A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

RESPONSES 2001-9 (Sept)

Archive Index


: « First : « 25 : Displaying #233 - #257 of 292 records. : 25 » : Last » :


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


Bookmark Link

Shan writes...

I just got done watching "Double Jeapordy," and in it Goliath emphasizes to Elisa that he must stay on the rig and talk to/rescue Thailog because "he is (of?) my blood. He is my son."

However, later on he meets his daughter Angela, but doesn't realize the connection at first. After Sevarius clues her in about her biological parents (Goliath and Demona) and Angela starts pressing the point with Goliath, Goliath responds with something to the effect that children belong to the whole clan. It is not until Elisa's mother and Goliath have the heart to heart about children sometimes needing special attention that Goliath and Angela begin to bond more directly, if I'm not mistaken.

But with Thailog, Goliath wants to reach out and make a bond almost from the outset.

Is it the circumstances of Thailog's creation that make Goliath take more responsibility for Thailog from the get-go versus Angela, or is it (though certaintly not her fault) that the fact Angela is also Demona's child somehow alienates Goliath more at first? Is it something else entirely? I found the difference in attitudes striking.

Greg responds...

In fact, Goliath's initial reaction to Thailog is not to form a bond. It's to call him an abomination. (You blithely skipped over that, Shan.) Part of what follows is a bit of guilt mixed in with him taking responsibility for Thailog as a parent.

As to Angela, you've again missed his initial reaction to her on Avalon. It is clearly one of paternal pride, just as he is proud of Gabriel and all of his children.

Later, he NEVER denies her as his child. He simply is uncomfortable with her focus on him as her biological father. This also mixes in guilt -- survivors guilt this time. And a healthy fear that if she responds this way to him being her biological father, then how will she respond when and if she learns that Demona is her biological mother. If she had simply been calling him father from the get go, he'd have had no problem. But she didn't until she got word from Sevarius about biology. That's what troubled him. She wasn't thinking like a gargoyle. When "Goliath responds with something to the effect that children belong to the whole clan" that's not just a means of putting her off, it's not just something to say. That's how he was raised. That means something to him.

In any case, the Thailog and Angela situations are so widely different, it's really comparing apples and oranges. But I certainly don't see any inconsistencies in Goliath's behaviour.

Response recorded on September 06, 2001

Bookmark Link

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.

Greg responds...

Interesting.

Response recorded on September 06, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Who are Morgana's parents?
How can she beat Merlin? I mean Merlin is the son of Oberon who is one of the most powerful fay. Does that mean she also has a unique parentage like Merlin?

Greg responds...

Who said she 'beat' him and what does that even mean?

Response recorded on September 06, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

What class of fay is Lady of the Lake? Power class?

Greg responds...

This ain't an R-P game, my friend.

Response recorded on September 06, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Does the Lady of the Lake have any biological children? Have you mentioned the name of any of her children on Askgreg?

Greg responds...

YOu are now officially making me sleepy.

Response recorded on September 06, 2001

Bookmark Link

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?

Greg responds...

Well, I haven't seen Mists and have only seen pieces of Merlin. So I can't judge either series.

I think you tip your hand on your opinion, however.

In and of itself, the approach has some potential. It's about execution. And the ideas aren't mutually exclusive. Look at EXCALIBUR (the movie). It has elements of both approaches, and I think it's wonderful. (Just saw it again recently. It really holds up.)

Response recorded on September 06, 2001

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

One question which I'll confess I've occasionally found myself asking about Arthur's quest for Merlin. Why does Arthur feel that he really needs Merlin by his side again? After all, in the traditional legends, he spent the majority of his reign without Merlin being there (Merlin's departure in the "Arthurian canon" took place almost directly after Arthur married Guinevere and set up the knights of the Round Table), and fared well enough on his own (not to mention that I don't think that Merlin could have seriously prevented the fall of Camelot even if he had been there, seeing that it was brought about through the one thing that his magic could not overcome, the human heart, as Macbeth pointed out in "A Lighthouse in the Sea of Time"). Furthermore, at least some versions of the legend (including T. H. White and Roger Lancelyn Green) indicate that part of the reason why Merlin left Arthur's court (ultimately to wind up in the Crystal Cave) was because Arthur needed to stand on his own rather than constantly leaning on the wizard for help.

So why does Arthur feel that he still needs Merlin's help? (Admittedly, he does seem in a rather vulnerable situation at present, given that he's now in a world that's unfamiliar to him and very different from 6th century Britain - and he hasn't had the advantage that Macbeth had of being able to watch it change gradually and adjust accordingly - it's all been thrown upon him at once, just the way that it was on Goliath and his clan).

Greg responds...

Well, start with this. Merlin's a friend.

Do you really need any other reason?

Some of the other stuff you mentioned is good too.

Response recorded on September 06, 2001

Bookmark Link

LIGHTBULB CONTEST

Poor Fang. Never even got to say the punchline...

Here's the set-up:

"Hey, Goliath, how many gargoyles does it take to screw in a lightbulb..."

