From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #99 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: archive/volume99/99 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 99 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] Assassin Re: [B7L] Cult TV guests Re: [B7L] Assassin Re: [B7L] Assassin Re: [B7L] The Logic of Empire Re: [B7L] Assassin Re: [B7L] Assassin [B7L] Steven Pacey in The Birthday Party Re: [B7L] Assassin Re: [B7L] Assassin [B7L] Ooh, I've binged... [B7L] Too much of something [B7L] The Logic of Empire [B7L] test Re: [B7L] Stardrive Re: [B7L] Assassin Re: [B7L] Ooh, I've binged... Re: [B7L] Assassin ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 04:31:46 -0800 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 list Subject: Re: [B7L] Assassin Message-ID: <36EBAC31.C999F561@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mac4781@aol.com wrote: > Avon was willing to do things, but > he wanted it clear that he wasn't responsible if anything went wrong. So he > had to make his obligatory speech about the risks/the stupidity of the > venture. If he was just intent on protecting himself, he could have refused > to participate. Aaaaugh! Must seriously disagree. Since he was outvoted, he had no choice about participating (unless he wanted off the ship, even more dangerous, besides which, he wanted the ship), therefore, he had to contribute everything he could to the success of any venture that was undertaken, whether he liked it or not. (Up until the time he has committed himself to Blake, which I differentiate from Blake's cause.) > Also, he was known to mention risks even when he wasn't the > one taking them. So I'm wondering if this wasn't more prompted by care for > others than concern for himself. Perhaps he knew (maybe only subconsciously) > that he'd feel awful if something happened to someone else on a mission and he > wanted to diminish the responsibility he'd feel in that case. I am bemused. In your other post, Carol, you accuse me of trying to change Avon. This fellow you're talking about above has very little relationship to the man *I* see on the screen. I think you're trying to make him 'nicer' than he is. Avon does care about people, more than he lets on, but IMHO he is *not* a crusader, *not* an idealist, and *not* a bleeding heart. Having given a warning, he would consider his obligation ended. Regards, Mistral -- "One day that great big bleeding heart of his will get us all killed."--Avon ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 12:58:37 -0000 From: "Dangermouse" To: , Subject: Re: [B7L] Cult TV guests Message-Id: <199903141339.NAA02068@gnasher.sol.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > The name Simon MacCorkindale is sooooo familiar, but it's driving me crazy > that I can't place him. Manimal -- "When two hunters go after the same prey they usually end up shooting each other in the back - and we don't want to shoot each other in the back, do we?" http://members.aol.com/vulcancafe ------- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 09:17:14 EST From: Mac4781@aol.com To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Assassin Message-ID: <5a2fcc24.36ebc4ea@aol.com> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit As I mentioned on the other list, I can't afford another day of indulging in list threads, but I will toss out a few brief comments before I hit the grindstone. I had also been intending to mention that Tarrant's military training made it easier for him to adapt to chain of command. Thanks for bringing that up, Nina. Meanwhile, Mistral writes: > I think you're trying to make him 'nicer' than he is. > Avon does > care about people, more than he lets on, but IMHO he is *not* a crusader, * > not* an > idealist, and *not* a bleeding heart. Having given a warning, he would > consider > his obligation ended. I have to admit that I have been feeling a bit protective of the Snout and Snarl one this weekend. What can I say, my softer side sometimes forces its way to the surface. :) That aside, I'd never claim he was a bleeding heart or idealist (perish the thought), but I do think he was a man of conscience. And he would feel guilty by omission if he had failed to warn folks of possible danger. Granted, he would probably consider his duty done after he did that. And granted he was doing it as much for himself (spare himself future guilt) as for them. I can't help but think a part of him who preferred less togetherness wouldn't have minded if a few of his crewmates had gone missing, but he resists the urge to help them along that path. :) And I keep remembering Avon's softer moments (most of which he attempts to hide as selfish gestures). What boinged in my memory most this morning was "Harvest," when Servalan