From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V98 #56 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/volume98/56 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 56 Today's Topics: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Re: [B7L] oracle of avon Re: [B7L] oracle of avon Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) [B7L] Families (was why Blake stayed...) [B7L] Second-best computer man (was Avon and Vila) [B7L] Permissions Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) RE: [B7L] Re: safety [B7L] Re: safety Re: [B7L] Re: Safety Re: [B7L] Re: Safety Re: [B7L] Safety [B7L] re: safety Re: [B7L] Re: Safety [B7L] Backtracking to Horizon Re: [B7L] Re: safety Re: [B7L] Re: Safety Re: [B7L] Safety RE: [B7L] Re: safety RE: [B7L] Safety [B7L] What the window cleaner saw Re: [B7L] What the window cleaner saw ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 09:44:52 -0500 From: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu (Carol A. McCoy) To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Message-ID: <199802211444.JAA13885@yfn.ysu.edu> Sue wrote: >On Fri, 20 Feb 1998, Carol A. McCoy wrote: > >> >> >(a) assume it is Blake's base and know this is all a misunderstanding >> > Yup, pretty much. 8-) >> >> Why? > > Ummmm...Carol, the answer was in the rest of the paragraph. Ummmm...Sue, I knew that. But since I was willing to explain why I thought Klyn was Blakes responsibility (and I'll go into more detail below), I was hoping you'd explain the logic behind your answer. >>> >After al, Carol, _you're_ assuming Klyn >>> >is part of Blake's group even though there's nothing in the episode to >>> >support it. 8-) > > Like that, see? You assumed it, why shouldn't he. Well, I did try to base my assumption on available data. I'm wondering what data Avon had available to him. Indulge me on this, because I've obviously missed something that you picked up on. >> We can't prove she was a rebel, but she did appear to work for the man. >> She asks Blake what to do about the unidentified flyer (Avon's). > > Klyn talks to Deva on the intercom, as she does in an early scene. >In both cases, it's DEVA who gives the order, although in the second, he >takes his order from Blake and relays it. I see I should have taken more time and explained this in steps. I apologize. I tend to be hasty. The question, to my mind, is did Klyn work for Blake? Whether it is in a civilian capacity or as part of his rebel army (and that point is certainly debatable), I would assume that Blake is responsible for considering her welfare when he allows Tarrant to run loose and Avon to pop on down. Yes, Klyn took her orders from Deva. And, yes, it's possible she doesn't realize she's working for Blake. But Blake knows who she is working for. That's the crucial point, for me. It makes her Blake's responsibility. >When Klyn and Blake speak >directly, they seem friendly but don't even remotely discuss anything >relating to his true identity. In fact, Deva's insistence on referring to >Blake as "the bounty hunter" whenever anyone else is listening and Blake's >line to Klyn. "Nothing in it for me, then. Outlaws tend not to use >distress beacons" and their later conversation about the activity make >me think she isn't in on the plan at all. And you could very well be right. I would never argue one hundred percent that she was a rebel. (I've said why I prefer to think that.) But at the very least she's a dedicated civil servant, staying on past her normal work hours, as the episode tells us, because of the abnormal traffic. >> I'd >> sure rather assume she was a rebel than believe that Blake was playing >> bounty hunter in the midst of the enemy or even neutrals. How >> do you explain hauling in a prisoner one day and putting him/her on your >> security force the next? > > Maybe Blake was playing Arlen. We're given so little on what Blake >was doing, everything is speculation. Also, the official order to give >Arlen a job probably came from Deva. And most of the bounty hunters, and >perhaps therefore some of the base security, were outlaws turned outlaw >catchers themselves. There is certainly plenty of room for speculation on a number of things. But none of that affects the impression we're given that Blake is most certainly in charge. Which makes Klyn one of his "people" (civilian or rebel). Would you rather have him putting to risk non-combatant employees or dedicated rebels who went into the job knowing the dangers? I would honestly like to think that Blake wasn't putting civilians in danger. I truly see him as a very moral individual, one who would be especially protective of neutrals. There are two things that Klyn does that lead me to think she has to have some awareness of Blake's games, but I admit it is pure speculation on my part. First, when she challenges Tarrant. Why would a $10/hour switchboard operator challenge Tarrant's right to roam? Even if she recognized that he wasn't supposed to be doing that/breaking some kind of base policy, wouldn't a switchboard operator have been trained to report to security rather than challenge the person herself? Later, when the odds are less in her favor, she does call security. But at that point wouldn't a switchboard operator (after the white-coated guy had been shot) hide behind her console quaking with fear? That's where I'd be. Call security and call attention to myself? No way. I hope you can see, Sue, from all of the above, that I wasn't flippantly trying to up Blake's body count by putting Klyn on his list. Or trying to be unfair to Blake. It's something that I've given a lot of thought to, and there are logical