From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V98 #38 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/volume98/38 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 98 : Issue 38 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] Manipulation [B7L] B7 Myers-Briggs stuff on web Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers [B7L] Forbidden Planet [B7L] Robert Anson Heinlein Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers Re: Re[2]: [B7L] Doc Smith Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers Re: [B7L] The Web 1/2 Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers [B7L] Actors Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers Re: [B7L] Re: Blake's 7 & Myers-Briggs Re: [B7L] Doc Smith Re: [B7L] Vila as a god [B7L] Avon/Vila v Paul/Michael Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers Re: [B7L] Forbidden Planet Re: [B7L] Avon/Vila v Paul/Michael Re: [B7L] Robert Anson Heinlein Re: [B7L] Doc Smith Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers [B7L] Queen - The Eye [B7L] Re: Blake's 7 & Myers-Briggs ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 09:35:55 -0500 (EST) From: NWOutsider To: "Blake's 7 list" Subject: Re: [B7L] Manipulation Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, Ovina Maria Feldman wrote: > It's interesting about Avon saying, "Don't try to manipulate me, Blake!" > This is the kind of line that can have many readings. I took it > (especially after I had seen several episodes of B7 and was then able to > go back and re-watch this one) as "Don't (YOU BLAKE) try to manipulate > me (I'M SO MUCH BETTER AT IT)." LOL! I love it! 8-) > Who was more manipulative is open to > debate. Definitely. > Blake managed to convince or cajole everyone, including Avon, > into doing what he wanted regardless of dissenting opinions. One of my favorite interpretations, although I can't think where I read it, is that Blake only manipulates Avon because he doesn't have to manipulate the others--they share his goals. I'm also very fond of the idea that Blake, knowing as everyone must, that Avon has this paranoia occasioanlly yanks his chain just for because it's fun to tease him. 8-) Sue sclerc@bgnet.bgsu.edu http://www.bgsu.edu/~sclerc/Blakes7.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 09:41:19 -0500 (EST) From: NWOutsider To: "Blake's 7 list" Subject: [B7L] B7 Myers-Briggs stuff on web Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I've gathered a lot of the posts in the Myers-Briggs thread into a web page (with the permission of the posters) and I've been trying to update it daily. It isn't linked to any of the top pages yet (the thread's still going on) but the file is at http://www.bgsu.edu/~sclerc/mbb7.html if anyone wants to have a look. Sue sclerc@bgnet.bgsu.edu http://www.bgsu.edu/~sclerc/Blakes7.html "And so you see, Simon and Simon were not brothers in real life, only on television." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 14:56:17 +0000 From: Andy Smith To: B7 Subject: Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers Message-ID: <34DC7612.F324EF9E@dircon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fran Myers wrote: > Any movie that was faithful to a Heinlien book would look like a send > up. Heinlein wrote some excellent short stories, but his novels were > immature, sexist trash. They were sent up once under the a title > something like "earth virgins meet the slime monsters." > > He was one of the earlier SF writers during the popular period of SF, > but his stories were rather "Biggles in Space", about the standard of > fifties SF movies. I could never understand why he was regarded as a > serious SF writer. I think that's harsh, the female character in the book, took some very non-sexist decisions,and he did state that only women could become pilots because of their superior reflexes. Starship troopers is a very philosophical book, where the action is almost non-existant and happens in the background. I am not suprised that the film is the opposite, that's why I didn't bother trying to see it. (I saved my money to go and see 'Guards! Guards!'. Paul Darrow AND Terry Pratchett? Take me now Lord, it can't get much better than this!) Andy ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 14:58:15 +0000 From: Andy Smith To: B7 Subject: [B7L] Forbidden Planet Message-ID: <34DC7688.974F8533@dircon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My brother tells me that Jaqueline Pierce is signing copies of a book on 28th February at Forbidden Planet in London. Can anybody confirm this? I have no idea which book it is. This information is shared on the strict understanding that I get to be FIRST IN THE QUEUE!!!! Andy ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 07:10:27 -0800 From: "Adam L. Fuller" To: blake7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Robert Anson Heinlein Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980207071025.006931d0@POPD.