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.

Arwen writes...

just wondering... i havent seen all of TGC, so if this comes up in the show & i missed it... well, ops but

1)anyway, after hunters moon, what hapens 2 robyn canmore? does she keep tracking "the Demon" or what.

2) does jon canmore/castaway blame elesa at all for what hapened 2 jason

jillvevea@hotmail.com writes...

-Greg
Why did they end gargoyles? I mean, in the late show,after they save the train and everone see their point of of view and then LOVE them. But why did they conution on from their?

Please e-mail the anwer's...I don't know how or when to get back here to see my anwer.

Question writes...

What does the moon look like when it is viewed on Avalon? By that I mean does it wax and wane more often when viewed from Avalon because of the 1 hour for 1 day rule? Can you see the waxing and waning of the moon on Avalon in one night because of the time acceleration outside Avalon?

Stanley writes...

Greg responds...

So, if I'm getting you right the Hunter's Moon (a.k.a. the Blood Moon) is the first full moon of October. (Or the only full moon of October, most years.) Right?

Thanks. That's very helpful and useful. I'm writing this down.

So a couple more questions...

Do you know the origin(s) behind these names? And if so, what are they?

And what is a Wyrt?

recorded on 08-01-03

The lore of the names of the moon are posted at various sites around the net. Here's a few:

http://www.waningmoon.com/guide/moons.shtml
http://www.fariesmedow.org/13moons.htm

Not sure about the origins though. And "wyrt" is an Old English term for "wort", a generic word for "a plant" I believe.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=wort

Annie Onimous writes...

Was up!
At the end of the episode "the mirror", before Puck got all ticked and did the whole human by day thing, did he seem to sort of loosen up to Demona a bit to you? I thought he started to kinda like her near the end. What do you think greg?

Todd Jensen writes...

I was just looking through the archives again, and noticed a question about what Goliath's favorite books were. You mentioned that "Great Expectations" was one that came to mind.

This actually amused me a little, for there was one aspect of the book that reminded me a lot of "Gargoyles", in the way that Dickens connected the two convicts whom Pip has to help hide at the beginning of the book with the Miss Havisham and Estella part of the story (warning to those who haven't read the book: spoilers follow): it later on turns out that Magwitch (one of those two convicts) was Estella's father and that the other convict (whose name I forget) was the man who left her standing at the altar. That element of interconnectedness definitely struck me as something straight out of "Gargoyles" in terms of the way that everything turned out to be linked to everything else eventually.

I don't know if you had that in mind when you mentioned the book in your answer, but it did make me see its inclusion as appropriate.

bassiste bourre writes...

where i can find gargoles picture? (i'm french sorry for my english) :-)

Lawrence Matheson writes...

Hi I was wondering even though you don't read fan fic what your opinion on the idea is?

Andrea writes...

In the art room at the Gathering, While looking at the some od the photos Disney most graciously lent us, I found myself discussing one of the photos to two other people (I have no idea who..). You see, among the character prototypes (or whatever the heck you call 'em, thats the word that comes to mind right now) there was one of a stone Xanatos. This was od some surprize and confustion. Why? Because Xanatos never turned to stone! Practically everyone else did in City of Stone, but he didn't (and I don't reacall any other epsiode where a non-gargoyle was turned to stone). What gives? Did he turn to stone in the original plannings for that episode or something?

Macbeth writes...

Dear Greg , I have a few questions I was wondering about 1 . What Happened to Coyote 1.0's coyote head and body ?
2. Had Xanatos had Coyote armor that he wore ?
3. How come Coyote's head mcame back in Greif . Goliath destroyed Coyote's head to pieces in Upgrade ?
.P.S. - I will be really sad if you don't answer my questions right away .

Lawrence Matheson writes...

Who was Hudson's Mate?

Ewan writes...

dO WE EVER SEE ANY OF THE lOCH nESS cLAN?

Lawrence Matheson writes...

Hi would you mind e-mailing answers to my questions to opinionsrgood@hotmail.com

Srg1 writes...

Hello, Gargoyles is one of my favorite shows and Deliaih is
one of my favorite characters. I was wondering why in "The Reckoning" Thailog named Elisa's and Demona's clone to be named Deliaih? Does the name have a special meaning? I also
hope that someday you will also mention more about the Thailog/Deliaih reunion.

Lawrence Matheson writes...

I noticed In the mirror that when Elisa turned away from the mirror her image stayed still was this part of the mirrors magic or just an animation mix up?

Rob writes...

1) Your rendering of the Illuminati society has grounds in fiction... from where did you take your ideas about the society?
2) and isnt it a little weird that many stories in fiction include an "all-knowing" group that controls the worls from behind the scenes (for example Tomb Raider and Honey I shrunk the Kid's The TV show, starring Peter Scolari).. DO you think there's some sort of real world society similar to the Illuminati, kinda like in the Simpson's Stonecutter's Episode?? cause i think the society does exist..

