From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V4 #2 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, January 5 2004 Volume 04 : Number 002 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [chakram-refugees] Bring me the head of Tarzan's Aunt [IfeRae@aol.com] Re: [chakram-refugees] Tarzan's Last Ep ["Jackie M. Young" ] [chakram-refugees] Defending Fugate [KTL ] Re: [chakram-refugees] Can you be too Xenacentric? [KTL The quest for the head of Senor Garcia is apparently a Sam Penkinpaw movie > that is horribly violent and misogynistic. AND one of the links threw me > to a gay movie review site for a synopsis of "Between Pancho Villa and a > Naked Woman" which immediately triggered off a HUGE number of pop-up ads > asking me if I want to date handsome, young, WILLING men. Were I not on my > work computer at the moment, I would have jumped at the chance... > > Now I have to go delete my history file, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, Ife. (There > goes all my one letter typed in pulling up suggested links to Xena sites > that I've carefully built up over the years...) >> Awwww. But don't say I didn't give you the chance to meet all those young men -- whom I'm sure YOUR HONEY (as opposed to your work computer) prevented you from pursuing, hmmm? > I thought the hair and > >stair-climbing discussions were indicative of our obsession. I think the > >skull takes first prize. > > > Hooo-hoooo! Actually, I've yet to read the Tarzan threads anywhere. I'm > preserving my purity of thought for review purposes. > "Purity," eh? Riiiiiight. > > > > Unless you want to talk about that weird fingernail on > >the index finger of her right (?) hand, maybe the result of a childhood > >accident. You'd probably think that was beautiful too. > > > > > Now I've NEVER heard anything about that. Nor have I seen anything like > that. All I've heard is rhapsodies over how long and strong her fingers > are from certain of my friends. >> I can't remember when I first noticed it. Or why. Maybe when she's twirling the chakram at the beginning of "The Furies"? Certainly would be fitting. < g> - -- 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, 4 Jan 2004 20:36:47 -1000 (HST) From: "Jackie M. Young" Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Tarzan's Last Ep On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 00:52:24 EST, IfeRae@aol.com wrote: >That's the problem with self-employment. One minute I'm working like >crazy. The next, I'm messing around with XWP when I ought to be getting >stuff ready for my accountant. - --*Ahhhh*....I _knew_ you needed some prodding to become a *productive* member of society, Ife! ;P LOL >Um, aren't you usually cautious because you're unsure? Does either of >those have to mean you're "lost"? Okay, maybe you're saying it does to >you. - --Again, "cautious" is different from "hesistant". To me, "cautious" is _intentionally_ being watchful in order to be safe. "Hesitant" is because you are either unsure of yourself or of the situation or because you don't know what's going on in a general sense. Remember that Lilli said "hesitant". Around here, when the weather advisories say, "Caution is advised due to strong wind and sea conditions", they don't mean that you should hesitate when you go out, just that you should take precautions and _plan_ to be watchful. I think the advisory would have an entirely different meaning if it were reworded to say, "Hesitancy is advised due to strong wind and sea conditions", eh? ;P Again, "caution" is planned; "hesitancy" is not. Lilli said she thought LL was being "hesitant" as Kate; hence, that's similar to "lost" to me. ;P > But I think you're also saying that this was unintentional, because >Lucy herself was "lost" -- didn't seem to have a clue about what she >wanted to do. If so, maybe we'll agree to disagree on that. - --Yeah, I think we will have to agree to disagree. I really didn't see LL's overall plan, if she had one. If she had one, she should've made it clearer to the audience (and we shouldn't have to slo-mo or rewatch multiple times just to pick this up, as _some_ people had to do ;P ). >Heh. As I recall, ROC's vision didn't prevent views from "Gab's useless, >not even a good tagalong," to "Gabs is Xena's equal in her way," to "Gab >is the real hero." My point is that there was uncertainty about Gabs' >role early on and even up to the end. I'm not faulting ROC at all. - --But this is "begging the question", Ife! Ya can't do this! ;P I _know_ you're more logical than this (as least, I _think_ so ;P LOL ). ;) Just because different viewers thought different things about Gab's importance in the overall storyline is different from saying there's a dispute over LL's portrayal of Kate in Tarzan being "lost" or "hesitant". The first is how much some people liked ROC's role in the show; the second is how clear LL's acting is. Them's *apples 'n oranges*, m'dear. ;P >However, I do agree with those who say her character was shaped more to >meet Xena's needs than the other way around. - --That's true; but that doesn't mean her _character_ (i.e., personality) wasn't clearly defined in the beginning, because it