Blakes7 March 2001

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

96 participants
1067 discussions

Re: On con attendance
by Fiona Moore 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

>From: Tavia <tavia(a)btinternet.com> >Well, yet again, perhaps I'm unusual. I went to my first-ever con, >Redemption, purely for the workshoppy-type things as well as the >opportunity to meet and re-meet fans encountered in cyberspace. I don't know how typical I am either, but the first con I went to was partly out of curiosity, and partly because they were showing "Tomb of the Cybermen," which at the time had only just been rediscovered and was about a month away from video release. Mind you, I didn't object to getting one or two autographs as well :). >actually attend a single one of the guest-oriented events. And, for what >it's worth, I thoroughly enjoyed myself... I got the impression that a lot >of people at Redemption were operating under the same motivation set (but >then, of course, I only met the ones who attended the smaller workshops or >hung out in the bar...observer bias or what) I have to say I like workshoppy things more than guest panels myself, just because you tend to get a better signal-to-noise ratio. >To my mind, fans are much more interesting than guests, Hm, I find them both interesting but in different ways. At Panopticon, I had a lot of fun catching up with my mates from elsewhere in the country and listening to Alistair Lock talk about his work-- but there was also an element of fun in being able to ask David Collings about his upcoming projects over a whiskey. >I might well have had a different view 15 or so >years ago. (I do recall a doomed attempt to persuade my parents to let me >go to a play starring PD...) 15 years ago I was living in a different country, and had slightly more chance of seeing Santa Claus than of seeing Paul Darrow :)... 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] Gender and fanfic
by Fiona Moore 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

>From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner(a)tesco.net> <Almost as if rebellion or revolution were perceived to be mutually incompatible with sexual relations. I detect the implication that anything outside relationships is seen to be somehow asexual and sterile or even antisexual, whi strikes me as depressingly reactionary.> I think you're right, as witness the recent spate of posts along the lines of the writer liking a particular story up until the sex bit kicks in. But this does raise a point about a lot of the erotic fiction that I've seen: that often the sex does seem to be divorced from the politics, as if the two were mutually incompatible, which seems to run counter to the way in which sex was presented in the series itself. Not the case for all erotic fanfic, but certainly a problem with many examples of the genre. PS to Una and Tavia: OK, OK. Cambridge won already. What do you do, genetically engineer your rowing team? 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

4 5

Re: [B7L] Re: Candy
by Shane Little 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

Julia wrote: > >No I'm not. Ask Dana Shilling. I have a great deal of respect for Tavia, > >Dana, and several others who put out some well-crafted stuff. This doesn't > >stop me from objecting to other aspects of slash (artwork, gay lifestyle > >issues, etc.) > > >Yes, your later posts are a bit clearer in that regard. But you *are* >coming over, to some members of the list, in the way I described. Well, I feel I've been keeping to the same line throughout. Slash in general: not my thing. Well-written, political slash: I can respect it if not agree with it. PWP: can't see the point. Adult art: under the circumstances, totally unjustifiable. I've said it with varying degrees of intensity; it depends on who I'm talking to. And I don't expect to convince anyone or stop anyone else expressing their own opinion; I'm just expressing my own. >Please understand that I'm not trying to shut you up, quite the >contrary. You have things to say that I personally think are well worth >listening to, even if I disagree with you about some of it. However, for >me it's tending to get drowned out in the general tide of "all slash is >worthless exploitative trash" (which, I feel I should say in my own defence, I've never said) >that seems to me to be the theme of many >of your posts at the moment. Which isn't the case, but oh well. Frankly, my tone depends on who I'm talking to. If I'm talking to somebody like yourself, or any of the other people who are debating slash in a rational way, then I'll make my points in a reasoned manner. If I'm talking to somebody who is making extreme statements about other people being sick or telling me to just shut up and live with it if I don't like it, then I find it a little difficult to keep a civil tone. Reading back over my last few posts (narcissism) I've noticed that the ones where I get the most sharp tend to be when I'm dealing with people who are being offensive (for instance post #45493-- I'm sorry, but when somebody says they don't care how their activities hurt other people, fans and actors, I'm not going to be polite). And a couple of the people I've been posting to these past couple of days aren't exactly coming across as tolerant themselves-- though I think they're just looking to start a fight and distract us from the main debate. But if I'd really wanted to object totally to slash, I would have just come on and said "all slash is rubbish, end of discussion." Which is why I'm not saying that. As a writer whose slash output has a large >proportion of the political polemic variety, I'm finding it annoying on >a personal level as well as on the "why the hell don't you go and find >out a bit more about the subject you're talking about" level. Well, firstly, if that's the style you write, then you can pretty much consider yourself exempt from most of the criticism I've been making-- again, I thought I'd made it clear that I respect slash with a message, and so my complaints were directed against other sorts. Secondly, though, I'm not a slash virgin :-). I did read those five zines that were in the auction lot I bought; didn't think much of them but whatever. I also have friends (all female) who read slash with varying degrees of interest; one of them forwarded me some political slash offlist recently which I thought was reasonable (though to be totally honest it wasn't my idea of fun). Finally, I would ask you to send me some of yours-- but this sort of thing's all very subjective, and I'm not sure if I'd be the right person to give a reasoned critique. >Or to put it in my more usual posting style: look mate, you say a lot of >interesting, thought-provoking things, I'd rather you cut the >confrontational bollocks because the S/N ratio is getting a bit low for >my tastes and I'd rather not killfile you. I think you've just demonstrated my point. What you say in your last paragraph is a lot more confrontational than what you say in your first-- but _the message is the same_. On the killfile thing though-- I've never been totally comfortable with the concept, I have to say. I'm not asking people to read my posts if they don't want to-- but if you killfile somebody cause you don't like what they're saying on one thread, you might miss out on what they say on other, more interesting threads. Or, if a person comes up with a post on the subject of B7 FEATURE FILM NOW IN PREPRODUCTION or KILLER PENGUINS DESCENDING ON LONDON, then you'll never know, will you? The slash thread will end eventually, and I'm hopeful that the people who've been offending _me_ with their posting styles will turn out to have intellingent things to say elsewhere. Shane "I seldom comment on other people's ethics." --Avon Who needs Cupid? Matchmaker.com is the place to meet somebody. FREE Two-week Trial Membership at http://www.matchmaker.com/home?rs=200015

