From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V98 #187
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume98/187
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 187
Today's Topics:
Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Re: [B7L] US spelling
Re: [B7L] Drugging to Control Behaviour
Re: [B7L] US spelling
Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Re: [B7L] Drugging to Control Behaviour
[B7L] US spelling
Re: [B7L] Drugging to Control Behaviour
[B7L] Re US health care (was flag waving)
RE: [B7L] Happy endings
RE: [B7L] A query or two
Re: [B7L] Happy endings
[B7L] Re: Happy Endings
Re: [B7L] US spelling
Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Re: [B7L] US spelling
Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Re: [B7L] Blake (was Flag waving)
RE: [B7L] Happy endings
Re: [B7L] Re: Happy Endings
Re: [B7L] A query or two
[B7L] Re: Drugging to Control Behaviour
Re: [B7L] Blake (was Flag waving)
Re: [B7L] Re US health care (was flag waving)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 08:18:34 -0500 (CDT)
From: Tegan <tegan@goddess.coe.missouri.edu>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.980708080456.21200A-100000@goddess.coe.missouri.edu>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Wed, 8 Jul 1998 AChevron@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 98-07-08 04:48:15 EDT, you write:
>
> << Well we may be in a minority Amanda but I too prefer at
> least hopeful endings >>
>
> I like happy endings myself, but in the B7 world they are often hard to
> imagine. There is a certain perverse pleasure in watching Avon et al suffer,
> but it's with the expectation that no matter how hard they get hit or knocked
> down, they will get back up.(Geez, sounds like a Rocky movie).
I prefer realistic endings. There is nothing I hate more than to have an
ending where a deus ex machina saves every one from utter despair and
they're left all snuggly in their beds. That's why I like Blake's 7. It's
a wonderfully refreshing change from the happily ever after junk I see
almost everytime I turn around, on tv, in the movies, in books. Ugh.
> This thread has me wondering. How many people think that our heroes
> "really" died on GP, even if that's not the ending you would have wanted? How
> many believe they all lived? That might determine if the "happy ending" folks
> are really in the minority. D. Rose
Yeah, I think they all died. I think it was supposed to be a season
cliffhanger, but I'm pretty sure if there was a 5th season I'd be
complaining about what plot device they use to pull in another season.
Realism's my friend...
tegan (*)
tegan@goddess.coe.missouri.edu
http://goddess.coe.missouri.edu/~tegan
"Well, there's just no delicate way to say this. I want your body."
"What! Are you out of your mind?"
"Heh, that's a very funny question to ask a telepath,.. since we spend
so much of our time in other peoples' minds. I don't want it now,
Lyta, just when you are not.. using it anymore, after.. your passing."
- Bester and Lyta Alexander, Moments of Transition
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 14:59:10 +0100
From: "Heather Smith" <Heather.Smith@btinternet.com>
To: <blake7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] US spelling
Message-ID: <001e01bdaa78$9597e880$a83463c3@smith99>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Susan wrote:
>Excuse me? How would you define the role of the letter Y in these words:
>
>lymph nymph syzygy
>
>More to the point, if the Y's aren't the vowels in those words, which
>letter is?
We were always taught that Y is not a 'proper' vowel, but will do with
strange words descended from another language, i.e. Latin, Greek, etc. Out
of a matter of interest, what the Hell does 'syzygy' mean?
Heather.
'There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish'
-The fourth Doctor
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GIT/L/P/O d--? s-():(+) a--- C++(+++)>$ US@ P L E--- W++>+++
N++ !o K w+(---) O@ M- V PS+>$ PE Y+>++ PGP-- t-- 5+ X-(+) R(-)* tv
b++++ DI+ D++ G++>+++ e->+++++ h++ r? x-
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 07:24:11 PDT
From: "Don Trower" <gammablue@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Drugging to Control Behaviour
Message-ID: <19980708142411.24302.qmail@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
One of my sister's is like this, does coffee mornings, talks about
nothing but "child's" school progress. Stepford no question.
I see from my TV guide that Lost in Space is due to be shown on Friday
PM BBC2 19:00 ish slot.
Don.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 09:25:01 -0500 (CDT)
From: Tegan <tegan@goddess.coe.missouri.edu>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] US spelling
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.980708092247.21615B-100000@goddess.coe.missouri.edu>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Wed, 8 Jul 1998, Heather Smith wrote:
> Out of a matter of interest, what the Hell does 'syzygy' mean?
According to Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary:
"the nearly straight-line configuration of three celestial bodies (as in
the sun, moon, and earth during a solar or lunar eclipse) in a
gravitational system." *breathe* :)
tegan (*)
tegan@goddess.coe.missouri.edu
http://goddess.coe.missouri.edu/~tegan
"Well, there's just no delicate way to say this. I want your body."
