From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V98 #200
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume98/200
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
Reply-To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
------------------------------
Content-Type: text/plain
blakes7-d Digest Volume 98 : Issue 200
Today's Topics:
Re: [B7L] The Big Question
Re: [B7L] canon firing.
[B7L] Re: Flag waving-- LONG
Re: [B7L] Re: Flag waving-- LONG
Re: [B7L] B7 on UK Gold
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 21:19:18 +0930
From: "Ophelia" <ophelia@picknowl.com.au>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] The Big Question
Message-ID: <01bdb62f$ecdbfc40$LocalHost@waltersmith>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DJ wrote, re a certain golden haired
gunfighting grrl's chances for valentines
and red roses...
>I think Soolin and Vila could make a great couple!
And cute as hell...
Her
>looking after the physical-security side of the relationship,
>him doing the emotional/care-taking side of it, and working
>out their means of survival as a team---either in security
>consulting, or professional B&E.
They'd be invincible, I agree!
The only thing that boggles
>me, would be how to get them together, to start. What could
>he *do*, that could make a good enough impression on her,
>for her to seriously consider him worth her attention/affection?
"City" gives us a good starting place - Vila
has already demonstrated he has a way with
fierce-but-lonely mercenary types, exactly
becuase he is vulnerable, kind and no danger.
Soolin is a consummate professional, too, so
if she was forced to notice his thieving skills,
she might be impressed... Or she could be
bored and resentful, and sieze an unusual
chance to party... Or she could speculate about
those clever fingers of his...
More seriously, I think Vila's very helplessness
could get to her, as someone who has suffered
badly herself. If he confessed the events of
Maldoaar to her, she might take it on herself
to teach him not to be such a victim, which would
entail both feeling pity for him *and* spending
a lot of time with him. Or she could be feeling a
little, ah, tense, and figure he's the option for
relief most amenable to being kept into line by
a fiesty female. The possibilities are endless.
That's why first time stories are so popular!
XXX Lindley
"..the celestial and my soul's idol,
the most beautified Ophelia..."
The Knockwurst "'Allo 'Allo" Pages -
www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/2511/allo.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 22:27:39 +0930
From: "Ophelia" <ophelia@picknowl.com.au>
To: "B7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] canon firing.
Message-ID: <01bdb639$7904f100$LocalHost@waltersmith>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I don't have to consider anything canon I don't
want to. For example, the Vampire Chronicles
atrocity-that-shall-be-nameless isn't canon,
because it is obvious that Anne Rice was insane
when she wrote it.
Different incarnations *are* different.
In general, I consider the telly show
Blakes 7 canon, and anything else a spin-off.
Official spin-offs, maybe, but not canon.
If they made a new telly show called B7, that
would be its own canon, but not Blakes 7: The
original Series canon.
Re bad reunions - I am a devoted Addams Family
fan, and I will *not* accept the 1970 "Hallowe'en
With the New Addams Family" as canon, even
though it had the entire original cast except
Blossom Rock. (It also included my namesake,
the divine Ophelia Frump, although she'd apparently
had a character transplant.) It's an atrocity, and
there is little Addams Family-ish about it. Of
course I keep and watch a copy,but the same
could be said of "Power"...
The movies I see as a separate canon. It is
impossible to consider the books, cartoons,
1970s & 1990s animations, reunion,
appearances in The Scooby Doo movies
and movies all as canon - not to mention the
forthcoming Tim Curry/Drew Whatsername
telemovie. Just to compare the telly show and
movies, Mama is Gomez' mother on TV and
Morticia's in the movies, Uncle Fester is
Morticia's uncle or Gomez' brother, Puggsley
is a genius or an idiot, Wednesday is a
sweet little girl or a psychopath, Gomez has
recently come over from Castille or his family
have lived in the same house for generations,
Morticia and Ophelia are Frumps or
Addamses, Morticia and Gomez fell in love when
he was engaged to Ophelia, or they became
engaged the first night they met...
You *can't* reconcile the two.
So I enjoy them both separately. Gomez is
adorable whoever plays him, and I'm looking
forward to seeing Tim Curry in the role.
- XXX Lindley
Ophelia - ophelia@picknowl.com.au
"The girl has beauty, virtue, wit,
Grace, humour, wisdom, charity and pluck."
