From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #151
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/151
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 99 : Issue 151
Today's Topics:
Avon the Slave? (was Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (potential spoilers)
Re: Valuable Knowledge (was Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (potential spoilers)
Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long)
Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long)
Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long)
Re: Valuable Knowledge (was Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
[B7L] canals
Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One
[B7L] Filks was Musing
Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (potential spoilers)
[B7L] History
Re: Valuable Knowledge (was Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
Re: [B7L] "Man of Iron" for US B7 Fans
Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long)
Re: [B7L] French History
Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (potential spoilers)
Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 07:07:32 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Avon the Slave? (was Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
Message-ID: <3729B923.1B580DC2@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mistral say:
> <Some people would die before accepting almost any infringement of
> their freedom; others would even accept slavery in order to stay
> alive, believing that while you are alive, you still have a chance of
> something better. >
>
> <IMHO, Avon *might* be one of the latter, much as he'd hate slavery;
> he's certainly willing to go to great lengths to stay alive...>
And Sally replies:
> Nope. See Sargophagus. "Make me die. There's nothing else you can make
> me do." The one person who he's granted that privilege to (ironically
> in view of this discussion) is Blake.
I remain unconvinced. Avon was deliberately goading
the alien into a showdown so that she'd have to *try*
to kill him, so that Cally would fight back. He was
counting on Cally being able to stop the alien; if he
hadn't been *very* sure she could, he'd have bided
his time and tried another approach. It was a
calculated risk, but it was his (and all of their) *best*
chance at survival, since very shortly Cally would
be absorbed and the alien would be at full power.
That's *not* choosing death over slavery.
OTOH, I've probably been unclear. I should have
said that Avon might *tolerate* being enslaved to
stay alive, without *submitting* to it. Avon would
know that if they don't break your spirit, you're not
a slave. In 'Dawn of the Gods', he didn't refuse
to do the calculations; he was keeping alert for a
way out. If he'd had to go with Servalan in
Assassin, he'd have been biding his time looking
for a way to escape; and if he couldn't find one,
and decided to stop trying, at the very least he'd
get his hands around her throat and take her with him.
Obviously he prefers freedom to slavery. But if he
preferred death to a lack of freedom, then he would
have killed himself before boarding the London. But
he knew "an intelligent man can adapt"; so instead
of giving in to despair, if Blake and the Liberator
hadn't turned up, he'd have spent his time on the
London and Cygnus Alpha looking for ways to
escape or improve his lot; and he'd probably have
been running Cygnus Alpha within a couple of
years (doing the technological equivalent of a
Merlin impersonation, probably). He's definitely
smarter than Vargas.
Avon does not give up. (Unless he's just killed
somebody he loves.) Embracing death over
difficulty is (almost always) giving up.
Just IMHO,
Mistral
--
"And for my next trick, I shall swallow my other foot."--Vila
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 07:13:48 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
Message-ID: <3729BA9C.31013F86@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Stephen Date wrote:
> So Avon can be excused his ignorance on this occasion. Mistral on the other
> hand was obviously not paying attention !
Er, ummm.... what was that? Did somebody say something?What? What?
Mistral
--
"Thought is beyond my humble capacity."--Slave
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 10:13:55 EDT
From: Tigerm1019@aol.com
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (potential spoilers)
Message-ID: <3fd83376.245b14a3@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 99-04-30 01:07:53 EDT, Pherber@aol.com writes:
<< If I may play Fair Witness, I think you're making an unjustified
generalization here, Judith. You're implying that the populace *at large*
of
both Albian and Saurian Major were actively in favor of resistance when the
canonical evidence only supports the fact that there were active resistance
*groups*. I see no evidence that the stated attitudes of the resistance
members were supported by the general population. >>
There was considerable evidence that there was widespread support for
resistance on Helotrix. The general mentioned that it would have taken years
to subdue the place without pylene 50 and that it had taken years to conquer
the place before. I think it would be difficult for a covert rebel group to
exist for long on Federation controlled worlds without some sort of support
from the population.
I think the atrocities the Federation comitted were more than enough to stir
up the population at large on many of the worlds it controlled. Massacres
like those which occurred on Saurian Major and Auros were not that uncommon,
and the Federation was prepared to kill the entire population of Albian if
they didn't comply. Torture and conditioning were common. Torture is not
the best way to get information from someone. It *is* an effective tool of
terror. The troops seemed to have more or less free rein to do what they
wanted (Gan's woman, killing civilians for amusement in "Warlord"). If there
wasn't widespread support for resistance on the outer worlds, why were the
authorities so panicked when news about Blake spread?
