From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se Subject: blakes7-d Digest V99 #35 X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume99/35 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 35 Today's Topics: Re: [B7L] Relationships [B7L] Trolling, trolling, trolling..... Re: [B7L] Relationships (was Morrigan) Re:[B7L] bringing up children Re:[B7L]Stupesud Re: [B7L] sloganeering Re:[B7L]Social engineering [B7L] Redempton and Wales Re: [B7L] Renaissance [B7L] zine flyers Re: [B7L] Social engineering Re: [B7L] sloganeering Re: [B7L] Re: African explorers Re: [B7L] Renaissance Re: [B7L] B7 characters and dustbin lids Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7 Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7 Re: [B7L] Social engineering [B7L] This will be fun-- Blake's 7 and Discworld! Re: [B7L] Call to Arms! Re: [B7L] This will be fun-- Blake's 7 and Discworld! Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7 Re: [B7L] Re: African explorers Re: [B7L] Power - on topic ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:30:29 +1000 From: vera@c031.aone.net.au To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Relationships Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19990118233029.00861c80@mail01.mel.aone.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Of the men, the only one I'd want as a friend is Vila - can't have too many clever drinking companions! Pat Patera wrote: >Jenna: Don't expect dinner and dishes from her! And you'd better not >have a possessive bone in your body. Way impressive at a retro party if you had Jenna by your side. Sheer thinking woman's cheesecake, great hair and lots of cleavage. >Cally: I'd get bored with her real quick. And you'd better not try to >hide any secret affairs! Ah yes, but think of all the candlelit dinners and walks on the beach you'd get. Just joshing. Cally has a purpose and a longing for what she's lost. She wouldn't be a comfortable person to know closely. >Dayna: Baby dyke. Butch baby dyke. Hubba. >Soolin: <snip> >time, in the end, you would probably wind up a victim of domestic >violence. I wonder if Soolin is too pragmatic for that now. She did violent revenge. No, I think she'd just leave. With all the money. >Servalan: hahahahahahahahaha. You'd be dead in a week. (But *what* a >week!) Not if you made yourself useful, I'm sure. <g> And how pleasant it could be, being useful... to Servalan. >Tyce Sarkoff is not a main character, but would make the best spouse >material: steady, strong, practical, beautiful, loyal to family, well >connected. And stands to inherit a bundle! The only Martha in a show full of Marys? Have I got that the right way round? Malissa ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:48:55 +0100 From: "Nelly Meijerink" <nmeyrink@bart.nl> To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: [B7L] Trolling, trolling, trolling..... Message-Id: <199901181348.OAA09972@Njord.bart.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well, like most sensible people on this lyst, I thought it best to stay out of this *discussion* (like I stay out of most everything that's being said here, in accordance with my *natural* state of lurker) but after reading this morning's posts I finally got so angry and upset that I nearly decided to unsub from the lyst <sigh>. Fortunately I had to go to my Mondaymorning yoga lesson, and it is remarkable how 2 hours of yoga can 'clear ze mind and revitalize ze body'. I'm in perfect balance again :))))) Now, on to what SupeStud00@aol.com threw up: > I haven't been impolite to any member of this list, Yes you have. > man or woman and I intend to continue to respect all posters' opinions. You haven't yet shown any respect at all. > I haven't ridiculed any individual and have no plans to. You have done nothing else but ridicule the whole of humanity so far. > I also don't use profanity, in either my personal or public life. Interesting...... (?) > I do have very strong opinions in many areas, one of which is the gender > role issue in society. It seems that anyone with a strong opposing opinion > on this list is seen as automatically sarcastic or someone not to be trusted. Nope, that's not true at all. > I have given you no reason to not trust me. Plenty, plenty, plenty of reason! > I have been honest from the first post, You have been blatantly blunt, disrespectful, hurtful and galling and that has absolutely nothing to do with honesty. > or perhaps you prefer someone who smiles at you > and then stabs you in the back as soon as you turn your back. Nope, I prefer to stay out of the way of people carrying knives. > All future posts, should I be allowed to post here in the future, will be B7 > related by me. Well thank goodness, for none of them have been up till now.... You've only used Blake's 7 as a vehicle to ventilate your opinions on the *gender role issue*. If you're so desperate for people to know them, go to the Spin list will you please? > If you guys continue to choose to insult someone because you don't > understand them, You're as clear as crystal to me. Neanderthalers are not hard to fathom. > that's fine, do so, but do it in private. You haven't done that yourself, have you? > If you wish to insult me, my email address is open, No, no wish to at all. > but I come here because I'm a B7 fan, and there are so few of us Oooops, sorry ??? There are thousands of us mate, we're all over the place! > that I welcomed the chance to consort with other likeminded individuals Forget the *likeminded*! > at least likeminded in their appreciation of B7. Appreciation of Blake's 7 yes, not of your