Customer Reviews

The Dark Tower (Digest Edition) (Turtleback School & Library Binding Edition) (Dark Tower (Pb))

5 star:		(339)
4 star:		(150)
3 star:		(104)
2 star:		(100)
1 star:		(100)

 

 

Technically this book is not low quality enough to merit one star, but if you've been with this series since Day One, and believe as I do that this book carries more with it than just itself as a story, to give it anything more than one star would understate the magnitude of its failure.
All of the problems with book six are extended and compounded here in book seven: the reliance on New York and Maine as settings for an adventure story that's supposed to be grander than any one time or place, the prominence of annoying and unwelcome new characters, King's overuse of unbelievable internal dialogue to cram exposition down our throats, his narcissistic inclusion of himself as an important element, (more on that later) and his lack of focus on any one element worth caring about. The bottom line is this: "The Dark Tower 7" is King at his laziest and least original, which is hard enough to sit through in his lower-quality stand-alone output, but shockingly unforgivable in what is supposed to be the center of all his literary creation (his words, not mine) and his bid for greatness in the eyes of posterity.
Perhaps writing the Dark Tower had become a burden not unlike the Tower quest itself. Unlike his character Roland, however, King jumps ship rather than stick it out. Consider the evidence: the books inexplicably marginalize Roland and the Quest the further they go. By contrast, pointless distractions and King himself (with a profound dislike for the burden of being author) appear and assume importance. Roland is relieved of many of his soul-testing responsibilities (sacrificing his friends, dealing with his foes) by cheap plot devices that cause them to disappear outside of any action of his-- even the Tower itself is made practically irrelevant by a series of contrived events and unimportant characters. Forgive me, but wasn't the great central tragedy of this series that he'd give up anything for the Quest, and has in the past? King spent quite a bit of books one, three, and almost all of four dealing with this-- why throw it out the window in the closing 300 pages?
In "Dark Tower 7" Roland sacrifices nothing-- he is LEFT BEHIND and made irrelevant; this is perhaps symbolic of what has happened to the Series on the whole. The final three books in this series have a lurching, breakneck pace and reach their end with all the subtlety of a dump truck hitting a brick wall. Is it coincidental that they were penned all at once, contrasting with the twenty or so years it took King to write the first four? Consider also the growing preoccupation with the Tower in his other works over the last few years. The overwhelming presence in the first four books was the slow decay of a many layered world, one like and yet unlike our own, with complex characters that were all just a little bit crazy from their own mental decay. In the final three books, this world gives way to the familiar rushing and business-like atmosphere of omnipresent New York. The characters we knew fade and are replaced by cardboard heroes or villains, doing what they have to do to bring the story to an end.
The Quest (and possibly King's concern for his own mortality) probably proved too much to bear and King wanted out. If so, that is his prerogative. I do not feel he owes me any duty to "finish the series right," although I can offer my opinion that it would have been better to leave it unfinished than to drop it off a literary skyscraper like he has. In a self-serving note at the end, King remarks that the problem with Constant Readers is that they never want to acknowledge that sooner or later they'll have to let go-- whether there's real closure or not, and that it's a tragic thing to be insistent on some kind of neatly resolved 'ending.' I would answer that he should have taken some of his own advice: in the rush to close and end this series he's given up its soul. Tragic, indeed, as the once-great "Dark Tower" books deserved better treatment than this. If you are (like I was) an enthusiastic reader of the series and began to smell a rat in places during Book Five, I advise you to stop and leave your impression of the books as intact as it can be. If you've already read book six and enjoyed it without any problems, you might want to continue. For everyone else: it only gets worse.

I hate to admit this but the angry Constant Reader that King references in the last pages of his book, the one who doesn't like what he finds at the end of the quest and not to bother him with it...well, i guess that would be me.

I almost stopped reading when King said to. I really, truly almost stopped. It would have left me with insatiable curiousity though, and I think I'd have been curious how it all turned out till' my dying day. So with no more willpower than a wino guarding a liquor store, I trudged forth into the final pages of the book. And having finished it I will gladly share my thoughts with the whole shebang.

