From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #28
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/28
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 28
Today's Topics:
Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
Re: [B7L] Re: Tolkien, Moorcock and Fascism
Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas
RE: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
[B7L] Servalan's Wardrobe
Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas
Re: [B7L] Re: Fascism
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas
[B7L] Where does B7 stand politically?
Re: [B7L] Where does B7 stand politically?
Re: [B7L] Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Re: Tolkien, Moorcock and Fascism
Re: [B7L] Where does B7 stand politically?
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
[B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Facism
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
[B7L] Horizon competition
Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 07:58:55 +0000
From: Russ Massey <russ@wriding.demon.co.uk>
To: SupeStud00@aol.com
Cc: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7
Message-ID: <0c$ZWBA$Oan2Ew+9@wriding.demon.co.uk>
In message <a8b40467.369d31e0@aol.com>, SupeStud00@aol.com
writes
>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?
>
How did Ben Steed get onto this list?
--
Russ Massey
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 07:55:17 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tolkien, Moorcock and Fascism
Message-ID: <015a01be3f95$b0b0b400$241aac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>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.
Norman Spinrad rings a bell; I never meant Moorcock in that context.
Moorcock didn't write any sendup of LotR as far as I'm aware, instead he
wrote a vitriolic essay denouncing it. I've not read 'Epic Pooh' in its
entirety, only extracts quoted in a nice big coffee table book (Realms of
Fantasy, by Malcolm Edwards and Robert Holdstock).
"The little hills and woods of that Surrey of the mind, the Shire, are
'safe', but the wild landscapes everywhere beyond the Shire are 'dangerous'.
Experience of Life itself is dangerous. The Lord of the Rings is a
pernicious confirmation of the values of a morally bankrupt middle-class
....is much more deep-rooted in its infantilism than a good many of the more
obviously juvenile books it influenced. It is Winnie-the-Pooh posing as an
epic." LotR, according to Moorcock, "sees the petit bourgeousie, the honest
artisans and peasants, as the bulwark against Chaos. These people are
always sentimentalised in such fiction because, traditionally, they are
always the last to complain about deficiencies in the social status quo."
Heady stuff. But there's more. Imazine, the provocative role-gaming zine,
reprinted in #17 an article from the London Daily News by one 'Torquemada',
who picks up on Tolkien's arguments. (Torquemada may even have been
Moorcock himself - Imazine's editor wasn't sure.)
"The Lord of the Rings pretends to be about Good and Evil, but actually it's
about Nice and Nasty, about the discomfort of social change, the fear of the
Real. Tolkien can't bring himself to get close to his proles and their
satanic leaders, so we're never convinced that Sauron and Co. are quite as
evil as we're told. After all, anyone who hate hobbits can't be all bad."
Hear hear. Fondly though I remember LotR, I find it far easier to agree
with Moorcock/Torquemada's assessment of the trilogy than with those who set
out to defend it (eg; Kocher, LeGuin).
I can see some parallels with Moorcock's interpretation of LotR and B7.
We've already been through the business of matching characters to archetypal
roles. Alta technology, in the shape of the Liberator, as a form of magic:
its speed and firepower make it a magic chariot-cum-sword in one. The
convenience with which it is freely granted rather than fought for and won
is Hobbitish, as is the abundant roominess it offers and the limitless
wardrobe. It's little more than a Christmas present under the fairy lights.
Scorpio was more convincing (would have been more convincing still without
Slave and the clip guns and the teleport and the stardrive...). I'm even
more dissatisfied with the predominance of Alphas among the crew: Nation,
like Tolkien, prefers to keep the proles at arm's length.
>Oh, and while we're on SF neep: only one e in Delany.
My apologies to Mr Dlaney.
Oh ghod, another long post. Can't we go back to Servalan's wardrobe: I've
got nothing to say about that.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 04:01:00 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas
Message-ID: <00e801be3f87$b8dd5380$241aac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
A very interesting first post from Stephen, providing much food for thought.
>
>Were the Federation trying to breed violent impulses out of the Deltas ?
>I know that the show frequently suggests they were drugged but it seems
>to go further than that.
>
>1/ On Earth most people lived in Domed cities. We know that there is a
>correlation between certain types of urban environments and increases in
>crimes. Presumably the Federation were keen to forestall this.
>
>2/ Of the two Delta's among the regular crew (I am assuming Gan was a
>Delta although this was never explicitly stated) neither was the violent
>type.
