HIGHLA-L Digest - 31 Jul 2003 to 1 Aug 2003 (#2003-174)
Automatic digest processor (LISTSERV@lists.psu.edu)
Fri, 1 Aug 2003 22:00:02 -0400
There are 22 messages totalling 679 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. the stupid fanfic discussion AGAIN again again (8)
2. the stupid fanfic discussion (3)
3. the stupid fanfic discussion (no, let's discuss the good bits in Chivalry)
(2)
4. the stupid fanfic discussion (no,let's discuss the good bits in Chivalry)
5. OT Peacemakers/was: the stupid fanfic discussion...
6. Hi to y'all! (Lisa? Is that U?)
7. Hi to y'all! (FAQ and acronyms)
8. ONH being consistent (5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:00:55 -1000
From: MacWestie <mac.westie@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion AGAIN again again
> Nina
>
> " John tries cute--"
>
> Dang. I was trying for merely witty. I overshot.
I didn't say you succeeded.
Nina
mac.westie@verizon.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 07:10:32 +0200
From: T'Mar <tmar@sifl.iid.co.za>
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion
>Why do people write fanfiction?
>Now I don't want to talk legalities, and certainly not morality, but the
>creative process.
Why? You ask WHY? "Why does the phone always ring while you're in
the bathtub?" (Lex Luthor; Superman The Movie)
I can't speak for others, and I don't care to discuss the legalities
of it, same as you. But I can say that I *have* to write it to get
the bloody ideas OUT of me.
Sometimes I'll be watching a show and get an idea, and it won't leave
me alone until I put it down on paper (well, my hard drive). I would
think that anybody who writes "professionally" would understand that.
And for me it doesn't matter whether people see it or not (though
feedback is always nice). All that matters is that I'm no longer
plagued by an idea that metaphorically pokes me continually.
>Some of these fanfic writers are so very very very good at what
>they do. Why settle for writing something that can never be truly
>their own, [or published>]?
I have two plays that have been produced (and one TV and rap star
who emerged from my first play), but I'd rather write fanfic. I don't
care that I'll never get money or be famous. It's a creative thing.
It's satisfying. Maybe it's that "muse" thing.
- Marina.
\\ "Good girls go to heaven. ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
// Bad girls go to Smallville." || R I C H I E >> \\
\\ - 'Sorority Boys' wallpaper ||>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> //
//=======tmar@sifl.iid.co.za========|| \\
\\=======Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie=======//
"Colonel, we've found something you might wanna see."
"Daniel." - 'Fallen' (Stargate SG-1)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 07:50:56 EDT
From: Bizarro7@aol.com
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion (no,
let's discuss the good bits in Chivalry)
In a message dated 7/31/2003 4:40:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, RED57@aol.com
writes:
> Off topic, but more serious - did anyone watch the pilot of "The
> Peacemakers" the other night? The production values look so familiar - reminds me a lot
> of "Lonesome Dove" or even a Western-era flashback of HL. I couldn't read
> the credits, but it looks like it was filmed in the Canadian Rockies, standing
> in for Colorado.
>
We watched it because we've always been Western devotees. The certainly did
seem to be striving for some creative editing. It was difficult not to notice
that this seasons' program fad is clearly CSI:ANYTHING,
and-let's-have-all-new-shows-have-initials-rather-than-names-because-short-names-like-24-and-CSI-are-e
asier-for-the-viewer-to-remember-and-"X"-anything-has-already-been-used-up...
I do hope the trend to non-emaciated, non-teenaged casting, begun with CSI,
continues. That's a good thing. I do remember thinking that Peter Wingfield
would have been a superb choice for the Pinkerton man.
Leah
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 08:16:38 EDT
From: Bizarro7@aol.com
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion (no,
let's discuss the good bits in Chivalry)
In a message dated 7/31/2003 5:23:44 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Dotiran@aol.com writes:
> Why do people write fanfiction?
>
To tell the stories that don't get told on the show itself, because of
constraints of time, creativity, censorship, the taste of the fan and other
limitations. Anyone who has actually ever *produced* a fanzine will tell you that it's
uncommon to break even, much less profit. If there were money in the fanzine
concept, all of the franchises would be putting out the format themselves.