Time for our next ASK GREG contest. It's simple and subjective. Finish the joke. The punchline that gives me the biggest laugh wins a prize of no real value, but hopefully of some mild interest.

A few rules:

1. Since we're giving out a prize, no anonymous entries will be accepted. I'll ask Todd to delete them before I even see them.

2. All posts must be clearly marked with "LIGHTBULB CONTEST" in capital letters at the head of the post.

3. Don't ask additional questions with your entry. In fact I'd recommend that you don't include anything that might distract me from laughing at your joke.

4. Spelling COUNTS!!!

5. You may enter as many times as you wish. But each entry MUST be posted seperately. Try to be selective and funny. BEWARE!!! If I sense that you're just taking multiple random stabs at it in order to try and win by the shotgun method, it may prejudice me against you.

6. I'm acknowledging up front that this is a completely subjective contest. You (many or even all of you) may not agree with my final choice. But the decisions of the judges (i.e. yours truly) are final.

7. We will accept entries posted before the end of September, 2001. I'll decide on the winner AFTER I've read all the September posts. (So figure on November, HOPEFULLY.)

One last bit of random incentive, if we ever do make BAD GUYS, I will give Fang the opportunity to complete his joke, using (with permission) the winning entry.


Bookmark Link

Greg "Xanatos" Bishansky writes...

DrFaust> Oh come ON! You don't think Greg is going to say anything about that episode until it actually airs, do you?

Greg responds...

Well, now it won't be airing unfortunately, it won't even get made. But all will be revealed in Virginia Beach next summer. And we'll have some interesting items for sale at the auction.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

DrFaust writes...

So what happened in Paris, 1920 that was so significant to the Atlantis and Gargoyles universes?

Greg responds...

Come to G2002 and find out.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

Greg "Xanatos" Bishansky writes...

I might as well jump on the bandwagon here.

1. What did Titania whisper to Fox at the end of "The Gathering"?

I know you're not going to answer this, but in four years of posting here, I have never asked this, and figured I might as well at least once. Personally, I like not knowing the answer, and filling it in for myself.

Greg responds...

Then you're wish is granted. I still won't tell.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

Greg "Xanatos" Bishansky writes...

Now that he has made peace with the Manhattan Clan, would Xanatos have continued to make use of the Steel Clan, or his Steel Clan exo-armor?

Greg responds...

Given appropriate circumstances, I don't see why not.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

zakhur writes...

I'm confused about something. If in th Avalon Clan, there are three gargoyle beasts one is Boudicca, and there 2 more, one female and one male, if the male and female beasts are probably mates, shouldn't they have had a child together, seeing as gargoyle beast can mate one generation before gargoyles?

Greg responds...

Who said they didn't?

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

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... :-)

Greg responds...

Don't apologize. This subject is fascinating to me. Thank you.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

Andy Morrison writes...

How many stories is the Eyrie Building? (I hope I have the spelling right.)

Was there an episode that mentioned how many stories or is it a figment of my imagination?

If there was an episode, which one is it please?

Thanks for your help.

Greg responds...

You do have the spelling right.

I don't recall us ever establishing the exact amount of stories in the buidling.

Of course we told 66 stories, but they weren't all set there.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

Ambrosia writes...

Hi, Greg!
*Greatly* enjoyed the radio play. Thank you so much!
So...
Did the cut scene of Hunter's Moon III between Elisa and Jason in the decimated clock tower actually happen in the gargoyles universe, just off camera?

Greg responds...

Uh... I'd like to think so, yes.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

zakhur writes...

We know by City of Stone part 4, that MacBeth's son Luach is dead, probably even killed by Canmore himself. My question is even though there were circumstances that made them enemies, they were still very good friends when they were young, didn't that make Canmore at least think about not killing his cousin?

Greg responds...

They were very good friends when they were young? That's news to me. Did you see how they looked at each other after the Weird Sisters issued their prophesy?

And while they were still young, Luach's dad killed Canmore's. That probably didn't endear the cousins either.

I think you are reading too much into the fact that on one hike, they were having a good time until things got serious.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

Demoness writes...

1. Are there any other Oberon's Laws besides the "non-interfernce", "forking over talismens willingly", "Avalon Clan can stay" and "Goliath's Clan's immunity"?

2. If yes to above, what are a couple of those other laws?

3. Were there any placed before Oberon became King?

4. What are a couple of those?

Greg responds...

1. I'm sure there are.

2. No cheese on Saturdays. No littering.

3. No. Mab likes cheese.

4. There was something about smoke alarms in the lavatories at the Palace, but now I'm blanking.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

Demoness writes...

In "Future Tense" at the end of the illusion Elisa yells "No, not now!" and the illusion disappears and she becomes Puck. So my question is:

1. What was Puck referring to when he said that?

b. Was it Oberon's Law because Goliath realized that what he was experiancing was an illusion and the law dictates that Oberon's Children can not interfer in mortal lives and thus so forced the illusion to end?

c. Or was it another law that has to do with mortals willingly handing over talismens to Oberon's Children, kinda saying that if your intentions are discovered the game ends?

