Blakes7 March 2001

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

96 participants
1067 discussions

Re: Cyberpunk (Was: [B7L] Re: in calm discussion)
by Tavia 06 Mar '01

06 Mar '01

Betty wrote: >My immediate reaction when Neil suggested B7 fic in cyberspace >was to instantly flash onto two cliches: the out-of-control >holodeck simulation seen so often on Trek, and the dreaded >"and then he woke up and it was all a computer simulation." >I have the horrible, sinking feeling that if I ever tried to write >a B7 cyberspace story, it'd somehow end up turning into one >of those, whether I wanted it to or not... I think I have a big advantage here. I'd loved B7 for approaching 20 years when I saw my first-ever Trek, and the Trek episodes (all flavours, or should that be flavors) combined I've seen would probably still be in single figures. Ob B7: What do people think the computers of the future will really be like? Do people agree that the Federation computer technology we see on screen is just a smokescreen concealing the Real Thing? How does one go about programming them? -- I've never believed the prodding-with-fancy-screwdrivers line. Tavia

2 1

Re: [B7L] CWC (corn? what corn?)
by Bizarro7＠aol.com 06 Mar '01

06 Mar '01

In a message dated 3/6/01 1:09:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, j_macqueen(a)hotmail.com writes: << I suggest that this thread be taken off to the Other List at once, seeing as, potentially, it involves large quantities of butter being spread around. Or people with husk-y voices. Or the nefarious practice of "corn on the cob". (Whatever that entails...) >> Your attempt to shuck me off to a spin list is simply a-maizing. Do your stalking somewhere else! Leah

2 1

Re: [B7L] Science Fiction and Political Reality
by Harriet Monkhouse 06 Mar '01

06 Mar '01

Pat wrote, in her follow-up to a post I admired so much I've filed it for future reference: >I guess Boucher and Nation run the risk of possibly >having their audience see the tactics of say the IRA as >legitimate political actions, no less legitimate than Blake's. Well, some did, you know. In the original: >(A big aside here: This move, for any of you American > lefties out there, seems to echo the old Communist Party > USA's late 1930's and early 1940's "popular front against >fascism" in which the American Communists -- who were >the only real organized force actively fighting white > racism on the streets as well as in the courts -- actively >supported American National interests during the war >and even adopted patriotic rhetoric. Suppose you could also cite the Suffragettes, most of whom abandoned their "war" on the British government to support the war against Germany and her allies. But not all (eg Sylvia Pankhurst, who is often portrayed as more "pure" in her commitments). Er... somehow this brings me to Animals, not a subject I think of very often without brute force from Una... I've always been rather puzzled by Justin's remark about the Galactic war: "That war was a terrible, terrible mistake." Mistake by whom? It doesn't sound as if Justin means "only an immense cockup could have left us in such danger" - I think it's the policy he's criticising. Was there a faction which favoured surrender to the Andromedans, or thought there was a genuine possibility of a negotiated settlement? Blake and co never even contemplate an option other than fighting back against the alien invasion. Harriet

3 2

Re: [B7L] CWC (corn? what corn?)
by J MacQueen 06 Mar '01

06 Mar '01

>From: Bizarro7(a)aol.com >I declare a thread hijacking, effective immediately. The subject is now >cornography. Corn has infiltrated into every aspect of our lives, and must >be >stamped out! (Creamed, if you will.) I suggest that this thread be taken off to the Other List at once, seeing as, potentially, it involves large quantities of butter being spread around. Or people with husk-y voices. Or the nefarious practice of "corn on the cob". (Whatever that entails...) Regards Joanne _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: Re [B7L] PWP (porn? what porn?)
by Bizarro7＠aol.com 06 Mar '01

06 Mar '01

>>Well, darling, I think there's a big difference between sex and pornography, and I know of a lot of people who object to porn that don't object to sex. But since you obviously consider the two activities one and the same, I wouldn't _dare_ argue with you.<< So you don't feel that porn involves sex? How interesting. All this time I was mistaken, when it turns out it was really all about skiing. I'll spell it out once more. Some people regard any graphic depiction of contact between men and women as 'porn'. Some don't begin to think of sexual content as 'porn' until it reaches the illegal phase, or beyond. Most people fall at every part of the range in between. But all of it involves sex. Leah

