From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V3 #254 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 Sunday, August 31 2003 Volume 03 : Number 254 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [chakram-refugees] Interesting, possibly positive, news onXena 2 DVDs [cr ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Friend In Need Part 1 [KTL ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Friend In Need Part 1 [KTL ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Friend In Need Part 1 [KTL ] [chakram-refugees] Re: Xena Circle ["Cheryl Ande" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 15:55:25 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Interesting, possibly positive, news onXena 2 DVDs On Friday 29 August 2003 19:44, Cousin Liz wrote: > > Subject: OFFICIAL XENA STORE INVITE: Live the Fantasy, Become Part of > Xena's Circle Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 01:59:55 -0700 > From: "Sharon Jennings" > Organization: Davis-Anderson Merchandising > > Hello Faithful Xena Fan: > > My name is Sharon Jennings, Id like to introduce myself as > the new marketing maven over at Davis-Anderson Merchandising. (rest snipped) Well, she's certainly *new*, isn't she? It kinda shows in the approach. Typical 'marketing' exec. I expect she'd say the exact same things about - umm - Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. And probably has done. All that misdirected enthusiasm.... 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, 30 Aug 2003 20:06:42 +1200 From: cr Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Re: ITADITH On Friday 29 August 2003 17:48, IfeRae@aol.com wrote: (massive snippage) > > I think you mean, I assumed 'domestic' implied 'subtext' ? If so, > > you're right, I did. >> > > I figured that, but was trying not to assume. I don't think you can reply to anything without assuming *something*, even if only minimal. > I deleted my first response, > based on a second reading of your comment, which sounded like you didn't > like "domestic" in terms of the types of activities X&G did. I don't think the description fits most of what we see on screen, and it's not what I want to see on screen anyway. If there had been a lot of it I think I would have lost interest in XWP fairly rapidly. I like watching adventures. I'll save the domestic bliss for home. ;) > I recognize > that also might be part of it, but I wasn't getting how that had to mean > subtext. Mind you, it's little things like that which did influence me to > start seeing them as a "couple," along with all the other possible > interpretations of their relationship. I wasn't "invested" in one > interpretation over another, but all of them soon included X&G being each > other's "home" (as Sophia so beautifully said) as well as "family." Well, to me, the term 'domestic abuse' as it is normally applied, implies two people in a conjugal relationship. It may mean something else to others. > > Okay, now I understand too. You find details of everyday life > > interesting whereas I don't (not even 'male' occupations like digging > > ditches.) >> > > Not *all* such details, so much as the ones involving X&G. It communicated > the genuine affection between the characters, not just some idealistic > "Love" with a big "L." However, my work involves being interested in how > other people work, so I suppose what you say is truer for me. I love > watching people who enjoy what they do, whether it's driving a bus, digging > a ditch, playing basketball, raising kids, running a business, painting > .... Okay. I guess that does prove your point. Yup. I find the insides of gearboxes (or computers) more interesting than the insides of people or their minds. Unless they are exceptionally interesting people, such as Xena. > > >Actually, I said that that's true of sports where strength is an asset. > > >While strength is definitely a part of most sports, I don't believe it > > >means the "strongest" one will always win, except maybe in a very few > > >sports. > > > > Not always, but usually, I think. Depends how you define 'strong', of > > course.... obviously in the case of runners for example, speed and > > stamina > > (which are a reflection of physical strength) are what matters. >> > > In which case you'd see more weight lifters running in -- and winning -- > track meets. No. Obviously not. Are you trying reductio ad absurdum on me? I shoulda said, I guess, that speed and stamina are a reflection of physical strength *among other things*. Take a look at 100-yard sprinters and tell me they don't have big muscles! Xena certainly had physical strength. And endurance, and