Revel writes...

Okay, after going through the smart ass archive I know I definitly want to meet you in LA
My favorite was the guy swooning over Angela and your drawn out response.
-Sure, more power to you........Poor slob
My thoughts exactly. There's a world outside them for walls!

Todd Jensen writes...

Here's one of my favorites from the "Smart-ass Responses" section, as per your request:

<<What Would Happen to a gargoyle in space?

Greg responds...

They'd explode in the void, just like a human.>>

matt writes...

Greg, i love those smart-ass responses and it would be hard to choose one favirote, but i always thought that this one was pretty good:

-How do gargoyles view homosexuality?
-On cable, like the rest of us.

i also liked:

-After clones, superviruses, and mutates what could Sevarius possibly cook up next?
-Breakfast?

you sound like Xanatos in "The Edge" when he thinks he's lost his. i think you still have the edge in smart-ass responses, you are hilarious!

Ray Kremer writes...

All the rambles on City of Stone recently brought back some memories. While that season was airing I was in High school, and the English Class that semester was British Literature. Beowulf, Canterbury Tales, and of course Shakespere. We did the Scottish play not too long after CoS aired and when I was reading the book the voice of John Rhys-Davies always found its way into my head.

The classroom also had a big poster of the complete family tree of the royalty of the British Isles. You can imagine how much fun it was to look back to 11th century Scotland and find the names of Gillecomgain, Gruoch, and Luoch right there with MacBeth, Duncan, and Malcom Cannmore.

Then when we got to Arthurian Legend I asked the teacher what the significance of Avalon was besides being Arthur's final resting place, half expecting to hear it was the traditional home of the fairy kingdom. (Never could be too sure what was real, what you were making up, and what was some of both.)

Kirshanta writes...

Alright.
I just realized how long it has been since you've dropped by (I had a hard time finding the end of the page). This one is quick.

I need to know if you are planning to do an episode about the Fourth Race. I know it hasn't been mentionned, but since I have discovered them, I need to know if I have to hurry up and get published before someone else does.

(Not that it wouldn't be complimentary to be beaten by you, but you know - copyrights and all that...)

Kirshanta writes...

Hello.

My question is actually a permission. If I have used events in the Gargoyles animation and saga in a novel, do I need to ask Greg's permission or can I simply post a Disclaimer saying that Gargoyles are the property of Disney and the events from the Saga are used without permission?

Cassandra writes...

Correction for my last Ask Greg response. I accredited Demona's guilt, grief, and brief super-gargoyle aging appearance to the episode "Vows" when I meant it was in one of the "City of Stone" flashbacks. I apologize for any confusion.

Duncan Devlin writes...

Hey Greg,
At some point it just hit me to thank you. I got a 4 (out of 5, which is still pretty good) on the Language Advanced Placement exam. Since watching Gargoyles and writing about it while in seventh grade was strongly responsible, I decided that a "thank you" was in order, so...

THANK YOU

Sincerely,
Duncan Devlin

Cassandra writes...

A small ramble of my own about "Vows".

I always felt (especially after "City of Stone") that it would be much more tragic if the young Demona was trying to prevent what she had seen.

As her adult evil version explained, humans destroyed the clan. So ties with humanity should be severed. And with the way the humans eventually treat the gargoyles, who could really fault that separatist view? The clan should get the castle because they were here first. So when the oppurtunity arose, she made the deal with the Captain. But part of her knew what was doomed to happen and that's why she hid.

Which I think explains her grief, guilt, and brief aging in "Vows". This was what she was trying to prevent and it happened any way.

Maybe that makes her less flawed. Or maybe it just a bigger fuel for her denial.

Just my humble opinion. Later.

Blaise writes...

CITY OF STONE PART 2

What can I say about the first few harrowing minutes that you haven't already pointed out? I knew Xanatos would be able to pull them out of the drop of course. And you're right, his lines here are great.
I like Brooklyn's back at the Clock Tower as well, simply for the dramatic irony.

Ahhh, so THAT'S why Broadway didn't have a single line in the CITY OF STONE multi-parter! (seriously, I noticed that little fact on one of my re-viewings) As with Xanatos' chopper pilot being Fox, the "blind man" who helps clue in the gargoyles being Jeffrey worked better for me--personalized things more. And in this case, cut down on the "coincidence factor". On top of that, Jeffery's just one heck of a great character. I love how he remains pretty aware that the gargoyles are a little more in touch with what's going on, but doesn't press it too hard. Also, one of my famous "between character" beats, after Brooklyn blurts out a question:
Jeffrey: (amused)"Your friend is impatient."
Hudson: "The curse of youth."
I don't know why, but I like that little exchange. It just seems fitting.

Brooklyn's hatred of Demona comes off as strong as ever, and I like how Goliath handles that particular problem.

Demona and the slaughter...one of the most chilling and memorable moments in GARGOYLES. It sure goes farther than most other American animated series I'm familar with. The gal with her arms shot off "LESS HARSH?" Yeah. Sure. Whatever.
PERSON 1: "Um, instead of killing this one, don't you think you could just mutilate her body instead?"
PERSON 2: (evil villain voice) "YEAH, heh heh heh heh heh heh--*cough*ahem* Whatever you say."
Man I would have loved being privy to some of these S&P conversations.

I did wonder why Macbeth wore the Hunter's mask, but it wasn't an extremely pressing issue for me. Mac had his reasons--he ALWAYS has his reasons. I did like the new "eye-less" design. It also seemed to have a pretty clear metallic sheen...or I could be wrong.

Bodhe's switch from "big man" to "yes man" in the flashback I had noticed, but only dimly. I knew he was definitely shifting tactics to get what he thought was the best outcome...and Macbeth always listens to him. That scene on the hill is always difficult for me to watch. The voice acting and animation of the characters are quite good, and man I always feel frustrated for Macbeth.

You are right about Emma Samms. She didn't leave too much of an impression on me until Part 4, but that's a ways off yet.

Duncan, the @$$hole--that's how I'll always remember him from this. Of course he gets a bit of his own from Gillcomgain in that one scene--one of my favs in this episode I might add. Then Duncan comes up with the whole "He fooled me completely" routine for Macbeth--who buys it.

I knew Demona's "Never again" line was in reference to the Captain's betrayal, and I always liked that touch. I also like when Demona says "I make no promises" in reference to allying with a human, and the Weird Sisters smile.

Gillcomgain didn't need to crush the rose to make me feel okay about hating him--I was cheerfully doing it myself already.
Macbeth fights rather disappointingly in his battle with Gil, I must admit, but he did seem to have the upper hand when Gruoch came out and made the perfect hostage.
I suppose the two "Lovers almost fall over edge" scenes may have been a bit much for some, but they were different enough that it came across more as "parallel"(sp?) than "repeat".
Ah, the unmasking, and the revelation. Demona didn't remember scarring him. I wonder if this little revelation, an action of her's she didn't even remember creating her most hated adversary, had any impact on her. Did she think he was lying, or mistaken?

I don't know why, but I kind of like the Hunter's death more than most other "falling-deaths". Maybe it's because Demona THWACKED him down with her tail, or just that Jim Cummings gives such a great death yell (seriously, I really like it).
Demona thanks a human. A small thing, but of great importance considering what she will become. Still, she seems a bit glad that she doesn't owe Macbeth, seeing that he was the one first in her debt.
The second wedding, boy, everything about it is happier than the first one...except Duncan up in the tower. Nice, chilling little scene there between father and son.

Though the "talking, crumbling triplet statues" is pretty chilling in its own right. I liked that Goliath got mad enough to consider killing Demona--just seemed more natural.

I love Xanatos saving Owen during the fight with Demona--the bad guy saves his side kick. Not something you see very often.
I, unfortunately, did not get the idea that shutting off the broadcast would reverse the spell. Maybe this was because I didn't expect it to be that easy to reverse ANY spell (can we say "castle rises above the clouds"?). Also, since the flashback story didn't seem completely finished, I thought there was more of the multi-parter to go. Anyway, now Xanatos' line, "That should do it, eh Owen? Terrific" makes more sense to me. I had thought that maybe Xanatos had momentarily forgotten that Owen was stone, but it just didn't quite fit.
I DID however, get the idea that Demona and Macbeth feel each other's pain right from where it was introduced. The fight, while good, really just seemed like added candy around that juicy revelation. I was ready to learn the background about the connection.

Like Todd, one of my favorite things about the ending, where the hero and villain agree to team up, is that the villain suggests the alliance. "Do you want vengence, or a solution?" Xanatos remains so pragmatic here it's astounding. And for the record, I personally do like the fade-out on the handshake.

Waiting for Part 3

Todd Jensen writes...

Some time ago, I heard a fellow "Gargoyles" fan say that he considered Matt something of a hypocrite in that, while he was setting out to expose the Illuminati to the world, he was willingly joining in the efforts to keep the gargoyles a secret and hiding them, even after he became the head of the Gargoyle Task Force - and also condemned Elisa for keeping the gargoyles a secret, especially from Captain Chavez. I didn't agree with that person, feeling that there was a difference between exposing a ruthless and machiavellian secret society that's meddling in everybody's lives and exposing a group of extremely rare beings who have to hide from the world because most humans consider them monsters and would hunt them down if they knew about them, but I felt vaguely bothered by it, and thought that I'd ask you what your thoughts on the matter were.

Entity writes...

Hi Greg,

In your latest beat sheet for the series opener, I see that the idea of the Trio being young and inexperienced was still prominant. I understand where you came from in eventually changing that, but when I first watched AWAKENING I was distraught by the Trio. Every gargoyle we saw was a full-fledged warrior. Where _were_ the inexperienced kids? The elderly? It seemed slightly out-of-sync that the Trio were such able-bodied fighters. Was the Viking attack a real threat or wasn't it?

That is just my original impression of the events of the initial Viking attack. Later on, when the gang counterattacks the camp, I can understand their participation.

I guess the battle just came off too light-heartedly when we glimped the Trio, starkly contrasting with characters like Goliath's and Demona's scenes. A real sense of danger is added by Hakon drawing Goliath's blood, boulders crashing into stone, refugees huddling about, the Captain barking orders, etc. But then we have the Trio gallavanting through the battle like it's, as Brooklyn puts it, just "fun."

I think their innocense could have been portrayed in a way that didn't detract from the realism that was so effectively installed earlier on.

This isn't intended to come off as pure criticism. AWAKENINGS was brilliant, especially Part 1. But I thought I'd mention my first impressions.

Another little thing I noticed from the beat sheet is that the flashback originally began showing the refugees entering the castle, with the Marauders/Vikings on their tail, and then both parties camp for the day till dusk. This struck me in two ways: First, it gave me a better grip of realism. Enemy attackers camping right outside the castle, both sides waiting for the battle to begin... that could've added a cool flavor to things, and immerse us more into the medieval setting. Secondly, showing the refugees herded into the castle beforehand would've better clarified the events surrounding the battle. In the final product, we jump straight into the fight and, as a result, a reason is not even necessarily needed. The Captain's off-hand comment about refugees comes off as superfluous. I remember shrugging. 'That's nice' I thought. We were in the battle. Who needed backstory? Of course, the refugees were an important component, for the sake of Tom and his mother, and to better portray the environment of 10th century Scotland. If we'd seen the prologue to the battle, that's included in the beat sheet, I think it would've been much more effective.

I guess what this comes down to in the end is my earlier message I sent to you, in which I asked about trimming episodes with Last Time and Next Time segments. You defended, saying they were useful for tightening the episodes, but I put forth, as shown here, that some valuable stuff can be lost. Of course, it's doubtful you would've wanted or could've gotten a 6th Part to AWAKENINGS, but don't you think you could use ANY extra time you have to better flesh things out?

matt writes...

i'd just like to make a comment about gargoyles kissing. i think that stroking the brow ridges or hair is an extremely intelligent and important things in the garg series. first of all, it gives them some culture very different from humans and second, given that many gargs have beaks kissing becomes kinda hard to do. i'm surprised that Broadway and Angela kiss but i understand Greg's explanation that this is because of human influences on these two. good job, Greg, these subtle differences between humans and gargs really gives depth to the show!

Corrine Blaquen writes...

I was reading your "beat sheet" for the pilot you drew up, and it seemed that at first you didn't intend for Demona to be Goliath's mate. What made you change it, if you hadn't planned it since the beginning?

Blaise writes...

CITY OF STONE

[flexes fingers] Gonna be doing a LOT of typing about this one.

The opening scenes with the hostage situation are pretty good (Terrorist fires off a round of gun-fire and Matt wryly responds, "Think they're starting to see it our way?" The more I think about it, the more I realize how fun this guy is).
Slow person that I am, I didn't pick up on the Weird Sisters' oddity until they started talking to Goliath. Then they disappeared and that sort of clinched it. I knew they were talking about Demona (an idea probably helped by my reading a "Disney Adventures" article on GARGOYLES that litterally described her as a "Gargoyle terrorist").

The heretofore(sp?) unseen conversation between Demona and the Captain is finally revealed (and thanks to your ramble, the reason Demona looked a bit aged in some of the shots--that always drives me CRAZY!). On about my second viewing (I'm still slow) I finally picked up that the "Dawn Attack" was a back-up plan, and the original plan was attacking at night with the gargoyles away from the castle.
It always kills me to see Demona ALMOST tell Othello and Desdemona...and then not. Just like it always kills me later when she ALMOST accepts responsibility for what just happened...and then pushes it off on the humans. The first time I saw that, I was almost literally left breathless, it just seemed so...I don't know--I really cannot describe what that scene made me feel.

Backtracking a bit--The "Tears of Stone" are indeed a nice touch. Very effective, even the second time. In fact that whole sequence where Demona kisses the Goliath statue good-bye is one of the more heartbreaking parts in the series (especially considering the fact that now Demona tries to KILL Goliath).
Love the shattered "Coldstone-head" and Demona's anguished wail/roar; an excellent Act-ender.
The Eggs--You're right, I never gave them a thought after Xanatos mentioned them. Even after this, I didn't give them much thought, for much the same reason as Todd (a thousand years? Honey, they're dead by now--Avalon? Well now, that's different).
Gillcomgain (however you spell it). I liked the trickle of blood that came through his hands after Demona had slashed him. That's just the fiend in me.

