From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V98 #200 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/volume98/200 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 200 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] The Big Question Re: [B7L] canon firing. [B7L] Re: Flag waving-- LONG Re: [B7L] Re: Flag waving-- LONG Re: [B7L] B7 on UK Gold ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 21:19:18 +0930 From: "Ophelia" To: Subject: Re: [B7L] The Big Question Message-ID: <01bdb62f$ecdbfc40$LocalHost@waltersmith> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit DJ wrote, re a certain golden haired gunfighting grrl's chances for valentines and red roses... >I think Soolin and Vila could make a great couple! And cute as hell... Her >looking after the physical-security side of the relationship, >him doing the emotional/care-taking side of it, and working >out their means of survival as a team---either in security >consulting, or professional B&E. They'd be invincible, I agree! The only thing that boggles >me, would be how to get them together, to start. What could >he *do*, that could make a good enough impression on her, >for her to seriously consider him worth her attention/affection? "City" gives us a good starting place - Vila has already demonstrated he has a way with fierce-but-lonely mercenary types, exactly becuase he is vulnerable, kind and no danger. Soolin is a consummate professional, too, so if she was forced to notice his thieving skills, she might be impressed... Or she could be bored and resentful, and sieze an unusual chance to party... Or she could speculate about those clever fingers of his... More seriously, I think Vila's very helplessness could get to her, as someone who has suffered badly herself. If he confessed the events of Maldoaar to her, she might take it on herself to teach him not to be such a victim, which would entail both feeling pity for him *and* spending a lot of time with him. Or she could be feeling a little, ah, tense, and figure he's the option for relief most amenable to being kept into line by a fiesty female. The possibilities are endless. That's why first time stories are so popular! XXX Lindley "..the celestial and my soul's idol, the most beautified Ophelia..." The Knockwurst "'Allo 'Allo" Pages - www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/2511/allo.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 22:27:39 +0930 From: "Ophelia" To: "B7 list" Subject: Re: [B7L] canon firing. Message-ID: <01bdb639$7904f100$LocalHost@waltersmith> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I don't have to consider anything canon I don't want to. For example, the Vampire Chronicles atrocity-that-shall-be-nameless isn't canon, because it is obvious that Anne Rice was insane when she wrote it. Different incarnations *are* different. In general, I consider the telly show Blakes 7 canon, and anything else a spin-off. Official spin-offs, maybe, but not canon. If they made a new telly show called B7, that would be its own canon, but not Blakes 7: The original Series canon. Re bad reunions - I am a devoted Addams Family fan, and I will *not* accept the 1970 "Hallowe'en With the New Addams Family" as canon, even though it had the entire original cast except Blossom Rock. (It also included my namesake, the divine Ophelia Frump, although she'd apparently had a character transplant.) It's an atrocity, and there is little Addams Family-ish about it. Of course I keep and watch a copy,but the same could be said of "Power"... The movies I see as a separate canon. It is impossible to consider the books, cartoons, 1970s & 1990s animations, reunion, appearances in The Scooby Doo movies and movies all as canon - not to mention the forthcoming Tim Curry/Drew Whatsername telemovie. Just to compare the telly show and movies, Mama is Gomez' mother on TV and Morticia's in the movies, Uncle Fester is Morticia's uncle or Gomez' brother, Puggsley is a genius or an idiot, Wednesday is a sweet little girl or a psychopath, Gomez has recently come over from Castille or his family have lived in the same house for generations, Morticia and Ophelia are Frumps or Addamses, Morticia and Gomez fell in love when he was engaged to Ophelia, or they became engaged the first night they met... You *can't* reconcile the two. So I enjoy them both separately. Gomez is adorable whoever plays him, and I'm looking forward to seeing Tim Curry in the role. - XXX Lindley Ophelia - ophelia@picknowl.com.au "The girl has beauty, virtue, wit, Grace, humour, wisdom, charity and pluck." LONDON CALLING - a list to discuss Britcoms and knockwurst. http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/2511/knockwurst.html XXX Lindley. Ophelia Frump - ophelia@picknowl.com.au --www.geocities.com.au/TelevisionCity/2511/allo.html--- This angel's dirty face is sore, holding on to what she had before. Not sharing secrets with any old fool, now she's gonna keep her cool. -- "Naked" - the Spice Girls. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jul 98 06:16:00 GMT From: s.thompson8@genie.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Cc: mmoyer%mto.infi.net%inet#@genie.com Subject: [B7L] Re: Flag waving-- LONG Message-Id: <199807240625.GAA05903@rock103.genie.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Well, Kathryn and Joanne MacQueen, it doesn't look at all good for the academic reputation of U. of Adelaide. I was really, really hoping that the place would turn out to be something like the fundamentalist "colleges" here that teach "creation science" and that sort of thing; but according to a survey by Asia Week magazine ( http://www.pathfinder.com/asiaweek/98/0515/cs5.html ), it's your seventh-ranked university. Oh dear. Lindley says: "I've had extraordinary support, both intellectual and personal, from the staff of the underfunded and debt-ridden Arts Department. The purpose of a liberal arts education is, after all, not to teach you opinions but social responsibility and research and writing skills, while bringing you into contact with the major theories of your chosen areas." OK, that sounds great, but let's see what "social responsibility" and "research" really mean, by U. of Adelaide standards. Joanne, you said that the university is not responsible for Lindley's opinions. No, of course not; but they =are= responsible for her general background knowledge and, at least to some extent, for her standards of intellectual integrity. And in both respects, they appear to have failed her badly. Of course, Lindley might be lying about having gotten her notions of academic methodology from them; but where else would an undergraduate be likely to get such ideas, other than her school? Here's a small sampling of the many gems of misinformation that we've heard from Lindley over the past two years. Please note that these are not matters of opinion, but of simple and easily confirmed facts. Anyone who wants the exact wording of Lindley's utterances or the contexts in which they occurred can find them in the list archives, along with a great deal more nonsense from the same source. I did not mention Lindley by name at first because it occurred to me that her use of the new name, Ophelia Frump, and the new ISP instead of the University of Adelaide system might indicate embarrassment over her earlier statements and a wish not to be associated with those remarks. Since that's not the case, I won't worry about it. Among many other things, Lindley "Ophelia Frump" Walker Earnshaw- Smith has at various times claimed the following: 1) South Australia was founded as a multicultural utopia. The fact is that Australia banned immigration by nonwhites until 1973, as any basic reference book will show (for example, =The World Almanac=, 1997 edition, p. 741). The only way this statement could be construed as true is if Lindley is a white supremacist who believes that it is reasonable to call a society "multicultural" if it includes various European nationalities, even though others are excluded. Now, if we give Lindley the benefit of the doubt and assume that she did not intend that interpretation, then the other possibilities are: (a) she was genuinely ignorant of one of the most basic facts of modern Australian history, or (b) she was deliberately lying. Neither speaks very well for her education at U. of Adelaide. 2) No one in Australia would find it offensive to be described as a member of the Ku Klux Klan or other racist organization. (Specifically, Lindley said that none of the comments of her friend Fran Meyers would be considered offensive in Australia; and Fran, as Lindley well knew, had just made a group of Americans very angry by telling us we belonged to the Klan and claiming afterwards that it was intended to be a funny joke, and that we were mean and cruel and intolerant of Australian humor if we didn't like it.) Well, this is closer to being true than I would have thought at the time Lindley said it; apparently it =is= more or less true of a quarter of the adult population of the state of Queensland. But there are still the other 3/4 who made it clear that they don't think racism is funny. Not to mention the rest of Australia, who I certainly hope are less racist than the Queenslanders! 