Anonymous writes...

Which fandom do you honestly appreciate the most:
1- Gargoyles fans
2- Spectacular Spider-Man fans
3- Young Justice fans
4- Greg Weisman fans

Masterdramon writes...

Hey Greg! Hope that you're doing well, and that the holiday season is treating/did treat (depending on when you read this) your family happily.

What follows is a paper I recently submitted to my Contemporary Political Theory class at Pomona College, interrelating several of the concepts from the book we discussed that week ("You Are Not a Gadget" by Jaron Lanier) with the notion of namelessness in traditional gargoyle culture.

My professor (unfamiliar with the show, but very intrigued when I explained it to her) really got a kick out of the piece, and I earned a more-or-less "A-" equivalent for it. But as long as I've got it sitting around, I figured you might enjoy giving it a read as well.

[NOTE: You may want to review this post you made on Ask Greg in 2004 beforehand, as it is cited frequently: http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/search.php?rid=387].

Now, without further ado, the essay. It has been edited from the submitted version only by rearranging paragraph breaks...

The 1994 animated television series Gargoyles posits a highly intelligent species which dominated the Earth prior to human genesis and ascendance.

These gargoyles possess a unique culture which predates humanity's by a significant period, but the first on-screen depiction of the gargoyle species takes place in the 10th century, after millions of years of convergent evolution between the two cultures.

Indeed, the pilot episodes depict the essential death of one lingering component of gargoyle culture, at least for the series protagonists: that gargoyles lack personal names. This idea is first discussed in a conversation between two gargoyles and a human boy:

TOM: I'm Tom. What's your name?
GARGOYLE #1: Except for Goliath, we don't have names.
TOM: How do you tell each other apart?
GARGOYLE #1: We look different.
TOM: But what do you call each other?
GARGOYLE #2: (shrugs) Friend.

For context, "Goliath" is the leader of the clan of gargoyles to which the protagonists belong, and their liaison to the humans with whom they share an uneasy alliance; those humans felt incapable of dealing with a nameless entity, and Goliath did not bother to reject the name they selected for him.

Still, he does not use the name in communicating with his own clan until a betrayal by their human allies and a magical curse cause the protagonists to sleep as statues and then reawaken in 20th century Manhattan.

Here they meet and befriend Elisa Maza, a police detective who is both confused by and - for reasons she has trouble articulating - uncomfortable with this traditional lack of names. The following exchange takes place between Elisa and the clan's elderly mentor:

ELISA: Are you coming on the tour…uh, what do I call you, anyway?
GARGOYLE: Must you humans name everything? Nothing's real to you till you've named it, given it limits!
ELISA: It's not like that! It's just that…well, uh…things need names.
GARGOYLE: Does the sky need a name? Does the river?
ELISA: The river's called the Hudson.
GARGOYLE: (sighs) Fine, lass…then I will be 'the Hudson' as well.
ELISA: Great! Hudson it is.

From that point onward, that particular gargoyle is known as Hudson, and only Hudson.

The younger gargoyles who survived the centuries follow suit; the two who conversed with Tom become Lexington and Brooklyn, for example. And Goliath more-or-less fully accepts the moniker afforded him by the Dark Age humans.

As Gargoyles creator Greg Weisman points out, "naming is clearly addictive," and once they are established the convenience they offer makes doing away with them virtually impossible. Thus, for the Manhattan Clan of gargoyles, namelessness largely remains a thing of the past for the remainder of the series.

In "You Are Not a Gadget," Jaron Lanier describes the phenomenon experienced by these gargoyles using the term "lock-in."

As Lanier puts it, "lock-in…removes design options based on what is easiest to program, what is politically feasible, what is fashionable, or what is created by chance." Furthermore, the process "also reduces or narrows the ideas it immortalizes, by cutting away the unfathomable penumbra of meaning."

Despite originally referring to programming language, this is a perfect description of the process that "Hudson" has been subjected to in the previous scene.

Names are a method of defining identity, which necessarily must involve "giving it limits." But in traditional gargoyle culture, identity has greater meaning than that; it is amorphous, and changes with the circumstances.

The gargoyle who first made a compact with the humans at Castle Wyvern is the same gargoyle who mated three times and produced three progeny; he is the same gargoyle who fought the evil Archmage and received a wound that blinded him in one eye; he is the same gargoyle who slept for centuries and once awakened, found himself fascinated with the television show "Celebrity Hockey."

Does one name - Hudson - really encapsulate all of these aspects of his identity?

In-and-of-itself, all it signifies is that the place Hudson awoke in was modern-day New York (a cut line from the episode's script even has Elisa commenting, "Good thing we weren't facing Queens," emphasizing with humor how off-hand and esoteric the choice was).

That name was "locked-in" as the full and entire representation of the character from that point onward, solely because it was politically feasible (it makes dealing with Elisa and later human allies far more expedient), it was fashionable (every other intelligent being in 1994 New York has a name, so why not the gargoyles?), and it was created by chance (quite literally in this case, as the "Queens" quote illustrates).

And the result is that the very meaning of his identity is narrowed. He is no longer capable of being someone at a particular moment, and someone else in the next.

He is always Hudson.

There is an even greater story here, however, which Weisman's later musings have helped to illuminate. As he once observed, "Gargoyles don't seem to have a native language. They acquire human language, perhaps much the same way that they acquire names…And language, in many ways, is just sophisticated naming."

This is a compelling point. As he later notes, a different and arguably much more persuasive response that Elisa could have offered is that the river is called "the river."

Languages are systems for describing objects, concepts, actions, etc. using strict and uniform definitions, confining them to names that society calls words.

But does a name like "the sky" really fully encapsulate the meaning inherent within the depths that humans observe from below? Does it even begin to provoke a holistic understanding of its astronomical, religious, chemical, or poetic contexts?