was. Besides, how would keeping Kate's personality "hesitant" or "unsure" serve the needs of the Tarzan character?? >> If Kate's primary characteristic was that she was uncertain of her >> situation re: Richard and John, there were a variety of other ways she >> could've played it that would've made it clearer to the audience that >> that was her stance. >> > >How do you play "uncertain" without appearing "uncertain"? - --*Ummm*......kinda hard to explain, but ya know when you can tell a character is *snowing* another character, when they're telling a lie or somehow scamming them? The actor somehow has to make the audience aware of their character's own self-awareness of the lie or scam, but still seem real to the character they're scamming. When an actor plays uncertainty, they have to *really* play it strongly, otherwise it will come across as fake or "lost", as LL's character did to me. That's why Kate seemed so *wimpy* to me, rather than uncertain. The uncertainty wasn't *strong* enough. - --Jackie (to whom agreeing to disagree is looking better and better ;) ) ****************************************************** * Proud to have the same birthday as Lucy Lawless! * * * * "I think New Zealand geographically comes from * * ... Hawai'i." --Lucy Lawless, Late Show, 4/9/96 * * * * JACKIE YOUNG, JYOUNG@LAVA.NET * * * ****************************************************** ========================================================= 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, 4 Jan 2004 21:16:23 -1000 (HST) From: "Jackie M. Young" Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Tarzan's Last Ep On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 00:46:01 -0600, Lilli Sprintz wrote: >It's good I read these once in a while to know when people are talking >about me ; ) - --Well, it's not as if we were saying anything *bad* aboutcha (as if we _would_)....! ;) LOL >>Well, Lilli >> >[I am so glad someone got the spelling of my name right. Thanks!] - --Well, it's not as if we're *strangers*......;) >Well, I hate to say that Lucy Lawless' acting wasn't good in Tarzan, but >there it is. I really hate to criticize her, Renee O'Connor, or any of >the actors whom i loved over the years. And I am convinced, as we saw - --*Nahnahnah*, Ife!! ;P Lilli agrees w/moi!! ;P *Avenged* at last!! ;=) (and straight from the horse's mouth, too! ;) ) And Lilli, I don't believe it's wrong to discuss someone's acting performance. Professional critics do it all the time. We were doing it when XWP was on the air for the first runs, and now we're doing it for Tarzan's first (and last) runs. Nothing's changed. ;) Except we're all about 8 yrs. older......;P Just because we all *love* LL doesn't mean that we can't be upfront about how we feel she did in a particular show. > That's it affected her acting, and was >interfering with it. And I saw this on LL's face and body language. >And it made me mad because I was wondering if she walked on to the >Tarzan set and all people saw was her body. - --OK, I understand what Lilli's talking about here, and I actually had that feeling myself during Tarzan, but just didn't consciously state it, so thanks, Lilli, for putting that into words. I was just rewatching that ET interview LL did before Tarzan aired. One of her statements indicating how different this show was from XWP was that she had "7 different people whose sole job it is to make [her] look good". Meaning the show put a high premium on LL 's good looks (not that XWP didn't, just that Tarzan focused on it more). Every time LL was on camera, I felt her main impact was visual, not substantive (I noticed her clothes, her hair, how she walked, etc.). I.e., she was eye-candy (not that XWP wasn't, but in a different way). I think if she had made a stronger statement with her character, I wouldn't've felt that way, but unfortunately she didn't, so I did. ;P >I feel like I am talking about Lucy Lawless behind her back, and I don't >believe we have the right to do that to these people. Which is why I >have been incredibly hesitant about sharing any of my thoughts. - --Again, I don't believe it's wrong to discuss a show or the acting done on a show, no matter how much we love the actors involved. That's what fans and critics do alike. That's why we have these lists. If we all agreed or simply *loved* everything an actor did, it would get pretty boring/repetitous in short order. Also, I doubt that a larger fanbase would be reading our comments (since this is a by-invitation-only list), or even that LL herself would be interested in our comments. If so, I still wouldn't back down on what I've said just because I *worship* the ground she walks on; honesty is always the best policy, and that's what a true friend (and Xena) would do. ;P And it's not as if she's our mother or sister; we're _supposed_ to be "objective observers". ;) BG >A friend of mine noted, that - she hadn't seen the first two years of >Xena until last year, but came in on Season 3 - that she noted that in >the first couple episodes in Season 1, LL was made to look always >pretty, that she couldn't be looking too "messed." (except in >Gauntlet). But in later years she