Tiger M
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 07:46:15 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: Valuable Knowledge (was Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
Message-ID: <3729C236.9A4D50A2@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Judith Proctor wrote:
> Though Blake got the name wrong with regard to the plague blankets story,
> showing that data may not always have come down accurately (far more fun than
> saying the script-writer goofed) <grin>.
Not to mention a better verisimilitude of reality. I like it!!!!
LOL,
Mistral
--
"And for my next trick, I shall swallow my other foot."--Vila
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 08:28:10 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (potential spoilers)
Message-ID: <3729CC0A.51D2A80E@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Judith Proctor wrote:
> Essentially we have a situation where plants fall into two groups. Those where
> drugs were used and there was no resistance. Those where drugs (for whatever
> reason) were not used and where there seemed to be active opposition to
> Federation rule.
I'll agree with that, for the most part. There did appear
to be a fairly well organized resistance on Earth, where
there *were* drugs; there also seemed to be people who
were *not* drugged zombies, who were not only not
resistors, but who had no idea the Federation was so
repressive, for example, Blake's lawyer and his woman.
If the drugs alone were enough to suppress the will or the
power of thought to the point that you and others seem to
be suggesting, however, surely Blake would have been
no threat at all and could have been easily disposed of?
Nor would there have been any need for even a show
of elections, meetings of governors, etc., but the upper
echelon made a great show of maintaining the appearance
of freedom. That seems inconsistent with a population
unable to think for themselves.
> The new thing about Pylene 50 was that it only needed to be used once. You
> didn't have to feed the drug continually into the the system. Once someone had
> been affected, they stayed affected.
Marvelous point. I must remember this.
> What I'm saying above is that when they did have a choice, it often seemed to be
> that they chose to risk their lives and fight. The people of Albian were
> willing to risk the solium device. The people of Saurian Major fought
> too. They chose to risk their lives and those of their
> friends and families. That has to say something about the
> conditions they were living under.
As Nina's pointed out, we can only be sure that a few
people felt that way. There might have been many people
who would be equally horrified by the risks the resistance
had taken with their lives and the lives of their children.
> If they were willing to take the risks that they did take, then it is at least
> possible that they would have been willing (if it had been possible to ask them)
> to see Star One destroyed.
I'll agree that is possible. But why is it difficult
to acknowledge that there might be many people
who wouldn't be willing? The likeliest scenario is
some of each.
> It would be less of a risk than those they had
> already faced.
<g> Judith, you are very sharp and I always pay attention
when you speak, but that is a *very* subjective conclusion
based on completely insufficient evidence. Surely you don't
expect me to accept that?
> > > Intelligent people frequently have different ideas over what is
> > > right/appropriate. Defining 'right' is virtually impossible.
<snip>
> Aren't we just saying the same thing in different words? I have my own basic
> moral code, but it may not be the same as your moral code. Thus our definitions
> of what is 'right' will differ.
<nods> Yes, then what you meant in the preceding
is that *agreeing* on the definition of right is virtually
impossible. That's what I suspected you meant, but
wasn't sure. I agree with you completely about that.
Surely, however, that would support my original point,
(aeons ago as it seems now), that Avon might have a
different opinion about whether Blake's tactics in
destroying Star One were morally acceptable? Not
that it is the opinion I postulate, simply that he might
disagree.
It *is* fun, the way these discussions always mutate,
like living things, isn't it?
Grins,
Mistral
--
"And for my next trick, I shall swallow my other foot."--Vila
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 16:11:10 +0100
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long)
Message-ID: <00b401be931f$e8239d70$0c01a8c0@puffin.hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I said:
>>Interestingly, as far as I am aware, it's only Western thought which
>>has this idea of progress related to a civilization.
and Elynne responded:
>Sort of. Many cultures believed in the forces of change and that
>cultures had their ups and downs. In older western thought, this was
>expressed by the wheel of fortune. To put it briefly, things had their
>ups and downs, and then the cycle starts over. Western culture is unique
>(as far as I know) in the linear view of the future improving on the
>past.
