From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V3 #138 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 Thursday, May 22 2003 Volume 03 : Number 138 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [chakram-refugees] Xena tearaway desk calendar quickie POLL [Lilli Sprint] Re: [chakram-refugees] The Chakram [cr ] [chakram-refugees] Re: chakram-refugees-digest V3 #137 [cande@sunlink.net] [chakram-refugees] Re: ART CALENDAR [cande@sunlink.net] [chakram-refugees] Re: Last of the Centaurs [KLOSSNER9@aol.com] Re: [chakram-refugees] The Chakram [IfeRae@aol.com] Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: chakram-refugees-digest V3 #137 [IfeRae@aol.co] Re: [chakram-refugees] The Last Of The Centaurs [IfeRae@aol.com] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 00:00:02 -0500 From: Lilli Sprintz Subject: [chakram-refugees] Xena tearaway desk calendar quickie POLL Sharon Delaney said, During the calendar poll of which types we should do, the winners were the photo cal, tearaway and Lucy/Renee candid. The art montage calendar listed very low. I'm curious as to why. What didn't you like about the art montage calendar? Did you like 2002 better than 2003? Would it have been #4 on your list of choices? The Montage calendars, as a whole, are very visually confusing. which is why I like a regular calendar, like the one you do. Lilli ========================================================= 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: Wed, 21 May 2003 20:19:04 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] The Chakram On Wednesday 21 May 2003 07:49, IfeRae@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 5/20/03 5:12:09 AM Central Daylight Time, > cr@orcon.net.nz writes: > > Cande wrote: > << The new chakram seems now to have an affinity only for > > > > those who follow the enlightened path. > > > > "Knows"? "Redeemed"? An "affinity"? Um, okaaay. You probably go to > > New Age thingies, don't cha? Definitely got more imagination than > > those of us who see a pretty circle of metal. What about that fying pan > > in ADITL? Xena sure made it do some neat tricks before its untimely > > demise. How come it doesn't get to go to some kind of Heaven for > > Objects Xena Has Used, along with other things she's made into magical > > weapons? Huh? Huh? > > > > -- Ife > > Now that's definitely pushing it, lfe! ;) > I personally won't have a bar of New Age mysticism, I reckon it's a sign > of weakness in the head, *but* I can see quite clearly what cande's getting > at. > > IMO she's quite right about the chacky having a special affinity for Xena. > > And her speculation about the chacky having 'betrayed' its owner (maybe > involuntarily) by being used against her, and redeemed by joining with the > light chacky, is interesting. There's a loose parallel between Xena's > search for redemption and the chacky's, that hadn't occurred to me before. > > cr >> > > All kidding aside, let me say that I do not regard New Ageism as a sign of > weakness, but of the ability to see the spiritual in all things, which I > admit I don't do well. I have a problem with assigning human traits to > nonhuman things, especially when I fear it may suggest that the thing has a > "life" of its own apart from human responsibility or influence. Well, in Real Life (TM), I too have a problem with assigning 'consciousness' to inanimate objects. I admit I do it in sentimental ways (as we all do) - I regard my car as having a personality! But I know, intellectualy, that it really is inanimate. On the other hand, 'Xena' is fantasy, and therefore I have no trouble at all with the idea that the chacky *might* have a mind of its own. Now whether, in the context of the series, it does so, or may do so, is another matter. (snip to keep the listmistress at bay....) > First, I can't dismiss how close Callisto came to using the chaky to kill > that priestess, had Xena not thrown another weapon to knock the chaky off > course. It's never explained how/why Callisto could control the chaky > right off the bat, but that said to me that Xena could not take her > signature weapon for granted, in terms of its "affinity" for her or purpose > in her own or others' hands. Without Xena's vigilance, the chaky could be > appropriated by someone as evil as she once was. I think that was just intended to show how formidable an opponent, and how skillful, Callisto was. In fact we never did find out what Callisto had been doing between Xena's attack on Cirra, and Callisto's revenge campaign in 'Callisto', but I guess we are meant to assume that Callisto had spent the time plotting and practising for revenge, including a course on how to control chakrams. One could say that it's kinda remarkable that the