From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #227
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/227
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 227
Today's Topics:
Re: [B7L]Avon and Soolin
[B7L] woman and girl
Re: [B7L] woman and girl
Re: [B7L] Scriptwriters
Re: [B7L] Scriptwriters
Re: [B7L]Avon and Soolin
Re: [B7L] woman and girl
Fwd: [B7L] Greedy is as greedy does? (was Re: Avon & Vila)
[B7L] Just culled from Ceefax
Cleaned-up version: Re: [B7L] Greedy is as greedy does? (was Re:
Avon & Vila)
[B7L] Mountain Media Con
Re: [B7L] woman and girl
Re: [B7L] Greedy is as greedy does? (was Re:
Avon & Vila)
Re: [B7L]Avon and Soolin
Re: [B7L]Avon and Soolin
[B7L] Return of the Avon/Soolin debate
[B7L] Good news!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 08:36:38 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L]Avon and Soolin
Message-ID: <000201bed467$7a0328e0$63428cd4@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Pat wrote:
>Dayna, who is at least 18, (more like 20) is a young woman.
>Would you call an 18-24-year-old male a young boy?
Probably not, but that wouldn't necessarily stop him behaving like one.
>Terminology is a powerful tool used in the infantilization and
>sujugation of women.
>Please don't take it lightly.
>OK! Grammar lecture is over.
But what about adult women referring to each other as girls? Just as adult
men refer to each other as boys. Any man aged 60 upwards can be termed an
'old boy', and not necessarily by his peers.
This is a complicated area, related not so much to the use of words in
themselves as to the implication of power relationships through the choice
of words used. This can get quite amusing, as when my supervisor calls me
'son' even though he's nearly ten years younger than I am. Admittedly he's
also nearly ten times bigger than me.
Having said all that, I'm broadly with Pat on this issue.
Except it's not grammar, it's whatever the word is for how words are used.
(Philology? No. Lexicography? Etymology? Damn, damn, what -is- the word?
I ought to know this...)
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 18:24:40 +0100
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "B7 List" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] woman and girl
Message-ID: <000e01bed468$44f448e0$ca8edec2@pre-installedco>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mistral said -
>Infantilization and subjugation, however, is another one of those
>perceptual things; I don't view myself as either, and so I am
>unlikely to object to being called a girl unless the person is
>being deliberately condescending, the more so if she's female.
A couple of decades ago it would be the rule in many commercial
organisations that young lads in their twenties referred to women colleagues
who were older than them as 'girls', and the 'girls' were expected to go
along with it. This name-calling was also associated with condescending
and frankly bloody irritating attitudes - anyway, enough said.
I suspect that if any of the women (no - scratch that - people) on this list
went back to those days we would be startled and rather disgusted at it.
Even those of us who lived through it: you forget what it was like.
It's because women were prepared to make a fuss about it that it became
rare, and because it is now rare some women can say 'Oh, it doesn't bother
me' - it doesn't bother you precisely because women who went before you made
a fuss, and were prepared to be ridiculed for that stance. And (the vast
majority of) men, to their credit, listened to the women and changed.
Alison
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 10:55:08 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] woman and girl
Message-ID: <37975AFC.939DF0E6@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Alison Page wrote:
> A couple of decades ago it would be the rule in many commercial
> organisations that young lads in their twenties referred to women colleagues
> who were older than them as 'girls', and the 'girls' were expected to go
> along with it. This name-calling was also associated with condescending
> and frankly bloody irritating attitudes - anyway, enough said.
>
> I suspect that if any of the women (no - scratch that - people) on this list
> went back to those days we would be startled and rather disgusted at it.
> Even those of us who lived through it: you forget what it was like.
>
> It's because women were prepared to make a fuss about it that it became
> rare, and because it is now rare some women can say 'Oh, it doesn't bother
> me' - it doesn't bother you precisely because women who went before you made
> a fuss, and were prepared to be ridiculed for that stance. And (the vast
> majority of) men, to their credit, listened to the women and changed.
I'm sorry, Alison, but you are egregiously mistaken about
what bothers me or why. I lived through it as well; and I'm
also painfully aware that men still patronise women every
day. I did say I think it's relative; I think being fifteen or
twenty years older than someone qualifies you to think of
them as young, relatively speaking. Using a diminutive to
someone older than you is an entirely different matter. It's
no point in comparing them. And equals can sort things
out between themselves. I happen to think it's disrespectful
when bank clerks, doctors, telephone solicitors, etc., call me
by my first name without permission; but I don't get all bent
out of shape and lecture them on rudeness, either.
Mistral
--
"It seems that I'm some kind of a galactic yo-yo."
--the third Doctor
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 14:03:41 EDT
From: Tigerm1019@aol.com
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Scriptwriters
Message-ID: <9c0bd677.24c8b6fd@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 7/22/99 10:11:35 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk writes:
> Gareth once said that the child molesting angle prevented the programme
being
> broadcast in the States for several years. I don't know if he was correct.
