From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V1 #10 Reply-To: chakram-refugees@smoe.org Sender: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk chakram-refugees-digest Monday, October 15 2001 Volume 01 : Number 010 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [none] [owner-chakram-refugees@smoe.org] [none] [owner-chakram-refugees@smoe.org] Re: [chakram-refugees] << Dreamworker & Cradle Of Hope>> [IfeRae@aol.com] [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question [IfeRae@aol.com] Re: [chakram-refugees] << Dreamworker & Cradle Of Hope>> [Richan@aol.com] Re: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question [Thelonius > [NZJester > [IfeRae@aol.com] Re: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question [IfeRae@aol.com] RE: [chakram-refugees] << Dreamworker & Cradle Of Hope>> ["Lee Daley" > ["Lee Daley" ] Re: [chakram-refugees] << Dreamworker & Cradle Of Hope>> [meredith ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 01:22:30 -0400 (EDT) From: owner-chakram-refugees@smoe.org Subject: [none] [203.97.32.4]) by smoe.org (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) with ESMTP id f9ENGDv1020976 for ; Sun, 14 Oct 2001 19:16:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from argo (203-167-160-131.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.131]) by fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id MAA21935; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 12:15:53 +1300 (NZDT) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 11:26:41 -0400 From: Thelonius To: Mirrordrum Cc: cande@sunlink.net, chakram-refugees@smoe.org Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] <> Message-Id: <20011015112641.2d24b0dc.cr@clear.net.nz> In-Reply-To: <5.0.1.4.2.20011013215654.00a6fec0@pop3.norton.antivirus> References: <002c01c15437$000ef800$d8302940@cande> <5.0.1.4.2.20011013215654.00a6fec0@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.6.1 (GTK+ 1.2.6; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sat, 13 Oct 2001 23:02:54 -0400 Mirrordrum wrote: > At 06:31 PM 10/13/2001 -0400, Cheryl Ande wrote: > > >Well I guess I do see FIN as having a happy ending. Xena gets her redemption, > >Gabrielle comes of age, and the two have fullfilled their promise that "even > >in death" they would never be separated. I found the ending more powerful > >that a conventional happy ending. > > i agree with you at least in terms of the redemption and "more powerful > than a conventional happy ending" parts. indeed, i was watching > again the other day and these voice-over lines of gabrielle's struck me in > re the FINs: > > "My dear friend's curse is to spend the rest of her life seeking a > redemption she'll never allow herself." (thanks Whoosh! transcript) > > and it came to pass that this was true. xena's quest for redemption ended > when she chose to stay dead. now i don't consider dying a particular > virtue, but i think it fits with the show. of course, xwp is rather like > the bible--or anything else for that matter--if you look for support for > what you believe, chances are you can find it, construe it or infer it. Good point. In fact I was always amazed by the bizarre (to me) interpretations that some fans could put on certain episodes. > in thinking about FIN again in light of lucy's apology, i've wondered how > people would've reacted to the ep if she'd chosen to let gabrielle dump the > ashes in the water (i.e. if tptb had allowed it). there was much hue and > cry about the beheading but i wonder if that would have bothered people > much if xena and gab had sailed off into the sunset. xena's beheading was > only one of numerous beheadings in the series brought about directly or > indirectly by xena; the last one i think was gurkhan's. i don't remember a > lot of foaming and lathering about brutality in that ep which was one of > the most brutal, imo, of the series. I for my part wonder if the notorious plot holes in FIN would have rated a mention if Xena hadn't died. Certainly there are bigger plot holes (IMO) in many other eps, most blatantly One Against an Army, which everyone seemed to happily ignore. (I'll list 'em if anybody doubts me ;) I do have to admit that I'm more tolerant of defects in any TV episode that I otherwise like, than in one which has nothing to interest me. > i certainly hope lucy realizes that not all fans are enamored of the > soul-mate concept, not all of us (even subtexters) felt betrayed nor > crushed, and many of us felt the ep was well done, albeit very painful. i > don't think we really have any idea how the 'verse was split in terms of > response to the ending b/c many of us who liked it, or at least weren't > "destroyed" by it, didn't need to go on at great length. I do rather fear that the approval (or non-condemnation) may have got swamped under some of the more