From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #236
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume00/236
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 236
Today's Topics:
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ mistral@ptinet.net ]
Travis I or II was Re: [B7L] Why Not [ huh@ccm.net ]
Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel [ "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.n ]
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana. ]
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana. ]
[B7L] Re: The Jacket [ "J MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.co ]
Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel [ kminne@camtech.net.au (Ken Minne) ]
Re: [B7L] Re: The Jacket [ mistral@ptinet.net ]
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ Penny Dreadful <pennydreadful@power ]
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ Tigerm1019@aol.com ]
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ B7Morrigan@aol.com ]
Re: [B7L] Fanfic on the Web [ Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.com ]
[B7L] Re: Why not Blake II [ Steve Rogerson <steve.rogerson@mcr1 ]
[B7L] Re: b7 mention [ Steve Rogerson <steve.rogerson@mcr1 ]
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
The Jacket (was Re: [B7L] FC: New fr [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
RE: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ nyder@moore.britishlibrary.net ]
Re: [B7L] Re: Why not Blake II [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
Re: [B7L] Re: The Jacket [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
Re: Travis I or II was Re: [B7L] Why [ Penny Dreadful <pennydreadful@power ]
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ Iain Coleman <ijc@bas.ac.uk> ]
Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel [ Iain Coleman <ijc@bas.ac.uk> ]
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ "Jeroen J. Kwast" <jeroenkw@gns.get ]
Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel [ "Christine+Steve" <cgorman@idirect. ]
Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel [ Betty Ragan <ragan@sdc.org> ]
Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ "Ann Basart" <abasart@dnai.com> ]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 08:06:58 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-ID: <39A14591.2465AAA8@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sally wrote:
> central to my love or the show is
> Blake, Avon and the complicated relationship between them, and the
> wonderful chemistry between Gareth and Paul was crucial to that
> appeal. It just wouldn't be a tenth as interesting without that (even
> Avon and Vila - and the chemistry between those actors - just isn't as
> good).
Eep! Can't agree about that parenthetical, but you wouldn't expect
me to, surely? Must be in what one likes. I'll admit to watching more
series B than anything else, but it's Killer and Gambit that are getting
worn out the fastest in series B, because of the A-V (okay, and the
Jarriere). Shadow's the better ep, of course, but it's relegated to
third-most watched, because of the lack of A-V. There *is* good
chemistry in A-B; but all the humour in A-B is in the dialogue, none
in the relationship, AFAIC. A-V has both humorous and dramatic
chemistry. (IMHO)
Mistral
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 100 13:15:50 +0000
From: huh@ccm.net
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Travis I or II was Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-Id: <200008211815.NAA07485@bowe.ccm.net>
>
> Now this makes me wonder if those lyst members who prefer Travis II saw S2
> before they did S1? I like the theory that we prefer the one we saw first,
> but of course I may be totally wrong.
Good question. Travis II was the character I saw first (and was incidentally my
favorite character until his death) and I adored him. I only saw Travis I this
past year. Like him too, but it is such a different character. Still prefer the
totally whacked out portrayel of Travis II. He's always exciting. Travis I just
doesn't seem mad enough to have offed innocent citizens.
lisabeth
-----------------------------------------------------
This message was sent via the CCMnet Mailman.
Visit our website: http://www.ccm.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 20:35:21 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel
Message-ID: <000201c00ba2$525232a0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Christine+Steve <cgorman@idirect.com>
> I was watching Duel the other day and noticed this at the start :
There are four episodes that touch on this issue, all by different writers.
First, there is Duel, by Terry Nation, which implies that travel between
galaxies is not only feaible but might even be commonplace.
Next there is Horizon, by Allan Prior, in which the need for monopasium-239
makes it clear that the Federation is confined to just the one galaxy.
Then there is a remark by Blake in Killer (by Robert Holmes) about the risk
of the plague on Fosforon spreading to "all the galaxies" (presumably just
the inhabited ones).
Finally there is Star One (Chris Boucher) which makes it very clear that
intergalactic travel isn't remotely possible even for Liberator (though it
is for nasty Andromedans).
So we have two for and two against the idea of a multigalactic Federation.
