From: blakes7-d-request@lysator.liu.se
Subject: blakes7-d Digest V98 #56
X-Loop: blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se
X-Mailing-List: <blakes7-d@lysator.liu.se> archive/volume98/56
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 98 : Issue 56
Today's Topics:
Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Re: [B7L] oracle of avon
Re: [B7L] oracle of avon
Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
[B7L] Families (was why Blake stayed...)
[B7L] Second-best computer man (was Avon and Vila)
[B7L] Permissions
Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
RE: [B7L] Re: safety
[B7L] Re: safety
Re: [B7L] Re: Safety
Re: [B7L] Re: Safety
Re: [B7L] Safety
[B7L] re: safety
Re: [B7L] Re: Safety
[B7L] Backtracking to Horizon
Re: [B7L] Re: safety
Re: [B7L] Re: Safety
Re: [B7L] Safety
RE: [B7L] Re: safety
RE: [B7L] Safety
[B7L] What the window cleaner saw
Re: [B7L] What the window cleaner saw
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 09:44:52 -0500
From: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu (Carol A. McCoy)
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Message-ID: <199802211444.JAA13885@yfn.ysu.edu>
Sue wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Feb 1998, Carol A. McCoy wrote:
>
>> >> >(a) assume it is Blake's base and know this is all a misunderstanding
>> > Yup, pretty much. 8-)
>>
>> Why?
>
> Ummmm...Carol, the answer was in the rest of the paragraph.
Ummmm...Sue, I knew that. But since I was willing to
explain why I thought Klyn was Blakes responsibility (and I'll go
into more detail below), I was hoping you'd explain the logic
behind your answer.
>>> >After al, Carol, _you're_ assuming Klyn
>>> >is part of Blake's group even though there's nothing in the episode to
>>> >support it. 8-)
>
> Like that, see? You assumed it, why shouldn't he.
Well, I did try to base my assumption on available data. I'm
wondering what data Avon had available to him. Indulge me on this,
because I've obviously missed something that you picked up on.
>> We can't prove she was a rebel, but she did appear to work for the man.
>> She asks Blake what to do about the unidentified flyer (Avon's).
>
> Klyn talks to Deva on the intercom, as she does in an early scene.
>In both cases, it's DEVA who gives the order, although in the second, he
>takes his order from Blake and relays it.
I see I should have taken more time and explained this in steps. I
apologize. I tend to be hasty. The question, to my mind, is did
Klyn work for Blake? Whether it is in a civilian capacity or as
part of his rebel army (and that point is certainly debatable), I
would assume that Blake is responsible for considering her welfare
when he allows Tarrant to run loose and Avon to pop on down.
Yes, Klyn took her orders from Deva. And, yes, it's possible she
doesn't realize she's working for Blake. But Blake knows who she
is working for. That's the crucial point, for me. It makes her
Blake's responsibility.
>When Klyn and Blake speak
>directly, they seem friendly but don't even remotely discuss anything
>relating to his true identity. In fact, Deva's insistence on referring to
>Blake as "the bounty hunter" whenever anyone else is listening and Blake's
>line to Klyn. "Nothing in it for me, then. Outlaws tend not to use
>distress beacons" and their later conversation about the activity make
>me think she isn't in on the plan at all.
And you could very well be right. I would never argue one hundred
percent that she was a rebel. (I've said why I prefer to think that.)
But at the very least she's a dedicated civil servant, staying on
past her normal work hours, as the episode tells us, because of the
abnormal traffic.
>> I'd
>> sure rather assume she was a rebel than believe that Blake was playing
>> bounty hunter in the midst of the enemy or even neutrals. How
>> do you explain hauling in a prisoner one day and putting him/her on your
>> security force the next?
>
> Maybe Blake was playing Arlen. We're given so little on what Blake
>was doing, everything is speculation. Also, the official order to give
>Arlen a job probably came from Deva. And most of the bounty hunters, and
>perhaps therefore some of the base security, were outlaws turned outlaw
>catchers themselves.
There is certainly plenty of room for speculation on a number of
things. But none of that affects the impression we're given that
Blake is most certainly in charge. Which makes Klyn one of his
"people" (civilian or rebel).
Would you rather have him putting to risk non-combatant employees
or dedicated rebels who went into the job knowing the dangers?
I would honestly like to think that Blake wasn't putting civilians
in danger. I truly see him as a very moral individual, one who
would be especially protective of neutrals.
There are two things that Klyn does that lead me to think she has
to have some awareness of Blake's games, but I admit it is pure
speculation on my part. First, when she challenges Tarrant. Why
would a $10/hour switchboard operator challenge Tarrant's right to
roam? Even if she recognized that he wasn't supposed to be doing
that/breaking some kind of base policy, wouldn't a switchboard
operator have been trained to report to security rather than
challenge the person herself? Later, when the odds are less in
her favor, she does call security. But at that point wouldn't a
switchboard operator (after the white-coated guy had been shot)
hide behind her console quaking with fear? That's where I'd be.
