From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #27
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/27
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 27
Today's Topics:
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
[B7L] HORIZON NEWSFLASH 13/1/99
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
[B7L] Trolling 101
Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
[B7L] Re: Fascism
[B7L] Does anyone remember me?
[B7L] Trolling 101
Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Re: [B7L] Re: Fascism
[B7L] Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids... (was Trolling 101)
Re: [B7L] Re: Homophobia/Who
Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas and stuff
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
RE: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
------------------------------
Date: 13 Jan 1999 22:49:26 +0100
From: Calle Dybedahl <calle@lysator.liu.se>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <us1zkykfmh.fsf@sara.lysator.liu.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
"Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net> writes:
> But the 'myth of the "competent man"' is only half a mighty bound
> away from the Nazi misinterpretation of the Nietzschean Ubermensch.
Yes. Still a far cry from fascism (at least by the definition of
"fascism" used by most historians).
> Odd, isn't it, how nearly everyone who goes for the Ubermensch idea
> automatically casts themselves as a prime example.
I think it's a sort of mental blind alley. Those who aren't inclined
to cast themselves as supermen think a bit more about the concept and
end up with something like Sturgeon's "More Than Human" instead.
> Not read the book, but I loved the film. It seemed to parody everything the
> book is cited as standing for
It's a severely misunderstood book. If you ask me, all the film did
was make the parody obvious enough that at least half the moviegoing
crowd could see it. That said, I still rather liked it. It was much
truer to the book than I expected it to be.
My personal theory is that what RAH wanted (at least at the time he
was writing "Starship Troopers" and "Stranger In a Strange Land") far
more than proposing any single political view was to make people *think*.
> So where does B7 stand politically
Hard to say. The series is as you say adventurist, but the usual
political views that follow from that is pretty much blown away by the
simple fact that in B7 those who stand outside of society don't win.
Of course, those who work within the framework of society aren't
exactly portrayed in a positive light either.
Come to think of it, the series shows a certain lack of belief in
human nature. Stupidity, cowardice, greed and powerhunger drive the
Universe, the powerful prey on the weak and the weak let them, those
who try to fight the system are hunted down like rabid animals and die
ignominiously in a whole on an almost unknown planet. Geniuses are
driven away into the wilderness while the brutal and stupid sit in
power.
It almost enough to make one suspect that Terry Nation once worked as
a sysadmin.
--
Calle Dybedahl, Vasav. 82, S-177 52 Jaerfaella,SWEDEN | calle@lysator.liu.se
This posting is protected by a Whizzo Brand Fnord Filter (TM).
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:00:55 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: calle@lysator.liu.se, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <a617a6b.369d25a7@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 1/13/99 4:50:35 PM EST, calle@lysator.liu.se writes:
<< Come to think of it, the series shows a certain lack of belief in
human nature. Stupidity, cowardice, greed and powerhunger drive the
Universe,>>
And all of these are characteristics that make us who we are.
<< the powerful prey on the weak and the weak let them,>>
The first law of nature. The weak are so because they choose to be.
<< those who try to fight the system are hunted down like rabid animals and
die
ignominiously in a whole on an almost unknown planet. Geniuses are
driven away into the wilderness while the brutal and stupid sit in
power. >>
Bill Clinton?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 23:20:48 +0000
From: JMR <jager@clara.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] HORIZON NEWSFLASH 13/1/99
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990113232048.00796eb0@mail.clara.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
GUARDS! GUARDS!
PAUL DARROW IN GUARDS! GUARDS! OUTINGS The special Horizon (in
conjunction with the Avon Club) group outings to see Paul Darrow in Guards!
Guards! at Brighton and Wimbledon will be on the TUESDAY nights of each
week. There will be a get together after the show on each Tuesday, with
Paul and hopefully some of the other cast members. Many of us will also be
going to see the show on the Saturdays, but discounts are only available at
the matinees, not the evenings.