obtrusive posts. > I don't think its fair to the others here for you, or anyone else, to continue > to hurl insults. You should have thought of that before you started insulting people yourself. I guess you're well aware by now that you have kicked a lot of people in the shins and created a stinking atmosphere here. > If you wish to discuss this further, you know how to reach me... No, thanks, I've said what I wanted to say, and prefer to say it on the lyst. Nelly "shit is shit, whatever way you look at it" Meijerink ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 'One thing is for sure, a sheep is not a creature of the air' ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 05:48:50 PST From: "Rob Clother" <whitehorse_dream@hotmail.com> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Relationships (was Morrigan) Message-ID: <19990118134850.14063.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Avona/Pat: >> Blake is too patricarchal. He may not be sexist; he bosses everyone >> equally. But he bosses. > >Right. Not Blake, but because he's an emotional mess. I haven't the >patience for reconstructive hand holding. There's a difference between having a traumatic history and being an emotional mess. As Judith pointed out, though he's been to Hell and back, Blake has been forced to face the darker side of reality, and the darker side of his own nature. He's come out of it with a degree of maturity and self-sufficiency that Avon, for example, clearly lacks. I can't really see where reconstructive hand-holding would come into it. >> Avon-- I fear not. I like being needed. He doesn't need anyone, or >>likes to act like he doesn't. "Likes to act like he doesn't" is more accurate. He needed Blake desperately in "Terminal" and "Blake"; in "Rumours", he needed what he couldn't have -- Anna -- and so set out to claim the next best thing, which was vengeance. >What do the men think of the Blake's 7 gals? > >Jenna: Don't expect dinner and dishes from her! And you'd better not >have a possessive bone in your body. Don't expect anything interesting to come out of her mouth, either. She was good at witty put-downs -- I'll give her that -- but I find it very difficult to be attracted to someone with an almost permanent scowl on their face -- someone who seems to be saying, "Look at me I'm the most serious person in the World I've got an O level in geography." Bad chemistry, I suppose. >Cally: I'd get bored with her real quick. And you'd better not try to >hide any secret affairs! Again, are we talking about Cally 1 or Cally 2 here? Cally 1 really does seem quite fun, if a tad dangerous. >Dayna: As with Vila, I'd dearly want her for a friend. We would have >such fun hunting Sarrans in the hills! But not for a spouse: she'd be >off with the first truck driver who offered a new adventure. Technically skilled, but lacking a certain intellectual curiosity, I think. Oddly, she seems to be one of the most supportive of the group. I'm impressed by the fact, in "Blake", that while she's getting at Vila, she is attending to his injury. Soolin wouldn't have made the time or the effort. There are numerous other examples in the series where she was the first one to offer support where it was needed. Good quality for a parent, that. >Soolin: Oddly, I think she'd be a good spouse: dependable, >even-tempered, lucrative employability skills (personal bodyguard to >some rich bloke), intelligence, looks to die for. Oh, go on. Twist my arm. :-) >Servalan: hahahahahahahahaha. You'd be dead in a week. (But *what* a >week!) Do you know, I think I'd take that risk. It'd be well worth it in my book. >Tyce Sarkoff is not a main character, but would make the best spouse >material: steady, strong, practical, beautiful, loyal to family, well >connected. And stands to inherit a bundle! Yes, but how often would I have to go round and see her loopy old man? -- Rob ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:35:05 -0000 From: "Julie Horner" <julie.horner@lincolnsoftware.com> To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re:[B7L] bringing up children Message-ID: <01be42ef$bdb2ef30$170201c0@pc23.Fishnet> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ann said, >>Avon: forget it. He wouldn't know one end of a child from the other. >Don't be so sure. Leave it with him for a few hours and it would leave him in no doubt of the correct orientation. Rob suggested Servalan would make a good parent. I agree with that for when the child gets to an age of reason, i.e. with an older child, but I would have thought her style would be to leave the offspring entirely in the care of trained child minders or some such until it was about eleven or twelve. Obviously she would delegate the messy bits and the tedious day to day bits (and who can blame her) but I can't even see her taking very much interest in its development much before adolescence. Suppose the unfortunate toddler was brought out for inspection every week or so - like the Victorian upper classes viewed their offspring. She would be bored rigid by childishly lisped versions of "Twinkle, twinkle little star" and I can imagine her being a bit waspish about the unidentifiable sticky bits that transferred themselves to her gown after the obligatory hug with Mama. Consequently by the time she did want to take an active interest in the upbringing of young Servie, she might have lost the chance to have any useful rapport. At least, I imagine that is how it works - I haven't really got to the role model bit yet as I am still stuck at the peering anxiously at interesting stains stage. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 18:11:28 -0000 From: "Julie Horner" <julie.horner@lincolnsoftware.com> To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re:[B7L]Stupesud Message-ID: <01be430d$f7dbb700$170201c0@pc23.Fishnet> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Supestud said: >Well, there can be no healthy debate with this attitude.....I welcome debate >and discussion with anyone who wishes to disagree with me and can defend their >position. And I am grateful for being allowed to post to the list. You mean those posts were meant to be taken SERIOUSLY? Honestly, until now I had assumed that these views were done tongue in cheek to deliberately wind up anyone on the list prepared to rise to the bait - and that list members responding to them were being a bit over sensitive. But now you say you really, truly meant all that stuff...... Maybe I have been lucky but the only person I have ever known who seriously held views comparable with yours was born in about 1920, led a very sheltered life and had never read anything other than "The Daily Telegraph" and "Black Beauty" (No I don't know why Black Beauty). Julie Horner ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 08:16:01 +0000 From: Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] sloganeering Message-ID: <nn3dvJAB3uo2Ewn7@jajones.demon.co.uk> In message <19990118053306.21949.qmail@hotmail.com>, Joanne MacQueen <j_macqueen@hotmail.com> writes >>Which naturally, leads me to: >>Avon: the other white meat >>Pat P > ><choke> You comparing him to pork? > Hacing a truly filthy mind, there is only one way I can interpret you choking on Avon pork... -- Julia Jones "That's why I have my techie-sex-slave who supplies me with lots of hardware." Sylvia Spruck Wrigley, demon.local ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 18:28:22 -0000 From: "Julie Horner" <julie.horner@lincolnsoftware.com> To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re:[B7L]Social engineering Message-ID: <01be4310$547082f0$170201c0@pc23.Fishnet> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sarah T said >The small hint that occurs, I think, in the canon is when Bayban makes a >remark about Blake, something to the effect that "I was on the wanted list >before he crawled out of his creche." If we assume that Bayban didn't >actually know anything about Blake's personal history and was just assuming >the most likely sort of background for him, and that "creche" in context >means something like child-care center, that does rather suggest that a >communal arrangement was standard. >People in B7 do still know who their parents and siblings are; presumably >they would visit them at holidays. I would imagine the "creche" as being >something like a boarding school, but starting at birth, I think you are probably reading a bit much in to the word creche. Lots of people put their kids in a creche while they are at work but still pick them up every night and in no sense "board" them out in this sense. I think these days it is usually called day care but maybe in 1980-ish when this episode was written the term creche was more common. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:10:32 +0100 (BST) From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk> To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se> cc: Space City <Space-city@world.std.com> Subject: [B7L] Redempton and Wales Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0118111032-bbaRr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Enough people expressed an interest in going to Wales after Redemption to make it worth doing, so here's the basic details. Monday night is Guards Guards in Swansea. Tickets 14.50 pounds. Accomodation 18.50 for an en suite single (other options available - contact Judith for details). We'll be at the ael-y-bryn geusthouse. phone 01792 466707 (You can either book youself in or get me to do it for you if you live overseas) Tuesday night is Hosts of Rebecca in Cardiff. Tickets are 16 pounds. Accomodation single en suite 25 pounds (other options are available) We're staying at Preste Gaarden hotel phone 01222 374805 (again, I'm happy to do the booking for overseas fans) (cheaper tickets are available in both cases, but I assumed people would want good seats if they're travelling that far) (I've gone for lower priced accomodation a bit out of the city centre as it makes a massive saving in the overnight price and it's walkable if you're keen, or a taxi fare is only about 2 pounds) There are rail and coach services to Swansea and connections between Swansea and Cardiff. I'll be looking into the possibility of car shares, but as we'll all be going different ways home afterwards, there's not much point in me organising group transport. Please contact me to reserve your theatre ticket. I've booked seats in a block. Judith -- http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention 26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 08:23:26 +0100 (BST) From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk> To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: [B7L] Renaissance Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0118072326-0b0Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII On Sun 17 Jan, Lisa Williams wrote: > Judith Proctor wrote: > > >Avon is Leonardo da Vinci and Vila is a pupil of Leonardo's. > > Salai, I assume? > > (Quote from one of Leonardo's notebooks: "Salai steals money.") Correct! I didn't name him because I wasn't sure people would recognise the name, but I obviously underestimated kowledge of the period. He's given a different name, but he was indeed based on Salai. Judith -- http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention 26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 18:20:05 +0100 (BST) From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk> To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se> cc: Space City <Space-city@world.std.com> Subject: [B7L] zine flyers Message-ID: <Marcel-1.46-0118172005-480Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII I'll be printing two new zines fairly soon. If anyone wants to send me paper copies of their zine flyers, I'll pop them in the back. (has to be a paper copy - I can't take Word files) Judith -- http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7 Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention 26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption/ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:26:32 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net> To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: [B7L] Social engineering Message-ID: <01d501be433c$45838ae0$fd1cac3e@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Ah, someone needs to do an actual count of how many women there were in >positions of power (and how many men, to get the ratio). I remember reading >(a long time ago) that people tend to overestimate the numbers of women in a >group. That is, if, say, 35% of a group is female, people tend to perceive >it as 50%. I'm not saying that this is what's actually contributing to our >different impressions, just that it's a possibility. I'm not going to conduct any actual counts, but I think Ian's right, we perceive women as being more significantly represented than they actually are. If we take just politicos, then we have Servalan and LeGrand (two women) compared to Rontane, Bercol, Joban, Practor, Chesku and a male pre-War president (Avon used the male pronoun in Shadow) - six men. Of course such a small sample can hardly be considered representative, just tentatively indicative. >Also, I see the Federation as a very militaristic society (Parr's remark in >Trial that Space Command runs the Federation.) Apart from Servalan and >Thania, the only women in the military that I can recall were all mutoids. >If being in the military is an important avenue for power, the lack of women >in the military does make it more difficult for women in general to achieve >power. Neil ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:41:53 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net> To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: [B7L] sloganeering Message-ID: <01d601be433c$46561d20$fd1cac3e@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Malissa asked: >Speaking of which - do you lads not like our Avon? Or have no reasons to >like him? Or are bored with talking about him? (Oh, say it ain't so!) Or >are tentative about professing an opinion? Friend? Hero? Idiot? >Inspiration? Strong or merely brittle? I tend to stay out of character-oriented discussions because they have a habit of being directionless. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with this communal pooling of impressions and reflections, but it rarely seems to reach any definite conclusions, or even defined areas of disagreement. It also lacks the theoretical basis that my structurally-oriented mind prefers, but I guess that's just my loss. So I'd rather sit back and let those who enjoy it have their fun, and have mine in my own way. Neil the Patronising Slug ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:42:25 -0000 From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net> To: "lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: African explorers Message-ID: <01d701be433c$470d3820$fd1cac3e@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Edith Spencer wrote: > At first I was kinda worried about ya, Neil; after all, the freedom >the explorers experienced was that of not being in their own society. >The varied Arabian and africans society had their own rules; they<Burton >et al> just were not aware of them. > But then Neil showed he was on the game: Oi! I'm not that strapped for cash... The freedom the explorers felt was a freedom from a rigid, binding, all-pervading social infrastructure that was becoming increasingly bureaucratised and codified. Certainly the African societies had rules, social structures, codes of behaviour etc, and the explorers were not entirely unaware of them. But with such a low level of technological development and so much of the land in a natural state (virgin forest/scrub etc), the Europeans could do largely as they pleased. They could bag game with impunity, for example, without having to join a gentleman's club, curry favour with estate owners, follow dress codes, exhibit their flair for pointless small talk over sherry etc. The African people were part and parcel of the Dark Continent, another obstacle to negotiate, another hazard to risk. Although the explorers frequently had to submit to the rule of the various chiefs (paying tribute for passage, enduring protracted periods of enforced 'hospitality' etc), they did not live as Africans in the same way an African of the time visiting Europe would have to live as a European. To requote: >they<Burton et al> just were not aware of them. Burton, for all his faults (blatant racism among them), was a dedicated anthropologist, ethnologist and linguist, who at least took the trouble to understand the people he travelled among (even if he did allow his findings to endorse his theories of white supremacism). He was, after all, the man who successfully passed himself off as a Muslim to visit Mecca. He