one person who swore revenge on Xena should turn out to have powers not far short of Xena's own. (I always found it so). But on reflection, it's not so remarkable - probably hundreds of people of lesser ability swore revenge on Xena, but were never good enough to make it come true - so their stories, we never got to see. The one who *did* nearly bring it off was Callisto, which is why we saw her story. > Second, I'm not sure the chaky "betrayed" Xena, especially since it broke > and essentially became useless when it hit Xena. I don't think it had > "intent" to harm Xena, but was powerless to stop evil forces -- one a > supernatural one (the "devil"), the other (Callisto) one that Xena herself > helped create -- from using it for evil purposes. Callisto broke the rules > -- even of the supernatural evil -- when she used the chaky against Xena in > "Ides." I think that's why Xena was given another chance (fated?) to live > as its guardian once again. Yes, but the mere fact that it *broke* suggests there was something supernatural at work. I agree that it was powerless to prevent Callisto using it against Xena. That doesn't mean it was immune from suffering the consequences - and breaking. > Third, "redemption" suggests having had the consciousness and ability to > choose good over evil, just as does "betrayal." Maybe the chaky did > achieve its rightful state with both halves joined, but it was Xena who > made that choice, not the chaky. If it had a "spirit" apart from Xena, I > don't see any evidence to suggest that it also had "choice." OK. *If* the chacky also had a 'spirit' (which I agree is a debatable point), but didn't have choice, it could still feel guilty of having done 'wrong'. Like Joxer when he killed that warlord character in The Convert - it was an accident. But Jox still felt guilty, even though justice and fairness says he was entirely blameless. So, even if the chacky was used against its 'will', it could still 'feel' as if it had betrayed its owner and needed 'redemption'. (snip) > I guess I'm saying that Cande's idea does offer another layer to the story > -- a symbolic aspect that, as you say, "parallels" Xena's quest. It sort > of makes Xena the chaky's chosen guardian, just as she became the > protector/champion of the Amazons (through Gabrielle) and Eli (through > Eve). Hmmm. Remember back when she and Autolycus rescued the "ultimate > weapon" -- which turned out to be religious in nature (the 10 > commandments)? Well, the chaky was in its own way an "ulitmate weapon." > So, she was the Warrior Protector on the physical, social and spiritual > planes, eh? I can buy that. I can see the chaky's "spirit" in that > context, just not its having the gift of "choice." Interesting. I like > it. Thanks, Cande. Yeah, you too, cr. > > -- Ife Well, I would originally have preferred it had the chacky been 'just a weapon'. But it evolved beyond that - the powers it shows - most notably in 'Coming Home' - are such that that theory became gradually untenable. It was, at the least, an 'intelligent' weapon, able to hover around and home in on the Furies. (And, in FIN, able to score a direct hit on the general even though Gabs had, presumably, no practice at throwing it and seemed very surprised at the result). Without trying to apply the incisive logic required to distinguish between your and Cande's views, which I'm not sure I can summon up this evening or this century, may I say I like elements of them both? 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: Wed, 21 May 2003 09:35:33 -0400 (EDT) From: cande@sunlink.net Subject: [chakram-refugees] Re: chakram-refugees-digest V3 #137 Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 00:51:27 EDT From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] The Chakram "Knows"? "Redeemed"? An "affinity"? Um, okaaay. You probably go to New Age thingies, don't cha? Definitely got more imagination than those of us who see a pretty circle of metal. What about that fying pan in ADITL? Xena sure made it do some neat tricks before its untimely demise. How come it doesn't get to go to some kind of Heaven for Objects Xena Has Used, along with other things she's made into magical weapons? Huh? Huh? - - -- Ife Well actually I am not a new ager at all. My point was that in mythology heros often have weapons that are identified with them and have a spiritual bond to them ie Excaliber for Arthur, Ulysses his bow and I'm sure there are others. The chakram belongs to Xena and yes if some one steals it they can use it. Yes Xena is a master of all weapons and she can fling a fry pan better than a greasy dinner's master chef. Having said this I still believe that there is a bond between Xena and the chakram that is special and unigue. It