Blakes7 March 2001

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

96 participants
1067 discussions

Syndeton Experiment part two
by Fiona Moore 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

SYNDETON EXPERIMENT: A CLASSIC? Recently, the question was raised on Lysator of whether or not The Syndeton Experiment is deserving of the label "Classic Science Fiction" which appears in some of the related publicity. While it is admittedly an innocent marketing gimmick (inasmuch as any marketing gimmick is ever innocent), the validity of the epithet is worthy of further investigation. The phrase "classic" seems to be used in three ways with regard to sci-fi media productions. The first generally denotes sci-fi which in some way resembles what is deemd the "highbrow" end of sci-fi: the novels of H.G. Wells, Mary Shelley and, more recently, John Wyndham and Philip K. Dick. As such, it is generally used to denote "thoughtful" sci-fi programmes, and generally literary adaptations, such as the BBC's 1981 "Day of the Triffids" serial. Secondly, sci-fi that is either based on or resembles science fiction of the so-called "Golden Age" of the 1950s pulps, with specific reference to the work of Asimov, Heinlein and Clarke: in this sense, "classic" is used of productions such as "The Rocketeer" or "Starship Troopers." Thirdly, the word is used of science fiction programming made prior to the 1980s, an arbitrary cutoff date seemingly inspired by the relative dearth of new science-fiction, bar Star Trek, from about 1985 through 1996. In the first sense of the word "classic,", The Syndeton Experiment does not stand up particularly well. In no wise is the play a literary adaptation, and, while the latter end of the story makes deliberate reference to Capek's highbrow-sf play "R.U.R.," in the person of Dr Rossum and his robot society, and deals with the themes of mind transference and dystopia much beloved of such authors as Wells, Orwell and C.S. Lewis, the themes are dealt with fairly superficially, and furthermore tend to jar with the rest of the production: it is possible--and indeed "classic," as witness the "Mabuse" films of Fritz Lang--to work in such chilling revelations as Dr Rossum's inadvertent genocide into a superficial romp involving larceny and brothel madams, but in the production as it stands these themes feel rather like something tacked on to give the story a depth it does not otherwise possess. In the second sense of the word, TSE fares little better. The science fiction of the Golden Age is generally characterised by an emphasis on action-adventure and is notorious for lurid scenes and faintly unrealistic characters (especially female ones) and situations; in this regard, perhaps, TSE, with its superficial characterisation (particularly of women), lurid scenarios and occasional shoot-em-ups, could be said to qualify as "classic." However, the Golden Age was also a time when writers were expected to base their stories on hard scientific speculation, as in Asimov's "Robot" novels or Ray Bradbury's stories about computerised houses and Martian colonies; in the case of TSE, however, the science is largely pseudo (and even rather bad; as a recent review pointed out, it is highly unlikely for a new element to be discovered which would have the properties of syndeton), and not particularly speculative. Vila's mind-transference into a robot body could be said to fall within that remit, as the question of whether the human mind can be reproduced electronically is still a current one; however, this transference is not achieved by means of technology, but by the quasi-magical properties of syndeton. In the final sense of the word, however, TSE can arguably be said to be "classic." While of recent creation, TSE is based within the sci-fi series "Blake's 7," which, by virtue of having been screened between 1978 and 1981, just barely scrapes into the "classic television" category. Furthermore, attempts have visibly been made to evoke other elements of "classic television"; the title evokes "The Quatermass Experiment," and Dr Rossum's robot society has vague echoes of similar plots in "Doctor Who" (for which Letts wrote and script-edited) and the film "Soylent Green." However, given that TSE bears very little resemblance to "Blake's 7" as screened on television (lacking its characteristinc gritty themes of rebellion and political struggle, and its sense of genuine psychological menace), and to the other sci-fi programmes and films mentioned, even this definition is in doubt. In short, while the epithet "Classic Science Fiction" is indeed a misnomer when applied to The Syndeton Experiment, it can be said to be "based on classic science fiction." While there is in fact a connection between the radio play and some forms of classic science fiction, it must be admitted to be a tenuous connection at best. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Is Radio Canon? (was Re: [B7L] Re: Syndeton Experiment)
by Fiona Moore 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