is threatening to shoot the crew until Tarrant (or someone) gives her access to Zen. And Avon steps in with his almost perfect plan to give her Zen in return for all of their safe delivery to an Earth-like planet. He stepped in when Dayna was threatened. And while Servalan commented that she would expect Avon to give her access because he might have been next, it's pretty clear he's stepping in at that moment to save Dayna. It's also telling that Avon made sure the deal included all of them. I think he could have used a review course in the School of Nastiness; he really needed lessons on how to suppress those kinder instincts that kept foiling his attempt to be Cruella de Kerr. Carol Mc ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 06:25:35 -0800 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 list Subject: Re: [B7L] Assassin Message-ID: <36EBC6DE.E27FC978@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Neil Faulkner wrote: > Thinking about this post over a very boring 12-hour shift, I came up with > this great idea for an episode. If I have managed to alleviate your boredom somewhat, then I shall not have lived in vain. > All just a harmless jolly romp, and anyone who suggests otherwise is > obviously a killjoy with no sense of fun. Ah, well, I do think you're being just a =leetle= bit hard on yourself. I lost family to WWII. I suppose you did as well. I, for one, can still enjoy the bumbling Nazis on Hogan's Heroes and in the Indiana Jones movies. I appreciate the thought you put into things, Neil, but IMHO, you really ought to consider lightening up. You only get one chance at life, no point being unnecessarily miserable. > More seriously, I have very deep reservations about 'obvious comedic fakes'. > To me they reek of contempt for the reality from which they are drawn Quite possibly. I have a great contempt for many things, reality being very near the top of the list. > >Suspension of > >disbelief is pretty much an act of will; you either want to badly enough or > you don't. > > For me, at any rate, it's not just a question of wanting to, the subject > itself (book, film, whatever) has got to justify my making the effort. Sure. But you get to decide how far you go with that (you want to badly enough, or you don't). In for a penny, in for a pound. If you're gonna throw out one ep, I say throw 'em all out. > >I think most writers would not be pleased by readers throwing out whole > chapters of their > >novels. > > An important observation, and very true. But B7 was not a novel by a single > author, it was more like an anthology. But somebody, or somebodies, was responsible for the product, at least for a season. I'm not familiar enough with the BBC system to know. Maybe Boucher? Somebody bought and approved the script. He got to choose, not you, not me. I still think throwing things out is cheating. It means you're trying to force the show to be what you would have wanted it to be if you'd been in charge. IMHO not allowed. If you don't like the way something fits, why not develop back-story or side-story that *makes* it fit (you know, Avon shot the clone, or whatever?) I guess what I'm saying is that tossing out one ep appears to me to show either 1) a lack of imagination 2) a lack of effort or 3) extreme arrogance. I'd rather solve the puzzle. Oh, BTW, I think the idea of Auron being seeded by aliens is completely consistent with the things that we had been previously told about Auron, particularly if you consider 'Bounty'. Stupid, yes. Inconsistent, no. And nothing is either said or implied about other planets being so seeded, anywhere in the run of the show. Trivially, Mistral -- "And for my next trick, I shall swallow my other foot."--Vila ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 11:23:17 +0000 From: Julia Jones To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] The Logic of Empire Message-ID: In message , Judith Proctor writes >My opinion of T7FC is that it was a load of **** Unfortunately, I don't feel >masochistic enough today to listen to it again to recall why. I rewatched >'Stardrive' instead. It was less painful. All right, I confess. I haven't actually listened to T7FC all the way through, because the day it was broadcast, I got about half way through before being distracted by a pile of newly arrived zines. It really does say something about how appalling it was that I'd rather read zines than listen to a play with a fair chunk of the original cast reprising their roles. The official BBC tape is still in its cellophane wrapper. My boss, who'd taped it to listen to later, asked me whether it was worth listening to - he'd seen about two or three episodes of the fourth series, and that was it. I told him not to bother, as it was a travesty of the original and he'd have