Back in the present:
I entirely bought Demona's story about how she lived forever. Xanatos' interest in immortality caught me by surprise a bit. Wasn't this like the first time his desire to live forever was brought up?
"Listen, or watch, but not both." I wondered why Xanatos seemed so intent about this, and it took Hudson's explanation in the next episode for me to catch on. But I like it. It gives that extra complication to the magic.
Yeah, Owen being mesmerized and lifted into a chair while Demona gave the final phrase of the spell was a bit of a cheat. I try to rationalize it, like always (she...had a special talisman palmed in her hand--yeah, yeah!).

Then the Weird Sisters as "Modern Maidens" (if you will). Yeah, Phoebe looking at Seline while she's addressing Luna is a bit aggrivating, but on my tape, as she's finishing the line, after turning her head to Seline, Pheobe's eyes look back in Luna's direction. Maybe in times of great excitement Pheobe just gets her sisters mixed up (for half a second).

Demona and the guards. Yeah, she did NOT age well. The guards--in my mind, they're dead (that mace coming down seemed pretty final to me). I liked that about this 4-parter--people actually DIED. It added more emotional weight.

Demona's Second (I KNEW IT! I just KNEW that was John Rhys-Davies doing his voice). Yeah, I like him too, probably because he was the only other gargoyle in Demona's band who spoke and managed to develop a definitive personality (even when he wasn't speaking, his animated actions/reactions were great). Considering what happens to him off-screen in part 4...so much for not personalizing the victims.
The Weird Sisters as gargoyles--good, and I love their designs.

Ah, the happy days of Macbeth's youth. Like Todd, I find it all the more despicable of Duncan to order Findlaech's(sp?) death after Findlaech's true pledge of loyalty. Bodhe's cowerdice did register for me, but I only REALLY began to take full note of it as the multi-parter progressed and in later viewings.
The Hunter (I LOVE that title--any one word title that has a "The" before it just really piques my fancy). Yeah, I knew it was Gillcomgain (thanks to the painted scars on the mask). Yeah, the more I thought on it the less sense it made that no one would suspect him with those scars on his face. Still, he did wear a hood, and the very nature of his business may make a few people want to overlook any similarities, assuming they even had time to make note of the scars on the Hunter's mask before he A) gutted them or B) disappeared again.

Findlaech's death is the "fall-death," but I don't mind it too much here, and Macbeth's reaction makes it all the more tragic.
Demona saves the young couple. It's actually nice to see her make the "good-guy" choice here. It still shows a glimmer of what she once was, as opposed to how she now acts.

Unfortunately, no I never got the impression that Gillcomgain was going to attack Prince Duncan. But on the plus side the Weird Sisters' appearance really gave the scene an extra impact.
For the record, I was thrilled when I heard Jim Cummings as the Hunter--I think this guy does great voice work.

It was nice seeing Fox here (I had forgotten that in the original outline Derek was the pilot. I'm probably being redundant, but I'm glad you guys were able to go with Fox, it personalizes things even more for Xanatos). And the whole "humans turned to stone" thing really worked for me. When Owen changed, it was just shock--seeing the true nature of the spell. Fox's, more amazing for the danger it put both her and Xanatos in at that moment. Elisa's...her's was the eeriest, due in part to the camera shot and the closing music. I couldn't wait to see the next episode.

Be careful with the rest of these rambles--When it comes to CITY OF STONE I tend to be very long winded and go over almost every scene.

matt writes...

Jim R. and i were just discussing how to get certain with-held info from you by tricking you when we realized just how ruthless we fans can be. thats okay, cuz your smart-ass responses are worth not getting the answers we seek. keep up the good work!!!

Sixshot writes...

I always loved City of Stone 1-4.

My favorite moments :
- Demona smashing the soldiers at the food raid. Vengeance never tasted so cold.
- Gillecomegain entrance at Moray. Nice cloak.
- Demona ripping the mask off Gillecomegain. Demona never realized that she ruined a little boy's life.
- Duncan quote about the mask to baby Canmore.
- The coronation of Luach by Bodhe. Very dramatic.
- Final battle at the Eyrie Building. The double-punch by Demona-MacBeth at Goliath was priceless.
- Xanatos' quote about 'fire at them, sort this out later'.
- The mask passing from one Hunter to another during the whole series.
- And of course, Oeqn's note about 'even cable'.

My only complaints:
- Demona waiting all night to make up her mind on revealing or not her bargain with the captain.
- Demona didn't slaughter Katherine and Magus to retake the eggs.
- Gillecomegain putting the mask to kill MacBeth. Hey buddy, you only for the hunt!
- MacBeth comment about Robots/Gargoyles taking off from the world tallest building in a frozen city. Frozen or not, you can still notice Robots/Gargoyles taking off from the world tallest building.

Todd Jensen writes...

My ramble-response on "City of Stone Part Two".

I very much enjoyed it (like the other parts of "City of Stone"). A few specific thoughts:

The 11th century flashbacks continued to be good ones. I particularly liked Macbeth and Gruoch's scene on the hill, the "villains-fall-out" part between Duncan and Gillecomgain, and Duncan's afterwards duping Macbeth into going against Gillecomgain. (One thing that I recently found myself wondering was whether Duncan was hoping to trick Macbeth into killing Gillecomgain for him as a means of disposing of a former henchman who was now becoming of a problem to him, as a means of forcing Gillecomgain into killing Macbeth by having Macbeth attack him, or maybe even whether he was hoping that they'd kill each other and get rid of two problems for him at once).

One thing that strikes me about the Duncan of "City of Stone" (here already in the first two parts and even more in Part Three): he's a lot closer to the Macbeth of Shakespeare than the Macbeth of "City of Stone" is. Duncan is here the one who ensures a clear path to the throne by murdering the opposition; furthermore, he moves against Macbeth in a manner almost evocative of Macbeth's moving against Banquo in the play, because of the fear that Macbeth will cheat him and his future lineage of the throne. (It strikes me as significant that Duncan renews his scheming against Macbeth after Canmore's birth, as if that was the catalyst for it: now he has a future dynasty to protect, rather than just his own personal ambitions). The one significant difference is that the Duncan of "Gargoyles" never shows any of the internal torment or remorse that the Macbeth of Shakespeare shows over his criminal deeds; apparently Prince Duncan is much more hardened and callous.

I also like the touch of Demona genuinely failing to recognize Gillecomgain as the boy she attacked back in 994, even after he spells it out to her. (Definitely fits Demona's character a lot).

For the present-day parts: I liked Jeffrey Robbins' return, and thought that it was well-integrated into the story. Demona's massacre was very chilling. As for Xanatos shutting off the broadcast, I picked up on later showings the notion that he initially thought that that would be enough to undo Demona's spell, but I'm not so certain that it occurred to me the first time around.

The thing that interests me most about the ending, actually, isn't so much Xanatos and Goliath calling a truce as the fact that it's Xanatos who brings up the need for a truce with the words "Do you want vengeance, or a solution?" Temporary truces between the hero and the villain over a common foe happen often in adventure cartoons - but how often is it the villain who realizes the need for it first and has to convince the hero of it? The line tells us a lot, I think, about Xanatos's uniqueness: he has common sense, and the clear understanding that finding a way to undo Demona's spell is a much greater priority than just looking for someone to punish.

Looking forward to the rambles on the remaining two parts.

matt writes...

Jim R., i think that Greg explained time travel pretty well and it makes sense to me. if you were to go back in time to save JFK one way or another you failed cuz JFK was assasinated! its like Xanatos said, "You won't, because you didn't. Time travels funny, that way." you wouldn,t succeed it saving JFK because you obviously didn't save him, he was killed despite what you would do. another example is "M.I.A." Goliath knew from meeting Leo and Una that Griff didn't come home that night so when he went back in time even if he did everything to keep Griff in his time something else would have happened. Griff would have been killed etc. time is like a river and any attempt to change it will end in failure because if history had been changed you would never had wanted to try and change it in the first place! does all this make sense?

He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named writes...

I just returned from a vacation in Disney Land. (Boy, was it crowded!) So I figured that I could find some Gargoyle merchandise there; those stores have everything Disney. I walked into one, then another...and another...and another...with no luck. Not a single piece of Gargoyles merchandise anywhere in the park!!!
In one store, I asked an employee, "Do you have any Gargoyles stuff?"
He replied, "I...don't know what you mean...I don't know what a Gargoyles is."
It's nice to know that Disney employees know so much about there company's works. (And they use good grammar, too!) I have searched everywhere for Garg stuff, without luck. Where can I find it? Why isn't there any to be found; especially in Disney Land?

Ed writes...

"CITY OF STONE"

I first watched this about four years ago. I'd seen some of the later episodes of "Gargoyles" when we got the Disney Channel for the first time in the summer but I only saw a few episodes before they stopped airing the show. Later episodes - "EYE OF THE BEHOLDER", "THE GREEN", "THE NEW OLYMPIANS" and "CLOUD FATHERS" through to "THE GATHERING" PART ONE). You can imagine how it was to wait 14 months to find out how it ended. Anyway, I stumbled across the first part of "AWAKENING" completely by accident on GMTV one morning only a few weeks later. When they got to "REAWAKENING", they had a little advert in the break - for the next two weeks they planned to show two back-to-back episodes, and they showed teasers which made me sit up in my seat - Demona smashing stone humans with her "another human bites the dust" line being the one that always rings in my mind.

So, of course, I tuned in. I think, in hindsight, that I missed out by not having the cliffhangers to parts 1 and 3 in the same way. But I still feel now about part 1 as I did then. It's probably the most chilling cliffhanger you did. "HUNTER'S MOON" had two dramatic ones and I guess part 1 of that certainly ranks as quite scary. But I didn't see that until over a year later (GMTV only showed about 30 episodes and I had to wait until Disney started again). By that time, I'd seen many of the "Goliath Chronicles" episodes and had found a clip online showing "They did this to her," but cutting out the final "and I will kill them". Anyway, this cliffhanger I came to completely cold.

I think it's the music that gets me. It's so perfectly controlled and quiet, and pairs so well with the still face of Elisa. And the accompanying loose ends were fascinating too. For one, the stone humans - I knew what was going to happen to some of them from the teaser of Demona's smashing spree and this didn't do anything to lessen my appreciation of it. But then there was Xanatos and Fox. Bear in mind that at this point, I hadn't seen "VOWS" and hadn't yet realised that season 2 was being aired out of continuity. I remembered that they had a baby in "THE GATHERING" though, and was pretty hooked by their characters as such. Owen and Fox added to the drama really well: Fox's 'what can I say, I was curious' line is great and beautifully read. Same with Owen's 'Demona lied to us'. It's so simple, so urgent - a real panicked Owen. Loved it. Xanatos didn't have any particular outstanding dialogue here, but the animation on him is great. You're right - having a show where you really care about the villains, heck having a show where you can have a 4-part story where the problem is created by and solved by the villains (if you include the Weird Sisters and Xanatos), is something pretty special as well.

Basically, this is my favourite of the three cliffhangers. (Part 2's grew on me a lot. Part 3's lost its impact.)

As for Macbeth, I already was fascinated by him. I'd seen him only about five weeks ago in 'ENTER MACBETH' and the name intrigued me. So did the character. And it didn't hurt that his debut episode was great as well. (I can't help wondering how I'd have felt about Macbeth here had I seen 'LIGHTHOUSE' first - Macbeth appeared a lot less mysterious and a lot more villainous there). I never thought it was the same Macbeth that Shakespeare had written about. And I don't remember the naming thing being of particular interest to me. My reaction was more 'yes, it's Macbeth!', rather than 'wow, maybe we'll find out how he named her'. I can't remember when I realised he was in it either (whether he was in the ad or not). But I was bowled for six when I realised that he was the real Macbeth. And I knew nothing about the actual history of Macbeth at the time, although I'd seen several Shakepeare plays in the adaptation series that the BBC ran recently.

It was nice to see Matt too. I notice in your original draft you included Derek in place of Fox. Now, Fox is perfect for the situation but I'd seen 'HER BROTHER'S KEEPER' only a little while ago and Derek really impressed me - I couldn't wait to see how that story turned out. (And even longer to see 'THE CAGE' after that!). Anyway, I always thought it was a pity we didn't see more of Derek working for Xanatos. (Although since 'METAMORPHOSIS' is so early in the season I guess I now see why).

The Wyvern rerun. I'm so glad that you included some revision on the Demona/Captain betrayal thing. I'd seen 'AWAKENING' pretty recently (well, a few months anyway). But still, seeing episodes a week apart and the fact that the story was quite complicated led me to be thankful that there was some explanation. I only got confused once. I mixed up the Magus and the Archmage in 'VOWS'. Eventually I realised that I should just stick a tape in and should have done this from the very start. I regretted that immensely, especially with this story.

And yeah, it was painfully obvious that Macbeth was Macbeth. I didn't care. I was just desperate to see more of the guy. Not as much as the Weird Sisters though. What a presence. Every time they appeared they confused the hell out of me and I loved it.

Of course, I didn't really have to wait very long for part 2 and so most of what I remember is mixed up with that. So I'd better wait for your next ramble to say more…

Todd Jensen writes...

Oh, one other thing about "City of Stone Part One" that I forgot to mention. One touch that I liked was the bit about Findlaech's declaration of loyalty to Prince Duncan. I particularly liked it because of the light that it gives to Duncan's having Findlaech assassinated: not only was it an evil deed, but it was also unnecessary. Findlaech really didn't have any plans to put Macbeth on the throne and outmaneuver Duncan. So Duncan would have become King anyway without needing to send the Hunter over to Castle Moray. In fact, by having Findlaech assassinated, he wound up moving one step closer to the very future that he feared (Macbeth becoming king in his place).

You might almost view it as a parallel to Demona's helping to bring about the Wyvern Massacre, partly to avert the vision that she'd seen in "Vows" (assuming that my suspicion is correct that Demona believed that the massacre had been carried out by Princess Katharine's people; as I mentioned before, the Demona from 1995 tells her only that the humans did it without saying which humans, which could make misinterpretation very easy). In each case, the very attempt that the character makes to avoid an undesired future helps to bring about that future. The old self-fulfilling prophecy business again. (And it crops up, of course, even more in Part Three).

Todd Jensen writes...

After having read your ramble on "City of Stone Part One", I thought that I'd give my own response on it.

I've already given a previous comment on "City of Stone" focusing more on Demona and Macbeth than on the gargs, and how while I usually don't like episodes of a series that focus mainly on the antagonists and leave the protagonists to one side, this occasion was different, and why I believe that to be. So I'll move on to other matters.