reasons why I made that judgment call. > I know and I was basing most of mine on intense annoyance at >the blame the victim game that you know goes on. I wanted to point out >that there are many, many ways Avon could've avoided the mess he got >them all into. All of the options were Avon's, he's the only one who >could have stopped the snowball before it became an avalanche and he >didn't. I have a lot of sympathy for your position. As a fan of another less-beloved character, I know all about double standards. But I can't agree that Avon was the only one who could have stopped the snowball. I see mistakes on both sides. I also see mistakes on the part of Tarrant, Vila, Soolin, and Dayna. The four of them should never have allowed Avon to hurry them off to GP. There was no one person to blame. It was a set of unfortunate errors in judgment by a number of people. > Because the last person he met named Tarrant was a treacherous >bastard who got lots of people slaughtered. Because although he suspects, >from the teleport bracelet in the wreck, that Tarrant has some connection >to Avon, he _doesn't know what it is_. Because Tarrant could be Avon's >enemy, Avon's friend, or Avon's friend like Tynus was Avon's friend. I will grant you that the name "Tarrant" might set him off and he's also told us that he has to test everyone himself. But it's rather ironic that he goes from being over-cautious (testing Tarrant) to less cautious (letting Tarrant run off) at a point when he still needs to keep control of the situation. > Avon has no reason, since he knows _nothing about what's going on >at the base or what Blake's doing_ to assume Blake has anything to do with >the technician. Avon, as you said, doesn't know that Blake took Tarrant to >the base. Avon doesn't have solid proof that Blake is involved with the technician, but he does have an unfortunate chain of circumstances that leads him to reach that conclusion. It wasn't any one thing, but the combined picture that set him off, or so I believe. There were two key patterns as I see it. Tarrant's getting beat up--Tarrant's telling him Blake betrayed them. Klyn's call for security--Blake's arrival, as if timed to answer that call. Top that with two men (Avon and Blake) who have apparently been under a great deal of stress for a very long time. As we saw, it was a tragedy in the making. > It was perfectly straightforward: a was what Avon did, b,c,d,and e >were alternatives he didn't consider but hould have (except maybe e). But they weren't alternatives that took off from the same starting point. Some were choices he could have made that would have avoided a trip to GP and others were choices that he could have made on the planet. So each deserved an individual answer. >> Contact Blake--no. What's he going to ask him? Are you a bounty >> hunter? If Blake was a bounty hunter, would he say yes? > > "Hey, Blake, long time no see. So what've you been up to, dude? >Still rabble rousing? Why don't we get together...there's this place >called Freedom City, you might remember it...No, I lost track of the >others, why do you ask...?" Or have Vila do it, that might work even >better. Now, Sue, does that honestly sound like something Avon would do? > Gee, never felt safe with him but risks everything he has to get >back to him twice, risked his life for him several times, falls to pieces >because he thinks Blake might've let him down... I never said he didn't care about Blake. I said he didn't feel safe with him. >What I would urge him to >remember and rethink is the bizarre idea that Blake would be a figurehead >with Avon controlling him. That never flew in the past and is unlikely >ever to...but I think it was just face-saving bluster unless Avon >duplicated Glynd's black box. I completely agree that it was face-saving bluster. > You'll understand this is not a concern for me... I understand. If Tarrant had died in Scorpio, averting the misunder- standing, would you at least keep the cheers restrained? ;-) >> didn't go to Scorpio because he believed Tarrant was dead. But as >> long as he didn't see it with his own eyes, he could maybe fool >> himself into believing otherwise. > > Excuse me while I snort derisively. Ah, that's better. 8-) I see. It's believable for Avon to be broken up over Blake, but amusing if he's broken up over Tarrant. Or am I misinterpreting? > It's the white vinyl jumpsuit and sequined cape that give me >nightmares. I've heard that there are therapists who can cure that. ;-) Carol McCoy ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 07:25:31 -0800 From: Helen Krummenacker To: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu CC: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Message-ID: <34EEF1EC.3FC@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > > "Hey, Blake, long time no see. So what've you been up to, dude? > >Still rabble rousing? Why don't we get together...there's this place > >called Freedom City, you might remember it...No, I lost track of the > >others, why do you ask...?" Or have Vila do it, that might work even > >better. > > Now, Sue, does that honestly sound like something Avon would do? I have to give Sue this one, Carol. The wording, no, isn't something he would use. But a cautious approach, meeting on nuetral territory, would not be out of character. At least, not from earlier seasons. He did sort of throw caution to the wind final season. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 07:27:34 -0800 From: Helen Krummenacker To: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu CC: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Message-ID: <34EEF266.55C@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > >What I would urge him to > >remember and rethink is the bizarre idea that Blake would be a figurehead > >with Avon controlling him. That never flew in the past and is unlikely > >ever to...but I think it was just face-saving bluster unless Avon > >duplicated Glynd's black box. > > I completely agree that it was face-saving bluster. We're all agreed on that, I think. I mean "I've figured out I totally blow as Rebel Leader and want to give the job back to the guy I was always harping on." How would that go over with his crew? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 10:17:28 -0500 From: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu (Carol A. McCoy) To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Message-ID: <199802211517.KAA15404@yfn.ysu.edu> In chronological order, these quotes are by me, Sue, Avona: >> > But not Teal, thank you very much. We have a long, lean pilot's >> > welfare to consider. I don't think he'd last long as First >> > Champion. >> >> You'll understand this is not a concern for me... > >And yet it would have been for Tarrant's teammates. Yeesh, and Avon's >supposed to be ruthless! Now there's a nice thought: that Tarrant's shipmates wouldn't have chosen to expose him to that danger. Thanks, Avona. Carol McCoy ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 10:22:22 -0500 From: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu (Carol A. McCoy) To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] oracle of avon Message-ID: <199802211522.KAA15609@yfn.ysu.edu> Deborah wrote: > I have friends pestering me to do a Servalan/Orac story...unless someone >has already done it and gets me off the hook? Can't say I can recall a Servalan/Orac. Sorry... Maybe you can argue that the pairing is so natural that you really need more of a challenge. Then again, that might get you into a worse dilemma. ;-) Carol McCoy ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 07:48:10 -0800 From: Helen Krummenacker To: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu CC: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] oracle of avon Message-ID: <34EEF73A.7B6E@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Carol A. McCoy wrote: > > Deborah wrote: > > > I have friends pestering me to do a Servalan/Orac story...unless someone > >has already done it and gets me off the hook? > > Can't say I can recall a Servalan/Orac. Sorry... Maybe you can argue > that the pairing is so natural that you really need more of a challenge. > Then again, that might get you into a worse dilemma. ;-) > > Carol McCoy How about saying, "ORAC erased my computer file after I wrote it. I think he objects to the idea." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 07:51:43 -0800 From: Helen Krummenacker To: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu CC: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Message-ID: <34EEF80F.4EF2@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Now there's a nice thought: that Tarrant's shipmates wouldn't have > chosen to expose him to that danger. Thanks, Avona. > > Carol McCoy In my best Avon-type voice, "Turn a first-rate pilot into a second-rate First Champion? The waste of talent would be unpardonable." (Thought bubble: Are they buying my don't-give-a-damn act?) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 11:05:20 -0500 From: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu (Carol A. McCoy) To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Message-ID: <199802211605.LAA17614@yfn.ysu.edu> Avona wrote: >In my best Avon-type voice, "Turn a first-rate pilot into a second-rate >First Champion? The waste of talent would be unpardonable." > >(Thought bubble: Are they buying my don't-give-a-damn act?) You've got that down pat. But only "second-rate"...he's going to hurt Tarrant's feelings. ;-) P.S. to another post: I sent a reply to Harriet's latest body count rulebook post. But I can't remember whether I changed the addy to the list or sent it directly to Harriet. It's not here now, but it might have bounced back and I deleted it while distracted by offspring. Harriet, if I sent that only to you, would you please forward it to the list? Thanks. P.S. to my Klyn comments. While in the shower (great place to avoid offspring distractions), I realized that I hadn't included a short conclusion to my two things that make me think Klyn was part of Blake's rebel activity. If I may indulge and add that here... To my mind Klyn was either a recklessly brave individual (Tarrant's aunt? ) or a dedicated rebel willing to risk her life for the Cause. Carol McCoy ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 12:53:34 -0500 From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com> To: "Blake's 7 (Lysator)" Subject: [B7L] Families (was why Blake stayed...) Message-ID: <199802211253_MC2-342E-26D6@compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Helen asked: > Hands up, who thought that these people were couples, not family? I assumed Tyce was Sarkoff's daughter. Re Del and Anna, it's hard to say, because I missed that episode on first broadcast. The Greater Manchester Branch of the Richard III Society was holding its monthly meeting on March 6, 1979, so Countdown was relayed to me the following morning by Sally and Aileen. Can still hear their voices rising in unison as they got to "Maybe... it's because... Anna was your SISTER!" Harriet ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 12:53:37 -0500 From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com> To: "Blake's 7 (Lysator)" Subject: [B7L] Second-best computer