RISING STAR was amazing(no spoilers)
c...@sim.zipcon.net
Plain and Simple Cronan (cro...@DeathsDoor.com) wrote:
: _Between the Darkness and the Light_ was uneven... _EndGame_ was so
: rushed... But _Rising Star_..... *I* am at a loss for words.
And that makes "Rising Star" all worthwhile, no matter what flaws the
episode may have... =)
On another note: could you repost your detailed list of problems with
Endgame (the numbered list) to the moderated group? I'd love to see some
answers to some of the questions you raise about Mars; I'd noticed them on
a second viewing, but my science isn't that strong so I wasn't about to
complain about it.
Plain and Simple Cronan
wrote
>On another note: could you repost your detailed list of problems with
>Endgame (the numbered list) to the moderated group? I'd love to see some
>answers to some of the questions you raise about Mars; I'd noticed them on
>a second viewing, but my science isn't that strong so I wasn't about to
>complain about it.
I did! If it hasn't shown up then we must wait. I will wait 3 days this time
before complaining *AGAIN* about the mods need to delay my posts
Did I forget to mention that a post was rejected simply because I said the
Shadow WAr beared an uncanny resemblence to the Lord of the Rings?
Anywho: I have learned some interesting things from the mods:
1. JMS is god.
2. Voyager bashing is A OKAY
....
Well thats about it really.
-- Plain and Simple Cronan, Captain of the USS Megadittos <*>
Evil thrives when good men vote for democrats! - Edmund Burke[paraphased]
Get yer ass to http://gpgod.home.mindspring.com/wisdom.htm
David Stinson
In article <62obj0$i...@camel21.mindspring.com>, "Plain and Simple Cronan" <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
:
:I did! If it hasn't shown up then we must wait. I will wait 3 days this
:before complaining *AGAIN* about the mods need to delay my posts
It was there. You forgot to SPOILER PROTECT it. Kindly read the FAQ about
spoiler protection.
--
David A. Stinson Home E-mail: dsti...@ix.netcomz.com or
Remove the 'z' for mail dast...@zaol.com
Web: http://www.procom.com/~daves/index.html
"No electrons were harmed in the production of this message"
Franklin Hummel
In article <62obj0$i...@camel21.mindspring.com>,
Plain and Simple Cronan <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
>
>Shadow WAr beared an uncanny resemblence to the Lord of the Rings?
very well beaten in the B5 newsgroups.
-- Franklin Hummel [ hum...@world.std.com ]
--
====================================================================
* NecronomiCon, 4th Edition: The Cthulhu Mythos Convention *
August 1999, Providence, RI * Guests: Fred Chappell & T.E.D. Klein
Visit our web site at: http://www.necropress.com/necronomicon
James C. Ellis
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
>
>
> I find it interesting that my posts always appear after I say something.
Ya know, I've encountered the same thing.
Day after day I lurk, looking for any post made by me. Day, after day
I am disappointed. But the moment I write an article to complain about
it - Poof! There it is! I fully expect to return to the newsgroup to see
_this point_ coincidentally arrived.
Wait 'till I catch whoever is responsible for this outrage!
Biff
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Me? Lady, I'm your worst nightmare - a pumpkin with a gun.
[...] Euminides this! " - Mervyn, the Sandman #66
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Cook
"Plain and Simple Cronan" <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
(snip)
>But _Rising Star_.....
>Ohhhhhhhh Rising Star
>*I* am at a loss for words.
Cronan at a loss for words? Isn't this one of the signs of the
apocolypse?
Robert M. Cook
co...@sos.net
http://www.sos.net/home/cook/index2.htm
TMB
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote in article <62p031$g...@camel15.mindspring.com
>...
>>I find it interesting that my posts always appear after I say something.
>
Guess light switches blow your mind then.
"I flip it up and a light come on somewhere"
Try waiting long enough for it to get through the..., uh, well....them.
You know...THOSE guys.
Anyway, you'll get a response one way or another after a couple of days.
TMB
Of course, you'll want to argue about the length of a couple of days now,
supported by statistical facts of why it is or isn't the same as a few
days.
John & Linda VanSickle
Captain Infinity wrote:
>
> In article <62p1ck$g...@camel15.mindspring.com>
> "Plain and Simple Cronan" <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote :
>
> >>>Did I forget to mention that a post was rejected simply because I said the
> >>>Shadow WAr beared an uncanny resemblence to the Lord of the Rings?
> >>
> >>
> >> Cronan, that is a very old and very dead horse which has been
> >>very well beaten in the B5 newsgroups.
> >
> >because of it. In fact here it comes now:
>
> <snip>
>
> JMS has stated a number of times that he gets
> annoyed by the LOTR comparison.
Having both read LoTR and watched B5, I would greatly like to know the
evidence upon which belief in a similarity exists. I wasn't reading the
moderated group when the horse was killed. Is there a FAQ file somewhere?
Regards,
John
--
Ventos vinximus--caelum contigimus. http://www.erols.com/vansickl
spambot bait: ld...@nanaimo.ark.com dstr...@rocketmail.com
John_d...@bc.sympatico.ca pze...@hotmail.com qbe...@hotmail.com
ph...@wwems.com
jken...@himail.hcc.com
In <34511E...@erols.com>, John & Linda VanSickle <vans...@erols.com> writes:
>Having both read LoTR and watched B5, I would greatly like to know the
>evidence upon which belief in a similarity exists. I wasn't reading the
>moderated group when the horse was killed. Is there a FAQ file somewhere?
The evidence runs something like this.
Lord a da ringz is, like, a rilly, rilly long story.
Babalon 5 is, like, a rilly, rilly long story.
Lord a da ringz has, like, good guyz 'n' bad guyz.
Babalon 5 has, like, good guyz 'n' bad guyz.
Lord a da ringz has, like, elfs.
Babalon 5 has, like, mimbariez.
Lord a da ringz has, like, dwarfs.
Babalon 5 has, like, narnz.
Gee, dey must be duh same story!
What's _really_ frightening, is that one needs to be of the educated minority
before such drivel as that can even be conceived.
In truth, of course, the only particular work to which B5 has any great
debt is E. E. Smith's "Lensmen" saga, which is the original form of the
"Earthmen and alien allies eventually play the pivotal role in a war
millions of years old between two godlike races" plot -- but "Doc" Smith
pitched it as a fastball, whereas Joe Straczynski's making a knuckleball
of it.
John W. Kennedy - HiServ NA - Team OS/2 - (The OS/2 Hobbit) - TIPA
IBMMAIL: USAHC29S IBMLink: NAAO3IY "Compact is becoming contract;
CompuServe: 75136,1413 Prodigy: MTMV04A Man only earns and pays."
X.400: US Telemail Hoechst AOL: WillmoreRv -- Charles Williams
Captain Infinity
In article <62p1ck$g...@camel15.mindspring.com>
"Plain and Simple Cronan" <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote :
>Franklin Hummel wrote
>>>Did I forget to mention that a post was rejected simply because I said the
>>>Shadow WAr beared an uncanny resemblence to the Lord of the Rings?
>>
>>
>> Cronan, that is a very old and very dead horse which has been
>>very well beaten in the B5 newsgroups.
>
>I merely pointed it out in passing and a rather lengthy post was thrown out
>because of it. In fact here it comes now:
<snip>
JMS has stated a number of times that he gets
annoyed by the LOTR comparison.
**
Captain Infinity
Plain and Simple Cronan
John & Linda VanSickle wrote
>> >I merely pointed it out in passing and a rather lengthy post was thrown
out
>> >because of it. In fact here it comes now:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> JMS has stated a number of times that he gets
>> annoyed by the LOTR comparison.
>
>Having both read LoTR and watched B5, I would greatly like to know the
>evidence upon which belief in a similarity exists. I wasn't reading the
>moderated group when the horse was killed. Is there a FAQ file somewhere?
Subject: B5 and the _Lord of the Rings_ model...
From: 4r...@qlink.queensu.ca (Marks Robert B)Date:
1997/02/11
Message-ID: <5dosmv$k...@knot.queensu.ca>Newsgroups:
rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5
[More Headers]
It occurs to me that B5 is actually following _Lord of the Rings_ quite
closely. We can examine several key events and equate them to parts of
Tolkien's great work...
1. Sheridan's resurrection = Gandalf's resurrection. The only thing is
that this part is out of timing with the books, but...
2. The Shadow War = the War of the Ring. Pretty obvious, including the
way it ends. After all, the War of the Ring ends around 2/3 of the way
through the plot of _Return of the King_. The rest of the book revolves
around claiming the glory and the scouring of the shire...the battle for
Earth, anybody?
3. President Clark = Saruman. Both Saruman and Clark were traitors, both
were in key positions of power, and both last until around the end of the
book. Also, Saruman has a deal with Sauron which he is weasalling his way
out of, just as Clark has a deal with the Shadows he is weasalling his way
out of. Going by the pattern, it is logical that Clark will be killed at
the climax of the series.
4. The passing of the Shadows and the Vorlons = the passing of the Elves
and the destruction of the Orcs. Here, the Vorlons are the Elves, who
passed into the west/outer rim, and the Shadows are the Orcs and Sauron,
who are destroyed or dispersed. The only thing is, the Shadows also flee
to the rim.
-- Plain and Simple Cronan, Captain of the USS Megadittos <*>
THE TRUTH HAS BEEN DELCARED! LIVE IT! KNOW IT! READ IT at
http://gpgod.home.mindspring.com/declaration.html
David Stinson
In article <62p031$g...@camel15.mindspring.com>, "Plain and Simple Cronan" <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
:
:David Stinson wrote
:>:I did! If it hasn't shown up then we must wait. I will wait 3 days this
:>time
:>:before complaining *AGAIN* about the mods need to delay my posts
:>
:>It was there. You forgot to SPOILER PROTECT it. Kindly read the FAQ about
:>spoiler protection.
:I find it interesting that my posts always appear after I say something.
Then don't say anything. You'll find they appear anyway...
The Mule
jken...@himail.hcc.com wrote:
[...]
> In truth, of course, the only particular work to which B5 has any great
> debt is E. E. Smith's "Lensmen" saga, which is the original form of the
> "Earthmen and alien allies eventually play the pivotal role in a war
> millions of years old between two godlike races" plot -- but "Doc" Smith
> pitched it as a fastball, whereas Joe Straczynski's making a knuckleball
> of it.
Of course if one really wants an inane "B5 is x with the serial numbers
filed off," I suggest reading the Elric Saga by Michael Moorcook.
Both have Lords of Order and Lords of Chaos. Both have the [some number]
who are One. Both have a character named Elric.
(Boy I hope people know what "inane" means or I am in real trouble.)
--
"In fact, the Old Egyptians and the Old Romans would be more alien to
us than most authors' Martians."
- Gardner Dozois
James D Thompson
John & Linda VanSickle wrote:
> Having both read LoTR and watched B5, I would greatly like to know the
> evidence upon which belief in a similarity exists. I wasn't reading
> the moderated group when the horse was killed. Is there a FAQ file
> somewhere?
Most of the evidence is coincidental or a matter of similarities in
form, but the most brazen "borrowing" is the "Eye of Z'Ha'Dum" which was
lifted almost word-for-word from the latter part of the first book.
[oh, and for anyone who is mortally offended by my trollish slandering,
go right ahead and explain the vast differences between the workings
of the "Eyes" of Sauron and the Shadows]
David Thompson
Hiero Bosch
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote in message
<62obj0$i...@camel21.mindspring.com>...
>Did I forget to mention that a post was rejected simply because I said the
>Shadow WAr beared an uncanny resemblence to the Lord of the Rings?
>
>Anywho: I have learned some interesting things from the mods:
>
>1. JMS is god.
>2. Voyager bashing is A OKAY
Yeah, posts there can have nothing to do with B5, as long as they bash
Voyager. I sense a collective insecurity over there.
Don't worry, I've sent in three this week and none of them have been
accepted. Jay Denebeim is God, I say.
Gharlane of Eddore
In <62obj0$i...@camel21.mindspring.com>,
Plain and Simple Cronan <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
>
> Shadow WAr beared an uncanny resemblence to the Lord of the Rings?
>
hum...@world.std.com (Franklin Hummel) writes:
>
> Cronan, that is a very old and very dead horse which has been
> very well beaten in the B5 newsgroups.
>
To quote JMS on the subject:
"I didn't go without sleep for five years and suffer all this hassle,
just to make a TV version of 'THE LORD OF THE RINGS' with the serial
numbers filed off."
( Well, actually, he used a much more pungent word than "hassle." )
I find it hugely amusing that one of the formal academic papers being
presented the University of York B5/SF convocation later this fall
is titled "HOBBITS IN SPACE," and deals with what the perpetrator
views as derivation of B5 from JRRT's work. ( Said writer should
read a few of Joseph Campbell's books on mythic archetypes and
try to learn a bit more about universality of motif and plot
before lecturing in public! *grin* After all, if B-5 is derived
from JRRT, then DS9 is a *third*-hand derivation....)
David Stinson
In article <345100...@SPAMMOwco.com>,
Robert Holland <rhol...@SPAMMOwco.com> wrote:
:Franklin Hummel wrote:
:>
:> In article <62obj0$i...@camel21.mindspring.com>,
:> Plain and Simple Cronan <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
:> >
:> >Did I forget to mention that a post was rejected simply because I said the
:> >Shadow WAr beared an uncanny resemblence to the Lord of the Rings?
:>
:> Cronan, that is a very old and very dead horse which has been
:> very well beaten in the B5 newsgroups.
:And yet the tv show continues to weigh in on the side of LOTR
:ripoff. Last night we saw Frodo return to the shire and set
:things right.
:
And that never happened in myth (let's see - Ulysses, Odysseus, etc.) before
it was written up in LOTR, did it, Robert???
--
David A. Stinson Web Page: http://www.procom.com/~daves/index.html
E-Mail: dsti...@ix.netcomz.com da...@procomz.com dast...@aolz.com
* NO ELECTRONS WERE HARMED DURING PRODUCTION OF THIS MESSAGE *
REMOVE Z FROM ADDRESS IN POST TO EMAIL.
David Stinson
In article <62r8ot$2...@camel20.mindspring.com>,
"Plain and Simple Cronan" <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
Cronan,
Go out and pick up a copy of Joseph Campbell's books on myth & legend.
Lord of the Rings is based on the Norse Eddas, which are part of the
works that Campbell describes in his "heroic journey" discussions.
JMS has said that he does use Campbell's work as a basis for some of his
ideas.
In other words, JMS wrote a story incorporating the arc and background of
the "heroic journey", as did Tolkien.
ITs not a case of one being based on the other, but of both being based on
similar principles. Greek mythology and Sumerian/Babylonian mythology (both of
which have a lot of references in B5 stories) predate Lord of the Rings by a
few thousand years.
David M. Sueme
On Thu, 23 Oct 1997 16:22:10 -0400, "Plain and Simple Cronan"
<cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
I said the
>Shadow WAr beared an uncanny resemblence to the Lord of the Rings?
YOu said this? For a while there I thought you were clever and
original. And I think I remember alluding to such publicly. Now I am
embarrassed.
LOR <> B5 has been beaten to death Cronan. WHere the HEll WEre YOu -
TYping CLass?
