From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #64
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume00/64
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 64
Today's Topics:
[B7L] Collector's Lot
Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Re: [B7L] Crossword clues
Re: [B7L] Re: Re: Episode Reviews
Re: [B7L] First Impressions: "Cygnus Alpha"
FW: [B7L] complexity of character
FW: [B7L] Crossword clues
[B7L] complexity of character
Re: [B7L] Episode Reviews
Re: [B7L] 'Beautiful' suffering
[B7L] complexity of character
Re: [B7L] Episode Reviews
Re: [B7L] Baby Boom and Meyers-Briggs
Re: [B7L] Re: Re: Episode Reviews
[B7L] Re: BB & MB
[B7L] Re: Pat is quoting Trish
Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Re: [B7L] Baby Boom and Meyers-Briggs
Re: [B7L] 'Beautiful' suffering
Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Re: [B7L] 'Beautiful' suffering
Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Re: [B7L] B7 dangerous to tired minds.....
[B7L] Ayn Rand
[B7L] Episode Reviews
[B7L] Episode Reviews
RE: [B7L] complexity of character
Re: [B7L] Crossword clues
Re: [B7L] Episode Reviews
Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Re: [B7L] Baby Boom and Meyers-Briggs
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 22:57:57 +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] Collector's Lot
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0308225757-d63Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
There's a regular programme on Channel 4 featuring collectors of various things
ranging from china to far more exotic items.
On Tues 4th April at 3.30, the programme will feature Andy Hopkinson's
collection of Blake's 7 costumes and props.
I was there when they recorded it and I can tell you that it's a really amazing
collection with costumes belonging to Avon, Blake, Servalan, Jenna, Travis,
Vila, Cally and other characters as well (people who were at Deliverance may
remember some of them from the costume exhibition there). Channel 4 filmed it
in style. The set is stunning and a tribute to many days hard work by Andy. (I
turned up to help on the last day and am now an expert in using a staple gun
whilst balanced on the top of a ladder...)
The presenter, far from taking the piss, got into the spirit of the thing and
actually did the programme wearing one of the costumes.
I'll have a few pictures up on the web site in a day or so, just to whet your
appetite.
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 - Fanzines for Blake's 7, B7 Filk songs,
pictures, news, Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth
Thomas, etc. (also non-Blake's 7 zines at http://www.nas.com/~lknight )
Redemption '01 23-25 Feb 2001 http://www.smof.com/redemption/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 20:40:55 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Message-ID: <38C72B56.BBF5E6DA@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Iain Coleman wrote:
> Serial fiction doesn't work like that. We must always be able to be
> surprised by the characters, must always be able to find new facets to
> their character. You don't do this by meticulously detailing them before
> the first script is written: you do it by starting with a spark, and
> adding fuel slowly over the course of many stories.
Another difference between stand-alone fiction and serial fiction
is that stand-alone generally revolves around the most important
event of the main character's life. Serial fiction can't afford to do
that every week, or there's nothing to do week two. The events
should be important but not pivotal; so it's more important in serial
fiction that we be intrigued by the characters, to keep us coming
back because we care not so much about what happens, as what
happens to *them*.
Mistral
--
"We all have something to hide, and we all have something to tell;
we all have a secret name; we all have a secret question--
one question that unlocks our heart."--Galen, 'Crusade'
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 23:43:14 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Crossword clues
Message-ID: <38C75611.AD44ED78@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Neil Faulkner wrote:
> Okay okay, since none of you seem even remotely interested in deciphering my
> cryyptic crossword clues,
On the contrary, I found myself wishing you hadn't lost the rest of it.
I'll admit I didn't get the DTs one. I think perhaps our cryptics rules
are ever-so-slightly different from yours. Try these, they're easy:
Turn right in story five to find a fanatic (6)
A rebel returns without magma (6)
A famous key figure in organized crime (5)
This defender might be confused in a hat (6)
Sell lost delta, remove university from ugly state and corrupt official (3,5)
Mistral
--
"We all have something to hide, and we all have something to tell;
we all have a secret name; we all have a secret question--
one question that unlocks our heart."--Galen, 'Crusade'
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 07:54:41 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Re: Episode Reviews
Message-ID: <008f01bf899d$3eedb5e0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Trish wrote:
> Neil wrote:
> >I'll ask you the same question you were asked about your mailing
> >list (which I haven't, by the way, yet seen you answer):
> >What's special about your new website, as opposed to all the
> >other B7 websites out there, that would make me, or anyone else
> >but you, *want* to write stuff especially for it?