Given how conservative most of the U.S. is, it wouldn't surprise me at all.
B7 wasn't broadcast on WILL (Champaign-Urbana, IL) until 1987 or so. Lucky
people in the Chcago area got to see it a couple of years earlier.
Tiger M
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 13:25:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: hill susan a <adairh@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
To: blakes 7 list <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Scriptwriters
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.9907221322480.14461-100000@staff1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999 Tigerm1019@aol.com wrote:
>
> Given how conservative most of the U.S. is, it wouldn't surprise me at all.
> B7 wasn't broadcast on WILL (Champaign-Urbana, IL) until 1987 or so. Lucky
> people in the Chcago area got to see it a couple of years earlier.
>
Actually it was 1989 for WILL. I know, I can remember viewing the episode
with Tyce on New Year's Eve, 1989. I spent a good part of 1990 trying to
track down the earlier episodes that I had missed.
Susan Adair
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 19:26:24 +0100
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L]Avon and Soolin
Message-ID: <001001bed46f$ce583c20$ca8edec2@pre-installedco>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Except it's not grammar, it's whatever the word is for how words are used.
>(Philology? No. Lexicography? Etymology? Damn, damn, what -is- the
word?
>I ought to know this...)
>
>Neil
Semantics?
Alison
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 19:40:54 +0100
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "B7 List" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] woman and girl
Message-ID: <001901bed471$f78da240$ca8edec2@pre-installedco>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>I'm sorry, Alison, but you are egregiously mistaken about
>what bothers me or why. I lived through it as well; and I'm
>also painfully aware that men still patronise women every
>day.
Actually, I kind of guessed you were my age (ish).
So it comes down to this - something either bothers you (I mean generic
'you') or it doesn't. And if it does bother you, you either do something
about it or not. I guess it's a matter of taste. I guess my taste is to make
a fuss when things bother me.
If I can be bothered that is :-)
But, wrenching the subject back to B7, I actually might refer to Dayna as a
'girl' and mean it condescendingly (well.. a bit patronisingly at least).
because I think she is very young and foolish. But then it's precisely
because the word has that kind of force that I wince to hear it applied to a
nurse, or a scientist or whatever.
Alison
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 14:44:37 EDT
From: VulcanXYZ@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Fwd: [B7L] Greedy is as greedy does? (was Re: Avon & Vila)
Message-ID: <55ca25e5.24c8c095@aol.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_55ca25e5.24c8c095_boundary"
--part1_55ca25e5.24c8c095_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I wrote this post at work, forwarded to me home, and now am forwarding it to
the lyst. I hope this works.
Gail
--part1_55ca25e5.24c8c095_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline
Return-Path: <GGawlik@stfrancis.edu>
Received: from aol.com (rly-za02.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.98]) by
air-za02.mail.aol.com (v60.18) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Jul 1999 11:54:04
-0400
Received: from stfrancis.edu ([206.54.235.17]) by rly-za02.mx.aol.com
(v60.18) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Jul 1999 11:53:35 -0400
Received: from USFnet-Message_Server by stfrancis.edu
with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 22 Jul 1999 10:52:19 -0500
Message-Id: <s796f7e3.047@stfrancis.edu>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 10:51:47 -0500
From: "Gail Gawlik" <GGawlik@stfrancis.edu>
To: <VulcanXYZ@aol.com>
Subject: [B7L] Greedy is as greedy does? (was Re: Avon & Vila)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Goodness, gracious!!! My summaries were only meant to make my post read mor=
e smoothly through all of my snips. Instead, they seem to have created more =
misunderstandings!!! I shall have to be more careful when I summarize. Sti=
ll, the summaries suggest that I am STILL not understanding your posts, at l=
east not completely. For an INFP, understanding is very important, and reac=
hing a concensus suggests a "meeting of minds." Although it's okay to agree =
to disagree, it is much less satisfying to the NF. Still, I hope all of you =
INTs will stick with me while I work through this. (Now, now, I am not just =
being fuzzy here, but just think differently.)=20
When I said:
> Mistral came up with this interesting idea to back up her view that Avon's
> money-grubbing was the result of a deep insecurity (have I got that right,
> Mistral?) rather than my contention that it was a convenient way to keep
> people at bay:
She replied:
Hmm... I guess that depends on whether you think of a strong
desire to control your own destiny and avoid being controlled
by others as insecurity. I certainly don't; I think of that as
independence, self-reliance, and a little distrust of others' intent
and ability to look out for you as well as you'd look out for
yourself. An individualist sort of philosophy. It *does*, in fact,
often appear a little paranoid to people who are more connection
oriented.
No, no, no, I don't have any problem with the individualist. They are very =
necessary to make the world go around, IMHO. When I mentioned *deep insecur=
ity*, I was thinking more of your remark that Avon was a control-freak. I h=
appen to live with a control-freak and know that this trait can cause a lot =
of grief for all concerned, especially those being controlled. And I don't =
see Avon as a control freak, although he is a very organized and exacting pe=
rson which is not the same thing.
