The MythMaker writes...

A long time ago, you asked if anyone knew the origin of the "eye in the pyramid" symbol for the Illuminati/Masons/etc. Since I saw no update on it, I thought I would give you the short version (the long version would take several pages).
The pyramid represents knowledge, taken directly from ancient Egyptian mythology (before the whole "Pharoah's Tomb" fiction was created) but the pyramid in the symbol is truncated, representing lost/suppressed knowledge. The eye is the "All-Seeing Eye" (God) and placed in a triangle above the truncated pyramid to point out that no amount of official supression will destroy the knowledge forever, it's still out there to be rediscovered.
The second layer of interpretation is part of where the Illuminati as "bad guys" comes from: they were "enemies" of the authorities throughout history (some rare exceptions) because they had managed to retain the missing/forgotten knowledge, and the authorities (who were seen to not be wise/good enough to be given access to the knowledge/power) were jealous and either wanted the knowledge for themselves or wanted these "outlaw" groups killed, or preferably both. The official church declared them to be Satan-worshippers; these groups considered themselves to be the true believers of God and the church to be full of Satan-worshippers (or at least selfish opportunists). So, the symbol shows that they believed in God (in spite of what the authorities claimed) but also shows their own recognition that they would always be in danger from outsiders who would try to supress the "truth".

Your "grey-area" approach to Duval and the Illuminati is a great way of showing that, in spite of what we are often taught, black and white are ALSO in the eye of the beholder...

Siren writes...

This isn't a question, but more a comment, perhaps a suggestion. It's unbelievable the amount of people who post what essentially are usless questions. Ones you know they already know and are just trying to be smartass about or one's who are obviously too lazy to look it up for themselves. It annoys me to no end. And I don't want to signal out anyone so I won't list the names or questions they ask, you know who they are and they know who they are. A best example is asking what a certain character's name is. How hard is it to look it up? There are 100s of Gargoyles sites. Have you ever thought about having someone extra to weed through the unimportant and "cute" questions just so you can get to the important ones that serious people really want to know? I think if the person is too lazy to at least make an attempt at finding it out for themselves, then perhaps they shouldn't be posting in the first place. I think if you really want to know something, you look it up first and ask questions later. Not to mention there IS a comment room here, that is pretty much a message boards for fans to discuss the show. Why not ask questions like, "What's the name of the young white haired gargoyle?", there? I think a lot of these people are just out to pull your leg, thinking themselves cute or just so desperatly want attention, they'll take anything they can get. It's just a pet peeve of mine and it wastes time for you and for us, the serious fans and readers. I just wanted to make a small rant. I hope I didn't waste your time. ;-)

Twin_Kitten writes...

Um Hi. I saw a post about why we like gargoyles? and i wanted to answer..

I like all sorts of 'dark' things i read lots of vampire and witch books and your cartoon was awesome when i was little and i think it was a nice way of introducing those concepts to me. I wish there were more new episodes, and that the show was on lots more. I loved the charicters most of all, i still do. I used to sit in front of the tv and then during the commercials i would pretend i was part of the show then when it came back on i would sit down again. My favorite charicter of all was Brooklyn, he always reminded me of myself, and i would just like to thank you for creating the show.

Twin_Kitten
kittin@epals.com

The evil forces (again...) writes...

Excuse, I have mistake forgive with forgoten.

The evil forces (o Las feurzas del mal, segun idioma ^_^) writes...

Dear mister weisman,
I'm a fan of your serie "gargoyles" and I tell this with admiration and respect.

Your behaviour with some fans is not very kind, I know you must be very tired to stand some fanatics of the serie, but remember, the word fan not always mean fanatic.
I Know, I Know, you are always answering the same question one time, and another and another and another, I understand it's must be very dull and boring, but understand us, we don't know the other fans´ questions and your answers, and we want to know all the details and tiny things of the serie.

Because is very possible that Disney will forgive the serie and we like to know , for example, what happen with Thailog or maybe Angela and Demona would be friends someday?, and only you have all the answers of our question, please, treat us with more respect and kind.
Remember, Disney could have forgive you, but we don't.

With all my respect and greatings from a group of fans of Spain (But this letter have been writing for only one person)

The evil forces and a group of fans.

Pd: forgive me if you didn't understand this letter, but my English is not very good ^_^.

Lovel writes...

Hi, Greg it's Lovel again. I wanted to apologize to accidently posting twice. I didn't know how it happened. So I wanted to apologize for making you read my ramblings twice,*snicker*. With that said, I guess I want to add something that I forgot to put in my other posts.

It REALLY irritates me when fans refer to the Wyvern and Ishimura Clans as "GENERIC" Gargoyles. Being a intense Biology nut I fully see the differences between the two clans, and being a Anthropology student I can see the clear differences between the two clan's cultures. I see nothing similar about the Ishimura and Wyvern clans. I appreciate each distinct curve of their horns and the beauty of their wings, and tails. Sorry to post all that I just figured that it probably bothers other fans,lol. Thanks for everything.

--Lovel

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

Blaise writes...

GRIEF

I've been waiting for a long time to ramble on this one.
I like this episode mostly, I think, because of how it deals with death, and even the personification of that concept. Anubis' change when going through the three personae really does reflect the faces of death: it can be horrifying and gruesome (Jackal-avatar), or it can be a peaceful release (Emir-avatar), and finally, outside of those faces, it just exists as a constant part of life (Anubis).
I thought Anubis was well done (and I cannot describe how thrilled I was to hear Tony Jay's voice in GARGOYLES). Actually, Mr. Jay also played an incarnation of Death (the Grim Reaper, in this case) in an episode of DARKWING DUCK (a slightly less dignified portrayal, but a fun one). At any rate, I also thought it was cool that Anubis talked without a mouth or any outward expression. In fact, he strikes me as the type of being who really doesn't care what form/name he takes on. I could be wrong on that count, but he seems to take his office very seriously and place it above all other concerns. I, too, felt it was out of character for him when he laughed in THE GATHERING part 1.
On a tangent, here, Greg, I feel I must disagree with your description of laughter as "petty." I, for one, think laughter to be one of the best things there is in life--heck, I watched "Treasure of the Sierra Madre" last week and one of the best parts is the laughing at the end (I'll say no more for fear of spoiling it). Anubis, of course, is one who for ages has been "guardian of the gate" so he would be less likely to laugh at anything in this world (certainly not at the Banshee falling on her bum), but I still don't think that in any way diminishes the "power of laughter," if you will. Of course, I could have just been reading too much into that statement. Okay, enough out of me on that.
I was VERY surprised to see the Emir actually appear. I had always figured (as I have said in earlier rambles) that Xanatos' dealings with the Emir would be something of a running gag, always in the background of the series. Instead, he turned out to be a person with a past and an agenda all his own. I don't condone his actions here, but I do understand, and even sympathize with him. I cannot fully know his pain, that of losing a child (and I pray I never find out), but I have lost family and friends over the years, and felt the wish to turn back the clock, if only for a little bit. Tony Shaloub did fantastic work here. I especially like his one line: "To hold [my son] again...I would move Heaven and Earth with my BARE HANDS!" Indeed, he seems to be doing that. I may be wrong in assuming the Emir is Islamic, but if he is then calling up a deity of the Egyptian pantheon shows just how desperate and determined he is to regain his son.

Okay, now let's back track and start at the beginning.
I was glad to see the Pack again, though a little disappointed that Dingo wasn't among them (I was starting to find him the most interesting), but then he always did seem to be the odd one out. Coyote's new design was cool, and I was glad the head was still there (though I was puzzled, since last I saw it was smashed--now I know it's an image). My eyes widened at Hyena's line to Coyote, "Wanna make sparks fly?" That had to be one of the most sexually tilted lines I had ever heard in the series. And then there's Jackal's look at the Anubis carving. I know Jackal liked Anubis for being jackal-headed, but I sometimes wonder if the connection to death might not have sweetened the idea.
The old "hidden temple in the Sphinx" concept. I know it was at least used in an old computer game before GARGOYLES came out, but is this an idea that dates even further back?
The travelers arrive, and Angela describes the Sphinx as the world's "biggest gargoyle" (and yes, I did expect that connection to be made!).
I looked at the scene where Goliath spys on Coyote and from what I can tell the face is in the bubble. Also, Coyote and Goliath seem to press the same carvings--maybe that got fixed in later airings?
Shortly thereafter a battle ensues. Jackal and Hyena, with their prediliction for blades, are still unnerving. I love the little "Uh-oh" Elisa says before Coyote knocks her out.
One more thing about Anubis, here. It always fascinates me how he refers to death as a "boon." Actually, his lines about death really got me the first time I saw this ep. It actually made me think about the nature of death and look at it in a slightly different way.
The Pack has some nice interplay with each other in this ep. Pity it's the last we'll see of it for a while--a fact I didn't really pick up on until the second or third viewing. The Pack had always been a group (except for HER BROTHER'S KEEPER, where it was Jackal and Hyena), and them splitting up was as unthinkable to me as the Manhattan clan splitting up. But I digress....
Jackal to Coyote: "You're not exactly Mr. subtlety." And the understatement of the year award goes to.... :-)
I agree that a great opportunity was missed by not having our heroes get blasted and survive. It would have really driven the magnitude of the situation home. However...even as I think of that, I can't help but wonder if their bodies could still be damaged, which may open up a whole other can of worms. Ah well, it's all moot now.
I knew Jackal would try to take the Emir's place as Anubis' avatar. I thought it was a great job with the character design and voice mixing--not only did I like having both Anubis and his "vessel" talking at the same time, I kind of expected it. It seemed right.
Jackal-avatar's attitude and use of power are indeed chilling. Heck, by the time he ages Elisa he's doing it just for fun (she wasn't even moving to attack him). The skeletonized crocodiles were pretty eerie, but that WHOLE TOWN (obviously inhabited) being wiped out was horrifying. I had wondered for years if Emir-avatar had been able to undo that damage. Now I know that he couldn't...and that makes the whole scene all the more disturbing.
I never picked up on Jackal using the promise of reuniting the Emir with his son as Jackal's way of keeping the Emir from stopping his fun--I always took it that Jackal would kill the Emir last of all. But now the Emir's refusal to act sooner makes more sense to me.
Goliath anashamedly refers to Angela as his daughter here. He doesn't do it to her face, but still....
The Emir-avatar's design is cool, too. I especially like the soft blue eyes (as opposed to Jackal-avatar's one ghost-white eye and Anubis' glowing red eyes).
Backing up, again, I like the "black light" energy that Jackal-avatar gave off. I had always wondered how something like that would be accomplished, and this was a pretty darn good way of showing how.
Emir-avatar destroys the temple, and I remember worrying (even on the second viewing) that the Sphinx would be destroyed as well. I was also thankful that it survived. (Like Todd, I saw that "X-Men Evolution" episode, and recalled cringing when I saw missles hitting the Sphinx in the face and back).
I already knew that gargoyles aged at half the speed of humans (again, that Disney Adventures article), but it was nice to actually hear it onscreen.
And I loved that final summation by Goliath. Very poignant.

This was an episode I really loved (the title is great, too).

Todd Jensen writes...

Thanks for the ramble on "Grief", Greg.

I was amused by your remark about Michael Reaves and a Batman episode that he'd written involving Egyptian elements that had gotten changed. As I'd commented in an earlier question (which you should have gotten to long before you read this response to your ramble, since it's that much before me in the queue), I'd seen an episode of "Batman: TAS" once named "Avatar" with some moments strongly evocative of "Grief", and I suspect that that was the episode that you alluded to.

I hadn't picked up the double meaning of the title (though I did recall Wolf's use of the word). Thanks for pointing it out.

I certainly wasn't surprised that Dingo was absent, after "Upgrade". I *was* surprised to see the Emir actually becoming an on-stage character, and agree with you that his role was an effective one. (Another bit that I hadn't picked up on was your remark about Jackal's semi-promise to reunite the Emir with his son was what kept him from acting earlier, and was deliberately uttered by Jackal to keep him from interfering.)

I might add that I was certainly not surprised to see your remark about "I should have had the Pack kill Goliath and Co. only to discover that they couldn't die while Anubis was trapped." (Incidentally, the situation of "While Anubis is imprisoned, nobody can die" reminds me of the Greek myth about how Sisyphus put either Hades or the death-god Thanatos - which one he imprisoned varies from which version of the story you read - in handcuffs to wriggle out of being taken away to the underworld, with the result that nobody was able to die - until Ares, fed up with the fact that the "nobody could die" business was taking all the "fun" out of war, freed his prisoner.)

Jackal becoming Anubis's avatar and causing all that devastation was one of the creepiest moments in all of "Gargoyles" for me - especially when he aged Goliath and Co. (The fate of the crocodiles was certainly chilling). I think that the fates of Hyena and Wolf served as a good "comic relief" counterbalance to it to keep it from getting too dark. (Wolf being turned into a puppy was great!)

(I can see one flaw in Jackal's plan, though; if you wipe out all other life on Earth, what do you do after that, with nobody else to torment?)

I can agree with you about the "cringe" moments over the gargoyles and the Pack destroying ancient Egyptian antiquities, and the relief that they didn't destroy the Sphinx. (It's odd, since a couple of days ago I saw an episode of "X-Men: Evolution" where there was a battle between Apocalypse and some Sentinels at the Sphinx, and I had a shuddering moment when one of the Sentinels blasted a hole in the Sphinx's back.)

And the end with Goliath hoping that the Emir was reunited with his son in the afterlife was a touching moment.

matt writes...

i just watched "MIA" last night. i wrote down some notes:

- first off, the English gargoyles. for years i didn't like them, i mean physically. they seemed so different from the other gargs around the world and they looked like birds, lions and horses. that really irked me, but i've gotten over it. i started to think of different reasons they look like they do, and Greg had some theories as well, so i'm ok wth it now, and frankly, they are now my favorite gargoyle race to draw. i find them really neat. i did notice that they are the only gargs we've seen whose eyes seem to be tinted when NOT glowing. Leo and Griff's eyes were tinted tannish-gold and Una's were more light blue. interesting.
- it made me sad for years that there were only three gargoyles in the English Clan. i remember thinking to myself that they were another clan that was dying out, just like the Manhattan Clan. much to my surprise and excitement, i discovered the fandom online and soon discovered a whole Clan was never seen on the show! and they are one of the more populated Clans at that! very cool.
- it always amazes me how good a likeness of Griff and Goliath those statues are... guess Leo, Una and the pilots had excellant memories.
- when the English thugs surround Elisa i think how rascist they must be against her. kinda feel sorry for them... esspecially when the gargs kick their @$$! i LOVE Angela's line, "Surely we were sent her for something more important than this..." she gets that from her mother i think,
- i remember thinking that it was weird that Angela instantly recognized Leo and Una as gargoyles. esspecially because they were robed and she had recently been tricked by Raven. plus Leo and Una look so different than most gargoyles. maybe she smelled them or something. or maybe she was somehow familiar with the idea of what English gargs looked like.
- i like how comfortable Leo and Una are around humans. so used to them. its certaintly new to not see humans running away in fear of gargs.
- good touch when Goliath transports into the 1940 sky and falls cuz he was standing up. kinda like having the rug pulle dout from under you.
- i instantly love Griff when he saves Goliath from a propellor blade and says, "You know old boy, that could've been a bit nasty!" love his accent, hes great, i love Griff!
- when Griff honors Leo and Una for "minding the store" i think about how Hudson and Bronx are always left behind and how that is honorable too.
- when Goliath and Griff take on the pilots its great animation, it reminds me of the Trio taking on the Pack's helicopter. i like these sky battles, i guess.
- every time i see Goliath's wing get shot, i cringe. "OW!" thats gotta hurt, i mean theres a hole in his wing!
- destiny really had it out for Griff, one thing after another tried to kill him. i remember i was a little afraid that Goliath would be unable to prevent his death and hjave to go back to tell Leo and Una how Griff had died. fortunatly, Goliath was smart enough to get out of the warzone and back to the 90s.
- and back in the 90s theres a reunion, but a weird and awkward one. talk about your love triangles. Una is stuck between the gargoyle she loved in her youth and has been missing for so many years and the gargoyle who has been her companion for all those years! it doesn't help that Griff and Leo are such good friends either. its an ugly situation, i think and i totally understand why Griff would want to stay with King Arthur, but thats a story for another day...

Alex Garg writes...

"Although I don't know if they actually used the M.I.A. acronym as far back as WWII. I associate it with Vietnam. Does anyone else know?"

The farthest back I've seen militaries use "Missing," not necessarily "M.I.A.," on casualty lists is the Crimean War. I know the U.S. used "Missing" during the Civil War. Before then, armies had "Unclassified" casualties because it was nearly impossible to tell if someone was missing as a result of a battle, was mixed up with another unit or had gotten scared and ran from the battle.

But going back to your actual question, the acronym came about during WWI (or at least that's when the U.S. began keeping track of M.I.A. figures) and was very much used in WWII. The U.S. Department of Defense Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office's mission of recovering M.I.A.'s begins with those missing from WWII.

Probably the reason why you associate the acronym with Vietnam is because the U.S. added the acronym M.I.A.P.D. - Missing in Action Presumed Dead - to its acronym-heavy lexicon either shortly before or during Vietnam, and because the government didn't want to keep reporting PD's to the media, they more readily reported those who were M.I.A. and might be found alive (of course, they might have been reporting PD's as well and just never informed the general public about the acronym's extension).

Sobering statistic time: Of the 217,000 U.S. soldiers reported M.I.A. from WWI through Vietnam, 42% remain unaccounted for; 88,000 of those still missing are from WWII-Vietnam.

Anyway, that's the best I can do with that - maybe someone else knows more. Thanks for the ramble, I hope you have more on the way.

Battle Beast writes...

I loved the ep. Not just to see a new clan of Gargoyles, but it brings up memories of the war stories my Grandmother told me.

Every time I watch it, I can see my Grandmother running for cover from the Nazi's as a young girl. And then I can see my Grandfather shooting them down. Every time I watch "M.I.A." I think of my Grandfather very fondley.
To me, my grandfather was, and still is a good 'ole Canadian war hero.

Thanks a million, Greg!

Blaise writes...

M.I.A.

Ahhhh...a new ramble! Glad to hear your thoughts on the episodes again, Greg!

Anyway, as soon as I saw Una and Leo I kind of figured them to be gargoyles--I don't know why, exactly, but it just seemed so obvious. I love the idea of the magic shop, too--I know it's the type of shop I'd like to visit.
While I'm talking about the London clan (or at least, the three that we've met), I just want to talk about their designs. Not just their physical designs mind you--their clothes and such as well. I'll admit, I didn't know much about "heraldic animals" at the time I saw this, so I didn't quite pick up that layer of it. I still liked it, though--helped make them unique, even from Raven's illusion clan. The feathered wings were also quite beautiful. Their tails, though, don't look like they would be as strong as those in the other clans we have seen. Griff's and Leo's maybe, but I doubt Una would be able to wrap her tail around someone's gun and jerk it from their grasp. Their attire is similarly unique, with them wearing quasi-medieval armor and dresses (I especially like Una's dress; very elegant). Griff's is different, yet still evocative of armor, which IMO makes him seem more "modern" than his cohorts. Leo and Una's cloaks are nice, and color-coded as well--green for Leo, violet for Una. Other small things: Leo's eyes seem to have a yellowish tint while Una's have a blue one, Leo's mane is tied back in a pony tail (never noticed that before...). And, even after your ramble, Greg, I look at Griff and cannot see a bit of Foghorn Leghorn in him.
Okay, long digression. Anyway, seeing Leo and Una's coldness to the plight of the man from the street made me feel a little cold to them myself. Leo seems to be a bit more aware than Una is though. By that I mean, he's the one who looks out the window and says "There goes the neighborhood." This sort of thing leads me to believe that Leo's final "revelation" in ACT 3 is something that he's been pondering over for quite some time. Sure, he still doesn't do anything, but I can't help feeling there's something there.
The weary travelers arrive in London, and spot the memorial. I instantly recognized Goliath's statue and became intrigued, as for Griff's...I think I had some vague recollection of his portrait, but I didn't really dwell on it.
Elisa apologizes to the cabby for the "American money." It's a little touch, but I really like it.
Then the thugs show up. I think I've finally figured out the actors who did the voices of the three who talked:
Jeff Bennett--Baldy.
Neil Dickson--Red Mohawk.
Gregg Berger--Big Guy with Torn Green Shirt.
(I could be wrong, though...)
Anyway, the gargs show up and make short work of them (I especially love Angela's disdain over her foe). Leo and Una arrive on the scene, and Goliath (and this audience member) start to become confused. Elisa, noticing the growing crowd, suggests that everyone go inside the shop.
When it comes up that Goliath met the London clan in 1940, I remembered the "Previously on..." segment with Goliath saying he's going to make sure nobody uses the Gate again, and kind of figured out what would happen.
Maybe I really am cold, but I don't feel much sympathy towards Leo and Una at this point. Even in hindsight, I still feel cold. They don't even bother to listen to Goliath's story--I would have thought the mention of "being frozen in stone hibernation" would have at least piqued their curiosity in some way. Instead, they just feel like doling out punishment--even if it means shackling up an innocent third party in the dungeon for no other reason than their association with Goliath. I never noticed the parallel between Una and Demona before you mentioned it, Greg, but I definitely see it.
I didn't think Goliath's "inner monologue" was terribly awkward. I mean, Matt Bluestone, a supporting character, got pretty much a whole episode to do it. Who are we to begrudge the series lead just one line.
I like Griff's reaction to Goliath's "You saved my life--it was suppossed to work the other way around." I also like Goliath's tentative "Pleased to meet you" when he "first" meets Leo and Una.
Back on the London Clan designs again--I really liked how the artists aged them (or "youthened" them as the case may be). Lines on the face, the grey in Leo's hair. Also the voice actors did a good job (I especially liked Sarah Douglas).
I never heard the name of Douglas Bader before this episode. And even then I didn't know he was a real person (nor how exceptional he was) until I read about it in one of your responses to something. I'm glad you got the chance to meet someone like that (hell, you got to go to DISNEYLAND with someone like that--that's got to be an honor). Even in this ep, he was the one who stood out, and (knowing who he is now) it makes his dogfight with "the Skull" all the cooler.
Funny you should mention using the Goliath/Una/Leo/Griff scene in your voice seminars, Greg--I remember reading that scene in the one you held at the Gathering 2001. I was Goliath, as I recall (very hard trying to follow in Kieth David's footsteps), and Crispan Freeman was Griff. What a fun time!
I like how Goliath doesn't say a definite "Yes, let's fight" or "No, stay here" but just states a simple truth. He's trying to stay out of trouble, of course, but it also just seems, to me, like the most intelligent and even-handed thing to say. And in the next 55 years, Leo and Una apparantly twisted the whole darn thing around in their heads....
Leo expresses some doubt even at this point, asking if Griff thinks less of him and Una for not going out to fight. I like the arm clasp, too.
By this point I had definitely realized that Una and Griff were an item this far back. I also kind of guessed that during the interrum (sp?) she and Leo got together.
The Battle of Britain. I had never made the connection between the wee lad running with his sister, and the old cab driver in the present. Makes the scene even cooler now, though.
Nor, I must shamefacedly admit, did I single out the skull-and-crossbones plane ("the Skull" as I have already called him) as unique. I feel like an idiot now though--it just seems so obvious. Heck, even after the pilot's gone the PLANE continues to be a threat; the last thing Goliath and Griff have to escape. It's an old trick--you have a lot of similar enemies (planes, in this case) you give one a distinguishing (sp?) mark to set it apart and mark it as the "alpha enemy" (kind of like Stripe in "Gremlins.")
Speaking of gremlins, I kind of like the connection with the gargoyles (come to think of it, I always saw Lexington as being gremlin-like--greenish-brown with a prediliction for tinkering and all that). I also like that Bader notices them, and instead of being frightened, actually becomes a sort of ally.
The "no-dying" rule...I have to admit I get kind of sick of that sometimes. Several other animated shows I've seen (western animated) actually managed to have planes explode and no parachutes shoot out. Heck, at least they should have had "the Skull" be stuck in his plane. (And maybe I'm sadistic, but I would have liked a shot of his screaming face just before his plane crashed....)
Goliath's wound. Ouch. I still say that every time I see him get hit. He still manages to pull off some great ariel manuevers on that injured wing, though.
And talk about a tough time getting home. First they're nearly shot out of the sky by friendly fire, then a building nearly falls on them, then a truck nearly hits them (and rudely interrupts Goliath while he's speaking).
And finally Goliath realizes what we the audience already knew--that time is immutable--and to avoid the final danger ("the Skull's" plane) Goliath sends both he and Griff back to the future (pun intended). Pretty much what I expected would ultimately happen.
Leo and Una look in on their captives in the basement (the fact that Elisa and the rest are in chains lessened my respect for them another notch), and after Elisa figures out what Goliath's plan is, both of the London gargoyles pause. Una recovers and continues to rant and rail against Goliath, while Leo closes his eyes and realizes the truth. I love Leo's speech here. And how he admits that while protecting their home may have been "the right thing to do" it's still their own guilt they've been feeling. I find this scene even more fascinating with the revelation that Una is the leader of the London clan. A leader is a person, too, with all the foibles (even Goliath shows that from time to time).
Goliath and Griff show up and Griff experiences major culture shock. I love the punk playing the gameboy--he just walks right by these two huge, winged monsters and doesn't even notice. In fact, Griff is the one who nearly faints (into the path of an approaching car). I just love Goliath's "Let's not start that again." Keith David just delivers it so well.
The reunions commence. I already started warming up to Leo and Una after the cellar, but now it really is great to see the joy on their faces. Griff is also joyful, but it's easy to sense a bit of awkwardness as well.
Goliath tries to explain the time loop, and Elisa does the "smile, nod" thing and asks for the explanation just one more time. "And take it slow."
The thugs pester the "foreigner" again--it wasn't until now that I realized they were racists as well--and then find themselves reaquainted with the fact that there are people out there even more different from them. Leo and Una kick two of them away (and Una has HOOVES--triple OUCH!), and stand proudly...in front of a crowd of humans. I thought that was rather interesting. I especially like the shopkeeper (the guy in the apron). He has his arms folded almost as if in pride.

Well, there's my ramble (and a long one, too). Can't wait for your next one (though I may have to--but I'll do so gladly).

Todd Jensen writes...

Wow! A new ramble! This is the best Columbus Day present that I've ever had! (Actually, it's the only Columbus Day that I've ever had, but it was still a very pleasant surprise).

I really liked "M.I.A." and still do. A major reason is that it was set in London and I'm a Anglophile (particularly since I spent a lot of my boyhood in England, from between the time that I was 9 to the time that I was almost 13). Plus it was a time travel episode involving a bit of English history (the Battle of Britain), and on top of all that, I really liked Griff. I found him a great character.

I found your vision of Macbeth and Shakespeare visiting the Mystic shop together a delightful one (even if you don't see it as having literally happened in the Gargoyles Universe). I considered it appropriate that the London gargs be shopkeepers, on account of Napoleon's famous description of the British as "a nation of shopkeepers" (which you even alluded to in your ramble). (Of course, I've sometimes wondered if Napoleon might have reconsidered his dismissal of the British after those setbacks that he received from Lord Nelson and the Duke of Wellington.) And they show themselves to be further "anglicized" by even having tea! (I liked the little touch of Una apologizing for the absence of sugar on account of rationing.)

I've sometimes wondered what the London public's response was to the gargoyles' memorial statue; since they didn't know then that gargoyles were real, it must have seemed to the bulk of them like - say, raising a World War One monument to the Angels of Mons.

I also thought that the racist thugs in this episode were almost the English equivalent to the street thugs in "Awakening Part Three", "Avalon Part One", and "Hunter's Moon Part One". Rather appropriate that they'd be racists, as a parallel to the Nazis in the 1940 sequence (and definitely fitting in with Griff's comment of "The more things change, the more they stay the same.")

I hadn't even realized the similarity between Demona and Una before you mentioned it.

One thing that amused me about the episode was Leo and Una's response towards Goliath's using the Phoenix Gate - just a mild stare. (Maybe it's not so surprising, given that if you work in a magic shop, you start getting used to things.)

I liked your description of Griff, and was amused by your description of him as a "Robin Hood of the 1940's". It strikes me as particularly appropriate in light of his later on team-up with King Arthur; after all, Arthur and Robin Hood are the two leading "legendary heroes" of Britain. While a literal team-up between them in the Gargoyles Universe doesn't strike me as probable (I assume that Robin Hood is long since dead by the present-day portion of the series), Griff can serve as an equivalent to him. (Of course, T. H. White did manage to pull off a literal team-up between Arthur and Robin Hood in "The Sword in the Stone".)

I hadn't known about Douglas Bader before I saw "M.I.A." (I recall that it was Stormy who first informed me about Bader being a real historical figure when I joined the Gargoyles fandom at Station 8, back in late 1996 and early 1997). I really liked him in the episode, especially his being another human who could see gargoyles for what they really are (my favorite moments involving him being his saying "They're real, and they're on our side!" and he and Griff giving each other the thumbs-up after he shoots down the Nazi pilot). And I enjoyed "Reach for the Sky" (it even brought back memories of my boyhood in England, even though they were from the late 70's), after you recommended it in early 2001.

