From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #301
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume00/301
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 301
Today's Topics:
Re: [B7L] Avon as loner? (was Dorian [ "Dana Shilling" <dshilling@worldnet ]
Re: [B7L] Blake's 7 on DVD [ Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.com ]
[B7L] Even I noticed there were more [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
[B7L] Avon as loner? (part 1 again) [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
[B7L] Avon as loner? (part 2 and mos [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
[B7L] Avon as loner? (now extremely [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
Re: [B7L] Avon as loner? (part 2 and [ Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net> ]
Re: [B7L] Even I noticed there were [ Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net> ]
Re: [B7L] Richard III and all that [ Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net> ]
Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa [ Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net> ]
Re: [B7L] Deja Vu [ "Christine+Steve" <cgorman@idirect. ]
Re: [B7L] Deja Vu [ Iain Coleman <ijc@bas.ac.uk> ]
Re: [B7L] Avon as loner? (was Dorian [ Mac4781@aol.com ]
Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa [ Mac4781@aol.com ]
Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa [ Mac4781@aol.com ]
Re: [B7L] if Shakespeare wrote Blake [ Natasa Tucev <tucev@tesla.rcub.bg.a ]
Re: [B7L] Avon as loner? (was Dorian [ Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net> ]
Re: [B7L] Avon as loner? (part 2 and [ Mac4781@aol.com ]
Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa [ Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net> ]
[B7L] Offshoot of Dysfunctional/lone [ Susan Beth <susanbeth33@mindspring. ]
[B7L] Avon and Revenge (was 'Was Avo [ "Ellynne G." <rilliara@juno.com> ]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 00:59:48 -0400
From: "Dana Shilling" <dshilling@worldnet.att.net>
To: "B7 Mailing List" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Avon as loner? (was Dorian and Avon and *is* long ...)
Message-ID: <00e801c03fd3$6065af60$20684e0c@dshilling>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Steve D. said:
>
> Yep, that's the one. I quite like "Headhunter", especially watching Avon
> argue with Orac about leaving the teleport switched off.
I don't like it much (although I guess we need someone who DOESN'T
have quite a head on him to balance Og)--I thought of it as a Reader's
Digest Condensed version of Star One, with the really interesting issue of
whether to destroy or control the irresistible force getting nowhere near
enough screen time.
-(Y)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 20:58:25 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.com>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Blake's 7 on DVD
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-1026195825-0b0Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Thu 26 Oct, Mac4781@aol.com wrote:
> Judith wrote:
>
> > You might also want to add a *friendly* request saying that you hope
> they'll
> > clean up the prints so that the picture quality is better than the video.
>
> <snip>
>
> > The e-mail address is info@fabulousfilms.co.uk
> >
> > (and thanks to Robert Windle for suggesting this -
>
> Thanks for the suggestion and for the email address. Yanks might also write
> and ask about B7 DVDs that are compatible with our technology. I think we're
> region 1, but I'm not positive about that.
A *very* good point. America and Australian sales might well make a difference
and they're both different regions. I don't know if Fab Films have considered
non-UK sales. But then they sell the videos in the US, so I guess they'll be
aware of the market there, though I've no idea how large it is.
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: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 06:57:34 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Even I noticed there were more than two people on the ship ...
Message-ID: <LAW-F28wQ1N8Pik3Y8p000008d8@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Yes I did, truly (even though you might not believe it sometimes). Given
the recent reams of stuff on My Darling and Fearless Leader (and the fact
that, from the archives, this one does get the lion's share of wordage -
well, it ends in a crime passionel, what do you expect?), it made me think
about those interactions that *really* miss out on attention. I know that
there's not a lot one can say about Gan's relationship with Servalan or the
Travii (if anyone can even see one, do let me know :-)) and nice,
straightforward, uncomplicated friendships like Tarrant & Dayna, Vila &
Cally, Vila & Gan, Blake & Cally etc simply don't seem to garner as much
interest (which I can understand, I guess. These people clearly like each
other. That's nice. Ummm ... let's go back to the explosion-fests.)
Lessee ...
Travis doesn't appear to have *any* relationships outside the ones with
Servalan and Blake (in the regulars - Parr and Marryatt would be
interesting, but there's not enough time). There's a touch of
something-less-than-impersonality in his brief scenes with Cally (SLD), but
the ones in Hostage with Vila are pretty dead. Since one does believe that
he would have made a close study of Blake's crew (mostly from their criminal
records, methinks :-)) one would love to have read the notes he made while
viewing Vila's/Gan's/Avon's ...