>From: Steve Rogerson <steve.rogerson(a)mcr1.poptel.org.uk> >Fiona also said on the canon point: "for >some fairly curious reasons, mainly "...because they were done by the BBC."" > >Well yes. The 52 episodes are canon because they are the official programmes as >done by the BBC. The radio plays fall into the same category. They mostly even >used the same cast. That two characters changed actors is irrelevant anyway given >that in the TV show one main character (Travis) also changed actors part way >through. I'd argue though that there's a few reasons to consider them noncanon, and even anticanonical. To take the change of actors point first: while Travis changed actors in the series, the actor then stayed consistent afterwards: in the case of the radio plays, Soolin apparently changes from Glynis Barber to Paula Wilcox (so far so good) but then changes *back,* since the radio plays are set in the middle of Series 4. Many people have little difficulty developing subcanonical interpretations of varying degrees of believability for Travis' change (plastic surgery? Altered reality?), but it's a bit more difficult to explain a sudden two-story transformation. Furthermore, there is the fact that many of the characters in the plays act totally out of character. Servalan, for instance, washing dishes; Avon developing superhuman strength and publicly asserting that he likes hurting people; Vila suddenly becoming a glutton. Again, it can be argued that characters have acted out of character in the series, for instance Blake in "Voice from the Past" and Avon (debatably) in "Harvest of Kairos"; in both cases, however, the other characters do not act in the slightest bit out of character (Avon and Cally in "Voice" being actually quite well characterised), and also the fact that one character is behaving unusually is in fact a major plot point of both (and again, Avon's sudden withdrawal in "Kairos" can be said to be just a temporary reversion to the more introspective Avon of Series 1, in reaction to Tarrant's posturing for power). Finally, there are a few minor but significant points. One being that the episode titles are totally out of keeping with the one-word titles of Series 4, when the stories are set; another being the sudden changes in explanation of the functioning of the stardrive (again, this would not be a problem except that the new explanation lasts for two stories only [and even then contradicts itself], and that sort of discontinuity is not typical of Series 4). Finally, the ship goes into hyperspace, which never happens within the show. I actually agree with Mistral. Had Chris Boucher, with his keen eye for characterisation and continuity, been minding the store, these discrepancies wouldn't have occurred (it's also quite possible that he might have been able to talk Josette Simon and Glynis Barber into returning, too-- we'll never know). Furthermore, the plays would have been much closer to the tone of the original, and he probably wouldn't have set it in Series 4 to begin with. IMO, one of the best moves Doctor Who ever made was involving scriptwriters/editors/actors from the series in the writing of the New Adventures. The end result tends to fit the series, but still leave room for development. Fiona The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: [B7L] B7 Redux
by Bizarro7＠aol.com 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

In a message dated 3/27/01 10:58:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, rilliara(a)juno.com writes: << OTOH, maybe computer special effects would have outweighed storyline concerns, meaningless violence would be used as filler everytime they felt they had done what they could with the idea, the financial backing would be pushing to water down anything vaguely intelligent under the theory it would alienate the target audience, and Crusade gets cancelled after . . . . Oops, I mean B7.>> Don't break my heart! I adored Crusade. The characters really grew on me and I thought the X-FILES take-off episode was the funniest thing since Fawlty Towers. Leah

1 0

Re: [B7L] the politics of slash
by Tavia 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Shane: >Which, to bring the discussion back to pornography >(which Neil was discussing), suggests that you get something >out of consuming it, but that it also takes something out of you... Well to bring the subject back to slash -- ie fan-written and fan-consumed porn, out of which no profit is made -- I'd personally say it's one of the nearest things to a free lunch I've ever come across. Tavia

1 0

Re: [B7L] zine editing
by Tavia 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Shane wrote: >What is the average sales of a B7 zine? One of the plus >factors may have been though the fact that DW fandom is bigger then B7. As I could only answer that by quoting more experienced zine editors than I, I had better leave them to speak for themselves -- if they choose to make their sales figures public. >Good question. Certainly they [[Ashton Press]] are interested >in protecting their particular >market, but I feel that there maybe another reason for their continued >involvement in B7 fandom, one that perhaps stretches a long way back. Any >ideas? I would say the most likely reason was an abiding love for Blake's 7 and its fans. And finally, if I might say just one thing, Shane. I might not agree with everything Annie or Leah have posted to this Lyst; in fact that's true of virtually any regular poster I could name. However, casting unproven and unprovable aspersions about them or their enterprises, on the basis of what feels to this reader at least like a personal grudge, is really not doing anyone any good. Tavia

1 0

Re: canon
by Steve Rogerson 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Fiona said: "I tend to regard canon as a very fixed thing: it's 52 episodes," Can't remember if I've mentioned this before, but in the debate at Redemption, the majority of those in the discussion on the two radio plays regarded them as canon too. -- cheers Steve Rogerson http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson Redemption 03, 21-23 February 2003, Ashford, Kent The 25th Anniversary Blake's 7 Convention The 10th Anniversary Babylon 5 Convention http://www.smof.com/redemption