man (was Avon and Vila) Message-ID: <199802211254_MC2-342E-26D7@compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Walter wrote: >My memory may be faulty, but I don't actually >recall any independent confirmation that Avon >was the "Second Best Computer Man in the >Federation" or however it is that Vila acclaims >him in Spacefall. > >Was this confirmed anywhere else? It's a JOKE! The whole point is for the other person to ask "who's number one" so Vila can come back with his punchline: "the one who caught him". That's why Nova rolls his eyes a bit: he realises he's fallen into the trap. None of this means that it couldn't be true. Avon could be the second-best, the best, the 42nd best... and the rest of your reasoning could still apply. But Vila's evidence isn't evidence at all. I'm marginally more willing to take notice of the banter between Dorian and Soolin about whether her trainer was the best or the second-best gun. At least, I believe that Soolin took it quite seriously. Harriet ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 09:03:05 +0000 (GMT) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: [B7L] Permissions Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII I always get permission for anything done by fans, essays, con photos, etc., and I think I've always managed to credit these correctly, but I don't even know who owns the copyright on half the commercial things I've got on the page. The BBC pics are obvious, but a lot of the ones from other channels are often cases where I'm not sure whether the channel or the production company own the copyright and I don't normally know the production company in any case. Plus these independent TV companies change hands, sell on rights, etc. 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, 21 Feb 1998 09:05:56 +0000 (GMT) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety) Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII On Fri 20 Feb, Reuben Herfindahl wrote: > This pretty much sums up my problem with the Blake and Avon set it all up > theory. Avon is one stubborn single minded guy. Which I guess I > understand. I hate those 2 hour meetings planning in intricate detail how > to handle the distribution of a damn software patch.......(sorry, off topic > venting) Anyway my other problem with that theory is Terminal. He went > through all that to get Blake, and it WAS a set up. Somehow they managed to > even fool Avon into thinking it was Blake, and don't forget the Blake > clones. So when he sees Blake there is a big reason why he asks "Is it > you?". A question that Blake leaves sorta unanswered and just acts on his > hearts reaction to seeing Avon. Which was probably the worst idea since > using the Pan Galactic Gargleblaster in drinking games. And of course, poor Blake didn't even know that there'd been a fake of him on Terminal. It's an interesting question as to whether they knew about the clone or not. They never met the clone face to face. Did 'Roj' identify himself when he and Rashel contacted Liberator to let them know Imipak was safe? 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, 21 Feb 1998 19:04:40 +0000 (GMT) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: RE: [B7L] Re: safety Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII On Sat 21 Feb, Louise Rutter wrote: > Unfortunately, with Blake you'd also end up walking into Federation bases > for the sake of a noble cause. You might not have to worry about a bullet > in the back from Blake, but you'd be doing enough worrying about a bullet > from the Feds. At least when Avon puts the lives of his crew at risk > (Stardrive, Games), he does it because success will be of _immediate_ > benefit to their survival chances, such as acquiring the Stardrive. I'd > rather risk my life for my benefit than for a revolution that isn't going > to happen. I'm not much of an idealist. As far as overall safety goes, my vote is with whoever said (I think it may have been Helen) who said that Blake with Avon acting as a safety brake was a pretty good combination. However, looking at them as individuals, one has to consider one other point. People who followed Blake did so from choice. Thus, those who died when his original Freedom party was ambushed etc., did not not die as a result of Balake's actions. They had freedom of choice. They believed in what he believed in and made their own decisions. Those decisions led them eventually to die, but to blame their deaths on Blake is to deny their freedom of choice. 'Pressure Point' is a different case, because Blake was misrepresenting the danger, although interestingly, Gan was the one who was with Blake on the ground and thus the one best in a position to assess the danger when they knew Kasabi's peopel had been wiped out. Gan had as much data as Blake did at that point, and he chose to stay. With Avon too, one has to distinguish between cases where people willingly followed him into danger and where he deliberately risked their lives. For instance, if Tarrant had died in 'Terminal', I would not have counted it against Avon as he tried very hard to prevent anyone following him. That act was Tarrant's free will. However, if Vila and Dayna had died when the space rats discovered them, then I would have counted it against Avon as he deliberately sent them in as bait without telling them what he was doing. I'd rather risk my neck for a leader who gives me a reasonable assessment of the risk and asks my agreement before sending me into danger. On this count, neither Avon nor Blake come out lily-white. 