Servalan and Jenna ... well, I aren't keen on catty sessions like the one in
the Keeper, but I do think they could have made something (especially *in*
this scene) of the neat fact that Jenna used Servie's essential cowardice to
get Blake out of the 'Pressure Point' trap. Jenna strikes me as very much a
'man's woman' - my (uncanonical) assumption is that she prefers male company
in general (her relationship with Cally - after that rocky start - is
friend-ish but cool.)
Cally and Gan ... one assumes they like each other, maybe because they're
both nice people and why shouldn't they? <g> but there's very little
evidence that I can recall *of* their relationship (unless you count her
silliness in Breakdown, which I don't). Gan has more involvement with
*Orac*, for goodness sake. Even in Trial - where the rest *all* get to make
some gesture towards what Gan's death meant - Cally hovers around the edges
looking thoughtful and inscrutable.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 07:01:56 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Avon as loner? (part 1 again)
Message-ID: <LAW-F59GmAf0MjkatwD00001e2d@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Carol wrote:
<I have a lot of trouble believing that someone who is the bastard you
describe in regard to almost the entire universe becomes a veritable saint
when it comes to Blake.>
<gurgle> PERISH the thought. He's actually more vicious to Blake (when he's
mad at him) than any of the rest of them (Trial and Star One - those
ice-white, really lacerating blasts). Only that fling at Cally in Children
comes anywhere *near* the level of spleen. Their fights are quite wonderful
for just that reason - the mixture of bedrock affection and creative venom.
This, of course, makes perfect sense to me since, when someone you care
about (and *definitely* wish you didn't <g>) makes you angry, it's that much
more intense.
Avon is also definitely a stirrer by instinct (it's the brat in him) and
Blake is his favourite target (for an example, witness the wonderful opening
scene in Redemption, where they carry on a perfectly serious conversation
*and* a perfectly lovely argument absolutely seamlessly.)
The main point is - as I have said repeatedly - my understanding of the man
- based on canon, the 51 episodes he is in - is that one of the central
aspects of his character is that excrutiatingly narrow but fathoms-deep
capacity for love and/or loyalty. He doesn't give readily or easily and
most of the time only to a bare necessity, but when he does, it goes deep.
(He does give that loyalty/friendship - but only to an extent - to Cally and
Vila, and I think if given a loooonnng thawing time, maybe would have to
Soolin. There was also some friendship with Tynus. Given his
sweetness-and-light nature, that's actually rather a *lot* IMO.)
Everyone likes and dislikes and simply puts up with others unequally - I
have something like 80 close relatives, and I would never claim that I love
them all equally or even vaguely equally. And often, it isn't any logical
or rational reason that makes us care for one person more than another -
they just appeal more as a human being.
There could have been other people apart from Anna, Blake and The Brother
who he felt deeply for. We don't know. What we *also* don't know is how he
acted around Anna and The Brother, except for those few sickly rose-coloured
memories in 'Rumours" (which I sincerely hope were nostalgic rather than
accurate, for My Darling's sake).
He could have fought up hill and down dale with them as well (with the Anna
we see as Sula I can see a certain percentage of vases flung at heads,
especially if she was as pugnacious as her brother).
<Again, I ask why? Why would a man who is so indifferent to his fellow
human beings change so drastically when it comes to Blake?>
See above. Something about Blake got to him, right from the start (right
from Spacefall and that burst of trying-to-make-the-lunatic-see-sense in the
computer room.) Just as Anna appears to have done so (though we never got
to see it with her).
Betty jumped in here:
<There's really two questions here, I think. "Why would a man who is so
indifferent to most of his fellow human beings feel so drastically different
when it comes to one particular human being?" and "Why Blake?" I'm not
entirely sure which one you're asking, and they're both pretty complicated
questions...>
And I'm way too tired this weekend for the mammoth burble the latter would
involve... (weary cheers from the gallery)
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 07:03:48 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Avon as loner? (part 2 and most about the word 'canon' actually)
Message-ID: <LAW-F150r4YFM8De4wk00000a46@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Carol again:
<I enjoy discussing the characters and what makes them tick. But I need
canonical facts to do that. I'm not interested in "he is; he isn't.">
But in that case, what's the point of any discussion at all? Why bother?
Tarrant says he doesn't trust anyone at all, then shows he does trust total
strangers with a story in City. So we just shrug our shoulder and say "he
lies." Cally tells one story in Time Squad and another in Dawn - okay, she's
a liar too, or has severe memory problems. Avon calls Vila a spare part in
Powerplay? He must mean it, it's there on screen. Avon didn't give Anna two
seconds thought between Countdown and the morning before Rumours - well, he
*can't* have, there's nothing on screen, is there? Ditto Tarrant and Deeta.
Ditto Cally. Dead and forgotten indeed.
And we haven't even gotten onto the bad science aspect. Why bother trying
to interpret or reason it out? Take what is there on the screen as gospel.