<But I think the greed is... a false solution. Poor logic. Shallow
and stupid, and because he doesn't reevaluate it often enough,
a blind spot when we meet him.
Yes, I'll agree that greed is a false solution, both as a form of security a=
nd as a way to keep others at bay, an INTP trait as you have pointed out. A=
s Leah pointed out, we are probably both right, there being an element of re=
al greed in Avon and his using it to keep others away. <Gail seeking consen=
sus here!>
<snipping a bit- talking about Avon as INTP vs. INTJ> Mistral says:
<snicker> You'll never get 'em to agree... I'll just say that
some of the bits I find puzzling if you say INTJ fall *wham*
into place when you say INTP faking INTJ.
Interesting. But I thought the P rating suggested a certain amount of disor=
ganization, and Avon never seemed anything to me but organized. Am I off on =
this?
When I try to summarize further, saying:
> Furthermore, as a compensation-device, Mistral feels that Avon is a
> control-freak and adds:
Mistral replies:
<Er... I'm sure that you're restating for pupose of clarifying,
but I don't think that I meant it as a compensation-device.
Actually, control-freak is, in itself, a very strong term; I said
a *bit* of one; trying to give an example of how strong I think
this desire for self-determination is in him, so you won't just
think "well everyone wants to control their destiny"; this desire
is *very strong* in INTPs (and INTJs, I think). He doesn't want
his opportunities or his potential for achievement of any sort
limited by what Federation society will allow (like Coser in
Weapon). INTPs want to see all, know all, be all (unless it
involves feely-feely stuff).
Well, I guess the *control-freak* statement threw me off. Seeing Avon as a =
strong individualist fits my view of him, also. <more consensus :) > =20
Actually, INFPs want to know it all also, including the emotional stuff! Bu=
t I always double check my feelings against the facts to make sure I am on t=
he right track. (I don't know if this is common with other INFPs or not.)
Then talking about Blake/Avon, I said:
> The independent INT would certainly have a hard time with this. But I don=
't
> see how that makes Avon a control-freak. Indeed, if he were a control-fre=
ak,
> I don't think he could have stayed with Blake who was nearly as controllin=
g
> as the society he was fighting against.
And Mistral replied:
<I don't mean Fed society *gave* him the desire for control.
I mean the regimentation pulled against his *natural* desire
for control and aggravated it.
Interesting. This could be. And yes, I think his individualism was a natur=
al part of him, also. <consensus, I love it!>
But here I still disagree < :( > <snipping a bit> Mistral says:
<Also, I really don't think he felt as controlled by Blake as he
did by the nameless, faceless institutions of Fed society; he
could argue with Blake. From Duel:
Blake: Does that mean you agree?
Avon: Do I have a choice?
Blake: Yes.
Avon: Then I agree.
Pre-Blake, his voice wasn't heard. With Blake, it was, even
if not always heeded. He probably spent a lot of time hoping
that Blake would learn to pay attention to him; and a lot more
time laughing at himself for bothering to entertain such a
daft hope.
Well, I think they all felt controlled by the Federation, sort of the norm f=
or that society. And I can see that this would be worse for some types, suc=
h as Avon's individualist type. But I think Avon's main conflict was his at=
traction to Blake. Blake was extremely magnetic and had a conviction for SO=
METHING, it didn't matter to Avon what it was, that Avon lacked. This attra=
ction wasn't something that Avon had analyzed and chosen, so it probably bot=
hered him even more. And no matter how often he threatened to leave, he fou=
nd himself bound to the crew, but to Blake especially. This must have been =
galling for the very proud, individualistic INT.
Then discussing the compartmentalized Avon <with snips> Mistral says:
<I agree completely with this part, now I understand what you
mean (and cannot resist mentioning that one of my MB books
mentions compartmentalizing as an INTP trait :)
But when I say:
> But the relating Avon has been very
> hurt by past experiences and works very hard at portraying a hard-nosed,
> I-don't-need-anyone facade. Indeed, I know plenty of people who do great =
at
> work but have no real personal life at home.
She replies <with snips>:
<But here I'll have to say you're only half-right. He indeed works
hard at pushing people away. However, I think you're interpreting
the desire not to be close as an act;
No, no, I think the *pushing people away* part is very real. It's the greed =
that I found, at least in part, to be an act. And I can see the rest of you=
r description of INTPs as being right on the money.
Mistral continues:
<Also, we want to be sure that those friends feel the same
commitment we do, and understand the importance of being 'let in'.
Hmmm, well, remember that INFPs are introverts, also. So we have a drive to =
reach out to people that fights with the introvert part of us, uncomfortable =
at times. We tend to reach out only to one or two people at a time, with as =
much trepidation as any INFP, I think. Afterall, we are only different by o=
ne letter, suggesting that exists some similarities between our personalitie=
s.
<Mostly, that involves being politely distant and turning down overtures
of casual friendship;
Which would probably hurt the INFP's feelings. Feelings can be a real disad=
vantage at times.
