From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #11
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume00/11
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
Reply-To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
------------------------------
Content-Type: text/plain
blakes7-d Digest Volume 00 : Issue 11
Today's Topics:
Re: [B7L] New B7 tape release in the US?
RE: [B7L] Mission to Destiny
Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Re: Re: [B7L] New B7 tape release in the US?
Re: [B7L] New B7 tape release in the US?
Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Re: [B7L] New B7 tape release in the US?
[B7L] Pages Bar drink
Re: [B7L] Too quiet
RE: [B7L] Mission to Destiny
Re: [B7L] Too quiet
Re: [B7L] Too quiet
Re: [B7L] review of Judith's "All Change"
Re: [B7L] Too quiet
[B7L] the netcop strikes again
Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Re: [B7L] Too quiet
Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Re: [B7L] Mission to Destiny
Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Re: [B7L] Many many people...
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 05:00:28 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] New B7 tape release in the US?
Message-ID: <387F1DEB.4F56A1F2@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mac4781@aol.com wrote:
> While I've not been able to access the site, a friend of mine said that
> Columbia House (www.columbahouse.com) is currently offering the B7 tapes on a
> subscription basis.
>
> She thinks it might be a new release. We were wondering if the tapes might
> be better quality than the ones that were released in the US some years ago.
>
> Has anyone bought the Columbia House tapes?
Actually, these are the ones I was complaining about early last year.
They're manufactured in Canada, and the cassettes are the heavy,
well constructed ones, but I'm personally disgusted with the quality
of the duplicating. The picture's nice and clear--except when it's
not, which is often, depending on how picky you are. At over
$25 apiece (including shipping), I'm extremely picky. I do not want
broad white snowy lines *or* thin white lines *or* distortion. If I
restricted myself to complaining about broad white snowy lines,
I'd only have to return about one-third of the tapes. As it is, I've
had to return all but one of those volumes I've received so far at
least once, and I had to return The Web/S-L-D three or four times.
If you add that to the fact that they ship last class, and that the
billing date is three or four weeks gone by the time you get the
video, so that you have to either ship it back first class or pay
the bill immediately to avoid being delinquent, the irritation factor
(and the cost of postage) is pretty high.
I've been told that others have had good luck buying them from
Suncoast, but there's not a Suncoast in my area, so I've no way to
compare. Still, I wouldn't recommend the Columbia House tapes
to anyone who had an alternate source. I notice Amazon.com has
them for 16.99, which would still make them about $4-5 cheaper
than Columbia House after adding shipping, and their turnaround
time is much quicker, as well. Has anybody tried getting them
from Amazon.com? Are they any better?
Mistral
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 13:39:06 -0000
From: Godrich Stephen <Stephen.Godrich@icl.com>
To: "'blakes7@lysator.liu.se'" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] Mission to Destiny
Message-ID: <8FA6C9AA73AAD211BCEE00A0C9D9E5750134589B@WWMESSM7>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi,
I'm new to this list and have sat back and watched, but plan to submit more
often. Now onto business...
<snip>
>> Ellynne wrote
>> > In the episode where they're trying to find the murderer to keep that
one
>> > planet from turning into a mushroom 1) is there anyone who believes the
>> > Federation wasn't responsible for the fungi?
>>
>> Yes, me. Why blame the Federation for every last disaster?
>
>Ditto. I fail to see how the Federation could cause Destiny's star
>to be lacking in certain wavelengths of light. (OTOH, a good
>writer might make me believe they took advantage of that lack
>to engineer a lovely fungus-- but no, I don't "really" believe it.)
I believe that a more acceptable answer would be that the fungus DID occur
as a natural disaster, the federation supplied the isotope/cure, bribed Sara
to set up the capture, and retrieve the isotope and wipe out the crew
(including Sara).
This would place the population of Destiny in a hopeless situation where the
Federation could move in with the cure (quids up on the deal) and take
control of the planet as 'saviours'.
I suppose it could also be plausible that the Federation DID come up with
the fungus in the first place but that would have placed them in the firing
line for blame for implanting it. In other words, they had to get there to
start the infection off.
Then again, why not hire a mercenary. Why does this solution 'stink' of
Servalan? :)
<snip>
>> 3) Is
>> > there anyone who doesn't think either the alphabet or handwriting would
>> > have had to change considerably for _Avon_ to take that long figuring
out
>> > the one clue? Or has he been going through a great deal of effort to
hide
>> > his mild dyslexia and this one slipped past him?
>>
>> The obvious is always obvious in retrospect, never necessarily so before
you
>> realise how obvious it is.
>
>I guess we can take it from that that you didn't figure it out before
>Avon did? It *was* obvious; it was the weakest part of the plot.