That's a much better formulation of what I was trying to say. Thanks,
Ellynne. You're absolutely right that there's a simultaneous tradition of
history being cyclical.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 16:32:43 +0100
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long)
Message-ID: <00b501be931f$e8856c80$0c01a8c0@puffin.hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jonathan said:
>Hmm... as I remember the Greeks saw the Gold Age as being the first and
>greatest age and each of the others as successive steps in decline. Isn't
>this the *opposite* of progress ?
My dictionary tells me that 'progress' means 'movement towards a goal':
neither positive nor pejorative. I agree that the word tends to carry
positive connotations.
You're absolutely right that the Greeks saw the Gold Age as the greatest age
and the successive steps as decline: but what's significant is the idea that
society and civilization could have a linear, *inevitable* progression
towards an ultimate point.
>I'd suspect that the idea of progress (== something liked "a destiny of
>continuing improvement in everything that matters") might have started with
>the north european puritan christians, who believed both in the second
>coming of Jesus with attendant benefits (paradise for theirselves, hell for
>their ideological enemies), and in the importance and possibility of
>individuals and movements improving their own cirumstances ("a career open
>to talents" was one of the slogans of Cromwell's faction.) These social and
>religious concepts had an interestingly early marriage with science and the
>idea of technology improving the world - the Royal Society was almost
>dominated by former Cromwellians when it was established.
My own guess is that the Greek/Roman idea is Christianized by Augustine, and
is later picked up by the Renaissance humanists and transported into early
modern political thought. I tend to characterize the Puritan heritage as
much more pragmatic, arising out of justifications for disobedience against
absolute monarchs. But these things are always debatable. Political
discourses tend to be made up of a lot of inherited threads.
>Progress's next big break was in the American colonies. People there could
>see that their lives were better than those their parents had, and with
vast
>natural resources freely available to them (minus only the cost of some
>socially approved genocide) and fewer social barriers perhaps than ever
>before, the idea of progress took deep root in the American psyche. Again
>technology was linked to social factors early on - think of the role of
>Benjamin Franklin.
I always think of the nineteenth-century as the great heydey of progressive
(in a positive way) discourse: evolutionary theory acts as a great
justification for empire-building. The really big teleologies emerge in the
19th century: social Darwinism, Marxism, Millite liberalism.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 16:41:10 +0100
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long)
Message-ID: <00b601be931f$e8ced190$0c01a8c0@puffin.hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Alison said:
>The important questions for me, in relation to Blake in particular, are
>
>- can things get better, or must they inevitably return to some
conservative
>default state?
>- is it ever justified to use violence to bring about change?
>- if people are prevented from deciding, can you intervene and make that
>kind of decision for them?
>
>I think these have been very live questions in most human societies, not
>just the modern west.
Oh, most certainly! That was never my opinion. I was just doing a little
theoretical posturing! ;)
>My personal answers are yes they can, yes it is, yes you should. But I'm
pretty sure that >a good proportion of listees would disagree.
You've pre-empted me there but, for the hell of it:
1. Things *can* change, but not always for the better. And who decides what
'better' is?
2. Yes. You can up with justifications for most things.
3. Yes. And you can come up with justifications one way or the other for
that as well.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 09:11:13 -0700
From: Pat Patera <pussnboots@geocities.com>
To: B7 Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: Valuable Knowledge (was Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
Message-ID: <3729D620.158FE08B@geocities.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Judith Proctor wrote:
>
> Though Blake got the name wrong with regard to the plague blankets story,
...
> See the Sevencyclopaedia on
> http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 to see who actually did the trick with the
> blankets.
I looked under P plague and B blankets but drew a blank (et).
More hints, please.
PS. I saw a pix of ugly Bercol but no pix of pretty Bayban. Why?
Pat P
________________________________________________________
NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet. Shouldn't you?
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download.html
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 17:26:54 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
cc: Space City <Space-city@world.std.com>
Subject: [B7L] canals
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0430162654-566Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Anyone interested in sharing a narrowboat?
date 14-21 August. Location - starting and ending in Worcester.
cost 200 pounds for one person or 170 pounds each for two people (beds can be
set as two singles or one double)
This would suit somebody who can happily survive a week with my husband
(computer geek), my sons (11 and 16 and fairly reasonable specimens of the
breed) and myself.
It helps enormously if you like board/card games as we tend to play a lot of
those. If you can play some kind of musical instrument then that's an added
bonus as I like filking (you don't have to be particularly good at it though - I
can't manage chords...). Apart from that, you just have to like the idea of
cruising at 3 mph through the English countryside and odd bits of industrial
dereliction. It's hard physical work on the locks alternating with complete
laziness inbetween. For those who like walking, there are long stretches of
towpath suitable for walking and when the boat only goes at 3mph, a walker can
easily keep pace.
