From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V98 #183 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/volume98/183 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 98 : Issue 183 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] Flag waving. [B7L] Sports, PD, Blake [B7L] Re: Flag waving [B7L] wobbly sets [B7L] Re: Caliph of Krandor. [B7L] Addedum to Flag waving. Re: [B7L] Re: Flag waving ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 17:14:32 EDT From: AChevron@aol.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Flag waving. Message-ID: <8d6f1868.359d49b9@aol.com> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 98-07-03 16:21:34 EDT, you write: << patriotism and spirituality seemed a bit shallow, considering many of the problems that we have in the States ( no universal single payer health care, bad support of teachers, lack of funding for the arts) >> Can't resist. yes, indeed, our patriotism is shallow in this day and age, where taking a political stand doesn't involve the threat of property, postition, and life itself as it did when the Founding Fathers decided the most drastic of actions was nessacary to gain their political ends. but the patriotism celebrated by the holiday should not be defined in terms of your feelings on individual political issues. Instead, I look to the 4th as a time to reflect on the great ideals spelled out in the Constitution and Declaration of Independance, the triumph of those ideals over the passage of time, and yes, the awareness that even today we have yet to reach the full potential of those ideals. Yes, the United States has many problems. Waiting 6 months to a year for a bypass operation isn't one of them. instead of reasoned debate, oftentimes political opponants settle for vilifying the opposition and rousing the basest emotions of their constituants to bring about their ends. yes, in many ways we have acted as hypocrits through the years. but every country has its flaws. Every political system in theory is an ideal one; in reality each is rigged with flaws which render it a potential monster. But the American Dream has inspired people around the world. Every year people immigrate here to carve out their own version of that dream. And it is a worthy dream. Our Founding Fathers strived for a system that elevated Man. they may not have succeeded, but nor did they fail, so long as their ideals still inspire others to rise. Let us rejoice in our differences, and our similarities, and for this one day, revel in the pride of a nation that is a unique amalgamation of the world's population.Please? Deborah Rose with apologies for losing the B7 thread of this posting. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jul 98 03:12:00 GMT From: s.thompson8@genie.geis.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Sports, PD, Blake Message-Id: <199807040341.DAA21119@rock103.genie.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I love the suggestion of drag racing for Tarrant. I once read a fan story that I really liked, set in a kind of 1950s alternate universe. It was about an aging hoodlum and his alcoholic sidekick, and the three juvenile delinquents they hung out with. Avon spent his time souping up their car, Scorpio, which Tarrant would be driving in the big drag race in the probably-vain hope of beating the prom queen, Servalan. It was a wonderful story, but unfortunately the author was too shy ever to agree to publishing it. I think she has now gafiated, alas. I also like the idea of Cally doing gymnastics, which would enhance her potential for tantric sex! A lot of people seem to see Cally as asexual, but I see her more as being very in control of her body, which suggests some interesting possibilities. My feeling about =Avon: A Terrible Aspect= is that there are two separate problems with it: 1) It badly needed editing. Things like the astronomical gaffes could have been cleaned up fairly easily, and it could have been turned into a moderately readable pulp adventure. PD does have a pretty good sense of pacing and dialogue-- more suited to scripts, really, than novels. The fact that the book wasn't edited at all suggests a certain contempt for the readership on the part of both the author and the publisher, which may be one reason why fans in turn tend to be rather vocal in their contempt for the book. 2) The portrayal of the title character is, as a number of people have pointed out, not very compatible with what we saw on screen. That would still be the case even if the book had been cleaned up and made more readable. My theory about that is that when PD wrote the book, he was extrapolating backwards from the Avon of the fourth season, his own favorite season, and was pretty much ignoring all the evidence of the first three seasons. I also think that the reason for the difference between the early Avon and the Avon of the fourth season is that by the time of the fourth season, PD was a big enough star that he had more control over the direction of the series and could steer the development of the character in the direction that he would have preferred all along, namely toward being more of a macho action hero. But that was so different from the earlier presentation of the character that