About the closest I've ever seen anyone come were the MAN FROM UNCLE monthly
magazines that were released when the show was on the air. They had a very 'zine'
feel, and the stories were above-average. But the general public wasn't
familiar with the concept of a fiction-only magazine on the news stand, and although
they went a good run of issues, the idea didn't catch on for other shows
(that I saw). The problem with the licensed novels based on TV series is that they
generally tell only one story, the authors are under strict rules and
limitations that often leave the events of the novel outside of the current
'universe' of the show, and the quality of the writing often doesn't have that fanfic
'feel' to it, possibly because the authors aren't always actual fans of the
show or the characters.
There are, of course, notable exceptions, like Diane Duane's memorable TREK
novels. I'm sure some of us can chime in with others. Some HL fans maintain that
AN EVENING AT JOE'S is technically a HL fanzine written by the HL cast and
crew. There's certainly precedent for actors writing pro novels and stories
about their characters; sometimes exceptionally well, like Nichole Nichols and
Armin Shimmerman; sometimes horribly bad, like Paul Darrow. But a fanfic is
fanfic. It seems to have existed throughout human history, from the apocryphal
stories of the gods and heroes that became classic mythology, to the Sherlock
Holmes pastiches that started while Doyle's creation was still appearing in The
Strand, down to this very day (League of Extraordinary Gentleman, etc etc.).
Leah
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 08:21:43 EDT
From: Bizarro7@aol.com
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion (no,let's discuss the good bits in
Chivalry)
In a message dated 7/31/2003 6:20:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, RED57@aol.com
writes:
> I don't understand it either. I know passions are high on both sides of the
> fence, which I also don't understand. It's a pretty "meh" subject
Writing is one of those professions in the Western World where there doesn't
seem to be much of an outlet for apprenticeship. If you need to write, you
write and either you're published professionally, or you aren't.
Fanzines actually do provide the occasionally talented writer to excersize
and improve their skills at fictional storytelling until it sometimes gives them
the development and opportunity to launch themselves into the pro world.
There are many examples of pro authors out there on the bookstore shelves (in many
genres) and elsewhere, who got their start in fanzines. Gillian Horvath, for
one.
Leah
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 00:09:20 +1000
From: Carmel Macpherson <tunnack@webone.com.au>
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion AGAIN again again
Hi all
Don't you just *hate* it when people forget their medication!!
Kind regards
@ Carmel Macpherson
<<<@{}=================>>>
@ carmel@hldu.org
http://www.hldu.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HLDU6: 29 April - 1 May, 2005. Sydney
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 07:14:19 -0700
From: Becky Doland <becky@beckyjo.com>
Subject: Re: OT Peacemakers/was: the stupid fanfic discussion...
RED57@aol.com
> writes:
> > Off topic, but more serious - did anyone watch the
> pilot of "The
> > Peacemakers" the other night?
We watched it too. Husband was disappointed, and I
thought it was better than I'd expected. But I have to
wonder about the forensic investigation they're
bringing into it. Were these tests even available
then? Next week's previews show them using ballistics
testing. Had that even been invented at that point in
time?
Leah:
>I do remember thinking
> that Peter Wingfield
> would have been a superb choice for the Pinkerton man.
GMTA! Within five minutes of his screentime, husband
was saying, "They should have cast Peter Wingfield in
that role." Although the guy did grow on me a bit by
the end, Peter would have created an entirely different
character.
~ Becky
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 10:16:34 -0400
From: "a.j.mosby@btinternet.com" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion AGAIN again again
> Nina
>
> " John tries cute--"
>
> Dang. I was trying for merely witty. I overshot.
>I didn't say you succeeded.
But I tried. I get brownie points for trying. And I'll always settle for
wit. Even if I have to fight the ocassional unarmed opponent.
And the votes are still out on the 'cute' thang apparently.
John
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 10:29:53 -0400
From: Bizarro7@aol.com
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion AGAIN again again
John:
>>But I tried. I get brownie points for trying. And I'll always settle for wit. Even if I have to fight the ocassional unarmed opponent.<<
Perhaps, like the President, they have hidden WMD's (Wits of Mass Destruction) that they unaccountably chose not to use.
>>And the votes are still out on the 'cute' thang apparently.<<
Perhaps, like the President, the votes are still out...
