From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #27 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/volume99/27 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 99 : Issue 27 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? [B7L] HORIZON NEWSFLASH 13/1/99 Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7 Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? [B7L] Trolling 101 Re: [B7L] Trolling 101 Re: [B7L] Trolling 101 Re: [B7L] Trolling 101 [B7L] Re: Fascism [B7L] Does anyone remember me? [B7L] Trolling 101 Re: [B7L] Trolling 101 Re: [B7L] Re: Fascism [B7L] Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids... (was Trolling 101) Re: [B7L] Re: Homophobia/Who Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas and stuff Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? RE: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7 ------------------------------ Date: 13 Jan 1999 22:49:26 +0100 From: Calle Dybedahl To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII "Neil Faulkner" writes: > But the 'myth of the "competent man"' is only half a mighty bound > away from the Nazi misinterpretation of the Nietzschean Ubermensch. Yes. Still a far cry from fascism (at least by the definition of "fascism" used by most historians). > Odd, isn't it, how nearly everyone who goes for the Ubermensch idea > automatically casts themselves as a prime example. I think it's a sort of mental blind alley. Those who aren't inclined to cast themselves as supermen think a bit more about the concept and end up with something like Sturgeon's "More Than Human" instead. > Not read the book, but I loved the film. It seemed to parody everything the > book is cited as standing for It's a severely misunderstood book. If you ask me, all the film did was make the parody obvious enough that at least half the moviegoing crowd could see it. That said, I still rather liked it. It was much truer to the book than I expected it to be. My personal theory is that what RAH wanted (at least at the time he was writing "Starship Troopers" and "Stranger In a Strange Land") far more than proposing any single political view was to make people *think*. > So where does B7 stand politically Hard to say. The series is as you say adventurist, but the usual political views that follow from that is pretty much blown away by the simple fact that in B7 those who stand outside of society don't win. Of course, those who work within the framework of society aren't exactly portrayed in a positive light either. Come to think of it, the series shows a certain lack of belief in human nature. Stupidity, cowardice, greed and powerhunger drive the Universe, the powerful prey on the weak and the weak let them, those who try to fight the system are hunted down like rabid animals and die ignominiously in a whole on an almost unknown planet. Geniuses are driven away into the wilderness while the brutal and stupid sit in power. It almost enough to make one suspect that Terry Nation once worked as a sysadmin. -- Calle Dybedahl, Vasav. 82, S-177 52 Jaerfaella,SWEDEN | calle@lysator.liu.se This posting is protected by a Whizzo Brand Fnord Filter (TM). ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:00:55 EST From: SupeStud00@aol.com To: calle@lysator.liu.se, blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Message-ID: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/13/99 4:50:35 PM EST, calle@lysator.liu.se writes: << Come to think of it, the series shows a certain lack of belief in human nature. Stupidity, cowardice, greed and powerhunger drive the Universe,>> And all of these are characteristics that make us who we are. << the powerful prey on the weak and the weak let them,>> The first law of nature. The weak are so because they choose to be. << those who try to fight the system are hunted down like rabid animals and die ignominiously in a whole on an almost unknown planet. Geniuses are driven away into the wilderness while the brutal and stupid sit in power. >> Bill Clinton? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 23:20:48 +0000 From: JMR To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] HORIZON NEWSFLASH 13/1/99 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990113232048.00796eb0@mail.clara.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit GUARDS! GUARDS! PAUL DARROW IN GUARDS! GUARDS! OUTINGS The special Horizon (in conjunction with the Avon Club) group outings to see Paul Darrow in Guards! Guards! at Brighton and Wimbledon will be on the TUESDAY nights of each week. There will be a get together after the show on each Tuesday, with Paul and hopefully some of the other cast members. Many of us will also be going to see the show on the Saturdays, but discounts are only available at the matinees, not the evenings. We hold 3 blocks of seats and have negotiated discounts for our groups as follows (tickets must be booked through us): 7.45pm Tuesday 2nd February - Brighton £8 for best stalls seats (normally £13.50). (Seats being held) 5 pm Saturday 6th February - Brighton £8 for best stalls seats (normally £10) 8.30pm Saturday 6th February - Brighton £14.50/£13.50/£10.50/£7.50 prices available 7.30pm Tuesday 9th February - Wimbledon £11.50 for best stalls seats (normally £14) (Seats being held) 5 pm Saturday 13th February - Wimbledon £11.50 for best stalls seats (normally £14) 8.30pm Saturday 13th February - Wimbledon £15/£13/£11/£9 prices