"What! Are you out of your mind?"
"Heh, that's a very funny question to ask a telepath,.. since we spend
so much of our time in other peoples' minds. I don't want it now,
Lyta, just when you are not.. using it anymore, after.. your passing."
- Bester and Lyta Alexander, Moments of Transition
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 10:43:11 -0500
From: "Reuben Herfindahl" <reuben@reuben.net>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Message-ID: <00ab01bdaa87$1cd6ada0$660114ac@misnt>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
-----Original Message-----
From: Iain Coleman <ijc@mail.nerc-bas.ac.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Date: Wednesday, July 08, 1998 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: [B7L] Happy endings
>
>
>On Wed, 8 Jul 1998 AChevron@aol.com wrote:
>
>> This thread has me wondering. How many people think that our heroes
>> "really" died on GP, even if that's not the ending you would have wanted?
How
>> many believe they all lived? That might determine if the "happy ending"
folks
>> are really in the minority. D. Rose
>>
I wish I could believe otherwise, but they are all dead. Especially Blake.
There was blood.
Well, I should amend that Orac is still alive, and presumably taking the
place of Star One, all by himself.
Boy, that depressed my day.
Reuben
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 21:44:35 +1000
From: "Afenech" <Fenech@onaustralia.com.au>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Message-Id: <11525067551005@domain2.bigpond.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> In a message dated 98-07-08 04:48:15 EDT, you write:
>
> << Well we may be in a minority Amanda but I too prefer
at
> least hopeful endings >>
> This thread has me wondering. How many people think
that our heroes
> "really" died on GP, even if that's not the ending you
would have wanted? How
> many believe they all lived? That might determine if the
"happy ending" folks
> are really in the minority. D. Rose
They live.
Pat Fenech
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 14:13:16 +0100
From: "Alison Page" <alison@alisonpage.demon.co.uk>
To: "Lysator" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Drugging to Control Behaviour
Message-Id: <E0ytu38-0002dH-00@post.mail.demon.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Susan Beth
> Frankly, I don't understand why doing an
> excellent job at THOSE jobs should get a woman sneered at as a "Stepford
> wife" while doing an excellent job at any other job gets respect.
Perhaps my post didn't make it clear enough. I'm not criticizing what
anybody does with their life. You may not know Susan-Beth but I am a mum
with young kids and I do all the things you describe so I'm hardly likely
to be sneering at it.
I'm pointing out that large numbers of women
are drugged all day, every day. Which makes me wonder how happy they
really are. I also think it explain some of the affectless-ness which I see
about me.
It also makes me wonder what would happen to society if the drugs were
taken away.
The point was to relate current life to life in 'The Federation' where
people are drugged to make them fit into lives which would otherwise make
them unhappy. The implication being that we are half way there already.
And I'm pretty sure that figures are available about the number of women
who are on permanent psychoactive medication, and there are really a very
large number. However I don't have the stats to hand.
I must also make clear (if perhaps it isn't already) that I'm not talking
about medication for the x% of people who have some kind of chemical
imbalance which would need correcting no matter what their lives were like.
Taking whatever pills in this context is of course as sensible as taking
insulin if you are diabetic. I assume anyway.
Phew.. hope this has made what I saying even more obvious. I thought it was
unambiguous to start with.
Alison
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 12:40:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Claudia Marie <cmarie@tiac.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] US spelling
Message-Id: <199807081640.MAA05932@shell1.tiac.net>
"amanda" <amanda-robertson@lineone.net> wrote:
: all this talk of the forth of July and flag waving got me talking to a
: teacher I know I the USA and she informed me that Y is a vowel now I
: know its a long time since I was in school but I am sure its still only
: AEIOU that are vowels so is this just in the States that they use Y as a
: vowel.
Not that this has anything to do with Blake's 7 ;-) but it's
"a, e, i, o, u, and sometimes y". That's because there are times when
y is the vowel core of a syllable (like in the word sYllable, or rhYthm,
or earlY). Sometimes I've heard, aeiou, sometimes y or w, but as far
as I know w only acts as a vowel in Welsh loanwords (cwm is a handy
crossword-puzzler's example)--far more rarely than y.
"Play"--we don't consider "y" a vowel there.
"Fly"--we do consider it a vowel there.
Claudia
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 18:11:48 +0100 (BST)
From: Iain Coleman <ijc@mail.nerc-bas.ac.uk>
To: Lysator <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Drugging to Control Behaviour
Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.96.980708175936.5999D-100000@bsauasc>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Wed, 8 Jul 1998, Alison Page wrote:
>
> I'm pointing out that large numbers of women
> are drugged all day, every day. Which makes me wonder how happy they
> really are. I also think it explain some of the affectless-ness which I see
> about me.
