From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #243 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/volume00/243 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 243 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysf [ Jacqueline Thijsen ] [B7L] Blakes motives [ "Jessica Taylor" ] Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7 II? [ Iain Coleman ] J or P revisited (was Re: [B7L] Why [ mistral@ptinet.net ] Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ Mac4781@aol.com ] Re: [B7L] Re:recasting [ "Dana Shilling" ] Re: [B7L] Re:recasting [ Steve Kilbane ] Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysf [ Betty Ragan ] Re: [B7L] Orac the Great (was Why No [ Betty Ragan ] Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? [ "Ellynne G." ] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 07:46:25 +0200 From: Jacqueline Thijsen To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysfunctional ... (was: Why Not Blake II?) Message-Id: <4.3.1.0.20000828074359.00a88e90@pop3.wish.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 01:15 28-8-00, Neil Faulkner wrote: >Said Sally, re Avon > > There's that rather singular but unshakeable brand of honesty, which >insists > > that he will not (knowingly) lie to himself or about himself > >So when he told Tarrant that his name was Shevron and Dayna was his wife, he >really believed he'd got hitched and signed the deed poll whilst teleporting >back up to the Liberator? No lies about himself there, then. I think that should be qualified: he wouldn't mind lying to someone he intends to kill or otherwise get rid of, but I think he'd have more trouble with lying to someone he intends to work with or (perish the thought) even cares about. Jacqueline ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:19:16 -0700 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] Re:recasting Message-ID: <39A9B003.C8DF4793@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Steve Rogerson wrote: > Steve Kilbane said: "Anyone reckon Anthony Stewart Head could do Blake?" > > Only if Sarah Michelle Gellar could do Jenna and Alyson Hannigan as > Cally. Ack! Only if you write Cally as altWillow. I've no desire to watch Aly mope around the flight deck and spout stupid, meaningless 'proverbs' for the better part of three seasons. She'd be great as the Cally of 'Time Squad', however. Or (beating the dead horse) a female Avon ;-) ASH could do either Blake or Avon; but I'd like to see him as Travis. Mistral -- "Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!" --Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:44:04 -0700 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] recasting (was Coltrane) Message-ID: <39A9D1F3.42ADF684@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Helen wrote: > James Marston (Spike) isn't really a Cockney; he's from Modesto. To my > ear he deos the accent rather well, but I suppose you Brits can tell me > if it's totally hokey to your ears. Anyone fancy him making a Vila who's > pretty scrumpcious? Great minds, Helen. I think you were signed off last year when I suggested this very thing. Perfect Vila. Different, but perfect. Mistral -- "Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!" --Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:40:53 GMT From: "Sally Manton" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Sally's request Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Helen K wrote: [b] Vila's first driv- errr, flying lesson; (in script form) Avon> Ouch! Vila> Sorry about that, Avon. etc ... and lots of fun it was too (I must try this more often, the results are great). Thanks heaps for this, Helen. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:43:47 GMT From: "Sally Manton" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysfunctional ... Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Betty wrote: <"Honesty" is not quite the word I would use. If anything, it seems to me that the way he warns people off is somewhat *dishonest*: IMHO he (probably quite deliberately) exaggerates his own bad qualities, his dangerousness, in order to keep people at a distance. As for lying to himself... I keep waffling back and forth on this issue.> As I said, I don't believe he *knowingly* lies about himself to them. Avon thinks the absolute worst possible of just about everyone in sight, and that includes himself. After all, he knows his own darker side very well; he does believe that he'll use them for his own ends (a belief shown to be well founded once he takes charge, even with Cally and Vila). The "I am a selfish bastard and not to be trusted" routine *is* at least a true part, a very important part, of his nature *as he sees it*. "I do not need anyone at all" is interesting, because IMHO it *is* proof of this refusal to lie to himself. Avon spends all that time quizzing Orac - and it's fairly obvious, to me at least, that Orac is not telling him anything he can't work out for himself - in order to prove to himself, on good hard (if somewhat technical) grounds that he *honestly* doesn't need the others. As he doesn't, not to simply survive. What it does come down to, of course, is asking *yourself* the right questions as well as Orac ... Actually, the line that gets me in Rumours is the simple "you weren't even real." Not that she betrayed him, not even that she lied to him ... but she *was* a lie. < (After all, he's quite willing to *deceive* the people he cares about, if it will help to protect them. "Hostage" being the obvious case in point.)