If you had one question to ask JMS, what would it be?
Patrick M. Berry
> I was looking at all the ATTN JMS posts and started wondering. If you
> could ask JMS any ONE question about B5 that he would give a complete,
> open, and honest answer about, what would it be? Would it be a really
> broad general question (ie. Where is the series going?) or would it be
> something really specific (ie. What exactly is the third age of mankind?)?
I don't need to ask him those questions. He's already going to answer them in the
natural course of the series. And I don't want to know before then.
If I could ask JMS one question and get a complete and truthful answer, I think it
would be: "What would it take to convince you *not* to retire from television after
B5?"
Either that, or: "What *is* Garibaldi's favorite thing in the universe?"
David Frankel
>I was looking at all the ATTN JMS posts and started wondering. If you
>could ask JMS any ONE question about B5 that he would give a complete,
>open, and honest answer about, what would it be? Would it be a really
>broad general question (ie. Where is the series going?) or would it be
>something really specific (ie. What exactly is the third age of mankind?)?
Many questions that might be asked will be answered in the course ofthe
series (such as the examples above). I can wait. I would ask something
such as "How would the series, plots and character development have
differed if actors hadnot departed the series, if all the characters that
were in the pilot had chosen to continue with the series." And I would
hope for a thorough answer that would not be Vorlonesque.
I similiar question would be "How would the story have differed if it
were a written novel rather than a novel for television."
(Hey, if enough of us ask similiar questions, maybe Joe would answer
some. :) But then again, hopefully not; Iwould rather he write the
show :) ).
David "Full of questions" Frankel
Wendy Marsden
> I was looking at all the ATTN JMS posts and started wondering. If you
> could ask JMS any ONE question about B5 that he would give a complete,
> open, and honest answer about, what would it be? Would it be a really
> broad general question (ie. Where is the series going?) or would it be
> something really specific (ie. What exactly is the third age of mankind?)?
No, it would be something along the lines of, "what can we do to
make sure this entire story gets finished." I hope this man
looks both ways before he crosses the street, never hangs out in
bars and doesn't smoke. I want him to live longer than Kosh!
Wendy
Steven W. Difranco
>I was looking at all the ATTN JMS posts and started wondering. If you
>could ask JMS any ONE question about B5 that he would give a complete,
>open, and honest answer about, what would it be? Would it be a really
>broad general question (ie. Where is the series going?) or would it be
>something really specific (ie. What exactly is the third age of mankind?)?
>
>
>
>
>
My question would be:
"Exactly what is the relation between the Shadows and the
Vorlons, and how does this impact the Earthers and the other
sentient races of the galaxy?"
But I guess that would be telling.....
>
>
>
>
--
[ Steven W. DiFranco, CEO, WEBCRAFT Data Resources ][ Coming soon through
corporate right-sizing and merging: "Domino's Pizza-Pizza Hut McHero King"
Home of the "Stuffed-crust-wopp-arch-deluxe"(tm) - the Ultimate in fast-food
One-stop indulgence ][ Zathras not good at ordering...good at eating ]
Jms at B5
think it
would be: "What would it take to convince you *not* to retire from
television after
B5?"
1) An anthology show.
2) A B5 spinoff that would be a complement to, not a capitalization upon,
the primary B5 series.
3) Something that would be as revolutionary for TV as the 5-year arc
structure, a project which could change the way TV is done, technically
and story-wise. If you can't top the last thing you did...don't do it.
jms
Jms at B5
a novel for television."
More descriptions, more internal monologue. More locations off-station.
Larger cast of characters. Shorter arc (5 years at 22 episodes per and 45
pages per script is a hell of a lot more than you can get into any novel
or series of novels.)
jms
Brian K. Bragg
Have you ever considered a nonconvintional novel structure. Maybe a
series of volumes each containing a number of books, each being
readable on it's own and at the same time contributing to an overal
arc. In a way this is what you are already doing. In fact it is
exactly what you are doing and you have said as much, but I see no
reason why it could not work in a text based format. I have seen
people stick with series that contain dozens of novel from writes who
don't have half the talent. I haven't ever read your novels, I didn't
even know you wrote any novels until a few days ago, but I would love
to see how your stories work without actor and director
interpritation.
> jms
**********************************************************************
*Let us eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow we shall have hangovers!*
*******************************************************Brian K. Bragg*
****************
Brian K. Bragg
>1) An anthology show.