And even more to the point, what of metaphysical concepts like "justice"? Can a single clear definition even exist for such a weighty and nebulous notion - and if not, does sticking the name "justice" to it not necessarily limit it?

Lanier certainly appears to believe so. As he conceives it, the system of symbology under which all current human languages operate is itself a lock-in; at best, a "middleman" between intent and "directly creating shared experience" that he wants to work to cut out.

His method for doing so is improvements on virtual reality, until researchers develop "the ability to morph at will, as fast as we can think."

Lanier envisions a world where the rather simplistic words "I'm hungry" will not be the only way to communicate the sensation which has brought them on - instead, he sees potential in the power of virtual reality technology to place us in the bodies of others, as a way to intimate the sensation itself.

Humanity would no longer have to be limited to extracting some piece of the concept it calls "hunger," giving it that name, and using it as code so that others who know the symbology of the English language will understand some approximation of that concept.

The concept would simply be understood, and communication would be a straightforward matter of imparting that understanding.

But perhaps there is an even better solution than this - although one that is, unfortunately, largely forgotten.

Presented with the puzzle that gargoyles are highly gregarious and intelligent by nature and yet appear to lack any notion of their own language, Weisman has mused that perhaps, long before human language evolved and became the locked-in method for communication, the gargoyle species possessed "mild psychic abilities that left them with no need to create language."

While emphasizing that he was only asserting a possibility, the communication he imagines - where it was not "words that they intuited (or transmitted or read or whatever) but emotions, maybe images or sensations" - sounds exceedingly similar to what Lanier hopes to achieve through virtual reality.

Such communication would be consistent with what audience knows about pre-human gargoyle culture, where definition and identity are situational as opposed to consistently codified.

But if that is the case, it leads to a rather lamentable conclusion. As Weisman puts it, "perhaps the very language skills that gargoyles learned from the human race dampened their psychic intuitiveness;" in other words, lock-in of a very particular method of communication (symbology) "locked-out" another method that presented communicative possibilities human technology can currently only dream of.

The initial insistence on not using personal names, then, can be considered a lingering hold-out of a bygone era where every concept was considered unlimited, and every sensation intimated in their full depth.

In dealing with nascent human cultures, gargoyles must have gradually accepted the limiting of concepts like "sky" or "river" because this made interspecies congress significantly more efficient, but they resisted the longest on the limiting of the very depths of the self.

But with the permanent instatement of "Hudson" and the rest, there does not appear to be room to return to the possibilities an unlimited identity presents. Human language has killed them.

Of course, both the gargoyle race and their culture are fantastical constructions, but that does not necessarily mean that humans cannot learn from their fictional example.

While humans do not seem to share these "mild psychic abilities" (although there are some who would vehemently disagree with that statement) that Weisman hypothesizes, that there are methods of sensation and communication which precede language skills is clearly documented.

As with gargoyles, members of the species Homo sapiens did exist well before the development of the earliest known language, and while current understanding of those early cultures is limited at best, there is also a much more immediate example to turn to.

Newborns spend a few years before they learn to define the world around them in the code of words - the sun is an experience to them long before the strictly defined, limiting name of "the sun" is ever applied to it.

The depths of what could be learned from observing children raised without learning language skills, interpreting sensations and intimating them to others via methods of their own device, are boundless; of course, the enormous ethical travesty presented by such experiments means they are not a viable avenue for inquiry.

So instead, humans turn to fiction - attempting to realize through others what that they have long since lost, and yearn to find again.

Greg Weisman has often described gargoyle culture, and pre-human gargoyle culture specifically, as something of a wish fulfillment for him. "I'm such a human," he laments with a written-out sigh, "But I aspire to gargoylosity."

Well, if the virtual reality morphing that so excites Jaron Lanier can indeed allow humans to experience sensation as a pre-human gargoyle (or a pre-language human, or a baby, or even a cephalopod) did/does - if it has the potential to turn the clock back as well as forward, and show what it is like for things simply to be, without the cumbersome and restrictive middleman of naming them - then perhaps that is an aspiration that more humans should share.

Tyler Reznik writes...

Hello once again, Mr. Weisman.
Fully expecting it to be months before you get to this question, but patience is a virtue, so...
1) Is the Brain gay? I suspect that you may not answer this one, but nothing ventured, nothing gained, so I thought I'd ask.
2) How did the Brain become a disembodied... well, brain?
3) Two previous posts had you give Wonder Woman's age as 90, then 85. Was the difference because you'd already started working on the post-timeskip timeline?
4) For your production bible, do you assign real names to characters who traditionally lack them (Bane, the Joker, the Brain, etc.)?
5) How does the Light recruit supervillains to work for them (apart from the League of Shadows and the member's own forces)?
Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions, and thank you for Gargoyles, a series I greatly enjoyed when I was younger (I've had the misfortune of not seeing an episode in several years). It meant a great deal to me, and helped inspire my interest in storytelling and Shakespeare (the former more than the latter, but Gargoyles introduced me to the Bard's work). It is very much appreciated, and I will remember Gargoyles for a very long time indeed. Have a good day, sir.

J&M writes...

Heya Greg! I know your focus has been on Young Justice lately (as it should be) but hopefully you won’t mind kicking it a little old-school and reading fans gush about Gargoyles. This is more of a ramble than a question but hopefully you won’t mind.

I have a good friend that lives in another state that is fairly arduous driving distance away so we only see each other in person every couple months. Naturally one of our main ways of staying in touch is talking via IM. And one thing we do is choose shows one of us has never seen (mostly her, but occasionally me) and watch episodes at the same time we talk to each other, so we’re watching ‘together’ even if we’re not actually together. We actually have a standing list of things we want to go through this way. And a short while ago my friend chose to start Gargoyles. We blew through all five parts of Awakening in one session and I thought you might get a kick out of seeing some choice bits of our conversation. (And yes my friend did give permission for me to share this with you.) There’s going to be more of what she has to say than me because I feel like reading me responding to her reactions with, “Why yes that IS awesome and part of the reason I love this show” would get old after awhile. The ‘choice bits’ are still pretty long, but hopefully you won’t mind too terribly.