Because the minute you don't, in a group of two fans, three of them are
going to disagree.
Yes, I'm exaggerating. But the problem is, I think I *am* arguing straight
from canon - taking Avon's actions on screen and interpreting them so they
make sense (to me it *is* canonical that he doesn't give much of a damn
about most of the human race, including several of his crewmates. His
actions in the actual episodes don't make sense to me otherwise). You think
that is what you are doing - and you come to a completely opposite
conclusion.
And why? Because this is *Blake's Seven* - ambiguous, indefinite,
impossible, extraordinarily and unwittingly complex, sometimes sketchy,
sometimes dowright contradictory. Writers saying one thing, actors saying
another, viewers a third, fourth and right through to ninety-ninth.
We can't be objective - none of us can. Being trained in history, I tend to
view the series as primary documents rather than the be-all and end-all of
the matter, but the interpretation of primary documents is always, always
subjective and that's part of the fascination. Canon is the raw material,
but without interpretation all we have is 52 often-clashing episodes, and
scripts (and characters) that often make no sense.
I'm afraid I'm increasingly of the opinion that the word 'canon' is a Humpty
Dumpty one. I can give a bucketload of examples of what I consider to be
canonical proof of the Avon-Blake bond; others don't consider them anything
of the sort. Fair enough. Other things that you consider canon - such as the
fact that Avon likes people - I can't see your proof on the screen. Equally
fair enough. (And before the non-character junkie people smile smugly, let's
remember that a lot of the more involved science/political etc threads are
based on interpretation rather than what's on-screen as well :-))
Goodness, Joanne proved quite conclusively that it isn't even canonical that
the Lobster Top is red!
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 07:08:50 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: dshilling@worldnet.att.net, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?)
Message-ID: <LAW-F25adQZUraGLxbA00001dd9@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Dana wrote:
<Typo (Freudian slip?) s/b "Avon had emotional problems that would NOT
>let him accept..." unless My Client agrees with me that attachment to Blake
>is a sign of poor judgment or worse.>
<grin> I have no doubt Your Client would agreed with more enthusiasm than
he's shown for anything since the Treasure Room.
(PS - have noticed the headers are getting quite mammoth in themselves,
never mind the posts...)
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 07:31:40 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Avon as loner? (now extremely short)
Message-ID: <LAW-F2508YkdavN3qlj00000aa6@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Betty wrote:
<Here I am, jumping in between Carol and Sally yet again, but, hey, my Avon
and Sally's Avon are practically identical... :)>
But not quite, dear ... mine survives, remember?
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 04:13:07 -0700
From: Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net>
To: B7 lyst <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Avon as loner? (part 2 and most about the word 'canon'
actually)
Message-ID: <39F96343.EF0CD43F@centurytel.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sally Manton wrote:
> Goodness, Joanne proved quite conclusively that it isn't even canonical that
> the Lobster Top is red!
Really? I'm sorry to have missed that - it took me a while to figure out
what everyone was referring to when they said 'red leather'. It doesn't
look a bit red on my TV.
Mistral
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 04:22:13 -0700
From: Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net>
To: B7 lyst <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Even I noticed there were more than two people on the ship ...
Message-ID: <39F96565.7D835619@centurytel.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sally Manton wrote:
I know that
> there's not a lot one can say about Gan's relationship with Servalan or the
> Travii (if anyone can even see one, do let me know :-))
I've been thinking that it would be nice to see the bit right after
Pressure Point - Travis, trying to get after Blake and away from a
carping Servalan, digs and squirms his way through the rubble, only to
encounter the not-quite-dead-yet Gan. They talk - well, mostly Travis
talks - about the rewards of loyalty on both sides of the rebellion.
Mistral
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 04:25:37 -0700
From: Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net>
To: B7 lyst <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Richard III and all that
Message-ID: <39F96631.B69F13EC@centurytel.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dana Shilling wrote:
> However, on a more symbolic level, Hamlet =
> Blake, born to set right the times out of joint,
> Claudius = Servalan, killer and usurper.
I still think that makes Avon Hamlet - Hamlet _didn't want_ to be the
one to set things right; he was just stuck with it, which makes his
attitude closer to Avon's than Blake's.
Mistral
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 04:29:19 -0700
From: Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net>
To: B7 lyst <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?) (getting even
longer)
Message-ID: <39F9670F.929A91B2@centurytel.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dana Shilling wrote:
>
> Replying to Betty and Carol:
>
> > > Anna refused to talk. Or so her brother believed. From "Countdown":
> > > "They kept her under interrogation for nearly a week. They tried
> > > everything but she never broke. If she had spoken, told them what they
> > > wanted to know, she'd be alive now." Presumably "what they wanted to
> > > know" was Avon's whereabouts, or possibly details about his plans.
