Blakes7

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

5511 discussions

Re: [B7L] We can't *all* be geniuses ... (long)
by J MacQueen 14 May '01

14 May '01

>From: "Dana Shilling" <dshilling(a)worldnet.att.net> >and the rubber duckie. You know, Dana, I'm damn glad that Avon doesn't go in for multicoloured, horizontally striped tops, and Ernie-from-Sesame-Street style hair. It's bad enough having "Rubber duckie, you're the one..." running through the back of my mind, so I don't want to start casting Tarrant as Bert, perhaps... Oh. Stop that, stop that now. Regards Joanne _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

2 1

Re: Limiters in general
by Steve Rogerson 14 May '01

14 May '01

Jenny says about Spike: "Thirdly, after he gets the chip in, there is no instance of him killing a human under any circumstance." Wrong. When Druscilla makes her brief return, she shows him that the chip's power is all in his mind and he can overcome it with willpower. He does just that and kills a human. -- cheers Steve Rogerson http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson Redemption 03, 21-23 February 2003, Ashford, Kent Celebrating 25 years of Blake's 7 and 10 years of Babylon 5 http://www.smof.com/redemption

3 2

Re: [B7L] Re: Gan in Breakdown
by Jenny Kaye 14 May '01

14 May '01

Helen Krummenacker wrote: > > > : No. It's a deliberate act. The malfunction didn't "scramble his > > > brain : impulses," it removed his restraints. > > > > > > That's your interpetation. Based on evidence from the series. The text doesn't give us to believe that > > > we're seeing the true Gan. I'd grudgingly allow that it leaves the > > > possibility open, Good. I've established something at least. but on the other hand we have: > > > > > > AVON: It's not my field, but if I am right, then the limiter is > > > feeding scrambled impulses into his brain. > > > > > > > >Which seems sensible given that: > >1. If he is the cold blooded psychopath capable of planning the > >abandonment of friends to be killed while leaving himself looking merely > >the fool, and all the limiter did was remove his restraints, why the > >temper-tantrums in plain sight of everyone? A temper-tantrum is one thing. Strangling a woman is another. Gan believes that women despise him (the clue is given in his words in Time Squad). Therefore in return he wants to kill them. He enjoys killing them. But he can't do it because the limiter prevents him from committing a violent act without the approval of the social group he has joined. So if he can't do it himself, perhaps he can get others to do it for him. That's why he lets the Guardians terrorise Jenna in Time Squad. She goes to the capsule and calls Gan's name, but he doesn't answer. The next minute we see Gan's left hand extending up. He's awake. Gan is trying to cheat the limiter. He is standing by and allowing the Guardian to do the job for him. That way he can vacariously get his jollies. Instead, the limiter cuts in when Jenna is attacked and causes Gan pain. So that little idea didn't work. Plan B, leave the women in dangerous situations where there is a high chance that they will be attacked and killed. > > Why not pick the others off one by one, first though asleep in their cabins, then whoever is on duty > >on the flight deck. 1/ He doesn't want to get rid of the men, just the women. His attack on Avon was for a different reason: all the insults he's had to suffer from him. 2/ He can't attack someone unless he has the groups approval, or a verbal command from a group member, and even then the context has to be right. Why attack without weapons and inefficiently? He's only going to, well, get himself drugged and bound going about things > >that way. His madness, or hatred for women, is so great that once the restrainer is off, he can't help himself. > >2. The limiter is right in whatever portion of his brain controls the > >urge to kill. It deteriorates, it isn't as if it's suddenly not there; > >there's a metal irritant among his dendrites at the very least. In Breakdown the limiter malfunctions and cuts out. But before it malfunctions it gives him pain. Then Jenna comes onto the deck. Oh, dear. Gan always attacks women when they are on their own. That's why whenever he is alone, or alone in the presence of a woman, Gan gets a headache. It is conditioning him to find such an enviroment uncomfortable. When Gan is strangling Cally the limiter cuts in again. The device is faulty. It is repaired in Brakedown, but the headaches don't stop after this episode. He has them again in Orac. There will usually be a secondary reason BTW, but although the reasons for that headache changes, the context will always be the same. Gan is alone. Gan is alone with a woman. Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