> jms
Actually I was woundering if someday the arc might just end up
classified as a literary format like the novel, the autobiography, the
poem, ect. I never understood why some people were willing to
classify stage plays as litirature and exclude screne and tele plays.
Some amazingly deep work has been done in both field, although I think
television is not so far along as film in this department because it
is so much more audience sensitive then cinima. Not that making money
isn't important to film, but it is a lot easier to get funding for a
one time deal were no one really knows how the audience will react
until after the project is complete than it is to sustain funding for
a show that has a small audience. in other words, it is easier to do
more lireray work in film and easier to cater to the masses in
television. That's why shows like B5 are so special. They don't
cater to the masses. They tell their story. I love the structure of
it. Forshadowing is my favorite literary device because I love trying
to figuer out what is going to happen next, and I'm never more
delighted than when I get it completely wrong but look back and the
forshadowing points in exactely that direction if you look at it
differantly. I love it when someone throws me a curve ball. Most of
the time I will watch a show for a while, lose interest and stop
watching, then later I might come back and pick up where I left off.
It is disapointing when you are gone for a season or two and come bakc
and nothing has changed. When you can watch the episodes in any order
and the only thing that seems displaced is the actors hait cut.
I am babeling but it is had to express what I have to say. Let me try
from a differant angel. The five year arc has created a unique
opportunity for other writers. Babylon 5 is slowly reaching a leave
of popularity that will rival that of Star Trek. But people (at least
most people) aren't forming the slavish devotion to the B5 universe
that seems to follow Star Trek. They aren't afraid to take an
objective look at the show and say "I don't like this episode.". What
is happening is that a demand for quality is developing where the
market was full of brain candy before. If Babylon 5 becomes as much
of a comecial success as Star Trek, without comprimising its quality,
then maybe more writers capable of work on this level will be give
series, and the opportunity to creat literatur instead of fluf.
As for finding something else as revolutionary to television, I hope
you can. I don't know what it could be, but then at the moment I
don't need to because your the one looking and if I did I couldn't say
it. But let me say this. You posted a message about new tools you
were adding to yur writting and said that the trick was not to go
crazy with it and forget your old tools in favor of the new. The old
tool I'm refering to is the X year arc, and to quote my favorite ST
character "Remember..."
As for the sequel series, would it run concurrentaly with the current
series, or would it begin in 2263 or latter?
tomlinson
: I was looking at all the ATTN JMS posts and started wondering. If you
: could ask JMS any ONE question about B5 that he would give a complete,
: open, and honest answer about, what would it be?
OK...
Dear JMS:
If you had the choice of _any_ writer, director, cinematographer,
etc., etc., etc., living or dead, to work on one episode of B-5,
who would they be? What's your ideal, once-in-a-life-time "dream
team"?
Cheers,
-et (or maybe I just shoulda asked what the meaning of life is)
--
Ernest S. Tomlinson : "The incident was important, however, because
------------------------+ immediately after it, Gharlane of Eddore made
e...@ugcs.caltech.edu : what proved to be an error."
etom...@rohan.sdsu.edu : - from E. E. Smith's _Gray Lensman_
Jms at B5
etc., etc., living or dead, to work on one episode of B-5, who would they
be? What's your ideal, once-in-a-life-time "dream team"?"
Rod Serling, script. (Second choice: Charles Beaumont.) Director: John
Frankenheimer (from his "Seconds" period).
jms
Jms at B5
Babylon 5 is slowly reaching a leave of popularity that will rival that of
Star Trek. But people (at least most people) aren't forming the slavish
devotion to the B5 universe that seems to follow Star Trek. They aren't
afraid to take an objective look at the show and say "I don't like this
episode.""
Let me agree and disagree with you simultaneously. On the disagree side:
I'm on a number of forums where ST fans also tend to congregate, and if
there's an episode they don't like...they say so. With breahtaking
enthusiasm. I think they're savvy enough and discriminating enough to
speak forthrightly.
As for the part where I agree..in the ST series, at the end of the show,
there usually isn't a great deal of ambiguity left to the issues. Our
guys were right, their guys were wrong, and there tend not to be a lot of
ethical loose threads still hanging around. (This shouldn't be taken as a
blanket statement; there are the occasional episodes where you get close
to this, but they're not the norm.)
