Blakes7 March 2001

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

96 participants
1067 discussions

Redemption con report
by Steve Rogerson 03 Mar '01

03 Mar '01

Liked reading the con reports so much, I decided to write one. For me it started nearly two years ago at Eastercon 1999 when we decided to do another one. Skipping to theThursday before the con, when I'd acquired so much stuff to take down that public transport was out of the question, so my next-door neighbour kindly drove me to Ashford. I spent the joutney explaining what it was all about and we even started talking about slash, which she'd never heard off but was amused to hear about. BBC Radio Kent rang me on route and arranged to do a telephone interview with me about the con at 8.10 Saturday morning. Aaargh! Got to the hotel early Thursday afternoon and found the hotel had me down for a suite. No thanks I said, I want a normal room near Ops and that was sorted for me. Bumped into Michael Sheard and Gareth Thomas before going into town for something to eat. Popped into the Kentish Express offices and they said they'd try to get a reporter down over the weekend. As the evening arrived, more people started arriving volunteering to help get things set up. However, due to others arriving later than expected with the badge parts and about half the stuff for the con packs, we didn't get any badge making done and only got the stuff I'd brought with me into the con packs. Friday dawned and we got badge making and con packing teams to work. Tech gear arrived and everything seemed to be going smoothly, if somewhat hectically. Then we discovered that the walkie talkies for ops had gone to the wrong Ashford - they never did make it. Then we ran out of badge parts, which is why some on Friday had temporary passes. Eddie arranged for more parts to be couriered to us and they arrived Saturday morning. We then got hit by a double whammy on the video programme. We couldn't get the video and TV sets to work together so much time was spent running back and forth between tech people and the main hall and the video rooms - we could have done with those walkie talkies. The second problem was that the compilation four-hour block tapes of the video programme had been left behind and so we ended up using the original videos. Slight snag, we didn't have the B7 ones, but thankfully there was a full set in the auction and we used those. Apart from Sunday evening when they'd already been sold - sorry Rita and others who wanted to watch B7 then. The rest of Friday afternoon is a bit of a blur up to getting things ready for the opening ceremony. I was a bit nervous this time for some reason and I can't really remember much about it apart from introducing Laurie and Steve K as Drazi War leaders. Friday night and off to the the Freedom City room party (thanks Rita for hosting this) and I got an ace pic of Nicola Collie and Nickey Barnard, which will eventually appear on my web site. Had a brief break to go to tyhe new-zine launch party as Paula and I had our publication out, the proceeds of which kept us in drinks most of the weekend. Kathryn Andersen also showed one of the four copies of Staked Blake that exists (a Buffy Blakes 7 crossover zine) and Judith agreed to print a proper run for her, which pleased me as I have a story in it. This launch party replaced the Friday night turkey reading, cancelled for two Redemptions in a row - third time lucky in 03 hopefully. Saturday morning and I was up in time to be interviewed reasonably coherently by BBC Radio Kent. Probably a good plan as I was on a panel at 10am on the B7 radio plays with Una and Rita (first time I've ever seen Rita that early at a con). The question was were they canon or bull and we decided both. While this was happening, Lesley and David were getting married somewhere in Ashford. I then spent an hour on the registration desk and got ready for taking 03 registrations before nipping off to the bring and buy sale, the official launch of our zine, though Richard had been selling some in the dealers room already. Flogged a few other bits and pieces in the sale too and donated left overs to Judith's Oxfam stall - couldn't be bothered taking them back. Photographer turned up from the Kentish Express or Messenger, can't remember which. Took him round to photo various things and people. Hopefully something will appear, especially as a reporter rang me up afterwards to ask about stuff to go with the pictures. Then got junk from my room for the chaos modelling and turned into a Klingon for the Drazi challenge. Didn't stay in costume for long but I can't for the life of me remember if I got changed out of the costume before or after the panel I was on about Farscape and Lexx with Alison and Calle. I became a Centauri for the cabaret (thanks Nickey for doing my hair) - much cooler costume - and was once again astonished by the high quality of the fan entries, with a special mention to the Reduced Blake's 7 Company - excellent, no other word for it. Got changed again into my Rocky Horror jacket for the evening disco, though I spent more time in the bar than the disco, playing Wobblevision and the like. We did Shadow and to my shame I couldn't remember hardly anything about the episode - must rewatch it soon. The funniest moment was Michael Sheard eating moon discs - I hope someone captured that on camera. I then spent a bit of time in the slash turkey reading, though I avoided reading any myself. Gareth popped in briefly and left with the words "Remember in prison your anus is never your own". Sunday dawned and Ashford was covered in snow, so we immediately announced extra Drazi points for completed snowmen. Purples did well here making a snowman, snowdalek and snowpacman. Greens stayed in the warm. I helped move chaos models from one room to another ready for the filming. Then I helped Mike hide tribbles for the Tribble Hunt. We had to move a couple of items around when we discovered the fliming was overrunning, but the result was well worth it when we watched it in the closing ceremony. Managed to juggle working on the reg desk, helping the auction, sorting the Drazi points and another panel, this time on how other shows treat telepaths with Rebecca and Kathryn. Sunday afternoon and I was a scrutineer on the Florida style ruler of the universe election, during which time Rita tormented me for a whole hour as she tried to cheat. Debra and I then took the votes away for counting and discovered everyone had cheated with clearly photocopied ballot papers. David Walsh even put his room charge card in the box as a bribe. Closing ceremony now and I announced the purples and David Walsh had won again and gave out lots of prizes, then back to registration to take the final 03 registrations - we sold over 50 for a con in two years time, amazing. The special offer for early bookers lasts till the end of March, hint, hint. Missed the stewards party as a result. Went to the slash debate. Someone suggested a sex with colostomy bag story and half the room turned to look at me. Humph! Have I got a reputation or what? This overran and continued for a while in another room. I ended up in bed at midnight (early for me at a con) totally exhausted. Monday morning and realised my plan to take the train home as I'd have less to carry was a bad one. Much too much still for public transport. A bit of sorting out and Gaspo John agreed to give me a lift home - ta. Hugs and goodbyes in reception and it was all over. Thanks to everyone who came and helped and all the rest. I had a ball. My only regret is I didn't have enough time to talk to some of the people who were there who I hadn't seen for a long time. -- cheers Steve Rogerson http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson Redemption: The Blake's 7 and Babylon 5 convention 21-23 February 2003, Ashford, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption

2 1

Sorry!
by Fiona Moore 03 Mar '01

03 Mar '01

In my state of high emotion, I've just duplicated a post. My apologies to all those of you who have been forced to delete my ire twice now :). Fiona ____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie

1 0

Re: B7L] Simple misunderstanding? (was in calm discussion)
by Tavia 03 Mar '01

03 Mar '01

Susan Beth wrote: >And that is, truly, an accurate statement going by my experience. >There are a lot of fans, particularly slash-friendly ones, who don't >at all like having a spotlight shown on their hobby. It has nothing to >do with whether they thought his study was accurate, or whether or not >they liked the conclusions/theories he drew from it. They simply *like* >having fandom be their little secret cabal, safely hidden away from >the eyes of mundanes. Does anyone have any idea of the readership of Jenkins' book (in terms of numbers and composition)? I very much doubt if it was aimed at the average non-fan (I hate the word 'mundane'), and I also very much doubt that it had any effect on the average non-fan's (rather unfriendly) opinion of fans. >IF your experience is that Attention to Fandom = Mockery of Fans then >you, too, might very much prefer to be left quietly alone and dislike >*anything* which draws attention to fandom's existence. While I can understand the feelings that you are relaying, there's really not a lot that fans can do about the fact that non-fans know about fandom's existence, and have a *very* low opinion of fans (at least that's my personal experience of 'coming out' as a B7 fan to various people I know in a non-fan context -- to quote one of the more positive views expressed by an intelligent and broadminded woman with whom I work, 'Do you realise how *sad* that makes you sound, Tavia?'). It seems to me (based on my personal experiences) that fans are being used as a scapegoat. Someone (Betty, I think) perceptively suggested that might be because of a need among some non-fans to convince themselves that their overconsumption of television was 'normal' by demonising others who had an 'abnormal' consumption. Tavia