Quick background. We are both of the female persuasion. I’m 24 and have a B.A. in English and am going back to school in the fall for a Library Science degree. She’s 20 and a Creative Writing major at a University that feels there is very clear divide between ’literature’ and ’entertainment’ and that all genre fiction falls into the latter category by default.

Needless to say, since both of us are fans of Fantasy, Science Fiction, and Animation…we disagree with that. A lot.

I’m going slightly out of order, starting with her reaction to seeing the theme song before getting into the actual episode stuff. I’ll use [] to indicate me making a comment or an edit after the fact. ‘J’ indicates my comments. ‘M’ is my friend.

J
Oh and THEME SONG OF EPICNESS
M
Preeeeetty
J
Awesome visuals are awesome
M
Hey wait a minute
I've totally heard this before
J
The interwebs loves Gargoyles
M
I've never seen the visuals to the theme song though
Heeeeee
J
So you probably have
M
As the interwebs should
J
I KNOW RIGHT!!??
M
IT'S EPIC

[Start of Episode 1]

J
What do you know about Gargoyles already?
M
There are charries named Puck and Oberon
That's all I know

[First battle between Vikings and Gargoyles]

M
Ooooh that was really good animation
J
1994
Damn straight
[Meaning that it‘s still impressive now, and considering that it‘s from 1994, is even more-so]

[The Banquet]

M
Hi hot lady
Hi fabulous Pegasus-like man

[Pegasus is a villain from season 1 of Yu-Gi-Oh with long white hair and a…distinctive personality]

M
Hey
I know your voice
Hi Jeff Bennet?

[Re Demona and Goliath‘s conversation with the Captain of the Guard after leaving the Banquet]

M
Redhead needs a haircut
I really like their relationship though so far
It seems rooted in a mutual respect
M
WHY AREN'T RELATIONSHIPS IN TV LIKE THIS ANYMORE
YES
M
THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO
M
THANK YOU GREG WEISMAN
M
THIS IS HOW RELATIONSHIPS IN TV SHOULD WORK

[Goliath and Hudson falling into the Vikings trap]
M
Hi horsies!
Oooooh
Uh oh
Raaawwwwr
Ohhhhh
I see
They turn to stone in the sun
J
Yep.
And at night they're awake
M
That was a good bit of exposition
I just got back from seeing Puss in Boots yesterday and while it was good there was a *ton* of unnecessary exposition in dialogue
Ummmmmm

[The start of the Wyvern Massacre with the Hakon and the Captain arguing over smashing the Gargoyles]

M
Oh dear
Oh dear
Hello high [conflict]
NO
DON'T DO IT
DON'T
NO
YOU DIDN'T!
NO!
M
Holy [censored]
I feel bad
And I don't even know who that guy is
That gargoyle rather
[J] why didn't I watch this show as a kid?

[Episode 2]

M
I love the Magus
J
Can I marry Keith David's voice?
M
NO
GET IN LINE

M
Maaaguuuus
I love you already
J
"He's going to slay her!"
J
Like Buffy
M
Heeeeee
Wait is she really dead?
GO MAGUS!
J
*is behind you*
M
"You are the betrayer?"
"All of my kind are dead"
M
"YOU LYING SCUM!"
Uh o
DON'T
FALL OFF
NO
Oh okay
Awwww Goliath
Uh oh
"What sorcery is this?"
M
Can I marry the Magus?
J
Get in line :P
M
Oooooh nice twist

[1994]

M
Pretty grass
Hello long time in the future?
long time passed*
Who is this guy and when can I [censored] him?
And his tech guy?
J
Xanatos is dark hair and beard
Blonde glasses is Owen
And again get in line :P
M
Heeeeeeeeee
DAMN
J
"Pay a man enough and he'll walk barefoot into hell."
M
He has a HELICOPTER
M
I want him
He just needs to shave and clip the ponytail
J
I think the goatee and ponytail are sexy. So clearly I love him more than you do and should have him.
M
Heeeeeeeeeeeeee
I'll take his tech guy happily
J
Yeah you can't have him either :P
M
Awwwwww
No fair
J says
You're about eighteen years too late :P
M
Heeeeeee
M
WAIT
Do we get to see the Magus anymore?
J
I can't tell you :P
No spoilers remember
M
Heeeeeee
Because if I don't I will cry
M
This may be an off guess but are any of the present-charries descended from the past-charries?
But you can't answer that either
J
No spoilers LOL
This is fuuuun
M
:P
Seeing all my wild guesses

M
Ooooh
I love Xan
J
I know you do.
M
This show has been really good about engaging right from the pilot
So far it hasn't really been talk-heavy

[Episode 3]

M
Owen is totally Magus
J
I think they're both voiced by Jeff Bennet
M
They're totally related in some way

J
Elisa is quipping a la Buffy before Buffy
M
But Goliiath wil save her
I love the Gargoyles
It's a nice deviation from what you'd expect
J
How so?
M
They're very respectful
M
And not all grrrrr
They have morals and principles they go by and they're fairly peaceful

M
Heeeee hundreds of spells
On a floppy
M
My 1TB talisman can kick its ass
M
I really really like this show so far
M
AND IS THAT THE REDHEAD LADY?
I saw poof
I'm so confused
M
But it's *really* hard for me to get into most shows and I'm into this one
Honestly I didn't think I would.
J
Am I not awesome at showing you things you'd like?
M
I mean I didn’t think I'd hate it
Heeeeeee
You aaare