> This, like that blatant fibbing at the end of Gambit, isn't lying about himself, but about what he's *done*. And you will notice in both cases that he is endearingly clumsy at it (even if obsessed, Blake couldn't *possibly* have missed it in Gambit!!!!!!) In Hostage, Avon does not lie about what he's done, he just doesn't mention that he's done it (not all that difficult, since none of the others have any conceivable to think of it and therefore ask him.) And when Cally does prod, he doesn't prevaricate or deny that something's wrong, he simply (and veeerrrry pointedly) changes the subject. And Neil wrote: Do not be so danged literal, man. Okay, okay, so I should have qualified it to lying about himself to the people in his life (mutter grumble, lovely flow of rose-coloured eloquent gush, and people have to spoil it by pointing out the potholes). Of course he fibbed *there* (though not very well - even at gunpoint, he still ain't good at it), but there is a slight difference in lying about your morality and motives to your own people and concealing your highly-saleable identity from the completely unknown (but possibly avaricious and unquestionably hostile) stranger with the enemy uniform and the gun. I'll admit, even My Darling has enough sense to bend his own rules when telling the truth if it kills him *would* kill him. (PPS - I liked Kathryn's suggestion of the word 'integrity'. For all his bad points, it does fit him beautifully IMO.) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 01:36:26 -0700 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <39AA2489.EDAA5960@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Carol Mc wrote: > Mistral wrote: > > > If you'll note in the passage you've quoted, I've put 'best' in quotes, > > and the parenthetical (as he sees it). I was trying to distance myself > > from the opinion; it's (IMO) *Blake's* view, not mine. > > So Blake didn't think Avon was at his best? That was the part that was very > confusing. At one point you said Blake accepted Avon for what he was, then > below that you said he was trying to persuade Avon to be his best. Those > statements appear to contradict each other. Let me pull up the quotes from > your earlier post. > > > Actually, you can boil that down to three things: (1) intelligent and/or > > mentally stimulating; (2) trustworthy; (3) likes Avon just the way he > > is. Blake has pretty much everything enumerated in the previous > > paragraph, > > > > > All this while Blake keeps prodding Avon, trying to bring Avon around > > to the cause, to be his 'best' self (as Blake sees it); > > That seems to suggest that Blake doesn't like Avon just the way he is. Only if one insists on having an overly simplistic view of humans and their relationships. I'm trying to draw a distinction between accepting someone's basic nature, and thinking that 100% of his behaviour is as effective as it could be. Blake accepts Avon's basic nature, and recognizes the strengths of that nature; and when he wants something from Avon, has the wisdom and sensitivity to give reasons that *Avon* will find valid (i.e. logic and loyalty) rather than insisting, as most people would, that reasons that are good enough for Blake (common good, etc.) should necessarily be good enough for Avon. What you're suggesting makes it sound as if you think in order to like someone just as they are, you have to remain unaware of their flaws, or their differences from oneself. I don't think you can actually be said to like someone if you are unaware of their flaws, and I don't think you can be said to be a true friend if you don't encourage their growth. Hm. Try this analogy. Avon is a musician in a world full of painters. All his life, people have tried to *make* him paint pictures, because normal people don't play music, they paint. He stumbles into Blake's colony of artist-rebels, all of whom are painting pictures of rebellion. Blake says, 'Join the rebellion!' Avon says, 'I won't. I won't paint any stupid pictures of your stupid rebellion.' All the other artists crowd around and say things like: 'Why won't you paint for the rebellion?', 'You are so cold, don't you care about anything?', 'Painting is good for you!', 'Must be something wrong with him if he won't paint!' Blake on the other hand, thinks that it would be good for both Avon and the rebellion if Avon got involved; and with his usual attention to detail, has noticed the guitar slung on Avon's back. 'Well,' he says, 'will you write a theme song for the rebellion, then?' 'Uh...' says Avon. He really doesn't know what to think. It must be a trick. Practically nobody listens to his songs; and nobody's ever asked him to *write* them one before. 