Anonymous writes...

Does Duval still remember Arthur?

seeker writes...

Where can I find the stories refered to in different questions? Such as the story of Oberon and Mab, or the stories that take place in the future? I've searced for them but haven't found them.

Vanity writes...

I was watching Gargoyles on Toon Disney tonight, plus my taped episodes over the weekend. I couldn't help myself, I whipped out my axe and hammered away. Eventually though I found the Gargoyles Title Theme. So guitar players out there here it is:

opening intro-10 measures- first measure is in 2/2 time then it goes into 4/4 time for the remaining 9. I could be wrong but it doesn't really matter.

Main-lead

E-13-11-9-8-6-14-13-11-8-5-13-9-11-13-9-11-14-17]CONTINUED]
B-
G-
D-
A-
E-

E-9-8-6-8-11-11-9-8-9-13-13-12-10-12-0h1-15h1]CONTINUE
B
G
D
A
E

E-0h1-15-13-12-17-13-11-9-8-6-14-13h11-8-5-13]CONTINUE
B
G
D
A
E

E-9-11-13-9-11-14-17]continued to outro-->
B
G
D
A
E

outro--->
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

==listen to the song for the timing it is really easy. Plus keep in mind that the opening "ahhhhh" sound seems to be in 2/2 time but the main "dummm da da dumm" flute? is in standard 4/4 time. And the outro is sped up considerably it is apparantly in 3/4 time.

Have fun with it. It sounds okay on an acoustic, but electric has a way better richness to it. I like to go crazy with the whammy bar on the 14th fret on the high E when its held for four counts. Another way to ROCK-up the sound is set the gain up to 7 or 8 and pull your switch all the way back.

questions-comments-corrections write me at iron_wind@hotmail.com I'll be happy to work with you.

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...

Punchinello and yourself discussed "sententiousness" in quite lenghty detail. If I remember right the main buckling of the topic of one's being sentient was ultimately his ability to communicate ideas. I don't seem to remember any talk about awareness of thought and decision.
If a Russian speaker was adopted into your household, and could not understand nor speak a single word of English, you cannot communicate with him on any level of aphroristic expression (if you infact cannot speak Russian). In fact the communication would very much be like that between man and an animal. When he wants a drink and says (whatever in Russian means 'I want to drink your water'); you will overtime perhaps reckognize what he wants through mere repitition. Never though be able to ask him if he liked the water, describe the compositional qualities that make up the glass, or how the purification system(s) in your water plant makes that water safe for you and your family to drink. You can say it he won't know it.
Yet he can still make the moral judgement on his own princibles that he understands in his own language as to if he will leave the toilet seat up or not. His sentience is still very much intact as is yours, but in communication most of what we consider humanesque intelligible relay of thought is lost.

He can learn but he may not learn English just as you can but may not learn Russian. Words are words, but diction, structural differences, and phonetic discrepencies between the two languages make changing your thinking process from thinking as an Englishmen(English speaking man not man born on England) to thinking as a Russian quite likely impossible. Even if you learn Russian as to be able to go to Moscow and fool everyone into thinking that you are indeed a native Russian. Your nueral networking will still under most serious probability process thought in English just, as it does; it will translate that process to Russian in a fashion quite like my thoughts now are magically appearing in this post box thingy by mere change of production from thought to text by fingur relay in the procession from mind to hand to finger to keyboard to computer to eventually cyber-wherever. I do not think like a keyboard or a computer yet I can communicate using one but only in the language I am prepared to use it with.

Gargoyles as well can type on keyboards and relay thought. Lexington with very little experience in terms of years and could only practice at night, was able to punch a keyboard judging by the "clicking" sound of the keyboard at nearly 129 words per minute, without looking and locate Coldstone in MacBeth's mansion. Quite impressive really. Yet his thoughts were in English. (note if you were in Madrid when you first seen Gargoyles and they spoke in Spanish and of course you did too you might argue they thought in Spanish and you would most likely be right mi amigo). But not as an English Man but and English Gargoyle again not as a nationality but as a tongue. Still Lex's moral judgements can be made too stand on thier own and can communicate with anything Man or Gargoyle or Oberon's Child that also speaks English, whether they think "English" or not.

Language is not merely a tool for communication it is a way of thinking Eskimos have something like seven words that really just mean "snow". Yet an Eskimo thinks like an Eskimo and can judge the minor differences in the type of snow they see and to them one kind of snow is not "a" snow but a "d" snow and ect..

Luckily for us I suppose that as humans we all relatively think alike even with our differing way of thinking. The means of production are different but the product is still the same. This allows for learning multiple languages each human no matter his language that language has the ability to "learn" or adapt to the use of another language and that is quite a remarkable thing. Almost too remarkable to be chance.

I don't have the full answer, just what I feel like that (and as arrogantly as I can feel it) that I know what perhaps I know or don't know and go with that by fusing it with things that I learn or that are revealed to me by you and others who post and participate. I very much enjoy this site and the people who participate it is so cool, this is the greates fandom in the world.

Vanity writes...

William Cain writes...
In the episode "Temptation", Goliath is placed under the a spell that makes him a slave to whom
Ever holds the Grimorum. OK. (A few point then my question and hopefully an answer.)
Point 1.The confines of the spell were that he would obey whoever held the book.
Point 2. In order to free Goliath from the zombie like state Elisa told him to act as is he was not placed under the magic spell.
Point 3. Demona took the actual counter spell.
I just don't feel that her having him act normal would cancel the effects of the magic as for him running around like a zombie yes but not the magic control its self but… I will leave that to you.
My question is if Demona was to take the book again could she take control over Goliath once more or are the effects of the spell no more?
Thank you for your Time
William Cain

Greg responds...