vitriolic posts and in that respect, for LL's and RT's own sake, the less notice they take of the Internet the better, IMO. It must be extremely discouraging to have worked so hard on the finale and be faced with that barrage of criticism. Sender: owner-chakram-refugees@smoe.org Precedence: bulk > > well, now, as i write that, i find that this isn't exactly right either. i > do believe in co-creationism; i believe that people conjointly create > social reality(ies). i guess i do agree that together xena and gabrielle > were engaged in a dance that they choreographed as they went along and that > simultaneously had abiding themes. one of those themes was that xena was > responsible for perennially dragging gabrielle out of her way. xena's was > the way of remorse, if you ask me. Except that Gabrielle freely chose to follow Xena - regardless of Xena's sporadic attempts to ditch her. Xena may blame herself for what happens to Gabby as a result but, IMO, there's no grounds for that. Any more than one can blame the zoo if someone ignores the warning signs and climbs into the crocodiles' pond. > md--happy to be talking about xena on chak. . ., er chakram-refugees Btw, any ex-Chakramers who never read Xenaverse, beware and behold md. She's here and she's posting. ;-) T ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 01:22:36 -0400 (EDT) From: owner-chakram-refugees@smoe.org Subject: [none] [203.97.32.4]) by smoe.org (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) with ESMTP id f9ENGDv1020979 for ; Sun, 14 Oct 2001 19:16:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from argo (203-167-160-131.dialup.clear.net.nz [203.167.160.131]) by fep4-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.7) with SMTP id MAA22060; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 12:16:02 +1300 (NZDT) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 11:27:08 -0400 From: Thelonius To: "Jackie M. Young" Cc: chakram-refugees@smoe.org Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] <> Message-Id: <20011015112708.202f7208.cr@clear.net.nz> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.6.1 (GTK+ 1.2.6; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sat, 13 Oct 2001 21:26:14 -1000 (HST) "Jackie M. Young" wrote: > "Cheryl Ande" wrote: > > >Well I guess I do see FIN as having a happy ending. Xena gets her > >redemption, Gabrielle comes of age, and the two have fullfilled their > >promise that "even in death" they would never be separated. I found the > >ending more powerful that a conventional happy ending. > > --I agree with Cheryl, I found the ending very poignant, moreso due to X's > death. A so-called "happy ending" would've been a disservice to such an > iconoclastic show. ;P > > Along these lines, and not to "stir the pot" again about the > revenge/redemption issue several of us were wrestling with before Chakram > died (RIP ;( ), but this reminded me of a recent article I read that one > of our Philosophy (again!) students wrote in our student paper about the > events of 09-11-01, and whether retaliation is right. > > This student cites the dilemma faced by Lawrence of Arabia in the film of > the same name, in which neighboring tribes have formed a tenuous peace, > but this is threatened by one member committing a serious crime against a > member of the other tribe. In order to avoid war, Lawrence steps in as > an impartial mediator, and volunteers to execute the offending person. He > discovers to his dismay that that person is his friend whom he earlier > saved. Obviously torn, but true to his promise, Lawrence executes his > friend. > > The student goes on to explain this: > > "C.S. Lewis would not call Lawrence's act 'revenge'--he would call it > 'retribution'. In 'The Retributive Theory of Justice', Lewis argues that > retribution is a just, dignified and necessary response to evil that > ultimately preserves the good. The implication is that all violence is > not unjust and all violent responses are not revenge." > > > Although, again, as in my previous discussion with md, I don't pretend to > understand this theory thoroughly, I find myself mostly agreeing with it > as it applies to XWP in general, and in particular to <>. > > Undoubtedly, X traversed the countryside dispensing her own retributive > justice and we never questioned it (or rarely); but when it gets turned > back on her, we fans put up a big hue and cry. > > I don't know if it will help those who had trouble with the "revenge" part > of <>, but perhaps looking at X's death as "retribution" as defined > above ("a just, dignified and necessary response... that ultimately > preserves the good"), rather than "revenge", will clear things up? > > Or, it may *muddy* the waters even more.....;) > > Just MO, ;) > --Jackie > In fact the word used was 'avenge' not 'revenge' and, in fact, the souls so far