From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #59
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume00/59
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 59
Today's Topics:
[B7L] Avon & Gan
[B7L] Oak Leaves
Re: [B7L] Blatant Oak Leaves-Not
Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Re: [B7L] Blatant Oak Leaves-Not
Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Re: [B7L] Blatant Oak Leaves-Not-Oh yes it is
Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
[B7L] half an hour to go
Re: [B7L] Blatant Oak Leaves-Not
[B7L] Shots fired
Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Re: [B7L] Oak Leaves
Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Re: [B7L] Introduction
[B7L] First Impressions: "Cygnus Alpha"
Re: [B7L] 'Beautiful' suffering
Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Re: [B7L] First Impressions: "Cygnus Alpha"
Re: [B7L] First Impressions: "Cygnus Alpha"
[B7L] Re: Soul Mates
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 19:38:14 -0700
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Avon & Gan
Message-ID: <38C07715.71D5@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> I thought Avon's patience with Gan's
> questions in the The Web indicated a degree of respect. Yes, he throws in a
> disparaging remark--"It's slow. You should appreciate that problem."--but I
> don't think he'd have bothered to discuss what he was doing if he didn't
> think Gan could understand.
I thought so. One of the ways Avon's like ORAC-- really. He doesn't
answer your questions if he doesn't think it's worth his time.
You know Gan is slow, a bit. Slow, steady, and in some ways that may
make him just as good a thinker as a fast but flighty one. Those of you
who read Small Gods know that slow doesn't necessarily equate to stupid.
In fact, Brutha and Gan are a LOT alike!
Another thing-- Avon may have casually pushed Gan out of his way to get
to some controls (personally, when *speed* is required, that's not a bad
thing); but Avon never was foolish enough to try invading Gan's personal
space as an intimidation tactic... something I've noticed him doing
with other men.
And we have to remember that one of Avon's
> hobbies is putting down his shipmates, all of his shipmates, so I don't take
> his slurs too seriously.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 22:22:09 -0700
From: "Ellynne G." <rilliara@juno.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Oak Leaves
Message-ID: <20000304.222217.-200515.0.Rilliara@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
All right, I've been a bit nasty (by my standards, anyhow). There are
LOTS of great things to be said both about Gan and dogs.
First, Gan may have needed his crewmates to survive, but he always saw
that as a two way street. In the end, he willingly died to save the
others.
And let's talk about Gan's respect for women. In Deliverance, please
note that Gan is the only guy present who tries to explain to what may be
the only woman on the planet that they're NOT gods. Vila complains that
Avon was elevated to godhood and not him. Avon simply enjoys it. Gan is
also the only one to talk to Meegat under the assumption she can
understand these things.
As for comparing Avon to Gan, please note which of the two managed to
avenge his girlfriend in a timely manner. Please, also note that we are
never given cause to doubt _Gan_ went after the _really_ guilty parties
from the start.
Gan obviously didn't have all the education the others did, but that was
hardly his fault. He also didn't have the emotional trauma (Federation
schools may be very scary places), not a bad trade off.
Then there's the recently suggested similarities between Gan and Avon.
Let's see, wasn't Gan's full name Gan Olaf (sorry, Neil, the
Sevencyclopedia is not handy and, if I'm wrong, I can't make the
following point, now, can I?)?
Remove the G and we have An. Take the O and F from Olaf. Vibrate the
old vocal cords when you say the F and, voila! it's a V! There's Avon.
Now, _stop_ vibrating the G and it's a K. Vibrate the L and it becomes an
R. A little slurring of the vowel, and--
Yep! Gan Olaf = Kerr Avon.
At last, we know what happened to that brother of Avon's (seen in the
mental attack being picked on by bullies at the beach from BEFORE he sent
away for the body building kit).
It kind of fits, doesn't it? The mixed respect and disrespect, mutual
drooling over the new tech toys one minute, treating him like an
inanimate object the next? Extremely nasty put downs followed up by
sacrificing his bolt hole to save Gan? It even goes with Avon's comment
about prison colonies. Isn't Gan the one we see adapting to his
environment there?
And no wonder Avon's a bit put out by Blake's behavior when Gan dies.
Hello! His big brother (of course, he's the big brother--protective but
with nothing to prove, never upset or intimidated by anything Avon does,
never competitive--what more do you want?) just bought the big one, and
_Blake's_ acting like he's the only one this really matters to!