We never take a TV set. Mobile phones are banned. We only tend to stop to
stock up on food at little canal-side shops. Everyone takes a share at
cooking/dishwashing. (We eat vegetarian part of the time)
If you're interested, drop me a line. The last time we took a fellow fan it
worked out very well.
Judith
PS. Information for colonials <evil grin>. England has an extensive narrow
canal system built during the industrial revolution. They are narrow because of
the need to conserve water in the locaks. A narrow lock is about 7 foot wide by
70 foot long. This limits the width of the boats. Most boats are shorter than
70 ft. Some canals are 'wide canals' and can take two boats in one lock. The
Inland Waterways are very popular for holidays and the boats are fitted out to a
good standard. The boats were originally horse-drawn, hence the tow-path. They
have deisel engines now.
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
Fanzines for Blake's 7 and many other fandoms, B7 Filk songs, pictures, news,
Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth Thomas, etc.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 13:29:16 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0430122916-354Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Fri 30 Apr, Pherber@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 4/29/99 3:42:06 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk writes:
>
> > What I'm saying above is that when they did have a choice, it often seemed
> to
> > be that they chose to risk their lives and fight. The people of Albian were
> > willing to risk the solium device. The people of Saurian Major fought
> too.
> > They chose to risk their lives and those of their friends and families.
> > That has to say something about the conditions they were living under.
>
> If I may play Fair Witness, I think you're making an unjustified
> generalization here, Judith. You're implying that the populace *at large* of
> both Albian and Saurian Major were actively in favor of resistance when the
> canonical evidence only supports the fact that there were active resistance
> *groups*. I see no evidence that the stated attitudes of the resistance
> members were supported by the general population.
Well, we have two options. Either the resistance was widespread, or else the
Federation were so evil and repressive that they took planetary-wide revenge for
the actions of a minority.
If the first case is correct then Blake is right to assume popular support.
If the second case is correct, then the loss of life caused by Star One's
destruction seems a lot less than the lives likely to be saved by bringing down
the Federation.
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
Fanzines for Blake's 7 and many other fandoms, B7 Filk songs, pictures, news,
Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth Thomas, etc.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 19:06:14 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Filks was Musing
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0430180614-d63Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Fri 30 Apr, Sally Manton wrote:
> Joanne wrote:
>
> <On an unrelated note, the Muses will be displeased. I've given up on that
> filk. I console myself with the thought that Judith has probably given up on
> many in the course of amassing that impressive collection on her filk page.>
>
> Displeased? Displeased??? My one great chance to be a footnote to - er -
> something, and you give up on me? Just 'cause you have to do all the work...
>
> On the other hand, a Muse with a sense of rhyme like McGonagall's probably
> wasn't going to inspire you with anything immortal.
Actually, the best thing to inspire filks is a listener or two. Give me instant
feedback and I can filk virtually anything. When on my own, I can rarely do as
well.
Which reminds me - Julia, could you please let me have the words to the 'House
of the Rising Sun' filk that I wrote at Redemption. Steve Kilbane wanted a
copy.
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
Fanzines for Blake's 7 and many other fandoms, B7 Filk songs, pictures, news,
Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth Thomas, etc.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 19:33:17 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (potential spoilers)
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0430183317-e74Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Fri 30 Apr, mistral@ptinet.net wrote:
>
>
> Judith Proctor wrote:
>
> > Essentially we have a situation where plants fall into two groups. Those
> > where drugs were used and there was no resistance. Those where drugs (for
> > whatever reason) were not used and where there seemed to be active
> > opposition to Federation rule.
>
> I'll agree with that, for the most part. There did appear to be a fairly well
> organized resistance on Earth, where there *were* drugs; there also seemed to
> be people who were *not* drugged zombies, who were not only not resistors, but
> who had no idea the Federation was so repressive, for example, Blake's lawyer
> and his woman. If the drugs alone were enough to suppress the will or the
> power of thought to the point that you and others seem to be suggesting,
> however, surely Blake would have been no threat at all and could have been
> easily disposed of? Nor would there have been any need for even a show of
> elections, meetings of governors, etc., but the upper echelon made a great
> show of maintaining the appearance of freedom. That seems inconsistent with a
> population unable to think for themselves.