1. About the Eggs: To tell the truth, I honestly hadn't given their fate in the series any real thought (beyond the fact that I did believe that Princess Katharine, the Magus, and Tom had taken good care of them) for this simple reason: the thousand years between the Wyvern Massacre and the present day. I didn't think it likely that gargoyles naturally lived for a thousand years (and of course, we now know that they don't and that Demona's only managed it because of the Weird Sisters' help), so I assumed that the eggs had long ago hatched, and the young gargoyles grown up, lived out their lives, and died long before Xanatos ever relocated Castle Wyvern to New York. I hadn't anticipated the possibility of a place such as Avalon where time moved slower. So I simply hadn't given any thought to the eggs having any impact on present-day events in the Gargoyles Universe.

2. The first set of flashbacks, the one to the Wyvern Massacre of 994, felt very effective to me - I particularly find Demona's grieving farewell to a stone Goliath extremely moving (and the musical accompaniment fits it very well). You'd have to have a heart of stone (pun not intended) to remain unmoved by it, as well. And the "What have I - what have they done?" moment is a memorable and chilling point for me. (One thing that I've noticed is how often Demona comes close to realizing her error and turning around for the better - and then she rejects the opportunity and the moment passes. Kind of sad, really).

3. I must confess that the subtle hints about Owen's true nature slipped past me; I hadn't equated the "tricky" adjective with "trickster" as in "Puck the trickster". I was just assuming, I suppose, that Demona was considering Owen the more cunning of the two (which I mentally disagreed with since I don't like to imagine Xanatos as less smart than Owen).

And I'd also noticed the way that Demona magically overpowers Owen at the same time that she's reading the spell, and felt a bit puzzled by it. It seemed to me almost as if she was casting two spells at once.

4. The 1020 flashback: The big thing that I thought that I'd say about the Macbeth flashbacks here (for the entire four-parter, actually) is that I do feel that I was better prepared for the differences between the "Gargoyles" Macbeth and the Shakespearean Macbeth than most of the viewers may have been, since I'd read up on the historical Macbeth already. So I knew a good deal of the data about him that showed up in "City of Stone". I knew that Gruoch was the real name of the historical Lady Macbeth (and so I could immediately guess as to the role of the character Gruoch in "City of Stone" when she was first introduced). I knew that Macbeth was, in actual history, a much better king than Duncan was, and that he had overthrown Duncan in battle rather than murdering him in his sleep. I knew about Duncan's son Malcolm being nicknamed Canmore (the name that "Gargoyles" used for him). So I felt quite prepared for the story that "City of Stone" used.

The one case where the Shakespeare version did throw me was when, in the course of watching this episode for the first time, I thought "Findlaech being given as the name of Macbeth's father? But I thought that it was Sinell." (The name of Macbeth's father in the play). But then that evening, I happened to be reading something up on the historical Macbeth, and discovered that his father was indeed named Findlaech - which quite amazed and impressed me. (I also spotted Gillecomgain on Macbeth's family tree as Gruoch's first husband, and was astounded to discover that the first Hunter was a real historical figure thereby; I had known before, however, that in actual history Gruoch had been married to somebody else before Macbeth, and about Luach/Lulach).

5. The bits at the end with Owen, Fox, and Elisa turning to stone were very chilling to me; I'd known that something nasty was going to happen from Demona's spell, but not what, and when we actually saw it take place, it definitely felt spooky. And it's certainly a great cliffhanger, as you said (and I hadn't even noticed that the cliffhanger was directed more towards Xanatos and his associates than to the protagonists).

6. I had indeed believed, for a while, that Demona's spell was how she survived - though by the end of Part Four, I knew otherwise.

At any rate, I thought that it was a great episode, and a great beginning to the second season's first multi-parter. Thanks for the ramble, Greg.

matt writes...

i just watched "Heritage" today. i didn't like this episode for a long time but i've started to like it more and more. i think this episode forshadowed the rest of the series even more than "Future Tense" did.

for instance, when Goliath is in the water and shouts, "Elisa!!" it sounds and looks exactly like Elisa's "death Scene" in "Hunter's Moon III" and Elisa and Goliath's reunion really shows their growing relationship, so much so that i had never thought of those two as a possible couple until this episode (i know, i must have been an idiot not to see it).

"Heritage" also really shows that while Angela is very intelligent she is also very naive about the world outside of Avalon. i don't think she really begin to understand the way the world works until "The Reckoning".

Also, when the whole world tour began i figured Goliath and co. would meet other gargs somewhere and i was so anxious for this that i was fooled into believeing those gargs were real even after Grandmother said that there were no gargs there. poor Goliath, he thought he finally found another clan...

its a good episode, Greg. like "Turf" and "The Silver Falcon" i kinda grew to really like this episode alot!

Jim R. writes...

Happy New Year!
What are your New Years resolutions, Greg? I'm hoping one of them is to get Gargoyles back on the air. But I'm sure you've had that one on your list for at least 2-3 years, right?
If matt was the first to post in 2001, then I hope to be the last person to post today (01/01/01).

Todd Jensen writes...

Re your comment on changing Broadway's character from female to male:

Well, maybe it was cowardice, but I'm certain that it was a good thing for Angela that you did. She wouldn't have been able to have had a S&P-approved relationship with Broadway otherwise, after all :)

Heather N. Allen writes...

City of Stone...what a great miniseries! Not one of my specific favorite sets of episodes, but I love how everything storywise came together ('what a tangled web we weave'!) I ADORE continuing story lines, which is why I never got into many 'sitcom' cartoons. (I DO admit having a weakness for "Freakazoid", though...)

And thanks for explaining that whole screw up with Demona looking too old in that 'new' scene with the Captain of the Guard. That has always annoyed the heck outta me, but I wasn't thinking along the lines of the poor animators trying to keep things straight. Considering I want to go into some type of animation, I feel guilty for not being more thoughtful! ^_^

Now, on to some questions/musings/etc...

"If it turns out short, we can add the bit about 'Birnam Wood coming to Dunsinane', which I've left out for now."

1>You planned to use this witches' prophecy from the play in the show? How were you going to fit it in exactly?

This was one of my favorite ironies in the play (now that I've read it!), right next to the prophecy about Mac not being killed 'by a man of woman-born'. And if you think about it, that irony _was_ portrayed in the series. Demona isn't woman-born, and she certainly ain't a man! ^_~

"He gets in his helicopter heading for Studio, with Derek at pilot."

2> You mean you didn't have "Metamorphosis" planned out at this point in time? Or were you just confused? Or am I just confused...?

"Duncan goes to destroy them starting with Demona."

3> Whoa, hold on! I just thought of something...how'd Duncan know about Gil's feud with Demona specifically? Did Gil tell him? And did he pass on the legend of "The Demon" down to Canmore? How did the Eternal Hunt for the Demon get passed down (I mean, how did future Canmores specifcally know to hunt HER?)

"Duncan is killed in some way. (Preferably the same way Find & Gil bought it.)"

4> Well, we know he DIDN'T die this way. How did that whole magical orb thing come into the picture? Who's idea was it? (Yours? Mr. Reaves?)

"...To Demona, who is having a grand old time with the 'stoners'..."
"...She's practically giddy, talking to herself and the 'stoners'..."
"...In the skies above Manhattan, Xanatos & Goliath fly abreast for a moment as they 'pass gas'..."

>No questions here, I just thought that was funny. ^_~

>Hmm...I just ran this by spell check, and it suggested "manatees" for "Xanatos". How the heck do you get _manatees_ outta that?! There's no "X" in manatees! Sheesh!

Ciao, thanks again!
~H\A~

Entity writes...

Hi Greg,

We've all been awaiting this ramble for a long time, and no doubt, the coming weeks will be VERY enjoyable. :)

CITY OF STONE, PT 1.

I'll admit to you that the opening terrorist sequence wasn't all that effective to me. It came off rushed. But it provided an excellent transition to Demona. And then... THE FLASHBACK. The first of many. My God, this was glorious. I always imagine that if I were to ever show off Gargoyles to someone new in under 5 minutes I'd show them this flashback. Even though deductive reasoning filled the holes that this flashback does in, it was still such an experience actually seeing it take place, like witnessing history. The Wyvern Massacre was the defining moment of the series. And now, to see the behind-the-scenes was breathtaking beyond description. Demona's tearful turn to stone, then horrific discovery at sundown were amazing. That 'blood-curdle' music is just great, too.

Let's see, I can't go on like this with every scene, so I'll try to sum up from here.

You mentioned it was originally going to be a three-parter. Allow me to accidentally spit my drink all over my keyboard at reading that. Even now, I think about how much better it could've told its story with five or even six parts. Just three? Impossible. There is so much jammed in there. Too much, really. I'm glad you're here for insight, because I'll be honest: I got scarcely any of what you had in mind for various characters' motivations and inter-relating. Everything was crunched to 'sound bites' and didn't get enough flesh for me to interpret what you were aiming for. Of course, I got all the necessary things needed to understand the flow of the story, but I regret not getting the rest...

This is completely random, but I just thought I'd say that when Macbeth removes his Hunter's Mask later, in Part 4 I think, I like how his hair was ruffled. A nice touch. Very appreciated.

Anyway, to do with Part 1, I have really one more comment. I think the "mistake" you made with the Weird Sisters in their portrayel in this multi-parter has to do with just one key scene... aww, crap, here I go referring all the way to Part 4 again. Oh well, the scene in question is the very end, the "they are our responsibility... our children... that is a story for another day" scene. Up until then, I believe our impression of the Sisters was of benevolent helpers, like you wanted us to believe, according to your memos. However, in this scene, they suddenly "reveal" that they actually had a reason for helping them. That there is a greater design. That Demona and Macbeth have destinies to fulfill. I, and I'm sure most other people, suddenly got insanely excited thinking that D&M were going to be instrumental in saving the world from some great prophecy or something. But as it turns out, it's just a petty strike on an island...

Just my take. (I'd be interested - if this doesn't sound like me usurping your forum, Greg - in what others' takes were.)

Lastly, I just thought I'd mention that, ironically, I was talking with a friend this morning about the play Macbeth. I mentioned Gargoyles and off-handedly about its superior historical accuracy, to which Friend reponded that Macbeth, the play, was fiction. I insisted there really was a Macbeth and Duncan, but he was convinced otherwise. Interesting, huh?

Of course, I myself thought it was all made-up by you and the makers of the show till I looked it up in my Encyclopedia, to see what kind of historical "damage" you were doing in drawing these elaborate tales set in real countries' pasts... heh.

Dracolich writes...

Hello again.

After checking a great website called Encyclopedia Mythica (probably the most extensive list of mythology) I discovered an interesting tidbit on a being that might make the unusual depiction of the Banshee in the Garg universe understandible. The creature there is called a Baobhan Sith, and on a different webpage, it is considered to be another name for the Banshee.
This being is supposed to be a fairy-vampire. Interesting to note that it is supposed to wear green clothes, like the Banshee of the series. Interesting.

Tim writes...

City of Stone 1 ramble:

The Revelation about the Weird Sisters double agent motiviations was a thrill to read. It worked on me exactly like you said it did...did you have a camera inside our heads? Those are still the most wonderfully mysterious fey ever...I loooove Kathie Soucie's voicework.

In the top 5 of the most heart and gut wrenching scenes ever, Demona turinng to stone with a tear in her eye, the massacre finding scene (I thought "COLDSTONE!!!" when she picked up the piece of face) and her tearful goodbye to Goliath and any hope of a non-vengeful life.

1. Eggs: I never gave any thought to the eggs, but once they were shown driven away, it just opened up a whole new subplot to wonder about.

2. MacBeth, I was wondering about, he was neither a hero, nor a villian, something grey in between, which is always the best character. Young Macbeth and Young Gruoch certainly had to grow up fast. Loved the battle scene between Young MacBeth the Hunter and his "Nooooo!" Bodhe seemed to be a shrewed negotiator...probalby would make a good ambasador.

3. I really thought that was how Demona got her immortality, from the Grimorum. Why the heck not? Xanatos seemed to be desperate enough to trust her. Either he would have used the spell on Fox if it worked on him, or he didn't love her enough to ask her about it...wouldn't he have tested it on somebody first?

4. Yeah, Owen being caught by the spell was a bit cheating...but that's okay. :) Never even thought about the "tricky one" comment until I saw the Gathering. Once again, love the latin spells, gives the show authenticity, plus latin sounds just really darn cool and mystical.

Overall, the fact that this show provides wonderful backstories for the "villians" in a FOUR PARTER episode just goes to show why this is on nearly everybody's top 5 best episodes list.

Questions: 1. What did Standards and Practices think about the implications of Goliath and Elisa's relationship by the end of the series?

2. Who came up with the brilliant idea of the access code being "ALONE"? That just fits so well. Thanks so much for these episode rambles!

Yadira - xena_lawless@hotmail.com writes...

Comment:

Shutting off the broadcast, did not make me think that would work in breaking the spell and I thought it foolish of Xanatos to be so sure that it would work. I thought I was going to see a bit of hesitation and uncertainty in Xanatos right before he shuts off the broadcast. It seemed too simple a solution. In many experiences, it's easier to start something, but a bit more complicated to end it.

I did pick up on the fact that Demona recognized and knew the true identity of the person behind the mask when they felt each other's pain, an incident which I found rather interesting and wanted to learn more about it.

I do like Xanatos' line "You want vengeance or a solution." Something a true businessman would say. Put all your personal feelings aside and let's get right down to business , this needs to be fixed right away. That line is totally Xanatos.

Then at the end when Xanatos and Goliath shook hands...I didn't like it. I thought Goliath too forgiving....I mean shaking the hands of a man who's attacked you, paid people to attack you, manipulated you, and evicted you from the only home you've ever known....to shake hands with that man after only one situation where they had to work together and call a truce....for me...it was too soon. I think they should have just nodded to each other
when they parted...letting the other know that they appreciated the other's help, but I still don't trust you. Sometimes I don't blame Demona for being so upset at Goliath and calling him a fool....because sometimes he's too trusting and forgiving....but then again that's why I love him.

Thanks again, Greg, for helping to create a fascinating
series which I will continue to watch on tape and adore.

JADE writes...

Hi Greg,
Your always asking for some feed-back, and well here's mine, well it's more of my thoughts of a certain character--Demona. In the show she always seemed to filled with so much hatred, hatred for every one it seemed. Seeing the person she was before and after the raid of the castle really made me think. Having my own bad days, like every one else, I know what it feels like to "hate" the world, and during those days I realise it takes more strength to stay mad at the world than it does to "like" it. So thinking of Demona always being so full hate all the time is really sad, of course in a way she put herself in it...it was her own hatred for humans that did her brothers and sisters "in". Of course she'll never understand this, I guess her pride gets in her way some times, like every one does. In closeing I would like to say that I think Demona was a good character to throw in, it made the viewers see what a long time of hatred does to the heart.

