From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #242 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/volume00/242 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 242 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysf [ Betty Ragan ] Re: [B7L] Five minutes after _Voice [ Betty Ragan ] RE: [B7L] recasting (was Coltrane) [ "J MacQueen" ] [B7L] Re:recasting [ Steve Rogerson ] [B7L] Re: Sally's request [ Helen Krummenacker ] Re: [B7L] Re:recasting (from btvs) [ "David Henderson" ] Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysf [ Kathryn Andersen ] [B7L] Orac the Great (was Why Not Bl [ "J MacQueen" To: B7 Lyst Subject: Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysfunctional ... Message-ID: <39A98F73.38AAC6D8@sdc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sally Manton wrote: > There's that rather singular but unshakeable brand of honesty, which > insists that he will not (knowingly) lie to himself or about himself > - that makes him constantly seek to warn the others, keep them wary > of him, keep them from trusting him, but also means that he's > forced, albeit begrudgingly, to live up to trust given, even when he > didn't want it and openly rejects it (this I love about him - it's > not *his* fault that Blake insists on trusting him, but he still > reluctantly accepts the responsibility that goes with it.) And of > course, it means having given his word, he will keep it through > hell, high water and alien invasions (Star One). Hmm. I half-agree and half-disagree with this... "Honesty" is not quite the word I would use. If anything, it seems to me that the way he warns people off is somewhat *dishonest*: IMHO he (probably quite deliberately) exaggerates his own bad qualities, his dangerousness, in order to keep people at a distance. As for lying to himself... I keep waffling back and forth on this issue. There are times when I'm quite convinced that Avon's in deep denial about most of his own emotional issues, and is probably lying to himself nearly every minute of every day... and there are other times when I'm equally convinced that he knows his own mind (and heart) perfectly well and is entirely aware of every nuance of his own reactions. I never can quite make up my own mind (though I strongly suspect the answer lies somewhere in the middle). I *do* think, though, that there are times when he at least *tries* (however unsuccessfully) to lie to himself. "I do not need anyone at all," for a major instance. I agree -- I absolutely agree -- that he *does* keep his word, once it's given, no matter what, and also that he does feel himself bound to live up to others' trust, once they've forced it on him. Again, though, I don't see that as having a great deal to do with honesty per se. I'm not sure that honesty is something Avon values greatly for its own sake. What he *does* have is something that's perhaps better described as "loyalty" (although that word somehow doesn't feel quite right, either). In Avon's belief, the worst possible sin is to betray someone who trusts and cares for you, and that is the one thing he *will not* do. If he keeps his word, if he lives up to trust given him (even if he didn't ask for or want it), it's all to do with that determination not commit betrayal. That might result in a peculiar form of honesty, but IMO the honesty itself is far from primary. (After all, he's quite willing to *deceive* the people he cares about, if it will help to protect them. "Hostage" being the obvious case in point.) Since we're talking about Avon's good points here, I hasten to add that I very much share this belief of Avon's, and that I think the fact that he truly lives by it is extremely admirable. > He has a great deal of physical courage, but even more he has moral > courage, if of a different type than Blake or Cally or Gan. Having > chosen his own path, he accepts the right of others to condemn him > for what he is and does (in fact, he sometimes seems to welcome it > :-)). He *does* seem to welcome it, IMHO sometimes a little more than is healthy. I think there are (at least) two things going on there... One is that he realizes that if he's going to put on that "I am a selfish bastard and not to be trusted" routine, then it's perfectly reasonable for others to look upon him that way. In fact, if they do, then he's succeeded and can feel pleased with himself. The second is that Avon sometimes buys his own propaganda and thinks of *himself* as a selfish bastard not to be trusted. A lot of bad things have happened to people who trusted and relied on him, and (deliberately or not) he was at least partially responsible for a lot of it. "I failed Anna [or Cally, or Blake]" is a bit too close to "I betrayed Anna [or Cally or Blake]," and he does, I think, have something of a tendency to wallow in guilt (although he certainly won't do so *publicly*). I think Avon very much fears being the thing he hates most: a Judas. (Something that just makes "Blake" all the more