once had to forcibly dissuade the far less sensitive Speke (the Unspekeable) from killing a pig for dinner, so as not to alienate the expedition's Muslim porters. I know this is all a bit removed from B7, but science fiction is by nature explorative. I think there are some comparisons to be drawn between the attitudes and behaviour of the European explorers and the way exploration of the galaxy is presented in SF. The recurrence of (technologically) primitive tribal societies is one such aspect - B7 gives us the Cephlonians, Goths, Sarrans and Hommiks, for example, and none of them are accorded much in the way of respect by the scripts. The noble civilised space-farers exercise a self-appointed mandate to trample all over them, and still be the good guys. (But when ultra-developed aliens come and do it to _us_, they somehow seem to end up as the bad guys. Funny, that.) Neil ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:17:59 PST From: "Joanne MacQueen" <j_macqueen@hotmail.com> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Renaissance Message-ID: <19990119001800.4058.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Judith said: >It's an alternative universe story written by Diane Holland. The >characters are cast into historical roles in Renaissance Italy. Blake is >cast as Machiavelli (note that a lot of Machiavelli's bad reputation >was created by his enemies). Reminds me of "Pasquale's Angel". Blake would've got on quite well with the Machiavelli depicted in that book - both are determined to investigate to find the truth behind the smokescreens of the State. >Avon is Leonardo da Vinci and Vila is a pupil of Leonardo's. But any comparison falls over now - the da Vinci of MacAuley's novel would be Ensor, and I can't see Vila being interested in being anyone's catamite, forgetting slash for the moment. Avon would be an artificer, if I'm being honest and not succumbing to the temptation to make him one of the artists - he might possibly enjoy the lifestyle of the book's Michaelangelo or Raphael, or maybe he'd just enjoy the money! Dayna would be the Amerindian girl Pasquale fancies. Given Pasquale's youth, he'd have to be Tarrant (that'll please Carol - equating him with the young and handsome hero of the story), but a spacecraft pilot and a young man who dreams of painting an angel, and has only got as far as the wings, compare only vaguely at best. There are plenty of candidates for comparison to Servalan, and if I had the book with me, I'd be able to choose the most likely. >It's like no other Blake's 7 story I've ever read. It sounds really good, certainly. I'll have to add it to the list of things I want, although when I'll get around to buying them, I've no idea. Regards Joanne (this is so much more interesting than indexing charts of compensation awarded in torts cases) ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 01:11:46 +0000 From: Richard Watts <Richard.Watts@cl.cam.ac.uk> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] B7 characters and dustbin lids Message-Id: <E102Phq-0004Dm-00@canada.cl.cam.ac.uk> On Fri 15 January 1999, Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net> wrote: [snip] >Tarrant, would, I think, quite likely make a good father. This does NOT >mean I am joining the Tarrant Nostra. Yes, but on the other hand, he'd only bring up lots of little Tarrants, and there there'd be nothing for it but the flamethrower... Richard. [ Murphy's laws of combat #<somethingorother>: Never share a foxhole with anyone braver than you are ] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 01:47:03 +0000 From: Richard Watts <Richard.Watts@cl.cam.ac.uk> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7 Message-Id: <E102QFz-0004EH-00@canada.cl.cam.ac.uk> On Mon 18 January 1999, Pat Patera <pussnboots@geocities.com> wrote: >Richard Watts wrote: > >> Well, judging by the subject matter, endless plot repetition, and >> prose style, I'm afraid you may be right :-). >I assume you are referring to SuperSuds here. Nope: to John Norman being God, actually :-). The more I think about it, the more parallels I see between the Gor books (or, the ones I've read, anyway) and the Bible. I think I shall stop thinking about this. I think I shall stop thinking about this _now_. [snip] >level of intelligence. But, being a pop psychology hobbyist, I am >endlessly fascinated by people of all types. I expect few have troubled >to read the aol. profile SS offered: Are AOL profiles available to the Big Bad World ? (his post implied they weren't, but I must admit I haven't looked..). > it says he's 30 years old, >studmuffin, etc., hahahahaha typical macho profile commonly made up by a >14 year old boy. And, can't you tell by the often disjointed writing >style that SS is a kid, playing comic book hero? Aren't you amused? Yup :-), though I think his USENET postings are far more amusing - look his email address up on Dejanews sometime :-). [snip] >corner bar, but then, pre-internet, we didn't have the chance. Can't you >just see young Vila engaging in just such hijinks? Actually, no: I don't think it's really Vila's scene. Avon, perhaps (but then, if it were Avon, I would no longer have an internet connection with which to make this accusation :-)). >As far as the >fixiation on mothers staying home, perhaps he was abandoned young. I >consider this an insight into a unique person who is differnt from me. I agree. Much as his opinions appear to be flamebait, he does actually seem to be genuine, so he's either playing a _very_ obtuse practical joke, or he's for real. In either case, I don't think he deserves some of the abuse