stamina, and so on... > Form, technique and strategy are also important, as are > determination and mood. They all work together, and I don't see how you can > isolate strength as the most critical. All other things being equal, the > runner who can bench press the most weight may actually be at a > disadvantage in terms of agility, flexibility and being injury prone. > Dancers and gymnasts can be extremely strong, but not in the same way as > someone who doesn't have to move a lot, fast or for sustained minutes. As > you say, a lot depends on how we're defining "strength." Precisely. > My perception is that you're talking about one person who can push around > another more easily, with the latter presumed to generally prevail. I'm > talking about "strength" as more than that and only one of many factors > that may determine who prevails. Well, you perceived wrong, then. As you pointed out, and I maybe neglected to make sufficiently explicit, 'strength' isn't just brute strength. > > << We're going to breed a generation of helpless motorists > > who can't even change the spark plugs. (That's why I said men of 'my > > generation' - we did pride ourselves on being able to keep going if it > > broke > > down. But then, we didn't carry cellphones to summon help - it was fix > > it or start walking.) I like my computer, but I wouldn't let it drive > > my car for me! :( >> > > Well, to be fair, isn't one of the points of technology to do the > "thinking" for us? Hasn't mass production made it cheaper to get rid of > some things and buy a new one, rather than fix an "outdated" one? No, absolutely not. Case in point - an acquaintance of mine has an old PC and would like a 17" monitor. She was advised that she need a new PC to go with it. Hogwash! These are NZ$ prices: Cost of new PC: $1500 - $2000 Cost of new 17" monitor (which *will* plug straight into her old PC) - $250 Cost of VGA card with 4MB RAM (if she wants to use higher-res modes on her new monitor) - $40. OK, so the monitor will probably accommodate all sorts of modes and features that her old PC can't utilise and hence are 'wasted' - but so what? She can afford $300 and get what she wants, she can't afford $1500 anyway. Another case - if my Escort should break down (and bear in mind, 85% of car breakdowns were electrical, in 1980 - it's probably 99% for 'modern' cars), I can almost certainly fix it. I carry a spare coil, condenser and contact breaker in the toolkit, and a few lengths of electrical wire. This is *certainly* cheaper and often far easier and quicker than trying to find a mechanic, 40 miles out of town, on a Sunday evening. Disastrous mechanical failures are very rare, in any car. If it's just a slipping clutch or a wheelbearing on the way out, they give plenty of warning. It's only cheaper to keep buying new cars (as you suggest), losing horrendous amounts of depreciation, under the hope that they won't break down before you trade them in for the next one, *if* you allow yourself to be ignorant and helpless of what to do to fix them. Even if you don't do the work yourself, ignorance just sets you up (like my friend who was told she needed a new computer) to be fleeced. There's no need for it, there's a *heap* of information on the Internet, from how to build a computer down to how to clean your VCR heads, and Google is your friend. ;) > My > father could fix almost anything, but even he would probably throw his > hands up at trying to fix some ultra-computerized gizmo that requires > special equipment to analyze and repair. Such as 'modern' cars, or VCR's - but hang on. It al depends what needs fixing. 'Modern' cars, for all that they've buried half the works in a mass of pipes and wires beyond all belief, still rely on mechanical things like wheel bearings and drive belts. And VCR's - well, I wouldn't try getting into the electronics, but anyone with a bit of savvy and a just averagely non-clumsy can take the case off and *carefully* extract a jammed tape or clean the heads. Why pay The Man (who has no more delicate touch than anybody else) $50 to clean the heads? > It seems the more "modern" we > live, the more helpless we are -- dependent on someone else to provide and > maintain everything from such basic necessities as food, to the resources > to keep the food from spoiling (e.g., electricity) once we've got it. Only if we allow ourselves to be. > You know, I think one of the appealing aspects of XWP was that it showed a > "simpler" time when our girls could control their environment more, provide > for themselves. Well, hell, they're welcome to it. Could I catch a rabbit? Or kill the wretched thing and eat it? I'd probably starve to death first. > Yet, there was a science fiction aspect that futuristic, > in terms of, say, Xena's ability to "invent" or replicate so many of the > things we see now. Heck, she could "fly" or otherwise traverse huge > distances in no time, not to mention freezing or blowing up whole armies > and surviving for long periods underwater. She was her own technology. > Fantasy, actually. ;) > > > If by more 'practical' you mean women are more ready to call the repair > > man, > > then that's *another* term we disagree on. I consider 'practical' to be > > the > > ability to fix minor faults.