From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V16 #292 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Wednesday, August 15 2007 Volume 16 : Number 292 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Only Ones, Toes [hssmrg@bath.ac.uk] Re: so, what does everybody think... [kevin ] REAP ["Maximilian Lang" ] Reap [Jeff Dwarf ] Re: so, what does everybody think... [2fs ] BBC E-mail: Paper battery offers future power [Mike Godwin ] Re: Fantasy Football [2fs ] Re: Fantasy Football [Jeff Dwarf ] Re: Fantasy Football [2fs ] Re: Fantasy Football [Jeff Dwarf ] Re: Fantasy Football [Steve Talkowski ] Re: Fantasy Football [Tom Clark ] Pseudo-RH Content ["Aaron L." ] Re: Pseudo-RH Content ["Sumiko Keay" ] Re: Only Ones, Toes [Rex ] Re: Fantasy Football [Rex ] Re: Pseudo-RH Content [Rex ] Fwd: Secret show at Bowery Ballroom, NYC, 8/20 [Steve Schiavo ] Re: the buffy thread lives ["Lauren Elizabeth" ] Re: Squeeze, Only Ones [hssmrg@bath.ac.uk] Re: the buffy thread lives [2fs ] Re: the buffy thread lives ["Sumiko Keay" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:03:01 +0100 From: hssmrg@bath.ac.uk Subject: Only Ones, Toes > but the real killer in the set for me is "another girl, another > planet." sigh. Has anyone seen the semi-reunited Only Ones? I have always drawn some parallels between the vocal styles of the young Robyn and the young Peter Perrett, so it'd be kind of instructive to hear Perrett today (acknowledging that he didn't treat himself quite as well in the intervening years as Robyn). - - -Rex * Rex, Lauren: I have a ticket to see The Only Ones on 7th September, after coming straight back from a Tax Research Network conference in Sheffield. (I thought I had posted this once already). * Whaddya mean 'semi-reunited' Rex? If Mike Kellie, Alan Mair and John Perry aren't there, I'll ask for my money back! 'The Only Ones have been very influential on the alternative rock scene ever since, they're back with the full original line up for the first time in 25 years! Get ready to be taken to another planet!!' > www.sunbeamrecords.com have re-released both Blossom Toes albums with loads > of extra tracks. Good news!- - Mike Godwin > > Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:49:53 -0400 > From: "Leftenant Reg?" > Subject: Re: Subject: Blossom Toes albums re-released > One of 1967's best kept secrets! Wicked groovy reissue! > Mark NP - The Prime Moves - Sins Of The Fourfathers (the no > overdubbed organ issuance!) * The second, less well-known album is still better than the overtly psychedelic one, and 'Ever since a memory' is the best bonus track. - - Mike Godwin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 08:16:32 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: kevin Subject: Re: so, what does everybody think... >Subject: so, what does everybody think... > >...of the new beatallica album? i can't figure out whether i love it...or >hate it...or what? There's a powerful odor of kitsch coming off that project if ya ask me. Did the brains behind Pat Boone's metal album have anything to do with it? np Velvet Underground & Nico (not only do I never fail to get an almighty rush off Cale's piano on "All Tomorrow's Parties," but it annoys the whining Mormon in the next cube over - bonus!) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:11:36 -0400 From: "Maximilian Lang" Subject: REAP Holy Cow! Phil 'Scooter' Rizzuto _________________________________________________________________ Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and more.then map the best route! http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&ss=yp.bars~yp.pizza~yp.movie%20theater&cp=42.358996~-71.056691&style=r&lvl=13&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=950607&encType=1&FORM=MGAC01 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 09:12:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Reap Phil Rizzuto http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2007/08/14/2007-08-14_rizzuto_yankees_hall_of_fame_shortstop_b.html "Children have always enjoyed my movies. They are just not allowed to watch many of them." -- John Waters . ____________________________________________________________________________________ Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:49:37 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: so, what does everybody think... On 8/14/07, kevin wrote: > > >Subject: so, what does everybody think... > > > >...of the new beatallica album? i can't figure out whether i love > it...or >hate it...or what? > > There's a powerful odor of kitsch coming off that project if ya ask me. Well, yeah: they're hardly playing it as if they're totally serious. On the other hand (I sorta know some people who sorta know the band), they're serious in the sense that they love and appreciate both Metallica and the Beatles. It's an affectionate parody, in other words. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 18:30:14 +0100 From: Mike Godwin Subject: BBC E-mail: Paper battery offers future power Mike Godwin saw this story on the BBC News website and thought you should see it. ** Message ** But what about the trees to produce the paper? ** Paper battery offers future power ** Flexible paper batteries could meet the energy demands of the next generation of gadgets, say researchers. < http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/1/hi/technology/6945732.stm > ** BBC Daily E-mail ** Choose the news and sport headlines you want - when you want them, all in one daily e-mail < http://www.bbc.co.uk/email > ** Disclaimer ** The BBC is not responsible for the content of this e-mail, and anything written in this e-mail does not necessarily reflect the BBC's views or opinions. Please note that neither the e-mail address nor name of the sender have been verified. If you do not wish to receive such e-mails in the future or want to know more about the BBC's Email a Friend service, please read our frequently asked questions. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/help/4162471.stm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:03:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Fantasy Football Anyone want to sign up for the yahoo! fantasy football league I didn't need to set up after all? http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com/f1/393436 Password: 666 "Children have always enjoyed my movies. They are just not allowed to watch many of them." -- John Waters . ____________________________________________________________________________________ Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:15:30 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Fantasy Football On 8/14/07, Jeff Dwarf wrote: > > Anyone want to sign up for the yahoo! fantasy football league I > didn't need to set up after all? Fantasy football? Is that like where you get tackled by the Dallas Cowboys cheerleading squad? - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:28:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: Fantasy Football 2fs wrote: > On 8/14/07, Jeff Dwarf wrote: > > > > Anyone want to sign up for the yahoo! fantasy football league I > > didn't need to set up after all? > > Fantasy football? Is that like where you get tackled by the Dallas > Cowboys cheerleading squad? The Gold Rush are much hotter.... "Children have always enjoyed my movies. They are just not allowed to watch many of them." -- John Waters . ____________________________________________________________________________________ Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:08:28 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Fantasy Football On 8/14/07, Jeff Dwarf wrote: > > 2fs wrote: > > On 8/14/07, Jeff Dwarf wrote: > > > > > > Anyone want to sign up for the yahoo! fantasy football league I > > > didn't need to set up after all? > > > > Fantasy football? Is that like where you get tackled by the Dallas > > Cowboys cheerleading squad? > > The Gold Rush are much hotter.... The who-what-now? As a non-fan, I've heard only of things that permeated my brain in my impressionable adolescence - thus the Dallas reference. No idea even which team "the Gold Rush" "cheerlead" for. God what a ridiculous concept, btw - cheerleading... - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:14:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: Fantasy Football 2fs wrote: > On 8/14/07, Jeff Dwarf wrote: > > 2fs wrote: > > > Fantasy football? Is that like where you get tackled by the > > > Dallas Cowboys cheerleading squad? > > The Gold Rush are much hotter.... > The who-what-now? > > As a non-fan, I've heard only of things that permeated my brain in > my impressionable adolescence - thus the Dallas reference. > > No idea even which team "the Gold Rush" "cheerlead" for. 49ers. > God what a ridiculous concept, btw - cheerleading... Well, it does get some attractive women in needlessly skimpy clothing. "Children have always enjoyed my movies. They are just not allowed to watch many of them." -- John Waters . ____________________________________________________________________________________ Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:29:19 -0400 From: Steve Talkowski Subject: Re: Fantasy Football On Aug 14, 2007, at 5:08 PM, 2fs wrote: > God what a ridiculous concept, btw - cheerleading... True. Heaven forbid anyone cheerlead for a musician on an Interwebs mailing list... ; P - -Steve, dated a cheerleader once in high school, but she was called a "pommy" or pom pom girl, or whatever the hell it was called back in the early 80's ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:36:11 -0700 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: Fantasy Football On Aug 14, 2007, at 12:03 PM, Jeff Dwarf wrote: > Anyone want to sign up for the yahoo! fantasy football league I > didn't need to set up after all? > > http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com/f1/393436 > Password: 666 The Lobster Gang has joined the league. - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:39:06 -0500 From: "Aaron L." Subject: Pseudo-RH Content Sooooo.... I admit that there are periods of time when I don't follow the list as closely as others, and this may have been mentioned here before but.... http://imdb.com/title/tt1050170/ Huh? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:27:29 -0500 From: "Sumiko Keay" Subject: Re: Pseudo-RH Content Look there's a website: http://www.mywifeandmydeadwifethemovie.com/ Sumi On 8/14/07, Aaron L. wrote: > Sooooo.... > > I admit that there are periods of time when I don't follow the list > as closely as others, and this may have been mentioned here before but.... > > http://imdb.com/title/tt1050170/ > > > Huh? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:06:17 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: Only Ones, Toes On 8/14/07, hssmrg@bath.ac.uk wrote: > > > * Whaddya mean 'semi-reunited' Rex? If Mike Kellie, Alan Mair and John > Perry aren't there, I'll ask for my money back! > 'The Only Ones have been very influential on the alternative rock scene > ever since, they're back with the full original line up for the first > time in 25 years! Wow... I honestly had only heard secondhand accounts of the reunion, and hadn't done my homework... I just assumed there was no way in hell it was the original, original, original lineup. It, like, never is... perhaps my presumption was fueled by seeing the definitely only semi-reunited Squeeze last night. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:19:16 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: Fantasy Football On 8/14/07, Steve Talkowski wrote: > > -Steve, dated a cheerleader once in high school, but she was called a > "pommy" or pom pom girl, or whatever the hell it was called back in > the early 80's "Song girls"? My college girlfriend had been a high school... well, it really seemed to me like she'd been a cheerleader, but she was pretty insistent that "song girl" was the proper term. Which I found odd, because they didn't sing, really, but hey, we're talking Orange County in the '80's. I think the distinction may have had something to do with whether or not the squad just cheered at athletic events, or was also capable of doing Michael Jackson-like synchronized dance routines along with recorded music (in which they could compete), so I guess that those were the "songs". Dunno. It's a bit hazy, but I can ask her if anyone cares. Which kinda leads me to something else I've been wondering about-- cheers aren't songs, as they don't have melodies as such, but... they do vary in pitch, much as do the camp "songs" my stepdaughter likes to teach me on the drive home from day camps. She has me learn them and "sing along"... but while I don't sing, I do have to match her pitch somehow, and approximate the tonality of what she's singing, much as a group of cheerleaders cheer sort of vaguely "in tune" with each other (which they do, at least to the extent that you would be able to tell if one of them was doing it "wrong"). It's more than just cadence, but less than melody... the same thing sort of exists in rapping... but... well... what the hell do you call that? It's pitch variation without melody, and I can't imagine how you'd notate it musically, and maybe I'm explaining it poorly, but, basically, WTF? - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:21:40 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: Pseudo-RH Content On 8/14/07, Aaron L. wrote: > > Sooooo.... > > I admit that there are periods of time when I don't follow the list > as closely as others, and this may have been mentioned here before but.... > > http://imdb.com/title/tt1050170/ Weird. I wonder if Robyn will see a dime (much less some vegetation) from it? - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 20:33:55 -0500 From: Steve Schiavo Subject: Fwd: Secret show at Bowery Ballroom, NYC, 8/20 NY Fegs - Begin forwarded message: > From: "Buy Early, Get Now" > Date: August 14, 2007 2:25:47 PM CDT > To: The New Pornographers > Subject: Secret show at Bowery Ballroom, NYC, 8/20 > Reply-To: "Buy Early, Get Now" > > The New Pornographers will be playing a special intimate show at > the Bowery Ballroom on the eve of "Challengers" official release. > Go to thenewpornographers.ducatking.com and you'll be able to > order from a limited ticket pool we've reserved for Buy Early Get > Now members. > > Also, we've got a pair of tickets to give away for the show. Send > an email with "Bowery Ticket Giveaway" to > buyearlygetnow@matadorrecords.com by 8 PM Eastern Time to be in the > running. We'll randomly choose a winner and email you tomorrow to > set it up. > > Show details: August 20 at the Bowery Ballroom, 6 Delancey St, New > York, NY, 10002. Set time will be 10:15 pm. - - Steve __________ Not since the medieval church baptized, as it were, Aristotle as some sort of early  very early  church father has there been an intellectual hijacking as audacious as the attempt to present Americas principal founders as devout Christians. Such an attempt is now in high gear among people who argue that the founders were kindred spirits with todays evangelicals, and that they founded a Christian nation. - George F. Will ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 22:30:23 -0400 From: gaseous clay Subject: Re: Fwd: Secret show at Bowery Ballroom, NYC, 8/20 alas, the presale is already sold out but the regular sale tickets go on sale tomorrow at noon (edt) on ticketmaster: http://www.ticketmaster.com/event/00003F0EE581BB8A woj ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:24:22 -0400 From: "Lauren Elizabeth" Subject: the buffy thread lives i'm sure you're all dying for an update, so here's where i am: buffy season 5 - just watched "into the woods." angel season 1 - just watched "she" (i admit i skipped a few episodes.) possible angel season 1 spoiler: V V V V for the love of All That is Good: angel is chained to the bed in episode "somnambulist" _with his shirt on_ ??? oh, this is one fucking dark, sick show indeed. as ever, lauren - -- - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "People with opinions just go around bothering one another." - The Buddha ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 03:05:37 -0400 From: "Lauren Elizabeth" Subject: Re: the buffy thread lives as i reported, i am on buffy mid-season 5 and angel mid-season 1... so *warning* *possible spoilers* for what i've seen so far. i would wait until i was finished watching the series to start some discussions, but given that apparently television, combined with a break from classes, has left me fairly motionless on the couch, i thought i'd take a field trip to the computer room. so keep going for spoilers... V V V V V (...i have no idea how what is a "polite" number of blank lines here...) V so is it just me or is there some really intense, dark sexuality on buffy? i've actually been a bit shocked at some of what's been shown and implied since i assume it was prime-time television when it was on. i listened to the commentary for the episode "innocence" (b-side of james' album) and found it particularly interesting that the writer/director says that buffy is, after all, a feminist. or maybe he says buffy is a feminist show. whatever he says, i very much agree to that point, but we're talking camille paglia feminist here. the relationship between angel and buffy, and buffy's relationship with riley as well, is built into the inherent violence and danger of sexual attraction. it isn't a relationship of equality. it's a consent to the inequality of power in sexual relationships. and i know that angel and buffy are sort of "special" on the show and there are other relationships that don't have the amount of aggression, but buffy's relationships are _central_ to the show. and anyway, willow's relationship with oz...yawn. and so he leaves her for the darkness, and she goes for the girl. there's more balance for willow there, but that's because she's with a girl. the differences between the sexes is less an issue for willow and tara. well, at least as far as i've watched. kind of a small aside - jeme mentioned (excuse my paraphrase) buffy's having sex with angel and then he turns into a "soulless creep." one of a girl's worst fears. but there's also a way to look at that from the fears of the male - that true love expressed through sex obliterates the male, and to save himself, angel chooses his identity over the annihilation of love (i think the facts surrounding the event support jeme's statement way more than mine, but either way, angel's having sex with buffy plays into very deep fears in both females and males.) now onto to the small small: i'm curious as to whether people have an opinion about watching a show as it airs on television vs. watching it over a much shorter period of time on dvd. it's been interesting for me to watch BSG and buffy on dvd. i haven't watched many television dramas, and although i confess i enjoy the single-mindedness of sitting down with an entire season at hand, i can't help but feel that i'm missing something because although i'm seeing the same characters and same events, there's just not the same relationship with a show when you watch it over a period of e.g. a month or two vs. e.g. seven years. as ever, lauren p.s. SOYLENT GREEN IS (STILL) PEOPLE!!!! - -- - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "People with opinions just go around bothering one another." - The Buddha ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:25:44 +0100 From: hssmrg@bath.ac.uk Subject: Re: Squeeze, Only Ones Last time I saw Squeeze was on the 'Some Fantastic Place' tour where they had a different bass player and (I suspect) keyboard player. But as long as it's Tillbrook-Difford-Gilson Lavis then it counts as Squeeze for me. - - Mike Godwin n.p. Swing 39 by the Hot Club on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6nkHJQnEPs Quoting Rex : > Wow... I honestly had only heard secondhand accounts of the reunion, and > hadn't done my homework... I just assumed there was no way in hell it was > the original, original, original lineup. It, like, never is... perhaps my > presumption was fueled by seeing the definitely only semi-reunited Squeeze > last night. -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:32:39 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: the buffy thread lives On 8/15/07, Lauren Elizabeth wrote: > > as i reported, i am on buffy mid-season 5 and angel mid-season 1... > > so *warning* *possible spoilers* for what i've seen so far. > > > > > > > > V > > > > > V > > > > > V > > > > > V > > > > > > V > > > > > (...i have no idea how what is a "polite" number of blank lines here...) > > > > V > > > > so is it just me or is there some really intense, dark sexuality on > buffy? i've actually been a bit shocked at some of what's been shown > and implied since i assume it was prime-time television when it was > on. It's not only you. i listened to the commentary for the episode "innocence" (b-side of > james' album) and found it particularly interesting that the > writer/director says that buffy is, after all, a feminist. or maybe > he says buffy is a feminist show. whatever he says, i very much agree > to that point, but we're talking camille paglia feminist here. the > relationship between angel and buffy, and buffy's relationship with > riley as well, is built into the inherent violence and danger of > sexual attraction. it isn't a relationship of equality. it's a > consent to the inequality of power in sexual relationships. I don't think it's a "Camille Paglia feminism" (I think Paglia's a loudmouthed idiot for the most part), but it certainly isn't a stereotypical, vanilla "wicca, good and love the earth, and woman power..." thing either. (You won't recognize that quote yet!) Whedon's feminism is simply that women, like men, should have the freedom to become who they want - - even if they make mistakes in so doing - and shouldn't be judged differently by being women. I'll also say that *presenting* a kind of relationship is not the same thing as *endorsing* one. I'm also not sure about "the inherent violence and danger of sexual attraction." I mean, that there are such qualities inherent therein. Some people experience them to be sure - that doesn't make them inherent to sexual attraction (else it wouldn't be true that other people do not experience them...and the way out of that is only, Dworkin-like, to deny that such people really know what they feel and have been co-opted by sexism). > > > kind of a small aside - jeme mentioned (excuse my paraphrase) buffy's > having sex with angel and then he turns into a "soulless creep." one > of a girl's worst fears. but there's also a way to look at that from > the fears of the male - that true love expressed through sex > obliterates the male, and to save himself, angel chooses his identity > over the annihilation of love (i think the facts surrounding the event > support jeme's statement way more than mine, but either way, angel's > having sex with buffy plays into very deep fears in both females and > males.) When you get there, there's a key moment in the whole "Angel cannot have one moment of 'true happiness' lest he lose his soul and turn back into a monster" bit - given the way both series allow you to assume, repeatedly, that "true happiness" is just TV speak for orgasmic sex. now onto to the small small: > i'm curious as to whether people have an opinion about watching a show > as it airs on television vs. watching it over a much shorter period of > time on dvd. it's been interesting for me to watch BSG and buffy on > dvd. i haven't watched many television dramas, and although i confess > i enjoy the single-mindedness of sitting down with an entire season at > hand, i can't help but feel that i'm missing something because > although i'm seeing the same characters and same events, there's just > not the same relationship with a show when you watch it over a period > of e.g. a month or two vs. e.g. seven years. You mean the relationship of "christ another damned commercial!" and "oh great another four weeks of reruns" and "dammit! they went