matt writes...

a couple weeks ago someone asked what gargoyles protected before the other races showed up and you said each other. but since we have the Mayan clan protecting a forest, the Loch Ness clan protecting prehistoric monsters, the London Clan protecting a shop in SOHO, and i'm sure there were other examples, what gargoyles protect has always been extremely varied and never limited to sentient beings.

1. it seems from clan to clan there is a wide range of what to protect. why is that?

2. every species, like the gargoyles, protect their own kind and eggs, etc., but why did gargoyles begin to extend that protection to more than themselves?

Todd Jensen writes...

Since you and Entity recently (as of July 20th) had a brief exchange about Xanatos's characterization, I thought that I'd give a thought of my own about him.

One thing that has occurred to me is that there was an intriguing paradox about Xanatos in his "feud" with the gargoyles. One advantage that Xanatos had over the conventional "cartoon super-villain" was that he was a level-headed, practical man who wasn't interested in revenge or pointless vendettas. And this, on one level, made him potentially a more challenging adversary for the gargoyles. Because as a result, he wasn't likely to get so distracted in carrying out his personal score with the clan that he'd make foolish mistakes which they could take advantage of and thereby win, the way that more conventional "master-villains" in animated series do (and which, elsewhere in "Gargoyles", the Archmage himself fell prey to, when he kept on making strategic and tactical errors in "Avalon" - such as not waiting until dawn to attack or in magically tormenting Goliath when he could just as easily have simply zapped him into a pile of dust). It removed the leading source of "mistakes that antagonists make" which can save the day for the protagonists.

But, ironically enough, this very trait of Xanatos's also may have helped the gargoyles in a way. For, since Xanatos wasn't a revenge-crazed man, he wouldn't be likely to be constantly pursuing the gargoyles obssessively in "conventional cartoon super-villain" style, and indeed, he didn't. He went after them because he had specific plans about what to do with them (using them as his agents for such operations as stealing the disks from Cyberbiotics). But that motive didn't take too long to be discarded, as it became increasingly aware to Xanatos that he couldn't make use of the gargoyles in that way ever again; in fact, I recently noticed, upon examining his actions closer, that in Season Two, despite his continued clashes with the clan, he had stopped attempting to actually capture and dominate them (the one exception being his capture of Hudson in "The Price", and then there was a different reason for that - the need to use Hudson as a guinea pig for the Cauldron of Life). So he no longer had a serious reason for capturing them, and consequently, didn't see the need to make those efforts. The only possible reason left for going after the gargoyles was that of revenge, and that obviously didn't interest him. So he had no reason to pursue them (and indeed, seems to have even been aware, as the ending of "City of Stone" makes clear, that leaving them more or less at liberty could be much more advantageous to him anyway). He could afford to leave them alone.

So I find it an amusing paradox that the very factor which could have made Xanatos a serious threat to the gargoyles actually helped to make him less of a threat than he might have been. He wasn't obssessively pursuing them on the basis of a pointless grudge. He went after them only when he saw a genuine need to, and there was increasingly less reason for him to capture or destroy the whole clan as the series went on (and good reason, on the other hand, to let them be).

KW Keller writes...

Well, I'm not Todd, but in response to the history of Excalibur, Geoffrey of Monmouth's "Caliburn" is thought by some to be derived from the Welsh "Caledfwlch" (Breton "Kaledvoulc'h"), or from the Irish "Caladbolg" or "Caladcholg." Caledfwlch appears in several Welsh Arthurian stories, especially "Culhwch ac Olwen." Caladbolg, "hard dinter," was the lightning sword of Fergus Mac Roth. Caladcholg was a similar sword owned by Fergus Mac Leti. Various people have argued at one time or another that the modern idea of Excalibur was taken from one of these sources.

Entity writes...

Hi Greg,

Don't let the death of Team Atlantis get you down, true brilliance is never recognized in its own time.

Anyway, I was wondering about your personal opinion on something: pop Arthurian Legend. First there was the "Merlin" miniseries, now there's another one on TNT called "The Mists of Avalon." Both take the traditional story of King Arthur and try to present its elements of magic to contemporary TV audiences in the guise of religion. Instead of accepting magic as a part of the legend, which I guess TV execs think is too "silly" or maybe even "controversial," they turn the Arthur legend into a morality tale about the old verse the new, Paganism verse Christianity, imagination verse logic, etc... take your pick.