<(This, I
think, is one of the places fuzzy INFPs misunderstand prickly INTPs;
the desire for distance is normal to us, not a dysfunction.)
This is very interesting, a fact that I shall try and remember when I am doi=
ng my *reality check.*
< One of
the reasons Blake made the cut is because he pushed back, just as
hard, and he didn't give up-- but his appeal wasn't emotional, it was
practical. (INTPs like to have a practical excuse for emotions.)
Hmmm, interesting. What was Blake's personality type? The INFP doesn't giv=
e up easily, either. My read on Avon was that there WAS an emotional appeal =
that he didn't want to recognize and that bugged the heck out of him. But h=
e would certainly have a plethora of rational excuses to explain it away.
Mistral says about greed & Avon:
<Ack! Not obsessed. But true greed. Not the same thing.
No, I can't see this. Webster says greed is *excessive or reprehensible acq=
uisitiveness* and how can you achieve this is you are not obsessed with mone=
y?
<snip, snip, & snip >
When I said:
> Well, I don't think making someone fight in a war through the draft is the
> same thing as trying to throw them out of an airlock. At least as a soldi=
er,
> you have a chance to live and you are defending your country, so it's for =
a
> greater good. (Ooooh, I think I'm sounding like Blake here!)
Mistral's evil twin responded:
Yes you are, you fluffy bunny Idealist groupist, you!! ;-)
<Mistral's evil twin taunts Gail, nyah, nyah, nyah!!>
Dang, I have tried to be more rational, less idealistic, and just can't do i=
t. Must be that INFP thing.
<Hugs back>
Gail
--
"It seems that I'm some kind of a galactic yo-yo."
--the third Doctor
I love the Doctor, all of him!
--part1_55ca25e5.24c8c095_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 20:55:40 +0100
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>,
"Space City" <space-city@world.std.com>
Subject: [B7L] Just culled from Ceefax
Message-ID: <000701bed47c$3f9894f0$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ceefax p.566
Apparently, Equity have just agreed to reduce the amount paid in residuals
for a whole pile of BBC dramas, which means that the BBC will now find it
cheap enough to start repeating things.
Three shows were mentioned in particular as being 'treasures' from the
archives: Poldark, Lovejoy and - you guessed it - B7.
So even less reason to leave the house during the day. Anyone for decent
off-air copies?
Una
http://www.q-research.connectfree.co.uk/personal/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 19:33:44 EDT
From: VulcanXYZ@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Cleaned-up version: Re: [B7L] Greedy is as greedy does? (was Re:
Avon & Vila)
Message-ID: <6bccc2f8.24c90458@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Here is the same post, redone in a more readable form, I hope. Sorry for the
inconvenience!
Goodness, gracious!!! My summaries were only meant to make my post read more
smoothly through all of my snips. Instead, they seem to have created more
misunderstandings!!! I shall have to be more careful when I summarize.
Still, the summaries suggest that I am STILL not understanding your posts, at
least not completely. For an INFP, understanding is very important, and
reaching a consensus suggests a "meeting of minds." Although it's okay to
agree
to disagree, it is much less satisfying to the NF. Still, I hope all of you
INTs will stick with me while I work through this. (Now, now, I am not just
being fuzzy here, but just think differently.)
When I said:
> Mistral came up with this interesting idea to back up her view that Avon's
> money-grubbing was the result of a deep insecurity (have I got that right,
> Mistral?) rather than my contention that it was a convenient way to keep
> people at bay:
She replied:
Hmm... I guess that depends on whether you think of a strong
desire to control your own destiny and avoid being controlled
by others as insecurity. I certainly don't; I think of that as
independence, self-reliance, and a little distrust of others' intent
and ability to look out for you as well as you'd look out for
yourself. An individualist sort of philosophy. It *does*, in fact,
often appear a little paranoid to people who are more connection
oriented.
No, no, no, I don't have any problem with the individualist. They are very
necessary to make the world go around, IMHO. When I mentioned *deep
insecurity*, I was thinking more of your remark that Avon was a
control-freak. I happen to live with a control-freak and know that this
trait can cause a lot
of grief for all concerned, especially those being controlled. And I don't
see Avon as a control freak, although he is a very organized and exacting
person which is not the same thing.
<But I think the greed is... a false solution. Poor logic. Shallow
and stupid, and because he doesn't reevaluate it often enough,
a blind spot when we meet him.
Yes, I'll agree that greed is a false solution, both as a form of security
and as a way to keep others at bay, an INTP trait as you have pointed out.
As Leah pointed out, we are probably both right, there being an element of
real greed in Avon and his using it to keep others away. <Gail seeking
consensus here!>
<snipping a bit- talking about Avon as INTP vs. INTJ> Mistral says:
<snicker> You'll never get 'em to agree... I'll just say that
some of the bits I find puzzling if you say INTJ fall *wham*
into place when you say INTP faking INTJ.
Interesting. But I thought the P rating suggested a certain amount of
disorganization, and Avon never seemed anything to me but organized. Am I
off on
this?
