Blakes7 March 2001

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

96 participants
1067 discussions

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

28 Mar '01

Tavia wrote: > >Shane wrote (responding to Julia): > > >That wasn't the case with the zines I was involved with; in fact it was > > >impossible *not* to make a profit, which was a bit of a problem because > > >fanzines by their nature have to be non-profit making, or else you are > > >infringing copyright. > > > >I'd genuinely be interested to know how. Your sales must have been very > >large compared with the sales of B7 zines. I don't know. 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. > > >I'm sure that is your experience, but Ashton Press have their fingers in > > >many fandoms, not just B7. > > > >If Annie and Leah are that money-grubbing, why the hell are they bothering > >to produce B7 fanzines at all, one wonders? Good question. Certainly they 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? > > > > >Unfortunately, you also compromise yourself. Another problem which > > >I've experienced in my involvement with zine producing, > > >and I'm sure you have also, is that most fanfic is very > > >badly written :-). Not good when dealing with a controversial subject > >like > > >sexual politics. > > > >Hmm. I can honestly say that has not been my experience. Mebbe I was > >just lucky, but I got submitted some real gems. Maybe you know a group of really good and reliable writers. Or mebbe I just have low > >standards. That doesn't ring true to me:-) Shane ""Welcome back to your people" -- Chel 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

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

28 Mar '01

Carol wrote: >Shane wrote: > > > I'm sure that is your experience, but Ashton Press have their fingers in > > many fandoms, not just B7. Ever wondered why? Especially when you consider > > that Annie or Leah have repeatedly failed to demonstrate any real interest > > whatsoever in what B7 was about, and in fact have demonstrated a clear > > dislike for some of the main actors involved. Needs investigation, I feel. > >Well then, why don't you go conduct that investigation? And when you're >ready to level specific charges, come back and tell us about it. Why don't you? You're closer than I am. But if you want some advice, you could start by asking for their accounts to be made public... Shane "Aren't you going to bed?" --Dayna 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

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

28 Mar '01

Julia wrote: >In message <IOOEAFEPJGOJNAAA(a)angelfire.com>, Shane Little ><littles(a)angelfire.com> writes > >I was involved in the production of a number of Doctor Who zines in the mid > >80's and early to mid nineties, so I have quite a bit of experience. I don't > >make comments about things I know nothing about, and if you've been reading > >my posts, then you should know that, Julia :-). > ><grins evilly> Right, we've got him, he's publicly admitted to editing >experience. > >Shane, how would you like to edit a Blake's 7 anthology zine? Yes, I'm >perfectly serious and not just pulling your leg, the good Citizens will >confirm that. Given the current burnout rate, another editor who >believes in editing as well as publishing would not go amiss. Nor would >another take on zine format. I will admit to personal interest in this - >I think I might like a B7 zine edited to your tastes, going by what >you've been saying. Well, I'm very flattered, Julia, I have to say. Unfortunately, I'm just about to start a new job, and I don't know how much work it's going to take. If the offer's still there in six months, let's talk :). Shane "And may I be the first to offer you my congratulations, Madam President." --Durkim 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

Re: Syndeton Experiment
by Steve Rogerson 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Fiona said: "I've actually been listening to Syndeton Experiment recently and was inspired to write a review. Wanna hear it?" Yeah, be interested as I recently heard them again to prepare for that panel and I'd like to know what others think. 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. -- 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

1 0

Another chance to see
by J MacQueen 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