>It requires a mighty effort to suspend disbelief over that one.
>Avon had his blinders on.
I agree that it was a MAJOR plot hole. But I suppose that if you had been
beaten about the head with a blunt instrument to the point where death is
inevitable, you'd find it quite hard to write too.
Hope that opens up a bit more of a debate...
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 13:40:25 -0000
From: "Jonathan Coupe" <jonathan@meanwhile.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Message-ID: <004901bf5e94$ea8ca5c0$5854883e@ming>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
----- Original Message ----- >
> I dunno... when I was a kid, I was told by a fellow pretty high up
> in the US military that the Soviet Union would collapse from inside--
> when enough of its people were ready for it to. He said that we get
> the governments we deserve--because we accept them. I didn't
> believe him at the time; but it appears now that he knew what he
> was saying.
>
Re. "we get the governements we deserve" - I'd say that this has a lot of
weight on its side in the case of the Russians. But not for the Poles,
Bulgarians, Czechs and other East Europeans who had communism forced on them
at the point of a tank barrel.
And of course it's now the Russians that the West thinks most about helping
in the transition to a post-communist society. Probably necessary, but very
unfair.
Jonathan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 09:00:47 EST
From: KKrause658@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Re: [B7L] New B7 tape release in the US?
Message-ID: <a3.1046f4e.25b0860f@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mistral wrote< I notice Amazon.com has
them for 16.99, which would still make them about $4-5 cheaper
than Columbia House after adding shipping, and their turnaround
time is much quicker, as well. Has anybody tried getting them
from Amazon.com? Are they any better?>
I've been getting them from Amazon after MPT took Blakes7 off for a while. I
like the quality on par with most new tapes you get from video stores. I
would say go for it.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 09:04:22 EST
From: Mac4781@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] New B7 tape release in the US?
Message-ID: <45.44aced.25b086e6@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mistral wrote:
> Still, I wouldn't recommend the Columbia House tapes
> to anyone who had an alternate source.
Thanks for the report.
> I notice Amazon.com has
> them for 16.99, which would still make them about $4-5 cheaper
> than Columbia House after adding shipping, and their turnaround
> time is much quicker, as well. Has anybody tried getting them
> from Amazon.com? Are they any better?
Based on what I've heard from others, all the tapes released in the US are
apparently from the same source, which is to say they are all hit or miss
quality. :(
Mistral, may I forward your post to my friend who asked about the Columbia
tapes?
BTW, the URL I sent was incorrect--no wonder I couldn't connect! Sorry about
that. The correct URL is www.columbiahouse.com
Carol Mc
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 09:09:31 EST
From: KKrause658@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Message-ID: <67.abe870.25b0881b@aol.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_67.abe870.25b0881b_boundary"
--part1_67.abe870.25b0881b_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 1/14/70, 1:15:44 AM, N.Faulkner@tesco.net writes:
<<But make it a million and it would have been no more than a statistic.
Surely Cally's vague reference to ''many many people'' suggests that she
herself can't put a figure on the bodycount, so really she's just guessing.
>>
but many many people? When you can actually say millions, or worlds or
something else more convincing? I guess this is like the Bomb being
dropped on Japan. Was it right to drop the bomb, killing many innocent
people in order to stop WWII? You'll find arguments for both. Like dropping
it then ended the war and stopped other innocent people from being killed by
having the war drag on. But did that make dropping the bomb right?
--part1_67.abe870.25b0881b_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Return-Path: <blakes7-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from rly-za02.mx.aol.com (rly-za02.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.98]) by
air-za03.mail.aol.com (v67.7) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 02:15:44
1900
Received: from samantha.lysator.liu.se (samantha.lysator.liu.se
[130.236.254.202]) by rly-za02.mx.aol.com (v67.7) with ESMTP; Fri, 14
Jan 2000 02:15:30 -0500
Received: (from list@localhost)
by samantha.lysator.liu.se (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA28615;
Fri, 14 Jan 2000 08:14:46 +0100 (MET)
Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 08:14:46 +0100 (MET)
X-Authentication-Warning: samantha.lysator.liu.se: list set sender to
blakes7-request@lysator.liu.se using -f
Message-ID: <00aa01bf5e60$0d31c4a0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
References: <Pine.OSF.3.96.1000113102201.31428A-100000@bsauasc>
<08e201bf5db8$51f29040$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 20:16:55 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Resent-Message-ID: <"mUaPIC.A.A_G.kzsf4"@samantha.lysator.liu.se>
Resent-From: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> archive/latest/22292
X-Loop: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: blakes7-request@lysator.liu.se
Una wroteth:
> <Piously> Indeed, if only *one* person had died, it would still have been
a
> moral outrage.