is her signiture weapon and hence Callisto keeps stealing it because it represents more to Xena and the audience than just a nifty looking round killing thing. The chakram is a part of Xena - in it's deadliness and it's beauty it almost a mirror of Xena's personality or even soul. In Ides when Xena is shattered by her weapon shatters also just as Xena has been. When it is reborn it is reborn as Xena has been. In Chakram Xena has separated from her darkside but she needs her darkness to be a whole functioning person. The chakram also needs to be reunited with it's other half to be functional. The dark chakram is shattered and useless and the light chakram can't be used because it kills everyone (pure souls just don't exist naturally). Once their two sides the are united they become functional much as Xena becomes herself once her dark side returns. Now of course you ask a logical question when ask why can Callisto use it with such deadly force. Remember the orginal chakram is the dark one. It has an affinity to the darkside. Xena certainly is dark but she has the strength to use her darkness for good and she has the strength to use the dark chakram for good. Callisto is of course all dark and so her mastery of this chakram is natural to her. It will do her evil will because she can call upon it's darkness. Now the chakram may obey Callisto but I still believe that it "knows' who is its true master and when it is used to kill Xena (that is what happened) it knows it has been used against its true purpose - to serve Xena. So it breaks. Yes this all very metaphysical but in a land where people are resurrected from the dead on regular basis, god pop in and out and girl angels make people pregnanat and sentient chakram can't be too big of a stretch. 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: Wed, 21 May 2003 16:07:07 -0400 (EDT) From: cande@sunlink.net Subject: [chakram-refugees] Re: ART CALENDAR From: "Creation (Sharon Delaney)" Subject: [chakram-refugees] [Flawless] Re: Xena tearaway desk calendar quickie POLL The art montage calendar listed very low. I'm curious as to why. What didn't you like about the art montage calendar? Did you like 2002 better than 2003? Would it have been #4 on your list of choices? I voted for the art calenders in fact I bought two this year one for home and one for the office. I was disappointed that you didn't do the 8X10s also. The 2002 calendar's numbers were very hard to see however. This year they are darker and much better. So if you want to make a few next year I'll buy it - just make sure the numbers show up. They are really great. 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: Wed, 21 May 2003 19:16:34 EDT From: KLOSSNER9@aol.com Subject: [chakram-refugees] Re: Last of the Centaurs On the question of forgiving the villain in Last of the Centaurs, remember that Xena was also ready to let the villain in the Helicon episode live. Boeotian ========================================================= 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: Wed, 21 May 2003 19:48:49 EDT From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] The Chakram In a message dated 5/21/03 3:24:35 AM Central Daylight Time, cr@orcon.net.nz writes: << Well, in Real Life (TM), I too have a problem with assigning 'consciousness' to inanimate objects. I admit I do it in sentimental ways (as we all do) - - I regard my car as having a personality! But I know, intellectualy, that it really is inanimate.>> A man who really believes his auto to be inanimate? Bwahahahahaha! << On the other hand, 'Xena' is fantasy, and therefore I have no trouble at all with the idea that the chacky *might* have a mind of its own. Now whether, in the context of the series, it does so, or may do so, is another matter. >> Oh, same here. In this case, I simply saw little evidence of that beyond external events that seemed to confer more meaning depending on unique circumstances due to some other (beyond Xena) character's motivation to see/use it a certain way. Even then, I didn't see it exhibiting "consciousness." Of course, that's because I'm perfectly willing to believe that Xena had the skill to make it do just about anything she wanted. << In fact we never did find out what Callisto had been doing between Xena's attack on Cirra, and Callisto's revenge campaign in 'Callisto', but I guess we are meant to assume that Callisto had spent the time plotting and practising for revenge, including a course on how to control chakrams. >> My assumption also. << One could say that it's kinda remarkable that the one person who swore revenge on Xena should turn out to have powers not far short of Xena's own. (I always found it so). But on reflection, it's not so remarkable - probably