fans interpreted it to mean that the character was going mad, or at the very least, that he was severely stressed out. Such, at least, is my theory of the external, production-related reasons for the change in Avon. But what we see on screen can also be explained internally, in terms of the development of the character: Avon realizes that in order to survive in an increasingly hostile universe, he's going to have to become a macho man of action whether he wants to or not. Since he has no real choice anyway, he makes the best of things and does it with style, becoming a flamboyant space pirate. But at heart he's still a quiet, nerdly computer geek, which is why he often seems a bit twitchy and strange during the fourth season. IMO. Edith, what was Blake fighting for? Good question. Many fan writers have taken him to task for not, apparently, having any well-thought-out plan for governing the galaxy after the fall of the Federation. Might not anarchy be worse than tyranny, especially with so many worlds dependent on organized technology for survival? I have the impression that what Blake wanted was an end to the drugging and the threat of the Federation military, so that the people on the various worlds could decide for themselves what they wanted. But what the results would have been if he'd gotten what he wanted is another question. Sarah T. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1998 12:05:48 +1000 From: Taina Nieminen To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: Flag waving Message-ID: <359D8DFC.BD7A8B65@netspace.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Over here in the United States of America, we will be doing our bit > of patriotic flag waving tomorrow- a time of picnics, music, beer and > fireworks being done by those who are fortunate enough to be off. > I had put out a post stating that our(USA) patriotism and spirituality > seemed a bit shallow, considering many of the problems that we have in > the States ( no universal single payer health care, bad support of > teachers, lack of funding for the arts)and that it seemed grimly > reflected in B7's world. My comments are obviously biased from having lived all my life in Australia, where we have free/subsidised health care available to everybody who needs it, a solid welfare system, a very minor homeless problem compared to the US, a so-so education system (but without the problems of children regularly taking guns to school), and even arts funding. So, the US is one possible system, and the Federation is another possible system, but it's not a choice between those two. It is possible to have a society in which people are economically secure, well-fed, housed etc. (some people in Australia would argue with this, but in comparison with other places in the world, we are really very well off) but still have personal freedoms. Of course, I'm also strongly influenced by Western cultural bias, which emphasizes individual autonomy. Personal freedoms/"rights" very important to me are my right to hold and express my own political opinions, religious beliefs, choose my occupation and place of residence, and to have friends and sexual partners of my choice. > The question is, what was Blake fighting for, > exactly? Everyone was drugged and dulled, but fed and perhaps reasonably > taken care of. Being drugged and dulled attacks what I would call a fundamental right of people to be themselves. The right to think your own thoughts, feel your own feelings is much more fundamental than any right to express them. A drugged Federation resident would not even be able to decide whether they'd rather be drugged and well-fed, or free and have to struggle for existence. As for myself, I'd rather be free and not well taken care off (but then, I've never been in a situation where I haven't been well taken care off). Once again, I can only say that there are other alternatives, and I think Blake would have had one of these in mind - a free(er) society in which people were still taken care of. > Was he rebelling against absolutely control ( from > strength comes unity) at the expense of security? I think Blake was rebelling for a different kind of government. I haven't seen any episodes since late 1993, so my memory is vague on some of it. What indications are there as to what kind of government Blake wanted to replace the Federation with? Also, I get the mailing list in digest form, so I've written this response without any idea as to what other responses people have made so far. > Did he expect others, > in mass movement, would join him? Especially if they had bread and > circuses? Again, my memory is vague, but my impression is that he wasn't counting on mass support, but was focusing on what he and his companions could do to damage Federation control themselves, and make it possible for others to also rebel. Another question - what exactly did he do after he left the Liberator? Taina Nieminen (recently joined the list) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1998 12:37:54 +0100 (BST) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: [B7L] wobbly sets Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII I saw a set wobble in Babylon 5 this week when a character got thrown hard against a low wall. Made me feel quite nostaligic to know that some things never change. Judith -- http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention 26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1998 14:05:25 +0100 (BST) From: mjsmith@tcd.ie (Murray) To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: Caliph of Krandor. Message-Id: <199807041305.OAA12959@dux1.tcd.