DAve
John & Linda VanSickle
jken...@himail.hcc.com wrote:
>
> In <34511E...@erols.com>, John & Linda VanSickle <vans...@erols.com> writes:
> >evidence upon which belief in a similarity exists. I wasn't reading the
> >moderated group when the horse was killed. Is there a FAQ file somewhere?
>
>
> Lord a da ringz is, like, a rilly, rilly long story.
> Babalon 5 is, like, a rilly, rilly long story.
> Lord a da ringz has, like, good guyz 'n' bad guyz.
> Babalon 5 has, like, good guyz 'n' bad guyz.
> Lord a da ringz has, like, elfs.
> Babalon 5 has, like, mimbariez.
> Lord a da ringz has, like, dwarfs.
> Babalon 5 has, like, narnz.
>
> Gee, dey must be duh same story!
The American Public School system strikes again.
> In truth, of course, the only particular work to which B5 has any great
> debt is E. E. Smith's "Lensmen" saga, which is the original form of the
> "Earthmen and alien allies eventually play the pivotal role in a war
> millions of years old between two godlike races" plot...
Now I HAVE to go read it.
--
Ventos vinximus--caelum contigimus. http://www.erols.com/vansickl
spambot bait: John_d...@bc.sympatico.ca pze...@hotmail.com
qbe...@hotmail.com ph...@wwems.com pics...@picsmallbiz.com
extp...@mykabot.net the...@webjetters.com
John & Linda VanSickle
Simply Stupid Cronan wrote:
>
> John & Linda VanSickle wrote
> >
> >evidence upon which belief in a similarity exists. I wasn't reading the
> >moderated group when the horse was killed. Is there a FAQ file somewhere?
>
> From: 4r...@qlink.queensu.ca (Marks Robert B)Date:
> 1997/02/11
> Message-ID: <5dosmv$k...@knot.queensu.ca>Newsgroups:
> rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5
> [More Headers]
> It occurs to me that B5 is actually following _Lord of the Rings_ quite
> closely. We can examine several key events and equate them to parts of
> Tolkien's great work...
> 1. Sheridan's resurrection = Gandalf's resurrection.
Except that Sheridan != Gandalf. The two characters are not even remotely
stimilar. One of them isn't even a human being, for crying out loud.
> 2. The Shadow War = the War of the Ring.
Not!
> Pretty obvious,
To someone who smokes a lot of dope.
> including the way it ends.
The War of the Ring was simple imperialism, aggressor vs. defender, and
ended with the destruction of a single artifact, causing the aggressor to
be unable to continue operations.
The Shadow War was a war by belligerents who were not really interested
in exterminating each other, who finally were talked out of continuing
the war when the middlemen decided that they weren't going to play
anymore.
The War of the Ring always appeared to be exactly what it was. The
Shadow War turned out to be something utterly different from what it was
thought to be.
The War of the Ring was a two-sided affair, from the stabbing of Frodo
under Weathertop to the arrowing of Grima in the Shire.
The Shadow War was a three-way affair at specific points in the tale.
> After all, the War of the Ring ends around 2/3 of the way
> through the plot of _Return of the King_.
Which is NOT the 2/3 point of LoTR. Learn some math, eh?
> The rest of the book revolves around claiming the glory and the scouring
> of the shire...the battle for Earth, anybody?
Except that the Scouring of the Shire ends with everything being peaches
and cream and lots of blond children being born. Knowing JMS' aversion for
children of any color hair, the ending of B5 will probably be far less
pleasant.
> 3. President Clark = Saruman. Both Saruman and Clark were traitors, both
> were in key positions of power, and both last until around the end of the
> book.
Clark was never part of the Army of Light. Ergo, Clark != Saruman
> Also, Saruman has a deal with Sauron which he is weaseling his way
> out of, just as Clark has a deal with the Shadows he is weaseling his way
> out of.
Just where was Clark trying to weasel his way out of the Shadow alliance?
> Going by the pattern, it is logical that Clark will be killed at
> the climax of the series.
Yah, but the timing (which is your Precious for some points), is way
off here. In LoTR, Saruman's defeat precedes his demise by a long period
of time, during which he causes much mischief elsewhere. Clark's demise
is at the moment of his defeat, and the post-mortem mischief he hoped to
inflict was averted (and a pointless lass-minute scare which either should
have been allowed to do something or have been cut entirely). Also, the
scouring of the Shire was an uprising of the people lorded over by Saruman.
The overthrow of Clark was not a popular uprising.
> 4. The passing of the Shadows and the Vorlons = the passing of the Elves
> and the destruction of the Orcs. Here, the Vorlons are the Elves, who
> passed into the west/outer rim, and the Shadows are the Orcs and Sauron,
> who are destroyed or dispersed. The only thing is, the Shadows also flee
> to the rim.
Except that the War of the Ring was not about whether the humans would join
the Orcs or the Elves, but over other matter entirely.
The closest thing to Vorlons in LotR are the Valar, who aside from the
Istari (a measly three individuals) take no part in the conflict
whatsoever.
The closest thing to Elves in B5 are the Minbari, who of course DON'T
depart the scene, and the Shadow allies are neither destroyed nor
dispersed at the end of the Shadow War.
Sheesh. I'm arguing about alleged similarities between two works of
fiction. I oughta be an English Lit professor.
Regards,
John
Plain and Simple Cronan
David M. Sueme
>YOu said this? For a while there I thought you were clever and
>original. And I think I remember alluding to such publicly. Now I am
>embarrassed.
Hey! I only mentioned it in passing! It wasn't the primary focus of my post.
>LOR <> B5 has been beaten to death Cronan. WHere the HEll WEre YOu -
>TYping CLass?
YUp
Plain and Simple Cronan
Theron Fuller wrote
>It's still Lord of the Rings with the serial numbers badly filed off.
>
>And it looks like season 5 is going to be "Lensmen" with the serial numbers
>badly filed off.
I didn't read LOTR until I was told B5 was a rip off there of. Didn't care
for it myself. I don't really like fantasy. Now I hear alot of refernces to
E. E. Smith's "Lensmen" and I would like to read it. Unfortunately I can't
find a copy. Is it that far out of print?
-- Plain and Simple Cronan, Captain of the USS Megadittos <*>
Everyone tells you that masturbation is healthy.. until you do
it in front of them -Emo Williams
http://gpgod.home.mindspring.com/
Theron Fuller
David Stinson wrote in message <62sq8n$o...@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com>...
>In article <62r8ot$2...@camel20.mindspring.com>,
> "Plain and Simple Cronan" <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
>LOTR similarities snipped
>
>
>Cronan,
>
>Go out and pick up a copy of Joseph Campbell's books on myth & legend.
>
>Lord of the Rings is based on the Norse Eddas, which are part of the
>works that Campbell describes in his "heroic journey" discussions.
>
>JMS has said that he does use Campbell's work as a basis for some of his
>ideas.
>
>In other words, JMS wrote a story incorporating the arc and background of
>the "heroic journey", as did Tolkien.
>
>ITs not a case of one being based on the other, but of both being based on
>similar principles. Greek mythology and Sumerian/Babylonian mythology (both
of
>which have a lot of references in B5 stories) predate Lord of the Rings by
a
>few thousand years.
It's still Lord of the Rings with the serial numbers badly filed off.
And it looks like season 5 is going to be "Lensmen" with the serial numbers
badly filed off.
Regards,
Theron Fuller
8paper
How do children like you call yourself sf fans when you have NO knowledge
of Classic sf works like the Lensmen
series? I suppose you've never read the Foundation books or Stranger in a
Strange Land either.The idea that
people like you are "what the world is coming to" is more frightening than
any work of fiction.
Klyfix
In article <01bce1c6$987050$5820...@8paper.flash.net>, "8paper"
<8pa...@flash.net> writes:
I don't think there's a catechism for SF Fandom that requires one to
have read all the major SF works from H.G. Wells onward in order to
qualify. I've not read anything from Doc Smith myself, but I have read the
original Foundation Trilogy and Stranger in a Strange Land and a goody
portion of stuff from other "classic" SF writers. Still, the world of SF is
bigger than it was; as Asimov (if memory serves me correctly) pointed out
that back in the 30s and 40s one could read all the SF that was being
produced, but more recently that became impossible. We end up reading and
watching what we like or think we would like, as opposed to attempting to
read everything that has ever been produced. We're still "fans"
V.S. Greene : kly...@aol.com : Boston, near Arkham...
David Stinson
In article <62uf46$u...@camel15.mindspring.com>,
"Plain and Simple Cronan" <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
:Theron Fuller wrote
:
:
:>It's still Lord of the Rings with the serial numbers badly filed off.
:>
:>And it looks like season 5 is going to be "Lensmen" with the serial numbers
:>badly filed off.
:I didn't read LOTR until I was told B5 was a rip off there of. Didn't care
:for it myself. I don't really like fantasy. Now I hear alot of refernces to
:E. E. Smith's "Lensmen" and I would like to read it. Unfortunately I can't
:find a copy. Is it that far out of print?
You ever thought of trying a library???
Or any good used book store.
Eoghann Irving
On 25 Oct 1997 11:15:09 -0600, Phil Fraering wrote about Re: B5 and the LOTR(was Re: Things I have learned from the Moderators):
> dsti...@ix.netcom.com (David Stinson) writes:
>
> >ITs not a case of one being based on the other, but of both being
> based on >similar principles. Greek mythology and Sumerian/Babylonian
> mythology (both of >which have a lot of references in B5 stories)
> predate Lord of the Rings by a >few thousand years.
>
> (because of Iron), Minbari = Persians, Narn = Israelites, Centauri =
> Sumerians...
There are many analogies that can be drawn between B5 and other
historical or fictional things. thats because like most authors JMS
draws from his experiences. Those experiences including reading
fiction and history. I'd say that was a good thing, not a bad
one.
--
Have fun
Eoghann
http://www.thenet.co.uk/~eoghann/sflist.html
Moderator Fantasy & Science Fiction mailing list
Theron Fuller
Gene Breshears wrote in message <87785670...@moon.aa.net>...
>>I didn't read LOTR until I was told B5 was a rip off there of. Didn't care
>>for it myself. I don't really like fantasy.
>
>Then why are you watching Babylon 5 ? I love the show, have a great
>admiration for JMS and all the work he's done, but Bab 5 isn't Science
>Fiction... it's Epic Fantasy with lots of SF trappings.
>
>I wouldn't say the Bab5 is a "rip-off" of LOTR, rather that JMS, and
>h'e admitted this more than once, draws upon some of the same cultural
>sources the J.R.R. Tolkien (and many other authors) did for his work.
>Certain archetypes and thematic reasonances can be found.
It's still Lord of the Rings with the serial numbers badly filed off. Joe
Straczynski has gone from flaming at any suggestion of similarities between
Lord of the Rings and Babylon 5 to "admitting that he draws on some of the
same cultural sources...J.R.R. Tolkien...did for his work."
Regards,
Theron Fuller
Plain and Simple Cronan
David Stinson wrote
>You ever thought of trying a library???
Tried it.
>Or any good used book store.
Tried it.
Phil Fraering
"Eoghann Irving" <eog...@thenet.co.uk> writes:
> There are many analogies that can be drawn between B5 and other
> historical or fictional things. thats because like most authors JMS
> draws from his experiences. Those experiences including reading
> fiction and history. I'd say that was a good thing, not a bad
> one.
Well, silly old me had decided to take JMS at his word and look
for analogies in the ancient middle east, f'instance in and
around a city-state called _Babylon_.
Don't you think that's a pretty big hint?
--
Phil Fraering "And don't think it hasn't been a little
p...@globalreach.net slice of heaven,
/Will work for *tape*/ because it hasn't!"
+ Send me spam, and I'll send you termcap +
Gene Breshears
>I didn't read LOTR until I was told B5 was a rip off there of. Didn't care
>for it myself. I don't really like fantasy.
Then why are you watching Babylon 5 ? I love the show, have a great
admiration for JMS and all the work he's done, but Bab 5 isn't Science
Fiction... it's Epic Fantasy with lots of SF trappings.
I wouldn't say the Bab5 is a "rip-off" of LOTR, rather that JMS, and
h'e admitted this more than once, draws upon some of the same cultural
sources the J.R.R. Tolkien (and many other authors) did for his work.
Certain archetypes and thematic reasonances can be found.
*******************************************************************
* "Humankind is poised midway * Gene Breshears *
* between the gods and the beasts." * tai...@aa.net *
* --Plotinus * (just my opinion) *
*******************************************************************
Shin Chyang Yu
In article <62h7me$q...@camel18.mindspring.com>,
Plain and Simple Cronan <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
>
>
>Ohhhhhhhh Rising Star
>
>*I* am at a loss for words.
>
Because it is good or bad? I didn't like it very much. Some of
the plot twists doesn't make sense to me.
John Yu
Plain and Simple Cronan
Shin Chyang Yu wrote
>Because it is good or bad? I didn't like it very much. Some of
>the plot twists doesn't make sense to me.
Good. I rather liked. Made up for EndGame
David DeRubeis
David Stinson wrote:
>
>
> You ever thought of trying a library???
>
>
Be fair, David. I've seen nothing by Doc Smith in the Houston Public
Library, and it took me about a year to track down the whole Lensman
series, before a couple of people decided to sell 2 sets at roughly the
same time. It's been out of print for quite a while, yet is still
fairly popular.
David
Plain and Simple Cronan
J. Potts wrote
>Libraries have things called inter-library loans. You ought to
>try it sometime.
Wow! I never heard of that before. Tell me more about the mazing owrld of
the Library... the Wake County Public Library does not have a copy.
>Remember, he said *good* ones. Besides, since the books are so popular,
>someone else may have already grabbed them up. You may have to make more
>than one trip. Better yet, ask the store to give you a heads up if they
>get a copy of the books in.
Again you startle me with your informative prattle. Please do tell me more
about this fabulous world of books.....
>If you check Gharlane's Lensman webpage (*the* place to find about all
>things Lensman):
>
>http://www.peterzale.com/now.html
>
>I believe a new edition of the books are coming or have come out.
-- Plain and Simple Cronan, Captain of the USS Megadittos <*>
We are willing enough to praise freedom when she is safely tucked away
in the past and cannot be a nuisance. In the present, amidst dangers
whose outcome we cannot foresee, we get nervous about her, and admit
censorship. - E.M. Forster http://gpgod.home.mindspring.com/wisdom.htm
Plain and Simple Cronan
William December Starr wrote
>Oh, try turning down your "Snobbishness" dial. There's no requirement
>that one have read the bad (Lensmen), boring (Foundation) or just
>plain "Huh? What the heck was the point of all that?" (Stranger)
>"classic" sf of the past in order to enjoy, appreciate or comment upon
>the sf of the present. Go back to your Hugo Gernsback Appreciation
>Society.
I liked the first 3 Foundation Books.
Robert Holland
You're a sucker for closure.
We got tons of exposition in Rising Star, which rather ruined
the mood.
And the earth president was a cartoonish display of political
maneuvering.
--RH
Plain and Simple Cronan
Robert Holland wrote
>> Good. I rather liked. Made up for EndGame
>
>You're a sucker for closure.
<<looks at feet>>
You got Bob, you got me. I am. After years of being left hanging in ST I
guess that even this closure was good enough to satisfy.