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, 21 Feb 1998 16:59:32 -0500 (EST) From: brent@ntr.net To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: safety Message-Id: <199802212159.QAA08656@rome.ntr.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Louise responded: >This is the worst of all options. Not only is it a >complete waste of one >life, but it means that Servalan wins and Orac falls into her hands. If >both die together, they put the lives of the rest of the Scorpio crew in >severe jeopardy aswell. I'm not for one moment suggesting that was Avon's >motive for going after Vila, just pointing out that your theory doesn't >hold up too well. If you want a moral way out, I'd say draw straws. Orac could be jettisoned so that no one gets it, assuming you think it would survive the resulting crash anyway. And it isn't like Avon never put the crew of Scorpio in danger before. Tarrant was an accomplished pilot and would have possibly been able to get them out of the situation--note that before he became part of the crew in Aftermath, Tarrant showed the ability to be calculating and resourceful on his own (though not to Avon's level, to be sure). And, if their deaths would have been pointless, why wasn't Blake killed in the beginning, instead of being reprogrammed? Because his death would have made him a martyr, just as Avon and Vila would have become if they had died in a crash. By becoming martyrs, their deaths would NOT have been pointless. Servalan wins one battle, but because Blake does not die at Avon's hands, she may not win the war . . . >>If you would follow Avon, then ask yourself >>whether you would have the guts to flush Vila out the airlock yourself, >>since following Avon is following his example. > >I don't know what I'd do in that situation, panic does funny things to >people. Can you honestly say you _know_ you'd be thinking of the moral >aspects rather than the practical? I can honestly say I wouldn't be thinking of the moral aspects. The thought of tossing Vila out an airlock would simply not occur to me as a viable option. In that situation, it wouldn't be a matter of inner moral debate or conscience, rather something I just would not do. He is my friend. My comrade. I would continue to search for anything that could be blasted apart by that gun and jettisoned, even going so far as to destroy Orac, helpful as it was. I probably wouldn't have survived, but I would have died with a clear conscience (or pissed off if Vila had decided to flush me out the airlock to save himself). >Unfortunately, with Blake you'd also end up walking into Federation bases >for the sake of a noble cause. You might not have to worry about a bullet >in the back from Blake, but you'd be doing enough worrying about a bullet >from the Feds. At least when Avon puts the lives of his crew at risk >(Stardrive, Games), he does it because success will be of _immediate_ >benefit to their survival chances, such as acquiring the Stardrive. I'd >rather risk my life for my benefit than for a revolution that isn't going >to happen. I'm not much of an idealist. Too bad, then, that an idealist is what Avon was becoming. After he became the de facto leader, he wasn't risking his life solely for his own benefit, else he would have been using the Liberator for his own (and the crews') benefit and with the absence of Jenna, who would have argued? Maybe Cally, but if displeased with Avon and his goals, she could have found an easy way out of the crew in The Children of Auron. With Avon, you could never be quite sure what the hell you were doing because I'm not sure he knew (which the whole sordid Gauda Prime affair shows). Sure, there were obvious cases like Stardrive, but what was his purpose for risking everything forging an alliance in Warlord? What was his purpose for finding Blake? How did either of those situations increase his chances for survival? They didn't--they only made him a bigger Federation target. Someone had a great point about why Avon risked his life for Jenna that time he "lost" her (forgot the post AND the episode, but it was within the last few days)--it was because he didn't want to be a failure in Blake's eyes since he was in charge of the mission at that time. I think his search for Blake was along the same lines. He was returning the crew to Blake. He didn't want to be the leader, but he didn't want the "7" to dissolve while under his control and thus make him a "failure" in Blake's eyes. In the end, he embraced Blake, stood over him, and took the least likely option for survival, thus dying "pointlessly." Idealistically. I guess no matter who we would feel safer following, we would reach the same end. Brent ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 21:38:30 -0000 From: "Jennifer Beavan" To: Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Safety Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The unarmed man part does not impress me; I have seen situations > where an unarmed man has hurt a police officer y because the officer was > reluctant to use his weapon. Blake is bigger and stronger than Avon; only an > idiot would let someone like that in arm's reach.> < just as Avon could have not > pulled the trigger(and have the series end with Arlen blasting them both > down?) D. Rose Sorry, I don't think the analogy stands up. Blake wasn't a stranger. Avon didn't KNOW that Blake and Tarrant had met and if Avon wanted to make the point that he was serious about doubting Blake (and ensuring his crew's survival) he would have shot down Arlen the moment Tarrant made his charge! Jennifer > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 22:05:14 -0000 From: "Jennifer Beavan" To: Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Safety Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Helen said> The wierd changes Blake has gone through since they last > met? Blake's own words? None of that is any reason.