Goliath's line "human problems become gargoyle problems" is a favorite of mine; indeed, a close inspection of the series (as I've said before) shows how true it was. For one thing, we've seen how all those struggles for the succession to the Scottish throne between 971 and 1057 impacted the gargoyles in Scotland (the alliance between Prince Malcolm and Hudson, the flight of the eggs to Avalon after Constantine's usurpation, the rise of the Hunters, Macbeth and Demona's short-lived alliance). And it still goes on in the modern world, where Castaway's vengeful war on the clan arose from a human problem (he shot his brother and couldn't take the responsibility for it, so he goes after the gargs instead to take it out on them).

Another favorite bit of mine; Goliath tells Una that he won't let anything happen to Griff "this time", and Una puzzles over the "this time" part.

Since (as I mentioned in my comments on "Avalon Part Two") I've been working on a fantasy novel for some time now (begun even before "Gargoyles" came out) which uses the same rules for time travel as "Gargoyles" did (that you can't change the past because your travels there are already part of it), which were there even before "Gargoyles" came out as well, I had no difficulty following the time loop. (One reason why I'm grateful for having come up with those rules for time travel independently before the series aired - it made the Phoenix Gate episodes easier to follow!)

Your comment at the end about Leo remembering "what his business is supposed to be" reminded me of the scene in Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" where Scrooge tells Marley's ghost "But you were always a good man of business, Jacob", and Marley replies "Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence were all my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!"

At any rate, it's great to have a new ramble again. Let's hope that there's more in the weeks to come.

Todd Jensen writes...

I just thought that I'd mention that I enjoyed your account of your visit to Scotland, particularly your getting to visit the Stone of Scone/Stone of Destiny and your reading "Shakespeare's Kings" (I've got a copy of the book myself, and very much enjoyed it). Thanks for sharing it with us.

Francois Ferland writes...

If nothing went right, you recently got a post I made by mistake that included every previous questions I asked you. But if everything went right and the webmaster got my mail, it's gone and you don't know what I'm talking about. I'm hoping for the former, so here's the question I was trying to send last time:

I'm still making my way through the archives (hey, it's been four years since I read it all) and each day brings forth new ideas to me, so forgive me for swarming you with so many posts in a row.

I've been reading several of the comments you made when seeing Gargoyles episodes with your family, and where you where interested in how we reacted at first to some events. So I decided to dig up those old memories and list a few key moments from the show where you (and your staff) managed to really surprise me.

Deadly Force:

This one surprised the hell out of me. When Broadway fires the gun and we hear silence, I was certain that this was a fake-scare. I mean, one of the show's hero shooting another one? Get real! And then I saw Elisa on the floor. And not just lying there with no sign of injury like is often shown in cartoons with serious accident, but resting in a pool of her own blood! If there ever was a moment where I finally took for granted that Gargoyles was a cartoon far beyond any other in terms of sophistication, that was it. And even better, we got that from Disney? Damn, I wish they'd take that kind of risk again for a TV series...

The Edge:

The opening scene where Xanatos, responding to Owen's offer to pretend to lose, replies "I'd fire you if you did". Almost any other cartoon (or live action show for that matter) would have had the villain either beat up or berate his underling for daring to beat him. You just expect it, as it's one of the most popular stereotype on TV. At this point, I still didn't know enough about Xanatos to expect that from him. It's also a defining moment where I also realized that Xanatos wasn't your ordinary bad guy. I don't think he ever really surprised that much afterward.

A Lightouse In The Sea Of Time:

Having Xanatos shown as the one responsible for the theft at first was actually refreshing. You don't know how many shows I've seen where even for very obscure reasons the right villain is always suspected right away, or how a mostly forgotten villain will suddenly be mentionned for no reason at all just to be revealed as being the brains behind the evil scheme of the day.

Maybe producers feel they don't have time to waste on a false lead, or that it's better to give the upcoming villain some introduction, no matter how clumsy it might seem.

Outfoxed:

When we meet Preston Vogel, there was an immediate alarm in my mind. We get another executive assistant type-guy who happens to look exactly like Owen? Can you say lazy Character Model re-use? It felt very cheap, and even though the rest of the episode was good, that particular detail always bugged me. That is, until several episodes down the road, we get to...

The Gathering:

First off, the scene where Petros comments on Vogel and Owen's ressembleance was hilarious. At first, I thought it was only a bit of self-derision, being aware the animators hadn't been very subtle about Vogel's character model, until Puck tells us Vogel was the inspiration for Owen. Great stuff.

And while Oberon was wasting his energy fighting the force field, I kept yelling "Just get in form the underside, it's not protected dummy!". It always seemed stupid in cartoons and comics when nobody ever thinks to go UNDER the blasted force field. Imagine my surprise when our favourite lord and master does just that.

I'm sure there are other instances where the Gargoyles staff played on our expectations as an audience. It gives the series a much more polished feel, that you were quite aware of what we might think and expect and deliberately used that to your advantage as often as possible to surprise us.

Francois Ferland writes...

Hello yet another time Greg! Sorry to flood you with questions as of late but keep fate, as I'm running out of things to ask you.

1. This one's simple and concerns the Children of Oberon.

Almost everyone uses Children of Oberon and Fae interchangeably. But after going through the archive for said beings, you once mentionned that Fae (or is it Fey? No one seems to agree on the spelling) are only one particular group of Oberon's Children akin to the Norse or African pantheon.

I'm not really knowledgeable in myths and legends, so could you tell me who the Fey are, with example from the show? I assume (perhaps or should I say probably wrongly) that it simply represents another pantheon, maybe the Anglo-Saxon one (is it Anglo-Saxon if I'm refering to England, Scotland, Ireland and other countries nearby) in which case, Puck, Oberon and Titania might be a part of it, being quite ingrained in English litterature.

But then again, what do I know?

2. This one's not a question but a personal comment, so I can get away with it not being on the same subject :) . It just dawned on me that by creating such a complex and (in itself) realistic universe with Gargoyles, you ran the risk of the viewers not "getting" many of the subtleties of the show, its universe and characters.

With your average TV show, things are often very clear. Heroes, while hardly perfect, are almost always morally right, while bad guys, which are not always purely evil persons, are almost always despisable no matter how they try to justify themselves. You rarely see a character that can't basically be classified as "good" or "evil", or to use more appropriate terms, morally "right" or "wrong".

Also, most of the time, what you see of a character on screen is a pretty accurate representation of who that person is and what they do all the time. So if someone is always seen giving money to the poor and never seen doing anything reprehensible, you assume that person is caring and generous. It never dawns on you that the man in question might actually beat up his wife everyday, because it wouldn't "fit" with the image shown to you. Yet it would not be impossible, as people are known to have very selective values sometimes. He might feel bad for those less fortunate while thinking that "disciplining" his wife is the right thing to do for a husband. Like I said, such is rarely the case, and what is shown is often intended to be representative of the whole truth.

And finally, things are often easily explained in most TV shows. The villain did this because of that, the aliens invaded for such reason, etc.

What am I getting at? That a lot of the questions you get at Ask Greg are due to the above. Although the fans recognize and live the show for its maturity and above-average (and that's putting it lightly) complexity, they fail to realize that things in the Gargoyles universe, just like in real life, don't have easy answers.

The seemingly benign Weird Sisters lost a large part of the popular vote when it seemed all their interventions were geared for the sole purpose of revenge. Yet, you said yourself that the Sisters have many aspects, with vengeance and fate being a part of them. We at first ASSUMED they were completely (or close to) benign, and then we changed our perception to one where they are only after revenge. And yet, like you said, things aren't that simple, and we STILL don't know much about who the Sisters really are. The fate part might play a larger role later on, or they could yet reveal another part of their identity. In the end, they are complex characters who cannot be summed up in a few sentence, which is what most people seem to want.

Oberon is another victim of this. I admit that I too, thought he was a big arrogant jerk, whom Titania manipulated all the time to get what she felt was best for everyone. But like you made me realize, he has a lot of quality, the first being that he cared enough about mortals and how his Children dealt with them to force them out in the real world for a millenium in the hope of them gaining some maturity. And in every story we saw with him, he always ended up being generally fair to most. He isn't perfect (and who is?); is not above pettiness and anger for example. But his behaviour, from his POV, is perfectly acceptable, if not admirable. And there is so much about him we don't know and haven't seen to be able to judge his being accurately. For all we know and despite appearances, Titania might not be THAT more mature than him.

The list goes on and on. People (and I'm guilty of that as well) want easy answers where there are only complex explainations. I hated the concept of Anubis on my first viewing of "Grief" because it seemed at first that all death on Earth were and had always been caused by the guy. It just seemed so cheap, yet I accepted it at face value because it was what was shown at the time (and like I said, we tend to not question things seemingly presented as fact). Now, thanks to you, I know better, with what little you let on about death-gods and their connection to death and such. And just like there's no solid rule as to wether the Children can go against Oberon's law. It depends on all sorts of things, like intent, bending the law itself and people's words and so long and so forth.

In short, thanks for Ask Greg, I've gotten a better perspective on the complexity of the Gargoyles universe. It doesn't mean I'm no longer looking for easy answers, but I understand why you might reply that "there are no easy answers" or "it isn't that simple", because in your mind, that's really the case. Thanks again for your patience and dedication!

Punchinello writes...

Hi Mr. Weisman.

Have you ever noticed that anonymity cant disguise transparent stupidity?

I have.

The Cat writes...

I'm going to ramble and rant, so I hope you can forgive me if I confuse you or loose you along the way.

Response from Greg to Vanity's question that was posted January 6th 2002:

The notion that vengeance begets nothing more than a vicious cycle of further vengeance, is not only true but is if anything UNDERSTATED. Hardly exaggerate. One only has to look at a newspaper to see that the Montagues and Capulets of this world simply refuse to recognize this obvious, obvious FACT. It drives me insane. Your casual dismissal of the notion doesn't thrill me either. (Sorry.)

Okay, I'm going to ramble on this one a bit. Chew it up spit it out type deal.

Okay, what has always confused me about Demona is that she supposably hates humans. She wants to kill them and wipe them off the planet.

If that is true then why didn't she kill the Canmore brat when he was young and not any sort of threat to her. She could have gotten away with it to, to an extent of the imagination anyway, saying that she was protecting herself from attack and that she just happened to rake the young child's jugular vein with her talons would have worked rather nicely as an excuse. The thing is Demona knew, sort of, that Canmore would become vengeful. I mean, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out that this little bratty prince is going to go looking for revenge. He's so spoiled he still needs some one to wipe his butt! If that doesn't say"I'm going to go seeking revenge because somebody lower than me hurt my pride I don't know what does. She could have easily nipped it in the bud and there would no longer be any Hunters. Of course, you put them into the show to keep the plot rolling, but that really didn't work out did it. Of course not.

Also, Demona is suppose to be insane. She could have easily taken out the humans with her plague. Why tell Goliath that all he had to do was destroy the praying gargoyle and then she wouldn't spread the plague. Insane people are not known for having morals! What got me to was she wouldn't spread the plague because it would kill Angela. That made no sense. Demona has always tried to kill Goliath and the clan, saying that they've been corrupted by the humans. Now, the interesting thing is Angela has been the most corrupted. She was raised by humans and taught by humans, so Demona should have wanted to kill her to. Especially her. That would have definitely reinstated the fact that Demona was a villain.

Perhaps I'm looking into this too much, but Demona had the opportunity to kill a lot of people in the last thousand years and save herself a lot of heartache later. I highly doubt that anyone would defend the Canmore brat. I highly doubt anyone would have been capable of stopping her from killing the last hundred or so Hunters that came after her when Canmore didn't succeed.

However, I think I can answer this for myself I just want to know your thoughts on it.

Demona is not evil, per say, and she's hoping that the humans realize that they've treated her kind wrong and will repent, however, she doesn't see that time coming up anytime soon. She also saw that Macbeth's way of handling Canmore was better, not as fulfilling, but better. She, I suppose, was expecting Canmore to realize, later, that she had spared his life and that he might realize that it was out of the goodness of her heart not out of the fact that she couldn't kill him. Men are extremely short sighted in this fact: A woman can kill you! A beast can kill you! *shrugs* I've never understood how come it was so hard for some men to understand this.

Also, I think Demona's looking at the whole revenge thing a bit wrong. If I'm correct she's looking at it as though its her against The Hunter. She's not looking at it as though it is a war. That it is a campaign that she has to plan for. That she has to choose her ground. She needed to think things through!

I honestly have to wonder how many times she has planned out her schemes. Aside from the plague thingy, I don't think she's ever thought any of her things through to the very end. I'd have to say that she never thought about what torture Puck would put her through the night she stole The Mirror, if she had she probably wouldn't have stolen it. The one time she does plan for years upon years she hamstrings her own plan by telling Goliath how to defeat her. Stupid! Utterly stupid!

So, now I've ranted and I want to know am I right? Even to some degree.
Also, I'd like it if you read this. It was the main reason I began this rant. The book is titled: Oathblood and was written by Mercedes Lackey. One of my all time favorite authors. (I know you don't read fan fiction, quite understandable really, but I usually incorporate some aspect of her stuff into my fan fiction.) This book is a bunch of short stories pulled together and the last one is the one that inspired this rant, however, the whole book is good and I would suggest reading the other two that go with this one as well. Their titles are "Oathbound" and "Oathbreakers". They're good books and a must read for anybody because they go into details that most fantasy novels just don't go into. Especially, the ones published back in the 1980's when it was still "a man's world".

Punchinello writes...

<<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.>>

Breathtaking.

<<Yet his thoughts were in English.>>

No. They were not. Look. Mental concepts (especially highly abstract concepts) do not emerge from language. It works the other way around. Concepts are formed internally. We can use language to describe them but we don't need to. That's the important distinction.
Consider the acquisition of tool use. A tool you have never used before. Lets consider something like a construction crane. You see it's controls. By experimentation you might begin to discern the function of each control. But none of this is the product of some mental narrative. Pretend you've never seen a crane before. Maybe you're an aboriginal who has never seen western devices. Better yet, pretend you're Lexington. You're a gargoyle transplanted from 10th century Scotland into contemporary America. Lexington has never seen a lever. He's never seen a gas pedal or a start button. If you sit him in a crane and point to controls and tell him what each one _is called_ what do you think it would mean to him? Nothing. Simply calling something a gas pedal gives it no context. You have not imparted anything about it's function. Lexington has no concept that these structures in front of him have functional relationships with the larger device. However, if he experiments, he can begin to observe that if he pushes the lever forward, the crane rotates clockwise. If he pulls it backwards, the crane rotates counterclockwise. He can make associations now, and he can begin to detect patterns. He can anticipate that if moving a control in one direction corresponds to one function, then moving it in the other corresponds to the opposite function. This process of observation, association and anticipation is an example of conceptual thinking. In order to understand the crane, he would have needed to think about it in concepts. Not in English.

The corollary to the computer should be clear. Lexington simply could not have considered the novelty of the computer in words. He would have no words to describe it's properties, it's function or it's nature. If you were transplanted 1000 years into the future and someone handed you a solid metal sphere and told you to use it to write words, how would you contemplate the thing they handed you? It's surface is smooth. No obvious control mechanisms. No obvious surface features of any kind. So how the devil do you write with it? Speculating about it's functionality is a highly conceptual and visual process. If handwriting and typing are both lost arts in 1000 years, then you don't even have words to describe this thing's function.

Think about how Lexington would actually interpret a computer. You have a conceptual understanding of what a keyboard is, but Lexington doesn't. He's never seen a typewriter. He's never even seen a printing press. Do you suppose that when Lexington ponders this device, his thinking takes the form of mentally spoken instructions? Instructions to do what? To type? He has no concept of typing. He would be as mystified by this thing as you would be by the sphere.

However, if he can observe the device in use, and if he can experiment with it, then just as with the crane, he can begin to infer the functional relationships of the keys. He can form a mental picture of how this device works. At that point, he's certainly free to attribute words to the concepts if he want's to communicate them to someone else, but he doesn't need to. His ability to think about the device is not contingent upon his ability to describe those thoughts linguistically.

Proponents of the idea that thought is a purely linguistic process cling to this fantasy that thought is a perpetual little personal narration providing us with instructions. As though a little person were sitting on our shoulder whispering to us. Even if this ridiculous picture of the thought process were verifiable, consider that it would be useless as a medium for thought. Instructions mean nothing without concepts. Even simple concepts.

What about Bronx...

The point of my original thesis on sentience was that it is frequently treated in an uncritical and mentally lazy way. It enters popular culture, not as anything analytical, but as an imagined distinction between those we have to respect and those we don't have to treat with any kind of consideration.

So, is the mental world of Bronx (or Cagney) diminished by their not being able to articulate it? It should be evident that the notion their thought hinges upon language is ridiculous. Can we say they are sentient? Can we say they have the ability to observe, make inferences and anticipate? Can we say they are aware?

Of course. It's not just a matter of our having significant evidence for the ability of non-humans to have this type of mental experience. It's profoundly unreasonable to maintain that they are not aware and intelligent when we consider the emergence of intelligence in pre-history. It's often supposed that these mental abilities just suddenly appeared in homo sapiens, as if by magic, once we passed a certain threshold in our evolution. Nothing compels this feature to emerge, according to popular mythology. It just shows up unannounced. And it renders homo sapiens capable of language and tool use in a single second of evolutionary history.

Now, evolutionary psychologists have realized for a long time, that this picture of the development of intelligence was as silly as they come. Highly ordered structures like awareness and intellect don't just appear all at once. They emerge over time from more primitive systems. Intelligence evolved under the pressures that all species face in nature.

Awareness and thought did not emerge from nature as a means to get us into college or to allow us to write resumes. They emerged as a means to avoid large predators and distinguish things we can eat from things that can eat us. Living beings need to be able to distinguish between these two things in order to survive. The ability to contemplate concepts of things in our environment is just the natural product of species adapting to interact beneficially with it. All of our mental abilities are inherited from our earliest ancestors and were developed as an instrument for them to survive. The development of these faculties simply could never have delayed emerging until after we developed language.

If you consider it, you will discover that abstract concepts frequently defy linguistic expression, because our ability to think abstractly developed independently of language. You can't really describe a sophisticated mathematical concept or a work of music in words. They can only be contemplated conceptually. In fact very common things defy linguistic expression. Try this experiment.

Describe the color red.

The reason we cant is because the linguistic structure to describe it does not exist. It didn't emerge because it does not serve to benefit our species survival in any way. Yet you can picture red mentally. Or any number of colors. Doubtlessly, a variety of hues, which you might not even have a name for, exist in your mind. They exist as concepts. Mental pictures. And their inability to be defined linguistically does not diminish them. You can picture red. You can apply it to various forms. You can anticipate what would happen if you mixed it with another color. But you don't need language to do that. The imaginative process, the conceptual process, has nothing to do with language.

<<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.. >>

This anecdote about Eskimo's having such a plurality of words for snow is often referred to in arguments for the dependence of thought on language. I don't know why. It does not appear to lend anything to this position. I guess the idea is that the way Eskimo's think about snow is supposed to be structurally different from the way english speakers think of snow. If they do, then it's not evident that it follows from their having more words for snow. In fact, I'm pretty sure there are at least a dozen words for snow in the english language. Flurry, Slush, Hardpack, Frost, Powder, IceLens, etc. And if we include all the descriptive lexemes that we count when we talk about the Eskimo words for snow, then there are probably dozens more in english.

This really is not an indicator that thought is contingent upon language. I can provide an analogous example though, which begins to demonstrate that thought takes place in the absence of language. Colors end up being a good example again, because they are such a large part of our visual world.

In Swedish, there are probably as many words to describe various colors as there are in English. Possibly more. I know they have a special word for light gray. Linguistic relativists would take the position that the Swedish or English must be thinking about colors in a way that is fundamentally denied to people of other cultures, who do not have all these words for colors.

There are many, such cultures. For instance, the Tiv language of New Guinea, where there are only two words for colors, equivalent to light and dark. A Swedish scientific study done years ago sought to test the theory that thought must be absent where language to describe something is also absent. However, when tested, it became apparent that Tiv speakers were able to recognize as many colors (and with the same facility) as Swedish speakers. This is certainly an indicator that thought exists without the benefit of language.

<<Luckily for us I suppose that as humans we all relatively think alike even with our differing way of thinking.>>

I find some arguments for deep structure very persuasive Vanity, but you treat the concept in a way which is very far removed from those arguments.

<<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. >>

Has this become a prescription for theology now?

Punchinello writes...

<< (if you infact cannot speak Russian). In fact the communication would very much be like that between man and an animal.>>

I'm not confident of this, Vanity. I think you need to be more careful in the way you treat the issue. What are you basing this similarity on?

<<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. >>

I don't understand what your point is here, Vanity. What are you trying to say?

<<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. >>

Moral judgement? What relationship do moral judgements have with your thesis on thought and language? This tangent about morality doesn't seem to be anything you could reasonably infer from a theory about language. I confess that I'm a little uncomfortable with this avenue of argument. I suspect that by injecting your thesis with reference to moral principles, you're attempting to take what should be a purely normative argument and turn it into a prescriptive one. I'm anticipating that you're going to advocate the application of some kind of value system down the road, and that you're going to take the position that what you say here demonstrates the validity of that system.

You're going to need to demonstrate the legitimacy of the Wharf hypothesis in this thesis if you want to use it as a prescription for moral behavior. Right now, it would be premature. Even unethical. Of course, your point isn't entirely clear to me. I have to guess at your meaning. What I'm guessing you intend is that the Russian's internal self, his "moral principles," are based in a faculty for language. This would be a strange position to take. I think you're confusing the idea of values with the idea of thoughts.

Maybe it would help to clarify your meaning if you considered the following.
1. Assuming that the Russian's "moral principles" have a foundation in language faculty, does this mean anything? It doesn't seem to reinforce any argument you make.
2. Do you assume that moral principles depend on language? It is not apparent that this is so. But if it were apparent, what would it mean? Would it mean sentience was dependent on language? I don't think so.

<<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. >>

Why don't you just say..."we don't understand someone when they are speaking an unfamiliar language."
I'm bothered by the way you treat this statement as though you have provided a demonstration of the Russian's intact sentience. I think you're implying that we can agree that his sentience is unique among species and incontestable, but nothing you have written demonstrates that the Russian's experience of awareness is even marginally different from a non-human.

<<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.>>

What do you mean by "changing your thinking process?" I can't make sense of the above statement . Is it a linguistic relativist position? It sounds like maybe you're proposing there is a unique type of deep structure in the mind for every native language? The thesis that thought is dependent on language is frequently attributed to Noam Chomsky's theory of deep universal generative grammar, but you need to understand that Chomsky is referring to the basic universal structures that language emerges from. He is not correlating thinking with regional languages. People who attribute that position to him wildly misunderstand his intent. There is no school of linguistics or cognitive science which advances the notion that there are different deep structures for Russian and English. Wharf and Humboldt have attributed different structure to various cultures. But I don't think any of this amounts to deep structure, and certainly not structure based upon language.

<<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>>

What is "neural networking?"

I think your position hinges upon this notion of how thought is processed. This is where I fundamentally disagree with you.

Thought is not "processed" in English. Or Russian. I'm supposing you borrow this notion from linguistic relativism even though you seem to subscribe to theories of innate language faculty. I would emphasize that even Chomsky, who is the most prominent proponent of deep structure for language, has explicitly conceded that we also think _without words_ in his response to John R. Searle's critique of his theory. Introspection is not a narrative process.

You should consider that it's probably not appropriate to be treating concepts of deep structure in language as linguistic relativist concepts. Eric H. Lenneberg is a deep structurist, and in his study of the biological basis for language he explicitly defends the antithesis of linguistic relativism. He states clearly "that cognitive function is a more basic and primary process than language, and that the dependence-relationship of language on cognition is incomparably stronger than vice versa."

If it begins to sound like deep structurists consider language independent of thought, that's probably because they do. Their position is a much more realistic one. They regard language as a product and expression of thought. But only one of many such products.

Punchinello writes...

<<You say you don't have the full answer. I'm just not clear what the question was. I don't disagree with anything you said, except for the notion that Punchinello and I were defining sentience as simply the ability to communicate. I don't think either of us ever did that.>>

Neither of us did. I should stress however, that I disagree with Vanity, strongly. I take this very seriously. Maybe that appears strange. As I read Vanity's thesis though, I think I detect an effort to base a prescription for moral behavior on what he believes sentience is. And if we're going to do that we need to be very careful. It won't be enough to guess at who we judge worthy of some investment of our ethics. We can't limit the moral worth of some creature because we have a feeling. I imagine people couldn't be bothered to have a disagreement over an obscure philosophical issue. Perhaps if it were just a normative argument being made, I wouldn't care either. That's the problem though. Philosophies are never purely normative. They're always potentially prescriptive.

And since you have opened the floor Greg, to really have an exchange about what sentience is, and by extension, what thought is, responding to this provides a good opportunity to do that.

<<(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 >>

<< 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.>>

Well I've reviewed what I saved of that thread, and I cant find any indication that anyone participating intoned that sentience relied upon communication of ideas. _I_ certainly never did. The idea you're describing in your thesis, that thought depends on a faculty for language, arguably originates in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis and the work of Boas and Humboldt. I'm familiar with this work, and I've never been persuaded that it possessed any kind of intellectual legitimacy. Particularly where Whorf is concerned. The magnitude of error in his thinking is almost comical. Also, while I am unsure of how you are treating the Sapir Whorf hypothesis here, Vanity, it sounds like you suppose that it is not seriously contested by anyone. If that's the case, then you need to understand that it has been the subject of alot of scholarly level criticism among cognitive scientists. In fact, there has been harsh critique in the literature from both the cognitive-neuro camp and the linguistics camp. It's reliability as an hypothesis is alot more tenuous than you might suppose.

<<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>>

Aphoristic expression?

Punchinello writes...

<<Well, let's start with the "buffet"/game-playing writing style. I think it's awful. >>

I agree.

<<Having said that, I have this friend, a garg fan who's now a pretty darn successful writer. When I read her first book, I felt that the first half of it was written in that way. As if rolls of the dice determined who each character was, what he or she could do and what happenned to them.
When I asked her about it, she confessed (if that's the word) that I was dead on. The first half of the book was her almost literally setting to prose a game of D&D that she had played.
I don't recommend doing that, but look at the result. The second half of the novel, inspired as it was by the first half, was wonderful. And she's moved forward with these characters into other books as well. >>

When I indicated that I thought this game-players writing style could be exploited profitably, I wasn't really thinking of more mature, conventional writing emerging from it. Although, that obviouly works too. I was thinking, if you were writing something, for instance, where there was a consistent theme of game-playing, then maybe you could exploit it as a device. I'm thinking of game-playing themes more along the lines of George Perec than dungeons and dragons. So maybe there would be subtle games embedded in the text. But at the same time, maybe there could be a section of the book, or a certain character, which you treat in the game-players writing style. Sort of in the way you could mimic the writing style of the Victorians. I have given no serious thought to what properties make game-player writing read the way it does. But it _is_ recognizable. You've identified it, yourself.

<<But your second question is more serious. Does this process in fact impair the reader/audience. Forget that some of these guys will never be great writers, will this make them bad readers?
I don't know. But my guess is that it's the same (or similar) percentage of people who would have been bad readers in the first place. The good ones will transcend. The others won't. That's my hypothesis.>>

I suppose so. It's just that I keep on detecting subtle trends in the way people in our culture think about things. And I worry this game-players thing will worsen. It's like that business of an incomplete idea of "sentience" invading popular culture. It seems ridiculous to speculate that the idea migrated into the culture from star trek, but if you observe carefully, you can see it. I think people in our culture, are less and less informed by critical thinking today.

Ten years ago, for instance, I don't think I saw game-player writing anywhere. Now, even before this conversation I had, in which we began to put a name to this thing, it seems pervasive. I think the novelty has become the institution. Consider that twenty years ago, aspiring authors could not have seen this in literature. Today, I have waking nightmares that the kid who would have been the next Paul Auster is going to become intellectually deranged when he picks up a dungeons/dragons book for the first time and gets the idea that "this must be how people write."

I'm probably thinking of something along the lines of memes here. Ideas enter the culture and become dominant over time. Usually, stupid ideas. They begin to define the way that people think about things and even the way they value things. It doesn't just erode our intellects. It can erode sensible ethics. Consider this...

I saw an episode of star trek recently, and it really alarmed me. The premise was that the characters travel to a planet where the human population reproduces exclusively by cloning. For some ridiculous reason they could no longer continue cloning themselves, so they ask the characters to donate genetic material so their culture can survive. The characters hostility to the idea is so irrational that I wouldn't know how to describe it. And when the clone people sneak away some of their genetic material to make clones of them anyway, a demonstration of some of the most demented rationalization of science fiction occurs.

The characters go to the lab where their clones have already developed into full grown reproductions of themselves, and use their death rays to obliterate them. And I should be clear that these were not blastocysts in test tubes. These were obviously fully grown and autonomous people. And this is all treated by the authors as though it were the most natural thing in the world. It's simply understood that being cloned "diminishes you" as a human being, and that their absurd indignation was somehow righteous. Precisely how this diminishes a person is never elaborated upon, and I'm sure that the authors never even thought about it. They assume, with remarkable vacuousness, that the cloned people in the lab do not possess any type of intrinsic worth. I know that star trek authors have never picked up a science text, but the poverty of ethical thinking here, compelled me to think they had never read a book or had a thought about anything.

Of course, it's just a silly TV show. Right?