That wasn't me, it was Meredith, though I broadly agree with her. And she's
dead right in pointing out that Michael has failed to point out why his
mailing list has any advantage over this one.
> Michael responded:
> I wasn't anticipating that anyone would feel that I am trying to better
> another
> web site.
Unfortunately the website in question does offer the impression that it is
touting itself as *the* definitive B7 site. I'm sure this is an unfortunate
by-product of youthful enthusiasm rather than blinkered arrogance, but
Michael does seem depressingly unaware of the bad impression he's creating
for himself. This is a shame because he's obviously keen on B7 and has
taken the time and trouble to think about it. I see no reason why he
shouldn't become an active and positive contributor to B7 fandom on the Net,
once he finds the right way to go about it.
> However, it completely blows my mind that someone such as yourself
> would be as rude and snide to insult something that was intended merely
to
> stimulate further exchange of opinions concerning Blake's 7.
I presume this retort of Michael's was aimed at Meredith, though it could
also apply to my own post on the subject.
> I apologize if in any way I have personally insulted you. However, when
you
> feel
> a need to criticize a newcomer in a way like this, the least dignity you
> might
> show would be to contact via a NON-PUBLIC correspondence.
I did consider contacting Michael personally, but on balance opted to do so
in a public forum so everyone else could see what I said and pounce on me if
I was being overly harsh. Michael doesn't need slagging off or even
dressing down, he just needs to be told where he's going wrong (or indeed
*if* he is going wrong). There is also some potential merit in opening up a
debate on what a B7 website should or should not be.
> and Trish throws her two cents in (as if Neil needs anyone to defend
him!)
"Needs", no, probably not, but at times like this I'm grateful to know there
are people on my side. Thanks. (And thanks to Lisa, too.)
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 07:57:29 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] First Impressions: "Cygnus Alpha"
Message-ID: <009001bf899d$408fcd20$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Pat P wrote:
> P.S. Andrew wrote: >Neil's too clever - let's kill him now.
> I agree! Before he alters the list logs to make himself look the
> smartest INTJ of the lot.
But I'm not INTJ.
As far as M*****B***** goes, I'm more CGFF (Couldn't Give a Flying
Fudgecake).
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 18:54:03 +1100
From: Andrew Williams <AWilliams@daikin.com.au>
To: "'blakes7@lysator.liu.se'" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: FW: [B7L] complexity of character
Message-ID: <4103E830BB67D211877400A0247B635E15ED92@daikin_aust.daikin.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain
Alison wrote:
>How much
>Hamlet fanfic is there out there anyway?
I've been meaning to put "Rontane & Bercol are Dead" down on paper for some
time now....
(It always comes back to time!)
Andrew.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 19:02:05 +1100
From: Andrew Williams <AWilliams@daikin.com.au>
To: "'blakes7@lysator.liu.se'" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: FW: [B7L] Crossword clues
Message-ID: <4103E830BB67D211877400A0247B635E15ED93@daikin_aust.daikin.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain
Neil wrote:
>> "I leave Israel, get a head start, and turn into a slave (6)"
>Utterly straightforward.
But then he wrote....
>Add H to get 'sraelh'.
Ah, yes, of course....The prosecution rests, m'lud.
>How about "Mechanical ruler of Horizon? (5)"
Robot.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 19:36:30 +1100
From: Andrew Williams <AWilliams@daikin.com.au>
To: "'blakes7@lysator.liu.se'" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] complexity of character
Message-ID: <4103E830BB67D211877400A0247B635E15ED95@daikin_aust.daikin.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain
Iain wrote:
>Serial fiction doesn't work like that. We must always be able to be
>surprised by the characters, must always be able to find new facets to
>their character.
Like the identical twin brother you never knew they had until episode 652.
Andrew.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 01:31:57 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Episode Reviews
Message-ID: <38C76F8C.2179C1DD@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Neil Faulkner wrote:
> I don't want to quash your enthusiasm for B7 or for fandom
But Neil, dear, you do it so well. ;-)
Michael, don't let Neil (or me, or anybody) discourage you from
pursuing your own style of fandom with great gusto. Cynics such
as some of us can be a little frightened by enthusiasm--it implies
that one actually cares. Cynicism is so much safer.
I do think that Neil is trying in his own way to encourage you to
excellence. It can be an eye-opener to new fans like you and me
to realize that many folk have a twenty-year head start on us and
a lot of the more obvious (logical) things have been done. You can't
let that stop you but you have to be informed by it. The thing that
will make a valuable contribution to fandom is your uniqueness.