heart-wrenching...) Hmm. It suddenly occurs to me that there's a real potential here for an unfortunate positive feedback loop: he doesn't want to betray people, so he pushes them away to keep them from trusting him, but the more people fail to trust him, the more it seems to confirm to him that he's not worthy of trust, so the more he needs to push everyone away... And Blake, bless him, broke that ugly little loop *very* neatly. (All the above very much based on my own personal interpretation of the character, obviously. And I think I may have belabored some of the above before, but not here, so what the heck!) -- Betty Ragan ** ragan@sdc.org ** http://www.sdc.org/~ragan/ "Imposing Latin rules on English structure is a little like trying to play baseball in ice skates." -- Bill Bryson ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:02:40 -0600 From: Betty Ragan To: B7 Lyst Subject: Re: [B7L] Five minutes after _Voice from the Past_... Message-ID: <39A99000.C780C8DB@sdc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Predatrix wrote: > Well, Sally, I dunno about 24 hours. I can do five minutes, though. [LOL!] Yay, Pred! > Vila jumped in, "Well, you made me think Avon and Cally were pairing > off, and you said we had to gang up against the others, and you were > hypnotised so you kept going loony, and then you made me go down to > this really crap asteroid _instead of Del 10_," he wailed, "and you > said that for the sake of Truth and Freedom we had to go along with > someone we found there." I abosolutely *adore* this rendition of Vila! (It's the "_instead of Del 10_" that does it. :)) -- Betty Ragan ** ragan@sdc.org ** http://www.sdc.org/~ragan/ "Imposing Latin rules on English structure is a little like trying to play baseball in ice skates." -- Bill Bryson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:05:18 EST From: "J MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: RE: [B7L] recasting (was Coltrane) Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: Louise Rutter >Hmmm. I'd prefer to see him do Blake rather than Avon. He can do driven >obsessive brilliantly, has done so as both Giles and Oliver in different >ways. In fact, he's another of those actors who seems able to turn a hand >to just about anything.... I'm remembering the first version of Jonathan Creek's boss, at this point. But then, I've never seen any other role he's played (is now a good time to admit I've never seen an episode of Buffy in my life?). Regards Joanne _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:14:16 EST From: "J MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7 II? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: "Dana Shilling" > >attempting to join the sections of the joint Mistral/Dana filk >It's interesting to note that Joanne's is POV Blake and mine is (you're >dying of surprise here, right?). I began to change my mind, and was beginning to think of Vila as the POV. That was before I gave up for the weekend, and started thinking of a filk for Dayna to a folk tune. Not finished that either, suprise, suprise... > > (Thinking about Avon interviewing potential flatmates. Ouch.) >I think I saw that movie already--it's called "Shallow Grave." God help me, little wonder I hadn't any luck with that sort of encouragement! Regards Joanne _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:20:26 EST From: "J MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: "Dana Shilling" >Re American Pie: something about >Built by Ensor, >Late of Mensa, >But his batt'ries ran dry ? And his good ol' boy's hijacking ships on the sly Singing "This may be the day that you die." Don't get me started... Regards Joanne (Dana, this one is ALL yours...) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:26:22 EST From: "J MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed > > I met it on the shore over Ensor's place This was intended for the first line of the Orac/Lola filk. Now it strikes me that something to the tune of Da Doo Ron Ron might also be started like this. I'm at work; why aren't I? Regards Joanne _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:35:31 EST From: "J MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7 II? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: mistral@ptinet.net >Oh, yeah, I agree he could absolutely do Avon Trouble is, and I hate to provide fodder for those who don't wish to see anyone else as Avon, Rickman's only about 5 years younger than Darrow. And for anyone that doesn't care for the idea of "Paul Darrow, action hero" at this stage in his life... >(Mind you, if Avon is as actor-proof as Iain says then I want Keanu.) This is slightly less scary than Kathryn's suggestion on the spinlist, but it's still a bit scary. Regards Joanne _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:19:29 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <021901c0107c$e73d0960$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Ika > > >Carol wrote: > > >On the same