I certainly wouldn't argue with Vila as averse to violence (shooting a
trooper in Games was way out of character for him), but he hardly counts as
a typical example on his own. That's always assuming he was a Delta in the
first place:). Making Gan Delta is a matter of opinion; there's nothing to
say you're right or wrong to do so.
(Aside: Vila didn't like personal violence, but he was quite happy to fire
the neutron blasters - in The Web he said he'd been looking forward to it.
He also manned the portable heavy weapon they took outside the ship in Dawn
of the Gods.)
>3. The other prisoners on the London (I presume most of whom were
>Deltas) were a pretty unagressive lot.
How many really were Deltas? Blake was probably Alpha, Avon is generally
assumed to be Alpha, Jenna implicitly Alpha. Vila claimed to be Delta, Gan
is unknown. Porah was a product of Colonial Service training, so probably
Alpha/Beta equivalent. Nova didn't sound too convincing as a
street-hardened crim, though Arco might fit the bill there.
Personally, I think deportation (expensive, perhaps less so than long-term
imprisonment but certainly more so than execution) was a way of getting rid
of criminals from the more respectable strata of society, under a show of
leniency ("See, we're humane, we're not killing them..."). The only
prisoners we saw on Exbar were Ushton and Inga; as relatives of Blake's,
presumably they had a comparable grade. Doran and the rest of the Calcos
mob, on the other hand, are more the Delta type (but then they were banged
up in cells, not allowed to roam free on the surface - Calcos was not so
much a penal colony as a standard prison).
>I know they were
>drugged on the ship but that must have worn off by CA.
But on CA they were disoriented, confused, and laid low by a bad case of the
Curse of Cygnus. And most of them didn't listen to Blake anyway.
>
>4. Organised crime amongst the Deltas was run by a covert branch of the
>Federation (Shadow). It seems logical to assume that the idea was to
>co-opt any trouble makers who did get past the genetic screening and the
>drugs instead of letting them become nuclei of discontent. It may also
>have been felt that having crime dominated by one cartel was easier to
>manage than gang warfare.
Possible on both counts.
>
>5. Yes there are still aggressive non-Alphas in the B7 universe. I am
>assuming that the Federation Troopers are a separate caste - Jarvik
>refers to them as 'Security Grades' in HoK. I am also assuming that
>Federation society is less stratified on the Outer Worlds
A perfectly reasonable assumption, especially if the Outer Worlds are
colonies governed on behalf of the Federation rather than directly by them
(which is how I envisage it).
>,,,it follows that the likes of Bayban,
>and the homicidal types on GP hadn't come under the same sort of
>conditioning.
They weren't necessarily Federation citizens to begin with. Bayban was
wanted by the Federation, but he could have come from anywhere (plenty of
references to unfederated worlds in the series - Destiny, Chenga, Auron
etc). Gauda Prime was applying for Federation membership, thus also
independent.
All in all an interesting theory, though I'm not sure I completely agree
with it. I'd agree that the Federation would want to do all that it could
to minimise crime, but would engineering the populace to be non -aggressive
really serve that end? Not all violence is criminal, and not all crime is
violent. Still, you've argued a coherent case for a possible scenario.
Tiger M noted the need for troopers, which would seem to be real given that
there were swarms of them. So maybe only the Deltas were engineered for
non-aggression, and the Gamma grades acted as a recruiting ground. (Another
aside: I don't personally think the Federation was into expansion for its
own sake. The troopers were for policing what they already had, not to add
to it).
Hang on a mo - those troopers, despite being 'highly trained' (Project
Avalon) were bloody rotten shots at the best of times. Stephen, I think
you're onto something...
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 09:46:23 +-100
From: Jacqueline Thijsen <jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <01BE3FA2.C28FAC00@nl-arn-lap0063>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Judith wrote:
>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.
The "Janissaries" in these books (it's a trilogy) are human slaves in an intergalactic empire. They are responsible for all administrative tasks and according to the books (or what I remember of them), that is about the same status that the janissaries had in the Ottoman Empire.
They are mostly background to a story that is situated on a planet where groups of humans from earth are moved to about every 600 years. In this case a bunch of mercenaries, the book is situated in our time. They run into Highland clans, a Roman Empire and several other groups that still live pretty much the same as they did in our history.