>We got tons of exposition in Rising Star, which rather ruined
>the mood.
I don't think so. The exposition was handled much more effectively in this
episode than in EndGame....
>And the earth president was a cartoonish display of political
>maneuvering.
Raher liked her myself. Thought her accent was horrible but that cna be
forgiven
Gharlane of Eddore
David Stinson wrote:
>
> You ever thought of trying a library???
> Or any good used book store.
>
In <3454CEC8...@ligand.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu>
David DeRubeis <deru...@ligand.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu> writes:
>
> Be fair, David. I've seen nothing by Doc Smith in the Houston Public
> Library, and it took me about a year to track down the whole Lensman
> series, before a couple of people decided to sell 2 sets at roughly the
> same time. It's been out of print for quite a while, yet is still
> fairly popular.
>
The most recent mass-market paperback printing of the "LENSMAN" books
in the U.S. was nearly 15 years ago ("Berkeley Books") and used-book
stores have begun to run a bit dry on the material.
Mike Walsh's "OLD EARTH BOOKS" got a contract to do trade-paperback
reprints (high-quality acid-free paper, staunch covers) of the books
last year, and Walsh expected to have the first ones out in January.
Due to a number of situations I won't waste space by documenting here,
Walsh' delivery date for the first books slipped about 9-10 months,
and "TRIPLANETARY" and "FIRST LENSMAN" didn't make it to the bindery
until a few weeks ago.
On the plus side, Barnes & Noble committed for a good many copies, so
the size of Walsh' initial print run has been more than doubled from
his initial intent. Mike's price is about $15/book, or $100 for the
boxed set.
Further, "Ripping Communications" in the U.K. got a reprint contract,
and reportedly has all six out and available as of summer '97.
(I haven't seen any of these, can't speak to quality or even existence,
but they're well reported by folks on the east side of the Atlantic.
Ripping's base retail price appears to be about L5.99 per book.)
What details I have on the subject are listed in my "LENSMAN" Web Page,
which you can find at
http://168.150.253.1/~zlensman/lensfaq.html
....see Section SIX, "Where To Find The Books."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| __ __ |
| We are dreamers, shapers, singers and makers. / | / \ |
| We study the mysteries of laser and circuit, -|---+----+- |
| Crystal and scanner, holographic demons, | | | |
| And invocations of equations. |_/ \__/ |
| |
| These are the tools we employ. And we know... many things. |
| |
| .....including how to spell "gray." +\../- |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gharlane of Eddore
David Stinson wrote:
>
> You ever thought of trying a library???
> Or any good used book store.
>
In <3454CEC8...@ligand.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu>
David DeRubeis <deru...@ligand.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu> writes:
>
> Be fair, David. I've seen nothing by Doc Smith in the Houston Public
> Library, and it took me about a year to track down the whole Lensman
> series, before a couple of people decided to sell 2 sets at roughly the
> same time. It's been out of print for quite a while, yet is still
> fairly popular.
>
The most recent mass-market paperback printing of the "LENSMAN" books
in the U.S. was nearly 15 years ago ("Berkeley Books") and used-book
stores have begun to run a bit dry on the material; as pointed out
above, you *can* find copies, but sometimes you have to be patient.
In 1996, Mike Walsh's "OLD EARTH BOOKS" got a contract to do
trade-paperback reprints (high-quality acid-free paper, staunch
covers), and Walsh expected to have the first ones out in January.
Due to a number of situations I won't waste space by documenting here,
( we won't mention Walsh' abduction by Space Aliens and his resulting
tendency to emit beeping noises and jam nearby computers; or his
having been missing for at least five consecutive full moons while
nearby ranchers and farmers reported major livestock depredations by
some sort of clever predator; or Walsh' lengthy stay in Monaco
during a certain notorious divorce trial involving royalty, wherein
Walsh was named as a co-respondent; or the two months he spent in
the psycho ward at Arkham Asylum after publicly insisting he was
"Batman" and trying to prove it by kidnapping Kim Basinger....)
Walsh' delivery date for the first books slipped about 9-10 months,
and "TRIPLANETARY" and "FIRST LENSMAN" didn't make it to the bindery
until a few weeks ago.
On the plus side, Barnes & Noble committed for a good many copies, so
the size of Walsh' initial print run has been more than doubled from
his initial intent. Mike's price is about $15/book, or $100 for the
boxed set.
Further, "Ripping Communications" in the U.K. got a reprint contract,
and reportedly has all six out and available as of summer '97.
(I haven't seen any of these, can't speak to quality or even existence,
but they're well reported by folks on the east side of the Atlantic.
Ripping's base retail price appears to be about L5.99 per book, but
we haven't been advised of any U.S. availability at this time.)
What details are available on the subject are listed in the "LENSMAN"
8paper
The simple fact that your reaction to Stranger is "huh"
tells me all I need to know about you. Try reading the unabriged version of
Stranger. It is far easier to understand than the story as originaly
published.
People who cannot or do not learn from the past are unable to develop a
sense of continuity in the present and will become hopelessly lost in the
ever more rapidly changing future.
Perhaps you would do me the courtesy of posting a list of what you would
consider "classic" sf.
Captain Infinity
In article <345553...@SPAMMOwco.com>
Robert Holland wrote :
>And the earth president was a cartoonish display of political
>maneuvering.
I liked when they used her voice for the pop-up-bomb-in-the-box that
blew up the Martian Mafia. That made me laff.
Actually, just the idea of a Martian Mafia made me laff.
In fact, the *phrase* "Martian Mafia" makes me laff.
**
Captain Infinity
....that Earth creature makes me so ANGRY!
Now I'll have to make *more* Martians!
Plain and Simple Cronan
Captain Infinity wrote
>I liked when they used her voice for the pop-up-bomb-in-the-box that
>blew up the Martian Mafia. That made me laff.
>
>Actually, just the idea of a Martian Mafia made me laff.
>
>In fact, the *phrase* "Martian Mafia" makes me laff.
Mind if I call you Capt. Forever?
Good
What's amazing about the Martian Mafia is that they are still fat guys with
pseudo-Italian accents just like they are in every other third rate
representation of organized crime(no matter the time period).
Maybe they gotta go to the Old School like the general?
Or maybe they are grown in little vats?
What do you suppose the Yakuza, another fall back in bad movies that
replaces the need for icky things like character development, are up to?
Maybe they are Proxima?
Klyfix
In article <01bce355$9a3f5b60$cc1f...@8paper.flash.net>, "8paper"
<8pa...@flash.net> writes:
>
>People who cannot or do not learn from the past are unable to develop a
>sense of continuity in the present and will become hopelessly lost in the
>ever more rapidly changing future.
>
Yesss....but somehow I suspect that having a complete knowledge of the
classic works of SF alone is what will be need to adapt to the future.
Heck, I'll dare say that utter ignorance of all SF but a good knowledge of
history may leave someone well prepared for the future. Sure, the
Foundation Trilogy and _Stranger in a Strange Land_ are great stories, but
not having read them or the "Lensmen" stories isn't going to leave somebody
utterly helpless to face the Future. Let's get real here. :)
Captain Infinity
In article <345664e9...@snews.zippo.com>
morp...@super.zippo.com (Morpheus) wrote :
>On 27 Oct 1997 16:31:15 GMT, nav...@pubs35b.ih.lucent.com (J. Potts)
>wrote:
>>If you check Gharlane's Lensman webpage (*the* place to find about all
>>things Lensman):
>>
>>http://www.peterzale.com/now.html
>
>What's the value of pi in your universe?
>
>Not that that's not an interesting URL, but it's not Gharlane's.
>
>http://168.150.253.1/~zlensman/lensfaq.html
>
You're both crazy. The URL you want is:
http://www.bath.ac.uk/~bs4cmc/knacker.html
**
Captain Infinity
Theron Fuller
Phil Fraering wrote in message
<87zpnwq...@lungold.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-shoot-me>...
>"Eoghann Irving" <eog...@thenet.co.uk> writes:
>
>> There are many analogies that can be drawn between B5 and other
>> historical or fictional things. thats because like most authors JMS
>> draws from his experiences. Those experiences including reading
>> fiction and history. I'd say that was a good thing, not a bad
>> one.
>
>Well, silly old me had decided to take JMS at his word and look
>for analogies in the ancient middle east, f'instance in and
>around a city-state called _Babylon_.
>
>Don't you think that's a pretty big hint?
Silly old us for taking Joe Straczynski's cryptic comments about the
relationship of the Babylon 5 universe to the historical Babylon and doing
all sorts of fruitless historical research to find meaningful parallels,
when all we really had to do was read Lord of the Rings, ignore Joe
Straczynski's comments about "serial numbers filed off,"
and believe the conclusions we drew.
Now that the original "5-year arc" story has been mostly told, why doesn't
someone ask Joe Straczynski to expand a little on His historical references?
For example, just what common historical and mythological sources did He
and Tolkien use? And how does He know so much about Tolkien's sources?
Regards,
Theron Fuller
Maria Ana Montalvo
In article <633q7t$g...@camel18.mindspring.com>,
Plain and Simple Cronan <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
>
>forgiven
Especially since that's her natural accent....
Maria
J. Potts
On 27 Oct 1997 16:31:15 GMT, nav...@pubs35b.ih.lucent.com (J. Potts)
wrote:
>If you check Gharlane's Lensman webpage (*the* place to find about all
>things Lensman):
>
>http://www.peterzale.com/now.html
In article <345664e9...@snews.zippo.com>,
Morpheus <morp...@super.zippo.com> wrote:
>What's the value of pi in your universe?
>
>Not that that's not an interesting URL, but it's not Gharlane's.
>
>http://168.150.253.1/~zlensman/lensfaq.html
Oh, bother. Of *course* that's the correct URL. This silly mouse
and it's swipe and dump, sometimes it just gets a mind of its own.
Next thing you know, Gharlane will be offering to fix *my* nutrient
feeds.
--
JRP
"BLONDE? Blonde? You didn't TELL me you were a blonde....."
--Gharlane of Eddore
J. Potts
In article <630c8o$4...@news2.jic.com>,
Theron Fuller <tfu...@moon.jic.com> wrote:
>It's still Lord of the Rings with the serial numbers badly filed off. Joe
>Straczynski has gone from flaming at any suggestion of similarities between
>Lord of the Rings and Babylon 5 to "admitting that he draws on some of the
>same cultural sources...J.R.R. Tolkien...did for his work."
In article <6334bd$a...@access2.digex.net>,
Jonathan Blum <jb...@access2.digex.net> wrote:
>Whoa, I think the ACCURACY-O-METER just flatlined on that one.
>
>In fact, JMS said way back when the Rangers were first introduced that the
>name was a deliberate tip of the hat to Tolkien; he was happy to admit to
>the similarities which he did intend, while denying that he'd intended the
>ones which he hadn't.
Bzzzzzzt! Wrong answer. Thank you for playing. Here is, in fact, the
basis for the name Rangers:
From: strac...@genie.geis.com
Subject: The Coming Of Shadows - **SPOI
Date: 2 Feb 1995 16:36:51 -0500
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA
Re: the name Rangers...hey, when you grow up watching The Lone
Ranger, and spend lots of time researching the Texas Rangers when you
work (briefly) on Walker...certain names spring unbidden.
jms
When someone tried making the comparison of B4 to LoTR, JMS responded with:
From: strac...@genie.geis.com
Date: 15 Nov 1994 19:56:00 -0500
Subject: RE: B5 & Tolkien
The only problem with this discussion is that it begins on the
assumption that there is *any* kind of one-to-one correlation between
B5 characters and LoTR characters. There isn't. There are, however,
many aspects that they share in that they both are moving toward creating
myth of a sort; if you've read Campbell's "Hero With a Thousand Faces,"
you know that there are some constants that work throughout mythic-based
fiction. The Foundation books, the Lensman books, Childhood's End, all
worked on a kind of myth-structure; so does B5 (at least in theory; how
well it actually succeeds at that task will have to be seen with time).
jms
Note the date. JMS has *always* maintained that B5 is using some of the
same mythic ideas that are found in other great works. So you see? This
discussion has been hased and rehashed for the last three years. It's no
wonder we're getting tired of seeing it.
James C. Ellis
Theron Fuller wrote:
>
<Yet Another B5 = LOTR claim snipped. This must be Theron's
Rant-of-the-Month (TM). Ah, well at least he's still not on that
rec.arts.denebheim stuff>
>
> Now that the original "5-year arc" story has been mostly told, why doesn't
> someone ask Joe Straczynski to expand a little on His historical references?
> For example, just what common historical and mythological sources did He
> and Tolkien use?
That's actually not a bad idea.
> And how does He know so much about Tolkien's sources?
Well, I dunno. Perhaps any of the dozens of dissertations which
investigate the roots of LOTR, many of which have been released in book
form?
Biff
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Me? Lady, I'm your worst nightmare - a pumpkin with a gun.
[...] Euminides this! " - Mervyn, the Sandman #66
-------------------------------------------------------------------
8paper
Thanks for the reading list. We share at least some of the same taste. Some
of the books on your list I've read but don't care for, I.e. Clarke has
never been one of mt personal favs.
The original post about the Lensman books was designed to respond to a 17
year old who had opined that he hadn't read the Lensman books or The Lord
of the Rings, but yet went on and on about how good B5 and Star Trek DS9
were. I have encountered some
"children" (people under 30) who, when speaking about
Star Trek for instance, say silly things like "you mean there was a TV show
before the movies" Although sf
books become dated quickly (a trend that seems even to be even more true
about sftv) IMHO many of them still make fine reading especially if one
takes the time to
investigate the accepted scientific theories of the time it was written
that the book may be based on. My point was simply that much of current sf
is written by people
who grew up reading some of these books I arbitrarily
labeled as "classics". I think that knowing what some of
these folks influences/anticedents can be of great help in understanding or
decerning, if you will, why these writers use the themes and plot devices
they use.
While on the subject of personal "classics" I would add;
1984 by George Orwell
(also Animal Farm)
Brave New World by Huxley
A Canticle for Liebowitz by Walter Miller
Farenhiet 451 by Ray Bradbury
most Heinlein, some of my favs;
I Will Fear No Evil
The Past Through Tommorow (the future history)
Time Enough For Love
( I think LL may be my all time fav fiction hero)
Job (a very funny book)
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
I've wasted enough bandwidth pontificating my opinions
Thanks for sharing your readind list w/ me.
Eric Berge
In Article<345627...@cadvision.com>, <ell...@cadvision.com> writes:
> > Now that the original "5-year arc" story has been mostly told, why doesn't
> > someone ask Joe Straczynski to expand a little on His historical
> > references?
> > For example, just what common historical and mythological sources did He
> > and Tolkien use?
>
> That's actually not a bad idea.
>
> > And how does He know so much about Tolkien's sources?
>
> Well, I dunno. Perhaps any of the dozens of dissertations which
> investigate the roots of LOTR, many of which have been released in book
> form?
Pfft. Give me a break - Almost all of that stuff is in print, and a great
deal of it is on the web.
Start with Snorri Sturluson's "Prose Edda". You will immediately note the
lists of names of Dwarves and Elves which Tolkien copied wholesale for his
book.