'Well... okay.' So Avon settles in to the colony, writing rousing rebel tunes. He's still sensitive to the most oblique allusion that he ought to take up painting, and he thinks the rebellion is utter stupidity; but so far, Blake asks him for songs, not paintings; maybe Blake's not such a bad guy, after all. In this case, Blake has done what Blake sees as 'bringing out Avon's best' (since Blake thinks everyone should contribute) without changing Avon's nature (from musician to painter.) > If your Avon is emotionally moved by Blake, Blake's persuasion, Blake's > cause, and if he misses that "great big bleeding heart," then your Avon is > far more "wonderful, good, noble" than my Avon. Okay.... I genuinely *don't* see where you got this, it's exactly the opposite of what I've been trying to convey. My Avon thinks the cause is stupid, thinks Blake's great big bleeding heart is a liability to both Blake *and* his cause, and bristles at the merest breath of any sort of emotional persuasion. But he is touched, at a very deep level that only reveals itself in a quiet and unspoken personal loyalty, by Blake's *consistency of character*, and by his acceptance and liking of Avon for who he is (as per above.) Now, I don't expect you to agree - our Avons are too different; but I hope at least I've been clearer this time. Cheers, Mistral -- "Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!" --Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:13:22 GMT From: "Sally Manton" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Mistral wrote: IMHO, (yes, maybe I should stop putting the 'H' in ) a good example comes very early, in Time Squad, *with* that piece of calculated trust Blake displays in placing his life in Avon's hands (and not all that long after he's risked setting the man against him by the take-over-command bluff on the flight deck). The integrity and the seeds of loyalty that makes the trust possible *is* part of Avon's nature, but up till now he's had precious little cause to show or use it, and the others have had even less reason to suspect it's there (Cygnus Alpha, anyone?). By this action, Blake doesn't change, or try to change, anything fundamental about Avon - he just gives fair notice that he knows the trustworthiness is there, is a part of Avon, and can be called upon when needed. And he does it in an understated, pragmatic way that doesn't get Avon's goat as lofty declarations about trust and loyalty would at this prickly stage. Blake does accept Avon's basic nature - the bad and the good - and draws on the good (okay, and the incorrigibly criminal when needed - he's an idealist, but definitely not a saint ) . _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 02:57:44 -0700 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysfunctional ... (was: Why Not Blake II?) Message-ID: <39AA3798.74C76BEE@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Neil Faulkner wrote: > Lying *to* himself is another matter. I think that what Avon wants above > all else is certainty. Unfortunately, one thing he would swiftly become > certain of is that there are rather broad swathes of life where one cannot > be certain. Got up today and found Neil playing in a character thread. After I checked to make sure the world wasn't ending, I really enjoyed this post. Mistral -- "Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!" --Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 20:25:36 +0930 From: "Minnie" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] info request Message-ID: <000301c010df$60d69180$a1c326cb@marina> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Neil wrote: > >I'm not sure any reference was given by one of the crew. Scorpio was >reported to leave Bucol-2 (in Animals) at TD 12, but that reference comes >from a Federation officer reporting to Servalan. > >Stardrive gives the speed of the initial space chopper attack (witnessed by >the Scorpio crew) as Standard By 12.6, but Atlan and Plaxton cited >theoretical speeds of Time Distort 12 and 15. But Stardrive is a Follett >episode, and as such need not be taken seriously. Thanks to Neil and everyone else who answered this question. I have worked out that I can put anything I like and it will sound like I know what im talking about Im going to go with Time distort 10 then, thats fast and thats what im after. Anything to out run the federation. Cheers. Min.xxx (who thinks that no matter what the speed, Scorpio could out stroll them ) > > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 22:06:49 EST From: "Jessica Taylor" To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Blakes motives Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed (Tried to send this last night but it doesn't seem to have workd, sorry if you've already got it.) Sally responded to me: >Errr ... sorry and all that, exactly how would getting killed on Albian >along with Avon have accomplished that? How would it have helped the cause? >Or stranding himself (*without* thinking to check surface conditions, >possible