From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #339
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/339
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 339
Today's Topics:
[B7L] Gareth in Heatbeat
Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
[B7L] Blake lives
Re: [B7L] Strange website
Re: [B7L] Strange website
Re: [B7L] Re: Tarrant's Uniform
Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Re: [B7L] blakes7-d Digest V99 #337
Re: [B7L] thisism and thatism
Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
[B7L] Re: list info
Re: [B7L] Strange website
Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 20:01:17 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
cc: Freedom City <freedom-city@blakes-7.org>
Subject: [B7L] Gareth in Heatbeat
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-1205200117-339Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
After last week's episode in which he was cheerfully wandering around waving a
shotgun at all and sundry, Gareth Thomas will be reappearing in Heartbeat next
week, 12 December. We rather suspect the plot will revolve around a boundary
dispute as the seeds for that plot were sown last time.
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, 5 Dec 1999 19:43:03 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-1205194303-06cRr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Sun 05 Dec, David A McIntee wrote:
> > > We do seem to agree, however, that even when you hit your target,
> > > you can't count on them dying instantly.
> >
> > Blake lives! I always knew it. That guy on the floor isn't dead, just
> > unconscious. Nobody even checked his pulse.
>
> He did have a very large hole, and some minced organs...
I didn't see any hole...
People frequently recover from gunshot injuries.
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, 5 Dec 1999 19:44:40 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-1205194440-bbaRr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Sun 05 Dec, Deborah Day wrote:
> >Blake lives! I always knew it. That guy on the floor isn't dead, just
> >unconscious. Nobody even checked his pulse.
>
>
> I think after nearly twenty years you could safely say he is dead now.
Quick bit of surgery and he'd be good for 40 years. He was only in his
thirties.
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, 5 Dec 1999 21:00:32 -0000
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: "Lysator List" <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Blake lives
Message-ID: <003c01bf3f63$c82a70c0$77218cd4@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>On Sun 05 Dec, Deborah Day wrote:
>> >Blake lives! I always knew it. That guy on the floor isn't dead, just
>> >unconscious. Nobody even checked his pulse.
>>
>>
>> I think after nearly twenty years you could safely say he is dead now.
>
>Quick bit of surgery and he'd be good for 40 years. He was only in his
>thirties.
>
>Judith
By which time the new crew member (a medic to replace Gan / Cally, who was
present on the base and administered that field heart transplant) has been
back to Xenon, got a tissue replacement gadget working, and has worked on
the insanity bit and basically stretches out lifespans to about 200 years.
Andrew (definitely impersonating an optimist - that was a plasma bolt, not a
bullet, and for 10 to 8 on a Thursday, that was a lot of blood)
Andrew
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 08:57:04 EST
From: "Joanne MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Strange website
Message-ID: <19991205215705.34411.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>From: Steve Rogerson <steve.rogerson@mcr1.poptel.org.uk>
>A friend suggested I look at this web site:
>http://www.caitys-world.com/aven.html
>It should interest Avon lovers
Oh no! Who'd name a ferret Adric!?!?!
Regards
Joanne
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 09:06:47 EST
From: "Joanne MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Strange website
Message-ID: <19991205220647.17004.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
>You see? I told you about six months ago that the cast of B7 were all
>members of the weasel family. And now - photographic proof.
<remembering> I didn't notice a long shagged Tarrant, but others may beg to
differ <grin>
Avon and Tarrant ought to be badgers -- because that is what the both of
them do so well, blue eggy thingy or not <ducking for cover>
Regards
Joanne
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 08:27:40 +1100
From: Kathryn Andersen <kat@welkin.apana.org.au>
To: "Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tarrant's Uniform
Message-ID: <19991206082740.A8880@welkin.apana.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Sat, Dec 04, 1999 at 09:18:01PM -0700, Helen Krummenacker wrote:
> > Unless of course he ended up in the company of the Black Friday
> > Afternoon Kill All Fed Scum Popular Peoples Mad-Eyed Revolutionary Front,
> > but that's just one of the risks he'd have to take.
> >
> > Neil
> Well, you do sort of wonder about him wearing it to board the Liberator.