Call security and call attention to myself? No way.
I hope you can see, Sue, from all of the above, that I wasn't
flippantly trying to up Blake's body count by putting Klyn on
his list. Or trying to be unfair to Blake. It's something
that I've given a lot of thought to, and there are logical reasons
why I made that judgment call.
> I know and I was basing most of mine on intense annoyance at
>the blame the victim game that you know goes on. I wanted to point out
>that there are many, many ways Avon could've avoided the mess he got
>them all into. All of the options were Avon's, he's the only one who
>could have stopped the snowball before it became an avalanche and he
>didn't.
I have a lot of sympathy for your position. As a fan of another
less-beloved character, I know all about double standards. But
I can't agree that Avon was the only one who could have stopped
the snowball. I see mistakes on both sides. I also see mistakes
on the part of Tarrant, Vila, Soolin, and Dayna. The four of them
should never have allowed Avon to hurry them off to GP. There
was no one person to blame. It was a set of unfortunate errors
in judgment by a number of people.
> Because the last person he met named Tarrant was a treacherous
>bastard who got lots of people slaughtered. Because although he suspects,
>from the teleport bracelet in the wreck, that Tarrant has some connection
>to Avon, he _doesn't know what it is_. Because Tarrant could be Avon's
>enemy, Avon's friend, or Avon's friend like Tynus was Avon's friend.
I will grant you that the name "Tarrant" might set him off and
he's also told us that he has to test everyone himself. But it's
rather ironic that he goes from being over-cautious (testing Tarrant)
to less cautious (letting Tarrant run off) at a point when he still
needs to keep control of the situation.
> Avon has no reason, since he knows _nothing about what's going on
>at the base or what Blake's doing_ to assume Blake has anything to do with
>the technician. Avon, as you said, doesn't know that Blake took Tarrant to
>the base.
Avon doesn't have solid proof that Blake is involved with the technician,
but he does have an unfortunate chain of circumstances that leads him
to reach that conclusion. It wasn't any one thing, but the combined
picture that set him off, or so I believe. There were two key patterns
as I see it. Tarrant's getting beat up--Tarrant's telling him Blake
betrayed them. Klyn's call for security--Blake's arrival, as if timed to
answer that call. Top that with two men (Avon and Blake) who have
apparently been under a great deal of stress for a very long time. As
we saw, it was a tragedy in the making.
> It was perfectly straightforward: a was what Avon did, b,c,d,and e
>were alternatives he didn't consider but hould have (except maybe e).
But they weren't alternatives that took off from the same starting
point. Some were choices he could have made that would have avoided
a trip to GP and others were choices that he could have made on
the planet. So each deserved an individual answer.
>> Contact Blake--no. What's he going to ask him? Are you a bounty
>> hunter? If Blake was a bounty hunter, would he say yes?
>
> "Hey, Blake, long time no see. So what've you been up to, dude?
>Still rabble rousing? Why don't we get together...there's this place
>called Freedom City, you might remember it...No, I lost track of the
>others, why do you ask...?" Or have Vila do it, that might work even
>better.
Now, Sue, does that honestly sound like something Avon would do?
> Gee, never felt safe with him but risks everything he has to get
>back to him twice, risked his life for him several times, falls to pieces
>because he thinks Blake might've let him down...
I never said he didn't care about Blake. I said he didn't feel safe
with him.
>What I would urge him to
>remember and rethink is the bizarre idea that Blake would be a figurehead
>with Avon controlling him. That never flew in the past and is unlikely
>ever to...but I think it was just face-saving bluster unless Avon
>duplicated Glynd's black box.
I completely agree that it was face-saving bluster.
> You'll understand this is not a concern for me...
I understand. If Tarrant had died in Scorpio, averting the misunder-
standing, would you at least keep the cheers restrained? ;-)
>> didn't go to Scorpio because he believed Tarrant was dead. But as
>> long as he didn't see it with his own eyes, he could maybe fool
>> himself into believing otherwise.
>
> Excuse me while I snort derisively. Ah, that's better. 8-)
I see. It's believable for Avon to be broken up over Blake, but
amusing if he's broken up over Tarrant. Or am I misinterpreting?
> It's the white vinyl jumpsuit and sequined cape that give me
>nightmares.
I've heard that there are therapists who can cure that. ;-)
Carol McCoy
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 07:25:31 -0800
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu
CC: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Message-ID: <34EEF1EC.3FC@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> > "Hey, Blake, long time no see. So what've you been up to, dude?
> >Still rabble rousing? Why don't we get together...there's this place
> >called Freedom City, you might remember it...No, I lost track of the
> >others, why do you ask...?" Or have Vila do it, that might work even
> >better.
>
> Now, Sue, does that honestly sound like something Avon would do?