M
Detective lady is wearing mom jeans
M
I really like that concept
J
Which concept?
M
Of not having names for things
M
And they utilize a large cast very well by having a few characters around at a time and having their different reactions ot the same world
M
We get expositoon that way and viewers aren't bogged down or feel the need to spread their interest too thin
Just "oh hey going on a NY adventure"

[When the Trio fight off the gang after saving Brendan and Margot]

M
Oooh interesting
That the guys react with fear initially and then charge
This show is really well-crafted
M
I mean you could just classify this as 'low-brow kids' entertainment' but it's really more than that
It's a beautiful work of art and storytelling that's fun and fanciful
J
Exactly.
J
There's so much work put into it and it shows.
M
And it has layered, deep conflict
Oh yes
J
IMO it's art
M
It's wonderful
Yes.
Exactly.
Very good, show!
Tranqs take a while to take effect

M
But yeah [censored] 'high art.' This is art
J
It's got all the complexity of a Shakespearean drama. It just happens to be animated and feature fantastic elements.
M
Oh yeah. I agree 100%

[Episode 4]

M
This show handles exposition beautifully
J
It does
Seriously Greg Weisman is the MASTER of set-up and payoff.
M
It really works.
M
THIS IS WHAT I SHOULD BE LEARNING IN FICTION CLASS
DARNIT

[Re Elisa hiding from the goons]

M
Uhhhhho oh
Way to make the tension rise
That's beautiful
M
THAT'S HOW YOU DO PACING FICTION CLASS
M
I rather like the music for this show too
M
I'm still kind of enamored by the whole show
It does action sequences very well too
M
Greg Weisman is incredibly talented and I bet my fiction prof would hate his guts
J
Oh yeah. The physicality is great. Not overdone and very realistic.

[Re Demona and Goliath‘s reunion]
M
That's an evil smile
I don't like that
Awwww wing hug
M
That's so BEAUTIFUL
SEEE LITERARY FICTION?
SEE WHAT YOU CAN DO?
M
SEE THAT THIS IS NOT BULL[CRAP]?
J
I totally wrote a paper for a Shakespeare course that involved Gargoyles. I got an A in that class. :)
M
You are amazing

J
They said KILL
M
THEY DID
J
Whooooo!

[Episode 5]

J
Do not mess with old guys and dogs
Especially if they're Gargoyles
M
Hee
J
And hi G-rated version of Lethal Weapon line
M
TRAAAIN
M
And that is why you back up your files

[Re the Blimp being on fire and falling]

J
And that would not be a scene post 9-11
M
No it would not
J
I think there'd be a lot less stuff blowing up in general
M
Yeah

[Again re Demona and Goliath]
M
THIS NEEDS TO BE THE MODEL FOR FICTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
GOD WHY IS THIS SO AMAZING
M
Awwwww Goliiiiath

J
Look at Lexington his laptop
M
Heeeeeeee
J
That has like 250 MB memory LOL
J
Hi Demona
You want to marry her too yes?
M
No
J
Really?
M
I don't like her hair :P
*is shallow*
J
Aside from the hair :P
M
Yes
J
I kneeeeeew it
You villain sluuuuut
M
I aaaaaaam
I can't heeeelp it
J
Heh Chinese food
J says
HEEeeeeGiants
GO GIANTS!
M says
That's a funny way to spell Patriots Jess

[This was soon after the Super-Bowl. She‘s based in New England and I’m from New York.]

J
:P
And that's it
Final thoughts?
M
GAHHHHHHHH
THIS IS WHAT ART IS SUPPOSED TO BE
M
THIS IS WHAT ENTERTAINMENT SHOULD STRIVE TO BE
M
SCREW THAT HIGH ART CRAP
J
Exactly. I have taught you well young Padawan.
M
*bows*

Hopefully that put a smile on your face. We will be watching the rest of Gargoyles, and eventually W.I.T.C.H, Spectacular Spidey, and Young Justice.

I did want to ask, would you be interested in reading more of what we say as we watch?

Subsequent conversation snippets will probably be shorter, but I understand you’re very busy and that Ask Greg can get backlogged. I’d only want to continue sending this kind of ramble if it’s something that you would enjoy reading, as a small way to pay you back for the excellent entertainment you provide. I’d never want it to be a chore or something you feel you have to slog through.

So yeah. Hope you enjoyed! Please continue making awesome shows so we can keep watching. :)

Briget writes...

Hi there! This isn't actually a question, but it's the only way I saw of contacting Greg. I just wanted to say thank you for creating Gargoyles and thank you for making such a rich, elaborate show. Your cartoon formed a big chunk of my childhood, and the storytelling introduced me to so many different aspects of the world of fantasy. It was my favorite thing to watch when I was little. I hope this gets passed along and you get to see it. This show just means a lot to me.

Green Lantern's Nightlight writes...

I've mistakenly put typos in my name for my last two questions now & I'm terribly sorry for that especially since you put yourself out to answer all of our questions.

Lurker writes...

As of writing this, it is the 17th anniversary of Gargoyles. Made a comment in the room but wanted to share here:

"Sorry about the double, I saw vinnie took two spots and decided THIS was a countdown I wanted to be a part of. My countdown number is especially fitting, as I was 10 when Gargoyles premiered.

17 years. My God. I remember seeing the preview commercial once or twice. Running home after school, literally running, so I could catch the premier and every episode thereafter. Enough to make me feel a little choked-up. Nearly getting a lump in the back of my throat.

Phoenician> I do believe I will join you in watching one episode of awakening everyday [this week]. It must be providence. I just received my season one back from a friend, to whom I lent my seasons so she could show her son.

She said that at first, he was watching the episodes alone. After a while, she remembered why she liked the show so much and they now watch them together. They are now somewhere in season 2.

