greg responds...

There is wing variation across the Gargoyle bio-community. You just haven't seen many gargoyles (not many are still alive, frankly) to know that she is not completely unique in this wing shape.

Response recorded on February 26, 2004

Bookmark Link

Firebird writes...

Okay, I've looked but can't find the answer.
You said that gargoyles get energy from the sun, but they also eat (at least, Broadway does), so what kind of dietary requirements would they have? ie. would a gargoyle food pyramid of what they need to eat look like one for humans (lots of starches/carbohydrates on the bottom, fruit and veg. next etc), or should they eat proportionatly more of one thing than us and less of others?

Greg responds...

I don't know. What do you think?

Response recorded on February 25, 2004

Bookmark Link

folklore writes...

Dear Greg, great job you deserve more compliments than i can offer, but my question is why were the gargyles from the different regions of the earth so different except for the japanese and your staring characters? well thanks for your time if i get it. bye

Greg responds...

I think the Ishimura clan was just as different from the gargs as many of the Mayan clan. I'm not going to get caught up in migration patterns or genetic explanations that are just going to trip me up later. In any case, most of the differences you observed are fairly superficial anyway.

Response recorded on January 28, 2004

Bookmark Link

Joshua writes...

What *exactly* makes the gargoyles turn to stone and break away from stone? They've been stone indoors, in sunlight-deprived places, and even outside in overcast. So it can't be sunlight directly... and when travelling the world, since time zones are different, it became apparent that it's not a 12-hour schedule. So it seems to be the *knowledge* of sunlight being out there... is that true?

Greg responds...

As I've stated before (in the Archives), they have an internal biological clock that keeps them quite attuned to the seasons, etc. That can be screwed up obviously by changing time zones, but I think Avalon tended to compensate a bit.

And the strong visual cue of the sun rising is still gonna tend to turn them to stone.

Response recorded on December 17, 2003

Bookmark Link

demona writes...

I was wondering how exactly does a gargoyle breed??

Greg responds...

More or less like a human does, but they lay eggs which take ten years to hatch.

Response recorded on December 03, 2003

Bookmark Link

Siren writes...

1.)Did Magus, Tom, and the Princess know Angela was Goliath and Demona's daughter?
2.)Did they know Gabriel was Desdemona's and Othello's son?
3.) Did we ever meet Ophelia's parents? Besides the Britain Clan and Zafiro, she is one of the most interesting looking.

Greg responds...

1. Given her looks and coloring, it's not a great leap.
2. Ditto.
3. I haven't given it any thought.

Response recorded on December 02, 2003

Bookmark Link

Joshua writes...

I apologize if this has been asked (I couldn't find it skimming): Were the Gargoyles supposedly created through evolution or magic?
If via evolution, can you explain how their "ability" to turn to stone evolved?
If via magic, when, where, how, and by whom?

Greg responds...

Depends on what you believe created humans. All I will say is that it was the same process.

Response recorded on November 24, 2003

Bookmark Link

Demi writes...

How many of the clan's eggs were Goliath and Demona's??

Greg responds...

I assume you're referring to the 36 eggs that Princess Katharine preserved, in which case the answer is one: Angela.

Gargoyle females only lay one egg at a time, generally.

Response recorded on November 18, 2003

Bookmark Link

Mooncat writes...

Hello Greg,

The subject came up in the Adult comment room on the Gargoyles Fan Website, on wether Goliath and Elisa would ever be able to become mates. Physically.

So the main question is, can they become mates, in a physical sense, without physically harming Elisa?

How well endowed is Goliath (beneath the loin cloth)?

How well endowed are Brooklyn, Broadway, and Lex? Yes, inquiring minds want to know *^_^*. If not exact sizes, some general indication would be appreciated.

Thank you for taking the time to consider the question.

Mooncat >^,,^<
and the peeps in
the Adult Gargoyles Comment Room

Greg responds...