We hold 3 blocks of seats and have negotiated discounts for our groups as
follows (tickets must be booked through us):
7.45pm Tuesday 2nd February - Brighton �8 for best stalls seats (normally
�13.50). (Seats being held)
5 pm Saturday 6th February - Brighton �8 for best stalls seats (normally
�10)
8.30pm Saturday 6th February - Brighton �14.50/�13.50/�10.50/�7.50 prices
available
7.30pm Tuesday 9th February - Wimbledon �11.50 for best stalls seats
(normally �14) (Seats being held)
5 pm Saturday 13th February - Wimbledon �11.50 for best stalls seats
(normally �14)
8.30pm Saturday 13th February - Wimbledon �15/�13/�11/�9 prices available
(Best stalls seats being held at �15)
To secure your seats for any shows where we are holding an allocation,
seats must be booked and paid for CHEQUES PAYABLE TO HORIZON by 23rd
January at the latest. However, we would appreciate you booking/paying as
soon as possible in case we need to increase our allocation. We can
reserve seats for you at
the Saturday matinees with our group discount but no seats are currently
being held. Reservation requests/payment should be sent to GG Outing, c/o
Diane Gies, 18 Holt Road, North Wembley, Middx. HAO 3PS. Please send an
SAE OR provide an email address for confirmation of booking, and a contact
telephone number in case of emergencies. Tickets will be handed to you at
the door - you should aim to arrive 30 minutes before the show (at least)
to collect your tickets (though if you're late, tickets will be left in
your name at the box office).
If you have any queries, please call Diane Gies on 0181-904 5588 for
further information, or Email diane@horizon.org.uk.
COMPLETELY AMAZING RAFFLE - there will be a special Grand Raffle (prizes to
include publicity photos, Guards! Guards! merchandise, programme signed by
all the cast, video footage, rare photos of Paul taken at various events
over the past 20 years, and more!) This is a very special raffle, because
you cannot BUY tickets, you have to "Earn" them. For EACH USED STUB FROM A
PERFORMANCE OF GUARDS! GUARDS! of your own, or from people you persuaded to
go to the show, you will be allocated ONE raffle ticket in the grand prize
draw (to be held two weeks after the last performance of the 1999 tour, to
give you time to send them in). For every stub you send in from either of
the Special Group Outing days, you will be allocated FIVE raffle tickets,
instead of just one.
There will be TWO prize winners - the first prize will be for someone whose
ticket is drawn out of the hat, and the second for the person who sends in
the MOST used ticket stubs. Quite an incentive to not only see a brilliant
show yourself, but also to persuade your family and friends, or even
organise a works outing, to join you. Ticket stubs should be sent to
Guards! Guards! Raffle, c/o Valerie Guy, 62 Rothesay Avenue, Greenford,
Middx. UB6 0DA. Don't forget to give her your name and address. At the
moment, the last confirmed date for the show is 6th March in Swansea, but
the company are hoping to have at least 4 more weeks so watch the website,
join the Horizon Newsflash service or send Ann Bown of the Avon Club an SAE
for news.
A WELSH WEEKEND WITH PAUL AND GARETH. With Gareth Thomas and Paul Darrow
only 40 miles apart the week of 1/6 March, we are thinking of organising a
special Weekend Away taking in Guards! Guards! in Swansea with Paul, The
Hosts of Rebecca in Cardiff with Gareth and possibly a visit to a nearby B7
location, eg. Oldbury Power Station (better known as Saurian Major,
Spaceworld and Fosforon). Since there would be a fair amount of
travelling, we'll either be looking for several car drivers forming a
convoy, or possibly hiring a minibus or even a coach depending on interest.
Options are as follows (you can join and leave at any point):
a) See Paul in GG in Swansea on Friday night (stay overnight in Swansea)
b) see Gareth in HOR 3pm matinee on Saturday in Cardiff (go home after, OR
back to Swansea to...
c) see Paul in GG in Swansea 8.15pm Saturday (stay overnight in Swansea)
d) Visit Oldbury Power Station on Sunday, then return home. (The tour
takes about 2 hours - we'd probably aim to arrive there late morning or
early afternoon.)
The cost would obviously depend on how many people were going, and what
method of transport is used. Let Diane Gies know if you're interested AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE, stating which of the above Options you are considering,
whether you have your own transport (with how many spare place) and where
you'd be coming from. Trains depart regularly between Cardiff and Swansea
(journey about an hour), if rail travel were to be used.
REMEMBER - for ANY of these discounts/outings, ANYONE can join, whether a
Horizon/Avon club member, B7 fan or not. ALL are welcome - the more the
merrier. JOIN US NOW..