danger etc or leaving himself an escape route) on Zil's planet? I remember reading somewhere (possibly in the Lysator archives) someone suggestng that the reason Blake didn't get out when he and Vila had the chance was because he was keeping the teleport free for Avon and Del Grant to get out as quickly as possible. Considering that the bomb wasn't actually meant to blow the planet up but pump out some sort of radiation to poison everyone the only two people who would certainly be killed as soon as it went off were Avon and Del, it was the most logical thing to do. This seems reasonable but I agree that Trial is a little harder to explain, I suppose someone could say that Blake couldn't deal with what had happened on Earth and was basically running away from or it could be said that that was Blake manipulating the crew so that they would stay with him, but no, I don't believe that either. >Blake is not stupid. If he dies, the Liberator will probably cease to be as >effective a force for the cause (in fact, the desultory and muffled >muddle-and-go-nowhere of early 3rd season shows that, without his guiding >hand, it does precisely that. It's really only Servalan's determined >pursuit >that keeps them fighting *at all*.) Agreed. So repeatedly risking his own >life, >especially when he knows the others would not blame him if he didn't (as in >SLD) is actually *harmful* to the cause. Not necessarily if he thought he could get them both out alive it may have seemed worth the risk for the sake of keeping a full crew complement. >I've said it before, Blake's a driven man, and I do think his cause is *as* >important to him as his people (he will not give up the Liberator to the >federation - that would be a crime against humanity). But again, if the >cause overrode the people, he *would* have tried harder to keep Avon in >Breakdown - he knows he has the influence, he knows he has the manipulative >skills, and he knows Avon is valuable. But Avon's free (or as free as Blake >can make it) choice comes first - "if he stays, it's got to be for his own >reasons", not Blake's. Can't remember Breakdown too well so if I've got something muddled up I apologise in advance. If Blake had tried to force Avon to stay on the ship he knew very well it would simply make Avon even more determined to leave. Blake certainly isn't stupid he knows Avon needs to feel that he has control before he'll ake a decision so he gave Avon his space. >I think Blake was stating the absolute truth when he gave Cally the reason >he went back for her on Centero. "Too many of my *friends* are already >dead, >Cally. I can't afford to lose another one." Yeah, you could be right. Best wishes, Jessica. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 13:42:50 +0100 (BST) From: Iain Coleman To: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7 II? Message-Id: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 25 Aug 2000, Dana Shilling wrote: > > > (Thinking about Avon interviewing potential flatmates. Ouch.) > I think I saw that movie already--it's called "Shallow Grave." Speaking of 'Shallow Grave', Christopher Ecclestone for Blake, anybody? Think about it, it might just work. Mind you, with Robbie Coltrane as Avon we might as well just call it 'Cracker' and have done with it. Indeed, I have a notion that simply transposing the entire cast of Cracker would work disturbingly well. Iain ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 13:37:23 +0100 (BST) From: Iain Coleman To: B7 List Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7 II? Message-Id: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 25 Aug 2000 mistral@ptinet.net wrote: > > (Mind you, if Avon is as actor-proof as Iain says then I want Keanu.) I said _actor_ proof. Iain ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 04:48:41 -0700 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 List Subject: J or P revisited (was Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?) Message-ID: <39AA5198.617F8E95@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kathryn Andersen wrote: > On Sat, Aug 26, 2000 at 08:32:32AM -0700, mistral@ptinet.net wrote: > > > > learns fairly early on to try to change Avon's *mind*, not his heart. > > There is some emotional leakage due to Blake's nature, but it's > > mostly incidental - his appeals to Avon quickly become based on > > logic; and the consequence is that he reaches Avon's heart as well. > > [The reason for this is easiest explained by type theory: as an INTP, > > feeling is Avon's *last* (4th) function; under stress he will reject it, > > which means that an emotional appeal from someone who claims > > to be a friend is the *least* likely way to persuade him - it will > > IMO be viewed as emotional blackmail; it would either have the > > opposite effect and/or damage the friendship. However, Blakes > > discretion in this will earn Avon's appreciation.] > > Even if Avon is INTJ rather than INTP (I am still not convinced that > he's INTP, though he might be) then he's still likely to object to > emotional appeals as emotional blackmail