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Fran Myers says: >Any movie that was faithful to a Heinlien book would look like a send >up. Heinlein wrote some excellent short stories, but his novels were >immature, sexist trash. They were sent up once under the a title >something like "earth virgins meet the slime monsters." Actually, I know some very staunch feminists who really love Heinlein's novels. They say that Heinlein, espeically in books like "I Will Fear No Evil" really understand women and what they desire and their struggle for independence. Now I'm not going to comment on whether that is true or not, I'm just saying that some feminists don't agree that he was sexist. Also, not ALL of Heinlein's books have themes like that. It's actually his later work, Fran, like "Time Enough For Love," and "To Sail Beyond the Sunset" that begin to explore it.You're not going to tell me that "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" or "Rocket Ship Galileo" are sexist novels. As for "Starship Troopers," I am a hardcare Heinlein fan too, and I strongly disagree with most fan's opinions of that movie. I think it was great! No, it didn't follow the book very well or get into the real substance of what Heinlein wrote (and then got into trouble for with Eugene McCarthy). But still, I'm willing to say that if Robert Anson Heinlein were around today, he would approve of the movie that they did. Of course, he would have really hated "Puppet Masters." But still, I think he would have really liked "Starship Troopers." -Adam L. Fuller ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 14:54:18 +0000 From: Russ Massey To: Calle Dybedahl Cc: B7 list Subject: Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers Message-ID: In message , Calle Dybedahl writes >Ann Reckner writes: > >> From this I got the impression that the filmmaker was quite faithful >> to Heinlein's book. > >I thought it was, actually. It was less subtle, but I think that's >mainly because Heinlein had a rather higher opinion about his >audience's intelligence than Verhoeven had. > I was surprised how closely Verhoevan followed the plot line of the novel. All the major characters were there (although some were squeezed together into a single person, and one was flipped to female) and all the major incidents. >Of course, if one thinks that Heinlein's message was "The military is >way cool!", then it would look like a sendup, I guess. Those who think >so are urged to (re-)read "Stranger In a Strange Land", keeping in >mind that he wrote "Starship Troopers" at the same time as he wrote >that one. For a far more in-depth analysis than is appropriate for >this list, see Alexei Panshin's "Heinlein In Dimension". Heinlein's message was that war is capable of bringing out man's finest qualities. The film completely subverts the book by saying that war brutalises everyone it touches. Heinlein would not have approved at all IMO. -- Russ Massey ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 16:30:43 -0000 From: "Dangermouse" To: "Iain Coleman" , Subject: Re: Re[2]: [B7L] Doc Smith Message-Id: <199802071641.QAA05652@gnasher.sol.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > You can see how this would cause some difficulty. I saw various exchanges where > people just point-blank refused to acknowledge that the movie was supposed to > be funny. To be honest I'm not certain it *was* supposed to be funny. But since it was funny, who cares? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 16:35:04 -0000 From: "Dangermouse" To: "Calle Dybedahl" , "B7 list" Subject: Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers Message-Id: <199802071641.QAA05655@gnasher.sol.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- > From: Calle Dybedahl > Of course, if one thinks that Heinlein's message was "The military is > way cool!", then it would look like a sendup, I guess. Actually I thought of it more as a send up of other modern SF - i.e. the idea that clean-cut American kids are kicking ass on every planet as the galaxy's police force. For showing that the Trek Federation and all of its ilk can be construed as fascist, this gets a thumbs up from me. Also the design was all very much inspired by other things (Imperial shuttles, Battlestars, Shadows etc) and Michael Ironside and Clancy Brown had clearly decided that this po-faced tosh would be good for a laugh. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 11:22:51 +0000 (GMT) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: Re: [B7L] The Web 1/2 Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-1 On Sat 07 Feb, NWOutsider wrote: > I want to like this episode, I do...some nice crew stuff, great > Blake-and-Avon moments, some interesting ideas...but, my God, the > head in a jar, the Land of the Tossed Salads... I agree about the head, but I always thought the Decimas were quite well done. > Get Lost: How does the story of the Lost, cast out because they weren't > pure enough or whatever, match up with the story Cally tells about > the Thaarn in "Dawn of the Gods"? The Gods in DotG were going > to give the Aurons telepathy. Saymon uses it...were the Lost part of > the same group as the Thaarn and the Gods? What does it mean > when Saymon says they were "from the Auronar but not of them"? > >From Auron but not of it, I could understand but the sentence as said > doesn't make sense to me ("your words are meaningless to me" 8-). I always assumed that the Lost were cast out in relatively recent times, no more than a couple of generations back. I think the Lost were from Auron, but were rejected by rest of the Auronar, In other word, if you want to use a fancy term, they weren't part of the 'soul of Auron'. Thus, from the Auronar, but not of them. Is this the episode where Gareth injured a leg during filming? The Web has always been an episode that I count among my favourites. Partly for the Avon-Blake interaction and partly because the Decimas (to me at any rate) were one of the series' better aliens. Judith -- http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention 26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 17:20:50 GMT From: Iain Coleman To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers Message-Id: <18387.9802071720@bsauasb.nerc-bas.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Md5: RM6T0LuCo2X8FXWj7alaIg== > From calle@lysator.liu.se Sat Feb 7 13:12:42 1998 > Ann Reckner writes: > > > From this I got the impression that the filmmaker was quite faithful > > to Heinlein's book. > > I thought it was, actually. It was less subtle, but I think that's > mainly because Heinlein had a rather higher opinion about his > audience's intelligence than Verhoeven had. > > Of course, if one thinks that Heinlein's message was "The military is > way cool!", then it would look like a sendup, I guess. Those who think > so are urged to (re-)read "Stranger In a Strange Land", keeping in > mind that he wrote "Starship Troopers" at the same time as he wrote > that one. For a far more in-depth analysis than is appropriate for > this list, see Alexei Panshin's "Heinlein In Dimension". When an avowedly antimilitary, antifascist director gives you "Leni Riefenstahl In Space", I think you can be pretty sure it's a sendup. Particularly when he consistently says "This movie is a satire on contemporary America" in interviews. (Of course, some people refused to believe him, which I found pretty funny.) I think the movie bears much the same relationship to the book as "Blade Runner" does to "Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?". Both movies use the events and some of the dialogue from the book as material with which to tell their own, quite different stories. Admittedly, "Blade Runner" does not openly mock its source material - but then, "Androids" does not exactly cry out for such mockery. Then DM wrote >Actually I thought of it more as a send up of other modern SF - i.e. the >idea that clean-cut American kids are kicking ass on every planet as the >galaxy's police force. For showing that the Trek Federation and all of its >ilk can be construed as fascist, this gets a thumbs up from me. ...which brings us nicely back to Blake's 7! Iain ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 09:25:33 +0000 (GMT) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: [B7L] Actors Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-1 On Sat 07 Feb, Fran Myers wrote: > Let me state firstly that I ADORE Avon, and love the way Paul played > him. However, Paul seems to be rather typecast in flamboyant, cold, > evil roles. At least I've never seen him play anything else. Most of what I've seen him in fits that pattern, although he managed a rather bland character in 'Murder Must Advertise' (which was apropriate for the part) > Michael is an ACTOR, and I can easily imagine him playing Avon. It > would be a different Avon, of course, but I'm sure it would be just as > convincing. > > Just because Michael plays a weak character in B7 doesn't mean he is > incapable of playing a strong one. He's an ACTOR, not a STAR. Snap for Gareth (being an actor, not a star). I've seen him play an amazing variety of roles: cold-hearted bastard, conniving lover, affectionate father, shy introvert, charismatic leader, brusque Yorkshireman, etc. Only twice have I been able to look at a character and say that it was someone who reminded me of Gareth ('Emlyn's Moon' and 'After the War') > And Michael is much better looking than Paul. And looks more > intelligent, too. Hm. Don't think I can claim Gareth as good-looking. He's beautiful; I could happily look at