And yet, it's conspicuous that the range public debate about bioethics is defined by these concepts. I'm not talking about the range of debate in the literature of science or philosophy. That remains very isolated from the public forums where most people in our culture consider these issues. In popular magazines and network news journalism, the dominant logic is that a person is rendered somehow, "lesser" by having been cloned. The idea has been in ascendancy for a decade despite the depth of it's ignorance. The people who define and limit public discourse about it have certainly never thought about it critically. Their positions frequently contradict themselves and more frequenly rely on popular myths and emotional appeals to people's superstitions.

And it gets worse. Something far more sinister has emerged from popular, misinformed dialogue about cloning. In popular disputes about it (I heard the notion resurface on CNN about a month ago) the question of "what kind of rights would a clone have" is routinely brandished about as though it were an intelligent thought. To practicing ethicists and scientists, this notion probably would not have even entered the dialogue if it had not been thrust upon them by popular culture. That the question is being asked at all assumes, uncritically, that there is something meaningfully distinguishable about a cloned person which would compel us to assign a different worth to them. A worth, lesser than a person who came into the world by conventional means.

I have a suspicion, that the people most vocally shrieking about the moral dilemmas of cloning, are actually theologically threatened by it. I have no evidence of this. But a few inferences they have made, have got me thinking that their theological picture of "personhood" follows a very rigid prescription, and their indignation may originate with some inept idea that a clone would not have a soul.

"Soul" becomes a good parallel to "sentient life." One is from religion and one is from science fiction, but both of them are shortcuts people use instead of actually thinking about the internal properties that imbue something with intrinsic moral worth.

I hope it's apparent why I think this is important. Magical thinking can be dangerous. The worth of a being can't reasonably be described in these terms. If the distinction between ruling class and underclass or the difference between pets and meat is being determined by distinguishing one as sentient or soul-containing, then we have not really distinguished anything. We're just making things up. We might as well assign moral worth based upon who has stars on their bellies.

I don't remember what Goliath's reaction to Thailog was precisely. I remember that he was alarmed by the prospect of there being another version of himself. How would you describe his feelings about the issue. I suspect since he would have no concept of cloning technology, his perception of it would be unique.

Punchinello writes...

Hello Mr. Weisman.

<<So sometimes, it does get annoying. But mostly I enjoy doing this. (I do think that doing a little a day has been a much better system than trying to do big batches of questions all at once. I get less annoyed when not burdened with the cumulative effects of annoyance.) Do I wish this could be more of a forum for ideas and discussion? Well, yeah, duh. I've invited that in the past, and, P., I always enjoy reading and responding to your posts.>>
<<I hope that 18 months later you're still checking ASK GREG and reading this. I hope that you'll compose your response and hold on to it, submitting it when we finally get things back up and running. But even if you're not, even if you're long gone, thanks for raising some interesting issues.>>

All this sort of diminishes some of my apprehensions about submitting things to this forum. Most of the time I have assumed it's a huge hassle for you.

<<(Although what you quoted at the head of your post:
<<You idiot! Did you not read the no ideas clause on the main askgreg page or are you just pretending to be stupid!>>
is a bit lost on me out of context. I can't believe I wrote the first quote.) >>

You didn't write it. I'm sorry. That must have seemed strange to you. When I submitted this post (all those many years ago) there were two posts in the list directly before mine. The first was from someone who I don't think had ever posted a message here before. I don't remember his name or what he wrote, but I do remember that he was speculating about something you did in the show. His post seemed pretty benign to me. He was just curious about something.

The second post was from...some anonymous idiot. He was the one asking the curious guy if he was "pretending to be stupid." I got the impression he was trying to demonstrate his superior knowledge of "gargoyles forum culture." I found his invective incredibly offensive. Apparently so did your mr. Gorebash, because he deleted his post after I responded. That's why you didn't see it.

I think the guy rematerialized shortly afterwards, as Master Debator, who had never posted before and most likely never will again. I almost regret you decided not to dignify his contest for "king of the garg fans" with a reaction, as I'm sure your reaction could have been very amusing.

<<So a lot comes down to the intent of the questioner, and you can usually tell, if not in a single post then in the range of posts that that person submits. If I get 16 posts in a row asking something like, "Who is Maggie's father?" followed by "Who is Claw's father?" followed by "Who is Fang's father?" or if I get requests for laundry lists of things, "Name all the ancient heroes who have encountered Oberon," then you can bet that the questioner was looking for a question to ask, as opposed to trying to deepen his or her understanding of the show or character.>>
<<And again, I think you can often (though not always) tell by the question itself if that's what the questioner is seeking. A deeper understanding about some aspect of the show.>>

I understand. I think part of the reason that I responded to the anonymous character in the way I did was because I had gotten the idea in my head that it was the same anonymous character that is persistently demanding that you elaborate on the most trivial minutia. From my perspective, it seemed like someone had just asked where fox got her tattoo six times in a row, then had the unmitigated gaul to call someone else an idiot for asking an innocent question.

Gothic Cowboy writes...

Hello, again. I have a question/observation concerning Oberon. I have noticed an unfortunate trend among fans of the series (particularly in fanfiction, although I understand you don't read such material) to present Oberon in an unfavorable light. Even The Gargoyles Saga, which normally boasts excellent characterization, consistently depicts Oberon in a manner which I feel is grossly unfair. I liked Oberon. I thought that he was stern, but fair, and was also very concerned with the proper use of power. Granted, he possessed character flaws. But he banished his Children from Avalon, forcing them to live amongst mortals, because he felt that they didn't have proper respect for the rights of mortals. His Law is also shown in an unfair light. Most fans seem to like to show him as an uncaring, distant figure, who could care less if the bulk of humanity simply died off. I interpret his Law differently, though. Perhaps its simply because I am an inveterate comic book fan, and the topic has been frequently used in comic books. But I believe that Oberon forbids direct magical intervention, even to help mortals, because he understands that mortals must stand on their own. He understands that, if he were to direct his Children to use their powers to shelter and care for mortals, we would come to rely on them for everything, even the problems that we could solve on our own. Our potential would be stunted. We would eventually become little better than pets for the Children of Oberon. Obviously, he doesn't mind non-magical intervention. Puck interferes a great deal, but as Owen, without magic. Grandmother has seemingly guided and advised mortals for centuries. Many of the Children (including Oberon himself) have sired or beared Half-Fae children with mortals. His emphasis seems to be on ensuring that mortals don't become reliant on the Children of Oberon, that we feed our own poor, treat our own sick and wounded, fight our own battles. In short, that we make our own mistakes and stand on our own two feet. Was I off the mark?

Audra writes...

I know that the Gargoyles Movie on VHS has scenes cut out from the Awakening episodes that were shown on TV. You guys did a pretty good job editing it I think. (I'm not sure if you did that or not though.) This is just my opinion, but I'd just like to tell you about one small scene I think should of been kept in the movie on VHS. The scene where Goliath is talking to Princess Katherine and Magus, right before Magus turns Goliath to stone, Goliath says, "The eggs in the rookery will soon hatch, they will need guidance." And then Princess Katherine says, "Never fear, we will watch over them as if they were our own." I think that small scene should of stayed in the movie. If you never saw the Awakening episodes on TV, and started watching the other Gargoyles episodes on TV, I think that small scene is important so people know that Goliath asked Katherine and Magus to take care of the eggs. Maybe that's just me, but that's just my opinion, and I thought I'd like to tell you about it.

P.S. I also think on the Awakening episodes on TV, it's funny when Hudson is flipping through the channels on the TV, and there is a scene from the Lion King. Since I'm also a big Lion King fan.

Blaise writes...

Hey there! Welcome back!

Just finished reading your summer vacation..."Escape from New York" is right! Man, that must've been a tense ride at the time. I guess no harm no foul, but I still don't envy your experience. I envy Greg "Xanatos," though--he got to be your chauffer for the day!

BTW, I didn't realize you were a "Harry Potter" reader! I read through the whole of book 5 in about three nights and a Saturday morning. Yes, it has grown up some, but then, so has Harry.

LXG: I was introduced to that last year, read the collected graphic novel at the house of a friend I was visiting for Thanksgiving. I thought it was a great, fun read (though I, predictably, shook my head at the whole "Freemason" thing). I have to admit I had no idea who Quartermain was, originally. Still not sure if I'll see the movie though, considering the changes they've made.

I'm also not sure if I'll go see Sindbad in the theaters. I'm tempted to see it just for Eris--I like her look, and her animation style seems nice--but frankly, my biggest turn-off is the dog. From what I've heard, he originally wasn't in that much of the movie, but after viewing their test audience's reaction to him (and they were predominantly young children) they added 7 more scenes with the dog. Of course, since I have not seen it, I cannot judge. What rubbed you about it?

And the Gathering...man what a great time it must have been. I wish I could have gone. Heck, I wish I remembered to do the Honorary Attendee thing (I'm still kicking myself over that). The thing I actually missed most about this one, is that I wasn't able to sign the Sperlings' card--that was a great thing that everybody did, and I really regret not being a part of that.

Well, that's about all I have to say right now. But just wait 'til you post your next ramble, Greg--I'll have a whole book written for you then! Of course, by the time you read this, a LOT of what I've written will be outdated. Oh well.... :-)
Later!

Blaise writes...

SANCTUARY

Naturally, Notre Dame had to be brought into this series *sometime* (especially once they started the world tour).
I don't know who I figured the "winged sillhouette" (sp?) at the beginning to be, but I think I may have suspected Demona, because she struck me as the most well-traveled gargoyle I could think of.
Then we see Macbeth with a babe who sports a heavy French accent. It wasn't until she said "we have all the time in the world" (accompanied by a not-too-subtle music sting) that I recognized her (by voice anyway). I knew I was in for a good ep.
And Elisa pretty much admits her romantic view of Goliath. I find it interesting how she so naturally moves from talking to herself to talking to the "snoozing" crew. And of course we have yet another "D'oh" moment when Elisa starts to call her parents...and stops to follow Demona and Macbeth.
Pointless note--I like D & M's costumes here. Very nice.
Elisa eventually makes her way back to the others with the paper and they're off and running after the plot.
Something I'd point out here, Angela never says that Katharine or Tom told her about Notre Dame, yet I've seen several people make that assumption. As far as I can tell, Angela didn't hear about it until Elisa mentioned it.
I believe, when I first saw this, I took Goliath's rebuking Angela for calling him father as him preserving tradition--even though he pretty much states he's concerned about keeping Angela away from Demona the next minute. Gradually, I began to see that this was mostly just his excuse. Unfortunately, in doing that, he was actually pushing her away.
I love Elisa's shocked "What?!" to being put in the role of "helpless damsel who needs protection." Goliath didn't even ask her (or wait to hear what Elisa had to say after "I can sympathize, but--"). He just did it. Yet, Elisa goes along with it. She can barely look Angela in the eye when she says it.
Every time I see Goliath clawing the wall of Notre Dame I cringe. Have some respect for historic sites, will ya?!
I only really noticed Demona's line "In here, my love" the second time I watched it. I think the first time, her actual reaction upon seeing Goliath pushed it out of my mind. I like her line "New York is your protectorate--Paris belongs to me!" This is especially fun in hindsight, because, as we learn later in HUNTER'S MOON (and the unanimated TEAM ATLANTIS episode THE LAST) she has quite a history with this city.
There is some weird animation here. At one point, Demona sends Goliath hutling through the tower and he knocks the head off a stone gargoyle next to Bronx--but there's no sound! I recall that some folks assumed said gargoyle to be Boudicca ducking (probably because of its coloring) before they slowed down the tape. Also, when Demona says "You're not leaving here alive" she seems a bit skinnier than usual (and her halter-top seems to be a bit more...[ahem] revealing).
Enter Thailog. In new threads too! I don't know when/where/how he got that armor, but it does end up making him look even more distinctive from Goliath. And, as per the memo, gives him a little more of a Xanatos quality. And reintroducing him as Demona's love interest! It was a twist but felt so natural at the same time!
Thailog is great here, and Demona's taunting of Goliath is really...something, I don't know. All I know is it's aggravating enough to make me want to strangle her (and that's with the knowledge that I'd be dead within .2 seconds). And Goliath's actions here are endlessly fascinating. He accuses Demona, and tries to save Thailog. I have to wonder at his thoughts about his "son" getting together with his ex. I love Thailog's offering "to share [his] santuary" with Goliath--that is SOOOO Xanatos. And of course Goliath brings up the obvious objection, which Demona taunts him for (honestly, who wouldn't be a little paranoid around that woman?).
Angela, being the good little helper she is, and still eager to stay close with her father, has run to what was supposed to be a battle, and finds herself eavesdropping. I wonder if maybe she regretted having done that once she got back to the skiff. It almost looks that way.
It wasn't until my second viewing that I caught the name of D & T's company--Nightstone Unlimited. Very nice indeed. And we finally hear the human aliases of these two plotters. BTW, much happier that you went with Dominique Destine (sp?) over Dierdre (sp? again). I like their embrace--Thailog's wrapping his wings completely around her, Demona snuggling into his chest when they share a villainous laugh. This is one of the steamiest scenes in the series, I think. You always said, Greg, that although Thailog intended to betray Demona from the beginning, he still found her physically attractive. I'll bet he had his kicks while he had her around.
Anyway, it made sense that Demona had hoarded treasure. How much money does she have anyway?
Meanwhile, Goliath and Angela get into another "family discussion." As someone else has pointed out, Goliath really seems to get angry here...and Angela matches his outrage. Little animation nit though--after our heroes turn to stone, we get a back-shot of Angela, and...she has Demona's hair. A bit distracting.
Elisa talking to herself in the cafe was alright--she has a long established habit of doing this. As for her last line...I recognized that it was a Superman reference (and I probably would have appreciated it more had I known that Cary Bates wrote for that comic way back when), but still...I'm sorry, Greg, it just doesn't do it for me. I do appreciate the referencing behind it, though.
The wedding. Demona really looks good in that wedding dress--and it's a testament to her acting that she looks more comfortable in that than Banquo and Fleance do in their respective outfits. Seriously, those two look so out of place in such fancy clothes--I bet they were happy to be out of them.
I feel real sorry for Macbeth in this episode. He marries this woman, starts to tell her about himself, and it turns out that his "bride" has been his enemy all along. His shock is excellent, and I can only imagine what his initial thoughts were upon coming to in his cell.
I love the animation on Demona's transformation. Very nice, and we see her without her tiara for once.
I also like Macbeth's "Who the blazes are you?!" when he sees Thailog. I wonder what he might have thought about this gargoyle that sounded like Goliath and shared a remarkable number of physical features.
Then Thailog hands Macbeth a gun...and I am left totally clueless. I admit it, I didn't fully grasp Thailog's plan until he spelled it out. Maybe I'm slow, or maybe by this point I just wanted to watch the story unfold. But Thailog is excellent at diverting suspicion from himself. And I love his little "Have a blast, you two" followed by his laugh.
And then he leers at Angela. I partially agree with Airwalker that this might in some part be to creep Goliath out, but I also find it more interesting (and preferable) that Thailog did feel some bit of lust upon seeing her. It just darkens his character more and, IMO, adds a whole lot more fun to him. I don't know why, but I love how Thailog holds Angela by her belt, too.
Thailog reveals the truth, and NOW is, in my mind, when Goliath views Thailog as a true enemy instead of a lost soul. And the amazing thing is, for having so little battle experience, Thailog holds up pretty well. Mostly because of his particle-beam rifle, but that of course also gets him into trouble with the water tower. All that "vast knowledge" and he doesn't try to run when the tower starts to creak--he *is* inexperienced. I also like Goliath's double-fisted punch to Thailog, and Thailog's fall (accompanied with EXCELLENT music thanks to Carl Johnson). Then Thailog gets up and attacks Goliath full force, and it's only through the intervention of Angela and Bronx that G is able to get the upper hand. Seriously, they have Thailog cornered, and only stop when they realise that the battle INSIDE the building has stopped. Thailog is such a cool bastard as he smilingly says "I enjoyed the exercise, Goliath" and soars off the rooftop.
While all of this has been going on, Demona and Macbeth have been having a pretty good scuffle. The highlights for me include that three barralled particle cannon, the bit with the globe (one person gets bowled over by the globe, the other by...NOTHING!), and Demona's oft-mentioned stagger (seriously, how often do you get to see a character "punch drunk" like that?). Then Elisa hits on the solution both I and my brother (who had been watching this with me) figured right away. I like her uncertainty, though--it is a bit of a difficult concept to swallow.
Goliath and Macbeth, who had started out this series as enemies, now are almost like comrades. Similar experience probably paves the way for this, but it really is nice to see the hero show genuine sympathy for a former foe, and for said foe to accept it. And hey, Goliath tells a pretty good joke and even gets Macbeth to smile!
Of course, there is another moment between Elisa and Goliath, fleeting, but still wonderful.
Demona gets her first glimpse of Angela, and her reaction is just right. Of course, before the matter gets pressed, Thailog reappears. He salvages the situation for himself wonderfully (and it's so odd to see Demona being carried off like that...one isn't used to seeing her in such a vulnerable position). And both Macbeth and Goliath have, again, a moment of shared regret.
The episode wraps up with a somber ride into the mists, as Angela seeks the final confirmation for her question. Since Goliath won't answer (won't even look at her, it's too painful), she turns to Elisa, who pretty much admits the presence of the elephant in the room, allowing Angela to cope with that knowledge as best she can.
In case you can't tell, I think this is a great episode--and there's so much in it! Not the least of which is Thailog. I knew from his first episode he'd be someone to watch out for, but this episode cemented him as one of my favorite villains, and led to my brother dubbing him "evil incarnate in GARGOYLES."

Todd Jensen writes...

My ramble on "Sanctuary", in response to yours.

"Sanctuary" is one of three "Gargoyles" episodes that I like to watch (from my tapes) once a year, on holidays. I watch it on Valentine's Day. (The other two are "Eye of the Beholder", for Halloween, and "The Hound of Ulster", for St. Patrick's Day). It does seem appropriate for Valentine's Day, with all the romance in it. (Although, at the same time, it's mostly "failed romance". Macbeth falls in love with Dominique Destine, only to be betrayed by her. Demona falls in love with Thailog, but is betrayed by him - though she doesn't even find out that he's no good until "The Reckoning". We get references back to Goliath and Demona when they were a couple - and we know how that one turned out. The only romance here that's got any real hope is Goliath and Elisa - and even that hasn't quite begun yet, with Elisa still holding off on it, as you pointed out).

I couldn't help but think that Dominique's French accent sounded more than a little hokey.

After marrying Macbeth, of course, Demona now could be called "Lady Macbeth" - and I'd say that she fits the imagery surrounding that name a lot better than Gruoch does.

One of the moments that I find especially touching in this episode is where Macbeth is getting ready to explain to Dominique all about his true nature. (Come to think of it, the real challenge that he'd have here - if the situation was what he thought it was - would be having to counteract the "murderous tyrant" image that Shakespeare had built around him, given that almost everybody who's heard of Macbeth is more likely to be familiar with the Shakespeare version of his story than the real history behind it).

I'll admit that I cringed at Elisa's "This is a job for the gargoyles line" (I honestly don't see the gargoyles as being "super-heroes", at least, not the same variety as Superman or Batman). But I agree with you on Thailog's cunning in immediately derailing suspicion from himself with his "Didn't you search him?" line. And on how unsettling it is when he leers at Angela (and, frankly, I don't think that he'd be at all bothered by the incest angle).

I also noticed how Thailog bears the same first name as Xanatos's biological son - and it's definitely creepy, especially given that Thailog and Xanatos couldn't even have come into contact with each other about it.

So you noticed those paintings that appear to be of Elisa, too? I was wondering about them myself.

One odd little thought from the first time that I saw it: I'm not sure why, but for some reason or other, the first time that I saw this episode, I actually thought, when Angela got buried under the rubble, that she wouldn't make it out alive. It does appear that I wasn't quite certain that she'd make it to the clock tower (too much influence from "status quo" television here, perhaps?).

I liked your analysis of Goliath's fears over Angela meeting her mother - but I wonder if Demona really could pose a danger of corrupting Angela. Angela's overall interactions with humanity have been much happier than Demona's - three loving human foster-parents who raised her and her rookery siblings, plus Elisa - that'd have to outweigh even the worst that an anti-gargoyle mob could do. But I suppose that it would be like Goliath to not want to take that risk.

(And re Elisa being Angela's "stepmother" - well, you've got to admit that it would definitely break the Disney cliche there - the first time that they do a "good stepmother" - and with the biological mother as the "wicked witch", at that).

Blaise writes...

GOLEM

As soon as I saw the title, I instantly thought of the connection between this legendary figure and our gargs. It's fitting that Max's description of the Golem resonates with Goliath.
Actually, when I saw this, I had not realized that there really was a Rabbi Loew, and that legends had connected him with the Golem. You learn something new from GARGOYLES every time.
I liked a lot of the animation and character work in this episode. Especially the shots of the gargs climbing and gliding. They were very well done.
Brode interested me mostly because of his look (and Clancy Brown's voice). He's given some nice facial expressions and character moments. I don't think he's on a level with Xanatos, but he does seem a bit more competent (sp?) than Dracon--that boy's biggest chance to shine came only at the very beginning of DEADLY FORCE when he knocked down Bruno. Otherwise, Dracon seems to avoid direct confrontations, whereas Brode is far more hands on. And, as has been said, he can think more in the long-term.
Max Loew--another budding hero our travelers meet. Unlike Nick, Max seems to have some belief in ancient legends, and though he is reluctant at first (and voices his doubts) it takes very little prodding from Janus or anyone else for Max to do what must be done. I really like some of his and Janus' exchanges. In terms of character, my favorite is Janus telling Max, "YOU are the Chosen One," with Max responding, "Which doesn't leave me any choice." In terms of comedy, I like Max's "What if it doesn't like me?" to which Janus can't help but smile.
I really wish more could have been done with Janus. He seems like such an interesting character (heck, he seemed even less taken aback by the gargoyles than Max--and even that boy took the whole thing in stride).
I loved the flashback of Prague 400 years ago. That moment where the old man falls down, and then we pan up to see the shadow of the Attacker beating him...that was one of the most chilling moments in this show. Of course, it's undercut by the same old man appearing in relatively good condition later, but still.... And the ceremony of the Golem's Awakening was breathtaking. I loved the scenery with all the candles, and seeing Loew through the Golem's POV. And I pretty much fell in love with the Hebrew incantations. Of course, the rest of the scene has some very anime moments. Not just the pink hair on the woman with the baby, but also some of the facial expressions of the Attackers seem straight out of "Speed Racer" or something. It's somewhat distracting, but not terribly so.
I like how Act 2 begins only with the striking of a match. A nice moment.
Now, for Renard. I was mildly surprised to see Vogel with him, but I didn't think it a real discrepancy. It wasn't too great a stretch of the imagination to think that Renard had forgiven him. What did surprise me was their being in the company of Brode. That, and Renard's "reveal" (hidden in shadows at first before coming into the light) lent a sinsiter nature to his appearance here. One of my friends, who had never seen the show before, had caught a glimpse of this and assumed "the old man" to be the main bad guy or something close. For my own part, I was instantly intrigued. Why would Renard have this dark aura about him?
I knew Goliath would try to get in touch with him, they are friends after all, and was surprised at how curt Renard was with G. I like how Goliath's mouth hangs open for an instant after being rebuffed, and then he broods away.
This episode was the first time I realized Renard had an illness. I had thought before that he was just very old, but with this...it adds even more bitterness to his situation (more than if it had been just a natural aging) and makes his fall more believable. When Renard does become the Golem, he has a very telling moment, where after crowing, "I can walk," he touches the cheek of his human body and quietly murmurs, "I can feel again." That got to me--that he was robbed not only of movement, but of feeling as well. Of course, he abuses his new-found power (and now I finally know the name on the tombstone he knocked over, and as for the car Greg, it is a bit battered, but whole enough for Renard's smashing it to crush in the top and windshield). Still, he seemed to degenerate rather quickly for me. I found his turning back towards the light, so to speak, more natural. But I KNEW that at some point, Renard-Golem would say "It's not my fault"--that just had to be there to show how much he betrayed his ideals. While I may have found his turnaround rather jarring originally, in later viewings, especially this last one, I notice how much Robert Culp is able to do with his voice. He actually portrays the doubt, frustration, fear, everything. His acting goes a long way towards making Renard's changes work. Still, a little more "breathing space" might have helped.
One thing I really thought about just this last time--Renard orders Vogel to guard his human body. Even there, Renard has doubts about being in the Golem.
And I also like Goliath's line about "Giving up all you believe in--for a piece of CLAY!"
For his own part, Vogel seems to have thrown himself even more into the role of "yes-man" than usual (probably to make up for his earlier betrayal). He only comes out of it once when he chastises Goliath (he's got guts, that one).
I had figured that Goliath and the others would have tried to get in contact with Renard or someone to get home eventually, but when Goliath decided to stay the course and finish out going where Avalon sent them to go...I was almost cynically expecting that. Yet, I was not really disappointed--it made sense for everything and everyone up to this point. So I sat back and tried to stop worrying about when they'd get home.
Misc. stuff: When Goliath gets hit by Brode, it's with a stun gun--that looks very much like his regular bullet gun.
One of Brode's goons is the thug from the park in DEADLY FORCE. And the driver of the car that nearly runs into the Golem looks like the guy who tried to buy a gun from Glasses in the same episode, except the guy here has black hair (a second cousin, maybe?).
While on the subject of cars--the guy above was on the left side of the car, driving the right side of the road, whereas Brode was on the right side of the car, driving on the left side of the road. Which is the right one in Prague?
Anyway, while it's not on my "top ten list," I do think this is a pretty cool episode. Of course, only now, after reading your ramble, Greg, do I actually realize the importance of it in regards to the focus of the World Tour. Very nice that.

Todd Jensen writes...

About "Golem".

The funny thing is that I was watching "Golem" this morning, as part of my little custom of rewatching my "Gargoyles" tapes each summer. Which means that it's still fresh in my memory as I'm writing this ramble-reply.

I will confess that I don't have as many observations to make about this episode (beyond the fact that I quite enjoyed it). I'm not much of an expert on the Golem legend (beyond the overall concept) - Airwalker did a splendid job of analyzing the use of the Golem legend in his comments at the comment board - so I can only give some general remarks here.

Brod struck me as more akin to Dracon than to Xanatos, truth to tell (partly because Brod was an open criminal, which Dracon was but Xanatos wasn't). I hadn't even noticed the parallel between the Golem about to kill Brod and Goliath about to kill Xanatos in "Awakening Part One", until you mentioned it.

I hadn't realized the parallel between Elisa and Max, either - though I did pick up on the parallel between the gargoyles and the Golem pretty quickly.

One of my favorite little bits: Bronx nudging himself against Janus, who then scratches Bronx behind the ears.

I liked the development of Renard, including his and Goliath's reversal of roles from "Outfoxed" - and I picked up at once on the significance of his "It's not my fault" line. I was one of those who thought that his change of heart came a little too quickly, but you provide a good explanation for how Goliath convinced him so quickly.

I was quite impressed, by the way, with the dedication that Max Loew showed in firmly speaking to Renard-in-the-Golem's-body, as well as with the Golem when it's about to drop Brod into the pit.

I was also pleased to see that Goliath caught on to the significance of the Avalon World Tour at the end of this episode (definitely making it into a turning point). Obviously, he'd have to catch on soon in order to keep from looking slow.

Not much to say, I'll admit; I do have more comments, though, for "Sanctuary", which is coming up next.

Wingedbeast writes...

Ramble on Golem.

A great episode this.

On the climbing. I've got to say, my favorite Gargoyle shots are of them climbing. It best shows off how animalistic they are and how beautiful they are. It really drives home the "they aren't human" issue. They're creatures of instinct.

And, BTW, when Angela and Bronx are climbing up the tower, that's a great butt shot on Elisa. Gotta say. Elisa rocks. Strong woman that never gives up, protects her friends, has a sense of humor, and has a great butt.

If she's based off of anybody you know, mind introducing me? :)

Onto the rest of the ramble.

Max and Elisa parallel on that huge issue. They're the heroes beside the heroes. The difference is that Elisa started out that way. It's who she is. Considering who her parents are, it might even be an instinctive trait to her.

Max? Max isn't so lucky as to have Elisa's upbringing. He's probably had to learn that lesson that there are some things that are too powerful for him to overcome. So, he has to overcome that fear just to go into his destiny.

Elisa's learned quite the opposite lesson. Even within the series, she's learned that, even though there's always somebody bigger and stronger than she is, that doesn't really matter.

Renard gone mad. Oh come on, like you wouldn't destroy a few things if you got that kind of power. It's like a new toy. You play with it until you're through.

But, when Renard was through with the euphoria of the new toy, he was left with the cost. And, that was a great face shot of the Golem when Renard realized that he had become something. It also made sense that it was Goliath's words that finally got through.

He might, logically, have known that Elisa and Max were right, but he considered Goliath to be an equal. They both share that daily struggle of integrity. And, it's here where Goliath really repayed Renard for his lesson in Outfoxed, and reminded him of the daily struggle that is integrity.

The final fight sequence was something that struck me. 4 different heroes, 4 different styles. Max, the Golem, Goliath, and Elisa. Each very effective.