Eric Berge
(Remove underscore for valid address)
John & Linda VanSickle
Gharlane of Eddore wrote:
>
> To quote JMS on the subject:
>
> "I didn't go without sleep for five years and suffer all this hassle,
> just to make a TV version of 'THE LORD OF THE RINGS' with the serial
> numbers filed off."
>
> ( Well, actually, he used a much more pungent word than "hassle." )
>
> I find it hugely amusing that one of the formal academic papers being
> presented the University of York B5/SF convocation later this fall
> is titled "HOBBITS IN SPACE," and deals with what the perpetrator
> views as derivation of B5 from JRRT's work. ( Said writer should
> read a few of Joseph Campbell's books on mythic archetypes and
> try to learn a bit more about universality of motif and plot
> before lecturing in public! *grin* After all, if B-5 is derived
> from JRRT, then DS9 is a *third*-hand derivation....)
I submit that anyone doing an academic paper on a B5/LoTR comparison,
without having read Campbell, has certainly NOT done his/her/its
homework.
Regards,
John
--
Ventos vinximus--caelum contigimus. http://www.erols.com/vansickl
spambot bait: John_d...@bc.sympatico.ca pze...@hotmail.com
qbe...@hotmail.com ph...@wwems.com pics...@picsmallbiz.com
extp...@mykabot.net the...@webjetters.com
Plain and Simple Cronan
John & Linda VanSickle wrote
>If what you posted the other day are the "huge similarities," then
>JMS is vindicated.
nah. Those were just the quickly dredged up words of another. Several
others, including Bobby Boy Holland, have psoted extensive comparisons of
the happenings in Into the Fire.....
Eric Berge
In Article<01bce3c7$8dd561e0$4d1f...@8paper.flash.net>, <8pa...@flash.net>
writes:
> The original post about the Lensman books was designed to respond to a 17
> year old who had opined that he hadn't read the Lensman books or The Lord
> of the Rings, but yet went on and on about how good B5 and Star Trek DS9
> were. I have encountered some "children" (people under 30) who, when
> speaking about Star Trek for instance, say silly things like "you mean there
> was a TV show before the movies" Although sf books become dated quickly (a
> trend that seems even to be even more true about sftv) IMHO many of them
> still make fine reading especially if one takes the time to
> investigate the accepted scientific theories of the time it was written
> that the book may be based on. My point was simply that much of current sf
> is written by people who grew up reading some of these books I arbitrarily
> labeled as "classics". I think that knowing what some of these folks
> influences/anticedents can be of great help in understanding or
> decerning, if you will, why these writers use the themes and plot devices
> they use.
(SNIP PASSABLE LIST OF INTRODUCTORY GOOD S/F)
If you really want a good intro to classic S/F (which, in my mind, still
refers to the 40s and 50s), read Healy & McComas's anthology, "Adventures
in Time and Space", which has to have been one of the most influential books
in science fiction for the twenty five years between 1945 and 1970.
It goes in and out of print periodically; I think the Science Fiction Book
Club has it currently.
And for a good classic space station book, the "Venus Equilateral" stories,
by George O. Smith.
Eric Berge
(remove the _ for correct address)
The Man
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
> >And the earth president was a cartoonish display of political
> >maneuvering.
>
> forgiven
Well, as one of my roommates said... "She made me want to salute."
--
email - dfr...@mail.vt.edu
-----------------------------------------------
Daniel Andre Frost - Lord of the Urbanmechs
- Proud Owner of the 1st Ever Urbanmech Battalion
- Why Mining Engineering?
MinE 4073 - Principles and Applications of Explosives
- Student Member of the International Society of Explosive Engineers
- Currently Reading.... "Orion Shall Rise," by Poul Anderson
- Spammers Slapped this Month - 19
-----------------------------------------------
jken...@himail.hcc.com
In <345771ea...@snews.zippo.com>, morp...@super.zippo.com (Morpheus) writes:
>P.P.S. "Pinky and the Brain" just hasn't been the same since I
>discovered that the Brain claimed CRTs emitted photons at the screen.
>Well, at least they had the basics of emitted particles striking the
>phosphors correct.
Errr.... All the CRT's I know _do_ emit photons at the screen. Wouldn't
be much use otherwise.
John W. Kennedy - HiServ NA - Team OS/2 - (The OS/2 Hobbit) - TIPA
IBMMAIL: USAHC29S IBMLink: NAAO3IY "Compact is becoming contract;
CompuServe: 75136,1413 Prodigy: MTMV04A Man only earns and pays."
X.400: US Telemail Hoechst AOL: WillmoreRv -- Charles Williams
Eric Berge
In Article<638ldr$9...@nnrp1.farm.idt.net>, <pau...@dtc.net> writes:
> From: pau...@dtc.net (Paul E. Jamison, Esq.)
> And one I'd bet very few have heard of: "E for Effort" by T. L.
> Sherred.
I've read that.
Good story.
Eric Berge
(remove the _ for address)
Paul E. Jamison, Esq.
On Tue, 28 Oct 97 23:20:48 , a little light bulb went on over the head
of Eric Berge (Eric Berge <e_db...@ibm.net>), and he wrote thus and
so to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5:
>If you really want a good intro to classic S/F (which, in my mind, still
>refers to the 40s and 50s), read Healy & McComas's anthology, "Adventures
>in Time and Space", which has to have been one of the most influential books
>in science fiction for the twenty five years between 1945 and 1970.
Agreed. I would also recommend "Treasury of Great Science Fiction"
ed. by Tony Boucher. And any of several anthologies edited by Groff
Conklin. I couldn't vouch for the availabiliy, but that's what used
bookstores and dealers' rooms at conventions are for.
>And for a good classic space station book, the "Venus Equilateral" stories,
>by George O. Smith.
This is also a classic "Astounding"-ish puzzle book, and recommended
no less for that.
A few specific short stories I'd add to the recommendations list:
"Flowers for Algernon" (Daniel Keyes) goes without saying, but I'll
mention it anyway.
"A Martian Odyssey" by Stanley Weinbaum -- an early (1930s) depiction
of a truly *alien* alien. No human with latex stick-ons here!
"Farewell to the Master" by Harry Bates, the short on which "Day the
Earth Stood Still" was based. The movie, alas, did not include that
absolute killer of a last line.
"It's A *Good* Life!" by Jerome Bixby -- a Twilight Zone episode was
based on this. Chilling.
And one I'd bet very few have heard of: "E for Effort" by T. L.
Sherred. It deals with the invention of a machine that can view any
event in the past and present. Deals not so much with the invention
itself as with the consequences of its existence -- and the
consequences of the awareness of its existence.
Can't right at the mo' say where you can find the above, but they've
been anthologized. So *hunt* for them.
(I love recommendation threads like this.)
--
"So this Vorlon says to me "Never ask that question!',
and I go, I says,
'IT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I GOT, BABY!!'"
Michael Rogero Brown
David DeRubeis (deru...@ligand.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu) wrote:
: David Stinson wrote:
: >
: >
: > You ever thought of trying a library???
: >
: > Or any good used book store.
: Be fair, David. I've seen nothing by Doc Smith in the Houston Public
: Library, and it took me about a year to track down the whole Lensman
: series, before a couple of people decided to sell 2 sets at roughly the
: same time. It's been out of print for quite a while, yet is still
: fairly popular.
It's also not BACK IN PRINT. A small press has reprinted the whole
series in trade paperback reprints of the original hardbacks. As Barnes&
Noble and B.Dalton's has mentioned this in their freebie sf book mag, I'm
sure you can get these from the chains.
--
<< Michael Rogero Brown | Any opinions expressed are my >>
<< (UNIX System Support) | own, and generally unpopular >>
<< Motorola-Plantation Radio Products Group| with others. >>
<< Internet: mich...@cse.fau.edu | Ask me if I care. >>
John & Linda VanSickle
Theron Fullofit wrote:
>
> Labeling my comments "Theron's Rant-of-the-Month (TM)" doesn't make them any
> less cogent. C'mon, folks. Leonard Bernstein wrote a very good musical
> based directly on Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet." His accomplishment was
> that he made an original re-interpretation of "Romeo and Juliet." He added
> something to the Shakespeare story. Fans of "West Side Story" don't have to
> make some bullshit claim that Bernstein drew on the same historical and
> literary sources as Shakespeare and independently came up with "Romeo and
> Juliet in New York."
>
> Similarly, Andrew Lloyd Weber and Tim Rice took the New Testament account of
> the life of Jesus and wrote "Jesus Christ Superstar."
It would be more precise to say that they took some of the words used in the
New Testament account and wrote "Jesus Christ Superstar."
> Both "West Side Story" and "Jesus Christ Superstar" are brilliant derivative
> works. Babylon 5 fans should be raving about how brilliantly Joe
> Straczynski interpreted Tolkien's work in a "future universe" setting.
But he didn't. When the differences in setting and style are stripped away,
we are left with two radically different stories.
> Instead they're cheapening Tolkien's accomplishments by claiming that if
> someone just uses the same sources as Tolkien, that they come up with some
> version of "Lord of the Rings."
Nobody on this side of the argument is claiming that B5 is a version of
LotR.
> >> Now that the original "5-year arc" story has been mostly told, why
> doesn't
> >> someone ask Joe Straczynski to expand a little on His historical
> references?
> >> For example, just what common historical and mythological sources did He
> >> and Tolkien use?
> >
> > That's actually not a bad idea.
> >
> >> And how does He know so much about Tolkien's sources?
> >
> > Well, I dunno. Perhaps any of the dozens of dissertations which
> >investigate the roots of LOTR, many of which have been released in book
> >form?
>
> If Joe Straczynski acutally used any of those sources as the basis of His
> own background research instead of "Lord of the Rings," and all He could
> come up with is a version of "Lord of the Rings in Space," then that's even
> less original and creative than deriving his arc directly from Tolkien's
> work.
A hypothetical concern, since B5 is simply not the same story as LotR.
Regards,
John
--
"We Yellowbeards are never more dangerous than when we're dead."
http://www.erols.com/vansickl
spambot bait: qbe...@hotmail.com ph...@wwems.com pics...@picsmallbiz.com
extp...@mykabot.net the...@webjetters.com SUE...@HOTMAIL.COM
Plain and Simple Cronan
John & Linda VanSickle wrote:
>A hypothetical concern, since B5 is simply not the same story as LotR.
Yeah it is. IT just ain't quite as epic
-- Plain and Simple Cronan, Captain of the USS Megadittos <*>
Wanna know how the generally obscene and seemlingly simple
place you believe to be reality is really run? No? Then go to
http://gpgod.home.mindspring.com/godFAQ.htm for a brief FAQ
on the universe
John Keegan
In <63gs2d$g...@camel18.mindspring.com> "Plain and Simple Cronan"
<cro...@DeathsDoor.com> writes:
>
>
>John & Linda VanSickle wrote:
>>A hypothetical concern, since B5 is simply not the same story as
LotR.
>
>Yeah it is. IT just ain't quite as epic
OK. I have heard this claim time and time again. So I think
it is time to put your money where your mouth is. Either you
or Theron Fuller (since you have both been the ones to claim
this recently) should do a point for point analysis of how
Babylon 5 is simply Lord of the Rings redux. Let's see it,
plot point for plot point.
I don't think you can do it. First of all, you need to have
all of the characters match up perfectly. Then, you have to
take the structure of the story, point for point, and compare
it. They should match.
Guess what...I say it cannot be done. And I am not talking
about some partial, half-baked effort, either. You should
either meet the full challenge, or concede that you are wrong.
I think that you will either ignore the challenge, or make
some snide and useless remark. Either way, you will prove
my point.
Here it is, folks! Mark this down! Because one way or another
we will get to the bottom of this. Either they will prove
their point *fully*, in which case I will be willing to take
that defeat in stride, or they will be proven wrong.
(BTW, I note that neither Theron or Cronan bothered to reply
to my earlier response on this issue...<g>)
Yours,
John Keegan
PS: Mr. Ford Thaxton, I am still waiting for you to publicly
explain your point of view without tossing insults and baseless
rumours. We are waiting...
Plain and Simple Cronan
John Keegan wrote
>OK. I have heard this claim time and time again.
It should have sunk in by now.
So I think
>it is time to put your money where your mouth is.
Deal.
Either you
>or Theron Fuller (since you have both been the ones to claim
>this recently) should do a point for point analysis of how
>Babylon 5 is simply Lord of the Rings redux. Let's see it,
>plot point for plot point.
Unfair. Are you expecting me to write a comprehensive analysis of a series
of books that have benn the focus of college courses? You kno very well that
what you ask is simply impossible with weeks(possibly monthes) of detailed
analysis.
>I don't think you can do it.
Your right. Guess why? It can't be done by anyone who has the time to sit
here and argue over it.
First of all, you need to have
>all of the characters match up perfectly.
Since when? Do the characters in Westside Story and Romeo and Juliet match
up perfectly? No. B5 is LOTR remade into scifi. Never said this was a bad
thing but the major plot points(particularly those concerning the Shadow War
and Sheridan's retaking of Earth match up to B5 in a way that cannot simply
be dismissed as coincidence. The method by which the younger races were left
to thrive was so much like the departure... ahhhh forget it. This isn't what
you want, is it? I am going to need charts and graphs and an accountant or
two.
Then, you have to
>take the structure of the story, point for point, and compare
>it. They should match.
They do. I remember being amazed at hearing from Sheridan in "Into the Fire"
lines that bore more than a passing similarity to the certian passages in
the LOTR.
>Guess what...I say it cannot be done.
What you want? Take a long time. I could do it. I could also build a manned
probe to Mars in my backyard and cure cancer with a pair of tweezers and an
ocsilliscope. It can be done but I have neither the time nor the patience to
go through 100+ episodes of B5 and 2000+ pages of the LOTR in an effort to
satiate your clearly ravenous hunger to prove JMS correct. Worship. It is
all you are good for.
And I am not talking
>about some partial, half-baked effort, either.
Well! Gosh darn it! I have been out manuevered. You have simply brought down
the unstoppable twosome of Theron and I. We simply could not keep up with
you. Feel proud. Your master will be pleased.
You should
>either meet the full challenge, or concede that you are wrong.
>I think that you will either ignore the challenge, or make
>some snide and useless remark.
I cannot speak for Theron. I like him. Nice guy, he is. But I can't speak
for him. Snide? Not me. I am merely posinting out that your request is the
equivalent of rewriting the works of Campbell. He books on the subject you
know. ha what others have spent monthes of research on. I can only tell you
firmly and absolutely that JMS' own statements help prove this point. "Going
to the same source material"? Yeah. Of course he completely skipped LOTR and
went to the source material in an effort to be pure as the driven snow and
as orginal as he could possibly be. He intentional did not read LOTR because
he didn't want to haircut it. Emhm. Great.
Either way, you will prove
>my point.
First one must have a legitmate point before it can be proven. I can prove
any point that has no basis in reality.
>Here it is, folks! Mark this down! Because one way or another
>we will get to the bottom of this.
I reached the bottom of this long ago. Probably after I first picked up the
Hobbit.
Either they will prove
>their point *fully*, in which case I will be willing to take
>that defeat in stride, or they will be proven wrong.
My point has been proven *fully*. B5 and the LOTR are far too similar for it
be coinky dink or a similar source.
