From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #296
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/296
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 296
Today's Topics:
Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience
[B7L] Why Stay? (was Re: Authority and Obedience)
[B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
[B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
[B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
[B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #291
Re: [B7L] Re: New Horizon Policy
Re: [B7L] Re: New Horizon Policy
Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience
Re: [B7L] Authority and obedience
Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience
[B7L] Captions and faster url
Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience
Re: [B7L] Horizon hub of fandom?
Re: [B7L] On "bad" episodes...
Re: [B7L] Fandom... online vs in person
Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience
[B7L] Authority and Obedience
Re: [B7L] Lightergate
[B7L] New Policy On Ultraworld
[B7L] Squash Ladder
[B7L] Squash Ladder.
Re: [B7L] Fandom... online vs in person
Re: [B7L] Squash Ladder
Re: [B7L] Squash Ladder
Re: [B7L] Fandom... online vs in person
Obedience and Free Will (was Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience)
[B7L] Re: Obedience and Free Will
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 21:24:59 -0600
From: Penny Dreadful <pennydreadful@powersurfr.com>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience
Message-Id: <4.1.19991016211808.00935be0@mail.powersurfr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 12:04 PM 17/10/99 +1000, Kathryn Andersen wrote:
>Then folk started talking about totalitarian governments and dictators
>and bullies, how they don't have real authority, that they take it,
>people don't give it to them. I beg to differ. People still give it
>to them. The reasons that people may choose to obey may be pretty
>horrible ones, like fear of being shot, tortured or simply beaten up,
>but the choice is still there.
>
>I assert this because of another example in Blake's 7. Avon's
>example, again. An example of where he did *not* give someone
>authority over him.
>
>"You claim you can kill me. You'd better get on with it.
> Make me die. There's nothing else you can make me do."
> -- Kerr Avon to the alien (Blake's 7: Sarcophagus [C9])
>
>There's nothing else you can make me do. I love that line. I love
>it a whole lot.
>
>See, there it looked possible that the only choice was between
>obedience and death, or, at least, between obedience and a whole lot
>of pain. But when it came down to it, the only thing that the Alien
>could *make* Avon do, was die - and of course, she couldn't even do
>that. Avon asserted his free will - whatever he did was his own
>choice. When people say "I had no choice" what the case really is, is
>that the alternative was so unacceptable and abhorrent (or perhaps
>merely uncomfortable) that they chose the lesser of the evils before
>them. But they still had a choice.
Avon and the Alien did have a dynamic which allowed free will -- however
the Federation seems to have a knack for depriving people of the right to
choose even between obedience and death. For example surely if Blake had
been given a choice, way back in his first stint as a rabble-rouser, he
would have opted to die (and/or be shot, tortured, etc.) rather than become
a Brainwashed Tool Of The Opressor. The Feds apparently offered him only a
choice between obedience and meat-puppetude. So Blake, for one, did not
'give them authority'. But he *appeared* to be obedient to the authority of
the Federation (till he snapped out of it, smack smack smack).
--
For A Dread Time, Call Penny:
http://members.tripod.com/~Penny_Dreadful/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 21:35:40 -0600
From: Penny Dreadful <pennydreadful@powersurfr.com>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Why Stay? (was Re: Authority and Obedience)
Message-Id: <4.1.19991016212537.00938220@mail.powersurfr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 09:58 PM 16/10/99 -0500, huh wrote:
> I can understand Jenna, Gan, Vila and Cally following Blake but I still
>can't understand why Avon ever did. I thought his plan to return to Earth
>with a new identity and scam credits to start a new life seemed perfectly
>reasonable and feasible - can't imagine why he stayed on.
He wanted the Liberator. Treasure-hold, costume-room, awesomely advanced
Altazoid technology and all. The 'new-life-on-earth' bird in the hand must
have paled dreadfully in comparison.
Well that and of course...*ahem* never mind.
--Penny "Ill Wind" Dreadful
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 21:24:53 -0700
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
Message-ID: <38094F95.7ED8@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Helen Krummenacker wrote:
>
> > Seems the more we look into authority, the broader the definition seems
> > to become. It includes many definitions; but I am not convinced it
> > excludes legal power.
>
> No, I would have said legal authority was one example of authority.
>
>
> Una
Well, then if you were the one arguing in favor of the Federation having
autority (i've forgotten who's on which side), now you can see we are in
full agreement.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 21:35:15 -0700
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
Message-ID: <38095203.2C39@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
3] Star One over The Keeper.