2 1

Re: [B7L] Re: moloch/limiters
by Jenny Kaye 14 May '01

14 May '01

Harriet Monkhouse wrote: > >Jenny wrote: > >>Kayn and Renor knows what a limiter > >>is and speak of it in a very matter-of-fact way-- not as if it's something > >>rare. Are they in on the experiment too? > > > >They're experts in neurosurgery, who should be expected to keep up with > >the latest developments. Yes but when Kayne sees the implant he immediately identifies it as a limiter, and at no point during the episode does either Renor or Kayne state that the Limiter implant is experimental. If the author wanted to put that over then you may have had something like: KAYNE: This man's got a limiter implant. RENOR: Really? So what's he doing here? KAYNE: Good question. It's one thing to accept that this is an experimental craft on a proving flight, but quite another to believe it's a test bed for limiter implants. These people aren't Federation! It's Blake and his rabble. RENOR: Are you sure? KAYNE: Of course I'm sure. Remember that story about one of the limiter test specimens escaping? RENOR: You're saying this is the one who got away? KAYNE: To right, you big bottomed bastard! RENOR: (CONFUSED) What? KAYNE: Are you a good witch or a bad witch? RENOR: (MORE CONFUSED) Eh? Are you alright Professor? KAYNE: (SWAYING FOR A SECOND) Sorry about that. Dropped out of character for a moment there. We gather from the search for help in > >Breakdown that such experts are not two a credit. When are they ever? > >>It also makes sense to conduct this experiment on Cygnus > >>Alpha as well, does it? Where there is no one to actually observe the > >>experiment? > > > >I always presumed that Gan was a guinea pig they'd finished > >experimenting with. Good point and one that Stephen Date makes, but there is still no evidence, only supposition. Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

2 1

Re: [B7L] We can't *all* be geniuses
by Jenny Kaye 14 May '01

14 May '01

Stephen Date wrote: > > >--- Jenny wrote: > > > > > > > > >: No. It's a deliberate act. The malfunction > > > > didn't "scramble his brain > > > > > >: impulses," it removed his restraints. > > > > > > > > > > > >That's your interpretation. > > > > > > > > Not just mine, and it's one that fits all the facts. > > > > Look at the script > > > > too-- Avon says the Limiter is "feeding scrambled > > > > impulses into his brain." > > > > It's not the *brain's* impulses that are scrambled. > > > > It's the limiter's. > > > > > > >I have to say, given the half a dozen or so times in > > >the last couple of years that I've watched "Breakdown" > > >(how sad is that !) That the impression I got from the > > >script is that Gan's homicidal mania is caused by the > > >scrambled impulses caused by the limiter. These > > >impulses are removed by Kayn and hey presto Gan > > >returns to normal. This is entirely feasible, people > > >who suffer severe head injuries can become aggressive > > >and violent afterwards. This happened to a friend of > > >mine a few years ago after he was involved in a car > > >accident. He is now pretty much back to normal. Absolutely. The author is playing a double game. > > > > > > > > He also says, "It's not my field". If the author > > > > didn't want to generate > > > > doubt then there would have been no qualification. > > > > Later Professor Kayn, > > > > an expert (one of the exclusive specialists to whom > > > > Avon defers earlier in > > > > the episode, saying that they're the ones who know > > > > about this), says > > > > regarding Gan: > > > > > > >I think the author may be establishing the need to > > >urgently find a neuro-surgeon. Avon's competency with > > >a vor-ray scan or what ever it was, does not equate to > > >an ability to perform complicated brain surgery. Also > > >the remark is in character. "it's not my field" is > > >intellectual speak for "Whilst I have not studied the > > >subject formally, I'm probably still right". (in > > >Avon's case we can discount the probably). Ah. Disagree. Avon sometimes gets it wrong. >Nowhere do > > >Kayn or Renor suggest that Avon's diagnosis is > > >incorrect. Not directly, no. > > > > KAYN: Farron is a bureaucratic fool. I'm talking > > > > about stability, Renor, > > > > stability. With no stability there is no progress. > > > > RENOR: Progress to what? Brain implantation? > > > > KAYN: A dangerous psychopath? Certainly. Or would > > > > you prefer he'd been > > > > executed? > > > > > >Kayn also describes the crew as muderers, maniacs and > > >mindless destroyers. This is really rather inaccurate, > > >even in Season 4. Yes, but when it comes to a surgical procedure he has to be more precise. If he isn't Renor, who would know these things and with whom he is arguing, would put him right. >The expression may be an indicator > > >of Kayn's political sympathies rather than a > > >considered diagnosis. It's both. See above. Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