changed, and was allowed to look more >real - dirty, tired, or whatever she was playing. - --I kinda agree. I noticed in the earlier seasons that LL had more make-up on. More lipstick, etc., to make her look attractive. In the later seasons, it was far more subtle, as the character got more established and secure. > (Jackie, bet you didn't expect this response. Thanks for the nudge - >Lilli) - --Yah, you're right, I didn't expect this response, but it's good you came out of lurkdom to give it. ;) I _knew_ I wasn't "fighting the good fight" alone......;P And I'm glad I could give ya a *push* there.....;) - --Jackie (Da "Pusher" ;) ) ****************************************************** * Proud to have the same birthday as Lucy Lawless! * * * * "I think New Zealand geographically comes from * * ... Hawai'i." --Lucy Lawless, Late Show, 4/9/96 * * * * JACKIE YOUNG, JYOUNG@LAVA.NET * * * ****************************************************** ========================================================= 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, 4 Jan 2004 21:33:52 -1000 (HST) From: "Jackie M. Young" Subject: [chakram-refugees] OT: Accents [was: Last Samurai--*Leetle SPOILER*] On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:44:55 +1300, cr wrote: >As I understand it, 'mid-Atlantic' is a term used for a sort of >compromise accent - not strongly British, not strongly American - which >is reputed to be adopted by many actors (and requested by many producers) >as being sufficiently 'neutral' to pass unnoticed in most >English-speaking markets. - --Thanks to TeXena for pushing Thel to this explanation; I always was wondering *what-the-h*ll* he meant by this, but always let it pass for more important thangs at the time.....;P And I *still* don't even know *what-the-h*ll* you mean by the above, Thel?? Exactly *what* accent is "not strongly British or not strongly American"?? Like, a fake stage-acting accent like Richard Chamberlain used to use (overly pronounced and slightly British)?? Or the mish-mash of accents used on LOTR (those didn't seem "neutral" at all to me)?? And why would that be known as "mid-Atlantic"; to me, that's just "fake British". ;P LOL To me, an American, a "neutral" accent is one used by broadcasters, without a regional dialect, but more closely Californian than anything else. It's the one that LL tried to use on XWP, and was usually successful at, though not 100% of the time. I certainly don't understand the "most widely requested" part, because it would depend on what country's production you were working on at the time. If it were American, it would be an American accent. If it were British, it would be a British accent. Huh?? Confused in Hawa-yah (poor American accent ;P ), ;) - --Jackie ****************************************************** * Proud to have the same birthday as Lucy Lawless! * * * * "I think New Zealand geographically comes from * * ... Hawai'i." --Lucy Lawless, Late Show, 4/9/96 * * * * JACKIE YOUNG, JYOUNG@LAVA.NET * * * ****************************************************** ========================================================= 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, 5 Jan 2004 00:08:35 -0900 (AKST) From: KTL Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] The full horror of season five starts again > KT wrote: > > One of the best scenes to me from Punch Lines was them in the supermarket. > > Xena is eating a raw turnip as she waits on line and the guy behind the > > counter yells at her for eating it without paying for it. > Ife replied > I remember quite a few funny scenes from that ep. Xena dosing on the horse, > reacting to the knowldege of her pregnancy, discussing it with Argo, yelling > it out to her friends, ordering milk at the tavern, reacting to shrunkent Argo. > I also liked the Aphrodite scenes, with her in Freud mode. And seeing to of > my favorite recycled actors -- Alison Bruce and the guy who played her hubby > and Theodorus. Even Argo and that other horse had some funny moments. > Certainly one of the eps I'll rewatch when I need to lighten my mood. > > Hey! Wait a minute. You've got me mixing up Animal Attraction with Punch > Lines! How is that your fault, you ask? Have we not established that > everything is your fault? > > 00 Ife > Well, you keep TRYING to do that. When we all know it's Fugate's fault. KT speaking of which!.... ========================================================= 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, 5 Jan 2004 00:12:49 -0900 (AKST) From: KTL Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Don't get me started on Lyre Lyre > At 07:06 pm 24/12/2003 +0000, sojourner wrote: > > >Draco and the lads again in the show itself - that is a kick-arse rock > >number in itself. But completely topped by THE jiggly bikini number gabby > >wore. Still can't believe quite how hot she looks in that "outfit". Didn't > >Renee say something about the sexy nature of the cossie was independent of > >whoever wore it? > > I'm sure it would not have looked sexy on Draco or even Joxer ;-p > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Catch ya later > NZJester > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- LOL! Wellllll--but I bet it would have looked sexy on Draco's stand in. Liz pointed out to me in the Always Something There to Remind Me number how they obviously used some second unit bits for fill in. And Jay's body suddenly slims WAY down and gets WAY cut in some of the overhead shots. And I bet that boy woulda done a real nice spin in Gabrielle's little swinging beads duds. 