What happens to B7 when it goes through Michael Bailey's head
and comes out the other side? Show us that.
Good luck,
Mistral
--
"We all have something to hide, and we all have something to tell;
we all have a secret name; we all have a secret question--
one question that unlocks our heart."--Galen, 'Crusade'
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 02:21:40 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] 'Beautiful' suffering
Message-ID: <38C77B33.BC511478@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Neil Faulkner wrote:
> > <sigh> Trust you to assume the worst of me.
>
> Now, whose fault could that be, I wonder...
Ooh, how about that obvious intellectual elitism that you like to
pretend you don't suffer from. Whereas, I always give you the
benefit of the doubt, though I know you don't deserve it ;-)
> > "In a very real sense, we all feed on death."--Mr. Spock, vegetarian
>
> Hurry up then, I'm starving:)
<g> It's a good thing I'm too stupid to realise you're not joking,
else I might be hurt.
It's really wonderful the way you give us these little insights
into what it might be like to have to live with Avon.
Misty
--
"Tact is just not saying what's true. I'll pass."--Cordelia Chase, BtVS
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 02:14:31 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] complexity of character
Message-ID: <20000309101431.76830.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Alison wrote:
<I was reading (alt fan B7? can't remember) somebody suggesting that as Star
Trek evolved the characters became more complex, and the ideas less.As the
franchise developed the characters gained more complexity, but alas many
episodes became more like a soap opera, concerned primarily with the
interaction between characters, with the SF content becoming more
incidental.>
Interesting idea, and has some merit, but some of the good ideas plots
*were* in the 4th series (they were better than 3rd, at least). As for the
characters, it's true to an extent, but OTOH the *most* complex characters
were IMO those introduced at the beginning (Avon, Blake and Vila,
especially) and later additions to the cast were less so (especially Dayna
and Soolin, both of whom who really never got much development, but also
Tarrant when compared to the earlier three. OTOOH, here's Gan.) So on a
one-by-one basis that's true, but not for the cast as a whole. And character
interaction definitely got less complex (IMHO*only*, I know, I know) in the
later series.
<There is almost a knee-jerk feeling (in me) that greater character
complexity must be good. But is it?>
YES!!! (How's *that* for knee-jerking?)
Oh all right, within reason. The *show* is not going to give us the depth of
complexity we might like, not without heaps more exposition and monologues
and getting inside the characters' heads etc (all of which would be rather
soporific.) What B7 gives us is *ambiguous* characterisation. And not always
deliberately - different writing, *bad* writing, plot glitches, the tension
from clashing views (e g the gap between PD's view of Avon and everyone
else's, etc etc ). In B7 we have to do a lot of the work ourselves (that's
where the fun is.)
And Ellynne wrote:
<I've always said Avon cared about the others - he'd just sooner surrender
to Servalan and have her kill him with a blunt weapon than _admit_ it to
anyone (himself included).>
Agreed. One of the joys of Avon-watching is how much creative thinking goes
into those self-serving reasons for Doing The Right Thing. Horizon and the
dither, Pressure Point and going with Blake. T one for "leave me, watch
yourself" in Hostage must have been a beauty.
<But how did he get that way? A single, traumatic incident? A string of
traumas? Or was it simply the result of being a certain kind of person
trying to adapt to the ruthless environment and ethics of the Federation? Or
all three?>
I'm convinced that he had a emotionally barren childhood - not necessarily
cruel, hard or painful, but loveless. Which is one reason why he reacts so
strongly and immediately (if not exactly positively - Spacefall) to Blake's
warm, rich, tempestuous personality.
<So, taken someways, there's an incredible implication of depth. Taken other
ways, there isn't.>
But us character junkies aren't going to admit the latte for a moment, are
we?
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 03:20:20 -0700
From: Penny Dreadful <pennydreadful@powersurfr.com>
To: "Blake's 7 Mailing List" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Episode Reviews
Message-Id: <4.1.20000309014157.0094e340@mail.powersurfr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 03:58 PM 07/03/00 -0500, Michael Bailey wrote:
>I have been trying to work up a page for episode reviews I wanted some
>professional opinions (yours), so I was hoping if some of you could help me by
>adding one.
<snip>
>I think it would be so interresting and awesome because of all of
>the many different opinions.