and manipulation; the logical > intellectual appeal is still the one most likely to succeed. > > For an INTP, Thinking is the first function, iNtuition is the second; > for an INTJ, iNtuition is the first function, Thinking is the second; > so both types have a high regard for logic. Aw, I didn't really mean to open up the J/P debate again; it's just so difficult to explain why I think certain things about Avon and A-B without resorting to type theory; sort of like I suppose it's difficult to discuss OOP without using the vocabulary, once you're used to the vocabulary. Okay, IMHO you've used what is essentially the right piece of data, but overlooked the deeper implications of same. He is, as Helen says in another post, very borderline, and presents himself as certainly more J than I do; but people can and do learn to use a range of behaviours in appropriate circumstances, especially by the time they are Avon's age in the show. I suspect he presents as J as he does because he needed to develop those behaviours to get along in his society, at his job, etc. But by the time one reaches midlife, one is fairly adept at the first and second function, and starting to develop the use of the third. My contention is that the most accurate way to type someone who is borderline on J/P, is by deciding which is his *fourth* function (the opposite of the first), because it is far easier to do accurately. (However, if you're going to try to decide between T and N, I'll point out that Avon says in 'Mission to Destiny' that he doesn't trust intuition - doesn't sound very INTJ to me.) The fourth function is (1) developed late in life (*after* the point at which we see Avon); (2) the one we're worst at; (3) the one that we will reject under stress. So: INTJ - N, T, F, S - the fourth function is sensing and INTP - T, N, S, F - the fourth function is feeling. So the question becomes, which is Avon worse at, sensing or feeling? Which does Avon reject under stress, sensing or feeling? I think the answer is very clear. Avon doesn't want to deal with feelings - his own, or anybody else's. It's been mentioned before by someone(?) on the lyst the way in which he goes cold and analytical in a crisis - not normal for most people, but normal for short-term stress in an INTP, shutting off feeling until the crisis is over. Under long-term stress, when the feeling cannot be shut off, he extraverts it - another INTP characteristic. I can probably list dozens of examples from canon where Avon rejects feelings or fails to cope with them appropriately; show me a correspondingly large number of times that he rejects or retreats from or mishandles sensing, and I'll be forced to reconsider my position. Really I will ;-) > Of course, we could simply put this subtle debate down to this: both > Mistral and I identify with Avon. She's an INTP, so she thinks Avon > is an INTP. I'm an INTJ, so I think Avon's an INTJ. Hee. Except that *isn't* why I think Avon's an INTP (though it's probably why I'm *glad* he's an INTP). I used to think he was an INTJ. It was reading INTJ Lisa Williams's assertion that Avon is an INTP masquerading as an INTJ, and the subsequent discussion (on Sue Clerc's site, IIRC), that made me change my mind. I think that particular read of Avon makes a lot of his motives and behaviours transparent; reading him as an INTJ doesn't. For example, his stress pattern in S3 and S4; I'd have to say he was cracking up as an INTJ, but as an INTP, those behaviours look like fairly normal patterns for long-term stress. And the behaviour in Rumors and Terminal strikes me as relatively normal for an INTP; lots of us are obsessive; but it doesn't strike me as very INTJ. I think Avon's hard to type if you just look at J/P, but the more I learn about function preferences, the more certain I am that P is the 'correct' choice. > Or we could throw our hands up in the air and say that the writers > didn't know type theory. (grin) Hey, neither do most parents, but they still manage to produce perfectly typed children. Seriously, the better a character is written (as in realistically) the more he'll be typeable. The fact that we can narrow it as much as we do indicates how well Avon is drawn. A real person would, IMO, be just as difficult to type, if you couldn't ask him questions about himself. Just IMHO, Mistral -- "Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!" --Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:48:17 EDT From: Mac4781@aol.