Blakes7

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

5511 discussions

Re: [B7L] Gan and Killing
by Sally Manton 12 May '01

12 May '01

Leia wrote: <I'm not quite sure where the idea that Gan got the limiter because he was a danger to woman came from.> It's one of the semi-regular floating pieces of speculation that gets kicked around in the archives every so often (along with Blake-as-terrorist, why Vila gets called by his first name and Avon by his surname by his brother, the two Federations, Star Trek and B7, recasting the series etc) and appears to have been running in the Horizon magazine for a while - I think 'The Mark of Kane' probably gave it a boost. I think the fact that there *are* these unsolvable speculations adds to the appeal of the show, since - if it was all cut and dried - we might have lost interest some years ago (well, lost interest in Avon's mind if *not* his wardrobe). Now that I think of it <very *very* evil grin> we haven't had the "is Avon nuts?" discussion for quite a while ... _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

3 2

Re: [B7L] Re: Marriage and the Federation
by Alison Page 12 May '01

12 May '01

Ellyne said marriage would have advantages for the Federation >2) If people know their misbehaviors may come back and >hit their family, they are less likely to commit them. Though of course people who are not married still have families, and live with them, and love them just as much and everything, so this would apply anyway. Or do you mean that the Federation would find it harder to identify who those families were? >Would a delta >grade who had a child out of wedlock or whatever receive any kind of >state help? Unlikely. Would a Delta who conceived a child *in* wedlock receive any state help? Presumably the same rules would apply: in either case if she or her partner were unemployed they wouldn't be able to feed the child without help. A marriage contract doesn't make it cheaper to live. Alison

2 1

Re: [B7L] iains episode reviews: TWB
by Alison Page 12 May '01

12 May '01

Iain W said - >at the time the >series was written/broadcast, the threat of nuclear war was a real >possibilty >Maybe other >list members who were in their "formative years" in the 1970's would like to >comment on my perceptions I would agree with you that people were generally scared of nuclear war in those day. It was almost a reflex cliche, when talking about the future, for example on TV or in the pub, people would prefix their comments with 'assuming we haven't all blown ourselves up by then' or something along those lines. I don't hear people use that expression as commonly these days. They talk about global warming and super-viruses and so-on instead. Alison