no idea why B7 was so popular. -- Julia Jones "Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!" The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 07:12:34 -0800 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 list Subject: Re: [B7L] Assassin Message-ID: <36EBD1E1.697F284B@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mac4781@aol.com wrote: > Meanwhile, Mistral writes: > > > I think you're trying to make him 'nicer' than he is. > > Avon does care about people, more than he lets on, but IMHO he is *not* a > crusader, *not* an idealist, and *not* a bleeding heart. Having given a > warning, he would consider his obligation ended. > > I have to admit that I have been feeling a bit protective of the Snout and > Snarl one this weekend. How amusing. It comes across to me like you're trashing him by trying to clean up some *imagined* flaws. I like him just the way he is. Tall, Dark and Nasty without the Nasty part becomes Tall, Dark and Insipid. > That aside, I'd never claim he was a bleeding heart or idealist (perish the > thought), but I do think he was a man of conscience. I agree completely; and with everything you said following this. Having values very similar to those I see him display, I find him to be a better man than Blake, although I realize that few people actually would IRL. I think we're at semantics and shadings again. Having said that, most of the risks he took were calculated ones. He was never in any real danger in 'Harvest' until he wound up on Kairos (by his own error), and he knew it. The only people Avon would knowingly walk into his own grave for were Anna and Blake. Risking your life is one thing; accepting your own death utterly is another. The 'Orbit' shuttle question, again. Ah, well, like you, I have a real life to get back to. I will have to wait until tomorrow to work on the Blake-Avon Avon-Tarrant thread. Grins, Mistral -- "I could never stand heroes."--Avon ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 10:31:16 -0600 From: Lisa Williams To: Subject: Re: [B7L] Assassin Message-Id: <4.1.19990314102723.00c71700@dallas.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" mistral@ptinet.net wrote: >I am bemused. In your other post, Carol, you accuse me of trying to change >Avon. This fellow you're talking about above has very little relationship to >the man *I* see on the screen. That's a point I was going to comment on earlier and didn't get around to it. There simply is no one Avon that "we" saw on the screen. Yes, we have a guy who canonically said this or did that, but the interpretations of his character are all over the map. The one Carol saw is radically different from the one I saw, and they're probably both different from the one you saw. I keep having to remind myself of that -- frequently, my first reaction to someone's interpretation is "But I liked Avon the way he was; why would she want to change him into *that*?" Then I stop and think, "No, she's not changing him, to her that *is* the way Avon was." I invariably like mine better, of course, but it's interesting to see the others. - Lisa _____________________________________________________________ Lisa Williams: lcw@dallas.net or lwilliams@raytheon.com Lisa's Video Frame Capture Library: http://lcw.simplenet.com/ New Riders of the Golden Age: http://www.warhorse.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 20:14:10 -0000 From: Louise Rutter To: "'B7 Lysator'" , "'B7 Space City'" Subject: [B7L] Steven Pacey in The Birthday Party Message-ID: <01BE6E57.714C79C0@host5-171-228-173.btinternet.com> I caught this play at Richmond last night, and I went along without any idea of what the play was actually about. I have to say that it was the _oddest_ play I have ever seen. Comments overheard from other members of the audience as I left (it was a full house) include: "Well, err....", "very different", "Artistic or autistic?!" and "It was so cleverly handled". Artistic or otherwise, the acting was uniformly excellent, with Prunella Scales in classic Sybil voice for her role as the boarding house owner. Steven Pacey was superb, having the most varied and taxing role in the play and carrying it off effortlessly. He looked a lot better when the glasses were taken off, though. I'm glad to say how well he's resisting the tendency of most of the male B7 cast to gain weight, he looks far younger than his true age. I couldn't place the accent he was trying to do, but it was far removed from Tarrant's RADA tones. I'm not going to say any more as I don't want to go into plot details for those who might not want to know. Overall, I have to say that it's not a play I would go to see again, but I'm glad I saw it once. Louise ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 12:42:23 -0800 From: mistral@ptinet.net