>(BTW, I note that neither Theron or Cronan bothered to reply
>to my earlier response on this issue...<g>)
I did not see it. I skim posts rather quickly. My spelling is a reflection
of this.
To sum up: your point is non-existent, your request ludicrous, your
intelligence in question, your perspective warped and your fanaticism clear.
>Yours,
>
>John Keegan
I really wish I did have the resources to write waht you would ask of me. It
would interesting to see the internet equivlaent of someone's head
exploding.....
John Keegan
From: john...@ix.netcom.com(John Keegan)
In <63gs2d$g...@camel18.mindspring.com> "Plain and Simple Cronan"
<cro...@DeathsDoor.com> writes:
>
>
>John & Linda VanSickle wrote:
>>A hypothetical concern, since B5 is simply not the same story as
LotR.
>
>Yeah it is. IT just ain't quite as epic
OK. I have heard this claim time and time again. So I think
it is time to put your money where your mouth is. Either you
or Theron Fuller (since you have both been the ones to claim
this recently) should do a point for point analysis of how
Babylon 5 is simply Lord of the Rings redux. Let's see it,
plot point for plot point.
I don't think you can do it. First of all, you need to have
all of the characters match up perfectly. Then, you have to
take the structure of the story, point for point, and compare
it. They should match.
Guess what...I say it cannot be done. And I am not talking
about some partial, half-baked effort, either. You should
either meet the full challenge, or concede that you are wrong.
I think that you will either ignore the challenge, or make
some snide and useless remark. Either way, you will prove
my point.
Here it is, folks! Mark this down! Because one way or another
we will get to the bottom of this. Either they will prove
their point *fully*, in which case I will be willing to take
that defeat in stride, or they will be proven wrong.
(BTW, I note that neither Theron or Cronan bothered to reply
to my earlier response on this issue...<g>)
Yours,
John & Linda VanSickle
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
>
> >OK. I have heard this claim time and time again.
> >
> >or Theron Fuller (since you have both been the ones to claim
> >this recently) should do a point for point analysis of how
> >Babylon 5 is simply Lord of the Rings redux. Let's see it,
> >plot point for plot point.
>
> of books that have benn the focus of college courses? You kno very well that
> what you ask is simply impossible with weeks(possibly monthes) of detailed
> analysis.
Oh please. You and your fellows on this matter have been behaving as
if the B5=LotR argument was an elementary matter proven by a few pages
of arguments.
> >I don't think you can do it.
>
> Your right. Guess why? It can't be done by anyone who has the time to sit
> here and argue over it.
But you do have the time. You are one of the most frequent posters to
rec.arts.sf.tv, et al.
> First of all, you need to have
> >all of the characters match up perfectly.
>
> Since when? Do the characters in West Side Story and Romeo and Juliet match
> up perfectly? No.
Irrelevant.
> B5 is LOTR remade into scifi. Never said this was a bad
> thing but the major plot points(particularly those concerning the Shadow War
> and Sheridan's retaking of Earth match up to B5 in a way that cannot simply
> be dismissed as coincidence.
Oh please. If Frodo has come from Orthanc, and the last event in the tale
had been Frodo's retaking of Orthanc, then maybe you might have a leg to
stand on here.
> The method by which the younger races were left to thrive was so much
> like the departure... ahhhh forget it.
Since you have forgotten the essential differences between the two tales on
this event, this is understandable.
LotR was not about the good Ainur vs the evil, with the Children of
Iluvatar deciding to escort both of them out of Middle-Earth.
> This isn't what you want, is it? I am going to need charts and graphs
> and an accountant or two.
No. A simple arugment that does not equivocate on the bases of non-essentials
is what we're after.
> >Then, you have to take the structure of the story, point for point, and
> >compare it. They should match.
>
> They do.
Between your ears. And Theron's. Nowhere else.
> I remember being amazed at hearing from Sheridan in "Into the Fire"
> lines that bore more than a passing similarity to the certian passages in
> the LOTR.
In that they are written in the same language, yes.
> >Guess what...I say it cannot be done.
>
> What you want? Take a long time. I could do it. I could also build a manned
> probe to Mars in my backyard and cure cancer with a pair of tweezers and an
> ocsilliscope. It can be done but I have neither the time nor the patience
nor the willingness to back up what you say.
> to go through 100+ episodes of B5 and 2000+ pages of the LOTR in an
> effort to satiate your clearly ravenous hunger to prove JMS correct.
You made the claim. Put up or shut up.
> Worship. It is all you are good for.
Who's worshipping? There are plenty of B5 fans who will acknowledge B5's
weaknesses, and if you had confined your discussion to actual, existing
weaknesses in the show, your name would not stink so much around here.
> Either they will prove
> >their point *fully*, in which case I will be willing to take
> >that defeat in stride, or they will be proven wrong.
>
> My point has been proven *fully*. B5 and the LOTR are far too similar for it
> be coinky dink or a similar source.
The "evidence" you have presented so far is not sufficiently strong to
prove that dung stinks.
> To sum up: your point is non-existent, your request ludicrous, your
> intelligence in question, your perspective warped and your fanaticism
> clear.
Considering that it is YOU who continue to make the same claim over and
over without offering more than the most ridiculous excuses for a
supporting argument, it is YOU whose point is non-existent, YOU whose
request is ludicrous, YOU whose intelligence is in question, YOUR
perspective that is warped, and YOUR fanaticism that is clear.
> I really wish I did have the resources to write waht you would ask of me.
You do. You are one of the newsgroup's most frequent posters. If backing
up what you say was all that important to you, you would take a sabbatical
from this ng, work up the few thousand words it will take to convince us,
and return.
Captain Infinity
In article <63hd6n$i...@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com>
john...@ix.netcom.com(John Keegan) wrote :
<snip>
>Here it is, folks! Mark this down! Because one way or another
>we will get to the bottom of this. Either they will prove
>their point *fully*, in which case I will be willing to take
>that defeat in stride, or they will be proven wrong.
>
>(BTW, I note that neither Theron or Cronan bothered to reply
>to my earlier response on this issue...<g>)
>
>Yours,
>
>John Keegan
John Keegan?? John Keegan! Captain Kangaroo himself!! How exciting!
I grew up watching your show, and now here you are on usenet!
Is it true that you were Frank Zappa's father?
>PS: Mr. Ford Thaxton, I am still waiting for you to publicly
>explain your point of view without tossing insults and baseless
>rumours. We are waiting...
Please exclude me from that "we", thank you. I am quite happy to read
Mr. Thaxton's insults and baseless rumours, they are a wonderful spice
and source of amusement, much like the ping-pong balls that used to
fall on your head. You were such a nice old guy; how did you get so
grumpy? And what the heck did you do to Frank? I need to know so I
can do it to my son, too. Imagine raising a child with the wit,
humor, intelligence, and acerbity of Frank Zappa! Not to mention the
ability to piss so many people off!
From one Captain to another, you were the best, Mr. Keegan.
**
Captain Infinity
Plain and Simple Cronan
John & Linda VanSickle wrote
>Oh please. You and your fellows on this matter have been behaving as
>if the B5=LotR argument was an elementary matter proven by a few pages
>of arguments.
I have? I said this? If I did I retract the statement imediately. Before I
retract it I would appreciate it if you would repeat so that I might
properly phrase my retraction.
>> Your right. Guess why? It can't be done by anyone who has the time to sit
>> here and argue over it.
>
>But you do have the time. You are one of the most frequent posters to
>rec.arts.sf.tv, et al.
I have the time? What is it that makes you think that?
>> Since when? Do the characters in West Side Story and Romeo and Juliet
match
>> up perfectly? No.
>
>Irrelevant.
Why...
>Oh please. If Frodo has come from Orthanc, and the last event in the tale
>had been Frodo's retaking of Orthanc, then maybe you might have a leg to
>stand on here.
I don't get what your aiming at here.
>Since you have forgotten the essential differences between the two tales on
>this event, this is understandable.
>
>LotR was not about the good Ainur vs the evil, with the Children of
>Iluvatar deciding to escort both of them out of Middle-Earth.
See if you can figure out where to substitute Shadow and Vorlon and Lorien.
>No. A simple arugment that does not equivocate on the bases of
non-essentials
>is what we're after.
IF you eliminate the non-essential tangents from B5 what are you left with
but a synopsis of LOTR?
>> They do.
>
>Between your ears. And Theron's. Nowhere else.
Can you think of any finer place?
>In that they are written in the same language, yes.
Such drollery.
>nor the willingness to back up what you say.
I have backed up my statements to the extent I feel nessecary. Simply
because you choose to demand outrageous amounts of evidence does not
>> to go through 100+ episodes of B5 and 2000+ pages of the LOTR in an
>> effort to satiate your clearly ravenous hunger to prove JMS correct.
>
>You made the claim. Put up or shut up.
I made an observation.
>Who's worshipping? There are plenty of B5 fans who will acknowledge B5's
>weaknesses, and if you had confined your discussion to actual, existing
>weaknesses in the show, your name would not stink so much around here.
My name stinks? I wasn't aware of that. Well gosh and golly gee. Isn't it
amazing how personal all this gets. I wonder who is it that insists my name
stinks, other than you of course? It strikes me as rather interesting that
"my name stinks" when I strike a nerve(like doing something JMS don't
like)but when I praise the show or demolish Voyager people jump to my side
with "Attaboys".
>The "evidence" you have presented so far is not sufficiently strong to
>prove that dung stinks.
Perhaps it is because your bias plugs your nose?
One thing you cannot say about me is that I am biased in any direction. All
shows get an equal helping of venom from me.
>Considering that it is YOU who continue to make the same claim over and
>over without offering more than the most ridiculous excuses for a
>supporting argument, it is YOU whose point is non-existent, YOU whose
>request is ludicrous, YOU whose intelligence is in question, YOUR
>perspective that is warped, and YOUR fanaticism that is clear.
Amazing. You are capable of base repition. Now that I see what I am up
against I have no real choice but to submit and offer you my first born
child as penance for my crimes.
>You do.
I do?
> You are one of the newsgroup's most frequent posters.
This is a resource? Being prolific means I have extensive resources at my
disposal?
If backing
>up what you say was all that important to you, you would take a sabbatical
>from this ng, work up the few thousand words it will take to convince us,
>and return.
Herein you admit that in order to write what you and Keegan require I would
have to take a sabbatical to do work for *you*. I should put stop having fun
and playing about on the usenet simple becuase you request that I do to
provide you with something more thna cursory analysis.
My point has been proven for quite some time.
After you pull the plugs from your nose that prevent you from seeing the, as
you so quaintly put it, stench that surrounds B5
James C. Ellis
Theron Fuller wrote:
>
> Labeling my comments "Theron's Rant-of-the-Month (TM)" doesn't make them any
> less cogent.
You don't need _my_ help for that.
> Both "West Side Story" and "Jesus Christ Superstar" are brilliant derivative
> works. Babylon 5 fans should be raving about how brilliantly Joe
> Straczynski interpreted Tolkien's work in a "future universe" setting.
> Instead they're cheapening Tolkien's accomplishments by claiming that if
> someone just uses the same sources as Tolkien, that they come up with some
> version of "Lord of the Rings."
Strange, but someone recently posted a comparison showing 'remarkable'
similarities between B5 and "Blazing Saddles". I guess that means that
"Blazing Saddles" ripped off Tolkien too, eh Theron? And them damned
Norse Edda's; another flagrant ripoff. Not to mention Joseph Campbell's
book, DS9, "The Prisoner", the Lensmen books, etc.
It is just outright appalling at the number of Tolkien ripoffs that
are out there!
Biff
[Note: close captioning provided for the sarcasm impaired.]
David P Benjamin
[Cronan blather snipped, newsgroups trimmed]
Nope, Cronan and Theron cannot do the impossible.
Not because it is hard, but because their thesis is absurd.
When was the Mayor of Michel Delving assassinated?
When did Sauron get asked to leave?
Where is the ring?
Troll on, mighty river...
--
David Benjamin
http://www.duc.auburn.edu/~benjadp
Spam reported to ISPs and/or US Fraud hotline. Inquire within.
Plain and Simple Cronan
David P Benjamin wrote
>[Cronan blather snipped, newsgroups trimmed]
How rude. If I were a different type of person I might think I had been
insulted.
>Nope, Cronan and Theron cannot do the impossible.
>Not because it is hard, but because their thesis is absurd.
Yah think?
>When was the Mayor of Michel Delving assassinated?
>
>When did Sauron get asked to leave?
Didn't say all the details were exact. If that were the case everyone would
see it not just those who read the book while actively looking for
similarities to B5.
>Where is the ring?
B5 is the Ring. Remember the episode where Sheridan died? Me too. Remember
what the Shadows said about B5.
>Troll on, mighty river...
Troll?
I am being insulted, aren't I?
Plain and Simple Cronan
David P Benjamin wrote
>So you're saying that aside from the completely different plotlines,
>characters, and themes, that B5 is LOTR.
No I am saying that the plotlines converge at several key points, the
characters bare more than a few passing similarities and the themes were
changed for the conversion to space( in some places.
>B5 was not created by the chief (living) proponent of evil.
>B5 was not destroyed to eliminate the foundations of evil's power.
B5 was created to be the chief propenent of good
B5 was almost destoryed by the chief angents of evil becuase it becamse
good's power base
It is flipped but it is there.
>You'd be better off comparing B5 to Excalibur or Achilles's armor,
>especially since the parallels in those two cases have been
>explicitly made in the show.
Never heard of those
Enlighten me.
James C. Ellis
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
>
>
> >So you're saying that aside from the completely different plotlines,
> >characters, and themes, that B5 is LOTR.
>
> No I am saying that the plotlines converge at several key points,
Some mythic similarities.
> the characters bare more than a few passing similarities
The characters bear more than a few passing similarities?!?
Name some such.
> and the themes were changed for the conversion to space
Common mythic themes. The journey of the hero, etc.
>
> >B5 was not created by the chief (living) proponent of evil.
> >B5 was not destroyed to eliminate the foundations of evil's power.
>
> B5 was created to be the chief propenent of good
Wrong.
> B5 was almost destoryed by the chief angents of evil becuase it becamse
> good's power base
Doesn't track the history of the One Ring at all.
>
> It is flipped but it is there.
You are _really_ reaching... like to Pluto.
>
> >You'd be better off comparing B5 to Excalibur or Achilles's armor,
> >especially since the parallels in those two cases have been
> >explicitly made in the show.
>
> Never heard of those
Goggle!
<The Tick>
Achilles?...The Iliad?...Homer?
Excalibur?...The Sword in the Stone?...King Arthur?
Read a book!!!
</The Tick>
Biff
Mark A Kille
Plain and Simple Cronan (cro...@DeathsDoor.com) wrote:
: David P Benjamin wrote
: >So you're saying that aside from the completely different plotlines,
: >characters, and themes, that B5 is LOTR.
: No I am saying that the plotlines converge at several key points, the
: characters bare more than a few passing similarities and the themes were
: changed for the conversion to space( in some places.
??? You don't have to change a theme to use it in a different setting.
Themes by their very nature can apply just about anywhere.