When I try to summarize further, saying:
> Furthermore, as a compensation-device, Mistral feels that Avon is a
> control-freak and adds:
Mistral replies:
<Er... I'm sure that you're restating for purpose of clarifying,
but I don't think that I meant it as a compensation-device.
Actually, control-freak is, in itself, a very strong term; I said
a *bit* of one; trying to give an example of how strong I think
this desire for self-determination is in him, so you won't just
think "well everyone wants to control their destiny"; this desire
is *very strong* in INTPs (and INTJs, I think). He doesn't want
his opportunities or his potential for achievement of any sort
limited by what Federation society will allow (like Coser in
Weapon). INTPs want to see all, know all, be all (unless it
involves feely-feely stuff).
Well, I guess the *control-freak* statement threw me off. Seeing Avon as a
strong individualist fits my view of him, also. <more consensus :) >
Actually, INFPs want to know it all also, including the emotional stuff! But
I always double check my feelings against the facts to make sure I am on the
right track. (I don't know if this is common with other INFPs or not.)
Then talking about Blake/Avon, I said:
> The independent INT would certainly have a hard time with this. But I don't
> see how that makes Avon a control-freak. Indeed, if he were a
control-freak,
> I don't think he could have stayed with Blake who was nearly as controlling
> as the society he was fighting against.
And Mistral replied:
But here I still disagree < :( > <snipping a bit> Mistral says:
<Also, I really don't think he felt as controlled by Blake as he
did by the nameless, faceless institutions of Fed society; he
could argue with Blake. From Duel:
Blake: Does that mean you agree?
Avon: Do I have a choice?
Blake: Yes.
Avon: Then I agree.
Pre-Blake, his voice wasn't heard. With Blake, it was, even
if not always heeded. He probably spent a lot of time hoping
that Blake would learn to pay attention to him; and a lot more
time laughing at himself for bothering to entertain such a
daft hope.
Well, I think they all felt controlled by the Federation, sort of the norm
for that society. And I can see that this would be worse for some types,
such as Avon's individualist type. But I think Avon's main conflict was his
attraction to Blake. Blake was extremely magnetic and had a conviction for
SOMETHING, it didn't matter to Avon what it was, that Avon lacked. This
attraction wasn't something that Avon had analyzed and chosen, so it probably
bothered him even more. And no matter how often he threatened to leave, he
found himself bound to the crew, but to Blake especially. This must have
been galling for the very proud, individualistic INT.
Then discussing the compartmentalized Avon <with snips> Mistral says:
But the relating Avon has been very
> hurt by past experiences and works very hard at portraying a hard-nosed,
> I-don't-need-anyone facade. Indeed, I know plenty of people who do great at
> work but have no real personal life at home.
She replies <with snips>:
<But here I'll have to say you're only half-right. He indeed works
hard at pushing people away. However, I think you're interpreting
the desire not to be close as an act;
No, no, I think the *pushing people away* part is very real. It's the greed
that I found, at least in part, to be an act. And I can see the rest of your
description of INTPs as being right on the money.
Mistral continues:
<Also, we want to be sure that those friends feel the same
commitment we do, and understand the importance of being 'let in'.
Hmmm, well, remember that INFPs are introverts, also. So we have a drive to
reach out to people that fights with the introvert part of us, uncomfortable
at times. We end to reach out only to one or two people at a time, with as
much trepidation as any INFP, I think. After all, we are only different by
one letter, suggesting that exists some similarities between our
personalities.
<Mostly, that involves being politely distant and turning down overtures
of casual friendship;
Which would probably hurt the INFP's feelings. Feelings can be a real
disadvantage at times.
<(This, I think, is one of the places fuzzy INFPs misunderstand prickly INTPs;
the desire for distance is normal to us, not a dysfunction.)
This is very interesting, a fact that I shall try and remember when I am
doing my *reality check.*
< One of the reasons Blake made the cut is because he pushed back, just as
hard, and he didn't give up-- but his appeal wasn't emotional, it was
practical. (INTPs like to have a practical excuse for emotions.)
Hmmm, interesting. What was Blake's personality type? The INFP doesn't give
up easily, either. My read on Avon was that there WAS an emotional appeal
that he didn't want to recognize and that bugged the heck out of him. But he
would certainly have a plethora of rational excuses to explain it away.
Mistral says about greed & Avon:
<Ack! Not obsessed. But true greed. Not the same thing.
No, I can't see this. Webster says greed is *excessive or reprehensible
acquisitiveness* and how can you achieve this is you are not obsessed with
money?
<snip, snip, & snip >
When I said:
> Well, I don't think making someone fight in a war through the draft is the
> same thing as trying to throw them out of an airlock. At least as a
soldier,
> you have a chance to live and you are defending your country, so it's for a
> greater good. (Ooooh, I think I'm sounding like Blake here!)