1 0

Re: [B7L] iains episode reviews: TWB
by Jenny Kaye 12 May '01

12 May '01

"Iain Walker" wrote > >I *did* watch the episode!!! Good boy :-). > >The Way Back > > > >A tremendous first episode that sets the scene for the whole series. We > >get>insight to how the federation works, Blakes background, indications that > >you can't trust anyone, noone is totally good or bad. I don't agree. There are some extremely evil people at work in this story, but the fact that they are not directly recognised scares me to death. Another indication of imperfect > >drugging is the public address announcement: "President to answer questions > >on population control". So clearly there are people questioning authority > >and public announcements about it Or it's just a pretence that you have a say. > >- so even the fact that people question > >authority is not hidden. Again, it is just a placebo. They pretend to be one thing, but in fact are something completely different. "Look! We're giving you a forum! Aren't we democratic!" While at the same time hiding the real nastiness that goes on. A bit like the use of "IMO". This implies that the administration needs some > >sort of popular support. Doesn't always follow. The fact that it drugs its populace, has surveillance cameras everywhere and armed guards, suggests that they prefer control to popular support, assuming there is a difference of course. And control includes propaganda and the appearance of good government. Is it possible that there are elections to some > >positions within the administration? So Blake may be fighting a democracy > >(albeit a pretty dodgy one). Any elections would be fixed. Drugging the populace clearly shows an utter contempt for other peoples right to freedom. > >Blake asks Ravella why the administration would suppress us [with drugs]? > >Is he blind. everyone we see looks drugged. Is part of the drugging (even > >after 36 hours without drugs) stopping him from seeing this? Yes, but you are talking from the perspective of an outsider looking in. To the ant in the glass tank, everything seems normal. It's only when you kick against the traces that the true nature of the establishment is revealed. > >I live in a dome. > >People live in domes, but it is possible to live outside - they are not > >surrounded by wasteland, the air is safe to breathe and the water is safe > >to > >drink (as Blake and Ravella do later in this episode). It is illegal to > >leave the domes - presumably because then people would not be drugged. The > >doors to outside are also locked (so the drugging isn't perfect) and > >require > >special equipment to open them. I wonder what drove everyone into the > >domes > >to begin with Control and all that. It's a Brave New World (Aldous Huxley). - I am sure the writers want us to believe some global > >nuclear > >or biological war. No. There were never any atomic wars. The reference to "pre-atomic" in ROD is a reference to the atomic age not an atomic war. The "Galaxy wide atomic wars" crap only appeared in the pre-publicity hand outs for season 4. It is never referenced in the series itself. > >Get a job. > >Blake (and presumably others?) is being "looked after": constant > >observation > >and following and faked tapes from his relatives (needing actors that look > >just like his family). Or computer generated images. > >This must be a huge industry in the federation > >employing lots of people. As in Orwell's 1984. > >You can't trust anyone anymore. Why is Tarrant following them? And why is > >he following them if there are surveillance cameras everywhere? This is > >another indication that the total control is not perfect - there must be > >parts of the domes not covered by the cameras so they need to be followed > >in person). No. He's following them because he knows where they are going. Outside. There are no cameras outside. > >These people are as ruthless as the federation No, it's a totally different scale. They're risking all their lives contacting Blake, and so are acting out of fear. As you would. >- they have prepared > >documents to implicate Blake in their activities. Why would this worry > >Blake? - the federation watch him all the time and know that he has not > >been > >in contact with the resistance. 1/ Blake doesn't know this. 2/ He's gone outside. And in the Federation "looking guilty is all that it takes." > >Conspiracy theories galore. > >Are Tarrant and Foster both double agents? Tarrant asks Foster "what do > >you > >think?", to which Foster replies "there's not much left of the man I knew". > >Foster sounds sincere so I don't think he is a double agent, but this might > >be evidence that Foster is being "run" by Tarrant because Tarrant doesn't > >care what Foster thinks really because he has arranged a massacre! I am > >even more confused by their wanting to trap Blake if he is a reformed > >character. It's the rebels that have introduced the "Blake factor" not the Federation. Though Tarrant would have known about this plan. > >When the troopers come in, a trooper looks at Blake in his hiding place and > >does nothing: have they all been briefed to let Blake live (but then the > >"mastermind" would have to do something to all the troopers so they don't > >blab about this. This kind of thing is always a problem with too complex > >conspiracy theories - you have to keep too many people silent!). A pro keeps it simple. If you watch that scene, the trooper doesn't see Blake in the shadows; his comlink clicks just before he comes into position. If Blake had been with the group when the soldiers attacked, then he would have been shot down like the rest. See also Gauda Prime. > >Why are all the bodies left lying around? To provoke Blake? No one goes outside. And if they do then they are either Federation security or enemies of the state. After all, > >they are waiting for him when he returns to the dome: the expect him to > >survive!, Tarrant would have known if Blake had survived or not. He would have checked the bodies. and get captured! And return to the dome!! He could just have > >run off into the countryside. He could have, but where would he have gone? Better to return home. Was he saved because he would have become a > >martyr? He was saved by fate. As a dead body, lying in a deserted concrete