available (Best stalls seats being held at £15) To secure your seats for any shows where we are holding an allocation, seats must be booked and paid for CHEQUES PAYABLE TO HORIZON by 23rd January at the latest. However, we would appreciate you booking/paying as soon as possible in case we need to increase our allocation. We can reserve seats for you at the Saturday matinees with our group discount but no seats are currently being held. Reservation requests/payment should be sent to GG Outing, c/o Diane Gies, 18 Holt Road, North Wembley, Middx. HAO 3PS. Please send an SAE OR provide an email address for confirmation of booking, and a contact telephone number in case of emergencies. Tickets will be handed to you at the door - you should aim to arrive 30 minutes before the show (at least) to collect your tickets (though if you're late, tickets will be left in your name at the box office). If you have any queries, please call Diane Gies on 0181-904 5588 for further information, or Email diane@horizon.org.uk. COMPLETELY AMAZING RAFFLE - there will be a special Grand Raffle (prizes to include publicity photos, Guards! Guards! merchandise, programme signed by all the cast, video footage, rare photos of Paul taken at various events over the past 20 years, and more!) This is a very special raffle, because you cannot BUY tickets, you have to "Earn" them. For EACH USED STUB FROM A PERFORMANCE OF GUARDS! GUARDS! of your own, or from people you persuaded to go to the show, you will be allocated ONE raffle ticket in the grand prize draw (to be held two weeks after the last performance of the 1999 tour, to give you time to send them in). For every stub you send in from either of the Special Group Outing days, you will be allocated FIVE raffle tickets, instead of just one. There will be TWO prize winners - the first prize will be for someone whose ticket is drawn out of the hat, and the second for the person who sends in the MOST used ticket stubs. Quite an incentive to not only see a brilliant show yourself, but also to persuade your family and friends, or even organise a works outing, to join you. Ticket stubs should be sent to Guards! Guards! Raffle, c/o Valerie Guy, 62 Rothesay Avenue, Greenford, Middx. UB6 0DA. Don't forget to give her your name and address. At the moment, the last confirmed date for the show is 6th March in Swansea, but the company are hoping to have at least 4 more weeks so watch the website, join the Horizon Newsflash service or send Ann Bown of the Avon Club an SAE for news. A WELSH WEEKEND WITH PAUL AND GARETH. With Gareth Thomas and Paul Darrow only 40 miles apart the week of 1/6 March, we are thinking of organising a special Weekend Away taking in Guards! Guards! in Swansea with Paul, The Hosts of Rebecca in Cardiff with Gareth and possibly a visit to a nearby B7 location, eg. Oldbury Power Station (better known as Saurian Major, Spaceworld and Fosforon). Since there would be a fair amount of travelling, we'll either be looking for several car drivers forming a convoy, or possibly hiring a minibus or even a coach depending on interest. Options are as follows (you can join and leave at any point): a) See Paul in GG in Swansea on Friday night (stay overnight in Swansea) b) see Gareth in HOR 3pm matinee on Saturday in Cardiff (go home after, OR back to Swansea to... c) see Paul in GG in Swansea 8.15pm Saturday (stay overnight in Swansea) d) Visit Oldbury Power Station on Sunday, then return home. (The tour takes about 2 hours - we'd probably aim to arrive there late morning or early afternoon.) The cost would obviously depend on how many people were going, and what method of transport is used. Let Diane Gies know if you're interested AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, stating which of the above Options you are considering, whether you have your own transport (with how many spare place) and where you'd be coming from. Trains depart regularly between Cardiff and Swansea (journey about an hour), if rail travel were to be used. REMEMBER - for ANY of these discounts/outings, ANYONE can join, whether a Horizon/Avon club member, B7 fan or not. ALL are welcome - the more the merrier. JOIN US NOW.. THE HORIZON CLUB WEBSITE: J.M. Rolls jager@clara.net ---------------- Steedophilia: The John Steed Website ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 23:06:50 -0000 From: "Alison Page" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Message-ID: <017701be3f4e$14fee280$ca8edec2@alisonpage.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Neil's question >> So where does B7 stand politically I've been thinking a lot about personality lately, and the flaws and strengths of different types of personality. The conventional 'western'/Christian/'right wing' opinion seems to be that we should work to overcome our personal flaws, thus making ourselves more 'perfect', more 'complete' more 'good'. The lone adventurer is of this type. People indulge themselves with the belief that if only they were sufficiently strong in themselves they would no longer have to rely on other people, if they were sufficiently 'good' nothing would go wrong. The Ubermensch idea is the absurd extreme of this view. In contrast I believe that each person is incomplete on their own. Our strengths and weaknesses complement each other, because we are not loners by nature. In other words it is because of our flaws that we need each other to survive. B7 seems to exemplify this quite well, and moreover the co-operation takes place without authoritarian leadership. So I would argue it makes quite a good left wing antidote to conventional adventure series. And I have just realised why I like it so much, after twenty years wondering. Great. Alison ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 23:12:19 -0000 From: "Alison Page" To: Subject: Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas Message-ID: <017801be3f4e$1867b000$ca8edec2@alisonpage.