To: B7 list Subject: Re: [B7L] Assassin Message-ID: <36EC1F2E.E49F18F7@ptinet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lisa Williams wrote: > That's a point I was going to comment on earlier and didn't get around to > it. There simply is no one Avon that "we" saw on the screen. Yes, we have a > guy who canonically said this or did that, but the interpretations of his > character are all over the map. You're right, of course, and I have never pretended that we have to agree 100%. Some interpretations however, are easier to accept than others. Albuquerque is not in New Zealand; that *would* be all over the map. For example, I think an Avon not 'drawn' to Blake against his will, (by his own subconscious, not Blake's charisma), but who always wanted to be a revolutionary and simply pretended not to be, would be pushing the limits of credulity a bit. It would require quite a bit of complicated backstory for me to accept. (Besides which, Lisa, if Avon is INTx, I think some of the things Carol has said are *extremely*unlikely; but I've noticed our differences are *mostly* in definitions.) Having said that, if we don't discuss individual character motivations at all, that sort of leaves out relationships and plots too, since those are affected by character motivations, yes? One could argue that the entire list is pointless, except for con announcements and updates on the actors. Being stuck in America, I'd find that fairly boring. I *do* realize this discussion is entirely trivial -- I'm only participating for fun. If you're interpreting my reaction in any other way, please don't :) Trivially, Mistral -- "We need more information."--Jenna ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 15:48:33 -0600 From: Lisa Williams To: Subject: Re: [B7L] Assassin Message-Id: <4.1.19990314151226.00c91bf0@dallas.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" mistral@ptinet.net wrote: >Some interpretations however, are easier to accept than others. There's some (mostly) common ground, but the range of variation is surprising. I see more differences in character interpretation for this show than any of my other fandoms, and especially for Avon & Blake. >(Besides which, Lisa, if Avon is INTx, I think some of the things Carol has >said are *extremely*unlikely; Oh, I agree; but then, your view of Avon is fairly close to my own, and the chap Carol describes I don't even recognize, so naturally I *would* agree. >Having said that, if we don't discuss individual character motivations at all, >that sort of leaves out relationships and plots too, since those are >affected by character motivations, yes? I didn't even hint at not discussing character motivations -- I find it quite intriguing to try to understand how someone managed to see a particular character in *that* way. Or why they'd want to. (In some cases I have to confess eternal mystification, though.) My point was that someone with a significantly different interpretation isn't taking the character you saw and changing him, but is actually perceiving something else to begin with. Which was actually a response to Carol's earlier remark of "Do we like the Avon on the screen or do we want to change him?" -- I don't think that's usually the issue. - Lisa _____________________________________________________________ Lisa Williams: lcw@dallas.net or lwilliams@raytheon.com Lisa's Video Frame Capture Library: http://lcw.simplenet.com/ New Riders of the Golden Age: http://www.warhorse.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 14:39:07 PST From: "Joanne MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Ooh, I've binged... Message-ID: <19990314223908.25531.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-type: text/plain What a weekend! Oh my brain - it's stuffed with B7, and I won't have the opportunity to properly think about what I've seen so far! First things first. All hail the mighty Harriet, and give thanks for my brother's powers of observation at a suburban video rental place. Between the two of them, I have now seen Shadow, Weapon, Bounty, Dawn of the Gods, Volcano, City at the Edge of the World and Harvest of Kairos. All in the same weekend. Yes, that's right, I have now seen Boris! And survived! A few comments on first impressions: 1) Sorry, Harriet, but Carnell still has too much chin. It has effectively distracted me from those eyelashes. 2) Boris might've worked if they hadn't chosen to shoot in broad daylight. The herculanium-stripping machine in DotG wasn't bad, simply because it was suggested, rather than shown. How many other people hooted with laughter when they first saw Boris? That was my brother's reaction - I was trying to work out if it was as bad as its reputation, or worse. 