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: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 02:09:14 -0900 (AKST) From: KTL Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Season 5 > /He was an honorable person. > /And he fell (not immediately and not just out of lust) for someone whom he > /felt was an honorable person also. And then he finds out she's been > /scamming him the whole time. > > But Anthony wasn't honorable. He was determined to destroy his political > opponents, at least some of whom didn't deserve it. That's why Xena had to > kill him. The fact that he was a sincere lover didn't mean that he was a > good guy. > > Boeotian > > Nice last line! I actually sat down and rewatched the ep tonight. And for me, it just gets better and better each time I see it. I LOVE what Hurst did in this ep--it's so moody and atmospheric and just so beautiful. Very stage-like to me, more theatrical than filmic. (Filmic? Well, you know what I mean...) Oh, uh..cinematic... Anyway, yeah, you've got a point that Antony was out to destroy his political opponents. But a number of things are going on at this time. Caesar was assassinated and there's a power vacuum at the moment. SOMEONE has to take over. Brutus is a contender but Brutus is actually one of the assassins. Should he profit from regicide? Does Antony know why he was one of the gang who killed Caesar, what his motives were? Before Ides, we were led to believe that Brutus was possibly a man of conscience. But he follows the orders of his leader instead, turning his back on the Amazons. But then he "listens" to what Xena planted in his mind and winds up joining the conspiracy to kill Caesar. For the good of Rome, I imagine he would explain. He also says of Octavius, "He claims to be the rightful heir to Rome. He's just a murdering opportunist." Unlike Brutus, of course, who would certainly say that he offed Caesar for the Greater Good of Rome. And we were led to believe that too, I think. This ep stands that on it's head, and instead postulates Brutus as an ambitious man of little honor, one who killed Cleopatra, the queen of another country, to place himself in a position of power. Octavius himself says that Caesar exploited the people of Rome. And that he wants to change that. Antony says that Octavius is just a boy and Caesar's hand-picked replacement. Did Caesar not know that Octavius wanted to change the way Rome was ruled? Or did he just assume "power corrupts" and that Octavius would be a worthy successor to him. Or did he just not want Antony or Brutus or whomever else to get in as emporer? Octavius being a powerless, fearful boy is a serious complication. Who else will possibly kill him and therefore take the throne? Someone might also get control of him even without killing him, and rule Rome as a regent. And from what we've seen of Rome in XWP, one always has to fight to be leader. This Octavius is no fighter. Antony is not totally unselfish, certainly not. But he has been a military officer, engaged in conquest for Rome for presumably much of his life. Caesar was no more than an upstart who fought his way to the throne with much manipulation and murder in his background. Should Antony follow this upstart's desires in passing on the throne of Rome? At one point he says, "It's not that I love Caesar less. I love Rome more". This is at least somewhat true. He also later says about Octavius when Xena suggest that they might work together, "There must be consequences for opposing Marc Antony. Death. Executions. It is the Roman way. And I am Roman." And he's proud of that. I think he really does care about Rome. He doesn't want to see it in the hands of Brutus nor Octavius. He'd much rather see it in his own hands, of course. In these circumstances, with powerful people trying to claim a throne, with warriors assassinating leaders for personal gain and/or to boost the power and importance of the country they serve, with people conspiring to kill each other, honor is more relative than absolute. BUT I also think we are supposed to see Antony as a good man having to do a certain job for his country and for his own desires. I think that's the theme of this ep. That Antony and Xena finding each other was totally unexpected and not something either of them were looking for nor particularly wanting. And their tragic conflict is that they cannot fulfill the roles their hearts want them to. That both of them have to do what they have to do in order to stay true to themselves. And that honor in war which is after all nothing more than legalized killing, is always relative. 