From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #236 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/volume00/236 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 00 : Issue 236 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ mistral@ptinet.net ] Travis I or II was Re: [B7L] Why Not [ huh@ccm.net ] Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel [ "Neil Faulkner" ] Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel [ Iain Coleman ] Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ "Jeroen J. Kwast" ] Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ "Ann Basart" ] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 08:06:58 -0700 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <39A14591.2465AAA8@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sally wrote: > central to my love or the show is > Blake, Avon and the complicated relationship between them, and the > wonderful chemistry between Gareth and Paul was crucial to that > appeal. It just wouldn't be a tenth as interesting without that (even > Avon and Vila - and the chemistry between those actors - just isn't as > good). Eep! Can't agree about that parenthetical, but you wouldn't expect me to, surely? Must be in what one likes. I'll admit to watching more series B than anything else, but it's Killer and Gambit that are getting worn out the fastest in series B, because of the A-V (okay, and the Jarriere). Shadow's the better ep, of course, but it's relegated to third-most watched, because of the lack of A-V. There *is* good chemistry in A-B; but all the humour in A-B is in the dialogue, none in the relationship, AFAIC. A-V has both humorous and dramatic chemistry. (IMHO) Mistral -- "Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!" --Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Aug 100 13:15:50 +0000 From: huh@ccm.net To: Subject: Travis I or II was Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-Id: <200008211815.NAA07485@bowe.ccm.net> > > Now this makes me wonder if those lyst members who prefer Travis II saw S2 > before they did S1? I like the theory that we prefer the one we saw first, > but of course I may be totally wrong. Good question. Travis II was the character I saw first (and was incidentally my favorite character until his death) and I adored him. I only saw Travis I this past year. Like him too, but it is such a different character. Still prefer the totally whacked out portrayel of Travis II. He's always exciting. Travis I just doesn't seem mad enough to have offed innocent citizens. lisabeth ----------------------------------------------------- This message was sent via the CCMnet Mailman. Visit our website: http://www.ccm.net ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 20:35:21 +0100 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel Message-ID: <000201c00ba2$525232a0$e535fea9@neilfaulkner> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Christine+Steve > I was watching Duel the other day and noticed this at the start : There are four episodes that touch on this issue, all by different writers. First, there is Duel, by Terry Nation, which implies that travel between galaxies is not only feaible but might even be commonplace. Next there is Horizon, by Allan Prior, in which the need for monopasium-239 makes it clear that the Federation is confined to just the one galaxy. Then there is a remark by Blake in Killer (by Robert Holmes) about the risk of the plague on Fosforon spreading to "all the galaxies" (presumably just the inhabited ones). Finally there is Star One (Chris Boucher) which makes it very clear that intergalactic travel isn't remotely possible even for Liberator (though it is for nasty Andromedans). So we have two for and two against the idea of a multigalactic Federation. In the case of Prior/Boucher, however, confining humanity to the Milky Way is fundamental to the mechanics of the plot, whereas with Nation and Holmes this is not so. In these latter two cases, any reference to other galaxies comes in throwaway lines that can easily be amended, with no extensive revision of the plot required. What this appears to show is that even a simple bit of background detail such as this was not decided in advance, and that Nation and Boucher had some rather different ideas when it came to making a decision. I know whose side I'm on. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:28:21 +1000 From: Kathryn Andersen To: "Blake's 7 list" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <20000822072821.C6150@welkin.apana.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 08:43:40AM -0600, Betty Ragan wrote: > I do wonder if this theory might not hold for fans of Tarrant, and of > the latter half of the show in general. Did most Tarrant fans, say, > join the show originally during the third season (or later?). Did > 3rd/4th season fans generally come in during the 3rd/4th season, or is > it more usually a case of having watched it from the beginning and > liking it more as it went along? (This is something I've been slightly > curious about for a while, I must admit.) I must admit, 3rd-season junkie that I am, that it *was* the season I saw first. But I had forgotten about it when I came to watch the whole show in all its glory from the start, until it got to the third season and I said, hey, I've seen this before! My order of viewing was 3rd season, 1st season, 2nd season, 3rd season, 4th season. -- _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen / \ | http://www.foobox.net/~kat \_.