Leah
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 10:37:20 -0400
From: "a.j.mosby@btinternet.com" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion AGAIN again again
Perhaps, like the President, the votes are still out...
Leah
Oh, I quite like your President Bartlett...not like that silly Bush fellow
in Fox News' unbelievable soap-opera.
John
Acute at least.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 11:07:08 EDT
From: Ashton7@aol.com
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion AGAIN again again
In a message dated 8/1/2003 10:08:13 AM Eastern Standard Time,
tunnack@webone.com.au writes:
>
> Don't you just *hate* it when people forget their medication!!
LOL! You're always so funny, Carmel. I was going to say "wish you were here,"
but honestly I really wish I was *there*. In Australia again. Sigh.
Annie
"I'm back!" -- Dr. Daniel Jackson
****************
Stargate Solutions: http://www.savedanieljackson.com
Our Stargate Discussion Forum:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/ourstargate/start
Ashton Press: http://ashtonpress.net/
Gateway, A Stargate Slash Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Gateway/join
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 11:08:51 -0400
From: RED57@aol.com
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion AGAIN again again
Earlier, Leah started to say:
"Perhaps, like the President, the votes are still out..."
Back? In the Okefenokee Swamp? Eaten by an alligator? <eg>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 13:01:16 -0400
From: comet <hickss@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu>
Subject: Re: Hi to y'all! (Lisa? Is that U?)
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, L Cameron-Norfleet wrote:
> Author of some bad fic, back in the day. Formerly known as Krakowka.
Don't listen to her. It's not bad fic. It's very good fic. Nice plot and
good characterisations.
comet
hickss@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu
Elizabeth: So that's it, then? That's the journey of the infamous Captain
Jack Sparrow? You spent three days, lying on a beach drinking rum?
Jack: Welcome to the Caribbean!
-- Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 13:04:50 -0400
From: comet <hickss@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu>
Subject: Re: Hi to y'all! (FAQ and acronyms)
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Shawn wrote:
> Is there a FAQ explaining the acronyms? I can't let my mind loose on
> anything with an "F" in it.
sometime ago I ended up the keep of these two documents, they may help you
(but they have not been updated for a while):
Episode Title Abbreviations - http://www.ao.net/~comet/HL/
Acronyms: Highlander Quick Reference - http://www.ao.net/~comet/HL/acr.html
comet
hickss@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu
Baddie: What are you?
Dorian Gray: Complicated.
-- The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (2003)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 18:42:33 +0000
From: beccaelizabeth <r.day@netcom.co.uk>
Subject: ONH being consistent
Hi
since if we're going to argue we may as well argue about the show-
I tend to think of DM as being inconsistent and on occaision hypocritical, with
one standard for his friends and another for strangers, one for himself and
another for his students. For instance, in the show there have been two
mentally disabled Immortals, one found by Duncan, who found him holy ground to
live on, and one found by Richie, who DM said had to die.
I still havent seen all the episodes (season 1, 2, 5 and a bunch of Methos
episodes) and I'm still annoyed at DM for doing the bad thing to the two best
people (which never happened really but tends to color my perception of him).
So do y'all think I'm just being sulky or is there some basis for the way I see
him?
beccaelizabeth
arguing on topic for once
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 12:35:18 -0700
From: "R. Shelton" <rshelton2@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: ONH being consistent
At 6:42 PM +0000 8/1/03, beccaelizabeth wrote:
>since if we're going to argue we may as well argue about the show
I don't see it as arguing - it's discussion. It's what we all signed
on here to do.
> being inconsistent and on I tend to think of DM as occaision
>hypocritical, with one standard for his friends and another for
>strangers, one for himself and another for his students.
Well, no one's perfect; even an Immortal hero. BUT. . . you all knew
that was coming, huh? <g>
>For instance, in the show there have been two mentally disabled
>Immortals, one found by Duncan, who found him holy ground to live
>on, and one found by Richie, who DM said had to die.
These seemed very different to me - in the second case (brainfading
on his name right now) even *he* agreed that he had to die; he'd
killed an awful lot of people & IIRC, he had trouble understanding
that he'd even killed people until after the fact when it was too
late.
In the first instance didn't what'shisname (Ursa or something?) only
kill the bad woman? And IIRC, didn't he understand killing/murder in
general a bit better than the second guy? Sorry I can't remember
these names (they were two of my least fave characters ever) & don't
have time to look them up right now.
