Blakes7 February 2001

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

80 participants
929 discussions

Re: [B7L] Re: Gay Subtexts
by Mac4781＠aol.com 23 Feb '01

23 Feb '01

Dana (quoting Fiona) wrote: > > My point is, if the writers/actors/whoever had intended the characters to > > read as gay/involved, they could have done so. But they didn't. > And don't forget that apart from anything else B7 was sometimes considered > a kids' show which would limit exploration of any kind of sexual > relationship > with anybody. Dana, do you accept that there is a difference between raw canon and what individual viewers think they see/might like to see on the screen? That on a very basic level there is a show that is put together by a creative team (writers, directors, actors, etc) and that team considered the Blake and Avon relationship to be strictly platonic. I have to agree with Fiona that canon is separate from fanon. There are a few canonical adult relationships that were clearly intended to be adult relationships per the intent of the creative team (such as Avon/Anna). Beyond those, postulating sexual relationships between B7 characters (and I enjoy exploring those possibilities) isn't canonical. Carol Mc Carol Mc

2 1

Re: [B7L] Avon's signature
by Ashton7＠aol.com 23 Feb '01

23 Feb '01

In a message dated 2/23/01 7:39:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, awilliams(a)daikin.com.au writes: << Also, does anyone know if any of the other actors have provided signatures for their characters? >> I don't think I ever got any autographs of the actors with the character names on them, although I do have a fairly unique (I would think) photo of Phil Collins signed by Michael Keating with the notation "Sisters". LOL (Some of you who have been around for a long time will probably remember that it became a joke to tease MK at conventions about a resemblance to Phil Collins). Annie

3 2

Wendy's complaint (was Sally-speak)
by littles＠lycos.co.uk 23 Feb '01

23 Feb '01

> As for attacking Wendy - no, I don't think so, either. It looked more to > me like people reacting to what they perceived as an attack from her. > The topic and her position on it were not the problem; it was the > sarcasm, insults, and slurs. I'm telling you, go back and read the thread from the beginning, and prepare for a shock. It makes for exhiliarating reading. Sarcasm, yeah, but no insults *or* slurs. Often, too, she's only quoting people's own language back at them (there's one where somebody starts a reply to her with "well, duh," and she starts her reply with "well, duh," too-- why's that an insult from Wendy and not from the other person?). I'd also point out that if you read her penultimate Deliverance post (it's the fourth of the month I think), she lets the last two defenders of the "Avon was nice to Meegat" school off the hook. Obviously lacks the killer instinct. The bit where it all seems to fall apart, though, is the "knock knock, there's a wolf at the door" post. Now I haven't got the text of that handy, cause I can't seem to get that far on the archive, but some people on the Lyst seem to have decided to take it as an insult. Me, it reminded me a lot of a riddle I heard a while back. The question was, "Are we wolves or lambs?" and the answer was "both." Or, like Pogo said, "we have met the enemy and he is us." That post was so cryptically put, it could have meant any number of things. Shane "None of us showed conspicuous intelligence on this occasion." --Avon

1 0

Thread hijacking (was Re: Sally-speak)
by littles＠lycos.co.uk 23 Feb '01

23 Feb '01

Neil wrote: > > But there's another sort of thread hijacking which neither of you > mentioned, > > which is when somebody comes on the serious thread and makes a point, but > > does it in a silly way, say calling Blake "my sweet baboo" or calling > > Servalan "She who must be obeyed." Which IMO trivialises the the > character, > > the argument and the poster's point, all at the same time. > > Actually I have no problem with this per se, since a valid point is a valid > point regardless of the terms in which it's couched. However, such posts > are likely to be character-oriented, and as such pull a non-character > oriented thread off-track. No matter how sensible the point, when it's prefaced with "Fearless Leader" (originally a sarcastic remark from Avon about Blake) it makes it pretty difficult to take seriously. Everything that follows the epithet then sounds like it is meant to be sarcastic-- and to make matters worse, you can't post in to say "Erm, did you *mean* that to sound as sarcastic as all that?" or "Would you mind not saying Fearless Leader, it's altering the tone of the argument" without insulting the original poster mortally. Shane "Here's hoping they all have nice legs."-- Vila