Here's that numbered list everyone hates, along with footnotes:

1. Flagg: Randall Flagg. Anyone who's read "The Stand" understands what a mean, nasty villain this guy is. To be frank I never got the idea that Flagg was entirely human. Sure, he *looks* human, but can change into a crow, can seemingly teleport, has a high innate knowledge of his surroundings. Tom Moon in "The Stand" indicates that he is known by many names, including Legion, when Jesus cast him into a herd of swine once. Flagg is something more than a simple man, something less than a demi-god. While it is nice to get a little more background info on him in this book I just have a really difficult time believing that he could be dispatched so easily, not to mention by *anyone* other than Roland, who was the one who was meant to kill him. His means of death was grotesque, and while debate will probably ensue on whether or not he got justice remains to be seen. Personally I thought it was horrific, even for him.

2. New York, Maine: I'm sick of it. I'm sick of both. What was great fun in "Drawing of the Three" and "The Wastelands" feels like covering the same old ground, over and over and over again. This whole business of jumping back and forth repeatedly grew so stale that I was tempted to just skip by it. I thought, in fact, that it hurt the story terribly that even though what seems like a dozen trips have been made there that one final trip to Maine had to be made to save King yet again. The Tet Corporation, while interesting, really brought nothing to the book. I didnt' really know these people and the gifts they gave Roland were, shall we say, lame? A book which he quickly gives away (huh?), a watch that will stop working when he goes near the Dark Tower (um...huh?) and I can't even remember what else. It was beginning to feel more like an episode of "Sliders" rather than the Dark Tower series. A really boring episode. Nuff' said.

3. The Crimson King: Granted, he's crazy. But the ruler and almost victor of the battle of the Dark Tower should be more than a doddering old fool throwing hand grenades. He was made such short work of (by the unforgivingly convenient Patrick) that it felt like a rush job.

4. Mordred. I'll grant that while he was an interesting sub-plot idea this guy was just put down alarmingly too easy. The entire fight lasts 3 paragraphs (small ones at that), and this after an entire book filled with tension buildup.

5. The Dark Tower: Exactly how I pictured the outside. Not at all how I thought it would be inside. Now after having read "Insomnia" my imaginings brought me to believe that the Tower itself was an inhabited structure with several levels, each level containing more and more sophisticated and/or powerful creatures as you reached the top. Now it's possible that all it is is a representation of the major events of the life of whoever enters it. I would have liked to see Roland receive redemption at the end. A nice "Well done, Gunslinger...be at rest" from God or Gan or whomever. Instead...well...it broke my heart. An intesting ending, very original, but not one I agree with for one of my favorite story characters. He deserved better. Sue me if you don't agree.

6. Miscellany: The book had so many loose ends to tie up, so many uber-villains to kill, so much plot to sew up, so many mysteries to unravel, that I just cannot see how this could have been done with a clear conscience. I understand Mr. King wanted the books to be done, and I don't blame him. They're his "Opus Magnus" as he calls it, but it being that it should at least be as neat as the first four books of the series. The last 3 books, but this one in particular, feel rushed. Hurried. Please don't get me wrong, in places this book is wonderful (Blue Heaven, the Breakers, Empathico, the last leg to the Dark Tower, etc) and had me almost crying with several deaths. These were my friends, they'd become something real to me, and to have the book feel so rushed is almost...shall I say...sacrilege? I'm sorry...I'd have rather waited 5 years between installments for a better ending than this offered.

King was in the book *too much*, making me wonder if he's got a narscissitic streak. What was done good in Song of Susannah just doesn't have the same cohesion in this book. NYC possibly being the Lud of the past really flummoxed me. Susannah's "reunion" with Eddie and Jake at the end felt like a terrible cop out. I cannot believe for a minute that Susannah would do such a thing with anyone other than *her own* Eddie, and nice as it was to see her happy at the end it just felt poorly thought out. Where were "Travellin' Jack" Sawyer and Parkus of "The Talisman" and "Black House" fame? These were characters I fully expected to see and when they didn't show I wondered why all the hooplah from "Black House". Sheemie being there shocked me, but his untimely death and total non-reaction to that death by Roland left me stunned. Why no more flashbacks? What happened to Alain and Jamie DeCurry? So many unanswered questions.

