From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #323
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/323
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 323
Today's Topics:
[B7L] Digest headers
[B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #322
[B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #322
Re: [B7L] dystopias/natural culture
Re: [B7L] dystopias/natural culture
[B7L] Re: Cally
[B7L] Star One and after... (was: Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #320)
Re: [B7L] the Federation
Re: [B7L] Star One and after... (was: Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #320)
Re: [B7L] Re: Cally
Re: [B7L] dystopias/natural culture
Re: [B7L] Re: Cally
Re: [B7L] dystopias/natural culture
Re: [B7L] the Federation
Re: [B7L] Cally-related.
Re: [B7L] the Federation
Re: [B7L] Cally-related.
[B7L] Paul Darrow at Cult TV
[B7L] Reserved materials
Re: [B7L] dystopias/natural culture
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:55:53 +0000
From: Steve Rogerson <steve.rogerson@mcr1.poptel.org.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Digest headers
Message-ID: <38334088.91FE0B20@mcr1.poptel.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Could fellow digesters responding to mails please change the header so
it reflects the mail they are responding to rather than saying, for
example, "Re: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #321"? I know we all, me
included, do it accidentally occassionally, but it seems to be coming
the norm for some posters and it does make it hard to skim digests for
the threads you are following at the time.
--
cheers
Steve Rogerson
http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson
"In my world, there are people in chains and you can ride them like
ponies"
The alternative Willow, Buffy the Vampire Slayer
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 21:38:48 -0700
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #322
Message-ID: <383382D8.2143@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Massacring whole populations. Are you sure they (Victorians) would not have
> done it if there were not other empires to keep them in check ? Threatening
> populations with death by far superior weaponry ?
Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't the Australian aborigines nearly
wiped out? I thought I read somewhere that 90% of their population was
destroyed.
--Avona
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 21:43:13 -0700
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #322
Message-ID: <383383E1.1A20@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Ob B7 ref.: Which of our heroes would actually read the materials the
> professors put on reserve?
>
Blake. Avon, if he liked the subject. Gan would, I feel sure. He'd trust
the teacher's recommendation, and want to improve himself.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:42:52 -0700
From: "Ellynne G." <rilliara@juno.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] dystopias/natural culture
Message-ID: <19991117.234254.9926.0.Rilliara@juno.com>
On Tue, 16 Nov 1999 20:07:55 -0000 "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
writes:
>Rob wrote:
>>I've heard an awful lot of people speculate on what our "natural"
>behaviour
>>is, was, or should be. But I've never heard anyone even attempt to
>define
>>exactly what they mean by "natural". To me, it usually sounds like
>"the
>way
>>*I* think people should be".
>
Since I think I'm the person who introduced the "natural" theme, I feel
like I'd better respond.
There are some things that may come fairly naturally to humans and our
cultures. There are other things, particular stresses in modern society
being the best known, which really weren't much of an issue till
recently. Of course, this leads to the question of whether we're
equipped to cope with the evironment we've created.
I"M NOT DEALING WITH THAT QUESTION!
I was only pointing out that, even in borderline survival situations,
dystopias weren't common.
Now, while I don't want to go to the other extreme, trying to make modern
culture sound like the closest thing to utopia, let me point out some of
the problems these "natural" cultures often had.
Nomadic tribes: infanticide (usually unwanted females) was common in many
of these. While war usually had lower mortality rates, some seem to have
deliberately used them to get rid of social pariahs. Diet was more varied
than that of farming communities but less reliable, effecting mortality
rates, etc.
Settled groups: Disease. Lack of knowledge combined with lack of ability
to create a decent sewer system led to many deaths. Diseases we might
expect to survive even without modern medicine exacted heavy tolls due to
malnutrition. Another effect of malnutrition: retardation. There's a
reason fools were so often associated with the lower classes other than
education opportunities. Malnutrition can cause retardation, along with
physical problems, and they were the most vulnerable population group.
Wars tended to be bloodier, although civilian populations were actually
not as devastated as they are in modern times in most cases, despite far
too many gruesome events recorded in history.
In both these groups, a more stable and homogenous society also led to
heavier pressure on individuals to conform, with sometimes terrible
consequences for those who wouldn't or couldn't.