--.*/ | http://jove.prohosting.com/~rubykat v | #include "standard/disclaimer.h" ------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:39:57 +1000 From: Kathryn Andersen To: "Blake's 7 list" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <20000822073957.D6150@welkin.apana.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 12:05:55PM +0200, Jeroen J. Kwast wrote: > > You call that seriously????? So you want me to believe that you > rather have NOTHING than a brand new series bases on the original > series with new characters? > You don't think that it is even remotely possible that those new > characters can have some chemistry going too??? Yes. Exactly. Precisely. I'd rather have no B7 than bad B7. It all depends on what you mean by "new characters", and "based on the original series". If you mean a re-make, re-casting the original characters, then I don't want to see it -- the case of Travis I versus Travis II demonstrates clearly that the chances of getting it to work are slim (just look at the Avengers movie!). If you mean a spin-off, with the same background but with new characters, I don't see the point. One is just as likely to have a good show with new characters whether one makes it a specific spin-off of B7, or if one makes it an independent show with its own background. Hey - they've already done it! It's called Farscape. Kathryn Andersen (who doesn't understand why channel 9, one of the co-producers of the show, has only seen fit to show 6 episodes of Farscape in Australia.) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Controller: You always have such a smooth explanation. Theroux: Well, what do you want me to do - learn to stutter? (Star Cops: An Instinct For Murder) -- _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen / \ | http://www.foobox.net/~kat \_.--.*/ | http://jove.prohosting.com/~rubykat v | #include "standard/disclaimer.h" ------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:52:20 EST From: "J MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: The Jacket Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: mistral@ptinet.net >Perhaps you could get more in touch with these things if you wrote a >filk about it? In the Liber-ator's wardrobe Was the Jacket, a lovely suede.* On the other side of the wardrobe Stood Kerr Avon, half afraid. By the starlight he could see it Sparkling slightly 'gainst the wall. His little heart was filled with wanting And hoping that it wasn't small. Kerr Avon wanted that Jacket With a desire he couldn't deny Kerr Avon wanted that Jacket One he knew he couldn't buy >"This is silly." -- Dayna It is indeed. 'Specially as I would like to consign "Running Bear", the tune concerned, to the nethermost hells. Therefore, if anyone else has any desire whatsoever to make it their own, you have my wholehearted permission. If no one does, then it descends to the oblivion it so richly deserves! Regards Joanne *I, personally, don't *care* what material it's made of, so you have no need to be picky about such a detail! ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 00:28:08 GMT From: kminne@camtech.net.au (Ken Minne) To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel Message-ID: <39a1c49d.652355@mail.camtech.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Good day all, On Sun, 20 Aug 2000 20:35:21 +0100, Neil wrote: On the subject of intergalatic travel, >So we have two for and two against the idea of a multigalactic = Federation. >In the case of Prior/Boucher, however, confining humanity to the Milky = Way >is fundamental to the mechanics of the plot, whereas with Nation and = Holmes >this is not so. In these latter two cases, any reference to other = galaxies >comes in throwaway lines that can easily be amended, with no extensive >revision of the plot required. > >What this appears to show is that even a simple bit of background detail >such as this was not decided in advance, and that Nation and Boucher had >some rather different ideas when it came to making a decision. I know = whose >side I'm on. > >Neil > Do we have any astronomers on the list who can tell us the relative distances of Andromeda and any other nearby galaxies, such as the Magellenic Clouds and perhaps relative to the width of the galactic disk of the Milky Way? I am not sure that the series ever established how much of the Milky Way humans had explored, so it may be that the Federation is confined to the rim of the Galaxy closet to the path taken by the Andromedans. Might it be easier for the Federation to send expeditions to some of the companion dwarf galaxies of the Milky Way than to reach the opposite edge of the Milky Way itself?