hundreds of people of lesser ability swore revenge on Xena, but were never good enough to make it come true - so their stories, we never got to see. The one who *did* nearly bring it off was Callisto, which is why we saw her story. >> Which is also why I see credence in Cande's suggestion that Callisto had the requisite darkness to "take to" the chaky so easily. The difference is, I see the "affinity" coming from within the person, rather from within the weapon. I think Cande suggests the affinity could have been mutual. > Second, I'm not sure the chaky "betrayed" Xena, especially since it broke > and essentially became useless when it hit Xena. I don't think it had > "intent" to harm Xena, but was powerless to stop evil forces -- one a > supernatural one (the "devil"), the other (Callisto) one that Xena herself > helped create -- from using it for evil purposes. Callisto broke the rules > -- even of the supernatural evil -- when she used the chaky against Xena in > "Ides." I think that's why Xena was given another chance (fated?) to live > as its guardian once again. Yes, but the mere fact that it *broke* suggests there was something supernatural at work. I agree that it was powerless to prevent Callisto using it against Xena. That doesn't mean it was immune from suffering the consequences - and breaking.>> Agreed. Again, I simply saw the "supernatural" forces as external to -- not within -- the chaky. As to its "suffering," when it broke, I gasped because of what it had been used to do, because Xena was broken. It was a powerful representation of Xena's "fall," but I didn't cry over the chakram itself. (Hmmm, I don't think I'm getting into the spirit of the chakram's ... spiritual ... aspect. Maybe I'll rewatch "Ides" and have a little memorial service for the chaky. ) << So, even if the chacky was used against its 'will', it could still 'feel' as if it had betrayed its owner and needed 'redemption'. >> Cr? Is that you? If not, who are you and what have you done with my cr?! << Well, I would originally have preferred it had the chacky been 'just a weapon'. But it evolved beyond that - the powers it shows - most notably in 'Coming Home' - are such that that theory became gradually untenable. It was, at the least, an 'intelligent' weapon, able to hover around and home in on the Furies. (And, in FIN, able to score a direct hit on the general even though Gabs had, presumably, no practice at throwing it and seemed very surprised at the result). >> I'll grant that it was a wonderful weapon with much symbolic import. However, in my mind, it was the "intelligence" of the thrower that gave it is power. In Gabs' case, it was unconscious, after years of watching/following Xena. In the WP's case, it was `cause I had to believe she could do just about anything or I'd've stopped watching when she caught those arrows in the second ep. I'm sure she'd scoped out that site in "Coming Home," figured how long it would take for the bit with Ares, for the Furies to appear in just the right place, and for Gabs to resuscitate her -- just like she did in "Been There." What's so hard to believe about that? << Without trying to apply the incisive logic required to distinguish between your and Cande's views, which I'm not sure I can summon up this evening or this century, may I say I like elements of them both? >> Why, of course! Hopefully this is more of a dialogue/discussion of multiple possibilities, than debate about who's "right." I've always perceived XWP on many levels and as open to many perspectives. To me they are all valid, even though some make more "sense" or have more meaning to me personally. The chaky was arguably as much a "character" in XWP as Jox-- um, I mean, other regular cast. I loved watching it zip around, so see nothing wrong with giving it a personality or imagining its thrill when Xena threw it or disgust when Gabs used it as a backscratcher or kitchen utensil. I can even give it a "spirit," though I have to work on accepting the "will" aspect. :-) - -- Ife 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: Wed, 21 May 2003 19:48:42 EDT From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: chakram-refugees-digest V3 #137 In a message dated 5/21/03 8:37:01 AM Central Daylight Time, cande@sunlink.net writes: << Well actually I am not a new ager at all. My point was that in mythology heros often have weapons that are identified with them and have a spiritual bond to them ie Excaliber for Arthur, Ulysses his bow and I'm sure there are others. >> Just kidding about the new age part. I understand what you mean about the weapons with "spiritual bonds." I've simply never cared about that. Well, until now. I'm listening .... << The chakram is a part of Xena - in it's deadliness