I have to give Sue this one, Carol. The wording, no, isn't something he
would use. But a cautious approach, meeting on nuetral territory, would
not be out of character. At least, not from earlier seasons. He did sort
of throw caution to the wind final season.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 07:27:34 -0800
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu
CC: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Message-ID: <34EEF266.55C@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> >What I would urge him to
> >remember and rethink is the bizarre idea that Blake would be a figurehead
> >with Avon controlling him. That never flew in the past and is unlikely
> >ever to...but I think it was just face-saving bluster unless Avon
> >duplicated Glynd's black box.
>
> I completely agree that it was face-saving bluster.
We're all agreed on that, I think. I mean "I've figured out I totally
blow as Rebel Leader and want to give the job back to the guy I was
always harping on." How would that go over with his crew?
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 10:17:28 -0500
From: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu (Carol A. McCoy)
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Message-ID: <199802211517.KAA15404@yfn.ysu.edu>
In chronological order, these quotes are by me, Sue, Avona:
>> > But not Teal, thank you very much. We have a long, lean pilot's
>> > welfare to consider. I don't think he'd last long as First
>> > Champion.
>>
>> You'll understand this is not a concern for me...
>
>And yet it would have been for Tarrant's teammates. Yeesh, and Avon's
>supposed to be ruthless!
Now there's a nice thought: that Tarrant's shipmates wouldn't have
chosen to expose him to that danger. Thanks, Avona.
Carol McCoy
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 10:22:22 -0500
From: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu (Carol A. McCoy)
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] oracle of avon
Message-ID: <199802211522.KAA15609@yfn.ysu.edu>
Deborah wrote:
> I have friends pestering me to do a Servalan/Orac story...unless someone
>has already done it and gets me off the hook?
Can't say I can recall a Servalan/Orac. Sorry... Maybe you can argue
that the pairing is so natural that you really need more of a challenge.
Then again, that might get you into a worse dilemma. ;-)
Carol McCoy
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 07:48:10 -0800
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu
CC: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] oracle of avon
Message-ID: <34EEF73A.7B6E@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Carol A. McCoy wrote:
>
> Deborah wrote:
>
> > I have friends pestering me to do a Servalan/Orac story...unless someone
> >has already done it and gets me off the hook?
>
> Can't say I can recall a Servalan/Orac. Sorry... Maybe you can argue
> that the pairing is so natural that you really need more of a challenge.
> Then again, that might get you into a worse dilemma. ;-)
>
> Carol McCoy
How about saying, "ORAC erased my computer file after I wrote it. I
think he objects to the idea."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 07:51:43 -0800
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu
CC: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Message-ID: <34EEF80F.4EF2@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Now there's a nice thought: that Tarrant's shipmates wouldn't have
> chosen to expose him to that danger. Thanks, Avona.
>
> Carol McCoy
In my best Avon-type voice, "Turn a first-rate pilot into a second-rate
First Champion? The waste of talent would be unpardonable."
(Thought bubble: Are they buying my don't-give-a-damn act?)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 11:05:20 -0500
From: ay648@yfn.ysu.edu (Carol A. McCoy)
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Message-ID: <199802211605.LAA17614@yfn.ysu.edu>
Avona wrote:
>In my best Avon-type voice, "Turn a first-rate pilot into a second-rate
>First Champion? The waste of talent would be unpardonable."
>
>(Thought bubble: Are they buying my don't-give-a-damn act?)
<giggle> You've got that down pat. But only "second-rate"...he's
going to hurt Tarrant's feelings. ;-)
P.S. to another post: I sent a reply to Harriet's latest body
count rulebook post. But I can't remember whether I changed
the addy to the list or sent it directly to Harriet. It's not
here now, but it might have bounced back and I deleted
it while distracted by offspring. Harriet, if I sent that only
to you, would you please forward it to the list? Thanks.
P.S. to my Klyn comments. While in the shower (great place to
avoid offspring distractions), I realized that I hadn't included
a short conclusion to my two things that make me think Klyn
was part of Blake's rebel activity. If I may indulge and add that here...
To my mind Klyn was either a recklessly brave individual (Tarrant's
aunt? <g>) or a dedicated rebel willing to risk her life for the
Cause.
Carol McCoy
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 12:53:34 -0500
From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com>
To: "Blake's 7 (Lysator)" <BLAKES7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Families (was why Blake stayed...)
Message-ID: <199802211253_MC2-342E-26D6@compuserve.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Helen asked:
> Hands up, who thought that these people were couples, not family?
I assumed Tyce was Sarkoff's daughter. Re Del and Anna, it's hard to say,
because I missed that episode on first broadcast. The Greater Manchester
Branch of the Richard III Society was holding its monthly meeting on March
6, 1979, so Countdown was relayed to me the following morning by Sally and
Aileen. Can still hear their voices rising in unison as they got to
"Maybe... it's because... Anna was your SISTER!"