> Actually I think what they wanted to know was where the money was.
Canon suggests *very* strongly that the money never left the banking
system. "You were never even close," - Shrinker, Rumors - among other
bits.
Mistral
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:09:23 -0400
From: "Christine+Steve" <cgorman@idirect.com>
To: "B7 Mailing List" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Deja Vu
Message-ID: <00ce01c0400f$145cff60$81139ad8@cgorman>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Andrew Williams wrote :
> Which young actor played a Federation soldier in B7 and then went on to
play
> a moustached CID officer?
>
> Of course, you're meant to say Kevin Lloyd ('Tosh' Lines in The Bill), but
> I'm actually thinking of David Haig. It only dawned on me yesterday that
> Section Leader Forress ("Every part a moving part") in Rumours went on to
> play DI Derek Grim ("I don't want any fannying about!") in "The Thin Blue
> Line" with Rowan Atkinson.
Haig is wonderful in The Thin Blue Line... "Its my arse on the line and I
don't want a cock up." He was also good in Four Weddings and a Funeral.
Maybe Forress could be a candidate to join the crew. Splitting from the
Federation, bored with his guard duties, he seemed to be quite fun.
Steve D.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 13:16:09 +0100 (BST)
From: Iain Coleman <ijc@bas.ac.uk>
To: B7 Mailing List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Deja Vu
Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.96.1001027131541.17846B-100000@bscomp>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Christine+Steve wrote:
>
> Maybe Forress could be a candidate to join the crew. Splitting from the
> Federation, bored with his guard duties, he seemed to be quite fun.
A bit too dead, though, which is a disadvantage.
Iain
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:19:59 EDT
From: Mac4781@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Avon as loner? (was Dorian and Avon and *is* long ...)
Message-ID: <fb.ce7b11d.272accef@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Betty wrote:
> Assuming there's any still reading this. :)
I'm not sure why we're reading this. :) We are getting down to the ragged
edges that leave little room for discussion. I am going to try to restrain
from further comment. I don't think I've missed making any points that I
believe are relevant.
> "A veritable saint?" [Snort] No, I certainly don't think he was
> *that*. He was frequently nastier to Blake than to anyone else. He
> made Blake's life even more difficult than Blake himself did. He
> *killed* Blake, fer cryin' out loud!
Exactly. That's not the behavior of a man who has a strong, positive,
personal commitment to Blake. It's what I've been saying all along. Avon
does not treat Blake the way he'd treat someone he regarded as highly as he
did Anna.
> Avon was never, and in no way a
> saint to *anybody*. But, IMO, he did care about Blake. A lot. Enough
> to make him do ill-advised, irrational, risky things for him. Yes, that
> seems a bit contradictory. I *said* I thought he was an extremely
> complex person...
A lot contradictory. As I've said, the only way Avon could be that
contradictory is to make him severely dysfunctional. And we're back to the
same circle. For Avon and Blake to work, he has to be dysfunctional, so if
you want Avon and Blake to work, you are going to see him as dysfunctional.
> There's really two questions here, I think. "Why would a man who is so
> indifferent to most of his fellow human beings feel so drastically
> different when it comes to one particular human being?" and "Why
> Blake?" I'm not entirely sure which one you're asking, and they're both
> pretty complicated questions...
Both. But you don't need to answer them (or any other questions I've asked
in other posts I wrote this morning). What you've said has already told me
there isn't any hard evidence, just theories and personal opinions. I just
wanted to be sure that I wasn't overlooking something that was important.
Carol Mc
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:19:58 EDT
From: Mac4781@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?)
Message-ID: <9d.c49e854.272accee@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Betty wrote:
> Ah, that's the $64,000 question. I've already given some idea of *my*
> take on the "why," I think (although probably pretty sketchily). As for
> the "when," I'd say: gradually, and with considerable reluctance, but
> nevertheless quite early on.
Nothing here I can respond to.
> It was a distinct possibility, though. And he definitely thought it
> likely that he was going to die at Terminal.
Thinking it likely or possible isn't quite the same as facing certain death.
> Which, IMO, was an incredibly risky and irrational thing to do.
Per Avon's behavior, he expected to find a visible Federation presence at
Exbar. He knew the Liberator had the capability of getting away from
Federation ships. I think it shows how desperate Avon was to have more say
in the decision making.
> Will flying around on the Liberator in
> a galaxy inhabited by hostile Andromedans be any worse than doing so
> in a galaxy inhabited by hostile humans?
I think Avon is a civilized man. He wants civilization around him. Humans
afford that.