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <7a.988da10.26dbb991@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mistral wrote: > What you're suggesting makes it sound as if you think in order to like > someone just as they are, you have to remain unaware of their flaws, > or their differences from oneself. I don't think you can actually be > said to like someone if you are unaware of their flaws, I don't think Avon was hiding his flaws under a bushel barrel. I think everyone was aware of them. There are days I'm amazed that anyone liked him. But like him they did, flaws and all, and despite his best efforts to push them away. > and I don't > think you can be said to be a true friend if you don't encourage their > growth. Ahhh, there's encouraging growth and encouraging growth. I suppose it depends on how one categorizes encouraging Avon to be part of the rebellion. I don't see that as encouraging growth. > Hm. Try this analogy. I honestly don't see how that analogy relates. There isn't a world full of rebels telling Avon to join the rebellion or calling Avon cold and uncaring if he doesn't join the rebellion. There's just Blake. And of course he uses persuasions that will work as opposed to persuasions that won't work. He doesn't use those persuasions because he cares about Avon. He doesn't use them because he wants to encourage Avon's growth. He uses them because he wants Avon's cooperation and that's the best way to obtain it. Blake isn't stupid. Nor is he terribly concerned about Avon or Avon's feelings. He doesn't care that Avon is cold and uncaring as long as he gets the job done. Blake is focused on a greater goal. I don't blame Blake for his using whatever means are at his disposal to gain Avon's cooperation. I'd do the same in his shoes. This is a business to Blake. I don't know where you came up with the theory that Blake had Avon's growth in mind when he co-opted him into the rebellion. If Blake is as honest and intelligent as I think he is, he knows that the rebellion isn't going to bring out the "best" in Avon, or in anyone. It's not only a dangerous place to be, it's a place that demands moral corruption and sacrifice of integrity if you want to succeed. You have to be open to dancing with the devil to win rebellions. It doesn't make for better. That's one of the fascinating aspects of Blake's 7; though their goals may be noble, our heroes are a bunch of terrorists, capable of cruel, evil and thuggish behavior. > 'So > Avon settles in to the colony, writing rousing rebel tunes. He's > still sensitive to the most oblique allusion that he ought to take > up painting, and he thinks the rebellion is utter stupidity; but so > far, Blake asks him for songs, not paintings; maybe Blake's not > such a bad guy, after all. As you say below this quote, our views of Avon are quite different, so this part isn't going to work me. It's not an Avon I recognize. > In this case, Blake has done what Blake sees as 'bringing out > Avon's best' (since Blake thinks everyone should contribute) > without changing Avon's nature (from musician to painter.) I don't think Avon saw it as bringing out his best. And I hope that Blake didn't see it as "bringing out Avon's best." I wouldn't much like a Blake who thought that. He'd be blind to the harsh realities of the rebellion business. > Okay.... I genuinely *don't* see where you got this, it's exactly > the opposite of what I've been trying to convey. That's fair enough, because I genuinely *didn't* see where you got the impression that I think Avon is good and noble and wonderful. I don't think he's as uncaring as he would like people to think, but he's certainly capable of harsh behavior. > My Avon thinks the > cause is stupid, thinks Blake's great big bleeding heart is a liability to > both Blake *and* his cause, and bristles at the merest breath of any > sort of emotional persuasion. But he is touched, at a very deep level > that only reveals itself in a quiet and unspoken personal loyalty, by > Blake's *consistency of character*, and by his acceptance and liking > of Avon for who he is (as per above.) My Avon thinks the Cause is a goal that involves more liabilities than rewards. He thinks Blake's heart is a liability to himself (Avon), and doesn't care that it is a liability to Blake except that Blake is involving him in his schemes. If Blake wants to go out and get himself killed, that's Blake business. That Blake might also go out and get Avon killed makes it Avon's business. And Avon feels he then has a right to object to Blake's foolish plans. My Avon is not touched by acceptance and liking and doesn't care whether Blake likes or accepts him. He does appreciate that Blake has the intelligence to value his skills. My Avon appears, to me, to be a colder Avon than your Avon. And I'm not saying cold is bad; I think it's great. > Now, I don't expect you to agree - our Avons are too different; but > I hope at least I've been clearer this time. Clearer, yes, but obviously our logic meters are as different as our opinions of Avon. Thanks for the expanded explanations. I appreciate your time. Carol Mc ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 09:50:54 -0400 From: "Dana Shilling" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Re:recasting Message-ID: <00cf01c010f8$4c4b21e0$51614e0c@dshilling> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Steve Rogerson said: > Steve Kilbane said: "Anyone reckon Anthony Stewart Head could do Blake?" > > Only if Sarah Michelle Gellar could do Jenna and Alyson Hannigan as > Cally. You forgot Nicholas Brendon as Vila. -(Y) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 09:59:14 -0400 From: "Dana