From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #320
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/320
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 320

Today's Topics:
	 Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #318
	 Re: Re [B7L] Whence Herculanium?
	 Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #318
	 [B7L] J Pearce
	 RE: Re [B7L] Whence Herculanium?
	 Re: [B7L] Casting the Potter books...
	 Re: DS9 (was Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #315)
	 Re: [B7L] J Pearce
	 [B7L] Re: Cally-related.
	 [B7L] dystopias
	 [B7L] Cally-related.
	 [B7L] Star One (was: Cally-related.)
	 Re: [B7L] Mornington Crescent
	 Re: [B7L] Redemption sketch 
	 Re: [B7L] Redemption sketch 
	 Janeway fans (was Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #318)
	 Re: [B7L] dystopias
	 Re: [B7L] Re: The Quibell Abduction 
	 RE: Re [B7L] Whence Herculanium?
	 Re: [B7L] dystopias
	 Re: [B7L] Re: Why Dystopia?

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 18:26:24 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "Lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #318
Message-ID: <054c01bf2ecd$c3e6f610$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jacqueline wrote:

> Una wrote:
>
> > Penny wrote:
> >
> > > At 11:02 AM 14/11/99 +0000, Una McCormack wrote:
> > >
> > > >I always liked the character of Janeway, and the actress
> > > >who plays her, but
> > > >I'm usually in a very small group of one, whenever I mention this.
> > >
> > > Una, baby! Welcome to my world. ;-p
> >
> > AAAAARRRRGHHHHH!
>
> Then let me to ruin your day even further: I love Janeway. I had a picture
> of her as background on my computer until my harddisk crashed.

Double AAAAARRRRGHHHHH!


Una

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 19:19:40 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: Re [B7L] Whence Herculanium?
Message-ID: <001f01bf2ed5$47d1b260$7115ac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Sally wrote:
>Jacqueline wrote:
>
><I always thought it was SF-latin for 'really strong stuff that the bad
guys
>can pound the hell out of without destroying the ship whenever dramatic
>tension required the shields to go down a few scenes ago and we didn't get
>around to fixing them yet'.>
>
>Yes, that's the high-tech explanation....

And in perfect accordance with Squirble's Law

Neil

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 19:18:17 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #318
Message-ID: <001e01bf2ed5$466996e0$7115ac3e@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Helen wrote:
>For example, if someone was raised among
>the Mah-Kee (I'm sure someone will correct my spelling)

I've only seen the pilot ep, but I thought it was 'maquis', as in the French
resistance movement of WW2.

The name originally refers to the dense and impenetrable thorny scrub of the
Mediterranean coast.

Neil

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 20:17:31 -0000
From: "Deborah Day" <d.day@ukgateway.net>
To: "blakes7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] J Pearce
Message-ID: <02a801bf2edd$a245d980$2296bc3e@oemcomputer>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Talking about Dr Who night (nice to see David Maloney, and a good friend of
mine, Jim Acheson, costumes) did anyone else see Jacqueline Pearce in the
programme about the Thames on before?  There was quite a long interview with
her, dealing with the Hammer Horror films that she was in, and when asked
what appealed to her about the parts, she relied the sexuality.  Wished I'd
recorded it but doubtless somebody has and will put the transcript up in due
course.  It was a bit of a strange programme but enjoyable it its way.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:27:39 EST
From: "Joanne MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: RE: Re [B7L] Whence Herculanium?
Message-ID: <19991114222739.86643.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

>From: Jacqueline Thijsen <jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl>
>Well, the town was named after Hercules, so even if it was named after the
>town, it would still indirectly be named after the guy.

Of course. There's nothing to have stopped, say, Chris Boucher, thinking 
"That's an interesting name, sounds like a metal", and there you are...

Regards
Joanne

All you're interested in is the idiotic tintax or something.
--Vila, Ultraworld
(oops, sorry Una!)



______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:30:49 EST
From: "Joanne MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Casting the Potter books...
Message-ID: <19991114223049.91756.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

>From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
>Allan (my husband) has suggested Brian Blessed for Hagrid.

