From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V00 #298
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume00/298
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------"
To: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
Reply-To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se

------------------------------

Content-Type: text/plain

blakes7-d Digest				Volume 00 : Issue 298

Today's Topics:
  Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa  [ Betty Ragan <ragan@sdc.org> ]
  Re: [B7L] Re: Bookworms               [ "Dana Shilling" <dshilling@worldnet ]
  Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa  [ "Dana Shilling" <dshilling@worldnet ]
  [B7L] B7 magazine collectors--part 1  [ JEB31538@cs.com ]
  [B7L] B7 magazine collectors--part 2  [ JEB31538@cs.com ]
  [B7L] B7 magazine collectors--part 3  [ JEB31538@cs.com ]
  Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa  [ Mac4781@aol.com ]
  Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa  [ "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.n ]
  Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa  [ "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.n ]
  Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa  [ "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.n ]
  Re: [B7L] Re: wardrobe choice in Dea  [ Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones. ]
  Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa  [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
  Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional?      [ "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com ]
  Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (wa  [ Mac4781@aol.com ]
  Off-topic Ricardianism [was Re: [B7L  [ Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@comp ]
  [B7L] Bookworms                       [ Jacqui Speel <jacquispeel@netscape. ]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:30:14 -0600
From: Betty Ragan <ragan@sdc.org>
To: B7 Lyst <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?) (long)
Message-ID: <39F70A96.DFAEAB0D@sdc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Responding to me, Carol Mc wrote:

> <g>  Actually, the reason I didn't respond was because there was nothing
> specific to grab hold of, and I couldn't see of the point of an "I think he's
> dysfunctional" - "I don't think he is" exchange.  But now that you've given
> me some points to respond to, it becomes interesting.  I pondered your points
> during my morning tramp through the fog.

Always glad to provide material for controversy! :)

I deliberately tried to keep things very specific and tied to actual
events on the screen, here, because arguing in abstract terms about
what's going on in a character's head does just tend to lead to "Well, I
see him this way"/"No, he's not like that!" kinds of exchanges, which
aren't very fruitful.  (That having been said, I *do* very much agree
with Ellynne's post about Avon being conficted over just what he
wants/needs from his relationships.)

> The environment is, I think, an important consideration.  Because many (all?)
> of the B7ers behave in ways that would be considered inappropriate per our
> society.  But the B7 universe is much darker.

Definitely.  One thing that I thought about mentioning and didn't is
that one could aruge that Avon was not "normal" even before he got
arrested and took up the life of a reluctant rebel, because normal
people don't rob banks.  Except that it's entirely possible to take the
view that robbing the bank was a perfectly reasonable thing to do for
someone who had the skills and honestly thought he could get away with
it.  Earth, you could argue, is *not* a good enviroment, and stealing
the money would permit him to get out of that environment.  Perfectly
rational... in the B7 universe.

> >  For
> >  instance, I think that it's fairly reasonable to make the argument that
> >  Avon's relationships with people are, in general, dysfunctional.
> 
> I have to admit to being completely blind to his relationships as
> dysfunctional.  Probably because I can see myself behaving exactly as he did.

Hmm.  Well, quite apart from anything else, there *is* the thought that
being nasty to people on whom your life is going to depend on a regular
basis may not be the most adaptive of behaviors...

> You've already answered this for me.  Avon doesn't want healthy, happy
> relationships.  His pushing people away is planned and calculated in a way to
> make *his* life *happier.*   He doesn't want ties.  Is it abnormal not to
> want the responsibility that comes with close relationships?  Not to my way
> of thinking.  It's work to maintain close relationships.  Avon recognizes
> that some aspects of life are much easier if you are an emotional loner.  He
> doesn't want to have to depend on other people; he doesn't want other people
> to depend on him.  If you can actually achieve perfect distancing from
> everyone else--and I don't think anyone except a hermit who never has contact
> with anyone else can totally manage that--then you always know exactly where
> you stand.  You know how your energies and time will be committed.  It
> honestly sounds very attractive to me.
> 
> But, back to Avon.  His attempts to push people away, to alienate them, don't
> succeed.  Poor baybee.  And he shows that he can interact with them, come to
> care for them, etc.  Which suggests normal to me.

Now we're getting into what I think is very interesting territory.  We
actually agree with the major points here, I think: Avon doesn't want
emotional ties.  Avon finds the idea of maintaing perfect emotional
distance and perfect emotional independence attractive.  And Avon
doesn't succeed at maintaining it; in fact, that's probably not even
possible to do.