Dana writes...

Hey I'm a big fan of the show, it's been so long since the last time I saw it. I would really like to know if there is anyway I can get my hands on all the 78 shows of VHS. I tried looking on ebay but most are just recorded copies and poor quality. I really want to get the whole series though. If you can get back to me email me at dplatt31@hotmail.com

Ancient Kaa The Soulless writes...

Just a question regarding Mace Malone's dental plan.

Are the dentists/orthodentists members of the Illuminati?

John writes...

Hi, I wanted to ask a couple of questions related to Scottish royal genealogy and Gargoyles.

First, I was wondering about the identity of Prince Malcolm. Having read "Once upon a time, there were three brothers," I see that you make him the youngest son of King Malcolm I. But the sources I have note only two sons - Duff and Kenneth II. Is Prince Malcolm, then, made up? (Duff, I'd note, had a younger son Malcolm who died in 990...)

Second, in "City of Stone", Lulach/Luach is depicted as Macbeth's son, but in actual history, he was Gruoch's son by Gillecomgain (who is the first Hunter, in Gargoyles). Was this change made on purpose, to simplify things, or was it a mistake?

Thanks. (And just wanted to say that these aren't criticisms. I remember when I first watched Gargoyles how impressed I was by the effort that was made to actually depict a recognizable version of Scottish early Medieval history - "City of Stone" was what really drew me in to the show in the first place. I'd seen it a few times before that, and then I remember coming home from school and saying "a cartoon show with a revisionist version of the story of Macbeth? What's going on?" And after that I was hooked.)

fba827 writes...

*No question, just answering Greg's August 2003 question*

Creamy writes...
1. Is Hunter's Moon a specific day or week of the year?
2. If so could you give us the date(s)?

Greg responds...
In 1996, Hunter's Moon was on Saturday, October 26th. I doubt it's on the same night every year, since we operate on a solar, rather than a lunar calender. Anyone else know how this works?
recorded on 01-15-02

F7 Addict writes...
The Name of the moons are based on 12 lunar cycles per year, first is Jan or Wolf; 2 Feb or Storm; 3 Chaste; 4 Seed; 5 Hare; 6 Lover's; 7 Mead; 8 Wyrt; 9 Harvest; 10 Oct Blood or Hunter's moon; 11 Snow; 12 Oak. And on the odd chance of two full moons in a month, the second is called the blue moon.

Greg responds...
So, if I'm getting you right the Hunter's Moon (a.k.a. the Blood Moon) is the first full moon of October. (Or the only full moon of October, most years.) Right?
Thanks. That's very helpful and useful. I'm writing this down.
So a couple more questions...
Do you know the origin(s) behind these names? And if so, what are they?
And what is a Wyrt?
recorded on 08-01-03

(Sorry for the large amount of text from previous posts and large amount of text to follow - just wanted to keep this in context for when you got a chance to see this whenever :) )

I did not bother looking up this information until you asked. Quite interesting really :)

-- You can read this information in a nicer format by following the "Source" links at the bottom of this post. I am merely copying sections in case those websites are unavailable at the time you have the opportunity to refer to this post --

Background:
"Full Moon names date back to Native Americans, of what is now the northern and eastern United States. The tribes kept track of the seasons by giving distinctive names to each recurring full Moon. Their names were applied to the entire month in which each occurred. There was some variation in the Moon names, but in general the same ones were current throughout the Algonquin tribes from New England to Lake Superior. European settlers followed that custom and created some of their own names. Since the lunar month is only 29 days long on the average, the full Moon dates shift from year to year."

Note the sentence that states there has been some variation in the moon names with different tribes, etc. That would explain why the list I am about to post is different in one or two months than the list previously given.

January Wolf Moon (aka Old Moon) "Amid the cold and deep snows of midwinter, the wolf packs howled hungrily outside Indian villages. Thus, the name for January's full Moon. Sometimes it was also referred to as the Old Moon, or the Moon After Yule. Some called it the Full Snow Moon, but most tribes applied that name to the next Moon."

February Snow Moon (aka Hunger Moon) "Since the heaviest snow usually falls during this month, native tribes of the north and east most often called February's full Moon the Full Snow Moon. Some tribes also referred to this Moon as the Full Hunger Moon, since harsh weather conditions in their areas made hunting very difficult."

March Worm Moon (aka Crow Moon, Crust Moon, Sugar Moon, Sap Moon) "Moon As the temperature begins to warm and the ground begins to thaw, earthworm casts appear, heralding the return of the robins. The more northern tribes knew this Moon as the Full Crow Moon, when the cawing of crows signaled the end of winter; or the Full Crust Moon, because the snow cover becomes crusted from thawing by day and freezing at night. The Full Sap Moon, marking the time of tapping maple trees, is another variation. To the settlers, it was also known as the Lenten Moon, and was considered to be the last full Moon of winter."