topic--liking shipmates--it was interesting to hear Gareth say > > >(on THE ACTOR SPEAKS CD) that Blake didn't like any of his shipmates. He > > >cared about them in the way you'd care about anyone you came in contact > > >with, but there was no deep caring. He primarily viewed them as tools to > > >use for the job he was trying to accomplish > Jessica: >> I'm not sure he ever or would ever have put their needs above those > > of his cause and it could probably be argued that his main motive was to > > keep his only supporters and the rebellion alive. I always got the > > impression that he considered all of them, himself included as tools toward > > a greater good. > > Hmmm. Me & housemate co-snippetted once (lost, or I would post) where Avon was > trying to convince Blake to get some more people on the crew, since if they > *had* to fight the Federation they might as well have some cannon fodder around > to even the odds up a bit, and Blake was fairly sickened at the idea of asking > people to risk their lives in a soldier-type cannon-fodder way, insisting that > he should know and care about the people who fought with him, otherwise he was > no better than the Federation, blah, blah. So I can't see Blake treating the others (or > himself) *only* as tools. Except maybe Vila, but I'm not getting into *that* > fight again, so I'll just say IMHO. Blake, as a revolutionary idealist (with aspirations to being an ideal revolutionary) would be caught up in the usual paradox. As a revolutionary, the Cause must come first, with the dispassionate ruthlessness that alone can vindicate pursuing it in the first place. But the Cause, being essentially humanitarian in its goals, implies that people are not to be exploited in the pursuit - they are an end in themselves, not a means to an end. So Blake has to care about their welfare, whether he wants to or not, as a point of ideological principle. Yet at the same time he cannot afford to develop anything akin to true friendship with any of them (again, whether he wants to or not) because that would compromise the level of emotional detachment that the same ideological principle demands. Having friends is politically incorrect. (And conducting a romantic relationship with anyone would put him on a fast track to a firing squad, even if only a purely figurative one in which he had to pull the trigger himself). Unfortunately, nailing your first and only allegiance to a flag is a good way of quickly ending up in emotional Coventry, triggering a positive feedback loop that turns you into a mindless fanatic - emotional isolation fuels your increasing dedication to the Cause, which in turn induces further isolation etc. Fortunately for Blake, he's not quite that stupid, but it's a very slippery tightrope to walk and I think Star One shows him hanging on by his fingertips. The problem is further compounded by the way Blake's comitment is primarily an emotional one - he has to care, albeit in an impersonal, macrosocial way, in order to be driven in the first place. The ideal revolutionary is placed in the awkward position of caring passionately about people without being permitted to give a pair of fetid dingo's kidneys about individuals *as* individuals. From there it's just a short hop to arrogating to oneself the right to decide what's best for 'the people', whether or not the individual people want it or not. (Conversely, people throughout history have proved time and again that they cannot be relied on to to choose what is best for themselves or society, let alone the ecosphere.) Blake is smart enough to recognise that arrogance within himself, and to deplore it, but he is then faced with the problem of reconciling the need to discard that arrogance with the counter-revolutionary implications of doing so. Moral: Don't be a revolutionary idealist, it only screws you up. Be a selfish greedy bastard instead - they always win in the end anyway. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 22:09:46 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <021a01c0107c$e858d9a0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Kathryn Andersen > The thing that gets me is, how TPTB conclude that people don't want a > (radio/TV/novel) continuation of a show when, say, the novels don't > sell, and they think that people don't like the show, when the real > answer was that the show is still wonderful, but the novels are > absolutely awful. They think that all they need to do is slap a label > on it, and it will sell, no matter how crappy it actually is. I don't think the problem lies so much with TPTB than with the fans themselves, or rather with what distinguishes the fans from the wider public. A fan production is, by its very nature, pitched directly at other fans, and therefore seeks to satisfy the interests of those fans. A commercial product, OTOH, is implicitly pitched at the general public, and must therefore accomodate the expectations of said public, which are generally shallower, looser