2 1

New guest at Eclectic 21
by sue wadsworth-ladkin 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

Hi Chaps Eclectic 21 is proud to announce a new guest on board, David Walsh, the alternative Servalan. Our other guests are Gareth Thomas, Jacqueline Pearce, Frank Maher, Michael Billington, Ed Bishop, Storm Constantine and Steve Englehart. For those of you who are UFO fans as well as Blakes 7 devotees, you have another chance to see Ed (Commander Straker) and Michael (Colonel Foster) in this series as it is being shown on the Sci-Fi channel on Sunday evenings. For more information on events and for booking forms, see our website www.eclectic21.co.uk Sue Wadsworth-Ladkin _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

"That" issue
by Ellynne G. 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

Watching all the fighting going on, I'm wondering why I bothered. I mean, I survived a few years of elementary school on the philosophy that no one attacks the kid they haven't noticed. I know when I'm asking for trouble (well, I usually know. There are always the social blunders you didn't intend to make, but let's not go there). And, I mean, if anyone thinks that I wouldn't prefer to have to trot around a couple of miles of concrete with the epidermal layer (and some of the dermal) gone from the soles of my feet than jump in on something like this, they are sadly mistaken. So, why? Well, lack of common sense, sure. I've always had that. That general attitude that makes you think, hey, maybe the little lemming really _does_ know where its going. Yeah, been there, done that. And then there's all that "Give me liberty or give me death" stuff that I couldn't help absorbing as a kid (hey, it was in the air). The feeling that those things need to be said. Also, let us not forget the areas I could mention that still have laws saying People Like Me can't vote, own property, or stuff like that. Because of personal beliefs. And, if someone had stood up and said something extemely unpopular, would it have made a difference? Well, yeah. Because history shows some people did. And they made a difference. Me, I figure there's a better than even chance I'll say the wrong thing and make it worse, but sometimes keeping silent seems wrong. For the kinder, more civil, even supportive responses, thanks. For the ones that might have been intended sarcastically or might not - I'm assuming not. So, thanks. For the use of the words moral and ethical, I don't know an alternative. An ethics system is more than an opinion. I realize some people have radically different value systems than me. That doesn't make them any less important to us. Ob. B7. Having said my Cally-esque piece, I think I will now give into my natural impulse, be Vila, and go into lurking. 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] Homophobia
by Ashton7＠aol.com 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

In a message dated 3/26/01 5:30:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, tavia(a)btinternet.com writes: << All the zine editors I know of have some pretty carefully worded warning text at the front of their zines and on all their promotional material which uses the word 'homosexual' rather than 'slash'. I guess it is incumbent upon the editors of mixed zines to be particularly careful -- not that there are that many of us around. (Are there any others? asks she, glancing round...) >> Mysti Frank has published what you'd probably consider "mixed" zines. I remember she had some problems with a Blakes 7 issue years back with someone who wanted her to photocopy out only the non-adult parts of the zine for them and Mysti took exception to the request. Of course, back then, it wasn't as easy to photocopy things *and* we had to run off zines in 200-300 copies at a time just to get a decent print price. So, anyone cutting in to your potential sales could be potential cause for alarm. I considered publishing some "mixed" issues of my own zines, mostly from urgings of people like Jane Carnall who objected to non-explicit stories being relegated to adult zines simply because they featured homosexual relationships. I happen to agree with her that it wasn't fair. But I also had to look at how such a move would affect my sales. I was still operating, at that time, under the rule of having to print a minimum print run of 200 zines. If I mixed *gasp* slash stories in with the gen, even if they were non-explicit, I ran the risk of missed sales. Not that the slash zines didn't/don't sell well on their own. The reality is, though, that there are some fans who read gen, some who read slash and some who read both. Those who prefer only slash and those who prefer only gen don't tend to *want* the zines mixed. Annie