The murder rate during the middle ages, I should mention, was well above
that of New York's. A high number of these deaths were the result of
vendetta killings--i.e., semi-sanctioned murder. Outlaws were also a
problem. A man of this period, in praising the _safeness_ of one region
said, if you traveled with a group of 60 armed men, you could sleep as
safe as if you were in your own home.
Not enough? I knew a woman who worked as a nurse in a third world country
and was sometimes driven nuts by the fatalism of the culture. We're
talking an area where child mortality was horrible--comparable to the
middle ages. The people had a remarkable ability to cope with this and
other hardships without coming unglued (like I might) but it was partly
because of their fatalism. The nurse I knew told me about a child she
treated who died and the mother said it was God's will. This nurse was a
devout woman (kind of how she wound up being a nurse in a third world
country) but she really hit the roof when she told me about this. She
wanted to shout, "It wasn't God's will! If you'd brought this child in
sooner instead of using useless home remedies for days, he'd still be
alive!"
Fatalism was a coping skill, an acceptance of how much was literally
beyond their control. But it worked against them when circumstances
changed and things could be in their control.
>>I have to admit, given the choice of (1) writing my own personal
>moral
>code,
>>based on my life's experiences and the teachings of the people I
>respect
>>most, and (2) having my morals dictated to me by some dogmatic tract,
>I
>>would choose the former over the latter. Up to a point,
Granted, despite the way I may sometimes carry on, I'm only an amateur
anthropologist, if that. However, it's amazing how much we accept
without thinking that we never realize we accept without thinking. Like
what's funny. Anyone who likes B7 should have an appreciation of irony
and sarcasm. Some cultures don't (I always thought Aurons were one such
culture, it would explain so much). You'd be surprised how much you
accept without question.
Which brings us back to the issue of "natural" man. The "unspoiled" and
"noble savage" idea in fiction usually presents someone who has grown to
be some sort of paragon precisely because they didn't have corrupt,
"unnatural" society messing them up. Skipping the evidence that flies in
the face of this, ever notice how nature boy, in these stories, may have
trouble adjusting to the corrupt elements of society but _never_ to the
underlying premises? Look at Tarzan. Despite real ape behavior, does he
ever question the value of monogamy, _not_ an ape value? Does he ever
try to fight other guys for their mates? What about the value he puts on
_romantic_ love? How about his awareness of social obligations to
complete strangers (you know, saving the lives of every Tom, Dick, and
Harry to come through the jungle)? How about picking the "right" side in
any local wars according to either general European values or British
national interests? And never violating certain ideas of fairness in a
fight?
For crying outloud, he never tries to groom Jane's hair and eat the lice!
This is because the author saw these as "natural" virtues, ones that
might be not be lived up to but which were an inevitable part of the
moral code (especially the lice). You might say you question certain
values--but there are certain core ones you won't think to question, the
ones you judge the others by.
Boy, I'm long winded. Sorry about that. And too abstract.
Hmm, I'd better make a B7 connection, quick. OK, here goes. When Dayna
first appeared, she was an obvious "natural" person of this type (despite
killer tendencies). She was uncorrupted until the twin serpents, Avon
and Servalan, showed up in her garden, leading to the deaths of her
family. Since a natural innocent wouldn't fit well in most B7 stories,
this was quickly lost.
Avon and Servalan, of course, represent the corrupt effects of society to
varying degrees. In fact, if I pushed this interpretation, I'd have to
say Avon represents the potentially good man twisted by corrupt (i.e.,
high tech) civilization. Servalan simply represents corrupt (i.e., high
fashion) civilization.
So maybe we should be glad this wasn't a theme in most B7 stories.
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: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 01:48:10 PST
From: "Rob Clother" <whitehorse_dream@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] dystopias/natural culture
Message-ID: <19991118094810.40715.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Fascinating post, Ellyne! Thanks.
-- Rob
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 02:15:01 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: Cally
Message-ID: <19991118101502.70432.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
benmtt@cwcom.net writes:
<Cally has never struck me as being given to sententious sneering
at the behaviour of others, rather she merely exercises her perfect
right to express an alternative viewpoint according to her own
specific (cultural?) beliefs.>
Ummm....that isn't my impression of that glower she gives Blake in
Breakdown (which is with Moloch the worst examples of her lazy
conscience). Here she is extremely holier-*and*-more-civilized-
than-thou ("among my people such things are considered
barbarous"), without making the slightest effort to come up with a
better solution to the minor matter of Gan possibly killing them.