Greg responds...

1. That Goliath had figured him out when he was so close.

b. More or less.

c. More or less.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

Demoness writes...

I just watched "Heritage" and I just noticed something. I know you've said before that your colored blind and sorry to bringing up colors again...but I'm curious.

1. How come in "Heritage" Raven and Grandmother glow a blue aura when using their magic while others glow a green aura? Such as Oberon, Titania, the Wierd Sisters, and Puck.

I think Odin glowed white, Anasi-blue, Banshee-white, Anubis-black, and Lady of the Lake-blue.

2. Does this coloration have anything to do with their connections (meaning Anubis=death)?

3. Does it have to do with positions in their culture? Like warriors in the warrior caste, tricksters in the tricksters caste, royalty, servents, etc etc?

Greg responds...

If we were consistent, then sure. But I'm not sure we were.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

wow, its beginning to feel like the time when i first found this site and asked strings of questions daily! anyway:

when the eggs of a generation hatch, does the clan keep the hatchlings in the rookery for awhile or are they generally let to run around outside the rookery with the rest? all these infants and youngsters running around at once seems to me to be quite a handful! how do they deal with this?

do you suppose that the kids of Bronx's generation were in the rookery during the Viking attack and thats why we didn't see them?

like maybe gargs make them sleep outside so they can get their solar energy, but at night they stay in the rookery, maybe?

just seems dangerous to have all these winged, horned and taloned toddlers running around the castle! geeez!

Greg responds...

In DARK AGES, given the chance, I'd like to show more of castle life, more of human/gargoyle interaction. More of the generations of gargoyles who live there.

Locking kids up in the rookery every night seems unlikely. Though perhaps a wise course during a Viking siege.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

in the Wyvern years, was the Trio kinda outcasts or loners of their generation? it seemed to me that they generally just stuck together with Bronx and didn't interact much with their siblings. am i right about this or did we just not really see their relationships with their siblings due to lack of time?

Greg responds...

Mostly the latter. I certainly wouldn't call them outcasts. I just think they were best friends.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

didn't the various gargoyle clans feel wary or even angry that humans were building their castles and fortresses over garg rookeries for free soldiers? i mean, it seems to me that the humans are like, "we're going to build our castle here, if you want to stay, fine, but you have to help protect our castle." if i were a garg i'd have been angry, Demona and Othello were right, not only were the humans totally asses to them, but they were also using them! why do the old garg clans put up with this?

now, obviously i know that the humans would make the deal of protecting the gargs during the day, but did they just move in or did they ask the gargs first? i'd imagine that most humans generally wouldn't bother to ask "animals" permission. what are your thoughts?

Greg responds...

There's no ONE answer to cover every clan. There was a period, a semi-mythical golden age in human/gargoyle relations, when this was popular. I'm sure there were times when gargoyles were presented with little REAL choice, given their vulnerabilities.

If we're talking about Wyvern specifically, there was an alliance formed between Hudson and Malcolm.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

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...

Greg responds...

The quotation I'm thinking of is by Ralph Waldo Emerson.

As far as I know, it's one series. Many series.

Yeah, I'll start the next contest soon. Heck. Maybe tonight.

Response recorded on September 05, 2001

Bookmark Link

GLITCH

okay something very weird just happened. I was answering a question that Matt posted about the 'chameleon gene'. Then suddenly, the question just changed. My answer (which I was in the process of writing) remained , but there was now a new question listed above it.....

Hmmmm.... Okay, I think Gore just re-activated the question answering function while I was typing and we had a little glitch here. Matt's question was lost. I'll try to recreate it a bit...

1. Matt wrote something like, "I know you're not a biologist, but how does this chameleon gene' work."
2. Matt thought gargoyles were the sources of various legends, but does the chameleon gene cause gargoyles to look like legendary characters.
3. He asked whether the gene would start changing the looks of familiar clans over time. Or something like that.
4. He stated that he had his own theories as to heredity, etc. And he challenged me to 'sell' him on my chameleon gene theory.
5. He had at least a fifth part to the question (maybe more) but I didn't even get the chance to read it.

My answers to his original question; not to the paraphrased versions above. (Man, this is a mess.)

1. I have no idea. It was just a random thought.

2. No. Definitely not. You're first thought was correct.

3. Natural Mutations (not the Sevarius kind) are likely to occur. They occur to some degree in all species. I was simply positing (and only positing) that Gargoyles might have a gene that causes mutations to occur more frequently. But mostly, garg appearance is defined by heredity.

4. I don't have to sell you on anything. For starters, I'm not sure I've sold myself on it. Second, I'm under no obligation to compete with your personal beliefs. Third, if it isn't in the 66 -- I'm not guaranteeing it. Even some of that is suspect. Sevarius theorized that gargs absorb solar energy while stone. But that was just a theory. He may have been right. He may have been wrong. He may have been partially right. Or he may have been lying intentionally. See?



: « First : « 25 : Displaying #233 - #257 of 292 records. : 25 » : Last » :