From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #26
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume00/26
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 26
Today's Topics:
[B7L] B7 related Western (fwd)
[B7L] Re: Fan Types
[B7L] Was Blake motivated by personal vendetta?
[B7L] Re: Fan Q eligibles
Re: [B7L] Was Blake motivated by personal vendetta?
[B7L] Motivations and Justifications (Part One - well, I didn't mean to ramble)
[B7L] Motivations and Justifications (Part Two)
[B7L] Motivations and Justifications (Part Three)
[B7L] Re:Avon&the masses (was history)
Re: [B7L] Was Blake motivated by personal vendetta?
[B7L] The Hilarious Vila
[B7L] Pages Bar drink
[B7L] Toying with Travis
Re: [B7L] Was Blake motivated by personal vendetta?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 21:02:37 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
cc: Freedom City <freedom-city@blakes-7.org>
Subject: [B7L] B7 related Western (fwd)
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0127210237-c72Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
--
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/
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 00:01:07 -0000
From: Gillian Taylor <gftay@rockingw.freeserve.co.uk>
To: Judith@Blakes-7.demon.co.uk
Subject: Strange B7 related fiction
A long time ago, in a galaxy not very far away, Paul Darrow once said that
he'd like to be in a Westerm. Now I don't make movies, but I do happen to
write Western novels; and I've been a B7 fan since 1978.(my God, I feel
old). "Darrow's Law" is by Gillian F Taylor (me) and was published by
Robert Hale last year 1999. Robert Hale westerns are intended for
libraries, so anyone interested should ask theirs to get it, but any good
bookshop should be able to order a copy. (9.99, hardback)
The story is about a sheriff (Darrow) and his deputy (Keating) who have a
relationship not unlike that of a certain embezzler and thief. The western
characters aren't identical to the SF ones, but certainly close enough to
entertain fans. Their troubles really start when a rich, beautful woman
arrives in town with the intention of gaining complete power...
If anyone wishes to check my style before buying or borrowing the book, I
had a short Avon/Vila story published in the last Horizon fictionzine. The
story is Long Odds.
I hope you and others enjoy reading Darrow's Law as much as I enjoyed
writing it. Direct feedback from anyone who does read it would be welcome,
so feel free to mail me about this if you wish.
Keep up the good work generally
Love Gillian
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 14:06:38 -0800
From: Susie Wright <piscescat@home.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: Fan Types
Message-ID: <3890C16E.200B8300@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Neil,
What about data/media collectors - which category is that? (You were describing Mad
Hatters and Dormice...) BTW, I'm enjoying the various tangents into history.
Susie
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 17:22:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Sondra Sweigman <sweigman@world.std.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Was Blake motivated by personal vendetta?
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.95.1000127172113.23604C-100000@world.std.com>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Not in my book he wasn't. As Mistral says, a lot depends on how
we interpret tone of voice, emphasis of words, etc (and I obviously
interpret them differently than she does). But I think we can be more
objective in assessing whether Blake cares about those who aren't useful
to his cause, and I'd maintain that the evidence shows that he does:
(1) He shows concern for the Decimas in "The Web" and for Zil in "Trial"
(and they're not even human).
(2) He goes to the aid of unknown persons in apparent distress in "Time
Squad" and "Mission to Destiny" without knowing how or if they'll fit into
his rebellion.
(3) When he sends people down to look for crash survivors on Cephlon in
"Deliverance", he doesn't yet know that they will end up rescuing someone
who will lead them to Orac.
(4) In "Killer" he even warns Federation personnel about potential danger
from the derelict ship and then tries to help Bellfriar find a cure for
the plague.
As for the slave who dies in "Redemption", my recollection is
that the man urged Blake to leave him behind to hold off any pursuers.
Sondra
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 00:17:19 -0800
From: "Sarah Thompson" <sthompson162@mindspring.com>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Cc: <freedom-city@blakes-7.org>, <annbown@aol.com>,
"Susan Batho" <s.batho@uws.edu.au>, <judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Subject: [B7L] Re: Fan Q eligibles
Message-ID: <000501bf6971$07909500$c4d88ad1@y1i7s9>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Observant readers-- thank you!-- pointed out some problems in the lists.