>
> It also makes me wonder what would happen to society if the drugs were
> taken away.
But which drugs? I certainly couldn't contemplate a working day (or any
day) without caffeine, and in the unlikely event of alcohol prohibition in
this country, you'll see me on the first plane to Ireland.
I'm not disagreeing with what you say, but sometimes we do need to attend
to the beams in our own eyes. There are many rather artificial
distinctions in our society about how different drugs are perceived. If I
took speed to perk me up at work, that would be a serious no-no, and coke
would be right out even if I could afford it (unless I changed jobs to one
of those flash City firms where it's de rigeur). Similarly, your "Stepford
Wives" can acceptably take pharmaceutical tranquilisers, but if they drank
instead they might well be regarded less favourably, and I'm sure they'd
be ostracised if they admitted to using heroin.
Very few people live drug-free lives, and I suspect it has always been
thus.
Iain
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 18:12:37 +0100 GMT
From: STEVE.ROGERSON@MCR1.poptel.org.uk
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re US health care (was flag waving)
Message-Id: <79891532MCR1@MCR1.poptel.org.uk>
Taina Nieminen wrote: "And never mind how many health
problems people cause for themselves, my understanding of the
American system is that if a person is injured in an accident, or
something, and they don't have health insurance, hospitals
won't treat them. If I'm wrong, please tell me so. I would very
much like to be wrong about that."
And Susan Beth replied: "It undoubtedly varies from state to
state, but I'd be very surprised if that "let them die on the
sidewalks" attitude was the rule anywhere."
By an amazing coincidence I was a lecture in London today
given by a woman from Chicago in which she said, though it
does vary from state to state, the number of cases where
hospitals refuse to treat people because they have not got
insurance is growing. And a lot of insurance is far from
comprehensive. She quoted the case of a man in hospital
suffering from cancer. His insurance ran out after a year and he
was thrown out of the hospital.
Not related to health insurance, she also told of the case of a
young boy who was shot in the street in Chicago. His friends
carried him to the hospital but, because they were young boys,
could not get up the ramp to the hospital door. Hospital
managers stood just inside the door watching them, but would
not help. It was half an hour before an ambulance crew arrived
to take him the last 30 metres. He died.
cheers
Steve Rogerson
Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention
26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent
http://www.smof.com/redemption/
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy
and taste good with ketchup
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 18:14:03 +-200
From: Jacqueline Thijsen <jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl>
To: "blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] Happy endings
Message-Id: <01BDAA9C.3103E1C0@cmg71700449>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
-----Original Message-----
From: Reuben Herfindahl [SMTP:reuben@reuben.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 1998 5:43 PM
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Happy endings
-----Original Message-----
From: Iain Coleman <ijc@mail.nerc-bas.ac.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Date: Wednesday, July 08, 1998 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: [B7L] Happy endings
>
>
>On Wed, 8 Jul 1998 AChevron@aol.com wrote:
>
>> This thread has me wondering. How many people think that our heroes
>> "really" died on GP, even if that's not the ending you would have wanted?
How
>> many believe they all lived? That might determine if the "happy ending"
folks
>> are really in the minority. D. Rose
>>
> I wish I could believe otherwise, but they are all dead. Especially Blake.
There was blood.
[Jacqueline Thijsen] I agree about Blake being dead, but mostly because Avon shot him at close range. And let's face it: Avon is always very efficient, no matter how upset he is.
As for the rest of them, I just don't know. I would say that if a fifth season had come along, some of them would have turned up wounded in some prison hospital. The rest would have been dead.
> Well, I should amend that Orac is still alive, and presumably taking the
place of Star One, all by himself.
Boy, that depressed my day.
Reuben
[Jacqueline Thijsen] I was really depressed right after watching "Blake" (about 12 years ago now). I didn't know it was the last episode, so for a while I was waiting for the next one, hoping it would show something like the above scenario, with most of them still alive. And then I became even more depressed when I found out that that episode wasn't made.
And now I'm depressed all over again :(.
Jacqueline
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 17:47:41 +-200
From: Jacqueline Thijsen <jacqueline.thijsen@cmg.nl>
To: "blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] A query or two
Message-Id: <01BDAA98.846B0900@cmg71700449>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On Tue, 7 Jul 1998, Joanne MacQueen wrote:
>
> This made me wonder. It's more than possible that this has been
> discussed before (I may not have been paying due care and attention),
> but what sort of constitution do you think the Federation has? If it has
> one at all, of course. It could be that the Federation grew out of a
> declaration of martial law that was never revoked, a situation that
> suited both civil and military authorities. Thoughts, anyone?