In the case of Prior/Boucher, however, confining humanity to the Milky Way
is fundamental to the mechanics of the plot, whereas with Nation and Holmes
this is not so. In these latter two cases, any reference to other galaxies
comes in throwaway lines that can easily be amended, with no extensive
revision of the plot required.
What this appears to show is that even a simple bit of background detail
such as this was not decided in advance, and that Nation and Boucher had
some rather different ideas when it came to making a decision. I know whose
side I'm on.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:28:21 +1000
From: Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana.org.au>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-ID: <20000822072821.C6150@welkin.apana.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 08:43:40AM -0600, Betty Ragan wrote:
> I do wonder if this theory might not hold for fans of Tarrant, and of
> the latter half of the show in general. Did most Tarrant fans, say,
> join the show originally during the third season (or later?). Did
> 3rd/4th season fans generally come in during the 3rd/4th season, or is
> it more usually a case of having watched it from the beginning and
> liking it more as it went along? (This is something I've been slightly
> curious about for a while, I must admit.)
I must admit, 3rd-season junkie that I am, that it *was* the season I
saw first. But I had forgotten about it when I came to watch the
whole show in all its glory from the start, until it got to the third
season and I said, hey, I've seen this before!
My order of viewing was
3rd season,
1st season, 2nd season, 3rd season,
4th season.
--
_--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen <kat@foobox.net>
/ \ | http://www.foobox.net/~kat
\_.--.*/ | http://jove.prohosting.com/~rubykat
v | #include "standard/disclaimer.h"
------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere
Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:39:57 +1000
From: Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana.org.au>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-ID: <20000822073957.D6150@welkin.apana.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 12:05:55PM +0200, Jeroen J. Kwast wrote:
>
> You call that seriously????? So you want me to believe that you
> rather have NOTHING than a brand new series bases on the original
> series with new characters?
> You don't think that it is even remotely possible that those new
> characters can have some chemistry going too???
Yes. Exactly. Precisely. I'd rather have no B7 than bad B7.
It all depends on what you mean by "new characters", and "based on the
original series". If you mean a re-make, re-casting the original
characters, then I don't want to see it -- the case of Travis I versus
Travis II demonstrates clearly that the chances of getting it to work
are slim (just look at the Avengers movie!). If you mean a spin-off,
with the same background but with new characters, I don't see the
point. One is just as likely to have a good show with new characters
whether one makes it a specific spin-off of B7, or if one makes it an
independent show with its own background.
Hey - they've already done it! It's called Farscape.
Kathryn Andersen
(who doesn't understand why channel 9, one of the co-producers of the
show, has only seen fit to show 6 episodes of Farscape in Australia.)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Controller: You always have such a smooth explanation.
Theroux: Well, what do you want me to do - learn to stutter?
(Star Cops: An Instinct For Murder)
--
_--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen <kat@foobox.net>
/ \ | http://www.foobox.net/~kat
\_.--.*/ | http://jove.prohosting.com/~rubykat
v | #include "standard/disclaimer.h"
------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere
Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:52:20 EST
From: "J MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: The Jacket
Message-ID: <F116J3kEPF3cMnA0VYq00006be1@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>From: mistral@ptinet.net
>Perhaps you could get more in touch with these things if you wrote a
>filk about it?
<cackles madly, possibly even hysterically>
In the Liber-ator's wardrobe
Was the Jacket, a lovely suede.*
On the other side of the wardrobe
Stood Kerr Avon, half afraid.
By the starlight he could see it
Sparkling slightly 'gainst the wall.
His little heart was filled with wanting
And hoping that it wasn't small.
Kerr Avon wanted that Jacket
With a desire he couldn't deny
Kerr Avon wanted that Jacket
One he knew he couldn't buy
>"This is silly." -- Dayna
It is indeed. 'Specially as I would like to consign "Running Bear", the tune
concerned, to the nethermost hells. Therefore, if anyone else has any desire
whatsoever to make it their own, you have my wholehearted permission. If no
one does, then it descends to the oblivion it so richly deserves!
Regards
Joanne
*I, personally, don't *care* what material it's made of, so you have no need
to be picky about such a detail!
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 00:28:08 GMT
From: kminne@camtech.net.au (Ken Minne)
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel
Message-ID: <39a1c49d.652355@mail.camtech.net.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Good day all,
On Sun, 20 Aug 2000 20:35:21 +0100, Neil wrote:
On the subject of intergalatic travel,
<snip>
>So we have two for and two against the idea of a multigalactic =
Federation.