and rescheduled the show for Monday at 6:36pm this week only!" and "gotta turn the show off before the stupid previews because I hate having spoilers forcefed" and therefore missing the announcement of the rescheduling because I live in the dark ages and lack TiVo or the equivalent? I'd far rather watch DVDs and watch the shows more quickly, when I want, w/o commercials. But then, I would: two months ago we cancelled our cable TV, and no longer even have the ability to watch real-time TV. Any new episodes of any show we want to watch, we'll wait for the DVDs (if we were geekier or more impatient, we'd download them). Then, we've been purposely avoiding watching new shows - the only current show we're planning on watching is _24_ when its next season DVD comes out probably a year from December. > > > p.s. SOYLENT GREEN IS (STILL) PEOPLE!!!! Dammit - why no spoiler warning? - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:43:54 -0500 From: "Sumiko Keay" Subject: Re: the buffy thread lives Well, one thing is - no waiting for a month or whatever for cliffhangers -- which is good and bad. Did you notice that the time between Hush and Doomed? - Just a little over a month -and Hush ends and Doomed begins in exactly the same place. That rocks. Also, that time between episodes allows for lots of speculation and discussion. Sumi On 8/15/07, Lauren Elizabeth wrote: > as i reported, i am on buffy mid-season 5 and angel mid-season 1... > > so *warning* *possible spoilers* for what i've seen so far. > > i would wait until i was finished watching the series to start some > discussions, but given that apparently television, combined with a > break from classes, has left me fairly motionless on the couch, i > thought i'd take a field trip to the computer room. > > so keep going for spoilers... > > > > > > V > > > > > V > > > > > V > > > > > V > > > > > > V > > > > > (...i have no idea how what is a "polite" number of blank lines here...) > > > > V > > > > so is it just me or is there some really intense, dark sexuality on > buffy? i've actually been a bit shocked at some of what's been shown > and implied since i assume it was prime-time television when it was > on. > > i listened to the commentary for the episode "innocence" (b-side of > james' album) and found it particularly interesting that the > writer/director says that buffy is, after all, a feminist. or maybe > he says buffy is a feminist show. whatever he says, i very much agree > to that point, but we're talking camille paglia feminist here. the > relationship between angel and buffy, and buffy's relationship with > riley as well, is built into the inherent violence and danger of > sexual attraction. it isn't a relationship of equality. it's a > consent to the inequality of power in sexual relationships. and i > know that angel and buffy are sort of "special" on the show and there > are other relationships that don't have the amount of aggression, but > buffy's relationships are _central_ to the show. and anyway, willow's > relationship with oz...yawn. and so he leaves her for the darkness, > and she goes for the girl. there's more balance for willow there, but > that's because she's with a girl. the differences between the sexes > is less an issue for willow and tara. well, at least as far as i've > watched. > > kind of a small aside - jeme mentioned (excuse my paraphrase) buffy's > having sex with angel and then he turns into a "soulless creep." one > of a girl's worst fears. but there's also a way to look at that from > the fears of the male - that true love expressed through sex > obliterates the male, and to save himself, angel chooses his identity > over the annihilation of love (i think the facts surrounding the event > support jeme's statement way more than mine, but either way, angel's > having sex with buffy plays into very deep fears in both females and > males.) > > now onto to the small small: > i'm curious as to whether people have an opinion about watching a show > as it airs on television vs. watching it over a much shorter period of > time on dvd. it's been interesting for me to watch BSG and buffy on > dvd. i haven't watched many television dramas, and although i confess > i enjoy the single-mindedness of sitting down with an entire season at > hand, i can't help but feel that i'm missing something because > although i'm seeing the same characters and same events, there's just > not the same relationship with a show when you watch it over a period > of e.g. a month or two vs. e.g. seven years. > > as ever, > lauren > > > p.s. SOYLENT GREEN IS (STILL) PEOPLE!!!! > > > > -- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > "People with opinions just go around bothering one another." > > - The Buddha ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V16 #292 ********************************