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: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 02:28:24 -0900 (AKST) From: KTL Subject: [chakram-refugees] Defending Fugate > > >Ife, I don't mind the Neener neeners. (I always find them amusing. AND > > >satisfying in what they imply. Grin.) > > > > > >But I will NOT accept your claim that I am bashing Fugate. I am commenting > > >on her work and analyzing why it doesn't work for me. SNip snip > > My apologies. "Bashing" was a poor choice, even in fun. I did indeed mean > "criticism," not personal attacks. > > -- Ife As I told you privately, this is a very gracious apology you gave me. And as I also told you privately: Actually, I like Fugate's public persona far more than I enjoyed her work on XWP. I've seen her at two cons. (? I think it was 2.) I enjoyed listening to her talk, especially after she warmed up some and relaxed and began to play around with the audience. She's very new-agey and the things she says remind me a lot of the hippy outlook of the 60's. So much so that I'm actually kind of surprised she didn't have Xena sing, "Always look on the bright side of life" as she hung on the cross. Though it would NOT have been tongue-in-cheek had she had her do that. Grin. (I KNOW this is an old joke--but I was one of the first to use it about Bitter Suite...) One thing--I found out Fugate is a Cajun when I went to her web site which someone had pointed out to me so I could read her explanation of why she showed Xena giving up to her enemies. I have to say Fugate is the MOST white bread, waspy Cajun person I've ever run across. And I realized that if she's Cajun, she's probably got some Catholic in her background. And Catholic kids know there's always lessons to be learned on a cross. I also want to say that I admire soem things about Fugate. Most fans I personally know either strongly dislike Fates or like some parts of it quite a bit, but certainly don't consider it their favorite ep. But to some very passionate and very vociferous fans, it is THE ep, the only ep that matters and the ep that should have ended the show. They have set Fates up as the Anti-FIN and anybody who disagrees with them is one of the fabled sheep fans who will take anything that damn Tapert tries to foist upon us. My only response to that charge is the same as it always has been since it was first thrown out in season three. BAAAAHHHHHH. I imagine that that woman who stood up at a con and told Fugate, "I know I speak for everyone here when I say that Fates should have been the last episode, not (and she spit it out like an epithet) FIN!" is most likely one of those kinds of folks. When Fugate is asked publicly (as she always is), what she thinks of FIN, she always defends Rob's right to end his show the way he wanted to. She tells her fans that if they want to end a show their way, then they need to create their own show. She talks about letting people live their own dreams and the right of the artist to control their own vision. In fact, the only time I've ever noticed a trace of impatience in her towards fans is when she's defending Rob from the furious Anti-FIN contingent. She absolutely admires and respects Rob. She has called him a genius, but then laughs and says, "An INSANE genius." LOL! She admires and respects all the hard work that went into XWP. She LOVES XWP. She talks about how great Rob and RJ are to work with, how they respect writers. Which sadly, is something that she hasn't run across much in her business dealings. She was amazed that Rob offered to let her go on the set while they were shooting the episode, again since most producers don't want any part of talking to the writer, for god's sake. She talks about how Renee came up to her the minute she got on set to eagerly discuss the story and the characterizations with her. And how Renee had obviously read every version of the script. She has nothing but praise for PacRen and all the people associated with it. So no, I don't dislike Fugate just because I don't like Fates. She seems to be a very nice (if a tad spacy for my tastes) person. As I say, I admire her honesty and yeah, her integrity in not going along with those of her adoring but more hysterical fans who hate the show and expect her to diss it along with them. I love that she stands up for the people who actually created and developed the characters and the story of the Warrior's Quest that Fugate got to play with for only one chapter among the 134 other chapters that Rob and RJ gave us. So there. Phhhfffft! (Hey, she should spell it Phugate! Fancy it up even more...) 