THE HORIZON CLUB WEBSITE: <http://www.horizon.org.uk>
J.M. Rolls
jager@clara.net
----------------
Steedophilia: The John Steed Website
<http://home.clara.net/jager/>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 23:06:50 -0000
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <017701be3f4e$14fee280$ca8edec2@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Neil's question
>> So where does B7 stand politically
I've been thinking a lot about personality lately, and the flaws and
strengths of different types of personality. The conventional
'western'/Christian/'right wing' opinion seems to be that we should work to
overcome our personal flaws, thus making ourselves more 'perfect', more
'complete' more 'good'. The lone adventurer is of this type. People indulge
themselves with the belief that if only they were sufficiently strong in
themselves they would no longer have to rely on other people, if they were
sufficiently 'good' nothing would go wrong. The Ubermensch idea is the
absurd extreme of this view.
In contrast I believe that each person is incomplete on their own. Our
strengths and weaknesses complement each other, because we are not loners by
nature. In other words it is because of our flaws that we need each other to
survive. B7 seems to exemplify this quite well, and moreover the
co-operation takes place without authoritarian leadership. So I would argue
it makes quite a good left wing antidote to conventional adventure series.
And I have just realised why I like it so much, after twenty years
wondering. Great.
Alison
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 23:12:19 -0000
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas
Message-ID: <017801be3f4e$1867b000$ca8edec2@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Iain said -
>This reminds me of a famous psychological experiment, involving a group of
>student volunteers and a small made-up prison. The volunteers were split
>into two groups - prisoners and guards. The guards had to enforce the
>prison rules over a period of a couple of weeks, at which point the
>experiment would end.
>
>The guards were immediately hostile and sadistic towards the prisoners,
>and the prisoners were immediately very passive and subordinate towards
>the guards. The guards treated the prisoners like scum because "they
>deserved it", and the prisoners accepted their low status.
I read a paper on this experiment about a year ago, and I found out
something new about it that never gets reported. Before they split the
people into two groups they vetted them for their attitudes to authority.
They excluded people who were extremely authoritarian - and those who were
extremely anti-authoritarian.
In other words they excluded trouble-making commie types who would have
kicked up a fuss about what was going on.
So to me, rather than showing that people can be corrupted by too much
freedom, it shows that humans need to exist in groups that have the full
range of types - including trouble makers. They might be a pain in the neck,
but they act as a conscience to the group, and if you remove them the group
acts like a person without a conscience.
Alison
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 23:48:57 -0000
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <019c01be3f4f$84a625c0$ca8edec2@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sorry I'm posting so much I'm playing with my new computer
I just downloaded this from Calle -
>I think it's a sort of mental blind alley. Those who aren't inclined
>to cast themselves as supermen think a bit more about the concept and
>end up with something like Sturgeon's "More Than Human" instead.
What a great example. 'More than Human' is about all those things I have
been wittering on about - the complementarity of flawed people, and the need
for someone to act as the group 'conscience'. I never linked it with B7
before but it fits in really well.
But who was the conscience after Gan, Blake and Cally all died?
Alison
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:53:04 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
Message-ID: <a8b40467.369d31e0@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
It has always been my opinion that by the time of B7, women will no longer be
in command positions ala Servalan. Before I'm stoned by feminists rocks, let
me explain.
At some point, especially following a great catastrophe like the one hinted at
in B7, social scientists and engineers will realize that society has degraded
because of the disintegration of the family unit, brought on by the failure of
women to remain home with their chiudren and maintain the family unit (ie-
cook, clean, etc.) As a result, women would be required by the Fewderation to
return to the "Leave It To Beaver" mode of doing things. Servalan would be
barefoot and pregnant, Soolin would be vacuming the rug, Dayna would be
dusting etc. Of course, malcontents like Avon would not exist because a happy
home would have made him a happy productive individual.
Comments?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:54:49 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <db17387b.369d3249@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 1/13/99 6:50:00 PM EST, alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk
writes:
<< >I think it's a sort of mental blind alley. Those who aren't inclined
>to cast themselves as supermen >>
But aren't many men 'supermen". I'm referring to the bread winners, the
responsible fathers, etc.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:10:01 PST
From: "Penny Dreadful" <pdreadful@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Trolling 101
Message-ID: <19990114001001.11190.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Supe "Crocodile" Stud00 said (You call that a troll? See, this, now
*this* is a troll.):
>It has always been my opinion that by the time of B7, women will no
longer be
>in command positions ala Servalan. Before I'm stoned by feminists
rocks, let
>me explain.