OTOH, maybe Blake thought a hasty retreat mixed with a "You're welcome to
abandon me" message was very prosurvival under the circumstances.
One does wonder what Countdown would have been like with Big Brother Gan.
"Hey, Grant! You take on my kid brother, _you take on the whole
family_!"
Hmm, it even puts that "We only need the hand" comment in a new light.
The Brothers Avon may have had more in common than they let on....
Ellynne
"Cats and dogs, living together"
Ghostbusters
________________________________________________________________
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.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 23:31:27 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Blatant Oak Leaves-Not
Message-ID: <20000304073127.6941.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Kathryn wrote:
<Avon
Cally
Blake & Vila
would all be given the lifeboats first, by me, over the others.>
<grin> neat game. I'd have Avon *and* Blake (and not only 'cause I love
them, but at least partly because, going on his track record, Avon would
waste valuable time trying to think up an excellent reason why Blake going
first was in *his* own best interests anyway.) Then Vila. The rest could
probably draw lots, I don't mind.
Of course, one would have to knock Fearless Leader out cold to make him go
before the *entire* rest of them, but I can also see Avon doing that (Gan
and Cally, being Noble Souls, might even help him – 'tis a far, far better
thing, 'tis for the good of the rebellion, and all that…)
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 08:45:33 -0000
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Message-ID: <006101bf85b6$2c73ec80$ca8edec2@pre-installedco>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Kathryn said -
>Calling the attention-span thing and the short posts thing a "gen-X"
>characteristic is, IMHO, incorrect. For one thing, I believe *I'm*
>technically supposed to be a gen-X person (somebody told me that once),
>and I figure a lot of people on this list will be around this same
>age.
FWIW I think the 'technical' division between baby-boomers and
Generation-X-ers is birth before of after 1963 (the date coincidentally
immortalised by Philip Larkin). I think the real net-babies are even
something else, of which I forget the name. I've heard it called Generation
Y but I think that is a rubbish and unimaginative name.
> For another, and more pertinent point, the short-message posting
>pattern - didn't we establish that it's a personality type thing?
>Introverts (especially INT*s) tend to go for the long, thoughtful,
>analytical postings, and extroverts go for the short, low-content,
>yes-I-agree-with you postings.
That kind of leaves out two categories:
- the short pithy post
- the long rambling load of nonsense
I diagnose 'Introvism': "Those bloody extroverts coming round here,
rebuffing our arguments and kissing our women"
Alison
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 00:10:21 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Blatant Oak Leaves-Not
Message-ID: <000301bf85c2$052dcae0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Kathryn wrote:
> Avon
> Cally
> Blake & Vila
> would all be given the lifeboats first, by me, over the others.
But Gan is probably the only one who wouldn't trample you underfoot in the
rush for said lifeboats:)
But I'm with you and all the others who prefer Cally to Gan, for 10 very
good reasons, viz:
1. Erm, this one belongs on the Other List, actually.
2. Come to think of it, so does this one.
3. Hmm, there seems to be a definite pattern evolving here.
4-10: Excuse me while I go and lie down in a dark room for a while...
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 11:08:13 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Message-ID: <065901bf85d4$6accf080$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Kathryn said -
>
> >Calling the attention-span thing and the short posts thing a "gen-X"
> >characteristic is, IMHO, incorrect. For one thing, I believe *I'm*
> >technically supposed to be a gen-X person (somebody told me that once),
> >and I figure a lot of people on this list will be around this same
> >age.
>
> FWIW I think the 'technical' division between baby-boomers and
> Generation-X-ers is birth before of after 1963
Is that right?
> I think the real net-babies are even
> something else, of which I forget the name. I've heard it called
Generation
> Y but I think that is a rubbish and unimaginative name.
I can even tell you when that generation starts. It's people born from 1974
onwards. People who bought Nirvana and Placebo albums, wore things with
tassles on, and used the word 'lush' as a means of expressing of enthusiasm.
> I diagnose 'Introvism': "Those bloody extroverts coming round here,
> rebuffing our arguments and kissing our women"
Damn right.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 13:10:31 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "B7 List" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Blatant Oak Leaves-Not-Oh yes it is
Message-ID: <06cc01bf85db$069e8f90$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Andrew wrote:
> >9. Cally was a drug dealer. (OK stretching it a bit now)
Shh! You're giving away the secret of the moondisk farm!