>I still havent seen all the episodes (season 1, 2, 5 and a bunch of Methos
>episodes)
Meaning you haven't seen seasons 1 & 2 at all? Or you have? Have
you seen both the episodes we're speaking of or have you just read
about them? Seems like it's best to see the eps before discussing
them in depth.
>and I'm still annoyed at DM for doing the bad thing to the two best
>people (which never happened really but tends to color my perception of him).
Um. . . you've lost me completely here. What's the 'bad thing' and
who are the 'two best people'?
Rachel (TGIF!!)
--
Rachel Shelton *
rshelton2@earthlink.net
@}->->->-
"We're living on borrowed time. And if you don't put your heart out
there on the line, you're never really living at all." Alec aka X5
494 ~Dark Angel~
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 10:07:14 -1000
From: MacWestie <mac.westie@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion AGAIN again again
Carmel--
> Don't you just *hate* it when people forget their medication!!
Well, now that you're back on your meds & have rejoined the discussion, how
about an update? Have your lawyers come up w/ any more "creative"
strategies regarding your fanfic? (Their previous stab at having your
personal Internet plurality of fic-writing fans taking over DPP's canon
would be hard to beat, for comedic value anyway.)
I'm still wondering how far your recent on-list epiphany/breakdown went. You
stated before (several times) that if DPP asked you to take your HL fanfic
off your website, you would happily do so. Still true?
Nina
mac.westie@verizon.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 17:03:02 -0400
From: Wendy Tillis <immortals_incorporated@cox.net>
Subject: Re: ONH being consistent
beccaelizabeth wrote:
>I tend to think of DM as being inconsistent and on occaision hypocritical,
>with one standard for his friends and another for strangers, one for himself and
>another for his students.
This is true..although I might argue that Duncan is much harder on himself than he is on anyone else (most of the time).
>For instance, in the show there have been two
>mentally disabled Immortals, one found by Duncan, who found him holy
>ground to live on, and one found by Richie, who DM said had to die.
Ursa versus Mickey.
Ursa: I'm not sure Ursa was, strictly speaking, mentally disabled but let's go with that. Ursa liked flowers. Ursa liked music. Ursa would stay in one place for centuries if allowed to. Ursa understood the Game well enough to handle a sword if challenged. Ursa couldn't bring himself to kill Jenny when the bad singer ....whatzzhername... wanted him to. He took Jenny into the catacombs but he didn't kill her. He didn't killed the bad singer - she ran in front of a car. He realized the bad singer was bad and was happy to go back to a monastery to live.
Mickey: Mickey liked trains. Mickey wouldn't stay put when told to. Mickey had a temper and killed people . Mickey also killed people "accidently" . Mickey had no idea what the Game was and could not defend himself. Unless he was locked up somewhere forever, he would always be a danger to others -both those who tried to protect him from Immortals and those who just got in his way when he was upset. Duncan was prepared to leave him on HG before Mickey killed two policemen. Duncan realized it just wasn't going to work. Which is kinder? Putting Mickey in chains in a basement for a thousand years or killing him? Even Mickey seemed to understand the choice.
>I still havent seen all the episodes (season 1, 2, 5 and a bunch of Methos
>episodes) and I'm still annoyed at DM for doing the bad thing to the two
>best people (which never happened really but tends to color my perception of
>him).
Doing the bad thing? You mean killing them or sleeping with them? <EFG>
I assume you mean Richie to be one of the two "best people" ... who is the other?
>So do y'all think I'm just being sulky or is there some basis for the way
>I see him?
Most people are inconsistent (Unless one is infested with hobgoblins and a little mind). Duncan holds *everyone* to an almost impossibly high standard. It is little wonder that he - and everyone else - fails to meet that standard all the time.
Wendy (Duncan does have some basic rules.)( Don't hurt women and children.)( Don't kill people - mortal and Immortal - if you don't have to.)( Keep your promises.)(Tell the truth when possible.)( Wear clean underwear every day.)