--Penny "Gay Jews Run Hollywood" Dreadful
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 19:14:27 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: pdreadful@hotmail.com, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Message-ID: <cb7d5387.369d36e3@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 1/13/99 7:12:16 PM EST, pdreadful@hotmail.com writes:
<<
Supe "Crocodile" Stud00 said (You call that a troll? See, this, now
*this* is a troll.):
>It has always been my opinion that by the time of B7, women will no
longer be
>in command positions ala Servalan. Before I'm stoned by feminists
rocks, let
>me explain. >>
I thought the argument a legitimate perspective on B7. What exactly makes it
trollish for you?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:53:08 PST
From: "Penny Dreadful" <pdreadful@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Message-ID: <19990114005308.24568.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
SupeStud00 said:
>I thought the argument a legitimate perspective on B7. What exactly
makes it
>trollish for you?
Specifically, the apparently gratuituous use of the inflammatory phrase
"barefoot and pregnant" made me suspicious. However, if you were
serious, I apologize.
--Penny "I Won't Even Put A Snide Remark In My Signature" Dreadful
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:01:50 PST
From: "Joanne MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Message-ID: <19990114010150.20088.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
It's all right, Penny. He/she/it is just putting forward a scenario that
is just as likely as any that anyone of us could dream up. None of us
has any guarantee that there would be enough fertile examples of either
gender after a catastrophe. If you wanted to, you could argue for a kind
of reverse "Handmaid's Tale", with those few fertile men standing in for
Offred, with names indicating similar status. Of course, such a
situation can be considered as degrading to men as the reverse is to
women.
The bit about "happy" households not producing people like Avon must be
in "red rag to a bull" territory - for every set of parents like mine
there must be quite a number who don't understand what, if anything,
they did wrong.
Lastly, there is always someone like Servalan, and she isn't in the
kitchen. She might be in the bedroom, but at the very least she is
standing behind the throne planning the best way to be the next person
to sit on it. Then again, I'm having trouble imagining Servalan without
a pair of stiletto-heeled shoes of any kind.
Regards
Joanne
Out of every hundred people...
Wise in hindsight:
not many more
than wise in foresight.
--Wislawa Szymborska, "A Word On Statistics"
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 99 02:57:00 GMT
From: s.thompson8@genie.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: Fascism
Message-Id: <199901140301.DAA18039@rock103.genie.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Neil, Calle is quite right about Norman Spinrad (not Moorcock) being the
author of =The Iron Dream=, subtitled "Lord of the Swastikas." I have a
copy myself, although it's currently in storage, so I can't refer to it
directly.
Of course, it's possible that Moorcock may also have done a sendup of
Tolkien, but if so I'm not aware of it. (And it's also conceivable that the
writer of the article you read may have been mistaken.) The most outrageous
Tolkien parody I've ever seen myself is National Lampoon's =Bored of the
Rings=, but I can't remember who wrote it or even if an author is credited.
Calle is also right about the frequency of debates on "Was Heinlein a
fascist?" in SF circles. The first such article I ever saw was in the
(literary SF) fanzine =Niekas= in the late 60s, and what a shock it was to
me as a tender teenage Heinlein fan! I found it uncomfortably persuasive,
though. The most recent example I've seen was in =The New York Review of
Science Fiction= #116 (April 1998), and as usual it provoked a flurry of
letters expressing widely differing opinions.
A lot of this name-calling goes back to the days of the Viet Nam war, which
seriously polarized the science fiction community in the U.S.: Heinlein et
al on the hawk side, Asimov et al on the dove side.
Oh, and while we're on SF neep: only one e in Delany.
Sarah T.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 21:05:18 -0700
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Does anyone remember me?
Message-ID: <369D6CFD.4B02@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Re-subbed and safe.
Tramila, are you awake? ;^/
Avona has returned.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 22:37:31 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Trolling 101
Message-ID: <4b4883fc.369d667b@aol.com>
Content-type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="part0_916285052_boundary"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--part0_916285052_boundary
Content-ID: <0_916285052@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
In a message dated 1/13/99 8:12:06 PM EST, j_macqueen@hotmail.com writes:
<< The bit about "happy" households not producing people like Avon must be
in "red rag to a bull" territory - for every set of parents like mine
there must be quite a number who don't understand what, if anything,
they did wrong.>>
Actually, it is my theory that if more moms stayed home and didn't work we'd
see fewer Avon like people as a result of more nurturing.