Iain Coleman answered:
I don't think so, for various reasons, but especially the bit at the start
of "Trial":
<snip>
Now, if the Federation were under martial law it would be obvious that the
military were running the show, and Par wouldn't have to explain it to his
colleague. Furthermore, the trappings of civilian constitutional law are
clearly still in place, and the Federation citizens still generally
believe they work.
The Federation appears to hve an independent judiciary, a constitution
that allows political disputes to be resolved by peaceful means, a
military which is accountable to the civilian authorities and for all we
know democratic elections. Doesn't do much good, though, does it? My, what
a cheery thought.
[Jacqueline Thijsen] I believe so, too. In the episode "The way back", the authorities went to some lengths to make it appear as if Blake had a fair trial, for charges that would be handled by a civilian court even under martial law. If there hadn't been something like a seemingly independent judiciary, they wouldn't have needed to do that. Of course, "The way back" also shows exactly how independent said judiciary system is.
> One important distinction between the Federation and our respective legal
systems is that we never see a trial by jury. However, Travis's trial is a
court martial, and perhaps the right to trial by jury has only been
revoked in certain sensitive cases, including child abuse.
[Jacqueline Thijsen] It is also possible that the federation came out of a political system that never had trial by jury. We don't have it in Holland and I don't think anyone here misses it. So, no trial by jury doesn't really say anything about the fairness of the trials, as long as the judges are independent.
Jacqueline
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 12:52:06 -0700
From: Catharine Roussel <croussel@telusplanet.net>
To: Lysator B7 list <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Message-ID: <35A3CDE5.53D0@telusplanet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Pat Fenech wrote:
> Amanda wrote:
>> is it just me or do people prefer happy endings or do
>> people prefer all the ones where every one dies or suffers
>> terribly.
>
> Well we may be in a minority Amanda but I too prefer at
> least hopeful endings -smile- I don't want them to suffer
> any more terribly than they have and definitely don't want
> them dead.
I certainly agree that most of the time I don't want to see them dead,
although Suzan Lovett's 'Circle of Fire' is an excellent story and one
of my favourite exceptions to this statement.
In my case, I don't think that it matters so much if the ending is
happy, sad or ambiguous. The important thing for me is that by the end
of the story there has been a significant development in the characters
from where the story started. This can be a development in how the
characters perceive themselves, how they perceive the world, how they
relate to each other, how they cope with stress or how they deal with
their own limitations.
The thing that I find objectionable about some happy endings is that in
the end, everything is back the way things were before the story began.
The characters have been put through the wringer physically and/or
emothionally, and yet by the end of the ordeal, nothing has changed.
The characters cannot remain unaffected by the terrible situations that
they run into in the Blake's 7 universe. They either have to change and
adapt or discover that they are incapable of flexibility. Either way,
the audience/reader learns something significant about the characters
involved. If the events of a story fail to affect the characters, they
become like comic book cutout characters (and I think I'm now being
uncharitable to comic books)--inhuman and, difficult or impossible to
realate to.
One of the things that I dearly love about the B7 characters, the thing
that has held my attention so long, is that they are very human. They
are not perfect people, and in each of them I can see various aspects of
myself: the good, the bad and the ugly. Whether the ending is happy or
not, the humanity of these characters must be preserved and growth and
change are a necessary part of the process.
If I really had to choose, I think that I prefer ambiguous
endings--happy in the sense that the characters are alive in the end,
but they are not unscarred and given the choice, the characters would
have wished the outcome to have been different. 'Terminal' is a good
example of this type of story.
Anyway, that's my 2 cents worth for now.
Cheers,
Catharine
--
Catharine Roussel croussel@telusplanet.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 15:09:45 -0400
From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com>
To: "INTERNET:blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Re: Happy Endings
Message-ID: <199807081510_MC2-528E-AD46@compuserve.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Amanda wrote:
>is it just me or do people prefer happy endings or do
>people prefer all the ones where every one dies or suffers
>terribly.
I sometimes like happy endings that take me by surprise, like, er,
(SPOILER!)
Catch 22, or the Fortunes of War Trilogy, perhaps. Or endings which are
left open for the reader to decide (I love Pynchon's Crying of Lot 49
because the balance of probabilities at the end is so perfect I have no
idea which will turn out to be true).
In Blake's 7, I like endings where there is a 99 per cent chance of
disaster, but one time in a hundred they might get through.
Maybe, as I prefer happy endings not to be signalled in advance, it's the
build-up to a tragic ending that I enjoy as much as the ending itself.
Harriet
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 19:24:57 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] US spelling
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.42-0708182457-9eeRr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Wed 08 Jul, amanda wrote:
> back to Blakes 7 I have been of work for the last 3 weeks and it has given me
> time to watch some Blakes 7 again, after watching Gambit it remained me why I
> loved the Avon/v illa by play the look of little boys caught is just wonderful
> at the end,this is proba bly why I love the zines like jabberwocky where
> things work out well for our heroes.