The book itself is written well enough. I couldn't put it down until the very end. Knowing now what I didn't know before though prevents me from wanting to read the series again. I'm sorry Steve, it kills me to say it, but this hurts, man. I'm certain that many will argue this in an "Emperor's New Clothes" manner, debating on the genius of the last 3 books and about how only Lit majors and NY Times book reviewers are the only ones smart enough to understand and agree with it. So be it. Between the hasty writing style and continuity problems I'm sorry to say their arguments are without merit. The bottom line is now that no matter how good the first half of the series is that now I cannot recommend this series to anyone because of the last 3 books alone, and certainly the ending. Let the buyer beware.

...this book will make you want to slam your fingers in a car door just to stop the pain in your head. After I finished this book I just sat and stared dumbly at a wall for 10 minutes thinking, "Arrr?" How could this be a Steven King book? And after the previous books in the series were so good! What happened? A few things that particularly bothered me (and probably you too (Spoiler warning):

1. Mordred: An entire book to build up this character. Nevermind the fact that he's kind of some cheesy spider-man weirdo. We'll accept it, because he's gonna have an epic battle with Roland that will span chapters and wow us all. Right? What's that? Roland shoots him by a campfire and he dies in 2 paragraphs, rendering his entire existence meaningless? Oh. Nevermind.

2. The Crimson King: Ok, so Mordred sucked. But the CK will be awesome! Some really big bad dude that Roland will have a tough time beating. Maybe Roland won't even win! I can't wait! Huh? The CK ends up being some crazy old guy hopping around on a balcony who throws hand grenades at Roland? No way. Steven wouldn't do that to us. CK is like the equivalent to Sauron, or Shai'Tan. He's much tougher than that. And what else? He is defeated by being PAINTED OUT OF EXISTENCE? What? I'll pretend I didn't hear that.

3. The epilogue: Alright so the villains really sucked. But at least the Dark Tower itself will rock! Can't wait for Roland to climb to the top and achieve his quest. Who knows what adventures he'll have inside? Oh wait. Before that, it's a message from Steven King. And he tells us not to expect a good ending. Huh. Gotta tell ya Stevey, that kind of bummed me out. And after the actual ending, King hits us with another dose of suck, telling us not to bother sending him letters about how much we hated the book. It's like his preemptive strike. He knew his book was awful, put no effort into the ending, so instead attacks the READER, and chides us for expecting a good ending! Not sure what's going on here, but man if it didn't make me hate King.

Give the Stephen King Five-Star Brigade credit for one thing: they are certainly out in force for the release of The Dark Tower. Whether any of them **seriously** believe this is a five-star book, however, is a different story altogether. If so, I'd like to borrow their copy of DT7, because mine contained a terrible, lazily written tale nearly unfit for reading.

The problems with DT7 are too numerous to mention in a short review, but I'll touch on a few as a warning to unwary potential buyers (and I'll do my best not to let any spoilers slip):

1). I wasn't looking for a happy ending, but how about a **good** one? You know, something better than an eighth-grade-level meditation on The Meaning of Life?

2). SK writing himself in the tale as a character in DT5, DT6, and DT7. Seriously, how does the man's head fit through doorways?

3). The three major villains - some of whom we've been hearing about for 20 years or so - all turn into bad parodies of Marvel Comics characters within a space of about 250 pages.

4). The rushed, under-edited writing. An overwhelming sense of `just get it finished' practically flows from King's mind to the actual pages of DT7.

5). The totally LAZY author. `Deus ex machina,' indeed, Stevie. Do the characters need a door? Fine, SK puts a door there. Does the author need to totally contradict passages from earlier DT installments? No problem; contradict away. There is absolutely not one shred of drama or tension in DT7, and, really, why should there be? Careful readers of the series have all known for some time (at least since the awful Wolves of the Calla) that nothing ever really counts in this tale: dying isn't necessarily dying, actions can always be undone, and a door is always around the corner if a character needs one. And remember: you can solve a LOT of problems with some simple time travel.

Ugh. That's enough for now. If I've warned away even one reader with a critical eye and a limited budget, I feel I've done my duty. I'm going to go find my copy of The Stand or Eyes of the Dragon and remember a time when Stephen King used to be able to actually spin a coherent, entertaining, and dramatic tale.

******SPOILERS********

As if the year jam packed with awful movies and distasteful entertainment on television couldn't fit any more junk in it, Stephen King released this book. Granted, I loved a lot of it, and I'll give my pros and cons in a minute, but the second half of the book left a bittersweet taste in my proverbial mouth.