It's nearly 1 AM. I believe I will put in the DVD, raise a toast, and enjoy the beginning chapter of a phenomenal series.

In the already spoken words of Vinnie, "And away we go on with the show."
Lurker - [!)]"

Greg, the show is something that has always stuck with me, as it has many others. In case you didnt know ;) I just wanted to thank you for continuing to work on the show, in the sense that you have never given up on it. Thank you for allowing fans to interact with you and ask you various things. Thank you for the contributions to my childhood and all the wonderful memories.

Harlan Phoenix writes...

Less a question, more of a comment. While visiting one of my dearest friends over in Long Island over the summer, one of the things we did together was watch Gargoyles (as part of a little trade of interests-her offering was showing me a documentary on the legacy and fandom of the Rock-a-Fire Explosion series of animatronics, which was fairly interesting and quite enjoyable in its own right). As we've mostly communicated online for our 9 or so year friendship, doing something like this isn't a common thing. Especially considering we've only been in person together for two visits, each lasting about a week.

I'm happy to report that after a viewing of The Mirror, Double Jeopardy, and Eye of the Beholder, she became quite fond of the series and has expressed interesting in indulging further. I was beyond happy that she did, as being able to share Gargoyles with her joins the rest of that week as one of many memories I feel lucky to have.

Thought you'd like to know.

Dan writes...

Not a question, more something you might like: http://nebezial.deviantart.com/art/gargoyles-goliath-3d-fun-200441030?q=sort%3Atime%20gallery%3Anebezial&qo=1

Ozaline writes...

Not a question this time, just a comment I want to apologize I didn't think they'd send you both vesions of my initial questions cause I thought the first one was too leading and the second one was more civil.

I am still watching the series and not making too many judgements yet, my point wasn't to come off like I was attacking I was just wondering why you didn't do some things, you've got a good track record so I'm hoping things turn out.

I apologize if it seemed like I was attacking.

charles.wonsey writes...

also i know since i did not write a question it wont get posted but to the person that sends this to greg please let him get this. its real important to me. thank you again

Charles. wonsey writes...

Hello greg my name is charles and im currently in the navy. in about 4 months i will be a film student and i was interested in producing one of your works. i have a strong passion for film and i eat breath and sleep it. with that being said the school said i should contact you and maybe get to know you. so this is the only way i know that what i have to say will reach you. but i am very serious about my passion and when i finish school i have ideas of what i want to produce as far as film goes. so if you can please email me. im gonna put my email so you can contact me so i can have a better way to contact you. also the school i will be attending is full sail university. my email is charles.wonsey@med.navy.mil so i hope this reaches you . thank you for your time.

Jess writes...

Heya Greg! This isn't really a question. Rather a resounding "THANK YOU" for pretty much all of the work you've done over the years. Right now a few of my fandoms that are still on-going have come out with new installments that have, well, been disappointing me. I'm not going to name names because I don't want to put you in the position of having to bash a fellow professional's work and there's no guarantee you're familiar with the specific ones I'm speaking of anyway.

But to me it feels like the writer(s) have been failing, not because they're not talented, but rather because a) When they began their projects they failed to think far-forwardly to where they wanted their stories to go once the initial conflicts they set up have run their course. And B) Instead of letting plot-lines flow from characters that are complex and change over time, they fall back on comfortable clichés, simple black-and-white conflicts, and cookie-cutter romance. To put it simply, when given the opportunity they take the 'easy' dramatic choices.

Seeing this happen over and over has made me much more appreciative of the insane amount of world-building and planning that you must put into the things you undertake, and your skill as a storyteller to dig into the well of timeless archetypes and situations and do things that are new and exciting with them.

For me it's a relief to know that when Young Justice premieres as a series (I did see the pilot movie and loved it) I'll have something where I can sit down and be entertained, and trust that the people behind it are doing everything they can to ensure that it's the best it can possibly be. And even if at the end it hasn't matched my vision for what it could have been, I know it will definitely be just as good, and most likely a whole lot better. So, in conclusion: Thanks for being awesome! Please keep it up. :)

Vaevictis Asmadi writes...

I just re-read The Moorchild by Eloise McGraw. It's a book I mentioned in a much earlier question to you, one about a changeling girl who is half human and half fae, and the weirdness and difficulty she has fitting in with either because she is different from both species. (It's even set in medieval Scotland.) It prompted me to ask you how different or similar, emotionally and psychologically, the Third Race are to humans, because the depiction in this book is of quite inhuman fae who really can't relate to humans. You have consistently answered that the Third Race are quite similar to humans, emotionally and psychologically -- that the main difference is that of great power without great responsibility, of never growing old or having to work, and of being able to look however they want on a whim. You've even said that a human could imagine what it is like to be such a being by imagining what life for one of us would be like with those benefits.

Reading The Moorchild again got me to wondering about what it is like growing up as a hybrid (in a family of non-hybrids), or as a non-hybrid changeling raised by another species, in the Gargoyles universe. The personality differences don't seem nearly as pronounced between humans and Third Race as they are between humans and fae in The Moorchild, so it seems like fewer problems should arise, although physically there seems to be quite a lot of difference between mortals and the Children even when they look human. Clearly a half-mortal child like Fox can grow up without ever figuring it out, or learning magic. But did she ever feel different from the mortal children around her? Did other humans notice anything different about her? Or was there nothing really out of the ordinary, no noticeable outward signs of her magical heritage?

And what about Morgan le Fay, who according to what you have revealed is a purely Third Race changeling. Was it strange for her to grow up among humans? I assume she looked human, but did she feel human, or did she feel different from those around her? Did she seem unusual to her human parents and siblings, or did they never really notice anything out of the ordinary, personality-wise or physically? Did she just seem like a regular human being to them?

As for Nimue, well, she can't have helped but notice she was different, not having the same nearly-effortless magical abilities and shapechanging that the Third Race have. That and not being made of pure magic, along with whatever that entails.