What's your take? Do you think this is a constructive and innovative approach to telling the story, or a distracting and childish one?

Aris Katsaris writes...

A couple weeks ago, you posted a ramble in an interesting exchange of ideas with Punchinello, about the subject of "sentience" and how it's used in science fiction and fantasy, about whether it's a wall or not, etc, etc...

I thought to chime in, contributing with the concepts that Orson Scott Card introduces in "Speaker for the Dead" (an excellent book btw - I encourage everyone to read it). There he uses different words to differentiate between different kinds of 'alienness'... Let me quote:

"The Nordic language recognizes four orders of foreigness. The first is the otherlander, or 'utlanning', the stranger that we recognize as being a human of our world, but of another city or country. The second is the 'framling' [...]. This is the stranger that we recognize as human, but of another world. The third is the 'raman', the stranger that we recognize as human, but of another species. The fourth is the true alien, the 'varelse', which includes all the animals, for with them no conversation is possible. They live, but we cannot guess what purposes or causes make them act. They might be intelligent, they might be self-aware, but we cannot know it."

Obviously here the most important concepts are that of the 'raman' and of the 'varelse'. These can be useful, over and beyond the concept of 'sentience', because they refer to how much of an understanding can exist between different species - unlike 'non-sentient' for a species to be 'varelse' doesn't necessarily make it "inferior"... Only non-understandable.

On the other hand I find these concepts also intriguing because they *do* carry a moral judgment within them, even if it's a more subtle one. To recognize an alien as "raman" is to recognize him as basically human, to recognize that his fundamental motivations are the same as yours. It's the beginning of understanding and tolerance...

Now in the gargoyles universe, it's clear that both gargoyles and fae (and Nokkar's people also) are all "ramen": Other species which despite all their difference with our own, we can recognize as fundamentally 'human'. I'd also go on to say that this is what people like Jon Castaway refuse to see. By declaring that all gargoyles are monsters he doesn't necessarily refuse them their 'sentience' - he does refuse though to see that they are 'ramen'... and as such he can say things such as 'they are all evil', 'they must be destroyed', etc, etc...

And with that let me conclude with another quote from the book:
"Since we are not yet fully comfortable with the idea that people from the next village are as human as ourselves, it is presumptuous in the extreme to suppose we could ever look at sociable, tool-making creatures who arose from other evolutionary paths and see not beasts but brothers, not rivals but fellow pilgrim journeying to the shrine of intelligence.
Yet that is what I see or yearn to see. The difference between raman and varelse is not in the creature judged, but in the creature judging. When we declare an alien species to be raman, it does not mean that they have passed a threshold of moral maturity. It means that *we* have."

Sorry for the length of this ramble... :-)

Patricia writes...

Hi Greg!

In response to the Tootsie Pop commercial: I've seen it within the past year on TV, so.. it's still making its rounds on TV. And yes, I know the commercial, but.. I'm an early 80s baby (born in the early 80s). And that response fit with the question, very much so.

I'm running out of things to say.. whee.. ahem...

Oh! I found a quote or a poem or something about the "Hobgoblin of Little Minds," but I've forgotten where I put the paper that has it.. hmmm Maybe (hopefully) when I find it, I'll remember to type it up for you.. and see if that's what you're talking about.

Ok, general question that isn't really on Gargoyles or any of your other projects, but you might know.

What's the plural form of series? Is it series or seria? Or none of these? If it's not one of these, then what is it?

Thanks.

P.S. I can't wait for the next Contest to begin ;) Though I respect if you take a break, I just want to see how well I think I can do in them.. hehe... Umm.. yeah. Boy this covered alot of ground...

VF writes...

Some comments about the 2001 Gathering

I am a communications director at a university and can truly appreciate the vast amount of work that goes into event planning, so thanks to all the people who worked so hard on the Gathering 2001. I had posted a note in the Station Eight Comment Room a few weeks before the convention, expressing some slight trepidation about my two daughters and myself attending the event because I felt like a bit of an outsider, but we wanted to show our support for the series and encourage its revival. Several people, including you, Greg, responded in the Comment Room and were very welcoming and put my concerns to rest.

Or so it seemed.