The first time I saw this, I saw the golem as a robot and Max as the mind behind it. Telling it what to do and, like a good little drone, it does it. Essentially making Max the mind. But, that scene with Brode over the big pit, last time I saw it, changed my mind. Instead of the golem's mind, the golem has it's own mind even if it is a primitive one, Max is the golem's heart.

If there were future episodes with the golem, I could see Max going through efforts to keep the golem from becoming like the monsters that he fights.

Can't wait for the ramble on "The Hound of Ulster"

Honey writes...

Crikey, wouldn't have found that 'posting' page if you hadn't taken me straight through. I can answer some of those questions!
ANonymous - WOuld you laugh or smile much when your whole family has been slaughtered and you know you could have prevented it? It's called Guilt, mate, it's the same thing that makes Demona so insane. Mind you, GOliath HAS got a lovely smile when it shows up, I'm sure you're not the only one wishing it showed up more often.

Demona was given her name in City of Stone, the four-parter 1/3 of the way through the three years.

Since Awakening was set in 994, a squiz at the history books will show that the Vikings were out on world conquest around this time, they were attacking every country they could get to. Basically, Greg & Co were kind of taking one viewpoint of a historical event, like HOgan's Heroes focusing on POW camps during WW2.

I'm guessing that all those extra characters in the age list are actually in your stories, hmm GReg? You know how to keep us thinking, that's for sure, mixing up two rather different topics.
Hey, have a great night everyone.

Siren writes...

I was reading some of your answers and was reminded about how Broadway was originally female. I am an overweight female, and the thought that a overweight female gargoyle wouldn't have bothered me in particular. I think it is all in the way the character is. Broadway knows he is big, and his self esteem is pretty good, considering the jabs his rookery brothers make. He is smarter then he looks too. Naive, but so were the rest of the clan, it's a learning process. New time, new people, new culture, new ideas. I love Broadway, think he is a great character, but I hope one day they can come out with an overweight, young, smart female. Most overweight females are all the Miss Potts type. Mother hens, grandmothers, etc. I like the way Broadway is and acts, and I wouldn't want that to change, but I still want to see a similar female character one day, human, gargoyles, whatever. I know a some people blow things out of proportion when a female actress puts on a fat suit, like Courtney Cox in Friends. If your going to make the character humourous, it should be tasteful, not hurtful. Someone for people to look up to, not a joke, most characters should be. Look what they do to mentally retard people, Adam Sandler still does it, and it's still funny to a large amount of the public. (Not me.) Maybe it's just me about the whole thing, I am overweight, but I am secure in my look. I think the ones who bash the overweight characters are the people are unsecure with themselves. But there's my ramble. What do you think?

Blaise writes...

MONSTERS

I, too, thought the animation was rather problematic (a lot of repetition and stiff movements and expressions). The image-continuity suffered as well--when we first see the sonar tag, it's attached directly to the skin, but later it becomes a collar. Also, instead of the usual pole for steering and propelling the skiff, Goliath is now using an actual oar (of course, this is balanced by the fact that there is something rather ludicrous to traversing a mile-deep loch with a 7-ft pole). Finally, Angela did have a rather poorly done awakening sequence (although I swear that later airings seem to have cleaned it up slightly).
And yes, I noticed the similarities between the beginings of this and HERITAGE (there were subtle differences, but the overall resemblence is pretty big).
Despite all this, I still find myself comfortably watching this episode. Perhaps this has a lot to do with Tim Curry as Sevarius. He's just so fun!! And he has a tendency to get all the best lines. In addition to the ones you've mentioned, Greg (particualaly the "...finger down my throat" one), I'd like to add two more:
"Well, this shouldn't take long. I'm sure Big Daddy misses his Nessie-wessy." (Just the way Tim says that last part is great).
"'Monster Love!' How touching."
Whatever else you can say about the guy, he loves his work.
Anyway, from beginning to end...
Elisa's line about the water being too clean still works for me (I mean, there isn't any garbage floating on top of it). And the initial bump with the sub was good, too. I like Angela's pose when she puts here finger in the water after the group goes ashore (I don't know why, I just do), and her mention of trying again to find Manhattan really spoke to me (I had just started to wonder along with her).
I knew Elisa would try to contact home and let them know what was going on, but I felt like screaming my throat into a bloody mess when I saw the message saying "Tape full." Talk about frustrating. Pointless note--the first time I saw this (i.e., before KINGDOM aired), I was goofishly pleased that Brooklyn was singled out as someone to get word to. Just my pride for my fav character coming out I suppose.
The sequence with the boat (and the cameo by Margot and Brendan) is pretty fun. I like Elisa's calm, smug confidence that the whole thing is fake--and how, while she's obliviously comparing the situation to theme parks, the gargoyles notice the creature heading right toward them with somewhat horrified looks dawning on their faces.
It was several viewings before I noticed that Goliath had seen Angela's sillhouette (sp?) under water and tried to swim toward it before being blocked by Big Daddy.
The Goon Squad Leader/Head of Security finally gets a name. And we find out that Sevarius is at work in the loch. He has a rather interesting introduction here. Almost like a Bond villain, what with being heard only as a voice first, then seen as a sillohouette (sp?), then just a shot of him from the neck down, and FINALLY his face. Though, for those of us who followed the show religiously from the beginning, there was no mystery as to who this guy was (not with Tim Curry doing the voice). But I wonder what the effect would have been on a casual viewer for whom this was the first episode (something I may come back to later...).
Severius seems very...enamoured with Angela. The way he...handles her hair is very...interesting.
Angela's interaction with Nessie makes much more sense, and is much more palatable (sp?) with the knowledge that Nessie is familiar with gargoyles. Without it (the knowledge), it's alright, but seems a little like Snow White with all the animals of the forest just eating out of her hand. Thus, Sevarius' line is all the more hilarious (and even a bit cathartic).
While the gargoyles sleep, Elisa manages to find and tail the Goon Squad (typical detective). It was weird to see the Female Goon without her helmet on. Just a random observation.
I actually rather like Sevarius and Angela's conversation. Angela's calling Sevarius "the only monster here" may have been blatantly pointing out the theme, but I still like it.
And now we have actual confirmation that Goliath is Angela's biological father. Personally, I think that revelation is more for Angela's sake than the audience (or at least those who saw AVALON PART TWO). It must be weird, hearing about this great hero all your life, then meeting him, then being allowed to go adventuring with him, and then finally learning that you are his child! With her somewhat human viewpoint, that must have had Angela's mind reeling for a little bit.
One thing that really impressed me in later viewings. An almost casual throw-away line as Sevarius leaves Bruno to guard the base. He gives Bruno the gun with the implied order to kill Goliath if he "becomes too rambunctious," but he preceeded this with "It would be a shame to lose a gargoyle." There may have been a bit of sarcasm there, but I feel like the line kind of shows the scientist in Sevarius--the man fascinated by unique species.
I noticed the awkwardness of Bruno's "All right" line. Actually, that whole sequence was problematic. It took me several viewings before I realized what went on there.
For being an enemy, Bruno was pretty helpful in the mini-sub. Then again, if you're faced with an armed woman (you don't know the gun's not loaded) and a beast that could give Cujo a run for its money, you might be helpful, too!
I'm surprised the mini-sub didn't take any damage when it scraped along the side of the main sub.
One note: I never actually thought that Nessie was Big Daddy's daughter. I don't know how, but I kind of figured they were mates. Still, maybe a different name for the male would have worked better. Alpha, maybe? Or how about, Nester? NO! No, definitely not that....
It's a bit disconcerting when you see the goon at the controls for the tasers, and then, after Sevarius gives the order, seeing the doctor's hands on the controls. I do think Sevarius is the kind of guy who would try to do this sort of thing personally, but I think a scene of him pushing the Goon out of the chair and taking his place would have helped.
A good animation bit--the electricity of the taser reflected in Angela's mask as she looks on horrified.
And the monsters destroy the sub. It took me a while before I realized that those Goons probably all died. I really like that little revelation. Adds another dimension to what happened there. I also like how Sevarius vanished, and Bruno speaks of him as having "more lives than an alley cat." Nice little ominous bit that.
Actually, one thing I thought of a while back was how much Sevarius fits into the stereotypical, Saturdy morning Archnemesis role. I mean, he's seen in command of henchmen, he does the standard "telling of plans" with Angela, Goliath yells his name in anger when G recognizes his voice, he has the best lines, he vanishes at the moment of probable death, and a hero/henchman (in this case the latter) states that he will be back. I wonder if the casual viewer for whom this was the first episode would conclude that Sevarius was the main antagonist for the heroes. Of course, there is the mention of "Mr. Xanatos." You've got to admire a man whose very name warrants a musical sting.
All in all, while it certainly isn't the best episode, I find it a pleasant enough one.

Todd Jensen writes...

My thoughts on "Monsters":

I agree with you on the animation issue (although I never noticed the parallels with "Heritage" prior to your mentioning of them), but I will admit that I thought the episode a rather fun one (if not one of the greats). Part of it, I suppose, is my fondness for British settings. (In fact, I visited Loch Ness with my parents briefly as a boy, back when we lived in Britain; didn't see anything unusual in its waters, though).

I did find it appropriate that the gargoyles would encounter the Loch Ness Monster at some point. After all, the gargoyles are Scottish "monsters" - and who's the most famous monster in all of Scotland? Made the same amount of sense as Macbeth getting in earlier, and for a similar reason.

Alas for Brendan and Margot! They run into the gargoyles even while they're on vacation! (Come to think of it, Margot also pops up briefly in Paris in "Sanctuary").

Got to agree with you over Sevarius's over-the-top performance; always a lot of fun to hear.

Count me as another one of the people who mistook Nessie for Big Daddy's daughter (partly because of the Goliath-Angela parallel).

I definitely recalled Matt's answering machine scene: either the guy doesn't clear out his phone very often, or he gets a lot of calls. At least Goliath and Elisa finally get a message home via Renard in the very next episode.

Sevarius's speculations over the Loch Ness clan (more accurate than he thought, after all) certainly become even more interesting in the aftermath of the Clans Contest (and like you, I can't help but wonder now where the local gargoyles were during this episode). We also definitely find out that Angela is Goliath's daughter (although I doubt that that surprised anybody in the audience).

I wonder if that ruined castle over Sevarius's headquarters was based on the real-life Castle Urquhart, at Loch Ness. (Probably is).

And, as you pointed out, that marked the end of the Xanatos Goon Squad, except for Bruno (and I don't recall ever seeing him again, either, after this episode); although I'll admit that I never realized that they were dead at the time. If I had, no doubt it would have impacted me much the way that the destruction of the Grimorum Arcanorum did in "Avalon" - the startlement at seeing another familiar element that had been in the series from the beginning suddenly gone. (Was the blonde female member among the casualties? She was the only member besides Bruno that really came out as much of an individual, to me).

At any rate, thanks for the latest ramble, Greg.

Babs writes...

I would also like to thank you for taking the time out of your day to read all of our questions and comments, even though they are hell on your eyes, and helping us understand the show that we have grown to love, and hope lives on.

wayne writes...

well, this is just a comment of a sort. i just started to watch the show after all these years. it is amazing. here i thought it was just another kid cartoon, but hell, i am an adult and love the show! great work to all those involved in making the show happen and wish to see more!

Blaise writes...

KINGDOM

Like METAMORPHOSIS and THE CAGE, I missed this during the first airing (an episode spotlighting Brooklyn, my favorite character, and the Mutates, my favorite arc). Consequently, this was the last "new" episode I watched. So, I already knew that Brooklyn would be trying to start something with Angela and that Fang would be imprisoned for something, but I was left wondering about how Fang got in there and what closure there was to Brooklyn's crush on Maggie. This ep was almost like a long needed salve for me.
First, let's get the animation out of the way. I must say, with all love and respect, that this really is some of the least in the series. It could have been good--the movements are very smooth, almost liquid and supple. However, some of the characters seem to go slightly "off-model" every now and then, and image continuity suffers quite a bit. Aside from the infamous scene, which I affectionately call the "Two Hudsons and a Bronx" scene, the gargoyles seem to not only change positions, but places during their day of stone sleep. What, did they all have to get up at noon to go to the bathroom/get a drink of water/have a mid-day snack--what?
Regardless, there were some things I liked in the animation. One of the big things, by either accident or design, was Brooklyn's change. He seemed a lot smaller in the beginning, both shorter and skinnier. When he accepts his responsibility though, he seems to stand taller, and become well-muscled. I also like it when the gargoyles bust through the ceiling at the end. Lex looks especially cool with the way his arms are folded.
I was also glad that Cagney was well taken care of--but I already knew he was from THE GATHERING. I did like how the clan did not instantly know that Elisa was missing along with Goliath and Bronx--Broadway had to check out her apartment first.
Brooklyn's reluctance to accept leadership in this situation was nice, and exactly what I had wanted to see through most of the World Tour (too bad I had to wait until summer reruns). I must admit, I had not figured out that Brooklyn saw accepting leadership as giving up on finding Goliath, but it makes sense. I had guessed that he was held back by fear. The fear of doing something wrong, bringing everything crashing down. So, I was half-right, I suppose.
Brooklyn still has his crush on Maggie, but he's not blindly chasing after her anymore. Showing a bit more maturity (sp?) there. He can obviously figure out the best course of action to take (like not outright attacking Xanatos, nor letting on to him that Goliath is missing--I feel like slapping Broadway when he blurts that part out). Of course, he lets his insecurities get the better of him (until Maggie asks him for help...you're right Greg, a damsel in distress is a great motivator for the Brookster). I like how his wings fold into a cape for a moment after he accepts leadership (caping wings is something Goliath tends to do more than the rest, so perhaps as a result of that, it kind of gives Brooklyn that extra majesty).
Hudson, the old soldier, gently nudging Brooklyn in the proper direction. I like him here--not only does he get on well with the cat, and admits he misses the "dog," but he allows Brooklyn to grow. Hudson's always been a very patient fellow, and a sly teacher when he needs to be. He fits the "advisor" role quite well.
Fang--I already knew he'd be a bad guy, but I wondered when the schism came up. Fang loves to have power, and so he becomes, for all intents and purposes, a super-powered bully. I thought he was pretty funny, and a good threat. I especially like James Belushi's reading of "I'll show him who rules down here." Nice and dangerous.
Talon--I always found it ironic that Talon basically goes around saying, "No one is in charge, and that's an order!" Talon's behavior actually kind of adds to Fang's character--it gives the latter a valid point ("For someone who's not in charge you sure like dishing out orders.") I find it interesting how Talon seems mocking/angry when he tells Brooklyn, "You want to be in charge? Speak now or hold your piece!" I wonder what got him in such a tizy about leadership. I would have loved to see the look on Talon's face when Fang says "THIS army--and you're our first prisoner of war" (love that line). Maggie had warned him about Fang....
Now Claw was the surprise for me. I knew he was one of the good guys, but I never thought that he originally went with Fang. Claw's an odd one--he's the biggest and most heavily muscled of the Mutates, and yet he was one of the most submissive. I liked how he took no part in the fight between Brooklyn, Fang, Chaz, and ?, and even looked worried about it. I liked how he helped Maggie escape, and I laughed at his pantomime (along with ?'s reaction of "Boy, are YOU asking the wrong guy!") and his hiding inside his wings. I liked how he never used his gun, instead falling back on his electro-blasts. At the end, he finally grows in resolve, and develops the strength to rebel against Fang. I like the look on his face there. Very nice.
It never bothered me that Maggie was the only female portrayed here, because I had never given any thought to it before. Maggie is more of a "support" sort of character, anyway--she makes suggestions and helps in more passive ways. But she can still give a good tongue-lashing (she tries to scold Fang after he riles up Talon--I like the shocked look on her face when she realizes that Fang really IS trying to get Talon out of the way).
Some comparisons. Although Talon was ultimately captured, it was only because of Chaz and ? using their guns that he fell. Talon bested Fang--in terms of power and stamina it seems to me Talon was the better. The Mutates may have limited flight capability, but judging from Broadway and Lexington's dodging of particle beams, the gargoyles still manage to outdo them in aerial manuevers (sp?). Maggie does a good acting job, and so does Brooklyn. For Maggie, this scene is so much more fun now that I know she was trying to be an actress--but she still has trouble concealing her smile as she deftly unlocks the cage (of course her's is nothing compared to Talon's pleasantly nasty little grin as he exits the tube). With Brooklyn, I wonder how he learned to act that well--did he have to talk himself out of trouble a lot when he was younger?
While I'm on this tack, I liked the closure this brought to the whole Brooklyn/Maggie arc, while also strengthening (sp?) Talon and Maggie as an item. I like how Brooklyn comforts Maggie in the Clocktower and she doesn't flinch from his touch like the first time--in fact, she ran to him. Perhaps appropriately, the plight of her and Talon seems to be what compels him to finally accept leadership (though it takes Hudson's "Is that an order, then?" for Brook to aknowledge it as such). And then when Brooklyn practices his deception on everyone at the end...I must admit I almost believed that Brooklyn would trade his integrity for a chance with Maggie (only to, of course, make the right choice at the end). But then he surprised even me. I like the expression on his face when Maggie looks at him after noticing the keycard, and the smile on her face immediately afterwards. Brooklyn's head does bow when he sees Maggie and Talon's joyful embrace, but it seems to me like a gesture of acceptance as well as sadness. I'd like to think that, even though Brooklyn only had a crush on Maggie, that those two did develop something of a friendship.
As for Maggie and Talon: they really do look happy together, and comfortable in each other's embrace. It's hard not to be glad for them.
Crikey! I almost forgot about Xanatos! Now I know I'm tired. Anyway, Xanatos and Owen were great fun. All the good lines have already been stated, so I won't repeat them. The whole "turret-cannons" thing was rather silly, and I don't think non-projectile cannons would be able to fire when the barrels are bent. Still, I like the looks on X's and Owen's faces as they dodge debris after the castle takes a pretty heavy hit. How much you want to bet that after the gargoyles and Talon started their search, X turned to Owen and said, "Get rid of that security system and fire the man who designed it...and sue him for the damages to my castle"? I, for one, kind of miss that we didn't get to see Xanatos take advantage of Goliath's disappearance--it would have been nice to see how all parties acted in such an occasion.
Pointless trivia: Owen says, "An intriguing development." Immediately after which, Brooklyn says, "Perfect." The ONLY time in the series, as far as I remember, in which Owen and Brooklyn (both voiced by Jeff Bennett) speak two consecutive lines. I would have loved them having a conversation.
Broadway and Lexington smashing the guns with the rocks. I figured the audience was supposed to, at first, think they were bashing Chaz and ? on the head, but I don't know if I ever thought that myself.
My ramble has been kind of piece-meal, but hey, I guess I'm just rather tired now and stressed from trying to find an apartment in LA. I'll just finish off by saying that I really like this episode.

Justin writes...

Greg,
This isn't a question, so much as a comment. I just rewatched Awakenings Part 2, and I must say it was absolutely stunning. The part that really sticks out for me is when the great acting the voice artist do in the opening scene. The parts that stick out in my mind are as follows:

"These bowstrings have been cut... there was betrayal here."
As you said Hudson was falling back on his training.

And Keith David and Bill Fagerbakke were excellent in their exchanges.

The animation during this scene is amazing in my book. Maybe not the models that I liked in episodes like Hunter's Moon, but it is still amazing. Each character display such emotion. I know Bronx is only a beast, but it even feels like he gets what happened. I loved the scene. Hudson knocking some Vikings into hay as he swoops in. Broadway using what he knows best... food! The action really picks up here and I feel so sorry for these characters. I must admit that in October 1994 when this first aired I thought many more died than about forty. Which is the number I think u said. But nonetheless it is so sad. I just lost a friend of mine back in November. So it taught me that if even one life is lost is just hard if hundreds are lost.

Anyway Kudos on an awesome episode.

Balrog writes...

I have been reading the archives and was wonderig about one thing about a Shakespeare character and wondering something about it.

Why is Calaban(presumuble Caliban)to be a antagonist, I been cheking about the Tempest and thougt that he would be more suited in a role of protagonist,given to childis presonality.

That's just my opinon on the issue.

Todd Jensen writes...

Ah, a new episode ramble at last! Thanks, Greg!

My own thoughts on "Kingdom".

I certainly do remember this episode airing out of order; the first time was in February 1996, just before "The Hound of Ulster". (I also missed the beginning of the episode first time around, so it was a while before I got to see the whole thing).

I'm glad that Broadway and Hudson provided a home for Cagney at the tower; as a cat-lover myself, I certainly wouldn't have wanted to see Elisa returning from the Avalon World Tour only to discover that her pet had starved to death in her absence. Hudson tending to Cagney (and admitting that he wasn't quite a substitute for Bronx) was a lovely moment.

I was, for my own part, a bit disappointed that Xanatos only got a sub-plot role here, although still a fun one. (Yes, the cannons could have been better designed, but he himself was in form as ever: "Don't you just hate it when people drop by unannounced?" as well as the one that you cited "Do I really need an excuse to have a good time in my own home?")

Fang made a very entertaining "bad guy" here; I got a real kick out of the scene where Claw hands him the key card. Although, for me, the funniest moment comes when Claw, after doing that pantomime sequence for an angry Fang, hides inside his own wings. I always LOL at that part.

I liked the handling of Brooklyn being unwilling to become a leader, for fear that it means admitting that Goliath won't be returning. One of my favorite parts in that plotline comes when Brooklyn finally tells Hudson to accompany them to the Labyrinth, admitting that it's an order, and Hudson has a little smile upon his face as he sees that Brooklyn's finally taken on his responsibility.

To return to Xanatos: when I think it over, I don't think that it's all that surprising that he didn't actually take advantage of the information about Goliath being missing. (Although, the first time that I saw "Kingdom", I was indeed expecting him to do some real searching for Goliath and Elisa, in line of his words to Brooklyn - particularly the "I wasn't aware that I needed permission" line - and was a bit disappointed that when he and his associates do encounter them during the Avalon World Tour, it's unintentionally). Because, when you stop to think over it, what would he really have done? He had no practical reason to go after Hudson and the trio (it was clear by now that they wouldn't serve him as henchmen), and certainly wasn't going to be hunting them simply for revenge, since that wasn't his style. Likewise, I can't see him attempting to take over the whole city in Goliath's absence, regardless of what "Future Tense" might claim; after all, why conquer it when he'd already been able to achieve the bulk of his goals under the current system (as I recall you pointed out in the Gargoyles Season One Bible)? In the end, Xanatos's doing nothing to take advantage of it made a lot more sense, because taking advantage of it didn't match his character and goals. (One thing that definitely makes him a unique "main adversary" in animation).

Forliya writes...

hey,Um, I'm wondering if you could tell me how many gargoyal
cronicals are thear? because I'm embarresed to say that I'm in love with goliath. I know its stupid but I cant help it.Oh by the way can you tell me who dose the voice of goliath ? because it goes by so fast on the credits I cant read it on the screan!

The Cat writes...

Hello!

Okay, I goofed up big timeon one of my questions. My June 11th one where I'm asking about the car was a total mistake. My brain apparently flipped the image and I thought I saw it differently. This hasn't been the first time my mind has done that. Try looking at it from my point of view, everyone uses their right hand. However, I use my left hand so I sometimes get right and left confussed. Well, anyway, I'll write later or who knows I might be able to come to the next Gathering, if my mom ever stops treating me like a little baby.
Choa, The Cat(El Gato)

Lynati writes...

I would have just emailed this, but as there is no email address… whoever is in charge of the list, please leave this up for a little while at least.

"Disappointed" wrote, on July 07:
[It's about this whole "Ask Greg" thing. I love that we can come here and ask questions, but I don't love your answers.]
I do. Even when I don't get proper responses.

[suggest that if Ask Greg is a pain to you, that you simply quit.]
If he found it so much a pain, I am sure he would have by now. And I for one am glad he has not.

[You're not doing much good anyway since you don't answer our questions.]
*Points in the direction of the Questions Answered archive* Have you looked in there? At all?
The overwhelming majority of those are direct, clear answers. And quite a few of the questions currently on the waiting list are ones either already asked, or one fans could easily figure out on their own given the info already provided. We have the cast list for when most people were born, and their ages in certain years. It wouldn't hurt to take up a pencil and determine the age of a character in a certain year themselves if they wanted to know, rather than flooding the archive asking about it.
Or to spend an hour looking through the archive to see if the question they want to ask has already been answered…especially since it is going to take at least 6 months (a present) for Mr. Weisman to get to it anyway.

[So do yourself and everyone a favor...treat Ask Greg as you should be treating it or just simply drop it. But just remember whatever you do is by your choice alone. So grow up a bit, stop trying to be "funny" as you so often say when someone brings this up to you,]
He's not "trying" to be funny, he is *succeeding* at being funny.
You yourself said it- he is under no pressure to do anything for or related to "Gargoyles", and has not been for years. This entire site is for the fans, and I think we can all suffer being his entertainment now and again in return for the answers we do receive, and have a little respect for the secrets he wants to keep.

C. Sewell writes...

Dear Mr. Weisman,

After skimming through this site, then becoming completely absorbed, I felt a bit of gratitude was in order: I really enjoyed Gargoyles; thank you very much. It is rare to find an adventure cartoon that has a story that feels like some work and thought went into it. Cartoons don't seem to get (nor do they seem treated with) a great deal of respect, which always seemed strange to me considering how much power a story aimed at children can have (Especially just after school or on a saturday morning when the folks are still asleep; I remember Robotech and Dungeons and Dragons a lot more accurately than quite a few of my Jr.High School classes).

Cartoons and comics, along with their creators, seem to get an unfair amount of disregard, just because they are thought of as being a kid's stuff. I remember a blip in the L.A. Times (I think it was the Times? I can't think of any other paper I would have been reading with my toast) concerning Neil Gaiman. He was making an appearance at the Golden Apple comic book shop in Los Angeles. The person who wrote the blip said that a line formed around the block to meet this comic book author, and the writer added that he/she, "weeped for the future," since obviously so many people shouldn't be that enamoured with a mere comicbook.

This comment was hidden deep in the depths of the paper. Most people probably didn't even see it, and if they did probably didn't have any inkling who this Neil Gaiman person was. I understand that the fantasy genre isn't for everyone, but the remark seemed extremely unfair. Just because it is a comicbook (or cartoon) does that mean that the creator didn't put any consideration into creating it? It always seems that there are more unfavorable comments made then kind ones, especially concerning certain forms of creative expression. It isn't often that I have such an easy opportunity to thank someone for creating something worthwhile; especially in a genre that seems to get more abuse and disregard then praise. Gargoyles was a wonderful show. I'm sure there was a breakfast ceral connected with it and who knows how many toys, but Gargoyles was creative and inspired the imagination (along with giving a healthy dose of mythology and Shakespeare-the music was nice too), and it seems that type of cartoon doesn't come along often enough.

But what impressed me the most and convinced me that thanks were in order, is your willingness to treat your fans so kindly, and in such an engaging and open manner. I just stumbled upon this web-site and it completely sucked me in (so now it is way past my bedtime, but well worth it). I wasn't sucked in because of my need to know the mating habits of Gargoyles, but because the answers in the FAQ were interesting and eloquent, and extremely forgiving in regards to those companies that produced the show. I'm not sure if I could ever be so generous to those that obviously didn't value what they had. I'm sure you have heard all of this before, but I'm extremely impressed by both the creation and one of its creators, and just wanted to say, "Thank you."
Sincerely
C. Sewell

Disappointed writes...

Hi Greg, I just wanted to say I love the show. But I have a bit of a bone to pick with you...

It's about this whole "Ask Greg" thing. I love that we can come here and ask questions, but I don't love your answers. I don't think that you owe us anything, but you've got to realize that some of us come here with high hopes, and we love the show enough to ask you about it. You choose to do this, yet you shoot half of us down. I'm rather tired of looking through the archives and seeing a question I want answered, getting my hopes up, then having them dashed to pieces because you gave some smart ass answer. I much rather appreciate when you simply say "I don't know" or that "I'm not answering this now." Keep in mind that you choose to do this Ask Greg thing, no one is forcing you. And for the people that do pick at you and only ask things to make you look foolish or whatever, why waste your time on them? You could be answering other true fans' legitimate questions and not falling so damn far behind. Yes, I know I'm complaining, but if you honestly can't see my point of view I can't make you understand. I enjoy Ask Greg (or at least I am trying to) but it gets really hard when half the answers you give are callous and uncalled for. I suggest that if Ask Greg is a pain to you, that you simply quit. You're not doing much good anyway since you don't answer our questions. So do yourself and everyone a favor...treat Ask Greg as you should be treating it or just simply drop it. But just remember whatever you do is by your choice alone. So grow up a bit, stop trying to be "funny" as you so often say when someone brings this up to you, and take some responsibility. Now if you've read this all the way through, thank you. I appreciate your time, I know you are very busy. But just keep in mind what I said and take it in and consider it. Thank you.

icemann writes...

This isn`t a question. But I just thought I`d say that I for one am REALLY glad to hear that disney took notice of all the gatherings, and also of the future DVD releases. I`ll definately be grabbing all of those when they come out :)

Bridget writes...

I cant find garfoyles toys anywhere! do you know a place on line where one might purchase them. And thank you. I saw gargoyles when it first aired, it always stuck with me and I always try to watch it on toon disney. I'm 16 now and I just always wanted to thank someone who had a hand in makig incredible show!

Spacebabie writes...