> What weird changes? That he looks different? Other than that what does Avon know? Blake reassures him that he IS Blake and tells him that Tarrant hasn't understood what's going on. Clear enough if you aren't paranoid! Jennifer (definitely NOT from Auron - all that reasonableness and trust, shudder!) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 21:56:21 -0000 From: "Jennifer Beavan" To: Subject: Re: [B7L] Safety Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Jennifer > How many ways can you take, "He's betrayed you"? And how long is he > supposed to discuss it with Tarrant while Blake could be gunning them > down, if he's really changed sides. Gunning them down with his invisible gun? (grin) Jennifer ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 18:16:45 -0500 (EST) From: brent@ntr.net To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] re: safety Message-Id: <199802212316.SAA14347@rome.ntr.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Brent wrote: >> >When you look at something solely through the eyes of pragmatism, the >> >morality of an act gets lost. If you would follow Avon, then ask yourself >> >whether you would have the guts to flush Vila out the airlock yourself, >> >since following Avon is following his example. Helen wrote: >I meant to respond to this earlier. Just because I think Avon's more >honorable than he's given credit for doesn't mean I have to choose his >solutions for my own. Cally followed him in the same way she followed >Blake, willing to let him do most of the planning but able to make >intelligent objections. Why should floowing him mean following his >example. I would never go on a vengence mission like "Rumors of Death". >I sure as heck wouldn't kiss Servalan! True, I suppose I used a poor choice of words. I meant that Avon was more ruthless than Blake. MUCH more ruthless, as can be attested by his willingness to flush Vila. I would not want to follow someone who would stoop to such levels, since following such a person would mean that I give tacit appoval to their means of achieving an end, thus making me an enabler for their actions, despite any disapproval I may voice. Those who follow him would be in the same situation. Avon in seasons one and two didn't always agree with Blake's methods, or goals, but by staying with him, he gave his approval. A Federation court of law would no doubt agree, though I'm sure Vila would argue the point. >On the other hand, if Vila and I had been in the shuttle, I might have >needed the gun. I'm much smaller than Vila, and _he_ might have gotten >ideas about ensuring _his_ survival. I'm not saying I wouldn't keep the gun in that situation, just in case Vila showed a side I didn't know existed ;) Brent ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 18:20:37 EST From: ShilLance@aol.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Safety Message-ID: <105ff7e8.34ef6147@aol.com> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 98-02-20 21:52:36 EST, you write: << No reason to believe Blake would betray him? Tarrant's warning is no reason? The evidence all around them is no reason? (_Someone_ called in the Federation) The wierd changes Blake has gone through since they last met? Blake's own words? None of that is any reason. Granted, Avon was WRONG and Blake did not deserve to die. But to say he had no reason to make that mistake... >> It's been awhile since I've seen "Blake", but what if Blake had called in the Federation? What if Avon was right. Were there any indications that Blake might not have gone bad, besides his last words? Shil ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 10:35:30 +1000 From: Tim Richards & Narrelle Harris To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Backtracking to Horizon Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980222103530.007b61f0@wire.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sorry about backtracking in this manner, but I've just watched 'Horizon' for the first time in about ten years and was reminded of the recent discussion about Avon not leaving the others behind and going down to rescue them all again. It struck me that between asking Orac if he could survive alone and even *looking* like he was going to leave there was a reasonable amount of time. he didn't just say "Oh, righty-ho, then, let's bugger off" - he seemed to be thinking about it for a few minutes, anyway. And then he gets the message that the pursuit ships are on their way. Not *there* yet, mind you - the message states that they are two and a bit hours away. Plenty of time for his to fire up the engines and take off like a rat up an aquaduct. But... he laughs. ANd he prepares. And he kits up and gets them all out. Far from being cornered so he *has* to get them because he can't survive on his own, he has made a deliberate choice to go down. He doesn't even know if they're alive. I asked Tim what his take on that sequence was, and he replied: "I assumed the laugh was just at his sense of irony. He knows he has a little over two hours before the ships arrive, so circumstances have given him a time limit. He's got time to go down and try to save the others, and he can still choose to teleport back up in plenty of time to get away. He's been thinking he probably *should* go down, and now he can't dither any more." That's a bit of a paraphrase, to say the least, but I think I have the gist of it. I think that Avon is laughing at