we've seen of Avon up to this point his response to her should have been, 'I am not your Lord and I see no reason why we should involve ourselves in your problems.' But, as we saw, that wasn't his reaction. He felt a kind of 'sympathy' for Meegat and helped her.
Still, it has to be said that it was hardly in his own interests to disillusion her straight away, and that he was better off playing along with her until he worked out whether she could help him find Jenna or not.
I'm not saying Avon suddenly became a nice guy after this ep. Lord knows that didn't happen. But it did happen in this ep (towards Meegat, anyway)
No, I don't think Avon's actions are out of character for anything we've seen before or after-- if nothing else, it would be a bit odd for Terry Nation himself to write it like this. There are interviews with both him and Chris Boucher in which they state that when writing for Avon that it was always their intention to create two reasons for all of Avon's actions: either totally selfish or totally altruistic, a duality which remained with the character throughout the series.
and I saw nothing sexist about it.
'Sexist' is a loaded term and so one I'm wary of addressing here. Certainly her behaviour wouldn't get her a commendation in *Spare Rib,* but she does achieve the end her society requires (whether that justifies the means is another argument entirely). It must be said that Meegat's society comes across as very patriarchal, but the implications of that are debatable.
But I try
not to look at B7 from a 20th century (or 21st century) western civilization point of view. From my interpretation of the 52 eps, I have created my view of the B7 universe and I watch the show from that perspective.
'Although it is useful to understand a text's cultural context when making a reading, the paradigms or frameworks of understanding that are dominant at the time of reading will inevitably dominate how the text is understood.' --Lacey, York Notes on *Bladerunner*.
In other words, it's impossible to separate the episode from the context in which it was created (1970s Britain), or your reply from its context (February 2001). To argue that your analysis of the episode can only work if the episode is divorced from all surrounding context suggests that the argument would not stand up when applied in context-- and which would in any case make all critical analysis of the episode impossible, as in order to make an argument you have to be aware of possible alternative readings. Which IMO is where postmodernism falls flat on its face.
time). It wasn't til posts became insulting (beginning with the 'Wolf at your door' message) that
there began to be a
certain amount of resentment at the insistence that if we couldn't see sexism in 'Deliverance' we must be stupid or uninformed.
This post was actually her last post on the Deliverance thread, so whoever you saw as insulting you, it can't have been her.
Also, seeing a list member write that another list member's posts make them sick is extremely disheartening.
First of all, that wasn't what she said, so don't be disheartened. Second, that refers to a dispute which happened after the Deliverance thread was well over, so why bring it up here?
Shane
'You may not be drugged, but you're still dreaming.' --Avon