I've been a Stephen King fan from the time I was able to read It back sometime in elementary or middle school. I started reading the Dark Tower series only about 5 years ago, and had to go back and reread books I had sitting on the shelves, just to get the connections. I was grinning madly when Ted said "All things serve the beam!" in Hearts in Atlantis, and when Judy Marshall speaks of the Crimson King in Black House. With so many connections throughout the books, so much suspense built into Flagg, Derry, the beams, the rose, Patrick Danville, Ted and the other breakers etc, this book was the 'apotheosis of anticlimax'

Things I enjoyed about this book - You know what... I'm going to skip this section. If you want to hear all about the great things, read the 5 star reviews. They sum up whatever happy feelings this book left me with. This is my chance to whine.

Things I didn't enjoy about this book - 1. It seemed that King could not think of clever ways to bring all the essential characters written about in other books together in an organized way so he threw them all and made their appearances nearly cameos.

Examples:

Sheemie Ruiz. Although he was not foreshadowed to have a large part to play, he showed up, screamed about the beam thanking everybody, and died from a freaking foot infection, which we didn't get to witness in the first place.

Ted Brautigan. His part in this book didn't bother me so much, he had an impact on things and went on his course. I definitely enjoyed hearing his story, much like I enjoyed Callahan's when it was recounted.

Flagg. I was furious when Mordred dispatched the nemesis of Roland. With all the drama that happened between the two in Gilead, the Golgotha, and again in the Emerald City. In all the books he's been in, all the people who have been unavenged, Roland of all people deserved one last palaver and some kind of final showdown! He was, after all, the man in black that Roland has been chasing all this time! He was easily outwitted by a minor character (in my opinion). He was quickly reintroduced into the book, and just as quickly given the boot. Very disappointing.

Patrick Danville. Again, a character who was supposed to be integral to this tale. Introduced nearly at the end of the entire story, how and when he got there left totally unexplained. It's as if King got to the end and remembered, Oh! Forgot about him! How about I just put him in the basement, and they just happen to stumble upon him. Oh I know! I'll remove his tongue so he can't tell his story (because I haven't made one up for him) It made me sick.

Other complaints - Eddie and Oy's deaths hardly served a purpose. Again I feel these were needed solely to have Roland arrive at the tower alone. And how were they all together at the end if when they died in the world that mattered, they didn't go to other worlds than these.

Mordred's death was anticlimatic as well. There was no confrontation between him and any of the other characters. He just kind of grabbed Oy, got bit a little, tossed him away and got shot. Very weak.

The battle with the Crimson King was as tame as it was in Insomnia. This all powerful being who was supposed to orchestrate the destruction of the macroverse and beyond, all he has to arm himself with are flying grenades!? Several enemies in the tale could take advantage of Roland with glammer or other methods of mind control (Rhea, Walter, Dandelo etc), but the King couldn't put up a worthy fight? Give me a break.

And finally, the end of King's epic, his Canterbury Tales was one of the biggest cop out endings I've ever read. If you're going to leave so much unanswered, so many issues unsatisfied and unsolved, just have Roland wake up at Brown (and Zoltan's) house in the desert, and oh it was just all a bad dream... Why not? It is just as unexciting. Reliving the same adventure over and over is an utterly unfulfilling, second rate ending to a story which was supposed to be King's opus. Shame on you, Steve...

I hope (but doubt) that King will read many of these reviews, but I do hope he reads mine and regrets his decision to publish this book. I hope he looks back and rereads this novel and has bitter regret for stringing us all along this far, and essentially giving up at the end.

Well that's my two cents, and then some... Sorry it was so long! Hope somebody finds this review helpful. Don't waste your time with this book if you haven't already done so (and have gotten past all my spoilers)

Peace

Tom

SPOILERS - Don't read this review if you give a damn:

Well, I finished the Dark Tower series. My prevailing emotion is deep regret for ever having spent a dime on it, or anything else the author wrote. I had myself half-convinced, trudging through the contrivance of the final hundred pages, that the ending was going to make up for it somehow. It had to. "Okay, the eerie and terrifying magician from The Stand got eaten by some lame spider thing taking all of two paragraphs, Mordred was a pointless subplot, and the much-hyped Crimson King turned out to be perhaps the shallowest villain in this author's output, contributing nothing to the tale. But surely there's some twist that will make up for it!"

Nope.