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To my fellow subscribers: I have found out what type of badge is incorporated into the golden sash (or belt) worn around the waist of the Caliph of Krandor in 'Dawn of the Gods'. It is the badge of an old French order of knighthood, the Order of the Holy Spirit. The order was founded by King Henry III of France in 1578 and was limited to 100 knights. It was surpressed during the French Revolution, but was revived for a short time during the Restoration between 1816-30. The badge is an eight-pointed (or Maltese) cross, with lilies between the arms of the cross and a dove flying with the head downwards, which symbolizes the Holy Spirit. The Caliph does not wear the badge correctly, as the dove is flying with the head to the right. This would make a good question for a B7 quiz. 'Name the old French order of knighthood whose badge is part of the sash around the waist of the Caliph of Krandor?' It also makes us ask the question as to why the badge was used. I can come up with two answers: (1) The costume people were scraping the botton of the barrel. (The most plausible answer). (2) The Caliph liked French history. Murray Smith ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1998 12:59:57 PDT From: "Edith Spencer" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Addedum to Flag waving. Message-ID: <19980704195957.25086.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain To all ( Especially the United states citizen members): If you read an insult in my "flag waving" post, then I do apologize. No offense was meant. As a daughter of Carribean immigrants who went through a lot to become citizens of the USA, I am far too intimately aware of the ideals and goals of this country. I know of the very great sacrifices done by ALL ancestors to insure the ideals of liberty, justice and pursuit of happiness for its citizens. However, being a creole descendent also brings a certain appreciation for the masks that goverments and people often wear, and being able to call them on it. I look at the 4 of July as a holiday that commemorates the Republic's founding and against a lot of odds, success. But, for me, it is also a reminder that there are a lot of things that are very wrong, and there is a renewed obligation on my part as a citizen to help my fellow citizen where I can. There is a lot that i admire about my country, and a lot that I find to be bad. Such is the history of many countries and cultures, I think. Edith Spencer ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 09:58:16 +1000 From: Kathryn Andersen To: "Blake's 7 list" Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Flag waving Message-ID: <19980705095816.29156@welkin.apana.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 12:05:48PM +1000, Taina Nieminen wrote: > > Over here in the United States of America, we will be doing our bit > > of patriotic flag waving tomorrow- a time of picnics, music, beer and > > fireworks being done by those who are fortunate enough to be off. > > I had put out a post stating that our(USA) patriotism and spirituality > > seemed a bit shallow, considering many of the problems that we have in > > the States ( no universal single payer health care, bad support of > > teachers, lack of funding for the arts)and that it seemed grimly > > reflected in B7's world. > > My comments are obviously biased from having lived all my life in > Australia, where we have free/subsidised health care available to > everybody who needs it, a solid welfare system, a very minor homeless > problem compared to the US, a so-so education system (but without the > problems of children regularly taking guns to school), and even arts > funding. Actually, believe it or not, our education system is very good. Not as good as it *was*, but from my personal experience of both the US system and the Australian system, the Australian one is better. Of course that's only a sample-size of one. But certainly our universities are world-class, otherwise why would be be getting all those (paying) foriegn students? > So, the US is one possible system, and the Federation is another > possible system, but it's not a choice between those two. It is possible > to have a society in which people are economically secure, well-fed, > housed etc. (some people in Australia would argue with this, but in > comparison with other places in the world, we are really very well off) > but still have personal freedoms. Here here! And when you mutter to yourself, "I wish someone would bloody shut miz bloody Pauline-bigot-Hanson up," remember that that is the price of freedom. Even the hate-mongering Pauline Hansons are allowed a voice. (As they would be in America also) An interesting thought: how would Blake cope, in his new, free, Federation, with his own versions of Pauline Hanson; the people, speaking freely, who don't believe in