Now, a couple of points, here.  First of all, Avon would be the first to
point out, I think, that attempting the impossible is kind of dumb...
and yet, that seems to be exactly what he's doing.  Secondly, Avon,
however much he may dislike the fact, is a human being.  He may be a
loner, he may be an introvert, but he's a human being, and humans are
social animals.  Even the most dedicated loner needs *some* degree of
emotional connection, and attempting to cut oneself off from it entirely
is not healthy.  And, yes, I do think that the conflict between
*needing* emotional connection and not *wanting* emotional connection
causes him some problems.  For instance, he does just about everything
he can to keep Blake from trusting him... and then gets upset when Blake
doesn't seem to trust him ("Star One").

Talking about "Terminal" here:
> Keeping the others in the dark is reasonable if his goal was to protect them,
> which is how I see it.  If he tells them, they are going to insist on helping
> him.  He doesn't want to put them in danger.  It's an indication of how much
> all of them have come to mean to him.  Another sign of someone who is
> functioning normally and who is able to relate to other people to my way of
> thinking.

Except that it doesn't work, and they end up in considerably more danger
than they would have been if he *had* confided in them.  I'm going to
abandon the word "dyfunctional" here, because I think we've established
that it isn't terribly meaningful, but I *do* think that Avon often has
very bad judgment when it comes to other people.  He certainly makes a
bad judgment call here, *if* his motivation truly is to keep the others
out of danger.  He doesn't know them well enough by now to know that
they'll come after him, anyway?

> I don't expect Avon (or Tarrant) to be perfect.

I don't expect them to be perfect, either, and I find Avon's
imperfections the most interesting things about him.  I certainly don't
want to create the impression that I'm dumping on him for being
"dysfunctional."  If anything, I think I like the idea of a
slightly-messed-up Avon because that's much, much more interesting to me
than a normal, totally emotionally healthy Avon would be.  (Not to
mention easier for me to relate to...)

> >  Then there's "Rumours."  This
> >  is a man who is so consumed by the desire for revenge (probably, IMO,
> >  motivated by guilt) that he voluntarily undergoes five days of torture
> >  (and, not incidentally, considerably risk to his life) for a woman who,
> >  already being dead, is not in any way going to benefit from it.  That,
> >  to my mind, *is* pathological.
> 
> I pondered that one especially while I walked, and I didn't come up with
> pathological.  If someone I loved had been tortured and killed and if the
> only way to bring the one responsible to justice was to undergo five days of
> severe pain and to risk my life, would I do it?   Yes.  Without a doubt.
> Five days of pain is an eye blink of discomfort compared to a lifetime of
> mental anguish.  The risk to life preferable to long years of living with the
> knowledge that someone who had tortured and killed a loved one was going
> unpunished.

Hmm.  Maybe this is just another individual/personality thing, but that
really feels had to conceive of to me....  My attitude would be much
more likely to be along the lines of: "Anna died in an attempt to spare
me this.  Do I want to make her death meaningless, on top of everthing
else, by putting myself through it in her name?  Wouldn't that be a
betrayal of her memory?"  Anyway...  I don't by any means want to
suggest that *you* are "pathological" for agreeing with him on this --
after all, revenge is a powerful and quite normal human motivation.  But
I *will* say, categorically, that I do *not* think that this is a
healthy, adaptive method of coping with grief and guilt.  

> I was reminded of the character that Sally Field played in "An Eye for an
> Eye."  Was her character pathological or would many of us have wanted to do
> the same thing (though we may not have had the will to carry it out) in that
> same situation?

Haven't seen it, so I can't say.  But personally, I've never been big on
revenge.  I realize that that makes me quite different from Avon. :)

> > And, yes, there's "Blake."  Were there
> >  rational reasons to believe that Blake possibly *had* betrayed them?
> >  Sure.  But  pulling the trigger was definitely *not* the appropriate
> >  thing to do.  It was a violent emotional reaction, and by no means a
> >  healthy one.
> 
> Not healthy by our standards.  But in Avon's situation?  He's a wanted
> fugitive.  He's in the midst of enemy territory.  Security has been called.
> He's already asked Blake if he betrayed him.  And received an answer that he
> took to be yes.  What else would you have him do?  Ask more questions?  Tell
> Blake he never wants to see him again?  Avon is a soldier on a battlefield.
> He's identified the enemy.  He shoots.

What would I have him do?  Let the man finish his sentence, at least. 
But, to begin with, I don't think Avon was thinking anything like that
clearly.  He's not looking around, doing risk assessment, and taking
rational action.  He's in emotional shock.  (IMO, of course, based on
the look on his face, the tone of his voice,and, most particularly, the
way he freezes up completely after he shoots Blake.)