I think what you should do is try and solicit at least two reviews for each
episode from members of at least two of Una's B7 Fan Categories(tm). So it
would be, like,
---
"Siskel": Today we are reviewing "Doomorama", the [*cough*]th episode
[*cough*]. Well let me just say I really liked "Doomorama". It had an
intriguing premise and a well-paced plot; moreover the characters were
believable, the dialogue was witty, and the philosophical implications were
profound.
"Ebert": I disliked "Doomorama", because Avon's costume made him look like
a big fat overbaked ham.
"Pauline Kael": I *loved* this episode -- despite the fact that the Deadly
Alien Menace was quite obviously an old sweatsock with buttons for eyes,
and moreover the budget apparently only extended to one button so it always
had to attack from the left side of the screen -- because the way Blake
looked over his shoulder at Avon in that scene in the quarry makes it
*obvious* that [continued (and how!) on Other List].
"Rex Reed": Well, Pauline, I would *like* to like "Doomorama", but I'm
afraid I'll have to give it an F-minus for the reason that the Liberator's
fuel-consumption rate as given here (27 spatials to the megagallon) clearly
contradicts the rate of six time-distort units to the gigalitre which was
explicitly stated in the episode "Angstville". Of course Avon's big fat
overbaked ham costume didn't help either.
"Penny Dreadful": Brian Croucher's portrayal of Space Commander Travis in
"Doomorama" was both menacing and poignant. He exuded a magnetic presence
that this reviewer can only describe as "magnetic" as he strutted about
that abandoned gasworks in that extraordinarily tight--
"Pauline Kael": Give me a break, "Penny" -- Travis wasn't even *in*
"Doomorama".
"Penny Dreadful": Maybe not the "Doomorama" *you* remember...
---
Now come on, admit it, wouldn't that be...original?...hmm, I would have
thought so, but then why does this dialogue seem so eerily familiar? [Penny
scratches head] Did I subconsciously crib it from Shakespeare? On the
whole, doubtful. No, I think I must have read it somewhere on the internet.
Think, damn you, think! Oh yes...[a lightbulb appears over Penny's
head]...I remember now...it must have been the ENTIRE LYSATOR LIST ARCHIVE,
RIGHT BACK TO NINETEEN-NINETY-FREAKING-TWO!
"God": The thing that hath been, it is that that which shall be; and that
which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under
the sun.
"Penny Dreadful": Ah, shaddup.
--
For A Dread Time, Call Penny:
http://members.tripod.com/~Penny_Dreadful/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 11:14:52 +0000 (GMT)
From: Iain Coleman <ijc@bsfiles.nerc-bas.ac.uk>
To: B7 Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Baby Boom and Meyers-Briggs
Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.96.1000309111153.2619B-100000@bsauasc>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Alison Page wrote:
> On the contrary I would say the 'Ayn Rand' outlook is exclusively espoused
> by pampered pussycats who have never known a day's struggle in their lives.
> Only someone who is hugely protected from the harsh realities of life would
> think they could survive on their own gifts, without relying on the
> forbearance of the rest of humanity.
Now now, Alison, don't mince words.
>
> 'In the war of all against all the life of man is poor nasty, brutish and
> short'.
An excellent and venerable quotation, which has the advantages over Rand's
output of being (a) short and (b) correct.
I suggest that any further discussion of this silly Randite nonsense takes
place either on the spin list or (preferably) not at all.
Iain
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 10:57:38 -0500
From: Meredith Dixon <dixonm@pobox.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Re: Episode Reviews
Message-ID: <hpffcsoko77crt6g1c0jeobp5l3gckt11m@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I said (and this is *all* I said):
>>I'll ask you the same question you were asked about your mailing
>>list (which I haven't, by the way, yet seen you answer):
>>What's special about your new website, as opposed to all the
>>other B7 websites out there, that would make me, or anyone else
>>but you, *want* to write stuff especially for it?
and, in response, Michael Bailey wrote:
>I apologize if in any way I have personally insulted you. However, when you feel
>a need to criticize a newcomer in a way like this, the least dignity you might
>show would be to contact via a NON-PUBLIC correspondence.
Why? Your post, to which I was responding, was made to the list.
Besides, then from your reaction everyone would be thinking that
I had said something Much Worse. I'll keep it public, thanks.
>I wasn't anticipating that anyone would feel that I am trying to better another
>web site. However, it completely blows my mind that someone such as yourself
>would be as rude and snide to insult something that was intended merely to
>stimulate further exchange of opinions concerning Blake's 7.