himself, because he find he's made the decision to go off after them. His sense of irony and a certain amount of self-deprecation (which he was not otherwise often known for). Narrelle ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tim Richards and Narrelle Harris parallax@wire.net.au http://www.wire.net.au/~parallax "Look, he's winding up the watch of his wit; by and by it will strike." - Shakespeare ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 20:14:23 -0800 From: Helen Krummenacker To: brent@ntr.net CC: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: safety Message-ID: <34EFA61F.2BB@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > And, if their deaths would have been pointless, why wasn't Blake killed in > the beginning, instead of being reprogrammed? Because his death would have > made him a martyr, just as Avon and Vila would have become if they had died > in a crash. By becoming martyrs, their deaths would NOT have been > pointless. Servalan wins one battle, but because Blake does not die at > Avon's hands, she may not win the war . Blake is a big name hero, Avon and Vila criminals, period, as far as most of the population is concerned. They would not make good martyrs. Oh, and I love your thinking... if they die, Blake (who they think is deaad) won't die, so they will serve a noble purpose by shaking hands and agreeing to die like gentlemen. Well, I guess that thought just didn't occur to them. "Avon, if you die with me, you can't shoot Blake later, and he'll get our revenge against the Federation for doing this to us." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 20:18:53 -0800 From: Helen Krummenacker To: J.Beavan@btinternet.com CC: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Safety Message-ID: <34EFA72D.4E6E@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Blake reassures him that he IS Blake and tells him that Tarrant > hasn't understood what's going on. > Clear enough if you aren't paranoid! But Avon was always a little paranoid. Blake couldn't remember that? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 20:21:26 -0800 From: Helen Krummenacker To: J.Beavan@btinternet.com CC: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Safety Message-ID: <34EFA7C6.7EAE@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Gunning them down with his invisible gun? (grin) Blake has people working for him. He could distract Avon while someone else did the gunning. He also might not be as harmless as he looks. Many weapons are easily concealed. And how many times have they encountered something that seemed harmless and _wasn't_? Assuming someone is harmless is a great way to get killed in Blake's 7's universe. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 12:17:55 -0000 From: Louise Rutter To: "'B7 Lysator'" Subject: RE: [B7L] Re: safety Message-ID: <01BD3F8E.FCB0E800@host5-99-49-145.btinternet.com> Brent wrote:. >Orac could be jettisoned so that no one gets it, assuming you think it would >survive the resulting crash anyway. And it isn't like Avon never put the >crew of Scorpio in danger before. Tarrant was an accomplished pilot and >would have possibly been able to get them out of the situation--note that >before he became part of the crew in Aftermath, Tarrant showed the ability >to be calculating and resourceful on his own (though not to Avon's level, to >be sure). Egrorian was certain Orac would survive the crash and that's good enough for me, given all the planning that went into it. Throwing Orac out will work as long as it doesn't land in the marshes anyway. Yes, Tarrant could have got them out of the immediate situation, but once Servalan has Orac the Xenon base is compromised. Long searches through space on Scorpio looking for another bolthole is fairly risky, particularly without Orac's advice. >And, if their deaths would have been pointless, why wasn't Blake killed in >the beginning, instead of being reprogrammed? Because his death would have >made him a martyr, just as Avon and Vila would have become if they had died >in a crash. By becoming martyrs, their deaths would NOT have been >pointless. Servalan wins one battle, but because Blake does not die at >Avon's hands, she may not win the war . . . Blake would have been a martyr because he had spent years announcing himself to be a rebel and actively fighting the Feds. Avon and Vila wouldn't be such effective martyrs - they were rebels only by association, and once Blake was gone very little of what they did could be construed as anti-Federation idealism even by those _looking_ for such a hero. We don't hear much from rebels or Feds about Gan being a martyr. Besides, assuming you're right, wouldn't one martyr be just as good as two? >>Unfortunately, with Blake you'd also end up walking into Federation bases >>for the sake of a noble cause. You might not have to worry about a bullet >>in the back from Blake, but you'd be doing enough worrying about a bullet >>from the Feds. At least when Avon puts the lives of his crew at risk >>(Stardrive, Games), he does it because success will be of _immediate_ >>benefit to their survival chances, such as acquiring the Stardrive. I'd >>rather risk my life for my benefit than for a revolution that isn't going >>to happen. I'm not much of an idealist. >Too bad, then, that an idealist is what Avon was becoming. After he became >the de facto leader, he wasn't risking his life solely for his own benefit, >else he would have been using the Liberator for his own (and the crews') >benefit (snip) But that's exactly what he did do for a while. He looked for Blake (Volcano), stole some valuables (Harvest), made sure the ship