1 0

Re: [B7L] Vindicated!
by J MacQueen 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

>From: Mistral <mistral(a)centurytel.net> >Just remember that Travis is the Glove. (Hm. With two Travii, we have a >pair of Gloves!) Only first series, though - Travis II is quite happy to smash them, but not necessarily for Her Blueness's benefit. Regards Joanne (also trying not to consider who the apple bonkers might be - the alien menace from Andromeda... No, I'm not thinking about this!) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Vindicated!
by J MacQueen 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

>From: "Una McCormack" <una(a)qresearch.org.uk> >Her Herness: "Mort, so-and-so who was just here for tea... Liquidate him." >Goon: "Yes, Madame Vileness" (or whatever). <hoot of laughter> That does it. The Federation *are* the Blue Meanies, so far as I'm concerned. It all makes sense, especially if Jarriere is Max. Regards Joanne (now trying not to work out which of our heroes are John, Paul, George and Ringo) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

2 1

On con attendance (Was: [B7L] Biology, culture and the crush)
by Tavia 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

Fiona wrote: >yes, there are lots ofother reasons to go to cons, it's true, than >just to see actors. But it does have to be said, that the no-guest >cons I've been to ("relaxicons" I've heard them called) are generally >much more poorly attended than ones with guests (and even one >I went to where they had a couple of well-know writers along was >much more poorly attended than the rather small-scale DW con I >went to which could only boast Nicola Bryant as a guest), and it >seems to be a truism that the "bigger" the con, the "bigger" the name >of the actors they get as guests (probably a positive-feedback thingy). >I wouldn't consider myself starstruck by any means-- but the information >that David Collings was going to be at Panopticon was a big incentive >for me to attend. So actors aren't the only reason to go to cons, it's >definitely true-- but for a lot of people, they seem to be a big part of it, >for whatever reason. Well, yet again, perhaps I'm unusual. I went to my first-ever con, Redemption, purely for the workshoppy-type things as well as the opportunity to meet and re-meet fans encountered in cyberspace. I didn't actually attend a single one of the guest-oriented events. And, for what it's worth, I thoroughly enjoyed myself... I got the impression that a lot of people at Redemption were operating under the same motivation set (but then, of course, I only met the ones who attended the smaller workshops or hung out in the bar...observer bias or what) I briefly considered going to Cult TV last year (which had PD among its guests) and ended up *not* going partly because it seemed too focused on guests. To my mind, fans are much more interesting than guests, at least where the series is sufficiently old that the guest actors have forgotten what the series was about (GT's 'What is this StarOne thingy of which you speak' being a case in point). I might well have had a different view 15 or so years ago. (I do recall a doomed attempt to persuade my parents to let me go to a play starring PD...) Tavia

1 0

Re: [B7L] reasons
by Tavia 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

Fiona wrote: >Dunno about that-- have you read Jim Smith's episode reviews in Zenith and >in Horizon 39, on "Trial" and "Gambit"? Quite a bit of the series seems to >be about politics of a very Byzantine level of complexity and intrigue. Much to my surprise, I find myself agreeing here. While the overwhelming feeling I carried away from the series was action--adventure with a bit of black leather and sf cliche's thrown in, there are a fairly large number of episodes with at least some political content (eg, and I'm sure I've missed some, TWB, Breakdown, Bounty, Shadow, Horizon, Trial, VftP, Gambit, StarOne, RoD, Death-Watch, Traitor, Animals, Warlord). >We don't even know what sort of governmental system the fictional country of >Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" had, but that doesn't make it any less a political >story. Brilliant film. As I recall, though, 'Brazil' charted the effect of the regime on individual citizens, which made the precise nature of the governmental system less important than in something like B7 where the Merry Band is opposing the System. I think some of the information deficiencies that Dana pointed out were pure bad writing, probably because of the joint authorship of the series, where some writers were plainly more interested in the political dimension than others. >Well, I've read (and enjoyed) some of your stories, and I agree from those >that it is >quite possible to do slash with interesting premises and messages. But I >think it's the awful ones that people object to more than the interesting >ones. If I want to read sex for sex's sake, frankly, I'll buy a porn mag. We'll convert you yet... I fear, however, that you might be in a minority here. I get the impression that some readers find well-written and interesting slash stories even more pernicious than badly written dull ones. (I've heard a lot more invective directed at Nickey Barnard's 'Haunted' than any other single story.) Tavia

4 3

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