=20 So then the statements in the show need not be inconsistent, ie the =46ederation and Liberator can reach the companion Galaxies of the Milky way and return, but can not reach Galaxies at distances comparable to the Andromedans. As an analogy, just because the Ancient Romans could sail to Britian from France regularly, didn't mean that they could also sail to say the coast Florida ( though some may have done it by accident ). On the other hand, maybe the whole aliens from Andromeda bit was a piece of misdirection to hide their real origins and to waste =46ederation resources on the anti-matter minefield. Catch you later, Walter Minne ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 17:53:19 -0700 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: The Jacket Message-ID: <39A1CEFE.74877344@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Joanne MacQueen wrote: > > > In the Liber-ator's wardrobe > Was the Jacket, a lovely suede.* Mistral -- "Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!" --Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 21:46:08 -0600 From: Penny Dreadful To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-Id: <4.1.20000821213705.00975f10@mail.powersurfr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 10:29 AM 8/21/00 +0100, Iain Coleman wrote: >Avon, like Dr Who or Iago, could be played by anyone with an Equity card >and a pulse. Iain, we here at FINALACT have Big Plans that require you to be Pope, and here you are trying for Sainthood instead. -- For A Dread Time, Call Penny: http://members.tripod.com/~Penny_Dreadful/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 23:55:52 EDT From: Tigerm1019@aol.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <7c.9fea39b.26d353c8@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 08/21/2000 10:39:53 PM Central Daylight Time, pennydreadful@powersurfr.com writes: > At 10:29 AM 8/21/00 +0100, Iain Coleman wrote: > > >Avon, like Dr Who or Iago, could be played by anyone with an Equity card > >and a pulse. > > Iain, we here at FINALACT have Big Plans that require you to be Pope, and > here you are trying for Sainthood instead. But the two are not mutually exclusive. Many Popes have been canonized, starting with St. Peter. ;-) Tiger M ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 00:22:06 EDT From: B7Morrigan@aol.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > At 10:29 AM 8/21/00 +0100, Iain Coleman wrote: > > >Avon, like Dr Who or Iago, could be played by anyone with an Equity card > >and a pulse. > > Iain, we here at FINALACT have Big Plans that require you to be Pope, and > here you are trying for Sainthood instead. More like martyrdom. Morrigan "When I get a little money I buy zines; and if any is left I buy food and clothes." (apologies to Erasmus) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 22:10:43 +0100 (BST) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: Re: [B7L] Fanfic on the Web Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII On Fri 18 Aug, Kathryn Andersen wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 10:13:09AM -0400, Roberts, Patricia @ CSE wrote: > > I've been in touch with Sheila (encouraging her to post more fanfic) and she > > tells me she is working on another Jabberwocky!!!! She mentioned that Deeta > > is back!!! (She said no one stays dead in Jabberwocky.) > > > She also said it might be helpful if anyone wanting to see her finish this > > story tells her so. A little nagging (and encouragement) goes a long way. > > I *also* have been in touch with Sheila, and when I mentioned > Jabberwocky, she figuratively groaned and said don't hold your breath. > There's at least three other stories (none B7) which are in front of > it in line. And since one of them will probably be a novella, don't > expect anything soon. > > But, yeah, I'd agree that encouragement is good - so long as it > doesn't turn into pressure. (-8 well, she just asked me for an electronic copy of all the Jabberwocky stories (which I've sent her), so she might have some plans. 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.knightwriter.org ) Redemption '01 23-25 Feb 2001 http://www.smof.com/redemption/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:08:24 +0000 From: Steve Rogerson To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: Why not Blake II Message-ID: <39A234F9.547E9051@mcr1.poptel.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dana said: "Of course, my first choice for Blake II would be Stephen Greif, especially if they brought back Brian Croucher as Travis II" Oh god, then we'd all be seriously confused. But I do agree, it would be an option to have a new Blake (I mean they did it with Travis and we weren'r meant to notice) so using plastic surgery of some sort would work. If they had have thought of that at the start of series three and decided to go with it, then Steve Pacey would have ended up playing Blake and not Tarrant. -- cheers Steve Rogerson http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson Redemption: The Blake's 7 and Babylon 5 convention 23-25 February 2001, Ashford, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:09:29 +0000 From: Steve Rogerson To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: b7 mention Message-ID: <39A23539.85A707A4@mcr1.poptel.