they did have sex!!!!!
CALVIN D RUBY
FoLCs,
someone wrote in and said that in BGDF L&C fell to the floor! i
couldn't believe it so i rewatched that part. Sure enough they fell onto
the couch!(i was so unhappy the 1st time i missed it)FINALLY! that means
Clark is no longer a very patient man! PLEASE! someone write back!
TTYL,Jamie
Paul M. Sheldon
Claude Steiner should write in to this group. Stroke starvation is
society's way of getting maximum performance out of its "heros". Hey
Supermen don't need stroke starvation to perform!
Claude Steiner wrote "A Fairy Tale" in which the term "warm
fuzzy's" originated. It was a metaphor for his "stroke economy" concept
wherein so called "negative electrodes" get passed down through
generations in societies and lead to stroke starvation outside the natural
fun free child transactional analysis ego state and lead to Eric Berne's
games.
Superman doesn't play games, I'm sure.
I wish I could get a hold of a copy and I could if I could figure
some sort of address or phone number for him.
Didn't want you to be stroke starved, so I wrote back!
Jimmy Kaleung Poon
CALVIN D RUBY (JA...@ccia.com) wrote:
> FoLCs,
> someone wrote in and said that in BGDF L&C fell to the floor! i
> couldn't believe it so i rewatched that part. Sure enough they fell onto
> the couch!(i was so unhappy the 1st time i missed it)FINALLY! that means
> Clark is no longer a very patient man! PLEASE! someone write back!
> TTYL,Jamie
I don't know. The shadow fell, but that could be accomplished by them
stepping away from the window. I'd like to think that if they waited
this long, they could wait a little longer.
Jim
Jeffery D. Sykes
On Mon, 20 May 1996 19:47:13 -0400, CALVIN D RUBY (JA...@ccia.com) wrote:
> someone wrote in and said that in BGDF L&C fell to the floor! i
> couldn't believe it so i rewatched that part. Sure enough they fell onto
> the couch!(i was so unhappy the 1st time i missed it)FINALLY! that means
> Clark is no longer a very patient man! PLEASE! someone write back!
FoLCs, the *producers* said that they didn't.
Why is everyone *so* eager to have Clark lose his patience, so to speak?
Jeff
--
Jeffery D. Sykes | Kryptonian Cybernet: http://www.ms.uky.edu/~sykes/kc/
sy...@ms.uky.edu | L&C Episode Guide: http://www.ms.uky.edu/~sykes/lc/
|
| I believe the Son of God was crucified upon a tree, and
Ab.D.!!! | laid within a borrowed tomb, not far from Calvary. I
| believe He rose up from the grave, alive for all to see.
| That is why, all the more, I will serve Him!
| - Carman, "Serve the Lord"
CALVIN D RUBY
of couse the writers are going to say they didn't. it's for everyone to
decide on their own. i think they did.
Brad Ferguson
In article <4nt0vs$m...@mark.ucdavis.edu>, jkp...@chicken.engr.ucdavis.edu
(Jimmy Kaleung Poon) wrote:
> I don't know. The shadow fell, but that could be accomplished by them
> stepping away from the window. I'd like to think that if they waited
> this long, they could wait a little longer.
Ah, the crux of the matter. Clark is, in fact, going off to an almost
certain war, and he won't be invulnerable. There is an excellent chance
that he and Lois will never see each other again. There is probably no
tradition more widely practiced and lied about than the "soldier's
farewell."
And if they're never going to see each other again, waiting is no longer
an issue. They either do it, or they don't do it -- and if they don't do
it, the dialog about them actually being married doesn't have any context.
--
Stop by and set a spell at http://www.fred.net/thirteen/
Brad Ferguson
In article <4o1uc8$g...@t3.mscf.uky.edu>, sy...@math16.ms.uky.edu (Jeffery
D. Sykes) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 May 1996 19:47:13 -0400, CALVIN D RUBY (JA...@ccia.com) wrote:
> > someone wrote in and said that in BGDF L&C fell to the floor! i
> > couldn't believe it so i rewatched that part. Sure enough they fell onto
> > the couch!(i was so unhappy the 1st time i missed it)FINALLY! that means
> > Clark is no longer a very patient man! PLEASE! someone write back!
>
> FoLCs, the *producers* said that they didn't.
> Why is everyone *so* eager to have Clark lose his patience, so to speak?
Jeff, the point has always been that everything in the scene -- dialog,
action, mood -- suggests that they _did._ There are certain ways of
telling stories, certain conventions that are always followed.
I know that the writer/producer says Lois and Clark didn't do it. Either
he's covering his butt with prudish viewers, or he hasn't a clue about how
to tell a story. I suggest he's trying to have it both ways: the
characters did it, and he's denying it. Not very straightforward, and I
can't respect it.
Reminds me of something that happened in Liberty magazine in the 1930s.
Liberty was probably the most popular magazine in the country, even more
than Life. Every issue would contain part of a serialized novel. Well,
in one issue two unmarried people went home together at trhe end of that
part of the serial. At the beginning of the next part, she's making him
breakfast. Readers wrote in by the thousands to complain. Understand
that _nothing_ had been shown or said. There was _no_ sexual material.
