Blakes7 May 2001

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

84 participants
897 discussions

Re: [B7L] the limits of parody
by Steve Kilbane 15 May '01

15 May '01

Me, then Jenny: > > >Well, actually, we had *that* particular argument a few months back, and > > >it got rather unpleasant. :-) > > Yes. Ever wondered why? Nope. Some people just can't have a civilised debate without attacking or bating their opponents, it seems. I did wonder why it went on so long, though. > If you disagree about the evidence, you're > > >unlikely to be convinced. > > Not at all. You bring consistent evidence to support a conclusion, then I > will consider it very carefully. [blink] Are you saying that if someone presents evidence that you disagree with, you still might be swayed by it? > As for evidence... > > > > > But what we are implicitly accepting here is that there is an > > > > actual "truth". > > > > > >You might. I don't, > > You do with Shakespeare. Who, me? Nope. > for the reasons stated in an earlier post on > > >dramatic productions. Elements of interpretation and interpolation > > >become necessary, but they should be recognised as such. > > They also have to have a bearing on the text. I presume you mean "don't conflict with", here. But you need to define "text". Writer's intention? Script? Script editor's intension? Direction? But that's a separate issue. My point is, saying "X is true" when you're actually merely inferring X from circumstantial evidence, is flawed. > > >Don't recall that many people have left because of this kind of thing. > > >It seems more to be because of how people said it; comments ceased to > > >be about the series, and became about posters. > > Go back and look at it again. No, thanks. Been through it once. See no reason to go through it again. > The entire fight was over interpretation. Some > people just don't like having their fanons challenged. Must be talking about different events, then. Guess those posts passed me by. steve

1 0

Re: [B7L] We can't *all* be geniuses
by Steve Kilbane 15 May '01

15 May '01

Me, then Jenny. > That > > >makes "correct" something that can be difficult to pin down. > > Not at all. B7 was production line TV not a film. In a lot of films things > are changed all the time. Why do you think Live and Let Die is so full of > holes? But not in TV. You compare an original script with the version you > see on TV and the changes will be minimal. You've just agreed that that the product process has an effect, and that the writer's vision isn't the only one. Which means you've got at least two versions of correct - the writer's, and that of anyone who modifies the writer's - which immediately leads to two starting points for interpretation. The TV versus film comparison is irrevelant: to paraphrase you, one changes a lot, while the other changes a little. So they both involve change. So there are multiple viewpoints to start from. steve

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: Limiters in general
by Steve Kilbane 15 May '01

15 May '01

Jenny wrote: > Steve Kilbane wrote: > > > >Jenny wrote: > > > > I'm not making this up you know. This is no self deluding "IMO" > > >bullshit.. > > > > The pattern's there. Everything fits. > > > > > >Even assuming that that is the case, > > It is the case. > > > >that doesn't mean you're right. > > Yes it does. Sorry, no. Saying it does, doesn't work, either. See Popper. > > >It means you have a hypothetical model which fits the facts you've > > >observed. > > Yes, Dr Havant. Which means, what, exactly? > Other models that do not contradict the same evidence are > > >equally valid. > > But there are no others that do this and fit all the "facts." You can't know that. See Popper, again. > Standard scientific approach, diluted somewhat > > >by individual interpretations of what is a "fact", in a dramatic > > >presentation. :-/ > > Who do you think writes these stories? Aliens? No, human beings. Therefore > the stories will, to a great extent, reflect human society. Which has nothing to do with the processes of logical deduction, or the ability to recognise supposition for what it is, rather than facts. > This conversation with you reminds me greatly of that scene in TWB with Dr > Havant. If you like. It's irrelevant, but you can be reminded of it, if you like. > > >Note: anyone offering Occam's razor as a tie-breaker also has to > > >offer a mutually agreeable definition of "simplest". > > Simplicity is always easy to recognise. Note "mutually agreeable". steve

