Blakes7

blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se

5511 discussions

Re: the Mellanbys
by Helen Krummenacker 11 May '01

11 May '01

> > >I believe Ellynne was putting out the 'trusting' options as *unlikely*. > > >So far, I like [Ellynne's) version better than the lying hypocrite > version. > > Why? > Because I am generally a very good judge of character and my first impression of Hal Mellanby was that he was all right. And because I prefer to think the best of people until I am proven wrong. I didn't say I was basing my preference on canon. I believe that since most of our theories are not provable, it's best to enjoy the one(s) that suit each person's self. I don't believe it's right to force them on the rest of people, just make the suggestion and people can take it or leave it. I do think that debate is good because if a flaw is found in a theory, the people who hold with it can look for other proof to bolster it, consider it as working in an AU, or just decide no theory accounts for all behavior and shrug it off. What is ridiculous is when one of our number insists on an unprovable being correct to the exclusion of all other explanations, loudly and obnoxiously. Not that this is happening with theis thread. \However, one question which I don't know if you guys covered, because I did leave during the Mellanby discussion previously: if he was such a coward he turned in his own wife and friends for his and his daughter's safety, why would Servalan have killed him instead of forcing him to help her get ORAC and Avon as pizes for her triumphal return to the Federation? She could have done with some assistance.

1 0

Re: The Limiter
by Helen Krummenacker 11 May '01

11 May '01

> 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? > There space station has been allowed its nuetrality because of the valuable research they do. Maybe this is where the limiter was developed. Vila's been in prisons most of his life. You'd think if limiters were much in use he would have heard about it. > >

2 1

Re: Gan in Breakdown
by Helen Krummenacker 11 May '01

11 May '01

> : No. It's a deliberate act. The malfunction didn't "scramble his > brain > : impulses," it removed his restraints. > > That's your interpetation. 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, 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? Why not pick the others off one by one, first though asleep in their cabins, then whoever is on duty on the flight deck. Why attack without weapons and inefficiently? He's only going to, well, get himself drugged and bound going about things that way. 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.

1 0

Re: [B7L] We can't *all* be geniuses ... (long)
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

Some woman wrote: > >Jenny, you'll probably be glad to know I won't be following up to your > >posts anymore. "Relieved" I think would be a more accurate word. I'm tired of the "Watch the episode again" response when > >I know these episodes by heart, both word and nuance, and I see different > >things in them than you do. Well watch them again and you might think differently. You seem to think that a lot of what you've > >filled in for yourself (there's that word "interpretation" again) is > >actually incontrovertibly present, No. I'm just presenting an argument and waiting for someone out there to knock it down. I'm also trying to put a dent in this "IMO" bullshit. > > and I have little patience for the > >tone with which you repeatedly insist on it. So basically, and not to put too fine a point on it, you are incapable of constructing a rational counterargument, too arrogant and too contemptuous of an opinion that differs from your own to bother to even look at an episode again, and, having demonstrated your superior intelligence by attacking my posting style rather than any of the points in my posts, you are now going to run off and stick your head in the sand. Bravo. From Jenny the Flaming Arsehole. Please note spelling! _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] We can't *all* be geniuses ... (long)
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

1 0

Re: [B7L] We can't all be Geniuses
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

Harriet Monkhouse wrote: > >Jenny wrote: > >>Oh, he does act stupid. There's a lot of Gan's actions > >>which are put down by a lot of people (including the crew) to his being > >>stupid-- not > >>checking to see if Jenna was behind him on Cephlon, or tearing out the > >>computer > >>banks in "Breakdown." > > > >The latter is proof that Gan was a computer genius. More a happy accident. A minute earlier, > >Avon tells Blake he can't get control of the systems. After Gan tears a > >couple of sections out, Avon has it sorted in no time. Gan cut the > >Gordian knot for him. You're right, I never noticed that before. Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Dayna's family
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