Harriet
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 12:53:37 -0500
From: Harriet Monkhouse <101637.2064@compuserve.com>
To: "Blake's 7 (Lysator)" <BLAKES7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Second-best computer man (was Avon and Vila)
Message-ID: <199802211254_MC2-342E-26D7@compuserve.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Walter wrote:
>My memory may be faulty, but I don't actually
>recall any independent confirmation that Avon
>was the "Second Best Computer Man in the
>Federation" or however it is that Vila acclaims
>him in Spacefall.
>
>Was this confirmed anywhere else?
It's a JOKE! The whole point is for the other person to ask "who's number
one" so Vila can come back with his punchline: "the one who caught him".
That's why Nova rolls his eyes a bit: he realises he's fallen into the
trap.
None of this means that it couldn't be true. Avon could be the
second-best, the best, the 42nd best... and the rest of your reasoning
could still apply. But Vila's evidence isn't evidence at all.
I'm marginally more willing to take notice of the banter between Dorian and
Soolin about whether her trainer was the best or the second-best gun. At
least, I believe that Soolin took it quite seriously.
Harriet
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 09:03:05 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: [B7L] Permissions
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.42-0221090305-b49Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
I always get permission for anything done by fans, essays, con photos, etc., and
I think I've always managed to credit these correctly, but I don't even know who
owns the copyright on half the commercial things I've got on the page. The BBC
pics are obvious, but a lot of the ones from other channels are often cases
where I'm not sure whether the channel or the production company own the
copyright and I don't normally know the production company in any case. Plus
these independent TV companies change hands, sell on rights, etc.
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention
26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent
http://www.smof.com/redemption/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 09:05:56 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [B7L] Blake's body count (was safety)
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.42-0221090556-d07Rr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Fri 20 Feb, Reuben Herfindahl wrote:
> This pretty much sums up my problem with the Blake and Avon set it all up
> theory. Avon is one stubborn single minded guy. Which I guess I
> understand. I hate those 2 hour meetings planning in intricate detail how
> to handle the distribution of a damn software patch.......(sorry, off topic
> venting) Anyway my other problem with that theory is Terminal. He went
> through all that to get Blake, and it WAS a set up. Somehow they managed to
> even fool Avon into thinking it was Blake, and don't forget the Blake
> clones. So when he sees Blake there is a big reason why he asks "Is it
> you?". A question that Blake leaves sorta unanswered and just acts on his
> hearts reaction to seeing Avon. Which was probably the worst idea since
> using the Pan Galactic Gargleblaster in drinking games.
And of course, poor Blake didn't even know that there'd been a fake of him on
Terminal.
It's an interesting question as to whether they knew about the clone or not.
They never met the clone face to face. Did 'Roj' identify himself when he and
Rashel contacted Liberator to let them know Imipak was safe?
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention
26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent
http://www.smof.com/redemption/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 19:04:40 +0000 (GMT)
From: Judith Proctor <Judith@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
To: Lysator List <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] Re: safety
Message-ID: <Marcel-1.42-0221190440-bbaRr9i@blakes-7.demon.co.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
On Sat 21 Feb, Louise Rutter wrote:
> Unfortunately, with Blake you'd also end up walking into Federation bases
> for the sake of a noble cause. You might not have to worry about a bullet
> in the back from Blake, but you'd be doing enough worrying about a bullet
> from the Feds. At least when Avon puts the lives of his crew at risk
> (Stardrive, Games), he does it because success will be of _immediate_
> benefit to their survival chances, such as acquiring the Stardrive. I'd
> rather risk my life for my benefit than for a revolution that isn't going
> to happen. I'm not much of an idealist.
As far as overall safety goes, my vote is with whoever said (I think it may have
been Helen) who said that Blake with Avon acting as a safety brake was a pretty
good combination.
However, looking at them as individuals, one has to consider one other point.
People who followed Blake did so from choice. Thus, those who died when his
original Freedom party was ambushed etc., did not not die as a result of
Balake's actions. They had freedom of choice. They believed in what he
believed in and made their own decisions. Those decisions led them eventually
to die, but to blame their deaths on Blake is to deny their freedom of choice.
'Pressure Point' is a different case, because Blake was misrepresenting the
danger, although interestingly, Gan was the one who was with Blake on the ground
and thus the one best in a position to assess the danger when they knew
Kasabi's peopel had been wiped out. Gan had as much data as Blake did at that
point, and he chose to stay.
With Avon too, one has to distinguish between cases where people willingly
followed him into danger and where he deliberately risked their lives. For
instance, if Tarrant had died in 'Terminal', I would not have counted it against
Avon as he tried very hard to prevent anyone following him. That act was
Tarrant's free will.
However, if Vila and Dayna had died when the space rats discovered them, then I
would have counted it against Avon as he deliberately sent them in as bait
without telling them what he was doing.
I'd rather risk my neck for a leader who gives me a reasonable assessment of the
risk and asks my agreement before sending me into danger. On this count,
neither Avon nor Blake come out lily-white.