Mistral's evil twin responded:
Yes you are, you fluffy bunny Idealist groupist, you!! ;-)
<Mistral's evil twin taunts Gail, nyah, nyah, nyah!!>
Dang, I have tried to be more rational, less idealistic, and just can't do
it. Must be that INFP thing.
<Hugs back>
Gail
--
"It seems that I'm some kind of a galactic yo-yo."
--the third Doctor
I love the Doctor, all of him!
-
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 21:32:31 EDT
From: Pherber@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se (lysator), space-city@world.std.com (Space City)
Subject: [B7L] Mountain Media Con
Message-ID: <2f71de7.24c9202f@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Is anyone here going to be in Denver this weekend for Mountain Media Con?
I'm going to check it out for at least one day -- it would be really cool to
actually meet some of you!
Nina
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 20:20:20 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] woman and girl
Message-ID: <3797DF73.6ED23C3@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Alison Page wrote:
> But, wrenching the subject back to B7, I actually might refer to Dayna as a
> 'girl' and mean it condescendingly (well.. a bit patronisingly at least).
> because I think she is very young and foolish. But then it's precisely
> because the word has that kind of force that I wince to hear it applied to a
> nurse, or a scientist or whatever.
Can't find anything to disagree with there. Pity. ;-)
Mistral
--
"It seems that I'm some kind of a galactic yo-yo."
--the third Doctor
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 21:11:24 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Greedy is as greedy does? (was Re:
Avon & Vila)
Message-ID: <3797EB69.A253FBD1@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Gail wrote:
> For an INFP, understanding is very important, and
> reaching a consensus suggests a "meeting of minds." Although it's okay to
> agree to disagree, it is much less satisfying to the NF.
Ooh, yeah, me too. I like to find *some* point of agreement--
one of the reasons I go on so.
Re control (as in self-determination):
> No, no, no, I don't have any problem with the individualist. They are very
> necessary to make the world go around, IMHO. When I mentioned *deep
> insecurity*, I was thinking more of your remark that Avon was a
> control-freak. I happen to live with a control-freak and know that this
> trait can cause a lot
> of grief for all concerned, especially those being controlled. And I don't
> see Avon as a control freak, although he is a very organized and exacting
> person which is not the same thing.
Sorry, I did wonder if you'd find the term confusing. What
I mean to say is he needs to control *himself*, and his destiny,
and that sometimes has to extend to controlling the environment.
Controlling other people wouldn't interest him much; as long as
he can keep them from controlling or emotionally invading him.
(Well, um, okay, sometimes we do it for fun, just to prove we can.)
On Referee/Adult Leah trying to confiscate the game ball ;-)
> Yes, I'll agree that greed is a false solution, both as a form of security
> and as a way to keep others at bay, an INTP trait as you have pointed out.
> As Leah pointed out, we are probably both right, there being an element of
> real greed in Avon and his using it to keep others away. <Gail seeking
> consensus here!>
For the sake of consensus <g> I'll agree that he generally
exaggerates his worst qualities in order to push others away.
I haven't noticed it with the greed, except in Trial, maybe.
On P/J traits:
> Interesting. But I thought the P rating suggested a certain amount of
> disorganization, and Avon never seemed anything to me but organized. Am I
> off on this?
Not off on it being a P trait, no, but you don't have to have all
the traits for your end of the scale. It's a continuum, not an
on-off switch. (Just because you're an F, doesn't mean you
can't think!) Just based on the 7 or 8 INTPs I'm acquainted
with, my guess is it's pretty common for us to work hard at
having more J characteristics, as otherwise we find it very
difficult to function in the day-to-day world. Organization
seems to be one of the ones we work hardest at, that and
decision-making.
Re Big Brother Blake:
> But here I still disagree < :( > <snipping a bit> Mistral says:
> <Also, I really don't think he felt as controlled by Blake as he
> did by the nameless, faceless institutions of Fed society; he
> could argue with Blake. From Duel:
> Blake: Does that mean you agree?
> Avon: Do I have a choice?
> Blake: Yes.
> Avon: Then I agree.
> Pre-Blake, his voice wasn't heard. With Blake, it was, even
> if not always heeded. He probably spent a lot of time hoping
> that Blake would learn to pay attention to him; and a lot more
> time laughing at himself for bothering to entertain such a
> daft hope.
>
> Well, I think they all felt controlled by the Federation, sort of the norm
> for that society. And I can see that this would be worse for some types,
> such as Avon's individualist type. But I think Avon's main conflict was his
> attraction to Blake. Blake was extremely magnetic and had a conviction for
> SOMETHING, it didn't matter to Avon what it was, that Avon lacked. This
> attraction wasn't something that Avon had analyzed and chosen, so it probably
> bothered him even more. And no matter how often he threatened to leave, he
> found himself bound to the crew, but to Blake especially. This must have
> been galling for the very proud, individualistic INT.
I'll agree with you he was conflicted about Blake; but
what I meant is, Blake gave Avon some input, at least,
whereas in Federation, Avon would have felt a cipher.