Actually, in my response to you, I was doing my best (and it was
something of a challenge) to give constructive criticism. You
said, "Write for my website?" I said, "Why should I?" Last time
I checked, that wasn't either rude, snide or an insult.
Since it looks as though you're going to insist on being insulted
regardless of what I say, let me take the opportunity to be a
little blunter.
You seem to be trying to create new resources that you can be in
charge of -- a new mailing list where *you* can be listowner, a
new website that's *yours*. That leaves people wondering --
what's different about your B7 mailing list (except that you are
its listowner)? What's different about your website (except that
you are its maintainer)? This is especially true since you're
asking others to contribute content to your website. If you have
something new to create, a new perspective to bring to B7, that's
great. But to create something new you need to know what's
already been done, and you don't seem to know that.
You came charging into Calle's B7 list and you started trying to
moderate the discussion, with comments like "Keep those ideas
flowing!" when people were actually rehashing for your benefit
ideas which have been discussed here time and again. I'm not
Calle, so if he's not upset about that I guess I'm not. But it
was annoying.
Then you created a *second* B7 list on Onelist -- either you
didn't bother to check for the existence of Kristin's list, or
you didn't care. Then you tried to pretend you weren't that
list's listowner in order to get us to come to it, which was
not the most clueful thing you could have done. Didn't you know
that we could check your list's creation date, and its archives?
Then you created a website -- not a website with content, but a
website with promises of future content, something which has
always irritated me. And you came here and asked *us* to
provide content for *your* website.
If you want to make a B7 website, great! Make your own website.
Check to see what's already out there (to avoid needless
duplication). Figure out what you can add to what's already
being done. I'm glad you like B7. I'm glad you want to
devote time and energy to it. I like the show myself. :) But
I'm suspicious of this eagerness to be in charge of things that
you seem to have; I don't like powerseekers. And at the moment
it seems to me as though you're charging around reinventing the
wheel.
--
Meredith Dixon <dixonm@pobox.com>
Check out *Raven Days*, for victims and survivors of bullying.
And for those who want to help.
http://www.pobox.com/~dixonm/raven.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 09:47:47 -0800
From: Susie Wright <piscescat@home.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: BB & MB
Message-ID: <38C7E3C3.970C45A8@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In Pat Patera's message "Baby Boom and Meyers-Briggs" she's supposedly
quoting me but I didn't write what she's quoting...
I need to look back a couple of digests to find the real source (I
haven't looked at them fully yet...)
Susie
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 09:57:46 -0800
From: Susie Wright <piscescat@home.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: Pat is quoting Trish
Message-ID: <38C7E61A.C3A5AD04@home.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I found it... it's from the #61 digest and Pat is quoting Trish.
The M-B stuff is not all that interesting to me since it's not very
precise. I took too many psychology classes in high school and
college. Everyone has a theory and it seems you can mix and match your
way through life. I kinda like Jung myself....
Anyway... I have a date, time to run. I'm doing three or four things
right now and I can't breathe with this stupid lingering sinus bs. Oh,
and I very much like the idea of Avon without his trousers.... yum!
Susie
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 19:37:53 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Message-ID: <00be01bf89fe$f86b8e00$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Neil wrote:
> In other words, the strength of B7's appeal ultimately resides
> in its imperfection.
>
> So the series *is* crap, and for that we ought to be eternally thankful.
Yes, yes, yes!
Una
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 19:38:17 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "B7 Lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Baby Boom and Meyers-Briggs
Message-ID: <01e101bf8a00$03a48550$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Alison wrote:
> '...nasty, brutish and
> short'.
The three words which best describe me.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 19:38:42 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] 'Beautiful' suffering
Message-ID: <01e901bf8a00$0d40b200$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Karen:
> <On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, Neil Faulkner wrote:
> Of course, Una could send Iain along in her place, in which case my last
memory would be of a ginormous wet scaley thing swinging down from out of
the clouds.>
>
> No scales. Trust me, eels are the thing you want for a real fish battle.
Good weight and a nice swing.
>
> <Assuming I wear my kilt, of course.
>
> Iain>
>
> Will there be pictures of this battle? <g>
Only on the other list.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 19:38:45 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Message-ID: <01ea01bf8a00$0d933ed0$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Andrew wrote:
> Iain wrote:
>
> >Serial fiction doesn't work like that. We must always be able to be
> >surprised by the characters, must always be able to find new facets to
> >their character.