LONDON CALLING - a list to discuss Britcoms and knockwurst.
http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/2511/knockwurst.html
XXX Lindley.
Ophelia Frump - ophelia@picknowl.com.au
--www.geocities.com.au/TelevisionCity/2511/allo.html---
This angel's dirty face is sore,
holding on to what she had before.
Not sharing secrets with any old fool,
now she's gonna keep her cool.
-- "Naked" - the Spice Girls.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 98 06:16:00 GMT
From: s.thompson8@genie.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Cc: mmoyer%mto.infi.net%inet#@genie.com
Subject: [B7L] Re: Flag waving-- LONG
Message-Id: <199807240625.GAA05903@rock103.genie.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Well, Kathryn and Joanne MacQueen, it doesn't look at all good for
the academic reputation of U. of Adelaide. I was really, really
hoping that the place would turn out to be something like the
fundamentalist "colleges" here that teach "creation science" and
that sort of thing; but according to a survey by Asia Week magazine
( http://www.pathfinder.com/asiaweek/98/0515/cs5.html ), it's your
seventh-ranked university. Oh dear.
Lindley says: "I've had extraordinary support, both intellectual
and personal, from the staff of the underfunded and debt-ridden
Arts Department. The purpose of a liberal arts education is, after
all, not to teach you opinions but social responsibility and
research and writing skills, while bringing you into contact with
the major theories of your chosen areas."
OK, that sounds great, but let's see what "social responsibility"
and "research" really mean, by U. of Adelaide standards.
Joanne, you said that the university is not responsible for
Lindley's opinions. No, of course not; but they =are= responsible
for her general background knowledge and, at least to some extent,
for her standards of intellectual integrity. And in both respects,
they appear to have failed her badly. Of course, Lindley might be
lying about having gotten her notions of academic methodology from
them; but where else would an undergraduate be likely to get such
ideas, other than her school?
Here's a small sampling of the many gems of misinformation that
we've heard from Lindley over the past two years. Please note that
these are not matters of opinion, but of simple and easily
confirmed facts. Anyone who wants the exact wording of Lindley's
utterances or the contexts in which they occurred can find them in
the list archives, along with a great deal more nonsense from
the same source.
I did not mention Lindley by name at first because it occurred to
me that her use of the new name, Ophelia Frump, and the new ISP
instead of the University of Adelaide system might indicate
embarrassment over her earlier statements and a wish not to be
associated with those remarks. Since that's not the case, I won't
worry about it.
Among many other things, Lindley "Ophelia Frump" Walker Earnshaw-
Smith has at various times claimed the following:
1) South Australia was founded as a multicultural utopia.
The fact is that Australia banned immigration by nonwhites until
1973, as any basic reference book will show (for example, =The
World Almanac=, 1997 edition, p. 741). The only way this statement
could be construed as true is if Lindley is a white supremacist who
believes that it is reasonable to call a society "multicultural" if
it includes various European nationalities, even though others are
excluded.
Now, if we give Lindley the benefit of the doubt and assume that
she did not intend that interpretation, then the other
possibilities are: (a) she was genuinely ignorant of one of the
most basic facts of modern Australian history, or (b) she was
deliberately lying. Neither speaks very well for her education at
U. of Adelaide.
2) No one in Australia would find it offensive to be described as
a member of the Ku Klux Klan or other racist organization.
(Specifically, Lindley said that none of the comments of her friend
Fran Meyers would be considered offensive in Australia; and Fran,
as Lindley well knew, had just made a group of Americans very angry
by telling us we belonged to the Klan and claiming afterwards that
it was intended to be a funny joke, and that we were mean and cruel
and intolerant of Australian humor if we didn't like it.)
Well, this is closer to being true than I would have thought at the
time Lindley said it; apparently it =is= more or less true of a
quarter of the adult population of the state of Queensland. But
there are still the other 3/4 who made it clear that they don't
think racism is funny. Not to mention the rest of Australia, who
I certainly hope are less racist than the Queenslanders!
3) The incest taboo is "silly," because it's really just a cover-
up for a deeper taboo against homosexuality.