> And why should he risk his
> life protecting a galaxy full of people who never did anything for
> him, anyway?
He's protecting it for his own selfish reasons, not for others.
> Hmm. It seemed like a very *nervous* sort of joke to me...
He's hugging Vila and cheerfully saying "duck." He's mentioned that Avon
can't always have what he wants. I didn't see any signs of nervousness.
> He has a truly touching amount of faith in Orac, and was counting on
> the plastic box to be able to teleport them out if they really needed
> it. I don't think he really thought he was putting Blake and co. at
> any greatly increased risk, actually.
He doesn't indicate that Orac would teleport them out, he blithely says Blake
will be longer than they are when Vila asks him what happens if Blake wants
fetched. I argree that he doesn't think he's putting Blake and Co at great
risk, but that's mainly because he's more interested in a chance to have fun.
He doesn't give the situation much consideration. Avon badly needs a break
by GAMBIT, and that's what he's thinking about.
> Well, if it had been up to him, he would have turned back in
> "Breakdown" once he realized the true extent of the danger, and let
> Gan die. Just off the top of my head...
Avon saw it as a situation where they were all going to die if they went
ahead. It was one of his pragmatic "Gan dies or we all die." It turns out
he was wrong. Avon does make mistakes. Aside from that, he does everything
he can to help save Gan.
Carol Mc
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:19:57 EDT
From: Mac4781@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?) (getting even longer)
Message-ID: <4b.2a73c9c.272acced@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Betty wrote:
> Now, you might not agree that that's what's happening, but surely the
> psychology doesn't seem all *that* bizarre, does it?
The psychology doesn't seem bizarre to me. There are people who repeat
mistakes. Avon is capable of repeating mistakes. But not this mistake with
this person. Avon has to love someone as deeply as he loved Anna to repeat
the mistake. And he doesn't have those feelings for Blake.
> Oh, he *certainly* recognizes that Blake is fallible. And he points
> it out often enough! But Blake is nevertheless something special
> (IMHO, and, I believe, in Avon's, not that you'd get him to admit it).
> He's that Honest Man that Avon didn't believe existed. He's not
> corrupt and self-serving like the rest of that dysfunctional universe.
> And yet he's not naive and stupid, the way Avon sees so much of the rest
> of the universe (and particularly idealistic types) as being.
This is something else I can't see at all. Blake *is* corrupt and
self-serving in pursuing his goals. He is willing to deal with the Terra
Nostra. He needs to prove he's right. He's willing to use methods that are
worthy of the Federation to achieve his goals. He's willing to wade in
blood. These are all things Avon knows. He can't possibly overlook all that
unless he's lost 70 or so points off his IQ or unless he's viewing Blake
through rose-colored glasses.
> > Blake might be the shipmate
> > Avon is least likely to trust for two reasons: (a) Blake has shown he's
> > capable of going to extreme lengths to get what he wants
>
> But he also goes to those same extreme lengths for his people. He
> expects them to risk their lives beside his, yes, but he will risk his
> life *for* them, as well.
Yes. After getting them into messy situations, Blake will do his best to get
them out. Avon has seen that. I'm sure he wouldn't dispute that Blake takes
his responsibilities seriously. There is a reasonable amount of trust there,
but no more trust than Avon gives to his own crew. Maybe less. Because Avon
doesn't know that Blake will do the same for Avon the man that he'd do for
Avon the revolutionary worker. And Avon never tests those waters to find
out. Possibly because he doesn't trust that Blake has that strong of a
commitment to him.
> > and (b) Blake is vulnerable to mind manipulation.
>
> Now, that's a more interesting point. But they did supposedly manage
> to get all of the residual programming out of him in "Voice." Sure,
> he's vulnerable to having it done again, but so is *everybody* (well,
> except maybe Vila).
I agree, and I wouldn't even disclude Vila. Anyone who has been apart from
Avon would be subject to the same degree of wariness. They might have
changed. They might have been corrupted. They might have been mentally
adjusted. It's why I don't see Avon approaching Gauda Prime with supreme
trust.
> > If it came down to the Cause or Avon, Avon
> > knows which Blake would choose.
>
> That's true, but Avon knows exactly where he stands, there. (He may
> not *like* it, but he knows it.) I think (and I think Avon probably
> does as well), that if it came down to a choice between Avon and the
> Cause, Blake would do everything he possibly could find a third
> option. And, being Blake, he'd probably succeed...
He didn't save Nova, Arco and Gan. And many a time, it wasn't Blake but one
of the others who pulled their necks out of the noose. Blake was also
willing to accept the deaths of many innocents at STAR ONE. Blake isn't a
miracle worker. He can't fight a rebellion without loss of life.