Imagine my thoughts when, shortly after the Opening Ceremonies got underway, my now-infamous daughter says, quite out loud for just about everybody to hear: "Mommy, what's a con virgin?!" Yes, that was my 4-year-old, Caitlin. So after blushing a bit and trying to quietly explain the term to her, all I could think of was that maybe I'd have to carefully scout out any future sessions and try to pre-determine their age-appropriate level.

But I didn't have to worry. The weekend was really very nice. I'm not very good at remembering names, so unfortunately I don't know the names of the kind people we encountered. The women in the Art Room, for example, were so accommodating and welcoming when both of my daughters became inspired to draw Elisa (as a human and as a gargoyle) and Goliath pictures and submitted them to be displayed. The girls were so excited that we had to drop in and see them ... often.

The purchase of some Gargoyles coloring books and stamps and a Goliath mug, the art table that totally occupied my daughters' time while I sat in on your Mug-A-Guest session, hearing the writers discuss their work on the show, the voice actor panel, the Radio Play (thanks for the great choice of material), the Video Room - all were very interesting and fun for this con ... uh ... first-timer.

It has been interesting to read other people's diaries of the Gathering since, including one from Aaron. I didn't know it until I read his summary, but he mentioned watching my other daughter, 6-year-old Jessica, who, during the Radio Play, spent more time turned around watching Aaron's friend, Mara, while she sketched. Mara (whose name I didn't know at the time) was kind enough not to mind Jessica staring mesmerized at her work. Jessica really has an affinity for art, and Mara was very encouraging and gave Jessica one of the sketches she had done. It was beautiful.

I also had the pleasure of meeting your wife, briefly. We compared notes a bit, this being her second - I believe she said - Gathering that she had attended. She, too, assured me that although newcomers may feel awkward at first, her estimation is that it's a pretty nice group of people who make up the fandom. I concur.

While my girls and I had perhaps only modestly participated in the Gathering, it was fun and I hope it will do some good to perpetuate what I think is a really great program that deserves to be revived. So thanks for all your work and that of the con staff and the guests for all the time and energy invested. My daughters and I certainly appreciated it.

Anonymous writes...

You realize of course that giving us vague information on future gargoyle stories and the six spinoffs only hypes gargoyles beyond proportion making it impossible for you to satisfy your audience or at least those who have read about the master plan. I mean some people are expecting your to deliver something rivaling Babylon 5 which is nearly impossible and also TGS and the other fanfics are also setting your vision so if you do something which will make the fanfic universes appear off track like that owen being puck thing then you'll alienate a lot of hardcore fans. Example of this is Star Wars fans who grew up on the sequel novels and comics which is in someway fan fanfiction since they aren't exactly canon are demanding the appearances or cameos of novel or comic characters in the prequel movies or the legitimazation of the non canon novels and comics.

1.Do you understand what I am talking about?
2.Have I changed your mind about revealing more secrets of the gargoyles universe?

matt writes...

geeez, you should make a new archive catagory called "Tootsie Roll Stuff" cuz of all these people talking about it. and for the record, i'm 19 and i remember it quite clearly despite my terrible meory, in fact, my brother and i recited the whole commercial te other day, including the best part when the Owl says two. he says, "twhoooo" its funny.

twhooo bad you had to answer "The World May Never Know" to my question, cuz first of all, i'm sure the clans with garg beast DO know, and second i don't understand why you won't tell us how many eggs a garg beast lays? i mean, is there some reason not to tell us? why are you holding this back? how many eggs does a female garg beast usually lay in a lifetime????!!!! geeeez, you frustrate me! thje archives wouldn't be so big if we didn't have to keep repeating questions cuz you avoid answering them!

i'm just kidding Greg. you don't have to reveal this, and honestly, if i were you i probably wouldn't have even revealed as much as you have about all the Gargoyles stuff. but i suppose it keeps interest and the fans pysched about the series. i'll say that since i stumbled upon this site my fanaticism in Gargoyles has gone up considerly. so good for you for revealing just the right amount of secrets, but not everything!

still wish you'd tell me though...

Kelly L Creighton/Kya White Sapphire writes...

"The world may never know.
(That smart-ass response was a reference to an old tootsie-pop commercial. Anyone old enough to remember it has my sympathy.) "

Its not that old. Im 21 and I get it.