>
> Like the identical twin brother you never knew they had until episode 652.
BTW, Neil, I've been meaning to tell you - I'm your identical twin brother.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 19:38:50 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Message-ID: <01eb01bf8a00$0e5e7e10$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Alison wrote:
>
> >How much
> >Hamlet fanfic is there out there anyway?
Rob's site compares and contrasts B7 and 'Hamlet':
http://www.amsta.leeds.ac.uk/~rob/Blakes/index.html
Andrew:
> I've been meaning to put "Rontane & Bercol are Dead" down on paper for
some
> time now....
Inspired!
Una
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 16:46:53 -0500
From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com>
To: "INTERNET:blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Message-ID: <200003091647_MC2-9C7C-9F6B@compuserve.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Alison wrote:
>Una and I had some kind of discussion a while
>back about R&G being rather reminiscent of Avon
> and Vila, but I can't remember which was which now.
More to the point, could they?
>I think this is the same as (Harriet I hope you don't
>mind me taking your name in vain)
Isn't that Dorothy L. Sayers?
>what Harriet calls the 'Platonic version' of Blakes 7.
No, that's fine, good for my ego to have my ancient theories mentioned once
in a while.
Harriet
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 08:51:37 EST
From: "J MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] 'Beautiful' suffering
Message-ID: <20000309215137.23391.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
> > <Assuming I wear my kilt, of course.
> > Iain>
> > Will there be pictures of this battle? <g>
>Only on the other list.
I protest <stamps foot>
Regards
Joanne
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 08:59:55 EST
From: "J MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Message-ID: <20000309215955.82189.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com>
> >I think this is the same as (Harriet I hope you don't
> >mind me taking your name in vain)
>Isn't that Dorothy L. Sayers?
<applause>
Wimsey=Avon, but only because of the nose. And the aristocratic behaviour.
And the hating things to remain unexplained. No leather, alas. Or not that I
can remember anyway. That'll disappoint some people.
Regards
Joanne
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 21:34:40 +0000
From: Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Cc: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] B7 dangerous to tired minds.....
Message-ID: <qq2ZRRAwjBy4Ew+4@jajones.demon.co.uk>
In message <e.162d814.25f7fffc@aol.com>, KKrause658@aol.com writes
>I tell you Blake's 7 is dangerous with a zonked mind....
This list is probably not the place to repeat the thoughts that went
through my mind one day when writing out sample bag labels including the
words "top" and "bottom"...
--
Julia Jones
"Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!"
The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 13:32:46 -0800
From: Pat Patera <patpatera@netzero.net>
To: B7 Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Ayn Rand
Message-ID: <38C8187E.E8081D8F@netzero.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
(This thread should move to the spin list if it continues)
Alison wrote:
>On the contrary I would say the 'Ayn Rand' outlook is exclusively espoused
>by pampered pussycats who have never known a day's struggle in their lives.
Do you mean the outlook espoused in the novels or by people who read the
books?
The book characters tend to be hard workers - definitly not lay-abouts.
True, they are educated: architects and building contractors come to
mind - but they work long hours.
They become angry when others (lazy layabouts) try to take what they
built.
>Only someone who is hugely protected from the harsh realities of life would
>think they could survive on their own gifts, without relying on the
>forbearance of the rest of humanity.
Do you mean forbearance (live and let live) or socialism (others forced
to give) or charity (the strong give to the weak of their own free
will).
The fable of The Ant and The Grasshopper is often mis-interpreted in
today's socialist state. In the days of The Republic it was taught to
impress children with the truth that if they did not work, they would
starve come winter (old age). But today it is used to justify taking
half of the life savings of The (industrious/rich) Ant and giving it to
The (lazy/poor) Grasshopper.
Like Vila said: "WORK???!!! ... Stealing's quicker."
Pat P the Libertarian
__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 13:59:53 -0800
From: Pat Patera <patpatera@netzero.net>
To: B7 Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Episode Reviews
Message-ID: <38C81ED9.7687B1BF@netzero.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lisa wrote:
>I didn't see anything rude or insulting about Neil's message. He was simply
>making a very practical and reasonable suggestion
I agree. What we have here is a failure to communicate.
Neil wrote:
>I'll ask you the same question you were asked about your mailing
>list (which I haven't, by the way, yet seen you answer):
The ensuing exchange might even answer my original question of Michael,
which was: Why start another B7 mail list? What is this one lacking?