But make it a million and it would have been no more than a statistic.
Surely Cally's vague reference to ''many many people'' suggests that she
herself can't put a figure on the bodycount, so really she's just guessing.
Julia:
>Oh, I think he was ruthless - more so than Avon, in some ways. I just
>get fed up with people misquoting Cally to support their view of Blake.
Me too, on both counts.
(a) For Blake to be a halfway decent revolutionary, he would have had to be
ruthless. Any system worth overthrowing isn't going to be toppled by high
ideals alone, and any attempt by Blake to pull his punches and restrict the
effects of his activities to his declared opponents would have turned his
actions into worthy but ultimately ineffectual protest. There's quite a bit
of Blake-bashing fanfic (Judith Seaman springs immediately to mind) that
depicts exactly that kind of Blake, so bound by his moral agonising that he
can't achieve anything. I don't buy it - Blake was smart. And ruthless.
And manipulative. But that's alright because it was all in a good cause.
(b) Some people put a lot of weight on Cally's objections as voiced early on
in 'Star One', but then overlook her later gung-ho enthusiasm for pressing
on with the mission. She really does look super-keen when they find that one
door, as requested (even if it isn't marked 'Entrance'). Whilst I think
it's reasonable to posit that Cally has appointed herself as Blake's
conscience on the flight deck, she has done so primarily to voice her own
ambivalence towards the venture, and ultimately she comes down on Blake's
side.
Come to think of it, so does Avon.
Neil
"I suppose I respond so antipathetically to Lewis and Tolkien because I find
this sort of consolatory Christianity as distasteful as any other
fundamentally misanthropic doctrine." - Michael Moorcock
--part1_67.abe870.25b0881b_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 06:45:06 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] New B7 tape release in the US?
Message-ID: <387F3671.A570B804@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mac4781@aol.com wrote:
> Based on what I've heard from others, all the tapes released in the US are
> apparently from the same source, which is to say they are all hit or miss
> quality. :(
Bummer :( Well then, I'd say Amazon's cheaper and faster, if
the quality's the same.
> Mistral, may I forward your post to my friend who asked about the Columbia
> tapes?
Certainly, if you think it helpful. Thank you for asking first.
Mistral
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 17:14:18 +0000
From: Steve Rogerson <steve.rogerson@mcr1.poptel.org.uk>
To: Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>, Freedom City <freedom-city@blakes-7.org>
Subject: [B7L] Pages Bar drink
Message-ID: <387F596A.FDFFB2CF@mcr1.poptel.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
As Una and I have to meet soon to complete a certain Dr Who book
transaction, we thought it would be a good opportunity for another drink
for members of the two B7 lists at Pages Bar, London's sci-fi bar. The
date we've picked is Saturday 12 February, which shouldn't be too busy
given the Starfleet Ball is on that weekend. At past drinks we've had,
some early birds like me start arriving from about 5.30pm. The bar shuts
at 11pm. Anyone who is interested in going, please drop me an email. If
you're new to these events, tell me what you look like and roughly what
time you'll be arriving so we can look out for you.
Pages Bar is on Page Street, London SW1P. Nearest tubes are Pimlico and
Westminster and railway stations Charing Cross, Victoria and Waterloo
are not far away. The No 88 bus, which you can pick up near Piccadilly
Circus, goes right past the door. The C10 bus also goes past the door
and you can get that at Victoria.
--
cheers
Steve Rogerson
http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson
"In my world, there are people in chains and you can ride them like
ponies"
The alternative Willow, Buffy the Vampire Slayer
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 07:41:45 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Too quiet
Message-ID: <000201bf5ec0$2060a680$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sally wrote
> Neil answered:
> <Me neither. Saddo Avon-groupie apologists will believe any
> old tripe if it gets Old Studsy off the hook.>
>
> Well, of *course*...if we wanted to be fair and reasonable and objective,
> we'd be fans of Gan. Or football commentators.
You can be a fan of football commentators if you really want to, see if I
care.
Neil
"I suppose I respond so antipathetically to Lewis and Tolkien because I find
this sort of consolatory Christianity as distasteful as any other
fundamentally misanthropic doctrine." - Michael Moorcock
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:34:08 GMT
From: Murray Smith <mjsmith@tcd.ie>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: RE: [B7L] Mission to Destiny
Message-Id: <l03110701b4a52a372f65@[134.226.96.44]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Dear Godrich,
Welcome to the list. Don't worry about being a lurker; I lurk all
the time, either because the topic doesn't interest me, or because I'm too
busy to submit.<g>
I found your theory regarding 'Mission to Destiny' as very interesting:
>I believe that a more acceptable answer would be that the fungus DID occur
>as a natural disaster, the federation supplied the isotope/cure, bribed Sara
>to set up the capture, and retrieve the isotope and wipe out the crew
>(including Sara).