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: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 02:47:13 -0900 (AKST) From: KTL Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Can you be too Xenacentric? > cande@sunlink.net writes: > > So perhaps I have watched just a bit too much Xena but it certainly makes > > Biblical documentaries even more interesting. > > > > LOL! You're not alone. There's very little I can read, watch or hear about > without it reminding me of XWP in some way. Even worse, I have to remind > myself which is the "real" event, which tends to differ a bit from what happened > in the Xenaverse. Some eps in particular had biblical references like burning > bushes, magi, etc. I won't even get into the crosses, as I don't want Certain > Parties to reminded on Unmentionaable Eps. > > -- Ife LOL! Ife, you REALLY can't stand it that I don't like Fates, can you? Which I find just so amusing, considering how you keep saying, "Everybody has the right to their opinion." I certainly wasn't out there monologuing endlessly by myself, ya know. You taunted me into giving my opinion. And then you kept arguing over it when I did. I merely kept replying to your constant arguments just to be polite, that's all. Uh-huh. Although I have to admit, I did begin to wonder if you would ever agree to let me have my opinion without protest. Obviously not. Grin. Though as I said, I DO love how you came up with the conclusion that Fates is good exactly because it's such a twisted interpretation of the Xena that we've come to know from the other 133 hours we saw of her character, so it makes us just appreciate that Xena more and more. But you know, the discussion made me realize a deeper truth on why I dislike parts of that ep so much. And it is precisely related to why I love XWP and it's regular presentation of female heroes so much. Xena is a woman who never stops fighting (and I mean physically and literally). She just never gives up. And this is a highly unusual presentation of females in mass media. Less rare, yes, now post XWP. But even now, other than in the sci-fi/fantasy genre, the vast bulk of images of women still show them shying away from physical conflict. Women don't fight back physically. Women give up. Women are inactive and don't rescue themselves but wait helplessly for other people (usually men) to rescue them. And this is exactly how Xena is portrayed in Fates. Xena passively lets her enemies crucify her, not fighting back against the people who want her to die on the cross. She is the absolute picture of a totally defeated and put in her place woman. And I just don't like pictures of helpless, whimpering, accepting-being-a-victim-of-other-people's-desires women. It's just not palatable to me. I've always hated it. And the normal direct visual defiance of an image like that in just about every other Xena ep is a very large part of why I love this show so damn much. And not just Lucy's presentation of a fighting woman--ALL the other presentations of powerful, physically able warrior women too, they all warmed up the ever optimistic throbbing of my little Tomboy heart. And no matter how much you try, all your extraordinarily convoluted rationalizations for why she gave up do not erase the image of her doing so. And THAT is what I hate about Fates-that image of a beaten, defeated Xena. Speaking of mistakes on XWP and false interpretations, I laughed out loud when I recently re-read this quote from the booklet included with the season six CD of Lo Duca's music: Lucy: Sometimes I would come home from shooting XENA to find my producer husband, Rob, watching dailies and he'd turn to me and say, "Lucy, what's the matter with you? You didn't nail that scene." Rob: And then she'd say, "It was the writing! There was nothing there worth nailing!" Lucy: And then we'd turn to each other and say together "Ahhhh, Joe'll fix it!" End quote And this IS my last word with you on this topic. No more endless Fates debates for me no matter how much taunting of me you do, no matter how many times you try to argue me out of my gut level distaste over how it portrayed Xena. I STILL think it sucks for doing that and there has not been any rationalization I've found on this thread for the last two months or so that has made me change my mind. Adios! Vaya con leche! Hasta Sandy Eggo! Bring me the headcheese of a pig! 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: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:35:05 EST From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Can you be too Xenacentric? In a message dated 1/5/2004 5:50:47 AM Central Standard Time, fsktl@aurora.uaf.edu writes: > Xena passively lets > her enemies crucify her, not fighting back against the people who want her > to die on the cross. She is the absolute picture of a totally defeated and > put in her place woman. And I just don't like pictures of helpless, > whimpering, accepting-being-a-victim-of-other-people's-desires women. It's > just not palatable to me. I've always hated it. And the normal direct > visual defiance of an image like that in just about every other Xena ep is > a very large part of why I love this show so damn much. And not just > Lucy's presentation of a fighting woman--ALL the other presentations of > powerful, physically able warrior women too, they all warmed up the > ever optimistic throbbing of my little Tomboy heart. > > And no matter how much you try, all your extraordinarily convoluted > rationalizations for why she gave up do not erase the image of her doing > so. And THAT is what I hate about Fates-that image of a beaten, defeated > Xena. >> Thank you for that. I feel what you say is "from the heart." As much as I tend to intellectualize things, I relate to "gut level" responses more than hypotheticals or how bad a plot was. I know you've said the above before, but some of the extraneous stuff got in the way of