Judith
--
http://www.hermit.org/Blakes7
Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention
26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent
http://www.smof.com/redemption/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 16:59:32 -0500 (EST)
From: brent@ntr.net
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Re: safety
Message-Id: <199802212159.QAA08656@rome.ntr.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Louise responded:
>This is the worst of all options. Not only is it a
>complete waste of one
>life, but it means that Servalan wins and Orac falls into her hands. If
>both die together, they put the lives of the rest of the Scorpio crew in
>severe jeopardy aswell. I'm not for one moment suggesting that was Avon's
>motive for going after Vila, just pointing out that your theory doesn't
>hold up too well. If you want a moral way out, I'd say draw straws.
Orac could be jettisoned so that no one gets it, assuming you think it would
survive the resulting crash anyway. And it isn't like Avon never put the
crew of Scorpio in danger before. Tarrant was an accomplished pilot and
would have possibly been able to get them out of the situation--note that
before he became part of the crew in Aftermath, Tarrant showed the ability
to be calculating and resourceful on his own (though not to Avon's level, to
be sure).
And, if their deaths would have been pointless, why wasn't Blake killed in
the beginning, instead of being reprogrammed? Because his death would have
made him a martyr, just as Avon and Vila would have become if they had died
in a crash. By becoming martyrs, their deaths would NOT have been
pointless. Servalan wins one battle, but because Blake does not die at
Avon's hands, she may not win the war . . .
>>If you would follow Avon, then ask yourself
>>whether you would have the guts to flush Vila out the airlock yourself,
>>since following Avon is following his example.
>
>I don't know what I'd do in that situation, panic does funny things to
>people. Can you honestly say you _know_ you'd be thinking of the moral
>aspects rather than the practical?
I can honestly say I wouldn't be thinking of the moral aspects. The thought
of tossing Vila out an airlock would simply not occur to me as a viable
option. In that situation, it wouldn't be a matter of inner moral debate or
conscience, rather something I just would not do. He is my friend. My
comrade. I would continue to search for anything that could be blasted
apart by that gun and jettisoned, even going so far as to destroy Orac,
helpful as it was. I probably wouldn't have survived, but I would have died
with a clear conscience (or pissed off if Vila had decided to flush me out
the airlock to save himself).
>Unfortunately, with Blake you'd also end up walking into Federation bases
>for the sake of a noble cause. You might not have to worry about a bullet
>in the back from Blake, but you'd be doing enough worrying about a bullet
>from the Feds. At least when Avon puts the lives of his crew at risk
>(Stardrive, Games), he does it because success will be of _immediate_
>benefit to their survival chances, such as acquiring the Stardrive. I'd
>rather risk my life for my benefit than for a revolution that isn't going
>to happen. I'm not much of an idealist.
Too bad, then, that an idealist is what Avon was becoming. After he became
the de facto leader, he wasn't risking his life solely for his own benefit,
else he would have been using the Liberator for his own (and the crews')
benefit and with the absence of Jenna, who would have argued? Maybe Cally,
but if displeased with Avon and his goals, she could have found an easy way
out of the crew in The Children of Auron. With Avon, you could never be
quite sure what the hell you were doing because I'm not sure he knew (which
the whole sordid Gauda Prime affair shows). Sure, there were obvious cases
like Stardrive, but what was his purpose for risking everything forging an
alliance in Warlord? What was his purpose for finding Blake? How did
either of those situations increase his chances for survival? They
didn't--they only made him a bigger Federation target.
Someone had a great point about why Avon risked his life for Jenna that time
he "lost" her (forgot the post AND the episode, but it was within the last
few days)--it was because he didn't want to be a failure in Blake's eyes
since he was in charge of the mission at that time. I think his search for
Blake was along the same lines. He was returning the crew to Blake. He
didn't want to be the leader, but he didn't want the "7" to dissolve while
under his control and thus make him a "failure" in Blake's eyes.
In the end, he embraced Blake, stood over him, and took the least likely
option for survival, thus dying "pointlessly." Idealistically. I guess no
matter who we would feel safer following, we would reach the same end.
Brent
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 21:38:30 -0000
From: "Jennifer Beavan" <J.Beavan@btinternet.com>
To: <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Safety
Message-Id: <E0y6Nit-0006bB-00@neodymium>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The unarmed man part does not impress me; I have seen situations
> where an unarmed man has hurt a police officer y because the officer was
> reluctant to use his weapon. Blake is bigger and stronger than Avon; only
an
> idiot would let someone like that in arm's reach.>
< just as Avon could have not
> pulled the trigger(and have the series end with Arlen blasting them both
> down?) D. Rose
Sorry, I don't think the analogy stands up. Blake wasn't a stranger. Avon
didn't KNOW that Blake and Tarrant had met and if Avon wanted to make the
point that he was serious about doubting Blake (and ensuring his crew's
survival) he would have shot down Arlen the moment Tarrant made his charge!