>
>This would place the population of Destiny in a hopeless situation where the
>Federation could move in with the cure (quids up on the deal) and take
>control of the planet as 'saviours'.
>
>I suppose it could also be plausible that the Federation DID come up with
>the fungus in the first place but that would have placed them in the firing
>line for blame for implanting it. In other words, they had to get there to
>start the infection off.
>
>Then again, why not hire a mercenary. Why does this solution 'stink' of
>Servalan? :)
The Federation certainly had the motive to do all this; but there is no
evidence in the episode. Remember Avon's remark that the motivation of
greed is 'always reliable'? Any number of rich people and groups could
have bribed Sara. Indeed, she could have approached the person or group
herself, judging by her abilities.
Murray
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:57:35 GMT
From: Murray Smith <mjsmith@tcd.ie>
To: Lysator <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Too quiet
Message-Id: <l03110706b4a52f365bcf@[134.226.96.44]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mistral,
I agree with you completely on this:
>But the point (to me, anyway) isn't the body count. It's
>whether Blake has the authority to make the decision to
>deliberately sacrifice non-combatants to win his victory.
>In my book, he doesn't.
There have been plenty of self-appointed groups who claimed to be doing
what they did in the best interests of the ordinary people, without
consulting the latter. Most of the people who would have died if Blake had
destroyed Star One would have been the same people he claimed to care about
so much.
That said, he made the right decision to remove the explosives from Star
One when the alien threat was discovered. Another person might have
persisted in destroying it, thus letting the aliens in, believing that the
resulting chaos would destroy the Federation, resulting in freedom. In
Germany in the 1930s, the Communists hoped that the Nazis would gain
control, destroying the Weimar Republic, and paving the way for a Communist
takeover. Of course, there _was_ a Communist takeover, but only over a
fraction of Germany, and only after 1945, due to the Red Army.
Blake realised that the aliens were hostile to _all_ humans, and if
victorious, would be an even greater foe than the Federation ever was; so
he did the right thing.
Murray
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:11:15 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Too quiet
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0114191115-6d1Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Fri 14 Jan, mistral@ptinet.net wrote:
>
> > And these examples
> > indicate that, when Star One goes feral, individual worlds
> > *cannot* override the lethal instructions (which makes sense,
> > since it's an instrument of oppression).
>
> Eh??? There is not one example of Star One being used as an
> instrument of oppression; in fact, it's quite clear it can't be done.
> There is no way for the powers that be in the Federation to give
> any orders to Star One at all. They don't know where it is, they
> can't fix it-- they have no control.
Just because they don't know where it is, doesn't mean that they can't relay
orders to it. To take one possibility, a broadcast (encrypted for security)
order would get to an unknown destination.
another possibility would be a chain of relay stations with various security
measures to prevent their output being picked up.
Another one (thinking about what we know of Orac here) is that communications
traffic to Star One is via another dimension - that could also be done without
knowledge of where it was in our dimensions.
>
> While it's true that destroying Star One will create havoc and
> weaken Federation control because of that havoc, it doesn't
> naturally follow that Star One is an instrument of oppression.
> That's just an unsupportable attempt to justify its destruction.
> I seriously doubt that if your government found a way to give
> you a perfect climate and eliminate traffic accidents, you'd
> find it oppressive.
Unless they then said "pay us quadruple taxes and do everything else we say, or
your perfect climate will become hurricanes." Climate control makes oppression
a doddle - bit like a solium device, only more expensive to set up.
> > destroying Star
> > One kills; Star One as an out-of-control but unstoppable control centre is
> > killing...and there is no way, for Our Heroes or for
> > us, to know which body count is highest.
>
> But the point (to me, anyway) isn't the body count. It's
> whether Blake has the authority to make the decision to
> deliberately sacrifice non-combatants to win his victory.
> In my book, he doesn't.
But then it is difficult to poll people at large when you have no access to the
media and there is no mechanism for recording their votes in any case. (I think
the alphas may have had some voting rights, but the labour grades certainly did
not)
He had no way to gain such authority - nobody did.
I find I always come back to the same question because one can only look at
these things in comparison to the real world. Do you feel the deaths in the
American civil war were justified?
The south (as I understand it) was within its rights to seceed. (thus one could
argue that the war was fought without 'authority' on the part of the North.)
However, the war ended slavery in America.
Civilians died in that war - I'm sure you can think of better examples than I
can - Atlanta comes instantly to mind. Sherman's march to the sea.
Non-combatants were deliberately sacrificed. Does that mean the war should not
have been fought?