Una
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 05:38:11 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Message-ID: <38C111C2.F7EA51CD@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Una McCormack wrote:
> > Kathryn said -
> >
> > >Calling the attention-span thing and the short posts thing a "gen-X"
> > >characteristic is, IMHO, incorrect. For one thing, I believe *I'm*
> > >technically supposed to be a gen-X person (somebody told me that once),
> > >and I figure a lot of people on this list will be around this same
> > >age.
> >
> > FWIW I think the 'technical' division between baby-boomers and
> > Generation-X-ers is birth before of after 1963
>
> Is that right?
I think that division has been somewhat fluid over the years. When I
was a kid, the end of the Boomers was supposed to be somewhere in
the mid-fifties; my sister (1947) was one and I wasn't. Then it shifted
to 1960; at that point I became a boomer, but my friends weren't,
that's how I remember it, and they weren't Gen-X, either; they used
to wonder what their generation was called. For a while, there was a
term 'boomlet' floating around, a second ripple, but I haven't heard
it in a while. Or they were called the 'Me' generation, the ones that
came to adulthood in the eighties, and Gen-X was supposed to be
the next batch. This is the first time I've ever heard a boomer
cutoff as late as 1963. Frankly, I think that's much too late. Boomers
are supposed to remember Howdy-Doody and feel nostalgic when
they watch Happy Days; I don't. I remember the Beatles and Vietnam
and and Flower Power and (yuk) disco. Not really the same world at all.
Maybe we're the Invisible Generation.
I think the One-list phenomenon *might* be a cross between youth and
culture. In the US, net access is becoming so cheap it's almost free,
there's no reason for a young netizen over here to realize that lots of
quoted text and upside-down quoting, etc., might not be appreciated by
everybody. Why would they know about the connect rates in other
countries or alternate e-mail clients if nobody tells them? And I've
seen faqs that say 'quote lots of text' for some lists. As to youth, yes;
I've seen lots of One-list posts like 'Hi. I'm Andi, I'm thirteen, I think
Blake's 7 is the best show ever and Avon is hot!'
Neil, please write us an essay.
Mistral
--
"Who do you serve? And who do you trust?"
--Galen, 'Crusade'
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 13:54:25 +0000
From: Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Cc: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Message-ID: <aq8VxHARWRw4EwIf@jajones.demon.co.uk>
In message <38C111C2.F7EA51CD@ptinet.net>, mistral@ptinet.net writes
> Why would they know about the connect rates in other
>countries or alternate e-mail clients if nobody tells them?
People do tell them, and they still don't get it...
--
Julia Jones
"Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!"
The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 13:58:18 +0000
From: Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] half an hour to go
Message-ID: <XamWdNA6ZRw4EwqL@jajones.demon.co.uk>
Radio Times says Cygnus Alpha, Ceefax thinks it's Time Squad. Either
way, less than half an hour to go at the time I post this. Get to your
sets...
--
Julia Jones
"Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!"
The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 08:00:41 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Blatant Oak Leaves-Not
Message-ID: <38C13328.EF0D9A1C@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Carol Mc wrote:
> > No, he's not stupid. He's intellectually slow, at
> > least as far as Avon's concerned (The Web),
>
> Which part of The Web do you mean? I thought Avon's patience with Gan's
> questions in the The Web indicated a degree of respect. Yes, he throws in a
> disparaging remark--"It's slow. You should appreciate that problem."--but I
> don't think he'd have bothered to discuss what he was doing if he didn't
> think Gan could understand. And we have to remember that one of Avon's
> hobbies is putting down his shipmates, all of his shipmates, so I don't take
> his slurs too seriously.
That's the bit. Yes, it's Avon's usual snippy remarks but IMO
even though just a habit, they are always carefully targeted at
actual or perceived weaknesses. Gan himself admits he's not
academically astute (Horizon). As to the explanation, it wasn't
a particularly technical one, and I think there's ample evidence
that Avon is a natural teacher--barring imminent danger, he'll
explain nearly anything he knows to anybody who's sincerely
interested (ex. Moloch).
For the rest, I'm largely in agreement with Sally.
> > Gan might be the character who most easily made Avon
> > question his self-perception
>
> I didn't see any indication that Gan prompted Avon to question his
> self-perception,
You're right. Brain got ahead of fingers; they were supposed
to type 'most easily could have made'. Something that could have
been explored if Gan had stayed.
Mistral
--
"Who do you serve? And who do you trust?"