>> > > "Practical" to me means fixing those faults in a reasonable enough time > that you don't have to cook outside for a month because the innards of the > stove are all over the kitchen floor while *somebody* is figuring out the > "minor" problem that needs fixing and waiting on the special tool to arrive > in order to do that. I don't know what American stoves are like, but New Zealand ones can all be dismantled and fixed with a screwdriver. *No* special tools. And the circuitry is elementary. I've never taken more than a couple of hours to either 'fix' a stove or at least put it back the way it was (in part-working order) until I could get the parts. Anyone who can build a model airplane kit can do it. Correction - I suppose it does require an elementary knowledge of electricity, viz that it flows through wires and you have to correct the wires up to the right places and avoid short circuits. But that's all. It's *way* simpler than threading the needles on an overlocker. > > << In other words your criticism of 'fixes' that > > take forever are based on someone incompetent trying to tackle the job, > > no?) > > Nope, I'm talking about folks who are probably even more experienced at > these things than you. Well, if your examples are true, demonstrably and absolutely not. :) > Besides, I've never yet met a male "someone" who > didn't think he was competent to work on whatever he was fixing. You must have met some right klutzes then. > > >>>Situations where someone is trying to harm you, physically or > > >>> otherwise. "Real" to me means you could be killed, whether it's alone > > >>> or with 100 other people, in your own home or a dark alley, as a > > >>> combatant or someone caught in the middle. > > >> > > >>Yes, OK. I've never seen that either. Have you? >> > > > > > >Yes. > > > > You have the advantage of me then. >> > > "Advantage" is not the word I would choose. I was agreeing with you that > we sometimes don't know how we'll respond in some situations -- that it > might be different than what we or others might expect, and that even > experience, role or personality is necessarily predictive of how we'd > respond. I was basing my opinions about the "appropriateness" or "reality" > of Xena's behavior in "Doctor" on what I'm aware of. It was "possible" to > me, not more "valid" than the possibility that she would've reacted > differently. So, *have* you ever been present in a situation where someone was trying to kill you or someone else? I ask this because people who have been under fire say that nobody who has not been in such a situation can possibly imagine what it's like. I believe them. > > < > viewpoint rather than just words. Cultural differences. There are > > some things my wife sees in a way which is quite surprising to me. >> > > That pretty much sums up what I've been trying to say. :-) > > > Yes, but surely you're assuming in that statement that there *is* a > > leader of > > the group. Which is the point I was making. And the leader would want > > to > > know if someone had heard or observed something, yes, but he would not > > want to debate courses of action or listen to opinions. Not in the > > middle of the action. > > How about we agree that, ideally, everything will go exactly as planned and > that, if not, the leader will know the best response? > > -- Ife Well, yes. 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, 30 Aug 2003 11:10:58 -0800 (AKDT) From: KTL Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Friend In Need Part 1 I have been SOOOOOO busy in work. (Most recently escorting my senior tourists around the town of Moose Pass, Alaska). And have been wanting to get in on this thread for SOOOOOOO long. I haven't even had time to read most of this thread, I've just been saving it. But I can't wait any longer!!!!! (And besides, I'm getting notes from my server that my inbox is about to explode from overload and start refusing any more mail. Gotta clean some of this out NOW!!) On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Cheryl Ande wrote: > Friend In Need Part 1 > Big ol' snippage > Now I don't know if Xena, as Lucy said, is just out of ideas > or decides to finally let Gabrielle show what she has learned but she asks > Gabrielle what she would do. I saw this as Xena testing Gabrielle. From the beginning dialogue, it seems that Xena's tired of simply wandering around, righting wrongs and singing songs and wants more from life. And perhaps she was just bored and wanted a little excitement. As we saw in other eps, like A Day In The Life where Xena encourages Gabrielle to keep trying to get the drop on her and in Warrior, Priestess, Tramp, where Gabrielle fumes over "Xena" supposedly testing her with the "Tie me to a stake and burn me up, Oh YES!" bit, it's clear that Xena often teasingly tests Gabrielle. And, as in Many Happy Returns, teasing Gabrielle leads to sometimes more excitement than Xena had actually planned for. But it does pass the time. It's tempting to say that Xena is testing Gabrielle to see how well she will do without her, but at this stage of the ep not even Xena's twitchy sense appears to suspect that next year she ain't gonna be appearing in any future Fall new TV show line-ups no more, nuh-huh. But of course, Tapert and Stewart know it and are shaping their story towards that end. And towards that end, Xena needs to test Gabrielle to be sure that she can function without her. That's what I think that little sequence was all about. And even though Xena gets impatient at the end and opens the wheel herself to save the town, she still praises Gabrielle for her acrobatic troop emulation. Thus letting us know she's content with her student's test results. > Xena takes Gabrielle by the hands and draws her down on the floor. > Kneeling before Gabrielle she Gabby's hands and puts them on her neck and > begins to show her the pinch. > (Gabrielle) pleads with Xena but Xena says she wants her to > know that if she only had thirty seconds to live this how she would > spend them- looking into Gabrielle's eyes. As Lucy says in the > commentary Xena is rehearsing her death and this is her deathbed > confession - she loves Gabrielle. Oh honey, you done been watching this with your HLAK (Hot Lesbian Action Knob) turned WAY up, ain'tcha? (Note: The HLAK was first noted and described on the Xenaverse list MANY MANY years ago...) What Lucy says in the commentary is: "I think this is Xena's practice run at death. Cause she knows she won't be able to go through it, with Gabrielle. So she's doing it now so that Gabrielle knows what it might have been like later." End of quote Actually I find this an odd statement. But one imbued with a great awareness of Gabrielle's character and the relationship between the two women. I can certainly see gabrielle going over and over in her mind Xena's last few moments of life. Being so upset she wasn't there and wondering what she could have done to prevent her death. (The answer of course is "Nothing". And had Gabrielle been there, she would have died also, but for no reason, unlike Xena. But one still wonders and agonizes when a loved one dies and you weren't there for them.) Lucy has a very intriguing and imaginative intellect. I love to hear her analyse what was going on in Xena's mind. I love how she stands back and comments on Xena--like when Xena bangs the wheel open with her sword--she says something about how with Xena the final answer is always brawn and violence. (IF the fancy plans fall through that is...) > Also now is a good time to say farewell to one the Xenaverse's most > interesting characters Young Xena. > > This character has always been a remarkable creation. Not just a remarkable creation, but the main reason for me and many others that the show was so unique and so remarkable. It was only with the introduction of Evil Xena in the Debt that XWP was transformed from being a cheesy parody of myths into being a true myth all of its own, featuring a hero who was extraordinarily original and compelling. The presentation of Evil Xena and stories from Xena's horrific past that were shared with us only after we fell in love with good reforming Xena, created a myth with a unique take on the hero that Tapert, Stewart and Lawless continued to weave on our teensy tiny TV screen over the last four years of the show. There had never been such a character as Xena in any western Civ storyline that I'm aware of. Tapert had tried to make a villain the hero in his and Sam's television show "American Gothic" which ran from 1995 to 1996. It didn't work. People don't take to villains who are TRULY villains and not just flawed heroes. And it appears that he learned his lesson with that