What you're telling me about Blake--he's not corrupt, he can work miracles
that will probably save Avon if it comes down to the Cause or Avon--makes me
wonder if I'm not approaching this from the wrong angle. Maybe you are able
to see an Avon who can't help but be attracted to Blake because you see Blake
as a superior being. You have Avon seeing Blake through your eyes.
> Anyway, in
> "Blake," it looks like he's sold out not just Avon, but Avon *and* the
> Cause, which is even more shocking.
I agree with that. And I think Avon was aware of that possibility before he
went to GP. He accepted before he got there that Blake had possibly sold out
the Cause. I think that's why he's so quick to believe ;he'd already
considered the possibility and accepted it could be true.
> Oh, gawd no! "Simple" and "gentle" are the *last* two words I would
> ever use to describe either of them! They're fantastically complex
> people; in fact, Avon is IMO perhaps the *most* complex and layered
> character I've seen in media SF. I think Avon's emotions towards
> Blake are *very* complicated and conflicted, and not at all gentle.
> (The phrase "love-hate relationship" doens't *quite* capture it, I
> think, but at least conveys some of the flavor.) I certainly don't
> think Avon "worships" Blake. Blecch.
But your paragraph above seems in direct conflict (to me) with your other
statements. You say Avon recognizes Blake's fallibility then you tell me he
doesn't see Blake as corrupt, etc., when he's had the evidence of his own
eyes and experience to know that. So it does seem as if Avon can only view
Blake as this very admirable, unique individual if he's viewing Blake through
rose-colored glasses.
> Oddly enough, the impression that I've gotten of *your* Avon seems far
> too simple and gentle to me.
I'd be happy to explain anything that gave you that impression. I find Avon's
psyche to be intriguing.
For now, I'll just talk a little about the Avon-Blake relationship as I see
it, because I had a moment of insight last night. I was thinking about what
you said about Paul's blank expression and it occurred to me that is exactly
what I see at STAR ONE. Avon cares about Blake. He wishes Blake all the
best, happy revolution, win, enjoy it all. Those are his positive feelings.
At the same time Avon cannot bear to be around Blake any longer. He needs to
be free. And those are his negative feelings. They balance into a
neutrality that leaves that blank look on his face. He's at the point where
his emotions are finally in balance. Blake will get what he wants; Avon can
be happy for him. And Avon will get what he wants, which makes him happy for
himself. The conflict between them is over; only the good remains. His
feelings for Blake are very complex; that's part of the reason he isn't
desperate to leave Liberator any sooner. The oppression of personality that
Blake represents is something that builds over time. It's the cumulative
effect that becomes increasingly more difficult to bear.
> Yes, we have been through it before... And I'm quite sure we're not
> going to agree about it now! I see a difference between the risks he
> takes for Blake and the risks he takes for the others: the former seem
> (often) to be more extreme, less rational, and more emotional. You
> don't see that. Once again, it's a difference of intepretation...
And there's no point in rehashing that.
> > Because Avon was loyal to his shipmates. Because Avon accepts that
> > he should do his share of the work if he's accepting a share of the
> > safety and protection that being part of a team provides. It's
> > pretty straightforward. And it allows canon to stand without
> > turning Avon into someone in need of therapy.
>
> But "safety and protection" are the *last* things the Liberator
> affords him! Running around blowing up Federation installations every
> week when he could find himself some neutral planet to hide on?
> Doesn't sound like the safe & sane choice to *me*.
Granted, it is a relative safety. But as long as he has that relative
safety, he'll do his share. You make it sound easy to find a neutral planet
to hide on, but Avon never wanted to merely hide. He wants to be in control
of his life. He's willing to take his time to find a situation that will
provide autonomy, safety and challenging projects before jumping ship. He's
willing to take the risks of staying on Liberator until he finds that
desirable location. Avon isn't someone who is afraid of taking risks to
achieve his goals (as we see in RUMOURS).
> IMO there is no
> rational reason why he should choose to stay and fight Blake's battles
> for him. Which just leaves emotional reasons... And *that* allows
> canon to stand without turning Avon into an idiot... :)
We see that he's making an effort to free himself from Blake; we see that
he's not happy with Blake. He would have left in BREAKDOWN. He's not
staying for Blake. He's staying for his own selfish reasons. Because Avon
wants a bolthole that is as desirable as Liberator. He gains that bolthole
through negotiations at STAR ONE. He's managed a win-win: his freedom and
the best bolthole the galaxy can offer. It was a long road to get there, but
Avon isn't afraid of risks or hard work.
> Because they are useful to him, because he feels a measure of
> responsibility towards them, and because they're the only thing
> resembling friends he's got.
That's exactly why he takes risks for Blake.