my understanding. The irony here is that you and I hate "precisely" the same thing -- portrayals of women as helpless victims. Both of us absolutely reject that, refuse to internalize it and will speak against it when we see it. I have always believed we could have contrasting opinions and never meant to imply yours needed changing. Lord knows I understand why you could feel as you do about Fates. I'm just sorry that my explanation of my own view keeps coming across as an argument against yours. You rejected what you saw outright and refused to accept that your Xena would do that. I also refused to believe Xena would give up, but (being the control freak I am) rejected the notion that she had given up. Since childhood, I've learned to transform negative images into something positive, which support what is important to me. Like you, I also protest the negativity, which I believe is important to do. But on a personal level, it is absoutely instinctive for me to reshape what I see into something I can learn from, that reinforces what I believe to be true -- in this case about Xena (and probably myself). You seem to think my comments are for the purpose of convincing *you* of something or winning points in an argument or possibly making fun of your perspective. Of making excuses for Xenastaff (as if they need me for that). Of accepting "less than" for some reason that escapes me. Well, it's not about that at all, anymore than your arguments stem from some feminist agenda or dislike of Fugate (which I don't believe is true of you, let me hasten to add). In my *gut,* I can no more see Xena as giving up than you can in your gut. We just deal with that differently. The first time I saw Xena on that cross in Fates, it didn't bother me a bit. I saw it as triumphant and was stunned to discover that others I usually agree with had not. It was only through our constant rangling back and forth that I realized how fundamental it was to me to see Xena as triumphant, how much I've programmed myself to see the best in something that's important to me. Yes, it started out as a "defense" of that view, against the accusation that she *had* given up. But in the end it was truly, simply about my explaining why I saw what I did, especially since we all did see Xena hanging helplessly on a cross. I thought *my* view was the "odd" one, not yours, which is why I shake my head at your idea that I'm trying to convince you otherwise. Thing is, I wouldn't have thought twice about my initial interpretation, without yours as a contrast. I was sincerely trying to figure out why we seemed so diametrically opposed. It's clearer to me now, from your statement above, that our gut reason for continuing to discuss this was actually the same -- our refusal to "see" Xena as "giving up." I actually thought we were through with this. My kidding around was just that -- kidding around -- and not intended as a taunt or any hint to continue discussing it. I think we're okay now, but just in case, I won't mention Fates anymore in connection with or one of my euphymisms for you. - -- 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, 5 Jan 2004 17:35:07 EST From: IfeRae@aol.com Subject: Re: [chakram-refugees] Tarzan's Last Ep In a message dated 1/5/2004 12:39:41 AM Central Standard Time, jyoung@lava.net writes: > Just because different viewers thought different things about Gab's > importance in the overall storyline is different from saying there's a > dispute over LL's portrayal of Kate in Tarzan being "lost" or "hesitant". > The first is how much some people liked ROC's role in the show; the > second is how clear LL's acting is. Them's *apples 'n oranges*, m'dear. ;P > > > I only brought that in because folks keep comparing Lucy's portrayal of Kate with that of Xena. I agree -- it's apples to oranges. But if a comparison is to be made, I think it's between playing Kate and Gabrielle, than between Kate and Xena. > > Besides, how would keeping Kate's personality "hesitant" or "unsure" serve > the needs of the Tarzan character?? >> "Feeling her way," as Cheryl put it, helps Kate make sure she's taking the right course of action, not making snap judgments about John, Jane or Richard. It makes the audience think about the characters, rather than stereotype them right off the bat -- which is how I think Lucy was trying to put "heart" into the show, trying to be *human* in her responses to other *humans.* Obviously it didn't work for some viewers. > That's why Kate seemed so *wimpy* to me, rather than uncertain. The > uncertainty wasn't *strong* enough. >> Okay, *that* I understand. I do think LL was trying to appear "crusty business woman" and cautious at the same time. As I wrote earlier, I don't think she focused as much on the former, and I think the only time we saw her in her office was in the beginning. After that, the setting was mainly her home or Richard's office. > > > --Jackie (to whom agreeing to disagree is looking better and better ;) ) > Anytime, m'dear. I've had a few "discussions" with myself, but they weren't nearly as interesting. - -- 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 V4 #2 ************************************