Since we determined the preponderance of one liner "me, too!" type
responses on the OneList B7, it was pointed out that extraverts (who
care about sharing relationships) tend to short, friendly posts while
introverts (who care about sharing ideas) tend to long, logical essays.
We tend not to clutter up the diamond beauty of our reasoning brilliance
with polite pleasantries. Rather we express: 'just the facts, m'am'. But
people who are not logic based get their feelings hurt by 'blunt fact /
truth'. They want debates no more challenging (sic) than: me, too!
So when Neil wrote:
>What's special about your new website, as opposed to all the
>other B7 websites out there, that would make me, or anyone else
>but you, *want* to write stuff especially for it?
and
>...is this because you are unaware of a thing called the Sevencyclopaedia,
>or do you think you can go one better?)
Michael replied:
>I wasn't anticipating that anyone would feel that I am trying to better another
>web site. However, it completely blows my mind that someone such as yourself
>would be as rude and snide to insult something that was intended merely to
>stimulate further exchange of opinions concerning Blake's 7.
In extravert/sociable fashion, this reply did not address any of the
factual questions posed, i.e. "What's different?" and "Why not write it
yourself? Why ask others to write it for you? Look at the *words*: no
personal attacks are stated or even implied.
"Go one better" meant: "Provide more information" not "win a boxing
match" This was a question, not a challenge.
Michael wrote:
>the least dignity you might show would be to contact via a NON-PUBLIC correspondence.
Any public post on this lyst deserves a public reply. Otherwise, it's
just shadow-boxing by yourself in the hall closet.
Trish wrote:
>It's wonderful to have more B7 websites, but there are some excellent ones
>already there (Neil names them) and it is wasteful to simply duplicate.
Since 'no electrons were harmed in the production of this page' what's
the harm; waste of what?
People who are learning to code HTML have to practice on something. The
lessons are more fun when you are building something you enjoy messing
about with. My B7 website can't hold a candle to the super ones, but I
am proud of it anyway, cuz *I* built it myself. :-D
Pat P
http://www.geocities.com/area51/1707
--
"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: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 13:48:44 -0800
From: Pat Patera <patpatera@netzero.net>
To: B7 Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Episode Reviews
Message-ID: <38C81C3C.4284CF6A@netzero.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Neil wrote:
>So the series *is* crap, ...
As priestess (in the place of Lindsey who ascended to a higher plane) at
the Temple of the Golden Goddess Soolin, I hold myself extremely and
personally insulted by your rude public criticism in throwing down the
carp - er, crap.
I challenge you to a duel to the depths: *Choose your fish!*
>Joanne wrote:
><smile> It's simply another example of how horribly misunderstood Neil is,
>right, Una? Maybe he does need the biggest fish after all.
But I - *I* get the biggest fish!!! ':-O
PatP
P.S. Iain, keep your pants on - you're next.
--
"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: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 23:49:43 +0100
From: Jacqueline Thijsen <jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl>
To: b7 <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] complexity of character
Message-ID: <39DCDDFD014ED21185C300104BB3F99FD0F6E6@NL-ARN-MAIL01>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Una wrote:
>
> Neil wrote:
>
>
> > In other words, the strength of B7's appeal ultimately resides
> > in its imperfection.
> >
> > So the series *is* crap, and for that we ought to be
> eternally thankful.
>
> Yes, yes, yes!
<groan> Look what you've done now, Neil. She's on her soapbox about Animals
again.
Jacqueline
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 20:38:07 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Crossword clues
Message-ID: <001301bf8a61$39507c20$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Andrew wrote:
> >> "I leave Israel, get a head start, and turn into a slave (6)"
>
> >Utterly straightforward.
>
> But then [Neil] wrote....
>
> >Add H to get 'sraelh'.
>
> Ah, yes, of course....The prosecution rests, m'lud.
'Head start' for 'H' is absolutely bog-standard Telegraph cryptic, along
with references to Gateshead (for 'G'), 'pound' for 'L', 'point(s)' for N,
E, S and/or W, and 'note(s)' for anything between A and G.
Hence also
'Land quietly before going further east (7)', which is Prussia (P-Russia).
It follows that 'loud' in a clue indicates 'F'.
'More than 50 perform in the pool (4)', which is Lido (LI = 51, more than
fifty)
'Question following rebels in the Middle East (4)' which is Iraq (IRA - Q)
Actually, they're all Daily Mail, but the principles remain the same.
> >How about "Mechanical ruler of Horizon? (5)"
>
> Robot.
Of course!
