Talk:Father Callahan

Cleanup

I'm cleaning up The Dark Tower Characters and am thinning the Father Callahan section considerably, since there is a main article on him. For legacy, or pasting into this article, here is the original text:

Callahan is the "damned" priest who appeared in the novel Salem's Lot. He makes his first appearance in the Dark Tower series in Wolves of the Calla, although his character's reappearance was hinted at in the afterword to Wizard and Glass. After being infected by the vampire Barlow, Father Callahan spends time in a homeless shelter that he later runs. A male partner in running the shelter, who is also the object of Callahan's love (it is too much to say that his is a Gay priest, only that he was in love with this man. It is stated many times that the Father still has an eye for the ladies, and shows no other interest in any other men (save the Man Jesus)), is given AIDS by a vampire. Callahan made it a goal to get even with the vampires for what they did to his partner. He is aided in this due to his ability to spot the vampires; since Jerusalem's Lot (and the forced taking of some of the vampire Barlow's blood) he has been able to tell who is a vampire. He enters Mid-World after jumping from a window escaping the agents of the Red King, then arrives at the Way Station from the The Gunslinger (right after Jake & Roland left), although this is not revealed until Wolves of the Calla. He assists the ka-tet (becoming a partial member) in the Battle against the Wolves, helps Susannah's rescue mission from 1999 New York, sacrificing himself so that Jake may live making his final stand in The Dark Tower VII against the can-toi (low men) and vampires: Thus he is redeemed from his fall in ’Salem’s Lot. Callahan kills himself before allowing himself to fall at the hands of the vampires in the Dixie Pig.

— RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 00:09, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Black Thirteen's fate and 9/11

Stating that Black Thirteen was destroyed during 9/11 is speculation. We do not know for sure. As we do not see it after that.

Stating that it might be related to 9/11 is speculation as well, not objective.

We don't see it after it is put in the locker, END of story.

--Antelope In Search Of Truth 03:40, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Give me a break. There's a line saying "Unless the building falls on top of it" "That'd be a way to destroy the nasty thing." I mean, King pretty much beat us over the head with it.--CyberGhostface 14:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Do we see it happen? Of course a building falling on it would likely destroy it, but we have to acknowledge that we don't see it happen.

I'm with you: building = crushed Black 13. But if we didn't SEE it, all we can say is something to the effect of, "it was likely destroyed during 9/11.

But all this is *beside* the point: the events of 9/11 fall outside the scope of events in the books. Of course, that line you mentioned would be a good thing to mention maybe, if we're going to bother referring this. It just comes a little too close to speculation to say anything definitive so as long as we don't do that......

And until there is composition regarding it's potential impact on 9/11, this is not the place to speculate.

--Antelope In Search Of Truth 20:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Well I guess the current revision is okay. Sorry for arguing.--CyberGhostface 21:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh no no..... no need for apology about arguing, though I do appreciate the sentiment. The whole point is that we are all trying to work toward an objective, concise, complete account of any given subject in an article.

Discussions like these ensure that we are standing up for the quality of these articles..... so thank you!

--Antelope In Search Of Truth 21:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Minor Change.

For a more exact definition of the "ruined children" I changed the sentences from:

"Roont" (ruined) children are sterile, grow to be larger and stronger than other children, and die painfully at a younger age.

in

"Roont" (ruined) children are sterile, mentally handicapped, grow to be larger and stronger than other children, and die painfully at a younger age. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hardwing (talk • contribs)

Maybe we should have a link to Down syndrome which is what I always thought of when I was reading it... — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 03:32, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Thats speculation. In no way is being roont down syndrome.--CyberGhostface 04:01, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

No, I didn't say it was. I meant that the outward appearances seemed very close. — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 12:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Father Callahan in a Koontz book, and other King references (Phantoms, Dean Koontz)

I'm reading through Phantoms by Dean Koontz right now and the similarities between this and some King books is really piling up.

Taken one by one they could certainly be small coincidences but the sheer volume of similarities is making me think something may've been up. I'll go through a brief list of some of the similarities and get to the Callahan part.