3 2

Re: [B7L] Re: On con attendance
by Tavia 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Fiona, quoting me: >>To my mind, fans are much more interesting than guests, >Hm, I find them both interesting but in different ways. I would go further and say that, in my opinion, guests can make fan-run panels/workshops function less well. For example, at Redemption, there was a workshop on British sf press which I attended. I (in my naivete) was expecting to discuss publications such as, say, Interzone (which I used to read in my youth). Instead, Steve K had brought along a load of stuff including SFX (I honestly can't remember the other titles) which (again in my naivete) I would have dismissed as 'girlie mags'. Without exception, they seemed to focus on Buffy, or rather SMG (which by no stretch of the imagination could be called sf). Now, we could have had the basis for an interesting discussion here, *but* also attending the panel were three guests, Andy Lane, Jane Killick and Joe Nazzaro -- all of whom write (or have written) for the SFX-type publications. All discussion of the type I might have enjoyed was instantly stifled. Instead the discussion focused on minute differences between the three (to my eyes) identical publications, and in particular on the problems of getting access to stars and writing articles where the pictures were deemed more important than the text. Interesting, perhaps, but not really much to point. Tavia

3 2

Re: [B7L] Re: canon
by Fiona Moore 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

>From: Steve Rogerson <steve.rogerson(a)mcr1.poptel.org.uk> >Fiona said: "I tend to regard canon as a very >fixed thing: it's 52 episodes," > >Can't remember if I've mentioned this before, but in the debate at Redemption, the >majority of those in the discussion on the two radio plays regarded them as canon >too. Yes, I know-- but from what someone told me afterwards who'd been there, for some fairly curious reasons, mainly "...because they were done by the BBC." In any case, because there's some dispute about them (I do know I'm not the only one who excludes them from canon), they weren't included. Anway, neither of them provide much in the way of fuel for the slash interpretation :)... though they do support the heterosexual-crew viewpoint (if only for Avon and Soolin). Maybe I *should* have included them! Curses! Oh, if only I weren't such a purist... :). I've actually been listening to Syndeton Experiment recently and was inspired to write a review. Wanna hear it? Fiona The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

Re: Propaganda Posters (was [B7L] the politics of slash)
by Fiona Moore 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

>From: huh(a)ccm.net > > And which would have been very cheap to do and would have been incredibly > > visual. Yes, I like that idea. > > > > > > Una > >but b7 only does very cheap and NOT incredibly visual. if it doesn't look >cheap, they don't want it! ;) > >huh? My sentiment exactly-- the "huh?" I meant, not the other thing. The cheap look was hardly deliberate on the series' designers' part, whatever that snide review in BBC Cult Vault may suggest; it was an unfortunate result of doing a show on a budget of £10 and a pickled egg, after all. Also, I personally consider a lot of things about B7 very visual. The Liberator flight deck-- nicely alienesque but still recognisable for what it is. Servalan's dresses, suggesting sex, money and power. The continual visual theme of having all Federation buildings/stations in monochrome decor. The Federation logo--a bit Star Trek admittedly but making for a very nice visual at the end of the opening credits. The industrial-functional feel of Scorpio and Xenon Base. The gas-masks and black jumpsuits of the guards, evoking both Nazi and nuclear thrillers. I'm sure other people have their favourites too.... As for the art: Una's right. Posters *would* have been a cheap but effective way of conveying a totalitarian system, and one with which the viewer could have immediately identified, being familiar with contemporary Civil Defence posters as well as with wartime propaganda posters of all sorts around the place. One wonders why they didn't. In fact, I recall from a DWB article on the B7 title sequence that the original title sequence was going to feature the printing of "Wanted" style posters of Blake and Co. Even if the final title sequence was much better than that IMO, it's a pity they didn't print up a few and stick them up in Central Control (or other areas where people would have known the truth behind the story that Blake was on Cygnus Alpha). Fiona The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