and less narrowly focused than those of fans. A fannish story seeks to redefine or reinterpret the source material by concentrating on certain key elements within that source. In doing so, it can at least be understood by other fans without necessarily being accepted. Such redefinition is at its most blatant in such subgenres as AUs or adult/slash, though it's usually present to at least some degree in almost any fan story. A commercial piece, such as a tie-in novel, however, seeks primarily to reiterate or simply regurgitate the source material, so that it can be accepted by as many potential purchasers as possible without necessarily furthering any deeper understanding of the source. Since 'true fans' (whatever they might be) don't normally constitute a significant percentage of the potential market, there is no great imperative to pander to their demands, especially if doing so might alienate a wider - and hence more profitable - readership. From that it goes without saying that fans should be kept as far away as possible from the production of any commercial merchandise. That's the theory, anyway. Quite how it stands up in practice I can't say, since I don't buy commercial tie-in fiction. B7 is not exactly brimming over with examples, and that's the only series I'd show any interest in re such products. I don't see the theory standing up too well with the DW New Adventures, but it might with commercial ST fiction. Neil (using the Bank Holiday weekend to catch up on some recent topics he's had to let slip) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 22:26:09 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <021b01c0107c$e943d5e0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Kathryn Andersen > On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 12:05:55PM +0200, Jeroen J. Kwast wrote: > > > > You call that seriously????? So you want me to believe that you > > rather have NOTHING than a brand new series bases on the original > > series with new characters? > > > You don't think that it is even remotely possible that those new > > characters can have some chemistry going too??? > > Yes. Exactly. Precisely. I'd rather have no B7 than bad B7. Hear hear! We had enough Bad B7 first time around, no sense in adding to it. I would rather have no new 'official' B7 at all. No films, no series, no radio plays - nothing. As others have said - quite correctly, IMO - one of the strengths of the series was that it was ultimately closed, contained within a finite time span and reaching a definite end. Paradoxically, another of its strengths was that the end wasn't necessarily The End, but the final episode represents a satisfactory close to an aired canon that should, again IMO, remain firmly closed. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 22:53:36 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel Message-ID: <021c01c0107c$ebda1120$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Hellen Paskaleva > If you imagine the Milky Way projected on a clock, where the Earth is far > away in "9 o'clock" direction, then Andromeda will be approximately in "1.30 > o'clock" direction. (Or, in other words, ~30 degrees clockwise from the > North Pole.) I think. > > This places Star One a bit out of the main bulk of stars in the center of > our Galaxy. We know that from the episode anyway. What matters is where Star One would be relative to Andromeda. If it's at 1:30 then the colonised galaxy extends a fair way along the galactic rim (about one third of the way round from Earth), and presumably a similar distance in the opposite direction, if Earth is roughly in the centre. So the colonised region of the galaxy would extend from about 4:30 round to 1:30, and probably well on the way to completing the circle. Extensive, if nothing else. Hmm, maybe I made the ship speeds too *slow*... Neil ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 22:56:31 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <021d01c0107c$ecc50d60$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Dana Shilling > Neil (as either originator of quote or imperative): > > > But not many Popes have played Avon, though. > That's what YOU think. > > Just wait until I put the snaps from the Vatican Christmas > party on my Web site. His Holiness looks divine in black > leather... And presumably Travis is there as Cardinal Sin. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 23:06:54 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel Message-ID: <021e01c0107c$eda6e1e0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Betty Ragan > Neil Faulkner wrote: > > > If the Magellanic Clouds are in reach, someone will go there, simply because > > they are there. > > True enough, but somehow I can't see the Federation bothering... To prove that they could get there first, in much the same way that the Soviets scattered little red flags all over the Moon. Prestige and kudos are powerful motives, however little they achieve in purely practical terms. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 23:11:20 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel Message-ID: <021f01c0107c$eed501a0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Betty Ragan > OK, so, except for the Star One glitches (which we know were due to the > Andromedans, right?), how come nobody on B7 ever seems to make stupid > computer mistakes? Can you imagine Blake accidentally e-mailing > Servalan with the plans for his next raid? Well, maybe not, but it's > easy to imagine Vila hitting the wrong button and doing something like > that. And the look on Avon's face would be priceless... Vila goofed with the teleport in Rumours, so screw ups did occur when the plot demanded it. Stupid computer mistakes like using the CDROM tray as a cup holder or the mouse as a foot pedal weren't really on the cards because the writers probably weren't sufficiently computerwise to know about their potential and even if they were then the audience would never have appreciated them. How many people had heard of email in 1980? Did the term even exist back then? Neil ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 23:20:41 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <022001c0107c$f02c5440$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Sally Manton > On the subject of actors and their views on their characters, I just thought > of something Michael Keating said on one of the tapes about his Vila, that > he thought Vila rather fancied *Jenna*. This honestly startled me at the > time, because of the four female crew members, Jenna would be the one I > would have said Vila showed the *least* interest in (okay, his passes at > Dayna and Soling were probably in the comfortable expectation that they > wouldn't take him up on them, but ...) > > Does anyone else see what he meant by this? Who you fancy the most has nothing to do with who you have the best chance of getting off with. Vila might have preferred Jenna simply because she was blonde and had big knockers. Personality doesn't have to enter into it. Sad, maybe, but nevertheless true. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 23:38:33 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] info request Message-ID: <022101c0107c$f0e4f5e0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Minnie > I was wondering if someone could tell me what was requested on Scorpio for > speed? > > Is Time distort the proper term?? If so, what was the speed they often > used to get away from pursuit ships?? I'm not sure any reference was given by one of the crew. Scorpio was reported to leave Bucol-2 (in Animals) at TD 12, but that reference comes from a Federation officer reporting to Servalan. Stardrive gives the speed of the initial space chopper attack (witnessed by the Scorpio crew) as Standard By 12.6, but Atlan and Plaxton cited theoretical speeds of Time Distort 12 and 15. But Stardrive is a Follett episode, and as such need not be taken seriously. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:15:56 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysfunctional ... (was: Why Not Blake II?) Message-ID: <022201c0107c$f297d600$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Said Sally, re Avon > There's that rather singular but unshakeable brand of honesty, which insists > that he will not (knowingly) lie to himself or about himself So when he told Tarrant that his name was Shevron and Dayna was his wife, he really believed he'd got hitched and signed the deed poll whilst teleporting back up to the Liberator? No lies about himself there, then. Lying *to* himself is another matter. I think that what Avon wants above all else is certainty. Unfortunately, one thing he would swiftly become certain of is that there are rather broad swathes of life where one cannot be certain. So any emotional insecurity he carries along with him would come from knowing that the only way to be emotionally secure is to tell yourself a pack of porkies and believe in them. From that premise, I would expect him to hold respect for people who had taken the trouble to construct their own belief system and subject it to rigorous critical analysis, and at least recognise any potential shortcomings for what they were rather than sweep them under the carpet. If nothing else, such people would make satisfying intellectual sparring partners, and Avon enjoys intellectual sparring. Blake would certainly fit the bill, probably Cally too. Jenna, OTOH, lacks the backbone to work it for herself, even though she could if she tried, and Gan even more so ("Another one who's prepared to let Blake do his thinking for him" - TIme Squad). Vila, perversely, makes the grade by constructing a belief system that consciously rejects any requirement to construct any kind of belief system at all, thereby becoming simultaneously contemptible and enviable, as well as immune to any kind of critical analysis. Vila embodies a kind of selfish, self-preserving honesty that Avon can acknowledge without necessarily respecting the essential cowardice on which it is founded. Neil, Lyst-clogger extraordinaire for the moment... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:34:23 -0400 From: "Dana Shilling" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <006a01c0107a$19a25f20$62ac4e0c@dshilling> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Responding to Sally: > > Exactly my point. The argument was that he neither liked nor much cared > about them as people. Yes, they are the human tools he's been given to use, > but that's the exact situation oof *any* commander/leader in any group. It > doesn't mean he can't care about them *as people* as well. My argument, > based on the examples, is that a leader who is quite prepared to die or > suffer for any of them - or who can lose all claim to common sense when one > dies (Trial) I'm not quite sure how to interpret his reaction to Gan's death, which is so disproportionate to his reaction to the deaths on the London and Cygnus Alpha--it could be argued that he is indifferent to the latter because he didn't know them very well personally, or OTOH that he went postal in the wake of Gan's death because of the cumulative effect. > Errr ... sorry and all that, exactly how would getting killed on Albian > along with Avon have accomplished that? How would it have helped the cause? > Or stranding himself (*without* thinking to check surface conditions, > possible danger etc or leaving himself an escape route) on Zil's planet? I don't know why nobody ever said, "Blake, Zen's information about planetary conditions (including radiation) simultaneously sucks and blows--let's buy a !#$$$%^ guidebook instead." > > Blake is not stupid. If he dies, the Liberator will probably cease to be as > effective a force for the cause Which is why, in Horizon, he's willing to accept the possibility of Jenna dying or being seriously damaged--degree of angst depends on which fanfic you're reading/writing >But again, if the > cause overrode the people, he *would* have tried harder to keep Avon in > Breakdown - he knows he has the influence, he knows he has the manipulative > skills, and he knows Avon is valuable. But Avon's free (or as free as Blake > can make it) choice comes first - "if he stays, it's got to be for his own > reasons", not Blake's. Because this is this list and not the other one, I will merely say that each of them is waiting for a declaration which is not forthcoming. -(Y) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:56:07 -0400 From: "Dana Shilling" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? (playing cards) Message-ID: <006c01c0107a$276bbac0$62ac4e0c@dshilling> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In response to Ika: > I've been half-heartedly trying to design (in my head, I can't design for shit) > a B7 Tarot deck for ages, but can never decide who would be who - I'm kind of > drawn to King of Wands for Blake, The Chariot, possibly reversed (he never does manage to keep all the forces in balance) but then maybe I should save him for one of > the Major Arcana; Avon usually ends up as the Magician, King of Swords? I can definitely see Dayna as Fortitude, ripping open leonine jaws. Tarrant = Knight of Pentacles? Servalan = Pope Joan? -(Y) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:56:21 -0400 From: "Dana Shilling" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <006d01c0107a$2aa0a700$62ac4e0c@dshilling> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Carol Mc said: > I listened to the Gareth discussing Blake part of the CD again before my > friend who owns it left. I don't remember everything word for word, but he > never said he didn't like them as people. He said he cared about them as > people, but they weren't his friends. Self-proclaimed leaders have to be careful about fraternization. > I can't say my primary canon agrees with Gareth, but I do find his viewpoint > interesting. It's a fascinating intellectual exercise to view the series > from that perspective: that Blake wasn't friends with his crew. Sometimes I think about the Morning Line if Orbit had involved a different combination of people--i.e., Soolin/Vila: 19:1 in six furlongs (i.e., the race would be over in about a minute and a half). Blake/Vila? > Was that a sign of friendship or was that a sign that Blake wasn't entirely > rational and practical? Another thing Gareth mentioned was that Blake became > a fanatic. A fanatic might be inclined to perform irrational actions, such > as staying on Albian despite the danger, and it wouldn't have anything to do > with friendship. Blake ALWAYS at least believes and generally assumes they will all survive, and as long as he and Avon are both alive, neither of them is willing to place in the I Tried to Get Killed for You More Often stakes. >As a commander, it's helpful and desirable to keep a degree of > distance. As a farmer, you don't give a name to anything you're eventually going to eat, and