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 20:45:35 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Episode Reviews
Message-ID: <001401bf8a61$3acae720$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Alas, poor Misty, for 'twas she who wrote:
> Michael, don't let Neil (or me, or anybody) discourage you from
> pursuing your own style of fandom with great gusto. Cynics such
> as some of us can be a little frightened by enthusiasm--it implies
> that one actually cares. Cynicism is so much safer.
A statement that rests on two assumptions:
(a) I am somehow frightened of Michael.
(b) I am a cynic.
Sadly, neither is true.
What *is* true, OTOH, is that Michael is doing very much the same thing I
did when I first came across fandom about ten years ago, making a very loud
noise and getting right up people's noses. (Actually I can still do both.)
The main differences are that I had over ten years of being a closet fan
behind me when I first discovered fandom, whilst Michael seems to be
relaatively new to the series, and that I had something (a lot, even, in
fact too much) to say, whilst Michael has next to nothing. The sheer
inanity of his questions and the vacuous brevity of his statements almost
beggar belief. I see someone who has yet to articulate to himself, let
alone others, the depth and nature of his interest in B7, so setting up
mailing lists and websites is a tad premature on his part.
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 07:16:58 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] complexity of character
Message-ID: <001501bf8a61$3d1dfee0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
'Misty' wrote:
> Another difference between stand-alone fiction and serial fiction
> is that stand-alone generally revolves around the most important
> event of the main character's life. Serial fiction can't afford to do
> that every week, or there's nothing to do week two. The events
> should be important but not pivotal; so it's more important in serial
> fiction that we be intrigued by the characters, to keep us coming
> back because we care not so much about what happens, as what
> happens to *them*.
This might be true from a character-centric perspective, but adventure
serials aren't
really character-centric. In an episodic drama (like a SF or police series,
as opposed to a soap), and especially one with a number of scriptwriters,
the primary function of the characters is to provide continuity from one
episode to the next. So what happens in the episode is very important, but
what happens *to the characters* is generally peripheral (unless it's really
drastic, like one of them gets killed off).
Even in an episode like 'Rumours', the (writer's) focus is not on "What
happens to Avon", but simply "What happens", because this is not an episode
in Avon's Life Story, but a chunk of futuristic action drama. Avon is
merely the means by which the drama is enabled. In other words, the writer
thinks: "I need a plot. What can I get from this or that character?",
rather than (as in a soap), "I have these characters, what can I do with
them?"
It's the *viewers* who think in that latter mode. It is they who watch
'Rumours' and transfer the emphasis to Avon, and generally set about
creating the 'Big Icture' from numerous little scenes in disparate episodes
(often by very different writers)
to each other. This is the primary theme of Henry Jenkins' book (Textual
Poachers, and recommended reading) - that viewers appropriate (poach) a
series and turn it into something it was never intended to be.
Of course, it's not that simple. The interactions between writers, cast and
(to a lesser extent) audience are complex. The writers' primary aim is to
produce 50 minutes of television drama, not 50 minutes of character
analysis. But they have the given characters, who must remain reasonably
(but not absolutely) consistent from one episode to the next, and those
characters can function as cues for plot possibilities. The actors' primary
aim is to deliver their lines, but if they have any professional integrity
(not all do, of course) then they will try to develop their characters and
maintain their consistency. And as a series develops over time, so the
characters take more definite shape, and can generate more feedback to the
writers.
I think this reached its apogee in the 3rd Season, where the characters were
providing the plots more than in the first two - City, Children, Rumours,
Deathwatch, Terminal. (Sarcophagus was subtly different in that the
characters provided the platform for the action, rather than acting as a
springboard for it.) So it's strange that this season should get slated for
being directionless when if anything it comes closer to the supposed viewer
ideal. This supports my Grand Theory that the appeal of a series like B7
does not lie in it giving the viewers what they want, but in the tension
between what they want and what they actually get.
(And while I'm not overly hooked on the characters the way some people are,
I do care about background - which can be regarded as a kind of character in
itself - and that tension definitely underlies much of my interest in B7.)
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 07:35:29 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Baby Boom and Meyers-Briggs
Message-ID: <008401bf8a66$e2e63c20$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Una wrote:
> > '...nasty, brutish and
> > short'.
>
> The three words which best describe me.
More precisely, three of the words that best describe you.
>BTW, Neil, I've been meaning to tell you - I'm your identical twin brother.
That would explain a lot.
Neil
"I am not a man, I am a free number."
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #64
*************************************