From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V2 #156 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, June 10 2002 Volume 02 : Number 156 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: unproduced Xena script [mirrordrum ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: unproduced Xena script [cr ] Re: [chakram-refugees] CON 2002 Day 3, Part 2 [KTL ] Re: Deliverer and Legacy (was: Re: [chakram-refugees] <>) [KTL ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: unproduced Xena script [IfeRae@aol.com] [chakram-refugees] << Tsuname>> ["Cheryl Ande" ] Re: Deliverer and Legacy (was: Re: [chakram-refugees] <>) [mirrordrum Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: unproduced Xena script At 02:22 PM 6/6/2002 -0400, Lynn W Ribaud wrote: >Onward, Xenite Soldiers... and would this continue about marching to war with the cross (urn? head?) of xena going on before? so many crucifixions, so little time. one blenches at the thought. > > At 12:55 PM 6/6/2002 -0400, Lynn W Ribaud wrote: > > > > How about the air? I'm thinking of "Altared States" and "Been > > >There, Done That", > > > > blast. i can't remember when it took on a mind of its own in bt,dt. ??? > > Well, it didn't, really. But the climactic throw still suggests >some sort of internal guidance, if you ask me. I could get technical and >mention uncertainty...but we don't really want to go there. actually, we went there several years ago altho i'm not sure you were involved. a lot of discussion about sensitivity to initial conditions and micro errors getting magnified with each bounce and the like. it was quite entertaining and instructive. > > also both autolycus and gab have it and use it when xena's in their > > respective bodies in . i think they should count as "uses by > someone > > other than xena" since xena avers that she killed theodorus in the 20 > > questions game even tho it was callisto who did it in her (xena's) > > body. so if that's the rule xena goes by (that is, that it's the body that > > counts), that's good enough for me. > > Yah, that works. i did realize afterwards that this does rather drift from the original question which was, i think, about uses not authorized by xena and i reckon in that case, the above two don't count and the use by gab on the eel probably does. i'd also forgotten that callie grabbed and used it in, uh, . i can't remember whether the question was how many times it was used or by how many people it was used w/out her blessing. if people (or other forces) then callisto's already covered by that blanket. if times, well then i think this is one that hasn't been mentioned. > > and of course, also from the same ep, we have gabrielle's use of the > > chakram for fish decapitation. chuckle. that oughta count for something. > > Umm...counted for Xena's ire, anyway...about equal to Gab's ire at >the bend frying pan. i've always like gab standing there muttering at the pan. well, i would. 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. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 01:00:37 -0400 From: mirrordrum Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: unproduced Xena script At 09:19 PM 6/7/2002 +1200, cr wrote: >On Friday 07 June 2002 06:10, mirrordrum wrote: > > > > > also both autolycus and gab have it and use it when xena's in their > > respective bodies in . i think they should count as "uses by someone > > other than xena" since xena avers that she killed theodorus in the 20 > > questions game even tho it was callisto who did it in her (xena's) > > body. so if that's the rule xena goes by (that is, that it's the body that > > counts), that's good enough for me. > >And a very nicely argued case, if I may say so, md ;) thank you. i rather thought so. and then i realized, as noted in response to sleepy lynn, that i may have been barking up the wrong question. i still like it. i can always just redo the question to fit my answer anyway. > > and of course, also from the same ep, we have gabrielle's use of the > > chakram for fish decapitation. chuckle. that oughta count for something. > > > > md > >And, um, (really stretching for examples here), there was the time when the >chacky was intercepted by Morloch's tri-chaky in Dangerous Prey and ended >up stuck in a log. Not that it was used by anyone else. you know that was rather extraordinary. xena's always doing that to everybody else's weapons but i can't, right off hand, think of any other time when another person threw anything at the chakram. > We did mention Gabs in Friend in Need, I take it? somebody did. i'm inclined to forget that myself although i thought renee did a much better job with it then than in . >Oh yes, and OF COURSE! The Ring trilogy - Xena dropped it at the end of >The Ring and Beowulf lugged it around for a year till he gave it back to her >in Return of the Valkyrie. (I'm happy now, I found one! :) yes you did. of course, we don't know did he use it but the temptation would be well nigh overwhelming, would it not? 