I imagine a slightly different dynamic for the Avalon Clan, since there was no human society around them and they actually outnumbered their foster parents 11-to-1, but I'm sure that was at least somewhat weird, especially for the humans.

Greg Bishansky writes...

I originally wrote this for my blog, and decided to paste it in here.

Young Justice

Well, what do you know? This is my one hundredth entry. Appropriate that it is about Greg Weisman's newest TV series.

Anyone who knows me knows I am a huge fan of Greg Weisman's work. "Gargoyles" is my all time favorite TV series; I adored "The Spectacular Spider-Man;" I was quite fond of the second season of "W.I.T.C.H.;" and the freelance scripts he wrote for shows like "Men In Black" and "Buzz Lightyear of Star Command" were always fun.

Okay, I really hated "Max Steel" and couldn't watch more than one episode, but that show had all sorts of behind the scenes problems that were not his fault. And sadly, "Roughnecks: Star Ship Troopers Chronicles" never aired in my area, so I've never really seen it. But, overall, Greg Weisman is responsible for high quality television. So, I was greatly anticipating his newest series, "Young Justice."

"Young Justice" is loosely based on a DC Comics title by the same name, but draws from many other sources. It focuses on a group of sidekicks (but don't call them that) who band together to become a covert ops team connected to the Justice League. The stars of the show are Robin, Kid Flash, Aqualad, Superboy, Miss Martian, and Artemis. Although, we have yet to meet Artemis and only briefly met Miss Martian.

The theme of the first season is "secrets and lies" and this is very apparent within the pilot already. The Justice League is keeping secrets from the members of Young Justice... which was enough to piss off Speedy, and get him to storm off. And Project Cadmus was keeping secrets from the rest of the world.

I love a good mystery, and we've got one set up with a shadowy organization called The Light, who were behind Project Cadmus. Although, I am somewhat reminded of the Illuminati from "Gargoyles" (Hmm... Light - illuminated - Illuminati) and the Council of Thirteen of the Guild of Calamitous Intent in "The Venture Bros." although, I highly doubt Davie Bowie is L-1.

The writing and dialogue are very sharp, and considering the pilot was penned by Mr. Weisman himself, that was to be expected. The animation is very strong, and I kept wondering what their budget was, because it looks great. The voice acting was also phenomenal, which is to be expected from any series voice directed by Jamie Thomason.

This series has just about everything going for it, and already, in my mind, blew the competition out of the water. Yes, I enjoy "The Avengers - Earth's Mightiest Heroes" quite a bit, but the quality of that show just doesn't compare to the quality of "Young Justice." The funny thing about that is that outside of Batman, and some Vertigo comics, I have no attachment to DC Comics at all. I've always been a Marvel reader. But Marvel has never had animated series as good as DC's, with the exception of "The Spectacular Spider-Man" which was just as great as "Batman the Animated Series." But then, look at who the mastermind behind Spidey was.

I give the pilot of "Young Justice" a solid five stars. It also left me intrigued enough to come back for more when the series really gets going in January.

Todd Jensen writes...

Another comment, rather than a question. I've mentioned before about how well Goliath's statement in "M.I.A.", "Human problems become gargoyle problems" had been borne out so often in the series (especially when we saw how the struggles over the Scottish throne between 971 to 1057 - definitely a human problem - affected the gargoyles in Scotland, not to mention the Quarrymen being ultimately about a human unwilling to face his responsibility for seriously injuring his brother). Recently it occurred to me that the Humility Spell, though not actually a *problem* for the gargoyles (except maybe the occasion when it prevented Brooklyn from recovering Goliath's half of the Phoenix Gate in 997), is also an example of this at work.

We know from your statements (canon-in-training, of course) that the Humility Spell stemmed from Caesar Augustus' wish to improve the morals of the early Roman Empire, which extended to his disapproval of gargoyles awakening in the nude because their clothes were torn apart with their stone skin shells at nightfall. Thus, it's the result of another human problem which came to affect gargoyles worldwide (even gargoyle clans that presumably never even suspected that the Roman Empire existed).

Trevor Doyle writes...

Hello Greg

I just want to say thank you for creating such a wonderful world. Filled with complex, multi layered characters. I am nearly twenty three now, but I can still remember watching the premier of episode one just two days after my seventh birthday. The show definitely affected my childhood both conscioussly and subconsciously. Anyway I digress. I recently learned about the annual Gargoyles Gathering. I was disappointed to find out that it has been cancelled. So my question is why it was cancelled, and if there is any chance that it will start up again in the future?

-Trevor Doyle

Justin writes...

Dear Greg,

Recently watched "Long Way Til Morning"

And this is hopefully the first question that leads to what I hope to complete soon as a long essay on how fascinating Demona is as a character as well as her impact on her estranged clan "family".

In this we see three characters. All with relatively strong familial bonds. First we have the Father, Hudson. Then of course the rookery children Goliath and Demona.

My actual question is this:

What had to be going through Hudson's mind during all of this? I know he acknowledged the two as a mated pair, but in essence he had to save his son from his daughter. That could not have made him all too plussed.

Secondly, the dialogue in this last scene really shows how even now, they still have latent feelings of being family...

Hudson: "Give it up girl, you can't win.." Which even as a boy, first watching this I always received as a Father being parental in some way to his daughter.

Then there is Demona, who is as bananas as it gets. She, even in her tirade tips her hand. She, through raw, volatile emotion expresses she still has love for Hudson.

"I would have ended this quickly! Your pride will cost you your life!" Even though I know at this point in her life she is past redemption, I still feel that the way she exclaims these sentiments is a tell she doesn't want to HAVE to say them. She loves her rookery father. And in a way, still NEEDS him. As all grown children do once we reach adulthood. But nothing can stand in the way of her vengeance. The vengeance for her murdered family. Not even surviving FAMILY.