as I could see weren't vengeful - they weren't demanding Xena's death. Nowhere was 'revenge' mentioned. I draw a distinction between 'avenging' a wrong (usually a wrong done to somebody other than the avenger, and in which he may have no personal interest - as per the Lawrence of Arabia illustration); and 'revenge' which usually implies getting somebody back for something they have done to you personally. It was more a matter that the 'local rules' governing such things required that their deaths be paid for in some way. In that respect I think even the retribution angle is minor. There's a parallel I believe with an archaic English law that said that anything which caused the death of a man (whether deliberate or accidental) was 'deo dandum' (given to God - i.e. forfeit. Presumably the local church collected.) In other words, a wrongful death had to be paid for somehow. (There was an early railway accident in the 1840's in which the coroner's jury declared the train to be subject to deodand :) This seems to fit with the idea of some sort of balance - sometimes expressed as 'a life for a life' - common in early societies and implicit in much mythology. The point is, that though Xena was not (IMO) particularly culpable in the deaths of the 40,000, and though they were not demanding REvenge, she was in a position to release them. It was her decision alone and Xena being Xena, she decided the way that she did. In those circumstances she would have decided the same way even if she had been entirely uninvolved in their deaths, I think. T Sender: owner-chakram-refugees@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 01:24:23 EDT From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] << Dreamworker & Cradle Of Hope>> In a message dated 10/14/2001 6:51:28 PM Central Daylight Time, leed@daleyenterprises.cncdsl.com writes: > Cheryl Ande wrote > > Working my way through my tapes and I'm sticking to my plan of. > > watching one > > tape each weekend so far. > > You know that this is going to get all of us to do it. Actually not a bad > idea, it's kinda like a virtual season 1. > I started doing that some months ago, and am now up to "Old Ares" of season 6. I'm curious to see what discoveries I'll make in the old eps, once I've digested the last ones. Even now, it's interesting to re-hear lines that made me wonder at the time if they would have a bearing on the finale. I always wonder if some things were telegraphed or built on intentionally, or if we fans gave something significance that really had little bearing at all. One is example is in ONE AGAINST AN ARMY, when Gabrielle basically says she accepted the consequences of traveling with Xena -- in that case, that one might die before the other. - -- Ife - -- Ife ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 01:24:36 EDT From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question The welcome letter reminds us that some people have not see all the eps. Can we assume everyone on this list has seen the first two seasons? Even though some of us may be quite conscious about putting in spoiler space *and* the names of the eps that might be spoiled, it is soooo easy to refer to an old ep that's been discussed so often we forget not everyone may have seen it. Some international folks have said they'd like to see -- maybe even participate in -- discussions of eps they haven't viewed, while others want to avoid all mention of, say, season 6. Would it be worthwhile to get a sense from international list members which seasons they'd be okay discussing without spoiler warnings? - -- Ife ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 01:38:42 EDT From: Richan@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] << Dreamworker & Cradle Of Hope>> Thelonius writes: << > > Cradle Hope has a number of interesting things in it. > > To include the damn "BABY TOSS" that every talk show used as one of the > clips. > Actually, before that there was a pig-tossing episode on Hercules... >> This plot device comes from THE MOUSE THAT ROARED.Tully Bascomb invades the United States during an air raid drill with a squad of men dressed in medieval armor and armed with long bows. They are mistaken for Martians. Tully and his men kidnap Professor Kokintz the maker of the Q bomb. The bomb is shaped like a football and is tossed about as it is about to explode. As the story concludes the bomb is placed on a pedestal in a dungeon for safekeeping much like Pandora's box is. And like Pandora's box it is inadvertently knocked off it's pedestal. Both the box and the bomb turn out to be duds. I sometimes think of Q on whatever Star Trek franchise you choose as having derived his name from the Q bomb. Especially since whenever he shows up with his immense powers all his efforts turn out to be duds. Peter Sellers plays three roles in the movie. Tully Bascomb, Count