It was a foolish response, to say the least, unthinking and ignorantly
critical -- about what you'd expect.
The magazine responded to the complainers by saying it was not responsible
for what the characters in its serials did between issues.
maj...@qucdntri.ee.queensu.ca
In article <4o1uc8$g...@t3.mscf.uky.edu>, sy...@math16.ms.uky.edu (Jeffery D. Sykes) writes:
> FoLCs, the *producers* said that they didn't.
> Why is everyone *so* eager to have Clark lose his patience, so to speak?
I guess some people think that sex is the only way of expressing love.
Frankly, why would they do such a "cruel" thing to THEMSELVES (i.e. Lois and
Clark). If they knew that there is a very strong probability that they won't
see each other again (say 99.99999999999...%) then why would they do something
that will make them miss each other even more (if sex = love)!? Shouldn't
they just accept the inevitable and not ruin their future love lives.
Sherrill C.J. Edwards
thir...@fred.net (Brad Ferguson) wrote:
>In article <4nt0vs$m...@mark.ucdavis.edu>, jkp...@chicken.engr.ucdavis.edu
>(Jimmy Kaleung Poon) wrote:
>
>> I don't know. The shadow fell, but that could be accomplished by them
>> stepping away from the window. I'd like to think that if they waited
>> this long, they could wait a little longer.
>
>
>And if they're never going to see each other again, waiting is no longer
>an issue. They either do it, or they don't do it -- and if they don't do
>it, the dialog about them actually being married doesn't have any context.
>
window curtains as a definitive cue that something was "going on". Until
I was reading the messages this week, I just thought it was a segue into
the next scene. Maybe I don't have the active imagination of a lot of
FOLCs on this newsgroup....
I don't think you have to have consummation for their dialogue to make
sense. After all, Zara is claiming that Clark is married to her. It makes
perfect sense for Clark to tell Lois before he leaves, possibly
forever, that as far as he's concerned, he's Lois' husband, not Zara's,
so she doesn't have to worry. Lois is responding in kind, showing that
emotionally, they are in the same place.
I agree with those who state that when "it" happens, we'll all know it.
There just wasn't the kind of change in demeanor that you'd expect
between Lois and Clark in the scene before Supes leaves to confirm that
they "did it" behind the gauze curtains.
Waiting till September to see for myself.
Howard M. Blank
They DIDN'T *DO* anything! Maybe they just fell onto a chair and kissed,
or fell to the floor and kissed, in a sitting position. That's possible.
I think the fall was just for dramatic effect, and nothing happened.
And the producer said nothing happened.
Sincerely,
Gina Blank =)
KalElFan
In article <thirteen-240...@thirteen.fred.net>,
thir...@fred.net (Brad Ferguson) writes:
>I know that the writer/producer says Lois and Clark didn't do it.
To be fair, Brad Buckner has been very careful not to give a
straight yes or no answer on this. He was specifically asked for
a straight yes or no answer in the AOL Cyberplex last night:
Q: Can you tell us whether or not L&C "did it?" (Preferably in a
straight yes-or-no answer so it can't be misinterpretted.)
A: When Lois and Clark do it, you'll know it and there will be
no question. Personally, we think it deserves more than a
fluttering curtain.
So in fact, the writers are admitting that there is some question,
aren't they?
>I suggest he's trying to have it both ways
Exactly.
When I first saw the episode, I didn't really notice it much. Maybe
it's because I'm an astronomy buff and I was paying more attention
to the night sky they showed in the shot just before that. When you
watch it and pay attention, it's hard not to come to the conclusion
that they did it, especially in the context of the conversation they'd
just had ("I AM your husband").
Justin Miller
On Fri, 24 May 1996, Howard M. Blank wrote:
> They DIDN'T *DO* anything! Maybe they just fell onto a chair and kissed,
> or fell to the floor and kissed, in a sitting position. That's possible.
> I think the fall was just for dramatic effect, and nothing happened.
>
> And the producer said nothing happened.
The producers also said, "This is the final cliffhanger you've all been
waiting for..."
Brad Ferguson
Boy, I just love watching these kids rattle on and on about sex, when they
haven't got a clue and couldn't buy one with all the money at the U.S.
Mint.
Brad Ferguson
In article <4o5ug9$1...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, kale...@aol.com (KalElFan)
wrote:
: In article <thirteen-240...@thirteen.fred.net:,
Kal, thanks very much for the quote from Buckner.
There's also this, for all the chastity fans out there:
At the wedding ceremony, Clark fully believed he was marrying Lois. His
committment to the marriage was real, and freely given. That committment
continues. In the church I was brought up in, people married each other
and the priest was there not as the agent, but as God's envoy. Seems to
me you could make a case that Clark is married to Lois, if not
vice-versa. You might even make a case that it was a proxy marriage,
althugh that would be a bit of a stretch.
And for all the people boogered about them waiting for marriage: What is
so almighty dignified and holy about a ceremony conducted by a minister of
the Church of Elvis? I thought Clark and Lois' heartfelt statement of
mutual committment was much more sincere.