Gathering Journal III
Woke up early again after barely any sleep. Took a shower and the bathroom floor flooded. My night gown got soaked.
My head was starting to hurt.
Went to breakfast with Mooncat. we were joined by Patrick and Kathy. Get this Patrick was not aware that Deidric Bader was the voice of Jason Canmore.
After Breakfast I bummed some tylenol off of someone. I'm sorry I forgot your name but thank you whoever you are.

We lounged on the sofas afterwords and I took a lil snooze.
Went on mad raid at the dealers buying a bunch of stuff: A picture for mom, cards, a Lex plushie and a dragon for me.
Chilled with Demona May and explained I wanted to buy one of her prints. We talked about the situation with my early flight with the con chair. She gave me a free clender.

Before number one I was able to purchase Demona May's print.
I was torn between the countdown and the Radio play, but when will I ever get a chance to see Gargoyles again? I don't have Toon Disney,((Yes I am aware of the irony that I live within a 20 minute drive from Disney World and I don't have Toon Disney)) and when the heck will I ever get to see Deadly Force? I had to absorb it all.

Changed a little before the banquet, had some tome to kill so I went to the snack room. Greg G was there talking about th Lilo and Stitch series that was working on.

Banquest started and I was seated with a group of Con Virgins.
The Food sucked, compared to the banquet in Orlando: Burgers, mac and cheese paste, and a hot dog. The only thing to drink there was water. Emily fetched a plate of lemon slice so we could make Lemonaid. Stood near Demona May to take pics of the Gregs.

As I changed into my costume I had trouble with the hosiery. The Pantys and belt was no problem. Mooncat laced up the corset in the back. I slipped into my shoes, did my hair,make up, shimmer and beads. Grabbed my puse and camera and shirt.
Luckily I did not come in contanct with any norms on my way to the elevator. When the doors opened everyone's jaws dropped and the guys drooled. I was a big hit. Everyone was taking pics, but really impressed me was everyone elses costume. Damn they were great. Aaron and Mara looked beautiful, and the crossdressers were a hoot. Lynati's was the best. Everyone was impressed with her feet. I had to touch the wings of those who had wings.

Well we were introduced and I shook my booty when I strut my stuff. After I went on I took some more pics. Then I had to get a pic of myself between the two Grgs, but the camera ATE it!!!! Well I gave beads away to the guys, only making a few flash.
Then I pulled on my shirt and sat amongst the others so we had our picture taken for Toon Disney and Disney Japan.

Followed Aaron and Greg B To Aaron and Maras room, we talked and I got registered for next year. Then I changed clothes. So I can breath and dance. Decided to finally draw something, but ended up dancing and Joining Greg W's discussion group until I was tired.

Bid fare well to Crzy before I went to pack and go to bed.

Next day Leo drove me to the Airport and I flew back home.

Great Weekened. Only had a few problems.
1. the headache.
2. I pulled a hamstring
3.The food
4.It didn't last long enough.

Next year I'll try to pace myself, and to bring a bottle of Tylenol.
Also try to convince my dad to come next year. He loved the show as well.

Mike R writes...

Hi Greg. I started watching Gargoyles on Toon Disney over my younger sisters shoulder a few weeks ago and haven't stopped since. Alas I've discovered that Toon Disney are only showing about half the total number of episodes, so there are probably gaping holes in my understanding of the overall theme (I get the impression there is one - correct me if I'm wrong;-).

First off, very well done. I'm very impressed. Not only are they extremely well written and animated, but there is subtlety of dialogue and expression! In a Disney Cartoon? Indeed.

Secondly: just finished City of Stone. Missed part of it the first time round. There's only one thing I can say... "Oi! The tragedy!" If Demona is not one of the most cathartic characters created in the last century I don't know who is! Despite her brutal treatment of Goliath it's hard not to empathise with her, or to enjoy her episodes perhaps more than the rest (is this unhealthy?;-). Macbeth is the perfect counterpoint, another very good character and equally engaging in his own way. However, I am frustrated. I glanced down an episode list and couldn't find anything further devoted to them. How does their story conclude? I must know!

Thirdly: somewhere I posted an e-mail to a Gargoyles site and the owner told me a film had been on the cards for the last five years, but with no apparent progress. Is anything known that you could tell? I did wonder if, when the reply mentioned it might be live action, whether this might change as a result of the successes of CGI films in recent years. I wonder which would best suit the genre - CGI or live action? With CGI the original voice cast could be used, of course.

Sorry for the long message, and thanks for indulging a new initiate.

The Cat writes...

Subject Make-A-Wish, Nov. 1999
Hey Greg.

Okay I this isn't exactically the best place to ask this but I'm not going to see you at The Gathering this year and by the time the next Gathering rolls around I'll probably have forgotten the question.

Anyway, my mother was telling me that _you_ asked her whether or not what was said about the road kill in Texas was true when we met ya'll back in November of 1999 through Make-A-Wish. However, I don't seem to remember you asking that. Then again my memory has gotten rather faulty lately.

What I want to know is were you the one that asked that or was it someone else?

Okay, another thing(more like a personal ramble on what was said that day) after we got finished taping the mock episode of Turf ya'll are all signing pictures and my script. Thom says something about his character Lexington and about Sheena Easton(I had no idea who she was then, but not long after that day I saw her on the Home Shopping Channel.)
Thom: Sheena Easton always said "The wee one is playing with his...weewee." I can't think of the word that she used though.(Something to that effect.)
Jeff(quickly supplies the word): Willyad!
All the while I'm thinking:'Tippickle men. Obsessed with that part of their anatomy! Well,I'm tired I'm not going to say anything. I just want to get to the hotel and fall into bed.' (That wasn't exactly what I was thinking, but there might be little kids out there that their parents do not wish them to know such things just yet.)

Anyhow, you get the idea. By the way in case you were wondering how I was capable of remembering that little chat between Jeff and Thom. It's because my mother accidently filmed it. If those two were a little more conservitive I might be tempted to use that darn tape as blackmail.

Well as they say down here, Adios Amigo. The Cat.
Hmm, curiousity is suppose to kill The Cat, I wonder how many of my nine lives I've wasted this time around.

Lord Sloth writes...

Just thought I'd join the bandwagon here since posting in these archives is pretty well the best way to give my writings immortality.

I got my mom to watch this with me earlier (it's getting easier to get her into a new episode each time) and she enjoyed immensely. I like just as much, it's a very "crisp" looking episode IMO, and the story in spaced out well to always keep me interested with new revelations.
- When it got to the part where Elisa disappears and we see Raven flying over head, mom mistakenly asked "she turned into a crow?", and I thought that somewhat interesting as that never occurred to me when I first saw it; did anyone else think that?
I think my favorite part of this episode is when Raven scares that hungry bear enough to charge toward Elisa, and then Bronx boldy tackles him. It's just a very tense and scary moment that looks beautiful.
-I like when Goliath runs up that fallen tree trunk in order to glide; don't ask me why, I just do.
- I just want to congratulate whoever it was who designed the Thunderbird; she looked incredible cool, both scary and majestic.
-I also really liked Raven in his Gargoyle guise, and I agree with Jim R., he really reminds me of someone else.
-His clan of Illusion looked sweet as well, but I was kind of relieved that they weren't real since their diversity would have been harder to accept then the London Clan. Leo looks a lot less like a lion then the wolf guy resembles wolf
- Sea Monster had a nice prehistoric look & I liked how she used the blowhole, but her forelegs seemed very scrawny for her to be a good swimmer, if they could keep her afloat. Perhaps she had very big paddle hind legs to supporter her, and perhaps I'm just nit picking and she doesn't have to look right cause she's being of magic.
-A bit more repetitiveness in how Rory Dugan will latter on be learning to accept his Heritage, but this doesn't bother me at all. Each episode was different enough that it's cool seeing their similarities. At least Nick wasn't some old relic of a Haida Shaman reborn.
- Incidentally, I didn't like Nick all that much. Didn't dislike him, but he did seem slightly typical in his rejection of tradition. A the same time, I'd really like to see more of him in the show, and think he'd make a great mach up for Beth, assuming he'd end up with Beth. Perhaps Diane will become a widow in the near future, but we all know, for the long term, he can't touch Elisa with a 30-foot pole.
- Just want to mention that I love the all Tricksters in "Gargoyles"; smart and subtle is the key. And I think Xanatos deserves to be declared an official trickster.
- I'm no volcano expert, but I didn't think a caldaria could be filled almost to the brim with magma, and not be in danger of causing disaster. I accepted this more in "Ill Met" since it was on a magic island, but does anyone know if a volcano can really do this. It's a good thing it can in the Gargoyles Universe, cause it would be pretty embarrassing to let the water flow, renewing the balance of nature at last, only to have the volcano overflow and destroy everything. And I'm assuming the caldaria would have changed a bit by 2198.
-I loved that last scene with Harry Water (not Potter), though it did kind shock me initially.

One more interesting thing is how Angela shouts "We've defeated the monster!" after their first battle with Grandmother. If this had aired after "Monsters" (as it does on my tape cause for some reason I wanted to put the two Scotland episodes together) she would probably have not made that face value judgment. Now I know someone will likely point out that the name of that creature was "Sea Monster", but I'm sure you know what I mean, so don't. Just anther fascinating evolution of a character in this incredible show; was that intentional Greg?

There's one book I have read about a year ago that has a lot to do with the mythological stuff in this episode. It's got raven, and the thunderbird (though they don't make any personal appearances, it does go into Raven's origins and how he became such a pest) but it mainly concerns this fear/soul-devouring demon named Sisiutl; and the one of the main characters in a native called Grandfather interestingly enough. It's called "Dreamspeaker", it's by Cam Hubert and I recommend it to you all most enthusiastically. It won't even take you long, it's just 121 pages (though I'm sure you will wish there was more by the time you finish. After we finished watching Heritage, mother took out the book "Daughters of Copper woman" by Anne Cameron, which seems to go quite in depth into the legends of the Natives of B.C., and I hope to look into it more. Once again that dratted show has got me interested in another of the world's culture, and now I'm wasting my time researching it rather then watching TV. Hey, I wonder if that's what Disney finds so threatening about "Gargoyles". <HMRPH>

I'll just add a footnote that will probably please you. Ever since I started spending a lot of time at ASK GREG, my interest in writing stuff has increased tenfold. I'm creating essays about gargoyles as well as my own short stories and I feel that I owe it to you for creating this topic in the first place. Now I only need to learn to make English assignments interesting, and thus do more of them, but I've passed High School now so I'm happy.

That was a bit lengthy.

Zarok writes...

HERITAGE
Here goes my very first episode ramble don't know why it took me so long (I had a "shadows of the past" ramble but my computer seems to have eaten it). So we come to the second episode in the world tour, I am a full world tour supporter Greg I think it served a vital role in broadening the scope of the gargoyles universe. This episode really sets out to explore the whole "all things are true" issue. I think the introduction of Oberon's children was instrumental in that goal. I really like the way you went about that, first you established the fay as a race via Puck, set down the ground rules, creatures of pure magic, shape shifters, vulnerable to iron, no messing with mortal lives. And here in the world tour you establish that many of the supernatural beings in world mythology were in fact children of Oberon. This lets you bring in Odin, Anansi, the Banshee and so on without fussing over backstory and the like but back to today's episode. This episode starts off nicely I think, Goliath's rowing along and Elias craving a hot dog all nice and serene the BOOM the sea monster bursts out of the water and starts mixing it up with the gargs. It's kind of odd actually in retrospect causes grandmother would probably not have attacked the travellers. Then again, they defeat her rather easily, too easily. The whole totem pole thing made for a nice bit of red herring. Raven does a good job of duping Goliath by using one of the most fiendish kinds of lies, ones that are as close to the truth as possible. Even closer than raven realises as a gargoyle clan will actually make its home in that very crater, they'll be abducted by aliens a few minuets after they hatch but its still their home. I never thought grandmother was a bad guy, she just oozes niceness all over the place, the thunderbird is impressive, very majestic. Raven cleverly gets around the non-interference edict by sending that bear after Elisa (as I'm writing this you still haven't answered my question regarding weather the edict applies to animals). Natsilane's personal journey here is well played as he comes to terms with the fact that there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in his philosophy. Actually while we are on the subject I really am not too crazy about that Quote don't get me wrong it's a great quote its just that its so overused in soaps, sitcoms, advertising, hell even Lex Luther uses it, Kinda like the whole Yorick thing. The final battle in the volcano is very cool I especially liked the wooden totem beasts. Just curious are Natsilane's weapons made of iron or are they magical or what? Anyway thanks for another great episode. Till next time.

Blaise writes...

HERITAGE

I don't think I expected "our heroes" to get home after just one stop, so it didn't surprise me that they ended up someplace else first. Of course, even I didn't expect them to be traveling for as long as they were....
Anyway, I love the way Angela is sitting in the skiff when she notices the sea monster. It's a small thing, barely on screen for a second, and I probably only notice it because I think she looks quite alluring there, but it's something that strikes me everytime I watch this episode.
The sea monster has an excellent design, very unique, and the ensuing battle has some real nice moments, such as when Angela appears to be riding a wave into battle.
Of course, the sea monster appears to damage the skiff during the battle, and in the next scene a hole can be seen in the upper side of the skiff (not in a "sinkble" area, per se). So, how'd it get fixed? Well, Grandmother may have "healed" the skiff as she healed the island, or the skiff may have just fixed itself (hey, it can sink itself, as we'll see with Arthur later on).
I knew something was up with that raven when it seemed to appear out of nowhere, and then landed on top of the totem pole.
Actually, during my first viewing, I had been wondering when the subject of totem poles would be addressed. From what I had heard (and that was little) they could have fit into a "inspired by gargoyles" category, and I was quite happy they showed up. I don't remember my reaction to the revelation that they didn't actually have any gargoyle connection, but thinking about it now, I'm rather glad you guys went with them being what they are in the real world, Greg. Sometimes a spade is a spade.
Natsilane/Nick fills a fairly stereotypical role, to be sure, but he is acted well, and given some nice lines and facial expressions. I also liked Grandmother, and had always wondered if she was a figure from North American myth and legend as well. Good to know that she is.
I'm almost ashamed to admit this, but I had thought Queen Florence island might actually be a real place until I read your ramble, Greg. You can tell I haven't spent much time in Canada (aside from the area around Niagra Falls).
Ah, Raven as a gargoyle. It's an excellent design, I love his red eyes and the pattern of feathers over his chest. However, there are some...glitches in his gargoyle design. The fact that he has no tail, five fingers instead of four, and even his eye color differentiate him from the "normal" gargoyle design. More, in my eyes, than his having a bird's head. I'm not nitpicking the character designers, though--and for all I know, there are gargoyles out there with similar abberations (just look at Sora's two-toed feet in BUSHIDO)--I actually think those oddities are neat. They might even be considered hints that this fellow isn't exactly what he appears to be. He also has a nice entrance: assuming the form and place of the top totem pole creature he had landed on in the morning. Anyway, I kind of figured that this was the "Raven" that Grandmother had spoken about in the previous scene. When he referred to Grandmother as an "evil sorceress" I thought that maybe this was a POV problem. Two different sides with half-true gripes fighting each other. I couldn't buy for a minute that Grandmother was evil, but I wouldn't be surprised if she were a sorceress, and Raven spoke a story that seemed to resonate with how gargoyles were treated. I thought maybe bringing peace was the ultimate goal. Of course, things turned out differently.
RE: "Elisa as sexy when feverish and vulnerable." Are you sure that's not just because she's probably topless (at least) underneath that blanket? ;D
Raven leads our gargoyle heroes to the caldera of the volcano, and introduces them to his clan. I liked their designs as well--especially the wolf and eagle ones. But I found it extremely odd that they did not come out or say anything (WARNING lights began going off in my brain there, I think). Still, I did like Goliath's initial joy over the thought of finding gargoyles living in other parts of the world.
Grandmother uses Haida (is that spelled right?) medicinal techniques to cure Elisa's fever, but I wouldn't be surprised if she used just a little magic to put Elisa to sleep (I thought I heard a "magic-like" sound effect or something). And yes, I think the "...and roots" line and Natsilane's silent reaction to it are funny. Actually, my brother has caught this episode a few times, and always gets frustrated that Natsilane doesn't believe that "roots" and such can cure a fever. As far as he's concerned *all* medicine came from plants and the like. Well, I guess my brother's not too far off the mark--I know at least aspirin comes from a plant.
Our heroes start to search for each other. Raven's "disappearing clan" was a nice little confirmation for me that this guy was not what he claimed to be.
Goliath's little phrase "Humans fear what they do not understand. And what they fear, they often seek to destroy." It's a nice, truthful little phrase. Maybe that's why it has been used in so many other places (DARKSWORD book one, for example). The funny thing is, Goliath has been telling Angela truths all along that play right into Raven's lies. Sheesh, no wonder Goliath wants to rip the Trickster a new one when he learns the truth. I'd be pissed, too.
Finding the wallet was a nice touch. Another, earlier one, was Elisa wondering if totem poles were connected with gargoyles. Grandmother knows exactly what Elisa was talking about. Like I said, nice.
Bears by themselves are scary enough, but a Trickster influenced bear? I didn't envy Elisa. Of course, Bronx takes Yogi out with little problem (and manages to have a cute moment directly afterward).
Fun line from Elisa: "Are Goliath and Angela OK? Heh, right, like you're going to answer."
I think I may have jumped out of my seat and applauded when Goliath and Elisa hugged. It was so unexpected, yet perfectly natural between them (and long overdue I thought--besides which, by this time I had concluded that G & E would kiss SOMETIME during this season, and while this was not quite that, I found it pretty close).
The characters compare notes and go off to find Grandmother, who transforms into the Thunderbird at the (music-less) cliff-hanger. By this time, I was thouroughly confused as to what was going on and went to my old standby attitude--ride the storm out and see what happens.
One of my favorite bits during the ensuing battle: Angela lands on the Thunderbird, and the chest-face wraps its tounge around her leg and throws her off. The look on Angela's face is great. Then of course there's the bit where the Thunderbird's wings pass through Raven's illusions. By now, I already knew he was the bad guy, and applauded Angela's trying to dupe him. Of course, he shows up later so it's doubtful she was successful, but it's nice that she makes an attempt.
Finally, the truth is revealed. Grandmother and Raven are kinsmen of Puck (at least figuratively) and Raven shows his other preferred form. I like how the design on his shirt is evocative of his feather pattern in gargoyle form. Another thing I liked in this scene was Grandmother's quiet joy that gargoyles still live (if they don't thrive). She's a very benevolent Oberati.
Elisa shows the gargoyles to Natsilane, quoting Shakespeare for good measure, to induce him to take up the fight. I love Angela's jump to right in front of Natsilane with the shield and weapon. I also love Nick's line: "Wait! You're asking me to fight a creature of legend...with a stick. Get real." Funny, and indicative of his world view at the same time.
Natsilane's sudden appearance at the caldera always threw me. I try to rationalize it, as usual. When he takes up the cause and armements, his clothes are magically changed and he is transported to the volcano top. At any rate, Bronx, Elisa and Grandmother arrive a bit later than Nick.
I love how Raven gives his chant here: "Totem beasts entrapped in wood, the time has come to...do some good." I guess he's not much of one for rhyming.
It's a nice battle, though nothing particularly of note except for Goliath's playing possum, and Natsilane mastering the use of his weapons.
I like Raven's last two lines in this ep and the way his voice actor (and I am kicking myself for not remembering his name) delivered them. "Your people have fled!" Nicely defiant. And "This place no longer amuses me," along with his laugh (I LOVE that laugh). Now that you mention it, Greg, it would have been a bit better for him to fly off in raven form, but the gargoyle form works alright.
And then Grandmother heals the island. I liked her hair becoming the water.
A word on the repetition (sp?): Yeah, I noticed that, too. It's a bit of an annoyance, but there are little differences. In this episode the sea monster wasn't the focus, the companions were reunited well before the end of the adventure, and Natsilane is younger than Peter Maza, chose to live where he grew up, and doesn't have the "estranged father" element that Peter had. It's not much, but the little details help prevent this from becoming too tired.
HERITAGE is mostly an average episode for me (nothing that particularly grabs me, but a nice watch), and I think it says something that even an average episode compels me to write *this much* about it.

Todd Jensen writes...

My ramble on "Heritage".

Truth to tell, I no longer recall my initial responses from when I first saw this episode (I particularly don't remember how long I expected the Avalon World Tour to last, or what my initial responses to Raven and Grandmother were), so I'll have to simply give my overall thoughts on it.

First off, I'll admit that the "legendary background" in this one was something that I was less familiar with than the use of actual myths and legends in earlier episodes of "Gargoyles". This does appear (as best as I can tell, at present) to be the first time that "Gargoyles" uses legends from a non-Western culture; up till then, the mythical background was that of the Western world (mostly the British Isles), with Macbeth, King Arthur, Puck, Avalon, etc. Here the legends were those of the Haida people, which I hadn't read as much about. I had some general knowledge of Raven, the Thunderbird, and totem poles, but that was about it. However, I did still quite like this episode.

Grandmother and Raven's introduction as specifically Children of Oberon, of course, makes it clear that Oberon's Children are worldwide, not confined to just one mythology, which was a good touch. (I noticed the pointy ears on both Grandmother and Raven in his human form, of course - one of the best-known ways of identifying someone as a mythical being). I also thought that Grandmother and Raven worked well in their respective roles - Raven, especially, who (as a trickster) got some of the best lines. (As generally is the case with tricksters). Such as "Oh, well, better make sure it's an uneven fight" or, in his big "sour grapes" moment, "This place no longer amuses me."

I agree with you about Natsilane's facial expression after Grandmother's roots line being priceless; it's one of the big LOL moments in "Gargoyles" for me. (Another one is coming up in "Kingdom", in fact - but I'll mention that one when we get to that, which'll clearly be soon).

Of course, since you released your "Gargoyles 2198" overview, we now know what some of your future plans for the events in this episode were. I still find it interesting that Queen Florence Island would indeed wind up being the home of a new gargoyle clan, converting Raven's lie into the truth (in a way). I wonder if anybody in 2188 was conscious of that (all of the original participants in that episode - except for Grandmother and Raven, of course - would obviously be long since gone, but their descendants - and we do know that both the Manhattan clan and Natsilane have descendants around in 2198 - might have preserved the story of that event).

I also like the exchange between Goliath and Angela over Raven's story, including Goliath's comments about how humans fear and hate gargoyles in spite of the fact that gargoyles protect them (and why), and yet how gargoyles still have the duty to look after their protectorate (something that he certainly lives up to himself, in his refusal to abandon Manhattan even when it becomes difficult for gargoyles to live safely in). So even an episode where the "new gargoyles" turn out to be impostors tells us more about gargoyles, which is quite a nice touch.

By the way, I did some general research on the legendary figures in this episode, and found out that the Thunderbird appears in some legends as a "benevolent teacher-figure", which does fit in quite nicely with it being one of the creatures that Grandmother shape-shifts into.

I also agree that it's a lovely moment when Goliath and Elisa hug just after the bear gets driven off (I also get a kick out of the scene where Bronx sticks his head out of the bush after driving the bear away).

Karissa writes...

Im your biggest fan of garoyles i watched every show sicne it came out till now i know everything about the gargoyles please make another show of gargoyles and let me join the clan i would be horoned if you would thank you for taking your time to read this

Entity writes...

I'd just like to say that the Magus' death is, I think, the strongest moment in GARGOYLES. The Magus is loved by every fan, and it's because of all the humanity you were able to instill in him in about five minutes of screen time. His tragic love for Katherine coupled with his guilt which almost seems biblical by this point in the series, and the enchanting setting of Avalon, all make the Magus into... I don't even know! Just recalling his final moments brings tears to my eyes. That trembling finger. And his reaction to Goliath's thanks is heart-swelling. He simply doesn't comprehend how Goliath could be thankful to him and it's too much. Good job.

Blaise writes...

SHADOWS OF THE PAST

And so the World Tour truly begins.
Right off I'll say I agree that the numerous reruns did little to help the appeal of the "long absence from home." This might have been allieviated a litte if KINGDOM had been able to air when it was intended (it didn't, at least not on my stations, and prolonged the absence of the Trio and Hudson). I also think that AVALON PART THREE might have been a good "chapter break" (for lack of a better term) for reruns until the majority of the WT eps were finished. But then, I'm just a struggling actor, what do I know?
At any rate, I felt it fitting that Wyvern should be the first stop. Visiting the place where everything started, and bringing some closure (at least for Goliath) to an immense part of the clan's history. I love how he says, "It's home! My home." In terms of both dialogue and acting, it's very well done.
I also instantly liked Angela's mention of the weather in Avalon. A very nice bit of fleshing out (both for character and universe) that felt completely natural.
I'll say right now that I love the animation here, too. Granted, about half-way through the first act Angela's eyes seem to change size/shape and it drives me a little nuts, but overall it's just fantastic. I'm glad you and Frank stuck to you guys' guns, Greg, and made sure things like the cliffside and Elisa's wardrobe remained consistant. Shows the dedication.
I always noticed the awkward (sp?) moment between Elisa and Angela when Goliath instantly starts climbing the cliff. I don't think Elisa had been expecting this, but I believe she understands.
Goliath's description of all his old haunts--the Rookery (I just love the line "I was hatched here" for some reason), the caves--are just so wonderful. Detailed and told with the weight of one visiting a past lifetime almost.
Hakon's axe: I was always torn between seeing it as the same one as in VENDETTAS, because that's just what GARGOYLES would do, and a different one because it only had one blade. I suppose the "eldritch, spectral energy" of Hakon may have reformed it, though. But yeah, a mace (THE mace, in fact) would have been just ripping. Practical and symbolic at the same time, with so much emotional resonance.
But on with the show. I liked how Goliath admits he still wanted revenge. Very in character, and realistic. It sounds like he's admitting it as much to himself as to Angela and Elisa. I wonder if that (coupled with hearing her voice) made Goliath think a little about what Demona had become. Or I might be going overboard here. Don't hesitate to say so.
The "old wounds" line--yeah, that's another one I liked right off as well.
Then Goliath sees Hakon and the Captain (or thinks he does) and instantly attacks. I'm not sure if, during my initial viewing, I thought Goliath was going insane. I think I picked up that Bronx was sensing something and so was prepared for something more supernatural. Or maybe not--like I said, I can't remember. Still, I think Goliath may have gone a *little* insane when he instantly attacked Elisa/Hakon and Angela/Captain without wondering how those two got there. Just shows that even the strongest rock can crack given enough pressure in just the right areas.
The glowing...blobs, floating in the air. Yeah, by that time I think I pretty much knew what was going on, a suspicion that was confirmed when Desdemona, Demona and Othello turned into Hakon and the Captain when Goliath wasn't looking their way.
Keith did a lot of good line readings for Goliath when he begins to doubt his sanity, but one of my favorites is "I can't trust what I see!" The pain and frustration conveyed by Mr. David is wonderful there.
I love it when Hakon's ghost comes flying right at the camera (Goliath's POV) with glowing eyes and mouth while Clancy Brown gives that great, gurggling-sort of yell. That was pretty cool/creepy.
I always wince when Bronx bites G in the arm to keep him from falling. Very painful, but you have to admire the pooch's determination. As well as Elisa's when she decides to climb down after her falling (more than) friend. I always liked the contrast between Angela's shocked reaction and Elisa's strong decision.
Goliath's fall is well done, and I'm glad it took him two tries to really stop himself.
The Captain always does seem to be the dissenting opinion against Hakon. Even before the Captain demands an end to Goliath's torture, he gives Goliath the credit of suspecting their plan. Maybe, deep down in the bottom of his...ectoplasym, the Captain was hoping Goliath would escape.
The rock zombies. :) Yes, their final "death" was cool and creepy, with their disintegration, but their original integration, with the pieces seeming to literally fall upward into place was also pretty neat in my book. Their sounds were good, too, with some of those weird high pitched roars and the double voices (were those both Ed Gilbert and Clancy Brown?). I also liked the look of "Hakon's Gargoyle" with the large nose.
Then they bring "Demona" out and everything (literally) goes to pieces. I loved the hand turning into a mace, BTW. Very cool.
The energy transfer. Maybe the fact that the Captian seemed rather gloating when he described to Goliath what would happen made his chage of heart seem to come out of left field. At any rate, I'm glad that when it came to getting what he thought he wanted, the Captain realized it wasn't really. As for Hakon, he's a jerk but the utter joy in his voice at being able to feel again is rather disarming. If he weren't a bad guy he'd be almost sympathetic. With Goliath, I like how he chooses to win this fight, not by taking out Hakon but by reasoning with the Captain (even when the process begins, his first impluse is to remind the Captain who had wronged whom). And even if the Captain's decision to attack Hakon seemed a bit sudden, it frankly made more sense to me. Hell, it was the only right way! The Captain was woefully misguided yes, but he wasn't the evil that was Hakon.
"LINES of power!" That's what Hakon was saying! I finally get it now.
The megalith dance was pretty cool all around (concept and execution), but, frankly, it almost gets overshadowed by the character interaction going on around/inside it.
Then, after the destruction, Goliath again describes the Captian as a friend (and again, Mr. David puts great emotion into that line). And then we see the Captain appear one final time. And yes...my first thought was that he looks younger than before. Maybe just less care-worn. At any rate, he has a truly heavenly type of exit. Beautiful.
I like how Goliath answers the question of what happened to Hakon. "He has made his fate, Angela, whatever it might be." I just love that line, and have seen how it could be applied to all sorts of people and incidents. And it just seems right that Goliath would say something like that.
And then we see Hakon. I don't know if I would have preferred seeing Hakon stay there. I suppose I knew, deep down, that a bad guy like him can't stay locked away forever. However, I must say that, IMHO, there's something inherently scary about complete stagnation. Even though we don't know where he finally went to after VENDETTAS, he at least moved on. To be trapped (inside a rock of all places) in complete solitude...with no guarantee of "moving on" before the "end of creation" seems to me to be a singularly scary prospect. Still, it's nice contrasting the spectral Captain's final passing here with Hakon's later on.
For me, this was an excellent start to the World Tour.