I won't give an answer, but I do think that a generation of living in peace with
the horrific memory of WW2 in a previous generation has led us to an unrealistic
desire that all wars should be won without anyone getting killed. I also think
the media (which portrays 'heros' as being able to win without ever hurting
anyone more seriously than a punch on the jaw) builds up an expectation among
young people that the impossible is possible. (and Western's of course, where
the good guy never draws first, but still turns out to be fastest)
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 - Fanzines for Blake's 7, B7 Filk songs,
pictures, news, Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth
Thomas, etc. (also non-Blake's 7 zines at http://www.nas.com/~lknight )
Redemption '01 23-25 Feb 2001 http://www.smof.com/redemption/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 18:28:41 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] review of Judith's "All Change"
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0114182841-518Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Fri 14 Jan, Sally Manton wrote:
> Tanja quoting Judith:
> <Blake: Let me introduce you to Orac.
> Deva: What is it?
> Blake: It's an extremely useful pain in the neck. Speaking of
> which, where's Avon?>
>
> <choke> Oh Judith, that line is so - so...*him*. I love it.
>
> The whole thing sounds wonderful; will have to add this to the
> list of 'when I have pennies...'
You don't need many pennies for this one. I produced it in the lowest possible
cost-format so that people could afford to buy multiple copies to read as a
group if they so desired. (I've taken part in 'performances' on a couple of
occasions now and it's been fun.)
It's also the only zine I do that is copy-lefted. ie. If you want to xerox a
few extra copies yourself to make a group reading possible, then I don't mind.
(But I don't give permission for extra copies to be sold)
It's an A5 digest zine, spine stapled, with a black and white card cover.
prices including postage are 1.50 pounds UK, 2.00 pounds Europe, 2.40 pounds or
$4 cash to the USA and 2.50 pounds to Australia.
Send your cash to Judith Proctor, 28 Diprose Rd, Corfe Mullen, Wimborne, Dorset,
BH21 3QY, UK
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 - Fanzines for Blake's 7, B7 Filk songs,
pictures, news, Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth
Thomas, etc. (also non-Blake's 7 zines at http://www.nas.com/~lknight )
Redemption '01 23-25 Feb 2001 http://www.smof.com/redemption/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:32:33 +0000
From: Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Cc: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Too quiet
Message-ID: <sMT4IYARn3f4Ew1P@jajones.demon.co.uk>
In message <387F18AB.3E12DFB2@ptinet.net>, mistral@ptinet.net writes
>None of the other members of
>Scorpio's crew fit the bill in the way Vila did.
>
>(Okay, okay, that and the fact it's a Robert Holmes script.)
Oh look, I agree with Mistral on at least one thing tonight:-)
--
Julia Jones
"Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!"
The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:57:26 +0000
From: Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] the netcop strikes again
Message-ID: <08e+UfAm+3f4EwVI@jajones.demon.co.uk>
I had a rant on The Other List about this recently, but I'm going to do
it again. In short form, look up the long version on the Lyst's FAQ.
Trim irrelevant material from your post, *don't* leave a copy of the
entire thread dangling off the end of your post. And while I'm on the
subject of OE's failings, *don't* post in HTML. Or any character set
other than ASCII.
The rant in the FAQ talks about the inconvenience caused, and mentions
that it costs money. So let's do some sums. I've just received a post of
about 5.7 kB, of which around 3 to 4 kb was a quite unnecessary copy of
the post replied to. Trivial, really. On the other hand, IIRC the last
time Calle said how many subscribers we had, it was around 300. So that
post generated about 1 MB of quite unnecessary traffic. Quite a bit of
that 1 MB was downloaded by people who pay metered rates for their
telephone line or their ISP access. All of it was transmitted across
equipment that has to be paid for by somebody, both temporary storage on
mail servers etc, and the ISP equivalent of telephone lines.
All right, you say, but it was only one little email that only directly
cost members of this list collectively a few pennies, maybe a few tens
of pennies. And a few pennies more to the people who own the equipment
that it went across. But "one little email" from a lot of people adds
up. And up.
Don't.
Yes, Calle, you can append this...
--
Julia Jones
"Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!"
The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:15:46 +0000
From: Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Cc: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Message-ID: <e8$0ETAiX3f4Ewxo@jajones.demon.co.uk>
In message <387EFA29.87E9FA9F@ptinet.net>, mistral@ptinet.net writes
>
>
>Neil Faulkner wrote:
>
>> Julia:
>> >Oh, I think he was ruthless - more so than Avon, in some ways. I just
>> >get fed up with people misquoting Cally to support their view of Blake.
>>
>> Me too, on both counts.
>
>Whereas I get fed up with people insisting that disagreeing with
>Blake's (or anyone's) actions is bashing him.