One thing else in favor of this ladder switch, is the Federation
technician and her boyfriend back home... both minor characters, but
well portrayed and likable. I really liked the way it was set up, so
that for a second, you do wonder whether the girl is mad or right. And I
liked her interaction with Avon (okay, so I like just about every
character's interaction with Avon <g>).
The Goth characters, otoh, were either sneaky and nasty, or large and
brutish.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 21:51:06 -0700
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
Message-ID: <380955BA.4E95@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Re: Kathryn Anderson's whole, lovely post about Obeidiance and
Authority...
Hear this? This is the sound of someone in California rising to hehr
feet and giving a standing ovation.
--Avona
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 22:00:55 -0700
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
Message-ID: <38095807.3E87@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> I can understand Jenna, Gan, Vila and Cally following Blake but I still
> can't understand why Avon ever did. I thought his plan to return to Earth
> with a new identity and scam credits to start a new life seemed perfectly
> reasonable and feasible - can't imagine why he stayed on. In the last two
> seasons as it becomes a "safety in winning" philosophy I can understand why
> it continued, but I just can't wrap my mind around why he didn't exit in
> the very beginning. Has that been talked to death on-list and what did
> people say?
There are numerous possible reasons. Among those I can think of...
a) He couldn't find a safe way to do it. How could he be sure he
wouldn't be caught again?
b) He'd never admit it, but he liked the company.
c) He wasn't that keen on the plan of going back just to steal money to
live free. No Anna to join him. And he's about as free on the Liberator
as he could be anywhere, except for Blake always dragging him into
dangerous spots. And in his own way, he may have liked that. (sort of a
combo of a and b, in a way)
d) Didn't plan to leave without bringing with him a lot of money, and/or
technology. Which he was somehow prevented from doing.
e) Ultimately, his story is one of the longing for freedom asmuch as
Blake's is. However, Blake holds the issue of freedom for all as dear as
freedom for self-- Avon, acting on the principle that the only authority
anyone has over you is the authority you grant them, would rather stay
on the Liberator, granting Blake authority (I let him lead, while all of
*you* follow-- a paraphrase, I know, but you remember the idea he
expressed) over him in a l imited fashion. If he went elsewhere, sooner
or later the Federation catches up to him, and he has to decide whether
he wants to die free or be under their power. (basically a and b, but
with a principle behind it)
urm... can someone come up with something more than these options? I
know I'm really not capturing them all.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 01:53:51 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #291
Message-ID: <38098E9F.1F9F9183@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Avona wrote:
> And yet, there have been factory fires which killed hundreds of people
> who were locked in by their employers and sweatshops where children work
> twelve-hour days; did(do) those employers have authority by your
> personal definition? When a parent beats a child bloody, does he/she
> lose the authority you believe is inherent in their position?
Authority is rarely if ever absolute. Sometimes people overstep
the limits of their authority.
Mistral
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 02:04:38 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: New Horizon Policy
Message-ID: <38099125.39860E8E@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Judith Proctor wrote:
> PS. Can I please add a general rider. What applies to me should also apply to
> Diane. We should stick to the issues and try not to attack individuals.
:-( Oops. You're so right. I must try harder not to do the very
things which annoy me. Now, where did I leave my centipedes?
Mistral
--
"And for my next trick, I shall swallow my other foot."--Vila
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 01:42:16 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: New Horizon Policy
Message-ID: <38098BE7.C8BB5579@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sarah T. wrote:
> Mistral and Bill, where, specifically, did you two get the idea
> that I said that Horizon ought to publish slash??? Seems to me
> that I am saying almost the exact opposite-- that they should not
> publish any erotica at all, at least not if they are going to
> attack other people for doing the same.
Hmm. I've never had the idea that you said Horizon ought to
publish slash; and I'm confused why you think I said that. Let me
assure you that I feel just as badly misinterpreted as you do.
> I feel that I really have to ask both of you to correct your
> misunderstanding publicly, here on the Lyst.
I believe I've done that previously; please let me know if you
still feel that I haven't.
Mistral
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 02:23:27 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience
Message-ID: <3809958E.E73195B4@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Kathryn Andersen wrote:
A lovely, elegant post. Thank you for saying so eloquently
all the things I was trying (and failing miserably) to say.
<admiring look>
Mistral
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 01:59:48 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Authority and obedience
Message-ID: <38099003.837D765F@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Harriet wrote:
> Mistral wrote:
> >If authority and legality are equivalent, then
> >Blake has no authority on Liberator because he
> > is an *illegally* escaped *Federation* convict,
> >and has no permission from his *legal* government
> >to be on Liberator, let alone to be the authority on it.