show, that even though it was critically acclaimed, most viewers just would not empathize with a truly demonic hero. So first he created a character we could sympathize and agonize with when she talked about her bad past and how it had affected her life. After we had bonded to this character, THEN he showed us that past in detail and laid out just how horrific it had been. And it was just too late for us to turn against her. We were already in love with the character. And for most of us showing Xena's truly evil past did not make us abandon her in disgust, it only made us root for her all the more because we suddenly found out just how huge a burden she had to overcome. Xena wasn't just a bad, impatient person who broke a few rules. She was a murdering warlord who killed warrior men and women, who rampaged through and burned villages filled with innocent people, who made some children orphans and kidnapped and abused some others, who turned on her allies without turning a hair. And yet, because we first met her after she began to turn her life around and knew how horrified she was by what she'd been and done, we still loved her. (Except for the Gabfundies who have hated Lucy/Xena for a long time.) And rooted for her to make atonement and reparations enough to enable her to gain peace from the ripping talons of her wretched past. With the story of her > relation with Akemi we see why the character did the things she did after > Chin. Xena meets Akemi after her encounter with La Mao. Xena is still very > much a barbarian - violent, crude and with an adolescent egotism. Xena has > begun to see herself as a just a tad better than Borias. I don't see that she thought she was better than Borias. WORSE than Borias, more evil, more irrational, more dangerous yes, but not better. When she meets Akemi > the girl's adoration and praise stokes Xena's feelings of superiority. I don't see this so much. Because I don't think Xena thinks a great deal of Akemi at this point. She's just a captive. Yes, Xena likes the fact that she's "known". In the Debt when Lao Ma says, "You must be Xena", Xena preens and says, "Oh, ya heard o' me?" Like Lucy, Xena wanted fame. But Xena sought the fame that comes from being feared, from getting her way because she's such a loose cannon. Lao Ma's reply to "Oh ya heard o' me" is, "They say you're a dangerous woman." And Xena growls out, "Well they're right." And again LOVES hearing how dangerous people consider her to be. Especially does she love hearing it from an important, powerful woman like Lao Ma. But certainly at this stage of FIN, Akemi is no Lao Ma in Xena's eyes. She's just a hostage. And Xena is just there for the money. One interesting question to me was why was Xena so ready to serve Lao Ma? She is EAGER to offer her her service. How did Lao Ma so easily turn Xena's head that far around? And how did Xena feel when Lao Ma literally threw her around the room as punishment for trying to murder her son? Damn, I wish we'd had a scene with Xena and Borias discussing what happened to them at Lao Ma's place that day. (snip snip) > Then finally Xena must do the most > horrible thing of all kill the girl she has come to love. In the end she has > a final failure when she can't even bring the ashes to the shrine. Xena has > found out a terrible thing - love makes you vulnerable and can cause great > pain. It is no wonder that the Xena that we meet afterwards in AITST, Past > Imperfect, and The Ring rejects love and uses it only to manipulate. Xena has > learned from Akemi that love should be feared but also that it is powerful > weapon. Xena now begins to reject love and see it as only fit for fools. > Xena learned long ago about love making you vulnerable and being able to cause great pain. She learned that when she lost Lyceus and when her family and town turned against her after she led them against Cortez. Caesar fooling her, Borias betraying her to an enemy, Lao Ma turning against her, Akemi using her, even her men making her run the gauntlet (though "love" is not what she felt for them--she did expect loyalty from them), these all build on Xena's open wounds over the way loving someone always seems to end for her. With her on the run, deserted, hurt and always, always alone. (NOT that she didn't usually bring this on herself. But it still affected her deeply.) I think this is what is so beautiful and poignant about the line in FIN, "Wherever you go, I'm by your side." For the constantly betrayed Xena and for the constantly overlooked and dismissed Gabrielle, this is a profound mutual promise that is a cornerstone of their life together. > Another remarkable character