Re: Re: [B7L] reasons
by Shane Little 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Lisa wrote: > >Shane Little wrote: > > > >>It's not as boring as it might sound-- some of the best fiction is both > >>good entertainment _and_ full of literary merit. > > I spend a great deal of time in intellectually challenging > >activities -- there is nothing wrong with some pure mind candy for > >relaxation purposes. My stack of current reading includes a book on > >history, one each on physics, cognitive science, and software, an SF short > >story anthology, and a Ngaio Marsh mystery. Somehow I doubt my brain is > >going to rot because I stoop to the occasional formulaic mystery, pulp > >novel, or frivolous bit of fanfic (slash or otherwise). Very impressive. > >>Where do you think the phrase "sexual politics" comes from? > > > >Dunno, but I tend to run when I hear it. Looks like all that reading didn't count for much then. > > >>So basically then, you read slash for _unrealistic_ relationships? > > > >Well, you're starting to get the idea, I think. Not just slash, however; > >that applies to most of the fiction I read for pleasure. It's not that I'm > >looking for "unrealistic"; I'm looking for *what I like* -- which often > >happens not to be especially realistic. (Not everything unrealistic is what > >I like, but much of what I like is unrealistic -- does that make sense, or > >is it getting murkier?) It makes sense alright, but you're not doing yourself any favours. > >>correct me if I'm wrong but you're not talking about the "realistic" genre > >>of slash here are you? > >Er, I don't know -- I'm not sure what you're calling the "realistic" genre > >of slash. Well if you had quoted my question in full you wouldn't be so confused. It went, "But we weren't talking about "stark realism," just about the story having a basis in some kind of canonical "reality" as a whole, or in the reality of gay relationships. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're not talking about the "realistic" genre of slash here are you?" Other people on the lyst (Tavia, Dana, Julia) have been talking about slash which is realistic either in its depiction of gay relationships or its political attitudes. This is the genre of slash I was referring to. > >>I think I'm getting a little confused here. Let me get this straight, you > >>like to read fanfic about unrealistic characters in unrealistic > >>situations, > >>but they have to be believable in the context of the characters as you see > >>them. > > > >That's correct. I was afraid you'd say that. I want internal coherence -- the characters in the fanfic > >need to match fairly closely the characters I perceive in the original -- > >but I don't regard those characters themselves as being particularly > >realistic. Perhaps that's because realism is not what you are looking for? Personally I think that most of the characters in B7 are very well written indeed; in fact that's what the show is famed for. But somehow you've missed it... > >>Does this mean then you only read fanfic that you write? > > > >No; I don't write fiction. However, there are a sufficient number of fans > >who write, and who see the characters similarly to the way I do, that I can > >find fanfic I enjoy reading. Ah, but how do you know that? You may just *think* they see the characters as you see them; perhaps the authors don't see the characters the way you see them at all. Perhaps if you went up to someone who had written a particular story you had liked, and gave the reasons why you liked said author's particular story, s/he would think you were raving bonkers. But then again, perhaps you would perceive the authors reaction as a sign of their warm approval of your view of their story... > >There's also a lot of it that I *don't* enjoy > >reading, because the characterisations are so far from the way I see them Are you sure though? Perhaps if you had a couple of pints of beer, things would become clearer and the characterisations would fit your perception. Who can tell? > >-- but those characterisations presumably match some other people's > >perceptions quite well. Yes, you could be right there. Perhaps the people who wrote them, even. > >>I've come to like and respect a lot of pro-slash people-- but trying to > >>read it back onto the series is the fastest way to stop me taking what you > >>have to say seriously. > > > >I don't understand what you mean by "read it back onto the series". No. I'm sure you don't. > >I got > >my perceptions of the characters from *watching* the series; I'm not > >certain how else you would expect me to get them. But you said earlier that your perceptions have nothing to do with reality or realism, and that you have no problem with that. > >>I am not suggesting anything, I am telling you that if you want to write, > >>or read slash, then go ahead. > > > >Thank you for your permission. I feel very guilty now, knowing that for all these years you have been waiting to read all this stuff, but couldn't because I hadn't given my permission. You should have e-mailed me sooner, you silly sausage. > >>Read and write as much slash as you like, but don't then try and tell me > >>that Avon, Vila, Tarrant and all, were written > >>and played as gay. > > > >I'm hardly likely to, since I *don't* think any such thing, nor have I ever > >stated or implied that I do. Then why are you arguing, on another thread, that slash has a canonical basis in the series? > >>If that's true then don't reply to this e-mail. > > > >Well, darn; I wish you'd said that back up at the start, See, you should have read my e-mail first before replying. Think of the time it would have saved -- for both of us. > >and not then asked > >a number of questions which I thought it would be impolite not to answer, > >since I assumed you were asking for clarification or information... No. They were rhetorical questions, designed purely to make you look bad. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. I'm only on this lyst in order to irritate you and get up your nose, you know. Shane "A fool knows everything and nothing" -- A fool Who needs Cupid? Matchmaker.com is the place to meet somebody. FREE Two-week Trial Membership at http://www.matchmaker.com/home?rs=200015

1 0

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 March 2001