Twice as large and loud as anyone around? Of course, who else!

>And Steven Pacey, well, there's Lockhart. <g>

Oh, the teeth, the teeth!

Regards
Joanne

I have a cunning plan.
--Baldrick


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:35:56 EST
From: "Joanne MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: DS9 (was Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #315)
Message-ID: <19991114223557.82764.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

>From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com>
>Apparently the final series is so bad I shouldn't be watching, but it's
>succeeded to the extent that *I want to know what happens next*.  (Yes,
>that's a quote, but not remotely SF-related.)
>Harriet

Because there's only one Michael Murray, right Harriet?

Regards
Joanne
(...there's only one


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 23:03:42 -0000
From: "Andrew Ellis" <Andrew.D.Ellis@btinternet.com>
To: "blakes7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] J Pearce
Message-ID: <012e01bf2ef4$beb69d40$e2feabc3@leanet.futures.bt.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

From: Deborah Day

>..... did anyone else see Jacqueline Pearce in the
>programme about the Thames on before?  There was quite a long interview
with
>her, dealing with the Hammer Horror films that she was in, and when asked
>what appealed to her about the parts, she relied the sexuality.  Wished I'd
>recorded it but doubtless somebody has and will put the transcript up in
due
>course.  It was a bit of a strange programme but enjoyable it its way.
>


I saw that, but with kids around, no tape in the recorder and the dialogue
is a bit vague. Still, and excellent surprise.

Andrew

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 16:01:49 PST
From: "Hellen Paskaleva" <hellen_pas@hotmail.com>
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: Cally-related.
Message-ID: <19991115000149.45848.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

Kai mailed next fantastic post!
Kai, the whole post of your's is so thoughtful, so elaborated! I'm 
speechless... And the Terry Pratchett's reference was nice (BTW, I just met 
the man - this Friday).

Nevertheless, here are some thoughts on it.

<2. The Changing Seasons of Cally:
In "Star One", the epic culmination of the "Blake-era", she is the only one 
to point out the moral dilemma of risking what could be labelled as genocide 
by destroying Star One (with a sudden
simultaneous breakdown of just about every larger computerised function in 
over 200 worlds, many which are probably completely dependant of them, could 
well mean a death toll of millions, with entire civilisations wiped out by 
flooding, famine, loss of life support etc.). I think this scene nicely 
represents how not only she, but how the whole series has evolved from the 
rather simplified beginning. After all, Blake himself has changed from his 
more idealistic, "power back with the honest man" roots to someone seemingly 
driven by the raw need to just get the enemy slain, to prove that it was the 
whole world that had it wrong, not him.>

Defending Blake at all costs <g>, I have to refer here to my personal 
experience again. Several years ago the communists still ruled my country, 
but they had been surrounded already by the economical demands of the 
international free trade market. Being prepared only to face the needs of 
the "planned economy", communists failed to cope with the new requirements 
and some social groups in Bulgaria began to starve and even to die with 
hunger or cold.

At that point some people from The Our Side suggested to help the communist 
government to undergo the economical problems. But other people, from The 
Our Side again, opposed to that. Because, apparently, help for the 
communists _at that moment_ would ensured only temporary relief amongst 
endless further crisis. That is, because the communist system is rotten in 
it's very base. And it could not be repaired, only overthrown... As well as 
the Federation was. Q.E.D. ;-)

BTW, we were accused, too, of being immoral, of sacrificing people for our 
own purposes. But that seemed to be the only correct decision at that time - 
we weighted the lives of some people versus lives of whole future 
generations... There are, sometimes, decisions like this, which you _have_ 
to take the responsibility for, at all costs.