2 1

Re: [B7L] Re: moloch/limiters
by Jenny Kaye 14 May '01

14 May '01

>Stephen Date wrote: > > > > > > >--- Jenny wrote: > > > > > > > > >The limiter is clearly both very rare (we don't > > > > see it anywhere else, > > > > none > > > > > >of the others have ever heard of it before) > > > > > > > > They haven't encountered it because they have had no > > > > reason to. They are not > > > > psychopathic killers. Well not in the sense that > > > > Gan is anyway. > > > > > >Surely if the Federation used Limiters on anything > > >like a regular basis, the others would have heard of > > >it. Vila plainly hasn't heard > > >of limiters in Time Squad and he is pretty familiar > > >with the penal system. All that it prove is that they are infrequently used, and the person who has one doesn't brag about it. Also: GAN: It's almost as if Zen has a limiter? VILA: A limiter? GAN: Something that stops him from helping us to much. Or maybe it's someone who stops him. VILA: Gan if you're trying to scare me you're succeeding. Just because Vila says "A limiter?" it doesn't follow that he doesn't know what one is. He could be thinking, "Oh F**k, a Limiter. And why is Gan talking about it? Could he be a psychopathic killer? Oh, well... I wonder what's for tea." > > > > > >My guess is that it was an experimental thing, > > > > and that prisoners were > > > > > >allocated to the experimenters to work on. > > > > Scientists in Nazi Germany > > > > were > > > > > >allowed to carry out all kinds of experiments on > > > > prisoners, and I can see > > > > > >the same sort of morality working just fine in > > > > the Federation. > > > > > > > > A theory not supported by the evidence. Kayn and > > > > Renor knows what a limiter > > > > is and speak of it in a very matter-of-fact way-- > > > > not as if it's something > > > > rare. Are they in on the experiment too? > > > > > >Kayn and Renor are scientists at an experimental > > >research station. Kayn is the top neuro-surgeon in his > > >field. Renor must be good otherwise Kayn wouldn't have > > >him as his assistant. The rules of neuro-surgery apply > > >on earth and on XK-72. It is entirely possible that > > >they would recognise an experimental device. He doesn't call it an "experimental device" though, does he? They both talk as if it is commonplace. > > >Incidentally Renor's reaction is not matter of fact, > > >rather it is one of horror. Horror that such things are used, not horror at discovering that such a thing existed. > > >It is also worth observing that personality alteration > > >is a developed science in the Federation - witness > > >Blake's persona in "The Way Back" compared to his > > >normal persona in Space Fall onwards. If Gan was a > > >vicious killer, surely they would alter his entire > > >personality rather than just knock out one part of his > > >brain. The implant does alter his entire personality. >Gan appears to be a rather gentle person, when > > >not in a combat situation. That's right. But look at what he's like *in* combat. Grinning, usually. > > > > But to test > > > > > >something designed to stop people killing, > > > > > > > > It manifestly isn't designed to stop him killing. > > > > > >Surely that is exactly what it does. I forget Gan's > > >exact words when he falls out of the alien capsule in > > >Time Squad but they're along the lines of "Limiter > > >implant...impossible for me to kill". What Gan says in this scene is very interesting. Reprint the transcript and I'll go through it with you :-) >Later on in Time > > >Squad when he tries to shoot the alien he is unable to > > >do so. The limiter stops him. For an explanation see my correspondence with Fiona Moore, April 6th onwards. >In Deliverance he says "When it comes to > > >killing, remember my limiter implant". Well he would wouldn't he? To maintain the fiction. > > > > > > >It is entirely possible that after the experiment has > > >been conducted Gan was then sentenced to penal > > >servitude on Cygnus Alpha. After all, once they've > > >established it works they're not going to keep him > > >hanging around. Well rationalised, but see my comments about the Kayne/Renor conversation above. Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