him for hours, but what I see as beautiful certainly isn't going to be every woman's cup of tea. (There are some pictures that capture it though. I've got one on the web page from 'Merlin' and in this picture he's just looking into the distance. You get the impression there's been a major battle with lots of people killed. That picture is gorgeous - I had to remove it from my desk because it was too distracting when I was working!) Judith -- http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention 26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 17:24:04 +0000 From: Russ Massey To: space-city@world.std.com Cc: B7 list Subject: Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers Message-ID: In message , Calle Dybedahl writes >Ann Reckner writes: > >> From this I got the impression that the filmmaker was quite faithful >> to Heinlein's book. > >I thought it was, actually. It was less subtle, but I think that's >mainly because Heinlein had a rather higher opinion about his >audience's intelligence than Verhoeven had. > I was surprised how closely Verhoevan followed the plot line of the novel. All the major characters were there (although some were squeezed together into a single person, and one was flipped to female) and all the major incidents. >Of course, if one thinks that Heinlein's message was "The military is >way cool!", then it would look like a sendup, I guess. Those who think >so are urged to (re-)read "Stranger In a Strange Land", keeping in >mind that he wrote "Starship Troopers" at the same time as he wrote >that one. For a far more in-depth analysis than is appropriate for >this list, see Alexei Panshin's "Heinlein In Dimension". Heinlein's message was that war is capable of bringing out man's finest qualities. The film completely subverts the book by saying that war brutalises everyone it touches. Heinlein would not have approved at all IMO. -- Russ Massey ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 21:04:11 -0800 From: Pat Patera To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Blake's 7 & Myers-Briggs Message-ID: <34DA99CB.1D05@geocities.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Adam L. Fuller wrote: > > Anyway, I think it's amazing that no one has disagreed with my firm > assessment that Servalan is an SP. No one seemed to agree to it before I > wrote in with my explanation. Can I assume that my explanation changed your > minds, or is the jury still out on her type? > How could Servalan be other than an SJ? She is compulsive about order and "the rule of law" ok, "my law" Look at her orderly office, dress and schemes. She surrounds herself with orderly troops and mutoids. She plans and prepares. She finishes what she starts. Any J who has known Ps goes crazy over their procrastination on project completion. She's in government! SJs tend to be teachers (80% of all teachers are said to be SJs - pretty scary, huh?) wanting to preserve the past for posterity and administrators. Servalan may have a military title, but she is an administrator. Pat P ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 18:57:15 -0000 From: "Heather Smith" To: "Blake's 7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Doc Smith Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sam wrote: > I still get a kick out of reading Doc Smith's Lensman series. Especially > Children of the Lens. And its not just nostalgia for when I first discovered > them as a teenager. > > Admittedly, I get greater pleasure out of more modern writings which have > better characters and better story lines. But Doc Smith's books will always > have a place on my book shelves. Phew, I thought I was the only one! I still enjoy reading the odd Doc Smith book, actually I'm currently half way through re-reading Getaway world (Don't laugh! I needed something light to refresh myself after an Iain M. Banks jobby). Heather 'can't think of a clever quote to go here' Smith 'There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish' -The fourth Doctor ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 18:52:57 -0000 From: "Heather Smith" To: "Blake's 7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Vila as a god Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fran wrote: > Isn't there a Loki or something like that in Scandinavian mythology? A > clever trickster, if I recall it properly. Um, yeah, but the trouble is Loki's tricks are often very unpleasant, it was he that was the trigger that started Ragnorok, by causing the death of Balder, god of light. He's far too dark to be Vila. Actually, now I come to think of it, a lot of Loki's characteristics are present in Avon. He is extremely intelligent, a loner and *very* manipulative. He's almost what one would expect if Avon and Vila were merged, but probably with more of Vila showing through than Avon. Heather 'can't think of a clever