>
> Yes he has, they told him to go on board. Well, Leylan said they had a
> choice, but Avon said it wasn't a very good one.
<g> Leylan didn't offer him the option of *keeping* the Liberator;
he offered them leniency in return for securing the ship. Not quite
the same thing. (He reports them escaped in the next ep, remember.)
Mistral
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 11:31:36 +0100
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
Message-ID: <02cc01bf188c$3daed7e0$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Helen Krummenacker wrote:
>Una wrote:
> > No, I would have said legal authority was one example of authority.
>
> Well, then if you were the one arguing in favor of the Federation having
> autority (i've forgotten who's on which side), now you can see we are in
> full agreement.
Absolutely.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 12:44:00 +0100
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience
Message-ID: <030f01bf1894$ed45bc20$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Kathryn, I enjoyed your post a great deal - thanks for that.
> Then folk started talking about totalitarian governments and dictators
> and bullies, how they don't have real authority, that they take it,
> people don't give it to them. I beg to differ. People still give it
> to them. The reasons that people may choose to obey may be pretty
> horrible ones, like fear of being shot, tortured or simply beaten up,
> but the choice is still there.
Yes, indeed, I completely agree. As you go on to say, however, it often
involves extreme courage, or self-awareness, or conviction.
Penny brought up one of the few scenarios in which this isn't the case,
which are the ones relevant for the B7 universe, if not, thank god, for our
own: obedience through having been drugged or brainwashed. Although even the
latter can be problematic, dependent on degree: propaganda and advertising
are just forms of brainwashing...
> People choose to obey, and by obeying, give those whom they obey
> authority over them. Obeying a bully means that one chooses to obey
> rather than be beaten up - but that doesn't mean that one had no
> choice.
Perhaps the converse is also true: it's so much that some people choose to
obey, as others choose *not* to obey.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 07:19:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Sue Clerc <blake4fr@yahoo.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Captions and faster url
Message-ID: <19991017141902.4755.rocketmail@web214.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I thought I'd posted this but apparently not...
The new photos for captioning are up (and have been since the 3rd)
and will stay up until the 30th. This month's pictures are from
By The Sword Divided II, with Gareth Thomas and that woman from
the Taster's Choice commercials.
I tried to get Thomas's pilgrim hat but the tape flickered too
badly. For U.S. readers: picture Davy and Goliath on the Mayflower.
Captions for last month's collection of photos from Paul Darrow's
turn in The Legend of Robin Hood are also up.
The urls are:
http://pages.cthome.net/blakes7/ccurrent.html and the faster
http://members.xoom.com/sjcinct/ccurrent.html (because my isp
sucks)
Sue
=====
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 09:17:49 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-1017081749-0b0Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Sun 17 Oct, huh wrote:
> I can understand Jenna, Gan, Vila and Cally following Blake but I still
> can't understand why Avon ever did. I thought his plan to return to Earth
> with a new identity and scam credits to start a new life seemed perfectly
> reasonable and feasible - can't imagine why he stayed on. In the last two
> seasons as it becomes a "safety in winning" philosophy I can understand why
> it continued, but I just can't wrap my mind around why he didn't exit in
> the very beginning. Has that been talked to death on-list and what did
> people say?
Because he was fascinated by Blake. Here was a man who genuinely believed in
something beyond his own self-interest - that was something Avon found hard to
believe in, yet at some level wanted to believe in.
We all try and seek meaning in life. Blake gave meaning to Avon's life.
Turn off the sound and just watch early episodes. See the way Avon's eyes
follow Blake around. Note the way he reacts whenever Blake is in danger - the
way he catches him when Liberator is hit.
The nearest thing I can compare it to is an athiest seeking for a valid religion
- maybe I understand it so well because I'm an athiest myself.
Avon tries to pick holes in Blake all the time. He's continually testing
Blake's attachment to his principles. As long as Blake does not betray Avon by
betraying those principles, Avon will stay.
If you have a copy of the Programme Guide, read Chris Boucher's (the
script editor who also wrote many of the best episodes) interview there. It
brings this out very clearly. "Avon's crutch was personal loyalty" "Inside
every cynic, there's an idealist desperately yearning to be let out"
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 - Fanzines for Blake's 7, B7 Filk songs,
pictures, news, Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth
Thomas, etc. (also non-Blake's 7 zines at http://www.nas.com/~lknight )
Redemption '01 23-25 Feb 2001 http://www.smof.com/redemption/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 03:33:44 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Horizon hub of fandom?