What a weak, cop-out ending to a once great epic. 3000 pages for a quaint little zen jest (or myth of Sisyphus as another reviewer noted). Zen is funny and poignant in the confines of a koan or short anecdote. But a portentous seven-book series in an imaginary universe fleshed out in Tolkineque detail? Okay that is kind of funny now that I think about it. But Gan help me, I was hoping for more than a chuckle. Was a satisfying and cathartic conclusion too much to ask for? (No, Susannah in Central Park was not that conclusion, it was a cardboard cut-out made by North Central Positronics with "Happy Ending No. 38798745" stamped on the bottom, say thankya.) I get the point, that all triumphs are transient and ka is a wheel, and so forth... but that doesn't mean it's the "right" ending. Silly me, I thought it was about more than just Roland's addiction. It needn't have been a happy ending but it would've been nice to have a worthwhile and thoughtful one.

King's once-fertile imagination has darkened like Thunderclap. He's obviously not eager to deal with the complex questions and concepts raised by earlier entries and has thus resorted to cheap gimmicks and a patchwork plot. You can almost see the stitches.

"You can have my empire of dirt" - quothes King in this dreary final novel's epigram. Clever. Problem is, it was a lot more than dirt to most of us, that's why we came as far as we did. I remember well the moment I fell in love with the Dark Tower epic. Near the end of the first book, it was starting to take on a vast scope, expressed in strong images and beautiful minimalist prose, culminating finally in a staggering cosmic vision suggesting mind-boggling adventures and twists ahead. This flash faded over time, much like an artificial influx of dimethyltryptamine fades from the brain, finally becoming nothing but a mocking counterpoint in book 7's anti-climax.

Not only does he publish this cheesy, barely-edited trainwreck of a story, hastily getting rid of long-loved characters and villains like he's bailing water out of a sinking ship, not only does he cheapen it by interweaving his mundane self and life into the plot, but he also feels it necessary to chastise fans for their inevitable disappointment in a pre-emptive attack following the "coda". He tries to explain why he turned the series into meta-fiction (although he doesn't really explain it), but he doesn't want anyone calling it meta-fiction, because that's "pretentious".

The attitude he takes in this closing "argument" is insufferably condescending, lecturing readers with a lot of triteness about the point being the journey as if we've never encountered this idea before, and warning us not to write angry letters or show up at his door.

Don't worry Mr. King, you're not worth stalking. I'm just glad I didn't lay down money for this last defamation. I guess I sensed the decline after book IV, even though I didn't want to admit it.

- Constant Reader no more (btw King, I never liked your "constant reader" tag, it always irritated me)

Sorry to support the majority of King's fans but this book WAS a collosal disapointment. Although not completely unexpected (the series quality started dipping around Book 5) the laziness ok Mr. King here was shocking. Just a few of the points which I hated in the story.

1. King including himself in the story. This was just horrible and a reminder of just how bloated King's ego has become over the years. He makes himself the most important person in the Universe and a major character dies not for the Tower but for trying to save his pompous arse.

2. Walter/Flaggs demise : Nevermind the sudden change around book 5 of making Flagg and Walter the same person. The most popular of King's villains is taken out in the lamest possible fashion by a character introduced in the LAST book. Not to mention that a confrontation between Flagg and Roland had been building since the first book we are cheated of them even meeting for the last time.

3. The Ending : This has been discussed ad nauseum but I'll still add that this was a collosal copout. Roland is teleported back and the Tower placing itself in danger is probably the stupidest thing I've ever read. See the tower actually wants Roland to become a nicer person before he arrives there .. Jesus !! King's afterword in which he whines that it is unfair to expect an ending was probably the most insulting thing I've ever read. If you're going to write an epic write one and stop complaining !!

There are other thing I can mention such as crapness of the Crimson King, the convenience of Patrick, Susannah's abandonment but I think its enough to say this about this book

"M-O-O-N that spells CRAP ! laws yes"

I wish I could say I expected better, but after Wolves and Song, I was prepared for the worst. It wasn't the worst. But it wasn't the best, either.

Most of what needs to be said about this book has already been said. It's sloppy and bloated. It reads like a first draft (albeit a good first draft). It wanders off on long tangents that contribute nothing to the overall story. Parts of it are quite good, but overall, I was left with the impression that King just wanted to finish the book and get it out of the way.