--Galen, 'Crusade'
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 09:22:16 -0800
From: Pat Patera <patpatera@netzero.net>
To: B7 Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Shots fired
Message-ID: <38C14648.5154450A@netzero.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Andrew wrote:
Thanks, I was wondering when this was coming.
> From the Mary Ridge interview in B7 monthly no. 10, page 27:
> "The clue to what happened is on the soundtrack. The first shot fired was
> from Avon's gun.
ah ha! I *knew* that first one sounded different.
> The next three shots were from Federation guns - then
> the next two were Avon's again....
So that odd ray gun sound must have been a richochet - and not a Vogon?
Come to think of it, if this had been U.S. TV, the troopers could not
have killed any of them. On U.S. shows, none of the bad guys can hit the
broad side of a barn - much less a protagonist.
> It was always my intention to suggest to
> the viewers that Avon could well have survived...."
"... because a universe without Avon scarcely bears contemplating"
--Madame President
> I washed my kilt last night and now I can't do a fling with it.
<chortle snort>
Pat
(p.s. this post bounced back to me so I shall fling it again)
--
"Never give up. Never surrender."
-- Galaxy Quest
__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 11:08:16 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Message-ID: <000801bf8601$323fe240$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Kathryn wrote:
> Introverts (especially INT*s) tend to go for the long, thoughtful,
> analytical postings, and extroverts go for the short, low-content,
> yes-I-agree-with you postings.
I agree
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 11:30:37 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Oak Leaves
Message-ID: <000901bf8601$33434880$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ellynne wrote:
> Then there's the recently suggested similarities between Gan and Avon.
> Let's see, wasn't Gan's full name Gan Olaf (sorry, Neil, the
> Sevencyclopedia is not handy and, if I'm wrong, I can't make the
> following point, now, can I?)?
I'm afraid it was Olag Gan, so you're wrong and you can't make the following
point now, can you?
'Olag Gan' was once one of the answers in a B7 cryptic crossword I devised.
The clue was 'Big chap who doesn't fall behind on horseback (4,3)'. I was
quite pleased with that one - 'doesn't fall behind' = 0 lag, and Gan is
'nag' backwards (ie; horse back).
I sent the whole thing off to Horizon but they showed no interest in it.
And this was well before I fell foul of the wrath of the Great Gies.
Some of the others (ones I can remember):
"Second-rate bodies of water (there were several in 'Weapon') (6)"
"In this idyll a character returns (5)"
"Aliens - and a capital 'Sand' mixture! (11)"
"More than one of him and you might have a shaky flight (1,1)"
"I leave Israel, get a head start, and turn into a slave (6)"
"One drink proved fatal for this rebel (4)"
"Did Sula use him as an empty pencil? (3)"
Now the good news - I seem to have lost the darn thing:)
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 17:45:40 -0000
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "B7 List" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Message-ID: <002201bf8601$97ef60c0$ca8edec2@pre-installedco>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
mistral -
> This is the first time I've ever heard a boomer
>cutoff as late as 1963.
I suppose the convention arose because the (first) book 'Generation X' was
published in 1964, so it was like 'the future starts here'. In the eighties,
after Coupland's book, it was used to mean people aged late teens/twenties,
so that would be born in the sixties. I wouldn't call myself 'Generation X'
and I was born in 1961.
But, thinking about it, this is quite interesting. I'd say baby-boomers were
born in the home-making period after the war, while GenX'ers were the first
children to be born in a society where parents routinely got divorced (even
if one's own parents didn't). Hence the vulnerability/cynicism of the
children. That would probably result in an earlier cut-off in the US, where
divorce became common a lot earlier.
But young people nowadays are definitely not GenX - it's an eighties term,
like 'yuppie'.
Alison
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 18:06:51 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Message-ID: <004c01bf8604$78bce620$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Alison wrote
>I wouldn't call myself 'Generation X'
> and I was born in 1961.
I was born in '63. And I belong to the Blank Generation ("and I can take or
leave it each time, whooo-eee-oooooo")
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 17:52:11 -0000
From: "Ariana" <ariana@ndirect.co.uk>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Introduction
Message-ID: <00e401bf8619$692fade0$23ed07c3@ariana>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hello
Thank you, Julia and Penny, for welcoming me to the list...