At any rate, shooting Blake is *not* a rational thing to do.  Blake was
not an immediate physical threat (he wasn't even armed!), nor was he on
the phone to the Federation in the process of turning them in.  So it
wasn't the case that Avon needed to take Blake out to protect himself. 
And what does shooting Blake accomplish?  If he really *had* betrayed
them, and his security people are on the way, do you think they'd be 
*less* dangerous after Avon had just killed their leader?  I'd say it'd
make them more likely to shoot first and ask questions later, thus
making it less likely for Avon & friends to get out alive.  With Blake
alive, there might have been a chance to talk him out of it, or, at the
very least, to bide their time and manage an escape.

> What's of more interest to me in "Blake" is that Avon so easily believed that
> Blake could betray him.  And it always comes back to their personality
> conflict and to Avon's view of Blake.  Avon saw that Blake's rebellion was
> corrupting Blake.  Blake reached the point that had him willing to wade in
> blood to win.  I can see where Avon could believe that the corruption went
> one step farther.

I agree that that's of great interest, but disagree about the reasons
behind it.  I think Avon's gotten to the point where he's *expecting* to
be betrayed.  After Anna, he finds it very, very easy to believe that
*anyone* can and will betray him.  Blake's bounty hunter act is good,
but Avon doesn't take much convincing.  Paradoxically, I think Avon
*does* trust Blake, and I think that's the reason why he's so quick to
see and respond to signs of betrayal on Blake's part.  He knows he is
vulnerable to Blake.

> >  So, anyway, that's what I mean what I say that I think Avon *is*
> >  dysfunctional in certain ways, to a certain extent.  Just thought I'd
> >  clarify.:)
> 
> Which I very much appreciate.  It prompted me to think more deeply about
> Avon's behavior and why he acted as he did.

Cool. :)

-- 
Betty Ragan ** ragan@sdc.org ** http://www.sdc.org/~ragan/
"The Himalayas are quite tall at this time of the year."
-- Vila Restal, promoting Earth tourism, _Blake's 7_

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:47:21 -0400
From: "Dana Shilling" <dshilling@worldnet.att.net>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Bookworms
Message-ID: <007001c03ea5$1ea48bc0$0bac4e0c@dshilling>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jacqui asked:

So what books would the B7 group read: I can see Avon reading Marcus
Aurelius
(Meditations) - ie stoicism: would Blake read the Communist Manifesto?

Blake (& Tarrant): Whoever they have instead of Tom Clancy
Jenna (& possibly Servalan): Sex & Shopping novels--whatever they
have instead of Judith Krantz and Jilly Cooper
Vila: Equivalents of Agatha Christie and John Dickson Carr
Avon: Obviously I am not to be trusted on this subject, but I
got started writing my longest-ever story thinking about Avon
reading a Graham Greene paperback (and smoking a cigarette).
Also I think he'd really like Gerard Manley Hopkins.
Gan: Ray Bradbury? Sword & sorcery series?

-(Y)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:53:15 -0400
From: "Dana Shilling" <dshilling@worldnet.att.net>
To: "B7 Lyst" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?) (long)
Message-ID: <007101c03ea5$21193540$0bac4e0c@dshilling>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Betty said:
 
> The thing is, IMHO "Is Avon dysfunctional?" is a really slippery
> question.  First of all, you have to consider just what the word
> *means*.  The way I see it, "dysfunctional" means pretty much exactly
> what it sounds like it means: not able to function properly
I suspect that a lot of the impetus behind fandom is that Avon
spends the entire series seeming to be absolutely miserable, and
at least some of us wish we were there to cheer him up. 

It could also be argued that killing both of the people 
who are most important to you, if not dysfunctional, 
at least fails the Kantian test.

> The second problem is that what constitutes "functioning properly"
> depends a *lot* on the situation.  When we call someone dysfunctional, I
> think, it's generally with some comaprison in mind 
Freudian slip! Given the tendencies of fanfic, "Comaprison in mind"
would make a wonderful fanzine title.
> 
> Anybody wanna argue that
> locking himself onto the flight deck without sleep, keeping the others
> in the dark about what he was doing, pulling a gun on Tarrant, etc. 
Well, one vote for "pulling a gun on Tarrant"

-(Y)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 13:34:12 EDT
From: JEB31538@cs.com
To: freedom-city@blakes-7.org, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] B7 magazine collectors--part 1
Message-ID: <c2.2440e43.27287394@cs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

If you like to collect magazines with B7 content,  there is good news.  A UK 
bookstore,  At the Sign of the Dragon,  has a special snail mail catalog 
that's 10 pages long with B7 magazines or magazines with B7.  It is very 
detailed and available upon request.  Just ask for the B7 catalog.