3) The incest taboo is "silly," because it's really just a cover- up for a deeper taboo against homosexuality. Lindley posted a long and elaborate justification for parent-child incest, which revolved around (a) acceptance of Freudian ideas about the transference of the affections of developing children from one object of desire to another, and (b) the notion that homosexuality has been universally tabooed. Well, (a) is a matter of theory and difficult to prove one way or the other, though I for one find it unconvincing. But (b) is easily disproven as a matter of historical fact. In many societies, homosexual behavior has been perfectly acceptable. Just one sample reference: Gary Leupp, =Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan=, Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press, 1994. (To the best of my knowledge, parent-child incest is indeed universally tabooed; brother-sister incest is sometimes acceptable in special circumstances such as dynastic marriages, as in the well-known Egyptian example.) This doesn't sound to me like something an undergraduate would make up. I think Lindley was taught it. And I find it very disturbing that what is apparently a legitimate educational institution is teaching gullible undergraduates that incest and pedophilia are "delightful" (Lindley's word), by presenting a theory based on total ignorance of gay history. It doesn't matter how clever or complex a theory is if its basic premises are false. I also think that the attempt to associate homosexuality with pedophilia is appallingly homophobic in its implications. 4) Compulsory voting tends to support progressive legislation. Actually, Lindley put this the other way around, slamming the U.S. for our freedom not to vote if we don't want to. I ignored this particular comment at the time because, like many of her other comments, it seemed too silly to bother with. "Well duh," I thought, "of course voting is noncompulsory in democracies." Live and learn. Now I see that this was intended as praise of Australia, via an attack on us. (Joanne and others, if you wondered why I reacted so strongly to Kathryn's relatively mild chauvinistic remarks, that's one reason why.) Well-- let's look at the facts. Australia has had compulsory voting since the 1920s, according to the government website that I discovered by accident while I was looking at the National Library info. And yet it took them until 1973 to overthrow the racist laws banning nonwhite immigration. In the U.S., the armed forces were racially integrated in 1948 (I think -- shortly after WWII, anyway); the racial-quota aspects of our immigration laws were dismantled during the 50s and early 60s; and the civil rights laws that made racial discrimination illegal in any aspect of life that the federal government could possibly control were passed in 1965 (yes, enforcement is an ongoing problem, but at least the legislation is in place and provides the basis for legal action). Meanwhle, Australians were congratulating themselves on being so clever as to avoid American-type racial problems by not letting the "troublemakers" into the country in the first place. Lindley may not realize it, but all her talk of how smart the Aussies are and how stupid the Americans are is nothing but stale thirty-year-old White Australia rhetoric, nasty then and even nastier now. I thought that poison had died out years ago, and I'm horrified to learn that it has been passed on to a new generation. So, the historical evidence indicates pretty clearly that either there is no particular relationship between voting systems and socially progressive legislation (which is what I'm inclined to think myself); or else, if there is, then noncompulsory voting is a superior system in this respect. Why is the U. of Adelaide teaching the very opposite?? 5) Finally, a matter not so much of factual information as of basic honesty: Lindley believes-- and I'm very much afraid that she may have been taught this by her school-- that when she can't come up with any legitimate argument against a person she dislikes, it is acceptable to use lies instead. I'm referring specifically to her claim that I share Kathryn Andersen's beliefs on slash, and on homosexuality in general. Kathryn believes, for religious reasons, that homosexual behavior is sinful, perverted, and immoral. (Kathryn, I am trying very hard to state your position accurately; please feel free to make corrections if I have not got it right.) Kathryn finds the very idea of slash-- fan fiction about homosexual relationships between media characters, in this case B7-- to be extremely distressing. She had a very unpleasant experience once when she accidentally caught sight of some slash art. None of this is true of me, as everyone on the Space City list well knows-- and as Lindley herself knows, since she was on that list for a while herself. Her squawking of "Homophobia!" at me was completely dishonest. It had nothing to do with her interpretation of anything that I had actually said, but was merely a displacement of Kathryn's attitude onto me. Lindley was stupid enough to shriek at me that I