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. ========================================================= ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 19:35:52 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: unproduced Xena script On Sunday 09 June 2002 16:49, mirrordrum wrote: > At 02:22 PM 6/6/2002 -0400, Lynn W Ribaud wrote: > >Onward, Xenite Soldiers... > > and would this continue about marching to war with the cross (urn? head?) > of xena going on before? so many crucifixions, so little time. one > blenches at the thought. > Errrm, cross, I think. Xena should be getting used to it by now. > > > > > > blast. i can't remember when it took on a mind of its own in bt,dt. ??? > > > > Well, it didn't, really. But the climactic throw still suggests > >some sort of internal guidance, if you ask me. I could get technical and > >mention uncertainty...but we don't really want to go there. > > actually, we went there several years ago altho i'm not sure you were > involved. a lot of discussion about sensitivity to initial conditions and > micro errors getting magnified with each bounce and the like. it was quite > entertaining and instructive. > > Yeah. I started it IIRC, Lynn answered. I'm not sure we ever agreed on the exact details though. ;) (snip) > > i did realize afterwards that this does rather drift from the original > question which was, i think, about uses not authorized by xena and i reckon > in that case, the above two don't count and the use by gab on the eel > probably does. i'd also forgotten that callie grabbed and used it in, uh, > . She did? Oh yeah, was that to start a rockslide or something in the quarry? I'd forgotten that one. cr ========================================================= 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: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 19:45:33 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: unproduced Xena script On Sunday 09 June 2002 17:00, mirrordrum wrote: > At 09:19 PM 6/7/2002 +1200, cr wrote: > >On Friday 07 June 2002 06:10, mirrordrum wrote: > > > also both autolycus and gab have it and use it when xena's in their > > > respective bodies in . i think they should count as "uses by > > > someone other than xena" since xena avers that she killed theodorus in > > > the 20 questions game even tho it was callisto who did it in > > > her (xena's) body. so if that's the rule xena goes by (that is, that > > > it's the body that counts), that's good enough for me. > > > >And a very nicely argued case, if I may say so, md ;) > > thank you. i rather thought so. and then i realized, as noted in response > to sleepy lynn, that i may have been barking up the wrong question. i still > like it. i can always just redo the question to fit my answer anyway. > > > > and of course, also from the same ep, we have gabrielle's use of the > > > chakram for fish decapitation. chuckle. that oughta count for > > > something. > > > > > > md > > > >And, um, (really stretching for examples here), there was the time when > > the chacky was intercepted by Morloch's tri-chaky in Dangerous Prey and > > ended up stuck in a log. Not that it was used by anyone else. > > you know that was rather extraordinary. xena's always doing that to > everybody else's weapons but i can't, right off hand, think of any other > time when another person threw anything at the chakram. Maybe it had stealth technology too? :) > > We did mention Gabs in Friend in Need, I take it? > > somebody did. i'm inclined to forget that myself although i thought renee > did a much better job with it then than in . She only had to launch the thing. The Mark 2 is a smart weapon with all sorts of enhanced features compared with the Mark 1 (which only had user-controllable variable edge sharpness). The Mark 2 has active target acquisition. And (as we saw in Coming Home), target area loiter capability. And it even knows what its thrower wants it to hit. Oops, I slipped out of jargon mode there. How about 'intuitive target designation'? > >Oh yes, and OF COURSE! The Ring trilogy - Xena dropped it at the end of > >The Ring and Beowulf lugged it around for a year till he gave it back to > > her in Return of the Valkyrie. (I'm happy now, I found one! :) > > yes you did. of course, we don't know did he use it but the temptation > would be well nigh overwhelming, would it not? > > md Not sure. There'd be a temptation to try it out, yep. And of course, Beowulf didn't know he was ever going to find Xena again. So maybe he just kept it safe as a souvenir. cr ========================================================= 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: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 22:49:09 -0800 (AKDT) From: KTL Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] CON 2002 Day 3, Part 2 > > Hooo-hoooo! ALRIGHT! ALL the off continent states were represented then. > > I bet not ALL the in continent ones were. > > You including Alaska in that first category? > > Just curious. Yes. It's American phraseology. The "Lower 48" as some old timers up here call it, is referred to as "The Continental United States". And it specifically excludes Alaska and Hawaii. There is some movement to call that area the "contiguous states" which is more geologically correct, but the phrase the continental United States is still in use. In fact, there was recently a real brou-ha-ha when I think it was Scholastic Magazine ran a contest and limited it to the continental United States. Some schools in Alaska protested being left out. Just because there's a whole 'nother country between us and the rest of America is no reason to discriminate against us. Alaska and Hawaii are left out usually because things cost more here and there due to shipping costs. So you'll see a lot of TV ads and ads in magazines that offer a special deal in nationwide chains, but have fine print that says, "Offer good only in the continental United States" or "Excludes Alaska and Hawaii" or "Prices higher in Alaska and Hawaii". > > (snip) > > > > > > *Meeeemmmmories*....;=) (and this is *scary*, because it's now becoming > > > *collective* meeemmmories........ ;) ) > > > > > > > > > --Jackie > > > > That's all the show is now (seeing as it's on the Invisible Oxygen > > Network), collective memories in us all. > > > > KT > > And videotape! Don't forget videotape! It's just as good as TV. > > cr Yeah, but I done seen all of those. That's what's hurting to me--no NEW Xena. But we do have a fantastic body of work to pour over and rediscover and rediscuss. And I for one am MIGHTY grateful for that. KT ========================================================= 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: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 22:55:41 -0800 (AKDT) From: KTL Subject: Re: Deliverer and Legacy (was: Re: [chakram-refugees] <>) > >Oh get off it! md's right about as often as Gabrielle is. (KT gives a > >blindingly cute grin) > > > YAXI!! KT doesn't have a blindingly cute grin. That's: > > a) Gabrielle > b) Xena > c) Ares > d) Callisto > e) Aphrodite > f) all of the above except KT > > Sojourner HEY! I never said it was MY blindingly cute grin I was flashing. 8-p~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ But actually, if we're going to talk about very noticeable grins, I would nominate Callisto for that honor. Her expressions of glee were just about the scariest thing to gaze upon in the entire series. Damn, Hudson was good! (Till she became furken Angel Callisto at least, in my opinion.) KT ========================================================= 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: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 21:04:37 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] CON 2002 Day 3, Part 2 On Sunday 09 June 2002 18:49, KTL wrote: > > > Hooo-hoooo! ALRIGHT! ALL the off continent states were represented > > > then. I bet not ALL the in continent ones were. > > > > You including Alaska in that first category? > > > > Just curious. > > Yes. It's American phraseology. The "Lower 48" as some old timers up > here call it, is referred to as "The Continental United States". And it > specifically excludes Alaska and Hawaii. There is some movement to call > that area the "contiguous states" which is more geologically correct, but > the phrase the continental United States is still in use. In fact, there > was recently a real brou-ha-ha when I think it was Scholastic Magazine ran > a contest and limited it to the continental United States. Some schools > in Alaska protested being left out. Just because there's a whole 'nother > country between us and the rest of America is no reason to discriminate > against us. Hmmm. I suppose it could be claimed as no more misleading than the English habit of referring to the European 'mainland' as 'the Continent'. But which continent do they think Mexico, Canada and Alaska are _on_, then? > Alaska and Hawaii are left out usually because things cost more here and > there due to shipping costs. So you'll see a lot of TV ads and ads in > magazines that offer a special deal in nationwide chains, but have fine > print that says, "Offer good only in the continental United > States" or "Excludes Alaska and Hawaii" or "Prices higher in Alaska > and Hawaii". Ya could probably take a court case on that first description. :) > > > > > > That's all the show is now (seeing as it's on the Invisible Oxygen > > > Network), collective memories in us all. > > > > > > KT > > > > And videotape! Don't forget videotape! It's just as good as TV. > > > > cr > > Yeah, but I done seen all of those. That's what's hurting to me--no NEW > Xena. But we do have a fantastic body of work to pour over and rediscover > and rediscuss. And I for one am MIGHTY grateful for that. > > KT Well, having told Sky TV what to do with their useless service, I'm now following Season 5 Xena and Herc off videotape. Except that, given Sky's tendency to bounce Herc and Xena so they can screen $%&^^$^$^ rugby football, which is finally what led me to give them the elbow, I expect I'm probably ahead of them by now. cr ========================================================= 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: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 17:31:09 EDT From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: unproduced Xena script In a message dated 6/6/2002 9:42:45 AM Central Daylight Time, meredith_tarr@yahoo.com writes: > (Incidentally, is "Solstice Carol" the only episode > where Xena's chakram unintentionally left her > possession? I think yes...) > "Callisto." - -- 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: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 19:24:14 -0400 From: "Cheryl Ande" Subject: [chakram-refugees] << Tsuname>> # # # # # # # I once said that this episode is my guilty pleasure. Whenever I just want to watch a Xena episode I usually pick this episode. I watched it again this week and enjoyed it just as much. I've tried to figure out why. On the surface it is perhaps one of the most absurd of the Xena episode. Xena and Gabrielle are trapped on a convict ship while trying to find out why Autolycus is a prisoner. The ship has Autolycus, Macon a vicious killer (well actually more of annoying killer), a whiny young man with issues, and the convicts' new owner and his young pregnant wife. Before you can say Poseidon Adventure the ship is hit by a tidal wave and X&G and the assorted guest stars are trapped. After a lot of conflict where