SPOILERS AHEAD

King has stated that he never plans his stories. While that approach can lead to some wonderful spontaneity, it has its drawbacks, most of which are showcased in this volume. Mordred got a whole BOOK leading up to his birth. After all that fanfare, what did he ultimately contribute to the story? Nothing. He kills Flagg, but that's about ALL he does, and since he basically replaces Flagg as Roland's arch-nemesis, what was the point? And wasn't Flagg supposed to be immortal, anyway? Or at least quasi-immortal?

And then there's the ending.

At beginning of the Coda, King the Narrator first advises his readers to stop reading before the end (huh?) and then scolds the ones who are still there: "You are the grim, goal-oriented ones who will not believe the joy is the journey rather than the destination...who still get the lovemaking confused with the paltry squirt that comes to end the lovemaking." I have never had an author first wag his finger at me for NOT putting down his book before the end, and then insult my sex life on top of it. Though it's kind of a confusing insult.

Really, though, I think it says more about him than the readers. Basically he's failed to bring his story (and readers) to climax. And he anticipates our disappointment, so he's grumping at us. How dare we expect him to constantly perform! He's not a machine! He's tired! Why won't we just leave him alone?

And after this cranky little speech, he shows us the Tower, and what lies at the top...which, as it turns out, is a door back to the beginning of Roland's quest. Back in the desert, chasing that guy again...and who knows how many times this has already happened? Sigh.

I guess it's not the worst ending he could have written. I understand what he was going for themeatically (ka's a wheel and all). The problem is it makes no sense. What, exactly, has happened? Has time literally reversed itself? Is everyone else in Roland's world now condemned to relive that portion of their lives as well, simply because Roland made some boo-boos on his journey? Why is Everything About Roland? What happened to the rule that time couldn't go backwards in this world? Is the Tower (and all existence) now in danger again? Seems kind of stupid for it to do that to itself...unless Roland is fated to save it every time. In which case it was never in any danger, which makes the whole series seem kind of pointless. I guess saving the multiverse isn't that big a deal after all.

Or is Roland just caught in a private psychological loop which has no impact on the "real" world? In which case, did the events in these books actually happen?

In either case, the reader is left with the impression that the events in the Dark Tower series--which, we were led to believe, were stunningly significant--really didn't matter all that much. It's just Gan's video game, and Roland is his hapless Super Mario. Sorry, Roland, our princess is in another castle...er, Tower. And hey, don't worry, if you screw up, you can push the reset button and start over.

As disappointing and confusing as the ultimate ending was, though, it didn't bother me as much as Susannah's ending. After risking her life countless times for Roland and the Tower, she GIVES UP when she is literally days away from their destination and flees into some fantasy version of New York to live with a fake Eddie and Jake--a couple of guys who share the appearances and first names of Susannah's comrades, but are otherwise nothing like them. Don't kid yourself, Susannah; you might be in New York (or some version of it) but that's not Eddie and Jake. Maybe this was supposed to be uplifting, but as much as I was hoping King wouldn't kill her, I would have preferred an honest death to a fake happy ending.

Imagine if you had to wait ten years in between each book of the Lord of the Rings. Then imagine after being entranced by the first two books, surprising in their originality, wonder and realistic depth, you wait another decade, pick up The Return of the King, and halfway through, J.R.R Tolkien walks into Middle Earth, shakes Frodo's hand, and proceeds to explain to him how he conceived of the idea of hobbits as a bedtime story for his children.

Then read on for a bit more, and find that Sauron, Lord of Mordor, is in actuality not evil incarnate, but just some pissed off guy, yelling on the balcony of his tower.

Then, just as Frodo walks into the tunnel leading to the Cracks of Doom, there's an interjection BY THE AUTHOR, telling you that it's time to stop reading now.

Imagine all this, and then you begin to get a good idea of how what began as a truly unique and genere shattering epic and potential genuine magnum opus can go out with a groan instead of a bang.

Anybody who loved this series in its entirety, I cannot fault you. But I can say that you were not as dedicated and engulfed in the world of the gunslinger and his new friends as the rest of us were. You are the guys who never watch the ballgames until it's on the news that your team's made the playoffs for the first time in 30 years, and then you go out and buy their hat to wear at the sports bar.

You liked it because you don't care. You liked it because you were expecting just another decent story, and that's what you got. For you it was never real.