And talking about fascism: most of these mercenaries try to shoot their way to supremacy, and fail miserably in what they set out to do. The most successful ones are those who negotiate an alliance with some (and eventually most) of the local population. Doesn't sound like a particularly fascist viewpoint, does it, Calle?
Jacqueline Thijsen
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 01:10:21 PST
From: "Penny Dreadful" <pdreadful@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Servalan's Wardrobe
Message-ID: <19990114091021.6529.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Neil said:
>Oh ghod, another long post. Can't we go back to Servalan's wardrobe:
I've
>got nothing to say about that.
I do, I do! I was hiding in it the other day (for reasons which need not
concern you, youngster) and I kept pushing further and further back
through layer upon layer of fur coats (hmm-hmm) and then suddenly I fell
out into this magical land which was ruled by this *evil* White Queen...
oh, wait, I see what happened, I must have got disoriented from all the
naptha fumes and whatnot and come out the same entrance I went in. So
never mind. I've got nothing to say about Servalan's wardrobe either.
-- Penny "Campus Crusade For Tash" Dreadful
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 10:55:50 +0000 (GMT)
From: Una McCormack <umm10@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
To: Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas
Message-ID: <Pine.PCW.3.96.990114105438.6791A-100000@umm-pc.jims.cam.ac.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Rob:
>Harriet/Una:
>>Harriet said:
>>
>>>In Animals (pause to wonder whether this episode has any serious
>>>weight),
>>
>>I'm sure you people only do this to make sure I'm reading your posts.
>>
>>
>>Una ;)
>
>Whoosh! Forgive me if I've got the wrong end of the stick, but are you
>trying to tell us, Una, that you're an "Animals" lover?
'Animals' lover and deeply subtle about it, too.
Una
-----------------------------------------
In defeat, malice. In victory, revenge.
-----------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:11:07 +0000 (GMT)
From: Una McCormack <umm10@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
To: Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Fascism
Message-ID: <Pine.PCW.3.96.990114110929.6791D-100000@umm-pc.jims.cam.ac.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Lorna B. said:
>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..."
And the inspired prophecy received by the Boromir character:
'Five eleven's your height,
One ninety's your weight -
You cash in your chips
Around page eighty-eight.'
Una
-----------------------------------------
In defeat, malice. In victory, revenge.
-----------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 02:58:49 PST
From: "Rob Clother" <whitehorse_dream@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <19990114105850.9986.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
>><< 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
Before you ask who is the stronger or the weaker, you have to decide
whether you're referring to the $i$-level or the $p$-level. There's a
load of rubbish about this in my thesis...
-- Rob
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 03:17:37 PST
From: "Rob Clother" <whitehorse_dream@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <19990114111738.25852.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
>The ruling elite can do what they want to, rather than what they
>feel they have to.
In other words, the ruling elite in the ideal communist society believe
in a greater good, to which they are subservient. The ruling elite in a
fascist society believe that what's good for them is the greater good.
In that respect, the communist/fascist borderline may be in the eye of
the beholder. Adopting 20th Century terminology, Blake would have
called the Federation fascists; Kayn would have called them communists.
>Lenin assumed control of the nascent Soviet Union on behalf of the
>Marxist vision, as a stepping stone to global socialism.
Lenin hijacked the nascent Manshevik government as a stepping stone
towards his own vicious, murderous ends. His politics were less about
the greater good than about his pathological hatred for the ruling
classes.
Bolshevik atrocities did not begin with Stalin.
Anyway, back to B7:
>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.
That, I imagine, will be part of Harriet's Platonic B7.
Cheers,
-- Rob
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:58:40 +0000 (GMT)
From: Una McCormack <umm10@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
To: Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas
Message-ID: <Pine.PCW.3.96.990114115516.9687B-100000@umm-pc.jims.cam.ac.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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.
Don't forget some of the gorier details. The people who were 'prisoners'
were sprung from their homes late at night and marched off; the experiment
had to be ended after 5 days (as opposed to a fortnight) because the
'prisoners' were suffering from anxiety, depression, and physical symptoms
of stress.
I have the write-up of this experiment somewhere at home. An absolute
disgrace.
Una
-----------------------------------------
In defeat, malice. In victory, revenge.
-----------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:19:44 +0000 (GMT)
From: Una McCormack <umm10@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
To: Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Where does B7 stand politically?
Message-ID: <Pine.PCW.3.96.990114120556.9687C-100000@umm-pc.jims.cam.ac.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
To Neil's question:
>> So where does B7 stand politically?