If you are curious about magazines and B7,  Judith Proctor has a nine page 
listing at her site.  This will give you a pretty good idea of what was 
available and MIGHT still be available.  The ATSOTD  B7  catalog tells you 
exactly what they carry.

At the Sign of the Dragon is at  131/133 Sheen Lane, London SW14  8AE, 
England.  The phone number is  020 8876 3855.  They do not currently have a 
website, but they intend to get one soon.  They do have Email and it is
atthesignofthedragon@blueyonder.co.uk

I was excited to see several OOP magazines on their list that you cannot get 
at any price.  Most of their prices were reasonable, although a few got 
pricey.  but considering that Starlog tries to sell some of its magazines for 
50 dollars on up,  even the expensive ATSOTD prices are pretty low.

ATSOTD does ship internationally and does take credit cards.  For Americans,  
they do take dollars cash.   Allow four pounds extra for bank charges.

The people at ATSOTD tend to be a little slow to respond to orders, but they 
do respond.  I've been dealing with them for about seven years.  However, 
since I'm an American,  that may be the reason for their delay.  They might 
respond much more quickly to UK orders.

Joyce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 13:39:23 EDT
From: JEB31538@cs.com
To: freedom-city@blakes-7.org, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] B7 magazine collectors--part 2
Message-ID: <78.bb310a6.272874cb@cs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ar the Sign of the Dragon sells various B7 merchandise items.  I noticed that 
it carries  B7: The Inside Story by Sheelagh Wells and Joe Nazzaro  for 12.99 
pounds plus postage.  It also  carries the three Horizon technical manuals 
for 6.45 pounds (1 & 3)  and 5.75 pounds (2)  plus postage.  It carries the 
Rigelsford book for 9.99 pounds plus postage.  And it carries Zenith for 4 
pounds plus postage.  It gives Zenith   a ten line description.  It starts 
out by saying,  "This is a new amateur magazine with professional standards."

Joyce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 13:55:34 EDT
From: JEB31538@cs.com
To: freedom-city@blakes-7.org, blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] B7 magazine collectors--part 3
Message-ID: <a7.88d000c.27287896@cs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

At the Sign of the Dragon carries these hard to get or OOP magazines.   It is 
possible that Larry's Book Store in Chicago also carries some of these as I 
honestly haven't double checked.  If you need to find out either one's 
address,  it is listed on Judith Proctor's website in the magazine section.

The really wonderful hard to get or impossible to get (OOP) magazines that 
ATSOTD carries are these:

SFX 4           This issue has a lot of B7 in it.  Highly recommended.
Starburst 205   Lots of nice pictures and an article about the B7 reunion.
Starburst Special 21    Very nice article with pictures on B7.

I would think B7 fans who collect magazines would want to have these three 
magazines.

The following magazines may or may not be hard to get.  This is just a random 
listing of some of the thing listed in the ATSOTD  ten page B7 catalog.  

Time Screen 5 (revised)     Darrow interview & nice article on Star Maidens.
Starlog 135                 Pacey interview.
TV Zone 28                  Pacey interview.
Starlog 114                 Thomas interview.   Expensive.  10 pounds.
Starlog 139                 Thomas interview.
TV Zone Special 4           Thomas interview.
Starlog 147                 Episode guide to seasons 1 & 2
        (Starlog 148 has seasons 3 & 4. Impossible to get except used.)
Starlog 172                 Greif interview.
TV Zone 30                  Greif interview.
Starlog 138                 Croucher interview.
Starburst 196 & 197         Articles on B7.  

I do recommend you asking ATSOTD for its B7 catalog so you can see what it 
has as the catalog specifically lists the content for each magazine it has.

You can Email them, too,  at  
atthesignofthedragon@blueyonder.co.uk

Joyce

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 15:04:35 EDT
From: Mac4781@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?) (long)
Message-ID: <51.28e38b5.272888c3@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I should not have come to the computer.  Now it will be difficult to get 
away.  

Betty wrote:

>  Hmm.  Well, quite apart from anything else, there *is* the thought that
>  being nasty to people on whom your life is going to depend on a regular
>  basis may not be the most adaptive of behaviors...