and it's beauty it almost a mirror of Xena's personality or even soul. In Ides when Xena is shattered by her weapon shatters also just as Xena has been. When it is reborn it is reborn as Xena has been. >> Oh, my, that's wonderfully said. I said in response to cr that I liked where your idea about this took me, in terms of adding another dimension. This is even more illuminating. << Now of course you ask a logical question when ask why can Callisto use it with such deadly force. Remember the orginal chakram is the dark one. It has an affinity to the darkside. Xena certainly is dark but she has the strength to use her darkness for good and she has the strength to use the dark chakram for good. Callisto is of course all dark and so her mastery of this chakram is natural to her. >> Um, okaaay. I know Princess Diana's throw of the chaky was pretty scary, despite her good intentions. Frankly, I can't think of too many situations where someone else would've had access to or dared to catch the chaky. I see your point about Callisto's being someone who instinctively understood the chaky's abilities, especially since she apparently studied everything about Xena. << It will do her evil will because she can call upon it's darkness. Now the chakram may obey Callisto but I still believe that it "knows' who is its true master and when it is used to kill Xena (that is what happened) it knows it has been used against its true purpose - to serve Xena. So it breaks. >> This is where I have problems. I believed it broke as much because Callisto "cheated" in her purpose for using it. Mind you, that doesn't refute your point or take away from the symbolic aspect of Xena "breaking" at the same time. << Yes this all very metaphysical but in a land where people are resurrected from the dead on regular basis, god pop in and out and girl angels make people pregnanat and sentient chakram can't be too big of a stretch.>> LOL! To me, one of the challenges and intrigue of XWP is how symbolism was used for dramatic purposes, to underline both plot and ethical issues. They wanted her to have a "cool," unique weapon -- which turned out to be in the shape of a circle, which is often associated with "female." I felt TPTB kind of worked backwards with the chakram, endowing it with its mystical history after it became so clearly associated with who Xena was. We finally learn that Ares gave it to her, but we don't know the circumstances or who created both chakrams and why. Yes, Xena relied on this weapon, but I didn't see her bonding with it any more than with her sword or horse. TPTB seemed to treat it as more like a Swiss Army Knife -- an all-purpose handy gadget you could use for killing, knocking folks senseless, cutting fish, scratching yourself, sawing tree limbs, preventing accidents, etc. Indeed, they seemed to go to as much length to "demystify" the "round killing thing," as they did in ultimately giving it more meaning as the one thing Xena couldn't hold onto as a ghost and as a symbol of the legacy she passed on to Gabrielle. The impression I got was that Xena saw it as having extraordinary meaning only when others gave it that -- e.g., Ares and other gods, Callisto, Gabrielle. I can attribute more meaning to it too now, thanks to you. I guess what I'm really saying is that I just don't think Xena did. - -- 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: Wed, 21 May 2003 19:51:17 EDT From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] The Last Of The Centaurs In a message dated 5/21/03 6:18:06 PM Central Daylight Time, KLOSSNER9 writes: << In a message dated 5/20/2003 5:53:35 PM Central Daylight Time, KLOSSNER9 writes: << On the question of forgiving the villain in Last of the Centaurs, remember that Xena was also ready to let the villain in the Helicon episode live. >> Ah, quite true. Indeed, she grew more forgiving over the years. I'm okay with the concept in "Centaurs," but found the execution troubling. Xenastaff frequently left a lot for us to connect for ourselves. This was one of the few times it didn't ring "true" for me. I didn't feel Xena's anguish or dilemma. I felt her forgiveness and Gabs' lack thereof were forced. Oh, I can find rationales for Xena's behavior (heh), but I don't have any passion around them, as I usually do. It's more like, "Okay, there was this and that and maybe that explains it." Very personal response, admittedly. I just wasn't moved to care. I cared about and understood her response in Helicon and with Caligula. I didn't with Belach. -- 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. ========================================================= ------------------------------ End of chakram-refugees-digest V3 #138 **************************************