Jennifer
>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 22:05:14 -0000
From: "Jennifer Beavan" <J.Beavan@btinternet.com>
To: <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Safety
Message-Id: <E0y6Niw-0006bB-00@neodymium>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Helen said> The wierd changes Blake has gone through since they last
> met? Blake's own words? None of that is any reason.>
What weird changes? That he looks different? Other than that what does Avon
know? Blake reassures him that he IS Blake and tells him that Tarrant
hasn't understood what's going on.
Clear enough if you aren't paranoid!
Jennifer (definitely NOT from Auron - all that reasonableness and trust,
shudder!)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 21:56:21 -0000
From: "Jennifer Beavan" <J.Beavan@btinternet.com>
To: <Blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Re: [B7L] Safety
Message-Id: <E0y6Niv-0006bB-00@neodymium>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > Jennifer
> How many ways can you take, "He's betrayed you"? And how long is he
> supposed to discuss it with Tarrant while Blake could be gunning them
> down, if he's really changed sides.
Gunning them down with his invisible gun? (grin)
Jennifer
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 18:16:45 -0500 (EST)
From: brent@ntr.net
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] re: safety
Message-Id: <199802212316.SAA14347@rome.ntr.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Brent wrote:
>> >When you look at something solely through the eyes of pragmatism, the
>> >morality of an act gets lost. If you would follow Avon, then ask yourself
>> >whether you would have the guts to flush Vila out the airlock yourself,
>> >since following Avon is following his example.
Helen wrote:
>I meant to respond to this earlier. Just because I think Avon's more
>honorable than he's given credit for doesn't mean I have to choose his
>solutions for my own. Cally followed him in the same way she followed
>Blake, willing to let him do most of the planning but able to make
>intelligent objections. Why should floowing him mean following his
>example. I would never go on a vengence mission like "Rumors of Death".
>I sure as heck wouldn't kiss Servalan!
True, I suppose I used a poor choice of words. I meant that Avon was more
ruthless than Blake. MUCH more ruthless, as can be attested by his
willingness to flush Vila. I would not want to follow someone who would
stoop to such levels, since following such a person would mean that I give
tacit appoval to their means of achieving an end, thus making me an enabler
for their actions, despite any disapproval I may voice. Those who follow
him would be in the same situation. Avon in seasons one and two didn't
always agree with Blake's methods, or goals, but by staying with him, he
gave his approval. A Federation court of law would no doubt agree, though
I'm sure Vila would argue the point.
>On the other hand, if Vila and I had been in the shuttle, I might have
>needed the gun. I'm much smaller than Vila, and _he_ might have gotten
>ideas about ensuring _his_ survival.
I'm not saying I wouldn't keep the gun in that situation, just in case Vila
showed a side I didn't know existed ;)
Brent
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 18:20:37 EST
From: ShilLance@aol.com
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Safety
Message-ID: <105ff7e8.34ef6147@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 98-02-20 21:52:36 EST, you write:
<< No reason to believe Blake would betray him? Tarrant's warning is no
reason? The evidence all around them is no reason? (_Someone_ called in
the Federation) The wierd changes Blake has gone through since they last
met? Blake's own words? None of that is any reason.
Granted, Avon was WRONG and Blake did not deserve to die. But to say he
had no reason to make that mistake...
>>
It's been awhile since I've seen "Blake", but what if Blake had called in the
Federation? What if Avon was right. Were there any indications that Blake
might not have gone bad, besides his last words?
Shil
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 10:35:30 +1000
From: Tim Richards & Narrelle Harris <parallax@wire.net.au>
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] Backtracking to Horizon
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980222103530.007b61f0@wire.net.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sorry about backtracking in this manner, but I've just watched 'Horizon'
for the first time in about ten years and was reminded of the recent
discussion about Avon not leaving the others behind and going down to
rescue them all again.
It struck me that between asking Orac if he could survive alone and even
*looking* like he was going to leave there was a reasonable amount of time.
he didn't just say "Oh, righty-ho, then, let's bugger off" - he seemed to
be thinking about it for a few minutes, anyway.
And then he gets the message that the pursuit ships are on their way. Not
*there* yet, mind you - the message states that they are two and a bit
hours away. Plenty of time for his to fire up the engines and take off
like a rat up an aquaduct.
But... he laughs. ANd he prepares. And he kits up and gets them all out.
Far from being cornered so he *has* to get them because he can't survive on
his own, he has made a deliberate choice to go down. He doesn't even know
if they're alive.
I asked Tim what his take on that sequence was, and he replied: "I assumed
the laugh was just at his sense of irony. He knows he has a little over
two hours before the ships arrive, so circumstances have given him a time
limit. He's got time to go down and try to save the others, and he can
still choose to teleport back up in plenty of time to get away. He's been
thinking he probably *should* go down, and now he can't dither any more."
That's a bit of a paraphrase, to say the least, but I think I have the gist
of it.
I think that Avon is laughing at himself, because he find he's made the
decision to go off after them. His sense of irony and a certain amount of
self-deprecation (which he was not otherwise often known for).