<The third season Cally has gone through the Intergalactic War...>

...The third season Cally has been surrounded by mercenaries, not by 
freedom-fighters, by _colleagues_ rather, than comrades. And I see _that_ as 
the main reason for her psychological change through the episodes. In the 
whole season III I, personally, can't point out even a single episode, where 
the initial aim of the crew has been maintained. On the contrary - after 
Tarrant's appearance on Liberator, the crew actually declared their new 
status of working for themselves, rather for some vague cause. From that 
point ahead there was no room for Cally with her faith amid the crew. She 
could not match herself, she could not identify herself with actions like 
abducting gems ("Harvest of Kairos") or torturing people ("Rumours of 
Death").

Probably this internal conflict of her's - between that newly re-written 
aims of the crew and her persistent beliefs - has made her so unsteady and, 
consequently, helpless against external mental influences, which has 
happened to her most often than ever in season III.

Hellen

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 11:00:14 -0700
From: "Ellynne G." <rilliara@juno.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] dystopias
Message-ID: <19991114.202840.9054.0.Rilliara@juno.com>

The question was raised about what conditions are like when people like
dystopias.  People who have lived under really horrific conditions have
actually not necessarily had a taste for them.  In fact, given that most
of humanity through most of history enjoyed a lower standard of living
and a shorter life expectancy than most people who have access to e-mail,
the lack of dystopia oriented works becomes pretty glaring.

One theory for why the change is that most people have lived under
conditions where unlimited cynicism is not a survival trait.  You had to
trust people in your family, tribe, village, whatever if you were going
to survive--and they had to know they could trust you.  It didn't mean
there wasn't a lot of nastiness going on, but you probably had a stable
life within that context with a large number of people making up your
support group.  You also had a list of situations in which you could
encounter an enemy safely--perhaps even in a friendly way.  Example: if
you were guests under the same roof, if you were on holy ground, certain
types of celebrations or truces, etc.

Most modern society disrupts that.  People have smaller support networks
and larger numbers of people they need to work with whose reliability
they have limited ways of predicting.  Culturally backed neutral ground
is also limited, and a lot of people seem to actually consider it a
virtue to violate it (there are people out there who seem to regard
funerals as a last chance to put down the deceased rather than comfort
the family).

Any how, some people seem to regard cynicism as a virtue.  Like Avon.

Ellynne

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 23:35:59 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Cally-related.
Message-ID: <19991115073603.14769.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

From Kai's very good post on Cally:

<1. What's Revenge Got to Do with It?>

I can see what you're saying, but I still think revenge had a
great deal to do with Cally's behaviour on Saurian Major (the
wording is important - not 'my death will have meaning" but "companions 
for..." she wants blood). And agreed, while she
chose not to kill Travis, it's clear she wants to ("I should
like a reason to kill you").

Yes, by Children of Auron time, she's changed her mind about the
worth of revenge. I agree with your <I think being hot on revenge
and other violent action has understandably lost its taste for
her.> But there is *no* excuse, given her own earlier feelings,
for her to be so holier-than-thou about it.

"It doesn't achieve anything?" How would she know? It's fairly
obvious she at least knows *nothing* of Avon's reasons or feelings,
in fact she knows nothing at all (to be fair, IMO he only told
Tarrant and Vila what he had to to get them to do what he wanted. Cally 
wouldn't have been so manipulable, so he left her out of
it). How can she pronounce such a sweeping judgement without making the 
slightest attempt to understand?

Tolerance of others' failings is not a virtue seen very often among
our Heroes (there's Gan, and - umm - Gan, and - just Gan actually.
Blake sometimes, but sometimes spectacularly *not*)  But Cally
tends to be one of the worst offenders (after Avon, of course <g>).
And due to Bad Writer Sydrome, it sometime slides perilously close
to hypocrisy.

<2. The Changing Seasons of Cally
<with a sudden simultaneous breakdown of just about every larger
computerised function in over 200 worlds, many which are probably
completely dependant of them, could well mean a death toll of millions>

[1] See my other post - yes, "many many people" were going to die.
But how many is many is another question. I still think millions
is a gross exaggeration. And I'm absolutely sure Cally doesn't
mean millions (or she'd have used a less vague term, like - maybe?
- "millions".) But be that as it may...