the same ideals as him, even though, to him, these ideals are self-evident? > Of course, I'm also strongly influenced by Western cultural bias, which > emphasizes individual autonomy. Personal freedoms/"rights" very > important to me are my right to hold and express my own political > opinions, religious beliefs, choose my occupation and place of > residence, and to have friends and sexual partners of my choice. One of the things I appreciate about the Australian system is that compulsory voting prevents the issues being hijacked by extremists. Oh, we've got the extremists here, but they aren't represented disproportionately. People just vote the way they usually vote, but at least that makes for more stability of government. > > The question is, what was Blake fighting for, > > exactly? Everyone was drugged and dulled, but fed and perhaps reasonably > > taken care of. > > Being drugged and dulled attacks what I would call a fundamental right > of people to be themselves. The right to think your own thoughts, feel > your own feelings is much more fundamental than any right to express > them. A drugged Federation resident would not even be able to decide > whether they'd rather be drugged and well-fed, or free and have to > struggle for existence. As for myself, I'd rather be free and not well > taken care off (but then, I've never been in a situation where I haven't > been well taken care off). Gan: Is there a defense against IMIPAK? Avon: Of course there is. It's called slavery. (Blake's 7: Weapon [B3]) > Once again, I can only say that there are other alternatives, and I > think Blake would have had one of these in mind - a free(er) society in > which people were still taken care of. The American push is that Democracy is the best possible form of government. I don't think so, but it is sure a better alternative to tyranical dictatorships. But I figure monarchy has a lot going for it too -- so long as you've got a good monarch. (-8 The first purpose of government is to uphold the weak, to defend the weak against the strong. But any government (or law) whatsoever can be corrupted to side with the strong against the weak. The advantage of Democracy is that it prevents government from doing a lot. This of course is also the disadvantage. The advantage of a benevolent autocrat is that s/he can get a whole lot done to bring the country into good shape; the problems arise when the autocrat is either wicked or unwise - then the things s/he does are not of benefit to the country. As someone on this list proposed, ages ago, Avon might have said this: "Sometimes a majority simply means that all the fools are on one side." (a quote that never happened, from the Blake's 7 mailing list) So I suppose the best democracies are those which manage to cut down the fool factor. In a democracy, it is to the benefit of the country as a whole to make sure all its citizens are well-educated, morally as well as intellectually. (geeze, what a ramble!) > > Was he rebelling against absolutely control ( from > > strength comes unity) at the expense of security? > > I think Blake was rebelling for a different kind of government. I > haven't seen any episodes since late 1993, so my memory is vague on some > of it. What indications are there as to what kind of government Blake > wanted to replace the Federation with? I don't think Blake thought that far ahead; he just wanted to destroy the Federation, and he didn't think beyond that. I suspect that was one reason Avon was so scornful of his plans. "I never doubted that. I never doubted your fanaticism. As far as I am concerned, you can destroy whatever you like; you can stir up a thousand revolutions; you can wade in blood up to your armpits. Oh, and you can lead the rabble to victory - whatever that means. Just so long as there is an end to it." -- Kerr Avon, to Roj Blake (Blake's 7: Star One [B13]) > > Did he expect others, > > in mass movement, would join him? Especially if they had bread and > > circuses? > > Again, my memory is vague, but my impression is that he wasn't counting > on mass support, but was focusing on what he and his companions could do > to damage Federation control themselves, and make it possible for others > to also rebel. That seems to be one of the Freedom Party's aims at the start: to cause enough disruption on Earth to enable some of the Outer Worlds to break away from the Federation. > Another question - what exactly did he do after he left > the Liberator? That is open to pure speculation. All we have is that things happened to Blake (not on Earth) which destroyed his trust and made him more cynical. (If the Blake we see in "Blake" is the real Blake, that is.) Kathryn Andersen -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Tarrant: What would Servalan want with a penal colony? Avon: Who knows? Perhaps she wants to compare notes with some other genocidal maniacs - or take a refresher course in basic brutality. (Blake's 7: Moloch [C11]) -- _--_|\ | Kathryn Andersen / \ | http://home.connexus.net.au/~kat \_.--.*/ | #include "standard/disclaimer.h" v | ------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere Maranatha! | -> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V98 Issue #183 **************************************