Immortals Inc.
immortals_incorporated@cox.net
"Weasels for Eternity"
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 17:17:31 -0400
From: Bizarro7@aol.com
Subject: Re: ONH being consistent
Wendy (great assessment of the two immies, by the way):
>>Ursa: I'm not sure Ursa was, strictly speaking, mentally disabled but let's go with that. Ursa liked flowers. Ursa liked music. Ursa would stay in one place for centuries if allowed to. Ursa understood the Game well enough to handle a sword if challenged. Ursa couldn't bring himself to kill Jenny when the bad singer ....whatzzhername... wanted him to. He took Jenny into the catacombs but he didn't kill her. He didn't killed the bad singer - she ran in front of a car. He realized the bad singer was bad and was happy to go back to a monastery to live.<<
I was always under the impression that the writers were implying that Ursa was an unimaginably ancient Immortal from prehistory, not a mentally deficient person. I took his choice of weapon as a clue, and his willingness to stay sequestered in one safe place 'forever' (a cave, a monestary) as the explanation for how he'd managed to survive for so long. A pity the scripting wasn't more overt about this, if it was what was intended. It would mean Methos *wasn't* the world's oldest Immie, after all.
Leah
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 12:04:08 -1000
From: MacWestie <mac.westie@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion
Leah--
> Anyone who has actually ever *produced* a fanzine will tell you that it's
> uncommon to break even, much less profit.
Considering the plethora of fanzines, calendars, & other pseudo
Highlander/Stargate/etc. items you have for sale at your website, I imagine
you do quite well. I think I asked you this before, but--how much of the
sales proceeds do you send to DPP & the other franchise owners?
> But a fanfic is
> fanfic. It seems to have existed throughout human history
So has murder. But it's the Internet that has been a real boon to your
sales, isn't it?
Nina
mac.westie@verizon.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 17:30:05 -0700
From: Pat Lawson <plawson@webleyweb.com>
Subject: Re: the stupid fanfic discussion
Nina wrote:
>Leah--
> > Anyone who has actually ever *produced* a fanzine will tell you that it's
> > uncommon to break even, much less profit.
>
>Considering the plethora of fanzines, calendars, & other pseudo
>Highlander/Stargate/etc. items you have for sale at your website, I imagine
>you do quite well. I think I asked you this before, but--how much of the
>sales proceeds do you send to DPP & the other franchise owners?
Asking questions about private financial matters is generally considered
rude and noisy.
Pat L.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 21:31:08 -0400
From: Wendy Tillis <immortals_incorporated@cox.net>
Subject: Re: ONH being consistent
Leah:
>(great assessment of the two immies, by the way):
Thank you :-)
me:
>>>Ursa: I'm not sure Ursa was, strictly speaking, mentally disabled but
>let's go with that.
Leah:
>I was always under the impression that the writers were implying that Ursa
>was an unimaginably ancient Immortal from prehistory, not a mentally
>deficient person. I took his choice of weapon as a clue, and his
>willingness to stay sequestered in one safe place 'forever' (a cave, a
>monestary) as the explanation for how he'd managed to survive for so long.
That was my impression also - that he was incredible old. His reaction to the villagers with fire in the 1600's, as well as his lack of language (beyond the most basic), and his preference for caves/tunnels all seemed to hint at an Immortal that predated "civilization". He wasn't stupid - he twigged to the bad singer pretty quickly all things considered- he just wasn't very verbal (although he did like to sing/chant) and was pretty naive about women.
>A pity the scripting wasn't more overt about this, if it was what was
>intended. It would mean Methos *wasn't* the world's oldest Immie, after
>all.
Since it's unlikely that anyone, including Duncan or Methos, knows how old Ursa is, and since Ursa seems unlikely to care about the title of "Oldest Immortal". it may be that he is simply passed over in the reckoning. Then again, if we go with the story that Duncan told in "Band of Brothers", we could say that Methos was the oldest Immortal *after* the guy who Darius killed at the gates of Paris. We don't know if Duncan was discounting Methos as a myth and not counting Ursa since he didn't know Ursa's age, or whether Duncan knew (or thought he knew) that the old guy Darius killed really was the oldest at the time.
It is too bad that no one ever brought the "Ursa Issue" up to Methos on-screen. (Of course Methos would have just lied about it anyway<g>)
Wendy(Trying to imagine Ursa winning the Prize)(Could be interesting)
Immortals Inc.
immortals_incorporated@cox.net
"Weasels for Eternity"
------------------------------
End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 31 Jul 2003 to 1 Aug 2003 (#2003-174)
**************************************************************