First of all, "Under Control," by Steve Rogerson, should definitely be on
the slash list, not the gen list. (At 5 pp., it's a "short story" for
Stiffie purposes.) Even though it is mostly a Gan/Servalan het adult story,
there is also a bit of Gan/Travis slash that I had forgotten about. Sorry!
The other question is whether or not "Haunted," by Nicky Barnard, in
=Pressure Point=, is really slash or gen; someone who wants to nominate the
story for an award considers it to be gen. This was hard to decide, and in
fact I counted it as gen (albeit with some misgivings) in my original zine
listings. But for Fan Q purposes, the definitions (as given on the
nomination form) are as follows:
Gen (non-slash, whether adult or not)
Slash (same-sex physical relationship, not necessarily explicit)
"Haunted" deals with a physical relationship between Blake and an original
male character, although it is not at all explicit and the story is a very
serious (and very good) one. So... it seems to me that it clearly fits the
"slash" definition as given.
Please let me know if you spot any other problems.
Sarah T.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 18:44:35 +1100
From: Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana.org.au>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Was Blake motivated by personal vendetta?
Message-ID: <20000128184435.A9323@welkin.apana.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu, Jan 27, 2000 at 05:22:09PM -0500, Sondra Sweigman wrote:
> Not in my book he wasn't. As Mistral says, a lot depends on how
> we interpret tone of voice, emphasis of words, etc (and I obviously
> interpret them differently than she does). But I think we can be more
> objective in assessing whether Blake cares about those who aren't useful
> to his cause, and I'd maintain that the evidence shows that he does:
Another one that always struck me. That scene in Horizon, where the
prisoners are all scrabbling for the food. Then Selma comes and
gets her share, then they start scrabbling again, only Blake (armed
with nothing but charisma) stops them makes them take their portions
fairly, one at a time.
He's just a democrat at heart.
--
_--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana.org.au>
/ \ | http://home.connexus.net.au/~kat
\_.--.*/ | #include "standard/disclaimer.h"
v |
------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere
Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 02:16:52 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Motivations and Justifications (Part One - well, I didn't mean to ramble)
Message-ID: <20000128101652.33619.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Warning - long and involved and unabashedly biased...
Mistral wrote:
<His attitude is more "me against them" than "us against them". Ex: 'I
intend to see that heart torn out' (Spacefall); 'I will destroy it if I can'
(Duel); and the one that really bugs me 'it's the only way I can be sure
that I was right' (Star One).>
I agree that he feels it more his cause than that of the group as a whole,
but (apart from his arrogance, something I personally would never deny)
that's only common sense - he isn't blind, he can *see* the enthusiasm with
which the Fight for Freedom inspires the theif, the pilot and the computer
expert, the way they have taken it to heart and made it their own <g>.
Saying "we" all the time might have earned him some rather pointed looks and
even more pointed comments about assuming what *they* intend or think...Gan
may be willing, but wouldn't have started fighting without Blake's drive
(and quite possibly wouldn't have kept it up against his less enthused
compatriots). That leaves Cally. Would have been nice if he'd always said
"Cally and I and sometimes Gan" instead of "I" but life's too short
(especially in his line of work ) for that sort of verbal nitpicking.
It is, in the final and very real sense, his fight (something *they* all
tend to remind him of by pointedly leaving the toughies to him - Jenna
especially is good at this) more than theirs. As Avon (with his 'Blake's
rabble') affirms.
We have disagreed about that Star One statement - that one is actually, for
me, the least egoistical of this lot, and is actually about responsibility.
No matter that they are adults, have free choice, fought with him of that
free choice etc, in the end they were there and doing it because he asked it
of them, if he hadn't been there, *only* Cally would have been a rebel (and
none of them would've made it onto the Liberator safely anyhow), and if all
the blood on their hands was from senseless destruction - from the beginning
- then he bears the central responsibility. To pretend otherwise would be
sheer moral cowardice.