Alison answered:
>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
And yet all the time I was a Catholic I was a socialist, and since I've
been agnostic I've been conservative... Funny one that. My father, a
confirmed socialist, had a number of heroes across the centuries. These
included such diverse and famous left-wingers as De Gaulle, Napoleon, and
Franco!
>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.
Is this purely a 'western'/Christian/'right wing' perspective? It also
seems to underpin the type of Protestantism which in turn gave way to
secular liberalism - and everyone wants to call themselves a liberal these
days, right or left.
Very interesting analysis...
>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.
;) B7 was always, to me, the story of the outsider, the voice that dared
to speak against the crowd. The story of the (psychologically) 'lone
adventurer' who understands that s/he can't operate outside of society.
Now I'm bullshitting tremendously. Let's continue in this vein, shall we?
Actually, although B7 is *superficially* about politics, the political
picture painted on-screen is really so crude that the real interest is
not in that but in the psychological drama of the people involved. B7 -
not really about politics at all.
Una
-----------------------------------------
In defeat, malice. In victory, revenge.
-----------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 03:53:18 PST
From: "Rob Clother" <whitehorse_dream@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Where does B7 stand politically?
Message-ID: <19990114115318.221.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Una:
>Actually, although B7 is *superficially* about politics, the
>political picture painted on-screen is really so crude that the real
>interest is not in that but in the psychological drama of the people
>involved. B7 - not really about politics at all.
Counterexamples: "The Way Back", "Trial", "Voice from the Past",
"Rumours of Death", "Traitor".
Besides, *everything* is about politics. Including the Teletubbies.
-- Rob
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 22:51:40 +1000
From: vera@c031.aone.net.au
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19990114225140.00864b80@mail01.mel.aone.net.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Joanne MacQueen wrote:
<Bit of a snip>
>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!
A weedy, geeky, glasses wearing, timid but brilliant child who nevertheless
worshipped the ground Avon walked on while being a little scared of him,
and squeamishly grateful that Avon ever bothered with him. Avon would have
told himself he let geekboy follow him around, while really desperately
needing some human contact and someone to be a buffer between him and the
rest of the kids. Sooner or later geekboy would have grown up and got a
life. And thus, Avon.
Just a little theory.
Malissa
>
>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 22:21:30 +1000
From: vera@c031.aone.net.au
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19990114222130.0084ed60@mail01.mel.aone.net.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Neil:
<after significant snipping>
> 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.
Considering the growth of multinational corporations and the way laws are
being remade to favour their every whim, perhaps the Federation is the
product of the union of News Ltd and McDonalds? Both rigid grading and
peppy sloganeering are common in commercial companies.
Malissa
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 08:51:03 EST
From: Tigerm1019@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tolkien, Moorcock and Fascism
Message-ID: <76ffcd6.369df647@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 99-01-14 03:20:01 EST, Neil wrote:
<< Alta technology, in the shape of the Liberator, as a form of magic:
its speed and firepower make it a magic chariot-cum-sword in one. The
convenience with which it is freely granted rather than fought for and won
is Hobbitish, as is the abundant roominess it offers and the limitless
wardrobe. It's little more than a Christmas present under the fairy lights.
Scorpio was more convincing (would have been more convincing still without
Slave and the clip guns and the teleport and the stardrive...). I'm even
more dissatisfied with the predominance of Alphas among the crew: Nation,
like Tolkien, prefers to keep the proles at arm's length.
>>
I agree with most of what you have to say here, but the only character
explicitly stated to be an alpha was Blake. I also had the impression that
there weren't very many alphas. My own particular theory is that Avon was a
beta, as was Tarrant. If Avon had been an alpha, I think he would have
already had the status and wealth he so desperately craved and would have had
no need for the bank fraud. Tarrant was a line officer, not an aide in a
cushy job at HQ. I had the impression that military service was one of the
ways in which people could improve their social status in the Federation.
Jenna was described as a superior grade citizen, but that is not necessarily
synonymous with alpha. All three of these characters seem to have come from
backgrounds where they were expected to work for a living. Soolin seems to
have come from a working class background, probably gamma.
Tiger M
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:06:50 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Where does B7 stand politically?