Narrelle
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tim Richards and Narrelle Harris
parallax@wire.net.au http://www.wire.net.au/~parallax
"Look, he's winding up the watch of his wit;
by and by it will strike." - Shakespeare
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 20:14:23 -0800
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: brent@ntr.net
CC: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: safety
Message-ID: <34EFA61F.2BB@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> And, if their deaths would have been pointless, why wasn't Blake killed in
> the beginning, instead of being reprogrammed? Because his death would have
> made him a martyr, just as Avon and Vila would have become if they had died
> in a crash. By becoming martyrs, their deaths would NOT have been
> pointless. Servalan wins one battle, but because Blake does not die at
> Avon's hands, she may not win the war .
Blake is a big name hero, Avon and Vila criminals, period, as far as
most of the population is concerned. They would not make good martyrs.
Oh, and I love your thinking... if they die, Blake (who they think is
deaad) won't die, so they will serve a noble purpose by shaking hands
and agreeing to die like gentlemen. Well, I guess that thought just
didn't occur to them. "Avon, if you die with me, you can't shoot Blake
later, and he'll get our revenge against the Federation for doing this
to us."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 20:18:53 -0800
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: J.Beavan@btinternet.com
CC: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Re: Safety
Message-ID: <34EFA72D.4E6E@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Blake reassures him that he IS Blake and tells him that Tarrant
> hasn't understood what's going on.
> Clear enough if you aren't paranoid!
But Avon was always a little paranoid. Blake couldn't remember that?
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 20:21:26 -0800
From: Helen Krummenacker <avona@jps.net>
To: J.Beavan@btinternet.com
CC: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] Safety
Message-ID: <34EFA7C6.7EAE@jps.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Gunning them down with his invisible gun? (grin)
Blake has people working for him. He could distract Avon while someone
else did the gunning. He also might not be as harmless as he looks. Many
weapons are easily concealed. And how many times have they encountered
something that seemed harmless and _wasn't_? Assuming someone is
harmless is a great way to get killed in Blake's 7's universe.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 12:17:55 -0000
From: Louise Rutter <Louise.Rutter@btinternet.com>
To: "'B7 Lysator'" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] Re: safety
Message-ID: <01BD3F8E.FCB0E800@host5-99-49-145.btinternet.com>
Brent wrote:.
>Orac could be jettisoned so that no one gets it, assuming you think it
would
>survive the resulting crash anyway. And it isn't like Avon never put the
>crew of Scorpio in danger before. Tarrant was an accomplished pilot and
>would have possibly been able to get them out of the situation--note that
>before he became part of the crew in Aftermath, Tarrant showed the ability
>to be calculating and resourceful on his own (though not to Avon's level,
to
>be sure).
Egrorian was certain Orac would survive the crash and that's good enough
for me, given all the planning that went into it. Throwing Orac out will
work as long as it doesn't land in the marshes anyway. Yes, Tarrant could
have got them out of the immediate situation, but once Servalan has Orac
the Xenon base is compromised. Long searches through space on Scorpio
looking for another bolthole is fairly risky, particularly without Orac's
advice.
>And, if their deaths would have been pointless, why wasn't Blake killed in
>the beginning, instead of being reprogrammed? Because his death would
have
>made him a martyr, just as Avon and Vila would have become if they had
died
>in a crash. By becoming martyrs, their deaths would NOT have been
>pointless. Servalan wins one battle, but because Blake does not die at
>Avon's hands, she may not win the war . . .
Blake would have been a martyr because he had spent years announcing
himself to be a rebel and actively fighting the Feds. Avon and Vila
wouldn't be such effective martyrs - they were rebels only by association,
and once Blake was gone very little of what they did could be construed as
anti-Federation idealism even by those _looking_ for such a hero. We don't
hear much from rebels or Feds about Gan being a martyr. Besides, assuming
you're right, wouldn't one martyr be just as good as two?
>>Unfortunately, with Blake you'd also end up walking into Federation bases
>>for the sake of a noble cause. You might not have to worry about a bullet
>>in the back from Blake, but you'd be doing enough worrying about a bullet
>>from the Feds. At least when Avon puts the lives of his crew at risk
>>(Stardrive, Games), he does it because success will be of _immediate_
>>benefit to their survival chances, such as acquiring the Stardrive. I'd
>>rather risk my life for my benefit than for a revolution that isn't going
>>to happen. I'm not much of an idealist.
>Too bad, then, that an idealist is what Avon was becoming. After he
became
>the de facto leader, he wasn't risking his life solely for his own
benefit,
>else he would have been using the Liberator for his own (and the crews')
>benefit (snip)
But that's exactly what he did do for a while. He looked for Blake
(Volcano), stole some valuables (Harvest), made sure the ship was working
(City), went to settle an old score (Children, Rumours) and drifted around
looking at whatever he felt like (Sarcophagus, Ultraworld). If the Feds had
left him alone at that point, he would have been quite happy to leave them
alone. When he _did_ finally start to take action against the Feds
(following Servalan in Moloch is the first example I can think of where she
wasn't the one on the offensive), it was because they wouldn't leave him in
peace anyway and because Servalan was bugging him, not because he'd turned
idealistic.