<<Lastly, there is always someone like Servalan, and she isn't in the
kitchen. She might be in the bedroom, but at the very least she is
standing behind the throne planning the best way to be the next person
to sit on it. Then again, I'm having trouble imagining Servalan without
a pair of stiletto-heeled shoes of any kind. >>
In my scenario, the all male dominated government would probably pass a law
requiring women to wear stiletto heels, so as to improve their figures (from
the male prespective.) Servalan would be allowed to wear the heels, she just
wouldn't be allowed access to the throne. Perhaps she, Jenna, Cally, Dayna
and Soolin would form their own resistance of supports..........
--part0_916285052_boundary
Content-ID: <0_916285052@inet_out.mail.hotmail.com.2>
Content-type: message/rfc822
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-disposition: inline
Return-Path: <blakes7-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (rly-zc02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.2]) by
air-zc05.mail.aol.com (v56.14) with SMTP; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:12:06
-0500
Received: from samantha.lysator.liu.se (samantha.lysator.liu.se
[130.236.254.202])
by rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id UAA27653;
Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:11:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from list@localhost)
by samantha.lysator.liu.se (8.8.7/8.8.7) id CAA20488;
Thu, 14 Jan 1999 02:02:34 +0100 (MET)
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 02:02:34 +0100 (MET)
X-Authentication-Warning: samantha.lysator.liu.se: list set sender to
blakes7-request@lysator.liu.se using -f
Message-ID: <19990114010150.20088.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [210.8.224.3]
From: "Joanne MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:01:50 PST
Resent-Message-ID: <"sEH_q.A.AAF.oIUn2"@samantha.lysator.liu.se>
Resent-From: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> archive/latest/15988
X-Loop: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: blakes7-request@lysator.liu.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
It's all right, Penny. He/she/it is just putting forward a scenario that
is just as likely as any that anyone of us could dream up. None of us
has any guarantee that there would be enough fertile examples of either
gender after a catastrophe. If you wanted to, you could argue for a kind
of reverse "Handmaid's Tale", with those few fertile men standing in for
Offred, with names indicating similar status. Of course, such a
situation can be considered as degrading to men as the reverse is to
women.
The bit about "happy" households not producing people like Avon must be
in "red rag to a bull" territory - for every set of parents like mine
there must be quite a number who don't understand what, if anything,
they did wrong.
Lastly, there is always someone like Servalan, and she isn't in the
kitchen. She might be in the bedroom, but at the very least she is
standing behind the throne planning the best way to be the next person
to sit on it. Then again, I'm having trouble imagining Servalan without
a pair of stiletto-heeled shoes of any kind.
Regards
Joanne
Out of every hundred people...
Wise in hindsight:
not many more
than wise in foresight.
--Wislawa Szymborska, "A Word On Statistics"
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--part0_916285052_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 22:31:38 EST
From: SupeStud00@aol.com
To: pdreadful@hotmail.com, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Message-ID: <91a7e854.369d651a@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 1/13/99 7:55:35 PM EST, pdreadful@hotmail.com writes:
<< >I thought the argument a legitimate perspective on B7. What exactly
makes it
>trollish for you?
Specifically, the apparently gratuituous use of the inflammatory phrase
"barefoot and pregnant" made me suspicious. However, if you were
serious, I apologize. >>
Why would this phrase offend anyone? Thanks for the apology.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 22:28:05 -0600
From: "Lorna B." <msdelta@magnolia.net>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Fascism
Message-Id: <199901140422.WAA27950@pemberton.magnolia.net>
Sarah T. said:
>Of course, it's possible that Moorcock may also have done a sendup of
>Tolkien, but if so I'm not aware of it. (And it's also conceivable that
the
>writer of the article you read may have been mistaken.) The most
outrageous
>Tolkien parody I've ever seen myself is National Lampoon's =Bored of the
>Rings=, but I can't remember who wrote it or even if an author is credited.
I don't recall a Moorcock sendup of Tolkien either, but then I haven't read
his later works.
I've got Bored of the Rings around here somewhere. I think you're
right--there was no credited author, just "The Harvard Lampoon." Some of
the dialogue had me rolling: "Keen are the nostrils of the elves." "And
light are their feet..."
Lorna B.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:38:42 PST
From: "Joanne MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids... (was Trolling 101)
Message-ID: <19990114043843.9663.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
I suspect that computer problems at work are making me more irritated
than I ought to be. Answering this is *slightly* more productive than
being told that yet another piece of software is performing an illegal
function. So if I seem a bit overheated, blame Microsoft and Novell.
<growl>
>Actually, it is my theory that if more moms stayed home and didn't
>work we'd see fewer Avon like people as a result of more nurturing.