Shilling" To: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <00d101c010f8$54696120$51614e0c@dshilling> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: J MacQueen > > > I met it on the shore over Ensor's place > > This was intended for the first line of the Orac/Lola filk. Now it strikes > me that something to the tune of Da Doo Ron Ron might also be started like > this. Oooh--we're blowing up so fine Oooh--Orac's got Film at Nine Da Doo Roj Roj Roj.... -(Y) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 15:18:24 +0100 From: "Alison Page" To: "B7 List" Subject: Re: J or P revisited (was Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II?) Message-ID: <009b01c010fb$17ecbb40$ca8edec2@pre-installedco> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mistral said - >I think Avon's hard to type if you just look at J/P, but the more >I learn about function preferences, the more certain I am that >P is the 'correct' choice. It's complicated by the way introverted people hide their deepest enthusiasm. Without resorting to the letters, which get on people's nerves, I'd say the question is between two types of person: - is Avon, like say Einstein, presenting a fairly careless, laid back, exterior while underneath being very intellectually rigourous and intolerant of uncertainty ('God does not play dice'): On the list Mistral and Neil being of this type for example. (I am talking about INTP) - is Avon, like say Isaac Newton, presenting a fairly controlled exterior, and banging on about rationality, while underneath being fascinated by uncertainty and creativity ('I have been playing with pebbles on the beach while before me lies a great uncharted ocean'). A big swathe of the list being of this type. (I'm talking about INTJ ) >the better a character >is written (as in realistically) the more he'll be typeable. I do agree with this a lot. For example doctors will diagnose the illnesses and disabilities people suffered from, from portraits painted long before the diseases were identified. Because the artist is good he captures the syndrome accurately without knowing it. Alison ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 23:27:07 -0400 From: "Doraleen McArthur" To: "Blake's 7 list" Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <000201c0110c$8179d960$4df35a0c@oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kathryn said: > For an INTP, Thinking is the first function, iNtuition is the second; > for an INTJ, iNtuition is the first function, Thinking is the second; > so both types have a high regard for logic. > > Of course, we could simply put this subtle debate down to this: both > Mistral and I identify with Avon. She's an INTP, so she thinks Avon > is an INTP. I'm an INTJ, so I think Avon's an INTJ. > > Or we could throw our hands up in the air and say that the writers > didn't know type theory. (grin) Oh, but where's the fun in that? If you want to get out into the more specific (and thus probably less legit) parts of type theory, trying to choose between those two is trying to choose between someone whose outside is brainstorming Ne or conclusion-based-on-logic Te. I really think Avon's much more the latter. --Katie ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 23:29:18 -0400 From: "Doraleen McArthur" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Five minutes after _Voice from the Past_... Message-ID: <000301c0110c$854efd40$4df35a0c@oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Predatrix Subject: [B7L] Five minutes after _Voice from the Past_... Well, Sally, I dunno about 24 hours. I can do five minutes, though. [snippet] [snipped] LOL! I liked it... --Katie ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 17:56:31 +-100 From: Louise Rutter To: 'B7 Lysator' Subject: RE: [B7L] recasting (was Coltrane) Message-ID: <01C01119.4DB472E0@host62-7-63-60.btinternet.com> Tom and I were discussing recasting last night and came up with Michelle Yeoh as Dayna. Carrie Ann Moss could do Soolin or Jenna equally well - she's the only non-blonde I can picture as Soolin. Louise ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 20:01:33 GMT From: Ika To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysfunctional ... Message-Id: <200008281901.UAA17712@smtp.uk2net.com> Sally wrote: > > (PPS - I liked Kathryn's suggestion of the word 'integrity'. For all his bad > points, it does fit him beautifully IMO.) > And it comes from the Latin "integer", ie "untouched", which has the *perfect* connotations (sniffle) Love, Ika ---------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using http://uk2.net NEWS - CHEAPEST DEDICATED SERVERS IN THE WORLD - 29/month UK's FREE Domains, FREE Dialup, FREE Webdesign, FREE email ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 21:52:47 +0200 From: Steve Kilbane To: steve.rogerson@journalist.co.uk Cc: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re:recasting Message-Id: <200008282052.VAA17970@whitecrow.