as a commander, you have to keep some distance from troops who are not at all unlikely to die. -(Y) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 16:59:47 -0600 From: Betty Ragan To: B7 Lyst Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <39A99D63.D2E70BD6@sdc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit J MacQueen wrote: > And his good ol' boy's hijacking ships on the sly > Singing "This may be the day that you die." > > Don't get me started... But I *like* this! Come on, get started. *Pleeeeease*? -- Betty Ragan ** ragan@sdc.org ** http://www.sdc.org/~ragan/ "Imposing Latin rules on English structure is a little like trying to play baseball in ice skates." -- Bill Bryson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:22:01 +0000 From: Steve Rogerson To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re:recasting Message-ID: <39A9B0A8.7F39E503@mcr1.poptel.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Steve Kilbane said: "Anyone reckon Anthony Stewart Head could do Blake?" Only if Sarah Michelle Gellar could do Jenna and Alyson Hannigan as Cally. -- cheers Steve Rogerson http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson Redemption: The Blake's 7 and Babylon 5 convention 23-25 February 2001, Ashford, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:31:56 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] recasting (was Coltrane) Message-ID: <39A9B260.382A@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Anyone reckon Anthony Stewart Head could do Blake? > > steve Ah... (yum) I'm not sure if he has quite the *right* sort of presence. He certainly has presence, but it seems quiet strength and charm rather than rabble-rousing charisma. Mind, I know him mostly from one role (Giles), which would fit nicely with an Avon type... I can easily see him puttering with Sopron or ORACs insides, and then, in fight scenes, out comes 'Ripper'. But his motivational speeches lack the extorvert oomph that Blake needs. James Marston (Spike) isn't really a Cockney; he's from Modesto. To my ear he deos the accent rather well, but I suppose you Brits can tell me if it's totally hokey to your ears. Anyone fancy him making a Vila who's pretty scrumpcious? Or a Travis (#2 style)? For Blake, Jeremy Northam? He did righteousness quite delightfully in Emma... remove some of the surpressed hurt lover from that and you get a good 'Blake tells off his crew'. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:36:23 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: Sally's request Message-ID: <39A9B408.603F@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > [b] Vila's first driv- errr, flying lesson; (in script form) Avon> Ouch! Vila> Sorry about that, Avon. Avon> Sorry *isn't* enough. A few more Gs and I would have been plastered across Zen. That's the last time I let you sit at that console. Jenna> That goes for all of us. I'll shoot you if you reach for that control again. Blake> A little worse than when you hit that hyperdrive, I think. Cally> I told you we needed to put him trough de-tox first. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:36:25 +1000 From: "David Henderson" To: Subject: Re: [B7L] Re:recasting (from btvs) Message-ID: <00ba01c01090$6465c4a0$6a3bdb89@lemon.jcu.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Steve Rogerson >Steve Kilbane said: "Anyone reckon Anthony Stewart Head could do Blake?" > >Only if Sarah Michelle Gellar could do Jenna and Alyson Hannigan as >Cally. Provided you DONT use David Borenaez as Avon. later daveH ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:54:02 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: interpretations of Avon Message-ID: <39A9B82A.1BBE@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Of course, we could simply put this subtle debate down to this: both > Mistral and I identify with Avon. She's an INTP, so she thinks Avon > is an INTP. I'm an INTJ, so I think Avon's an INTJ. > > Or we could throw our hands up in the air and say that the writers > didn't know type theory. (grin) > > Kathryn Andersen Well, I seem to be borderline on J/P, identify with Avon, and I think he's more 'J' than I am, but then I liked the theory that INTx is a better category because the J/P function is weak in defining most INT's. I've heard very good arguements for Avon falling into one category or the other. Of course, people in general can act in other categories, they are just most comfortable in the one that suits them best. (Or so they said at my workplace when they administered Meyers-Briggs) I am going to get the Keirsey book soon, I swear. Oh, and here is a cookie for Ika for his profound post. () ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 09:50:36 +1100 From: Kathryn Andersen To: "Blake's 7 list" Subject: Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysfunctional ... Message-ID: <20000828095036.A3286@welkin.apana.