Message-ID: <001101bf18c1$e5526400$471eac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Una wrote:
>Neil wrote in reply to Meredith:
>> That may well be true for you, but how representative is that? (Isn't it
>> something like 80 per cent of the world's population have never even
heard
>a
>> dial tone, let alone peeked at a web page?
>
>But 80% of the world's population is unlikely to have heard of B7, if not
>more. That's not an argument, I'm afraid, Neil.
It wasn't meant to be. The point I was alluding to, albeit vaguely, is that
once you're online you tend to forget how many people still aren't. Let's
have a little poll here - hands up everyone on this Lyst who's got some kind
of internet access? Gosh, all of us, who'd have thought it...
I think the last set of figures I saw suggested that only about a third of
UK households had a personal computer, and not all of them were online, by
any means. The vast majority of British people have never sent or received
an e-mail. The proportion is falling, and steadily, but I think it would be
rash to say it's plummeting towards zero. I doubt if it's anywhere near the
halfway mark yet. (Up to date stats, if anyone's got any, would be
appreciated.)
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 03:34:17 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] On "bad" episodes...
Message-ID: <001201bf18c1$e6a21580$471eac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Una wrote:
>Well, for those of us with hayfever, this is a very serious point. The
>outdoors is just plain nasty and horrid. Long may I live in built-up areas
>covered in tarmac.
That sounds like a very good idea, Una.
Not just in built-up areas, though:)
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 04:42:31 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Fandom... online vs in person
Message-ID: <001301bf18c1$e7f96820$471eac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Avona wrote:
>In England, (which for this reason, I am willing to concede as 'the hub
>of fandom') millions of people have seen the show.
The Marvel Magazines Summer Special for 1995 gives ep-by-ep ratings, which
vary between 6.3 million (Horizon, heh-heh-heh) to 10.9 million
(Seek-Locate-Destroy). So something like 20 per cent of the population saw
at least one episode. Millions more would have seen trailers, newspaper
articles (the series was once savaged in the Daily Mail, the only newspaper
I tended to see at the time), or heard about it on Wogan's Radio 2 show (3rd
Season viewing figures are the highest overall, and that was when Wogan was
plugging the show. Children of Auron comes top of the poll with 10.4
million). The show was cited as one of the pet hates of Rowan Atkinson's
raincoated heckler on Not The Nine O'Clock News, and there was also a
reference in the NT9OCN Royal Wedding book.
>When repeats are shown, they are shown on a nationwide level.
Well, they would be if there were any. The last two eps of Season 1, about
two thirds of the 3rd Season, and all of the 4th got repeats on BBC1. The
whole lot's been rescreened several times on UK Gold, which is nationwide
but a satellite channel and thus not available to everyone.
The actors from the show are viewable in other shows, or on stage, easily.
On stage, yes. On TV, not a lot. I've seen Jan Chappell three times on TV
since B7, once in the Bill, once in Casualty, and once in a Ford Fiesta ad.
And she was the one I used to look out for. They do crop up from time to
time but not with any great frequency. Some more than others, of course.
>In America, most people have never even heard of it-- including many
>people who consider themselves fans of science fiction.
I bought or browsed through a few copies of Sci-Fi Universe (US prozine)
that somehow made their way to Darkest Margate and only one of them
contained a single reference to B7, with an adjacent rejoinder to 'track
that one down ... if you can' or similar. (I don't know much about SFU, how
widely it's read or even if it's still going, so I've no way of knowing how
its contents reflect general awareness in the US.)
>Online fandom is, I think fairly typical of the States,
>although I believe there is a club in Southern California. That's about
>800 miles away from me.
The last Horizon NL I received (hey, November 97, only two years ago) also
lists Orac in Texas and the Prydonians of Prynceton in New Jersey, though
neither are exclusively B7-oriented. I believe there have been if not still
are other US clubs. I've no idea what their membership figures are like,
what kind of activities they organise etc.
>Dormice in America will surf the web for sites that offer pretty
>pictures of the cast, stories to read, etc. I don't remeber the exact #s
>expressed, but in looking at slash percentages, some here tallied up,
>first, the numbers of hits they got on B7 pages in general. Huge.
With the usual problems associated with hit counts - how many repeat visits,
where in the world each visitor comes from etc. Judith P said recently that
her top page was getting something like 70 hits a day, which adds up to
about 25,000 a year. But whilst that means that Judith's site is popular
(and rightly so), figures like that are useless for estimating how many fans
are online, how many are Brit/US/Aus whatever.