I don't think so, or more to the point - what's the script one has to
follow for this sort of thing? An American sit-com such as the one you
mentioned is hardly the measure of many people's experiences (and you
could argue the same quite definitely for pieces of television produced
in other nations). But that's the present day problem.
Who's to say that children in Blake's 7 have mums and dads to nurture
them at all? For all I know, Blake, Vila and Avon all could've been
wards of the state, and yet their outlooks are not uniform. While
nurture is important, what is natural, what is innate, is arguably more
so in this case. Blake is a believer, and that belief is tempered, not
diminished, by his experiences. One could suggest that he has always
been fired up by ideas. Avon, by contrast, makes one suggest that,
regardless of how much of a loving upbringing he might have had, he's
such a morose bugger that the glass will always be half empty rather
than half full.
For Vila, the glass is half empty, and we all know why. <smile>
Then again, some theorists in the social scientists have come up with
the idea that one's friends are even more important than nature or
nurture. Having remembered that article on peer pressure and its effects
on teenagers, my brain is now trying to cope with picturing what sort of
child would have been the young Avon's friend. Help me, someone!
Regards
Joanne
Out of every hundred people...
Those who are just:
quite a few, thirty-five.
But if it takes effort to understand:
three.
--Wislawa Szymborska, "A Word On Statistics"
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 02:20:37 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Homophobia/Who
Message-ID: <00e601be3f87$b7753800$241aac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Martin wrote, re Robert Holmes
>The only stand out sexuality I note throughout his work is a genderless
sadism.
He does seem to inject a level of viciousness and callousness into his
scripts, though I'm not sure it's sexual. It feels more like a result of
the despair generated by being (eg) a vegetarian in a carnivorous society -
impossible not to see the worst in people. I know that feeling well.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 05:17:32 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas and stuff
Message-ID: <00e901be3f87$b9d918a0$241aac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Edith wrote
> Yeah, but the King had responsibilty and a definite say in their
>role in society. Many poor people in the past also had a role in their
>society, and felt worthy in their society. You would find this be the
>case in many non western societies as well. However, many western poor
>people do not have feelings of worth in our societies.
> I think, in a way, this is what Blakes 7 addressed in a way- how people
>are turned into nothing more than mass consumers of commodities, who
>have to be controlled.
I think it's more complicated than that (isn't it always?). The current
affliction of self-worthlessness in society arises from five converging
factors.
1) The Industrial Revolution created a new class of urban poor. Prior to
industrialisation, about 80% of the people lived in the countryside, 20% in
the towns. Industrialisation more than reversed that.
2) Social roles were reinforced by religious faith. Faith in religion was
shaken by advancing understanding of the true state of the universe, from
Copernicus through Darwin and beyond. The religious mandate for social
organisation gave way to a political one, with rival doctrines competing for
supremacy (back to Communism and Fascism again!) and people could no longer
be sure where they stood spiritually.
3) With workers collected together in towns, they could act collectively for
their own common interests. Hence progressive enfranchisement, the
realisation of liberal democracy and the erosion of the class system. Since
class was one of the things that defined an individual's place in society,
people could no longer be sure where they stood economically.
4) In a largely rural society, where most towns were small anyway, the
individual had an identifiable place in the community. Urbanisation (as a
product of industrialisation) changed that; people became aware of just how
many other people there were, and could no longer be sure of their own
individual significance.
5) Advancing technology shrank the world, and continues to shrink it
further. A global economy emerges, states merge into superstates, and
nationality (one of the few remaining toeholds of personal identity) starts
to melt away. As communications improve, so ideas are transmitted more
quickly, promoting cultural turbulence. People are no longer sure where
they stand culturally. We become aware not only of events on the far side
of the world, but of how they can affect us, our livelihoods, perhaps even
our lives. Weapons technology renders us helpless in the face of destruction
that can fall at any time. Not only do we now not know where we stand, we
can't even guess where we might fall.
I don't think it's 'feelings of worth' that we have lost. I think it's a
sense of identity, specifically externally imposed identity. We can no
longer be who or what we were born to be, since that's no longer
pre-ordained. Instead we have to create our identity for ourselves, and
that's a heady challenge to place before just about anyone. It makes us
aware of the artificiality of our projected personae. That is bound to
breed doubt, and denial in turn engenders either denial or despair (or
both).
I think the crisis facing the oxymoron of Western Civilisation is our
inability to come to terms with our own supreme unimportance.