<I don't think Cally's anywhere near as ignorant as you seem to
make out. Check out "Hostage" - she seems to suss out Avon's
guilty behaviour pretty fast.>
This scene in Children is clearly the first she's heard of this plan -
she didn't even know they were planning to go to Earth, let alone
that it was Avon's idea. And she doesn't ask any questions, doesn't
try to understand. It's immediate total unthinking condemnation
(like with Blake in Breakdown).
Hostage is a very different situation...she's studying Avon, trying to
work out what's going on in his mind. Trying to understand (see,
she can do it if she tries).
<I dare say that the loss of a colleague whom she has worked
alongside for a long period of time might have been a teensy
weensy bit traumatic. Gan's death certainly led Blake to
(temporarily) question his motivations, so why not Cally?>
In Trial she certainly questions their invulnerability, but not their
motives, and, as I said, she then doesn't appear to have a qualm in
her mind till that moment on the flight deck. Killer right through to
The Keeper...(with the exception of that one look both she and
Jenna give Blake in Gambit).
The problem with Star One, actually, is IMO that the writer needed
someone to do a dab of doubting, and they'd killed off the only
crew member who could do it with any credibility (Gan, evidence
being Shadow - another example of Cally's convenient conscience
there, BTW). And since Avon was already involved in a very
personal explosion, and neither Jenna nor Vila were really the type...
<Maybe Cally is a self-righteous, intolerant hypocrite, but to
quote the lady herself, "Nobody's perfect.">
Yes, but do remember <g> while I did lambast her for being self-
righteous and (along with just about everyone else) intolerant, I
only said she she slides perilously *close* to hypocrisy. She
doesn't quite get there (and I can forgive her quite a lot for Voice
From The Past. I really really would have liked to see more of the
Cally in Voice From The Past.)
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 02:20:05 PST
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Star One and after... (was: Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #320)
Message-ID: <19991118102009.75233.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
(See Steve, I'm being very obedient...)
<Probably the only way to justify the fight would have been to
introduce a new character to take Blake's place (e.g. make
Tarrant heir to Blake's ideals and personality, rather than just
heir to his hairstyle)>
<grin> then try to convince the audience that Avon would let
*again* let someone like that run his life, let alone *his* ship.
Mind you, I've thought once or twice that someone like Avalon (i e
a rebel totally *unlike* Blake) would have made quite quite an
interesting member of the Liberator crew (say in an AU story).
She *could* have brought Tarrant and Cally on side (and maybe
Dayna, thanks to her grief over her father and hatred of Servalan), pushing
them to keep up the fight, and she's pretty enough to
inspire Vila to want to please her, at least.
Making for a *really* fascinatingly ugly explosion from someone
who is decidedly possessive about the Liberator, is still
pretending he doesn't miss Fearless Leader and is not about to
let someone else into Blake's place for one second...
Also, after I wrote:
<oh dear, here I go again>
Kai also said:
<As I've only been on this list a couple of months, I am not
familiar with all the arguments presented before.>
Kai, I didn't mean that as a dig - I hope you didn't take it as
such? I was just warning those who *have* heard me on the subject
of 'Blake Was Right About Star One (and Avon Agreed)' that I was
unable to resist the impulse again (I do love this episode. I do
I do I *do* love this episode.)
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 10:22:56 +0000
From: Una McCormack <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] the Federation
Message-ID: <3833D380.31BC4E2F@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Judith Proctor wrote:
> PS. Fancy doing a panel at Redemption on comparative governments? Comparing
> different SF programmes and seeing what type of government control they exerted.
I think that's a cool idea for a panel.
Una
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 03:03:18 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Star One and after... (was: Re: blakes7-d Digest V99 #320)
Message-ID: <3833DCF5.9614160A@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sally Manton wrote:
> <Probably the only way to justify the fight would have been to
> introduce a new character to take Blake's place (e.g. make
> Tarrant heir to Blake's ideals and personality, rather than just
> heir to his hairstyle)>
>
> <grin> then try to convince the audience that Avon would let
> *again* let someone like that run his life, let alone *his* ship.