[2] Cally was perfectly happy to destroy the same computer complex
when she thought it was on Earth. She's perfectly happy right the
way through to end of The Keeper (she doesn't have any interest in
Avon's desultory 'let's use it'. There is no indication that they
had any more information about the results of loss of Star One than
of Control. *If* she thought millions would die, why not speak up
then? Why the *sudden* attack of collywobbles?

The problem is that Cally *doesn't* IMO grow into her changes of
attitude - she stays static, then lurches into them all of a
sudden when the writer needs her to. And there's no sense of "I
was wrong, I've changed my mind, I'm nor so sure".

<4. The Trouble with Trust>
<Cally and Gan...[are] much inclined to trust people without questioning>

I agree they're less inclined to question, either trust or
mistrust. Look at Bounty - both of them, like Avon and Vila,
perfectly ready to believe that Jenna had turned on them.

Other than that small quibble, I agree with the rest of this paragraph, 
especially about "the charm the original crew had".
Early 2nd season - so we can add in the endearingly self-
aggrandising box of tricks - is a *wonderfully* rich mixture of characters, 
and I do believe that Gan and Cally, though as you
say more straightforward and less interesting (to some of us)
in themselves, are important lighter elements of that mixture
(a whole cast as complicated as Fearless Leader and the Snarly
One might be *too* rich...)

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 23:38:35 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Star One (was: Cally-related.)
Message-ID: <19991115073837.73786.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

Kai wrote:
<with a sudden simultaneous breakdown of just about every larger
computerised function in over 200 worlds, many which are probably
completely dependant of them, could well mean a death toll of millions>

<oh dear, here I go again> As I've argued before, there's no proof
of what precisely will happen, or of the numbers that were going to die as a 
result of the destruction of Star One. Third Season
seems to indicate that in fact a lot of worlds survived it quite
well - well enough to achieve freedom, at least temporarily.

Where does anyone say that *all* computer functions will crash
with Star One, after all? In Pressure Point, Blake calls Control
"a computer complex to monitor information: political, civil,
military - everything." In The Keeper, Avon says "Star One is the automatic 
computer control centre for the entire Federation, and
in Star One Durkim calls it "our unbeatable control and coordination 
centre".

Note that word 'control'. (And the problems Durkim then outlines
are those not of control being lost, but control still there but
going haywire. Of Star One's instructions overriding the local
world's own systems as it is meant to do).

After all, the destruction of the *controlling* computers might
have not destroyed, but freed up local, civilian computer networks from the 
Federation's control and allowed each world to try and
grab control for themselves. At the same time, the overriding
defence computers - that coordinated the Federation's own forces - would 
have also lost their links to each other, and left a lot of local commands 
to counter any revolt as best they could by
themselves, with little or none of the back-up they would normally have.

This is what I think (from Pressure Point especially, but also from
Star One) Blake, Cally and Avon all believed would be the likely outcome.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 23:41:15 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Mornington Crescent
Message-ID: <19991115074115.2401.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

Neil suggested:
<the Last Lines game - think of a suitable line to end a long-running TV 
show, or in B7's case a particular episode.>

Not so much a last line as how to bring the episode to a screaming great 
halt...

Horizon
AVON: So we are free of the Federation.
BLAKE: Persistent, aren't they?
AVON: Let's just get out of his way.
BLAKE: (Pause) Okay.


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 12:44:08 +0000
From: Steve Kilbane <steve@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Redemption sketch 
Message-Id: <199911141244.MAA06727@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

> Has anyone just been watching 'Dr Who Night' on BBC2? Did you see how they
> nicked our sketch idea from Redemption as a framing device? I just may sue.

K and I had a rant about it, too. And we're several hundred miles apart.
We were definitely in Angry From Tumbridge Wells mode.

I was shocked by the omissions, too:
- Nothing on assistants.
- No K-9 (K was norrappy)
- No mention of The Master in the beastiary.
- The only fan mention was the painful sketch at the end,

Overall, I was really chuffed at the idea - makes a change to have something
reasonably to look forward to, on the day of a major sporting event - but
disappointed in the execution.