The rest of us were expecting a revolutionary epic, because all those years ago when we first found ourselves in the strange world of the gunslinger, we saw all the makings of one.

We saw the potential for something truly magnificent, and we're sad and disillusioned and pissed off as we contrast what could have been with what has come to be. We wonder how something that started so good could end so badly.

2.5 stars, and I have to round down to 2, it doesn't deserve 3.
Beware, spoilers abound in this review. I do not feel it can be properly reviewed without the concrete examples that will spoil the plot.

It hurts me to have to more or less pan this book, I started reading of Roland in Fantasy and Science Fiction. Confusing stories, but brilliant. The trade paperback, then Drawing of the Three made it clear and they were brilliant. Now like a bit of unfinished business needing to be gotten out of the way the Dark Tower is swept out the door in a series of anti-climactic denouments.

The book is, of course, too long. Hey we expect that, and we can even like it. It is how King has written books for some time. However in this case with the help of Ted Brautigan the universe is saved early on and 2/3's of the book is a slow denoument as Roland continues on his quest to see the Dark Tower even though it no longer matters. Fair enough though, I've gone this far and I want to see it too.

We then have the ka-tet torn apart. I understand there are thematic and dramatic reasons for Roland coming to the tower alone, however the deaths of 3 of the ka-tet are inexcusable, overly-manipulative and pointless deaths to seemingly provoke an emotional response. Sacrificing one of the characters to save King's own life was just over the top. Having other versions of themselves meet in the epilogue doesn't make up for it.

Walter/Flagg, he needed to die, but as others have said it was for Roland to do so, not Roland's spider-baby. Roland becomes stupid at the end, falling for Dandelo, and not worrying enough about Mordred. Roland was one tough S.O.B., and one cunning smart bugger too, he would never be taken in that easily. Worse, after warning Susannah of bewaring the welcome at the court of the Crimson King, he falls for the same thing just a bit later?

The artist, Patrick Danville, was the hugest deus ex machine to drop from the mind of an author into the pages of a book ever. Was King just wanting to wrap it up so he said "Ok, I'll have a guy draw my way out of the corner."?

There are good points, the ka-tet, Eddie, Jake, Oy are the noblest companions one could hope to have and live up to their literary predecessor Samwise Gamgee. Their deaths are a true waste. Despite their throwaway deaths though they are the real reason to have read this series. I also liked Whelan's art, and I'm not a real Whelan fan. It was much better than the horrible artwork in Song of Susannah. Algul Siento was very good, I'd be a breaker if I was put in a sweet setup like that. The story would have been well ended though at this point considering what was to come.

I wasn't bothered by the powerless Crimson King at the end of the book. After all, when the breakers were freed he was finished. If Mordred was bad enough to easily take Flagg down, some tainted meat should not have hurt him that badly. However it didn't bother me too much, it was obvious that he'd be dispatched by Oy and Roland, with Oy as the sacrifice.

The Coda was unforgiveable. Roland had learned to love, he had learned to grieve, his cries before the tower claiming Jake as his son proved so. To be thrown back into the story before book 1 starts with one symbol of change is not acceptable. Nor, Mr. King, is lecturing the readers who have paid your rent. I recognize I do not have the right to tell you how to finish your story, I do though hold the right to expect the enjoyable, fulfilling, purposeful epic you promised.

Let me dissect this further. If this is reincarnation, why does Roland not start as a baby? Following Walter through the desert is well into his middle years, he's lost Alain and Cuthbert, killed Susan and seen his world move on. Does this mean that after saving the beams and the tower, preserving the universe that just a few weeks later the universe is again in peril? We are supposed to accept this and believe that Roland's horn being part of his gear this time shows he has progressed in some small way? Roland progressed greatly as he saved the universe. If he is to have peace in this incarnation it should have started with his birth, not setting him again on such a thorny path.

Neil Gaiman, on being asked why end The Sandman stated "Because stories that matter end!". Yes, stories that matter end. They don't have to have a happy ending, or a just ending, or a sad ending. The ending can even be the ending of that particular story, such as the Sandman was, indicating another story, many stories, go on. This was none of that. By pushing the reset button King insults all of us who put a lot of time into reading a story, that without an ending, does not matter.

23 years after starting the trade edition of The Gunslinger I am sorely disappointed.

Hile Roland, Jake, Eddie, Oy, and even Susannah, you deserved better than your maker gave you.