From: Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk>
> A useful point at which to break the news to this list that I'm in the
> throes of doing the next volume of Tales from Space City - do not be
> surprised if you get wheedling emails about wanting to use something or
> other as a filler.
Sounds interesting. As a general rule, I don't have my work published in
fanzines, but as I currently don't have any Blake's 7 work anyway, that
point is moot. <g> However, once I have a few more episodes under my belt
and don't have to avoid spoilers, I might get around to purchasing some of
the zines. :)
Righto,
Ariana
http://www.alpha.ndirect.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 20:38:42 -0000
From: "Ariana" <ariana@ndirect.co.uk>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] First Impressions: "Cygnus Alpha"
Message-ID: <00ed01bf8619$a3d1c000$23ed07c3@ariana>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
So this is the very second episode I've watched in sequence so far, and it
was nice to be plunged back into the direct consequences of what happened
last week. Here are some miscellaneous impressions, all entirely MHO and
open to discussion, of course. :)
I could probably have done without Brian Blessed and his sect of Capuchin
nutters, and in particular their gratuitous female acolyte. The latter
served no practical purpose IMHO than to look pretty and snog Gan... neither
of which were particularly worthwhile pursuits, plotwise. If she had been
Vargas's daughter who betrayed her father and freed the prisoners, then
there would have been a point to her presence. OTOH, the episode would then
have been a rehash of the Space:1999 episode "The Metamorph", also starring
Brian Blessed as a madman with nefarious plans for Our Heroes. :)
The BBC presenter quipped about "wobbly walls" before the show, but these
were not in evidence in this episode. Instead, we had people trotting around
in front of blown-up photographs, and a lot of scrambling around the same
bit of a heap of gravel. That starfield they used for every space shot is
going to get old quick, too. The "early maniac" building looked OK in the
exterior shot, though I felt Blake was wandering around the ready-built set
for a Hammer Horror once he got inside. I'm wondering if we'll be visiting
that gravel pit again; it looks like an ideal Planet Hell location (to use
Star Trek terminology :).
Something which did strike me as slightly odd was the way the episode
carefully avoided showing us more than the command room and the teleport
room on the Liberator. This was noticeable in the bits where Jenna and Avon
kept leaving to explore, returning to *tell* each other what they had found.
A rule of "paper" writing is "show, don't tell" and those scenes definitely
contravened the recommendation. I wonder if it was to save time or money, or
if the effect was deliberate.
The strengths of the episode are those which I gather have made the strength
of the show itself: dialogue and characterisation. The three characters on
the Liberator, and Vila down on the planet, get a few chuckle-inducing
lines; the result both of a talented author and, IMHO, the British habit of
sharpening their wits on absolutely *anything*. Although serious American
sci-fi series will also have their share of witticisms, these are generally
confined to lower-rank or secondary characters (the resident Ferengi, for
instance), or to strictly *appropriate* moments. They don't just insult
their fellow crewmen for the sake of a good line. I've collected a few of my
favourite quotes from this episode lower down. :)
As far as the character relationships are concerned, it'll be interesting to
see how things develop. I'll leave aside the people on Cygnus Alpha and just
concentrate on the Liberator crew during this episode. For the moment, the
relationships between Avon, Jenna and Blake seem mostly to revolve around
the latter.
The rapport between Jenna and Blake seems pretty straightforward. She jumps
into his arms when they succeed in teleporting him back, and none of the
sharp dialogue in the episode is between them. Presumably, he respects her
as a pilot, she respects him as a leader. Her loyalty to him is visible in
the scene where Avon wants to take off with the loot. Whether or not she
seriously considers his offer, she's the one who successfully argues that
they should wait longer.
Avon is more complex... what a surprise. ;) My impression so far is that
he's on the Liberator for two reasons: it beat going to Cygnus Alpha
(obviously), and he's flattered by the trust Blake places in him. If you're
a bit of a tech-head and some prominent person, albeit a rebel without a
force, comes along and offers you an opportunity to show off, you'd probably
take it. Avon obviously has a pretty high opinion of himself; while the
rebellion means diddly-squat to him, I think showing off his technical
skills to the Fearless Leader is a bit of an ego-trip.
OTOH, that's nothing compared to the ego-trip he could buy with all that
jewellery! His keenness to scamper off is consistent with the crime that
stuck him on the London; it also reminds us that the character is very much
a loose cannon, someone Blake may need to keep an eye on.