Todd Jensen writes...

Here's my ramble on "Shadows of the Past".

First off, of course, this is where the Avalon World Tour begins (if you don't count the "Avalon" triptych), which makes it a biggie. I agree with you that the reruns in between the three instalments of it (which aired, as I recall, in November-December 1995, February 1996, and May 1996 - more or less) make the World Tour seem longer than it really was. (Incidentally, you're right that you were able to bring out more than 18 episodes of "Gargoyles" in the September-December period; I remembered that the "fall run" ended with "Grief", and so worked out that it was 30 new episodes during that period).

As I mentioned before, I enjoyed the Avalon World Tour, and agree with you that something like that was necessary for the series at some point (especially in bringing in enough other gargoyles to make it feasible for the species to survive and recover - as I've mentioned here before, something along the lines of the World Tour was probably the only realistic way for Goliath to discover that there were gargoyles left in other parts of the world, given that he couldn't simply hop on board the next flight from New York to London or Japan).

Angela's correct (from the original legends perspective) about it always being summer on Avalon; in fact, I remember that the old Welsh legends about Avalon (or, more accurately, its "literary predecessors") called it the Summer Country or the Region of the Summer Stars.

In hindsight from "Vendettas", I picked up on the significance of that axe that Goliath unearths - and agree with you now that Hakon's mace from the Wyvern Massacre would indeed have worked better. Too late for that now, though.

I also liked that line (which I considered very poetic) of Elisa's about "old wounds".

The Captain and Hakon's tormenting of Goliath was very effective - probably the creepiest part, in my opinion, was when Angela and Elisa appear in Goliath's eyes to be the Captain and Hakon - but then we hear Angela and Elisa's voices coming from the Captain and Hakon's mouths.

The Captain of the Guard's change of heart worked for me (again, I especially liked the bit that you mentioned where he's looking troubledly at his hands as he and Hakon solidify). In fact, it made sense in view of his role in "Awakening" - he'd never wanted the clan massacred, and was horrified as to how that had gone wrong. I might add that Hakon showed, again, just how creepy he is when he gets into the fight with Goliath and begins laughing as his fists pass through Goliath - the reason for that being now, not that Hakon's insubstantial and Goliath solid, but the other way around.

Incidentally, the Captain actually appears better-looking in the scene where he's giving Goliath his thanks, just before he ascends.

And I'll confess that I'm one of those who would have preferred Hakon to have remained trapped in the cave for all time - I felt, when "Vendettas" aired, that it destroyed some of the effectiveness, in retrospect, of Hakon's sentence: trapped alone for eternity, with nobody at hand for him to hate. (Also, "Vendettas" felt anticlimactic on the Hakon front; in "Shadows of the Past", he battles Goliath by skillfully undermining him with a lot of psychological subtlety; in "Vendettas", he's reduced to simply fighting him in a slugfest with a big dumb werewolf - though don't tell Wolf that I called him that. :) ). But I do think that you made a good point about how, ultimately, Hakon would have to be given more permanent resolution than just that.

Incidentally, your treatment of the megalith that the Captain and Hakon were using, and your comments on it, make me wonder now how you would have handled Stonehenge if you'd ever gotten to do an episode involving it (especially since you mentioned having had plans to send King Arthur and Griff there during their quest for Merlin) - a pity that we may never know the answer to that now.

Petronius the Younger writes...

Hi, I have really enjoyed your ramblings, even though I haven't posted any of mine until now. Your "That's my ramble, where's yours?" line finally brought me to write one. :)

Avalon

After City of Stone, I was really looking forward to another multi-parter. It's quite amazing to me that with all the expectations, they never fail to deliver, even now.

Seeing Tom as the Guardian was quite a surprise. You almost never see characters age in cartoons. Seeing Tom go from the chubby cheeked little kid to an old man is quite a shock.

The middle age parts were excellent, as always. The transition from Wyvern to Edinburgh was very natural. It must have been the 4th or 5th time that the scenes right after the massacre. It's interesting to see it from different character's perspective each time.

The ending though was kind of a downer. I didn't like the fight between the characters too much, too cliched I thought. It seems strange that so much focus was put on Arthur, and then when he is awaken, he is just another foot soldier who fights Macbeth. Obviously Macbeth is a formidable character, but I was expecting something a bit more out of King Arthur, like taking on the archmage. Then that leaves Goliath who has to pull the eye of odin out of the archmage, which was kind of a bummer from all the focus on Archmage's powers.

The magus's death scene was really touching, one of the top moments in the show. I too wondered if he was really dead, but I figured that it was a way to leave it up in the air so as to leave for some creative wiggle room. I was very happy to read what you wrote on that subject. It put that subject to rest and was how I thought should be. Thanks.

Todd Jensen writes...

"Avalon Part Three" ramble.

I really liked this episode as well, especially with King Arthur being brought in. (And in my case, I was familiar with the "Pendragon" part of his name long before "Gargoyles" came out, and was both pleased and impressed that it was incorporated into the episode).

I may be biased (being a King Arthur fan), but I do look upon Elisa's awakening of King Arthur as one of the grand moments of her career; she actually restores to the world one of the most famous legendary heroes of all time. (One other note that occurs to me; Elisa isn't of British ancestry, which does fit in with your intention that Arthur's new destiny, after leaving Avalon, would ultimately lie outside Britain, and upon a larger stage).

The Magus might be old, but he was clearly still tough; Elisa had trouble keeping up with him all the way to the Hollow Hill.

I very much enjoyed the Magus's character development here, including his guilt over his hasty curse a thousand years before, his shouldering the responsibility for it without complaint or excuses, and his unrequited love for Princess Katharine. He really did become a sympathetic figure here.

(Incidentally, in light of your original idea of having him accompany Arthur - the Magus really does look much like the way that Merlin is often conventionally depicted in Arthurian art - except that his beard's shorter than Merlin's beard in the conventional representations of him. And, for that matter, although he doesn't leave with Arthur in the actual story, he's laid to rest on Arthur's sleeping place at the end).

I'm probably one of the extremely few "Gargoyles" fans who *didn't* think that that flashback scene with the hatchlings was taking place in the daytime. I always viewed it as being at night (it looked dark enough to me, in fact). I'd always assumed that the fans who thought that it was daytime were mentally merging it with the daytime flashback scenes where the hatchlings aren't present.

I liked the battle scene, including the choice of pairings, which struck me as appropriate ones (particularly Arthur versus Macbeth), and also the bit where the Archmage and Goliath are teleporting all about with the Phoenix Gate. (One possible nit here, though, is Princess Katharine being able to pick up so quickly on how to operate a laser cannon, given that back when she lived in the outside world, they were using bows and arrows and hadn't dreamed up even conventional fire-arms. But I think that the scene where she defeats Demona with it makes up for that nit).

The Magus's death: I agree that it's a tragic and moving moment. On the other hand, I've long felt that the fact that Goliath is able to forgive the Magus before he dies, and show him that what he'll be remembering him for is raising the hatchlings rather than cursing the clan, makes a good consolation for the old man.

I was excited to see Arthur also leaving Avalon, and hoped that we'd see more of his adventures in the series (and was right, even though it was just one episode and that spin-off never got made).

And I don't quite know what I was expecting when Tom called out at the end that "Avalon sends you where you need to me", but I enjoyed the Avalon World Tour when it came.

And thanks for the latest ramble, Greg.

Ancient Kaa The Souless writes...

My ramble of Avalon 2

Avalon 1-2-3 are among my best Gargoyles' episodes. However, 2 was always my favorite of the three, so I'll just talk about this one.

The exchanges between Archmage and Archmage+ were amazing. Funny too, specially:

- I could put you back where I found you. - No, no, no, no. (extra no added by me :-) )

- Are we going to take the grimoire from her now? - Weren't you listening?! (the background music really play well along with this line :-) )

- What am I supposed to do, eat it?! - You are learning.

- 900 and 75 years?! (it only takes a frown from Archmage+ to shut him up :-) )

- Then they must DIE!! - EXACLTY!! (OK I am saditic, so sue me)

David Warner stole the show. Love the new oufit of Archmage+. He also seem like he is having pointed ears.

In the early script, we now get to know the missing scenes from the Archamge flashbacks (FINALLY!). Wonder what our two Archmages would have worn in modern clothes :-)

The whole scene with the arifacts being given to Archmage was great. We also see that he isn't very polite and very rude: he just snatch the relic without saying "thanks".

My only complaint is that the assault on the castle didn't last long enough. But I still very love that episode. I'm just sorry Archamge+ be gone after ep 3. (Save for some flashbacks, Timedancer...)

Blaise writes...

AVALON PART THREE

One thing I forgot to mention in my thoughts on Part Two (and it's still relevant because it was featured in the recap): the Archmage's devouring of the Grimorum. I, too, found that a great image, and a nice way of sidestepping the "no magics" rule. Not to mention I love the little "[gulp] Ah..." the Archmage does.
Anyway, onto the fight.
When the folks at the palace decide to check out the Sleeping King, and Tom prepares to go, the Magus looks at Katharine's worried face and then volunteers to go instead. Yet another something I had to watch several times before I could fully appreciate it.
Angela and Gabriel check out the grotto (is that what it's called?). I like it when Demona jabs the laser rifle in Angela's ribs, and the younger gargoyle's first reaction is to elbow Gabriel and say "Stop it!" It was cool how Goliath temporarily overrode Macbeth and Demona's mind control by "appealing to their better natures," and then how the Archmage so easily reasserted his control. He had become quite a bit more powerful here, afterall. And then, of course, once things turn sour, and one of his enemies tries to take the Eye, the Archmage loses his cool and decides to start attacking NOW. His lines here are pretty neat and chilling ("They're my creatures now," and "...if they are so *eager* to *DIE*!" are ones I rather like, too).
It never ceases to amaze me how the Magus, a 72 year-old scholarly type, is able to make Elisa, a 27 year-old athletic type, ask him to slow down. I like Magus' line about being used to traveling alone, and how Elisa's mention of "the Princess and the Guardian" is contrasted with the Magus calling them "Katharine and Tom." His story was both a surprise and heartbreak to me--I had really thought from AVALON PART ONE that he would "get the girl" as most heroes do. As I said then (three weeks ago), the Magus had never looked quite so heroic. I had disliked him quite a bit in AWAKENING ONE and TWO, yet by the end of his appearance in TWO, his remorse kind of mitigated my disdain for him. In the first part of AVALON I really got to like him--you could see the depth of his feeling for Katharine, and his resolve and cunning with the way he saved the eggs and all. In PART TWO he showed how weak he felt without his magic book, and here...well by this time, the Magus had become a character I really liked and sympathized with.
Perhaps that's one reason that I became pretty much goggle-eyed upon learning that Katharine had fallen in love with Tom and vice versa. Then again, I did (and to some extent still do) suffer from a sort of "agism in male and female relationships." Of course, for that reason, I also applaud the princess and the pauper getting together simply because it now becomes a bit more unique. And I love the baby gargoyles!
BTW, Greg: rest assured that Elisa's lips were corrected in later airings, and on my tape the scene with the baby gargs actually looks more like a night scene (don't ask me how, maybe it's just my tape).
The Hollow Hill sequence was cool! I loved the Magus' spellcasting (now he has to ryhme like an Oberati), though I was of course confused until the Magus explained how he was able to do that. The "leap of faith"...Indy Jones, yeah, but I like how Elisa looked jumping.
And then the pillar lowers with (to me) some guy on it. She walks up to him, and says his name, "Arthur Pendragon..." It was at about that point that my jaw hit the floor and my eyes became as big as the moon. This was something I had not been expecting (due to my unfamiliarity with Arthur's "death") and as such became a huge, and enjoyable surprise to me.
I also like his presentation to the rest of the good guys. Until Elisa mentioned it, I had never realized that Goliath had never truly beaten Demona or Macbeth. I really liked this--it made them seem even more dangerous than before. And of course, King Arthur Pendragon, the legendary hero, reveals that he hasn't the slightest idea "what's going on." A funny moment that shows that, though legendary, Arthur is still a human.
I like how the Archmage looks when he says "I will wait here...for Goliath." An uber-villain look without a doubt.
Arthur's taking command of the situation and showing his strategist side is a nice scene (and he later proves that he is indeed a great warrior as well), and I noticed right away how (thematically) well paired off the adversaries were.
I think I'll follow your lead, Greg, and divide them up:
Arthur and Macbeth: The way Macbeth had spoken of Arthur in LIGHTHOUSE, this battle was only to be expected. I didn't mind Arthur's "manner of magic" as oppossed to "sorcery" (a little variety is alright in my book). I was surprised at Macbeth's sucker-kick when it took down Arthur. *That* part of the cliffhanger--Macbeth's sword at Arthur's throat--really got me (they were all tense, but Mac had the greatest warrior in legend at sword point!). Of course, Arthur still manages to defeat Macbeth (marvelously, I might add) with that oh-so-cool image of his ringed fist heading straight for Macbeth's face (the camera).
Demona vs. half the cast: I guess it says something that Demona needs THAT many people to take her down. One thing I love about this fight is how badly Gabriel's wings get torn up. The poor guy really gets battle damage here. Another moment--the gargoyles on the battlements fire arrows point blank at Demona...and MISS COMPLETELY!! "Not prepared...never honed combat skills" indeed! And then Demona goes after Elisa. I wonder if maybe somewhere in Demona's ensorcelled brain she sees this as a rematch of their previous hand-to-hand in HIGH NOON. Eventually, Katharine gets into the act in a very unexpected way. A bit of a stretch with her firing the gun perhaps, but still kind of fun.
The Magus vs the Sisters: I never caught the full meaning of Luna's "There is no future for you," but somehow I knew that the Magus was going to die in this battle. Something about his character, the tragedy and struggling. It made sense to me, from the moment he said "Leave them to me" about facing the Sisters, that he would die fighting them. His use of the magic is extrodinary, and I liked how the Sisters became outraged by his using Avalon's power. I also love Phoebe's fearful "Where is the Sleeping King?" when the Sisters finally make it into the Hollow Hill. And then the Magus casts his last spell. To be honest, I thought he was "all dead" when his hand went limp and fell backward onto the beir (sp?). I was actually kind of glad that we had a little bit more time with him afterwards.
Goliath and the Archmage (and Angela): This was a big one for me. The Archmage is pretty much the oldest adversary of the Wyvern Clan (with the possible exception of Iago). There is a sort of "epic" quality here with the way the Archmage and Goliath talk to each other (A: "I've waited a millenium for this." G: "You lose again, Archmage"--how many times have superheroes said that last one to their archfoes?). I remember wondering how Goliath was going to get out of this, until Angela showed up. One of my favorite scenes in this ep is when the Archmage freezes the lake, Goliath sinks out of sight as the Archmage laughs, and then the Archmage's eyes go wide as Goliath shoots up from the depths, giving a gurgling roar, and leaps through the ice. Finally, Goliath removes the Eye and the Archmage almost seems like he will continue being a threat. Then he gets incinerated by "magic energy" and dissolves in a cool death scene. Count me as another one who thinks the final line of the Archmage is pretty cool. There is a sort of sense of that "epic" quality coming to an end here. Goliath has defeated what was (as far as we know) the first true arch-villain he had ever encountered. There could be a world of meaning within his "It is over." And then the Archmage's scrying pool, as if to spite them, displays the dying Magus.
The death scene is a good one. In some ways, I find it more moving now than I did then (again, don't ask me why). I like the final exchange with Goliath.
G: "I owe you."
M: "You...but, I cursed your clan."
G: (shaking his head) "You saved my children."
And of course Katharine's grief over the passing of her friend from childhood caps the touching moment. Good voicework from Jeff Bennett and Kath Souci. It took me several viewings to notice it, but I thought the shooting star was a nice touch.
I always wondered why the "good-byes" seemed so strange to me. I suppose individual good-byes would be more realistic, but for a narrative...eh. I kind of got that Arthur would be visiting Manhattan eventually, so the foreshadowing was not wasted.
Goliath should laugh more. ;)
Angela's coming along. A new regular. This was something I had been wondering about for some time--if one of these new gargoyles we had just been introduced to would actually come along for the rest of the show. It made sense that it was Angela, what with all the angst her parentage would bring to light.
When Tom spoke about Avalon sending you where "you need to be," I kind of got a smile as I thought to myself "Oh, you guys aren't going to be getting back home for a while..." and got prepared for a world tour. Perhaps my reading about gargoyles in Guatemala, London, and Japan influenced me here.
One last interesting note. As with the previous two, I showed this one to my mother when it first aired. YEARS LATER, as I was telling her about your original plans for sending the Magus with Arthur, Greg, and your reasons for giving him a "good death" instead, she said, "Well, they also probably had to kill him off because his voice was too expensive." I, confused, looked at her and asked "What do you mean?" She, now looking confused herself, said, "Well, he was voiced by Michael York...wasn't he?" So when you see Jeff Bennett again, you may want to pass onto him that he does a good York!
This was a good ep with a feeling of closure and a sense of something exciting coming just over the horizon. It could have been a season finale, even. Just my thoughts.

Blaise writes...

AVALON PART TWO

Ah, the Archmage's ep. David Warner is another actor whose name and/or voice instantly catch my attention. He really does fantastic work in any of his roles (his turn as The Lobe on FREAKAZOID! always makes me smile), and this episode is no exception.
But I'm getting a little ahead of myself.
When Angela showed up, I can't quite remember what my exact thoughts were. I think I may have been pleasantly surprised that here was a *good* female gargoyle, who was also *alive*. I'm pretty sure that within the first few seconds of seeing her, I recognized her coloring pattern, and determined who she was. I thought it neat that she was named Angela (the opposite of Demona, and fitting, I thought, with the mindsets of her human parents). Gabriel's parentage took a bit longer for me. I think, some weeks later, I was trying to envision Gabriel in my head and Coldstone's face kept popping up (or was it the other way around?). Anyway, at that moment, I pretty much recieved a lightning bolt to the brain and realized Gaberiel's lineage.
The beach fight. I thought it was very well done (and am a little surprised that it wasn't in there originally), with the Archmage making good use of the material. I enjoyed the lines, too (especially Tom's idea that the air might attack them). In fact, when I showed this episode to my mother, she got a great kick out of "You beat up a beach." Just the way David Warner says it is great, too.
I had never picked up on Elisa's jelousy over the idea that Goliath and Demona were actually parents. It's a nice touch, a great character bit, and I wish I was more aware of it the first time.
Seeing Katharine and The Magus as older was a neat thing for me. I liked their new designs. And Kath Soucie and Jeff Bennett did good work aging their voices (although when old Magus speaks for the first time, Jeff Bennett seems to sound slightly different than he does for the rest of the three-parter).
I liked Goliath's reaction to seeing "laser burns." I don't know why, exactly. It just struck me.
I got the Archmage's Time Loop right off the bat. I liked it a lot--to me it was (at the time) a different approach to the whole "time travel" business. This sort of "you do what you always did" thing was touched on in VOWS, but here it's really exploited for all its worth. And I think it works well.
Now back to David Warner. I still find it hard to believe that he did both versions of the Archmage during the same session. He's able to invest each with particular mannerisms and yet keep the idea that they're basically the same guy. His line readings are great, too. You've already mentioned most of them, Greg, but the "No, no," and "Nine-hundred and seventy-five YEARS??!!" bear repeating.
The Archmage's plan was also pretty cool to watch. The picture of the happenings in Demona and Macbeth's life began to be completed, and (as cliched as he may have been) the Archmage took on a somewhat more majestic tone with the revelation that he had orchestrated so much (with a little help from the timestream/Luna--man, that girl can be subtle). I would have loved to have seen the rest of his planned time stops in there, but what we got was still pretty good.
As for the Weird Sisters...I think I was more disappointed than angry when I saw their "Fury" aspect dominant in these eps. It seemed to diminish their majesty and mystique when they revealed how much "vengence" had motivated them to do. (Hmmm, actually that could be another "lesson against vengence" there, Greg--it diminishes the respect one has in the eyes of others...or something like that, I guess).
BTW, in later airings, older Demona's model was fixed some. At least her hair's red, now.
The Archmage's intial attack on the palace was well choreographed (funny thing--even with the gargoyles as flesh, if he kept up like he did, he would have won; pity he didn't think about that). One thing that really struck me during the battle was Ophelia (of course, until ILL MET BY MOONLIGHT, I just knew her as "that female gargoyle with the triceratops plate"). Her design was that striking, probably because of her unique forehead. I think I was one of the ones who kind of thought there might have been something going on between Angela and Gabriel (they had always been seen together up until now, and, like I said, expectations of "animated relationships" kind of led me down that path). Even then, I had always found the scene with Gabriel and Ophelia here one that gave me pause. I really wish enough screentime remained to get a sort of stronger "nod" to the fact that THEY were the item (and for the rest of the Archmage+'s travels--they made his plan seem even bigger, and gave a better explanation of his knowledge of Goliath's being alive). But, "what you gonna do?"
The "caption countdown" was something I don't think I noticed, at least not consiously (sp?), the first time around. But it was pretty neat.
We return, finally, to "NOW" and the good guys as they start to come up with a plan. I liked the little moment between the Magus and Katharine after M has his bout of self-pity and K tries to snap him out of it. One wonders if they've had this conversation before. Goliath takes Angela and Gabriel with him for a strike on the Archmage, and suggests to Elisa that she come up with a contingency plan (I'm not sure, but I think my mother may have said, "Smart Goliath."). I like the look on Elisa's face here--the phrase "in case this doesn't work," is never really good, but it has the potential to be very bad.
Then she asks about "the Sleeping King" (and I *know* my mother said, "OOoo, smart Elisa!"). Now, I will admit my ignorance and say that at the time I watched this, my knowledge of Arthurian Legend encompassed only the Disney movie "The Sword in the Stone," a few episodes of the Family Channel's "Prince Valiant," and various pop-culture references. As such, I had no idea about Arthur's connection with Avalon, and in fact had never even heard of Avalon before this (I just liked the sound of the name). So the revelation of who "the Sleeping King" was turned out to be quite a nice surprise for me. (As for my mother...I'm pretty sure she knew who they were talking about--she had read ONCE AND FUTURE KING).
And then the Archmage sees his would-be attackers, and laughs...and quickly vanishes for "To be concluded." I liked that phrase here, actually. It begged the question of how they were going to get out of this mess in so little time.
A cool episode, it served as the centerpiece of the "triptych" (sp?) quite well.

Todd Jensen writes...

My ramble on "Avalon Part Two".

I really liked this episode (and never had any confusion with the time loop, since I've done similar things in my own fiction, conceived years before "Gargoyles" ever came out; indeed, a certain time loop that I've planned in the book that I'm currently writing - although I can't say anything more about it than that - fits beautifully the part where the Archmages say to each other "You're sure you know what to do?" "Of course. I've watched you do it.")

The introduction of Angela and Gabriel's names (alongside the whole "gargoyles being given names" process that you referred to) illustrates nicely just how Princess Katharine and the Magus's attitudes towards gargoyles have changed since "Awakening Part One". Now, they're naming gargoyles after angels rather than villainous giants. (Although, regarding Boudicca's name, as we agreed earlier, they couldn't have been too familiar with the original Boudicca's career when they named the gargoyle beast.)

I picked up easily enough on Angela's parentage (especially because of that article that I mentioned in the "Double Jeopardy" ramble); I never even suspected that Gabriel might be Othello and Desdemona's biological offspring until I discovered Gargoyles fandom on the Internet, though.

I definitely guessed from the start who the Sleeping King was (of course, from the moment that Avalon got into the story, I was hoping that Arthur would show up - and was mentally jumping up and down in excitement when Elisa actually asked about him at the end of Part Two). It's interesting to note that, judging from the Archmage's response, even by the late 10th century in the Gargoyles Universe, Arthur had faded into the mists of legend (of course, the same thing must have been true of him in the real world, judging from what I've read about early mentions of him in medieval writings predating Geoffrey of Monmouth).

About the Weird Sisters: I was more bothered over the Grace vs. Vengeance conflict than the Fate vs. Vengeance one, for my part. I was having a very difficult time reconciling their desire for blood and vengeance with all their talk in "City of Stone" about every life being precious and vengeance being wrong. (It actually made them seem worse than the Archmage, in fact; he, at least, was introduced in the series as a villain from the start, while the Sisters started off appearing to be benevolent. Truth to tell, my response to their behavior in "Avalon" was probably not too different from how Lexington felt in "The Thrill of the Hunt" when he discovered that the Pack weren't quite so heroic as they'd seemed to be).

I agree with you on David Warner's voice; it's great. Definitely justified bringing the Archmage back. (I'm actually reminded of an episode of "Batman Beyond" that I once saw. In it, Bruce Wayne had a reunion with Talia, only to discover that she'd been "taken over" by Reis el-Ghul following his final defeat by Batman (off-stage, some years previous), who'd somehow transferred his consciousness into her body. During the latter part of the episode - after the truth was revealed - Talia spoke in Reis's voice, done by David Warner as per "Batman: TAS". Although I knew that that was scientifically impossible - a mere mind-transplant couldn't have altered her voice - I didn't protest because David Warner did such a great job that he simply had to be in that episode. Leaving him out of the voice actor roster for the story would have been unthinkable.)

And I agree with you that, despite all his power, the Archmage ultimately comes across as not all that bright. (My favorite part is where he has to admit that, although he's spent all that time seeking to unite all three magical objects into one big Triad of Power, he hasn't even decided what he's going to do with it. And he even has to be nudged by his future self into picking the obvious goal for a cliched villain: Taking Over the World.) I LOL when you mentioned that the real reason why the two Archmages can't work together for long was because of their utter arrogance.

The scene where he becomes the "enhanced Archmage", as I call him, was very effective - and the bit where he eats the Grimorum definitely jolted me. It'd been around from the very start of the series, and so it shook me up a bit to see it go. (I know that the book's real end is in Part Three, but for me, the bit where the Archmage eats it is where it exits the series). And I also really liked the "caption countdown". It gave a feel of approaching ominousness and tension.

I'm eagerly awaiting your Part Three ramble now.

Ed writes...

Although I don't really have time to rewatch and ramble to most of the episodes as you do them (at least, not right now), I wanted to respond to one of the questions you posed in your "AVALON PART ONE" ramble.

With regard to denoting 'parts' on continued episodes, I'm massively in favour of it. The conventional wisdom you mention, for me at least, is completely wrong: "part one" tells me that there's something worth watching, or at least more likely to be worth watching, particularly as it's such a rare thing in cartoons, and many television programmes.

Although they were titled separately as I recall, I loved the multi-part stories that Disney did for 'Ducktales' with Gizmoduck and Bubba. I love continuity, and particularly given that the last 'Gargoyles' multi-part outing was 'CITY OF STONE'... well, it was a good move to mark the 'part one' at the beginning.

Ray Kremer writes...

The funny thing about the first time I saw the Avalon trilogy is that I knew next to nothing about Arthurian legend. The name Avalon meant nothing to me and that the "sleeping king" was Arthur came as quite a surprise. And then maybe a month later my high school enlgish class began doing Arthurian legend. When we got to his death a big light went on in my head as everything finally connected. I even asked the teacher if the island of Avalon had any other special significance, half expecting her to say it was the kingdom of Oberon and the fairies.

Heh. That reminds me. Earlier that year we read MacBeth, and since City of Stone had already been on I didn't enjoy the play one bit. Mac as the villian just seemed wrong. Even so, it was the voice of John Rhys-Davies in my head as I read. That classroom had a big poster on one wall displaying the family tree of British royalty through the centuries, and as you might expect I went looking and indeed found MacBeth, Gruoch, Luoch, Gillecomgain, Duncan, and Canmore back in 11th century Scotland.

Blondewookiee writes...

Well I don't really have a question my sister MaryMack has been here a couple of times and says that you were making references to how many licks does it takes to get to the center of a tootsieroll pop, well I know. The number is 1478 approx.

Blaise writes...