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Una said: "Even if the strike wasn't on, people might just have got into the habit of watching the BBC more." I remember my grand parents in Oldham. Every night they just watched BBC1 whatever was on - they had no truck with new fangled things such as ITV and BBC2. And apparently people like them were not that rare. -- cheers Steve Rogerson http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson Redemption: The Blake's 7 and Babylon 5 convention 23-25 February 2001, Ashford, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:57:27 GMT From: "Sally Manton" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Jeroen wrote: Don't expect those old folk willing to appear again. I'm tempted to think you dont care about the show as much as the characters! :)> Six and two threes, actually. Speaking as one of Una's Account 2 people (with a vengeance), the characters *are* the main thing about the show. I like a lot of other things about Blake's 7, but the people come first (second, third ... up to about seventh. Then we have the scripts, the Wardrobe Room, the politics, the ambiguity, the humour ...). Err, well for me it is ... New characters, fine (wouldn't be Blake's 7, but would quite possibly be a good show). Old characters played by new actors, no way. I like both Travises, after all, but I've realised that mentally I *don't* accept 2 as the same character as 1 - he's a different character with the same name. And given that Travis is rather peripheral to my galactic vision, 'tis a little hard to expect me to accept it for one of My Darlings (they do it in soap opera, true, but this is *space* opera). It'd be like fake Tim-Tams - quite nice, but not actually worth the calories. All comes down to the way we all enjoy our B7. I personally find the 3rd series a considerable drop from the 2nd (and not *only* because Gareth left, but that's part of it) but I like quite a few episodes/bits of episodes (hey, I even like bits of Kairos and Animals), and I have to say yes, I'd rather have a Blakeless B7 than a Gareth-less Blake, and that goes for Avon, Vila, Jenna, probably Tarrant ... just about all the characters I like (which leaves the recasts to Dayna and Servalan). ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:58:16 GMT From: "Sally Manton" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: The Jacket (was Re: [B7L] FC: New frame captures) Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Mistral wrote: The Jacket is symbolic. By this stage, what Avon is *really* looking for a portable bunker (not that things could possibly get worse ... could they?) and those shoulders ar the nearest Zen could manage (Zen is having a baaadddd costume-design period here anyway.) Yes, that's all very well, Mistral (and the Silver Alpha outfit was worth it) but someone should have un-freed him before he found that Lobster Top. ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:59:37 GMT From: "Sally Manton" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed After I wrote: Mistral wrote: I assume that *everyone* would take 'IMO' as read here ... for me, there's just so much more to A-B, right across the emotional spectrum from the lightest of teasing to the most venomous Flight Deck Fights, from light to very dark and back again. A-V is wonderful, and a rare look at a quirky, genuine but decidedly warped friendship, but (until the last minutes of Orbit, of course :-)) the *range* of interplay, especially the darker or more serious notes, isn't there (I do see humour and liking in Avon & Blake's relationship, but it's lighter and more subtle than the explosions and emotions and angst ). As Iain says, you *could* put other actors in both Avon's and Vila's shoes. You could have actors with far less chemistry and I think the relationship would still work (not nearly as well, of course, but it wouldn't fall flat). Take the unique chemistry, the way the actors play against each other, out of A-B, and even I'd be left scratching my head as to what on earth makes Avon *do* what he does for the man ... it doesn't make sense. Until you see them together. Then it makes perfect sense. Also, Iain said: Not that I can see anyone else playing Avon meself (the bastard they could get, the leather and studs and angst - but that delicious touch of pure unabashed brat...) but I wholly agree with the sentiment on Blake. ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 00:11 +0100 From: nyder@moore.britishlibrary.net To: "Marian de Haan" , Subject: RE: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-Id: <20000822080145.3F615537A1@latimer.mail.uk.easynet.net> >For me the proof that recasting doesn't work is Travis. After Stephen >Greif's subtle but sinister portrayal of Travis, I could never get used to >Brian Croucher's interpretation of the character. No accounting for tastes-- give me tragic and tormented over subtle and sinister any day. >Now this makes me wonder if those lyst members who prefer Travis II saw S2 >before they did S1? I like the theory that we prefer the one we saw first, Don't know about Penny etc., but I saw S1 first, and in fact, the first time I saw S2, I hated Brian Croucher on sight. It was "Trial" brought me round to the dark side, and since seeing that, I've liked Croucher's Travis more and more every time I've seen him. Though I must say, I've often felt that part of the reason some people dislike Travis II is cos SG's were big jackboots to fill, and that if it had been BC from the start things would have been different. Like how every time there's a new Doctor on Doctor Who, half the fanbase start issuing fatwahs simply cos they miss the old one. Fiona http://redrival.com/nyder/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:02:22 GMT From: "Sally Manton" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Why not Blake II Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Steve wrote: Somehow, one cannot imagine one's Hero taking time out to have *that* serious a facelift ... ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:06:29 GMT From: "Sally Manton" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Should have mentioned ... What one sees as chemistry is a very personal thing. After all, I see abolutely *none* - not a skerrick, not an atom - between Avon and Servalan, but I'm very much a minority of one, I think ... ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:12:59 GMT From: "Sally Manton" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: The Jacket Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Joanne gave us ... >In the Liber-ator's wardrobe >Was the Jacket, a lovely suede.* >On the other side of the wardrobe >Stood Kerr Avon, half afraid. ... etc ... a truly memorable ditty (so memorable that Sally found herself singing it at work). ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 02:45:19 -0600 From: Penny Dreadful To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Travis I or II was Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-Id: <4.1.20000822011329.0091df00@mail.powersurfr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 01:15 PM 8/21/00 +0000, huh@ccm.net wrote: >> Now this makes me wonder if those lyst members who prefer Travis II saw S2 >> before they did S1? I like the theory that we prefer the one we saw first, >> but of course I may be totally wrong. > >Good question. Travis II was the character I saw first (and was incidentally >my favorite character until his death) and I adored him. Ditto. I have tried to imagine how I would see things if I had watched them all in order...I think I'd still have the same preference, but I guess I'll never know for sure, unless they hurry up and perfect that brain-wiping technology already. >Still prefer the totally whacked out portrayel of Travis II. >He's always exciting. Travis I >just doesn't seem mad enough to have offed innocent citizens. Pessimist that I am, I have no difficulty imagining perfectly sane individuals committing mass murder. Really I don't have much trouble accepting that the two actors are portraying the same character, pre- and post- some sort of major mental meltdown. After all (as someone already said), I accept that first and fourth season Avon are the same character. With Travis it's just that we don't get to see the precipitating events/transition period, as we do with Avon. -- For A Dread Time, Call Penny: http://members.tripod.com/~Penny_Dreadful/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:11:19 +0100 (BST) From: Iain Coleman To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-Id: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 B7Morrigan@aol.com wrote: > > At 10:29 AM 8/21/00 +0100, Iain Coleman wrote: > > > > >Avon, like Dr Who or Iago, could be played by anyone with an Equity card > > >and a pulse. > > > > Iain, we here at FINALACT have Big Plans that require you to be Pope, and > > here you are trying for Sainthood instead. > > More like martyrdom. That's what I thought she meant. Iain ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:47:39 +0100 (BST) From: Iain Coleman To: b7 Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel Message-Id: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Ken Minne wrote: > Do we have any astronomers on the list Yup. who can tell us the relative > distances of Andromeda and any other nearby galaxies, such as the > Magellenic Clouds Okeydokey. From Allen, 'Astrophysical Quantities' Distance to Andromeda: 670 kpc Distance to Large Magellanic Cloud: 52 kpc Distance to Small Magellanic Cloud: 63 kpc (These numbers are about 30 years old, and there's been a lot of work on calibrating the cosmic distance scale since then, so I would only trust them to within 10% or so.) 1 kpc == 1000 parsecs == about 3260 light years and perhaps relative to the width of the galactic > disk of the Milky Way? > Galactic diameter == about 30 kpc Sun's distance from Galactic centre == about 10 kpc > I am not sure that the series ever established how much of the Milky > Way humans had explored, so it may be that the Federation is confined > to the rim of the Galaxy closet to the path taken by the Andromedans. > That seems right to me. > Might it be easier for the Federation to send expeditions to some of > the companion dwarf galaxies of the Milky Way than to reach the > opposite edge of the Milky Way itself? > Possibly. However, I doubt they even got that far. Even such limited intergalactic travel involves much greater distances than interstellar travel. > So then the statements in the show need not be inconsistent, ie the > Federation and Liberator can reach the companion Galaxies of the Milky > way and return, but can not reach Galaxies at