April Pink Moon (aka Sprouting Grass Moon, Full Egg Moon, Full Fish Moon)"This name came from the herb moss pink, or wild ground phlox, which is one of the earliest widespread flowers of the spring. Other names for this month's celestial body include the Full Sprouting Grass Moon, the Egg Moon, and among coastal tribes the Full Fish Moon, because this was the time that the shad swam upstream to spawn."

May Flower Moon (aka Corn Planting Moon, Milk Moon) "In most areas, flowers are abundant everywhere during this time. Thus, the name of this Moon. Other names include the Full Corn Planting Moon, or the Milk Moon."

June Strawberry Moon (aka Rose Moon, Hot Moon) "This name was universal to every Algonquin tribe. However, in Europe they called it the Rose Moon. Also because the relatively short season for harvesting strawberries comes each year during the month of June . . . so the full Moon that occurs during that month was christened for the strawberry!"

July Buck Moon (aka Thunder Moon, Hay Moon) "July is normally the month when the new antlers of buck deer push out of their foreheads in coatings of velvety fur. It was also often called the Full Thunder Moon, for the reason that thunderstorms are most frequent during this time. Another name for this month's Moon was the Full Hay Moon."

August Sturgeon Moon (aka Red Moon, Green Corn Moon) "The fishing tribes are given credit for the naming of this Moon, since sturgeon, a large fish of the Great Lakes and other major bodies of water, were most readily caught during this month. A few tribes knew it as the Full Red Moon because, as the Moon rises, it appears reddish through any sultry haze. It was also called the Green Corn Moon or Grain Moon."

September Harvest Moon* (aka Corn Moon, Barley Moon) "This is the full Moon that occurs closest to the autumn equinox. In two years out of three, the Harvest Moon comes in September, but in some years it occurs in October. At the peak of harvest, farmers can work late into the night by the light of this Moon. Usually the full Moon rises an average of 50 minutes later each night, but for the few nights around the Harvest Moon, the Moon seems to rise at nearly the same time each night: just 25 to 30 minutes later across the U.S., and only 10 to 20 minutes later for much of Canada and Europe. Corn, pumpkins, squash, beans, and wild rice the chief Indian staples are now ready for gathering."
*Note: The Harvest Moon is always the full Moon closest to the autumnal equinox. If the Harvest Moon occurs in October, the Sept full Moon is usually called the Corn Moon

October Hunter's Moon (aka Travel Moon, Dying Grass Moon) "With the leaves falling and the deer fattened, it is time to hunt. Since the fields have been reaped, hunters can easily see fox and the animals which have come out to glean."

November Beaver Moon (aka Frost Moon) "This was the time to set beaver traps before the swamps froze, to ensure a supply of warm winter furs. Another interpretation suggests that the name Full Beaver Moon comes from the fact that the beavers are now actively preparing for winter. It is sometimes also referred to as the Frosty Moon."

December Cold Moon (aka Long Nights Moon) "During this month the winter cold fastens its grip, and nights are at their longest and darkest. It is also sometimes called the Moon before Yule. The term Long Night Moon is a doubly appropriate name because the midwinter night is indeed long, and because the Moon is above the horizon for a long time. The midwinter full Moon has a high trajectory across the sky because it is opposite a low Sun."

Sources:
http://www.farmersalmanac.com/astronomy/moonnames.html
http://www.almanac.com/details/moondays.html

In other news.... I can not begin to express how much I enjoy Gargoyles. Since becoming aware of your name, I have also seen your name attached to other series that I enjoy. Thank you for the entertainment and enjoyment you have brought to me. My long winded post to answer your question can not compare to how much I have appreciated your work. In short, thank you.

Mandy writes...

Are the Timedancer, Dark Ages, and other such stories from another site, have anything to do with the orignial show?

Second, I have read several questions that mention future tense stories, are they on TV or where?

Thank you for your time and consideration with putting up with our questions. It is appreciated.

Todd Jensen writes...

In "City of Stone Part Three", Owen suggests to Xanatos that they look through the Grimorum Arcanorum for a way of reversing Demona's spell upon the city. This didn't seem too odd to me at the time, but after I found out that Owen was really Puck in "The Gathering", I started puzzling over it a little. After all, it seems more than likely that Puck, an inherently magical being, would already be aware of the fact that the spells in the Grimorum could only be used by experienced sorcerers, which Xanatos didn't have on hand, without Xanatos needing to tell him that. So I find that a bit puzzling - unless Puck didn't know as much about the "rules" governing human magic as he did about Oberati magic.