They are all, after all, as good at lumping that responsibility on his head
as he is at taking it (Gan's death being a case in point. Yes, it was
primarily Blake's overpersuading himself and them, but they agreed that the
decision about odds was to be his, and held him to it - first Gan and then
Avon and Vila knew the odds had shortened, but went along with it anyway.)
<He's much more impassioned when talking about what the Federation did to
*him* ('They butchered my family, my friends. They murdered my past and gave
me tranquilized dreams,' etc.) >
*That* is a perfectly human and natural reaction. I've no doubt there is an
element of personal hatred born of massive pain, and a desire for some
expiation on behalf of himself and the people he loved, in him. Wanting
revenge is again something Our Heroes are rather good at (Avon's whole
Rumours thing and "I need to kill her myself" of Servalan, Gan killing the
trooper who killed his woman, Cally's "companions for my death", Dayna and
Soolin...). And Blake's been hurt worst of the lot IMO; given the sheer
brutality and horror of what has been done to him, he'd have to be a machine
not to feel that way. It doesn't mean that any other emotions he feels are
any less real. And anyone - at all - who in that position could maintain
emotionless dispassion I would view with both skepticism and a fair measure
of distaste. (I dislike emotional plaster saints.)
<the former sounds more like motivation, the latter like justification.>
Don't agree at all, at all. It's natural to feel more immediate, visceral
emotion when people you know and love are brutalised - that doesn't make
concern on behalf of the 'people he doesn't even know' any less genuine.
<He doesn't coordinate his efforts with other rebels very often at all, even
though he's in an ideal position to coordinate a galaxy-wide rebellion>
We don't know much about his contacts with the rest of the rebellion - we
*do* know he has contacts, as Avalon knew how to get in touch with him, and
he knew how to reach Kasabi (and said contacts in both cases would probably
have involved intermediaries within resistance movements and a great amount
of care and suspicion and connecting with one person/group after another...
you don't just put out a bradcast "one Earth resistance group needed, please
contact Orac 991"). Cally's one line in Bounty - "is it as we were told?" -
indocates another connection we don't know about.
Again, what he's doing for Avalon - ferrying her from one planet to another
- strikes me as just the sort of non-exciting but practical stuff (ferrying
materials, people, information) that quite possibly filled in the large gaps
between episodes.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 02:18:12 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Motivations and Justifications (Part Two)
Message-ID: <20000128101812.44452.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Mistral goes on:
<Another thing that points to it being personal is the number of times he
lets Travis and Servalan escape.>
Actually, although I think he's wrong (it's part of Being The Hero - Avon
and Tarrant do it just as stupidly, and we have to find reasons) I can see
motivation. For the most part, he's quite dispassionate about violence - he
will kill, with neither satisfaction nor remorse, when he thinks the cost is
justified (his cold-blooded streak is even colder than Avon's IMO) but he
doesn't kill where he sees no need.
Blake hates and despises Travis, true, and is *totally* contemptuous of
Servalan (Avalon). He'd have killed either in an instance to save one of his
crew, the Liberator, or other innocent people. But most of the times he has
the drop on them...he's won the round, and there *is* no immediate benefit
(yes, down the track at Star One there would have been. Foresight is a
wonderful thing, but I didn't claim it as one of his virtues.) Neither of
them are of real importance any more than the person of the President is -
if he killed them, they'd be replaced and the Federation and the fight would
go on unchecked. And in Travis' case, as he infers in Duel, the replacement
might have been someone Blake *couldn't* beat. And - also from Duel - he
would enjoy killing them. He doesn't trust himself all that much - and he
won't kill someone for pleasure.
In Gambit (where I think he makes the biggest mistake not killing Travis)
his contempt for the man does bring an element of cruelty with it. But the
fact remains: he will and does kill faceless Federation apparatniks if he
feels he has to (whether you think he's fighting a war, I've little doubt
that he does, and that is what war is) but he won't kill unless he has a
reason *he* thinks is good (we don't have to agree with him, but who's to
say who's right? Me?)