> is it just me or do people prefer happy endings or do people prefer all the
> ones where every one dies or suffers terribly.
I tend to love the bleak gloomy ones. But even I like a happy ending at least
part of the time. All gloom would be no fun at all. Jabberwocky is a little
too happy for my tastes unless I really need picking up, but the main reason I
publish it is because I know not everyone has the same taste in stories as
myself.
There are several happy ending stories among my favourites, especially Mindfire
and The Last best Hope.
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: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 19:31:59 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.42-0708183159-ab5Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Wed 08 Jul, AChevron@aol.com wrote:
> I like happy endings myself, but in the B7 world they are often hard to
> imagine. There is a certain perverse pleasure in watching Avon et al suffer,
> but it's with the expectation that no matter how hard they get hit or knocked
> down, they will get back up.(Geez, sounds like a Rocky movie).
> This thread has me wondering. How many people think that our heroes
> "really" died on GP, even if that's not the ending you would have wanted? How
> many believe they all lived? That might determine if the "happy ending" folks
> are really in the minority. D. Rose
I firmly believe that they all died in the last episode, but I never let that
distract me when writing. If I only wrote about what I believed, I'd soon run
very short of material. <evil grin>
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: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 06:37:55 +1000
From: vera@c031.aone.net.au
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] US spelling
Message-Id: <3.0.1.16.19980709063755.0e8f9828@mail01.mel.aone.net.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 12:40 8/07/98 -0400, Claudia Marie wrote:
>"Play"--we don't consider "y" a vowel there.
>"Fly"--we do consider it a vowel there.
A vowel's a sound made with no stoppage or friction of the breath, which is
what Claudia just said. If you say "play" you can feel your tongue move up
to stop the word (I'm so technical) but you can say "fly" till you run out
of breath to say it with.
And this is a B7 debate - well, in the same way we could ask: Blake -
terrorist or freedom fighter? or Avon - mad as a loon or just having a
really bad hair day?
Happy endings? Love 'em. But I think they died on Gauda Prime. I'm willing
to entertain alternative views, however.
Malissa
(in a truly frivolous mood this morning)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 22:25:08 +0100 (BST)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.42-0708212508-b49Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Wed 08 Jul, Catharine Roussel wrote:
> In my case, I don't think that it matters so much if the ending is
> happy, sad or ambiguous. The important thing for me is that by the end
> of the story there has been a significant development in the characters
> from where the story started. This can be a development in how the
> characters perceive themselves, how they perceive the world, how they
> relate to each other, how they cope with stress or how they deal with
> their own limitations.
Yes! I think you've hit a major nail on the head there.
Perhaps for myself, it isn't so much that I like tragedy as that I like change
and growth. I don't like to know in advance how a story is going to end either.
Suzan Lovett is wonderful there. You simply do not know how they are going to
end. Some happy ending stories signal the ending from the first page. But then
some readers prefer it that way. I'm sure we all know at least one person who
reads the last page of a book first so that they'll know how it ends before
theyread it.
I also think it's one of the reasons why the series works so well. The
characters changed in response to events. Blake grew more fanatic as he failed
to do serious damage to the Federation. Avon changed as he lost Blake, then
Cally and had to cope with Anna's betrayal. Vila changed after Orbit. his
reaction to Avon was never the same again.
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: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 18:25:11 -0400
From: DJ Wight <Angnak@compuserve.com>
To: "INTERNET:blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Happy endings
Message-ID: <199807081825_MC2-5293-11C6@compuserve.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
D. Rose wrote,
> How many people think that our heroes "really" died
> on GP, even if that's not the ending you would have wanted?
> How many believe they all lived? That might determine
> if the "happy ending" folks are really in the minority.
I'd say Blake died---but in the absence of anyone persuading
me either that he *couldn't* have survived long enough for a trauma
team following the invading troops to get to him, or that no such
team could have the technology or sophistication to deal with his
injuries, I'm willing to stop short of certainty on it.
I'd make good odds on Dayna perishing as well, as the only
one of the party shot by Arlen rather than the invading troops.
Betting that Blake had any kind of 'no kills' policy, or only
issued his recruits with weapons capable of being set for
stun would be an incredible stretch.
For the rest of the group I'd call it 'really' 50/50, insufficient data.
If the troopers had their rifles set to stun (not impossible, if
the powers offstage were hot for the idea of pulling in Blake
alive) they should all survive---with the possible exception
of Avon. In the absence of anyone persuading me *he* couldn't
simply absorb too many stun blasts from surviving troopers, not
to be killed whether that was intended or not, I'd make him a
candidate for the trauma team as well...*did*, actually, in my
own PGP fiction. Or they could all have been toast.