Tavia wrote: > > > >Harriet, quoting Dana responding to Jenny: > > >>> It might be a good idea if you went back into the archive and reread > >the emails between Tavia, Dana, Harriet, Fiona and myself on the subject > >of Hal Mellanby ... but basically what we came up with is that he's a > >hypocrite and a > > >>> liar. > >I feel my name being taken in vain here. As I recall, I entered the fray > >merely to suggest that Terry Nation's scripts might be most simply > >interpreted just as hack writing, rather than the ingenious, enjoyable but > >in the end rather implausible interpretations put forward predominantly by > >Fiona. Then why didn't you say they were implausible at the time and to her face? And why were you conceding at the end of the thread that there might be more to Nation than just a hack? > >I don't usually assign moral values to fictional constructs. Perhaps you should start? Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: Gan's woman
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

This woman came back and said: > > > >That the other woman wrote: > >: Some woman said:-): > > > >: > >That some other woman said: > >: > > > >: That another woman wrote: > > > >You know, there's a reason for attribution lines. But-- but-- but-- when *Gan* calls people "my woman" it means he's being intimate and tender! Of course it does! So if I call somebody "woman," that means I like them, even love them! Doesn't it? And other reasons not > >to edit quoted material. I did attribute the thread in my post, and if > >my username doesn't appeal to you my signature is quite straightforward. What makes you think you were being singled out? > >This woman wrote: > >: Some woman said:-): > >Me, in fact. > > > >: > >That some other woman said: > > > >Thanks, that's very helpful. Sally, perhaps? Who knows? > >: That another woman wrote: > > > >And here I have no idea what you mean. Yourself? No idea at all. > >This is why one shouldn't edit out attributions. I think it's all the more reason why we should. > >: > >: <Suppose he'd said, 'a trooper killed Bobby. She meant everything to > >: me. > >: > >We were to be married. When she died, a part of me died as well.'> > >: > > > >: > >: If he'd said that, I'd have checked the tape for what show I'd got > >on > >: > >'cause it sure wouldn't be Blake's 7 :-) > > > >: The point I was making was that if the author wanted to be explicit about > >: Gan's connections to this "woman" then he could have easily done so. That > >: fact that he didn't is the point. > > > >And the point some other woman was making is that any other way of saying > >it would have carried different connotations less appropriate to the > >setting. Yes, but I don't agree. > >: > >: What Gan says - 'my woman' - is IMO perfectly in tune with the > >general > >: > >tone > >: > >: of the language used in the series, especially by people within the > >: > >: federation itself > > > >: Is that so? Give me some examples then. > > > >You weren't asking me, but here: > > > >SHRINKER: I never saw your woman. > > > >If you think Shrinker was going to be insulting to Avon about Anna at > >that point, you think he's far braver than I do. I have already answered this point in another email some days ago, but here we go again. Shrinker is a torturer. You are using the words of a torturer to justify Gan's use of the same words. Which is, if anything, *more* extreme than what I was saying. > >But since the comment was about tone, it's all in the ear of the listener, > >and not exactly susceptible to evidence. So if Gan had said, "Jenna, I am going to stand back and allow the Guardians to terrorise you throughout this episode" but had said it in a nice way you would then discount it? > >: You don't spill your emotions to > >: > >: people when you've spent your life not knowing who you can trust. > > > >: But in Time Squad Gan is saying that he has to stay with the crew of the > >: Liberator because he needs people he can "rely" on. That means he trusts > >: them. Please watch the episode. > > > >Please be a little less condescending. So, asking you to actually watch an episode before commenting on it is condescending? > >Trusting someone on a mission is very different than trusting someone with > >your emotional core. > > > >: Sorry, but as there is not one shred of evidence in the series to support > >: this speculation, I have to reject it. > > > >Well. So much for speculation, period. Good. Does that mean you are going to stop speculating now? > >: > >I think that one of the themes of the series is that nobody is > >squeaky- > >: > >clean. I interpret this as being because the Federation, the world > >: they're > >: > >in, doesn't allow them to be so clean. > > > >: I think it's more to do with them being members of the human race. > > > >If you like. Not much, no. > >: > >Back to Gan... to me, the *least* morally dubious statement he can > >make > >: > >is the one he does. Any elaboration would only give one reason to > >: > >dissect the statement for emotional falsity or lack of moral > >soundness. > >: > >What he says is straightforward and comprehensible, and not, to my > >ear, > >: > >sexist. > > > >: Then listen to it again:-) > > > >I hear it quite vividly in my recollection without having to play the > >tape again, I assure you. You can "assure" all you like but I still don't believe you, and until you do watch the episode, instead of relying on your "recollection" we aren't going to get anywhere. > > I don't see where you get off biting into me with a vicious ad hominem > > attack and then having the gall to sweeten it with a smiley face. It adds to the bite :-) It's called irony. > > You stink! :) Yet you're the one defending a murderer! And your logic is flawed! ;^) My logic is impeccable. And, you have absolutely no > > reason to attack me, Oh, I don't know, I can think of loads :-) > > except that apparently you're a big flaming > >asshole. Arsehole is better, less American. That Woman _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: Gan's woman
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