Here are my points:

1. Whoever held the spell. Not the book. At the end, Elisa was holding the spell.

2. Demona did not have the counterspell. She took other spells, like the one to summon Puck.

3. After Elisa issued her command, I'm betting they destroyed the spell. But who knows? (Well, I do. But I'm not telling.)

recorded on 08-30-01

Okay here is my thoughts,

How is a spell a tangible anything? How can you hold a spell?

-a spell is- a spoken word or form of words held or entrusted to have magic powers : The book or page that a spell is written on, isn't it just that a book or a page that has a spell written on it? What makes the paper or the book special? Couldn't any book or paper with a spell written on it be somehow endowed with the ability to flow with magic?

If Demona knows word for word the spell and wrote it on a legal pad (just as a reminder) couldn't she read it and being that she can channel magic be able to cast that spell?

Elisa holding the page to break the spell was quite a strectch of reason for me. Even though magic is quite illogical in the nature of itself. Gargoyles handled magic quite realistically. You said that you knew but wouldn't tell if the spell was broken but you revealed you think that most likely it would be. I do not see how the spell would be broken. He is still under the spell. But the spell is masked by itself acting as if it wasn't controlling him, allowing him to controll himself. Yet if Demona were to grab that spell and commanded the spell to stop masking itself, by the terms of the spell it should have to comply. It only makes sense.

Vanity writes...

Time Travel Question/Fate vs. Free will

1. Time flows in one direction. To travel back is merely to go on the bank run up stream and jump in up there. No matter what you do though, you will flow down stream back to the point where you were when you got out. You will see the same trees and scenery as you did previously. The river will not change that. I think that is a fitting anology, after all historical events are just scenery. They only act as landmarkers.

1-B: That being said I see that where ever you decided to get out of the river on to the bank. (Which as far as I am concerned is mostly impossible do to the force of the water and steepness of the bank. Not that somebody will not be able or has not been able to do it). But once you jump back in you will have in effect stopped the river. It can no longer push beyond the point of where you got out. Because the bank is where the scenery is and once you jump out you become the scenery for however long you wait or far as you run upstream. So every time you flow back to that point where you had gotten out you will have to get out again, as that was the scenery and now will always be the scenery for that duration of the river bank. Others may or may not know you got out and their lives would go on only untill you jumped in because the river never revealed anything up to the point past the duration of however long you had remained on the bank. The longer you stayed on the bank the longer everyone else lives thier future. And vice versa. (Do you accept my assertions so far)?

2- Free will, I will continue to use the above anology; is in action up to the time that you get out of the stream and then jump back in upstream. You decided when to do it. But once you have you kill free will. No longer do you decide to do it. You have to because you did. Everybody in the river looses thier free will, they can no longer choose to do or not do anything, they have to do it, or not because they did or didn't.

2-B Fate-Pre-destination or fore ordainment of events. Is not a polar opposite to free will. (Would you agree so far)? If God, a god, gods, or Gods decided to plant a shrub or build a structure a set of scenery 300 miles upstream. It does not affect your free will. You will see it once you get there, because it is there. You didn't put it there but not because you were destined not to do it but because the Gods put it there. You had nothing to do with that. The scenery's free will is in question. If Gods put it there before the river flowed down to that point we would say that that scenery was destined to be seen. But in effect even out own scenery will be destined to be seen by any who look at it. Because it will be there because we will place it there because we put it there. The question of free will is not at issue, it is a prophesy "This is what you will do", choose to do whatever you want but you will still do this becuase you will because eventually you did. You didn't know you did but the Gods knew you did they divert the rivers they watch them, they do because the did and alway have. After the river runs its course it starts again, and the Gods watched and they saw and still see because the river of time flowed and will continue to flow because it did and will always do.

3- Can multiple persons travel back in time at different times in the river? Of course but only depending on the duration of the time that the first person who jumped out stayed out. And if you were able to get out of the river whilst the person before you was able to jump back in. Ultimatley the first one to jump back in destroyed free will. But the latter has a chance to make the former(s) mysteriously vanish.
---If you get out of the river on to the bank before I do but I jump in before you do, not as far upstream as you, then you will forever be gone to the people after you climbed on the bank. YOU NEVER GOT IN THE RIVER, AND YOU WON'T EVER GET IN BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T.--"unless by the grace of thier tender mercies the Gods are with you"

- Just remember that, if you ever go time traveling -;)

I want to say that I very much love the way time travel worked on Gargoyles. It was definatley very unique and I absolutely love that. You have said you wanted strict rules for time travel. And as far as I can remember Gargoyles never betrayed the basic guidlines for time travel that were made evident in earlier episodes.

There are however things that bug me about M.I.A. Goliath was there in WWII Britain before he was awaken from stone hybernation. Goliath says something to the affect that their (Una and Leo's) memories of him where accurate he just hadn't lived them yet. And he saved Griff, who wasn't saved, because he hadn't been, because he died and will have died because he is dead, yet will have been saved because he had will be, by Goliath. (whew). Is this like the Gods just planting some scenery on the bank, regardless of what else was going to happen on the banks of the river? (I hope you understood my anology enough to answer this). If the answer is yes then that would mean that as I suspect Goliath's free will was not tampered with, even though he was lead to believe, by Leo and Una; that it might well have been. Is this also a correct assumption?

matt writes...

just watched Grief, had some questions:

1. Emir said his son had died two years ago, and Grief happened in early 1996, correct? so when did his son die? was it before Awakenings? was it before The Edge?

2. when Jackal/Anubis aged the gargoyles you said he just made them old in human terms, but how old were they anyway? older than Hudson?