They couldn't drug the upper levels of society. They needed intelligent people
to perform the jobs that were less repetative. That is presumably the people
among whom Blake represented a danger. Where these people were concerned, the
Federation had to try and pull the wool over their eyes as far as possible -
thus the charge of child-molesting.
>
> > What I'm saying above is that when they did have a choice, it often seemed
> > to be that they chose to risk their lives and fight. The people of Albian
> > were willing to risk the solium device. The people of Saurian Major fought
> > too. They chose to risk their lives and those of their
> > friends and families. That has to say something
> > about the conditions they were living under.
>
> As Nina's pointed out, we can only be sure that a few people felt that way.
> There might have been many people who would be equally horrified by the risks
> the resistance had taken with their lives and the lives of their children.
I think I covered this one in another posting. Essentially, if the rebels were
in that much of a minority and the Federation were willing to kill several
million people to stop a small number of rebels, then I'd have to say that
virtually anything would be justified to bring down that murderous a society.
(It's a bit like 'ethnic clensing' all of Kosovo on the grounds that some of the
men are members of the Kosovo Liberation Army - except that even the Serbs are
letting the women and children out alive)
>
> > If they were willing to take the risks that they did take, then it is at
> > least possible that they would have been willing (if it had been possible to
> > ask them) to see Star One destroyed.
>
> I'll agree that is possible. But why is it difficult to acknowledge that there
> might be many people who wouldn't be willing? The likeliest scenario is some
> of each.
I certainly see some of each. A homogenous society is impossible. I can see
quite a large percentage who aren't willing to risk their lives or the lives of
their children. I would find it difficult to risk my own children, no matter
what was wrong. (See the filk 'we're getting older now' - I'm not sure of that
one's one the web site becaus it's an original tune and I can't write down
music, but it's certainly on the tape) I think everyone has a point at which
they turn around and say 'I'm not taking any more' but that point is different
for every individual.
>
> > It would be less of a risk than those they had already faced.
>
> <g> Judith, you are very sharp and I always pay attention when you speak, but
> that is a *very* subjective conclusion based on completely insufficient
> evidence. Surely you don't expect me to accept that?
I was talking with regard to people on Albion who had faced the known risk of
the solium bomb killing them with 100% certainty if it went off. That's a
greater risk than loss of climate control, etc.
>
> > > > Intelligent people frequently have different ideas over what is
> > > > right/appropriate. Defining 'right' is virtually impossible.
>
> <snip>
>
> > Aren't we just saying the same thing in different words? I have my own
> > basic moral code, but it may not be the same as your moral code. Thus our
> > definitions of what is 'right' will differ.
>
> <nods> Yes, then what you meant in the preceding is that *agreeing* on the
> definition of right is virtually impossible. That's what I suspected you
> meant, but wasn't sure. I agree with you completely about that.
Exactly.
>
> Surely, however, that would support my original point, (aeons ago as it seems
> now), that Avon might have a different opinion about whether Blake's tactics
> in destroying Star One were morally acceptable? Not that it is the opinion I
> postulate, simply that he might disagree.
Well of course. I don't think I ever disagreed with that.
>
> It *is* fun, the way these discussions always mutate, like living things,
> isn't it?
That's what keeps life interesting <grin>
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
Fanzines for Blake's 7 and many other fandoms, B7 Filk songs, pictures, news,
Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth Thomas, etc.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 19:18:54 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] History
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0430181854-3e8Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Fri 30 Apr, Stephen Date wrote:
> The programme guide states that B7 took place 800 - 1000 years in the
> future. Whilst all of us have heard of the French Revolution and many of us
> have heard of Mme Roland (200 years ago,)I imagine if we were asked to place
> a famous quote by Athelstan Half-King or Sweyn Forkbeard (9th/10th Century)
> we would probably struggle, unless we were specialists in Anglo-Saxon
> history.
But I bet you know who said 'Veni Vedi Vici' and that was much earlier. I can
even manage 'Omnia Gallia in tres partis divisa est') though the spelling is up
the spout.
Or even older - Thou shalt not kill.
It isn't so much a matter of how long ago, but what periods you get taught. I
bet we can all do more on the Greeks than the Incas.
What periods of history would the Federation teach their children? I would say
that the choice in many countries is determined by what image of the past they
wish to project and how they wish to mould beliefs.
For instance, we know that the Federation had banned religion, so it's a fair
bet that they would not teach anything about it at all, or else only things that
showed it in an unfavourable light such as the Crusades.