1 0

Fw: [B7L] Sally-speak
by littles＠lycos.co.uk 23 Feb '01

23 Feb '01

Annie Wrote: > In a message dated 2/21/01 10:18:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, > littles(a)lycos.co.uk writes: > > << Slash, hurt/comfort... whatever. Rewrite the sentence to read "...between > fan hurt-comfort fiction and Eng. Lit." and you still get the idea. Anyway, > we're still talking about what appears to be a transatlantic imposition on a > British series, which has been retconned back into the series itself. >> > > Hmmm. So, you're saying that only us Americans have "forced" the BLakes 7 > characters into those naughty little slash stories and that icky hurt/comfort > stuff? Er, no. Sorry. Not true. Nope, the English are guilty as well. But hang on, wasn't it you who came on the lyst a few days ago and said that British fans tend not to like H/C and the Americans do, cause for the Americans it's "normal"? Why the change of story? > > And, even if it was, so what? I mean, really, "transatlantic imposition on a > British series"? Because we're American fans we're not allowed to enjoy > Blakes 7? Not saying it at all. Just wanting to propose a deal-- you don't have Avon making gushy speeches about his feelings, and I won't have Spock organise a union on the Enterprise and stage a sit-down in the transporter room. Remember what happened to Doctor Who: 26 years with the Beeb, 90 minutes in America. Half-human, indeed. > series? Just be FANS? So long as we're fans of the same series. I don't think so... and I think you're barking up the > wrong tree if you think you're going to have any effect on what other fans > say and do, regardless of their nationality. Not expecting that. Just expressing my opinion, ma'am. Fans, wherever they are from, > tend to like what they want to like and, in the case of fan writers, write > what they want to write. I think everybody all around would be a lot happier > if they would give up the notion of thinking they can somehow "control" the > direction of an entire fandom. Never said I wanted to change your mind. If you want to try to change mine, feel free, but what you said goes double. I think you're confusing me with Diane Gies. Shane "I always thought his death and mine would be linked in some way."

1 0

Fw: [B7L] Chemistry
by littles＠lycos.co.uk 23 Feb '01

23 Feb '01

Sally Wrote: > Also it's a matter of chemistry, which each viewer sees for themselves Explain to me what sort of chemistry there could be between two straight actors playing two straight men. The > fact that Fiona's friend is gay doesn't mean has some sort of chemistry > compass for all such on-screen relationships, But perhaps he's got more field experience in these things. As have I :). >even as I (being hetero) have > one for pairings such as Avon and Servalan, where many many others see it - > including the actors involved - and I don't. Passionate kiss in Aftermath... passionate kiss in Deathwatch... but both between Avon and Servalan. No heavy snogs for Avon and Blake that I can recall. Unless you know better? Shane "Who *are* you?" --Avon

1 0

Re: [B7L] Avon's signature
by Ashton7＠aol.com 23 Feb '01

23 Feb '01

In a message dated 2/23/01 2:51:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, sjk3(a)cornell.edu writes: << I have a copy of "Kill the Dead" signed by Paul Darrow as Parl Dro (not that you can tell the difference). He was about to sign it when I commented how much his signature looked like the character's name, and he responded with "I'll have to sign it that way, won't I?" >> Come to think of it, I also have a copy of "Kill the Dead" signed by Paul Darrow. Although I don't think he did it on *purpose*, it also looks like he signed it Parl Dro. That's sort of the normal state of his signature, isn't it? So, here's a question for you: if his "normal" signature as Paul Darrow looks like Parl Dro... when he went to sign it Parl Dro on *purpose*, did it come out looking like "Paul Darrow"? LOL. Annie

2 1

Re: [B7L] Avon's signature
by Ashton7＠aol.com 23 Feb '01

23 Feb '01

1 0

Re: [B7L] The Gospel
by Ashton7＠aol.com 23 Feb '01

23 Feb '01

In a message dated 2/23/01 2:44:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, ragan(a)sdc.org writes: << Fiona Moore wrote: > I wasn't actually referring to debate ettiquette when I spoke of the Gospel. > I mean that there are certain opinons which appear to be taken as the > "mainstream opinion" on the Lyst. For instance: These really surprise me, because I don't agree with most of them, and I *certainly* didn't think most of them were "mainstream opinion." >> Since I am most definitely pagan, I tend to find myself in opposition to anything calling itself "Gospel." ;-) Annie

1 0

Re: [B7L] The Gospel
by Ashton7＠aol.com 23 Feb '01

23 Feb '01

In a message dated 2/23/01 12:10:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, Mac4781(a)aol.com writes: << And that's precisely why I post more to FC than to the lyst. Because I don't want to have to worry about offending those whose tastes might differ from mine. >> Someone please tell me how to subscribe to FC. I don't want to have to worry about offending so many people, either. Annie

1 0

← Newer
1
...
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
...
93
Older →

Jump to page:

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 February 2001