All too fascinating Greg, and thank you!

Justin

Greg Bishansky writes...

1. Who is Demona's great love?
2. When was Gwen gonna die?
3. Will you spoil your entire series plan for "Young Justice story beat by story beat?
5. Why does the Monarch hate Rusty Venture so much?

LOL, I'm just kidding. Instead here's a comment.

I recently put the entire timeline from the GargWiki into my word processor, and it came out to about fifty-four pages. Obviously, about 98% of that timeline is directly quoted from ASK GREG's "This Day in Gargoyles Universe History" and since you last said that your timeline hit three hundred page mark, well, I am in awe.

In awe mostly because, I knew you were holding out on us... but damn. Sixty-five episodes and eighteen comics, and we still have not scratched the surface of what you have in your head for this world.

I am impressed, sir. Impressed. And, I hope you consider bringing "This Day in Gargoyles Universe History" back sometime soon.

Todd Jensen writes...

A comment this time, rather than a question. One of my favorite details in the "Stone of Destiny" story was Macbeth's presence at the Battle of Bannockburn. It recently occurred to me that this might be an example, if a subtle one, of the time-honored motif of a legendary hero from long ago who returns to his country to aid it in a time of need.

The concept has attached itself to King Arthur, of course, and his return has featured in "Gargoyles" (if with a premature re-awakening). The returns of the Golem and Cu Chullain, elsewhere in the Avalon World Tour, also evoke it. For that matter, I remember your once saying that the Avalon gargoyles looked upon Goliath (from what they had learned of him through their human guardians) as a great sleeping hero who would one day awaken and return if ever they needed him - and he did indeed return in their hour of need, when the Archmage attacked Avalon.

I also recall, outside of "Gargoyles", the legend that Theseus returned to aid his fellow Athenians against the Persians at the Battle of Marathon (and Mary Renault including it in her Theseus novels) - which forms a great parallel here to Macbeth's presence at Bannockburn, both cases of a desperate struggle against an invading army.

At the same time, your use of the "return of the king" motif for Macbeth's participation at Bannockburn (assuming you had it in mind at the time) came with a twist. Macbeth returns incognito; so far as we know, none of the other Scotsmen taking part in the battle know that he's fighting alongside them. Robert the Bruce is the Scottish king who will be associated with the victory (deservedly, of course, from what I've read about the battle). No chronicle or legend even hints at his presence there. As far as we know, only he knows that he was there (we don't know if Shari knows or not; the panel depicting him at the battle is in one of her stories, but she does not mention him in the text itself). The king returned to aid his country in need, but in secret, his presence unremarked on.

Lorranon of Oberon writes...

Mr. Weisman, I read your response on my question about the novel I wrote. I can't say I was thrilled with the response_ but I think that maybe it was because you didn't understand my motivation behined it. I posted a comment on your blog about the "Gargoyles" movie Disney wants to release. I was hoping you would read it and then perhaps we could discuss my motivation and reasons in more detail.

Anonymous writes...

Man, every Spidey question you answer that ends with some form of "it's moot now" or "we'll never see it" is depressing. I miss the show so much, miss anticipating what great new direction you guys were going to take it in, miss the awesome surprise of each new design by Cheeks, the great voice acting and sharp writing, the structure of the seasons and the way you were organically growing Spidey's world, etc. I'm really excited for Young Justice and think it looks great, but at heart, I'm mostly a Marvel, and specifically Spider-Man, fan. So basically, just thanks for the show. I loved it, it's a credit to your great talent in the field, and it was unquestionably the best animated Marvel adaptation ever made, series, movie, or otherwise.

Vaevictis Asmadi writes...

Bad Guys #5 & 6: I wanted to post my Bad Guys reactions all at once, but I wrote my #4 reaction long before this one. So here's the rest, in no particular order.

I just noticed that nobody is willing to sit next to Fang. I wouldn't either!

I continue to wonder about the (constrained) choices made by the members of the squad -- there's lots of tension in Losers about this. They don't know any more about their boss than they do about the Illuminati. Less, in fact, and it's the revelation that Oldcastle and Thailog work for the Illuminati that persuades the Squad not to join. But they still know so little about their own boss... for all they (and I) know, he's could be just as bad. If Robyn knows more she isn't telling, and the rest know basically nothing. They've been given very little choice, of course. They know the Illuminati are untrustworthy... but they can only hope that their mysterious boss is any better. Dingo finally asks, but somehow I doubt Interpol is the truth!
Of course I know the Illuminati are bad news. But I don't know any more about the Director than the Squad do. From what I've seen, they take an "ends justify the means" attitude just like the Illuminati does.
I was seriously worried that Matrix would join the Illuminati and spell Bad Things for basically the whole planet. The Redemption Squad is composed of criminals on the run from the law, and if anyone pointed out to Matrix that the Australian shaman's logic in Issue #1 wasn't actually logical (Dingo can't fight for law and order if he's breaking the law!) then the Illuminati might have looked more attractive to Matrix than its current situation. Fortunately the Matrix isn't bright enough to figure that out. At this point, Matrix is largely at the mercy of whoever controls its access to information about how laws actually work!

Humorous moments: Yama falling asleep mid-sentence, Matrix eating a fork, Yama freaking out over his broken sword, and Doll calling Matrix "that thing."

Yama being impaled on a sword and continuing to fight with no noticeable weakness is hard to believe, especially since Goliath was so much worse off after a much less serious wound in Long Way Till Morning, and completely incapacitated in Bash by a knife wound that definitely did not impale him. It shows how tough a warrior Yama is, but... makes him look literally immortal, Highlander style. This is one place where gargoyle healing abilities are not believable to me without magic.