In short, either denial is wonderful, or it's all a matter of how one
cuts one's assumptions. Put me down for the 'want happy
endings' group, on the understanding that in the B7 universe,
'happy' = they survive, more often than not.
--DJ
angnak@compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 18:25:07 -0400
From: DJ Wight <Angnak@compuserve.com>
To: "INTERNET:blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Blake (was Flag waving)
Message-ID: <199807081825_MC2-5293-11C4@compuserve.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Responding to my wondering about the effects of memory
erasure and reprogramming on Blake's perspective, Judith writes,
> It could have made a lot of difference. Before the mind-wipe
> I assume that Blake was motivated solely by abstract idealism.
I also tend to do this, without being able to say quite why.
> He saw a world in which people were drugged, programmed
> into mutoids, indoctrinated, 're-educated' and given no
> control over their own lives. I see him as one of the better off
> people, those who probably had some freedom and autonomy
> over their lives. It seems to make sense that jobs that needed
> the capability of original thought would be done by people
> who were not subject to the drugs. <snipping for brevity>
>As one of the better-off, I see Blake's motives as altruistic.
>He had more to lose, and in fact, he did lose it.
As Vila says: "Look, he was an Alpha grade on Earth. A highly
privileged group, the Alphas." I think this *is* largely where my
sense of his original commitment to resistance as more likely to
have been philosophically motivated, grounded in altruism and an
intellectual understanding of political ideals, rather than a matter of
immediate, gut-level outrage, comes from. It’s either that or his
awareness of history, driving the impression.
What I find hardest, when it comes to getting any good sense of
Blake's character beyond the narrowest interpretation of the
moment is, for me, the impossibility of opening any question about
who he is and was, without immediately opening an infinite set of
questions about the society and personal experience which created
him...most of which seem mostly unanswerable. Things like just
how explicitly repressive the Federation was. To what extent did it
rely on naked oppression as opposed to more subtle promotions of
apathy? How successfully did it justify its explicit restrictions in
terms of the entire society being on a war or post-war survival
footing? Its apparent militarization---how evident was that to most
citizens? What illusions of freedom and democracy were fostered? I
find it so interesting, in The Way Back , how intent Ven Glynd
and company are on having all appear to be above-board in their
handling of Blake’s case. Their concerns are framed in terms of a
dissatisfied population and growing numbers of dissidents.
Evidently control is not entirely---perhaps not even primarily---a
matter of brute force, here. I immediately wonder if the regime has
preserved some illusion of a more or less free news media, or,
thinking of its sponsorship of the Terra Nostra as legitimized
crime, perhaps tame activists. Perhaps that's what Foster meant
about there being many activist groups, and Blake's the only one
that really meant anything. So how much of the worst of
Federation abuses were common or even uncommon knowledge?
How much of it did Blake know? What knowledge, what personal
or witnessed experiences, moved him from being whoever he was
to begin with, to leading a resistance group in the first place?
> After the mindwipe, he had many motivations. <snipping
> again to condense> They'd tampered with his mind
>(remember that there were still remnants of that Federation
>conditioning at the end of the second season) and taken his
>memory of who and what he was.
Exactly! For me this adds the nightmare of sorting out how
far his memory might still have been blocked at any point, and
how he might have been experiencing that. It raises questions of
the extent to which his persona ended up being a patchwork of
real and implanted memories, and whether or not he ever
recovered enough of his true self, or achieved a coherent enough
patchwork, to feel he was 'all there'. Given the comfortable, pulled-
together strength of the character we see, it would be easy to say
'oh, no problem, sure he did!' and I won't say I really believe he
didn't...but the longer I look at it, the bigger an open question it
seems. I can't help thinking (leaving aside all the real-world reasons
why the character couldn't be either crazier or a more focused and
effective rebel than he was) it might be as sound a reading to say
that he only functioned as well as he did---only presented as
unbalanced/possessed/berserk/mad, when he could feel he was
approaching the immediate power to take down the Federation
with one last strike---because the circumstances in which he
found himself were relatively safe and simple. From the security
of the fastest and most powerful ship in the galaxy, with only a small
group of conveniently fractious (distracting) people to contain,
can we fairly call the challenges he had to face---had to, rather
than being able to choose or refuse them---anything like as
overwhelming as those he'd have faced if he were still trying to
organize a mass rebellion on the ground anywhere? One could
argue his seeming lack of focus and strategic thinking as giving
away the failure of the situation to challenge him either into a more
effective recovery, or---for me, more likely---complete
disintegration. But then I wonder if the doubts he expresses in
"Blake" aren't partly signs of his persona disintegrating. Perhaps of
other, darker experiences opening up other aspects of his past and
revealing him to himself as other than he and we have believed.
