From: Ashton7@aol.com
wilsonfisk2@yahoo.com writes:
<< If you (and I mean 'you' generic rather than specific) wrote an essay arguing Bklake and Avon were lovers you'd failt the course becasue you wouldn't be able to provide suifficent textual evidence.
Who cares?!?
Quite a few people, actually.
Most of us have no interest in writing an essay. We aren't taking university courses in Blakes 7, for Pete's sake. We're just fans, enjoying a hobby and a fandom.
But simply being a fan implies possession of a body of knowledge about the focus of fandom (in this case, B7), and it is through this body of knowledge that fan discourse takes place. There might not be a set course in B7, with pass marks and gradings, but fan discussion presumes some level of knowledge. Events in episodes are discussed, and the motivations of characters at particular moments are speculated upon, with evidence cited from the series to support a line of argument.
Which makes you something of an odd one out. Out of 111 posts to the Lyst since you returned on 13/02, only 5 or 6 actually contain any speculation on events within the series or even the background to the series. None of them cite any kind of canonical support. The rest are mainly about fandom, fannishness, and fan fiction - all perfectly legitimate topics for the Lyst, so I'm not accusing you of filling the Lyst with guff. But you might care to consider that the content of your posts is atypical. Nothing wrong with that per se. However, it does suggest that being *in fandom* is more important to you than being *a fan*, and that your primary focus of attention is not the series as such, but the discourse that evolves from it. Again, I see nothing wrong with that: we are all here because we want to talk to each other (or simply listen, in the case of lurkers), with B7 - however we may interpret it on an individual basis - as the common platform from which to enter into that discourse.
But to make a flat assertion that we are here 'just' to be fans and 'just' to have fun, goes directly against the grain of the common mode of fan discourse that *is* primarily focussed on the source, namely the citation of evidence from canon to support or deny a speculative proposition regarding ambiguities within the canon. I can't help but see some irony here, this statement coming as it does from one who has accused others of trying to 'control' the Lyst and the nature of the discussion that takes place within it, or suggested that they should even go elsewhere to pursue their debate.
To requote:
We aren't taking university courses in Blakes 7, for Pete's sake. We're just fans, enjoying a hobby and a fandom.
We might not be taking university courses, but most of us - you are a notable exception - are engaging in a mode of discourse that would allow us to take such a course if one existed. Much of the enjoyment of fandom comes from engaging in precisely that mode of discourse and from the possession of the body of knowledge (whether deeply encylopaedic or relatively shallow) that allows such discourse to take place at all. And when you go on to say:
But trying to insist that the rest of the fandom should adhere to the same sort of guidelines for "proof" and that they have to make a "case" or they can't discuss anything is just ludicrous.
you seem to be implying that 'the rest of fandom' represents a majority, whereas I detect precisely the opposite. The majority might not be looking for evidence that can stand up in a court of law, but they are nevertheless looking for evidence to support their speculations in a way that you have never done in any of your posts, at least not this year.
Despite the risk of being tedious, I'll repeat myself in the hope of avoiding any misunderstanding: I am not trying to suggest that your mode of engagement with fannish discourse is in any way 'wrong', inappropriate, or irrelevant. I merely think you are mistaken in thinking that your chosen mode of engagement is that adopted by most fans most of the time and hence represents a normative mode against which all others should be compared.
Neil