There are certainly many similar themes: the corrupting influence of
power, the necessity of being willing to sacrifice yourself, even
the idea of elder powers not belonging in a younger world. These themes
did not start in LOTR; they are not addressed in B5 in the same way as
in LOTR. Similarities in plot can be found if you dig,
but similarities can be
found in the vast majority of SF/Fantasy involving armies of good and
evil written since LOTR. Similarities can also be found, in LOTR, with
Norse and Celtic mythology at the least and probably others too.
Not to mention all the Christian imagery.
I think people see so many LOTR similarities not because JMS is a
talentless plagiarist, but because LOTR has become so familiar and
so ingrained in the Fantasy "world" that it's seen as _the_ story.
This is a great compliment to Tolkien, that his work has this
incredibly proprietary air about every last thing in it, but it's
not a very accurate way of looking at things.
I'm not saying there are no similarities, even the occasional
blatant one. But the story of B5 as a whole is _not_ LOTR in space.
: >B5 was not created by the chief (living) proponent of evil.
: >B5 was not destroyed to eliminate the foundations of evil's power.
: B5 was created to be the chief propenent of good
: B5 was almost destoryed by the chief angents of evil becuase it becamse
: good's power base
: It is flipped but it is there.
This has to be the goofiest thing I've heard here in a while, and that's
saying something.
Let us do this in detail, shall we?
The One Ring: evil's power is literally embodied by it; its power, in the
right hands, is almost unimaginable; evil keeps trying to get it back, good
keeps being tempted to evil ways with it; in the end, it's destroyed _by
accident_ (Frodo's finger gets bitten off, he doesn't destroy it of his
own free will) and evil is vanquished.
Babylon 5--and we'll flip it, even though that is an intellectually empty
critical argument--does not follow this. Is the power of good embodied by
it? No; no critical resources were drained from the Minbari, humans or
anyone else to build it or run it; except for strategic location, they're
just as strong without it as with it. (The Army of Light would be screwed,
but they didn't build Babylon 5, they appropriated it). Is its power
unimaginable? Well, no; what can it _do_, anyway, besides serve as a
refueling point and use its defense grid if the enemy comes up close?
Moving on: is there a struggle for possession of Babylon 5? Nope--
Earthforce tries once, then ignores it for more pressing concerns. The
Shadows try to get _Sheridan_ and use B5 for their own purposes, but
the backup plan to blow it up is not directed at B5, but at _Sheridan_'s
ability to mess up their plans. If Sheridan decided to move his
headquarters to some colony world, B5 wouldn't be bothered.
Make a case for Sheridan being a parallel for the Ring, and I might
listen. The space station? Whatever.
The point here is that the ring is powerful in and of itself, as an
object. B5 is powerful only as a place, because of the people who
are there. The final confrontation depended on B5 not one tiny bit.
There is no comparison, not even if you "flip" things.
(How can JMS win, if that counts? If it's similar, you say "it's LOTR!"
If it's dissimilar, you say "He's deliberately not being like LOTR,
but that's still being a slave to its pattern!" Goofy, goofy, goofy...)
In this sense, B5 is the direct opposite of LOTR. LOTR says "evil is
going to win, no matter what, unless we get rid of this one specific
thing." B5 says "evil will never win as long as goodness is in our
hearts and strength is in our wills." At least far as the Shadow War
is concerned. The whole point is completely different.
: >You'd be better off comparing B5 to Excalibur or Achilles's armor,
: >especially since the parallels in those two cases have been
: >explicitly made in the show.
: Never heard of those
: Enlighten me.
Excalibur = King Arthur's sword, given to him by the Lady of the Lake
and one mean weapon.
I don't know about Achille's armor.
Achilles was invulnerable except
for one heel, but I didn't know his armor had any significance.
--Mark Kille
John & Linda VanSickle
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
>
>
> >Oh please. You and your fellows on this matter have been behaving as
> >if the B5=LotR argument was an elementary matter proven by a few pages
> >of arguments.
>
> I have? I said this? If I did I retract the statement imediately. Before I
> retract it I would appreciate it if you would repeat so that I might
> properly phrase my retraction.
You have failed to understand a simple sentence. I did not claim that
you had said any particular thing.
> >> Your right. Guess why? It can't be done by anyone who has the time to sit
> >> here and argue over it.
> >
> >But you do have the time. You are one of the most frequent posters to
> >rec.arts.sf.tv, et al.
>
> I have the time? What is it that makes you think that?
Because you have the time to make a dozen or so posts every day.
> >> Since when? Do the characters in West Side Story and Romeo and Juliet
> match
> >> up perfectly? No.
> >
> >Irrelevant.
>
> Why...
Because we're talking about B5/LotR, and not Romeo & Juliet vs. WSS.
> >Oh please. If Frodo had come from Orthanc, and the last event in the tale
> >had been Frodo's retaking of Orthanc, then maybe you might have a leg to
> >stand on here.
>
> I don't get what your aiming at here.
Just the proof that the Scouring of the Shire and the Battle to overthrow
Clark are not similar.
> >Since you have forgotten the essential differences between the two tales on
> >this event, this is understandable.
> >
> >LotR was not about the good Ainur vs the evil, with the Children of
> >Iluvatar deciding to escort both of them out of Middle-Earth.
>
> See if you can figure out where to substitute Shadow and Vorlon and Lorien.
You can't. That's why they're not the same.
> >No. A simple arugment that does not equivocate on the bases of
> non-essentials
> >is what we're after.
>
> IF you eliminate the non-essential tangents from B5 what are you left with
> but a synopsis of LOTR?
No. You are left with the synopsis of an entirely different tale.
> >> They do.
> >
> >Between your ears. And Theron's. Nowhere else.
>
> Can you think of any finer place?
Yes. The skull of a retarded dog.
> >nor the willingness to back up what you say.
>
> I have backed up my statements to the extent I feel nessecary.
I.e., not at all.
Simply
> because you choose to demand outrageous amounts of evidence does not
>
> >> to go through 100+ episodes of B5 and 2000+ pages of the LOTR in an
> >> effort to satiate your clearly ravenous hunger to prove JMS correct.
> >
> >You made the claim. Put up or shut up.
>
> I made an observation.
"IF you eliminate the non-essential tangents from B5 what are you left
with but a synopsis of LOTR?" is not an observation. It is a claim.
> >Who's worshipping? There are plenty of B5 fans who will acknowledge B5's
> >weaknesses, and if you had confined your discussion to actual, existing
> >weaknesses in the show, your name would not stink so much around here.
>
> My name stinks? I wasn't aware of that. Well gosh and golly gee. Isn't it
> amazing how personal all this gets. I wonder who is it that insists my name
> stinks, other than you of course? It strikes me as rather interesting that
> "my name stinks" when I strike a nerve (like doing something JMS don't
> like) but when I praise the show or demolish Voyager people jump to my side
> with "Attaboys".
"Your name stinks" means that you have earned yourself a reputation for
being needlessly conentious. You aren't wrong all the time. I do agree
with your general assessment of Voyager, the intelligence of its fans, and
even some of the political opinions you have expressed in other newsgoups.
But on this issue you have continued to harp and harp the same flat note.
> >The "evidence" you have presented so far is not sufficiently strong to
> >prove that dung stinks.
>
> Perhaps it is because your bias plugs your nose?
No. It's because it simply does not support your contention.
> One thing you cannot say about me is that I am biased in any direction. All
> shows get an equal helping of venom from me.
That's the problem. You rarely show any sign that you can tell the bad
from the good.
> >Considering that it is YOU who continue to make the same claim over and
> >over without offering more than the most ridiculous excuses for a
> >supporting argument, it is YOU whose point is non-existent, YOU whose
> >request is ludicrous, YOU whose intelligence is in question, YOUR
> >perspective that is warped, and YOUR fanaticism that is clear.
>
> Amazing. You are capable of base repition. Now that I see what I am up
> against I have no real choice but to submit and offer you my first born
> child as penance for my crimes.
I don't want your firstborn; he/she might be as smart-mouthed as you are.
> > You are one of the newsgroup's most frequent posters.
>
> This is a resource? Being prolific means I have extensive resources at my
> disposal?
Yes.
> If backing
> >up what you say was all that important to you, you would take a sabbatical
> >from this ng, work up the few thousand words it will take to convince us,
> >and return.
>
> Herein you admit that in order to write what you and Keegan require I would
> have to take a sabbatical to do work for *you*. I should put stop having fun
> and playing about on the usenet simple becuase you request that I do to
> provide you with something more thna cursory analysis.
It might take all of two days.
> My point has been proven for quite some time.
Not to any unbiased observer.
> After you pull the plugs from your nose that prevent you from seeing the, as
> you so quaintly put it, stench that surrounds B5
Ad hominem, especially when based on a falsehood such as this, is not going
to work. Show me how B5 follows the same sequence of events as LotR.
Regards,
John
--
"You may bang your head on the floor until forgiven."
John & Linda VanSickle
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
>
> >Not because it is hard, but because their thesis is absurd.
>
> Yah think?
>
> >When was the Mayor of Michel Delving assassinated?
> >
> >When did Sauron get asked to leave?
>
> Didn't say all the details were exact.
These aren't details. These are major events in the plot.
> If that were the case everyone would see it not just those who read the
> book while actively looking for similarities to B5.
>
> >Where is the ring?
>
> B5 is the Ring. Remember the episode where Sheridan died? Me too. Remember
> what the Shadows said about B5.
Except that the Shadow War did NOT end with the destruction of B5,
and the Shadows would certainly not have been devestated by the destruction
of B5, as was Sauron by the unmaking of the ring.
Next.
jere7my tho?rpe
While watching "The X-Files" tonight, I was struck by something. It's
a story in which:
* the hero (Mulder) is attempting to expose and defeat a secret from a
time before he was born (the alien cover-up);
* the hero is aided by a mysterious source of cryptic information who
is eventually killed (Deep Throat);
* this source is replaced by a sinister version of same, whose
allegiances are questionable (X);
* another source, apparently immortal and outside the normal scheme of
things (the middle-aged alien from the end of season 3), appears to aid the
hero;
* the hero is partnered with a tough-as-nails woman whose humorless
exterior conceals an emotionally fragile interior (Scully);
* the hero loses the woman he is closest to (Samantha) as a result of
this age-old secret, and becomes obsessed with finding her again; and
* the hero's superiors (the US government) betray him and the
principles he holds dear, and force him to operate outside their authority.
Obviously, Chris Carter is putting a very different lens in front of
these things than JMS is, but the root structure is still there. The
reason "The X-Files" mirrors Babylon 5 so closely is not because one was
stealing from the other; it's because both are (more-or-less) following a
mythic structure which has its roots in the deepest part of the human
psyche. Many of the LotR parallels spring from the same source, as do
parallels to the Greek epics, Star Wars, and so on. Each pulls on
different threads ("The X-Files" has the Norns/Fates in the form of the
Lone Gunmen; B5 doesn't), but they are all cut from the same cloth.
Sure, some details of B5 are taken from Tolkien, consciously or
unconsciously: the specific implementation of the Rangers and the names
Lorien and Z'Ha'Dum, for three. There is a small point to be made there.
But the concept of "an ancient darkness awakening from an age-old sleep" is
older than Leviathan--saying B5 copied it from LotR is pure silliness.
You will be able to find common themes and motifs running through any
two epics you care to examine; often you'll find that major chunks of the
structure are the same. People spend thousands of hours writing just this
sort of comparative analysis. (Joseph Cambell is the Man for this stuff--I
recommend his _The Hero with a Thousand Faces_.) This doesn't usually mean
one is a cheap rip-off of the other; it means both draw from the same well.
B5 and LotR are no exception.
----j7y
******************************** <*> ********************************
jere7my tho?rpe "If I ever discover a definition of
now hailing from Ann Arbor science fiction, I shall
(313) 769-0913 immediately attempt to violate it."
----Roger Zelazny
Plain and Simple Cronan
James C. Ellis wrote
>> >You'd be better off comparing B5 to Excalibur or Achilles's armor,
>> >especially since the parallels in those two cases have been
>> >explicitly made in the show.
>>
>> Never heard of those
>
> Goggle!
>
> <The Tick>
>
> Achilles?...The Iliad?...Homer?
>
> Excalibur?...The Sword in the Stone?...King Arthur?
>
> Read a book!!!
>
> </The Tick>
>
> Biff
I know what they are just had never heard of anyone detailing the
similarities.
Plain and Simple Cronan
Mark A Kille wrote
>This has to be the goofiest thing I've heard here in a while, and that's
>saying something.
>
>Let us do this in detail, shall we?
>
>The One Ring: evil's power is literally embodied by it; its power, in the
>right hands, is almost unimaginable; evil keeps trying to get it back, good
>keeps being tempted to evil ways with it; in the end, it's destroyed _by
>accident_ (Frodo's finger gets bitten off, he doesn't destroy it of his
>own free will) and evil is vanquished.
>
>Babylon 5--and we'll flip it, even though that is an intellectually empty
>critical argument--does not follow this. Is the power of good embodied by
>it?
Yes. It is the center and focus for the Army of Ligh hence good is emodied
within it.
No; no critical resources were drained from the Minbari, humans or
>anyone else to build it or run it; except for strategic location, they're
>just as strong without it as with it. (The Army of Light would be screwed,
>but they didn't build Babylon 5, they appropriated it).
Nor didthe forces of good in LOTR build or create the ring. They
appropriated it.
Is its power
>unimaginable? Well, no; what can it _do_, anyway, besides serve as a
>refueling point and use its defense grid if the enemy comes up close?
Yes. In a philisophical sense. As rallying point and source of inspiration.
If
>Moving on: is there a struggle for possession of Babylon 5? Nope--
>Earthforce tries once, then ignores it for more pressing concerns.
Really? Seemed to me they were pretty concerned with B5 power.
The
>Shadows try to get _Sheridan_ and use B5 for their own purposes, but
>the backup plan to blow it up is not directed at B5, but at _Sheridan_'s
>ability to mess up their plans.
Wrong. Do you not remember the episode with his wife taking him to Z'Ha'Dum?
The Shadows go out of their way to point out that Sheridan is less important
than he seems to think. There are others who can take his place. The
destruction of B5 is the destruction of thier power.
If Sheridan decided to move his
>headquarters to some colony world, B5 wouldn't be bothered.
Not true. The ring had to be a thing that was *created* or *built*
>Make a case for Sheridan being a parallel for the Ring, and I might
>listen. The space station? Whatever.
Nope. Couldn't be Sheridan. The Shadows seemed to think he was readily
replacable by any one of three people. They wanted to possess or destroy B5.
Those were the two choices they saw. After Clake failedot take it they
choose to destory.
>The point here is that the ring is powerful in and of itself, as an
>object. B5 is powerful only as a place, because of the people who
>are there. The final confrontation depended on B5 not one tiny bit.
>There is no comparison, not even if you "flip" things.
There is plenty of comaprison. Flipping things will do it for you. The final
confrontation depended on the person who possessed B5 using its power
wisely. They weren't on the station but that's because it ain't portable.
They used an extension of the station.
<<snipped>>
>In this sense, B5 is the direct opposite of LOTR. LOTR says "evil is
>going to win, no matter what, unless we get rid of this one specific
>thing." B5 says "evil will never win as long as goodness is in our
>hearts and strength is in our wills." At least far as the Shadow War
>is concerned. The whole point is completely different.
I dunno. Seemed to me that the leaving of the elder races served precisely
the same purpose.