3) Tarrant should not wear green. It worked for Blake, but Tarrant isn't Blake. Well, that's my opinion, for what it's worth. Those tight, red leather trousers of a certain person in the same episode did nothing for my peace of mind either. Very distracting legs. Shame on me - I'm not normally given to looking at that end of the anatomy. I shall blame Julia, due to the interest she has shown in said pair of trousers in the past 4) Neil, add to your list the fact that DotG doesn't seem to have enough plot to fill 50 minutes (unless you've said that already, and I haven't noticed ). 5) I have no idea of what Jenna ever saw in Tarvin. Nice idea, though, to have a bit of a Middle-Eastern influence to the Amagons' costumes. 6) Apart from what was done with the Amagons, I liked Bounty. At least on first impressions. Shall have to watch it again at some stage to see if I still think it's any good. Next week, I am going to attempt to borrow Power/Traitor and Stardrive/Animals. It's been so long since I've seen Traitor (and only the once at that) that I may as well count it as one of the episodes I haven't seen. This could be very interesting, but then again... Regards Joanne This could be heaven, or this could be hell. --Split Enz, "Straight Old Line". Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 16:12:14 PST From: "Joanne MacQueen" To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] Too much of something Message-ID: <19990315001214.7589.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-type: text/plain >> Why do the two Obsidianites running up to meet the Federation >> troopers in "Volcano" appear and disappear as they move towards >> them? No comment is made of this in the story, does it really occur? >I've never been able to figure that one out and it really bugs me. It probably is to indicate the passage of time, as my brother commented on the weekend. I agree with him, although those fade-ins and fade-outs had a bad effect on me - the back of my mind (a mischievous area of my brain ) was beginning to suspect it was watching the video to Wuthering Heights, as Kate Bush is doing much the same thing at the end. Regards Joanne Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 19:36:49 EST From: NetSurfCK@aol.com To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] The Logic of Empire Message-ID: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk writes: << As it happens, I love the production qualties, but I wasn't so keen on the plot. The writing was excellent, especially the dialogue, and the story would have been great for a one-off. >> Though I agree the plot about Guada Prime was too convoluted, I actually quite enjoyed the play. Paul Darrow was 'right on' as Avon. However the story lost me when I figured out the premise. I simply can't buy the "punchline" at the end. Cynthia ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 02:57:17 +0100 (MET) From: Carol & Gordon Burgess To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: [B7L] test Message-ID: <36EB585300000269@base.catchnet.com.au> (added by base.catchnet.com.au) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" please ignore ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 02:24:48 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Stardrive Message-ID: <003101be6e8c$815ec0e0$6f428cd4@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Louise wrote: >Neil wrote lots of stuff I agree with and then: > >>Scripts like Assassin and Stardrive don't take >>B7 seriously enough, the writers didn't consider what they were writing >>about, and the treatment suffered accordingly. >I do feel that Stardrive the _script_ was taking the programme seriously, >though. The episode has, as everyone seems to be agreeing, a good, well >thought out beginning and end, with a naff middle. I guess I'll just have to be in a minority of one (again). I thought it had a decent intro and then slipped around all over the place. The pacing's very awkward - it feels like two short sequential episodes spliced together (possibly the only episode that could have benefited from a commercial break in the middle). And I personally think the scene with Vila faking drunkenness is just plain embarrassing to watch - I cringe big time whenever I see it. >But drop-out adrenaline >junkies are a fact of life, and I see no reason why they shouldn't still >exist in Blake's time. I agree totally - I would have liked to have seen more of that kind of thing. But done properly, not like this. >The story had some good comments to make about how >Plaxton was so desperate to get out of the Federation that she resorted to >the Space Rats (OK, so the name could have been better) and then began to >regret her decision as she got to know the people she'd fallen in with. Atlan drops a hint that he is not, in fact, a Space Rat at