Neil
Sorry for all these posts, but there really is a lot of jolly interesting
debate going on.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 06:31:18 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <00ec01be3f87$bc248f40$241aac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>But aren't many men 'supermen". I'm referring to the bread winners, the
>responsible fathers, etc.
Der Mensch (n.masc): person, man. pl Menschen: people.
Ich glaube, dass Sie ganz Scheisse schreiben. Warum?
Neil von Faulkner
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 03:18:32 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <00e701be3f87$b81d10c0$241aac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
A plea from Rob Clother:
>>This doesn't go very well with fascism, since one of the central
>>parts of fascism is the subordination of the individual to the
>>collective
>
>Is that fascism, or communism? Was Mao Tse Tung a fascist? Neil, help
>me -- I'm getting confused.
Possibly because it's confusing? I sometimes wonder if Left and Right don't
go their separate ways, sweep out in broad arcs and bump into each other on
the way back. Were Hitler and Stalin really all that different? Yes and
no.
This is purely my take, since I don't have a political science degree or
anything, but: Communism and Fascism are alike in that a self-appointed
elite grants itself the right to impose their ideology on the people as a
whole, the people being expected to accept that ideology for their own good.
The difference: Communism, as a variant of Marxism (whatever customised
tinkering of Marxism the ruling elite choose to adopt) is considered to be
implemented for the ultimate benefit of all humanity. It is global in
perspective (or at least aspires to be) and stresses interdependence over
individualism. Hence the subordination of the individual to the collective
that Calle mentioned.
Fascism, however, is parochial in outlook, and this creates a paradox. On
the one hand, it is touting an ideal ideology, which demands aforementioned
subordination of the individual etc, ie implied equality. But at the same
time, it asserts a national or ethnic or some other criterion of
supremacism, which contains explicit inequalities. Some people are superior
to others, and therefore need not be subordinate to the collective (the
Ubermensch syndrome). Whilst this might imply that Fascism inherently
contains the seeds of its own destruction, it also contains a mandate for
its own self-serving tyranny. The ruling elite can do what they want to,
rather than what they feel they have to.
Lenin assumed control of the nascent Soviet Union on behalf of the Marxist
vision, as a stepping stone to global socialism. Hitler seized power to
fulfil the destiny _he personally_ perceived for Germany and its true Aryan
people. Likewise, Mussolini's dream of a 'New Empire of the Caesars' - for
Italy and Italians, not humanity as a whole. (Another point of contrast:
Fascism tends to look back to a supposed Golden Age of the past, Communism
tends more to look forward to a Brave New World.)
The dividing lines get blurred, mainly through Communism degenerating into
Fascism. Communist leaders are in grave danger of being corrupted by the
power they wield (Fascist leaders are arguably already corrupted before they
get to wield it), and it's quite possible for a brown-noser like Caeucescu
to rise to power just by saying the right things to the right people at the
right time. Although ideally internationalist, Communism has failed to
bridge ethnic and national divides, as evidenced by the Soviet/Chinese
hostility and the conflicts between China, Vietnam, Kampuchea and Laos - all
with Communist governments post-1975.
Getting back to Blakes 7, what does this say about the Federation?
Personally I would be wary of pinning real world terms to a future scenario
where they might not be strictly applicable (both Fascism and Communism were
products of the Industrial Revolution, and both are possibly sliding into
history). You could take it either way, I think. The 'Strength to Unity'
sloganeering suggests a possible Communist slant, but the rigid grading
system is more in line with Fascism. What is missing is a concrete
statement regarding the Federation's aims, origins and professed mandate to
rule. Likewise Blake's counter-ideology. We might have seen what the
Federation did, but we never really found out what it stood for.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:38:23 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0113173823-566Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Wed 13 Jan, Jacqueline Thijsen wrote:
> I've read "The Mote in God's Eye", and personally I thought the Co-Dominium
> was just a nother one of those space-empires that were modelled after the
> Roman empire. This is d one very often in SF (even Asimov has done it, and his
> books are s o "feel-good" is comes close to Disney) and I've never seen it as
> particularly fascist . Pournelle has also co-written "Janissaries", which
> actually has some remnants of the Roman empire playing an important part in
> it. Just another sign t hat he gets some of his inspiration for backgrounds
> from our own past.
I haven't read 'Janissaries', but with a title like that I'd have expected more
Ottoman Empire than Roman.
The Janissaries were very much an Islamic institution.