Message-ID: <00ae01be3fca$a33bc6e0$251eac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Una wrote:
>>Actually, although B7 is *superficially* about politics, the
>>political picture painted on-screen is really so crude that the real
>>interest is not in that but in the psychological drama of the people
>>involved. B7 - not really about politics at all.
To which Rob replied:
>Counterexamples: "The Way Back", "Trial", "Voice from the Past",
>"Rumours of Death", "Traitor".
>>Besides, *everything* is about politics. Including the Teletubbies.
And that at least I would agree with (the everything, I mean, though the
insidious indoctrination of innocent children by the antics of the decadent
lickspittle capitalist lackey Teletubbies falls within the umbrella of
'everything').
The treatment of politics in B7 may have been superficial, as Una points
out, but it was also explicitly present, and it's that explicit presence
that invites 'real interest' from at least some quarters. And since it was
a drama serial, not a celebration of the Popular Heroic Peoples Popular
Struggle For Victory Over The Unpopular Bourgeois Oppressor, its emphasis
was inevitably slanted towards the characters and their psychological
dramas. It was through them - principally Blake and Servalan - that the
political dimension of the series was made explicit, however crudely it was
drawn.
Rob missed out one crucial episode from his list - Star One, the ultimate
test of revolutionary comitment.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:30:12 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <00b001be3fca$a48250a0$251eac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Rob Clother wrote:
>
>Lenin hijacked the nascent Manshevik government as a stepping stone
>towards his own vicious, murderous ends. His politics were less about
>the greater good than about his pathological hatred for the ruling
>classes.
>
>Bolshevik atrocities did not begin with Stalin.
Russian atrocities did not begin with the Bolsheviks, unless the Oprichniki
of Ivan the Terrible were really a bunch of laidback funloving dudes
victimised by a pernicious smear campaign.
Given the activities of the ruling classes in pre-Revolutionary Russia,
Lenin might arguably have good reason to harbour a pathological hatred of
the ruling classes. His older brother was hanged for plotting against the
tsar, I believe.
The rift between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks was unhealable. One had to win
out over the other. Given the total mess that Russia was in in 1917, it's
doubtful that the Mensheviks could have done any better than the Kerensky
assembly that assumed the reins of power from the Romanovs. Of all the
various competing revolutionary movements, only the Bolsheviks had the
organisation, popular support and above all determination to consolidate a
revolutionary victory. Undeniably it was messy, but it was also necessary
in order to hold Russia together. And holding Russia together was vital for
the success of the revolution.
I won't apologise for Lenin and suggest he wept buckets at the thought of
what the Cheka were up to. He was just a teensy bit too ruthless for that.
But what he did was what he had to do to make the revolution work. Unlike
Hitler, who didn't really have to conquer most of Europe and slaughter 15
million people just for having the wrong genes; or Mussolini, to whom the
annexation of Abyssinia was arguably not the most pressing thing he had to
do.
>Adopting 20th Century terminology, Blake would have
>called the Federation fascists; Kayn would have called them communists.
Not if Kayn himself was a fascist and proud of it. His admiration of the
Federation seemed to rest largely on their imposition of order as a bulwark
against the threat of chaos. As an end in itself, this is distinctly
fascist in inclination.
Vladimir Ilyich leNi
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 14:29:53 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101
Message-ID: <00af01be3fca$a3eb40c0$251eac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>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..........
>
I'm just wondering how long you can keep this up. For as long as you want,
I suspect.
Neil
PS Watch the spelling. You know what I mean.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 15:05:44 GMT
From: mjsmith@tcd.ie (Murray)
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-Id: <199901141505.PAA16836@dux1.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>To: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
>From: mjsmith@tcd.ie (Murray)
>Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
>
>Dear Neil,
>
> I was very interested in your belief in 'anarchist dictatorship'.
There is one very good fictional example of this in Captain Nemo's state (or
statelet) on board the Nautilus in Jules Verne's 'Twenty Thousand Leagues
under the Sea'.
>Nemo is an Indian rajah, dispossessed by the British, and built the
submarine, with the help of like minded people, cutting all links with the
terrestrial world, which he despises.
> This would be all right, except for the fact that this hater of
tyranny is himself ruthless and authoritarian. He uses the cypher 'N', which
all in the nineteenth century, particularly in France, knew was the cypher
of the Emperor Napoleon; and he attacks ships that do not have the power to
hurt him, so there is no excuse of self-defence. Also, when the three
outsiders, including the narrator of the story, are captured, he says that
he had long contemplated what to do with them, giving examples such as
throwing them back into the sea. When the narrator says that this was not
the behaviour of a civilized man, Nemo confirms that he was not civilized.