> But my guess is he noticed the lifepods go or something. After all,
> going there he was going into the Mad-eyed Revolutionary Front, unless
> he knew they'd bailed.
(with apologies and thanks to Ellynne G.)
Tarrant's lifepod arrives on Liberator. The goon patrol quickly
surrounds it.
Goon: All right, in there, come out with your hands up!
Tarrant: Er, just a minute, the lock's stuck. Say, are you guys
Federation or something else?
Goon: We are the Black Friday Afternoon Kill All Fed Scum Popular
People's Mad-Eyed Revolutionary Front! What's it to you? You
wouldn't happen to be Federation scum, would you?
Tarrant: Oh, no, of course not! Hate the bastards. Er, what do you
think of deserters?
Goon: Lily-livered scum.
Tarrant: But they aren't Federation!
Goon: They've been tainted with the black heart! The Evil must be
beaten out of them.
Tarrant: Ah, I see. What about Privateers?
Goon: They're okay.
Tarrant: [Lifepod begins to rock from hasty movements inside. There's a
clear sound of a zipper] No problem. No problem at all. [Door opens.
Tarrant comes out.]
Goon: [Goon sees Fed uniform on the floor.] Hey, where'd you get
that? Are you sure you aren't Federation scum?
Tarrant: I'm Del Tarrant, merc and privateer! That uniform belonged
to the Federation scum who tried to capture me! I had to disintigrate
him.
Goon: [suspiciously] Why keep the uniform?
Tarrant: Evidence.
Goon: Evidence of what?
Tarrant: Well, keeping his head would have been kind of grisly,
wouldn't it? Not to mention the smell.
Goon: You should have pickled it.
Tarrant: Ah, well, I didn't have the facilities.
Goon: [shrugs] Fair enough. Welcome, brother.
--
_--_|\ | 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: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 08:01:55 +0000
From: Steve Kilbane <steve@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Message-Id: <199912060801.IAA09750@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Kin wrote:
> Special Forces troops spend huge amounts of their time constantly training
> so they do have the reflexes to identify and eliminate the right targets
> with the sort of speed required. [...]
>
> So the question is whether that sort of skill can be realistically expected
> from the B7 characters - With the possible exceptions of Dayna and Soolin,
> I'd argue no. Even there, I still don't get the same impression of nigh-on
> constant training.
I agree, and don't expect to see such specialised skills from the B7 crew.
But I *do* expect to see:
(a) some evidence of an initial plan (other than "go here, break that, leave");
(b) some attempt to use sensible equipment (camoflage, night, etc. smoke
would have been possible, in budget terms);
(c) contingency planning, at least after the first screw-up (the teleport is
their biggest advantage, and their *first* uses involved timeouts, where the
tester was to be brought back if nothing happened after x hours);
(d) evidence that the Federation troopers had received similar/better
training.
steve
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 08:10:22 +0000
From: Steve Kilbane <steve@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Message-Id: <199912060810.IAA09975@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Actually the reason why most people fall down when shotis because of
> cultural indoctrination- we're all accustomed to seeing TV and movies where
> people are knocked down by bullet hits, so if shot, the mind tells the body
> that's what should happen, the body believes it, and most people nowadays
> fall.
I don't believe this: "I've been shot, so I guess I'd better fall down."
I can understand people reacting in different ways, based on experience
(been shot/shot at before), surprise (were you expecting to get shot at),
location (where you were hit), and awareness of danger (are they still
shooting at you), among other things. What TV programs I'd seen don't
feature high on my list.
> Simple physics- if a bullet had the force to knock you off your feet,
> firing it would knock the shooter off his!
Erm, no. The same reasoning says a martial artist can't kick someone off
their feet without going flying.
> (Despite knowing this, I'll admit to having people shot off their feet in
> my books simply because it's a cool visual/cinematic image.)
And expedient, as we've been saying.
> Actually standard SAS practice when in plain clothes is to use a good
> automatic pistol [...]
I suppose that situation applies to Blake and co a fair bit, but:
>
> When in uniform or combat gear, H&K MP5As are the currwent standard, pretty
> much permanently set to the three-round burst setting.
...is more what I was thinking of.
> Nobody with any sense would empty a mag into a wounded enemy
Nobody with any sense would be in the SAS, but that's irrelevant.