we find out that the Autolycus got captured on purpose, the slave owner and his wife are really nice, and the cowardly young man feels guilty about his brother's death, Xena comes up with a plan to escape the ship. They blow up empty wineskins and ride the sea geysers to the surface (the plan is so absurd that even Xena rolls her eyes when she announces it). Anyway they all survive even the nasty Macon who is rescued by Xena even after he has tried to kill her. Why do I love this episode for all its improbabilities and nonsense. First of everyone is very good - the guest star actors are good and play their parts well. More importantly I think is that both Xena and Gabrielle are just exactly as the audience wants them to be.be. Xena is stalwart - she keeps coming up with plans to save the day. She steers the ship through the sea, she chops through wood with abandon, she refrains from killing the pest Macon, she is understanding about the frightened boy, she stitches the wounded and she the picture of concern when looking for Gabrielle after the wreck. Xena even screws up a bit when her careening chakram (thrown to save Macon) causes the ship sink even more _ hey no one's perfect. Gabrielle on the other hand is just Gabby - she is the concerned confident to the young wife, the supportive helpmate to Xena, she too stitches wounded and saves the captain (why the unconscious captain didn't drown during the escape is a mystery but I'm sure it was because of Gabrielle), and she is obviously deeply concerned when Xena is late emerging from the sea after the escape. In between there are nice subtle moments between the two - a small pats on the back, a quick squeeze of the hand, - small moments that show two people who care about one another. Anyway I just like this episode. The cast should have gotten bonuses for being wet and uncomfortable in the tank which I understand not only stank but burst. CherylA ========================================================= 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: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 22:51:02 -0400 From: mirrordrum Subject: Re: Deliverer and Legacy (was: Re: [chakram-refugees] <>) At 09:56 AM 6/8/2002 -0800, KTL wrote: >On Sat, 13 Apr 2002, md wrote and cr replied: > > > > shows some of that good spidey sense. now it's also made more complicated > > > of course by xena's history w/ the one god of the israelites. xena gets > > > fooled just like the rest of us. you've got to admit that it's rare. > > > > Do I? (Tries to work out if md's contention is correct) > > > > OK, I guess it probably is. You're right. (Stop nudging me like > that, KT, > > I tell you she's got a point there much as I hate to admit it). > > >Oh get off it! md's right about as often as Gabrielle is. (KT gives >blindingly cute grin) oh, kt. you just don't truly appreciate the really great work of art that i am. indeed, i'm sure there isn't anyone here who can appreciate my specialness. "right" has so little to do with it. i go WAAAAY beyond right. and anyway, i can't believe you'd disagree with me that it's rare that xena gets fooled. >Actually, I'm not sure that the one god of the Isrelites figured into >Xena's equations at all. hey, it was just an idea. i'm allowed to have an idea, ya know. it worked for me. nyaaaa. >I don't think that Xena even thought about who Krafstar's god might be. yeah but you don't know that and my point is that we've heard about the one god before so it's not like it's a new concept to her and the show. at least that's how i got sucked in. after and , i just thought they were perhaps suggesting to us that it was the same one god again and that possibly xena might understandably have thought the same thing. or not. i don't really have an investment in this being right. it just works for me. big diff, oh you of the flashing dentition. >It didn't interest her at the moment, 'cause she was after Caesar. I don't >think she said to herself, "It's okay, it's just that god with the loud >talking machine voice." i don't think she said that either. i just think she took it for granted that it was that god. again. sort of like "WHATever, gabrielle, go play with your friends." i like thelo's flower children thing. is that original or xenaversal? >And I think yes, Xena was "off" in this ep. Exactly because Caesar is >most definitely her weakness and we've seen her beam into laser like focus >on him and only him whenever he's around. wasn't that what i was saying earlier there? well, i guess getting fooled and "being off" aren't the same. i just rather think that the normal sixth sense she has about protecting gabrielle from her foolishness was lulled into stony sleep not only by her lust for caesar's blood but also b/c the one god idea didn't jangle any bells. > But also because this ep is >the beginning of the rift arc where high drama and angst were the order of >the day. (Even if it meant twisting and tweaking the established >character traits of our grrls some.) absolutely. however, i still think xena had good reason to be casual about gab's playmates which to me makes gabrielle's purported hatred of her in over xena abandoning her a bit of a stretch. i'd have bought it more easily if she hated xena for having been right about hope. i don't suppose that would fly very well in this kind of show, but it would be more nearly true to life. to me anyway. rehashing the hash yet again. 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 V2 #156 **************************************