>In the case of Prior/Boucher, however, confining humanity to the Milky =
Way
>is fundamental to the mechanics of the plot, whereas with Nation and =
Holmes
>this is not so. In these latter two cases, any reference to other =
galaxies
>comes in throwaway lines that can easily be amended, with no extensive
>revision of the plot required.
>
>What this appears to show is that even a simple bit of background detail
>such as this was not decided in advance, and that Nation and Boucher had
>some rather different ideas when it came to making a decision. I know =
whose
>side I'm on.
>
>Neil
>
Do we have any astronomers on the list who can tell us the relative
distances of Andromeda and any other nearby galaxies, such as the
Magellenic Clouds and perhaps relative to the width of the galactic
disk of the Milky Way?
I am not sure that the series ever established how much of the Milky
Way humans had explored, so it may be that the Federation is confined
to the rim of the Galaxy closet to the path taken by the Andromedans.
Might it be easier for the Federation to send expeditions to some of
the companion dwarf galaxies of the Milky Way than to reach the
opposite edge of the Milky Way itself?=20
So then the statements in the show need not be inconsistent, ie the
=46ederation and Liberator can reach the companion Galaxies of the Milky
way and return, but can not reach Galaxies at distances comparable to
the Andromedans. As an analogy, just because the Ancient Romans could
sail to Britian from France regularly, didn't mean that they could
also sail to say the coast Florida ( though some may have done it by
accident ).
On the other hand, maybe the whole aliens from Andromeda bit was a
piece of misdirection to hide their real origins and to waste
=46ederation resources on the anti-matter minefield.
Catch you later,
Walter Minne
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 17:53:19 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: The Jacket
Message-ID: <39A1CEFE.74877344@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Joanne MacQueen wrote:
> <cackles madly, possibly even hysterically>
>
> In the Liber-ator's wardrobe
> Was the Jacket, a lovely suede.*
<echo cackling from America>
Mistral
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 21:46:08 -0600
From: Penny Dreadful <pennydreadful@powersurfr.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-Id: <4.1.20000821213705.00975f10@mail.powersurfr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 10:29 AM 8/21/00 +0100, Iain Coleman wrote:
>Avon, like Dr Who or Iago, could be played by anyone with an Equity card
>and a pulse.
Iain, we here at FINALACT have Big Plans that require you to be Pope, and
here you are trying for Sainthood instead.
--
For A Dread Time, Call Penny:
http://members.tripod.com/~Penny_Dreadful/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 23:55:52 EDT
From: Tigerm1019@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-ID: <7c.9fea39b.26d353c8@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 08/21/2000 10:39:53 PM Central Daylight Time,
pennydreadful@powersurfr.com writes:
> At 10:29 AM 8/21/00 +0100, Iain Coleman wrote:
>
> >Avon, like Dr Who or Iago, could be played by anyone with an Equity card
> >and a pulse.
>
> Iain, we here at FINALACT have Big Plans that require you to be Pope, and
> here you are trying for Sainthood instead.
But the two are not mutually exclusive. Many Popes have been canonized,
starting with St. Peter. ;-)
Tiger M
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 00:22:06 EDT
From: B7Morrigan@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-ID: <b4.9cd4502.26d359ee@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> At 10:29 AM 8/21/00 +0100, Iain Coleman wrote:
>
> >Avon, like Dr Who or Iago, could be played by anyone with an Equity card
> >and a pulse.
>
> Iain, we here at FINALACT have Big Plans that require you to be Pope, and
> here you are trying for Sainthood instead.
More like martyrdom.
Morrigan
"When I get a little money I buy zines; and if any is left I buy food and
clothes."
(apologies to Erasmus)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 22:10:43 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.com>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Fanfic on the Web
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0821211043-0b0Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Fri 18 Aug, Kathryn Andersen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 10:13:09AM -0400, Roberts, Patricia @ CSE wrote:
> > I've been in touch with Sheila (encouraging her to post more fanfic) and she
> > tells me she is working on another Jabberwocky!!!! She mentioned that Deeta
> > is back!!! (She said no one stays dead in Jabberwocky.)