Lindley posted a long and elaborate justification for parent-child
incest, which revolved around (a) acceptance of Freudian ideas
about the transference of the affections of developing children
from one object of desire to another, and (b) the notion that
homosexuality has been universally tabooed. Well, (a) is a matter
of theory and difficult to prove one way or the other, though I for
one find it unconvincing. But (b) is easily disproven as a matter
of historical fact. In many societies, homosexual behavior has
been perfectly acceptable. Just one sample reference: Gary Leupp,
=Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa
Japan=, Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California
Press, 1994. (To the best of my knowledge, parent-child incest is
indeed universally tabooed; brother-sister incest is sometimes
acceptable in special circumstances such as dynastic marriages, as
in the well-known Egyptian example.)
This doesn't sound to me like something an undergraduate would make
up. I think Lindley was taught it. And I find it very disturbing
that what is apparently a legitimate educational institution is
teaching gullible undergraduates that incest and pedophilia are
"delightful" (Lindley's word), by presenting a theory based on
total ignorance of gay history. It doesn't matter how clever or
complex a theory is if its basic premises are false.
I also think that the attempt to associate homosexuality with
pedophilia is appallingly homophobic in its implications.
4) Compulsory voting tends to support progressive legislation.
Actually, Lindley put this the other way around, slamming the U.S.
for our freedom not to vote if we don't want to. I ignored this
particular comment at the time because, like many of her other
comments, it seemed too silly to bother with. "Well duh," I
thought, "of course voting is noncompulsory in democracies." Live
and learn. Now I see that this was intended as praise of
Australia, via an attack on us. (Joanne and others, if you
wondered why I reacted so strongly to Kathryn's relatively mild
chauvinistic remarks, that's one reason why.)
Well-- let's look at the facts. Australia has had compulsory
voting since the 1920s, according to the government website that I
discovered by accident while I was looking at the National Library
info. And yet it took them until 1973 to overthrow the racist laws
banning nonwhite immigration. In the U.S., the armed forces were
racially integrated in 1948 (I think -- shortly after WWII,
anyway); the racial-quota aspects of our immigration laws were
dismantled during the 50s and early 60s; and the civil rights laws
that made racial discrimination illegal in any aspect of life that
the federal government could possibly control were passed in 1965
(yes, enforcement is an ongoing problem, but at least the
legislation is in place and provides the basis for legal action).
Meanwhle, Australians were congratulating themselves on being so
clever as to avoid American-type racial problems by not letting the
"troublemakers" into the country in the first place. Lindley may
not realize it, but all her talk of how smart the Aussies are and
how stupid the Americans are is nothing but stale thirty-year-old
White Australia rhetoric, nasty then and even nastier now. I
thought that poison had died out years ago, and I'm horrified to
learn that it has been passed on to a new generation.
So, the historical evidence indicates pretty clearly that either
there is no particular relationship between voting systems and
socially progressive legislation (which is what I'm inclined to
think myself); or else, if there is, then noncompulsory voting is
a superior system in this respect. Why is the U. of Adelaide
teaching the very opposite??
5) Finally, a matter not so much of factual information as of
basic honesty: Lindley believes-- and I'm very much afraid that
she may have been taught this by her school-- that when she can't
come up with any legitimate argument against a person she dislikes,
it is acceptable to use lies instead. I'm referring specifically
to her claim that I share Kathryn Andersen's beliefs on slash, and
on homosexuality in general.
Kathryn believes, for religious reasons, that homosexual behavior
is sinful, perverted, and immoral. (Kathryn, I am trying very hard
to state your position accurately; please feel free to make
corrections if I have not got it right.) Kathryn finds the very
idea of slash-- fan fiction about homosexual relationships between
media characters, in this case B7-- to be extremely distressing.
She had a very unpleasant experience once when she accidentally
caught sight of some slash art.
None of this is true of me, as everyone on the Space City list well
knows-- and as Lindley herself knows, since she was on that list
for a while herself. Her squawking of "Homophobia!" at me was
completely dishonest. It had nothing to do with her interpretation
of anything that I had actually said, but was merely a displacement
of Kathryn's attitude onto me. Lindley was stupid enough to shriek
at me that I couldn't bear the thought of A/V, shortly before I won
a Stiffie (=Slash Talent in Fandom award) for an A/V story!