"Hang the":-) DDJ wrote: Jenny Kaye wrote: > > > > > > > >My wife is not the same as "my woman". > > > > > > >Which might be because she's not his wife -- for any of a number of reasons > >(prohibitions against marriage in their grade; one of them in a situation > >where s/he's not free to marry because of family obligations or > >pre-existing marriage or financial inability to support a spouse). It "might be" that she is a rotting corpse and it's illegal to marry rotting corpses in the Federation. It "might be" that she is an android or really a man in disguise. Or an inflatable sea bird, or a kangaroo, or a plate of Spam. She "might be" a handgliding penguin from the planet Calufrax, who didn't have an entry visa. She "might be" a large stripy snake called Hector, or a shop window dummy, or she "might be" Sally Manton, or me, or she "might be" a cut out picture from a magazine. When > >I hear "my woman," it connotes a degree of intimacy/closeness beyond "my > >girlfriend" Does it now? So Jarvik, then, was really a kind and sensitive guy who just wanted to be intimate and close with Servalan, and all his ordering her about was just him being loving. -- the kind of closeness he'd have with a woman he wanted to > >marry but hadn't; However you want to paint it, though, that possessive is still there. Why is she "his" woman? What makes her "his" and not, oh, say, her own? at the same time, the term doesn't foreground the > >physical relationship the way "my lover" would. Or "my victim..." And not elaborating on the > >details seems in keeping both with Gan and the scene: That's true! it's not a > >confess-all-the-details situation, but a brief explanation. That's true! > >But one of Lennon's greatest love songs is titled "Woman" and conveys the > >opposite attitude : > > > >"Woman I know you understand > >The little child inside the man, > >Please remember my life is in your hands, > >And woman hold me close to your heart, > >However, distant don't keep us apart," Yes, but he doesn't use the possessive, does he? "My Woman I know you understand. The little child inside the man, Please remember your life is in my hands. And my woman, hold me close to your heart, However, distant don't keep us apart, Do that, and I will have to tear you apart." Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

1 0

Re: [B7L] Re: Gan's woman
by Jenny Kaye 11 May '01

11 May '01

Dana Shilling wrote: > > > >Jenny Kaye said: > > > From what what we have seen of Dana's previous "Pythonesque" humour, I'd > >say she was just joking here. Were you Dana? Please God say you were. > >It seems like a perfectly reasonable hypothesis to me, but we don't > >have the evidence either to prove or disprove it. Then it isn't a "reasonable hypothesis" then is it? PROSECUTING LAWYER: After shooting President Kennedy, the accused subjected himself to cryogenic freezing for 17 years, then, cunningly disguising himself as Mark Chapman, shot John Lennon. JUDGE: What's this got to do with the accused stealing a bicycle pump? PROSECUTING LAWYER: Nothing! But it seems like a perfectly reasonable hypothesis to me. JUDGE: Is that right? Case dismissed. Oh, and arrest that Prosecuting lawyer for contempt of court. > > > . The woman was > > > > >married to the trooper, but was "Gan's woman" by her own heart. > > > > >Here's an eerie idea for a fanfic-- what if Gan's woman (wife, lover, > >as > > > > >you will) was only injured, and transformed into a mutoid after the > > > > >incident? > > > > > > Or perhaps her intestines were ripped out by a herd of wildebeest! > >I'd be more inclined to read the former story than the latter Why? By the criteria you're using they are both equally valid :-). Jenny _________________________________________________________________________ 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