Dexter writes...

Why is Angela so DAMN sexy? Oh I love her SO much! Dude, do you think she'd go for a blonde-haired punk? I mean, her own dad even went for a human, so maybe there's hope for me yet. Hmm...I bet you're gonna give me a smart-ass remark like "she's taken" or something cuz "gargoyles mate for life" BUT Demona proved that it is not true! Go me! Long live the beautiful Angela!

WereFox writes...

Greg

Just read your rambling about COS part 2 and I must confess I didn't ever pick up on Goliaths intention on killing Demona. It makes sense even though it would have been futile. Still, say he did try it (Big IF I know), I wonder what her reaction would be. As often as she's thrown his feelings for her back in his face, she'd view his attempt to kill her as a sign that his sentimental weakness regarding her was over. On the other hand, would it be so shocking that Demona would express sorrow that Goliath's feeling for her had so diminshed that he was capable of killing her?

Anonymous writes...

Addressed to "matt":
About Goliath "abandoning" the eggs: There IS no justification for him leaving the responsibility of taking care of the eggs to Princess Katherine and the Magus. BUT I do "understand" why. Perhaps it was because he was so depressed and traumatized he couldn't think things all the way through. Perhaps because he didn't feel himself "suitable" or "worthy" of taking care of the eggs and that even the humans would do a better job than he would; he must have blamed himself and not just the captain of the guard and Hakon for what happened at Wyvern. He must have felt he deserved the fate of the surviving members of the clan. And it seems that you have forgotten how sincerely remourseful the Princess and Magus were toward Goliath and how they offered to do anything they could for him. It wasn't as if they grudgingly offered to help him; so they were not very likely to go back on their promise. Also he is mortal and imperfect, and as an imperfect being he made a bad decision. Everyone makes a bad decision, and no one is codoning it, I just want to make sure you understand that.

Anonymous writes...

Hi! I'm Mel from Malaysia and I just wan't to tell you that how much that I'm REALLY hooked and into your original and unique cartoon and it's colourful characters I adore. Well, actually, I do have a vast of shooting questions that might just nip your time away....But you know how Daddies monitor their 17 year old daughters, so I'll just ask a few.
1.I'm so head over heels giddy about the 'steam' between the romantic Duo(G&E), but it also kinda surprises me that the other clan member didn't mind the sparks, I mean, being two different species(I don't mind,REALLY!=]); How come? What did they see within that?
2.Should ever IF THEY have a kid, how'd Demona react to the hybrid

matt writes...

hey, Jim R., thanks again for the kind words but stop putting quotations around my name. Matt is my real name and i'm fortunate enough that one of my favirote characters in the series shares my name! HEY, no one has emailed me!! whoops! i forgot i wasn't going to talk about non-garg stuff!!

matt writes...

i figured since i was singled out to everyone by "Jim R." earlier i'd write something about me... also cuz i like to talk about myself.:)
i don't know Greg personally but i wish i did. i ask Greg so many questions because i'm a big fan and i want to know everything about "Gargoyles" that Greg is willing (or able) to share with us. i've watched garg. since it first came on and i've come up with a lot of questions and when i came across this website i started asking them. i just really love this show! if i had one wish i'd wish for world peace, but if i had two wishes i'd wish that "Gargoyles" had its own television station and played nonstop!! to show how much a fan i am, those last two sentences instantly reminded me of Puck's "does this look like Alladin's lamp" line!!!!
anyway, so as not to clutter up this page with anymore non-garg stuff if you want to email me you can at ewoks11@hotmail.com. i'd love hearing from other fans esspecially since none of my friends were ever really into gargoyles.
and as for all my really great questions: "I can't help it if you can't keep up with Greg and me!". joke. see "Turf".
oh, and thanks for comparing me to Mr. Spock!

demona writes...

gerg in the chat room who is hudson?

WereFox writes...

Greg

My aplogies for all of the typos in my previous post. Thats what I get for posting this at 2:45 in the morning.

Joxter writes...

How much fuu could a fuu dog fuu if a fuu dog could fuu fuu?

Yes, that was a variation on the How much wood could a woodchuck chuck bit... And yes, it made no sense at all. But, Timedancer Brooklyn has a fuu dog... And if you say it all really fast then add a "HEY!" to the end it's pretty fun actually. Just a fun little thing, since I can't think of any questions for you to give a smart-ass answer to at the moment...

Jim R. writes...

Suggestion: give "matt" his own category whenever in the "Greg Archives 3.0". I mean that as a compliment. I know, I know, what can I say...I'm done for tonight.

Jim R. writes...

Greg, who is "matt"? Do you know him personally? "matt", if you're reading this, why do ask Greg so many questions? I hate to be the backseat driver here, but must you require a logical explanation for everything? Mr. Spock would think so, but geez man...

Oh, yes, and Gorebash, I know you will read this...I might be the only person just to ask how do you handle all these questions? You must be damn good at your job! Keep up the good work. I hope this gets posted. (Elvis has left the building...)

Aaron writes...

Hmmmm, a couple of random replies that probably won't make any sense due to the lag. But what the hey.

On the G99 radio play:

<<I had some specific kind of space iron that they were vulnerable to. (I had a name for it. I can't remember it now.)>> If nobody's reminded you by now, it was Dark Iron.

From the comedy development documents:

<<Pat Riley would have had a hard time with this group.>> Hee hee, being nearly as big an NBA fan as I am a gargs fan, you have no idea how funny I find that. Now I'm trying to picture Demona in a dark suit with her hair slicked back, stalking the sidelines like a caged lion.

Oh, and Xavier promised to make Demona the head of security for Glint Enterprises? I know it's a comedy, and so perhaps not such a big deal, but I still get a grin over the idea of his security corps being introduced to their new boss.

"I guess when they said Glint Enterprises was an equal opportunity employer, they weren't kidding."

I do find it kind of ironic though, since being head of security, while primarily about power and control, does sort of fall under the "gargoyles protect" heading.

DCB writes...

More of a general comment than a question, Greg. You don't have to say anything :)

I watch Demona's twice-daily transformation, and it suddenly dawns on me how excruciatingly painful that must be. Which is strange and probably silly, considering her tortured howling and screeching through it all, but I still have to wonder. As much as I hate to admit it, I myself never truly respect physical pain until I actually feel it, and afterwards I'll ''forget'' what it was like until I feel it again. Or I'll recall a time I was in ''unspeakable'' pain, and the feeling itself will be remembered vaguely at best. Pain demands respect, but it isn't as deserving or demanding as . . . oh, say, love and emotion . . . or even mental anguish, which can be far worse than its cousin physical pain.

But the point is, since Demona's situation . . . her lot of pain, both physical and mental, is unique in all the world (save for MacBeth, perhaps), I have to wonder what it's like to go through all that, to live the life of the tortured soul who won't (openly or willingly) admit she's a tortured soul to anyone but no one, even though I'd be insane to jump at the chance to experience that tapestry of pain. A small part of me, the part that wonders, wants to feel it just for the sake of knowing, and the rest of me keeps that one part small.

And when that part grows some, I imagine what it'd be like to have my feet grow several sizes and explode from my shoes like that and come to my senses :)

I guess what I'm actually saying is that "Gargoyles" really makes me think about a lot of things, perhaps even things you never intended your audience to think about or realize.

Happy Holidays, Greg. And thanks.

WereFox writes...

Hi Greg. Just a few thought about the Post Hunter's Moon Demona. My sense from reading the archives is that even though her ultimate plan, representing 500 years of work, has been foiled, her resolve to destroy humanity has not weakened. I can buy this argument, but I'll admit my bias now. Another plan, even one with your usually creative flare, to destroy humanity would still seem anticlimactic to me. Plus any actions by Demona to just pick up where she left off would seem unnatural.

Hi, I've just built a nuclear in my basement and the other day I came within an inch of pushing the button. Does my life continue on as it did before? I'd hope not. There would be consequences, grave ones.

To me, Hunters Moon should be a similar watershed in Demona's plot development. I'm sure she has plenty of other ideas, but would she be allowed to act on them? Even if the Robin Canmore and her brothers keep quiet, Xanatos knows what she almost pulled off. Here is a man with the resources, the motivation, and determination to move mountains to protect his son. I'd be disappointed if he didn't react. If he knows then presumably Fox knows. I can imagine the conversation now. "Mom, you'll won't believe what that nut job Demona almost did." I'm sure Titania would have plenty to say to Demona on this matter. And then there is always the possibility of the Illuminati learning about it. I'm not advocating retribution here, but the bottom line is consequences. You play with a big fire, you get badly burned. Would Demona be allowed to continue scheming while carrying on as president of Nightstone Unlimited? I'd think her first instinct should be to go into hinding for a long while, or something... It just wouldn't feel honest if she just went back to going about her daily life as if nothing had happened.

I once saw a 60 Minutes interview with the surviving families of Herman Goering and Martin Boreman. What I chiefly took away from that show was the sence of overwhelming shame that these people lived with on a daily basis, due to the actions of their genocidal relatives. How does Angela absorb the impact of knowing just how close her mother came on Hunters Moon and not be completely devastated? What kind of a relationship would she want with her mother now that she know just how far she is willing to go?

I can go on but I think you see my point. In the Goliath Chronicles episode, Generations, no mention was made of Hunters Moon. I see that it is also played down somewhat in The Gargoyles Saga. I hope that in any of your future plans for Gargoyles, the consequences for Demonas actions are appropriately profound. Thanks for putting up with the rant.

Todd Jensen writes...

This is a comment on your answer to Jason Barnett's question about Rogue. I'd read your ramble on the "X-Files" movie where you explained why you weren't too keen on Rogue as portrayed in the comics, particularly because of what you viewed as a clumsy introduction (her story being mostly crammed-in backstory rather than happening on-stage).

WB's currently doing an X-Men cartoon in which Rogue's a major character, in which they handle her introduction differently. They introduce her in the "now" of the series at the point where her "draining" ability first manifests itself, whereupon Mystique finds out and recruits her for her followers; in the "now" of the series thereafter, Rogue is thus portrayed as a "villainess" of sorts in that she's one of a group of mutants whom Mystique's recruiting in opposition to Xavier and the X-Men - but also portrayed as not feeling quite at home with them (she even reluctantly helps out the X-Men in one episode, though she doesn't feel quite ready to join them even then and heads back to Mystique immediately afterwards).

Actually, I've found it a rather good series (I've been able to quite enjoy it and follow it, even though I've next to no knowledge of the X-Men; they went for a "start continuity over from scratch" approach of the sort that you praised in both the movie and "Batman:TAS"); incidentally, Frank Paur is one of the directors.

Todd Jensen writes...

This is a sort of early ramble for "City of Stone" in general; I know that you haven't started any rambles on it yet, but this was a thought that I'd had for some time on the four-parter in general that I thought I'd share with you now, since it is next in line on the Episode Ramblings list.

One thing that has surprised me for some time is that "City of Stone" is one of my favorite "Gargoyles" stories. Surprised me because, as you once said (although I honestly didn't realize that this was the case until after you pointed it out) that the episode focused more on the villains (Demona and Macbeth) than on Goliath and his clan. And when I thought over that, it surprised me. Because I've found that I generally don't like episodes in a series which focus on the antagonists and leave the protagonists off to one side. But I very much enjoyed "City of Stone".

Once I realized that, I began wondering over why "City of Stone" was an exception to the rule. And I did provide myself with two possible answers for why that was the case:

1. The focus of the Demona/Macbeth backstory was on something that genuinely interested me very much, long before "Gargoyles" came out. For one thing, it was set in the medieval period, which is my favorite part of history (and indeed, the "medieval Scotland" flashbacks were always one of my favorite parts of "Gargoyles"). But, even more significantly, the backstory in the flashbacks was all about Macbeth. "Macbeth" is one of my favorite Shakespeare plays, and I was genuinely delighted and thrilled to see Macbeth turn out to be *the* Macbeth in it, and to see his story unfold in the course of the flashbacks. And all the more so when I saw that you were basing it on the historical Macbeth (whom I was already fairly familiar with), even if with some elements from the play (such as the Weird Sisters). So the story there was very much my cup of tea.

And second, Demona was, to me at least, never just another villain in "Gargoyles". She was a very crucial figure in the series. After all, she's a survivor of the original gargoyle clan, and thus as legitimately one of the title characters as Goliath, Brooklyn, Hudson, etc. Not only that, but she's also Goliath's former mate, and thus very much part of his story. So the strong flashback element around her worked for me.

At least, that's the explanation that I've worked out for why my response was and is different to "City of Stone" than to other episodes in other series of that nature (i.e., episodes where the protagonists are given a relatively smaller role). I just thought that I'd share it with you.

AbVibiA writes...

Since you always ask for feedback, Greg, Here I am!!!!!
Thanks to you and many others for:

1. Your old notes from the earliest days and silly thoughts. Some of them make me laugh, and some of them make me wish you had used them. (Ala the Elisa- Goliath scene when she mimics Goliath's poses. CUTE!)
2. Gotta love those smart-ass responses!
3. The enduring mystery that you keep about the rest of your plot. I wish you, or some other heavenly creature, could find a way to get that show back on the air!
4. The priceless scenes that endure in the minds of children and obscessive adults alike that I know you had a hand in creating.

Okay, It's short, but what can I say? I just wish the Gatherings weren't so far away, especially for those of us who live in the NorthEast US! Maybe I'll actually get to meet you someday!
-AbVibiA, 13

Mel writes...

Hello, I'm doing an assignment at school for art on Gargoyles, & I thought I'd take a look here to see if I could find some info on them.

I'm LOVE watching the show on Thursdays. I favour Bronsen the best, he's so cute.

Please send a reply to this message to: missee83@yahoo.com.au
because I don't think I'll be able to find this site again.
Thankyou.

matt writes...

i was just looking through the archives and i noticed that everyone always uses the term "the humans" just as we would say "the gargoyles" or "the new olypians". that really struck me as odd because i assume everyone submiting questions is human, as well as you, Greg. we probably say "the humans" for clarification in a universe of diverse peoples, but i wonder if we sometimes say it to distance ourselves from "the humans" in the series who besides Elisa and other friends of the clans (who we are not) usually are the ones to cause trouble for the gargs (which we would not do). well, just another pointless ramble from matt, although i hope its food for thought...