AVALON PART ONE

I liked having the "Part 1" addendum to the title. It whetted (sp?) my appetite for a longer and more involved story than usual. Plus, the "To be continued" at the end didn't piss me off nearly so much since I knew it was coming and had mentally prepared for it.
There's so much cool stuff in this episode, I hardly know where to begin. Well, I might as well start at the beginning.
The clan goes out on patrol, minus Bronx, as per usual, and Goliath--a bit of a surprise that. But then, the big G does seem like the type to want to finish book when he gets to the good part. I wonder what exactly it was he was reading (and how miffed was he when it turned out it would be months before he could get back to it?).
Bronx's saddness at not going with the others helped to underline this particular instance. You know, I guess it says something that I never realized how often Bronx was left behind. Well, this time pooch is getting exposure.
The Guardian. I knew it had to be Tom for the same reason I knew Brooklyn was going to be Second-in-Command--Disney Adventures (an article this time, as oppossed to a comic). The article also said that the show would feature gargoyles native to other parts of the world, including (fanfare, please) Avalon! So I had some idea of what to expect there as well. But I will say that Tom the Guardian's entrance was quite impressive. I love his armor, and the way he refers to the lead ruffian as "sirrah."
Laws of TV and movies at work: within about two seconds of the breaking of the store window, the police show up. Two patrol cars, and 2-3 cops on foot (including Morgan). Talk about being in the right place at the right time.
Morgan's interaction with the Guardian is great. Tom's initial accusation of them being lawless undercut by Morgan's identifying himself, and Tom's rather knightly way of submitting to the law. A nice dignified bit until Morgan drops the sword.
Morgan talks to Elisa, and I like the way he describes the Guardian as "differnt, good somehow." Morgan definitely has a rather insightful and perceptive quality to him.
I didn't pick up on the meeting by Belvedere castle as a clue of any kind, unfortunately. Nor did I believe that when Tom was referring to the "eggs" he meant it in the literal sense of the term (after all, gargoyle eggs hatch after ten years (this was in the article, too) so they must have grown at least a little bit).
Let me just finish with the article now--the revelation that gargoyles existed in other parts of the world really excited me. Now the characters were no longer "the last of their kind," so this was something of a new approach in a series for me (I hadn't gotten to see that much of the GUMMI BEARS). This turning upside down of what my expectations had been at the beginning of the series was really fun.
Back to the show, the Guardian eventually mentions the Archmage. This was a complete and total surprise to me. He was dead! How could he come back like this? If I hadn't been hooked already (and I was) this would have clinched it.
The flashback starts. It's interesting to contrast Tom's traveling in the back of the cart with the eggs here to Demona's memory of him sitting up front (aah, it's probably just two different animation studios/storyboards, but I like the idea of a POV prism). Tom's solemnity (sp?) about his vow is rather touching in its way.
I liked the little scene with Tom and the Magus pushing the cart through the rain. They were becoming friends as well, it seems.
First impressions at the dinner: The King was a nice enough gentleman (voiced by Morgan Shepard), while Constantine's brief appearance here was not enough for me to form any opinions about him yet. Finella aroused some distrust in me for some reason...maybe her hollowed cheeks (that's how they looked to me), or the hint of insincerity in her voice when she spoke to the king, OR the scowl she gave when Constantine proposed the toast to Katharine. Anyway, next to her there was Maol Chalvim--who definitely looked more than a little sinister to me. This might have something to do with his sour expression, hollowed face, stylized eyebrows and Xanatosian beard. Suffice to say, their turning out to be "good guys" in this episode surprised me a bit (but the knowledge that Maol Chalvim would kill his cousin and take the throne did not surprise me at all).
I liked that people (at least Maol Chalvim) tended to look askance at Katharine's care for the gargoyle eggs. And Maol Chalvim already suspected Constantine's treachery ("they can smell their own" sort of thing I guess). I liked Constantine's scowl after Maol's thinly veiled insult.
Details. You just gotta love details. The Magus is writing in the Grimorum (the story of his cursing the gargoyles, perhaps?) and stops to look up when Constantine enters. Then he remains in the background while the future-usurper talks with Katharine. He senses the same thing Finella does (not that Constantine does much to hide it).
I love how when Finella mentions the King's proposal of marriage to her, Constantine seems somewhat incredulous that she has not accepted. A telling bit of character that.
Then Constantine murders Kenneth (who saw that coming? *countless hands raise into the air*). I liked how Finella turned out to be a more sympathetic figure here, through her devestation at this turn of events. And Tom (details--the tears down his cheeks) sees it all. I know kids had to grow up more quickly then, but MAN! Seeing that has got to affect a kid, no matter what era.
Scenes of the usurpation occur, and of course show what a jerk Constantine is. Maol Chalvim kills a guard (off-screen, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out what happened), and tries to get Katharine to flee. You're right, Greg, he is rather heroic here actually. I didn't see any smile though, after Katharine tells him to go for the last time. His face registers more a shocked expression. It's still an awkward transistion (especially because you only see it for half a second), but better than a smile.
Constantine tries to force Katharine into marriage, and it's only Mary and Tom that keep the Magus from rushing him (details again, yay!) while Finella runs away in, what seemed to me, a rather embarrassed fasion (one wonders if she, *ahem* gave more to Constantine than that one kiss).
About this scene, where Constantine is crowned, I find a contrast between this and Macbeth's back in CITY OF STONE. When Macbeth did it, I really believed that he meant those words. With Constantine, it seemed more of a PR thing. That could be just because we already knew what those characters were like before they took the oath, but I also think that Ian Buchanan just does good voice work here (and throughout the episode).
RE: The amount of broken crockery. Maybe Tom went and broke it for the plan to work. Or, hey, maybe Constantine and his boys are just a rowdy lot who like to break things (now THAT would be ironic). I like how the "magical glow" begins and ends with the eggs and their dopplegangers.
I loved the romantic moment between the Magus and Katharine in the next scene where he promises to take her beyond the ends of the earth. I did expect them to wind up together. Actually, I kind of expected it from AWAKENING PART 5--his anger there seemed very much like that of a man who lost his love.
Finella shows up and offers her help in the matter. I like her admission that she does it "more to hurt Constantine." True to the character, and a nice moment in an animated series.
Then the Magus tells us the "spiked-cider" plan. Actually, the Magus really gets to shine as a hero in this episode. He comes up with the plan to get the eggs to safety, and then, once Finella is brought in, comes up with the method to get Katharine out of the castle. Throughout all this, he has planned to take them all to Avalon, and when the Weird Sisters block their path, he is able to defeat them, not just with magic, but by skillfully weilding the steering pole as well. And then, for love, he gives up his magic book. It really isn't surprising that a fair number of fans really like this guy. Once he got past that "bigot" problem, he could be quite dashing and romantic (then again, since some folks take the same view of Brooklyn, maybe it's got something to do with Jeff Bennett).
I liked how Finella offered to take the book. This was a surprisingly noble gesture on her part. And not one that I expected. And then Mary offers to stay with her. I love her line, "One woman alone could get into trouble. TWO women can cause plenty of it." Mary is an interesting character. Like Katharine, once she got past the "bigot" problem she was quite a good judge of character. Also quite daring in her own right. I hadn't even noticed Kath Soucie voiced Mary until...I want to say the credits, but when Mary said "I'll stay with Finella" I half-thought that came from Katharine (leaving me very confused), until Mary's image popped up on the screen again. So that was how I figured they were both voiced by the same woman. Still, excellent work otherwise. Kind of sad that Mary and Tom had to separate, but then too, boys tended to become men much earlier in those days.
Back in the present, the Guardian spells out the time difference (fair enough) and Goliath asks about the Archmage, mentioning how that cad died before Tom was even born (a nod to continuity I was grateful for). Then we get to Avalon, and get our first glimpse of the new clan. I think I only recognized that we had a female, a male, and a beast, before Goliath's surprised face filled the screen. And excellent little cliffhanger that left me eager for the next episode as well.

Entity writes...

AVALON, PART ONE

I agree with Todd that, in principle, I like that you identified the multi-parters as such. Looking back, it feels more honest and manageable that way. But I gotta admit, upon the FIRST viewing, the labeling always made "Part One" stick out. Once you knew it was a multi-parter, you set yourself up for something big, so it was less fluid. For instance, in "Avolon, Part One," I knew it was a multi-parter, so when they arrive at the shore of Avalon and glimpse the "eggs" I don't blow soda out of my nose, but rather say, "Oh, so they're finally getting around to tieing up that loose-end about the Wyvern eggs. Cool." For me, at least, the honesty of telling the viewer ahead of time that it is going to be a multi-parter "spoiled" me, so that I expected something big, rather than getting it rewarded to me.

Todd Jensen writes...

My thoughts on "Avalon Part One".

First off, a little about the eggs. I honestly hadn't expected to see anything further with the eggs at this point. The reason was that I'd always assumed that the eggs were indeed all gone, as Xanatos had claimed in "Awakening Part Two", even after we found out what he was really like, for this simple reason: the thousand years between the Wyvern Massacre and the Awakening. Since I didn't think it likely that gargoyles live naturally for a thousand years, my assumption always was that the eggs had hatched long ago and that the gargoyles that had hatched from them had grown up, lived out their lives, and died long before as well. I hadn't taken into account the possibility of a place where time moved slower.

(Of course, thinking over it some more, I should have expected the eggs to return, simply because, if they weren't going to, their inclusion to date would have been almost pointless. After all, they'd had no real impact on the storyline in "Awakening" - the mere fact that the video version was able to edit them out is proof enough of that - so that would have to mean that something further with them would have to be done, or else why include them in "Awakening" at all?)

Regarding your multi-parter comments: I also prefer it when the first episode of a multi-parter clearly labels itself as "Part One". That way, I'm already prepared for the "To Be Continued" part. So I'm glad that you always labeled the multi-parters as such.

I was a bit amused to notice the Brigadoon alternative to Avalon, in light of the fact that you did manage to use Brigadoon as the Avalon-substitute in your "Gargoyles meet Captain Atom" story. And, yep, I was definitely looking out for King Arthur to show up at some point in this story, given that the thing that Avalon is most famous for is being his resting-place. (More about that in my ramble on Part Two when it comes).

Needless to say, I enjoyed the flashback. More 10th century Scotland! And more real Scottish history! In some ways, it was even more fun than the Macbeth backstory in "City of Stone"; after all, I already knew about the historical Macbeth before "Gargoyles" ever came out, but I'd never heard of Kenneth II and Constantine III before. After seeing this episode, I eagerly looked up everything on them that I could at the local library (although I wasn't able to find much, thanks to the scanty records for this part of Scottish history).

Constantine definitely struck me as shrewd when he provided a very convincing "innocent reason" for the secret meeting in the drying-house (the argument that it would be better for Kenneth's dignity to have Finella turn down his suit in private, rather than before his entire court). I thought he made a good antagonist here, even if for only one episode.

(I haven't seen the McKellen "Richard III" movie, by the way, but I do have a book that McKellen wrote about the making of it, including the screenplay, which I found fascinating reading.)

I also liked the mention of Michaelmas, which added to the medieval flavor of the story. (It's things like this that make me regret the fact that you never got to make the "Dark Ages" spin-off. Of course, I suppose that an animated series set entirely in 10th century Scotland wouldn't be all that commercially viable, more's the pity.)

I'm looking forward to your rambles on Part Two and Part Three, as well.

Blaise writes...

THE PRICE

I really like this ep. I liked it when I first saw it and I still like it now.
It's nice to have Hudson in the spotlight again, and Xanatos' quest for immortality is expanded upon while, just for good measure, we get a greater glimpse into Owen's character. Yeesh! Quite a lot stuffed into this ep.
I didn't begin to guess that "Macbeth" wasn't the real deal until the second time he appeared. His "Trophies" line, though not in character for the old Scottish noble, as Todd pointed out, seemed to me like it could have just been something of a joke. But when he showed up the second time, and repeated a line he had said before, in the exact same way, I began to figure out he/it was a robot. I did love how it "died"--Goliath punching his arm straight through its gut, and then the eye-pop, as the voice runs down, followed by a final explosion! I loved it.
When "Hudson" didn't wake up along with the other gargoyles, I was completely convinced that we were seeing the real Hudson under another magic spell. I had not read the Disney Adventures comic by Mr. Nordling, and consequently suspected nothing. At the end of Act I, I did indeed see Hudson's appearance in the cage as taking place within his mind. It wasn't until Act II had begun, and I saw the strange floor underneath the cage (not to mention the appearance of Xanatos and Owen), that I realized here was the real Hudson, and the one the other's were looking after was a decoy.
Hudson and Xanatos did have some great interaction here. I don't know about them being better adversaries than Goliath and (David) Xanatos, but there is something there. I think Hudson can figure out what really scares Xanatos because he himself is already there (the possibility that he was the last survivor of his generation even before the massacre leads to a certain viewpoint on the inevitability of death). Also, they throw their own quips and insults back and forth quite a bit.
Then too, there's Hudson's attitude towards Xanatos' plans. When X takes the stone skin, Hudson just asks "So, are ya through with me?" This is interesting because Goliath's most probable reaction, IMHO, would be to ask what game Xanatos was playing now. And at the end, Goliath would have probably destroyed the cauldron to keep Xanatos from any power it might bestow (and possibly just to spite X as well). Hudson, however, doesn't see any point to destroying the cauldron, and just wants to go home. He even shares a profound thought with Xanatos. And Xanatos, for his part, let's Hudson go in a rather honorable fashion. As I said, I don't know if they're "better natural adversaries" than Goliath and David, but Hudson and X do have an undeniable dynamic here.
Somehow, I knew that Goliath would suggest trying to seek out Demona at some point. I mean, she is the only sorceress they know of. I liked how that was worked in--a last resort sort-of thing.
Broadway's turning to stone in mid-air was something I had been waiting for. Well, not Broadway specifically, but one of the gargoyles, of course--it had to happen sooner or later. I kind of figured the box on the crane had something in it to save BW from shattering, but personally, I would have preferred "Extra Comfy-Soft Mattresses" (sp?) to the rolled up Persian rugs. Eh, minor quibble.
I didn't much care that the Hudson statue was blown up because I already knew about Hudson's being alive. I did, however, like the way the various reactions were portrayed. Goliath's rage was awesome. One of his most chilling moments in the series.
The "semi-Wind Ceremony" for Hudson, was nicely done, and nicely undercut by the old codger himself. I also liked his little remark about the head. On that track, I always enjoyed the way Hudson escaped from Xanatos and all ("Swordless maybe, helpless NEVER!"--too cool).
Although I thought Owen was cool, this episode was the one that really impressed me in regards to his character. I was completely stupefied when Owen just went up and dunked his arm into the Cauldron, resulting in it turning to stone. He had been permanently changed. Another one of the cool things about GARGOYLES: changes occur and cannot be reversed. I silently applauded the episode for daring to do this with one of its characters.
Of course, this aired out of order in my area, and although I missed THE CAGE, I saw DOUBLE JEOPARDY after this and noted that Owen's left hand was still flesh. Although I considered this a possible oversight, maybe somewhere at the back of my mind I realized that this just aired early, so I didn't mind too much.
OTHER NOTES: Lot's of fun lines and exchanges here. All those already mentioned, as well as the following between Brooklyn and Lexington:
LEX: "The city sure is different when it snows."
BROOK: "Yeah. It's colder."
I still laugh at that.
When Macbeth's guns were manned by Banquo and Fleance, the old man's mansion got pretty shot up in the ensuing fight. This time however, run by a computer, the mansion did not seem to sustain a single hit. Still, the cannons did shoot each other, so...nevermind.
I don't think I even realized that Brooklyn had said the word "Jalapena" until after I had watched PROTECTION (which had aired after this) and this one a second time. The first time around, I guess I just ignored it because I couldn't really understand it.
When "Macbeth" dies the first time, and Goliath says "I had no choice," Hudson calmly brushes the incident (and some of the dust) off. I like this sort of reasonableness about Hudson. He shows he's defintely more of the "old soldier," the 10th century warrior even, than the younger gargoyles in the clan. Incidentally, I never thought Hudson was going to die in this episode. That might have been me being tv-savvy...or just in denial.
And I thought the animation was spectacular (though the shadows in the beginning did make it look almost as though Goliath had a moustache (sp?).
At any rate, a wonderful episode.

Todd Jensen writes...

My own ramble on "The Price".

You mentioned in the course of your ramble a number of misconceptions that first-time viewers of this one could have had; I'll confess that, the first time that I saw "The Price", I fell victim to all of them!

1. I thought at first that Hudson might actually die in this episode, between the name of it and Goliath's line in the "Previously on Gargoyles" section about how Hudson had years ahead of him to live. I was relieved to see that Hudson doesn't actually pay the price (although Owen does, in a different sense, but I'll get to that later).

2. I thought at first that Macbeth really had turned Hudson to stone (and, when you stop to think it over, it probably wasn't too difficult to dupe the audience into believing it, thanks to the fact that we already knew that it was possible to trap a gargoyle in his stone sleep, with the Magus in "Awakening").

3. Since I knew that only Demona could kill Macbeth, I wasn't surprised at all by the fact that Macbeth "returned from the grave", to battle the clan again, and thought that he'd survived because it was Goliath who "slew" him rather than Demona.

4. And when I first saw Hudson in the cage, I thought that it was a metaphor for the spell imprisoning him. Even after Xanatos and Owen showed up, I initially thought that they were just "metaphors", like Xanatos being the shape of the Xanatos Program in "Legion". But I soon understood otherwise.

I did get suspicious about "Macbeth" in this episode, though, not so much from the "only a few lines", as from the fact that he appeared to be acting out-of-character here. I found it hard to believe that Macbeth really would go gargoyle-hunting just for the sake of a few trophies; that motivation was more appropriate to, say, the Pack. I could buy the notion of Macbeth going after the gargoyles again, but for a cause much bigger than just something to have stuffed and mounted. (Especially since, after "City of Stone", I'd become quite fond of him). So the "robot revelation" worked for me.

I also get a kick out of the scene where Xanatos acquired a bit of Hudson's stone skin. Just one of those moments that makes it so hard not to have a sneaking admiration for the man. "There, that wasn't so hard now, was it?"

This is the episode where we learn about Xanatos's desire for immortality, but it occurs to me that we also get a hint of it in "City of Stone", where Demona dupes Xanatos into thinking that the effect of her spell is to steal one minute of life from everybody who watches it, which she can use to augment their life-spans.

I very much enjoyed the interplay between Hudson, Xanatos, and Owen (I honestly hadn't thought that "The Price" helped lead to Puck's use of Xanatos and Hudson slaying each other in "Future Tense" prior to your ramble, I must admit), which certainly had some fine moments there. Like many viewers, I particularly found interesting the fact that Hudson wasn't interested in destroying the Cauldron of Life, but just in regaining his freedom. And also how Xanatos lets him escape from the castle on the grounds of "he's earned it".

Of course, the biggie here is Owen getting his hand turned to stone. That was one bit that definitely got my attention, because of the permanent change to a major character. (Interestingly enough, I didn't pay that much attention to the characters' response to the stone hand, maybe because I was too busy dealing with the mere physical change to pay attention to the fact that Owen was just staring at it. In fact, it wasn't until "The Gathering Part One" that I started to really suspect the truth about Owen, but that's another story.) Still, you've got to admit that it beats being turned into an anthropomorphic aardvark. :)

Entity writes...

THE PRICE

This is one of my all-time favorite episodes. The revelation that Macbeth was an android was done with astounding grace. I didn't realize he was a robot until Goliath's arm literally went through him. And then when I did realize, I didn't feel cheated, because it made sense out of everything (why he would be working for Xanatos, why he kept repeating those same four lines, why he had become such a narrow-minded character all of a sudden).

In general, I watched GARGOYLES with a jaded perspective. I kept waiting for it to become the run-of-the-mill, hackneyed cartoon series. I did this because I was so terrified of the show becoming that. So, when it appeared Macbeth was being used as a stock antagonist, I rolled my eyes. When it looked like we were supposed to be fooled into thinking Macbeth really died and then being surprised when he returned, I rolled my eyes. When it all made sense, it kind of restrengthened my resolve in the show.

I didn't expect Hudsun to leave without doing anything to the Cauldron. That was well-done. I was also left with my mouth hanging open when Owen stonified his arm.

My only complaints about this episode are that I think your original hunches were better on. We should've seen Banquo and Fleance at Macbeth's, and Broadway shouldn't have gotten frozen in stone in mid-air. The rescue was too hard to believe. I noticed and appreciated Elisa not hitting the cable on the first shot, but it was still too convenient, and really, it was a distraction. Hudson was the one in jeopardy this episode, not Broadway.

But none of that matters. Macbeth was a robot. I don't think another scene had me in more shock, short of when Elisa seemed to fall to her death in HUNTER'S MOON.

pizza girl writes...

dear greg, i have oftin wondered if there is a behgining to the end of the real show like right after the last episode i see all these new carectors in the fanfic and am lost is there a begining to all the new carectors? thanx!

Todd Jensen writes...

My ramble on "The Cage".

I quite liked this episode, especially since I'd been wondering a little over what happened to the Mutates after "Metamorphosis"; oddly enough, the one whom I was really wondering over was Maggie more than Talon. (Part of it was that I always had a strong sense of sympathy for Maggie, finding herself suddenly and unexpectedly "drafted" into a "war" that she didn't even suspect was taking place when she came to New York, and feeling much more the "ordinary person" in all of this than Derek/Talon did. I especially found myself wondering whether she'd find a cure, and even, at the climax, was half-expecting her to get cured when she took the phial from Sevarius.)

Regarding the identity of Sevarius's kidnapper: I honestly don't recall for certain what I thought the first time that I saw this episode. But Goliath as the kidnapper did make sense, given that he had the motive. I thought that the interaction between Goliath and Elisa over that act was well-done.

I hadn't really thought that Claw's muteness was in part a way of saving on voice actors (though it does make sense) - a lot of that comes, in part, from the fact that my writing has always been of the "written page" variety as opposed to the so that I've never had to give serious consideration to the logistics for writing for television (or the movies, for that matter), where you do have to concern yourself with things such as actor availability or actors needing to be paid. I saw his muteness more in terms of the cornerstone of his characterization (assuming that it's based on the shock and horror of his situation). I hadn't noticed before now that Diane doesn't speak in the episode, by the way.

I share your enjoyment and delight in Xanatos's lines such as "He's the scientist; you're just the experiment. Oh, hello, Goliath, almost didn't see you there." Definitely ranks among Xanatos's all-time great lines. Another of my favorites is Sevarius's "Nothing is so annoying as having someone watching over my shoulder" (though, frankly, I'm a little surprised that he actually dared speak that way to Goliath!)

The ending with the Mutates and Mazas is a lovely one, and it is nice to see Talon's family still accepting him despite his condition. Not to mention the shot of Goliath watching with an approving smile behind the curtain.

As for the "cage symbolism", I honestly hadn't picked up on it all the way until now. It's nice to know about that at last.

Blaise writes...

THE CAGE

Like METAMORPHOSIS and later, KINGDOM, I missed this episode the first time it aired. I did see it after METAMORPHOSIS though, and the rest of the second season (sans KINGDOM). Consequently, I had already become familiar with Vinnie in VENDETTAS, and had seen the new designs of the Mutates in THE RECKONING. Even though I had seen Claw in FUTURE TENSE, I wasn't sure if he was the same character as the "Tiger Mutate" because he didn't have wings. Fang in a jail cell...didn't surprise me. Having seen the way he liked his new form at the end of METAMORPHOSIS, I kind of figured he was a ne'er-do-well. Regardless, I was *extremely* happy to see this "lost chapter" in the series.
Even after having seen VENDETTAS, I still remained convinced that it was Talon who had kidnapped Sevarius. I think it was the kidnapping-sillohuette (sp?) that sold me--it looked enough like Talon in my eyes. And I remained convinced until I saw the image on Vinnie's security screen.
Speaking of which, it was fun watching Vinnie here, even in hindsight.
I had seen Beth Maza first in CLOUD FATHERS, so her appearance here had less impact on me than it probably would have, but she had some nice moments (especially the reminisce (sp?) about Derek).
I did rather like the new character designs (and my Mom, who has a thing for black panthers, *loves* Talon). I also like that Maggie tries to be the peacemaker in the first battle.
Actually there's a lot of interesting things about Maggie in this episode. Even though she's not a "warrior" she is confident enough to disagree with Talon, something she does in the beginning fight, when Talon accuses Goliath of being in cahoots with Sevarius, and at the end when Talon is ready to kill the doctor regardless of the chance for a cure.
Her interaction with the gargoyles themselves presents some fascinating qualities. She's openly apologetic to Hudson when Fang and Claw capture him and Bronx, and seems rather quiet around all the others...except Brooklyn. He is the *only* one in this episode who she becomes angry or confrontational with. I really like this. It's like a holdover from their first encounter, and has her actually arguing against Brooklyn for the idea she had disagreed with in the first place (especially when his thoughts threaten the hope that Xanatos will cure her). Also, it strikes me that the ease with which Maggie can confront Brooklyn is an indication that he is...more familiar to her, maybe? She just seems (to me) to act far less awkward around him. Of course, she did take him out with an electric bolt a month and more back.
As for Brooklyn, he really showed his maturity in this ep. He does not make a decision based on his crush here, and his letting Maggie and the rest go free probably went farther towards gaining their trust than trying to argue with them about Xanatos (well, Maggie and Claw anyway, Fang was out cold).
Re: Talon and Maggie's relationship. I saw it happen pretty much right when she glided down to stand between Talon and Elisa & Goliath. The way they talked to each other, the way they touched each other--it's amazing how close a couple can become when they've got nothing to rely on but each other (and two others, one who doesn't talk and other who talks too much) for several weeks.
Sevarius (and unfortunately, Greg, the misspelled briefcase was never corrected) is a lot of fun in this ep. We see him at the mercy of a gargoyle again, and he has some fun lines here ("I dislike having to work with someone hanging over my shoulder--Oh, wonderful, now there's two of you!"). My brother (who watched this with me the first time) loved one sequence in particular: in the third Act, when Goliath and Elisa are having their heart-to-heart, Sevarius is in the background mixing chemicals that frequently produce small explosions of green smoke. Fun!
Fang I had already known at length before, so it didn't surprise me that he was a bit of a jerk to Claw and abrasive with everyone else. What surprised me was that, despite this, he seemed rather chummy with them all (especially at the end) and never even argued with Talon. Maybe he did like being part of the group at first, and didn't have a bone to pick with Talon as long as he was sent to beat people up.
I finally got to learn more about Claw, too. I liked that his muteness was a result of trauma from the transformation.
Goliath and Elisa stay true to their personalities. Even when I found out that Goliath was the one who kidnapped Sevarius, I didn't feel for a minute that it was out of character for "our hero." I had never thought that Goliath's behavior here was a sort of indicator of what he would be like in EYE OF THE STORM, but it certainly makes sense. I did like Goliath's spying on the happy reunion at the end. It's not often you get to see the big guy smiling like that.
It's both frustrating and cool the way Xanatos dupes Derek. You'd think Derek would be more likely to at least investigate the claims of his sister (whom he's known his whole life) as oppossed to a man he's known personally for less than a year. But Derek, in addition to being blinded by rage may be in a bit of denial. Maybe he's still not entirely ready to admit that he was wrong about Xanatos? On the other hand, Xanatos is just that good. Before even mentioning the "placebo" Xanatos reinforces the idea in Derek's mind that Goliath is in cahoots with Sevarius. And Owen of course picks up on it ("It appears Sevarius *left* with Goliath").
There's an animation moment that I really like: when Owen is scanning the computer for labs that Talon might have taken Sevarius to, the readout is reflected in his glasses.
In contrast,an animation moment that bugs me: twice at the clocktower, once while fighting Brooklyn, and again when he's hanging unconcious between Maggie and Claw, Fang is inexplicably replaced with Talon. It just so mars otherwise good moments.
During the fight at the tower, I love it when Brooklyn uses the clock hand to get the jump on Fang. He looks so neat doing that.
On the subject of fights, Goliath and Talon's skirmish in the Labyrinth always puzzles me. Goliath seems to fare pretty poorly in the fight, more than I would have expected from him. I sometimes wonder if maybe Goliath was hesitant to hurt Elisa's brother.
The finale in which Xanatos finally reveals himself to Talon is, without a doubt, one of the highlights of the series. Talon of course has one of those great realizations of betrayal and irony ("I trusted you! You turned me into a monster and I defended you!"). And Xanatos...doesn't gloat, doesn't patronize, he just states simple facts. And then, half-surprised half-cheerful, acknowledges Goliath. This is an antagonist for the ages.
I liked the moment when Maggie was willing to take the potion, and Talon talks her out of it. It's a great individual character & relationship moment. I really enjoy it.
Of course Goliath offers to have the Mutates join his clan. I knew that Goliath would do something like that (again, he's staying true to his personality). I also, already knew that Talon and co. wouldn't be part of the clan proper (from seeing later episodes), but I was still surprised at how the Mutates decided to stick out on their own.
It was pleasant to have a rather upbeat ending in Derek's story for a change. I was glad (and maybe a little surprised) at how the Maza family was able to deal with this change in their son. It's just so good to see such a strong family, I guess.
It was several viewings before I really noticed the open cage at the end and got the symbolism. Regardless, I liked it.
Despite some animation problems, this is a really good episode.

Cristian Alvernaz writes...

Just got finished reading your ramblings on the Gargs episodes. WOW is all I can say, reading those has rekindled what I love about this wonderful show you've given us. I know some of these are a little over due, but they were going thru my mind as I was reading here we go.

UPGRADE- This episode actually kept me up at night the first time I saw it. I, like Dingo, was disgusted emotionally of they wy the pack treated their bodies. Wolf was just physically changed, but Jackal and Hayena were down right freaky, there was very little left that was actually human (I'm guessing Jackal's head and Hayena's torso & head). a reocurring mental image was the garbage bags containing their bodies callously tossed into the GEN-U-TECH dump. Really freaky stuff.Yes, I always had considered Brok the second in command.