I think the difference between UK and US Dormice might be that the UK ones
are more likely to be offline but countable through club membership, whilst
US (and elsewhere) ones are more likely to be online but invisible. Not,
may I restress, that I see anything wrong in being a Dormouse.
>Overall, I'd say I agree with Neil, but I wanted to bring up someother
>points and express an overseas viewpoint.
Thank grud someone agrees with me:) I think this issue (national and other
influences on the experience of entering fandom, being a fan, expectations
from fandom etc) is one where a wide range of viewpoints could be valuable.
One of the most enjoyable aspects of fandom is, after all, the wide
diversity of the people who are drawn to it.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 12:35:25 -0500
From: "Reuben Herfindahl" <reuben@reuben.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
Message-Id: <199910171735.MAA27406@athena.host4u.net>
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
----------
>From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
>To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
>Subject: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #295
>Date: Sun, Oct 17, 1999, 12:00 AM
>
>> I can understand Jenna, Gan, Vila and Cally following Blake but I still
>> can't understand why Avon ever did. I thought his plan to return to Earth
>> with a new identity and scam credits to start a new life seemed perfectly
>> reasonable and feasible - can't imagine why he stayed on. In the last two
>> seasons as it becomes a "safety in winning" philosophy I can understand why
>> it continued, but I just can't wrap my mind around why he didn't exit in
>> the very beginning. Has that been talked to death on-list and what did
>> people say?
>
Well, rewatching Cygnus Alpha last night...
Avon does try to tempt Jenna to leave Blake on the planet once he discovers
all the riches of the Liberator. Once Blake is back, it becomes too late.
I think at first Avon knows he can only leave if Blake is out of the
picture. He also sees the potential of the Liberator. He can out run
anyone, and has all the riches he desires at his disposal.
Blake sees this early on, but only really makes reference to it during Star
One.
Reuben
reuben@reuben.net
http://www.reuben.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 12:08:38 PDT
From: "Hellen Paskaleva" <hellen_pas@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience
Message-ID: <19991017190838.51567.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Kathryn wrote, re Authority and Obedience:
<snip>
<I have a little badge which has this saying on it: "The fear of death
is the beginning of slavery".
People choose to obey, and by obeying, give those whom they obey
authority over them. Obeying a bully means that one chooses to obey
rather than be beaten up - but that doesn't mean that one had no
choice. Before action, there comes will; before will there comes
thought.
Of course, then obedience can become a habit, and it usually is.
Maybe that's what authority is - the *habit* of obedience.>
<snip>
I was intended to quote the whole your post. Several times. In several
separate e-mail messages...
Thank you for it. Deep bow.
Hellen
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 14:13:40 PDT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Authority and Obedience
Message-ID: <19991017211341.16681.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
huh wrote:
<I can understand Jenna, Gan, Vila and Cally following Blake but I
still can't understand why Avon ever did.>
Don't worry, neither could he <veg>
Combination of shifting factors. I agree with Penny (he covets and
is fascinated by the Liberator) and Avona (he doesn't *like* all
of the crew, but he likes and enjoys the company of more of them
- Blake,Cally, Vila - than the rest of the galaxy combined).
At the start, there he is on the ship of anyone's dreams (see The
Web - he's like a kid in a candy store showing it off to Gan) with
its very own Ali Baba's cave. The Liberator is a *very* important early
incentive, methinks, though actually owning it becomes less important than
the sheer intellectual thrill of learning every
single thing about it (I think he, like the others, tends to think
of it as belonging to Blake, rather than their joint property). He
did try to get rid of Blake while keeping his new toy in Cygnus
Alpha, but Fearless Leader proved impossible to be rid of.
So Avon gets caught up in Fighting for Freedom, even though he
knows it could get them both killed. Then in Time Squad he finds
that he actually cares whether Blake lives or dies - a feeling
that spreads, rather grudgingly to the others, even Gan (Breakdown) and
Jenna (Deliverance) whom he doesn't particularly like. Given
the choice of lifestyle that Blake has decided on, that makes it rather
awkward for Avon, finding out that he actually *really*
doesn't want them to go to perdition, whether in their own way or
not, and can't bring himself to let them do it.
Then by Bounty, it's *really* too late. The price on his head
means he's probably just as safe on the Liberator watching
Blake's back as anywhere else in or out of the Federated worlds
(which must have been a depressing thought...)