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Iain said - >This reminds me of a famous psychological experiment, involving a group of >student volunteers and a small made-up prison. The volunteers were split >into two groups - prisoners and guards. The guards had to enforce the >prison rules over a period of a couple of weeks, at which point the >experiment would end. > >The guards were immediately hostile and sadistic towards the prisoners, >and the prisoners were immediately very passive and subordinate towards >the guards. The guards treated the prisoners like scum because "they >deserved it", and the prisoners accepted their low status. I read a paper on this experiment about a year ago, and I found out something new about it that never gets reported. Before they split the people into two groups they vetted them for their attitudes to authority. They excluded people who were extremely authoritarian - and those who were extremely anti-authoritarian. In other words they excluded trouble-making commie types who would have kicked up a fuss about what was going on. So to me, rather than showing that people can be corrupted by too much freedom, it shows that humans need to exist in groups that have the full range of types - including trouble makers. They might be a pain in the neck, but they act as a conscience to the group, and if you remove them the group acts like a person without a conscience. Alison ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 23:48:57 -0000 From: "Alison Page" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Message-ID: <019c01be3f4f$84a625c0$ca8edec2@alisonpage.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sorry I'm posting so much I'm playing with my new computer I just downloaded this from Calle - >I think it's a sort of mental blind alley. Those who aren't inclined >to cast themselves as supermen think a bit more about the concept and >end up with something like Sturgeon's "More Than Human" instead. What a great example. 'More than Human' is about all those things I have been wittering on about - the complementarity of flawed people, and the need for someone to act as the group 'conscience'. I never linked it with B7 before but it fits in really well. But who was the conscience after Gan, Blake and Cally all died? Alison ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:53:04 EST From: SupeStud00@aol.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7 Message-ID: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit It has always been my opinion that by the time of B7, women will no longer be in command positions ala Servalan. Before I'm stoned by feminists rocks, let me explain. At some point, especially following a great catastrophe like the one hinted at in B7, social scientists and engineers will realize that society has degraded because of the disintegration of the family unit, brought on by the failure of women to remain home with their chiudren and maintain the family unit (ie- cook, clean, etc.) As a result, women would be required by the Fewderation to return to the "Leave It To Beaver" mode of doing things. Servalan would be barefoot and pregnant, Soolin would be vacuming the rug, Dayna would be dusting etc. Of course, malcontents like Avon would not exist because a happy home would have made him a happy productive individual. Comments? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:54:49 EST From: SupeStud00@aol.com To: alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk, blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Message-ID: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/13/99 6:50:00 PM EST, alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk writes: << >I think it's a sort of mental blind alley. Those who aren't inclined >to cast themselves as supermen >> But aren't many men 'supermen". I'm referring to the bread winners, the responsible fathers, etc. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:10:01 PST From: "Penny Dreadful" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Trolling 101 Message-ID: <19990114001001.11190.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Supe "Crocodile" Stud00 said (You call that a troll? See, this, now *this* is a troll.): >It has always been my opinion that by the time of B7, women will no longer be >in command positions ala Servalan. Before I'm stoned by feminists rocks, let >me explain. --Penny "Gay Jews Run Hollywood" Dreadful ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 19:14:27 EST From: SupeStud00@aol.com To: pdreadful@hotmail.com, blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101 Message-ID: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/13/99 7:12:16 PM EST, pdreadful@hotmail.com writes: << Supe "Crocodile" Stud00 said (You call that a troll? See, this, now *this* is a troll.): >It has always been my opinion that by the time of B7, women will no longer be >in command positions ala Servalan. Before I'm stoned by feminists rocks, let >me explain. >> I thought the argument a legitimate perspective on B7. What exactly makes it trollish for you? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 16:53:08 PST From: "Penny Dreadful" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101 Message-ID: <19990114005308.24568.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain SupeStud00 said: >I thought the argument a legitimate perspective on B7. What exactly makes it >trollish for you? Specifically, the apparently gratuituous use of the inflammatory phrase "barefoot and pregnant" made me suspicious. However, if you were serious, I apologize. --Penny "I Won't Even Put A Snide Remark In My Signature" Dreadful ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:01:50 PST From: "Joanne MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101 Message-ID: <19990114010150.20088.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain It's all right, Penny. He/she/it is just putting forward a scenario that is just as likely as any that anyone of us could dream up. None of us has any guarantee that there would be enough fertile examples of either gender after a catastrophe. If you wanted to, you could argue for a kind of reverse "Handmaid's Tale", with those few fertile men standing in for Offred, with names indicating similar status. Of course, such a situation can be considered as degrading to men as the reverse is to women. The bit about "happy" households not producing people like Avon must be in "red rag to a bull" territory - for every set of parents like mine there must be quite a number who don't understand what, if anything, they did wrong. Lastly, there is always someone like Servalan, and she isn't in the kitchen. She might be in the bedroom, but at the very least she is standing behind the throne planning the best way to be the next person to sit on it. Then again, I'm having trouble imagining Servalan without a pair of stiletto-heeled shoes of any kind. Regards Joanne Out of every hundred people... Wise in hindsight: not many more than wise in foresight. --Wislawa Szymborska, "A Word On Statistics" ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 99 02:57:00 GMT From: s.thompson8@genie.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Re: Fascism Message-Id: <199901140301.DAA18039@rock103.genie.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Neil, Calle is quite right about Norman Spinrad (not Moorcock) being the author of =The Iron Dream=, subtitled "Lord of the Swastikas." I have a copy myself, although it's currently in storage, so I can't refer to it directly. Of course, it's possible that Moorcock may also have done a sendup of Tolkien, but if so I'm not aware of it. (And it's also conceivable that the writer of the article you read may have been mistaken.) The most outrageous Tolkien parody I've ever seen myself is National Lampoon's =Bored of the Rings=, but I can't remember who wrote it or even if an author is credited. Calle is also right about the frequency of debates on "Was Heinlein a fascist?" in SF circles. The first such article I ever saw was in the (literary SF) fanzine =Niekas= in the late 60s, and what a shock it was to me as a tender teenage Heinlein fan! I found it uncomfortably persuasive, though. The most recent example I've seen was in =The New York Review of Science Fiction= #116 (April 1998), and as usual it provoked a flurry of letters expressing widely differing opinions. A lot of this name-calling goes back to the days of the Viet Nam war, which seriously polarized the science fiction community in the U.S.: Heinlein et al on the hawk side, Asimov et al on the dove side. Oh, and while we're on SF neep: only one e in Delany. Sarah T. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 21:05:18 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Does anyone remember me? Message-ID: <369D6CFD.4B02@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Re-subbed and safe. Tramila, are you awake? ;^/ Avona has returned. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 22:37:31 EST From: SupeStud00@aol.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Trolling 101 Message-ID: <4b4883fc.369d667b@aol.com> Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part0_916285052_boundary" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --part0_916285052_boundary Content-ID: <0_916285052@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII In a message dated 1/13/99 8:12:06 PM EST, j_macqueen@hotmail.com writes: << The bit about "happy" households not producing people like Avon must be in "red rag to a bull" territory - for every set of parents like mine there must be quite a number who don't understand what, if anything, they did wrong.>> Actually, it is my theory that if more moms stayed home and didn't work we'd see fewer Avon like people as a result of more nurturing. <> In my scenario, the all male dominated government would probably pass a law requiring women to wear stiletto heels, so as to improve their figures (from the male prespective.) Servalan would be allowed to wear the heels, she just wouldn't be allowed access to the throne. Perhaps she, Jenna, Cally, Dayna and Soolin would form their own resistance of supports.......... --part0_916285052_boundary Content-ID: <0_916285052@inet_out.mail.hotmail.com.2> Content-type: message/rfc822 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (rly-zc02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.2]) by air-zc05.mail.aol.com (v56.14) with SMTP; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:12:06 -0500 Received: from samantha.lysator.liu.se (samantha.