quote to go here' Smith 'There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish' -The fourth Doctor ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 21:00:47 +0000 From: "Wendy Duffield " To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Avon/Vila v Paul/Michael Message-Id: <199802072100.VAA09466@svensta.eurobell.net> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT reading the posts from Julia and Fran etc regarding who is the better actor.. I have to disagree with whichever one said that Michael is the better actor, i think that Michael gave overall the most consistent performances through the four seasons of B7, he is a fantastic actor, however so are Paul and Gareth . I think that the fact that Paul plays so many 'baddie' parts is because he finds it easier to portray that kind of character,it appears to me that he feels comfortable with that so therefore the performances are better although he gets typecast in that kind of role, to a lesser extent i think Judith had found the same type of typecasting with roles whilst doing her research on Gareth. I still feel that Vila was designed to appeal to the masses and everyone was meant to feel that they wanted to take care of him and he was the kinda guy that you would take home and reform Blake was the unattainable one, some womens ideal guy but never going to be able to settle down. Avon was the bad guy, but by virtue of sheer good looks , charm and some wonderful dialogue, witty sharp some devastating stunts, your all round action hero, he was the one all the women were going to fall in love with and forgive him anything...even killing Blake Ah well that ends my saturday evening ramblings Hope the Pages Bar event is going swimmingly!! I'm off for a drink or two myself now :) Wendy __________________________________________________ E Mail Wendy@eurobell.co.uk "Winning is the only safety" (Avon- Blakes 7 ) __________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 16:09:06 EST From: RCobbett@aol.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers Message-ID: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I don't think it was meant to be a comedy - except those Interactive TV interludes. I still found it funny though..... - Richard ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 22:25:07 +0100 (MET) From: N van den Berg To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Forbidden Planet Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >My brother tells me that Jaqueline Pierce is signing copies of a book on 28th >February at Forbidden Planet in London. > >Can anybody confirm this? I have no idea which book it is. Not a book, but the first 2 tapes of the new B7 video rerelease. She will ONLY be signing these, nothing else (so you have to buy them first). Nicoline ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Feb 1998 22:08:29 +0000 From: Julia Jones To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Avon/Vila v Paul/Michael Message-ID: In message <199802072100.VAA09466@svensta.eurobell.net>, "Wendy Duffield " writes > >reading the posts from Julia and Fran etc regarding who is the better >actor.. > >I have to disagree with whichever one said that Michael is the better >actor, Me. In spite of the fact that the only reason I don't spend an entire con weekend gazing soulfully at Paul is that I'm too busy gazing soulfully at Gareth :-) I think Gareth is one of the finest actors I've ever seen. I must do, seeing as I've made three trips to Scotland to see him on stage in the last year :-) I've seen Michael in very little other than B7, but my impression is that he has a broader range than Paul. What Paul very definitely has is great gobs of stage presence. No, I'm not referring to sex appeal (although he has that too, and I *mean* that to be present tense), it's just that it's impossible to ignore him. Of all the actors in view, he's the one you'll be looking at. I'm looking forward to at long last seeing him on stage in Guards, Guards. This is not to say that he's a bad actor. He's not. Avon demonstrated some wonderful acting, even if it is a bit of a giggle to compare what Paul thinks he was doing and what his fans think he was doing. It's that I think there are good actors, and there are even better actors, and that while Paul has that incredible charisma, Michael and Gareth are better at acting. Of course, this is the sort of thing that is partly down to personal taste, so there's no reason why we shouldn't both be right :-) -- Julia Jones "Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!" The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 17:29:41 +0000 (GMT) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: Re: [B7L] Robert Anson Heinlein Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-1 I've never considered Heinlein as sexist. Far from it. When I was growing up, I believed