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Steve Kilbane said: "Anyone reckon Anthony Stewart Head could do Blake?" > > Only if Sarah Michelle Gellar could do Jenna and Alyson Hannigan as > Cally. No, wait: SMG as Servie. Charisma Carpenter as Jenna, and Emma Caufield as as Cally. steve ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 19:48:50 +0200 From: Steve Kilbane To: "Dana Shilling" Cc: "b7" Subject: Re: [B7L] Re:recasting Message-Id: <200008281848.TAA15290@whitecrow.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Dana writes: > You forgot Nicholas Brendon as Vila. True (although too young). But I think he could also do Avaon or Travis, considering how menacing he managed to be as a hyena. steve, who wants to see Brendon play Menacing more. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 07:28:56 EST From: "J MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: "Dana Shilling" >Da Doo Roj Roj Roj.... Now that I've managed not to distribute chocolate milk all over the desk, thank you for that! Regards Joanne _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 17:16:44 -0600 From: Betty Ragan To: B7 Lyst Subject: Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysfunctional ... Message-ID: <39AAF2DC.DD7D9DF@sdc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kathryn Andersen wrote: > I think the word you're searching for is "integrity", which covers > both "honesty" and "loyalty". Hmm. I don't know that that quite gets at the exact concept I was flailing after, either, but it *is* a surprisingly apt word for Avon. -- 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: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 17:31:29 -0600 From: Betty Ragan To: B7 Lyst Subject: Re: [B7L] In Praise of Dark and Dysfunctional ... Message-ID: <39AAF651.8852C08E@sdc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Responding to me, Sally Manton wrote: > and cares for you, and that is the one thing he *will not* do.> > > Actually, the line that gets me in Rumours is the simple "you weren't even > real." Not that she betrayed him, not even that she lied to him ... but she > *was* a lie. Ooh, yes. Not just that she'd deceived him, but the fact that *he'd* actually been living a lie... This seems to be one of the major recurring themes of the show, actually: Reality May Not Be What You Think It Is. Love it. > This, like that blatant fibbing at the end of Gambit, isn't lying about > himself, but about what he's *done*. And you will notice in both > cases that he is endearingly clumsy at it (even if obsessed, Blake couldn't > *possibly* have missed it in Gambit!!!!!!) In Hostage, Avon does not lie > about what he's done, he just doesn't mention that he's done it (not all > that difficult, since none of the others have any conceivable to think of it > and therefore ask him.) And when Cally does prod, he doesn't prevaricate or > deny that something's wrong, he simply (and veeerrrry pointedly) changes the > subject. Avon doesn't actually lie much directly, true. I don't see that as having a great deal to do with him placing some innate value on honesty, though, if only because he's quite excellent at lying by omission. I see Avon's attitude towards lying as being very much like my own: Lying to people who trust and depend on you in ways that will make them feel betrayed if they ever found out (whether you think they will or not), is *bad*. Otherwise, lying in general is morally acceptable, but can create problems in practice. The best way to deceive and mislead is tell the truth, carefully edited or carefully slanted with just the right words. It's easier to do, you don't have to worry about being a bad liar, and it's *much* easier to keep track of what you've told people. -- 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: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 18:21:54 -0600 From: Betty Ragan To: B7 Lyst Subject: Re: [B7L] Orac the Great (was Why Not Blake II?) Message-ID: <39AB0222.6BE86DD3@sdc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit J MacQueen wrote: > >From: Betty Ragan > >But I *like* this! Come on, get started. *Pleeeeease*? > > You may be sorry... I'm not! I'm not! :) -- 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: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 18:32:51 -0600 From: "Ellynne G." To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Why Not Blake II? Message-ID: <20000828.183257.-448287.0.rilliara@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit All right, this is mildly scary. I was just reading an article on who's been cast in the new Harry Potter movie. A couple names were mentioned earlier on the lyst for B7. Alan Rickman is in negotiations to play the most Avonish character in HP, Snape. Robbie Coltrane has been cast to play the least Avonish character (although the only so far to use any Avon dialogue), Hagrid. Oh, and Maggie Smith is playing Pr. McGonagall and Richard Harris is in negotiations for Dumbledore. Oh, and having recently seen X-Men, I'm trying to figure out how Patrick Stewart could play Avon with Ian McKellen as Blake. Also, how to explain Avon having a son from Australia.... Ellynne ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #243 **************************************