Kathy Lowe writes...

I just want to tell you how much I have enjoyed reading both your rambles on the episodes as well as all the development memo's. I never realized how much effort went into a production or how long in advance people start working on an idea. Your memos certainly show that a lot of team work was involved with the advanced details.
Thank you for sharing this priceless information.
See you at the gathering.

matt writes...

i know you get this alot, but i'd like to say thank you from all the fans, not just for the series itself, but for answering all of our questions and pushing to get episodes (new and old) back on tv. i've loved gargoyles from the beginning and even if there are no new spinoffs or movies i know "gargoyles" will still live on in our imaginations due to your commitment to the series. i love reading an answer to a question and going back to watch the episode talked about and seeing or realizing something i didn't before. thanks again.

JESS writes...

This is a general comment not a question, sorry.
matt writes about bronx not being able to feel pride ...
if he's comparing bronx to a dog, i know for a fact some dogs have a sense of humour, and can get jelous - so why not pride ??
also bronx seems to show considerable intelligence in the series, and to understand, pretty much, what is being said.
( cue "why not pride" question again!)
OK here's one for you, greg - does he?

matt writes...

at the end of "hound of Ulster" Goliath says that Bronx has a right to be proud of himself. now, i like Bronx and i think he is smarter and at times more emotional than your average dog but he is still an animal and i don't quite see how he can feel pride. maybe love, and fear, and loyalty, but pride???

matt writes...

in your analysis of "the mirror" (or somewhere) you mentioned that you wondered what the humans of New York thought when they suddenly relized they were not wearing shoes. last night, as i watched the episode i noticed that only one human was shown without shoes at the end of the episode. i don't think he was wearing shoes to begin with, here's why: the animators would probably pay closest attention to Elisa's changes back and forth cuz she was the main human character. when she became a gargoyle she no longer had shoes (or a jacket for that matter) and when she changed back she did. i think therefore that when Puck changed everyone back they would be as they were before, as Elisa was. that one guy probably was at home or something without shoes on when he was changed to a gargoyle than left his house and happened to be in the street when changed back. i realize i just rambled on about something completely pointless, but it was an observation that i had to share with everyone at "ask Greg".

Aris Katsaris writes...

Random thoughts about Vows:

I think it was around this episode that I decided I really loved the series. Or perhaps it was "The Mirror". One way or another this ep solidified the feeling...

There's an interesting thing about the greek dubbing. When the series was first shown in all the episodes the word "Illuminati" was spoken translated with the (archaic) Greek "Pefotismenoi"-"Enlightened Ones".

This created a very nice subtlety when the Norman ambassador greets Xanatos. He didn't say the obvious "a fellow Illuminatus" (in fact I was quite surprised -and disappointed- when I learned that's what was spoken in the original ep). He said "an Enlightened comrade." I really, *really* loved that line. Both the viewers and Xanatos knew what he was referring to. But the bystanders would get no special meaning by this, other than that the ambassador was praising Xanatos...

Something more about the translation was that it was strangely constructed in the speeches of the 10th century humans- adjectives after the nouns, a rhythm in their speech: Almost as if they were speaking poetry. Probably meant to make a distinction between their speech and the modern-day one... Was there anything analogous in the original?

<<Was anyone expecting Fox and X to really get married? And once they were, did you think you'd see them have a kid by season's end?>>

Once they'd gotten engaged, I did expect them to get married - but the child certainly stunned me. I think my mouth was hanging open at the end of "Outfoxed".

And I certainly didn't expect how that arc would go - that it'd cause Xanatos's redemption. What I had thought immediately after Outfoxed was "Poor kid! He's going to be experimented upon.". I knew that Xanatos had feelings for Fox, but I didn't know that he'd also have feelings for his son...

VF writes...

I've not read anything here before about this theory, so I hope I don't shock anybody. But have you ever thought about the evidence in the series that - gulp - there is a bit of a subconscious attraction between Elisa and Xanatos? Were you deliberate in creating this underlying current? Again, the intricacies of the characters and the stories are why this show appeals to me so much. Not that either Elisa or Xanatos would ever admit to such a thing, let alone act upon it. In fact, if I read Elisa's characterization right, she'd probably kill me for even suggesting such a thing.

But consider that Xanatos - although looking at Elisa as an adversary - will say things like "the charming Detective Maza" and "I love a woman with delicate wrists," etc. And, really, isn't he just a little too interested in her life? I have no doubt of his love and attraction for Fox, but Elisa is very similar to Fox - only working on the side of selflessness vs. selfishness. Xanatos seems to like strong women who can hold their own. And when he claims the feud against the gargoyles is over in "Hunter's Moon," his voice is almost - gulp again - tender when he says to Elisa, "He's waiting for you."

For Elisa's part in this - well, sure it's absurd to be attracted to a man who's turned your brother into a mutate. So I'll again caution that I'm meaning this on a very, very subconscious level. But you can't convince me there isn't some very passionate love/hate heat passing between these two in "Eye of the Beholder" when Xanatos prepares to take off in pursuit of Fox-as-werefox and Goliath, and Elisa jumps up and grabs her arms around him, looks him in the eye and very emphatically says, "I trust you about as far as I can throw you, Xanatos." And then he puts his arm around her waist and they're off because he doesn't have time to argue with her. It's almost as if you don't know if she wants to strangle him or kiss him. Similarly, look at the intensity of love/hate Demona has for Goliath. I also think you could argue that another reason why Fox attacks Elisa (who, to the werefox, appears to transform into Fox) is out of a tinge of jealousy. (You did say that episode was very romantically charged.) Also, Xanatos is a strong, attractive, intelligent ... human male (!) who, like Elisa, seems to have a bit of a nocturnal nature and has a seemingly predestined interest in and connection to the gargoyles. If he weren't so self-serving and nasty and wouldn't alter the physical chemistries of her relatives ... and if she hadn't met Goliath ... , heck, she could really go for a guy like him.

So, enough sacrilege out of me. I'd love to get your take on this. And thanks.

DrFaust writes...

Re: Working time paradoxes.

I must confess, I've always liked "changing the past" time travel stories. I was indoctrinated by "Back to the Future" at a young age. <shrug>

Unfortunately, I have yet to find a book with Heinlein's "All You Zombies." All the libraries around seem to focus on his monumental novels that hammer home the same points over and over. (Annoying nit I feel obligated to mention: all his characters have the same vocabulary and speech mannerisms. Drives me nuts.)

So, er, about the paradox thingy. Wish I had more to comment on it. There is a certain sense of balance and rightness to a self-fulfilling paradox. Makes for a neater and cleaner story. The first time I came across it was a short story by someone I can't remember called "Up By His Bootstraps" (or something similar). The idea blew me away.

It's almost a kind of aethestic, I think. While there is the appeal of a neat paradox, some people like the messy timeloops. Take Lawrence Miles' Faction Paradox ("Alien Bodies" and "Interference"). One of their forms of punishment is for a member to kill his or her's younger self.

Of course, Simon Bucher-Jones suggested in "Ghost Devices" that a self-cancelling paradox would loop over and over, variating slightly each time until some sequence of events occurred that allowed the universe to go on. Sort of like that mythical first time around that Vashkoda suggested.

Aesthetically pleasing as it may be, I always thought this kind of history was somewhat depressing. How do you *know* it was free will? If there never was a first time, and you've always been doing a particular action, then there's nothing to you say you could change. Which you can't.

Anyhoo, just a thought or two buried in all that.

"...full of sound and fury, signifying nothing..."

Jason Barnett writes...

I just read your thoughts on the X-men movie and the books' continuity. About Rogue, she actually first appeared in Avengers Annual 10 and apparently had several appearences in Dazzler, so she was with the Brotherhood for a little while at least. And as for the Ms. Marvel powers, they weren't that vague, super strength, invulnerability, flight. I always felt they were necessary to make a potentially interesting character viable. Half the time when she absorbed somebody their mind took her over so she was against the X-men, so she had to have something she could do to benefit the team.

demona writes...

greg could u give me some sits where i might find other gargoyle fans?

kevy writes...

Criky! I've just been looking at the archives and all I can say is thank you Greg! We fans are ruthless and relentless.

Blaise writes...

VOWS

First off, I hope you had a happy Thanksgiving!

Now, on to the episode.
The Pheonix Gate--I never dreamt of its power until Demona put it to use. I never even knew GARGOYLES would deal with time travel, but I was quite pleasantly surprised when it did.
On the subject of time travel, I really do prefer the way you guys used it. The "what's-happened-already-happened-time-is-immutable" method. You are right, it is far more satisfying for me (and in some cases, more fun as well).

Petros Xanatos is quite a guy. Usually, in animated shows with villains, they make the parents of said villain just as bad as their offspring, or turn them into comedy relief. It's refreashing that in this series, the parents don't approve of the more shady activities pursued by their children. Also, I think the way Morgan Shepherd (I know I misspelled that) reads each line is wonderful. And, like you, I think the "Mr. Big-Shot Time-Traveler" line and "American Penny" tag are wonderful moments.

In the initial airings, I did like seeing that Goliath bled from the mouth at the beginning. He wasn't quite so invulnerable after all. Unfortunately, they don't seem to show him bleeding in that opening fight anymore.
They also toned down Young Demona's over-enthusiastic greeting of Young Goliath the first time around. The second showing of the scene is exaclty as it should be, but the first time (when it's Goliath's flashback/dream) she no longer flies into his arms like before. I don't really understand why either of these alterations were made (or maybe I don't want to understand).

However, I MUCH prefer the REAL ending of VOWS (the flashback to the castle). When I first saw it, I felt "Okay, NOW this makes a lot more sense." So there is one person right here who likes the real ending.

In later viewings of this episode, I did pick up on Hudson's rather cryptic way of saying things, and liked it.
I'm also one of those people who think that Young Demona's visit to 994 may have played a part in her later machinations against the humans of Wyvern. She never knew WHICH humans were involved in the massacre, nor WHEN the massacre took place. Who knows how that may have eaten away at her?
And she could have avoided it if she had followed Goliath's advice. But she never did.

I was surprised that the Illuminati actually turned out to be real. And it made me happy.

The Archmage--well, I like the guy. And his revelation of the three talismans that would grant "the ultimate magical power" whetted my appetite for the day when we would see someone make that combination.

I wasn't surprised that Xanatos got married (I mean, he got engaged in the last episode, what's the next step?), but I was glad to see it happen. As for having a kid...best wait until we get to OUTFOXED.

Okay, this baby's getting a little thick, but that's only because you really did cram so much stuff into this episode.

Todd Jensen writes...

I was just looking over the two recently reprinted memos on all the variant names for the gargoyles. The part that really astonishes me the most about it is how many names were being suggested for the cast aside from the ones that they eventually wound up with. It seems so obvious to me now (although, of course, this is from the perspective of hindsight) that "Goliath" is the appropriate name for the "Gargoyle-Master" that I honestly can't imagine him being called anything else at all. (Ditto with the rest of the cast).

(Of course, I've come across this phenomenon in other "behind-the-scenes" cases; Tolkien, for example, originally considered naming the protagonist of "The Lord of the Rings" Bingo, but fortunately later on realized how inappropriately silly it would be and changed the character's name to Frodo).

Elisa Ann Goliath writes...

Hi! It's me again! Just wanted to ramble a little bit about E&G's relationship. (And a comment or two would be nice:)
Lately I've been thinking a lot about marital relationships. (You know, what makes a good one. My parents recently had their 41st anniversary, I guess that's why I'm thinking about it.) Now, I'm only 16, and I don't presume to know everything about marriage, but I think I can safely say I have a more realistic view of marriage than most of my peers.
In the series, as a HUGE fan of the E&G relationship, of course my main concern is for E&G to get "married", but really if you think about it, they already have a relationship that is.... I don't know, kind of marriage-like. In the Bible, men are commanded by God to love their wives as Christ loved the church (be willing to die for) and women are to submit to their husbands (like it are not, feminist ladies, it works best this way). With Elisa and Goliath, Goliath loves Elisa with all the tenderness of his heart, is willing to die for her, and he values her and her opinions, and is therefore always asking for her input and for her help. Also, since he loves her, he is not demanding or arbitrary, making it easy for her to submit. She, of course, loves him as much if not more than he loves her, is willing to die for him, and is usually ready to submit when he makes a final decision on something, whether or not it is what she suggested. As a proud, independent woman this cannot always be easy, but she makes the sacrifice because she loves him and because she knows that he is only doing what he thinks is best.
Well, I've just been wanting to get that down on record.
Thanks! TTFN!

Aris Katsaris writes...

More on fate and time-travel... :-)

I don't know if The Mighty Thor is Christian or not but if he is, then the following example from the bible may help explain the way that *I* view the whole fate/choice thing... Jesus several times reveals knowledge of the future. He says that St.Peter's going to deny him three times before dawn, that Judas is going to betray him, that the people are going to crucify him.

At the same time each of these choices belong to the people who made them: Free will is an important part of most Christian denominations. Peter *chose* to deny him, Judas *chose* to betray him, and the people *chose* to crucify him. Sure, God knew as he's supposed to know everything. But that He knew which choices they were going to make, doesn't mean that it wasn't *their* choices.

Personally, I don't believe in Christianity, nor do I believe that time-travel (either working-paradox or non-working paradox) will ever become possible... But I generally find it strange if one can accept the former's and isn't able to conceive the latter's strange blend of free-will and foreknowledge...

Entity writes...

Vows -

Melissa wrote about how she thought Elisa overreacted to Xanatos' invitation to Goliath and came off too jealous in her attempts to dissuade Goliath from attending the wedding. I'd just like to say that I was satisfied by Elisa's reaction. I mean, look at the setup: The main villain invites the main hero to his wedding. If this were any other show, it would be pure corn. Elisa was the voice of reason, the voice that reassured me that this episode was not going to degenerate into an episode of G.I. Joe or Ninja Turtles. So, thank you for giving Elisa's role in the episode its due, considering how densely-packed it was. It made the difference between sophistication and corn for me.

Todd Jensen writes...

One thought of my own about the "fate/free will" argument. Somebody cited Demona in "Vows" as an example of this, arguing that because her future self who visits her in 975 is evil, Demona's doomed to become evil herself regardless of what she does.