I'm not saying that anyone disagreeing with Blake is bashing them. If
you think that I wholeheartedly agree with Blake's actions at Star One,
I suggest that you go and reread my post, and note the emotionally
loaded word I used to describe his previous actions against the
Federation.
The distortion of Cally's words is frequently used by people who are
trying to argue a case that Blake was a Bad Person in trying to destroy
Star One because he deliberately chose a course of action that would
result in the deaths of a very large proportion of the people he was
supposedly trying to help.
>I dunno... when I was a kid, I was told by a fellow pretty high up
>in the US military that the Soviet Union would collapse from inside--
>when enough of its people were ready for it to. He said that we get
>the governments we deserve--because we accept them. I didn't
>believe him at the time; but it appears now that he knew what he
>was saying.
A better description of the Soviet Union might well be "The New Russian
Empire". Various constituent members of the communist block tried to
remove themselves from Russian influence, in some cases quite hard, and
failed courtesy of a military invasion.
I am not aware that there was large scale compulsory use of pacifying
drugs in the Soviet Union. Vodka doesn't count, as its use was merely
state-subsidised rather than mandatory.
>
>> Blake was smart. And ruthless.
>> And manipulative. But that's alright because it was all in a good cause.
>
>Rubbish. 'The end justifies the means' is just a cop-out for those
>who don't have the patience or the backbone or the intelligence to
>persevere against the odds, without caving in to the temptation
>to take the easier, less ethical path. Blake rose above that temptation
>a lot of the time. He also gave in to it occasionally -- Star One,
>Shadow, Bounty.
I find it helps to mentally sprinkle around large numbers of <irony>
tags when reading Neil's posts:-)
>
>> (b) Some people put a lot of weight on Cally's objections as voiced early on
>> in 'Star One', but then overlook her later gung-ho enthusiasm for pressing
>> on with the mission.
What interests me is the way Star One is quoted, but not Pressure Point.
It will somehow kill fewer people if the control system is located on
Earth when it's destroyed?
--
Julia Jones
"Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!"
The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:31:29 +0000
From: Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Cc: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Too quiet
Message-ID: <uMz4IUARm3f4EwU$@jajones.demon.co.uk>
In message <387F0EF2.B01B0BF3@ptinet.net>, mistral@ptinet.net writes
>Eh??? There is not one example of Star One being used as an
>instrument of oppression; in fact, it's quite clear it can't be done.
>There is no way for the powers that be in the Federation to give
>any orders to Star One at all. They don't know where it is, they
>can't fix it-- they have no control.
You don't have to know where it is in order to send messages to it.
The big problem, as they found out, is that if something goes wrong and
it stops obeying lawful orders (alien invasion or just a breakdown)
there is nothing you can do about it.
>
>While it's true that destroying Star One will create havoc and
>weaken Federation control because of that havoc, it doesn't
>naturally follow that Star One is an instrument of oppression.
>That's just an unsupportable attempt to justify its destruction.
>I seriously doubt that if your government found a way to give
>you a perfect climate and eliminate traffic accidents, you'd
>find it oppressive.
If the means of controlling the climate could also be used to turn the
climate in my locale very nasty indeed, I damn well *would* regard it as
a means of oppression. A very primitive version of this sort of activity
goes on already - dam a river upstream of your troublesome province,
saying that you're building a water reservoir so that they will have
water during the dry season, guard the sluice controls well, and let
them decide whether to give in or watch their crops fail.
We're being offered a means of decreasing traffic accidents in the UK.
Well, not offered, it's going to be imposed if Teflon Tony gets his way.
Enforce speed limits by putting a system into all new cars, whereby the
same technology used for those nifty little gadgets that tell you where
you are to within a hundred metres is used to tell where a car is and
what speed it's doing. Go above the speed limit for that stretch of
road, and the fuel line is interrupted. Oh, and it will allow the police
to track your car wherever it goes. Wonderful for fighting crime, as
well. All those people who do the wrong things, think the wrong way, now
you can track their movements at the press of a button. The pilot scheme
might even be online in time for the twenty year anniversary of 1984.
Won't that be nice?
The Federation may or may not have that sort of control over Star One.
But people think they do - Durkim assumes that Servalan will have to
jump through some pretty high hoops to get the location of Star One, but
he assumes that the location *is* known to a select few. If people think
the Federation has that sort of control, then effectively it does have
it, at least until someone's brave/stupid enough to test it.
--
Julia Jones
"Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!"