I think of Goliath (and all the gargoyles) as being proportional. So that would make him fairly well-endowed by human standards. I have no doubt that Elisa and Goliath could become intimate, but I do have some doubts as to whether they could engage in intercourse without harming Elisa physically. But there are of course, many ways to become intimate short of intercourse.

Response recorded on November 06, 2003

Bookmark Link

Wolfram Bane (wolfram_bane@hotmail.com) writes...

Gargoyle Biology

Gargoyle females may only lay an egg every 20 years, and it takes the eggs 10 years to hatch. Eggs generally hath on the spring solstice. A few questions regarding theis process.

1/ Are the female gargoyles reproductive cycles tied specifically to Earth's cycles, or does it just happen to coincide with Earth's cycles upon a specific date for all females. ei - If a female who to be was fertile in 2008 was removed from Earth's standard timeline (ie time travel, journeying to Avalon, age acceleration or such), would her fertility be influenced by Earth's natural cycles/forces or her own biological systems? Would she become fertile when her body becomes physically as old as it would be in 2008, or is her fertility governed by Earth's natural forces in the year 2008, regardless of her biological age?
2/ Is a male's fertility governed by the same cycle. Ie - Griff was transported from 1940 to 1995. If he remained in 1940, his next mating cycle would have been in 1948, 8 years in his future. After being transported to 1995, would he enter his fertility period in 1998 alog with the rest of Earh's gargoyles, or would he still have to wait 8 years (ie 2003) and be out of synch with the rest of Earth's gargoyles?

Greg responds...

1. They are tied to the Earth cycle. Removing her from the Earth and its timeline would have less of an effect if, say, you removed her an hour before she became fertile. The longer she's been away from Earth, the more likely her cycle would shift.

But keep in mind that removing her from Earth only to put her back on Earth in a different Era would cause her (eventually) to match back up with the Earth cycle.

Having said ALL that, a garg who was biologically too young or too old to conceive is still going to be biologically too young or too old to conceive.

2. Given years to adjust, both males and females would make that adjustment. Given days or hours or perhaps even weeks, probably not.

Response recorded on October 14, 2003

Bookmark Link

Wolfram Bane (wolfram_bane@hotmail.com) writes...

Gargoyle Biology

I have read that gargates (gargoyles and gargoyle beasts) are descended from dinosaurs. I was curious as to what species of dinosaur that gargates descended from. If no specific species of dinosaur, it is several species, an as yet unknown species, or just undetermined as to which species it is.

Greg responds...

The notion that gargates descended from dinosaurs was a merely one of many possibilities.

Response recorded on October 14, 2003

Bookmark Link

Proofreading/Apologia...

I just received the following e-mail from my brother:

Subject: proofreading
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:56:49 -0700
From: "Weisman, Jon"

Just my two cents, but I do feel you're a little strident about the proofreading. I'm completely sympathetic to the annoyance/frustration, but your discussion of your own errors undermines your argument. You misspelled a word in the very sentence about proofreading being good training. Then you say there's no point in identifying errors that you make, because you're dyslexic and because you make an effort. Who's to say that your reader isn't dyslexic or doesn't make an effort, either? All "Dan" did in his first sentence was leave out the word "have."

Personally, I think it's fine to ask your readers to proofread better, but I simply think you could be nicer about it. Since your replies do contain errors, good intentions or not, it just doesn't make sense to me to cop an attitude.

- Jon

Jon is, of course, correct. And so I apologize for my rant. In particular, I apologize to "dan" for taking my frustrations out on him.

My only defense is that all the lousy proofreading -- and there really is a lot of it -- creates a kind of cumulative frustration. I really do ignore it most of the time. I make fun of it (I hope in a good-hearted way with a smart-ass response) occassionally, and I only rarely blow a gasket. But that's not much of an excuse.

So let's all try to proofread a bit more, including me -- hell, especially me -- and I'll try to keep my temper.

Again, dan, sorry.



: « First : « 50 : Displaying #164 - #213 of 263 records. : Last » :