>
> > She also said it might be helpful if anyone wanting to see her finish this
> > story tells her so. A little nagging (and encouragement) goes a long way.
>
> I *also* have been in touch with Sheila, and when I mentioned
> Jabberwocky, she figuratively groaned and said don't hold your breath.
> There's at least three other stories (none B7) which are in front of
> it in line. And since one of them will probably be a novella, don't
> expect anything soon.
>
> But, yeah, I'd agree that encouragement is good - so long as it
> doesn't turn into pressure. (-8
well, she just asked me for an electronic copy of all the Jabberwocky stories
(which I've sent her), so she might have some plans.
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.knightwriter.org )
Redemption '01 23-25 Feb 2001 http://www.smof.com/redemption/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:08:24 +0000
From: Steve Rogerson <steve.rogerson@mcr1.poptel.org.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: Why not Blake II
Message-ID: <39A234F9.547E9051@mcr1.poptel.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dana said: "Of course, my first choice for Blake II would be
Stephen Greif, especially if they brought back
Brian Croucher as Travis II"
Oh god, then we'd all be seriously confused. But I do agree, it would be
an option to have a new Blake (I mean they did it with Travis and we
weren'r meant to notice) so using plastic surgery of some sort would
work.
If they had have thought of that at the start of series three and
decided to go with it, then Steve Pacey would have ended up playing
Blake and not Tarrant.
--
cheers
Steve Rogerson
http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson
Redemption: The Blake's 7 and Babylon 5 convention
23-25 February 2001, Ashford, Kent
http://www.smof.com/redemption
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:09:29 +0000
From: Steve Rogerson <steve.rogerson@mcr1.poptel.org.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: b7 mention
Message-ID: <39A23539.85A707A4@mcr1.poptel.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Una said: "Even if the strike wasn't on, people might just have
got into the habit of watching the BBC more."
I remember my grand parents in Oldham. Every night they just watched
BBC1 whatever was on - they had no truck with new fangled things such as
ITV and BBC2. And apparently people like them were not that rare.
--
cheers
Steve Rogerson
http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson
Redemption: The Blake's 7 and Babylon 5 convention
23-25 February 2001, Ashford, Kent
http://www.smof.com/redemption
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:57:27 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-ID: <LAW-F162t3hqAdeibzM00006c13@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Jeroen wrote:
<What is wrong with another blake? <snip> Don't expect those old folk
willing to appear again. I'm tempted to think you dont care about the show
as much as the characters! :)>
Six and two threes, actually. Speaking as one of Una's Account 2 people
(with a vengeance), the characters *are* the main thing about the show. I
like a lot of other things about Blake's 7, but the people come first
(second, third ... up to about seventh. Then we have the scripts, the
Wardrobe Room, the politics, the ambiguity, the humour ...).
<You call that seriously?????>
Err, well for me it is ...
<So you want me to believe that you rather have NOTHING than a brand new
series bases on the original series with new characters?>
New characters, fine (wouldn't be Blake's 7, but would quite possibly be a
good show). Old characters played by new actors, no way. I like both
Travises, after all, but I've realised that mentally I *don't* accept 2 as
the same character as 1 - he's a different character with the same name. And
given that Travis is rather peripheral to my galactic vision, 'tis a little
hard to expect me to accept it for one of My Darlings (they do it in soap
opera, true, but this is *space* opera). It'd be like fake Tim-Tams - quite
nice, but not actually worth the calories.
All comes down to the way we all enjoy our B7. I personally find the 3rd
series a considerable drop from the 2nd (and not *only* because Gareth left,
but that's part of it) but I like quite a few episodes/bits of episodes
(hey, I even like bits of Kairos and Animals), and I have to say yes, I'd
rather have a Blakeless B7 than a Gareth-less Blake, and that goes for Avon,
Vila, Jenna, probably Tarrant ... just about all the characters I like
(which leaves the recasts to Dayna and Servalan).
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:58:16 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: The Jacket (was Re: [B7L] FC: New frame captures)
Message-ID: <LAW-F22XW2bbUk5O91f00000e6e@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Mistral wrote:
<The white coveralls and the brown vinyl are faves because they're
associated with favourite eps; but The Jacket - ah! The Jacket is a thing of
delight unto itself.>
The Jacket is symbolic. By this stage, what Avon is *really* looking for a
portable bunker (not that things could possibly get worse ... could they?)
and those shoulders ar the nearest Zen could manage (Zen is having a
baaadddd costume-design period here anyway.)