all, but quite what he is instead goes unmentioned - a serious omission (unless it was cut from the original script). To me this echoed the stock reactionary idea that people like me at that time were supposedly being funded from Moscow, and it made me a little bit angry. >It was only once the design team got hold of the episode that it was >destroyed. You could hardly expect the episode actors to act seriously once >they'd been put in those Space Rat costumes. We could even name names and suggest that it was only when _Nicky Rocker_ got his paws on the episode... That man should never have been allowed anywhere near B7. A shame one of his predecessors couldn't have stayed on for another season. As for actors, I suspect that for many at that time, a one-off part in something like B7 would have been their first encounter with SF. Watching Mission to Destiny once, I was struck with the thought that given a decent part and some measure of restraint re costume etc, an actor would be prepared to give it his or her best shot. But with a pantomime script and way OTT costumes, they'd either set out to have a laugh and refuse to take it seriously, or just roll their eyes, think of the cheque and get it over with. >Inside Stardrive, there was a good script trying to get out. More the pity it didn't, then. I keep meaning to check up on how Stardrive relates timewise to Mad Max 2 (aka Stardrive Done Properly) - which came first? I know for certain that I watched Stardrive in my first year at university, but didn't get to see MM2 until at least a year and more likely two later, though it had been out for a while by then. Location filming for the episode was done in spring of 1981 (you can tell it's spring because you can hear a skylark singing in one scene) so the script must have been started earlier that year at the very latest. Was MM2 a direct influence on Stardrive? Neil >Louise > > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 01:25:49 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Assassin Message-ID: <003001be6e8c$7e749940$6f428cd4@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mistral wrote: >I lost family to WWII. I suppose you did as well. I, for one, can still enjoy >the bumbling Nazis on Hogan's Heroes and in the Indiana Jones movies. I >appreciate the thought you put into things, Neil, but IMHO, you really ought to >consider lightening up. You only get one chance at life, no point being >unnecessarily miserable. No casualties in my family that I know of. Maybe that's why I regard 'bumbling Nazis' as a gross insult to the German people. How would you feel about watching it in a room full of Germans? Of course, everyone who knows me is aware that I'm grimly serious at all times, with never so much as a hint of a smile daring to contaminate my brooding glum demeanour. >Quite possibly. I have a great contempt for many things, reality being very near >the top of the list. Just below non-human animals?:) >> For me, at any rate, it's not just a question of wanting to, the subject >> itself (book, film, whatever) has got to justify my making the effort. > >Sure. But you get to decide how far you go with that (you want to badly enough, >or you don't). In for a penny, in for a pound. If you're gonna throw out one ep, >I say throw 'em all out. A very black-and-white approach to a series normally lauded for its many shades of grey:) > >> >I think most writers would not be pleased by readers throwing out whole >> chapters of their >> >novels. >> >> An important observation, and very true. But B7 was not a novel by a single >> author, it was more like an anthology. > >But somebody, or somebodies, was responsible for the product, at least for a >season. I'm not familiar enough with the BBC system to know. Maybe Boucher? >Somebody bought and approved the script. He got to choose, not you, not me. I >still think throwing things out is cheating. It means you're trying to force the >show to be what you would have wanted it to be if you'd been in charge. IMHO >not allowed. But isn't all fannish rationalisation a process of turning the show into what they, as viewers, would have wanted it to be? Whether you slash B7 or cyberpunk it, you're remoulding the raw material of the canon into something else. This wilful act of redefinition is the root source of fandom's vitality. >If you don't like the way something fits, why not develop back-story or >side-story that *makes* it fit (you know, Avon shot the clone, or whatever?) I >guess what I'm saying is that tossing out one ep appears to me to show either 1) >a lack of imagination 2) a lack of effort or 3) extreme arrogance. I'd rather >solve the puzzle. Probably (3) in my case... I do prefer to slot in wherever possible, but DotG just compromises plausibility too heavily. Thinking