*Some* control is better than *no* control; and he was
probably fooling himself he had more control than he
actually did, and a chance of getting even more. Within
Federation society, however, he'd already hit the point
where he felt he had to break free, hence his turning to
crime.
On excuses for friendship:
> < One of the reasons Blake made the cut is because he pushed back, just as
> hard, and he didn't give up-- but his appeal wasn't emotional, it was
> practical. (INTPs like to have a practical excuse for emotions.)
>
> Hmmm, interesting. What was Blake's personality type? The INFP doesn't give
> up easily, either. My read on Avon was that there WAS an emotional appeal
> that he didn't want to recognize and that bugged the heck out of him. But he
> would certainly have a plethora of rational excuses to explain it away.
Blake's usually thought of as ENFJ or ENTJ. IMHO, definitely
ENFJ. Yes, there was an emotional appeal tugging at Avon;
what I mean is that Blake's *approach* wasn't emotional.
Respect for the INTP mind is nearly guaranteed to strike at
the INTP heart. Blake was not afraid to argue his opinions,
but also made it clear he valued Avon's opinions. That's a very
powerful combination, that.
On obsession:
> Mistral says about greed & Avon:
> <Ack! Not obsessed. But true greed. Not the same thing.
>
> No, I can't see this. Webster says greed is *excessive or reprehensible
> acquisitiveness* and how can you achieve this is you are not obsessed with
> money?
It's not the definition of greed that's messing us up, it's the
definition of obsession. Obsession means it's achieved a
degree of importance that it blocks out pretty much all else;
I might let you get away with calling him obsessed with
Blake, but that's the only thing; and I don't think I'd agree there.
> I love the Doctor, all of him!
Partial to the fifth Doctor, myself.
<bounce> <bounce> <bounce>
==========================
Mistral
--
"It seems that I'm some kind of a galactic yo-yo."
--the third Doctor
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 09:05:16 -0600
From: "Ellynne G." <rilliara@juno.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L]Avon and Soolin
Message-ID: <19990518.090518.9958.0.Rilliara@juno.com>
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999 04:27:52 -0700 mistral@ptinet.net writes:
>In the ongoing A/Soo battle, er, debate, er, opinion sharing,
>Mistral and Ellynne (chronologically) spake thusly:
Having said that, though,
>the necessities of her life had made her extremely cold. We're
>never told (that I recall) at what point she took up with her
>family's killers, but all the scenarios I can think of that place
>her close enough to them to learn gunslinging from them and
>then kill them are pretty horrific.
I know what you mean. I always thought she was picked up directly by her
family's killers, sort of the way Cassandra was picked up by Methos in
Highlander. They came and killed her family. Soolin, possibly out in
the barn when the bloodbath started, had time to grab a weapon she didn't
really know how to use and attack a minute or so after the main events
were over and the killers were not quite trigger-happy. One of them
disarmed her quickly and, half amused at what she'd done, decided to keep
her (he didn't strike me as the overly sober or intelligent type, just a
good shot). Soolin was a name the gang gave her (when I first heard it
on the show, her name sounded Chinese [specifically, if sounded like the
name of a friend from China] and I kept waiting for an explanation for
how her outlander blondeness got it). She either gave a good impression
of being a broken prisoner or went through a phase while waiting for a
better chance to get them.
Ellynne
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 23:21:50 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L]Avon and Soolin
Message-ID: <379809FE.3121C093@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ellynne G. wrote:
> I know what you mean. I always thought she was picked up directly by her
> family's killers, sort of the way Cassandra was picked up by Methos in
> Highlander. They came and killed her family. Soolin, possibly out in
> the barn when the bloodbath started, had time to grab a weapon she didn't
> really know how to use and attack a minute or so after the main events
> were over and the killers were not quite trigger-happy. One of them
> disarmed her quickly and, half amused at what she'd done, decided to keep
> her (he didn't strike me as the overly sober or intelligent type, just a
> good shot). Soolin was a name the gang gave her (when I first heard it
> on the show, her name sounded Chinese [specifically, if sounded like the
> name of a friend from China] and I kept waiting for an explanation for
> how her outlander blondeness got it). She either gave a good impression
> of being a broken prisoner or went through a phase while waiting for a
> better chance to get them.
This is a lot like my impression, that she wound up with them
immediately; but I also had the impression that she was only
a child, maybe eight; old enough to be aware of the horror,
but not old enough to fight back. That would seem to be an
extremely traumatic experience. Brutal doesn't half say it.
And then she had to pretend to be amenable, enough a part
of their group to learn gunfighting. Perhaps they were just
teaching a child, for amusement? Or perhaps as she got older
they believed she had really become part of the gang; or
maybe one of them had a wife and kids somewhere and
'adopted' her?
How this relates to my reading of her relationship with
Dorian is that, pretty as she is, I can't see a bunch of men
who wouldn't scruple at mass-murder and kidnapping,
leaving her untouched as she matured. She might easily
not associate sex with love or caring at all; at best, perhaps,
she'd see it as pleasure, or a commodity, as she certainly
couldn't be unaware of her own attractiveness. For this
reason, I don't find the idea of a physical relationship as
part of a business arrangement unworkable at all.