<Servalan's loss particularly would cause some real disruption...>
I doubt it. Didn't at the end of Terminal, where she was *the President*.
And remember, the current President wants rid of her anyway, so would
undoubtedly have good ideas on who could step into her over-high-heeled
shoes. She's a cog - an important and decorative but quite replaceable one
(and *I* think her knowledge of that is one of the factors leading to her
coup.)
<The rights and wishes of others come entirely secondary to his cause.>
Agreed as far as the crew and general practice goes (though not when they're
threatened, when emotion tends to take over), and he never denied it, or
forced them to stay. Anyone who wanted could have left (probably taking a
hefty share of the treasure room funds with them.) Yes, Gan and Jenna are of
the opinion that there's nowhere safe to go (Breakdown would indicate that
they're wrong - there are places if they cared to look).
*But*...you're forgetting one small and very very important fact (one I
doubt Blake ever forgot).
There's only one of him, for goodness sake. There are *four* of them (five,
with Cally). He actually *cannot* force them to either do as he says or
leave. They could decide to turn the Liberator into a flying Pleasure
Palace, go in for Kairos-style piracy or sell the ship to the highest bidder
- *if* they chose to defy his self-imposed authority. They choose not to.
You mention later the business in Time Squad - his rather (IMHO) wonderful
bluff to take over command of the ship ("anybody could opt out at any
time"). What comes over for me is two facts - [a] they *have* had at least
one discussion and (from what both Blake and Avon said) agreed that fighting
the Federation was on, subject to a full discussion of every point therein,
and [b] Blake hasn't taken this long to work out that with *this* lot,
especially Avon and Vila, that ain't gonna work, nothing would *ever* get
done (see early Series 3 for proof <g>).
So he basically risks his claim to control of the ship in that one sentence.
Because it would have taken just one "why should we?" and - well, what could
he have done? His control was always dependent of their acquiescence. Yes,
Avon and all.
Once he has that command, of course, it's fairly clear from Weapon, from the
start of Pressure Point, and from what Vila says in Voice that the
discussions did take place - that he did explain things, and welcome input
and discussion.
<And when the others don't jump at the chance to join up with him because
they're afraid for their lives if they go: 'You're pathetic. I should leave
you to rot. You want to live like slaves? Live or die at the whim of a
madman, then fine.But you're not taking me down with you. I'm getting out.
I'm better off without you.'>
Oh come on, he says this after they try to *make* him give the madman the
Liberator. He's just been tortured for refusing to do that, and they're
treating him like a leper - Arco actually attacks him when he refuses. Sure,
I can see why they do it, but he's absolutely right - they *are* pathetic.
I won't go one-on-one with the rest of your examples, because they're all of
a piece to me - a mixture of arrogance and extreme pragmatism. Not
particularly nice, but Blake is *not* a nice man (he's good. Not nice. Nice
is Inga and Governer Le Wassername.) He's arrogant and ruthless and
temperamental and wounded and emotional and driven by his hatred of the evil
that is the Federation and his desire to see that evil destroyed, but he's
also trying do do some good for as many people as he can with precious few
real resources - a fancy ship, two computers and five decidedly ill-assorted
don't-wannabe revolutionaries. Nice methods would simply get him squashed
flat by Episode Six.
A vendetta? Nope. The disarming regularity the way his cause keeps taking
second place whenever 'someone he doesn't even know' needs his help (Mission
to Destiny, Deliverance, Killer, and the way, in Countdown, he's all ready
to go off with Avon to disarm the bomb and Avon has to remind *him* about
Provine and what they came for. I love that bit) is proof that his political
agenda does *not* blind him to individuals in need. Travis and Avon - the
two people who to my mind actually know him best - both get it right, Travis
about his loyalty, and Avon about his "great big bleeding heart"...and the
blood is genuine.