I agree he'd never put up with that; that would be muddling his
loyalties [something INTPs scrupulously avoid].
> Kai also said:
> <As I've only been on this list a couple of months, I am not
> familiar with all the arguments presented before.>
>
> Kai, I didn't mean that as a dig - I hope you didn't take it as
> such? I was just warning those who *have* heard me on the subject
> of 'Blake Was Right About Star One (and Avon Agreed)' that I was
> unable to resist the impulse again (I do love this episode. I do
> I do I *do* love this episode.)
Y'see, Kai, she has to be careful not to get me started on 'Blake
Was Wrong About Star One (and Avon Knew He Couldn't Stop
Blake, So He Wanted It Over With)'.
Hi Sally <wink>.
Mistral
--
"There's always an argument."--Avon
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 03:16:33 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Cally
Message-ID: <3833E010.34C3EA82@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sally Manton wrote:
> The problem with Star One, actually, is IMO that the writer needed
> someone to do a dab of doubting, and they'd killed off the only
> crew member who could do it with any credibility (Gan, evidence
> being Shadow - another example of Cally's convenient conscience
> there, BTW). And since Avon was already involved in a very
> personal explosion, and neither Jenna nor Vila were really the type...
I've always thought that she was beginning to see that Blake did
occasionally have the edge of fanatacism in him... but perhaps
it was just a manifestation of fear? Not of the plan, nor of the
rebellion, but of the 'plunge into infinity'. It's true that Cally was
already separated from her people, but mightn't the idea of
leaving the galaxy entirely strike directly at her subconscious
fear of being alone? (Granted, said fear is purely subjective on
my part, but I think it fits her background, experiences, and
personality.)
> (and I can forgive her quite a lot for Voice
> >From The Past. I really really would have liked to see more of the
> Cally in Voice From The Past.)
Eh? That's interesting. Exactly what is it you like about Cally
in Voice?
Cheers,
Mistral
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 03:41:29 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] dystopias/natural culture
Message-ID: <3833E5E9.C85E3330@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Oops! Didn't change the address first time, sorry Ellynne!
Ellynne wrote:
> In both these groups, a more stable and homogenous society also led to
> heavier pressure on individuals to conform, with sometimes terrible
> consequences for those who wouldn't or couldn't.
Do you mean heavier pressure to conform than nowadays? If
so, I'd have to disagree. It may be expressed more subtly, but
it's still quite vicious and destructive. I suspect, the closer to
societal 'norms' or 'ideals' one falls, the less one is aware of the
pressure of one's *own* society. The average medieval housewife
probably wasn't overly concerned about the plight of, say, lepers.
Part of the irony of B7, IMHO, is that the society Blake wants
to establish will eventually become just as oppressive to *some*
segments of the population as the Federation is. All societies
are. Even if you establish a society where the only rule is that
you can't impose your values on somebody else, you have to
impose *that* rule on the people who think they *should*
impose their values on others. As Aristotle said, democracy
inevitably ends in mob rule.
> Hmm, I'd better make a B7 connection, quick. OK, here goes. When Dayna
> first appeared, she was an obvious "natural" person of this type (despite
> killer tendencies). She was uncorrupted until the twin serpents, Avon
> and Servalan, showed up in her garden, leading to the deaths of her
> family. Since a natural innocent wouldn't fit well in most B7 stories,
> this was quickly lost.
As B7 connections go, not bad; however, I don't think you can call
Dayna's upbringing Edenic. Chel seems enough of a serpent to me.
Mistral
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 04:20:35 -0800
From: mistral@ptinet.net
To: B7 List <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Cally
Message-ID: <3833EF12.5847ABF9@ptinet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ben M. wrote:
> Sally wrote:
>
> >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).
>
> I think it's a bit more involved than that. Perhaps
> she wants to atone for her "failure" (surviving while
> her Saurian Major colleagues all died?), but most of
> all she wants to avoid dying "alone and silent". The
> desire for revenge may be a contributing factor but it
> isn't the beginning and end of her behaviour, in
> stark contrast to Avon's plain revenge for revenge's
> sake and self-deluded notion of himself as an "executioner"
> and self-appointed righter of wrongs in "Rumours".