>With Avon, you could never be
>quite sure what the hell you were doing because I'm not sure he knew
(which
>the whole sordid Gauda Prime affair shows).
Well, third season Avon would have been a hell of a lot better to be around
than fourth, I will admit. He does make far more rash decisions later.
>Sure, there were obvious cases
>like Stardrive, but what was his purpose for risking everything forging an
>alliance in Warlord? What was his purpose for finding Blake? How did
>either of those situations increase his chances for survival? They
>didn't--they only made him a bigger Federation target.
His purpose for risking the alliance and looking for Blake was simply sheer
desperation. He'd tried everything he could think of to stop the Feds
expansion - recruiting Justin, Muller, etc - and finally figured out he
couldn't stop the Feds without help. His aim _was_ to increase his chances
for survival, as the continuing Fed expansion would soon reach Xenon
(sorry, can't remember exactly which episode that was pointed out). I don't
think floating around in Scorpio without a base would be particularly safe,
it broke down too often.
Personally I think the Warlord alliance was the best idea either Blake or
Avon ever showed, though Avon was hardly the ideal person to promote group
unity amongst squabbling peoples. This is what Blake _should_ have been
doing in the years he was with Liberator, instead of blowing up the odd
base here and there. Blake could have created links and treaties between
neutrals such as Lindor, Albian, Horizon and used Liberator to act as
go-between. Blake was the sort of person who could have held it together.
>Someone had a great point about why Avon risked his life for Jenna that
time
>he "lost" her (forgot the post AND the episode, but it was within the last
>few days)--it was because he didn't want to be a failure in Blake's eyes
>since he was in charge of the mission at that time. I think his search
for
>Blake was along the same lines. He was returning the crew to Blake. He
>didn't want to be the leader, but he didn't want the "7" to dissolve while
>under his control and thus make him a "failure" in Blake's eyes.
Agreed, and a failure in his own, which Avon really didn't like to have to
face.
>In the end, he embraced Blake, stood over him, and took the least likely
>option for survival, thus dying "pointlessly." Idealistically. I guess
no
>matter who we would feel safer following, we would reach the same end.
And on that we are also agreed 8-). Debating which is safer seems a bit of
a moot point when neither is obviously very safe at all...
Louise
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 12:24:18 -0000
From: Louise Rutter <Louise.Rutter@btinternet.com>
To: "'B7 Lysator'" <blakes7@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: RE: [B7L] Safety
Message-ID: <01BD3F8F.0D28E8E0@host5-99-49-145.btinternet.com>
>
>> Gunning them down with his invisible gun? (grin)
>Blake has people working for him. He could distract Avon while someone
>else did the gunning. He also might not be as harmless as he looks. Many
>weapons are easily concealed. And how many times have they encountered
>something that seemed harmless and _wasn't_? Assuming someone is
>harmless is a great way to get killed in Blake's 7's universe.
As Blake so aptly proved!
Louise
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 12:47:08 GMT
From: STEVE.ROGERSON@MCR1.poptel.org.uk
To: blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: [B7L] What the window cleaner saw
Message-Id: <298283805MCR1@MCR1.poptel.org.uk>
A friend of mine who's a window cleaner came up to me in the
pub last night in a state of gloating excitement.
"I cleaned the windows today of someone who's picture is on
one of your T shirts," he said.
It turned out to be Sally Knyvette in Kentish Town, north
London. Apparently she was concerned that her two dogs were
worrying him while he was working. He said one was an
alsation crossed with something and the other was a black
labradour type thing (he's not very good on dogs). He also said
she drives a Peugeot 206.
cheers
Steve Rogerson
Redemption 99 - The Blakes 7/Babylon 5 convention
26-28 February 1999, Ashford International Hotel, Kent
http://www.smof.com/redemption/
"The workers united will never be ignited"
Guards! Guards! - Terry Pratchett
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 07:55:22 EST
From: AChevron@aol.com
To: Blakes7@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: [B7L] What the window cleaner saw
Message-ID: <2f624036.34f0203d@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 98-02-22 07:48:48 EST, Steve wrote:
<< I cleaned the windows today of someone who's picture is on
one of your T shirts," he said.
>>
Which just goes to show you, fans will stoop(or rise, as the case may be)
to new levels to get information....
Actually this was nice info for you to share with us, especially since its
source isn't an over-entheusiastic fan impinging on the star's privacy. So her
picture is on the T-shirt eh?..... Deborah Rose
"5 more weeks? Wait a minute, where are the checklists? The phone list?
Arghhh!"
--------------------------------
End of blakes7-d Digest V98 Issue #56
*************************************