that women could be intelligent, have careers as engineers, etc, and still have children and be loved. Why? Becase I got my role models from Heinlein. Long live Hazel Meade Stone! Heinlein was one of the reasons I took science A-levels. I never thought of science or maths as 'boys' subjects. Blake's 7 served woman in a mixed manner, but it gave us some good models too. I rewatched Pressure Point recently and was struck by how well Kassabi was played. Interestingly enough, the character was originally written as a man, which may explain some of her strengths. I wonder who it was who took the decision to cast both Servalan and Kassabi as women? I don't know who it was, but I think it was a very good move. Judith -- http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention 26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 15:34:31 +1100 (EST) From: Gordon Burgess & Carol Mason To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Doc Smith Message-Id: <199802080434.PAA26700@magna.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Phew, I thought I was the only one! I still enjoy reading the odd Doc >Smith book, actually I'm currently half way through re-reading Getaway >world (Don't laugh! I needed something light to refresh myself after an >Iain M. Banks jobby). > >Heather 'can't think of a clever quote to go here' Smith > >'There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish' >-The fourth Doctor Hello all, I still have many EE"Doc"Smith books amongst my collection. Admittedly, I have not read them for a while, but I did enjoy the "Lensman Series" amd the "Lord Tedric Series" even though I never did compete the latter series, in my younger years. It was after reading a couple of Kimbal Kinnison stories, that my fascination with science- fiction began. I think I'll just hold on to my copies, for nostalgia's sake. By the way, Predatrix, good one, thanks for posting the continued adventures, I enjoyed them a great deal. Take care, I'm back to Lurkersville. Carol. Semper Fidelis Carol "Hondo" Mason < gcb7@magna.com.au > ******************************************************************* * "Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity" * * "Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film" * * "Friends may come and go, but enemies tend to accumlate" * * "If you can't convince them, confuse them" * * "Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk" * ******************************************************************* ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 19:56:53 +1100 From: Ross Mallett To: blake7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Starship Troopers Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Warning: contains some minor spoilers. S P O I L E R S P A C E O H S P O I L E R S P A C E I remember reading this book when I was a little boy. I loved it! At 5:24 PM +0000 7/2/98, Russ Massey wrote: >In message , Calle Dybedahl > writes >>Ann Reckner writes: >> >>> From this I got the impression that the filmmaker was quite faithful >>> to Heinlein's book. >> >>I thought it was, actually. It was less subtle, but I think that's >>mainly because Heinlein had a rather higher opinion about his >>audience's intelligence than Verhoeven had. >> >I was surprised how closely Verhoevan followed the plot line of the novel. >All the major characters were there (although some were squeezed together >into a single person, and one was flipped to female) and all the major >incidents. Yes, I was expecting lip service to the book, and was quite surprised at how much of it made it into the film. Well done guys! >>Of course, if one thinks that Heinlein's message was "The military is >>way cool!", then it would look like a sendup, I guess. Those who think >>so are urged to (re-)read "Stranger In a Strange Land", keeping in >>mind that he wrote "Starship Troopers" at the same time as he wrote >>that one. For a far more in-depth analysis than is appropriate for >>this list, see Alexei Panshin's "Heinlein In Dimension". He really wrote them at the same time? "Stranger in a Strange Land" was so different, I have trouble remembering that they were both written by the same guy. Loved them both though. Both however, sety out to challenge society's assumptions, so in that sense they are similar. As to Fran's comment about sexism, yeah pretty much. The film alters this somewhat, to a world not far away where both sexes serve together, and even take showers together! (Hey Fran, can I scrub your back?) >Heinlein's message was that war is capable of bringing out man's finest >qualities. The film completely subverts the book by saying that war brutalises >everyone it touches. Heinlein would not have approved at all IMO. Yes! I think Verhoevan's lyrical violence was well suited to a war movie. The brutalisation though was not as thorough as in other movies (or real life) and I got the impression that training was not so hard, even if the sergeant busts a few limbs. The send up of the World War Two propaganda films was also very well done. Doogie Houser in a Gestapo uniform was too much! I think Heinlein would have approved. Did seem more like the Blake's 7 Federation than the Star Trek one I thought. However, it all reminded me most of "Aliens". Almost a sequel to that film. (And a much better one tha Aliens 3 I might add.) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Feb 1998 22:59:38 +1000 From: Tim Richards & Narrelle Harris To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Queen - The Eye Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980208225938.007b17b0@wire.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I've been searching for the latest info on Queen the Eye and found the following page on Electronic Art's site. http://www.ea.com/eastudios/eastudios.html The release date is meant to be January 16th according to the official Queen site, but I am yet to find the game on sale online. I'll keep on looking. The Queen site, by the way, refers to Paul Darrow's book as follows: "Paul Darrow, making a somewhat surprising appearance as a novelist here, delivers a suitably fast-paced, rollercoaster ride of book, which catapults you and favourite characters from the game into further Queen-inspired fantasies and adventures." hmmmmmm. Surprising appearance? I was fairly shocked myself, though I should have known better. "Stick to acting, Paul. It's what you're good at." :-) Narrelle ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tim Richards and Narrelle Harris parallax@wire.net.au http://www.wire.net.au/~parallax "Look, he's winding up the watch of his wit; by and by it will strike." - Shakespeare ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 08 Feb 1998 07:34:14 -0800 From: "Adam L. Fuller" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: Blake's 7 & Myers-Briggs Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980208073411.0069198c@POPD.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Lisa said: >It goes with the arrogant self-confidence of the NT -- "If you've got it, flaunt it. And I've got it, SO THERE." >And one favorite character of mine in another fandom who likewise goes in for flamboyant, attention-getting >outfits is a definite NF (ENFP); he's fond of fantasies, sees life as a drama with himself as the star, and dresses >accordingly. No, I don't think you can tie that one to a given temperament -- except perhaps that it would be >least likely in an SJ, who is more likely to run to the conservative and practical in clothing. Sorry, Lisa, but this is absolutely *incorrect.* The NT type wears the most conservative, practical clothing of every single type. That's why they are often labeled as nerds. They like to wear utilitarian clothes - whatever feels comforable. Just about every single NT that I know, including myself, cares nothing about how their clothes look. They wear the most drab, out-of-style clothes out there. It's a polo shirt and pants for me, and this is exactly what I see other NTs wearing. NTs are self-confident a lot about their brains and mental capacity, but their physical looks are probably the least priority to them. This observation, I seem to recall, is also written in Keirsey's book. The SP type will care the most about clothes and how they look. They always have to wear the latest style, and be up with the latest trends. They are the ones that set the trends. As for SJs, you are wrong about that too. SJs like to be trendy too. It's just that they can't keep up with the fast-paced fashion style changes that SPs set. SJs are also very much into classes and having socioeconomic status and they see clothes as a symbol for that. NFs also like to wear pretty clothes that they think looks good on them. So, no, Servalan's flamboyant dress style is extremely unlike the NT. You also mentioned that you don't think she's an SP because you don't see her as a P. Actually, it doesn't really matter so long as she's an SP temperament. Like I said before, sometimes a person can be weak in one function but can be very strong in one temperament or type. But I think I can settle this dispute right now. Myers-Briggs is a theory that asses the personality preferences of normal people. It has been speculated as to what Adolph Hitler's type was, but no one can tell because he was a crazy lunatic. Therefore, Hitler has sort of become a tabboo topic among Myers-Briggsers. I think that's sort of the same thing with Servalan. Anyone who can will all those people dying can't possibly be normal enough to have a Myers-Briggs type. MB is for the normally functioning human being. -Adam L. Fuller (ENTJ) -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V98 Issue #38 *************************************