<g>. It's interesting that you say Cally wants to atone for her
failure, but Avon just wants revenge? I'd say their motives
are very similar.
It's always been my thought that Avon was motivated by guilt,
and the subconscious thought process went something like:
Couldn't save Anna, Can't find Blake, Didn't even *avenge*
Anna.... In other words, it was the only constructive thing he
could do for the people he loved and lost. Survivor guilt, and
personal loyalty.
Cally could have easily been motivated by survivor guilt as well
as her cultural background.
They were both of them quite willing to suffer and die to achieve
their ends; the only differences are that Cally was deliberately
staging a *suicide*, and that her victims would be faceless
Federation employees (who may or may not have ever actually
harmed her comrades), whereas Avon knew who he wanted to
kill (who was actually a killer himself).
But for her to say that her attitude is acceptable and Avon's is
not is surely either 1) hypocrisy, 2) jealousy, 3) groupism, i.e.
saying that her comrades deserved to be avenged and Anna did
not, simply because there were more of them. Hmm. Now that
I look at this list, I don't think you can have 2) or 3) without 1).
If either of them was self-deluded, it was Cally.
Mistral
--
"Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo. So little time! So much to know!"
--Jeremy Hilary Boob, Ph.D.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 10:51:45 -0700
From: "Ellynne G." <rilliara@juno.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] dystopias/natural culture
Message-ID: <19991118.105147.9126.0.Rilliara@juno.com>
On Thu, 18 Nov 1999 03:41:29 -0800 mistral@ptinet.net writes:
>Ellynne wrote:
>
>Do you mean heavier pressure to conform than nowadays? If
>so, I'd have to disagree. It may be expressed more subtly, but
>it's still quite vicious and destructive. I suspect, the closer to
>societal 'norms' or 'ideals' one falls, the less one is aware of the
>pressure of one's *own* society. The average medieval housewife
>probably wasn't overly concerned about the plight of, say, lepers.
>
I'm going to partly agree, partly disagree. Basically, most things in
cultures come with pros and cons. A large support group can also be a
large group with with big clout to make you conform--the feeling of
obligation cuts both ways. So, say you lived in a small village a
thousand years ago where you knew your neighbors would help take care of
you if things went bad. That also meant they were very likely to put
heavy pressure on you--that you couldn't avoid and that you felt a much
larger obligation to listen to--if they thought you _weren't_ doing
enough to support yourself or your family.
But it could go beyond this. The guy nobody liked had a greater chance
of dying in those little squabbles with the neighboring tribe. The
people Mayans sacrificed hadn't been too well-like before being tossed in
the sinkhole. Small communities were more likely to lable an outcast
unfit and take their children. I came across a classic example a few
years back where a family was told their baby was stillborn only to find
out, fifty years later, the small town hospital he was born in stole
babies from 'unfit' parents (in their case, prominent members of wrong
religion and poor) to give out for adoption, and this was apparently done
with cooperation of various well-placed people in the community.
Now, this doesn't mean you won't still read about baby selling in the
news or that there haven't been cases in big cities. But, whenever I read
about something like this in a big city, it's either a directly criminal
enterprise (no tacit support from the powers that be) or there's a
greater sense of bureaucracy gone bad (innocent parents losing custody to
impersonal agencies that spend more time looking at the rules and
statistical averages than they do to the individuals they deal with). If
it moves against "those people" it will be with less a sense of personal
retaliation. Usually.
>> Hmm, I'd better make a B7 connection, quick.
Oops. Yes, I'd better do that again.
Anybody think Avon was adopted after being stolen from his real family
and fraternal twin, Blake? Or maybe he's Inga's brother?
When
>Dayna
>> first appeared, she was an obvious "natural" person of this type
>(despite
>> killer tendencies). She was uncorrupted until the twin serpents,
>Avon
>> and Servalan, showed up in her garden, leading to the deaths of her
>> family. Since a natural innocent wouldn't fit well in most B7
>stories,
>> this was quickly lost.