He says nasty things, but at the same time he tends to make himself useful 
and to *do* the right thing or allow himself to be persuaded to do the right 
thing.  The reaction of his shipmates shows that he isn't engaged in risky 
behavior.  If you are useful enough, people will tolerate behavior that is 
more obnoxious than Avon displays.  I suspect Avon learned that long before 
he reached the Liberator.  :)  

>  Now, a couple of points, here.  First of all, Avon would be the first to
>  point out, I think, that attempting the impossible is kind of dumb...
>  and yet, that seems to be exactly what he's doing. 

This is a place where I disagree.  I think Avon is capable of taking on long 
odds.  He has nothing to lose and a slim possibility of gain by being sharp 
tongued  Maybe one person will take him at face value.  It also allows him to 
vent and speak his mind.  That can be a healthy outlet for negative feelings. 
 

We also see him take on the Federation in fourth season, and I don't think he 
ever expected to win.  But it was either giving up completely and waiting for 
the Federation to catch up to him or going on the offensive despite the 
impossible odds.

Then we have STARDRIVE when Avon says even the most cynical must sometimes 
trust to luck. IOW, even Avon is capable of seemingly irrational behavior.  
If one regards his fiery tongue to be irrational.

> Secondly, Avon,
>  however much he may dislike the fact, is a human being.  He may be a
>  loner, he may be an introvert, but he's a human being, and humans are
>  social animals.  Even the most dedicated loner needs *some* degree of
>  emotional connection, and attempting to cut oneself off from it entirely
>  is not healthy.  And, yes, I do think that the conflict between
>  *needing* emotional connection and not *wanting* emotional connection
>  causes him some problems. 

It definitely does, but not so great a problem that I see it as 
dysfunctional.  I think Avon might be more the norm than the exception in the 
Federation universe, particularly for those outside the law.  We see more 
avoiding emotional connections than seeking emotional connections.  Vila 
doesn't commit to Kerril.  Zeeona is the *one* to chase Tarrant.  Blake can't 
discuss his distress over Gan with his shipmates.  Tarrant watches his 
brother get killed and he smiles and makes a joke about it.  They are almost 
all emotional loners.  

> For instance, he does just about everything
>  he can to keep Blake from trusting him... and then gets upset when Blake
>  doesn't seem to trust him ("Star One").

I think there is  trust and trust. ;)  Avon isn't upset by Blake's comment to 
Jenna in HORIZON.  He wasn't expecting blanket trust from Blake.  But in this 
case Avon has given his word.  He expects Blake to know him well enough by 
now to recognize that his word is good.

>  Except that it doesn't work, and they end up in considerably more danger
>  than they would have been if he *had* confided in them.  I'm going to
>  abandon the word "dysfunctional" here, because I think we've established
>  that it isn't terribly meaningful, but I *do* think that Avon often has
>  very bad judgment when it comes to other people.  He certainly makes a
>  bad judgment call here, *if* his motivation truly is to keep the others
>  out of danger.  He doesn't know them well enough by now to know that
>  they'll come after him, anyway?

Does he really misjudge them?  I'm not so sure.  He doesn't seem terribly 
surprised when Cally and Tarrant are hauled in.  I think he was in an 
impossible situation--one of those ones like I talk about above.  There was 
no winning scenario. He chose to still try to protect his shipmates on the 
off chance that he could succeed.  That was a bad judgment in that working as 
a group might have kept them all safer.  But making a mistake isn't 
synonymous with dysfunctional to my way of thinking. 

But let's say Avon really did misjudge his shipmates. That he really believed 
they wouldn't follow him.  Even that mistake isn't grounds to label him as 
dysfunctional.  Blake misjudged Avon's words at STAR ONE--he thought the 
words meant that Avon hated him.  Does that make Blake dysfunctional or does 
it simply show that he is a fallible human?

>  I don't expect them to be perfect, either, and I find Avon's
>  imperfections the most interesting things about him.  I certainly don't
>  want to create the impression that I'm dumping on him for being
>  "dysfunctional."  If anything, I think I like the idea of a
>  slightly-messed-up Avon because that's much, much more interesting to me
>  than a normal, totally emotionally healthy Avon would be.  (Not to
>  mention easier for me to relate to...)

Maybe that's the key.  And you wouldn't be alone.  Poor Avon is a popular 
image in fandom.

>   My attitude would be much
>  more likely to be along the lines of: "Anna died in an attempt to spare
>  me this.  Do I want to make her death meaningless, on top of everthing
>  else, by putting myself through it in her name?  Wouldn't that be a
>  betrayal of her memory?" 