he's been getting (as opposed to his arguments, which richly deserve it because, quite frankly, they're crap). [snip] >> ><< To achieve their dream society, they not only have to >> > ensure that all mothers stay at home with the kids, they have to ensure >> > that poor nurturers don't breed at all >As birth control becomes more widely available, the poor nurturers (like >me) should have already bred themselves out of society by that time (I >have). But if your theory is correct, this should've happened hundreds (thousands ?) of years ago. I suspect non-nurturingness is a naturally arising phenomenon: it may even be an adaptation to cope with your siblings having large numbers of children (ie. the maternality gene is either full-off or full-on, ensuring that there are enough single women to take care of the children borne by the women who have astronomical numbers of kids), in which case it'll only breed out where the number of children per woman is strictly controlled. I wonder what happens in China ? OTOH, there is a simple mouse gene for nurturing, so I wonder if there's a simple human gene for it ? [I've snipped the bits I agree with :-)] My own solution to this whole tangled problem is to teach: you don't get to see the little brats (erm, lovable darlings, sorry) until they're 18, the admissions process weeds out the no-hopers, and you get shot of the ones that made it past admissions after a year or three :-). Oh, and then you can recruit them to help you break the federation banking system.... Richard. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 01:58:25 +0000 From: Richard Watts <Richard.Watts@cl.cam.ac.uk> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7 Message-Id: <E102QQz-0004EO-00@canada.cl.cam.ac.uk> On Sun 17 January 1999, SupeStud00@aol.com <SupeStud00@aol.com> wrote: >In a message dated 1/17/99 1:01:24 PM EST, Richard.Watts@cl.cam.ac.uk writes: > [snip] > >Make them nurturing through some unknown process or eliminate them....the > >Federation appears to be quite capable of both....brainwashing and > >ruthlessness. > ><< I think we're descending into the realms of `there's no evidence for > this in the series at all,>> > >I never proposed there was, I was simply suggesting the Feds are capable. >And, there's actually not much evidence against it. We don't find out many >detils about the fedeartion along the course of the series. True, but if they were doing nasty things to women's fertility, I would've expected some of the female rebels to be rather strongly opposed to it (though there is of course the counterargument that they couldn't be too strongly opposed at 7pm on a Monday). [snip] ><< I'm still not sure the Federation would get away with it though - > historically, tamper with practically anything else, and you'll get > little resistance. Tamper with someone's family, and they'll happily > charge a combat-ready mechanized infantry division armed only with a > small fruit knife.>> > >They did get away with drugging entire populations. `practically anything'. Modern Governments get away with drugging entire populations (Florine, Chlorine, vitamin additives in bread). [snip] > << Anyway, if the Federation has eliminated all dysfunctional families, > how do you explain practically all the characters in B7 ? > > >Good question. They were all crminals. Perhaps there are some forms of >genetic tampering that the Federation hasn't perfected? You can say that again :-)). Recall, for example, that Blake's alleged crime in The Way Back wasn't considered sufficiently out of the ordinary for there to be a major outcry about it. [snip] >We only saw the Federation through the crew's eyes. We don't really know if >there was civil unrest among the general population. It could go either way. True. Again, I'd've expected Blake to have enthused about it rather more if there had been (and for Sarkoff to have been more militant). I think we may have to agree to differ, since I can't think of any rational reason why you should agree with me :-(. > << If they were messing about with people's families in a general way > (rather than as experiments on specific worlds, and in fact even then), > I would expect someone to have mentioned it. >> > >You have a good point, but lets just go on speculation for the sake of the >argument. OK. It certainly sounds like a good basis for fanfic (indeed, I believe it has been in the past for general SF, multiple times...). > >Thanks for the discussion and for not resdorting to name calling. You're welcome :-). Thanks for the response :-). > What did >you think of my analysis of "Power"? I more or less agree with Louise, though I think Avon probably did get rather more satisfaction from shooting Pella than he would from shooting (eg.) one of the Homiks (sp?). Then again, this may well have been simply because Pella presented an intellectual challenge, which Avon was rather proud to have seen off, rather than a purely physical one which he never seemed to have much time for (hence, presumably, his attraction to Servalan). Then again, Avon is a terribly good approximation to a lump of Sopron, especially for CompScis .. :-). Richard. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 19:57:39 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net> To: B7 <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: Re: [B7L] Social engineering Message-ID: <36A3F4A4.28A3@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Iain Coleman wrote: > > On Sun, 17 Jan 1999, Taina Nieminen wrote: > > > I've always thought that the Federation was a very patriarchal society, in > > which it was difficult, but not impossible, for women to achieve positions > > of high power. The only powerful women who come to mind right now are > > Servalan, and Governor Le Grand in Voice from the Past. > > I always had the opposite impression. There are a fair few women in > positions of power and responsibility, and no-one ever remarks upon the > fact. This implies that it is an accepted fact of life. (I'm ignoring > Jarvik, just because.) Funny how we managed to get such different > impressions from the same series. > > Iain > My impression is somewhere in between-- like modern society. Women can rise without any sort of formal opposition to their ambition. However, most women are content to 'fit in' and 'get along', as opposed to competing. Like it was accepted that the Liberator was Blake's ship, because he saved the other two first-boarders from the security device. But Jenna could have said. "Excuse me, I was the one the ship bonded with, and I'm the one who's had plenty of deep space experience. I'll make the decisions, you Earth-lubbers." She didn't. Maybe it's her idealism, wanting to join Blake, but don't we think there's a little social assumption that the man leads? Of course, she might just have decided she doesn't want Avon to targer _her_ as the person to take the ship from. --Avona ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:00:32 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net> To: B7 <blakes7@lysator.liu.se> Subject: [B7L] This will be fun-- Blake's 7 and Discworld! Message-ID: <36A40360.690B@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I was thinking about this. Paul Darrow, or course, has played Avon and Captain Vimes. But if Avon was a Discworld charaacter, I would see him as one of the young theoretical wizards who work with dangerous, reality-altering theories. ORAC has a bit in common with the Librarian (don't call him a computer; he's a brain. Don't call the Librarian a monkey, he's an oragantang.) But to me, ORAC as most like the Luggage. A box with exraordinary powers and a lousy attitde. Blake is a bit Captain Vimes-ish; neither trusted governmental power too much, if I recall Vimes well. But he also is like Carrot, because everyone wants to follow him. My husband suggested Cally's counterpart would be Magrat. agree. She seems all mild, 'but sometimes, when cornered, a small furry animal turns out to be a mongoose'. Vila would be one of Nanny Ogg's brood. Drinks scrumpie, steals things, and talks dirty. Travis might be Nanny's cat, Greebo. Only interested in things if he can eat them, have sex with them, or attack them. And in human form, the swagger. Any other analogies people might think of? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:09:14 -0700 From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Call to Arms! Message-ID: <36A4056B.9F6@jps.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Pat Patera wrote: > DELTAS OF THE WORLD UNITE! > Throw off your soma sleep and stampede through the domes! > Stand and sass Supreme Commander Servalan! > Shout: we're not going to take it anymore! > We want equal rights to work in politics, work in the military, work in > ... > > -- er, on second thought, we want another shot of soma, eh? > > Pat P Well, better than wading in blood up to your armpits. To blazes with relying on people. I'll show Blake. I'll invent a gadget that does revolutions. --Avona ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:41:56 PST From: "Penny Dreadful" <pdreadful@hotmail.com> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] This will be fun-- Blake's 7 and Discworld! Message-ID: <19990119054157.24973.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Avona averred: >But to me, ORAC as most like the Luggage. A box with exraordinary powers >and a lousy attitde. Perfect! >Vila would be one of Nanny Ogg's brood. I have always seen Rincewind as Vila. And vice versa. >Travis might be Nanny's cat, Greebo. Only interested in things if he can >eat them, have sex with them, or attack them. Travis didn't actually seem much interested in eating things or having sex with them. Servalan would make a more fitting Greebo. Also I always picture Brian Blessed in the role of Ridcully. -- Penny "The Andromedan Can Never Be Buggered At All" Dreadful ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 20:55:27 -0800 From: Pat Patera <pussnboots@geocities.com> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] The Woman in B7 Message-ID: <36A4103F.1A90@geocities.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Richard Watts wrote: > Are AOL profiles available to the Big Bad World ? (his post implied > they weren't, but I must admit I haven't looked..). I don't know: an aol friend read me the profile poor nurturers: > >should have already bred themselves out of society by that time > But if your theory is correct, this should've happened hundreds > (thousands ?) of years ago. No - I said post birth control. Before the pill and tubal ligation, a woman had to hold a knife between her knees for a good 30 years to avoid pregnancy: desired or not. > I wonder what happens in China ? A society where men outnumber women 3:1. It will be interesting to watch how the loose males cope. Probably violently *sigh* > OTOH, there is a simple mouse gene for nurturing, so I wonder if > there's a simple human gene for it ? A simple single gene? That's pretty scary: now I can envision a future where designer genes are common and "baby makers" are genetically engineered to "like" doing the work of bearing and raising multitudes of babies! Going full circle back to the original post that began all this bruhaha: that the