The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 22:23:37 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Message-ID: <008b01bf5edf$c4be7f80$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mistral wrote:
> Whereas I get fed up with people insisting that disagreeing with
> Blake's (or anyone's) actions is bashing him. If you cannot think
> that a person is acting wrongly without hating him, then we might
> as well all agree to hate each other
Sounds good. I'll let you start:)
Not everyone who criticises Blake is a 'Blake-basher', but there *are*
people out there who hunt down every excuse they can find to stick the boot
in. I never said you were one of them. For some unfathomable reason these
fanatical Blake-haters seem to be equally fanatical Avon worshippers, or at
least that's the impression I've been getting all these years. If I didn't
have such a high opinion of human nature I'd almost be tempted to think that
they were taking sides in a conflict between two totally fictional
characters whose differences of opinion were consciously crafted by a team
of professional scriptwriters.
I could also note that I've yet to see any Blake groupies make a serious go
at laying into Avon. (I know *I* lay into Avon, but not because I'm
pro-Blake. I just do it to annoy people.)
> > Blake was smart. And ruthless.
> > And manipulative. But that's alright because it was all in a good
cause.
>
> Rubbish.
Oh. You mean I should have put the smiley in at the end after all?
>'The end justifies the means' is just a cop-out for those
> who don't have the patience or the backbone or the intelligence to
> persevere against the odds, without caving in to the temptation
> to take the easier, less ethical path.
Rubbish yourself. This is the whining rhetoric of bourgeois cowards who
endlessly argue the case for change but live in perpetual dread of anything
ever really changing. This is the self-righteous piety of those who value
their own involvement over any results they may or may not achieve. I've
seen them in CND, in the Animal Rights movement, even among the feminists.
They're the ones who commandeer the cause (whatever cause it may be) because
it's there to commandeer. They are generals who daren't win the war because
winning will leave them with no one to fight.
If the ends are justified (arguably a moot point in at least some cases),
then the ends in turn justify the means which will most efficiently secure
those ends. Ease and ethics have nothing to do with it. Where talk about
ends justifying means gets abused is when wilful belligerents seek to
promote their own chosen means, regardless of its effectiveness. People who
choose to get rough because they want to get rough, however
counterproductive or just plain ineffectual their tactics might be. (I've
come across this in the Animal Rights lobby too. You get some right tossers
in that crowd.)
Why should the 'less ethical' path be 'easier'? In my experience, such
supposedly high-minded homilies against the 'less ethical' are really
referring to the illegal, to the breaching of laws that have been written by
the perpetrators of perceived injustices to facilitate their continued
perpetration. This kind of sermonising is a sham. It is fear of the law
masquerading as respect for the law, because it dare not admit its own fear.
Who, then, really lacks the backbone? Or the intelligence, for that matter?
Star One (getting back on topic at last) is hard to square with real world
correlatives since - being TV drama - the dice are more loaded than they
normally are in real life. Blake, at any rate, believes that the only truly
effective way of destroying the Federation is to destroy Control, and not
even Avon disagrees with him on that point (he certainly doesn't offer any
alternative strategy). Avon merely queries the need to destroy the
Federation at all (not in itself an unreasonable query). But Blake is bent
on destruction rather than appropriation (also not unreasonable). He has
committed himself to the ends, which in turn binds him to what appears to be
the only effective means. He is not setting out to destroy Control for the
sake of doing so, so this is not a case of ends justifying means. It is a
case of ends determining means. (Largely because Nation/Boucher rigged it
that way.)
However, this is a digression from your objection to my endorsement of
Blake's less savoury aspects, which go back more or less right to the
beginning (the ruthlessness, the manipulativeness). I've already noted that
you seemed to miss the ironic dimension of that endorsement. But looking at
these qualities seriously, I don't think Blake would have stood much chance
without them. Judith Seaman has written a number of stories - quite a lot,
in fact - which turn Blake into a bumbling imbecile captivated by his own
impulsive self-righteousness. Avon then has to step in and save the day
with a hefty dose of the ruthlessness that Blake cannot bear to deploy. (I
don't like these stories at all, even though they are very well written.
For one thing, Blake is way out of character. For another, Avon's
pragmatism and ruthlessness are turned into - and venerated as - means
pursued for their own sake, turning him into an endorsement of the kind of
uncritical knee-jerk reactionism I tend to associate with black shirts and
jackboots. Avon's inevitable triumph over Blake becomes not an end, but a
vindication of the means.)
>Whilst I think
> > it's reasonable to posit that Cally has appointed herself as Blake's
> > conscience on the flight deck, she has done so primarily to voice her
own
> > ambivalence towards the venture, and ultimately she comes down on
Blake's
> > side.
> > Come to think of it, so does Avon.
>
> That's your spin. What he *says* is that he wants it over with.
> I think he means just that.