It looks like that Dalziel and Pascoe with Josette Simon in it is on the ABC again on Friday. The little episode summary certainly sounds as though it's this one. Regards Joanne _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] B7 Redux
by Ellynne G. 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 21:13:29 EST Bizarro7(a)aol.com writes: > > I'm genuinely curious to know if BLAKES 7 would have been done very > differently, if it appeared on the BBC now, rather than in the 70's. > I > suppose the answers to this question would be relevant if the show > is ever > revived, however many years later in the B7 timeline, but > still--would it > have been cast similarly? Would the demographic of the crew be the > same? > Anyone have any notions on the idea? So many possibilities . . . . It could go either way. On the good side, there might have been stronger scripts for the female characters. Special effects that open up new possibilities they couldn't afford before. Maybe the best thing since Shakespeare would do the writing and . . . well, fill in the blanks. Maybe it would come closer to whatever each of us feels was the full potential, the Platonic ideal, of the show. 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. Ellynne ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: canon
by J MacQueen 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

>From: "Fiona Moore" <nydersdyner(a)yahoo.co.uk> >I've actually been listening to Syndeton Experiment recently and was >inspired to write a review. Wanna hear it? If you could put in your opinion as to whether it fits the description "Classic Scifi". I wince every time that promotion for BBC audio material is screened on the ABC, and that phrase is used - the new Shier-headed ABC is overdoing the promotions bit, so that doesn't help. (Then again, it does depend on whether you think The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy and assorted Dr Who audio releases fit the description.) Regards Joanne _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

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

28 Mar '01

>From: "Dana Shilling" <dshilling(a)worldnet.att.net> > > I haven't heard of any Mark Chapman-style stalking of the B7 actors :), >but > > I have heard of a few cases of stalking which the actors found distressing > > if nothing else, <snip> >WHile I agree that it certainly is unmannerly to show people things they >will find distressing, you really can't compare giving someone a >disagreeable >experience of this type with placing him in fear that he or his family will >be >physically harmed. Yeah, but the question was about stalking, which, if I recall the definition correctly, covers all sorts of harrassment, not just the sort involving actual physical threat. My sister was technically stalked a couple of years ago-- it was a fellow-student at her university who developed a crush on her and began following her around as a result. He didn't mean her any harm--and she came out of the experience more cynically amused than hurt--but that's still stalking, even if he wasn't actually ringing her up and threatening her. And the dirty-pictures thing is more distressing than what happened to my sister. 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] reasons
by Shane Little 28 Mar '01