Hm, I'm going to sidestep here.  What would give him the idea that Anna died 
to spare him?  She didn't walk into Federation hands to save him.  She was 
picked up, tortured and killed against her will, per what he seems to 
believe.  And she didn't spare him; he was picked up as well, possibly 
tortured and questioned at the time of his initial arrest.

>  Anyway...  I don't by any means want to
>  suggest that *you* are "pathological" for agreeing with him on this --

<g>  It wouldn't matter.  I'm not the type who is bothered by what people 
think about me. 

>  after all, revenge is a powerful and quite normal human motivation.  But
>  I *will* say, categorically, that I do *not* think that this is a
>  healthy, adaptive method of coping with grief and guilt.  

Not healthy by societal standards.  And I'm not advocating vigilantism.  But 
per what you said, you thought it dysfunctional that he'd suffer five days of 
torture and risk his life.  I don't see that as an unreasonable reaction.  
And as you say revenge is a NORMAL human motivation.  Maybe even more normal 
in the B7 universe where justice through the law wasn't available.   I think 
Soolin suffered and took risks to avenge her family.  She's a beautiful 
woman; the scum who killed her parents quite likely sexually abused her in 
the years she was learning to use a gun.  Dayna would surely suffer and risk 
her life to avenge her father.  

>  What would I have him do?  Let the man finish his sentence, at least. 

Am I forgetting something?  Did Avon cut him down in mid sentence?  I thought 
Blake had stopped talking.

>  But, to begin with, I don't think Avon was thinking anything like that
>  clearly.  He's not looking around, doing risk assessment, and taking
>  rational action.  He's in emotional shock.  (IMO, of course, based on
>  the look on his face, the tone of his voice,and, most particularly, the
>  way he freezes up completely after he shoots Blake.)

I agree he's in emotional shock after he shoots Blake. He's just shot someone 
he cared about.  He's stressed before that, but he's functioning.  He was 
stressed but functioning when he stalked Vila in ORBIT.  And I think he'd 
have been in emotional shock there as well if he had managed the deed. 
  
>  At any rate, shooting Blake is *not* a rational thing to do.  Blake was
>  not an immediate physical threat (he wasn't even armed!), nor was he on
>  the phone to the Federation in the process of turning them in.  So it
>  wasn't the case that Avon needed to take Blake out to protect himself. 
>  And what does shooting Blake accomplish?

It's one less enemy soldier he has to face in the next few minutes.  Just 
because Avon couldn't see a gun didn't mean Blake wasn't armed.  And Blake 
has shown in the past that he doesn't need a gun to be dangerous.  He kept 
walking closer to Avon.  Maybe he wanted to get into range where he could use 
his greater size to subdue Avon or to take Avon hostage?

> If he really *had* betrayed
>  them, and his security people are on the way, do you think they'd be 
>  *less* dangerous after Avon had just killed their leader? 

Why would Avon think/know that Blake is the leader?  That information isn't 
available to him.  

>  I agree that that's of great interest, but disagree about the reasons
>  behind it.  I think Avon's gotten to the point where he's *expecting* to
>  be betrayed.  After Anna, he finds it very, very easy to believe that
>  *anyone* can and will betray him.  Blake's bounty hunter act is good,
>  but Avon doesn't take much convincing. 

I think he expected betrayal even before Anna.  And nothing has changed to 
persuade him to trust anyone except those immediately around him, his current 
crew. 

> Paradoxically, I think Avon
>  *does* trust Blake, and I think that's the reason why he's so quick to
>  see and respond to signs of betrayal on Blake's part.  He knows he is
>  vulnerable to Blake.

I don't understand what you are saying.  How would being vulnerable to Blake 
make a difference?  

Thanks for the interesting discussions,
Carol Mc

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:37:58 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?) (long)
Message-ID: <004701c03ebb$6c308720$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

From: Betty Ragan <ragan@sdc.org>
> Hmm.  Well, quite apart from anything else, there *is* the thought that
> being nasty to people on whom your life is going to depend on a regular
> basis may not be the most adaptive of behaviors...

Except that Avon *isn't* nasty to people.  He might be brusque, sarcastic,
acerbic or simply irritating, but anything he comes out with is mildness
epitomised compared to common real-life exchanges between people who know
that you don't have to be polite in dealing with people you know (and like).
Avon wouldn't last five minutes on a factory floor or a building site.
Actually, I'm not sure any of them would.  They're all far too 'nice'.

Neil

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:13:11 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?) (long)
Message-ID: <004501c03ebb$6a06a240$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

From: <Mac4781@aol.com>
> But, back to Avon.  His attempts to push people away, to alienate them,
don't
> succeed.