Oh, and did anyone else find the Hartnall episode somewhat incoherent?

steve

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:19:19 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Redemption sketch 
Message-ID: <082e01bf2f4a$85075980$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Steve K wrote:

> > Has anyone just been watching 'Dr Who Night' on BBC2? Did you see how
they
> > nicked our sketch idea from Redemption as a framing device? I just may
sue.
>
> K and I had a rant about it, too. And we're several hundred miles apart.
> We were definitely in Angry From Tumbridge Wells mode.

Dear Sir - whyowhyowhyowhy are you such thieving *bastards*?


> Overall, I was really chuffed at the idea - makes a change to have
something
> reasonably to look forward to, on the day of a major sporting event - but
> disappointed in the execution.

I thought Tom was on top form. As brilliantly barking as ever. *What* was he
doing in that playground?

I'll sit through a documentary about 'Who' quite happily. It's just watching
the damn programme that's a drag.



> Oh, and did anyone else find the Hartnall episode somewhat incoherent?

And you find the Hartnell episode incoherent rather than the McGann movie..?
;)  I think it was the final episode of 'The Daleks'. Final episodes are
usually runarounds.


Una

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 07:41:27 -0500
From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com>
To: "INTERNET:blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Janeway fans (was Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #318)
Message-ID: <199911150741_MC2-8D1F-4BFD@compuserve.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	 charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Una wrote, and others endorsed her:
>I always liked the character of Janeway, and the actress 
>who plays her, but I'm usually in a very small group of one,
> whenever I mention this.

I like Janeway.  Re Seven of Nine, having heard in advance that she was
there solely for her body, I wrote her off completely.  But having seen
some episodes with her in recently, I was forced to recant.  She's a good
character.  I think she would be just as good in shapeless overalls, but I
don't think US TV producers have me in mind as a target market.

Harriet

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 16:31:35 -0000
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] dystopias
Message-ID: <008701bf2f87$086fd360$ca8edec2@pre-installedco>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ellyne said -

>most people have lived under
>conditions where unlimited cynicism is not a survival trait.  You had to
>trust people in your family, tribe, village, whatever if you were going
>to survive--and they had to know they could trust you.

I couldn't agree more. And in a sense B7 replicates this primal situation of
a band of friends against a hostile environment.

I also think (BTW) that this post is the measured response to Penny and
Una's 'human nature is corrupt at root' point of view. I mean, I respect the
reasons they believe it, but I think the alternative is actually more
accurate.

>You also had a list of situations in which you could
>encounter an enemy safely--perhaps even in a friendly way.  Example: if
>you were guests under the same roof, if you were on holy ground, certain
>types of celebrations or truces, etc.

This is a very interesting thought. I wonder if we ought to make more use of
ritual truce as a way of mediating society, rather than what we do in
England - which is to cordially ignore everyone. Still that's better than
the alternative which you describe next.

>Most modern society disrupts that.  People have smaller support networks
>and larger numbers of people they need to work with whose reliability
>they have limited ways of predicting.  Culturally backed neutral ground
>is also limited, and a lot of people seem to actually consider it a
>virtue to violate it

Yes, (some) people think it is macho to violate neutral space, while relying
on everyone else to respect it.

>Any how, some people seem to regard cynicism as a virtue.  Like Avon.

I think the values which we are taught as children don't make any kind of
sense, and the result is that thoughtful people tend to get as far as 'moral
rules are rubbish' and leave it at that. What I like about the 7 is that
they don't subscribe to crappy pieties, but they do have loyalty and
compassion and courage, which (IMHO) are the real virtues.

Alison

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 13:50:46 +0000
From: Steve Kilbane <steve@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: The Quibell Abduction 
Message-Id: <199911151350.NAA08059@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

> Oh my aching head. I don't drink, so why do cons give me a hangover?

Because you're so busy doing con things that your normal food, drink 'n'
sleep routine is utterly disrupted. So you're more dehydrated than normal
for the time of day, and tired.