1 0

New Blake Zine: Price Revisions
by Sondra Sweigman 15 May '01

15 May '01

The Way Forward: Crusades of Blake, which debuted at Redemption in February, has just completed a second print run, and we find that we can now offer it to US and Canadian buyers for $2 less than the original price. TWF: CoB is an all-Blake genzine consisting of 165 A4 pages of stories and poetry, richly illustrated with all-color computer graphics (plus an original watercolor of Blake as a solar prominence on the back cover). The zine may be ordered from the following sources for the following prices: Pat Fenech 4/2-6 Darley Road Leichhardt, 2040 New South Wales Australia patriciamaryf(a)iprimus.com.au Price: $38.00 AUS Judith Proctor Waveney Press 28 Diprose Road Corfe Mullen, Wimborne Dorset BH21 3QY United Kingdom Judith(a)Blakes-7.com http://www.hermit.org.Blakes7 Price: 17 pounds (Note: Judith accepts credit card orders) Sondra Sweigman 2 Hiawatha Road Woburn MA 01801-5418 USA sweigman(a)world.std.com Price: $21.00 US Anyone who missed the publicity flyer originally posted on February 19, can't find it in the Lysator archives and would like to see the full rundown on the contents may contact me privately and I'll e-mail it to you (specify if you prefer Word or plain text). Sondra

1 0

RE: [B7L] the limits of parody
by Roberts, Patricia ＠ CSE 15 May '01

15 May '01

> Jenny wrote: > Suicide is painless :-). > > And Tavia replied: > No it isn't. > Neither is it a good subject for jokes. Agree. Pat

1 0

Re: death penalty
by Helen Krummenacker 15 May '01

15 May '01

Wow. Anna Simpson, thank you for that very long list of death penalty references. Given the number of them, it's amazing that so many of us had trouble remembering such specifics. I suppose it comes down to 'seeing is believing'-- excecutions are discussed, but never applied to any characters we are actually introduced to.

1 0

Re: [B7L] the limits of parody
by Tavia 15 May '01

15 May '01

Jenny wrote: >Suicide is painless :-). No it isn't. Neither is it a good subject for jokes. Tavia

1 0

Slave
by M 15 May '01

15 May '01

Wouldn't it have been interesting if Orac gave Slave lessons in behavious. You know - Avon: Set a cause Slave: Why? Avon: I beg your pardon Slave: Look I've been doing this all day, I'm going to do something else Avon walks off spluttering, mumbling to himself something about computers and taking them apart. M. ps - sorry I tend to watch The Way Back and Space Fall together, I meant Space Fall for Gan. _______________________________________________________ Get 100% private, FREE email for life from Excite UK Visit http://inbox.excite.co.uk/

1 0

Re: [B7L] the limits of parody
by Jenny Kaye 15 May '01

15 May '01

Neil Faulkner wrote: >From: Jenny Kaye <jennycat55(a)hotmail.com> > > > If all IMO's were valid, then life would have no meaning. > >Who says it does? Suicide is painless :-). Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] the limits of parody
by Jenny Kaye 15 May '01