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.202]) by rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0) with ESMTP id UAA27653; Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:11:58 -0500 (EST) Received: (from list@localhost) by samantha.lysator.liu.se (8.8.7/8.8.7) id CAA20488; Thu, 14 Jan 1999 02:02:34 +0100 (MET) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 02:02:34 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: samantha.lysator.liu.se: list set sender to blakes7-request@lysator.liu.se using -f Message-ID: <19990114010150.20088.qmail@hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [210.8.224.3] From: "Joanne MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101 Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 17:01:50 PST Resent-Message-ID: <"sEH_q.A.AAF.oIUn2"@samantha.lysator.liu.se> Resent-From: blakes7@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/15988 X-Loop: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Precedence: list Resent-Sender: blakes7-request@lysator.liu.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit It's all right, Penny. He/she/it is just putting forward a scenario that is just as likely as any that anyone of us could dream up. None of us has any guarantee that there would be enough fertile examples of either gender after a catastrophe. If you wanted to, you could argue for a kind of reverse "Handmaid's Tale", with those few fertile men standing in for Offred, with names indicating similar status. Of course, such a situation can be considered as degrading to men as the reverse is to women. The bit about "happy" households not producing people like Avon must be in "red rag to a bull" territory - for every set of parents like mine there must be quite a number who don't understand what, if anything, they did wrong. Lastly, there is always someone like Servalan, and she isn't in the kitchen. She might be in the bedroom, but at the very least she is standing behind the throne planning the best way to be the next person to sit on it. Then again, I'm having trouble imagining Servalan without a pair of stiletto-heeled shoes of any kind. Regards Joanne Out of every hundred people... Wise in hindsight: not many more than wise in foresight. --Wislawa Szymborska, "A Word On Statistics" ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com --part0_916285052_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 22:31:38 EST From: SupeStud00@aol.com To: pdreadful@hotmail.com, blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Trolling 101 Message-ID: <91a7e854.369d651a@aol.com> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/13/99 7:55:35 PM EST, pdreadful@hotmail.com writes: << >I thought the argument a legitimate perspective on B7. What exactly makes it >trollish for you? Specifically, the apparently gratuituous use of the inflammatory phrase "barefoot and pregnant" made me suspicious. However, if you were serious, I apologize. >> Why would this phrase offend anyone? Thanks for the apology. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 22:28:05 -0600 From: "Lorna B." To: Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Fascism Message-Id: <199901140422.WAA27950@pemberton.magnolia.net> Sarah T. said: >Of course, it's possible that Moorcock may also have done a sendup of >Tolkien, but if so I'm not aware of it. (And it's also conceivable that the >writer of the article you read may have been mistaken.) The most outrageous >Tolkien parody I've ever seen myself is National Lampoon's =Bored of the >Rings=, but I can't remember who wrote it or even if an author is credited. I don't recall a Moorcock sendup of Tolkien either, but then I haven't read his later works. I've got Bored of the Rings around here somewhere. I think you're right--there was no credited author, just "The Harvard Lampoon." Some of the dialogue had me rolling: "Keen are the nostrils of the elves." "And light are their feet..." Lorna B. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:38:42 PST From: "Joanne MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids... (was Trolling 101) Message-ID: <19990114043843.9663.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain I suspect that computer problems at work are making me more irritated than I ought to be. Answering this is *slightly* more productive than being told that yet another piece of software is performing an illegal function. So if I seem a bit overheated, blame Microsoft and Novell. >Actually, it is my theory that if more moms stayed home and didn't >work we'd see fewer Avon like people as a result of more nurturing. I don't think so, or more to the point - what's the script one has to follow for this sort of thing? An American sit-com such as the one you mentioned is hardly the measure of many people's experiences (and you could argue the same quite definitely for pieces of television produced in other nations). But that's the present day problem. Who's to say that children in Blake's 7 have mums and dads to nurture them at all? For all I know, Blake, Vila and Avon all could've been wards of the state, and yet their outlooks are not uniform. While nurture is important, what is natural, what is innate, is arguably