As a result, you more often get "I did/didn't like this *episode*" as
opposed to a heated debate over the ethical, moral and political issues
involved. That's the danger when your characters always take the moral
high ground, are always right, and rarely if ever make mistakes.
So to follow the thread of logic one step further...because B5 tends to
highlight those areas instead of minimizing them -- neither better nor
worse than the other approach, just a difference -- you end up
pre-selecting for an audience more given to analyze, critique, debate and
in general speak their minds on a variety of levels. There's a lot less
jingoism in the B5 fan community, it seems to me, than in other SF shows,
because there's more ambiguity involved. The lines aren't so clearly
drawn.
Which I think is only terrific.\
jms
Jeff Vavasour
>1) An anthology show.
>2) A B5 spinoff that would be a complement to, not a capitalization upon,
>the primary B5 series.
>3) Something that would be as revolutionary for TV as the 5-year arc
>structure, a project which could change the way TV is done, technically
>and story-wise. If you can't top the last thing you did...don't do it.
So if you were offered to opportunity to do an anthology series complimenting
B5, in a style that revolutionised the way TV was done, there's no way you
could refuse, right? :-)
- Jeff
Michael Emond
One question? Not fair.
One thing that comes to mind right now though is "Why was Babylon
5 the story you had to write? That is, what is so special about THIS
story that you fought to get it on the air and have given up your life to
it."
That's not in anyway to belittle B5 but rather, as an amateur
writer, I have so many stories to tell all equally important to me, but
JMS has seemed to imply that this particular story was especially
important to him. Was it the messages it was conveying? Was it the fact
it was a 5 year arc...and therefore any 5 year arc story would satisfy
him? Was it the characters? Was it the really neat plot twists?
See, I told you I couldn't ask just one :).
Jeff Vavasour
In <4r049g$k...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) writes:
>3) Something that would be as revolutionary for TV as the 5-year arc
>structure, a project which could change the way TV is done, technically
>and story-wise. If you can't top the last thing you did...don't do it.
I got it! A series that tells a whole story backwards, from end to beginning.
No wait... that's Valen. I guess that's been done too.
Actually, on the topic of "things to compliment B5" (item #2 which I cut a
little too fast from the above quote), I've been thinking that it would be
great to have a "history book" of B5 after it's all over. (I don't mean a
novelistion.) I've partially imagined B5 as the "retelling of an epic
period in human history," sort of like WW2 movies, so it only makes sense
that the story would be retold in a history book form too.
[Moderators: I see this as a merchandise request, not a story idea. If you
feel this a breach of charter, I apologise.]
- Jeff
orso steven n
>[SPOILERS FOR "WAR WITHOUT END"]
>In <4r049g$k...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) writes:
>>3) Something that would be as revolutionary for TV as the 5-year arc
>>structure, a project which could change the way TV is done, technically
>>and story-wise. If you can't top the last thing you did...don't do it.
>I got it! A series that tells a whole story backwards, from end to beginning.
>No wait... that's Valen. I guess that's been done too.
For reverse-time story-telling, see Harold Pinter, *Betrayal*
(read the play, or view the movie starring Jeremy Irons, Ben
Kingsley, and Patricia Hodge).
what does THIS button do?
> I was looking at all the ATTN JMS posts and started wondering. If you
> could ask JMS any ONE question about B5 that he would give a complete,
> open, and honest answer about, what would it be?
how do you get Claudia to go out w/ you?
.max
never do this.
FireDog
Difranco) wrote:
->In a previous article, pfin...@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Erik A Pfingsten) says:
->
->>I was looking at all the ATTN JMS posts and started wondering. If you
->>could ask JMS any ONE question about B5 that he would give a complete,
->>open, and honest answer about, what would it be? Would it be a really
->>broad general question (ie. Where is the series going?) or would it be
->>something really specific (ie. What exactly is the third age of mankind?)?
He CANT give an open and honest answer, JMS is KOSH :)
reg
'`~~~'` ^----^
\/@~@\/ U|..|U
\ / fir...@aloha.net | |
0 Woof Arf o/
what does THIS button do?
> never do this.
.max
definitely very bad
Brian K. Bragg
>Let me agree and disagree with you simultaneously. On the disagree side:
>I'm on a number of forums where ST fans also tend to congregate, and if
>there's an episode they don't like...they say so. With breahtaking
>enthusiasm. I think they're savvy enough and discriminating enough to
>speak forthrightly.