They would doubtless teach their children about how the Federation rose from the
ashes of world war and was the salvation of humanity (in my own version of B7
history there is a major nuclear war). They might teach of the bold explorers
who had discovered new worlds, of how evil rulers then swayed the colonists away
from benevolent Federation rulership for their own profit.
Maybe they'd touch on the Romans, a great empire that brought civilisation to
many parts of the world. We often project bits of the past that we like to
identify with or can use as justifications for how we are now.
The things that we don't learn about in history are often as illuminating as
those that we do. (I rememebr how horrified I was when as an adult I learnt
about the opium wars)
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
Fanzines for Blake's 7 and many other fandoms, B7 Filk songs, pictures, news,
Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth Thomas, etc.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 18:33:26 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: Valuable Knowledge (was Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0430173326-6d1Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Fri 30 Apr, Pat Patera wrote:
> Judith Proctor wrote:
> >
> > Though Blake got the name wrong with regard to the plague blankets story,
> ...
> > See the Sevencyclopaedia on
> > http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 to see who actually did the trick with the
> > blankets.
>
> I looked under P plague and B blankets but drew a blank (et).
> More hints, please.
Look under A for Lord Jeffrey Ashley
>
> PS. I saw a pix of ugly Bercol but no pix of pretty Bayban. Why?
because adding pictures is a slow process and we haven't got that far yet. We
intend to keep adding more pictures to the Sevencyclopaedia over time. We also
find that pictures occasionally generate new entries. There's a few entries in
the on-line version written by people other than Neil as we discovered that we
had pictures of things like obelisks and no entry.
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
Fanzines for Blake's 7 and many other fandoms, B7 Filk songs, pictures, news,
Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth Thomas, etc.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 15:45:47 EDT
From: Mac4781@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] "Man of Iron" for US B7 Fans
Message-ID: <8bb9f0dd.245b626b@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Judith wrote:
> On Thu 29 Apr, Bizarro7@aol.com wrote:
> > I've had enough inquiries now so that I'll just make a blanket
statement.
> If
> > anyone in the USA wants me to make a copy of the Paul Darrow B7 script
> MAN OF IRON, I'll send it to you postage paid for $5.00.
>
> Leah, how would you feel if someone in the UK offered to xerox copies of
> Bizzaro? Or what if they made copies of your cartoons without permission?
(
> I know how strongly you feel on that issue)
>
> Even if they didn't make a profit out of it, wouldn't you be up in arms?
I thought Leah's offer was kind and generous. Oftentimes, the only way fans
can get certain material is through the kindness of other fans who offer to
make copies. These are items that fans would be happy to purchase new, but
they simply aren't available. I have a number of radio and tv shows that I
wouldn't have if not for kind friends who made the effort to provide copies.
Think about tv shows that are only shown on one side of the Atlantic or the
other (Gareth in the Merlin show; Steven in Troubles and Strife). Fans
provide copies of that copyrighted material for other fans.
I would assume Leah was making the offer of material that she didn't know to
be otherwise available. Or, possibly, that she had also been given
permission to distribute the script. Especially since her offer was clearly
something that would mean a lot of work for her with no profit. I saw it as
a fan offering to provide a service for other fans. Let's give each other
the benefit of the doubt before assuming the worst.
I've been in contact with Diane and she has said she will make copies of "Man
of Iron" available through Linda Knights if that would make it easier for US
fans. More details on how to purchase "Man of Iron" from Horizon should be
forthcoming.
Carol Mc
Carol Mc
Via e-mail from Diane, she reaffirmed that it is available and will be made
available through Linda Knights if that would make it easier for American
fans.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 20:45:32 +1000
From: Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana.org.au>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long)
Message-ID: <19990430204532.A639@welkin.apana.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 10:51:33AM +0100, Alison Page wrote:
> The important questions for me, in relation to Blake in particular, are
>
> - can things get better, or must they inevitably return to some conservative
> default state?
> - is it ever justified to use violence to bring about change?
> - if people are prevented from deciding, can you intervene and make that
> kind of decision for them?
>
> I think these have been very live questions in most human societies, not
> just the modern west. My personal answers are yes they can, yes it is, yes
> you should. But I'm pretty sure that a good proportion of listees would
> disagree.
No, just the voluble ones. I agree, I think, but then I think some
more and I'm not sure. Let me think aloud...