underground building, he's just another voiceless corpse. Alive though, that's a different story. > >Then they try to frame Blake with the child molesting charges. > >This is baffling if they have caught him with the resistance. Is it the > >"avoiding martyrdom" problem That what Morag says. - i.e. child molesting will put everyone off. > >But then why set him up with the resistance? They didn't. > >What's going on??? Perfectly logical plot development if you ask me. > >when > >the lawyer and his S.O. are killed - their bodies are left lying around > >outside the dome. Won't these bodies be found by the outsiders and incite > >them further? Oh dear. Are you sure you've just watched this episode :-)? Tarrant says, "I think a transporter accident. Very tragic." Turns to Guard, "See to it will you?" > >Interior decorating taste aside, Glynd is concerned that justice has to be > >seen to be done. Yes he does. What a vile hypocritical piece of shit. When Blake meets Varon, Varon says "of course not" when > >Blake says the charges aren't true. How does he know, or was he just being > >cynical? He's supposed to be representing him, remember? But the way he says it and what he says later during the same conversation shows that he in fact believes Blake to be guilty. > >At the trial, why did Tarrant come to gloat. Very unprofessional! Because he is a vile piece of shit as well; he knows Blake can't touch him. It's a twist of the knife. > >The legal records technician is a character beaureaucrat - listening to > >music instead of working. Like all small minded people with a little power > >he is actually happy that they do not have the right security clearance. > >But he is easily bribed. Varon is very naïve - if someone is easy to bribe > >you have just established that they can't be trusted - it then becomes > >obvious that he will stab you in the back and turn you in to the > >authorities. No it isn't. You don't report people who give you money; it makes you look bad. > >(or - as part of the conspiracy he was told to take a bribe.). Blake is political dynamite. You'd want to keep an eye on things until Blake has been deported. The weakness in the plan is the records relating to the children. That's the point they are going to watch. Also, interestingly, Varon misses something which means that the Federation has been messing about with dates. If the Federation didn't know that Blake was going to go AWOL then there is no way they could have set up the kids with the false memories before Blake's arrest. Therefore the offences "happened" after Blake was brought into custody. It's the perfect alibi for Blake of course, and would prove his absolute innocence and the Administration's absolute coruptness. But of course the authorites will have changed the date of Blake's arrest. Another thing. They take three children out of school and implant in their minds a horror that will destroy their lives. They then accuse an innocent man of the crime, and say "Justice must be seen to be done." This is a crime of the most horrendous evil. They are mentally raping these children, but for what? Because they can. We are not talking about the sad, pathetic inadequacies of Gan here. We are talking about the ultimate demonstration evil, and its casual banality tells us that, within the Administration, such evil is common place. > >New neighbourhood, new friends. New enemies? Vila is the first one he meets. Vila > >knows > >Blake the name, No he doesn't. This implies that people (even > >potential followers) don't know what Blake looks like, so why don't the > >federation simply eliminate him? Because like all totalitarian dictatorships the are paranoid. They hate the idea of anyone having a different opinion to their own. And they take it personally as well. They don't just what to kill you. They want to smash you. Make you beg, humiliate you. Tear you apart for having a different opinion. For having the temerity to stand up and say, "no". See Stalinist Russia, see Hitler's Germany, and on a smaller scale, see Horizon the B7 fan club, see the darker elements on Lysator. All these things are within us all. Society, the world, England, The Falkland Islands, Sally Manton, Jenny Kaye, Iain Walker, Blake's 7, Terry Nation, Vila Restal. it's all there. We are all looking into a mirror and seeing ourselves reflected back. They can have a "Fake Blake" and noone > >will know. They want to discredit Blake and everything he stands for. They only want one voice to be heard, and that is their own. >>(However, Jenna looks like she recognises Blake?) She doesn't. The > >federation > >has failed to "adjust" Vilas brain too - a kindred spirit for Blake. Vila > >knows Jenna and Jenna knows Vila. Have they worked together before? If they've met before it would have been in the holding cell, (a pro keeps it simple) however, watching the scene, I don't think they know each other at all. Watch how Jenna stands back during the earlier part of the conversation between Blake and Vila. The only connection is that she apparently fancies Blake. > > The way they talk it does not sound like they have just met. Disagree. I think it does. At first Jenna is very aggressive, she says to Blake: "Better get used to the idea that noone > >out there gives a damn about you.". She is irritated at Blake professing innocence. A lot of people in prison will profess their own innocence, and yet will be totally dismissive of anyone else who does the same. Then she goes soft, reassuring Blake > >with "don't worry, they'll get it" when discussing the holding order. She > >also reassures him again on the ship. (She MUST fancy him - it is the ONLY > >explanation.) It's not the only explanation. She also is starting to believe in his innocence as well. Again, another phenomenon of prison life. If elements of the establishment start to put themselves out for you, then by definition you must be innocent. Strange that isn't it? That people in captivity start to believe in the establishment's honesty. That's one of the reasons why jailed policemen have to be segregated. A policeman who has behaved like a criminal is an affront to every crook and con in the joint. He's not playing the game! > >Next week: Space Fall Good. Nice one Iain. Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