15 May '01

Iain Coleman wrote: > > > Less intensively-planned? Don't you believe it. > > > >Umm... actually, I do believe it. Well stop :-) > >It's not a criticism, though. In fact, one of the things that draws me to > >B7 is that -- due to time/budget constraints -- it often comes closer to > >improvisation than to carefully-considered drama. I don't think it does. This is the source of > >much of the show's character and energy, and is why I find it more > >interesting than, say, 'Babylon 5'. The reason why B7 is more interesting than B5 is because it's much better. B5 does all the thinking for you. B7 lets the audience think:-) > > > > >2) The nature of performed text. Even if we manage an entirely > > > > >unproblematic text, what the audience has access to is the > >_performed_ > > > > >text. All performance of a text is an act of textual interpretation > > > > >(Hornby, 'Text into Performance'). > > > > > > To a degree. There are limits. If Darrow one day turned up and said, "I > >want to play the scene where I kill Pella in the style of an Indian bus > > > conductor." He would be told politely to "sod off". Why? Because it > >would > > > not fit with the rest of the episode, or the series for that matter. > > > > > > >I don't know. It might have been an improvement. It would certainly have > >added a bit of colour to the 'Was Avon Mad?' debate. Take it from me it would have been a disaster. I've seen Darrow's "Indian bus conductor", it's awful:-) > > > That's true. Shakespeare was a genius. It can be interpreted many ways > > > because it is meant to be. But any interpretation will have to fit with > >the > > > rest of the play, and it will have to be a "truthful" interpretation. If > >I > > > were to say that in the above text extract the character is talking > >about a > > > banana, you would quite rightly say, "What the bloody hell is she > >talking > > > about?" Well, that's what's happening to B7. > > > > > > >As it happens, I'll be rehearsing 'Macbeth' tomorrow in a house which > >generally has a ready supply of bananas. If I get a chance, I'll try doing > >that soliloquy as though it was about a banana. I suspect it might work > >better than you imagine. Oh, it'll work. But you'll very probably have to take the scene out of context. Also I dare you to do it on stage in front of an audience, or even suggest this as a serious possibility to the rest of the cast:-) and the best > > > > >interpretations have an 'aha!' quality that comes from pulling > > > > >previously disconnected elements together into a coherent whole. > > > > > > That's true. But what if it is not a case of disconnected elements, but > >an > > > overlooked pattern? > > > > > > >I think we're using different words to mean the same thing. Are we? Surely there is a difference between someone thinking up an explanation to explain a genuine mistake in production and someone putting elements together to expose a conscious, or sometimes unconscious, subtext put in by the author. > > > Iago is an immensely fascinating character. But if I told you that in my > > > fanon, Iago was a tree, you'd say I was mad. You have to understand a > >text > > > before you can send it up, or comment on it, or lampoon it. Most people > >on > > > this Lyst know nothing about B7 at all. Oh, they can quote the lines and > > > remember the episode titles. But actually understand it? I see very > >little > > > proof of that. > > > > > > >Oh dear, a rational email has now descended into name calling. A pity. It's a statement of fact. A statement of fact cannot be insolent:-) > > > > >I think you are quite radically misunderstanding my point. > > > > > > You think so? > > > >Yup. I guess you could always provide your summary of what you thought my > >point was, if you were interested in demonstrating that you had in fact > >understood it all along. Don't have to, you give a potted summary yourself, "It was shit acting". > > > > >It was shit acting, simple as that. Oh dear, a rational email has now descended into name calling. A pity. > > > It has everything to do with that time slot. The emotional realism is > >toned > > > down, because if it were played for real it would frighten its audience > > > half to death. > > > >If it had been played with the reality that Gareth brings to the last > >scene of 'Blake', that Michael Sheard brings to his death scene in > >'Pyramids of Mars', or that Peter Davison brings to his whole four > >tormented episodes of 'Caves of Androzani', it would have been great. Yes, but after the episode "Blake" there was an enormous public backlash that went on for months. Pyramids of Mars upset the "clean up TV campaigners" and "Caves of Andrazani" lead to Season 22 which was criticised for its violence and ended with the entire show being suspended for 18 months. When it returned it had been neutered. > > Darrow is a fairly mannered actor anyway. He plays the scene > > > in a very stylised and mannered way. Both of them do. But if the > >director > > > didn't want them to do that, she wouldn't have let it through. You do > >say > > > that emotional realism is not an unusual thing in B7 so why is this > >scene an > > > exception? Why wasn't Darrow getting direction? > > > > > > >First, a small point: while emotional realism is not unusual in B7, it is > >strongly correlated with particular performers. It would be. And sometimes Darrow doesn't give a hundred percent. But when he wants to Darrow can be excellent. > >To answer your main point: I don't know for sure, not having been on the > >studio floor for that day's shooting. It's easy to come up with > >possibilities: perhaps it was filmed last thing at night, perhaps the > >director was having to spend all her time getting the lighting right and > >couldn't spend much time on the actors... one could go on and on. For what > >it's worth, though, I think prevailing cultural attitudes at the BBC had a > >lot to do with it. Thank you. > > > Another example. Look at Darrow's studio fight with Bayban. Not very > >good, > > > is it? Now look at Darrow's fight with the Sarrans on that beach. Much > > > better. You know why? They had more time and a stuntman was involved. > >Don't > > > slag an actor off just because he's doing what he's been told to do. > > > >Is it all right with you if I criticise the actors' performance of a scene > >when I've seen it done vastly better by two totally miscast, entirely > >unprepared actors with no theatrical training? No. They were trained by you, and you are quite obviously a very bright individual who has a clear grasp of the subject. If that were not the case you would not have even attempted to pull something off like that. Unless you were stupid of course. Which you most certainly are not. You're probably a pretty good actor as well :-) Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

← Newer
1
...
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
...
90
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 May 2001