2 1

RE: [B7L] Re: sentencing
by Tavia 14 May '01

14 May '01

Helen wrote about the Federation administration: >They fear political crimes so much they >would rather covertly slaughter large groups than try to brainwash >them.This from a society that appears to have no official >death penalty (I may be wrong). Two possible exceptions: (1) Glynd, Morag and Havant discuss eliminating Blake rather than deporting him. The dialogue runs as below and one interpretation might suggest trial and execution for dissidence, though possibly a more likely one is another 'transporter accident'. HAVANT Can't he be eliminated? MORAG No, he's a symbol of opposition to the Administration. ... MORAG His death could be used by the dissidents. They need a hero. Alive or dead, Blake could be it. HAVANT Difficult. I suppose my department could infect him, some rapidly terminal disease. Would his natural death help? GLYND I don't think so. MORAG What we need is something to discredit him. If he could be deported to Cygnus Alpha .... (2) Travis is sentenced to execution in a Federation military court in Trial. Not only would I argue that this counts as the death penalty existing under Federation law, but the wording of the sentence suggests that some non-military criminals were executed. SAMOR We cannot find it in our hearts to absolve you in any way of the responsibility for these murders. The sentence of this tribunal is, therefore, that you should be stripped of all rank and privileges, that you be dishonorably dismissed the service, and that you then be executed for the common criminal you have shown yourself to be. Have you anything to say? Tavia

1 0

Re: sentencing
by Helen Krummenacker 14 May '01

14 May '01

> Leia wrote.... > > A life sentence for theft is a little heavy too but the Federation aren't > > exactly strong on prisoner rights from what we see of their justice > system. > Then Helen wrote... > >In California you could get a life sentence for theft if it's the third > >time you are caught and the dollar value is high enough. > > I never knew that. How high is 'high enough'? > I'm not sure what amount kicks it from misdemeanor to felony. Basically any felony, violent or *not*, is included as a strike in the three strikes law. Prosceuters have also, I think, sometimes counted felonies from the same series of events as seperate felonies in order to try for a 'three strikes' convinction. Anyone sentenced on a 'third strike' is supposed to be in jail for life. The prison industry is doing great business. > > >Vila was in and out of the system several times before he was made a > lifer, or so I > >interpreted his comments on his past. > > Yep I agree. I suppose when fiddling with his mind didn't work and locking > him up for a finite time didn't work they resorted to a life sentence. > Yes. In his case, the system appeared to be working more or less justly. After all, he couldn't stand the idea of life without theivery even if it included safety and a woman who loved him. So he seems pretty much beyond redemption. Now I'm wondering what determines whether a convicted criminal gets their mind messed with or gets locked up. Age? The Federation didn't seem to have any qualms about messing with the kids memories to get them to incriminate Blake. Seriousness of the offence? Repeated offences? Guessing from what little we've been given (Vila's treaments and imprisonment, the Federation's use of mind controls in general and desire to keep a labor force), the first step for nonviolent, nonpolitical crimes would be take them into custody and try to revise their minds to become law abiding citizens. It might even be possible to do this much without a trial-- after all, if you are already law-abiding, it won't change you, and if you are really guilty, it's necessary for you to become socially redeemed. Violent crimes may be harder to treat by conditioning. I would guess whatever methods they use work better on intellectual than emotional impulses toward crime; thus, the introduction of the limiter, and the failure of anti-theft conditioning to work on Vila, who has an emotional addiction to theft, rather than simple greed. Thus violent crimes are more likely to get a prison sentence-- likewise, sexual abberration like the pedophilia (the false charges on Blake). The behavior is more ingrained and harder to change. Then there is the political angle. I'm not sure there is a standard policy on this, and obviously, the Federation's real actions and its publicized ones are different. They fear political crimes so much they would rather covertly slaughter large groups than try to brainwash them. This from a society that appears to have no official death penalty (I may be wrong). >The really interesting thing, as someone brought up on list before, is >Nova-- he's a pretty fresh-faced kid to be getting life himself. And keen to help Blake and had been avoiding the drugs in the food on the London. Interesting. Now that you mention it, my best guess on Nova-- the son of one of the dissidents in the slaughter Blake narrowly avoided. He has the knowlege and political sympathies of his family, but rather than kill a youth with no active involvement, or take the risk of insufficient brainwashing, they sent him off on trumped up charges. Unlike Blake, Nova is not protesting innocence loudly but I can think of good reasons why. 1. He actually likes the idea of being sent to a prison planet-- there, he hopes, they can create a freer society. Australia turned out all right. :) 2. He's young; he's pretty... might as well let the inmates think he's got a violent record. 3. He also knows it won't do him any good. 4. He wasn't framed for anything as detrimental to his honour as Blake was. Of course, there are plenty of other reasons for him to be incarcerated, but given, as you say, he knew to avoid the drugs without being told and actually volunteered to join Blake's group, political crimes seem most likely.