her is Akemi. This is a remarkable girl. Yes > she is manipulative - it is the only real power she has -but that does nothing > to mitigate her strength of character. Snipped excellent character assessment of Akemi. We've talked about this before and I too am an Akemi fan-she was one of the most complex characters Tapert and Stewart ever created-excellent work on their part. I think that if Akemi had been dishonorable enough to just walk away from killing her father and not taken her own life, she would eventually have been possibly as powerful (and as self-serving...uh, but only for the Greater Good of course *wink*), a person as Lao Ma was. Perhaps this is part of what Xena saw in Akemi also--that loss of potential future greatness from a person such as this. (Along with Akemi's amazing inner strength and acceptance of responsibility that she kept faithful to despite what it cost her.) Hmmmm. Akemi and Xena both lose their heads. Was Lao Ma "only" scalped or did she also wind up beheaded also? (Snip snip) > Finally we have Xena's final battle. I don't think we could ask for more - > Xena uses all her weapons, chakram, arrows and finally her sword. She is > victorious - she destroys Morimoto's army. It takes a thousands of arrows to > kill Xena - when Xena's head is cut off she is already dead - she isn't > defeated by Morimoto. Her death is not a defeat just a tactic to get her to > the real enemy and the real final battle. Yes again. Fin was an extraordinary ep, a fitting finale to an extraordinary series. > > Well that's it for now. I'll let you digest this much for now. I now can go > watch FIN again - just call me obsessed. I travel with my FIN dvd all the time-but I gotta admit, as soon as the Debt comes out on dvd, that one will also be hitting the road with me, with or without FIN. KT > > 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: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 11:37:18 -0800 (AKDT) From: KTL Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Friend In Need Part 1 Ife wrote in reply to Cheryl's post: > > > << She > > fights the various assistants and gets her famous scare on her chest (I > > always > > thought the scar was real but Lucy says that this was the payoff for > > faithfully pasting it on for 6 years - so I don't know what the status of > > the > > scar actually is). >> > > I believe she was joking, as I read back awhile ago that it was the result of > a childhood bee sting. I'm sure someone will clear this up for us. > Well, at the second Burbank con, which was the first one I went to, someone asked Lucy how she got that scar. And she looked to me to be both surprised and dismayed in a way. And she kind of stumbled out a few words and then said something like, "No, no I don't think..no I'm not going to talk about that." So I'd say it's real. I've seen other fans say it's from a bee sting. But if so, why would Lucy not just say that? Unless she got the bee sting under somewhat er...private circumstances. That con appearance was REAL interesting to me. Because she did guard her privacy and personal life some. Which I think is entirely appropriate. Another person at a con once asked her what the colors at her upcoming wedding were going to be and she just kind of stared at them and then asked in a truly curious and amazed way, "Now WHY would you want to know that?" > > > Akemi says that Xena is a great warrior but knows nothing of love. Xena > > saved > > her life and there is no greater gift of love than that. As Xena ponders > > these words, Akemi asks for another gift - teach her the pinch that killed > > her > > master. Xena says it is a sacred trust but she will teach it to her. >> > > Yeah, that "sacred trust" thing surprised me. As I recall, Xena threatened > M'Lila in order for learn the pinch. Maybe they later entwined little fingers > and promised to share it only with someone reeely speshul? BWAHAHHAHAAAH! Ya big buffoon! KT > > -- 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: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 13:10:16 -0800 (AKDT) From: KTL Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Friend In Need Part 1 On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, cr wrote: > Random and gratuitous snips to save wear and tear on everyone's modems.... > > On Thursday 26 June 2003 11:04, Cheryl Ande wrote: > > Friend In Need Part 1 > > > This is what Lucy thought 'outed' Xena, IIRC. That Xena 'confessed' to > Gabby about Akemi, and therefore Xena and Gabs must have had a steady > relationship. (At least, I *think* this is what Lucy's saying in the > commentary. > LL: See we have for years been