Actually, my own thoughts on this was that the seeds of Demona's future character are already present even before Demona-1995 meets her. After all, she's already working for the Archmage, and stealing for him, suggesting that she'd started down that path already.

Aris Katsaris writes...

Time travel yet again!

Vashkoda> Ah, I think I get better now what you are talking about... I think I had a couple similar ideas when (pre-Gargoyles) I was trying to explain to myself the "working-paradox" of the Star Trek episode Time's Arrow. It's the episode where Data's head is discovered (among other things) in an archaeological dig, which leads Enterprise back in time to discover what happened, which causes Data to lose his head, etc, etc. I had then thought that perhaps once upon a meta-time (or "cycle" of time) , the Enterprise went for a different reasons in the past, there Data lost his head, etc. That's similar to your "missing origin" scenario, I think, right?

But the thing is that the butterfly effect still tears this down. In a sense there can be *no* small adjustments in the timestream, because there's no scientific distinction between "small" or "great" - the tiniest change in the combination of my parent's genes (a literally microscopical change) creates a individual which looks more like my brother, rather than like me. I really feel that a universe which has Xanatos in poor clothing go back in 975 couldn't possibly create a Napoleon (or Xanatos himself) the same way that a universe with Xanatos going back with rich clothing would... *Any* change means *huge* change...

(The Earth without Data's head buried in it couldn't have realistically spawned the same Picard/Riker/Data/Enterprise as the Earth *with* Data's head... Therefore the former idea of a "missing origin" must be disproven...)

Tim writes...

Vows-Loved this episode, it had Demona, Xanatos, characterization galore, intricate plot, everything that makes Gargoyles above and beyond other animated series. Favorite lines was Xanatos's "But you won't. Because you didn't. Time travel's funny that way." That is SO Xanatos! And Young Demona and Goliath's conversation gives me a lump in my throat, just because it is so tragic what ultimately happens. As to what was going on in her head when she flew down to the beach before the Massacre, I would say Panic. Full-fledged Panic. Heh, that's another beautiful scene. And the last scene in Vows when Goliath and Demona float off into the distance with those heart-strumming music chords playing is just wonderful and sad at the same time. A nail in the coffin, as you said.

Phil writes...

Continuing the recent discussion on the immutability of time and Mighty Thor's question about fate/predestination vs free will.

As an amateur writer I can relate to being the creator of a universe. When your characters are well developed, they do seem to have minds of their own. There are things they'll do and things they won't do. As "god," you can force them to do what you want, but then they're not the same person. You have to manipulate events so that choices they make are logical and in-character.

As I'm sure you've said, Greg, time is only immutable if you know about it. You can't change things that have happened, you can only work around them. And you can only fulfill things you didn't know about before.

The way I see it, our challenge as writers/creators is to arrange time/fate so that "independent" characters are "free" to make the choices we want them to make. It's often very difficult, but the result is so fulfilling when everything seems to work out naturally.

Thanks for reading my ramble, Greg. This is just my point of view. I'm interested to learn if and how yours differs.

SEM writes...

This is just a little follow-up to Faieq's question about Katherine and Tom not having children. Faieq assumed a fertility issue which Greg admitted not knowing for sure of either did or not.

There are methods of birth control that date back to the ancient Egyptians that involve acorns (given the variance of fan age involvement on the boards I won't go into much detail unless asked). Anyway, assuming acorns were accessible to Katherine that kind option would have been there.

But as Greg pointed out, Katherine and Tom probably wouldn't lean toward using any methods. And he's the expert.

Just got Toon Disney last night and am so thrilled to finally be able to catch up on ALL the GARGOYLES episodes I've missed!
Just putting the information out there for consideration.

Knoxville writes...

Hi Mr. Weisman,
This is only my second time posting here but I was wondering (you will probalby think I'm nutso or something)if you have ever found yourself saying that it would be wonderful to be a actual gargoyle like Goliath and the clan. I know I have, alot recently actually.
Thanks,
Knoxville

Jon writes...

Greg,

Like a lot of people, I'm sure, I haven't posted much to this forum, but have followed it avidly for as long as it's been running. I first wanted to thank Gorebash, Todd, and, most of all, yourself, for taking the time to keep this Ask Greg site up and going. It is just awesome that the fans that have received so much pleasure from Gargoyles (including myself) can communicate and share ideas with the creator of the show. It's particularly refreshing to see how much thought, effort, and soul (for lack of a better word) you have commited to Gargoyles; it's obviously not simply a product that you created for your job, you really believe in it and love it, which somehow affirms our own strong feelings for the show.

I started watching Gargoyles about mid-way through its first run. I was a graduate student (I guess you were WAY off your target demographic with me! :) ) at the time, and was hooked from the first time I saw it. I believe Long Way to Morning was the first episode I watched, and I taped every episode from then on until I had them all and could re-watch (and re-watch…) them in order. I loved the show for all the reasons that others have mentioned here; the complex characters, the mix of history, legend, and "realism", the continuity, the intelligent dialogue, and the magic that the story wove from episode to episode. But there was an aspect to Gargoyles that appealed to me on a much more personal level. I guess the best way to describe it is that the main characters in the show (specifically, the Manhattan clan and Elisa) exhibited a code of honor/respect/intelligence that I really appreciated, and often find to be lacking in today's world. The interactions of the Gargoyles sort of provided a model, or a reminder of a way of life that is often lost in the cynicism of the modern world. The meaning of Home. The importance of Accountability. The responsibility of Power. Trust. Friendship. Kindness. Loyalty. Humility. And perhaps most of all, Courage.

Somewhere along the lines, the Gargoyles became role models for me, in a strange sort of way. They embodied heroic characteristics, many of which I have listed above, that I guess I continue to try to live up to. As ridiculous as it might sound, I think Gargoyles has helped make me a better person.

Anyway, in closing, it seems like the world is short of great stories, and short on role models, but there are more of both since the airing of Gargoyles. Thank you, Greg.

Vashkoda writes...

Hey Aris. Well, the argument about missing loop origins is moot since Greg says there are none. Now I'm more interested in -why- these loops even exist. But I guess I'll explain more what I was thinking when I brought up the "missing origins".

What I reasoned was that for a certain period of time (lets say the first few hundred cycles of time), time was new and malleable and could be "experimented" with. So if Xanatos got his hands on the Gate in the 1990's and then decided he wanted to go to the 900's, he -could-, and yes, it -would- mess with the timestream, but that obviously would have been his intent if he wanted to send himself the coin so that he could be rich. And yes, that would mean that the Xanatos he once was would never have existed because his actions would change his own history (hence the "non-working paradox"). But lets imagine that this situation happened to hundreds of individuals who tried to alter the timestream, and lets say that for the most part, they cancelled themselves out so that they never happened. But for a -few- individuals, maybe their altered history does -not- prevent their getting the Gate and going back in time as they had originally done (even in real life, some people do get their cake and eat it too). Except of course now, the Xanatos who travels back in time is not the same as the Xanatos who originally went back (this one's richer, for example). So small adjustments are made in the timestream, but nothing as drastic as when Xanatos first appeared in the 900's (now the Prince might notice that Xanatos is dressed nicer than before, but at least Xanatos's appearance itself doesn't trigger anything new). So as time as a whole repeats itself, adjustments are made and wrinkles are ironed out until finally everything -works- and makes sense. Sure, it might take hundreds of cycles, but at some point every predicted event will be accounted for and the timestream, at last, becomes "immutable".

And as for the butterfly-effect, who's to say that there originally was a Macbeth, Napoleon, or Kennedy? Maybe they're all the result of Xanatos or some other traveler going back in time? The way I see it, the present as it is now could just be the final result of all the alterations made in time. So it's not a coincidence at all that Goliath still exists when Xanatos comes back from his trip (for all we know, Goliath still exists only -because- of X's trip).

Aris Katsaris writes...

Vashkoda, you said: <<I had hoped that there indeed was a "missing origin" to the time loops, as the presence of such loops would have made a lot more sense to me. >>

This discussion interests me, so I hope nobody minds if I take part in it:

I've read and seen a *lot* of time-travel stories, and I have to say that the "missing origin" concept of time-loops, the idea that there can be time-travel which *does* change history, seems much more filled with plot-holes than the kind of time-travel we saw in Gargoyles.

For example consider your own scenario: That there was once a 975 which *didn't* contain Xanatos as time-traveller. Let's assume that history otherwise goes on as normal and creates a Xanatos which for some reason wants to go back to 975 and change history. Let's assume that he can.

The problem is that if he goes back to 975 he will change history *entirely*. By simply being there for a single second, he will displace certain molecules of air, which (the butterfly-effect) will displace more molecules. After ten years a couple storms will occur which wouldn't have occured, other storms which occur won't. More importantly among the millions of possible gene-combinations for every single child, surely a different one will be made at every conception. *No* individual conceived after Xanatos' arrival in the past will be the same as before his time-travel. By going to the past, Xanatos won't have just erased his own birth from history, he will have erased the births of Macbeth, Napoleon, Lincoln, Kennedy, etc...

The only way to have Xanatos go back to the past, *and* be able to return to an even remotely recognizable world, would be if all the trillions of changes that will take due to his being there are already part of his world's history - aka if there's no "first loop" aka if history is unchangeable... But having someone *both* to be able to change history *and* at the same time change it in such a limited way as to influence only a limited amount of events, is wanting to have your cake and eat it also... Atleast the "unchangeable history" is just illogical for our sequential minds - one could even go metaphysical and say that it's God who put the loops there... The "changeable history" version may be logical, but it's also impossible... :-)

Vashkoda writes...

I had hoped that there indeed was a "missing origin" to the time loops, as the presence of such loops would have made a lot more sense to me. My problem is not with grasping the concept of pardoxes, but with understanding the reasoning behind them. When I thought that there had been an actual origin to the loops, the loops made sense because they were initiated by individuals who had access to the Gate and the desire to alter time. But by telling me that these loops have always existed, I begin to wonder why they exist in the first place. Were they made intentionally, meant to serve a particular purpose, or is the timestream just "flawed" (well, maybe flawed isn't the best word, but the presence of random paradoxes certainly make me question the efficiency of who/whatever created the timestream). If the loops are intentional, it begs the question of who arranged for them to happen, and why. Because of its nature, one can't help but think of a time loop as a means to rectify a mistake or improve one's situation (saving yourself from a fatal fall, making yourself rich, etc). But if you're saying that the characters themselves aren't responsible and that loops were always present in the timestream, then one has to look at it from the timesteam's point of view, and what it has to gain from them. Some characters have greatly benefited from the loops (Griff and Xanatos, for example), so does that mean that the timestream is somehow biased to favor certain individuals? (but you'd still have to wonder why the stream went to the trouble of creating a *paradox* to make Xanatos rich or save Griff's life). Or was the timeline "drafted" with errors, which were then fixed via paradoxes when the timestream was finally created? For example, although Xanatos is a New Yorker from the 20th-21st century, the timestream may have goofed and placed him briefly at a Scottish castle in the late 900's. Then, to explain his presence, the stream sent in the Phoenix Gate and placed him in a situation where he would have access to it (this use for the Gate does in fact fit with your description of it as a kind of "pressure valve" for the Timestream--here, acting to fulfill events that were fated but can't otherwise happen within the normal constraints of time and space).

So is the presence of these time-loops intentional (and if so, who is responsible and why?), or is the timestream just "flawed" (for lack of a better word)?

Donald writes...

You know, of all the types of Time Travel stories there are, the "working paradox", as you put it, is my favorite. However, it does seem that many people, like Vashkoda, have fundamental difficulties grasping the one defining aspect of the concept.

Time is not linear. All of time exists as one unit...there is no beginning and no end. Think of it as a multi-faceted jewel, of which we can only see one facet at a time. The whole jewel is already there, but it is a limit of our perception that makes us think time is linear.

I suppose your love of the working paradox is why you like the first Terminator but not the sequel. I feel the same way. It is probably one of the more famous of the working paradox stories. Another good example is The Philadelphia Experiment, which was more purely focused on the concept.

In case you're wondering, the multi-faceted jewel explanation comes from Alan Moore's Watchmen, which did not really have a time travel element to it, but the roots of the concept were there with the Dr. Manhattan character's ability to perceive all of time within his existence.

Of course, that idea harkens back to poor old Billy Pilgrim in Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five. Of course, that's not really a time travel story either, but it does help explain the concept a bit.

Hope I haven't bored everyone ;-)

Melissa writes...

Hey Greg,

Just a few small comments on your ramble on "Vows".

Although I think this was a great episode and it had amazing dialogue moments, I thought that after seeing it a few times it became boring and I was less interested in it. I was definitely more "into" the second half of the episode when it got to conversations held by the old and young Goliath and Demona. The dialogue between all of them just seemed to fit so well and flowed beautifully.

I did notice the change in size of the Gate but I just thought of it as being bigger in human hands and smaller in the gargoyle's hands because of size difference between gargoyles and humans.

I also thought that Elisa (my favorite character) was acting way out of hand. I thought it was out of character for her to act so jealous. It wasn't even that, it just looked like she had PMS. I kept yelling at the tv (to Elisa) to back off his case!

Alright...I'm done.

Aris Katsaris writes...

You said: <<O.K. Thanks. So death was NEVER personified?
Certainly Uranos was personified in the mythology, right? And Eros, of course. >>

Umm, I'm not certain what exactly it is you mean by "personification", so let me be a bit more elaborate.

Pretty much *everything* was personified as a deity, including abstractions like "Victory"-Nike, "Peace"-Eirene, "Justice"-Dike, "Violence"-Bia, "Night"-Nyx, "Sleep"-Hypnos, etc. The name is the concept is the deity...

However most of these deities never seemed to have a solid existence in stories besides their very function - unlike gods and goddesses like Athena, Hades, Hermes, Thetis, Callisto, etc, who very clearly were "persons" with a history and personalities that was separate from their specific roles...

Uranus was ofcourse personified - he was a person who was defeated and castrated by Cronos, etc, etc. And in fact he was probably personified so much that the meaning of his name being "sky" was probably almost forgotten, and Zeus was considered the god whose province was the sky, etc.

Eros is a weird case: The story which "personified" him as the son of Aphrodite and the lover of Psyche, was written very late, 2nd century AD I think, by a Roman writer. In that one he was obviously a seperate person, "personified" with any definition one can come up with.

But before that, Eros seems to have been much more of an abstraction, one of the very first gods who was birthed by Chaos: For if there had been no Eros (no love) later gods (like Gaia and Uranus, or Cronos and Rhea, or Zeus and Hera) could not have loved each other. More of a force, less of a person.