>Yet even before he fully regained his memory, the urge to
>fight back was there. It was fuelled by the sight of the
>massacre of the rebels in the underground tunnels and by the
>fact that his trial was a sham. Hitting out at injustice was
>almost hard-wired into Blake.
Useful, IMO, in that it allows us to be reasonably certain of that
being part of him as he 'really' was. Establishes a strong, innately
decent base line.
>So, a mixture of motivations. I think he was driven harder
>afterwards because of the personal element. It drove him to
>become more fanatic. Remember his comment when he burst
>into Central Control. 'I've done it!' At that moment it
>was a personal vendetta.
It's that personal element I find most convincing, the man acting
out of a blazing personal need to strike back at his oppressor.
Could be because I somehow see that as lessening his
real effectiveness as a revolutionary, that I tend to assume it
was less of a factor the first time around.
>yet there were many times when he was capable of seeing he
>larger picture. At Star One he was able to set aside his
>personal hatred of the Federation because he recognised that
>the Andromedans presented a threat to all humanity.
I loathe the Andromedans as a mythic absurdity, but Blake's
deducing their presence and reacting as he does is one of his finer
moments.
>Many people initially see Avon as the more complex character
>because he's dark and broody, but Blake's motivations and
>feelings are complex, not least because of the mixture of
>personal and idealistic motivation.
Avon's easier to deal with, but by no means more complex. *Lord,
no....* I find it's easier to follow what's happening with him, he has
the advantage of starting as such a closed character, motives so
narrowly defined and so much to suggest him a relatively immature
and unsophisticated creature, that there's only one direction his
story can run---towards his growing up and suffering the
consequences. That and the fact that to the extent he's a mess, he
appears to be his own mess the way most of us are. One simply
doesn't have to deal with his having had the extraordinary help
Blake's had. Or to put it another way, imagining him whole and
complete, I get the image of (at best or worst, I'm not sure which )
an 18 to 20 year old kid, an off the scale introverted nerd of
dubious upbringing. Imagining Blake the same way, I get a tough,
humane, mature, well adjusted, well educated and highly intelligent
30 year old, a force to be reckoned with on all levels. Not as noisy
or obvious, and one doesn't need an advanced course in
porcupine-cuddling to survive him, but a whole different *order* of
complexity.
> PS. Blake's complexity is perhaps best demonstrated by the
> fact that many fan writers take him to one extreme or the
> other. He is portrayed as a saint who could not hurt a fly, or
> an extremeist who dices with the lives of his followers with
> no care for them at all.
Works for me.
*sigh* shutting up now, folks, forgive ramble
--DJ
angnak@compserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 17:52:33 -0500 (CDT)
From: Ray Kaplan <rckaplan@agamemnon.ai.uiuc.edu>
To: Blakes7 List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] Happy endings
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980708142037.29582A-100000@agamemnon.ai.uiuc.edu>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Wed, 8 Jul 1998, Jacqueline Thijsen wrote:
>>> This thread has me wondering. How many people think that our heroes
>>> "really" died on GP, even if that's not the ending you would have wanted?
>How
>>> many believe they all lived? That might determine if the "happy ending"
>folks
>>> are really in the minority. D. Rose
>>>
>> I wish I could believe otherwise, but they are all dead. Especially Blake.
>There was blood.
>
>[Jacqueline Thijsen] I agree about Blake being dead, but mostly because Avon
>shot him at close range. And let's face it: Avon is always very
>efficient, no matter how upset he is.
>As for the rest of them, I just don't know. I would say that if a fifth season
>had come along, some of them would have turned up wounded in some prison
>hospital. The rest would have been dead.
>
>> Well, I should amend that Orac is still alive, and presumably taking the
>place of Star One, all by himself.
>
>Boy, that depressed my day.
>
>Reuben
>
>[Jacqueline Thijsen] I was really depressed right after watching "Blake"
>(about 12 years ago now). I didn't know it was the last episode, so for a
>while I was waiting for the next one, hoping it would show something like
>the above scenario, with most of them still alive. And then I became even
>more depressed when I found out that that episode wasn't made.
I remember reading somewhere that Blake wasn't meant to be the last
episode, and there was going to be a fifth season, so it isn't
unreasonable to assume that at least some of them made it. I remember
that it was going to start out with Avon, then Vila would appear or
something like that.
Here is who I think is alive and dead. It has been a while since I have
seen the last episode.
Blake: Dead. Avon shot him at close range, so I don't see how he can be
alive.
Avon: Alive. We don't see him killed. Also, he was meant to be in the
fifth season.
Jenna: Alive. We don't see her get killed either. I don't know if I
really buy what Blake says about Jenna in the last episode.
Cally: Dead. She died at Terminal.
Vila: Alive. I remember reading about how he fell the wrong way, and of
course he was meant to be in the fifth season.