couldn't bear the thought of A/V, shortly before I won a Stiffie (=Slash Talent in Fandom award) for an A/V story! Kathryn herself presumably escaped attack because she is protected by the little map of Australia in her sig; and the whole ugly business, IMO, was really about Lindley's xenophobia and not about sexual politics at all. I was attacked for being an American, and for having corrected Lindley's foolish misstatements-- including her ignorance of gay history-- on several previous occasions, as described above. Kathryn, I can hardly believe that your Christian morality allows you to stand by in silence while someone else is made a scapegoat for your beliefs. I really think that you, Kathryn, need to apologize to me for that incident and to tell Lindley sternly that it is =you= who consider homosexuality disgusting, immoral, etc., and =you= to whom she should address her comments on the subject in the future. If you, Kathryn, were being attacked by some dishonest person who accused you of being one of those perverted slash fans, then I would certainly defend you against an accusation that I know is untrue, and that I'm sure must be as offensive to you as Lindley's claim that I share your beliefs is to me. (In fact, you may recall that what actually precipitated Lindley's irrational attack on me was the fact that I stood up for the Christians-- even though I am not one myself-- when they were being attacked by the religious bigots, and I pointed out that the last outbreak of religious prejudice on the list had been Lindley's anti-Catholic remarks.) I think you should extend the same courtesy to me. Now, there is one aspect of Lindley's sexuality that I do object to very strongly, and that is her approval of what she calls "adult- child love." Lindley, if you want to scream at someone who opposes pedophilia, then by all means scream at me. But if you want to attack someone who is opposed to homosexual activities by consenting adults, then you should be screaming at Kathryn and not at me. Kathryn, will you please explain this to Lindley in a way that she is capable of understanding? The people on this list who know me-- many of whom are themselves gay or bi-- told her plainly the last time around how wrong she was, but obviously she didn't understand what she was told. I think she has a mental block that prevents her from comprehending what is said by anyone other than a fellow Aussie. Fortunately you are more intelligent than she is and so can interpret. Please do so. I think I am owed a really grovelling apology by Lindley, as well as by Ross "Jessica Leenstra" Mallett, who chimed in in support of Lindley a few times even though he knew very well that she was lying. I don't actually expect to get that apology; but unless and until I do, I reserve the right to comment from time to time on the bad character of these unpleasant people, for the benefit of new list members who may become future victims of their dishonest attacks. I'd be enormously relieved if some of you Aussies would speak up and say, "Of course Lindley is an aberration, and her ignorance, bigotry, and dishonesty are just as shocking by Australian academic standards as by American ones." Otherwise, the only conclusion I can draw based on the information I have at present is that your standards are one hell of a lot lower than ours. Sarah Thompson ------------------------------ Date: 24 Jul 1998 09:34:20 +0200 From: Calle Dybedahl To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Flag waving-- LONG Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Please take the personal attacks to private mail and/or the spin list. -- Calle Dybedahl, B7-list admin qdtcall@esavionics.se http://www.lysator.liu.se/~calle/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 20:41:54 +0100 From: "Julie Horner" To: Subject: Re: [B7L] B7 on UK Gold Message-ID: <001c01bdb73b$1d229100$6e5b95c1@orac> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Steve Rogerson >According to Cult Times, these are the B7 episodes being shown on UK >Gold in August, though after they got July all wrong I'm not sure how >accurate they are. > >Sat 1 Aug, 9.05am: A8 Duel >Sun 2 Aug, 9.00am: A9 Project Avalon >Sun 9 Aug, 9.05am: A10 Breakdown >Sat 29 Aug, 9.00am: A11 Bounty > The Cable and Wireless Guide for August agrees with that exactly and they are usually pretty accurate. I also note that on Sunday 16th Aug at 9.05am, the Dr Who Omnibus is 'Silurians'. Isn't that the one with a certain young Mr Darrow in it? I am not sure I have ever seen that story - or not since I was a kid, can anyone tell me is it any good? Has PD got a significant role? Is it worth setting the video for? Julie Horner -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V98 Issue #200 **************************************