Point a: Things *can* get better. But if you leave them alone, they
will get worse. What's that quote - "The only thing necessary for evil
to triumph is for good men to do nothing." And the other quote about
the price of freedom being eternal vigalence. I'm definitely in the
"Reform is not the same as progress" school of thought.
Point b: Violence. I am reminded of something that a wise man once
said to me: "Ghandi's method can only work against a morally upright
enemy." *I* would not use violence, but I think it is a bit extreme
to declare that violence is *never* justified. If violence was never
justified for the "good" guys, then I wouldn't be typing English right
now, on this List. I would be typing Japanese, and Blake's 7 would
have been made in German, and probably not made at all, and Israel
wouldn't exist. Reform is better than revolution, but sometimes
reform isn't possible.
Point c: Choosing for others who can't choose. Or, in this specific
Blake's 7 context, revolting on behalf of others you didn't ask.
Yes, you should. Trying to get a consensus for a revolution seems
about as silly to me as those marketing managers in Hitchiker's Guide
To The Galaxy who failed to invent the Wheel because they couldn't
agree on what colour it should be. Oppression should be fought, full
stop. (Preferably fought without violence, but still fought.)
What on earth has the mandate of the people got to do with it?
Evil dictatorships are so obviously evil that there is a moral
imperative to as least resist them, even if one doesn't have the
resources to actually revolt.
However, maybe the sticking point here is people's views of good and
evil, security and slavery? I find it hard to credit, but apparently
some people do define good and evil by what the majority believe, and
therefore, if a change is mooted, the majority must be polled and
agree with the change, otherwise the change is by definition, evil,
since the majority don't want it.
Mind you, I doubt that the Northerners in the American Civil War
polled the slaves to find out if they wanted to be freed or not.
Freedom is a difficult thing. It is much more secure to be a slave.
Kathryn Andersen
--
_--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana.org.au>
/ \ | http://home.connexus.net.au/~kat
\_.--.*/ | #include "standard/disclaimer.h"
v |
------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere
Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 20:07:18 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] French History
Message-ID: <00f701be934b$c7cd3fa0$7b428cd4@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="utf-7"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Judith wrote:
+AD4-But of course +ADw-grin+AD4- if you go to http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 and look up
Mme
+AD4-Roland in the Sevencyclopaedia, then you will something that Avon didn't.
(Neil
+AD4-really did his research when compiling that volume - he even figured out
what
+AD4-Sarkoff had in his record collection+ACE- - look up Kathleen Ferrier and Tommy
+AD4-Steele)
Credit for those two snippets really ought to go to my mum, probably the
most reluctant B7 researcher in the world ever. I almost had to physically
drag her in front of the video and force her to watch. It's the only B7
she's ever seen.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 21:13:13 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (potential spoilers)
Message-ID: <00f901be934b$c9fec5a0$7b428cd4@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="utf-7"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Judith (bless her little cotton socks) wrote:
+AD4-On planets like Albion it would have been impossible to drug everyone. The
+AD4-population of the entire planet was around 5 million. That suggests an
agrarian
+AD4-economy with the populace widely sacattered. Certainly no really major
cities.
+AD4-That means that large scale drugging is impractical as you don't have
+AD4-centralised food and water. Hence, I suspect, why they used the solium
device.
Very spurious reasoning to my mind. A dispersed agrarian society is
certainly possible, but other options are hardly ruled out. Almost the
entire population might have been contained in a handful of urban centres
with all the agrarian activity handled by robots. There might not have been
any agrarian activity at all - mining or manufacturing might have been the
prime contributor to the planet's GDP, or maybe something else entirely.
For all we know, they might have specialised in management retraining
seminars or wheatiflakes commercials.
Given the extremely low temperatures at the poles, only the equator might
have been remotely habitable, which might explain the low population (six
million, not five).
+AD4APg-In fact, Liberator's crew never visit any large urban centres (BBC budget
+AD4-restrictions +ADw-grin+AD4-?). If they had, doubtless we'd have seen evidence of
drug
+AD4-use. (The man Travis took for his experiment in 'Project Avalon' seemed
pretty
+AD4-docile though)
+AD4-
+AD4-Saurian Major was a self-governing colony that was annexed by the
Federation.
+AD4-The colonists declared independance (again showing that there was
widespread
+AD4-dis-satisfaction with the Federation) and were crushed. We know nothing
about
+AD4-its population or social structure. The Federation may or may not have
found it
+AD4-an easy place to use drugs. The fact that they could only subdue the
rebellion
+AD4-there by executing half the populace suggests that the resistance was
extremely
+AD4-widespread and had massive popular support.