Perhaps your right, my main experiance with trekkers isn't from the
forums, and the ones I meet tend to be a little on the obssesive side.
Once had one of them argue with me for an hour because I said I
thought the Enterprise -D looked more like abstract art than a ship.
IOW I tend to get exposed to the more exstemist members of fandom
because of were my haunts are, and sometimes I generalize based on a
somewhat scued perspective. I apologies if I've offended, but I think
the statement holds in princepal if not in every case. Many will
support something *just* because it is ST
>As for the part where I agree..in the ST series, at the end of the show,
>there usually isn't a great deal of ambiguity left to the issues. Our
>guys were right, their guys were wrong, and there tend not to be a lot of
>ethical loose threads still hanging around. (This shouldn't be taken as a
>blanket statement; there are the occasional episodes where you get close
>to this, but they're not the norm.)
This will probably get me flamed a bit, but my favorite Trek series
after TOS is DS9. Just because this kind of story does slip through
from time to time. The show even has an anti-hero or two. I know
there is a good deal of hostility between some in this group and
anything to do with DS9, but I do like the show because sometimes they
really do try, but in the final analisys you are right, rarely are the
characters on shaky ground moraly. What it comes down to is that the
ST has become the Aaron Spelling series of the sci-fi genre. It
offers up characters which show little depth at most times, shallow
plots ect.. It has become fluff. The take few risks and so get few
rewards. I miss Kirk and *his* stim habit. His womanizing and his
humanity. Something in short supply on todays Treks.
(snip)
minor spoilers for Dust to Dust, and big ones for Interludes and
Examinations added below
JMS, please keep reading, I don't think I can spoil you for any
episodes.
>So to follow the thread of logic one step further...because B5 tends to
>highlight those areas instead of minimizing them -- neither better nor
>worse than the other approach, just a difference -- you end up
>pre-selecting for an audience more given to analyze, critique, debate and
>in general speak their minds on a variety of levels. There's a lot less
>jingoism in the B5 fan community, it seems to me, than in other SF shows,
>because there's more ambiguity involved. The lines aren't so clearly
>drawn.
>Which I think is only terrific.\
To be honest with you, I love the show the most when the characters
make the wrong desicions. My favorite moment to date is the scene
where Ivanova tried to kill Bester. Half of me wants Sheridan to be
late and half of me wants him to save her from herself. The thought
of killing a person in cold blood makes me ill, but somewhere deep
down part of me screams "HE DESERVES IT!". Every time I watch that
scene I am amazed. Now as to Kosh. I am a writer myself(at least I'm
trying) and I just would never have had the balls. I watched that
episode six times before I believed it. Then I almost had a childish
accident. I'm still depressed, but after watching that episode I
started look around for a Centuri so I could nominate you for godhood.
Don't worry though, I quite when I remembered you don't believe in
gods.
> jms
Brian K. Bragg
>He CANT give an open and honest answer, JMS is KOSH :)
Oh, pu-leeze. JMS could out Kosh Kosh in his sleep with one sylable
tied behind his back. The Vorlons had to learn from someone. Up
until they met him they were easier to understand than programing your
VCR (although that's not a ringing endorsment for their simplisity).
Jay Denebeim
Brian K. Bragg <bkb...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> I know
> there is a good deal of hostility between some in this group and
> anything to do with DS9
Well, that's not quite true. Many of the people on the newsgroup are
rather hostile twords ST in general. However, I think many think that
DS9 is the best of a bad lot after TOS. I find DS9 very irritating,
but I still watch it. Occasionally the show is watchable, sometimes
they even neglect to push the reset button.
Of course next week, Miles and Bashir were the best of friends
again...
Jay
--
* Jay Denebeim, Moderator, rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated *
* newsgroup submission address: ras...@solon.com *
* moderator contact address: rastb5-...@solon.com *
* personal contact address: dene...@deepthot.cary.nc.us *
Adam Zabell
all to do with the arc and even less to do with what it would take to
convince jms to stay in television. To wit:
"Why the *hell* did the Centauri give Earth jumpgate technology
100 years ago?"