Which brings us to...(next post <g>)
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 02:19:27 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Motivations and Justifications (Part Three)
Message-ID: <20000128101927.28686.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Mistral again:
<And then there's the System. The system has slaves, too. One of them died
to help him escape. Blake didn't see it happen, of course, but the risk, at
least, was apparent. If it's all about freedom and
oppression, why didn't he take the time to free the system's people?>
This is actually out of character for him (see in Part One - also The Web
and his concern for the Decimas), so I had a think about it. This time, it's
a pragmatic decision.
After all, how much time do you (or might he) think that might take? They've
done an unspecified amount of damage to the System's control centre, but
they have not the faintest idea of what the System is, how big, how
powerful, how much time and effort is involved. My guess is quite a lot...
he can't just barrel in and expect it all to fall over in a couple of weeks
or even months.
I don't know if he does consider it - I doubt that he would for long. He's
already taken on a large portion of the galaxy's power base, but even he
might baulk at fighting two wars at once with the resources at his command
(remember, one of Hitler's mistakes was opening up World War II onto two
fronts. And Hitler had a much bigger and more enthusiastic army than Blake
does.) Hey, he's got an ego, but it's not *that* big...
<Three planets would be a lot easier to free than the Federation.>
Three planets controlled by a vast computer of which he knows *absolutely
nothing*. Note what he says in Pressure Point - that he researched Control
*for a year* (half a year *with* Orac, which indicates Orac isn't the 'punch
this button for all the answers' we sometimes think) before deciding to take
it on. And they know nothing about how the System operates, where the main
complex is, what its defences are, any possible resisters who might help
them get that information, or even if there are any resisters at all...how
much research would have been necessary? Lots. Maybe it would be easier, but
almost certainly doing any good at all would have been hard and very slow
work.
Basically, IMO, he *would* have had to give up the fight against the
Federation - for an unspecified but probably lengthy period of time - to
take on the System. This was not a case where he could help one group while
still carrying on the fight against the other. One or the other battle *had*
to take priority, and people suffer. And, for reasons that we've gone over
many times and no-I-will-not go over them again :-) , his decision was that
the Federation was the greatest evil in his galaxy and had to be given
priority.
<*Note:* None of this qualifies as *proof* that Blake's motivations are more
personal than altruistic. But taken all together, it strikes *me* as a
pattern.>
And strikes me as a different pattern, one of ego (and name one of Our
Heroes without one. Okay, Gan. Name Two - Cally? Okay, *three* and don't try
to sneak Avon in there), ruthlessness and extreme pragmatism. There's a
personal element, but the altruism is genuine, and demonstrated quite
convincingly for me again and again. Ain't B7 grand???
Finally, after I wrote:
<Perhaps you can claim that Avon is not making these choices *on behalf* of
people so much as *about* them, but again I think that's a semantical
argument (one that the said people might not appreciate the finer points of
<g>).>
Mistral wrote:
<Mm. Well, if I were one of the people, I would appreciate it.>
You honestly believe it's more ethical for Avon to want to sacrifice people
to his own narrow self-interests, than for Blake to want to do it to try and
make life bearable/better/even possible for the majority (and maybe save
other lives as well, since the Federation were doing quite a good job of
massacring the innocent)? Interesting idea...
Personally, I'd like my death to have a smidge more meaning than "it will
make the Snarly One I don't even know happier"...Avon is too making a
decision on behalf of those people all right - that they and what they
want/feel/etc are of absolutely no importance whatsoever. That's My Darling
for you.