distances comparable to > the Andromedans. As an analogy, just because the Ancient Romans could > sail to Britian from France regularly, didn't mean that they could > also sail to say the coast Florida ( though some may have done it by > accident ). > It's a nice idea, but I don't buy it. I get the impression that the Federation is centred on Earth, and has the Galactic rim as one of its edges. In that case, it's a few kiloparsecs across. This gives us a reasonable size of empire for a civilisation with reasonably swift interstellar travel, as the typical distance between stars is a parsec or so. If you can travel a few parsecs per day, interstellar travel becomes routine, long-term interstellar cruises are feasible and interesting (as in 'Gold'), and the edge of the Galaxy is at about the outer limit for imperial control, being a few year's travel away. Iain ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 100 13:56:01 +0200 (CEST) From: "Jeroen J. Kwast" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-Id: <200008221156.e7MBu3T23728@pampus.gns.getronics.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jeroen: nothing / news b7> > Kathryn: > Yes. Exactly. Precisely. I'd rather have no B7 than bad B7. > I don't mean bad B7. It doesn't have to be the same angle. We know the actors are older now so they won't come back. If we use new cast then mucho people of this list don't want to watch it! (I'll take a peek though :)) What I was thinking was a different viewpoint from the series. Why not take a look at all the freedom fighters wannabees that Blake left behind? What went on at Kasaby's camp before the final confrontation. Make some red line in between. Maybe some other badass federation person? Lots of possibilities that I want to see. Why not make some of the written stories out there onto film? You see what I mean? I hope so. I love B7 and it's universe. Lets have some more! > > Hey - they've already done it! It's called Farscape. > YES that's what I mean. I love the show. It's got a lot of elements that are the same. Jeroen PS: What are nice places to visit in Oz? I'm going in feb/march! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:15:51 -0400 From: "Christine+Steve" To: "B7 Mailing List" Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel Message-ID: <004801c00c32$c94033e0$60109ad8@cgorman> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Neil Faulkner wrote on August 20, 2000 @ 3:35 PM > So we have two for and two against the idea of a multigalactic Federation. > In the case of Prior/Boucher, however, confining humanity to the Milky Way > is fundamental to the mechanics of the plot, whereas with Nation and Holmes > this is not so. In these latter two cases, any reference to other galaxies > comes in throwaway lines that can easily be amended, with no extensive > revision of the plot required. > > What this appears to show is that even a simple bit of background detail > such as this was not decided in advance, and that Nation and Boucher had > some rather different ideas when it came to making a decision. I know whose > side I'm on. Personally I would have thought that once this was established by Terry Nation at the start, then it should have stuck. B7 was vague enough for intergalactic travel to be possible, so why would the later writers be allowed to change things? There isn't the series continuity there should be (Was Boucher the script editor on series 1?). But this seemed to be standard with B7 - remember when Jenna first hit the acceleration button on the Liberator? Everyone's face showed the G Force effects. I don't ever remember seeing that again - but that could be more the responsibility of the episode's director. Steve Dobson. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:30:26 -0600 From: Betty Ragan To: B7 Lyst Subject: Re: [B7L] Liberator space travel Message-ID: <39A29C92.C181AB40@sdc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Iain Coleman wrote: > Possibly. However, I doubt they even got that far. Even such limited > intergalactic travel involves much greater distances than interstellar > travel. Plus, it seems to me there'd be a lot less incentive for expanding in that direction. There's an awful lot of nothing between here and the next galaxy: no planets to explore and conquer, no place to stop and refeul or resupply. It'd be an awfully long, boring, unprofitable trip, just to be able to say that you'd made it to the Lesser Magellenic Cloud. -- Betty Ragan ** ragan@sdc.org ** http://www.sdc.org/~ragan/ "Imposing Latin rules on English structure is a little like trying to play baseball in ice skates." -- Bill Bryson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:30:55 -0700 From: "Ann Basart" To: "Blake's7" , "Sally Manton" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <003501c00c56$5a9c7e20$5e790fd8@flp1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sally wrote: "I'd rather have a Blakeless B7 than a Gareth-less Blake, . . ." which made me think of Doctor Who, and how did fans accomodate themselves to all those regenerations? Of course, that's a very different situation. Still.. . Ann abasart@dnai.com -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #236 **************************************