Scorpio crew could easily be the warmest environment
she'd been in since her family died (horrible thought!)
And probably equally the best pool of potential mates.
The bigger question then is probably how did she develop
and retain the very real sensitivity and compassion that
she displays in the second half of the series? Can it be
possible that Scorpio crew brought out things that lay
dormant from childhood? Or were there other friends
or acquaintances along the way who nurtured the better
parts of Soolin? She's *remarkably* functional, considering
any background I could reasonably see, IMHO.
As to her name, Sue Lynn is also common in the US,
and isn't AFAIK particular to any ethnic group.
Speculatively,
Mistral
--
"It seems that I'm some kind of a galactic yo-yo."
--the third Doctor
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 02:33:03 PDT
From: "Rob Clother" <whitehorse_dream@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Return of the Avon/Soolin debate
Message-ID: <19990723093307.11766.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Now that there's precious little work to be done in this office, I've got
time to return to this thread. Having an argument with me takes rather a
lot of patience!
Mistral, Re Avon going to GP and springing it on Soolin, out of the blue:
>Even assuming that he knew she was from GP, which is never >explicitly
>stated...
I'd rather based my point on that assumption. I thought it was stated, or
at least hinted at, but my VCR's up the duff at the moment, so I'll take
your word for it. Anyway, for the moment, let's assume he did know, because
I don't really have a point otherwise...
>A thinker would not want their or anyone else's personal feelings >brought
>into the work environment; you keep them separate. For him >to warn her
>would be patronising; it would imply that she was
>unprofessional...
>Avon would expect Soolin to cope; as she would
>expect him to if she were in charge. Can't really see her
>going to Avon in private and saying 'just thought I'd let you
>know that we're going to Earth because you killed your
>girlfriend there and might need some time to adjust first.'
There's more than one way to skin a cat, though. How about consulting her
in private beforehand? Saying something like, "Soolin, what can you tell me
about Gauda Prime?" That's not being rude or condescending, or even
unprofessional -- but it is saving her the embarassment of discovering
Avon's plan in front of the rest of the crew. And she *was* visibly upset
by the revelation. Otherwise she wouldn't have threatened Vila over his
choice of semantics, and she wouldn't have allowed Dayna to get physically
close to her. Both acts were out of character.
For someone as professional as Soolin, being visibly hurt in front of
colleagues whose respect you've worked hard to earn adds insult to injury.
She was not pleased with Avon.
On to something else:
>Avon can certainly be brutal. Then again, so can Soolin.
>They're both very pragmatic. However, your original comment
>was that he lacked the subtlety and sophistication to understand
>Soolin. I don't think it would require a great deal, as they're so
>much alike.
For every similarity you come up with, I bet I can come up with a deeper
dissimilarity. It might take me a few weeks, though! :-)
>Soolin's got both the mindset to understand and appreciate Avon's
>strengths and the compassion to forgive his weaknesses. In all
>honesty, I can't think of another female character in the series
>that has both. Just IMHO.
Avon is one of these people whose (It chokes me to use this word to describe
one of my least favourite characters) *charm* overrides people's better
judgement. On the first viewing of Series 3, it's easy to say, "Tarrant,
what a bastard", and excuse Avon for worse behaviour. Because Soolin is (as
you correctly pointed out) so pragmatic, and because she has the ability to
see through people, she'll see Avon's weaknesses more clearly than others.
And she'll find them less easy to forgive.
>Er, addendum to that. Soolin is perhaps the only one who
>wouldn't see as weaknesses some of the qualities in Avon
>that he himself thinks of as strengths. Also IMHO.
For Soolin, read Servalan. Then I'll agree with you.
Of course, I remain completely unbiased in all of this. The fact that I
want to have Soolin's babies, and can't stand Avon's guts, hasn't affected
my point of view at all. No, never.
-- Rob
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 11:33:45 +0100
From: "David A McIntee" <master@sol.co.uk>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Good news!
Message-Id: <199907231050.LAA00258@gnasher.sol.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>From today's Times:
"SOME of the finest moments of vintage television drama will soon be
returning to the small screen, thanks to a deal signed yesterday.
Classics that include the science fiction series *Blake's 7*, Lovejoy,
Howards
Way, Poldark and Bergerac are about to enjoy a rerun on the BBC after the
actor's union, Equity, agreed to take lower payments for repeat
performances. The corporation has been unable to show some of its most
popular series because it could not afford the repeat fees. ...
The old favourites will replace American classics such as Ironside and UFO
at off-peak periods in the afternoons and at weekends.
The new deal will apply to BBC1 from 10am to noon on Sundays, and on
weekday
afternoons from 2pm to 3pm. On BBC2, the reduced rate will come into effect
on Saturdays from 4pm to 5pm. The agreement should mean payments of up to
�2million for actors in a full year..."
The Stage adds All Creatures to the list of repeats due as well.
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #227
**************************************