playing these characters as if they're.... > > LL: ... all of a sudden we're coming up and going 'Yup. I had a former > girlfriend... > > LL: ... like it's just an accepted fact that our characters are gay, ) > > I don't see it that way at all, though, myself, I think LL's reading too much > into it. Well, she does say a number of times that during the filming of FIN she was crazed and exhausted. What I find highly amusing is Renee's response to Lucy's claim that FIN outs Xena. She seems to find Lucy's sudden ephiphany surprising, since she apparently didn't see anything different in their relationship in FIN. Lucy confirms this, "So you were playing it straight again in your own head?" And Renee replies, 'Yeah, I was playing it straight". But I love Lucy's honesty in saying, "Damn! This ep shows Xena was in love with a GIRL!" But of course, Lucy has always been a strong and vocal supporter of an X&G are sexual lovers take being as valid as any take on the show. And I also appreciate that she's not overly happy that Rob "outed" Xena--as she always adds, "And why did we have to do that?", preferring to let people see what they see. (This disclaimer never seems to appear in the gay magazines that talk about Lucy's sudden realization of Xena's breadth of sexuality, oddly enough...grin) > > > Her fuming is cut short > > when Akemi asks her to restore her honor by cutting off her head. For once > > the young Xena is struck dumb by the magnitude of the request. She won't > > ... she can't but Akemi takes matters into her own hands when she plunges a > > sword into her own stomach. Xena screaming, in grief and rage, takes the > > katana and finishes what Akemi has started. > > That was a magnificent death scene. And Akemi could always surprise Xena. Wow. That's very true. Akemi did surprise Xena. Time and again. What a fascinating character she was. So complex, so intelligent, so talented and so honorable. A sensitive and aware poet forced to be an avenging murderer of her own father. Jeebs. And as you say elsewhere, Michelle Ang was just so incredible in that part. Actually, she was best in her stillness and in her gestures. She played the part of an exasperated girl very well but also the part of a tragic figure who didn't carry any self-pity. The only time she "clutched" was when she asked Xena to place her ashes in her family shrine. Akemi has to know the townspeople will be against this and will feel they have to defend their dead from desecration. But I imagine that Akemi also figures Xena would be the one person who could possibly accomplish this. (Though it MIGHT have been helpful for Xena to know that there could be "trouble" over this and it might be best to just slip them ashes in there in the dark of night.) Akemi oddly enough, trusts Xena--I think like Lao Ma, Akemi saw into Xena's soul and knew what type of person truly lived there. > > Xena now alone > > buries her armor like she did years ago in a forest outside of Potedeia; > > after this day she won 't need them. > > ... and people complain that the ending came out of nowhere. ;) > Didn't that just scream "Full circle"? Yes. And FIN was full circle. It completed Xena's redemption. This time she WILL be able to give up being a warrior. Unlike last time when she is shown that she is just not ready to stop being a warrior yet--that her redemption will come through her being a warrior for good instead of evil. This time, she's ready. KT > > 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, 30 Aug 2003 23:17:22 -0400 From: "Cheryl Ande" Subject: [chakram-refugees] Re: Xena Circle > IfeRae wrote: > Okay, I joined the Circle. It looks suspiciously like a marketing ploy, with > Lucy's (possibly one-time) "appearance" as bait. Of course this is a marketing ploy. What's wrong with that? At least Anchor Bay is making a real effort to merchandise Xena to the general public. If they are successful then the possibilty of a movie certainly increases. Lucy's chat is certainly tied in with the release of the DVDs and again there is nothing wrong with that either. She has an interest in selling this product - it is called show business after all. I know we are a suspicious bunch in the Xenaverse but companies have a right to use marketing tools to sell their products - it is not some dark conspiracy to somehow dupe us. They want to sell a product. They have to let interest parties know about it. This is as good a way as any. 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. ========================================================= ------------------------------ End of chakram-refugees-digest V3 #254 **************************************