Breakdown captures it all perfectly - Avon actually does leave
(albeit trying in his own way to ensure that his doing so won't endanger the
others) but the moment he realises that the Liberator crew are in danger he
throws his chance of safe obscurity away.
And in Horizon, he tries to convince himself that the others are already
dead so that he can take the Liberator and go - and can't quite *do* it...
I think Avon knew in Cygnus Alpha that if he didn't lose Blake
then and there, he was in for the duration (and even so, he's
still of two minds for most of the episode about ditching Blake -
he could have stopped Jenna hitting that button if he'd really
wanted to).
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 21:34:13 +0100
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Lightergate
Message-ID: <055401bf18ec$c7669300$36e8abc3@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Everybody wrote loads of stuff.
Just for information I'm now not reading it.
Andrew
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:13:34 +0100
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: "B7 List" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>,
"Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
Subject: [B7L] New Policy On Ultraworld
Message-ID: <055701bf18ec$ccbdc300$36e8abc3@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
'na wrote an interesting piece on Ultra World....
>Yet look at 'ltraworld. Riddles. Limericks. Cheap shots. This episode
>is a travesty of all that has made our nation great
What sort of humour I like is between me and my concience, attepts to censor
it is tantamount to Federation like control. What happened to free speech
....
> For example, Orac is reduced to nothing more
>than a 'straight man'.
Lets leave the slash out of this please, I'm a Horizon member.
>But perhaps what I find so offensive about 'Ultraworld' is that it is
>resolutely '-rated.
What the only episode with a sex scene !
> Any convention showing 'Ultraworld' in the
>video room will be boycotted.
You won't be advertising MY address then.
Andrew
p.s.
Ultra world goes up 2 places in the ladder.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 22:46:44 +0100
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Squash Ladder
Message-ID: <055801bf18ec$cdfb2500$36e8abc3@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Here is the latest ladder, with no explanations as to why the moves have
taken place ! Animals, The Web, and Stardrive are all still in the top half.
Space Fall
Blake
PowerPlay
Animals
Time Squad
Duel
Trial
Weapon
Killer
Sarcophagus
Power
Volcano
The Way back
The Web
The City at the Edge of the World
The Keeper
Star One
Gold
Orbit
Sand
Ultraworld
Terminal
Games
Stardrive
Assasin
Dawn of the Gods
Head-hunter
The Harvest of Kairos
Aftermath
Mission to Destiny
Rescue
Children of Auron
Shadow
Bounty
Death Watch
Rumours of Death
Project Avalon
Breakdown
Seek Locate Destroy
Horizon
Warlord
Deliverance
Orac
Pressure Point
Hostage
Voice from the Past
Redemption
Countdown
Gambit
Moloch
One rule I will state is that adjudication's take place when I have read the
digest.
I can't adjudicate my own argument until people have responded to it.
My turn.
Redemption should be above Voice from the Past.
The two good things about Voice are
1) The exploitation of the residual side effects of Blake's conditioning.
This is obvious evidence of the total incompetence of Federation scientists,
who completely missed the opportunity to capture Blake and the ship when the
reward first hit a million credits.
2) The exposure to the structure of the official Federation government
(rather than the actual government).
The rest is rather slow moving, with an obvious trap, too many missed
opportunities to spot it and a rather trivial end game by the only fully
functional side of the Federation.
On the other hand, Redemption is the excellent resolution of the Orac
prediction, combining a study of the ultimate future of warlike folk reliant
on computers and ultimate weapons with active roles for several characters.
Add to this some excellent additional characters, including the ubiquitous
local who fails to join the crew at the last minute, a history for the
Liberator. The Avon Blake exchange at the start is good even today, and at
the time served to re-establish the roles of the characters after the inter
season break.
The bad side of Redemption ? Orac won that one too easily. I mean, if Orac
can communicate with any computer with a tarial cell (sorry if I spelt it
wrong), who put the damn thing into the "system" if this civilisation was
isolated from the Federation as we are led to believe.
Andrew
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 21:48:42 +0100
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: "B7 List" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Squash Ladder.
Message-ID: <055601bf18ec$ca93de20$36e8abc3@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Well spotted Mistral
>Sounds fun. You might want to revise the list, I notice you've got
>Duel and Aftermath listed twice, so I'm not sure where to argue
>them at.
>
You get to nominate where one of the missing episodes into its proper place.
Kai gets to pick the other one for an excellent early turn.