>
>As B7 connections go, not bad; however, I don't think you can call
>Dayna's upbringing Edenic. Chel seems enough of a serpent to me.
>
Agreed. I was trying to make fun of the "natural innocent" theme,
although (once I thought about it), I could see how it had some
connection with Dayna. However, just to push the argument, notice the
primitive barbarians only felt obligated to go around killing aliens once
there'd been a new infusion due to the war (perhaps their whole prophecy
was the result of reading 'Lord of the Flies' one time too often?).
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: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 08:45:28 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] the Federation
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-1118084528-965Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Wed 17 Nov, Andrew Ellis wrote:
> >You have got to be joking! Being a disaffected member of a Western democracy
> >is a whole different ball park.
> >
> >there were good people working for the Federation, but they didn't have
> >enough power to make a change. eg. Governor Le Grand.
>
>
> But when it is as bad as people seem to say on this list, even the army
> rebels.
Some officers initially refused to work with Travis, but seemed to bow down
under threats.
'Old Starkiller' seemed to be kept away from the centre, possibly becasuse a man
of his integrity might have been a possible coup leader.
A common historical tactic is to have men serving away from their native areas.
Lessens the chance of revolt.
Armies don't always revolt, or it doesn't always succeed. Look how long Stalin
remained in power. I regard him as being on a level with the Federation.
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: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 18:48:44 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Cally-related.
Message-ID: <000b01bf31f7$82fd8880$32428cd4@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Andrew wrote:
>>> As our current leader in the UK has stated, "The
>>> Establishment" has too much control here.
>
>>Una replied
>>As our current leader of the opposition in the UK replied: 'This is a man
>>educated at public school and Oxford with a majority of almost 200 in the
>>House of Commons. Who does he think *is* the Establishment?'
>
>Exactly. thanks for backing me up.
>
I wouldn't class Robin Blair and his Merry Munchkins as 'The Establishment'.
The Big
E's got far more sense than to pack out the House of Commons.
Oh, the paranoia...
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 19:40:04 -0000
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] the Federation
Message-ID: <000a01bf31f7$8184a420$32428cd4@default>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Andrew wrote:
>Massacring whole populations. Are you sure they (Victorians) would not have
>done it if there were not other empires to keep them in check ?
Fairly sure, yes.
>Threatening
>populations with death by far superior weaponry ? I think they did that.
Really? Where and when?
The British Empires, like all the European empires of the 18th/19th
centuries, was founded on the principle of expanding trade and promoting
profit. Beyond that simple, if not crass, motive, there was no other
ideological imperative. Certainly there was racism and western supremacist
arrogance, as well as a hefty dose of blinkered idiocy (as at, for example,
Amritsar), but the Europeans did not set out to destroy foreign cultures
simply for being foreign. (Counter-examples may be cited but they represent
the exception rather than the norm, such as Sir Garnet Wolsey's Ashante
campaign of 1873.) Certainly they used superior weaponry - they couldn't
have carved out those empires without them. The 'evil' of the Victorian-era
empires lay not in the brutalisation of the colonised peoples, but in their
exploitation - of their labour, their land, and their natural resources.
(And it's still going on - how else do you think your grocery bill's so
low?)
Compare the European imperial mode with that of the Spanish in South and
Central America two hundred years earlier. Whole civilisations were
systematically dismantled in the name of self-righteous Christian
superiority. Cities and temples were levelled, the people effectively
enslaved, entire tribes exterminated. The closest European parallel would
appear to be in the late 1930s/early 40s, when another ideologically-driven
regime deployed an excess of might to prevent its right being called into
question. Though a little skirmish in the Balkans earlier this year runs a
close second.
Neil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 19:45:41 -0000
From: "Una McCormack" <una@q-research.connectfree.co.uk>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Cally-related.
Message-ID: <0fb501bf31fd$8fedb370$0d01a8c0@hedge>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Neil wrote:
> Andrew wrote:
> >>> As our current leader in the UK has stated, "The
> >>> Establishment" has too much control here.
> >
> >>Una replied
> >>As our current leader of the opposition in the UK replied: 'This is a
man
> >>educated at public school and Oxford with a majority of almost 200 in
the
> >>House of Commons. Who does he think *is* the Establishment?'