1 0

Re: telepathy
by Helen Krummenacker 03 Mar '01

03 Mar '01

> I go to the telepathy panel, which is being run by Alison, Rachel, and Nik > Whitehead. We hear all sorts of interesting perspectives, although I confess to > being pretty sceptical about the whole thing. Rachel's readings are wonderful, > and Alison asks whether what we think is psychic power is really intuition (my > own belief). This sounds like a great topic. (Came home in the middle of the day sick again, can you tell? Don't worry folks, at this point it's just allergies, but to a debilitating extent.) What do you mean by intuition? I have had what appear to me to be convincing psychic experiences that could not be explained by what I call intuition. Most specifically not with telepathy but precognition, but I have also had a few apparently telepathic encounters. If it wasn't telepathy, then two people who had not met shared a similiar imaginary experience at the same time, then met a few months later only to get into a discussion and calculate they had shared both had a sensation of touching a mind at the same time, allowing for a difference in time zones, three thousand miles apart. This may be explained by coincidence, or mental activity transcending time, but I cannot explain it as intuition as I know the term. Other experiments, where I have asked my telepathy partner, over the internet, to share what I am looking at or touching without me sending a written description merely asking what she thinks it is, could be intuition. However, once she decribed the smell of a candle which I had lost the label of and hadn't been able to place the scent myself until she said it. :) (I know this sort of incident isn't likely to change anyone's opinion on 'psychic' phenomina, because I could be making all this up.) I am extrememly interested in theories related to telepathy, because I am not entirely sure what I think of it in spite of my own experiences.

2 1

In very, very, very calm discussion.
by Fiona Moore 03 Mar '01

03 Mar '01

I'm resending this, cos from the looks of my inbox, Annie has somehow managed to kill my letter going to the Lyst as well as herself. Anyway... I probably shouldn't respond to this, seeing as Annie says below that she has killfiled me. However, in the hope that now she's no longer reading my posts, this debate can become more relaxed and healthy, I shall reply: --- Ashton7(a)aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 3/2/01 4:07:50 AM Eastern > Standard Time, > nydersdyner(a)yahoo.co.uk writes: > > << To accuse Dr Jenkins of not respecting his > informants' > wishes is very much an accusation of being > ethically > suspect, and one which could seriously damage his > professional credibility.>> > > I have now pointed out at least twice, maybe more, > that I never accused Henry > of anything. I made no moral judgment whatsoever. If > you chose to interpret > my words that way, you are mistaken. Again, to quote exactly, Archive #43924: <This is, in fact, the crux of the problem many fans had with Camille Bacon-Smith and Henry Jenkins' books about fandom. Many fans were highly offended that they had been part of some sort of "study." Personally, I have never had a problem with either book or either author... but, then, both authors had spoken directly to both Leah and myself and I remember even signing a release with one of them. So, we *did* know what they were up to. Apparently, there were a good number of fans who didn't know and didn't take kindly to be the basis of someone's academic lab experiment> I am not going to offer an intepretation. I am just going to let that post stand, as evidence. > I have also > repeatedly pointed out that > you and anyone else who interpreted my words that > way are mistaken. The only > quotes you have produced from me have proven my > point. At this juncture, you > are now calling me a liar and are refusing to accept > that fact that you > obviously misunderstood. I'm slightly confused, on two points. 1) Could anybody else, reading the quote from me at the beginning of this e-mail, tell me where I called Annie a liar? I have read that paragraph, and the posts leading up to it, over three times and 2) If both Iain (in Archive #44168) and myself have misunderstood the above statement, then perhaps the statement should have been more clearly worded. > I demand an apology. I'll apologise to you when you apologise to me for your earlier post accusing me of lax professional ethics, insensitivity etc, in archive post #43924 (in response, btw, to a discussion I was having with *Carol.* Not yourself). Which you haven't done. > Well, I didn't "twist" your words. I quoted them > directly. There were no > emoticons that I remember indicating you were joking > and, furthermore, you > were quite obviously trying to imply that it was I > who regarded Henry as a > "horrible demon bloke." Once again, I must ask that > you stop putting words in > my mouth Something else I have to raise. What I said (quoted in Archive #44165) was: << BTW, Una, you've met him-- is Jenkins really this horrible demon bloke who came in and didn't tell anyone bar a few what he was really doing? > Now if I had wanted to put words in your mouth, I would say: "Una, is it true what Annie says about Jenkins being a horrible demon bloke?" Which I didn't do. Furthermore, since more people than just Annie spoke out against Jenkins earlier, I did not feel I particularly singled yourself out in that post. >and, in fact, you owe me an apology for > that one, too. As I've just made clear, no I don't. > You can have the last word. I won't know if it's an > apology or more of the > same nonsense, anyway. You're on my delete list. Why demand an apology and then killfile the person from whom you want an apology? Somebody else please point out the logic in this to me? Thank you, Annie, for allowing me the last word. Fiona The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net ____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie

2 1

Re: Re [B7L] PWP (porn? what porn?)
by Tavia 02 Mar '01

02 Mar '01

Shane wrote: >...I wouldn't say that pornography distorts anyone's mind, >any more than violent movies (etc.) do, either. But if you're >fed a steady diet of the stuff, with no corrective factor from >other material (a healthy sexual partnership, a fondness for >great literature, psychotherapy...), I think it might have some >bearing on how you view reality, relationships, etc... I think there's some confusion here. Reality in 2001 includes rather large measures of pornography. I'm guessing when you say 'if you're fed a steady diet of the stuff' that you're referring to people whose main means of sexual expression lies in, shall we say, encounters with the printed page (or whatever medium), rather than with human beings? You might like to give a thought to the alternatives for people temporarily or permanently lacking a 'healthy sexual partnership'. (And what's healthy, anyway?) & Neil wrote: >It happens in every community, throughout the whole of society, >every minute of every day. Reality is constructed for us from birth. >We are 'fed a steady diet' of something we like to think of as >'reality' throughout our lives, whether it's nude art or billboard >posters for jeans. I'm not 100% sure what you're getting at here, Neil. It's not all that difficult to avoid the kind of conditioning that I think you might be talking about, ie advertising? -- at least not in rural UK. It seems to me that the only thing people are involuntarily fed is ignorance. My original point was that censorship is a far greater evil than pornography (in my opinion). I'd also say that protection from ideas can lead to consequences that are the reverse of those you might expect, on the rebound principle. (I won't bore you all with the personal anecdotes...) Tavia

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: in calm discussion (was Deliverance)
by Ashton7＠aol.com 02 Mar '01

02 Mar '01

In a message dated 3/2/01 4:07:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, nydersdyner(a)yahoo.co.uk writes: << To accuse Dr Jenkins of not respecting his informants' wishes is very much an accusation of being ethically suspect, and one which could seriously damage his professional credibility.>> I have now pointed out at least twice, maybe more, that I never accused Henry of anything. I made no moral judgment whatsoever. If you chose to interpret my words that way, you are mistaken. I have also repeatedly pointed out that you and anyone else who interpreted my words that way are mistaken. The only quotes you have produced from me have proven my point. At this juncture, you are now calling me a liar and are refusing to accept that fact that you obviously misunderstood. I demand an apology. <<< 3) I regard my Lyst time as my downtime. I am not on the Lyst to be scientific, rigorous or academic (although, like many people here, I may draw on my RL experience in discussions where relevant). Consequently, I am not always going to be so. Furthermore, I am also going to occasionally use facetious terms like "horrible demon bloke." I don't like it when people twist my words around either. >> Well, I didn't "twist" your words. I quoted them directly. There were no emoticons that I remember indicating you were joking and, furthermore, you were quite obviously trying to imply that it was I who regarded Henry as a "horrible demon bloke." Once again, I must ask that you stop putting words in my mouth and, in fact, you owe me an apology for that one, too. You can have the last word. I won't know if it's an apology or more of the same nonsense, anyway. You're on my delete list. Annie