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention
26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent
http://www.smof.com/redemption/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 05:20:29 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <00ea01be3f87$baed47c0$241aac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
><< the powerful prey on the weak and the weak let them,>>
>
>The first law of nature. The weak are so because they choose to be.
The first law of nature: the viability of a population of predators is
determined by the availability of prey. Who, then, is truly the weaker?
Neil the Ecologist
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 05:59:29 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <00eb01be3f87$bb7cb680$241aac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I asked:
>> So where does B7 stand politically
To which Calle replied:
>Hard to say. The series is as you say adventurist, but the usual
>political views that follow from that is pretty much blown away by the
>simple fact that in B7 those who stand outside of society don't win.
I think that, to me, is possibly the single most redeeming factor of the
entire series.
>Of course, those who work within the framework of society aren't
>exactly portrayed in a positive light either.
'So where are the good guys?' I think B7 reflects an establishment forced
to question its assumptions of its own supposed superiority. And by
'establishment' I don't mean the Federation! Older writers like Terry
Nation had grown up under the shadow of WW2 (like Michael Moorcock, Dennis
Potter and John Boorman, who have all produced provocative work of their
own) and then the dissolution of the British Empire, younger ones like
Boucher had probably had first hand contact with the social upheavals of
60s. America had got its hands dirty in Vietnam, Britain had approached the
brink of economic oblivion and western Europe was waiting to be the nuclear
playground of the superpowers. Britannia no longer ruled the waves, the old
had lost control of the young, and the government couldn't be trusted with a
whelk stall, let alone the country. In a world like that, good guys were
pretty thin on the ground. What was 'good' anyway:films like the Dirty
Dozen (cited by Nation as an inspiration for B7) and the spaghetti westerns
had turned villains into makeshift heroes to make up for the absence of the
real thing.
So to answer my question, 'Where does B7 stand politically?', I don't think
it's trying to stand anywhere. It's more concerned with trying to find
somewhere to sit, and lurk. I disagree with Alison's assessment of the
series as a 'left-wing antidote'. Some of the writers might have had
leftist tendencies (Boucher probably, Holmes possibly, Nation probably not
and Steed/Prior most unlikely), but the series as a whole is better
considered iconoclastic rather than radical. B7 was a captive animal locked
in the cage of political reality. But it knew it couldn't escape, and it
didn't try to pretend the bars weren't there.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 06:31:29 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
Message-ID: <00ed01be3f87$bca1ae80$241aac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
StupeSudd00 wrote:
>It has always been my opinion that by the time of B7, women will no longer
be
>in command positions ala Servalan. Before I'm stoned by feminists rocks,
let
>me explain.
>
>At some point, especially following a great catastrophe like the one hinted
at
>in B7, social scientists and engineers will realize that society has
degraded
>because of the disintegration of the family unit, brought on by the failure
of
>women to remain home with their chiudren and maintain the family unit (ie-
>cook, clean, etc.) As a result, women would be required by the Fewderation
to
>return to the "Leave It To Beaver" mode of doing things. Servalan would be
>barefoot and pregnant, Soolin would be vacuming the rug, Dayna would be
>dusting etc. Of course, malcontents like Avon would not exist because a
happy
>home would have made him a happy productive individual.
How absolutely true. At last I've seen the light, and John Norman is God.
How right you are to point out that working mothers are a recent social
development with no historical precedent whatsoever, and that there is no
other substitute for maintaining the family unit (given that men are
biologically incapable of cooking, cleaning, and etcetering, and that even
if they were there would be no prospect in both parents sharing domestic
responsibilities). It's nice to know I'm not the only one who believes that
the division of labour along gender lines is genetically determined, rather
than the product of so-called economic forces, and it's so reassuring to
realise that the nuclear family having to cope alone without assistance from
an extended community has nothing to do with urbanisation and the need for
social mobility in the wake of the Industrial Revolution. And how
refreshing to know that our lives willl one day be structured for us by
social scientists and engineers (social or otherwise) rather than the
self-serving decisions of politicians and the commercial interests that put
and keep them in power. Then, as you say, we will see an end to
malcontented men, because any mother that raises a malcontented child has
failed in her task, and once women are put in their proper natural place
they can never fail because it is proper and natural for them and there will
be no distractions like work to upset their hormones and stop them rearing
children properly without any need for instruction or experience whatsoever.
Just one small picky point, if I may: wouldn't Dayna vacuum the rug while
Soolin did the dusting?
Neil the Enlightened
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #27
*************************************