Kathryn herself presumably escaped attack because she is protected
by the little map of Australia in her sig; and the whole ugly
business, IMO, was really about Lindley's xenophobia and not about
sexual politics at all. I was attacked for being an American, and
for having corrected Lindley's foolish misstatements-- including
her ignorance of gay history-- on several previous occasions, as
described above.
Kathryn, I can hardly believe that your Christian morality allows
you to stand by in silence while someone else is made a scapegoat
for your beliefs. I really think that you, Kathryn, need to
apologize to me for that incident and to tell Lindley sternly that
it is =you= who consider homosexuality disgusting, immoral, etc.,
and =you= to whom she should address her comments on the subject in
the future.
If you, Kathryn, were being attacked by some dishonest person who
accused you of being one of those perverted slash fans, then I
would certainly defend you against an accusation that I know is
untrue, and that I'm sure must be as offensive to you as Lindley's
claim that I share your beliefs is to me. (In fact, you may recall
that what actually precipitated Lindley's irrational attack on me
was the fact that I stood up for the Christians-- even though I am
not one myself-- when they were being attacked by the religious
bigots, and I pointed out that the last outbreak of religious
prejudice on the list had been Lindley's anti-Catholic remarks.) I
think you should extend the same courtesy to me.
Now, there is one aspect of Lindley's sexuality that I do object to
very strongly, and that is her approval of what she calls "adult-
child love." Lindley, if you want to scream at someone who opposes
pedophilia, then by all means scream at me. But if you want to
attack someone who is opposed to homosexual activities by
consenting adults, then you should be screaming at Kathryn and not
at me. Kathryn, will you please explain this to Lindley in a way
that she is capable of understanding? The people on this list who
know me-- many of whom are themselves gay or bi-- told her plainly
the last time around how wrong she was, but obviously she didn't
understand what she was told. I think she has a mental block that
prevents her from comprehending what is said by anyone other than
a fellow Aussie. Fortunately you are more intelligent than she is
and so can interpret. Please do so.
I think I am owed a really grovelling apology by Lindley, as well
as by Ross "Jessica Leenstra" Mallett, who chimed in in support of
Lindley a few times even though he knew very well that she was
lying. I don't actually expect to get that apology; but unless and
until I do, I reserve the right to comment from time to time on the
bad character of these unpleasant people, for the benefit of new
list members who may become future victims of their dishonest
attacks.
I'd be enormously relieved if some of you Aussies would speak up
and say, "Of course Lindley is an aberration, and her ignorance,
bigotry, and dishonesty are just as shocking by Australian academic
standards as by American ones." Otherwise, the only conclusion I
can draw based on the information I have at present is that your
standards are one hell of a lot lower than ours.
Sarah Thompson
------------------------------
Date: 24 Jul 1998 09:34:20 +0200
From: Calle Dybedahl <qdtcall@esavionics.se>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Flag waving-- LONG
Message-ID: <is7m13g0sj.fsf@godzilla.kiere.ericsson.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Please take the personal attacks to private mail and/or the spin list.
--
Calle Dybedahl, B7-list admin
qdtcall@esavionics.se http://www.lysator.liu.se/~calle/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 20:41:54 +0100
From: "Julie Horner" <jihorner@dial.pipex.com>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] B7 on UK Gold
Message-ID: <001c01bdb73b$1d229100$6e5b95c1@orac>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Steve Rogerson
>According to Cult Times, these are the B7 episodes being shown on UK
>Gold in August, though after they got July all wrong I'm not sure how
>accurate they are.
>
>Sat 1 Aug, 9.05am: A8 Duel
>Sun 2 Aug, 9.00am: A9 Project Avalon
>Sun 9 Aug, 9.05am: A10 Breakdown
>Sat 29 Aug, 9.00am: A11 Bounty
>
The Cable and Wireless Guide for August agrees with that exactly and
they are usually pretty accurate.
I also note that on Sunday 16th Aug at 9.05am, the Dr Who Omnibus
is 'Silurians'. Isn't that the one with a certain young Mr Darrow in it?
I am not sure I have ever seen that story - or not since I was a kid,
can anyone tell me is it any good? Has PD got a significant role?
Is it worth setting the video for?
Julie Horner
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V98 Issue #200
**************************************