2 1

Re: Avon the Blake-killer
by Helen Krummenacker 02 Mar '01

02 Mar '01

> Do we > > need Avon > > to not have committed this crime so much, we try to absolve him? > > For me, killing Blake is one step too far (the same if Avon had killed > Vila). Without extenuating circumstances, this is just more than I can > take from him Yet, many watchers feel that Blake's indirect replies and refusal to follow orders, combined with Tarrant's announcement that Blake had sold them out, were extenuating circumstances. > But, I think it's also more than he can take as a > character. An Avon who has knowingly killed Blake has destroyed > something essential about himself. Whatever Blake symbolized to him - > hope, idealism, selflessness - and whatever part of him (however > grudgingly) connected to that is dead. > This is closer to home for me. It isn't that we need Avon not to be guilty. (Mistakes happen) It's that Avon wouldn't accept the mistake. To continue the story, we tend to need Blake to survive, or the mistake to be less terrible. Although, I myself would like any PGP to start with Avon's mental state thereafter, and deal with the question of what it would take to get him to be, well, human again.

4 3

Re: [B7L] Re: Brit-char-speak
by Ashton7＠aol.com 02 Mar '01

02 Mar '01

In a message dated 3/2/01 9:40:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, alison_page(a)becta.org.uk writes: << It's a distinction between form and content isn't it? If we pretend that the series 'Blakes 7' was a representation of a real world: is that world in any way distinctively 'British' ? That's a different question from saying, is the way that society is represented on TV distinctively British (video format, RADA accent, no natural ad breaks etc.).>>> Exactly. And I think that Leah's original point when this all started up was that, as far as some of us can see, as fans, the society in Blakes 7 does not seem to be based on a British society. If it is there, we, as Americans aren't seeing it and, so far, the only examples we've been given of why it should be regarded as "British" have been related to external influences and nothing within the universe itself. All of this began because of the contention that fan writers must adhere to some sort of "Britishness" when writing the characters. <<< I'd say the british features of B7 or the B7 universe are - not very polished - full of sarcastic bastards - successfully or disastrously amateurish - cynicism and pessimism - camaraderie combined with isolation>>> I think that you could say these are definitely features of B7, but I would disagree that they are distinctly "British" features. There are many shows from other parts of the world that could claim the same features. Highlander has "sarcastic bastards." What else is Methos? Highlander sure fits the idea of "camaraderie combined with isolation." I wouldn't call Highlander amateurish, but maybe some would, and again that's an external influence. <<< My experiences on the HP Lovecraft list lead me to strongly question the belief (which I myself held until quite recently) that America has a more open class system than Britain. I think the system is different, but not more open. >> I think there is definitely a class system in America without a doubt. Annie

1 0

Re: [B7L] James Schmitz Story
by Ellynne G. 02 Mar '01

02 Mar '01

On Thu, 1 Mar 2001 19:27:33 -0500 "Anna Sawitzky" <olddays(a)idirect.com> writes: > Fiona wrote: > > > The possibility of the clone meeting Avon PGP could be > > interesting though, given that the clone would not > > know him (there's a James Schmitz story from the > > fifties which briefly goes into the situation of a > > clone created to be the exact duplicate of someone... > > but who, once she is no longer needed in this way, > > goes off and has a life of her own which is quite > > different from her original's). > > What's the story called? Thanks in advance. > Sounds like "Ti's Toys" aka "The Telzey Toy," but that was printed in 1971 (and reprinted in TNT: Telzey & Trigger [I'm a Schmitz fan and it's just so wonderful to see his stuff back in print]). He might have used the premise in another story I don't know about. Ellynne ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

2 1

Jump to page:

2026

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