Andrew
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 15:41:27 -0700
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Fandom... online vs in person
Message-ID: <380A5095.A70F35F9@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Having been following this thread with a great deal of interest,
here are a couple of random thoughts:
Neil Faulkner wrote:
> Avona wrote:
> >In England, (which for this reason, I am willing to concede as 'the hub
> >of fandom') millions of people have seen the show.
>
> The Marvel Magazines Summer Special for 1995 gives ep-by-ep ratings, which
> vary between 6.3 million (Horizon, heh-heh-heh) to 10.9 million
> (Seek-Locate-Destroy). So something like 20 per cent of the population saw
> at least one episode.
Hm. If Horizon has only 1700 members out of all the millions who
watched B7, surely that's not the bulk of UK fandom, then. Maybe
there are more non-joiners than joiners. And I don't, strictly speaking,
mean Dormice. There are plenty of people who might be passionate
about a topic and still not see a fanclub as having anything to offer
them. Particularly if it doesn't put out a newsletter more often than
every couple of years. 1997? I'm rather glad I didn't waste my money.
As for online fen not having access to cons, that's not always the
case in America, either. We have SF cons quite regularly where I
live; and an annual con dedicated strictly to British shows; that one
gets guests from Red Dwarf pretty much every year, and the money
raised at the con goes to help pay for airing Dr. Who and other
British shows on PBS. Even though I used to live only a couple of
miles from where the cons are held, I've never bothered to go, as
that's not what interests me. I just send a check.
> I think the difference between UK and US Dormice might be that the UK ones
> are more likely to be offline but countable through club membership, whilst
> US (and elsewhere) ones are more likely to be online but invisible. Not,
> may I restress, that I see anything wrong in being a Dormouse.
Certainly a Dormouse is as valuable a *person* as a Hatter.
OTOH, the basic assumption I've seen in posts by several
persons that the *number* of fans serviced by Horizon is by
itself an indicator of Horizon's importance to fandom shouldn't
be allowed to go unexamined.
A hub is a centre of *activity*. And if I understand the definition,
it would be the Hatters who write and publish fanfiction, run the
clubs, organize the cons and other fan activities, etc. So the
Hatters would be those who keep fandom running, wouldn't they?
And without them, active fandom would seem to be in danger of
dying out.
My thought, then, would be that the hub of fandom _might_ be where
there is the highest concentration of Hatters, and where 'Hatterdom'
is best promoted. And nowadays that may very well be online, i.e.
the ratio of Hatters to Dormice higher on the net than in Horizon,
coupled with the fact that the ease and speed of e-mail versus
Horizon's newsletters or even snail-mail provides more stimulation
and possibly turns more Dormice into Hatters. Before the internet,
not many fans would have been able to discuss the show with other
fans on a daily basis.
Other thoughts: online fans may be a little more active insofar as
they logged on a search engine hunting for other fans, as opposed
to being exposed through Horizon's advertising. I'm also guessing
that online U.S. fans have a higher median age (because of the
fact that PBS viewers do) and therefore in for the long haul, as
opposed to kids who are indulging a current interest that may not
last later in life (Hands, everybody who's under eighteen).
I read some stats, IIRC, that said in five to ten years, 80% of
U.S. citizens would have internet access. You don't even need
a computer anymore, you can get e-mail on your cell phone. Even
if Horizon has been the hub of fandom in the past, my guess is that
is now or shortly will be no longer true.
And I bet this wouldn't be published as an Horizon LOC <eg>.
Just thoughts...
Mistral, Hatter Postulant (well I'm Mad, anyway)
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 16:51:35 -0600
From: Penny Dreadful <pennydreadful@powersurfr.com>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Squash Ladder
Message-Id: <4.1.19991017164002.009424b0@mail.powersurfr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 10:46 PM 17/10/99 +0100, Andrew Ellis wrote:
>Orac
>Pressure Point
Pressure Point should be above Orac because PP showcases Servalan's
egregious hypervillainousness AND awesome fashion sense (and as a bonus
Travis KOing that whiny brat Veron) whereas Orac has Servalan squealing
like a little girl when the Phibian gooses her, and later striving to keep
a straight face while conversing with some scrawny stagehand wearing
Travis' trousers.
--Penny "Some Sort Of Obelisk" Dreadful
--
For A Dread Time, Call Penny:
http://members.tripod.com/~Penny_Dreadful/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 23:55:33 +0100
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Squash Ladder
Message-ID: <040b01bf18f2$cbcaefd0$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Andrew Ellis wrpte:
> Here is the latest ladder, with no explanations as to why the moves have
> taken place ! Animals, The Web, and Stardrive are all still in the top
half.