about it, I suspect it's because of my firm conviction that because Cally looks so utterly human, then the Auronar must ultimately be of Earth origin (a conviction I know I'm not alone in sharing). To suggest otherwise is to fly in the face of everything we know about the evolution of species. Since Cally cited a timelag of one million years minimum in DotG, we are therefore forced to conclude that either - (a) early human space-farers dumped the first loving couple on Auron, and B7 is therefore set something like a million years in the future. (b) ancient space-faring aliens nicked a couple of humans (not necessarily H.sapiens) from Earth sometime in the last million years and dumped them on Auron. (a) stretches credulity by quite a margin, yet it's still preferable to (b) because the Thaarn himself, when finally encountered, is also very humanoid (and hence implicitly from Earth himself). (b) also entails a major paradigm shift in our perception of the B7 universe (and indeed of the characters' own perception of their universe). I'm not saying that science fiction is unsuitable for paradigm shifts because if anything it's the perfect medium, but not, I would say, in this particular context. Such a shift would have major ramifications for the entire series - it's something that should have been explicitly stated right from Episode One, or pulled out of the hat as a climactic revelation. As it is, the implications aren't even considered in DotG itself. This leads me to conclude, as I've already said, that Follett was merely exploiting an opportunity to use B7 as a vehicle for his own pet plot about time dilation and ancient astronauts, and DotG was not written _for_ B7. That might not actually be the case, but if it is then excising the episode is doing the series a favour. As to why Boucher commissioned it - I didn't get around to asking him this when I met him at Deliverance. Maybe he was just glad to get a script to fill the series quota. Maybe things went too far ahead too quickly to cancel it. Or maybe he was perfectly happy with it. I honestly don't know. >Oh, BTW, I think the idea of Auron being seeded by aliens is completely >consistent with the things that we had been previously told about Auron, >particularly if you consider 'Bounty'. The various references to the humanity or otherwise of the Auronar scattered through the series are notably mainly for their lack of any consistency. Sarkoff said, as I recall, 'Your people don't originate from Earth'. That's roughly on a par with saying Oprah Winfrey doesn't originate from Africa. (Though one could equally well say that we all do, of course.) Neil ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 02:34:37 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" To: "lysator" Subject: Re: [B7L] Ooh, I've binged... Message-ID: <003201be6e8c$822fcc80$6f428cd4@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Joanne wrote: >A few comments on first impressions: > >2) Boris might've worked if they hadn't chosen to shoot in broad >daylight. How many other people >hooted with laughter when they first saw Boris? That was my brother's >reaction - I was trying to work out if it was as bad as its reputation, >or worse. I think, when I first saw 'Boris' (as in the Who track, yes?) it was all I could do not to howl in despair. > >3) Tarrant should not wear green. It worked for Blake, but Tarrant isn't >Blake. Well, that's my opinion, for what it's worth. Tarrant not Blake? Are you sure? Damn damn... I don't mind the green, but those execrable grey pyjamas with the red piping - all it lacked was a pointy hat with pom-poms running up it. > >4) Neil, add to your list the fact that DotG doesn't seem to have enough >plot to fill 50 minutes (unless you've said that already, and I haven't >noticed ). Are you sure you mean 50 and not just 5? Neil ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 21:17:30 -0600 From: Lisa Williams To: Subject: Re: [B7L] Assassin Message-Id: <4.1.19990314211451.00cfa100@dallas.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Neil Faulkner wrote: >Maybe that's why I regard 'bumbling Nazis' as a gross insult to the German >people. How would you feel about watching it in a room full of Germans? "Hogan's Heroes" has been airing in Germany for some time now and, I understand, has been quite popular. In the dubbing they have used "hick" regional accents to make the bumbling Nazis look even *more* bumbling. - Lisa _____________________________________________________________ Lisa Williams: lcw@dallas.net or lwilliams@raytheon.com Lisa's Video Frame Capture Library: http://lcw.simplenet.com/ New Riders of the Golden Age: http://www.warhorse.com/ -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #99 *************************************