>: Never heard of those
>
>: Enlighten me.
>
>Excalibur = King Arthur's sword, given to him by the Lady of the Lake
>and one mean weapon.
>
>I don't know about Achille's armor.
>Achilles was invulnerable except
>for one heel, but I didn't know his armor had any significance.
Not that. But the similarities drawn between them and B5.
Plain and Simple Cronan
John & Linda VanSickle wrote
>Except that the Shadow War did NOT end with the destruction of B5,
>and the Shadows would certainly not have been devestated by the destruction
>of B5, as was Sauron by the unmaking of the ring.
>
>Next.
B5 is the ring. Save that the it is the power of good instead of evil.
Plain and Simple Cronan
John & Linda VanSickle wrote
>> >Oh please. You and your fellows on this matter have been behaving as
>> >if the B5=LotR argument was an elementary matter proven by a few pages
>> >of arguments.
>>
>> I have? I said this? If I did I retract the statement imediately. Before
I
>> retract it I would appreciate it if you would repeat so that I might
>> properly phrase my retraction.
>
>You have failed to understand a simple sentence. I did not claim that
>you had said any particular thing.
You said, "You and your fellows." Exactly how am I to interpret this?
>> I have the time? What is it that makes you think that?
>
>Because you have the time to make a dozen or so posts every day.
How long do you think it takes to write a post?
>> Why...
>
>Because we're talking about B5/LotR, and not Romeo & Juliet vs. WSS.
Seems like an effective parallel.
>> I don't get what your aiming at here.
>
>Just the proof that the Scouring of the Shire and the Battle to overthrow
>Clark are not similar.
That's nice.
>> >LotR was not about the good Ainur vs the evil, with the Children of
>> >Iluvatar deciding to escort both of them out of Middle-Earth.
>>
>> See if you can figure out where to substitute Shadow and Vorlon and
Lorien.
>
>You can't. That's why they're not the same.
You didn't even try. I am disappointed.
>> IF you eliminate the non-essential tangents from B5 what are you left
with
>> but a synopsis of LOTR?
>
>No. You are left with the synopsis of an entirely different tale.
Provide a synopsis of LOTR and I bet that with a minimum of word
substitution I can get a synopsis of B5.
>> >Between your ears. And Theron's. Nowhere else.
>>
>> Can you think of any finer place?
>
>Yes. The skull of a retarded dog.
How wonderful! It is good to know I am up against a wordsmith.
>> I have backed up my statements to the extent I feel nessecary.
>
>I.e., not at all.
If you choose to believe that then I cannot disuade you.
>> I made an observation.
>
>"IF you eliminate the non-essential tangents from B5 what are you left
>with but a synopsis of LOTR?" is not an observation. It is a claim.
observation: remark, statement
claim: an assertion open to challenge
semantics: you
>"Your name stinks" means that you have earned yourself a reputation for
>being needlessly conentious.
What is "conentious"?
You aren't wrong all the time. I do agree
>with your general assessment of Voyager, the intelligence of its fans, and
>even some of the political opinions you have expressed in other newsgoups.
>But on this issue you have continued to harp and harp the same flat note.
I have seen you provide nothing of note to refute the statements of myself
and others.
>> Perhaps it is because your bias plugs your nose?
>
>No. It's because it simply does not support your contention.
But does. Of course what you require for support of my claims/oberservations
is completely undoable.
>> One thing you cannot say about me is that I am biased in any direction.
All
>> shows get an equal helping of venom from me.
>
>That's the problem. You rarely show any sign that you can tell the bad
>from the good.
Yes I can. I have written several posts on the relative merrits of B5 and
Ds9. Hell I wrote a rather long post on the supporting actors on both shows
just the other day.
>> Amazing. You are capable of base repition. Now that I see what I am up
>> against I have no real choice but to submit and offer you my first born
>> child as penance for my crimes.
>
>I don't want your firstborn; he/she might be as smart-mouthed as you are.
Let's hope so.
>> This is a resource? Being prolific means I have extensive resources at my
>> disposal?
>
>Yes.
Well gosh. I had no idea.
>> Herein you admit that in order to write what you and Keegan require I
would
>> have to take a sabbatical to do work for *you*. I should put stop having
fun
>> and playing about on the usenet simple becuase you request that I do to
>> provide you with something more than cursory analysis.
>
>It might take all of two days.
Two days of my life to prove a point you will not accept regardless?
>> My point has been proven for quite some time.
>
>Not to any unbiased observer.
And you are fit to determine who is and who is not biased? I think not.
>> After you pull the plugs from your nose that prevent you from seeing the,
as
>> you so quaintly put it, stench that surrounds B5
>
>Ad hominem, especially when based on a falsehood such as this, is not going
>to work. Show me how B5 follows the same sequence of events as LotR.
Ad hominem? You accuse me of what you have done by saying, "your name
stinks" and "You rarely show any sign that you can tell the bad from the
good."?
Hypocrite.
James C. Ellis
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
>
That's asinine, even by your standards Cronan.
Name three similarities (even reversed ones) between the way that B5
served as a focus in the show of the same name, and the way the One Ring
was represented in LOTR. Note: be specific; both of your implications
above - that the Ring was imbued with the "power of evil" , and that B5
is imbued with the "power of good" - are vague (not to mention
nonsensical).
Plain and Simple Cronan
James C. Ellis wrote
> That's asinine, even by your standards Cronan.
>
> Name three similarities (even reversed ones) between the way that B5
>served as a focus in the show of the same name, and the way the One Ring
>was represented in LOTR. Note: be specific; both of your implications
>above - that the Ring was imbued with the "power of evil" , and that B5
>is imbued with the "power of good" - are vague (not to mention
>nonsensical).
Better idea: Read the synopsis of the episode in which Sheridan dies
The Lurker's Guide is down at the moment or I would give you a title...
Invid fan
In article <63q3ch$2...@camel18.mindspring.com>, "Plain and Simple Cronan"
<cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
> Mark A Kille wrote
>
> The
> >Shadows try to get _Sheridan_ and use B5 for their own purposes, but
> >the backup plan to blow it up is not directed at B5, but at _Sheridan_'s
> >ability to mess up their plans.
>
> Wrong. Do you not remember the episode with his wife taking him to Z'Ha'Dum?
> The Shadows go out of their way to point out that Sheridan is less important
> than he seems to think. There are others who can take his place. The
> destruction of B5 is the destruction of thier power.
>
You're missing the point of that scene. The idea is that if Sheridan dies,
some other person in the universe will come along to fill his role. If B5
blows up, some other place will become the home of the AoL. It's similar to
the argument made by one of the historians in the last episode- it wasn't
Sheridan who was important. Instead, he just served as a focal point for
the people and events around him. Just about anyone could have stepped into
that role, and he's no more special than the next guy. B5 is just a place,
no more special than any other space station or ship.
--
Chris Mack "...any occult ritual ought to involve
'Invid fan' (a) nudity
(b) wearing a bad hat, and
In...@localnet.com (c) assuming an uncomfortable and ludicrous
position"
-Penn and Teller
David P Benjamin
Plain and Simple Cronan (cro...@DeathsDoor.com) wrote:
: James C. Ellis wrote
: > That's asinine, even by your standards Cronan.
: >
: > Name three similarities (even reversed ones) between the way that B5
: >served as a focus in the show of the same name, and the way the One Ring
: >was represented in LOTR. Note: be specific; both of your implications
: >above - that the Ring was imbued with the "power of evil" , and that B5
: >is imbued with the "power of good" - are vague (not to mention
: >nonsensical).
: Better idea: Read the synopsis of the episode in which Sheridan dies
: The Lurker's Guide is down at the moment or I would give you a title...
Z'ha'dum. Maybe you should reread the synopsis. It doesn't
say what you seem to think it says.
Shelley Hatfield
Plain and Simple Cronan <cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote in article
<63sh6n$m...@camel21.mindspring.com>...
>
> John Keegan wrote
>
> <<snipped>>
>
> >Any comments?
>
>
> Plagerers UNITE!!
But it's only fitting. From the looks of it, the only "source" on myth that
they can find to read is the old plagiarizer himself, Campbell. Frasier,
anyone?
Graves, anyone?
Shelley
Plain and Simple Cronan
John Keegan wrote
>Any comments?
Just one
.
No wonder you defend JMS' rewritting og LOTR. You are doing the same thing!
Congrats
Plagiarizers UNITE!!
That is one last thing to remember: writers are always selling somebody out.
Joan Didion
James C. Ellis
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
>
>
> <<snipped>>
>
> >Any comments?
>
>
> No wonder you defend JMS' rewritting og LOTR. You are doing the same thing!
>
> Congrats
>
He went through all that trouble and _that's_ the response you give
him?!?
Moron.
I hope he sues your ass off Cronan.
David P Benjamin
Plain and Simple Cronan (cro...@DeathsDoor.com) wrote:
: John Keegan wrote
: >Any comments?
: Just one
: .
: No wonder you defend JMS' rewritting og LOTR. You are doing the same thing!
: Congrats
: Plagiarizers UNITE!!
Misspellers UNTIE!!
I take it you've given up on rational discussion and have
proceeded to proof by assertion. Very well. You certainly
haven't earned the right to be taken seriously in any
adult conversation. See ya later, B1FF.
James C. Ellis
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
>
> drawing several parallels between the two works. This does not satisfy you.
> Fine. No not accuse them of being baseless because you(and your cadre)
> disagree with them.
I don't think anyone following this thread thinks that your
substantiation was "adequate".
In fact, when I asked for "three specific" similarities between the B5
station and the One Ring, I was met with first a vague platitude, and
then only with silence.
Come on then, repost your substantiation. But be warned: in order to
be considered "adequate" it will have to be a thorough, specific,
point-by-point comparison, and will have to address shortcomings in your
assertation.
Until you have done this, my last word on the subject will be <plonk!>
John & Linda VanSickle
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
>
> John & Linda VanSickle wrote
>
> >> >Oh please. You and your fellows on this matter have been behaving as
> >> >if the B5=LotR argument was an elementary matter proven by a few pages
> >> >of arguments.
> >>
> >> I have? I said this? If I did I retract the statement imediately. Before
> I
> >> retract it I would appreciate it if you would repeat so that I might
> >> properly phrase my retraction.
> >
> >You have failed to understand a simple sentence. I did not claim that
> >you had said any particular thing.
>
As in "you and the other people who say the same thing on this issue."
> >> I have the time? What is it that makes you think that?
> >
> >Because you have the time to make a dozen or so posts every day.
>
> How long do you think it takes to write a post?
As long as some of them are, you spend at least an hour or two a day
reading the newsgroups.
> >> >LotR was not about the good Ainur vs the evil, with the Children of
> >> >Iluvatar deciding to escort both of them out of Middle-Earth.
> >>
> >> See if you can figure out where to substitute Shadow and Vorlon and
> Lorien.
> >
> >You can't. That's why they're not the same.
>
> You didn't even try. I am disappointed.
I did. They didn't fit.
> >> IF you eliminate the non-essential tangents from B5 what are you left
> with
> >> but a synopsis of LOTR?
> >
> >No. You are left with the synopsis of an entirely different tale.
>
> Provide a synopsis of LOTR and I bet that with a minimum of word
> substitution I can get a synopsis of B5.
Yes, but the substitutions will be unjustified, because you keep
sticking the square pegs from B5 into the round holes in LotR.
> >> I have backed up my statements to the extent I feel nessecary.
> >
> >I.e., not at all.
>
> If you choose to believe that then I cannot disuade you.
You could if you post a cogent argument.
> >> I made an observation.
> >
> >"IF you eliminate the non-essential tangents from B5 what are you left
> >with but a synopsis of LOTR?" is not an observation. It is a claim.
>
> observation: remark, statement
>
> claim: an assertion open to challenge
>
> semantics: you
>
> >"Your name stinks" means that you have earned yourself a reputation for
> >being needlessly contentious.
>
> What is "contentious"?
Provoking argument for the sake of argument.
> You aren't wrong all the time. I do agree
> >with your general assessment of Voyager, the intelligence of its fans, and
> >even some of the political opinions you have expressed in other newsgoups.
> >But on this issue you have continued to harp and harp the same flat note.
>
> I have seen you provide nothing of note to refute the statements of myself
> and others.
A lie. I've posted several refutations.
> >> Perhaps it is because your bias plugs your nose?
> >
> >No. It's because it simply does not support your contention.
>
> But does. Of course what you require for support of my claims/oberservations
> is completely undoable.
It's doable. The time you have spent on this thread since I have joined
it is more than sufficient to gather and present enough evidence to
establish your point.
> >> Herein you admit that in order to write what you and Keegan require I
> >> would have to take a sabbatical to do work for *you*. I should put
> >> stop having fun and playing about on the usenet simple because you
> >> request that I provide you with something more than cursory analysis.
> >
> >It might take all of two days.
>
> Two days of my life to prove a point you will not accept regardless?
I certainly will accept it if proven.
> >> My point has been proven for quite some time.
> >
> >Not to any unbiased observer.
>
> And you are fit to determine who is and who is not biased? I think not.
All right, let me ask you this then: What will prove to you that B5 is
not LotR with the serial numbers filed off?
> >> After you pull the plugs from your nose that prevent you from seeing the,
> as
> >> you so quaintly put it, stench that surrounds B5
> >
> >Ad hominem, especially when based on a falsehood such as this, is not going
> >to work. Show me how B5 follows the same sequence of events as LotR.
>
> Ad hominem? You accuse me of what you have done by saying, "your name
> stinks" and "You rarely show any sign that you can tell the bad from the
> good."?
>
> Hypocrite.
Biased people do not ask for evidence that challenges their convictions.
Show me how B5 follows the same sequence of events as LotR.
John & Linda VanSickle
Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
>
>
> >: Plagiarizers UNITE!!
>
> >Misspellers UNTIE!!
>
> plagiarize \'pla-je-,riz also -je-e-\ vb -rized ; -rizing vt [ plagiary ]
> (1716) : to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
> : use (a created production) without crediting the source ~ vi : to commit
> literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from
> an existing source _ plagiarizer n
>
> As you can see, in this instance, I spelled the word correctly.
That may not have been the word to which he was referring. Other words
in your post were spelled incorrectly (although they were probably typos).
Robert Holland
James C. Ellis wrote:
>
> Plain and Simple Cronan wrote:
> >
> > drawing several parallels between the two works. This does not satisfy you.
> > Fine. No not accuse them of being baseless because you(and your cadre)
> > disagree with them.
>
> I don't think anyone following this thread thinks that your
> substantiation was "adequate".
>
> In fact, when I asked for "three specific" similarities between the B5
> station and the One Ring, I was met with first a vague platitude, and
> then only with silence.
>
> Come on then, repost your substantiation. But be warned: in order to
> be considered "adequate" it will have to be a thorough, specific,
> point-by-point comparison, and will have to address shortcomings in your
> assertation.
>
> Until you have done this, my last word on the subject will be <plonk!>
Hey, lookie there, Cronan! You've created another plonk-whore.