> But I *still* see a difference between
> the lengths he's prepared to go to for the rest of them and the
> lengths he's prepared to go to for Blake.
What did he do for Blake that he wouldn't have done for any of the others?
> Or Anna, of course. Here's
> an interesting question: Do you think Avon would have undergone five
> days of torture to get revenge on Tarrant's killer? Soolin's? He
> certainly doesn't do anything like that for Gan's killer, or Cally's.
> Some people mean more to him than others...
He wouldn't have undergone revenge for Tarrant's, Soolin's, Gan's or Cally's
killer. I would not pretend to suggest that any of his shipmates meant as
much to Avon as Anna did. And that includes Blake. He wouldn't have
undergone five days of torture to get revenge on Blake's killer either.
Carol Mc
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 15:07:30 +0200
From: Natasa Tucev <tucev@tesla.rcub.bg.ac.yu>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] if Shakespeare wrote Blakes 7
Message-Id: <200010271307.PAA19895@Tesla.rcub.bg.ac.yu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Dana wrote:
>Natasa suggested an Avon/Del Grant rather than
>Hamlet/Laertes graveside punch-up. Well,
>depressed chap who spent a lot of time in graduate
>school, loads of black gear...And really, everything
>Avon ever says is a soliloquy, because no one ever
>pays a blind bit of attention.
>
No, no, no... My point (which followed after the Hamlet quote) was that I
couldn't actually imagine Avon delivering long soliloquies. Avon's character
is largely built by the technique of ommisions, lacunae, which is the
technique of minimalism. In other words, when they have to deal with complex
psychological content, or with the emotional response to a shocking event,
the minimalists resort to silence. It can also mean that a thing has
happened which does not fit into the character's system of thoughts, and so
he doesn't have the terms to express it.
This is why I think it would be the most fitting technique for Avon, if he
were a literary character. His emotional reactions have a tendency of
contradicting his system of thoughts, surprising him, as it were, because
his system of thoughts is probably based on pragmatism and extreme
rationalism, and so he lacks the words to express turbulences in his inner
self. Hence we so often miss proper motivation for his actions - or at
least, for the moments when he changes his mind. For example, we are given
prefectly solid motivation for his preventing Jenna to bring Blake back from
Cygnus Alpha, but we haven't got a clue what happens inside Avon afterwards.
Likewise, there is no mistery about Avon's reasons for wanting to desert the
crew in Breakdown or Horizon, but it's total mistery why he eventually fails
to do so.
These are the answers we have to provide by ourselves. In the chain
consisting of scripwriter & director & actors - the actual screened episode
- the viewers, the reception end is given a lot to do when it comes to Avon.
This is why I said Avon wouldn't be suitable for Shakespeare. Shakespeare's
characters give us a lot of background on their motivation, and with them,
we have the job to interpret their words correctly. Avon gives us silence,
and the greatest thrill about him is to fill in the blanks. Of course, if
Darrow weren't such a good actor, the whole minimalist job would be a large
scale failure, and Avon would end up being vague and poorly motivated
instead of misterious and intriguing.
(I can't believe I wrote all this - I'm in love with Blake, not Avon!)
N.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 06:52:06 -0700
From: Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net>
To: B7 lyst <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Avon as loner? (was Dorian and Avon and *is* long ...)
Message-ID: <39F98886.75595D18@centurytel.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Betty and Carol:
> > "A veritable saint?" [Snort] No, I certainly don't think he was
> > *that*. He was frequently nastier to Blake than to anyone else. He
> > made Blake's life even more difficult than Blake himself did. He
> > *killed* Blake, fer cryin' out loud!
>
> Exactly. That's not the behavior of a man who has a strong, positive,
> personal commitment to Blake. It's what I've been saying all along. Avon
> does not treat Blake the way he'd treat someone he regarded as highly as he
> did Anna.
Lessee.... Rumors: In an enemy stronghold, with a gun pointed at him,
Avon kills Anna, who has betrayed him. Blake: In an [assumed] enemy
stronghold, with a gun pointed at him, Avon kills Blake, who [Avon
thinks] has betrayed him. I see what you mean. He doesn't treat them
alike at all.
Mistral
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:02:34 EDT
From: Mac4781@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Avon as loner? (part 2 and most about the word 'canon' actually)
Message-ID: <de.b7c80b6.272ae4fa@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I lied. I have one more thing to say. :)
Sally wrote:
> But the problem is, I think I *am* arguing straight
> from canon - taking Avon's actions on screen and interpreting them so they
> make sense (to me it *is* canonical that he doesn't give much of a damn
> about most of the human race, including several of his crewmates. His
> actions in the actual episodes don't make sense to me otherwise). You
think
> that is what you are doing - and you come to a completely opposite
> conclusion.