I thought the interaction between Avon and Jenna was interesting. As I said
before, Jenna doesn't make any snide remarks about Blake, reserving those
for Avon. On the one hand, she neither likes him nor trusts him (and in her
situation, neither would I!). On the other, she gives him two
'opportunities' to misbehave, as it were. She leaves him alone in the
teleport room, and she tells him about the jewellery. Given her hostility
toward him, I'd have expected her to keep an eye on him for the full four
hours of Blake's absence. OTOH, perhaps she is merely following Blake's
lead; he didn't take Avon's threat seriously when they found the weapons,
and maybe Jenna decides that she's better off treating Avon normally rather
than antagonising him. Or maybe she did feel tempted by the jewellery and
knew that Avon would take the lead in arguing for them to use it. By then
allowing Blake an hour to contact them, she lets chance decide whether she's
going with Avon and the money, or staying with Blake and the rebellion.
Though I'm not sure the character is designed to be that scheming and/or
passive.
Completely weird thought: is the Liberator *creating* these things the
humans want, by any chance? Seems strange that it should sudden spout
weapons, chic 1970s fashions and plastic-bagfulls of costume jewellery that
just happen to be what Blake, Jenna and Avon have always wanted. Or am I
just inventing a red herring here? <vbg>
Anyway, enough disjointed rambling. Let's have some disjointed enumerations
instead...
Nitpicks and Preposterous Props:
================================
"I think he means it'll only let us have one gun each," says Blake, handing
*two* guns to Jenna.
Talking about the guns: the ones Blake and Co were exploring at the
beginning of the show have short lengths of telephone wire on the end of
them. The one Brian Blessed inspects and eventually fires has a longer lead
which is visibly wired to what is presumably a plug socket on the table.
Is it my imagination, or was Avon using those little sticky rings you put on
perforated binder paper to mark the controls on the teleport system?
Those were nifty tennis shoes Vargas was wearing under his monk's outfit. I
couldn't help noticing that Blake's shoes looked remarkably like something
one might pick up at Clark's too. I take it the costume department drew the
line at designing footwear. :)
Dialogue Gems:
==============
BLAKE: (taking one of the guns) Handgun?
AVON: It's a bit elaborate for a toothpick.
------
(As Jenna prepares to press another button after the high-speed acceleration
one)
AVON: (points to another control) Try that one. (He grabs the back of a
seat)
AVON: (as no obvious change occurs) Something of an anti-climax.
[[Not great dialogue, but an interesting snippet, as Avon also comes back to
the console and *smiles sheepishly*. I take it this isn't an expression
we'll see very often...]]
------
AVON: I handled the computer analysis for a research project into
matter transmission. It was based on a new alloy...
BLAKE: Aquatar.
AVON: That's right.
BLAKE: Yes, I worked on that project too.
AVON: Small world.
BLAKE: Large project.
JENNA: I didn't work on it.
[[If every episode has dialogue like that, I can see this column becoming a
regular feature!]]
------
(after Zen reprimands Avon for not addressing him properly)
JENNA: I don't think he likes you, somehow.
AVON: I think I may have to reprogram this machine.
JENNA: That still won't make you likable.
[[you tell him, Jenna ;) ]]
------
ARCO: What's that smell?
SELMAN: It's like something rotting.
VILA: Dinner probably
------
(When the prisonners reach the haunted house... er, Vargas's castle)
GAN: What do you think it is?
VILA: The architectural style is early Maniac.
ARCO: We need food and shelter.
VILA: But do we need them that badly?
[[I think I'm going to like Vila - sensible fellow]]
Miscellaneous:
==============
I hope Avon will soon get over that habit of tossing guns around. He throws
away the Liberator weapon when Blake and Jenna ignore his threat, and later,
when they all saunter out after meeting Zen, I'm pretty sure Avon tossed
away his Federation gun as well.
One nice touch was Blake nearly falling over when Avon and Jenna teleport
him onto the side of a heap of gravel. You never see that happen to a
Federation officer in That Other Federation. <g>
Enough from me...
Ariana
===============================================
"I don't think he likes you, somehow."
"I think I may have to reprogram this machine."
"That still won't make you likable."
- Jenna and Avon, "Cygnus Alpha"
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 20:06:34 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] 'Beautiful' suffering
Message-ID: <000a01bf8644$0f181d80$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Going back a bit, but I can't let it pass...