Mountjoy, and the Duchess Gloriana. I'm sure his multiple characters inspired the multiple Xena look-a-likes and the confusion they cause on XENA: WARRIOR PRINCESS. Richan ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 18:38:32 -0400 From: Thelonius Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 01:24:36 EDT IfeRae@aol.com wrote: > The welcome letter reminds us that some people have not see all the eps. Can > we assume everyone on this list has seen the first two seasons? Even though > some of us may be quite conscious about putting in spoiler space *and* the > names of the eps that might be spoiled, it is soooo easy to refer to an old > ep that's been discussed so often we forget not everyone may have seen it. > Some international folks have said they'd like to see -- maybe even > participate in -- discussions of eps they haven't viewed, while others want > to avoid all mention of, say, season 6. Would it be worthwhile to get a > sense from international list members which seasons they'd be okay discussing > without spoiler warnings? > > -- Ife I think that would be an excellent idea. Just as a guide (and maybe other list members can tell us how far other countries have got), here in NZ we just finished Season 5 (with no Season 6 in sight just yet). However, I do know that on some lists there are quite a number of new members who came in around Season 5 / 6 and haven't seen the old eps, and are now catching up on re-runs.... so I'd think maybe that any direct detailed discussion of an old ep should maybe carry a spoiler warning. Just IMO. (And I know I forget at times too....) T ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 18:50:37 +1300 From: NZJester Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] << Dreamworker & Cradle Of Hope>> At 06:08 PM 14/10/2001 -0400, Cheryl Ande wrote: >Dreamworker was the episode that got me really hooked on the series and on >Gabrielle's character. Gabrielle is certainly feisty and funny. We also get >a good look at Xena's tormented soul and she struggle to come to grips with >her darkside. It also presents the idea of blood innocence and the fact that >Gabrielle must be protected from shedding blood. After all these years "Dream Worker" is still my favorite ep of all and the one that got me hooked on Xena as well Looking back on it now, a lot of that ep seams to reflect aspects of later eps and set the groundwork for a lot of the best eps of Xena Catch ya later Jester New Xenaland http://www.angelfire.com/tv2/newxenaland/ ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 09:07:11 +0000 From: "~* Megaera *~" Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question My thoughts on this are, I believe the episode in the subject line is really enough as far as a spoiler goes. If people aren't sure of what episode goes to what season, they can check at whoosh.org and get the entire list. The reason is, people are going to have different points of views on what episodes to spoil or not. So, there will be no way to have a consensus IMO. But the episodes being discussed being in the subject line, lets people know to pass on by or go on ahead and read. ~Meg >From: IfeRae@aol.com >To: chakram-refugees@smoe.org >Subject: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question >Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 01:24:36 EDT > >The welcome letter reminds us that some people have not see all the eps. >Can we assume everyone on this list has seen the first two seasons? Even >though some of us may be quite conscious about putting in spoiler space >*and* the names of the eps that might be spoiled, it is soooo easy to refer >to an old ep that's been discussed so often we forget not everyone may have >seen it. >Some international folks have said they'd like to see -- maybe even >participate in -- discussions of eps they haven't viewed, while others want >to avoid all mention of, say, season 6. Would it be worthwhile to get a >sense from international list members which seasons they'd be okay >discussing without spoiler warnings? > >-- Ife _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 22:44:34 -0400 From: Thelonius Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 09:07:11 +0000 "~* Megaera *~" wrote: > My thoughts on this are, I believe the episode in the subject line is really > enough as far as a spoiler goes. If people aren't sure of what episode goes > to what season, they can check at whoosh.org and get the entire list. The > reason is, people are going to have different points of views on what > episodes to spoil or not. So, there will be no way to have a consensus IMO. > But the episodes being discussed being in the subject line, lets people > know to pass on by or go on ahead and read. > > ~Meg > Yes, I think that would be enough for the older episodes.... but I'm inclined to think spoiler