Blakes7 February 2001

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

80 participants
929 discussions

Re: What makes a fannish show?
by Harriet Monkhouse 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

Sally wrote: >Has anyone else seen a little Danish show called 'The Kingdom'? And was anybody else addicted to Cardiac Arrest (apart from the episodes where they went soppy)? I despair of anyone ever giving Helen Baxendale such a good part again... The final couple of minutes had me breathless with joy and admiration. Harriere

1 0

Re: Who becomes fans
by Harriet Monkhouse 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

Susan Beth: >Suppose *some* people are limited in their > taste/capacity for that interaction; they *do* >want and need it, but they need to be able to >control and limit it. Have it when they have the > energy to deal with it, be able to withdraw from > it when they can't. Absolutely. I like people, on the whole, but I find them very tiring after a while. So if I suddenly go very quiet halfway through a weekend, it isn't anything in particular you said, just the fact that everyone kept saying something... Harriet

1 0

Re: Blakes7 men
by Helen Krummenacker 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

> > > I *like* non-dominant men. Better listeners, more > respectful, more > > supportive, not only compared to egotistical men, > but also compared to > > many females. > > So men who aren't submissive are egotistical? I prefer > an egalitarian > relationship, myself-- neither partner dominant *or* > submissive. > Non-dominant CAN mean equal, rather than submissive. You complain about others not thinking before they write, and then come up with this? > If Jenna, Cally, Soolin and Dayna could hold their own > against the men, why > do you think the women on the list can't? I never said we couldn't hold our own. I just think they would be annoying IRL. It's my way of reversing the question of whether Avon or anyone would space any of us... why not ask if *we* would put up with them. > interesting that you > pick on the two men who are a) mentally neutered > (Gan), and b) weak and > timid (Vila)-- as long as he isn't sexual? Gan does not try to dominate or annoy people. His chip only keeps him from using lethal violence. I DON'T consider that nuetered. Vila should not make passes at me because I am a happily married woman. However, those two would not a) order me into danger b) gratutiously insult me because I'm not from their educational system c) try to space me d) leave me out of the planning I don't however trust Blake, Avon or Tarrant not to do most or all of the above. I *was* being flippant; I probably wouldn't really strand them on planet, rather, walk away from the situation while I could. I'm not a thief, after all. But I am serious about finding the company of men who respect me preferble to those who don't. The same goes for women. I don't need to be liked, but I do need respect.

2 1

Re: Sally-speak
by Betty Ragan 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

Responding to me, Wendy wrote: > > Indeed. There is nothing remotely as effective at getting me to > > ignore your posts, dismiss your opinions, and reinforce my > > commitment to my own position as taking that kind of insulting > > "anybody who agree with me is not only wrong but disgusting and > > stupid and evil" tone. [which should be "doesn't agree," of course] > As I've just said to Neil, I didn't say that. You can post what you > like. I'm posting what I like. I don't necessarily want you to agree > with me, I just want people to THINK about what gets said. And if I > have to offend a few people to get them to think about why they > consider their opinions to be the right ones then offend them I > shall Several points here: 1) No, you didn't *say* that, but, believe me, that's how it's coming across to many of us. Your contempt for some of the people on this list -- not just disagreement, but *contempt*, and not just for the opinions but the people *themselves* -- is blisteringly obvious. If that's not the impression you mean to convey, you should think seriously about the means by which you express yourself. 2) You're implying that the people who don't agree with you aren't *thinking*, and that's both insulting and incorrect. Believe it or not, people who *are* thinking can still disagree with you. 3) To reiterate what I said above, being offensive is more often than not the *worst* way to go about getting people to think about your opinions and take them seriously. If you really want to make people think about the issues at hand, again, you might seriously want to reconisider how you're going about it. The tactic you're using is counterproductive. > But take any piece of hurt-comfort fiction at random, > switch the sex of the character (e.g. make it Cally > not Avon) read it through and see how it sounds. It's > not the violence, it's the sadism I don't like. (and > note: I said *I* don't like. If you like sadism, > that's up to you). Do you realize just how insulting that sounds? How you've basically just made it impossible for anybody to disagree with your opinion without "admitting" that they "like sadism"? That's not honest discourse. That's like asking "How often do you beat your children?" As far as h/c goes, not all of it is "sadistic", not by a long shot. Not by my definition of "sadism," anyway. -- Betty Ragan ** bragan(a)nrao.edu ** http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/~bragan Not speaking for my employers, officially or otherwise. "Seeing a rotten picture for the special effects is like eating a tough steak for the smothered onions..." -- Isaac Asimov