Now Death-"Thanatos" was ofcourse personified like anything else: he's supposed to be the son of Night, and the older brother of Sleep (Hypnos). But besides that, he seems to me to be much more of an abstraction like Nike, and less of a person like Athena. He's referred to as a person occasionally (Zeus sends Hypnos and Thanatos to carry the body of Sarpedon with honour away from Troy, I think that Hercules is supposed to have wrestled with Thanatos in one case) but those two are pretty much the only occasions I remember him be a person...

I don't know if the above helped clarify or confuse...

Kalafarski writes...

A couple comments on your Vows ramble....

As I've said in a couple of posts about the Phoenix Gate before, I love the way you handle time travel. It just works so perfectly.

But here's what I found interesting. Demona has brought her past self nineteen years into the future. She shows her that her home has been invaded, her clan has been betrayed, her brothers and sisters are dead. And her true love has been turned to stone.

I thought it was interesting that Demona doesn't try to convince her younger self that Goliath is naive, too trusting of humans, or foolish. She doesn't even try to tell her that all this destruction will be Goliath's fault. Instead, she plays off of young Demona's love for Goliath, blaming the humans for what has happened to him. But it's not like the humans are the only ones old Demona blames in her own head right now. Goliath is clearly there. "Do not share it with....do not share it!"

So my question is, why does Demona do this? Is she certain that, knowing how she herself thought 1000 years ago, her younger self would never turn away from Goliath? Or is it that Demona's plan is to use her past self's own "foolish trust" in Goliath to serve her own ends?

Jon writes...

Well, now that I've posted once... :)

After reading your ramble on Vows, I wanted to comment a bit about it. It is an excellent episode, and one of the things I noticed is that Goliath sure gets the crud beat out of him in this one, first by Xanatos at the Golden Cup, and then by Demona after he barges in on her reunion with her younger self. Both animation sequences showed Goliath bleeding from the mouth after various blows. For some reason, that just awed me (and still does). This is a cartoon where the "hero" gets hurt!! I was always ridiulously amazed and pleased by this, maybe because it is so unusual to have that level of maturity and realism incorporated into a cartoon.

The animation sequence where Goliath and Demona are flying down to the watch the wedding is just terrific, really gives a sense of the power of movement of the gargoyles.

I never thought about Demona's overly excited greeting to Goliath that we see at the beginning and end of the episode was because she was just shook up about the encounter with the future Goliath. Very sophisticated.

I was always very amused at the concept of Goliath as Best Man for Xanatos. Not only is it ironic given their history, it's just funny to see Goliath in a role that is so "human".

I had a few questions, too:
1) The older Demona tells her younger self "Do not share it [the Gate] with... Do not share it!" Who did she mean her younger self shouldn't share it with? You may have said this before, sorry if I missed it.

2) Was the scene where Owen offers Goliath a bow tie cut during production (you mentioned it in the memo, but, unfortunately, it's not in the show)?

3) Did the younger Demona have any reservations about stealing the Gate? I'm still a bit shocked that the she stole it so willingly. While I know that this sort of foreshadows her personality to come, I'm still surprised she didn't have a bit more moral fiber at the time. Maybe she was living in fear of what the arch mage would do to her if she failed? Or perhaps she just didn't place any value in the trinkets or possessions of the worthless humans?

4) Was Demona's abuse by the Arch-mage intended to be a primary motivation for her general hatred towards humans? Early in her life she was mistreated by a cruel human that was more powerful than herself, and her self-loathing at carrying out his evil little errands could very easily have created a guilt cycle that resulted in a desire to kill ALL humans, as sort of a payback for what the Arch-mage did. All of which was compounded multifold by the events of the massacre, but still, her early suspicion/dislike of humans could have stemmed solely or at least primarily from the abuse of the Arch-mage. Ok, I'll stop trying to psychoanalyze Demona. But she's so FASCINATING....

Thanks!

Ed writes...

'VOWS' - what an episode. So many twists, so much drama, and some brilliant comedy from the Xanatos family. The thing that always occurred to me when watching this is: who on earth in Shari Goodharz? She only wrote the one episode that I recall and yet this is one of my favourites, if not my favourite outright. And yet she never did anything else. I guess looking at your outline she had a lot of dialogue to work in but even so, it was pretty damn good.

Actually, it always seemed like quite an intense episode to put before a multi-part story. I didn't watch it in order properly until I knew the whole season ('CITY OF STONE' aired at the beginning of the season here in two back-to-back weekends: accompanied with some stunning preview adverts of Demona blasting the stone humans).

Just one reply:

You said…
"But the gate stays open long enough for him to go with. Did it ever occur to her to go somewhen else other than 994? I guess part of it could be chalked up to dim memory. It was over a thousand years ago. And Demona lived through that 1000 years. Even for a very significant event in her life, it must still be very hazy."

Apart from the shock factor of the castle still burning (in this episode) and Goliath in stone, I think this would have meant most to Demona. But another possible explanation is in your outline:
"But choosing requires incredible concentration. Otherwise, the chooser's emotional or mental whim of the moment may cause the gate to drop everyone off at Burger King instead of Fort Knox."

Seeing as how Demona claims to have a clear memory of Goliath's 'inspirational' presumably this is the thought that would have dragged her to 994.

I really like your explanation of the Gate's changing size as being due to its 'time valve' function. Was this something you ever planned to develop or at least mention out loud in the series? I guess we'd get some hints from what you've told us about 'TIMEDANCER' so far.

Todd Jensen writes...

One other interesting feature about "Vows" that I forgot to mention in my ramble last night. When Goliath is talking to Hudson in 975, he indicates that he is afraid that Xanatos went back in time to 10th century Castle Wyvern to plot some sort of skullduggery against the clan then. But in fact, it turns out that Xanatos's real purpose for being there is to receive the coins from Prince Malcolm, not because of the gargoyles, and that it's merely a coincidence (insomuch as anything in the Gargoyles Universe can be considered a coincidence) that he received those coins at the old home of Goliath and his clan.

I mention this because it brings up one of the interesting features of Xanatos that makes him different from the conventional "main villain" in an animated series. Most such "main villains" focus their schemes almost exclusively on settling their feud with the protagonists, to such an extent that it often results in the rest of their objectives failing because they let themselves get sidetracked by their obsession. But Xanatos didn't. A lot of his schemes turned out to be, from his own perspective, only marginally involving the gargoyles, while really focused in a different direction ("Leader of the Pack" is a good example of this, where it turns out that Xanatos's real interest was in getting Fox out of prison rather than in defeating the gargoyles), and in fact, he often accomplishes a lot of his objectives (the ones that didn't involve capturing Goliath and Co. - or, later on, becoming immortal). Other antagonists in the series do strike me as thoroughly capable of letting themselves get sidetracked by the feud to the detriment of their other goals (Demona, the Archmage, and the Pack spring immediately to mind in such a category), but Xanatos seemed more inclined to focus his attention elsewhere than on the clan.

At the same time, of course, Goliath always seemed ready to take an angle towards Xanatos as though he really was the "stereotyped master-villain" above, automatically assuming that Xanatos's schemes were directed towards the gargoyles (as per the case above) or even initially thinking that he was behind somebody else's scheme (as when he initially believed that it was Xanatos rather than Macbeth who stole the Scrolls of Merlin). That helped make Xanatos's break with "cartoon tradition" all the more noteworthy, in having Goliath's perception of Xanatos being closer to how such a conventional villain acted than Xanatos in person actually was.

Revel writes...

Regarding your "Vows" ramble

I think More's the pitty is kind of like Ignorance is bliss. You've just heard it so many times no one knows who origninally said it.
(my opinion of course)

Todd Jensen writes...

My ramble/reply to your ramble on "Vows".

I very much liked this one. We got the time travel story at last (as I mentioned in my ramble/reply for "Lighthouse in the Sea of Time", I'd read that there was going to be time travel in the second season of "Gargoyles", but initially mistakenly believed that it would be in the "Lighthouse" episode because of the "Sea of Time" part of the title). I've always been fond of time travel stories, particularly ones sending the characters into the historical past, and this one I very much enjoyed, particularly since it led to more "10th century Castle Wyvern scenes" (one of my favorite parts of the series). I also noticed the care used (both here and throughout "Gargoyles") with how time travel doesn't change history but is simply part of the already extant history (which makes all the more sense to me since I've been working on a fantasy novel for some time now, begun before "Gargoyles" ever came out, which made similar use of time travel, with even a time loop or two similar to those in "Avalon Part Two" and "M.I.A." - which helped me understand those episodes better, but that's another story). Certainly that kind of time travel helps make certain that there's no cheating.

I also liked seeing the Archmage again, and hearing the mention of the Eye of Odin (without realizing the full significance of that part, though). One interesting piece in this episode is that Hudson seems to already suspect, by 975, the Archmage's true nature (given the bit where he comes to the aid of Young Demona near the end).

I was half-expecting the Hudson of 1995 to mention Goliath's showing up in 975 at the end, after Goliath returned to the clock tower; he didn't, but his behavior in the modern day does make more sense in light of his meeting the present-day Goliath back in 975.

I learned about the "King Lear" quote from a friend, and was amused to discover that in its original place in the play, it was spoken by Lear to his daughters Goneril and Regan; trust Xanatos to reverse the parent/child roles when he quoted it! :)

I was very interested to see Xanatos wearing an Illuminati pin and to have the Society's existence confirmed (doubly so with the Norman Ambassador). I can definitely remember what I thought upon seeing that bit: "I wonder what Matt would say if he could see this."

And yes, I was definitely surprised to see Xanatos getting married. (Maybe all the more so since the main antagonist of the aforementioned fantasy novel has some Xanatosian qualities - coincidental, since his basic character was worked out before "Gargoyles" ever came out - but is a very solitary figure, whom I definitely can't imagine ever developing genuine feelings of the sort that Xanatos had for Fox). Very daring, I've got to agree.

One interesting feature about Young Demona's visit to 994 (incidentally, that means that there were *three* Demonas existing simultaneously at that moment, the Demona of 975, of 994, and of 1995 - good thing that the 994-Demona didn't show up or things could really have gotten confusing:) is that she learns about the future Wyvern Massacre, which probably subtly influenced her towards eventually working with the Captain to betray the humans. It's been suspected by many fans that Young Demona might have believed that it was the humans native to the castle who carried out the massacre (note that 1995-Demona never says that it was an outside enemy who destroyed the clan - or, for that matter, that the reason why Goliath was turned to stone was because he begged the Magus to do it), so in her scheming with the Captain to avert the prophecy, she actually helped fulfill it. (A time-honored literary concept, of course, going back at least to Sophocles' "Oedipus Rex" where similarly Laius and Oedipus's very efforts to prevent Oedipus's prophecied destiny of killing his father and marrying his mother actually help bring that destiny about). A very chilling concept.

I've seen the phrase "more's the pity" used a few times in works that I know that I've read before "Gargoyles", and even used the phrase at least once in something that I wrote before "Gargoyles" ever premiered, but I've no idea myself where it comes from. Maybe it's one of those general phrases with no single originator.

At any rate, I enjoyed the rambling - and am looking forward to the comments on "City of Stone".

Todd Jensen writes...

I just read your two recently-posted memos for "Eye of the Beholder" and "Vows". Thank you for posting them (and I'm looking forward to the "Vows" ramble/review).

These inspired three comments, which I thought that I'd post (though all three separately, of course).

This first comment is on the "Eye of the Beholder" memo. One thing that stood out to me is that in the memo, Xanatos mentions that legend had it that the Eye of Odin was literally that, but this doesn't pop up in the actual episode. Actually, I'm glad that it didn't, because I feel that it made the impact of Odin showing up to claim the Eye in "Eye of the Storm" more dramatic as a result. Up until that episode ("Eye of the Storm") aired, I'd assumed that the Eye was just given a fancy name borrowed from Norse mythology, so it was more of a surprise when it turned out to be the actual eye that Odin gave up to Mimir than it would if Xanatos had mentioned rumors about that in "Eye of the Beholder".

Todd Jensen writes...

A bit of a ramble on the Hunters, particularly the Canmore trio, inspired in part by your answer to my last question about them.

One interesting element that becomes apparent when you put "City of Stone" and "Hunter's Moon" together is that the Hunters did, oddly enough, become somewhat more likable over the centuries.

The initial three Hunters depicted in "City of Stone", Gillecomgain, Duncan, and Canmore, all struck me as among the nastier villains in "Gargoyles", with very little in the way of redeeming features. Gillecomgain might have had a bit of sympathy from us (the audience), given Demona's wanton attack upon him when he was a boy. (I believe that it was more a deliberate act of hatred than a matter of self-defense, given her "That'll teach you humans to betray us" remark, something that better fits a calculated action). But then he quickly loses that by not only vowing revenge upon her entire race rather than just Demona, punishing the innocent alongside the guilty, but also willingly becoming Duncan's hired assassin by 1020, and also willingly entering into a loveless marriage with Gruoch twelve years later. Duncan was a suspicious tyrant ready to murder anybody whom he even suspected might threaten his claim to the throne, even when that person in question was innocent of such designs (as Findlaech and Macbeth both clearly were) and Canmore clearly followed in his father's footsteps; while both didn't like gargoyles much, it does seem that a lot of their persecution of the gargs stemmed from the fact that they were Macbeth's allies.

But when we get to the modern-day Canmores of "Hunter's Moon", the "powermonger" angle has clearly gone. Apart from their war on the gargoyles, the Canmores come across as quite sympathetic, more like basically decent people trapped by a horrible family tradition. Jason clearly has enough nobility in him for Elisa to develop genuine feelings for him, and he for her. The Canmores of "Hunter's Moon" are in the wrong, but they come across more as misguided than as truly villainous. Which makes them all the more into tragic figures, particularly Jason and Jon in their different ways (Jason learns the error of his ways in time, but loses the use of his legs; Jon half-realizes that what his family has been doing is wrong and almost turns aside from the path, but in the end yields to it in his weakness and undergoes the transformation into Castaway). It's one of the elements, in my opinion, that makes "Hunter's Moon" so effective.

Todd Jensen writes...

Note to Sapphire about the "Gargoyles/Buffy" crossover possibility:

While my thoughts on this one probably count less than Greg's (he's the creator of the series; I'm just one of the fans), I do think that such a crossover, while in some ways more feasible than, say, "Gargoyles/Batman" or "Gargoyles/Superman", does have a few snags to be overcome. One is legal ownership (Disney owns "Gargoyles", WB "Buffy"). Another is geography (Buffy and Co. live on the West Coast, the gargoyles on the East Coast).