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Sun, Aug 27, 2000 at 04:00:19PM -0600, Betty Ragan wrote: > Sally Manton wrote: > > > There's that rather singular but unshakeable brand of honesty, which > > insists that he will not (knowingly) lie to himself or about himself > > - that makes him constantly seek to warn the others, keep them wary > > of him, keep them from trusting him, but also means that he's > Hmm. I half-agree and half-disagree with this... "Honesty" is not > quite the word I would use. If anything, it seems to me that the way > he warns people off is somewhat *dishonest*: IMHO he (probably quite > deliberately) exaggerates his own bad qualities, his dangerousness, in > order to keep people at a distance. > > I agree -- I absolutely agree -- that he *does* keep his word, once > it's given, no matter what, and also that he does feel himself bound > to live up to others' trust, once they've forced it on him. Again, > though, I don't see that as having a great deal to do with honesty per > se. I'm not sure that honesty is something Avon values greatly for > its own sake. What he *does* have is something that's perhaps better > described as "loyalty" (although that word somehow doesn't feel quite > right, either). I think the word you're searching for is "integrity", which covers both "honesty" and "loyalty". -- _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen / \ | http://www.foobox.net/~kat \_.--.*/ | http://jove.prohosting.com/~rubykat v | #include "standard/disclaimer.h" ------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 22:19:57 EDT From: B7Morrigan@aol.com To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] recasting (was Coltrane) Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit At 10:42 AM 8/26/00 +0200, Steve Kilbane wrote: >Well, if you want to go for a big-but-not-noticably-so guy who you >wouldn't normally think of as Blake... > >(drum roll....) > >...Mitch Pileggi. Ooh I have seen the light! Forget Ralph Fiennes -- Gillian Anderson for Avon! She's got that withering How-Do-You-Manage-To-Breathe-Without-Written-Instructions stare right down to a science. And the actress who plays Marita Corroborrowhatever as Soolin. Well, I guess that's not really "against type", is it. Oh, seconded. Both of them. Gillian Andersen or Alan Rickman for Avon, Mitch Pileggi will definitely have to dress down for Blake. Trish ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 23:14:33 -0500 From: Lisa Williams To: (Recipient list suppressed) Subject: [B7L] More frame captures Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20000827231134.00a93610@mail.dallas.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Moving right along... "Sarcophagus" has now been added to the frame capture library. 202 pictures in this batch. As always , the library can be found at: http://lcw.simplenet.com/b7lib.html - 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://eroicafans.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 14:32:03 EST From: "J MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Orac the Great (was Why Not Blake II?) Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: Betty Ragan >But I *like* this! Come on, get started. *Pleeeeease*? You may be sorry... It's such a long song that I don't have time to work out a number of verses just now. One verse should do you, at least for now, and that may be too much for some. Regards Joanne Credit to Dana for 2nd, 3rd and 4th lines of chorus: Oh why, why on this box to rely? Built by Ensor Late of Mensa But his batt'ries ran dry? And his good ol' boy's hijacking ships on the sly Singing "This may be the day that you die, This may be the day that you die." Do we know how great you are And that you can see things from afar? That's because you tell us so. Ah, and did you say you see the truth, Though it seems that all the final proof rests On the nudge where e'er you want it to go. Well I know the way to shut you down, Even though it makes a dreadful sound. One just pulls out this key, And then you turn and flee! Wooh! It takes a will so very, very strong To override you when you're on. We may just have to call Avon, But then there's too much pride [Here on this flight deck] Chorus Why, why, etc. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 07:43:48 +0200 From: Jacqueline Thijsen To: Subject: Re: [B7L] Re:recasting (from btvs) Message-Id: <4.3.1.0.20000828074112.00a80650@pop3.wish.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 03:36 28-8-00, David Henderson wrote: >From: Steve Rogerson > > >Steve Kilbane said: "Anyone reckon Anthony Stewart Head could do Blake?" > > > >Only if Sarah Michelle Gellar could do Jenna and Alyson Hannigan as > >Cally. > > >Provided you DONT use David Borenaez as Avon. He could be Travis. His scenes as bad Angel show that he's better at being bad than he is at being good. And to my eternal shame I must admit that he'd do even better in the swimsuit competition. Jacqueline -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #242 **************************************