--RH
Invid fan
In article <63tgev$2...@camel15.mindspring.com>, "Plain and Simple Cronan"
<cro...@DeathsDoor.com> wrote:
> plagiarize \'pla-je-,riz also -je-e-\ vb -rized ; -rizing vt [ plagiary ]
> (1716) : to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
> : use (a created production) without crediting the source ~ vi : to commit
> literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from
> an existing source _ plagiarizer n
>
> As you can see, in this instance, I spelled the word correctly.
>
Yes, but I hope you've read the deffinition and see that it in no way
refers to the author who posted. He was deffinitly giving his sources, and
saying that while the telling may be new, the structure wasn't.
In a way, it's like saying that a poem is plagiarized because the damn
thing is broken up into lines that rhyme.
Plain and Simple Cronan
James C. Ellis wrote
> I don't think anyone following this thread thinks that your
>substantiation was "adequate".
And that would be whose problem?
> In fact, when I asked for "three specific" similarities between the B5
>station and the One Ring, I was met with first a vague platitude, and
>then only with silence.
Really? Vague? My first post in this thread contained *4* similarites
between the two. Not 3 as you request now but 4. Search for the first post
in this thread on dejanews and you will find them. No. Screw that. I am
tired of this game:
1. Sheridan's resurrection = Gandalf's resurrection. The only thing is
that this part is out of timing with the books, but...
2. The Shadow War = the War of the Ring. Pretty obvious, including the
way it ends. After all, the War of the Ring ends around 2/3 of the way
through the plot of _Return of the King_. The rest of the book revolves
around claiming the glory and the scouring of the shire...the battle for
Earth, anybody?
3. President Clark = Saruman. Both Saruman and Clark were traitors, both
were in key positions of power, and both last until around the end of the
book. Also, Saruman has a deal with Sauron which he is weasalling his way
out of, just as Clark has a deal with the Shadows he is weasalling his way
out of. Going by the pattern, it is logical that Clark will be killed at
the climax of the series.
4. The passing of the Shadows and the Vorlons = the passing of the Elves
and the destruction of the Orcs. Here, the Vorlons are the Elves, who
passed into the west/outer rim, and the Shadows are the Orcs and Sauron,
who are destroyed or dispersed. The only thing is, the Shadows also flee
to the rim.
> Come on then, repost your substantiation. But be warned: in order to
>be considered "adequate" it will have to be a thorough, specific,
>point-by-point comparison, and will have to address shortcomings in your
>assertation.
There you go.
> Until you have done this, my last word on the subject will be <plonk!>
If your goal was to wear away my defenses with your blunt edged stupidty all
the while attacking my "good name" then I should say you have succeeded.
Plain and Simple Cronan
John & Linda VanSickle wrote
>> You said, "You and your fellows." Exactly how am I to interpret this?
>
>As in "you and the other people who say the same thing on this issue."
Well gosh. That just explains everything. Thanks.
>> How long do you think it takes to write a post?
>
>As long as some of them are, you spend at least an hour or two a day
>reading the newsgroups.
Your point being? I am to take what amounts to 28 hours of my life that I
could spend enjoying myself doing research? No thanks.
>> >You can't. That's why they're not the same.
>>
>> You didn't even try. I am disappointed.
>
>I did. They didn't fit.
You have no sense of style.
>> >No. You are left with the synopsis of an entirely different tale.
>>
>> Provide a synopsis of LOTR and I bet that with a minimum of word
>> substitution I can get a synopsis of B5.
>
>Yes, but the substitutions will be unjustified, because you keep
>sticking the square pegs from B5 into the round holes in LotR.
More like ovals and ovoids.
>> If you choose to believe that then I cannot disuade you.
>
>You could if you post a cogent argument.
But I have. Repeatedly. Cogency is not what you wish. A jihad is what you
wage. I cannot combat this anymore than I could heft the world on my
shoulders.
>> What is "contentious"?
>
>Provoking argument for the sake of argument.
Why is that people automatically assume ignorance in my case? It does get
tiring..
I know the damn word.
The question is what about my argument is contentious?
>> I have seen you provide nothing of note to refute the statements of
myself
>> and others.
>
>A lie. I've posted several refutations.
If you have posted refutations there must be something to refute, yes? Well
that would imply that I posted something that is cogent since I am assuming
your refutations, at least in your eyes, were of equal of greater cogency?
Just checking
>> >No. It's because it simply does not support your contention.
>>
>> But does. Of course what you require for support of my
claims/oberservations
>> is completely undoable.
>
>It's doable. The time you have spent on this thread since I have joined
>it is more than sufficient to gather and present enough evidence to
>establish your point.
I established my point and drove it through your skull. Nothing happened so
one would assume that space was not in use.
>> >It might take all of two days.
>>
>> Two days of my life to prove a point you will not accept regardless?
>
>I certainly will accept it if proven.
I already have. You have not
QED
>> And you are fit to determine who is and who is not biased? I think not.
>
>All right, let me ask you this then: What will prove to you that B5 is
>not LotR with the serial numbers filed off?
I dunno. No one has ever tried.
>> Ad hominem? You accuse me of what you have done by saying, "your name
>> stinks" and "You rarely show any sign that you can tell the bad from the
>> good."?
>>
>> Hypocrite.
>
>Biased people do not ask for evidence that challenges their convictions.
Yeah they do. Hitler asked for it all the time(the 1936 Olympics for
example). He just ignored it, as you do, although it was overwhelming
>Show me how B5 follows the same sequence of events as LotR.
Same sequence?
Plain and Simple Cronan
Robert Holland wrote
>> Until you have done this, my last word on the subject will be <plonk!>
>
>Hey, lookie there, Cronan! You've created another plonk-whore.
I am not sure which is scary: being consistently grouped with Theron and
Robert or the fact that it doesn't seem like all that bad a place to be.
John Keegan
In <63snlb$b...@camel21.mindspring.com> "Plain and Simple Cronan"
<cro...@DeathsDoor.com> writes:
>
>
>John Keegan wrote
>>Any comments?
>
>Just one
>.
>No wonder you defend JMS' rewritting og LOTR. You are doing the same
thing!
Hmm...mighty easy of you to say that, considering that you have
not even read one word of what I have written, huh, Cronan?
Seems to me that you suffer from a certain lack of perspective.
I have seen your agruements...I disagree. But you will not even
consider mine, will you? You seem to think that anyone that
does not agree with you is somehow inferior.
That, and once again you are making accusations and assertions
that you cannot back up.
John Keegan
John Keegan
In <63tta0$d...@camel15.mindspring.com> "Plain and Simple Cronan"
<cro...@DeathsDoor.com> writes:
>
>
>James C. Ellis wrote
>
>> I don't think anyone following this thread thinks that your
>>substantiation was "adequate".
>
>And that would be whose problem?
You are the one that made a claim, that B5 = LotR. Yours
is the burden of proof. I was the one asking for proof.
Others joined in. You proceeded to toss insults and vague
ideas/evidence of your claim.
Cronan, there is no reason for you to insult people because
they do not agree with you. I make the same comments to
Ford Thaxton all the time. I also ask him to explain his
point of view.
At least he has the good grace not to reply if he does not
wish to take my offer in good standing.
>> In fact, when I asked for "three specific" similarities between the
B5
>>station and the One Ring, I was met with first a vague platitude, and
>>then only with silence.
>
>Really? Vague? My first post in this thread contained *4* similarites
>between the two. Not 3 as you request now but 4. Search for the first
post
>in this thread on dejanews and you will find them. No. Screw that. I
am
>tired of this game:
Tired of what? This is the first good effort I have seen you
make!
>1. Sheridan's resurrection = Gandalf's resurrection. The only thing
is
>that this part is out of timing with the books, but...
Heh. OK, this one has been mentioned before, so at least it
is familiar. But one little nit. If you are trying to
prove that something is exactly the same as something else,
you might not want to prove, at the exact same time, that
they are different!
But that is an aside.
This is good, though. You came up with a solid example. Only
one problem. The idea that a heroic figure falls into the pit,
only to rise with greater power, is a common theme. Happens all
the time in ancient mythology.
Also, Gandalf fell while defending the rest of the party from the
enemy. That was not Sheridan's purpose. He was alone, and he
was prompted into the action by an ally. Gandalf did what he
did for completely different reasons.
Also, Gandalf sacrificed himself so that the fellowship could
go on, so that the mission would succeed. Sheridan did what he
did in a vain attempt to change a future that only he could see.
Sheridan was following the same kind of logic as Oedipus in Greek
myth, while Gandalf was doing the usual "act of sacrifice for the
greater good" routine.
Similar, yes...but not the same.
>2. The Shadow War = the War of the Ring. Pretty obvious, including
the
>way it ends. After all, the War of the Ring ends around 2/3 of the
way
>through the plot of _Return of the King_. The rest of the book
revolves
>around claiming the glory and the scouring of the shire...the battle
for
>Earth, anybody?
Nope. Again, we see thematic similarities, but the details differ.
For one, the Shadow War ended, and then Sheridan gathered his
allies to deal with the issue of Earth. Sheridan only acted when
Clark began killing innocents in order to cement his hold on the
colonies. At that point, Sheridan lead his forces against Clark.
He was betrayed by Garibaldi, and then set free in time for the
final clash. In the end, Clark kills himself, and Sheridan's own
government forces him out.
Notice that I do not use many fine details...just the broad scope
of the plot.
In order for B5 to be LotR redux, LotR would have to go like this:
The War of the Ring ends. Gandalf gathers his allies to
retake the Shire, only after Saruman begins to kill innocents
in order to cement his hold on the Shire and the surrounding
area. At that point, Gandalf leads his forces against Saruman.
First of all, this is not at all close to what happens in LotR.
And you cannot show me where Gandalf is betrayed, after the War
of the Ring, by another wizard.
That, and you switch character equalities. First you say
Sheridan=Gandalf, and Clark=Saruman. That means that humanity
in B5 = the wizards of LotR, right? Well, then what does the
scouring of the Shire have to do with the war for Earth? That
would mean that Sheridan = Frodo...and if B5 is nothing more
than a simple rewrite, how can that be?
Every point of similarity can be found with any mythic saga,
including many of the Greek and Roman myths. Cronan, there
are countless stories about good forces facing the rebirth
of an ancient evil.
>3. President Clark = Saruman. Both Saruman and Clark were traitors,
both
>were in key positions of power, and both last until around the end of
the
>book. Also, Saruman has a deal with Sauron which he is weasalling his
way
>out of, just as Clark has a deal with the Shadows he is weasalling his
way
>out of. Going by the pattern, it is logical that Clark will be killed
at
>the climax of the series.
Clark never tried to weasal his way out of his agreement with
the Shadows. The Shadows left long before Clark was dealt with.
Also, did Saruman kill someone in order to become the leader of
the wizards? If so, I do not remember that. Also, did Gandalf
declare anything independent of the rest of the wizards, besides
himself?
Show me Clark's Ministry of Peace. Show me Clark's Ministry of
Truth. Show me Nightwatch, or the Psi Corps. All of these were
elements of Clark's base of power...and Saruman had nothing that
equates to them.
>4. The passing of the Shadows and the Vorlons = the passing of the
Elves
>and the destruction of the Orcs. Here, the Vorlons are the Elves, who
>passed into the west/outer rim, and the Shadows are the Orcs and
Sauron,
>who are destroyed or dispersed. The only thing is, the Shadows also
flee
>to the rim.
Wait...in order for B5 to be *the same* as LotR, they cannot
be different like that. The Shadows would have to have been
destroyed by an alliance of the Vorlons with the Army of Light.
Obviously this did not happen.
Not only that, but no one ever told the elves or any other race
to leave. They left because they no longer felt they needed to be
there. They felt that it was the time for man.
Leaving for a "land beyond" is common in ancient myth. The fact
that the elves left for the west is no great creation of Tolkien's.
In Celtic myth, like the myths of most cultures in that region,
the lands of the honoured ancestors were thought to be islands
to the west. The Irish called that place "The Western Isle",
"The Summer Country", "The Land of Youth", etc. Tolkien just
based his "land beyond" on the ancient archetype of the region
he was basing his mythology on.
OH...and did Tolkien plagiarize the ancient myths? Tolkien
researched the legends of Norse and Celtic mythology and mined
those sources for his own creation. While I do not claim to be
as thorough or as skilled as Tolkien, I did a similar thing.
Yet when I did it, you called it plagiarism!
>> Come on then, repost your substantiation. But be warned: in order
to
>>be considered "adequate" it will have to be a thorough, specific,
>>point-by-point comparison, and will have to address shortcomings in
your
>>assertation.
>
>There you go.
All you did was point out some general themes and some questionable
character comparisons. For each case, I was able to think of
differences...major ones. But you see, if B5 is only LotR
redux, as you seem to claim, then you should be able to answer
these questions easily, without basis for counter-agruement.
After all, if B5 is just LotR rewritten, they should be exactly
indentical. They are not. They are only similar.
Now, Cronan, give me the answers to these questions. If B5 is
simply LotR redux, everything should fit together perfectly.
There should be no room for error or misinterpretation. Let's see
if you can do this. If so, then maybe there is more to what
you say than meets the eye. In each case, I will give the
character/event in B5, and ask for the LotR equivalent. Feel
free to take your time.
Who are the Minbari?
Who is Delenn?
Who is Neroon?
What are the three castes?
Who are the Centauri?
Who is Londo?
Who are the Narn?
Who is G'Kar?
What is the League of Non-Aligned Worlds?
What is the Earth Alliance?
What is Mars?
What is Earth?
What is the Great Machine?
Who is Sinclair?
Who is Ivanova?
Who is Garibaldi?
Who is Franklin?
Who is Marcus?
Who is Talia/Lyta?
Who is Kosh?
Who is Lorien?
Who is Morden?
Who is Anna Sheridan?
What is the Earth/Minbari War?
What is the Narn/Centauri War?
Who are the telepaths?
Lots of questions, Cronan, but of B5 = LotR, they should all
fit. And here are some questions from LotR...find the same
analogy in B5:
What are the other rings? (Remember, there were other, lesser
rings bound to the One)
Who is Bilbo?
Who is Frodo?
Who is Samwise?
Who is Gollum?
Where is Minas Tirith?
Who is Aragorn?
Who are the Ring Wraiths?
If you can answer these questions, which are simple questions,
then B5 cannot be LotR redux. If the two are so obviously
the same, then it should take you no time at all to answer
these questions.
Of course, your response will likely be something to the
effect of, "You are asking the impossible!"
Nope...I'm just asking you to show me some more proof. What
you have already said does not convince me.
>> Until you have done this, my last word on the subject will be
<plonk!>
>
>If your goal was to wear away my defenses with your blunt edged
stupidty all
>the while attacking my "good name" then I should say you have
succeeded.
Cronan...who has been attacking whom? I asked you to "put
your money where your mouth is". You responded with insults.
You have been "attacking my good name" at every possible
opportunity. When I try to give you some kind of agruement
that bolsters my point of view, you go back to insulting me.
And you are worried about *us* attacking *your* good name?
Cronan, insulting people does not often convince them to
listen to your arguements with an objective eye. You are
the one that turned this into a grudge match, not me. I
simply made my request in a friendly, competitive manner.
Now, can we set aside the foolish insults and get to the
heart of the issue? I gave you a few questions that I think
you should be able to answer. Can you? If so, please do.
If not, just say so.
If I want to be called names for asking valid questions,
I will go and talk with my wife's first graders.
John Keegan