Mistral wrote:
> Neil Faulkner wrote:
>
> > Pat P (who proudly claims to be perverted) wrote:
> > > Avon is so superior in so many ways: smart, handsome, in control - he
> > > seems totally out of reach of we mere mortals.
> >
> > Surely that all depends on how you define 'superior'. You could cite
the
> > same three qualities (well, maybe not 'handsome') as evidence of him
being a
> > total jerk you wouldn't want to touch with gloves on.
>
> You prefer your heroes stupid and out of control? Odd. Or
> perhaps you're interpreting Pat's comments as 'smartass and
> controlling' whereas I'm reading 'intelligent and self-controlled.'
What I want to know is why you think the negative assessment of Avon happens
to be mine. This, I fear, is an unconscionable slur on my aspirations to
objectivity, and I demand that honour be satisfied. You have choice of
weapons and venue (though you'll have to cough up the bus fare if it's
anywhere west of Canterbury). I nominate Una as my second.
Actually, why don't you nominate Una as your second too? Then we can both
pretend not to make it, and hide behind a wall and watch her trying to beat
herself up. Should be a larf.
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 20:31:15 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Neil vs Gen X'ers
Message-ID: <000c01bf8644$11e9db20$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Susie wrote:
<quoting Pat>
>> Gen X hasn't yet developed the patience to wade through Neil's long,
literary thesis-quality
>> essays on intergalactic politics.
>
> I have to say Neil's essays are a big part of the appeal of this list!
And others have posted
> lengthy thoughts on the show which are also interesting.
You can spot the ones who never subscribed to AltaZine. They think my posts
are short. Once upon a time, not so long ago, three full pages of A4 was my
absolute minimum.
>The onelist strings it all
> together and there is way too much repetition in the attached texts.
Having finally joined it, mainly out of curiosity, I certainly noticed a
repetition of the word 'Bailey'. It seems like there's hordes of them.
Bit of a naff list, really, innit?
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 19:51:28 -0600
From: Lisa Williams <lcw@dallas.net>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] First Impressions: "Cygnus Alpha"
Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000304194902.00b21a00@mail.dallas.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Ariana wrote:
>I'm wondering if we'll be visiting that gravel pit again;
<snicker>
Do you think we should tell her, folks, or would that be a spoiler?
(Mind you, it'll become painfully apparent all too soon...)
- Lisa
--
_____________________________________________________________
Lisa Williams: lcw@dallas.net or lwilliams@raytheon.com
Lisa's Video Frame Capture Library: http://lcw.simplenet.com/
From Eroica With Love: http://eroica.simplenet.com/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 21:28:48 EST
From: Tigerm1019@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] First Impressions: "Cygnus Alpha"
Message-ID: <ee.21d29d3.25f32060@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 03/04/2000 7:54:01 PM Central Standard Time,
lcw@dallas.net writes:
> <snicker>
> Do you think we should tell her, folks, or would that be a spoiler?
Nah, let's let her find out on her own. ;-)
Welcome to the list, Ariana.
Tiger M
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2000 21:11:22 -0700
From: "Ellynne G." <rilliara@juno.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: Soul Mates
Message-ID: <20000305.211131.-194991.1.Rilliara@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
OK, I feel called upon to clarify my dislike of the term soulmates.
First, I have met people who I suppose would fit other people's
definition of the word
> I see it
> more of a pair of people (could be same sex, even siblings) who
> complement one
> another, the ying to the other's yang if you will. Like a best
> friend only more -
> someone who completely understands you.
All right, I can deal with that. And I should also admit to being a dyed
in the wool romantic. However, I've seen soulmate used by girls to
mean--
Crush=True Love=Soulmates= a whole variety of disasters. I've seen some
girls (this is girl as in certain attitude elements, not age) put up with
the most disgustingly selfish jerks on the face of the Earth because of
this. Others go the other way around and think the world has come end
and The Powers That Be are ranged against them because _they_ have a
crush on the guy and _he_ doesn't have one on them. By the way, stalking
is not a males only crime.
I've also seen it go the other way around where a couple had everything
going for them but didn't realize even the best relationships need work.
If they were soulmates, this sort of thing wasn't supposed to be
necessary.
One of the nice things about Avon is he knew relationships took work and
he wasn't expecting to find a perfect fit.
Unfortunately, he wasn't willing to take the risks involved in working on
one too often either (unless he could come up with good excuses for why
this was all really selfish and in his best interests).
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 #59
*************************************