Federation would require women to devote themselves to nurturing children who would grow up to be peaceable citizens: How would the Federation re engineer society to preclude the occurance of another cataclysm? Considering that we hear of the service grades, who seem totally docile; and that we hear of the military grades, who seem to have overly healthy libidos (Travis, Jarvik, even Parr) and that the Beta grade in Weapon seemed like a runaway truck and so went haywire and bonkers, as if he were suffering testosterone poisoning, I postulate: The Federation would induce a testosterone blocking agent into men (not needed for women who already have extremely low levels of this hormone, explaining why men brawl, box and war while women don't) to curb violent and war like tendencies. Only fighters being bred (and then carefully conditioned and controlled for obedience, like Parr) for the military would be allowed to develop any. Now: best of all: this explains the total lack of male interest in sex on the Liberator and Scorpio! It explains poor Jenna and Cally, quietly lusting after Blake and Avon - who remain: oblivious *sigh* Vila, of course, who has a healthy sex drive, obviously gets his testosterone on the black market. oh! so *that's* what's in the soma he's always guzzling! It explains Dayna having to tell Tarrant: "C'mon kiss me! I can't be all that repulsive!" It explains Soolin not having to shoot the boy. Pat P ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:01:56 -0800 From: Pat Patera <pussnboots@geocities.com> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: African explorers Message-ID: <36A411C4.1564@geocities.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Neil Faulkner wrote: > Goths, Sarrans and Hommiks, for example, and none of them are accorded much > in the way of respect by the scripts. The noble civilised space-farers > exercise a self-appointed mandate to trample all over them, and still be the > good guys. Dayna hunting Sarrans is a great analogy to the colonists hunting tigers in Africa. Just assumed it was their right. And how could the primitves protest? Spears against elephant guns? No contest! We never get to see Dayna hunting Hommiks on Xenon Base, but I have this vision of her doing so. She would no doubt do it on the sly, rather like poaching, as she'd know that Avon would not approve of her making the natives restless. Perhaps that is why Gunther's widow vows to move the whole tribe away? Well! She could hardly state the real reason now, could she? That the men were all scared of a <choke, sputter> grrrrrl??? > (But when ultra-developed aliens come and do it to _us_, they > somehow seem to end up as the bad guys. Funny, that.) I dread the day aliens find our broadcast signals and come to colonize us! Pat P ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 00:50:42 EST From: SupeStud00@aol.com To: alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk, blakes7@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: [B7L] Power - on topic Message-ID: <e7e689ab.36a41d32@aol.com> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/18/99 5:22:52 PM EST, alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk writes: << It seems that 'Power' does a similar thing. It is a male fantasy that women would be so horny that they would put up with living with that big ginger oaf (whatever his name is) and getting beaten up and losing their technology, just for the chance of having sex. I imagine a certain kind of man seeing just this much desperation for sex in himself, and then sort of projecting this desperation onto the women he desires.>> I think its a good argument.....and I think many people, whether they admit it or not, make sacrifices for sex to different degrees, as it is necessary and vital to human fulfillment. I think the women, and men, in Power, were faced with the drastic circumstance of seeing their race die out, and so, sex became even more important for them. I have even read arguments that the women in power are to be admired because the make the supreme sacrifice of their freedom, so that the enitre race can go forward and thrive. <<There is one aspect of 'Power' though that I really really hate. It just pushes my most vulnerable button. That is when we find out that the men are killing all the little girls as soon as they are born. I just can't bear casual references to violence against children.>> I didn't like this element of the story either. I think it ties into the social engineering discussion in that illustrates that a race need not be advanced 9as with the Federation) to dabble in it. << And somehow the fact that this killing is incorporated into a sexual fantasy just makes it seem so unpleasant.>> I didn't see it as being incorporated into a sexual fantsay.....please explain further. << I don't mind men fantasising that women would give up everything for sex. But the thought of Ben Steed (or anyone else) fantasising that women would allow their daughters to be killed, just for the chance of getting laid. Yuck. It really makes the episode unwatchable for me. >> I saw them as allowing their daughters to be killed for the betterment of the entire species....perhaps they knew there was no other option in dealing with the men. I feel the women in this episode have the right idea....subservience, etc, but the men are not acting responsibly in honoring the sacrifice made by the women. As a result, they will fail. In order for the idea to work, both sexes have to pull their weight. -------------------------------- End of blakes7-d Digest V99 Issue #35 *************************************