A Station Eight Fan Web Site
To celebrate the 25th anniversary of "Gargoyles", I watched "Awakening" (all five episodes) on DVD yesterday, and thought I'd share a few things I hadn't noticed before (or hadn't noticed enough) that struck my fancy.
1. When Goliath sends the trio and Bronx to the rookery, Bronx looks ashamed of himself - in a way that reminds me of times when dogs I'd known looked guilty over something.
2. When Xanatos tells Owen "Make the offer now" at the ruins of Castle Wyvern, I suddenly wondered whom he bought Castle Wyvern from. I won't ask here - it's obviously a "No spoilers" answer - but I was struck by the fact that this was the first time I wondered that.
3. I spotted what looked like a "foliate head" (or "Green Man"-type head) carved over the archway the gargoyles are standing beneath when the Commandos showed up in the courtyard, and a couple of winged figures on one of the tapestries. (I'll have to check for other unusual and remarkable features of the castle in later episodes, as well.)
4. Many of the human characters repeatedly call the gargoyles "beasts", both in the medieval scenes and the modern (Princess Katharine's protest at allowing beasts in the dining hall, Mary calling the gargoyles beasts, Bruno asking "Where's the beast?" while pursuing Goliath and Elisa).
5. Goliath asks Elisa, when they first meet, "What were you doing in my castle?" Despite Xanatos having bought it, he clearly thinks of it as still his - as if laying pipe for the arc about the gargoyles having to leave the castle and Goliath resisting it.
1. The dogs I've had get that shamed look based on my reprimanding tone more than based on what they've done. As opposed to the cats I've had (and have), who at best stare at me as if to ask, "Are you talking to me?"
2. An interesting question.
3. Art Direction was pretty awesome on the show.
4. All very intentional.
5. We tried to keep each character's POV clear.
I remember reading your response to a Gargoyles question about Tom's, Katherine's, and Magus's ages. You said that in 994, the Magus was 28, Katharine was 18, and Tom was 8. Katherine was a full ten years older than Tom was, so when did they start developing feelings for each other and when did they begin a relationship? Obviously, the flashback was shown that Tom was a full grown adult by the time he entered a romantic relationship with Katherine. Did they ever feel bothered by the huge age gap between them? Was their relationship ever met with disapproval because of it, even if Tom was an adult? I know it was a different period back then, so marriages between couples with age gaps were pretty common.
I'm surprised that depicting a relationship with two people with a ten-year age gap was approved by the network back then. I fully support Katherine and Tom's relationship, though! :D They were both adults when they got into their relationship, so there's nothing wrong with it, even though other people may not agree.
They didn't become romantic until he was full grown. It did trouble them, Katharine especially, but ultimately they got past any concerns. I'm not sure who was there to disapprove. The Magus didn't feel he had the right to disapprove, and the young gargoyles already regarded them as parental figures.
And we had no network to tell us no. We were syndicated in Season Two.
1. This is something I've never really understood, but if Princess Katharine disapproved so heavily of the Gargoyles, why did she even bother to continue the alliance with them? Regardless of what they did for the castle, she was unappreciative and acted as though they were nothing but monsters, getting offended so much by even the mention of one of them. If she had such a problem with the gargoyles, why didn't she want to get rid of them, like saying killing them in their sleep? Okay, that would probably be too bloodthirsty even for her at that time, but still, she certainly acted like she would much rather have them gone all together, so why didn't she end their alliance as soon as she succeeded her father?
2. Would you say that Katharine's later change in character was due mostly to the Captain's betrayal? Not really because she had mistreated the gargoyles, but the fact she mistreated someone who gave her his loyalty and in return she immaturely snubs him. She can't put the betrayal on anyone but herself because she ended up alienating someone who served her faithfully and who was in fact an important member of her court. Basically, the whole thing just made Katharine see what a horrible leader she had been. And of course Goliath rescuing of her, while losing his whole clan also made an impact on her, making her see he wasn't a savage as she believed him to be.
3. Why exactly did the Captain chase after Katharine and Hakon, when he knew that the latter's intention was to kill her? Did he want to talk him out of it because she had more value alive or did he actually want to save her out of some bit of honour? Why didn't he try to make a run for it before the gargoyles got to him? The fact that Goliath found him with Hakon is how he put two and two together over his betrayal
4. The Magus had a spell in place to stop the gargoyles in case they got out of hand, but why didn't he make any kind of counter measures for the Vikings? Granted, he's not that powerful, but seems like he might still be a theart with the Grimorum. Did the Captain make sure to neutralise him before the attack began?
5. Okay, I understand that this needed to happen in order to set up the basically entire plot of the show, but the Magus decision to curse the gargoyles for indirectly causing what he mistakenly believed to be Katharine's death just seemed so…….ludicrously rash.