28 Mar '01

Lisa wrote: >>My penguins don't read, they just eat slash. > >I've got a cat who does that. Yes, he's a fifth columnist working for me. >>Ahem, false analogy there. Bit of a difference between political >>fanfic >>and bad food. > >Ah, but that's the point -- I didn't say anything about *bad* food, I've been racking my brains to think of a context in which eating slugs is considered good, and drawing a blank. I know about the snails, I've just never heard it for slugs. Anyway, just because someone likes something doesn't mean it's good for them. >>I'm saying that people should know that slash is only a small part >>of a >>vast amount of fanfic of varying quality. > >Er, I think most people are well aware of that already. It's not >exactly a >secret. But when I first came on to Lysator, I found that people were talking about slash, and the people who spoke up for gen were very much in the minority. This has since changed. >>I'm sure Neil Faulkner and the other gen writers out there are >>delighted >>to hear that their writing is boring, as compared to a PWP. > >I said nothing comparing Neil's work to a PWP. You did say you found the politics boring, and Neil is a very political writer. (What is this thing >you've >got about PWPs, anyhow? It's not as though they're somehow >representative >of slash, after all.) I may not entirely like slash that's got a political or narrative point to it, but I'm willing to respect the writer's intention. But PWPs don't seem to have much merit beyond a wank, and not a good one at that. And they _are_ a lot more visible than the more thoughtful stuff, you must admit. However, from what little I know of Neil, I >suspect >he is a sufficiently mature writer to realize that no writer's work >appeals >to everyone, and hence there will be people who don't enjoy his, and >that >this is not necessarily a reflection on the quality of said writing. >Yes, >there probably *are* people who would like a PWP better than one of >Neil's >stories, and might be bored by the latter. They're allowed. There >are >probably also those for whom exactly the opposite is true. They're >allowed. >There are people who would enjoy neither Neil's work nor a PWP, and >some >who'd like both. Guess what? They're allowed. (sigh). Of course they're allowed. that's not the point. The point is that something that's really not representative of B7 fanfic as a whole seems to be becoming the dominant sort, and that's not allowing much of a voice to the other sorts. >>That _is_ politics, actually. > >Oh. Well, then I guess I don't understand what you mean by >"politics". Politics is human relations writ large. >>If you don't find sex interesting, why read slash? > >Because I enjoy it. (Or enjoy certain, highly specific instances of >it -- >I'm very picky.) I don't need any other reason or justification. In >my >case, I'm reading it primarily for the emotional content; I can find >the >level and type that I want more easily in slash than in gen, >usually. I >tend to skim through a lot of the sex scenes because, as I said, I >don't >find sex in itself particularly interesting. Slash stories aren't >just >about sex, Shane. (Say that three times, quickly.) No they aren't, but you're being sold a bit of a pig in a poke, aren't you? If the relationships in slash aren't realistic, then it seems to me it's a bad place to go looking for fiction about relationships. >An objection which I wholly understand and sympathize with. Making >up >stories about imaginary characters is called fiction; making up >stories >about real people is called libel. There's an intrinsic difference >-- >fictional characters can never know, or be hurt or embarrassed by, >anything >we make up about them. Well, we're agreed on something then. >>But if they're presenting two characters in a gay relationship, >>then they >>_are_ writing about my lifestyle. I'm a gay man in a gay >>relationship. >>Hence my concern. > >But you're not Blake, or Avon, or Vila, or Tarrant. No, but they're not gay. >>So we're agreed then. Slash of course being out of character for >>straight >>characters. > >Well, sure. But I don't think I've seen much slash about straight >characters. I meant, the characters as portrayed in the show. Who are straight, if you check the archive. >>Um, sorry, but relationships between two characters _are_ their >>lifestyle. > >*Their* lifestyle. (I just cringe using that word; my gay friends >hate it, >and pounce on any instance of it. Fortunately, I don't think they're >reading the list.) It's not some kind of sweeping comment on "gay >lifestyles". Or on yours. If you're not happy with the word "lifestyle" pick your own word, but what I said still stands. A lot of slash I've seen has nothing to do with gay lifestyles at all, just with titillation. >>But some sorts of fanfic fit the canon better than others. > >Sure. So? There is no rule that fanfic must fit the canon, loosely, >closely, or at all. If it directly contradicts canon -- canon being >what we >actually saw and heard on screen, not an individual viewer's >interpretation >thereof -- then it's an AU. That's fine; there's a big market for >AUs. And >any fanfic gets filtered through the reader's own perception of the >show, >so there will never be full agreement on how well an individual >story >agrees with canon. Nor do I see any reason why there should be. As I said before, I have no problem with fantasy. >>And if there's no worth in a story beyond a quick wank, what's the >>point? > >Maybe a quick wank *is* the point in some cases? But why would you >assume >that there's no other worth in the story? There's a broad, broad >field >between a "quick wank" and a story with a "serious message". And >there's >plenty of room for both, and all the stuff in between. Yes, true, but we're not talking about the deeper stuff. The stuff that's just for a wank though, I mean I sometimes wonder why not just save the effort and rent a porn video. >>It's 1984 all over again-- use porn to distract the people from the >>real >>issues and stifle discussion. > >Many of the most intriguing and in-depth discussions I've ever seen >in >fandom have been on slash lists, prompted by slash stories. If the >purpose >of slash stories is to "stifle discussion", all I can say is that >they're >failing miserably. Then perhaps I'm just being prejudiced, but here on the lyst, it's ironically been the conservative religious people who have been showing the most tolerance, and two slash fans who have been running around calling people sick. As I said, I've grown to respect many of the slash writers and readers on this lyst-- but I have to admit that slash fandom's extreme wing strikes me as nastier than gen fandom's extreme wing. > But in general, their primary purpose is >*entertainment*. Entertainment doesn't have to have a message. >Sometimes >it's just fun for fun's sake. True, but I'm voicing my opinion here, and my axe is being ground against other aspects of slash, and particularly the manufacture of explicit images without permission. >>Nobody brought up right or wrong in fanfic, slash or otherwise, >>prior to this. > >Then what's the problem? If you don't like it, don't read it. It's not just a matter of reading and writing it. Most anti-slash people don't read it, but we are aware of it and affected by it. You don't, for instance, have to read slash to have an opinion on the debate over whether or not slash is canon; at Redemption you could avoid the Slash panel but couldn't be unaware that it was going on. Like Alison said, you don't have to watch Westerns to know that the portrayal of Native Americans is not going to fit the U.N. anti-racism guidelines. >>If something offends you, you have a choice. Either passively sit >>around >>hoping it'll go away, or stand up and make your opinions heard. I >>know >>which I'll pick. > >OK, you've done that, at least to some extent. (I'm still not sure >what it >is you want to happen here.) I just want to raise people's awareness of the issues. > But I submit that there is a wide world >of >difference between not liking what someone else finds entertaining, >and >being oppressed and deprived of your rights. The former is simply a >difference of opinion; you're not being harmed because someone else >enjoys >something you don't. When was that ever at issue? Shane "Resist the host or your oneness will be absorbed" --Zil Who needs Cupid? Matchmaker.com is the place to meet somebody. FREE Two-week Trial Membership at http://www.matchmaker.com/home?rs=200015