space as well would be merited for the last couple of seasons. I know of fans in the UK for instance who really do _not_ know what's happened (other than in a very general way) in the final season. T ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 11:06:18 +0000 From: "~* Megaera *~" Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question >From: Thelonius >To: ~*Megaera*~ >CC: chakram-refugees@smoe.org >Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question >Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 22:44:34 -0400 > > > >Yes, I think that would be enough for the older episodes.... >but I'm inclined to think spoiler space as well would be >merited for the last couple of seasons. I know of fans >in the UK for instance who really do _not_ know what's >happened (other than in a very general way) in the final >season. > >T I actually don't understand the purpose of spoiler space. If the episode is in the subject line, then people don't have to read it. For those on digest, they have to scroll by it anyway. Even if in the subject line it says spoilers for, etc., it doesn't have to be read. It just seems to take up a lot of unnecessary space. But since it has been this way for quite some time, I don't know that a change would be in order. Although I wouldn't be opposed to getting rid of beginning a discussion halfway down the page. ~Meg _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 12:55:27 EDT From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] << Dreamworker & Cradle Of Hope>> In a message dated 10/15/01 1:52:05 AM Central Daylight Time, nzjester@ihug.co.nz writes: << After all these years "Dream Worker" is still my favorite ep of all and the one that got me hooked on Xena as well Looking back on it now, a lot of that ep seams to reflect aspects of later eps and set the groundwork for a lot of the best eps of Xena >> Absolutely. We see Gabrielle's early desire to be part of the action (evening picking up a sword -- ironic that she's the one who originally had the breast dagger), her ability to use all sorts of methods to avoid killing, Xena's desire to protect Gabrielle's "blood" and other innocence, Gabrielle's acceptance that killing is best left to Xena's hands, the need for Xena to recognize and integrate the strength of her "dark" side, Xena's being haunted by thoughts of her victims, and that recurring water theme at the end - -- what's on the surface vs. what's beneath, "hard vs. soft" (Lao Ma's description in Debt). Amazing how much this sets up issues we see explored later. - -- Ife ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 13:03:53 EDT From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question In a message dated 10/15/01 6:07:09 AM Central Daylight Time, megaera_@hotmail.com writes: << I actually don't understand the purpose of spoiler space. If the episode is in the subject line, then people don't have to read it. >> Apparently there are people whose mail shows automatically, without their clicking on a subject. Someone more versed than I will have to say how many services do that or which ones. As to the ep in the subject line, that's rarely sufficient when we begin referring to other eps. For example, I just responded to a post about Dreamworker, but I mentioned Debt I as another example. It's impossible to discuss certain themes without referring to a lot of other eps they may span all the seasons. Not only that, but a person piggybacking on a post may discuss more eps, yet not think to add that to the subject line or spoiler space warnings. I'm wondering if, in those cases where we're discussing a lot of eps, we say something in the subject line or spoiler warning like, "Seasons 2 -4" or "References to all seasons." - -- Ife ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 07:23:08 -0400 From: "Lee Daley" Subject: RE: [chakram-refugees] << Dreamworker & Cradle Of Hope>> > Hah! I woulda abandoned the show early in the piece if the > Irritating Blonde > _hadn't_ bit the dust ;-) > > Thelonius Different strokes for different folks. There was definately a journey for both women. Without this growth it wouldn't have lasted as long as it did. There are always a few that disagree with change. LeeD ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 07:50:19 -0400 From: "Lee Daley" Subject: RE: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question > Apparently there are people whose mail shows automatically, without their > clicking on a subject. Someone more versed than I will have to > say how many > services do that or which ones. > Micro$oft's Outlook is one of them, in the default configuration. However in these days of e-mail worms, anyone who leaves it that way has more to worry about than an episode being spoiled. Just a thought. LeeD ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 08:00:38 -0400 From: "Lee Daley" Subject: RE: [chakram-refugees] << Dreamworker & Cradle Of Hope>> Richan wrote > Thelonius writes: > > << > > Cradle Hope has a number of interesting things in it. > > > > To include the damn "BABY TOSS" that every talk show used as one of the > > clips. > > > > Actually, before that there was a pig-tossing episode on Hercules... > >> > Yea, but they didn't use it as the intro clip on every talk show for two years. > This plot device comes from THE MOUSE THAT ROARED.Tully Bascomb > invades the United States during an air raid drill with a squad of men > dressed > in medieval armor and armed with long bows. They are mistaken for > Martians. Just goes to show that TPRB knew their media history and borrowed (Homaged?) freely. And interesting line of discussion, "where did they come up with......?" LeeD ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 20:48:36 -0400 (EDT) From: owner-chakram-refugees@smoe.org Subject: [none] [204.147.80.14]) by smoe.org (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) with SMTP id f9G0N7v1006032 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 20:23:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 7338 invoked from network); 16 Oct 2001 00:23:04 -0000 Received: from dialupd123.mpls.uswest.net (HELO qwest.net) (207.225.143.123) by mplspop4.mpls.uswest.net with SMTP; 16 Oct 2001 00:23:04 -0000 Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 19:10:56 -0500 Message-ID: <3BCB7B10.CA20D349@qwest.net> From: "Laconia" To: XenaGuard@yahoogroups.com Cc: chakram-refugees@smoe.org, newxenaland@egroups.com, whoosh@egroups.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [chakram-refugees] Re: [XenaGuard] NEWS FLASH: Rock discovered on mountainside References: <01101513270400.16670@argo> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I really liked comparing the shots of Xena scenes with the photos of those places the way they are today. Thanks for letting us in on the fun! Sender: owner-chakram-refugees@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 22:04:10 -0400 From: meredith Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Spoiler Space Question Hi, Re spoiler space: for the first couple seasons, I think a subject line notice and a line at the top covering what may be spoiled should suffice. But for seasons 4-6, definitely subject line notices *and* space left at the top of the message are warranted, because there are international folks who haven't seen them yet. It's the way we did it on chakram, and I think we should do it that way here too. This method is used on other lists I'm on and it works universally well. If anyone has questions please feel free to e-mail me. Thanks! ======================================= Meredith Tarr New Haven, CT USA mailto:meth@smoe.org http://www.smoe.org/meth "an eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind" -- mahatma gandhi ======================================= Live At The House O'Muzak House Concert Series http://www.smoe.org/meth/muzak.html ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 22:12:17 -0400 From: meredith Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] << Dreamworker & Cradle Of Hope>> Hi, Ife noted: >I started doing that some months ago, and am now up to "Old Ares" of season >6. I'm curious to see what discoveries I'll make in the old eps, once I've >digested the last ones. Even now, it's interesting to re-hear lines that >made me wonder at the time if they would have a bearing on the finale. I >always wonder if some things were telegraphed or built on intentionally, or >if we fans gave something significance that really had little bearing at all. I think what happened is that TPTB attached significance to things after the fact, to suit the purpose of whatever story they were trying to tell at the time. The fans did the same thing, but often from the perspective of assuming that TPTB had some grand plan that they were aiming toward all along. _Dreamworker_ was obviously a seminal episode that was turned to many times as the series went on. It's a "canon" episode, that helped set the framework for the characterizations and mythology of the series. (It's one of my all-time faves too -- I've been having a hard time distilling my favorite 12 down for the Whoosh! poll...) > One is example is in ONE AGAINST AN ARMY, when Gabrielle basically says she >accepted the consequences of traveling with Xena -- in that case, that one >might die before the other. Another "canon" episode, which referred back to the previous episodes as much as it provided subsequent setup for later episodes. (And gee, another one of my all-time faves. :) Ever since _Babylon 5_, continuity has been a very important part of my enjoyment of a series. I've noticed that more and more shows have been incorporating continuity and arc development, I'm not sure