> - a single
> shot to the head is quite sufficient.
In sf? Nah.... :-)
steve
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 07:53:43 +0000
From: Steve Kilbane <steve@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Message-Id: <199912060753.HAA09529@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Blake lives! I always knew it. That guy on the floor isn't dead, just
> unconscious. Nobody even checked his pulse.
Yeah, they did: you just have to look at how much it's pulsing as it
gushes out of the big hole in his chest. :-)
Which partially supports Judith's point - didn't look too arterial to
me.
steve
------------------------------
Date: 06 Dec 1999 10:05:37 +0100
From: Calle Dybedahl <calle@lysator.liu.se>
To: "Kinkade, Carol A" <Carol.Kinkade@West.Boeing.com>
Cc: "'blakes7@lysator.liu.se'" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] blakes7-d Digest V99 #337
Message-ID: <us9038o2vy.fsf@sture.lysator.liu.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>>>>> "Kinkade," == Kinkade, Carol A <Carol.Kinkade@West.Boeing.com> writes:
> I'm hoping that by putting the word "UNSUBSCRIBE" in the subject
> line, lysator will throw it out to Calle.
It would have, if you had done so.
> I have tried but keep getting a message saying "you cannot be unsubscribed
> because you are not subscribed"
You've been trying to unsub from the single-mail list while
subscribing to the digest, I think. I took you off, anyway.
--
Calle Dybedahl, Vasav. 82, S-177 52 Jaerfaella,SWEDEN | calle@lysator.liu.se
"Our five main weapons are Invincible Ignorance, Not Invented Here,
FUD, derision, wild-eyed ranting, ad hominem attacks, straw men, and,
and...oh bugger." -- Joe Bednorz, A.S.R
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 05:31:22 PST
From: "Rob Clother" <whitehorse_dream@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] thisism and thatism
Message-ID: <19991206133123.87279.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>>Good point! There's optimism and there's optimism. There's the sort of
>>optimism where one believes in oneself and refuses to allow setbacks to
>>get in the way of that dream job, or that personal best athletic
>>achievement (or staying alive up a mountain).
>
>Is that really optimism? I think of that as self-confidence.
...which is why one should take isms with a pinch of salt anyway! They are,
as a rule, very much in the eye of the beholder. George Orwell expounded
eloquently on this in his essay, "Politics and the English Language", which
you should be able to download from just about anywhere on the Net.
Interestingly, Orwell would heartily approve of what we do here: when we
play around with isms, we usually make some kind of effort to explain our
conclusions with examples from our beloved series. George would probably
have wanted us to drop all the isms in the first place, but he'd give us a
B+ for trying!
Cheers,
-- Rob
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 14:32:35 +0000 (GMT)
From: Iain Coleman <ijc@bsfiles.nerc-bas.ac.uk>
To: b7 <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.96.991206142343.1147A-100000@bsauasc>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
(i'm piggybacking a wee bit here. Sorry.)
On Mon, 6 Dec 1999, Steve Kilbane wrote:
> > Simple physics- if a bullet had the force to knock you off your feet,
> > firing it would knock the shooter off his!
>
> Erm, no. The same reasoning says a martial artist can't kick someone off
> their feet without going flying.
Bear in mind that the shooter will be prepared to deal with the recoil,
while the target will be surprised by the impact. It's perfectly easy to
be unbalanced by firing a gun if you're not holding it properly.
> > Actually standard SAS practice when in plain clothes is to use a good
> > automatic pistol [...]
>
> I suppose that situation applies to Blake and co a fair bit, but:
> >
> > When in uniform or combat gear, H&K MP5As are the currwent standard, pretty
> > much permanently set to the three-round burst setting.
>
> ...is more what I was thinking of.
I heard a while ago that H&K have a three-round burst on all their
weapons, even handguns. This is because the first three rounds of a burst
are relatively unaffected by recoil, while subsequent rounds are made
increasingly inaccurate by the recoil of the previous rounds.
>
>
> > Nobody with any sense would empty a mag into a wounded enemy
>
> Nobody with any sense would be in the SAS, but that's irrelevant.
