Fiona Moore said:

"There is some evidence for heterosexual relationships/feelings/leanings between some of the principal characters on B7. There is no evidence of homosexual ones for these characters."

Steve Rogerson said:

This is just a matter of interpretation, on what you

see in their

interactions.

Yes, but there�s interpretation and misinterpretation.

the kiss with Inga in Hostage can be interpreted in many ways - she's family after all. But again, there is so little evidence of sexual preferences

that we really do

have very much a clean sheet and so can go wherever we wish.

I don�t agree with this at all. In order to build a �case� for a interpretation of a particular �text� you need to find evidence with which to support your case. People are also entitled to find counter evidence which can be used to build a counter case. Some interpretations of some texts are simply unviable, despite the postmodernist (and I speak as one) insistence on an entirely relativistic approach to textual analysis.

One cannot, with any real justice, advance the idea that the STAR WARS tetralogy is a comprehensive analogy for the politics of the Second World War, with each character and institution representing a country or political ideology. A friend of mine once attempted this as a joke. She could keep it going for about three minutes and then it collapsed and we all giggled a lot.

I could claim, in fact I�m going to, that �Schindler�s List� is pro-Nazi. I can find some evidence to support this. The Nazi Commandant is played by a tall, good looking actor known for playing �heart throb� roles; several characters get speeches about the need to remove the Jews form the Reich, and what�s more they clearly believe what they are saying. The audience is repeatedly told that Jewish people are less than human and need to be removed for the good of the world.

Not a lot of evidence, but some. More than there is for Avon and Blake having had sex. It�s nonsense, of course, you�ll counter; �Schindler�s List� was directed by a Jewish man who lost family in Death Camps! It venerates a man who opposed Nazism. The conditions of the ghettoes, and the sheer evil of the death factories are portrayed in heart-rending detail. To which I say. �Well, that�s your interpretation, I see Ralph Fiennes as the hero, engaged in work that must be done�.

Utterly untenable as an argument, you can�t believe. But you could argue it to a point. And it�s more believable than claiming a textual foundation for Blake and Avon as lovers.

To support an argument in court, in an essay, in a conversation you need evidence FROM THE TEXT, it�s the fundamental basis of literary criticism and interpretation. To want something to have been something it was not is one thing, to claim that it was something it was not, and then fail to provide any evidence, however circumstantial, to back this up is something else entirely.

If you can�t provide the evidence it�s because it isn�t there. It is possible to see things that aren�t there because you want them to be. Just about everyone who has ever lived has believed, briefly, that someone who isn�t attracted to them is, because they overlay their �wants� onto something exterior to them. But it doesn�t mean it�s really there.

You can�t create an argument with no evidence, because, unlike Michael Palin, you can�t build a castle on a swamp.

'kingpin' wilsonfisk2@yahoo.com

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/