I think there is a raw canon. B7 was developed as an action-adventure series
for family audiences. Thanks to Chris Boucher, the show provided more depth
and more character development than would ordinarily be possible under those
circumstances, but it was still subject to many limitations I know that my
basic canon diverts from straight canon. I have no problem admitting that.
Carol Mc
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 07:08:43 -0700
From: Mistral <mistral@centurytel.net>
To: B7 lyst <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?) (getting even
longer)
Message-ID: <39F98C6A.575B420E@centurytel.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Carol Mc (replying to Betty) wrote:
> What you're telling me about Blake--he's not corrupt, he can work miracles
> that will probably save Avon if it comes down to the Cause or Avon--makes me
> wonder if I'm not approaching this from the wrong angle. Maybe you are able
> to see an Avon who can't help but be attracted to Blake because you see Blake
> as a superior being. You have Avon seeing Blake through your eyes.
Even if that's true, it doesn't automatically invalidate Betty's
position. I certainly don't view Blake as a superior being - in fact
he'd drive me round the bend in a week - but frankly I don't see how
anyone could miss Avon's affection for him.
Mistral
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:15:49 -0400
From: Susan Beth <susanbeth33@mindspring.com>
To: blake7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Offshoot of Dysfunctional/loner thread
Message-Id: <3.0.4.32.20001026101549.03a46544@mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I was struck by Carol's saying that believing Avon to be somewhere on the
dysfunctional spectrum was required by a belief in a special Avon-Blake
bond -- it makes a lot of sense to me, now that she'd pointed it out.
Continuing to read the thread, I'm also struck by how consistently Carol
argues for a more, well, moderate interpretation of Blake's and Avon's
characters vs. Sally and Betty preferring more, uh, 'extreme' carries
meanings I don't want, maybe 'polarized' would do? As in their Blake is
more white and their Avon more black while Carol's are more clearly gray in
both cases.
I'm wondering if this all ties together in a too-be-expected manner.
Dramatically, clashes between Black vs. white, personified Evil vs. Good,
are more spectacular, fraught with tension, *fun* than just two
mostly-normal people who disagree but manage to mostly work together.
Having some special soul-deep link between Avon and Blake is clearly more
"interesting" than not having it.
Having Avon be a dark, twisty, complex, dysfunctional person is way more
dramatic than having him be a introvert with a nasty tongue, who talks a
much more misanthropic line than he acts.
Are all the differences in interpretation predictable offshoots from one
basic difference in taste? As in, maybe Sally and Betty like a full-out
operatic flavor while Carol likes a more "realistic" version? Space Opera
vs. Science Fiction?
Susan Beth (susanbeth33@mindspring.com)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:30:52 -0600
From: "Ellynne G." <rilliara@juno.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Avon and Revenge (was 'Was Avon Dysfunctional)
Message-ID: <20001027.083054.-89969.1.rilliara@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:19:57 EDT Mac4781@aol.com writes:
> Betty wrote:
> Here's
> > an interesting question: Do you think Avon would have undergone
> five
> > days of torture to get revenge on Tarrant's killer? Soolin's?
> He
> > certainly doesn't do anything like that for Gan's killer, or
> Cally's.
> > Some people mean more to him than others...
>
Avon's revenge was rather interesting. He was going after the specific
individual who pulled the trigger, so to speak, not the one who signed
the order, not the people who he may think turned Anna in, and certainly
not the whole corrupt system that made her death possible (well, in some
ways Avon is a bit of a supporter of the philosophy behind the status
quo, like Ivanhoe [all right, it's a stretch] who may challenge another
knight to a duel to the death but isn't about to question accusations of
witchcraft in general or whether or not Jews and Christians should date).
If that's the case, who should he go after for Cally's death? A link
(deceased) literally pulled the trigger. More importantly, if Avon
doesn't question the overall ethics of leaving bombs for your enemies, he
could see himself as having made the primary mistake that led to her
death (he suspected a trap on the ship but didn't think of bombs at the
base till the ship's had been triggered - even though it seemed obvious
in retrospect). Vila and Tarrant failed to get her out, and Dayna (by
rushing headlong into a snake) wasted valuable time that may have made a
difference.
Of course, he thinks Servalan's dead at this point. And, when he finds
out she's alive, he wants to kill her for a lot of other reasons.
With Gan's death, Blake held a fair amount of blame which, if Avon can't
quite overlook it, he's not going to press to an inevitable conclusion.
Just as well, "Is it true? Have you betrayed us? Have you betrayed...
_Gan_?" doesn't seem as memorable.
Ellynne
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #301
**************************************