if it's because of B5 or if it's just coincidence. That's why sometimes TPTB drove me round the bend by not paying attention to their own history at times. I think if they had had more of a game plan, the show would've been even more satisfying than it was. ======================================= Meredith Tarr New Haven, CT USA mailto:meth@smoe.org http://www.smoe.org/meth "an eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind" -- mahatma gandhi ======================================= Live At The House O'Muzak House Concert Series http://www.smoe.org/meth/muzak.html ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 22:23:18 -0400 From: Mirrordrum Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] LL on EW 10/5/2001, p. 141 At 08:37 PM 10/13/2001 -1000, Jackie M. Young wrote: >But something tells moi that LL probably won't become a *regular* on >X-Files. ;P what is it that tells you this, please? could you be more specific? i can't find the article itself (i'm very bad at searches) but gathered from that other article that she had quite a good time. if they're looking to lure viewers, i'd think she'd be prime lure material. my partner said they've started showing lucy trailers for x-files on O2 when xena runs. i asked if she looked good and got what can best be described as a leer from a woman who does not leer. was something said in this interview that suggested to you that la luce didn't come up to expectations or. . .? md--twirling tentatively in her diaphanous tulle tutu with deadly defensive daggers dangling from her diamond-decked diadem (i CANnot think of a really good alliterative synonym for sais, dammit) ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 22:28:48 -0400 From: meredith Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] LL on EW 10/5/2001, p. 141 Hi, md responded: >i can't find the article itself (i'm very bad at searches) but gathered >from that other article that she had quite a good time. if they're looking >to lure viewers, i'd think she'd be prime lure material. my partner said >they've started showing lucy trailers for x-files on O2 when xena runs. i >asked if she looked good and got what can best be described as a leer from >a woman who does not leer. The shot I've been seeing most often is one that is *very* reminiscent of the end of _The Debt I_, where she's rising up out of the water. The only thing missing is the dagger between the teeth. ======================================= Meredith Tarr New Haven, CT USA mailto:meth@smoe.org http://www.smoe.org/meth "an eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind" -- mahatma gandhi ======================================= Live At The House O'Muzak House Concert Series http://www.smoe.org/meth/muzak.html ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 22:55:07 -0400 From: Mirrordrum Subject: [none] At 12:44 AM 10/14/2001 -0400, you wrote: Thanks for the feed back and you bring up some interesting points: > > in thinking about FIN again in light of lucy's apology, i've wondered how > > people would've reacted to the ep if she'd chosen to let gabrielle dump >the > > ashes in the water (i.e. if tptb had allowed it). there was much hue and > > cry about the beheading but i wonder if that would have bothered people > > much if xena and gab had sailed off into the sunset. >I personally don't believe people would have cared at all about the arrows, >the beheading, or Xena being strung up like a prized buck if she was brought >to life at the end. well, i suppose the people who complain (and i confess i have occasionally have been one) would have complained. you can't end a show without people complaining, but i don't se how anyone could have gone into the betrayal thing and i do think the brutality would have taken its usual back seat. > I also wondered what the reaction would have been Xena >had been killed by a bunch of female samaris now that's interesting. hmmmmm. well, i suppose then the argument would be made that this is just another example of misogyny with women turning against women. *shrug* i dunno. if people weren't grateful for everything these folks gave us, there's really no pleasing them. >- I somehow think there would >have been more acceptable to a prtion of the fan base. It seems the shock >at the "brutality" was a little late. I don't remember all this concern >when Xena was impalling Amazons on trees. LOL! or beheading people in chin or leaving whatsername to be gnawed by crabs or. . .the list goes on. > > i certainly hope lucy realizes that not all fans are enamored of the > > soul-mate concept, not all of us (even subtexters) felt betrayed nor > > crushed, and many of us felt the ep was well done, albeit very painful. >I think it is a kind of a shame that Lucy felt the necessity to apoligize >for a dramatic choice that was made in good faith. Let's face it any