HIGH NOON- A personal fav. As was intended, I got that feeling of "whoah, THREE villains!" and continue to feel that way every time I see it, maybe just cause we didn't see Coldstone all that often, and he's one of my favorite characters. Comming off of City of Stone I was baffled as to why Demona and Macbeth were working together, but I came to the conclusion that they were under the control of the Weird Sisters. The "comming battle" line at the end intrigued me, my friend ws baffled by it, even beyon watching Avalon he was expecting some monstrous epic brawl, I feel the line referred directly to their machinations with the Archmage. I feel the toy of Coldstone helps to establish more the re-animated stone cause his actual skin was all cracked, a truly morbid thought indeed! I still the CS toy was the best one released followed by Bronx.

CITY OF STONE- Great episode, but I was put off by the first showing of Macbeth feeling Demona's pain. I didn't gather it, honestly ,I thought it was an animation error the first time. After re-watching it I'm like "ahhhh I get it now , those smart guy have thought of everything!" Also, I took note of Owen recognising the wrong spell, tho it took some time for the payoff, I did catch it.

The Mirror- Another fav. what can I say, it was perfect, I love it when the Gargs use their "extra" limbs for other things, like Demona's tail poking Puck and Goliath's wing in HighNoon. The only thing that was odd to me was when Demona, holding Puck with her wings, hovers into the subway. Upon re-watching I hear the sound effect of Puck hovering her , but I didn't catch this the first time.

Vows- I wish the animation was a liitle better in depicting the difference of older characters than it was, I mena Hudson had the obvious eye thing , y.Demona didn't have the arm jewelry and was thinner, and Goliath was only thinner and happier sounding. No biggie tho. I love how time travel was handled on the show, it always made perfect sence to me, leaving me explaining it to my friends (one of them STILL doesn't understnd how Gryff showed up!) Xanatos was awesome in this one! Fox's dress was reaaalllllyy low cut in the back, that's probably why their clothes were react to as such, she was real close to flashing some behind (not that I'd complain!

EYE OF THE BEHOLDER- I missed this one and cought it next re-run. Was it just me or was the animation during Act2 diferent from Acts 1&3? I liked Xanatos' variation of the armor. I was also shocked that you were able to get away with Fox not wearing anything, really interesting ;]. Of course watching this one in re-run I was spoiled to the notion that the Eye of Odin was important by the Avalon arc, but I would've noticed it anyway, the Edge was my bros' all time fav episode.

Keep em' coming and I'll keep enjoying them. now, because I'm kinda lazy, is Gargoyles 2198 merely an idea that is being pitched around or is it something more? Thanks alot!

Blaise writes...

PROTECTION

I'll be honest and say that this isn't one of my favorite episodes. Of course, in the initial airing that may have largely been the result of not having my favorite garg (Brooklyn) even appearing. And while I have definitely gotten over that, I think I really would have appreciated at least some mention of where the others were at this time (even if only "They're out on patrol...with Bronx").
Even then, there are a few other things that put me off. Broadway's "mobster lingo" for one. I'm sure some may find it humorous, and it is in keeping with Broadway's character, no doubt about that, but I just cringe every time he talks like that. I suppose I may have liked it better if there had been shots of the other characters reacting to it--Dracon and gang looking perplexed, Elisa embarrassed, and Goliath...well, the stoic look works for him.
There were other bits and pieces of dialogue that didn't really work for me, and they usually run along the lines of "stereotypical cops & mobsters" phrases (Elisa and Glasses get a few of that). On the other hand, I don't have any better suggestions for dialogue, so that's how much my two cents are worth.
And chalk me up as another one who didn't think Elisa had gone bad or was a clone (or even suspected that she was being framed--her telling Pal Joey that "Dracon's territory is [her] territory" led me to believe that she was the "lady cop" Glasses had been talking about...a conclusion I had already drawn when Glasses mentioned it).
All that said, this ep has gotten better with age for me, and there are quite a few nice things in it.
Elisa's clothes were a plus. I loved seeing her in something a little more..."fun," I guess you could say.
And while there may have been dialogue I didn't like, there was a fair amount that I did find enjoyable. Most of the one's that you listed, Greg, but also some that I like mostly because of the way the actor's read them:
Elisa: (as Goliath and Broadway attack) "Oh, not now!"
Dracon: (after Elisa has introduced Dracon to the gargoyles) "We've met."
Pal Joey: "Knock out the people, blow up the building: simple." (Gotta love that guyes ease when it comes to mob work.)
There are also some animation moments I like--standouts being Elisa's facial reactions when Dracon drapes his arm around her shoulders, and Goliath's gripping his belt at the end of Act 2 (you don't see him do that often).
Character-wise, the one's that are presented are still enjoyable. Goliath's outrage at the perversion of "protection" was something I didn't fully appreciate until later viewings. For a gargoyle that lives up to the ideals of his people, that's got to be something akin to blasphemy. [Note: I had not read Todd's comments when I wrote this, but I am in full agreement with him here.]
I loved Matt's interaction with Jaffe as well (and I could kick myself for not getting the "tilting at windmills" reference right off the bat). I also smile at how Matt looks in his disguise.
The whole supporting cast is enjoyable. Art and Lois are a nice introductory couple, and I love Art's defiance, how he almost names Dracon, only to be talked down, grudgingly, by Lois. A nice contrast in personalities, and you really feel sorry that their business of 30-years was gone in an instant.
I think Dracon, while not the mightiest of the garg's adversaries, has some enjoyable character aspects. Mostly, his chutzpah (sp?)--in his first appearance he took on Xanatos, here...he pats Goliath on the shoulder (I love G's growl). Glasses and Pal Joey are also unique, each in their own ways. I noticed Dracon's quiet insult to Glasses about how he's obviously not "the man in charge." You highlighted an interesting difference between Dracon and Xanatos, Greg--Dracon treats his henchmen in a fashion closer to a "normal" animated villain. Of course, he doesn't have the normal animated sidekicks--Glasses is more intelligent, and Pal Joey more ruthless. Seriously, Pal Joey really makes an impression here; his attitude during the interrogation, his "professional" demeanor in attmepting to blow up the laundromat, all very cool.
I didn't figure out who the laundromat owners were until after they dropped their act. :)
Dracon getting the drop on Elisa in the general store was a bit of a stretch, but I love that Elisa extricated herself from it and KICKED DRACON'S GANGERSTER @$$! I also loved it when she stuck it to Dracon about his habit of calling her "sugar."
One thing I saw in my first viewing that I really liked was the fact that Dracon's being out of jail was at least brought up. In a show like BATMAN, you don't mind that the villains just appear out on the streets again without an explanation, but in GARGOYLES, Xanatos kind of set a precedent. Bottom line, I was glad that at least some explanation was given for why Dracon was free to run business as usual.
Watching Broadway racing against the bomb's timer is always a nice sequence for me, and it still gets me how he just barely escapes the explosion.
I really liked Goliath's speech to Dracon when he had the jerk in the air. I hadn't really picked up on the clue of Goliath's eyes losing their "anger-glow," but I did find it a neat image all the same.
I also loved Goliath's, "I will protect you, you will protect me, and together we will protect this city." That was a line that really hit me.
As for the whole "Jalapena" thing...eh, it didn't leave too great an impression on me except for Goliath's one at the end. It did make for a cheesy, but somewhat fun way to finish the ep. I hadn't expected it to appear as a curse word throughout the rest of the series. I do agree that the gargs should have found some sort of substitute swear word, but I would have loved something with a more...gaelic (sp?) sound, maybe?
Anyway, while its not at the top of my list, there are things to like in this episode.

Todd Jensen writes...

My "ramble" about "Protection".

I'll admit that this isn't one of my favorite ones (more out of my personal tastes, I suppose, than anything else), although a few parts of it did stand out to me. Especially Goliath's disgust that Dracon would actually call his extortion racket "protection" (and indeed, to him, that misuse of the word would be approaching blasphemy).

Looking back on my "first-time response", I know that I definitely didn't think that the "Elisa gone bad" was a clone (maybe because the story concept here was so obviously a mundane one - Dracon, the most "mundane" of the recurring antagonists running an extortion racket - that such a notion just didn't occur to me). I'm not sure if I thought that it was a frame-up; what I do know is that I was surprised to see Elisa acting that way, and it made sense to me when it turned out that she was just acting. (I noticed that Goliath believed that she'd been placed under a spell - his 10th century upbringing naturally at work again here - but that Broadway made the correct realization almost at once.)

One nice touch during the "acting" scene for Pal Joey's benefit: Chavez mentioning about how Elisa's been acting strange lately - I can't help wondering whether she really was wondering about that at the time. (It certainly had the advantage of making the "acting" less obvious to the audience).

I've occasionally wondered just how much Dave knew about what was really going on when Elisa was visiting him in the pool hall. Did he really believe that Elisa was a crooked cop?

One other favorite part: the bit where Dracon asks Goliath if Elisa's his woman (just goes to show that he may be a crook, but he's not blind), then starts patting him on the shoulder, commenting on how he's got good taste - Goliath glowers at him for that familiarity, and Tony hurriedly retreats. (I can't say that I blame him, but I'm amazed that he was actually daring to pat Goliath to begin with).

Broadway lets out another rude crude belch while helping himself to the jalapena peppers. Though it's the last one that I can recall in the series.

I couldn't help but think that Matt looked almost hopelessly geeky in his grocery clerk disguise. Jaffe's "tilting at windmills" line reminded me of your remark about how "quixotic" is a very good word to describe Matt (I recall that I initially used it in my comments about his pursuit of the Illuminati).

We also find out how Dracon keeps on showing up again in spite of his getting arrested each time in the previous episode - though obviously, in light of his being behind bars at the beginning of "Turf", there are limits to what even his lawyers can do.

It's really great to have the rambles going again. I'm eagerly awaiting the next one.

Blaise writes...

UPGRADE

Ah, yes. The one where Brooklyn officially becomes Second-in-Command and the Pack become (for lack of a better term) bona-fide supervillains.
First off, I'll say that all the animation errors you mentioned, Greg, were eventually corrected--on my tape Fox's lips do move, and Goliath follows in pursuit of the Coyote head (I don't know about the Dingo hitting his head twice thing; never noticed that...or the glitch with the head/full-robot so that reveal still worked for me).
Anyway, when the Pack robs the bank, I kind of felt it was sort of "pathetic" for them as well, and I somehow KNEW Dingo would comment on it in that way. Actually, Dingo always seemed to be a bit distanced from the rest in one way or another. I mean, in his first appearance he didn't leave too much of an impression on me (I couldn't even remember his name), but then he's revealed to have fled to Europe while Jackal and Hyena stayed behind. Then, in LEADER OF THE PACK, he's Coyote's accomplice from the beginning, and the only one besides the robot to take down a gargoyle during the fight at the studio. Here, even in the first Act, Dingo is the one most disgusted with the Pack's current status, the one who figures out how to turn the tide in the beginning battle (which I'll get to in a bit), and, as Hyena points out, the only one to get away with any money. So even before the titular upgrade, Dingo kind of seemed the odd-man out of the group.
The Pack's battle with the gargoyles is interesting to me mostly because of how thoroughly Broadway trashes Jackal. I mean, he claws him across the chest, and then after recovering from a weapon blast, jumps on Jackal, pounds him a few times, and hurls him against the hull of the Pack Attack vehicle. Neat (in a brutal sort of way).
Well, the Pack gets away and a wounded Goliath is taken back to the Clocktower. Here comes the "it's time to choose a second in command" scene. I just knew that Goliath would try to make Hudson that ('cause that just seems like Goliath), but that eventually it would come down to the Trio.
Now, I had read that original comic in the Disney Adventures magazine that came out back in October of 1994, and it literally referred to Brooklyn as Goliath's Second in Command. So I pretty much knew who'd end up getting the job. However, I hadn't paid much attention to Brooklyn's "displays of leadership" before this episode. He really was the de facto leader of the Trio, and this episode does show his leadership capabilities in handling situations.
Back with the Pack...and Coyote. I just loved its nonchalant (sp?), "May I come in?" A robot with style--definite Xanatos style.
One note, despite the difference in appearance I kind of figured that the mutate shown in Coyote's pitch was Talon. I guess he must have gone back to Xanatos by this time.
I never realized before that Owen was absent from this episode. Having read your memo to Gilad, I now understand why that was--as cool as the guy is, he would have been a bit superfluous.
A month passes (which surprised me--the first major jump of time *within* an acutal episode), and while the Trio are away, Goliath and the rest meet up with the new and improved Pack. I was not really expecting what showed up, even with the robot's pitch. Dingo's initial appearance was a surprise, followed by Jackal, who inspired a sort-of "should have known" feeling when he revealed himself as a cyborg. Then Hyena gave me the creeps with her jumping and cackling, and finally Wolf in all his beastiality showed up and pretty much capped off the whole thing. A lot of fun touches here, the line about the Archmage, Hudson's referring to Wolf as a "forest demon," and Jackal's arm revealing a life of its own.
Dingo distinguishes himself even further with his disdain and horror at his comrades (maybe it's because he was the only one with dignity or humanity left, but I really jived with Dingo in this ep).
Coyote appears, bigger and badder than before, and Hyena starts up her infatuation with him again. It is "sicker than usual" as Jackal says, but also a lot of fun.
When the Trio reconnoiter (sp?) at the Clocktower, it always surprised me that Broadway stopped the most crime that night (and he of course follows it up with his modest "Just gotta know where to look"). I don't know why--maybe I'm a closet size-ist (or my "Brooklyn-fan" mind-set was kicking in).
Wolf still has it out for Goliath. This is a very interesting aspect of his character the more that I think about it. More than any other gargoyle, Wolf has singled out the big "alpha male," if you will. I just find it fascinating right now.
Returning to the Trio, we have a (for me at least) fun scene with Broadway zinging Lex's musing, and Fox's fun commercial. I just love the way Laura San Giacomo read that--just as I love Jeff Bennett's "She's talking to us."
It was at about this point that I FINALLY picked up on the "game" X&F were playing. Again, style for the both of them. And even though I noticed the recycling of "the edge" line, it still worked for me. "The edge" seems like something in which Xanatos places great interest.
Brooklyn displays his leadership qualities by his cool-headedness and capable planning (and you just knew Lex was going to try to fly in there right of the bat--hey, it's the Pack!). It didn't hit me until later viewings just how well Brooklyn planned that--divide the enemy's forces, impair their primary sense (vision), and free trapped comrades during the confusion.
The battle itself had some memorable occurances. As strange as Jackal's arm was, Hyena beats him (and the rest of the Pack) in the "unnerving" catagory with the way her fingers bend backward, her leg rotates completely, and her limbs become insectian (is there such a word?--who cares now?). Dingo impresses me yet again by how STRONG his head is. He crashes through the roof without a helmet and is just momentarily stunned.
I actually got that Wolf's features became more feral when he got into a "battle rage" but, yeah, the way it was handled I kind of felt that was just me rationalizing the change than realizing it. Maybe a "morphing" scene would have helped. I don't know.
I love how they take out Coyote. Especially when Goliath crushes the head (that's just that sick, twisted part of me again).
I actually didn't mind Morgan's line. Seemed kind of fun to me. Of course, that just may be the way Kieth David reads it.
Brooklyn is made Second in Command. Are we surprised? No. Are we happy? Speaking as a Brooklyn fan--OH YEAH!
And the Xanatos (or is it Fox) Tag. I love Xanatos' cheer over the fact that Fox is his equal.
"Care to play again?" That line always makes me smile, even if it's only at its sheer audacity.
Personally, I kind of liked that the Pack was "upgraded." I mean, they were tackling "supernatural" creatures, why not even the playing field a little?
I don't know whether you know this or not, Greg, but UPGRADE has become another episode that Toon Disney will not show. I can only guess it's because a building blows up (never mind the fact that it's abandoned, barely taller than five stories, and such a throwaway occurance that it wasn't even brought up in the ramble). I wish they'd just grow up.
Anyway, fun episode.

Todd Jensen writes...

My ramble on "Upgrade".

I'll confess, for a start, that "Upgrade" isn't one of my favorite episodes, due mostly to the fact that it seemed much more like a half-hour "slugfest" than is generally the case with "Gargoyles" (although, given that we're dealing with the Pack here, I suppose it's inevitable - they're not the most subtle antagonists out there, after all). But it had some parts of it that I rather liked.

The transformations of Jackal, Hyena, and Wolf definitely freaked me out. In fact, the first time that I saw this episode, I tried to believe, for a while, that Jackal and Hyena were simply wearing fancy mechanical armor, but the evidence against that was too strong; I had to face the facts, in the end, and realized that they'd become cyborgs. And that definitely chilled me. (In Wolf's case, I didn't even have the option of finding an alternative explanation; it was too obvious that he'd been mutated.) Those three had permanently changed, on the physical level, from what they'd been in "The Thrill of the Hunt". They were no longer fully human. In fact, to me, the real significance of their alterations in "Upgrade" wasn't what you'd pointed out (they need to be upgraded so that it won't be too easy for the gargoyles to take them down - though I did see that there) but rather the way that the three of them were growing less human, their physical transformation being almost an outward sign of their increasing degeneracy.

By contrast, I liked Dingo's refusal to become physically upgraded, and horror at what his teammates had done to themselves. In fact, that was definitely when I began to like Dingo, as opposed to seeing him as just another member of the Pack (as he'd been to me up until then). (It certainly echoed my response to their transformations, which, I suspect, was how most of the audience was similarly responding). I wasn't surprised, therefore, when he was no longer with the Pack in "Grief" afterwards, or when he was shown seeking to "go straight" in "Walkabout". This was definitely the point where we see the "break with Eastcheap" (I chose that particular phrase inspired by your idea of Dingo's real name being Harry Monmouth, and the parallel is definitely there - though I might add that I don't see any of his former Pack-mates being a Falstaff-figure - more on the level of Falstaff's associates like Bardolph or Pistol, perhaps, but not scaling the heights of comic genius of Sir John himself - not that they were meant to.)

We also see the definite introduction (though it'd been hinted at in "Leader of the Pack") of Hyena's interest in Coyote, which has to count as the most bizarre relationship in "Gargoyles"; even Jackal gets nauseated by it, and this is a guy whose idea of a good time is redesigning Goliath's features in his stone sleep.

One side-note: re Hyena's wondering aloud whether gargoyles taste like chicken. I've sometimes wondered why the phrase is "tastes like chicken" as opposed to "tastes like beef" or "tastes like pork", or "tastes like turkey". Just one of life's little mysteries, I suppose.

On the gargoyles' side, we get to see Brooklyn becoming the new second in command. I will admit that I honestly hadn't wondered about that issue until the episode came out. (I've occasionally wondered if Goliath didn't pick one before this episode had anything to do with it having last been filled by Demona, but that's probably a bit of a stretch.) I did think that Brooklyn fitted the role well, and liked the bit at the end where he admits that he's not in that big a hurry to take Goliath's place. And where Goliath offers the role to Hudson, but Hudson declines it.

I still get a kick out of Fox's little public service announcement: "Don't 'Pack' it in. Take the train." Pretty clever of her.

I don't find Officer Morgan's remark that troublesome; in fact, I found it quite amusing.

Incidentally, Xanatos's remark at the end about having found a true equal in Fox reminds me of your analysis of Theseus, where you saw him as having found his equal in the Amazon Queen Hippolyta/Antiope. It makes me wonder whether you'd included a little of your perception of Theseus and Hippolyta in Xanatos and Fox (whether consciously or otherwise). Come to think of it, there's even a slight connection between the two couples, via "A Midsummer Night's Dream".

Zarok writes...

I was reading through the archives and I found posts on the subject of Odin's horned helmet versus the more historically accurate hornless helmets of Hakon and your comments that perhaps the stereotypical vision of Vikings being clad in horned helmets was inspired by the Norse gods rather than Norse mortals and I remembered this bit of trivia you might find interesting, While Vikings never wore horned helmets into battle they were sometimes used in religious ceremonies. At any rate, I loved the design you guys gave to Odin. It's just as I always imagined the big guy. I would have been disappointed if you had given Odin a more earthly Viking look just as much as I would have been Hakon had had horns like Marvel's Loki (how can he stand up with those things?). It just seems pointless to me to debate historical accuracy in relation to supernatural beings, I mean if you say Odin shouldn't have a horned helmet because real Vikings didn't have them you might as well say Anubis shouldn't have a jackal-head because real Egyptians didn't have jackal-heads.

Todd Jensen writes...

Yay! A new episode ramble! Thanks, Greg!

Here are some of my own thoughts about "Double Jeopardy".

The opening one is a rather odd little memory. In the summer of 1995, I spotted an article on "Gargoyles" in a sci-fi magazine (whose name I can no longer remember) discussing what would be done in Season Two; among other things, it included a mention that Goliath's daughter would be introduced into the series. I was quite curious about that, and wondered what she'd be like and how it would be done. And then, when "Double Jeopardy" first aired, and Thailog was treated as Goliath's son in it, I wondered if the article had erred and gotten the gender of Goliath's offspring wrong. (Of course, I know now that it was Angela that the article meant, not Thailog, so that there was no mistake there except on my part.)

In light of the opening flashback, Xanatos must have already started building a whole new set of Steel Clan robots even while he was still in prison, before "The Edge" (especially given that I spotted a whole bunch of those robots in storage, alongside the one that was activated to attack Goliath).

I also liked Owen's "Is this a plan that you've neglected to mention?" line. He really sounded hurt there.

I was interested to notice Renard on Xanatos's suspects list for Thailog's kidnapping, alongside Demona and Macbeth. While I can easily imagine Demona or Macbeth being willing to engage in such a maneuver against Xanatos, I doubt, in light of his rigid code of integrity, that Renard would have done the same (although there is "Golem" to consider, coming up later in the season). Maybe Xanatos believed that the temptation of kidnapping his new gargoyle would have been too much for even his father-in-law to resist.

Sevarius's hamming it up with Xanatos ("Yes! You robbed me of my creation!") was one of the funniest moments in "Gargoyles" for me; certainly the funniest in the episode. (Don't quit your day job, Anton.) And I agree with you about the Dr. Antinori business, by the way. (Also on the subject of Sevarius's overacting, I couldn't help but think that some of his narration in the "clone files" that Lex and Broadway discovered felt almost like a parody of that in a nature documentary, such as the "time for it to leave the nest" line, though I don't know if it was intended that way.)

You no doubt recall how I'd earlier pointed out the similarities between Thailog and Edmund (which I first began to notice after you mentioned Edmund being your favorite Shakespeare character); it occurred to me recently that Thailog also does have a certain similarity to Mordred, especially in many modern-day versions of the Arthurian legend, such as T. H. White. He's Goliath's "illegitimate son", just as Mordred was Arthur's, and his training by his other two fathers, Xanatos and Sevarius, does have (if you're out looking for the parallels) a certain echo of how Mordred, in White's "The Once and Future King", similarly gets trained by his mother Morgause. And the dynamics between Goliath and Thailog, with Goliath initially rejecting his son but then learning that he was wrong to do so, and now reaching out to him - but too late - do remind me of how in White, Arthur similarly initially moves against his son (trying to drown him at birth), but then understands that he was wrong to do so, also makes the attempt to reach out to him, but is coldly rejected by Mordred when he does so. (Come to think of it, Thailog also clearly lusts after both of Goliath's loves, Demona and Elisa, even to the point of combining them in Delilah, just as Mordred lusts after his stepmother Guinevere and attempts to wed her after he usurps his father's throne.)

I've mentioned before the element that I believe makes Thailog an especially great antagonist (the incongruous pairing of Goliath's physical appearance and voice with a thoroughly Xanatosian amorality - though I think that Thailog comes across as more malevolent than Xanatos does, which is also a good touch), so I won't go into that again. It's a bit of a pity that he only turned up twice more in the original series after that ("Sanctuary" and "The Reckoning"), although I suppose that if you'd gotten to do more episodes past "The Journey" that we'd have gotten a lot more of the guy.

The ending definitely surprised me; I was expecting Xanatos to reveal that he'd seen to it that he didn't lose the ransom money after all, but instead we got the revelation that Thailog had escaped with it and is out there, happily scheming away, to Xanatos's own alarm. (As I mentioned before, it's particularly of interest to note that this is the last time in the series that Xanatos attempts to make his own gargoyles - and after the way that Thailog backfired on him, who can blame him?)

It's great to have the rambles going again, and I'm looking forward to the ones to come.

Lacy writes...

Hi, actually this is more of a general ramblin fan letter than a question.

I love gargoyals, and even after all this time I still do.

OH! Though one good question just came to mind (and likely has been asked a million times) Do you plan on ever re-releasing gargoyals as they were in the first two seasons? (not that stupid farce that ABC mangled.) Do you have to wait for any wavers of contracts or has Disney totally bought out all rights to the show so that we never have hopes of seeing it anywere unless they deside to grace us with it (like that would ever happen)

I also noticed that Aladdin the series was in your list of series you did, that was surprising to me, but then again not really, now that I think about it the series had alot of the same feel as gargoyals. (GO MOZENRATH! chee, I'm such a sap for the bad boys)

Gargoyals still holds a strong place in my heart and was definately the first series I ever did fan art, as well as stories about. (Hey I can read,just said I did it, not giving nothing here, nor do I want to. They just fun stuff for me personally anyway.)

Puck is definately my favorite charactor, and it was a huge disapointment to me, my little sister and our circle of friends who are all fans when he wasnt even given an apearence in that chronicals series. (well other than as Owen) So much got crammed and cliche'd in that series, BLEH gotta get off it >.<

Anyway, love the details and developement of the charactors, they all were so believeable and real. The series touched imagination and feeling as no show has, it wsn't just animation as america treats it, but a true series, like Babyalon 5 and StarTrek series. It is the exsample I use most often in arguements for animation used as another form of filming rather than just entertainment for children.

I really hope to see more someday.

OH!!!! End question!!! Did you ever write out how you planned the series to go? If so, did you ever put them to the web? If so... CAN I SEE?!!!!!

sniffer writes...

I'm trying to find pictures,drawings,or paintings of gargoyles. That I might use for a tatto.

Anonymous writes...

How can I petition Disney studios?

Rusty writes...

sorry for the typos...it's 3:06 pm and i have been up since yesterday trying to draw that stuff on note book papper don't worry i make sure you get all the credit for the people that belong to you.as long as i can use them.

Rusty writes...

hey greg..if i where to use your Charchters in a comic/ or anime some time in the future maybe would it be alright? i am asking you because you drew it and at frist i wanted you to sue me but...i was told you didn't do a copy right on it so disney owns it,thats ok disney can sue me :) they wont get nothing though, the reason i am asking you is cuz you drew them so in my eyes you are the orginal owner of the whole thing. thanks if your reading this (cuz i probly will just use them anyway lol) and sorry for takeing your time

DTorline@aol.com writes...

Not a question, or a suggestion (really!), just a quick comment. For your example of What Not To Ask (point #2), you use "Asking if Demona tried to assassinate Hitler during World War II". I'd just like to say that based on my knowledge of Demona, she'd've been more likely to have been fighting on his side, assuming she was involved at all.

Roxz writes...

Sorry if something is spelled wrong!

Foxy writes...

I think that Gargoyles do really exist and Greg do you agree
with me yes or no?

Laura 'ad astra' Ackerman writes...

Here's a should not have but couldn't resist:

"Greg Bishansky writes...
Happy Rosh Hashanah Greg. Though it may be closeto Channukah when you read this.

Greg responds...

It's past Purim. Pushing Passover. (Pretty pathetic, huh?)

But thanks!

recorded on 03-04-02"

"Pushing Passover"? Is this some knew social problem that will soon hit the newspapers?: "We just don't know how it happened! One day he steps into a synogogue, and the next he's pushing Passover! What are we going to do with 4 extra sets of dishes!? And the whole family has indigestion from all that matzah!"

Of course it'll probably be Succot before you get to this one :)

sorry about the lack of (relevant) question

The Cat writes...

Replying to Sep 12/Feb 14 Q&A.

Hey Greg,

As usual I'm stressed about college, since it is my first semester and all. Otherwise I'm well.

I'm glad Thom is okay. I haven't heard from Jeff in a while either. The last time was after Christmas, he sent me a card.

I'm not sure if ya'll be seeing me at the Gathering. It might happen it might not.

It is that whole question of: Can I kidnap my best friend, throw her into the trunk of the car and race head long to Virginia, while avoiding getting into a wreck and the cops? My answer to this question: I don't think so. Puck(don't ask me why she calls herself Puck, I haven't a clue.) is bigger than me and weighs more. Also, I don't trust myself behind the wheel of a car I just started learning how to drive.

It is also a question of: How well have I saved up money to go and whether or not I can sneak out of the house to go because much as I love my mom and tollerate my little brother, I'd like to go by myself or with just a friend.

So, I'll see what I can do. You'll know if I'm there I'll probably bug you the first day I get there.

Bye, The Cat

P.S. I know that you've said that we should make different posts for different topics and I guess this would be a multiple topic thing, but I'm replying to your reply so I figured just to post them all in the same area.

Choa!

AngelOfTheNight writes...

Hi Greg,
No question, just comment. I too was a big fan of Batman, untill "Gargoyles" came onto the scene. I was hooked instantly. I feel that "Gargoyles" far surpassed Batman, in animation, characters, storyline, etc. My favorite character is "Demona". I very easily connect with her, (scary as that is..) I understand her. My all time favorite episode is of course, "City of Stone". It is a work of art in every sense of the word. Thank You for the episodes that we all find so entertaining, and may all your future endeavors bring you the success you so richly deserve.