That's debatable.  As Betty(?) pointed out, Avon is caught between a push
and a pull, so he needs to strike some sort of balance between the two.  As
far as general day-to-day interaction with the S1/2 crew goes, he seems to
succeed perfectly well.  He maintains a satisfactory level of distance
whilst not really alienating himself from anyone at all.  I don't recall
anyone whinging about him behind his back.

Give the guy some credit.

Neil

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:23:55 +0100
From: "Neil Faulkner" <N.Faulkner@tesco.net>
To: "b7" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?) (long)
Message-ID: <004601c03ebb$6b026760$e535fea9@neilfaulkner>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

From: Betty Ragan <ragan@sdc.org>
> One thing that I thought about mentioning and didn't is
> that one could aruge that Avon was not "normal" even before he got
> arrested and took up the life of a reluctant rebel, because normal
> people don't rob banks.

Don't they?  It depends what you mean by 'normal', I suppose (always a
dangerous word to use, even with care).  If you mean statistically typical,
then everyone's abnormal in some respect or other.  If you're talking in
terms of psychological adjustment, I would certainly disagree with your
assessment of bank robbers, and probably most other professional criminals
too.  From the interviews I've watched, books I've read etc, these people
are extremely 'normal'.  They regard their criminal activities as just
another job, which happens to be illegal (and tax free).  They function
perfectly well within mainstream society, which is hardly surprising given
that the criminal underground they inhabit is part of that society, much as
we honest law-abiding types might like to think otherwise.

Neil

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 18:35:01 +0100
From: Julia Jones <julia.lysator@jajones.demon.co.uk>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Cc: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: wardrobe choice in Deathwatch
Message-ID: <rCnd5FBFnx95EwAw@jajones.demon.co.uk>

In message <LAW-F197reBBsQwY6YH000005ce@hotmail.com>, Sally Manton
<smanton@hotmail.com> writes
>Though personally I see Blake as more the type to hang onto ancient and 
>disreputable old clothing, long after everyone else thinks that the laser burns 
>and badly mended helium-flux-shredder-thing rips (well, can *you* see him 
>darning?  Or anyone on the ship offering to do it for him?)

After the knitting, I'm sure I can if it's Dana writing the fanfic.
-- 
Julia Jones
"Don't philosophise with me, you electronic moron!"
        The Turing test - as interpreted by Kerr Avon.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:46:51 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?) (long)
Message-ID: <LAW-F276kikieqXItMc00000e63@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

Betty wrote:
<I *do* think that Avon often has very bad judgment when it comes to other 
people.  He certainly makes a bad judgment call here, *if* his motivation 
truly is to keep the others out of danger.  He doesn't know them well enough 
by now to know that they'll come after him, anyway?>

I think the phrase 'none so blind as them that don't want to know' comes to 
mind ... and no, he doesn't know them that well.  Just about *anyone* could 
surprise Avon - the series is well sprinkled with examples.

<I think I like the idea of a slightly-messed-up Avon because that's much, 
much more interesting to me than a normal, totally emotionally healthy Avon 
would be.>

Oh absolutely. The difficulty is keeping it in proportion (I am not a fan of 
the Avon-goes-nuts school).

And re Blake ...

<What would I have him do?  Let the man finish his sentence, at least. But, 
to begin with, I don't think Avon was thinking anything like that clearly.  
He's not looking around, doing risk assessment, and taking rational action.  
He's in emotional shock.  (IMO, of course, based on the look on his face, 
the tone of his voice,and, most particularly, the way he freezes up 
completely after he shoots Blake.)>

It'll surprise no one that I agree with this :-)  We've *seen* Avon react to 
real or purported betrayal before (Jenna, Bounty; Tynus, Killer; Soolin, 
that moment in Warlord).  We've seen him expecting it from the others as 
well (changing the password so they can't take off with Scorpio in Power ... 
that is, if you accept Power as Really Happening :-)).

He's rarely surprised and never (except with Anna and Blake) really upset 
(which says something about the way he views the rest of the human race 
*except* these two, I guess).

<At any rate, shooting Blake is *not* a rational thing to do.  Blake was not 
an immediate physical threat (he wasn't even armed!), nor was he on the 
phone to the Federation in the process of turning them in.>

And Arlen *was* armed - *she* is the danger, not Blake. Does Avon even 
register her presence? (and BTW, Soolin and Dayna were both armed - why the 
hell didn't both of *them* have their gun out within 3 seconds of 'he sold 
you out?' They could have taken Arlen).