He comes down on Blake's side in that he does not seek to interfere with
Blake's intended course of action. In fact it is Avon who eggs Blake on
early in the episode ("Why are you listening to this drivel, Blake"), and he
goes down to the planet. His motives are hardly the same as Blake's, which
might be what you thought I was suggesting, but they share the same end
goal.
All those not against Blake are for him.
Neil
"I suppose I respond so antipathetically to Lewis and Tolkien because I find
this sort of consolatory Christianity as distasteful as any other
fundamentally misanthropic doctrine." - Michael Moorcock
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:58:44 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Mission to Destiny
Message-ID: <008901bf5edf$c09e9700$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mistral (oh grud, she's back!) wrote:
> > The obvious is always obvious in retrospect, never necessarily so before
you
> > realise how obvious it is.
>
> I guess we can take it from that that you didn't figure it out before
> Avon did? It *was* obvious; it was the weakest part of the plot.
> It requires a mighty effort to suspend disbelief over that one.
> Avon had his blinders on.
Ermm ... I was only 14 at the time? But then the prosecution would refer to
the prevailing habit among schoolboys of that era of entering 07734 on their
pocket calculators, then turning the display upside down and flashing it at
the boy sitting next to them. (Totally off-topic trivia quiz: which total
has-been of a band used this sad practice to get a title for one of their
more desultory albums?)
No, I didn't figure it out. In my defence I'll claim that I didn't even
try. That any good?
Thought not...
Neil
"I suppose I respond so antipathetically to Lewis and Tolkien because I find
this sort of consolatory Christianity as distasteful as any other
fundamentally misanthropic doctrine." - Michael Moorcock
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 20:00:26 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Message-ID: <008a01bf5edf$c2ea0da0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Una wrote:
> Neil also wrote:
>
> > "I suppose I respond so antipathetically to Lewis and Tolkien because I
> find
> > this sort of consolatory Christianity as distasteful as any other
> > fundamentally misanthropic doctrine." - Michael Moorcock
>
> Phooey. At least with the Tolkien bit. Anyone who thinks Catholicism is
> 'consolatory Christianity' hasn't hung out with enough Catholics. You only
> had that there to make me cross, didn't you, Neil?
No, I just like the quote. And the opinion of Catholicism proffered here is
Moorcock's, and hence not necessarily mine. Nevertheless I do agree with
him on the misanthropic bit. Possibly because I was brought up as a
Catholic.
Anyway, before I take the book (Wizardry And Wild Romance: A Study of Epic
Fantasy, Gollancz 1987) back to the library, here are a couple of other
quotes I rather fancied:
"Given to impulsive violent action, sudden rough affection and bouts of
melancholy, Conan was a sort of pint-sized King Kong."
"[Andre] Norton's influence has perhaps been unfortunate, in that sometimes
one begins to think the only alternative to Brute is Cute, and one grows
sick, these days, of a surfeit of healers, unicorns, nurturers and
beast-tamers. One begins to long to come across a female protagonist
called, say, Naomi the Castrator. One could tell her to look up John Norman,
for a start."
"The laboured irony, as it were, of the pulp hero or heroine, this deadly
levity in the face of genuine experience, which serves not to point up the
dramatic effect of the narrative, but to reduce it - and to make the
experience described comfortingly 'unreal' - is the trick of the worst kind
of an escapist author who pretends to be writing about fundamental truths
and
is in fact telling fundamental lies."
[On 'Watership Down'] "If the bulk of American sf could be said to be
written by robots, about robots, for robots, then the bulk of English
fantasy seems to be written by rabbits, about rabbits and for rabbits."
"If we must be given stories about talking animals, let them at least be
sceptical, sardonic and world-weary talking animals. Better still, a
book-length romance about a family of ferrets would make a welcome antidote
to the sentimental, quasi-romantic drivel presently filling the 'Fantasy'
sections of our bookshops. ("You'll never guess what's for tea, darlings.
It's Pooh-and-Pippin pie!") But that, I suppose, would be the most unlikely
fantasy of all."
I like Moorcock.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 23:25:26 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Many many people...
Message-ID: <14c701bf5ee7$8d2965a0$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Neil wrote:
> No, I just like the quote. And the opinion of Catholicism proffered here
is
> Moorcock's, and hence not necessarily mine.
Don't worry - it was him I was being cross with.
> "If we must be given stories about talking animals, let them at least be
> sceptical, sardonic and world-weary talking animals. Better still, a
> book-length romance about a family of ferrets would make a welcome
antidote
> to the sentimental, quasi-romantic drivel presently filling the 'Fantasy'
> sections of our bookshops. ("You'll never guess what's for tea, darlings.
> It's Pooh-and-Pippin pie!") But that, I suppose, would be the most
unlikely
> fantasy of all."
I like that one best.
Una
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #11
*************************************