<where the second season leathers show us an Avon freed from that society
and its labels;>
Yes, that's all very well, Mistral (and the Silver Alpha outfit was worth
it) but someone should have un-freed him before he found that Lobster Top.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:59:37 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-ID: <LAW-F276VaQvlk9TpoL000069d1@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
After I wrote:
<central to my love or the show is Blake, Avon and the complicated
relationship between them, and the wonderful chemistry between Gareth and
Paul was crucial to that appeal. It just wouldn't be a tenth as interesting
without that (even Avon and Vila - and the chemistry between those actors -
just isn't as good).>
Mistral wrote:
<Eep! Can't agree about that parenthetical, but you wouldn't expect me to,
surely? Must be in what one likes.>
<grin> I assume that *everyone* would take 'IMO' as read here ... for me,
there's just so much more to A-B, right across the emotional spectrum from
the lightest of teasing to the most venomous Flight Deck Fights, from light
to very dark and back again. A-V is wonderful, and a rare look at a quirky,
genuine but decidedly warped friendship, but (until the last minutes of
Orbit, of course :-)) the *range* of interplay, especially the darker or
more serious notes, isn't there (I do see humour and liking in Avon &
Blake's relationship, but it's lighter and more subtle than the explosions
and emotions and angst <g>).
As Iain says, you *could* put other actors in both Avon's and Vila's shoes.
You could have actors with far less chemistry and I think the relationship
would still work (not nearly as well, of course, but it wouldn't fall flat).
Take the unique chemistry, the way the actors play against each other, out
of A-B, and even I'd be left scratching my head as to what on earth makes
Avon *do* what he does for the man ... it doesn't make sense. Until you see
them together. Then it makes perfect sense.
Also, Iain said:
<I find it very, very difficult to imagine anyone else as Blake. It's a
complex role, demanding a blend of passion, heroism, ruthlessness,
insecurity and danger that just wouldn't work if you didn't have exactly the
right actor for the job.>
Not that I can see anyone else playing Avon meself (the bastard they could
get, the leather and studs and angst - but that delicious touch of pure
unabashed brat...) but I wholly agree with the sentiment on Blake.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 00:11 +0100
From: nyder@moore.britishlibrary.net
To: "Marian de Haan" <maya@multiweb.nl>, <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-Id: <20000822080145.3F615537A1@latimer.mail.uk.easynet.net>
>For me the proof that recasting doesn't work is Travis. After Stephen
>Greif's subtle but sinister portrayal of Travis, I could never get used to
>Brian Croucher's interpretation of the character.
No accounting for tastes-- give me tragic and tormented over subtle and sinister any day.
>Now this makes me wonder if those lyst members who prefer Travis II saw S2
>before they did S1? I like the theory that we prefer the one we saw first,
Don't know about Penny etc., but I saw S1 first, and in fact, the first time I saw S2, I hated Brian Croucher on sight. It was "Trial" brought me round to the dark side, and since seeing that, I've liked Croucher's Travis more and more every time I've seen him.
Though I must say, I've often felt that part of the reason some people dislike Travis II is cos SG's were big jackboots to fill, and that if it had been BC from the start things would have been different. Like how every time there's a new Doctor on Doctor Who, half the fanbase start issuing fatwahs simply cos they miss the old one.
Fiona
http://redrival.com/nyder/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:02:22 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Why not Blake II
Message-ID: <LAW-F112xpTljBOh8s400004af3@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Steve wrote:
<If they had have thought of that at the start of series three and decided
to go with it, then Steve Pacey would have ended up playing Blake and not
Tarrant.>
Somehow, one cannot imagine one's Hero taking time out to have *that*
serious a facelift ...
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:06:29 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-ID: <LAW-F210F8HGmCvoXM700004de3@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Should have mentioned ...
What one sees as chemistry is a very personal thing. After all, I see
abolutely *none* - not a skerrick, not an atom - between Avon and Servalan,
but I'm very much a minority of one, I think ...
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:12:59 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: The Jacket
Message-ID: <LAW-F140i5gjakzxHaM00002eeb@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Joanne gave us ...