<I think Avon's gotten to the point where he's *expecting* to be betrayed.>

From the examples above, it's possible to argue that he considered it a 
realistic possibility with nearly anyone, even before Anna.

<Paradoxically, I think Avon *does* trust Blake, and I think that's the 
reason why he's so quick to see and respond to signs of betrayal on Blake's 
part.  He knows he is vulnerable to Blake.>

I still think he's shooting as much at the sheer pain the idea causes as the 
man he sees as causing it.  Look at his face as Blake falls - he's stunned, 
as if he doesn't understand what he's done (of course, at this minute, I'm 
of the uncanonical opinion that he's also realised they were wrong ...



_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:52:09 GMT
From: "Sally Manton" <smanton@hotmail.com>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional?
Message-ID: <LAW-F944rhYQYx3G5aY00000d16@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

Betty wrote:
<One thing that I thought about mentioning and didn't is that one could 
aruge that Avon was not "normal" even before he got arrested and took up the 
life of a reluctant rebel, because normal people don't rob banks.>

And Neil:
<If you're talking in
terms of psychological adjustment, I would certainly disagree with your
assessment of bank robbers, and probably most other professional criminals
too.  From the interviews I've watched, books I've read etc, these people
are extremely 'normal'.  They regard their criminal activities as just 
another job,>

Even contract killers (Piri, anyone?)

Though I would suggest that Avon, being both very intelligent and (by the 
evidence as I see it) a very *bad* bank robber, would 'normally' have seen 
the light and given up crime (since I believe there were at least 2 failed 
frauds - the one with Tynus - "I kept my mouth shut" and the one with Anna. 
Then, notwithstanding that, he's already in Spacefall planning the next ... 
(and the crime sprees Our Heroes indulge in - Kairos, Gold - are not exactly 
glowing examples of success. For an intelligent man, he really *isn't* very 
bright when it comes to his preferred career ... :-))


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 17:03:08 EDT
From: Mac4781@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Is Avon dysfunctional? (was Re: Avon as loner?) (long)
Message-ID: <5b.d0af343.2728a48c@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Neil (quoting me) wrote:

>  > But, back to Avon.  His attempts to push people away, to alienate them,
>  don't
>  > succeed.
>  
>  That's debatable.  As Betty(?) pointed out, Avon is caught between a push
>  and a pull, so he needs to strike some sort of balance between the two.  As
>  far as general day-to-day interaction with the S1/2 crew goes, he seems to
>  succeed perfectly well.  He maintains a satisfactory level of distance
>  whilst not really alienating himself from anyone at all.  I don't recall
>  anyone whinging about him behind his back.
>  
>  Give the guy some credit.

I agree with you. (I hope Avon will forgive me the slight. :)  He does manage 
to keep some distance between himself and the Seasons 1 and 2 crew.  So he 
does partially succeed in his goal.  And Avon wouldn't need much more payback 
to consider his efforts worthwhile.  We are also both in agreement that he 
didn't alienate them.

Making a post that is so agreeable is almost unsettling.  But I'm sure it is 
just a momentary aberration.

Carol Mc

 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 17:48:52 -0400
From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com>
To: "INTERNET:blakes7@lysator.liu.se" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Off-topic Ricardianism [was Re: [B7L] bfi poll]
Message-ID: <200010251749_MC2-B861-6ED5@compuserve.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	 charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline

Dana said:
>I'm all in favor of anyone who was nervous enough
> to be caught fidgeting in an official portrait.

I think it was the fashion.  There's one of Edward IV doing exactly the
same thing.  Unless you think Richard worshipped his brother so much he
liked to adopt the same pose.  Though I don't know that any portraits are=

contemporary anyway.

>Where they probably have videotapes of Paul Darrow as Richard III.

Ooh no, don't!  Have you seen Al Pacino's film Looking for Richard? =

Alternating very interesting discussion of the play, including two of the=

best insights into Buckingham that I've heard - mutally contradictory -
with Pacino doing a really hammy performance ignoring all the insights he=
'd
patiently elicited.

>But are the White Surrey crew fans of the chatty Vice
> figure or the stout Northern administrator?

The latter, I hope.

Harriet

------------------------------

Date: 25 Oct 00 14:52:57 PDT
From: Jacqui Speel <jacquispeel@netscape.net>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Cc: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Bookworms
Message-ID: <20001025215257.18583.qmail@wwcst271.netaddress.usa.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Add Sherlock Holmes to Avon's list

(and with the Richard III comparisons Vila is 'Malmsey George' (Duke of
Clarence) of course)

____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://home=
=2Enetscape.com/webmail

--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V00 Issue #298
**************************************