And Dingo's childhood was finally revealed ... the creep who raised him is the same guy who murdered his mother! That's creepy, ick. The look on John's face is suspicious from the start, but I did not expect that. No wonder Dingo became a criminal.

Yama continues to be impressive. And the scene with Matrix holding up the light under the huge Illuminati banner just looks cool.

I have to wonder why the Illuminati is hoarding priceless art objects, and not even using them for anything. I'm impressed but surprised that Dingo cares enough to prevent their destruction.

Overall, Bad Guys is a good comic, but it leans heavily towards the superhero genre (Oldcastle's gang even seems to include super powers) and as with the Pack, that doesn't appeal to me nearly as much as the other elements of Gargoyles. (Fortunately, nobody except Tasmanian Tiger has a goofy supervillain costume). Not that I wouldn't buy more Bad Guys, if more were published and I could afford it.

Thanks for the stories.

Vaevictis Asmadi writes...

Bad Guys #4: Finally I am going to write my reactions to this, many months after I finally got a hold of my copy. It's difficult to come up with my reactions since I first read it a while ago.

I think the "cliched villainy" of Sevarius and Fang would be more horrific if I wasn't already used to mutates, and if was more plausible as a real-life event. Now Sevarius has extended his atrocities to children. It's hard to imagine what kind of life these people can possibly have... and on top of everything else, I guess that Sevarius probably had to wreck their immune systems just to mutate them at all.

Art nitpick: the new mutates look very good and are well drawn, but there's no way that Tasha's shirt and pants can go _under_ her shell, which is part of her skin.

Robyn is trying too hard to sound angry and tough, and she can't pull it off. A little hard to, when it's too late and she's in a cage. Her reaction to Sevarius wanting to mutate her implies that she's more horrified by gargoyle DNA, than by the mutation itself. That, along with other behaviors and statements throughout the six issues, make me think that she is still deeply prejudiced against gargoyles, and is playing nice partly to obey the Director's orders. She doesn't want to kill them all anymore, and her (private?) conversation with Jon shows how far she's already changed her attitudes, but she doesn't seem to regard gargoyles as equals. A lifetime of hatred and ignorance cannot be unlearned quickly or easily.

The big shock in issue 4 is the suicide of Tasha. I did not expect that such an event would be depicted in the comic books. Sadly, it's very believable. Sevarius utterly ruined her life, in what was surely an extremely traumatic experience. For one moment, Fang almost looks like this suicide upset him, but the he starts making repugnant jokes. If some of his _other_ jokes weren't still funny, I think this is one character I would completely hate. I certainly don't blame everyone else for hating him.

The ending, where Robyn's mysterious superior (presumably the Director who got her out of jail and created the squad) put Fang on the team, is confusing. I assume there must be some passage of time that I missed, but it appears as though Fang instantaneously acquires a tailored uniform.

An finally, now I can re-read the bits and pieces at the beginnings of the first 4 issues and make sense of them.

Dingo is angry that they "barely survived the last time" and I wonder what he's even referring to -- to the battle against Fang? Was that really a suicide mission? The reason Dingo barely survived is because Matrix decided to drop him in mid-air off a skyscraper. On the other hand, I have to wonder why they swallow these "missions" when they have no clue who is ordering them around, and no reason to know if they're being told the truth. OK, they've all been threatened with Bad Things, but they don't even ask who they're working for. (Maybe they already asked and Robyn just isn't telling). I also wonder how anyone, including the Director, thinks that Fang is remotely trustworthy, and isn't going to betray the others.
The entire helicopter gets blown up by missiles, but of course the characters aren't going to die just like that. Matrix saves them. The Illuminati possesses combat robots, like the Cybots and Steel Clan. Robyn's combat skills and acrobatics are amazing, when I think about it.

Yama looks great in these issues. I'm liking him. I also like Fang yelling at Yama.

Jurgan writes...

Not a question so much as a comment. You've said several times you think you missed a bet in "Grief-" namely, that Coyote should have killed the travelers, to show that death was impossible with Anubis locked up. I may be in the minority on this, but I prefer the story we got to this alternate version.

First of all, it would reopen the Highlander-esque questions that you get regarding Demona and Macbeth. So, Angela's shot through the heart but doesn't die- when Anubis is freed, is the wound still there? If so, would the wound then kill her? If Goliath were decapitated, would the head still talk, or would it sprout spider legs and walk back to him (sorry, I just watched The Thing the other night- incidentally, Keith making a surprise appearance in a movie is something that always makes me smile)? I imagine that, if only for S&P reasons, the death would simply be through bloodless laser beams (sorry, "particle beams") and the issue wouldn't have come up, but it's still confusing.

The bigger point, though, is that it cheapens the characters' abilities. I've read most of the Lee/Ditko and Lee/Romita Spider-Man comics, and while they're great stories, one thing that always bothered me was how supervillains always let Spidey live. Typically, a new villain would dominate the wallcrawler and then arrogantly announce "I don't need to kill Spider-Man- I can beat him any time I want!" I don't have a count, but I really think this happened dozens of times in the Silver Age. I could understand if the villain had a reason to run, like Doc Ock's power running low in your show, but most of the time they just seemed stupid, since of course Spidey trounced them next time. The point is that it seemed like he was surviving more through luck than any particular skill. Likewise, our gargoyles have survived countless battles because of their own abilities. To say that they finally lose- but it doesn't count because, for this one day, they can't die, seems to cheapen their earlier successes. It feels like the only reason they're winning is because the writers want them to win, and if they get in big trouble, a deus ex machina twist will save them. The show starts to feel artificial, and I wonder if these characters are really that special, or if they're just the designated heroes.

Now, of course, this is hypothetical. It's possible that, if I'd seen the episode the way you envision, I would have loved it. As it is, it's kind of hard for me to imagine it working. Just something to chew on.