choice >made would have been the wrong one for some segment of the fan base. My >ending would have been to have Xena and Gabrielle settle down in Japan >become somekind of Shinto pristess (if there is such a thing) and invent >karate. I suspect this would have stunned the fan base! oh, i like that. of course, x & g have already invented or encountered most of the ways of war in one incarnation or another. as it happens, ex-samurai women tended to go off and become buddhist nuns, so you'd not be far off base. > > > > > > >She also frees Gabrielle in a sense. Gabrielle because of her love for >Xena > > >is dragged along on Xena's quest for redemption. > > > >Perhaps I overstated my case a bit. oh, not necessarily. i was just thinking along and perhaps diverging; disagreeing amicably. > I guess what I was trying to say is the >from a mythological sense the young hero can not take up the mantle of her >own heroism until her mentor is dead or no longer in the picture. hmmmmmm. of course, i must confess that altho i'm a gab fan, and i love renee's stunt skills and all, i really con't see her as heroic in xena's way. that's just personal preference, not a believe in my correctness. i think there are infinite ways of being heroic in our lives and i guess my imagination would be to have her do something less combative. but that's just my idea. > I don't >really think Gabrielle was dragged along unwillingly but I do feel that >until Xena's redemption is accomplished Gabrielle cannot come into her own. i think you're quite right within the series. irl? well, i think sometimes that happens and sometimes we just need to redefine what "heroism" or "coming into our own" means. > > i would prefer, however, to believe that ultimately we redeem >ourselves--or > > perhaps more nearly that we are ultimately responsible for our own > > redemption. actually, i don't like the idea of redemption so much. i'm > > rather inclined to think of us as having the ability moment by moment to > > create ourselves anew. > >I think this is exactly what Xena did. She recreated herself. She let go of >the past. She finally said this is enough I have saved the 40,000. I have >done enough - I have accomplished my own redemption. yes, that fits. > > who touches us in our lives is with us. i think we're mistaken when we > > believe that we only keep them with us by continuing to suffer when >they're > > gone. > >This is absolutely true. I heard the other day that the last words one of >the hijacked passangers said to his wife on he cell phone from the plan was >that he wanted her to be happy. Living a good life and being happy honors >the one who is gone. absolutely. >It shows that they gave us strength and courage. or perhaps allowed us to find the strength and courage we already possess--to allow it to happen in the way that's unique to us. > I >think when we see a smiling Gabrielle on the boat back from Japa we a person >who grieves but a person who knows that living a happy life is the best gift >she can give Xena. mmmmm. > > ayup. grin. but ya gotta be careful what you wish for 'cause you just >might > > get it. xena's was the easy part: she made the decision and freed herself. > > the hard part would be gabrielle's: living with xena's decision and her >own > > compliance with it. don't you know she's just got to be kicking herself >all > > the way to tartarus and back for *finally* listening? > >I don't know if you watch Buffy but I just saw this weeks episode and it >made me think of Xena. Last week Buffy was brought back from the dead by >her friends. At end of this weeks episode she thanks them because she says >she was in hell and in torment. A little while later she confesses to >another character that she actually was happy, at peace and felt great love. >She assumes she was in heaven but her friends now have brought her back to >world of violence and pain and now she is truly in hell. i've neer been able to get into buffy. i keep trying but it never works. i miss luce and ren's kick ass abilities and their stunt work. >Just think if >Gabrielle had brought Xena back -perhaps Xena did find peace and contentment >only to be brought back to a life of violence and struggle because of her >friends selfish desire. that's exactly what i've thought. gabrielle would've been happy--for awhile. and then the rest of their lives would have been "oh gods, i brought you back out of selfishness and condemned all those souls etc. etc." >I think Gabrielle is wise enough to know that >respecting Xena's wishes was the right choice. well, it's practically a first for her. you *know* she never listens. >Anyway it's great to talk Xena again. It's always interesting chatting with >you. isn't it? and back atcha. md ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ End of chakram-refugees-digest V1 #10 *************************************