<Avon mostly minds his own business unless asked; Blake jumps right in
whether he's wanted or not, when it suits him.>
Going on the examples I gave you, I don't agree *at all* that Avon minds his
own business except when it suits him to do so, but since you've read them
and disagree, we'll have to leave it there. My view is, Avon does precisely
what he wants, quite blatantly interfering in other people's lives or
ignoring their rights if it suits him. Blake does precisely what he thinks
best, also interfering if he thinks it necessary.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 02:21:07 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re:Avon&the masses (was history)
Message-ID: <20000128102107.21237.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Ellynne G. wrote re Avon's reluctance to save Auron unless absolutely forced
to:
<This episode has some real odd points when you think about it. Avon has
let the Anna issue sit on the back burner for a couple years or more (don't
tell me it took him this long to dig up the official cover story on Anna's
death). Then, suddenly, this is all he can concentrate on.>
Mistral wrote:
<IMO, combination of two things. (1) First time he's been in charge instead
of Blake; (2) Guilt over not being able to find Blake stirs up guilt over
Anna's death.>
Oh good, I also agree with Mistral on something. This is very much how I see
it. There's also the extreme lack of anything for him to *do* in early
Series 3 except think, and obviously thinking about the last few months led
to...
<I think Avon discounted a lot of what Cally told him she was getting from
Zelda. Although he doesn't say it, he could have plenty of reasons for
being wary. Zelda could be lying.>
<He did say he suspected a trap. And he was right.>
Agreed, but that wasn't his main reason for objecting, but special pleading
IMO. After all, he was fairly sure (also IMO) that Terminal was a trap -
hence his extraordinary precautions for the others - but instead of a whole
planet of people he couldn't care less about (and who were genuinely dying),
it was baited with just one person. And he couldn't get there fast enough.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 02:49:18 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Was Blake motivated by personal vendetta?
Message-ID: <20000128104918.34659.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Kathryn wrote:
<That scene in Horizon, where the prisoners are all scrabbling for the food.
Then Selma comes and gets her share, then they start scrabbling again,
only Blake (armed with nothing but charisma) stops them makes them take
their portions fairly, one at a time.
He's just a democrat at heart.>
<grin> albeit a distinctly autocratic one on his own ship...
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 17:31:04 +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] The Hilarious Vila
Message-ID: <3891D254.EC96A375@mcr1.poptel.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
This announcement appeared in the classifieds in the February issue of
SFX:
"I want to start up a fan club for Blake's 7 star Michael Keating (the
hilarious Vila). If you wnat to contribute to a monthly newsletter, let
me know. Phone Mark Fatheringaye on 0171 366 7424"
Overseas peeps note the number is +44 171 366 7424
--
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, 28 Jan 2000 19:35:16 +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: <3891EF6C.B7213271@mcr1.poptel.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
This is your two weeks out reminder that a number of fans from both
lists are meeting up for a drink at Pages Bar, London's sci-fi bar, on
Saturday 12 February. The bar opens at 5pm, I'll be getting there about
5.30pm and others as the evening goes on. Email me to let me know who's
coming and what time you are getting there. Some of us are talking about
meeting earlier in Chinatown for a meal first. If anyone fancies that,
then drop me an email and I'll send you the details.
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, 28 Jan 2000 22:42:38 +0200 (EET)
From: Kai V Karmanheimo <karmanhe@cc.helsinki.fi>
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Toying with Travis
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.20.0001282220050.46-100000@kruuna.Helsinki.FI>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Hello again!
Mistral's comment about Blake letting Travis escape inspired these
thoughts:
Blake's stubborn and continued refusal to kill Travis even when the man is
practically presented him on a silver platter and an apple in his mouth is
one element that I wish the writers had thought out more carefully. I
think the ultimate reason is in the way the show was organised. Since
Travis had to be there in "Star One", he couldn't be killed anymore than
he could be allowed to succeed in killing Blake. This presented the
problem of defusing Travis's schemes and still letting him go free, back
to his copy of "101 Fiendishly Cunning Schemes to Capture Runaway Rebels
(with illustrations)". Unfortunately the way they frequently make Blake
let him go is clumsy and Blake's justifications hold less and less water
as the series goes on.