Either that, or they soak the sandwiches in vodka first.

steve

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 07:54:32 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: Re [B7L] Whence Herculanium?
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-1115075432-d07Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII

On Mon 15 Nov, Joanne MacQueen wrote: 
> 
> 
> >From: Jacqueline Thijsen <jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl>
> >Well, the town was named after Hercules, so even if it was named after the
> >town, it would still indirectly be named after the guy.
> 
> Of course. There's nothing to have stopped, say, Chris Boucher, thinking 
> "That's an interesting name, sounds like a metal", and there you are...

Oy!  Don't blame that one on Chris.  James Follett was reponsible for 'Dawn of
the Gods'.

Judith
-- 
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 -  Fanzines for Blake's 7, B7 Filk songs,
pictures, news, Conventions past and present, Blake's 7 fan clubs, Gareth
Thomas, etc.  (also non-Blake's 7 zines at http://www.nas.com/~lknight )
Redemption '01  23-25 Feb 2001 http://www.smof.com/redemption/

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 18:22:30 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] dystopias
Message-ID: <0b0101bf2f96$66fd2810$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Alison wrote:

> Ellyne said -
>
> >most people have lived under
> >conditions where unlimited cynicism is not a survival trait.  You had to
> >trust people in your family, tribe, village, whatever if you were going
> >to survive--and they had to know they could trust you.
>
> I couldn't agree more. And in a sense B7 replicates this primal situation
of
> a band of friends against a hostile environment.
>
> I also think (BTW) that this post is the measured response to Penny and
> Una's 'human nature is corrupt at root' point of view.

Ah - man is, by nature, fallen. And there was I thinking I'd shaken off all
my Catholic upbringing.

I don't think that's quite how I'd phrase it, but...

That argument seems to me to fall into a trap of saying, 'Well, that's how
people behaved in (some sort of) 'pre-modern' society, so that *must*
constitute our 'natural' behaviour.' I'm not convinced. Also, I *don't* live
in a society where I have to rely on people in my family, tribe or village -
so those survival techniques aren't appropriate to me anyway.

Cynicism doesn't strike me as a particularly effective strategy in the
'modern' era, either, leading, as it does, to depression, nihilism, and an
overwhelming sense of pointlessness. On a good day. It's just that in our
society we have more time to brood about it, rather than worrying where the
next meal is coming from.



> I mean, I respect the reasons they believe it,

You're turning INFJ - icky!  :P



> >Most modern society disrupts that.  People have smaller support networks
> >and larger numbers of people they need to work with whose reliability
> >they have limited ways of predicting.  Culturally backed neutral ground
> >is also limited, and a lot of people seem to actually consider it a
> >virtue to violate it
>
> Yes, (some) people think it is macho to violate neutral space, while
relying
> on everyone else to respect it.

You've just been talking to my next-door neighbour (who threatened to kick
my front door down on Friday).



> >Any how, some people seem to regard cynicism as a virtue.  Like Avon.
>
> I think the values which we are taught as children don't make any kind of
> sense, and the result is that thoughtful people tend to get as far as
'moral
> rules are rubbish' and leave it at that.

Or take the time to reconstruct their own personal creed based on e.g.
humanism, liberalism or some sort of bastardized psychoanalytic theory.



> What I like about the 7 is that
> they don't subscribe to crappy pieties, but they do have loyalty and
> compassion and courage, which (IMHO) are the real virtues.

However, I suspect that Avon would accuse Blake of subscribing to crappy
pieties.


Una 'Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep' McCormack

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 19:02:44 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Why Dystopia?
Message-ID: <001001bf2f9d$b241f060$e1438cd4@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Yoona wrote:
>> though quite who Una Palomablanca was I wouldn't
>> like to guess.
>
>D'you know, it's about 20 years since I last heard that joke.

About time it was dusted off, then.

>During the
>1970s, it was made so much that I was forced to start murdering people who
>cracked it (I was a precocious and bad-tempered 7 year-old.)

Ah, la plus ca change...

I won't tell you what I was called at school.

Big Bad Neil

--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #320
**************************************