I know Hakon said he was going to kill her and Magus was probably letting his own feeling of love cloud his mind, but by all account he really didn't know what had happened to her. I mean she did manage to make a run for it and a minute later Magus was screaming for someone to help her. He then just, somewhat stupidly, assumed she had been killed, even though he never heard a scream, nor did he try to look for her body to confirm that she was in fact dead. After he got free of his ropes, he doesn't seem to hold out even a desperate shred of hope that she may still be alive or that there may still be chance to save her, even though he had no real confirmation of death.
As soon as he sees the gargoyles, he pretty much writes Katharine off as dead and blames it on them. I just find it hard a bit hard to shallow that Magus would just so readily assume that the women he loved was dead without even seeing it happen. Did it all really just amount to him overacting because of his feelings for her? Seems to me like his personal prejudice of the gargoyles probably played a role in it as well, since that would make his accusation of them more justified. They're the monster, so it makes sense that they killed her, even if it's indirectly. As soon as he sees them, he directs all his anger toward them. Even later when Goliath shows up, he's more than ready to do the same to him, but then sees Katharine is safe and he becomes truly horrified by what he's done to the gargoyles. I would say he's even more horrified by the fact he did it all on such an emotional overreaction. Is this close to what he was feeling? It's kinda the interpretation that I take from it, but I'm curious if there is some more justification for the Magus rashness?
1. Katharine was hardly about throwing away all her father's policies. If he put it in place she maintained it. I think she was smart enough to see the gargoyles as, at minimum, a necessary evil - as long as they were clearly being controlled by the Captain or the Magus or some human she could trust.
2. All of the above, I suppose. But I'm happy to leave that to each viewer's interpretation.
3. I'd have to view it again, but my memory was that they were running and hoping not to get caught.
4. The latter. Can't cast many spells without your magic book.
5. Listen again, There was a scream after she ran, which to the Magus sounded like a death scream, like Hakon had caught up to her and killed her. I know this scream is there. Because I made sure to put that scream in there for just that reason. So, on the one hand, I don't disagree with your interpretation, but it's not LUDICROUSLY rash, in my opinion. Just plain old regular rash.
We know that, when Elisa dies, she's going to receive a Wind Ceremony, despite being human, because she's a full-fledged member of the clan. With that in mind...
1)Is she going to be the first human to receive a Wind Ceremony?
2)If, back in the middle ages, the Captain of the Guard had died without betraying the clan, would he have been given a Wind Ceremony?
3)If the Magus hadn't asked specifically to stay in the Hollow Hill, would he have been given a Wind Ceremony?
4)What about Katharine and Tom? When they die, are they going to receive Wind Ceremonies?
1. That seems unlikely.
2. Odds are he would have received human burial.
4. No spoilers.
You mentioned that Angela was raised christan, to an extent anyway by Katherine but was not necessarily bapitised.
I read a book about "monsters" in medieval art and apparently St Augustine claimed that even "monsters" were worthy of salvation but only if they were descended from man. Apparently Augustine's comments were very important to missionaries and their work. Could this have been a reason that Katherine didn't bapitise the Gargoyles as they weren't descended from man? Or was it a more literal, no priest on Avalon king of thing?
I'd have to do some research, I guess.
I ask a question before about Superman and Superboy from Young Justice before, but now I have a personal question about Gargoyles that I have wondered about off and on, for a while now.
Much of Gargoyles was inspired by Shakespheare, whose works I became familiar with from Patrick Stewart, and really enjoy myself.
My question is: What Princess Kathrine in some way named for the character from 'The Taming of the Shrew,' because when we first meet her she certainly acted like a shrew and then later on she becomes 'tamed' in a way?
I don't think so. Michael Reaves named Katharine, I think, before we all got started on the Shakespeare kick with Macbeth.
My question is aimed towards Princess Katharine's mother. Has Princess Elena actually passed away before we see Katharine as a child? Are we jumping to conclusions and assuming again? As so often happens in "Gargoyles."
Elena is dead by the time of Long Way to Morning.
Why is it that Tom and Katharine never had any biological children of their own?
Sorry if this has been asked before, I looked through archives but couldn't find anything on the subject.
It's in there. But the short answer, it's not for lack of trying. But it's not like they were diagnosed at a fertility clinic.
I think it's pretty interesting that Macbeth is actually the grandson of Princess Katherine's cousin. Do Macbeth and Princess Katherine ever realise that they are relatives?
I don't think Katharine does... and Macbeth isn't exactly "himself" when he meets her.
First off, I would just like to say that I am a huge fan of Gargoyles, and I look forward to any news on further DVD releases when it becomes available. With that out of the way, I'm curious as to whether or not Macbeth has any family ties to the Princess of Castle Wivern (I admit, I'm drawing a blank on her name). Are they both of the same royal bloodline, or are they from separate kingdoms within Scotland?
Princess Katharine's cousin Maol Chalvim was Macbeth's grandfather.