>
When I brought the subject up, I was thinking of the SAS ambush in
Gibraltar. That's exactly what they did. In fact, one of the soldiers
chased his target (an IRA bomber) down the street, shot him, emptied the
magazine into his body as he lay on the ground, reloaded and did the same
again.
> > - a single
> > shot to the head is quite sufficient.
>
> In sf? Nah.... :-)
>
Nor in real life. A quote from a former Foreign Legion chap: "It's the
ones you're sure are dead that get up and kill you".
Iain
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 11:30:40 -0500
From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com>
To: "INTERNET:blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Re: list info
Message-ID: <199912061130_MC2-8FDA-DDAB@compuserve.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Judith wrote:
>If you're a list member and you can't remember how
>to unsub, remember that I always have the details
>on my web site http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
> Just look under 'mailing lists'.
Good advice, though my practice is always to file carefully instructions on
how to unsub from a list the day I join...
But from Carol's note, I don't think she's lost the instructions, I think
the bot's playing up. I got that "you cannot be unsubscribed because you
are not subscribed" note the first time I unsubbed to go on holiday, and
when Calle checked he found that the bot was refusing to accept that
H_F_Monkhouse was the same subscriber as H_F_Monkhouse. It's only a
computer, you know, it takes talent to run a list.
Harriet
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 07:59:48 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Strange website
Message-ID: <000201bf4021$6aa59c40$d31fac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Joanne wrote:
>>From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
>>You see? I told you about six months ago that the cast of B7 were all
>>members of the weasel family. And now - photographic proof.
>
><remembering> I didn't notice a long shagged Tarrant, but others may beg to
>differ <grin>
>
>Avon and Tarrant ought to be badgers -- because that is what the both of
>them do so well, blue eggy thingy or not <ducking for cover>
It's unclear whether you realise or not that badgers are members of the
weasel family (Mustelidae). FWIW, they are.
Dayna, presumably, would be a sable (the ferrety thing, not the antelope).
Cally's longing for contact with other telepaths would make her a pine
marten.
Servalan, being a politician, would clearly have to be a poll-cat.
And Avon's tendency to gainsay Blake at every opportunity strongly suggests
that he's a notter.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 20:36:00 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Realities of combat
Message-ID: <016501bf4029$b0ac9380$d31fac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Steve Kilbane wrote@
>But I *do* expect to see:
>(a) some evidence of an initial plan (other than "go here, break that,
leave");
>(b) some attempt to use sensible equipment (camoflage, night, etc. smoke
>would have been possible, in budget terms);
>(c) contingency planning, at least after the first screw-up (the teleport
is
>their biggest advantage, and their *first* uses involved timeouts, where
the
>tester was to be brought back if nothing happened after x hours);
>(d) evidence that the Federation troopers had received similar/better
>training.
Agreed, agreed. I remember when we were discussing things we'd like to see
in the proposed B7 movie, I suggested more realistic combat (not 'more
combat', just more realism in whatever combat there is, since it's fairly
safe to assume there will be at least some).
At first I thought the unrealism we got in the series was just down to
ignorance on the part of the scriptwriters and directors, but on reflection
I think it's something else, far more complex (and far more pernicious). B7
is bound by an unconscious repudiation of a level of realism which stands to
compromise the validity of the characters' heroic stature. Pumping a stream
of bullets (or energy bolts) into an already-wounded target is not 'heroic',
nor is spilling guts, severing limbs, splattering brains across the scenery,
or agonised troopers screaming for their mothers. The physical cleanliness
of combat in shows like B7 (and many others) reflects the moral cleanliness
that the proponents of combat seek to advocate - the legitimacy of killing
requires that it be turned into a bloodless process, and also an absolute
one, with no interim state between dead and alive (save the occasional flesh
wound inflicted on one of the heroes).
I don't really know enough cultural history to analyse this further, but I
suspect the 'clean killing' fallacy may have originated in the
mythologisation of the American West, or perhaps in the European colonial
period. Both had reason to concoct a positive portrayal of violence for a
mass audience far removed from first-hand experience of the real thing.
However, this is just one angle into a complex area, and I've got to go to
work and pretend to be a thickie for eight hours.
Neil
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #339
**************************************