Everything I've seen in the typical Centauri psyche points to a very
Machievellian (sp?) attitude in every aspect of their lives; the race
as a whole rather expects a return on every investment. The
explanations I've seen thus far kinda gloss over this. To quote
from the Lurker's Guide: "In exchange for [the jumpgate] and other
technologies, they asked only for trinkets, novelties to sell back
home." I suppose it depends on how you define trinket, but I'd think
that it would take a hell of a lot of whoopee cushions to equal one
jumpgate.
And although it's probably a bit much to ask, if you (jms) answer
this, could you CC: it to my email address too? My newsreader is
anything but reliable and I'd hate to discover people refering to
the answer without having read it myself.
adam zabell
JJordnRoss
Okay. Suppose this awful, unthinkable, mind-rending situation: for some
reason, you _can't_ be a writer. What" the alternate career choice?
Also, sneaking in a quickie: do you listen to music when you write?
Boo
Brian K. Bragg
>In article <4r2tc4$1r...@mule2.mindspring.com>,
>Brian K. Bragg <bkb...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> I know
>> there is a good deal of hostility between some in this group and
>> anything to do with DS9
>Well, that's not quite true. Many of the people on the newsgroup are
>rather hostile twords ST in general. However, I think many think that
>DS9 is the best of a bad lot after TOS. I find DS9 very irritating,
>but I still watch it. Occasionally the show is watchable, sometimes
>they even neglect to push the reset button.
>Of course next week, Miles and Bashir were the best of friends
>again...
It's that whole ST copies B5 thing I was refering to. As for DS9, I
think it's my favorite because it has my favorite characters. In
order of Importance they are Bashir, Odo, and Dax. Now if only
paramount would take off the kid glove they could do some really
interesting things with these guys. Especially the Dax/Kira thing.
But I think they never will. Just like they never really got around
to exploring the Kirk/Spock relationship. I look at B5 then and just
shake my head and want to cry.
(let's not turn this into a verses thread. If anyone wants to respond
my e-mail adress is bkb...@orl.mindspring.com. This is cases
sensitive)
Ken Alper
wrote:
>If you had the choice of _any_ writer, director, cinematographer,
>etc., etc., etc., living or dead, to work on one episode of B-5,
>who would they be? What's your ideal, once-in-a-life-time "dream
>team"?
B5: A Spike Lee Joint
Starring Denzel Washington as John Sheridan
Jada Pinket as Susan Ivanova
and Spike Lee as Ambassador Kosh Naranek
With Danny Aiello as Ambassador Londo Mollari
Andreas Katsulas as Citizen G'Kar (no one else could be G'Kar)
Halle Berry as Ambassador Delenn
--Ken
---------------------------------<*>------------------------------------
SMUG INTELLECTUAL. Formerly rampant human-coded AI with a sense of humor
seeks bipedal oxygen-breathing cyborg for serious relationship in the
galactic core. I've got cool guns if you like to break stuff. No yuppies.
Bored? Go hit Akbar & Jeff's Web-o-Matic at http://web.syr.edu/~ksalper
Wesley Struebing
>On 26 Jun 1996 20:10:21 GMT, pfin...@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Erik A
>Pfingsten ) wrote:
>>I was looking at all the ATTN JMS posts and started wondering. If you
>>could ask JMS any ONE question about B5 that he would give a complete,
>>open, and honest answer about, what would it be? Would it be a really
>>broad general question (ie. Where is the series going?) or would it be
>>something really specific (ie. What exactly is the third age of mankind?)?
A mot question at this time, since the arc is still (Thank your
daemons, Joe!) running, but...
If you had to do it all over again, what would do you do differently,
or would you even do ANYTHING differently?
Take care and keep the faith!
Wes
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
TheWrapParty in'98!
See you there!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
str...@ix.netcom.com FAX: (303) 343-9026
HomePage: http://www.netcom.com/~strueb/male.html
Wesley Struebing
> What's your ideal, once-in-a-life-time "dream team"?"
>Rod Serling, script. (Second choice: Charles Beaumont.) Director: John
>Frankenheimer (from his "Seconds" period).
> jms
You do think big, don't you, sir? <G>
I like it!
stacie
Erik A Pfingsten wrote:
>
> I was looking at all the ATTN JMS posts and started wondering. If you
> could ask JMS any ONE question about B5 that he would give a complete,
> open, and honest answer about, what would it be? Would it be a really
> broad general question (ie. Where is the series going?) or would it be
> something really specific (ie. What exactly is the third age of mankind?)?