(Of course, there's no danger as yet of "Gargoyles Universe" vampires being incompatible with the Buffyverse, since all that we know about "Gargoyles Universe" vampires is that they're vulnerable to silver - Princess Katharine mentions this in "Ill Met By Moonlight" - which doesn't contradict any statements about vampires in "Buffy").

But as I said, I don't view such a crossover as something all that likely for the near future, myself.

evil circus midget writes...

I don't really have a question..I just want to say that this is really cool how you take the time to answer all these questions...even the dumb ones. So thank you.

Tim writes...

Eye of the Beholder: Always loved this episode, from Fox's transformation scenes, to Xanatos's spilled milk and Plan D, E and F, to Owen's smile and the revelations of the Eye of Odin. One question: What WAS that sound of Fox's roaring at the end of the episode when she's transforming back to herself? If you turn your volume up it makes the hairs on the back of your neck stand up and it is VERY disturbing. Great sound! Just wondering if you knew what that sound was.

Can't wait until you cover City of Stone!

Todd Jensen writes...

This is a sort of unofficial comment/reply to Sapphire's question about why some gargoyles (such as Yama) might want to reveal themselves to the human world. Of course, I believe that Greg has the final say here, but I thought that I'd give my thoughts on this topic (carefully staying within the rules for submitting questions such as "don't provide ideas") because it interests me.

While the existence of gargoyle-haters such as Castaway out there does make the gargoyles' secrecy a sensible decision, at the same time, there does seem to be something to the notion of the gargoyles making themselves public. For one thing, the main reason why humans hate gargoyles so much is because they're afraid of them, and the reason why they're afraid of the gargoyles is because they know so little about them, and so it becomes easier for them to be convinced, either by the demagoguery of others such as Castaway or by their own fears, that the gargoyles are a danger to them and have to be contained or destroyed. So one could argue that as long as the gargoyles take the route of lying low and hiding, they make it easy for the hatred and fear to continue, and that the only way that they can reverse this trend is to make themselves public, tell their side of the story to the humans, let them know the truth. The gargoyles' secrecy, in a way, plays directly into the hands of people like Castaway, for it keeps the humans ignorant of what this race is really like and therefore makes things easier for the hatemongers.

I'm enough of a realist to admit that even if the gargoyles did give some sort of public press conference announcing themselves and their mission of "protect the innocent" to the world, a la Superman, it wouldn't be likely to make the hatred and intolerance go away just like that. But it could certainly help to weaken their foundations at least a little.

(Not that I can truly blame Goliath and his clan for choosing the path of secrecy up until the destruction of the clock tower; they had reasons enough from their own experience to be cautious - between their treatment by the humans in 994 and their betrayal by first Xanatos and then the Pack so soon after awakening - not to mention that the preference of their chief human confidante, Elisa, to keep them a secret must have influenced them here as well).

Blaise writes...

EYE OF THE BEHOLDER

Elisa in a Belle gown dancing with Goliath--always the first image in my mind when this ep is mentioned.

I was quite surprised (and delighted) by the display of Xanatos's feelings for Fox in this episode. I mean, the beginning proposal to Fox literally sounds like a BUSINESS proposal, and it just kills me every time I watch that scene. The whole growth of Xanatos throughout this episode--his facial expressions and attempts to save Fox--is really a highlight of the series. A show in which the "BIG BAD GUY" is not all that bad. Of course, he naturally denies having any traits that could even remotely be considered "noble" in his character, and it leads to that wonderful final exchange with Owen.

Goliath himself actually gets a couple of jabs in at Xanatos' expense. "I don't suppose you have a Plan D?" I just love that line. That's probably...the second joke he's told in the series.

Of course, I love the whole Halloween block party. It's great to see the Trio finally being able to interact with the humans without the latter running away in fear. Still, I like how in their initial shot at the block party you can see the Trio are still a bit wary.
So Keith David's the voice of the witch! I always wondered who did that voice. I mean, that's one of the funniest moments in the episode--here comes this haggard witch that speaks in a deep male voice. Just totally catches you off guard.
Goliath and Elisa, one of the great couples of our time. I might as well say this now and get it out of the way--I think Elisa looked DAMN FINE in that costume. MAN that was good. When she had her gun I wondered where she had pulled it from, and I was glad when I saw the holster/garter.

As for the Eye and the Werefox--I never dreamed that the Eye had magical properties when I saw it in THE EDGE. Heck, I never expected to see it again. This added another dimension to it. The transformations to and from Werefox are terrific, and I love the animators' work on it. Some of the best character movement in the series. Being the dense person I am, I didn't entirely get all of Fox's internal conflict in the first few viewings. It's more clear to me now, though. Frankly, I'm glad that you guys were able to take the realistic approach and have Fox be naked when she changed back to human form.

On the subject of getting away with things, I was surprised that the engagment happend, myself, let alone that it panned out the way it did. Then again, by the time OUTFOXED came around, I had gained enough respect for the series to not be too terribly surprised that Fox was expecting.
Still, how many series have the villain get married?

An episode that I always enjoy watching.

Todd Jensen writes...

Another "rambling" on my part, this time on Future Tense and its relationship to the actual events in the gargoyles' lives after the Avalon World Tour. As we all know, one of the big questions in the fandom is how much the events in "Future Tense" reflect the actual future in the Gargoyles Universe, thanks both to the fulfillment of two of them (in a way) before "The Journey" and Puck's little "Was it a dream or a prophecy?" remark (although I think that that line of his was done just to tease Goliath).

Now, two "prophecies" in "Future Tense" were fulfilled. Xanatos and Fox did have a son named Alexander Fox Xanatos, and the clock tower was destroyed. But I'm not so certain that either of these are quite so significant. As Owen, Puck would obviously know what the Xanatoses were planning to name their baby, after all. As for the clock tower, the destruction of the gargoyles' home would be a natural part of any "gloom-and-doom" scenario for them (not to mention that in the "Future Tense Universe", the clock tower would more likely have been destroyed by Xanatos or Lexington masquerading as Xanatos, rather than by the Canmores - whose existence Puck might not even have been aware of at that point).

Two "prophecies" that seem to be on their way to fulfillment in the future, based on your earlier MasterPlan comments, are the Ultra-Pack and the forty-year separation of Brooklyn and Goliath (brought about by the Avalon World Tour in the "Future Tense Universe", by Brooklyn's Timedancer adventures in the actual Gargoyles Universe). The first of these, of course, can again be easily explained: the Pack getting upgraded again does strike me as something that anyone who had paid close enough attention to their past career could have expected. The 40 years timedancing is a bit more of a poser, but I imagine that if you make enough statements about the future, a few are going to turn out correct, and the only real similarity is the "40 years" element (and the number forty has long held a certain symbolic significance, anyway - the rain that caused Noah's Flood lasted for forty days, the Israelites under Moses spent forty years wandering in the wilderness, etc.).

(The irony is that Brooklyn's Timedancing adventures would have to be the consequence of Puck's whole "Future Tense" vision to begin with, since they came about because Goliath threw the Phoenix Gate away into the Time-stream, which he did because of the "Future Tense" vision; a good case of a self-fulfilling prophecy).

(I've also spotted a possible fifth "twisted fulfillment" of a "Future Tense" event in the outline for "Gargoyles 2198" that you posted, but I'll wait until after the contest is over before naming it and asking you if you'd intended it as such - you can, of course, in the interim, have the fun of guessing which part of "Gargoyles 2198" I had in mind when I wrote this paragraph :)

And, of course, the way that things were going by the end of the series (at least by the end of "The Journey"), I think that we can safely conclude that Xanatos isn't going to declare war on the gargoyles, kill Hudson at the cost of his own life, drive the surviving members of the clan into the Labyrinth, and take over New York (to be succeeded after his death by a traitorous Lexington using him for a facade).

At least, that's my own two cents' worth on the relevance of "Future Tense" to the future of the Gargoyles Universe.

Todd Jensen writes...

This is a question on Nokkar, but don't worry; it's about him as portrayed in "Sentinel" and isn't "Gargoyles 2198"-linked.

I've noticed that a great many "Gargoyles" fans have displayed a low opinion of Nokkar as a character because of his treatment of the gargoyles, mistaking them for spies for the Space-Spawn and refusing (until almost the last moment) to reconsider; they've considered him a stubborn fool. While I can't approve myself of Nokkar's attitude of "I've already made up my mind; don't confuse me with the facts" myself, I have wondered from time to time if we haven't been doing him something of an injustice.

The big element in this pondering is this question that I find it's occasionally useful to ask ourselves regarding those enemies of the gargoyles who fought against them because they believed the gargs to be evil monsters; would we have felt the same way about these people if the gargoyles really were a race of evil demons? In some cases, my answer would have been "Yes". I would have felt the same way about the Pack in "The Thrill of the Hunt", for example, or Castaway in "The Journey", because their reasons for going after the gargoyles were ignoble ones (the Pack motivated by a desire for simple excitement, Castaway by hatred and a desire for revenge) rather than for the purpose of protecting the community, and because they were willing to endanger innocent bystanders in a very ruthless fashion to achieve their goals.

But with Nokkar, my response is different. For one thing, he really does come across in "Sentinel" as genuinely concerned for the well-being of the inhabitants of the planet that he's been assigned to protect. He clearly shows concern for Elisa - he immediately asks her, after bringing Goliath down, if she's all right, and trusts her enough, in fact, to give her the personal guided tour of his spaceship. When Elisa finally, out of instinct, sides with the gargoyles and comes to their rescue, Nokkar still does whatever he can to treat her gently, and asks her (and actually listens) why she insists on risking her own life to protect them. (He also mentions having had a good relationship with the original inhabitants of Easter Island who built the moai statues of him, and seems willing enough to make friends with the two archaeologists and Dr. Arnada at the end of the story and share his mission with them). Indication enough that he was no simple mercenary but someone with a genuine protector instinct.

As for his treatment of the gargoyles - again, it wouldn't have hurt for him to have kept an open mind. But to return to my original point, would I have felt the same way about the guy if Goliath, Angela, and Bronx really had been an advance scouting party for the Space-Spawn? I will admit that I wouldn't. Even when Nokkar was about to execute them, he made it clear that a) he was doing this because the laws of his people forbade Sentinels to take prisoners and b) he was going to give them as merciful and painless a death as possible. (And, also to be perfectly fair to the guy, what proof did the gargoyles have to offer him that they weren't enemy aliens? To the best of my knowledge, none).

So this consideration does lead me to wonder whether we may not have done Nokkar a bit of an injustice in how we viewed his actions in "Sentinel". At any rate, I'm curious as to what your thoughts are on the matter.

Maria writes...

Hmm, in answer to your question, I honestly can't remembre
where I saw the word 'convenient' posted. I am pretty sure you had said it though. Someone had asked a question and you had said something along the lines of 'adoption probably being more convenient'. And, of course, that is probably true. I am certain that many of the fans, myself included - would be happy to just see Goliath and Elisa tie the not basically and at last rise a family. That in and of itself would be a nice closure to the romance to, even though it would forever continue.
Also, it strikes me as strange that G & E would break up so soon after 'Hunters Moon' and then have a double date like that following Halloween. But, someone in the comment room mentioned that 'Hunters Moon' had fallen on the 26th of October in 1996 - correct? So wouldn't the Halloween date take place in '97? And if so, why so long?
I know the general outline of what they'll go through and decide, having discussed their relationship and then find it a little too difficult. (But would that just be Elisa who feels that way, or would it be Goliath too?)
Somehow, I get the impression that they wouldn't break up for that long at all. But have we misunderstood the time line somehow? And wouldn't things work out to where they might have a commitment ceremony of sorts sooner than expected? It almost seems strange for them to want to drag it out, and yet at the same time, I can see why they would. Although they would be back together, they might still be afraid of total commitment. . .for obvious reasons. No kids.
But, how long exactly would thier triangle last? I don't think that Goliath would enjoy a date with Delilah, and she might in turn find it a bit odd to go out with the one who is Thailog's 'father' basically.
Anyway, you gave some good points and I do agree. I just have my own views too. Which we all do. And that is important so long as we don't obscure it for someone else or twist it around. And it's always important to be loved for who we are and to not judge others when it isn't our place. If I have come off judgemental - which I doubt I have - then I do apologize. (I apologize WAY too much! ^_^)
Anyway, good points.
Thanks. :)

zippysquir@aol.com writes...

...I don't think Goliath is the kind of guy who ranks his favorites.

I'm not either really.

----------->William Shakespeare

demona writes...

greg i have my one clan and we will bring them back will u help us

Todd Jensen writes...

Just read your "Eye of the Beholder" piece. Oddly enough, I watched that same episode just a few days ago (I like to watch my tape of it every Halloween, one of three "Gargoyles" episodes that I watch on tape for annual holidays. The other two are "Sanctuary" for Valentine's Day and "The Hound of Ulster" for St. Patrick's Day).

This episode I very much enjoyed. I will confess that, even though I'm quite fond of Norse mythology, I never suspected, even after the revelation that the Eye of Odin was a magical artifact, that it was literally that (the eye that Odin gave up for a drink from Mimir's well) - in fact, I never even thought along those lines until "Eye of the Storm" came out. But the revelation that it was magical got my attention.

I also noticed the development for Xanatos here, how he proposes to Fox in the manner of a business proposition, particularly his reasons, but then in the course of the episode realizes that he is in love with her. (I particularly caught the very worried expression on his face after his "Spilt milk").

I caught the "Beauty and the Beast" reference with Goliath and Elisa, but I will confess here that I wasn't seriously imagining anything going on between them at the time. (Kind of embarrassing in hindsight, I must admit).

I caught the significance of the trio's costumes (including Lexington as a pilot being a reference back to "Her Brother's Keeper") - and I've got to agree with you that Broadway's belch was probably the crudest sound effect that "Gargoyles" ever had :)

And of course, the exchange at the end between Goliath and Xanatos that you quoted ("So now you know my weakness." "Only you would regard love as a weakness.") is one of my favorite moments in the series. (And I also very much like the last shot being of Owen smiling as he watches).

John writes...

Hi Greg,
Now here comes a verry wicked question: What did you think, is the best point to end the show? I know, and I hope, that you get the show back someday, but someday it has to end...
CU, John