1 0

Recent slash discussions etc
by Kerry Hale 06 Mar '01

06 Mar '01

I watched B7 when it was first shown in 1978. I was a fairly unworldly and naive 21-year old and the subtexts passed me by. I've been on this list and Freedom City for about two years so I've now had the possibilities brought to my attention. Until it was pointed out to me the idea of any sort of sexual attraction between Blake and Avon never crossed my mind - although I felt that there was certainly a tension between them - but I would hestitate to say that it wasn't there. Although at that time (1978) i knew of the existemce of homosexuality I didn't think I knew anyone who was homosexual, after all the men I knew - my father, my brothers, my husband, the boyfriends and husbands of all my female friends - definitely weren't. You could tell the men who were homosexual by the outrageously camp and "limpwristed" way they behaved, but they were never "ordinary" people, only film or television stars or artists or ballet dancers. Of course I've lived and learnt since then but early cultural conditioning goes deep, so while I'm not homophobic it's still not the norm for me. I don't use the word "norm" as a value judgement, it's merely that I would assume a man (any man/Everyman) to be straight rather than gay unless I had obvious (to me) evidence to the contrary. [Aside: In the same way I have sexist and racist views. I'm not racist or sexist (I'm a woolly-liberal, feminist, socialist, vegetarian Guardian-reader, I can't be <g>) but I'm a white middle class, middle-aged, mother living in a cosy, affluent bit of south-east England so the "norm" for me is other white, middle-class, middle-aged mothers and fathers. I think I have an open mind and I'm aware of the rest of the world around me but it's only through the media (see above) and other sources that I know about societies and countries other than my own. This list is helping me broaden my views, for which I'm grateful, but I'm obviously not in quite the same mindset as many others members. I've just de-lurked on Freedom City as well as here and it's been mentioned that the lurkers may well be the majority so it's possible that the opinions and ideas of the regular posters aren't the "norm".] Anyway, the recent slash discussions have, at times, resembled the 19th century debates on the number of angels that could dance on a pinhead: they've produced some very interesting posts, some less-than-interesting posts, some mildly expressed posts, some very heated posts etc etc but the overall effect (on me) is becoming Does it really matter? I shall continue to read slash fiction and enjoy and agree with some stories and dismiss and disagree with others. Kerry

2 1

CWC (corn? what corn?)
by Bizarro7＠aol.com 06 Mar '01

06 Mar '01

I declare a thread hijacking, effective immediately. The subject is now cornography. Corn has infiltrated into every aspect of our lives, and must be stamped out! (Creamed, if you will.) Leah

1 0

Re: [B7L] Lament
by Bizarro7＠aol.com 06 Mar '01

06 Mar '01

In a message dated 3/5/01 3:41:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, ijc(a)bas.ac.uk writes: << It was that balance between serious threads and the light-hearted, funny or irreverent messages that made me feel so at home here. But now the lyst seems to have gone exclusively serious. Am I the only one missing the humorous threads? >> By golly, you're right! Enough of this pompous, boring nonsense about proper spelling and who's naughty bits are interfering with who else's naughty bits? Who cares if B7 takes place in a universe that's British, American or Disney? Let's explore the really *fascinating* issues, like whether Avon can sleep on his face, or if any of the Liberator rooms had a ping pong table, or if Travis ever used his hand crystal to 'key' scratches onto the vehicles of Fed officers who stole his parking space? Leah

1 0

Re: [B7L] Slash
by Bizarro7＠aol.com 06 Mar '01

06 Mar '01

In a message dated 3/5/01 8:54:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, wilsonfisk2(a)yahoo.com writes: << If a sexual relationship were developing between any of the lead characters (regardless I hasten to add of sex or sexuality) then we would see its development and repercussions. *Exactly* as we did in ‘City At The Edge Of The World’. >> You've taken the subject off track a mite. The subject involves fan fiction, and the choice of fan fiction that writers sometimes take. By any definition, fanfic can go wherever the individual writer chooses to take it, based on their own personal interpretation and taste with respect to the canon of the series. You may not see any of that interpretation. Fine. That series of stories is not going to be your cup of tea, and you should avoid it. If I don't see any lurid romance in B7, or any evidence of wallowing in B7, or any sign that there was ever contact between Travis and Dorian, then I will avoid such stories. But a difference of intepretation of the series is really the right of the individual fan, and can not be stopped. Like it or not, It's always been a part of fandom in ANY universe, and it always will be. So you've seen no evidence of slash in the B7 series. Don't believe it ever happened. Don't read the stories. Fine. That's your take, and you have every right to it. As they say, the mileage of others may vary. And that's *their* right. Leah

1 0

Stock Equalisation Act (1980s record producers?)
by Pat Sumner 06 Mar '01

06 Mar '01

From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner(a)tesco.net> Subject: Re: [B7L] Re:slash >... Nowhere was it said that the SEA was a Federation > law. In fact, we get the following: > > AVON: No problem. When Helotrix was first settled, the old Stock > Equalization Act was still in force. Every Earth race had to be represented. > > That is, Federation conquest came after settlement. The implication is that > the SEA is not a Federation law at all. Of course, there are several > possible interpretations, eg: > *Helotrix was settled under the direction of the Federation (and the SEA), > declared its independence and was then forcefully subdued. > *the SEA was legislated by a precursor of the Federation, but remained on > the books when the Federation assumed the reins of power. The wording of the quote, "...the old Stock Equalisation act was still in force," states that the SEA is NO LONGER in force. It was legislated by whomever did so (precursor to the Federation, or possibly the Federation itself) but is no longer on the books. > ObOT: I have never heard of a penguin eating ice cream. Well, now, I have never heard of a penguin *refusing* to eat ice cream. Perhaps you just have to get them in the right mood. I have, however heard of Penguin ice cream. A possible interpretation of this is that most penguins are not cannibals. Wildean

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

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 March 2001