>
> Space Fall
> Blake
> PowerPlay
> Animals
Animals fourth! I don't believe it!
Una
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 08:46:45 EST
From: "Joanne MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Fandom... online vs in person
Message-ID: <19991017224645.92805.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
>I've seen Jan Chappell three times on TV
>since B7, once in the Bill,
Which appearance was that, the mugging victim (blink and you miss it), or
the florist with a larcenous husband?
Regards
Joanne
PS Trooper Par made his final Australian appearance (barring repeats and
pay-tv) on The Bill on Saturday night.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 07:09:42 +1000
From: Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana.org.au>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Obedience and Free Will (was Re: [B7L] Authority and Obedience)
Message-ID: <19991018070942.D1436@welkin.apana.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Sat, Oct 16, 1999 at 09:24:59PM -0600, Penny Dreadful wrote:
> At 12:04 PM 17/10/99 +1000, Kathryn Andersen wrote:
>
> >"You claim you can kill me. You'd better get on with it.
> > Make me die. There's nothing else you can make me do."
> > -- Kerr Avon to the alien (Blake's 7: Sarcophagus [C9])
>
> Avon and the Alien did have a dynamic which allowed free will -- however
> the Federation seems to have a knack for depriving people of the right to
> choose even between obedience and death. For example surely if Blake had
> been given a choice, way back in his first stint as a rabble-rouser, he
> would have opted to die (and/or be shot, tortured, etc.) rather than become
> a Brainwashed Tool Of The Opressor. The Feds apparently offered him only a
> choice between obedience and meat-puppetude. So Blake, for one, did not
> 'give them authority'. But he *appeared* to be obedient to the authority of
> the Federation (till he snapped out of it, smack smack smack).
(sigh) Yes, it did cross my mind to mention mind-warping drugs as a
possible exception to the rule, but I sorta thought it was a red
herring, so I didn't mention it. Particularly since in the previous
phase of the discussion, no-one seems to have mentioned it before.
That I recall. And also because I wanted to make the point that in
those circumstances mentioned in previous posts which were asserted to
be examples of people "having no choice", the people actually *did*
have a choice. To then go on about circumstances where people don't
actually have any free will to assert a choice, I figured would be
muddying the waters.
Of course, the argument this then becomes is, at what point can one
say that a person no longer has free will? Or is it simply that
brainwashing consists of offering narrower and narrower choices, such
that the person's will is subverted or seduced into consenting to
whatever it is that the brainwasher wishes? I don't really know
enough about brainwashing to know.
Kathryn Andersen
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The real trouble with this world of ours is not that it is an
unreasonable world, nor even that it is a reasonable one. The
commonest kind of trouble is that it is nearly reasonable, but not
quite. Life is not an illogicality; yet it is a trap for logicians.
-- G.K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy
--
_--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana.org.au>
/ \ | http://home.connexus.net.au/~kat
\_.--.*/ | #include "standard/disclaimer.h"
v |
------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere
Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 23:08:06 -0600
From: Penny Dreadful <pennydreadful@powersurfr.com>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Re: Obedience and Free Will
Message-Id: <4.1.19991017224122.00955280@mail.powersurfr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 07:09 AM 18/10/99 +1000, Kathryn Andersen wrote:
>(sigh) Yes, it did cross my mind to mention mind-warping drugs as a
>possible exception to the rule, but I sorta thought it was a red
>herring, so I didn't mention it. Particularly since in the previous
>phase of the discussion, no-one seems to have mentioned it before.
As a product of thousands of man-hours of brainwashing at the hands of the
U of A Dept. of Philosophy (tm), it is my duty (to quote an entirely
unrelated SF TV show: "It's my duty as a complete bastard.") to hone in
monomaniacally on the Exception That May Or May Not Prove The Rule.
>That I recall. And also because I wanted to make the point that in
>those circumstances mentioned in previous posts which were asserted to
>be examples of people "having no choice", the people actually *did*
>have a choice.
That is true.
>Of course, the argument this then becomes is, at what point can one
>say that a person no longer has free will?
That is a very good question, to which the aforementioned thousands of
man-hours have not given me an adequate answer, which is (among other
things) why I dropped out and became a full-time Raving Lunatic (tm).
--Penny "Ooga-Boooga-Bbbrrrr" Dreadful
--
For A Dread Time, Call Penny:
http://members.tripod.com/~Penny_Dreadful/
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #296
**************************************