more so in this case. Blake is a believer, and that belief is tempered, not diminished, by his experiences. One could suggest that he has always been fired up by ideas. Avon, by contrast, makes one suggest that, regardless of how much of a loving upbringing he might have had, he's such a morose bugger that the glass will always be half empty rather than half full. For Vila, the glass is half empty, and we all know why. Then again, some theorists in the social scientists have come up with the idea that one's friends are even more important than nature or nurture. Having remembered that article on peer pressure and its effects on teenagers, my brain is now trying to cope with picturing what sort of child would have been the young Avon's friend. Help me, someone! Regards Joanne Out of every hundred people... Those who are just: quite a few, thirty-five. But if it takes effort to understand: three. --Wislawa Szymborska, "A Word On Statistics" ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 02:20:37 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Homophobia/Who Message-ID: <00e601be3f87$b7753800$241aac3e@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Martin wrote, re Robert Holmes >The only stand out sexuality I note throughout his work is a genderless sadism. He does seem to inject a level of viciousness and callousness into his scripts, though I'm not sure it's sexual. It feels more like a result of the despair generated by being (eg) a vegetarian in a carnivorous society - impossible not to see the worst in people. I know that feeling well. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 05:17:32 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Vila and Deltas and stuff Message-ID: <00e901be3f87$b9d918a0$241aac3e@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Edith wrote > Yeah, but the King had responsibilty and a definite say in their >role in society. Many poor people in the past also had a role in their >society, and felt worthy in their society. You would find this be the >case in many non western societies as well. However, many western poor >people do not have feelings of worth in our societies. > I think, in a way, this is what Blakes 7 addressed in a way- how people >are turned into nothing more than mass consumers of commodities, who >have to be controlled. I think it's more complicated than that (isn't it always?). The current affliction of self-worthlessness in society arises from five converging factors. 1) The Industrial Revolution created a new class of urban poor. Prior to industrialisation, about 80% of the people lived in the countryside, 20% in the towns. Industrialisation more than reversed that. 2) Social roles were reinforced by religious faith. Faith in religion was shaken by advancing understanding of the true state of the universe, from Copernicus through Darwin and beyond. The religious mandate for social organisation gave way to a political one, with rival doctrines competing for supremacy (back to Communism and Fascism again!) and people could no longer be sure where they stood spiritually. 3) With workers collected together in towns, they could act collectively for their own common interests. Hence progressive enfranchisement, the realisation of liberal democracy and the erosion of the class system. Since class was one of the things that defined an individual's place in society, people could no longer be sure where they stood economically. 4) In a largely rural society, where most towns were small anyway, the individual had an identifiable place in the community. Urbanisation (as a product of industrialisation) changed that; people became aware of just how many other people there were, and could no longer be sure of their own individual significance. 5) Advancing technology shrank the world, and continues to shrink it further. A global economy emerges, states merge into superstates, and nationality (one of the few remaining toeholds of personal identity) starts to melt away. As communications improve, so ideas are transmitted more quickly, promoting cultural turbulence. People are no longer sure where they stand culturally. We become aware not only of events on the far side of the world, but of how they can affect us, our livelihoods, perhaps even our lives. Weapons technology renders us helpless in the face of destruction that can fall at any time. Not only do we now not know where we stand, we can't even guess where we might fall. I don't think it's 'feelings of worth' that we have lost. I think it's a sense of identity, specifically externally imposed identity. We can no longer be who or what we were born to be, since that's no longer pre-ordained. Instead we have to create our identity for ourselves, and that's a heady challenge to place before just about anyone. It makes us aware of the artificiality of our projected personae. That is bound to breed doubt, and denial in turn engenders either denial or despair (or both). I think the crisis facing the oxymoron of Western Civilisation is our inability to come to terms with our own supreme unimportance. Neil Sorry for all these posts, but there really is a lot of jolly interesting debate going on. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 06:31:18 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Message-ID: <00ec01be3f87$bc248f40$241aac3e@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >But aren't many men 'supermen". I'm referring to the bread winners, the >responsible fathers, etc. Der Mensch (n.masc): person, man. pl Menschen: people. Ich glaube, dass Sie ganz Scheisse schreiben. Warum? Neil von Faulkner ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 03:18:32 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Message-ID: <00e701be3f87$b81d10c0$241aac3e@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A plea from Rob Clother: >>This doesn't go very well with fascism, since one of the central >>parts of fascism is the subordination of the individual to the >>collective > >Is that fascism, or communism? Was Mao Tse Tung a fascist? Neil, help >me -- I'm getting confused. Possibly because it's confusing? I sometimes wonder if Left and Right don't go their separate ways, sweep out in broad arcs and bump into each other on the way back. Were Hitler and Stalin really all that different? Yes and no. This is purely my take, since I don't have a political science degree or anything, but: Communism and Fascism are alike in that a self-appointed elite grants itself the right to impose their ideology on the people as a whole, the people being expected to accept that ideology for their own good. The difference: Communism, as a variant of Marxism (whatever customised tinkering of Marxism the ruling elite choose to adopt) is considered to be implemented for the ultimate benefit of all humanity. It is global in perspective (or at least aspires to be) and stresses interdependence over individualism. Hence the subordination of the individual to the collective that Calle mentioned. Fascism, however, is parochial in outlook, and this creates a paradox. On the one hand, it is touting an ideal ideology, which demands aforementioned subordination of the individual etc, ie implied equality. But at the same time, it asserts a national or ethnic or some other criterion of supremacism, which contains explicit inequalities. Some people are superior to others, and therefore need not be subordinate to the collective (the Ubermensch syndrome). Whilst this might imply that Fascism inherently contains the seeds of its own destruction, it also contains a mandate for its own self-serving tyranny. The ruling elite can do what they want to, rather than what they feel they have to. Lenin assumed control of the nascent Soviet Union on behalf of the Marxist vision, as a stepping stone to global socialism. Hitler seized power to fulfil the destiny _he personally_ perceived for Germany and its true Aryan people. Likewise, Mussolini's dream of a 'New Empire of the Caesars' - for Italy and Italians, not humanity as a whole. (Another point of contrast: Fascism tends to look back to a supposed Golden Age of the past, Communism tends more to look forward to a Brave New World.) The dividing lines get blurred, mainly through Communism degenerating into Fascism. Communist leaders are in grave danger of being corrupted by the power they wield (Fascist leaders are arguably already corrupted before they get to wield it), and it's quite possible for a brown-noser like Caeucescu to rise to power just by saying the right things to the right people at the right time. Although ideally internationalist, Communism has failed to bridge ethnic and national divides, as evidenced by the Soviet/Chinese hostility and the conflicts between China, Vietnam, Kampuchea and Laos - all with Communist governments post-1975. Getting back to Blakes 7, what does this say about the Federation? Personally I would be wary of pinning real world terms to a future scenario where they might not be strictly applicable (both Fascism and Communism were products of the Industrial Revolution, and both are possibly sliding into history). You could take it either way, I think. The 'Strength to Unity' sloganeering suggests a possible Communist slant, but the rigid grading system is more in line with Fascism. What is missing is a concrete statement regarding the Federation's aims, origins and professed mandate to rule. Likewise Blake's counter-ideology. We might have seen what the Federation did, but we never really found out what it stood for. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:38:23 +0100 (BST) From: Judith Proctor To: Lysator List Subject: RE: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII On Wed 13 Jan, Jacqueline Thijsen wrote: > I've read "The Mote in God's Eye", and personally I thought the Co-Dominium > was just a nother one of those space-empires that were modelled after the > Roman empire. This is d one very often in SF (even Asimov has done it, and his > books are s o "feel-good" is comes close to Disney) and I've never seen it as > particularly fascist . Pournelle has also co-written "Janissaries", which > actually has some remnants of the Roman empire playing an important part in > it. Just another sign t hat he gets some of his inspiration for backgrounds > from our own past. I haven't read 'Janissaries', but with a title like that I'd have expected more Ottoman Empire than Roman. The Janissaries were very much an Islamic institution. 