>
> Erik Pfingsten, University of Cincinnati | My shoes are too tight,
> E-Mail: pfin...@ucunix.san.uc.edu <-- | but it doesn't matter because
> pfin...@email.uc.edu | I've forgotten how to dance.
> WWW: http://ucunix.san.uc.edu/~pfingsea | --Londo Mollari
I myself would ask if he could possibly take all his scripts for the entire run and
write them into a novel or series of novels.
Richard Hudson
bkb...@mindspring.com (Brian K. Bragg) writes:
>jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
>>"If I could ask JMS one question and get a complete and truthful answer, I
>>think it
>>would be: "What would it take to convince you *not* to retire from
>>television after
>>B5?"
>>1) An anthology show.
How abut an anthology series based on the works of Harlan Ellison.
>>2) A B5 spinoff that would be a complement to, not a capitalization upon,
>>the primary B5 series.
>>3) Something that would be as revolutionary for TV as the 5-year arc
>>structure, a project which could change the way TV is done, technically
>>and story-wise. If you can't top the last thing you did...don't do it.
>> jms
>from a differant angel. The five year arc has created a unique
>opportunity for other writers. Babylon 5 is slowly reaching a leave
>of popularity that will rival that of Star Trek. But people (at least
>most people) aren't forming the slavish devotion to the B5 universe
>that seems to follow Star Trek. They aren't afraid to take an
>objective look at the show and say "I don't like this episode.". What
>is happening is that a demand for quality is developing where the
>market was full of brain candy before. If Babylon 5 becomes as much
>of a comecial success as Star Trek, without comprimising its quality,
>then maybe more writers capable of work on this level will be give
>series, and the opportunity to creat literatur instead of fluf.
>As for finding something else as revolutionary to television, I hope
>you can. I don't know what it could be, but then at the moment I
>don't need to because your the one looking and if I did I couldn't say
>it. But let me say this. You posted a message about new tools you
>were adding to yur writting and said that the trick was not to go
>crazy with it and forget your old tools in favor of the new. The old
>tool I'm refering to is the X year arc, and to quote my favorite ST
>character "Remember..."
>As for the sequel series, would it run concurrentaly with the current
>series, or would it begin in 2263 or latter?
>**********************************************rom b5mod Mon Jul 1 01:44:51 1996
Return-Path: <b5mod>
Received: by deepthot.cary.nc.us (Smail3.1.29.1 #3)
id m0uabn0-000cYAC; Mon, 1 Jul 96 01:44 EDT
Sender: b5mod (B5 Moderation Account)
To: dene...@deepthot.cary.nc.us
From: b5ha...@deepthot.cary.nc.us (B5 Moderation)
Path: bogus
X-Orig-From: lcra...@mickey.wittenberg.edu (Crawf)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Subject: Re: Memories from Chicago Comicon (includes question for JMS)
Date: 30 Jun 96 23:39:04 +1000
Organization: Wittenberg University, Springfield OH
Message-ID: <1996Jun3...@mickey.wittenberg.edu>
References: <4quab8$3...@plts.org> <4r044i$k...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <31D4DD...@informix.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mickey.wittenberg.edu
In article <31D4DD...@informix.com>, "David L. Kosenko" <da...@informix.com> writes:
> Jms at B5 wrote:
>> A book of my philosophy about this sort of thing, with anecdotes? I
>> can't imagine anything that could be more boring and self-serving.\
>
> Hey, it's made Robert Fulgham a small fortune. Why not do the same for
> yourself? "Everything I Need to Know I Learned in Writing the Third
> Season of Babylon5".
My favorite bon mot on RF is:
"The subtitle of this book is 'Some Observations from Both Sides of
the Refrigerator Door,' which is appropriate, since it could have been
written by a cabbage, either before or after conversion to coleslaw."
-- Ralph Novak
I couldn't have said it better, except perhaps, to point out that if
you learned everything you really needed to know in kindergarden, there
is something profoundly deficient in your education. :-)
ObB5: A B5 book that might contain, among other things, some of the
things we might have seen, we almost saw, etc. would be worth a read.
larry crawford
lcra...@wittenberg.edu
still putting the psycho in psychobiology
Jms at B5
"If you had to do it all over again, what would do you do differently, or
would you even do ANYTHING differently?"