> >
> >Exactly. thanks for backing me up.
> >
> I wouldn't class Robin Blair and his Merry Munchkins as 'The
Establishment'.
I refer the right honourable gentleman to the answer I gave previously...
> The Big E's got far more sense than to pack out the House of Commons.
Well, they won't be packing out the Lords anymore, will they?
Una
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 21:57:28 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
cc: Freedom City <freedom-city@blakes-7.org>
Subject: [B7L] Paul Darrow at Cult TV
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-1118215728-9eeRr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Cult TV have confirmed that for the first time ever, they have broken their 'no
repeating of main guests' rule. Who was the gentleman who was so popular that
they decided to ask him back next year?
Paul Darrow.
The venue is Pontins, Barton Hall, Torquay. The date is 27/30 October 2000.
The web site is www.culttv.net or you can contact them by e-mail at
culttvuk@geocities.com
It's going to be a tough weekend for fans. Paul Darrow and Stephen Greiff
(and Patrick McGoohan) at Cult TV and Gareth Thomas at Bats.
Cult TV is a long weekend break - there are no day memberships. Thus, doing a
day at both conventions is probably out of the question - not that I'd really
recommend that in any case. Cult TV is a good weekend quite apart from Paul
being there.
There's a report from the last Cult TV con on my web site - look under
'conventions'.
Bats' web site is www.burble.com/bats2000 or e-mail bats2000@burble.com
I still don't know which one I'm going to. I'm rather hoping that either Paul
or Gareth will get conflicting work and solve the problem for me! Otherwise it
will probably be Bats by a whisker - solely because I can't quite resist the
chance of seeing Gareth again.
Judith
PS. Quibell Abduction and Rites of Passage are now listed on the web site.
--
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: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 17:50:26 EST
From: Tigerm1019@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Reserved materials
Message-ID: <0.64acf6eb.2565dcb2@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 11/17/1999 7:22:42 AM Pacific Standard Time,
susan.moore@uni.edu writes:
> Ob B7 ref.: Which of our heroes would actually read the materials the
> professors put on reserve?
I think Dayna would, assuming the subject interested her. Soolin would
probably only do so if it were critical to passing the class. Tarrant would
read the materials because he would want to do well in the class. Vila would
blow it off and try to cheat off Tarrant's papers. Travis would likely
incinerate the materials and the professor with them. <g>
Tiger M
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 23:04:07 -0700
From: "Ellynne G." <rilliara@juno.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] dystopias/natural culture
Message-ID: <19991118.230411.10014.1.Rilliara@juno.com>
I looked at my previous, bloated post on this and decided to cut it down
to size.
On Thu, 18 Nov 1999 10:51:45 -0700 "Ellynne G." <rilliara@juno.com>
writes:
>
>On Thu, 18 Nov 1999 03:41:29 -0800 mistral@ptinet.net writes:
>>Ellynne wrote:
>>
>>Do you mean heavier pressure to conform than nowadays? If
>>so, I'd have to disagree. It may be expressed more subtly, but
>>it's still quite vicious and destructive. I suspect, the closer to
>>societal 'norms' or 'ideals' one falls, the less one is aware of the
>>pressure of one's *own* society. The average medieval housewife
>>probably wasn't overly concerned about the plight of, say, lepers.
>>
THe idea is that being in a small group with limited or no interaction
with others creates certain pressures.
Imagine being trapped with a small group such as, oh, lets say, the B7
crew in an area the size of the Liberator flight deck for, say, three
months with no place to retreat and no showers. Let's also say what
little food you have stinks (literally and figuratively). There are no
books, no view screens, nothing except the same old stories and jokes
from Vila over and over and over again. Imagine what Avon's temper in
particular is like at this point.
So, is there a lot of pressure to conform your behavior to others
expectations? Especially if Avon's armed? And your only alternative is
to leave for some place where your survival chances are worse?
Well, the dark ages weren't usually that dark, even in winter when you
did a lot of your living inside a one room hut with a large group of
people (and possibly animals) none of whom possessed antipersperant or a
toothbrush, but it wasn't a picnic by any stretch of the imagination.
On the other hand, they say our society is more stressful. Scary, isn't
it?
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.
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #323
**************************************