>In the Liber-ator's wardrobe
>Was the Jacket, a lovely suede.*
>On the other side of the wardrobe
>Stood Kerr Avon, half afraid. ...
etc ...
a truly memorable ditty (so memorable that Sally found herself singing it at
work).
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 02:45:19 -0600
From: Penny Dreadful <pennydreadful@powersurfr.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Travis I or II was Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-Id: <4.1.20000822011329.0091df00@mail.powersurfr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 01:15 PM 8/21/00 +0000, huh@ccm.net wrote:
>> Now this makes me wonder if those lyst members who prefer Travis II saw S2
>> before they did S1? I like the theory that we prefer the one we saw first,
>> but of course I may be totally wrong.
>
>Good question. Travis II was the character I saw first (and was incidentally
>my favorite character until his death) and I adored him.
Ditto. I have tried to imagine how I would see things if I had watched them
all in order...I think I'd still have the same preference, but I guess I'll
never know for sure, unless they hurry up and perfect that brain-wiping
technology already.
>Still prefer the totally whacked out portrayel of Travis II.
>He's always exciting. Travis I
>just doesn't seem mad enough to have offed innocent citizens.
Pessimist that I am, I have no difficulty imagining perfectly sane
individuals committing mass murder. Really I don't have much trouble
accepting that the two actors are portraying the same character, pre- and
post- some sort of major mental meltdown. After all (as someone already
said), I accept that first and fourth season Avon are the same character.
With Travis it's just that we don't get to see the precipitating
events/transition period, as we do with Avon.
--
For A Dread Time, Call Penny:
http://members.tripod.com/~Penny_Dreadful/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:11:19 +0100 (BST)
From: Iain Coleman <ijc@bas.ac.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.96.1000822101047.11811A-100000@bsauasc>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 B7Morrigan@aol.com wrote:
> > At 10:29 AM 8/21/00 +0100, Iain Coleman wrote:
> >
> > >Avon, like Dr Who or Iago, could be played by anyone with an Equity card
> > >and a pulse.
> >
> > Iain, we here at FINALACT have Big Plans that require you to be Pope, and
> > here you are trying for Sainthood instead.
>
> More like martyrdom.
That's what I thought she meant.
Iain
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:47:39 +0100 (BST)
From: Iain Coleman <ijc@bas.ac.uk>
To: b7 <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel
Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.96.1000822101318.11811B-100000@bsauasc>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Ken Minne wrote:
> Do we have any astronomers on the list
Yup.
who can tell us the relative
> distances of Andromeda and any other nearby galaxies, such as the
> Magellenic Clouds
Okeydokey.
From Allen, 'Astrophysical Quantities'
Distance to Andromeda: 670 kpc
Distance to Large Magellanic Cloud: 52 kpc
Distance to Small Magellanic Cloud: 63 kpc
(These numbers are about 30 years old, and there's been a lot of work on
calibrating the cosmic distance scale since then, so I would only trust
them to within 10% or so.)
1 kpc == 1000 parsecs == about 3260 light years
and perhaps relative to the width of the galactic
> disk of the Milky Way?
>
Galactic diameter == about 30 kpc
Sun's distance from Galactic centre == about 10 kpc
> I am not sure that the series ever established how much of the Milky
> Way humans had explored, so it may be that the Federation is confined
> to the rim of the Galaxy closet to the path taken by the Andromedans.
>
That seems right to me.
> Might it be easier for the Federation to send expeditions to some of
> the companion dwarf galaxies of the Milky Way than to reach the
> opposite edge of the Milky Way itself?
>
Possibly. However, I doubt they even got that far. Even such limited
intergalactic travel involves much greater distances than interstellar
travel.
> So then the statements in the show need not be inconsistent, ie the
> Federation and Liberator can reach the companion Galaxies of the Milky
> way and return, but can not reach Galaxies at distances comparable to
> the Andromedans. As an analogy, just because the Ancient Romans could
> sail to Britian from France regularly, didn't mean that they could
> also sail to say the coast Florida ( though some may have done it by
> accident ).