Professionally? No. I wouldn't change a thing.
If "it" includes the personal side...
(he looks off, a long moment, smiles sadly and shakes his head)
There are an infinite number of moments I would like to rewrite, words I'd
recall, opportunities lost I'd give a right arm for one more chance to
take...five minutes when I would've stopped going through my life like a
man late for a bus, missing the moments, because in the final analysis,
the moments are all we have.
Would I do some things in my life differently? Yes. Most definitely.
Goes with the territory.
jms
Yvonne Bennett
In article <31D4BB...@stanley.bio.purdue.edu>,
zab...@stanley.bio.purdue.edu says...
>
>"Why the *hell* did the Centauri give Earth jumpgate technology
>100 years ago?"
At some point, Garibaldi made the comment that the Centauri told Earthers
that they were related in some way. (Patently untrue)
If the Centauri actually did think that we were their descendents(sp),
they might have given us the technology as a present.
Otherwise, they wanted us to be so thankful to them that we would let
them rule us as yet another planet in the Centauri Republic.
--
__/^-^\__ *Miya!* | "Do we stay, or do we go?" -Bester
catb...@nrv.net | (anyone else feel the urge to sing?)
Brian K. Bragg
stacie <mpo...@otherside.com> wrote:
>I myself would ask if he could possibly take all his scripts for the entire run and
>write them into a novel or series of novels.
I don't want to sound like I'm flaming you because by no means is that
my intent, but this sounds like a really bad idea. Not to blow my own
horn or anything, but I am a playwrite, and this is sort of a pet
peeve (did I spell that right?) of mine. People in my family, and
friends of mine keep asking me to let them read my plays and I keep
telling them no because when it comes to scripts for the Stage, TV, or
movies, I think the work is deminished if you see it in print rather
than in action. The story is created with the performance at its
heart and translation into another medium would deminish what the
writer has worked so had to create. I tried this once. To take one
of my plays and turn it into a book. I thought it would make it
easier to learn the novel form if I already knew the story inside and
out instead of developing it as written, but everything I wrote left a
bad taste in my mouth. The beauty of the piece was its performance.
It had its impact because you saw people going through it. A novel
has that power but it comes from a differant source. In the
performance you, the writer, have created a character which speaks and
has a voice and demands to have his hour upon the stage, but when
creating a character for a novel you have to take a very differant
approach. The character has to carry in a differant manner. He has
to have a differant form of life. It is had to explain the differance
because it is so subtle, but read a book and then watch a movie that
was based on the book and you will notice a slight shift in the
characters. They seem just a little "off". Same works if you do it
in the reverse order. It happens even when the same person writes the
book and the screne play. The tools of the trade are differant, so
the stories they build are different. If he had originally written B5
as a series of novels no one would ever suggest turning it into a TV
show. Wonder why for a minute and you'll have the answer. The answer
also applies to the reverse
Pat_Buehler.@nt.com
Dear jms,
You've given a lot to the rest of us. Here's my attempt to give something
back.
I've found a way to begin taking time for those Moments of Life. First, I
had to figure out the one thing I couldn't go for a whole day without. (In your
case that would probably be writing.) Then I made a deal with myself: No
(whatever) today until I've taken time for at least one Moment of Life.
In other words, *no writing* today until you've laughed at a joke, hugged
your wife "just because", or gone out into the yard just to see how many
different flowers there are to smell. If a Moment of Life happens by during the
day, you may "save" *one* moment to be applied to tomorrow's writing. The only
condition is that before you write anything, you must take a second to fully
remember the Moment you saved from the day before. (I usually do all this in
the morning, but from what I've noticed about your sleeping schedule, it may be
easier for you to do this last thing before falling asleep.)
Try this for one whole month, then look back and ask yourself questions
like: Was I disciplined enough for the month to really be over? Was it worth
the time? What effect did this have on my writing?
I hope this turns out to be a worthy experiment for you. You, of all
people, sure deserve it!
Thanks for being. -- phb --
Bernard HP Gilroy
jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) said:
>"If you had to do it all over again, what would do you do differently, or
>would you even do ANYTHING differently?"
>
>Professionally? No. I wouldn't change a thing.
>
>If "it" includes the personal side...