2 1

Re: fandom
by Betty Ragan 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

Responding to me, Annie wrote: > << IIRC, Jenkins had a hypothesis about that. >> > > I'm starting to find the constant references to Jenkins' book...well, > strange. When it first appeared in fandom, yea many years ago now, it was > regarded as somewhat of a joke in most fannish circles, if I'm remembering > correctly. It certainly wasn't something that B7 fans (or any fans) took as > some sort of fannish "bible." Whoops, I certainly didn't mean to imply it was anything like that... Mainly, I regard the book as interesting food for thought. He tosses out a lot of ideas which I find rather fun to think about (whether I agree with all of them or not). And he's a pleasantly lucid writer, IMO. > I believe that, at the time, he was doing his thesis. I've seen > other fans do the same thing as a way to combine their love of > fandom with their scholarly career. RRight now, I know several > people who teach film history in schools and/or universities who > like to use their favorite shows (like Alias Smith & Jones, as one > example I know about) as classwork! Wish I'd had some of those teachers... Not that I ever took film history... I do remember writing a few essays about _Star Trek_ and _Doctor Who_ for my English classes. My high school teacher didn't quite know what to make of it, but my college prof was actually impressed. :) -- Betty Ragan ** bragan(a)nrao.edu ** http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/~bragan Not speaking for my employers, officially or otherwise. "Seeing a rotten picture for the special effects is like eating a tough steak for the smothered onions..." -- Isaac Asimov

1 0

Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Sally-speak (was: Was it something I said :-)
by Tavia Chalcraft 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

Wendy opined: >But this S/M stuff has been going on here for months >and I'm tired of it. I don't mind that some people like slash, >but if I see a slashzine I'm not forced to buy it. But every >time I open my mailbox there's at least one post on the list >about Suffering Beautifully, and I wish people would keep >that sort of thing on the other list, where it belongs. (1) Hurt/comfort is not S&M. Liking hurt/comfort does not necessarily correlate (either way) with liking S&M. (2) Hurt/comfort is often gen, and certainly needn't be slash. (3) Calle is the ListMaster; I assume it's up to him to decide what stays and goes in the Lyst rules. I got pretty tired of the Deliverance thread after a while. I stopped reading it. It stopped bothering me. Tavia [who has not noticed anything relating to S&M on this list in the past few months (and, believe me, I'd notice)]

1 0

Re: disagreements
by Helen Krummenacker 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

Betty said: > By contrast, there are those, on this list and elsewhere, with whom I > violently disagree, but whose posts are so well-thought-out and > reasonable that they cause me to seriously re-think my own position. The Tarrant Nostra, for instance, gave such a well grounded defense of Tarrant that I no longer think of him as a git. Took a *lot* of discussion to convince me, but never once was I called an idiot; if I had been, I imagine my reaction would be, "Oh , well of course people like *that* would like a git."

2 1

Re: Sally-speak
by Betty Ragan 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

> I've been assuming for two years that people took my 'Fearless Leader', 'My > Darling', etc, the burbles sending up the sillier aspects of the show and > splattering capitals and generally having a bit of fun with the characters > and the show as just that - fun, and had the sensitivity to discriminate > between that and my serious comments. I thought some people enjoyed the > humour in it, that most of you got a laugh out of it sometimes; That's certainly the way I feel about it, Sally, and I suspect that's true for most of us (although I certainly can't speak for anyone else). Don't let one insensitive poster shut you up. -- Betty Ragan ** bragan(a)nrao.edu ** http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/~bragan Not speaking for my employers, officially or otherwise. "Seeing a rotten picture for the special effects is like eating a tough steak for the smothered onions..." -- Isaac Asimov

1 0

Re: [B7L] Sally-speak (was: Was it something I said :-)
by Ashton7＠aol.com 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

In a message dated 2/19/01 7:37:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, penberriss(a)yahoo.com writes: << But every time I open my mailbox there's at least one post on the list about Suffering Beautifully, and I wish people would keep that sort of thing on the other list, where it belongs. >> I thought "that sort of thing" was okay here on lysator. I know it *used* to be okay, but I have been gone from actively participating in the list for a few years. Is it now a rule of the list that slash and adult topics aren't allowed here? Just checking! Annie

1 0

Re: fandom
by Helen Krummenacker 19 Feb '01

19 Feb '01

> How true! Only you forgot someone.. Buffy is only worth watching for Spike. > My dream would be that they end that show by letting him finally kill her... > she grows more awful by the season. > > Isobel I like Spike, especially as a reluctant hero, but I've mentioned that before on list only to be told he hasn't really changed, it's just the V-chip. I didn't mention him this time because I am content to think silently how right I am. I'd be disappointed if he kills Buffy, not because of my regard for her, but because it would destroy my theory that Darla's bloodline has been growing more human with each generation, that the 4 Vampires of the Apocalypse will all march together one last time *against* the demons, and finally because ot would really make all the character development they've done with him a waste. Noteworthy-- Spike has a strong fan following. When his past was revealled, it turns out he was (as I suspected) a bit nerdy. He acts Mr Tough Guy, but he's really, as he put it once "Love's Bitch"-- romance is the driving force behind him both for evil and good. He's the Fanfic Avon of Buffydom. Suffers beautifully, wears leather, and gets the cutting lines. He *is* a case of the writers giving the fans what they want, at least up to a point.

1 0

← Newer
1
...
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
...
93
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Blakes7 February 2001