2 1

Re: Marriage and the Federation
by Ellynne G. 12 May '01

12 May '01

My current thoughts on the matter (which may or may not contradict any previous thoughts of mine on the matter). The attitude towards marriage probably varied with the grades and with other elements of position in society. For the gentry equivalent (alpha grades who were essential to the Federation running but who had little or no real political power), like Blake, marriage was probably a respected institution. OTOH, I get the impression people like Avon don't share that idea (my guess on Avon is that he was an alpha whose work brought him enough in contact with the corrupt element [as opposed to Blake's segment which seems to have been sheltered from ugly truths] without having a share of their power). So, advantages of marriage: 1) Probably conducive to the kind of stability the Federation liked in the ruled. Hostages to fortune and all that. 2) Literal hostages. If people know their misbehaviors may come back and hit their family, they are less likely to commit them. And let's not talk about people who _have_ misbehaved . . . . 3) Inheritance. There would have been two kinds, basic wealth and money or business based elements of the power structure, and citizenship. Going right to citizenship, this also had two elements. First, to what extent did a minor (before grade testing) enjoy their parents grade privileges? Second, when was a child a citizen by birth? Giving an example on the second, consider some stereotypes about 'welfare moms' and how those might have played in the Federation. Would a delta grade who had a child out of wedlock or whatever receive any kind of state help? Unlikely. More likely, her child's citizenship (until adulthood or testing) would depend on her ability to support. If she was no longer able to support her child, the child was probably sent into state care and listed as a noncitizen (types of noncitizens in the Federation include slaves and [I would guess] ranks applied to inhabitants of worlds that were second or third class Federation members [Horizon, for example]). In practical terms, that could mean a variety of ugly fates. Probably the best case scenario would be something like lasting in the system long enough to eventually enlist as a Federation trooper, regaining some citizen status even if it did carry a 'possible cannon fodder' label attached. Being shipped off to a newly colonized world might be a possibility, which might stretch to cover something decent or might be simple slavery. Then there are the more direct kinds of slavery. Newly colonized worlds might have places for child labors, but Earth would have had machines for that kind of thing. The ugly fact is that a lot of these kids might have would up accesible to people who liked kids for the wrong reasons. And that is assuming the sunny alternatives. Check mortality rates in 19th century orphanages for the other possibility. For other grades, there may or may not have been losses of privilege or status. For someone like Servalan, or any of the ruling class, I doubt there'd be a problem. But I doubt Morag's career would have survived single motherhood unscathed (one can just see Servalan always making cutting comments and somehow working it into every job performance review). The first case, inherited status, is less clear. A child born to a pair of alphas probably enjoyed alpha status. What happened if one parent had lower rank than the other? Did it work differently if an alpha male married a beta female than if an alpha female married a beta male? We're talking social custom (which can be as unbreakable as law in some societies) as well as law, here. If an alpha or beta grade had a mistress a grade or two lower (under circumstances considered socially acceptable or even legally recognized) who had a child, what then? Did the high grade father have discretion in what privileges were handed over or was the child limited to the mother's status? What about the welfare mom we mentioned? Did a father acknowledging paternity make a difference? Right, right, cut to the chase. The core of this is, with some variations, marriage had social advantages and would have been one of several ways of clarifying who was a citizen and what kind of citizen they were. Did these considerations operate at Gan's level of society? Did they operate uniformly or did gammas and deltas frequently feel they didn't need to bother, especially when there were no children? And do we have evidence that Gan wasn't speaking respectfully of what's-her-name? Shrinker used the same phrase when trying _not_ to antagonize Avon, after all. Oh, and the Federation may have had reasons for _discouraging_ marriage in some circles as well. Getting back to the family connections thing, the whole reason the Chinese testing for status system never quite took off in Japan was because clan loyalties tended to outweigh it (well, maybe not the _whole_ reason). Clans can provide a rival loyalty I imagine the Federation wanted to discourage. Then there are the people you don't want to have hostages to fortune because you really don't want them thinking that far ahead. 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

Famouse Sand Pit (no! not _that_ one!) (was Gan's woman)
by Ellynne G. 12 May '01