-The story centres around a quiet ski-town which seems to have been emptied of its inhabitants in the blink of an eye. Dinner tables have been set in some houses, and in others food is cooking away to burnt globs of fat. Although bodies do turn up, it's setup in a way that immediately reminded me of Salem's Lot (or more specifically the short story Jeruselam's Lot).

-The main "beast" of the story seems to be a shapeshifter of some kind, which taunts many of the characters with their fears. One character is "defaced" by a giant moth after he claims "no, it was just a bird. no moth could be that big.". Later, that character comes back to haunt young Lisa with sexual advances; earlier in the book, the character made lude references about her. Very reminiscent of "It".

-A team sets out to find how many bodies are left in town, and they enter a church. Some of the descriptions are very similar to those in Jeruselam's Lot, and when they get up to the pulpit, they find that a priest has been crucified on the life-sized cross at the back of the wall. This taunting is again reminiscent of Jeruselam's Lot / Salem's Lot, and what pushes this further is when he's recognized as "Father Callahan" by one of the team.

-In one scene, a child's voice is heard. They discover that it's coming from the drain of a sink. When one of the character's leans in to have a peak, the sink backs up and sprays a tower of sludge upwards. Just reminded me of "It", although this one isn't as strong a reference.

-A team is sent into the sewer to patch into the town's power hub. The mood and descriptions here again reminded me of "It". Again, a weaker reference but I may as well list them.

-A criminal in the book has a very similar personality to both the Trashcan man (in his narrative processes), and another criminal from The Stand whose name I can't recall at the moment. He feels inexplicably drawn to the mountains (where the beast is and where all of the tension is).

I may be forgetting some.. as well, I'm only at page 283 of 425, so more may show up.

-Narwhal

Fair use rationale for Image:Callahanreview.jpg

Image:Callahanreview.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Callahanbook5.jpg

Image:Callahanbook5.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Callahanreview.jpg

Image:Callahanreview.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Fathercallahandt7.jpg

Image:Fathercallahandt7.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

LGBT Category

I removed the category and it was replaced with the edit summary "his relationship with Lupe was one of the biggest things about his subplot in DT5". It seems - and I'm not a fan, nor do I know a heck of a lot about Dark Tower or Stephen King - but it seems like a "big thing" about a sub-plot of a five part (?) series doesn't qualify as a major part of the character. Furthermore, the article doesn't mention anything about his sexuality - I find "a peck on the cheek" and "nothing physical occurs between them". That's the only mention. If I'm wrong, the article needs to include a lot more information =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why it makes it any less valid of a category. Does he not count as being gay if being gay isn't the focal point of his character?

The series is seven parts, but Callahan was only introduced until the fifth one. The fifth book is where he makes the majority of his appearences in the series. Lupe's relationship with Callahan was one of the major things that got Callahan into hunting the vampires. Here's a quote from the book.

"Oh, okay, I suppose you'd say that by March I'd fallen in love with him. Does that make me a queer? A faggot? I don't know. They say we all are, don't they? Some do, anyway. And why not? Every month or two there seemed to be another story in the paper about a priest with a penchant for sticking his hand up the altar boys' skirts. As for myself, I had no reason to think of myself as queer. God knows I wasn't immune to the turn of a pretty female leg, priest or not, and molesting the altar boys never crossed my mind. Nor was there ever anything physical between Lupe and me. But I loved him, and I'm not just talking about his mind or his dedication or his ambitions for Home. Not just because he'd chosen to do his real work among the poor, like Christ, either. There was a physical attraction." Callahan paused, struggled, then burst out: "God, he was beautiful. Beautiful!"

The only thing I would opt for a change is to make it "Fictional bisexuals".--CyberGhostface (talk) 15:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I would love to see the article explain a little better why the category is there. At the moment it's only mentioned in passing as a "deep fondness", which sounds like it's not an important piece of information about the character, thus my repeated removal of the cat. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)