Dayna: Not sure, but probably dead. We see her get shot.
Tarrant: Dead. He was in bad shape already, so I doubt he could have
survived.
Soolin: Not Sure, but probably dead. We see her get shot as well.
Orac: Alive. Orac could be talking the place of Star One, but unless it
wanted to I would think that Orac could devise a way to escape from
Gauda Prime and the Federation before anyone found it.
Of course all of this assumes that something doesn't happen such as a
cloning effort of some kind, or the Gauda Prime incident being a set up
by Avon and Blake, or Orac, or someone else, or something else plausible
happening.
_______________________________________________________________
Ray Kaplan CS Major University of Illinois
rckaplan@acm.org Chair of SigVR at ACM@UIUC
http://www.ews.uiuc.edu/~rckaplan O-
_______________________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 19:03:59 EDT
From: ShilLance@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Happy Endings
Message-ID: <1545b3a4.35a3fae0@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Any Forever Knight fans out there........?
What do you think about the ending to that series?
Gwynn
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 15:04:02 +0100
From: "Dangermouse" <master@sol.co.uk>
To: <AChevron@aol.com>, <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] A query or two
Message-Id: <199807081435.PAA29597@gnasher.sol.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
----------
> From: AChevron@aol.com
> To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
> Subject: Re: [B7L] A query or two
> Date: 08 July 1998 02:29
>
> My own feeling about the Federation is that there is probably some
> constitution, but one that is similar to that of my home state, Virginia,
Hey, you should come along to Rising Star - I'll be there...
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 18:45:31 +0100
From: "Susan Bennett" <susanb@iol.ie>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Re: Drugging to Control Behaviour
Message-Id: <199807081739.SAA09368@mail.iol.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Alison Page said:
>>>Also noticeable - they don't take much notice of their kids, although
that is ostensibly why they don't work.<<<
Alison - I've had the pleasure of meeting you in person so I know that you
realise what work is involved in raising children, but I still feel
compelled to take issue with your terminology. If one more person tells me
that mothers who stay in the home to raise their children don't *work* then
I will explode! We are not waged, but we do work. I know I'm being picky
here, but it's a distinction that I feel matters a lot to people like me
who do this job.
Susan Bennett
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 15:02:40 +0100
From: "Dangermouse" <master@sol.co.uk>
To: "Susan Clerc" <sclerc@bgnet.bgsu.edu>,
"Blake's 7 list" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Blake (was Flag waving)
Message-Id: <199807081435.PAA29584@gnasher.sol.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
----------
> From: Susan Clerc <sclerc@bgnet.bgsu.edu>
> > So, was the Resistance lying? Were they desperate enough to
fabricate the
> > story in order to get back their figurehead? The alternative
explanation is
> > that Blake's family met with an accidental death, or were later
executed for
> > "crimes" committed after transport. Any comments?
D. Rose
>
> 2. His family was killed and Blake knew it before the mindwipe, that's
why
> the Federation gave him the forged tapes to suppress the memory. Being
off
> the drugged food and water, meeting Foster again, and seeing the massacre
> overcame the conditioning and he remembered everything the Federation had
> tried to make him forget.
I find it unlikely that they were transported to a colony then killed. The
Federation is efficient enough at making people disappear on Earth, so why
go to all the trouble of moving them somewhere else just to kill them?
It's likely then, that both the Federation and Foster lied (or were in
error) about what really happened to them...
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 14:51:50 EDT
From: AChevron@aol.com
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re US health care (was flag waving)
Message-ID: <53a03d36.35a3bfc7@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 98-07-08 13:14:26 EDT, you write:
<< Not related to health insurance, she also told of the case of a
young boy who was shot in the street in Chicago. His friends
carried him to the hospital but, because they were young boys,
could not get up the ramp to the hospital door. Hospital
managers stood just inside the door watching them, but would
not help. It was half an hour before an ambulance crew arrived
to take him the last 30 metres. He died.
>>
Morally this case is reprehensible. However, the hospitals in the US live
in abject fear of legal provisions known as Cobra. These regulations would
cost a hospital its liscense and very steep fines if broken, and help ensure
care is rendered. Of more concern is hospitals dumping patients on other
facilities after stabalizing them. This is a problem Cobra helps with, but
does not competely prevent.
As a pre-hospital provider, and someone who has had a parent go through
both the "regular" health care system, and the Veteran's Administration's
system, I am very leary of government run health care ala the V.A. It is
slower, more ineeficient, and oft-times more dangerous than the regular
system. I don't know what the "perfect" solution is; but I doubt if it is
state-run medicene. to me, the best solution is to allow states to experiment
on their own, thus limitting damage if a system doesn't work, while providing
a model for others if it does. Ditto the education system. D. Rose
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V98 Issue #187
**************************************