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: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 05:20:29 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Message-ID: <00ea01be3f87$baed47c0$241aac3e@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ><< the powerful prey on the weak and the weak let them,>> > >The first law of nature. The weak are so because they choose to be. The first law of nature: the viability of a population of predators is determined by the availability of prey. Who, then, is truly the weaker? Neil the Ecologist ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 05:59:29 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Tanith Lee and her Fascism? Message-ID: <00eb01be3f87$bb7cb680$241aac3e@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I asked: >> So where does B7 stand politically To which Calle replied: >Hard to say. The series is as you say adventurist, but the usual >political views that follow from that is pretty much blown away by the >simple fact that in B7 those who stand outside of society don't win. I think that, to me, is possibly the single most redeeming factor of the entire series. >Of course, those who work within the framework of society aren't >exactly portrayed in a positive light either. 'So where are the good guys?' I think B7 reflects an establishment forced to question its assumptions of its own supposed superiority. And by 'establishment' I don't mean the Federation! Older writers like Terry Nation had grown up under the shadow of WW2 (like Michael Moorcock, Dennis Potter and John Boorman, who have all produced provocative work of their own) and then the dissolution of the British Empire, younger ones like Boucher had probably had first hand contact with the social upheavals of 60s. America had got its hands dirty in Vietnam, Britain had approached the brink of economic oblivion and western Europe was waiting to be the nuclear playground of the superpowers. Britannia no longer ruled the waves, the old had lost control of the young, and the government couldn't be trusted with a whelk stall, let alone the country. In a world like that, good guys were pretty thin on the ground. What was 'good' anyway:films like the Dirty Dozen (cited by Nation as an inspiration for B7) and the spaghetti westerns had turned villains into makeshift heroes to make up for the absence of the real thing. So to answer my question, 'Where does B7 stand politically?', I don't think it's trying to stand anywhere. It's more concerned with trying to find somewhere to sit, and lurk. I disagree with Alison's assessment of the series as a 'left-wing antidote'. Some of the writers might have had leftist tendencies (Boucher probably, Holmes possibly, Nation probably not and Steed/Prior most unlikely), but the series as a whole is better considered iconoclastic rather than radical. B7 was a captive animal locked in the cage of political reality. But it knew it couldn't escape, and it didn't try to pretend the bars weren't there. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 06:31:29 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7 Message-ID: <00ed01be3f87$bca1ae80$241aac3e@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit StupeSudd00 wrote: >It has always been my opinion that by the time of B7, women will no longer be >in command positions ala Servalan. Before I'm stoned by feminists rocks, let >me explain. > >At some point, especially following a great catastrophe like the one hinted at >in B7, social scientists and engineers will realize that society has degraded >because of the disintegration of the family unit, brought on by the failure of >women to remain home with their chiudren and maintain the family unit (ie- >cook, clean, etc.) As a result, women would be required by the Fewderation to >return to the "Leave It To Beaver" mode of doing things. Servalan would be >barefoot and pregnant, Soolin would be vacuming the rug, Dayna would be >dusting etc. Of course, malcontents like Avon would not exist because a happy >home would have made him a happy productive individual. How absolutely true. At last I've seen the light, and John Norman is God. How right you are to point out that working mothers are a recent social development with no historical precedent whatsoever, and that there is no other substitute for maintaining the family unit (given that men are biologically incapable of cooking, cleaning, and etcetering, and that even if they were there would be no prospect in both parents sharing domestic responsibilities). It's nice to know I'm not the only one who believes that the division of labour along gender lines is genetically determined, rather than the product of so-called economic forces, and it's so reassuring to realise that the nuclear family having to cope alone without assistance from an extended community has nothing to do with urbanisation and the need for social mobility in the wake of the Industrial Revolution. And how refreshing to know that our lives willl one day be structured for us by social scientists and engineers (social or otherwise) rather than the self-serving decisions of politicians and the commercial interests that put and keep them in power. Then, as you say, we will see an end to malcontented men, because any mother that raises a malcontented child has failed in her task, and once women are put in their proper natural place they can never fail because it is proper and natural for them and there will be no distractions like work to upset their hormones and stop them rearing children properly without any need for instruction or experience whatsoever. Just one small picky point, if I may: wouldn't Dayna vacuum the rug while Soolin did the dusting? Neil the Enlightened -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #27 *************************************