was working (City), went to settle an old score (Children, Rumours) and drifted around looking at whatever he felt like (Sarcophagus, Ultraworld). If the Feds had left him alone at that point, he would have been quite happy to leave them alone. When he _did_ finally start to take action against the Feds (following Servalan in Moloch is the first example I can think of where she wasn't the one on the offensive), it was because they wouldn't leave him in peace anyway and because Servalan was bugging him, not because he'd turned idealistic. >With Avon, you could never be >quite sure what the hell you were doing because I'm not sure he knew (which >the whole sordid Gauda Prime affair shows). Well, third season Avon would have been a hell of a lot better to be around than fourth, I will admit. He does make far more rash decisions later. >Sure, there were obvious cases >like Stardrive, but what was his purpose for risking everything forging an >alliance in Warlord? What was his purpose for finding Blake? How did >either of those situations increase his chances for survival? They >didn't--they only made him a bigger Federation target. His purpose for risking the alliance and looking for Blake was simply sheer desperation. He'd tried everything he could think of to stop the Feds expansion - recruiting Justin, Muller, etc - and finally figured out he couldn't stop the Feds without help. His aim _was_ to increase his chances for survival, as the continuing Fed expansion would soon reach Xenon (sorry, can't remember exactly which episode that was pointed out). I don't think floating around in Scorpio without a base would be particularly safe, it broke down too often. Personally I think the Warlord alliance was the best idea either Blake or Avon ever showed, though Avon was hardly the ideal person to promote group unity amongst squabbling peoples. This is what Blake _should_ have been doing in the years he was with Liberator, instead of blowing up the odd base here and there. Blake could have created links and treaties between neutrals such as Lindor, Albian, Horizon and used Liberator to act as go-between. Blake was the sort of person who could have held it together. >Someone had a great point about why Avon risked his life for Jenna that time >he "lost" her (forgot the post AND the episode, but it was within the last >few days)--it was because he didn't want to be a failure in Blake's eyes >since he was in charge of the mission at that time. I think his search for >Blake was along the same lines. He was returning the crew to Blake. He >didn't want to be the leader, but he didn't want the "7" to dissolve while >under his control and thus make him a "failure" in Blake's eyes. Agreed, and a failure in his own, which Avon really didn't like to have to face. >In the end, he embraced Blake, stood over him, and took the least likely >option for survival, thus dying "pointlessly." Idealistically. I guess no >matter who we would feel safer following, we would reach the same end. And on that we are also agreed 8-). Debating which is safer seems a bit of a moot point when neither is obviously very safe at all... Louise ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 12:24:18 -0000 From: Louise Rutter To: "'B7 Lysator'" Subject: RE: [B7L] Safety Message-ID: <01BD3F8F.0D28E8E0@host5-99-49-145.btinternet.com> > >> Gunning them down with his invisible gun? (grin) >Blake has people working for him. He could distract Avon while someone >else did the gunning. He also might not be as harmless as he looks. Many >weapons are easily concealed. And how many times have they encountered >something that seemed harmless and _wasn't_? Assuming someone is >harmless is a great way to get killed in Blake's 7's universe. As Blake so aptly proved! Louise ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 12:47:08 GMT From: STEVE.ROGERSON@MCR1.poptel.org.uk To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] What the window cleaner saw Message-Id: <298283805MCR1@MCR1.poptel.org.uk> A friend of mine who's a window cleaner came up to me in the pub last night in a state of gloating excitement. "I cleaned the windows today of someone who's picture is on one of your T shirts," he said. It turned out to be Sally Knyvette in Kentish Town, north London. Apparently she was concerned that her two dogs were worrying him while he was working. He said one was an alsation crossed with something and the other was a black labradour type thing (he's not very good on dogs). He also said she drives a Peugeot 206. cheers Steve Rogerson Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention 26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption/ "The workers united will never be ignited" Guards! Guards! - Terry Pratchett ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 07:55:22 EST From: AChevron@aol.com To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] What the window cleaner saw Message-ID: <2f624036.34f0203d@aol.com> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 98-02-22 07:48:48 EST, Steve wrote: << I cleaned the windows today of someone who's picture is on one of your T shirts," he said. >> Which just goes to show you, fans will stoop(or rise, as the case may be) to new levels to get information.... Actually this was nice info for you to share with us, especially since its source isn't an over-entheusiastic fan impinging on the star's privacy. So her picture is on the T-shirt eh?..... Deborah Rose "5 more weeks? Wait a minute, where are the checklists? The phone list? Arghhh!" -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V98 Issue #56 *************************************