> The narrator realised that because Nemo's crew are loyal to him,
the only restraints on him are God, if he believes in Him, and his
conscience, if he had one. Due to all this, I feel Nemo would answer the
criterion of an anarchist dictator. What do you think?
>
> Yours,
>
> Murray
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jan 1999 16:23:37 +0100
From: Calle Dybedahl <calle@lysator.liu.se>
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <ushfttj2ti.fsf@sara.lysator.liu.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
mjsmith@tcd.ie (Murray) writes:
> Due to all this, I feel Nemo would answer the criterion of an
> anarchist dictator. What do you think?
You have argued for Nemo being a dictator. You have not argued for him
being an anarchist.
--
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: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 15:20:53 GMT
From: mjsmith@tcd.ie (Murray)
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-Id: <199901141520.PAA21056@dux1.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Dear Neil,
I agree with you when you said: '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'.
A possible indication as to what it stood for, apart from the motto, can be
found in remarks made by Professor Kayn, a Federation sympathiser, and High
Councillor Joban. In 'Breakdown', Kayn calls the Federation 'the greatest
force for order in the known universe'; in 'Hostage', Joban reminds Servalan
that Blake and his crew 'impede progress, and more importantly order. Order,
Servalan. It is all that matters'.
So the Federation is big on progress, but particularly on order.
Presumably, several centuries from now, we humans have found out the
attitiudes of most other intelligent life forms in the galaxy towards us.
Unlike 'Star Trek: The Next Generation', where every other intelligent life
form is seen as decent when you get down to it, and which can be reasoned
and negotiated with, most of the dominant races even being humanoid, the B7
galaxy is a more dangerous place, with aliens, both within and without,
shown to be as likely to be hostile as friendly.
Presumably, the Federation had to fight 'evil' aliens, and could
present itself as the 'thin black line' protecting humanity against them, an
ideology reinforced by the Intergalactic War. Perhaps its reconstitution
after that war was helped by this ideology, and a desire by many to return
to the 'good old days' before that war.
Yours,
Murray
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 16:14:23 GMT
From: mjsmith@tcd.ie (Murray)
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Facism
Message-Id: <199901141614.QAA19978@dux1.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Dear Calle,
Nemo is an anarchist due to his despising of all terrestrial
governments to the extent that he removes himself and his crew from their
reach by living in the sea. He likes the sea because it is 'pure and free'.
While humans can fight wars on its surface, they do not own it; and all
creatures that live there are free of authority. The paradox is that he
despises terrestrial governments for being oppressive and rejects them; but
he then becomes a dictator. I should perhaps have said that he was an
anarchist who ended up _becoming_ a dictator.
The paradox is a similar one to a communist who becomes a dictator to (he
says) properly safeguard the revolution. If an anarchist dictator is a
contradiction in terms, so is a communist one.
Yours,
Murray
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 08:44:55 PST
From: "Rob Clother" <whitehorse_dream@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <19990114164455.10216.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Neil:
>Russian atrocities did not begin with the Bolsheviks, unless the
>Oprichniki of Ivan the Terrible were really a bunch of laidback
>funloving dudes victimised by a pernicious smear campaign.
While we're on the subject of Russian dictators, I think Catherine the
Great would have had something to say to that Ben Steed character who's
been trolling his way through this list.
Other comments (and possibly questions) to follow, maybe on the Spin
List. You're on that, aren't you Neil?
-- Rob
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:07:13 EST
From: AChevron@aol.com
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <165f3644.369e2441@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 99-01-13 18:41:11 EST, you write:
<< 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. >>
I'm not comfortable with this statement. I think it is a simplification and
distortion of how people view the world. The "Christian" view is that we
cannot overcome our flaws; we must look outside ourselves and adhere to God's
laws for any chance at happiness, contentment, or a "good" life. The so-called
secular humanists, on the other hand, tend to look upon the individual as
capable of self improvement and moving towards "perfection".