2 1

Re: [B7L] Marriage and the federation
by Sally Manton 14 May '01

14 May '01

One thing that struck me, rather than the formal vs informal commitment thing, was the striking *lack* of any kind of lasting, non-blood-kin commitments for any of the main characters except Gan. One can make out reasons why none of them show signs of serious relationships, whether legalised or not ... Jenna and Vila have rather precarious and unstable lifestyles, which might make maintaining one harder; Cally? Well, we don't know that one-on-one relationships are something an Auron telepath would even consider, and as a guerilla, she might fight shy anyway; Dayna was too young and isolated on Sarran (I do not *want* to call whatever she had with Justin a serious relationship); Soolin - like Jenna, an unstable lifestyle plus (possibly?) serious trust problems arising from the trauma in her childhood; Avon was involved with Anna, but that seems to have been a covert relationship, since she *was* married; also, he does not commit at all easily; Tarrant was in the military (that normally doesn't preclude marriage, but might make meeting the right woman harder); Travis as well, plus he's wedded to his obsession. Servalan's wedded to power; Blake's devoted to the cause of the common man, and would be too aware of the dangers inherent in his chosen path to risk it. All quite good reasons, *but* the overriding impression I get is that real, open commitment of whatever kind might in fact be less common than in our own society. JMO. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

3 2

Re: [B7L] iains episode reviews: TWB
by Jenny Kaye 14 May '01

14 May '01

Harriet Monkhouse wrote: About Blake in TWB> > > >I don't think they were setting him up as such, but they've good reason > >to watch him: > >One, they're not quite convinced the reprogramming will hold (and they > >turn out to be right); two, they suspect that the resistance will have > >the same idea and try to win him back, so he's good bait to reel them > >in. Both good points, well made. Watching those particular scenes back, it does seem interesting that the Security forces make their strike against the rebels on the day Blake is contacted and taken outside to one of their meetings. Also Dev Tarrant knows Blake from the old days, so he was possibly the traitor who set Blake and Foster up the first time around. The trap and bait motif appears again and again throughout all 52 episodes of B7. In TWB we have the trap set by the rebels for Blake. Tarrant's trap set for the rebels. The Federation's trap set for Blake when he returns to the city. The legal trap set for Blake by Morag, Glynd and Dr Havant. Blake's protestations of his innocence are a trap for Varon, drawing him into resistance. The trap set for Varon and his wife in the office of the public records computer. (The administration could easily have altered the school attendances and central clinic records to remove the evidence. But they don't. It's a trap. The central clinic files are classified. Varon has to bribe the official. That means Varon has the potential to be a resister. The records keeper is either undercover security, or just a good citizen doing his duty. Don't forget, even Blake threatens to report the rebels to the Administration. As in Nazi Germany, the culture of "neighbourhood watch" has become an epidemic. The final trap I suppose, is Varon's innocence. Everything he does is futile because everyone he turns to is in some way a part of the corrupt system he is trying to expose. You can't expose the system, because there is no one to expose the system too. Except the TV viewer that is. Seven traps. Funny number that. Jenny > >"Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased." - Lysator 14.5.01 _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

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