I can accept Blake's justifications in "Seek-Locate-Destroy" and
"Duel". In the latter case, I think the biggest part in his decision was
played by the suspicion that Giroc and Sinofar might not let them go if he
made raw steak out of Travis with his stake. With "Project Avalon", it is
possible that the Avalon android wasn't triggered by anything that Travis
did, but instead was programmed to drop the phial after certain amount of
time had elapsed (Blake said it would "crush" the phial, not drop it,
though I guess with a nice hard floor underfoot dropping it would be just
as reliable way to shatter it). A charming memento for those left behind
(and left dead) when they teleport, but getting out alive and with Avalon
was the main concern here, so not killing Travis and Servalan is
justifiable (anyway, I don't see Blake having the assassin-mentality to do
something like this).
However, when it comes to "Orac", "Hostage" and "Gambit, the credibility
of "let the Federation deal with their own scum" is stretched a bit
thin. Especially after Travis becomes fugitive himself, there's no real
tactical reason to spare his life; on the contrary, leaving him alive now
presents a double threat, as the Federation is still sending its own
troops after the Liberator crew. Just bashing Travis's ego and not the man
himself is just going to make him more cross and dangerous. Considering
that Blake claims to understand Travis's thinking, his judgement is way
off in "Gambit" if he really thinks that Travis is so crushed by his
failure that killing him would be a mere stroke of mercy. It's just
another example of how the good guys must keep their moral high ground and
so can't shoot the baddies in cold blood when they are helpless and pose
no immediate threat (perhaps if Blake had first said, "Now this is going
to hurt me more than you, Travis..."). Once the bad guy has shot you up
and is about to play the opening bars of "Hi-ho, to Kill the Human Race I
Go" (in C# minor), *then* it's okay to shoot him - in the back, no less.
That's the bad thing about being the hero's personal nemesis: once he
decides to quit, you're immediately made redundant. And the bad guys never
have time for a proper pension planning...
Kai
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 21:13:32 -0000
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Was Blake motivated by personal vendetta?
Message-ID: <005501bf69d8$248aecc0$358701d5@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
My answer is ..... Yes, but so what.
-----Original Message-----
From: Sondra Sweigman
> But I think we can be more
>objective in assessing whether Blake cares about those who aren't useful
>to his cause, and I'd maintain that the evidence shows that he does:
>(1) He shows concern for the Decimas in "The Web" and for Zil in "Trial"
>(2) He goes to the aid of unknown persons in apparent distress in "Time
>Squad" and "Mission to Destiny" without knowing how or if they'll fit into
>his rebellion.
>(3) When he sends people down to look for crash survivors on Cephlon in
>"Deliverance
>(4) In "Killer" he even warns Federation personnel about potential danger
Can't fault these arguments. When the opportunity presents itself to him,
Blake take the shows his humanity (or alienanity (?) in the case of Decimas
etc).
But when it comes to going out of his way to do something. Like destroy Star
One. Its to prove that HE was right. His motivation for fighting the
Federation ARE personal., based on personal grudges and personal
experiences.
Of course, as I'm sure (hope ?)our historians will point out, many of the
great revolutions of the past were perpetrated by people who had been
personally disadvantaged by whatever they are fighting against. In fact, its
hard to see how somebody could see a fight of that magnitude through unless
there was a personal element to it. So there isn't necessarily actually
anything wrong with having a personal agenda as well as a justifiable
political agenda (which is a whole topic in itself). The trouble arises if
the two are not well aligned and actions are carried out solely for personal
revenge that damage the overall aims of the cause itself. I think the crew
respect this need in Blake, after all, with the possible exception of Vila
(a career thief) most of them have their own personal reasons for hating the
Federation (in addition to most of them being convicted)
Blake - Being Framed, Brainwashed, loss of family......
Jenna, Gan - Rape of people close to them (I think) .....
Avon - Loss of Anna.....
Vila - ?
Cally - Carrying on rebellion after loss of all comrades.....
[
Dayna - Exile, Death of father.......
Soolin - Murder of family.......
Tarrant - Whatever made him leave space command to become a mercenary.......
]
So when Blake proposes actions against the Federation that have a degree of
personal motivation, they go along with it. After all who cares how and why
you decide to do the right thing, provided you do the right thing.
Andrew
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #26
*************************************