4 6

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

28 Mar '01

Annie wrote: >Frankly, most gay writing written by and for gay men focuses *solely* on the >sex You've only been reading the porn then. Plenty of writing by and for gay men deals with other aspects of life (even though they may write about sex as well). Derek Jarman, Armistead Maupin, Quentin Crisp, whoever it was who wrote "Bent," Russell T. Davies and Matt Jones (who wrote Doctor Who novels with interesting and subtle gay male characters as well as Queer As Folk)... Peter Tatchell, too, if you count nonfiction. > much like porno films that are made mainly for the male market focus >solely on visual images and the sex act. And porn made for the female market doesn't? What about PWP slash? > Slash written by women tends to be >much more romantic in nature. Not always. >So, when folks say that slash isn't what gay >sex is "really" like, I have to laugh. No, but gay porn isn't much like what gay sex is like either. We don't all go out shagging anything with muscles, you know. But at the same time even the "romantic" aspects of gay life aren't much like slash. >It isn't what gay men like to write >and read about, it's true. Who cares? It isn't written *for them*. It is >written mostly by and for women. So you're saying slash has no merit other than as something to titillate women? Perhaps the sort you like to read, but, in case you haven't been reading posts lately, a lot of people have been talking about political slash stories (Dana for instance). Shouldn't they be read by gay men too? Or do you want to keep slash your own private club? >And I have been happily partnered with another woman for almost 12 years >now... Which makes your frankly homophobic description of gay men above all the more disturbing. >I still like, read and write slash stories, mostly m/m. And yet you say you're not interested in what a gay male relationship is really like. This sounds a bit like those straight men who watch "lesbian" porn movies. >As for the person who pointed out that homophobia has "reared" its head >around here. Yes, it has. I take a great deal of exception to being told that >reading about two people making love is just as morally reprehensible as >massacre. There's something very sick about a religion or a person who would >believe that. And yet you, by your own admission, twist gay male relationships into something solely for your own titillation. I don't agree with Kathryn and Elynne's religious beliefs but at least they've come out and been up front about them instead of hiding behind a pretense of being liberal. And IMO it's more than a little offensive to call _anyone_ sick. Shane Largo: "Why do I feel that I'm on trial here?" Avon: "Why do I feel as if you should be?" Who needs Cupid? Matchmaker.com is the place to meet somebody. FREE Two-week Trial Membership at http://www.matchmaker.com/home?rs=200015

6 8

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