>
It's a nice idea, but I don't buy it. I get the impression that the
Federation is centred on Earth, and has the Galactic rim as one of its
edges. In that case, it's a few kiloparsecs across. This gives us a
reasonable size of empire for a civilisation with reasonably swift
interstellar travel, as the typical distance between stars is a parsec or
so. If you can travel a few parsecs per day, interstellar travel becomes
routine, long-term interstellar cruises are feasible and interesting (as
in 'Gold'), and the edge of the Galaxy is at about the outer limit for
imperial control, being a few year's travel away.
Iain
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 100 13:56:01 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Jeroen J. Kwast" <jeroenkw@gns.getronics.nl>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-Id: <200008221156.e7MBu3T23728@pampus.gns.getronics.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jeroen:
<snip -> nothing / news b7>
>
Kathryn:
> Yes. Exactly. Precisely. I'd rather have no B7 than bad B7.
>
I don't mean bad B7. It doesn't have to be the same angle. We know the actors
are older now so they won't come back. If we use new cast then mucho people of
this list don't want to watch it! (I'll take a peek though :))
What I was thinking was a different viewpoint from the series. Why not take
a look at all the freedom fighters wannabees that Blake left behind?
What went on at Kasaby's camp before the final confrontation. Make some
red line in between. Maybe some other badass federation person?
Lots of possibilities that I want to see. Why not make some of the written
stories out there onto film?
You see what I mean? I hope so. I love B7 and it's universe. Lets have
some more!
<snip correct explination by Kathryn>
>
> Hey - they've already done it! It's called Farscape.
>
YES that's what I mean. I love the show. It's got a lot of elements
that are the same.
Jeroen
PS: What are nice places to visit in Oz? I'm going in feb/march!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:15:51 -0400
From: "Christine+Steve" <cgorman@idirect.com>
To: "B7 Mailing List" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel
Message-ID: <004801c00c32$c94033e0$60109ad8@cgorman>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Neil Faulkner wrote on August 20, 2000 @ 3:35 PM
<snip>
> So we have two for and two against the idea of a multigalactic Federation.
> In the case of Prior/Boucher, however, confining humanity to the Milky Way
> is fundamental to the mechanics of the plot, whereas with Nation and
Holmes
> this is not so. In these latter two cases, any reference to other
galaxies
> comes in throwaway lines that can easily be amended, with no extensive
> revision of the plot required.
>
> What this appears to show is that even a simple bit of background detail
> such as this was not decided in advance, and that Nation and Boucher had
> some rather different ideas when it came to making a decision. I know
whose
> side I'm on.
Personally I would have thought that once this was established by Terry
Nation at the start, then it should have stuck. B7 was vague enough for
intergalactic travel to be possible, so why would the later writers be
allowed to change things? There isn't the series continuity there should be
(Was Boucher the script editor on series 1?). But this seemed to be
standard with B7 - remember when Jenna first hit the acceleration button on
the Liberator? Everyone's face showed the G Force effects. I don't ever
remember seeing that again - but that could be more the responsibility of
the episode's director.
Steve Dobson.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:30:26 -0600
From: Betty Ragan <ragan@sdc.org>
To: B7 Lyst <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel
Message-ID: <39A29C92.C181AB40@sdc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Iain Coleman wrote:
> Possibly. However, I doubt they even got that far. Even such limited
> intergalactic travel involves much greater distances than interstellar
> travel.
Plus, it seems to me there'd be a lot less incentive for expanding in
that direction. There's an awful lot of nothing between here and the
next galaxy: no planets to explore and conquer, no place to stop and
refeul or resupply. It'd be an awfully long, boring, unprofitable trip,
just to be able to say that you'd made it to the Lesser Magellenic
Cloud.
--
Betty Ragan ** ragan@sdc.org ** http://www.sdc.org/~ragan/
"Imposing Latin rules on English structure is a little
like trying to play baseball in ice skates." -- Bill Bryson
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:30:55 -0700
From: "Ann Basart" <abasart@dnai.com>
To: "Blake's7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>,
"Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?
Message-ID: <003501c00c56$5a9c7e20$5e790fd8@flp1>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sally wrote:
"I'd rather have a Blakeless B7 than a Gareth-less Blake, . . ."
which made me think of Doctor Who, and how did fans accomodate themselves to
all those regenerations? Of course, that's a very different situation.
Still.. .
Ann
abasart@dnai.com
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #236
**************************************