+AD4-
+AD4-
+AD4-
+AD4-Essentially we have a situation where plants fall into two groups. Those
where
+AD4-drugs were used and there was no resistance. Those where drugs (for
whatever
+AD4-reason) were not used and where there seemed to be active opposition to
+AD4-Federation rule.
+AD4-
+AD4-The new thing about Pylene 50 was that it only needed to be used once. You
+AD4-didn't have to feed the drug continually into the the system. Once someone
had
+AD4-been affected, they stayed affected.
+AD4-
+AD4-Remember also that the use of drugs was unknown to most people. Look at
Blake's
+AD4-reaction in The Way Back when he laughs as the 'myth' that the population
are
+AD4-drugged.
Just as you would probably laugh at the suggestion that our society is being
drugged en masse. Yet some people would suggest that it is...
Who needs lobotomy when we've got the ITV?
Who needs ECT when there's good old BBC?
Switch on the set and light up the screen,
Fantasise and dream about what you might have been
...
Softly softly into your life, you're held in its brilliant glow.
Softly softly feeding itself on the you you'll never know.
Your life's reduced to nothing but an empty media game.
Big Brother ain't watching you, mate,
You're f---ing watching him.
(But I bet only Alison recognises the source of -that- one)
Judith also said in a later post:
+ADw-They couldn't drug the upper levels of society. They needed intelligent
people
to perform the jobs that were less repetative. That is presumably the
people
among whom Blake represented a danger. Where these people were concerned,
the
Federation had to try and pull the wool over their eyes as far as possible -
thus the charge of child-molesting.+AD4-
This reiterates a conviction, quite possibly erroneous, that suppressant
drugs inhibited higher mental functions. As I've said before, this need not
be the case. If the people we see on Earth in The Way Back are drugged, I
would suggest that Tel Varon might be one of them. And why not Morag, the
arbiter, Dr Havant, even Dev Tarrant?
Leylan wanted the prisoners heavily suppressed in order to keep them docile.
Not to make them stupid. I'm a little disturbed by this equation of
docility with stupidity. It suggests that dissidence is perceived to be a
primarily intellectual activity, which strikes me as bollocks. It's action
that counts, and action is not renowned for being terribly intellectual.
Anyone can think revolutionary thoughts but that in itself doesn't get any
revolting done.
I'll accept that a low level of suppressant might be widespread within the
Federation, but I still maintain that the heavy suppression we saw in TWB
was both local and temporary. The aim of suppressants, as I see it, was to
curb dissident activity (not thought) and bring it down to manageable
levels, not to do away with it altogether.
(In TWB, Blake was asked to go without food and drink for 36 hours because
the dosage level was untypically high. Were it not so, Ravella might not
have made such a stipulation. Blake's negative reaction to going outside -
'a category 4 crime' - suggests only aversion to comitting an illegal
action, not to conceiving of it. It's the difference between thinking about
robbing a bank and walking into one with a sawn-off shotgun.)
I'm also reminded of the Kommissar's remarks about 'resistors' in Horizon -
'Only one person in ten thousand is a resister' or somesuch. I suspect some
people at least made the mistake (if mistake it indeed is) that he was
referring to those who resist Federation rule - more likely he meant those
resistant to the suppressant drugs. Given the source of most of Blake's
crew, it is not unreasonable that they were so resistant to some degree or
another. Therefore Avon could conduct his bank fraud, and Vila go about his
thieving activities, -despite- being subject to the suppressants, not
through the various oft-touted but unlikely means of avoiding them. They
would be the warfarin-eating rats in the sewers of Federation society.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 20:20:50 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Curious things in Star One (long))
Message-ID: <00f801be934b$c9355b20$7b428cd4@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ellynne wrote:
>Just to add my two cents on Avon's knowledge of history, in Orbit,
>Egrorian quoted a woman executed in the French Revolution ("Liberty, oh,
>liberty, what crimes are committed in thy name") and Avon didn't have a
>clue what he was talking about.
As I recall, Egrorian assumed that Avon didn't know, and didn't give Avon
the chance to show whether he did or not. ('Do you know the source? No, of
course you don't.')
No firm conclusions to be drawn either way from that example, IMO.
Neil
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #151
**************************************