As you say elsewhere in your post, we are not loners by nature. But I don't
think that it is valid to rely on others to help you "improve". While with
luck, you may find yourself associated with the proper mix of people to bring
out your best features, and you theirs, it is equelly likely that your social
group will serve to accent your worst features. Many Klansmen, for instance,
are honest, wonderful family types.( Yes, I know some). But by their
association with a particular social group, we also see their worst ascpects
featured.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that while I don't disagree totally with
your post, I think you might need to leave more room in it for the virtues of
self-reliance. Thank you though for posting something that really made me stop
and think, something I just don't seem to have time for lately. Deborah
Rose
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 12:07:22 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
cc: Space City <Space-city@world.std.com>
Subject: [B7L] Horizon competition
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0114110723-313Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
The new Horizon newsletter is just out and it looks very good indeed. The new
format is very attractive and there's a lot of interesting articles including
one on 'Gambit' with an interbiew with Aubrey Woods who played Krantor and a
look at bits that were edited out of the script to make it fit into the
available running time.
The photo reproduction in the whole magazine is excellent - I'd swear that the
pictures look crisper than in older issues.
There's a long interview with Peter Tuddenham and apparantly the general aim for
future issues is to continue this pattern, having a major interview and a
focused look on a particular episode. Certainly sounds good to me.
If you're not already a member of Horizon, I'd give it serious consideration.
The magazine is produced to a standard that compares well with anything you see
on the shelves in the newsagent. It's on glossy paper, is 98 pages long and
I've just realised that there's far more meat than usual as they haven't got the
usual merchandise section that takes up so many pages of previous issues. (I
imagine they'll either do it separately or perhaps in just one issue a year)
There's a lot of reviews - of the Sevenfold Crown and The Logic of Empire. The
general feeling (like my own) is that TLOE is by far the better of the two.
There's also write-ups of Deliverance.
There are also several articles written by the people who appeared in 'Lost in
Space' and theatre reviews of recent plays featuring Gareth Thomas, Michael
Keating, Stepen Pacey and Paul Darrow.
However, the bit that really caught my eye is on page 94. There's a competition
to submit a plot outline that includes Blake for a future radio play. The best
entry will win a prize, and will also be submitted to Brian Lighthill (producer
of the radio plays) for consideration. Entries should be sent to Diane Gies and
reach her before 31 March 1999.
The following coments are my own and not Horizon's:
I got the impression from Brian Lighthill at Deliverance (though I devoutly hope
that he may have changed his mind since) that he was most likely to do a story
with Blake if it was set in the 4th season. A flashback might be one
possibility with Avon and Vila (as they were present in all seasons) telling one
of the other crew members about something that had happened in the past.
If this route was followed, it might be best to keep the nunmber of characters
in the plot to a mimimum. In other words, the 'past' portion of the story
should ideally involve Avon, Blake and Vila. The reason for this is finance.
Every additional actor adds to the budget. If 4th season crew are involved,
then it's harder to afford 1st season crew. Thus, don't try to have all the
cast from both seasons involved. (This is from Brian Lighthill's comments)
Another possibility is having a plot in the 4th season that involves both Blake
and the Scorpio crew. It's tricky as they can't meet without wrecking
continuity unless you're very careful. eg. Dayna might be able to meet Blake
as she might not recognise him and didn't see him on Gauda Prime until events
were already far gone. Tarrant meeting Blake would be impossible.
I suspect most people would want a story actually set in the first or second
season, but I'm not sure that this is what Brian Lighthill wants (though I do
hope I'm wrong).
In the end though, whatever kind of story you would go for, please enter this
competition. Help put Blake back in Blake's 7!
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 18:53:46 -0000
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism?
Message-ID: <006d01be3fef$9f2b47e0$ca8edec2@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Me, Deborah Rose
><< 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'.
> I'm not comfortable with this statement. I think it is a simplification
and
>distortion of how people view the world. The "Christian" view is that we
>cannot overcome our flaws.
Darn it, you are right. Well perhaps it is a modern western thing then.
Perhaps
even a Hollywood thing?
> But I don't
>think that it is valid to rely on others to help you "improve".
I didn't mean that. I meant that our only hope is, not to achieve every
perfection on our own, but to co-operate with others with our various
strengths. However your point about corruption by the group is well taken.
.> I guess what I'm trying to say is that while I don't disagree totally
with
>your post, I think you might need to leave more room in it for the virtues
of
>self-reliance. Thank you though for posting something that really made me
stop
>and think, something I just don't seem to have time for lately.
Deborah
>Rose
>
You're welcome. Your answer has equally made me stop and think.
Alison
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #28
*************************************