12 May '01

Wow, I'm on a chatty roll. This is not about Gan's relation with any unnamed females, even if that's how it started. About whether the phrase "my woman" was demeaning in 1979 or in the B7 future (or in the 1979 translation of the B7 future which, of course, really happened/will happen), in Dune there's a part where Gurney Hallek is asked to play the song "My Woman" for a dying man (that's not what this is about either). It's a sentimental ditty, especially for all these guys who know that they're likely to never see their homeworld or the 'girl they left behind' again (even the ones who are likely to live to the end of the chapter). At any rate, I don't think Gurney was being asked to play a really demeaning, crude, drinking song. But, that pales beside the greater issue - The B7 characters are clearly reincarnated a few centuries later in Dune! (that's what this is about) Gurney, since he uses the phrase "my woman" must be Gan! Duncan Idaho is clearly Vila (who is paying off his bad Karma debt for cowardice by being reincarnated as a heroic type [again, and again, and again . . . he's got a lot of debt to pay off]) Orac was Thufir. Blake was Leto (guy tried to change the system for the better, failed). Blake's lawyer was Yueh. Avon was rather peeved to come back as Paul (IMO, especially as Cally was Jessica and Dayna was Chani). Soolin was Alia. Tarrant was Feyd (who, in Paul's opinion, talked too much) And, before the TN descend in mass, I would like to point out how often we're told Feyd would have been dandy with better parenting. Oh, and Travis was Fenring. And Servalan was his wife. The worms were all those large plot devices they were forever running into. 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

Maybe I'm Too British...
by Harriet Bazley 12 May '01

12 May '01

I've had enough. Once is an accident - twice is bad luck - three times is too much. Since the beginning of the year I have witnessed almost constant flame-wars on this Lyst of a peculiarly distasteful kind. I have kept silent and endured without the aid of so much as a kill-file. I hoped for entertainment here, and I have found only arguments ad hominem and cringe-making bitchiness of a kind I never witnessed in years of all-female schooling. I know it only takes a handful of rotten apples to spoil the barrel, but unfortunately there appears to be an endless supply. Don't bother to follow up to this. I'm unsubscribing. -- Harriet Bazley

1 0

Re: [B7L] We can't *all* be geniuses ... (long)
by Jenny Kaye 12 May '01

12 May '01

Claudia wrote > >: Is that right? > > > >: > >since it could have been > >: > >caused by scrambled brain impulses caused by the malfunction. > > > >: No. It's a deliberate act. The malfunction didn't "scramble his brain > >: impulses," it removed his restraints. > > > >That's your interpetation. 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. 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, Why grudgingly? 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 pretty directly contradicts you. No it doesn't, see above. >The other couple times Avon > >says "if I'm right", he is. ;-) 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: 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? > >OTOH, I agree with you regarding Jenna and the manacles. > > > >But not with your tone. It took me two hours to answer that letter. If you think my tone was off then that's why. Anyway, it takes two to tango. If people are going to send a letter which is sharp, they shouldn't get all moral when they get a reply which is somehow less than friendly. Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

3 2

the killfile is your friend
by Julia Jones 12 May '01

12 May '01

+----------+ | PLEASE | | DO NOT | | FEED THE | | TROLLS | +----------+ | | | | .\|.||/.. (c) 1999 Residents of NANAE -- Julia Jones "I wouldn't recognise a subtle hint if it dressed up in a purple tutu with green stripes and danced on my keyboard singing 'subtle hints are here again'." Stig Valstad, wibbling in alt.fan.pratchett

2 1

Playng the Game (and Not)
by Dana Shilling 12 May '01

12 May '01

Sally, thank you for your post about "playing the game"--it summarizes beautifully what I enjoy about B7 list discussion. Stephen, thank you for your ongoing contributions of civilized rationality. I don't think there's anything invidious about speculating about any sort of fictional event. Some speculations have more canonical evidence to support them than others, some are more inter- esting than others, that's all. Some items of fanon are widely held, others held by a small group or just one proponent. Personally, my major identification with fandom is as a fanfic writer, so to me the best possible list post is one that sparks off a good idea for a story. -(Y) PS: Re Gorillas--EVERYTHING I've ever heard about Gareth Thomas leads me to believe that he's a talented actor and a warm, delightful, and charming human being. But that doesn't change my mind about Blake in any way.

3 2

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