>
>(he looks off, a long moment, smiles sadly and shakes his head)
>
>There are an infinite number of moments I would like to rewrite, words I'd
>recall, opportunities lost I'd give a right arm for one more chance to
>take...five minutes when I would've stopped going through my life like a
>man late for a bus, missing the moments, because in the final analysis,
>the moments are all we have.
Sorry. I don't mean to trample, but the resonace gave me the
chills. I guess a good line never lets go.
Alexander Glazamitsky
Yvonne Bennett <catb...@nrv.net> wrote:
>zab...@stanley.bio.purdue.edu says...
>>
>>"Why the *hell* did the Centauri give Earth jumpgate technology
>>100 years ago?"
>
>At some point, Garibaldi made the comment that the Centauri told Earthers
>that they were related in some way. (Patently untrue)
around naked or we'll have to make up some technology which we don't really
have".
>If the Centauri actually did think that we were their descendents(sp),
>they might have given us the technology as a present.
Centauri are not that stupid. That was just a ploy.
>Otherwise, they wanted us to be so thankful to them that we would let
>them rule us as yet another planet in the Centauri Republic.
"Hey, look, there is a planet with humanoids. They seem quite primitive -
probably never really got much beyond their own system. Look like us, too,
except that they have weird hair style. I bet if we feed them some story
about being related, they would just fall all over themselves and we will
get most of their resources cheap.
One problem, though. Seem like nobody wants to go to run these primitive
worlds anymore. Too much hassle, too expensive.. oh, let's just trade
jumpgate tech for some trinkets. They'll be so grateful, we could get good
trade terms without putting a lot of people on their world. That always
causes problems anyway. Remember how those thrice-damned Narns reacted?"...
Korey Moeller
In <4r7lj8$d...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5)
writes:
>
>"If you had to do it all over again, what would do you do differently,
or
>would you even do ANYTHING differently?"
>
>Professionally? No. I wouldn't change a thing.
>
>If "it" includes the personal side...
>
>(he looks off, a long moment, smiles sadly and shakes his head)
>
>There are an infinite number of moments I would like to rewrite, words
I'd
>recall, opportunities lost I'd give a right arm for one more chance to
>take...five minutes when I would've stopped going through my life like
a
>man late for a bus, missing the moments, because in the final
analysis,
>the moments are all we have.
>
>
>Goes with the territory.
>
>
>
>
> jms
>
>
>
But then, after reading what Joe wrote, I wonder...
If we had NO regrets, maybe we haven't learn anything.
My father once told me one of the most difficult things about being a
parent (for him) was watching your kids make mistakes and getting hurt.
But sometimes thats the only way we learn. It would be nice to avoid
all that, but I guess thats part of living and learning, maybe not much
consolation.
Then again, my father was the same one who told me 'sympathy' was in
the dictionary between 'shit' and 'syphilis'.
kjm
Alan Turniansky
Jms at B5 (jms...@aol.com) wrote:
: "How would the story have differed if it were a written novel rather than
: a novel for television."
: More descriptions, more internal monologue. More locations off-station.
: Larger cast of characters. Shorter arc (5 years at 22 episodes per and 45
: pages per script is a hell of a lot more than you can get into any novel
: or series of novels.)
That's only 5*22*45= 4950 pages.
L. Ron Hubbard wrote that much in a couple of weeks, and he was dead
several years when he did it!
(-8
: jms
--
Alan Turniansky
p018...@pbfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
JJordnRoss
The question was:
>"If you had to do it all over again, what would do you do differently, or
would you even do ANYTHING differently?"
JMS says:
>If "it" includes the personal side...
<snip>
>There are an infinite number of moments I would like to rewrite, words
I'd
>recall, opportunities lost I'd give a right arm for one more chance to
>take...
<snip>
<before I get teary-eyed>
It is interesting how you said "rewrite" in reference to personal life
events, and not the show or a writing project. The question did not
necessarily refer to writing. Does this reveal how deeply being an author
has saturated your life? :)
Most people see their actions as movements, physical manisfestations. Yet,
when I take your point of view (?) and think of events in my life as
something to be _written_, it makes it clear how much we blunder through
life without thinking our choices over with care. When you write a
character taking an action, you have the tought before the action. In
life, usually you have the action, then the thought later. Sadly, the
thought is, "I should have..." "Had I but known..." or worst of all, "I'm
so sorry!"
It also pleasantly reminds me of Matt Ruff's "Fool on the Hill." You see
the blindfolded monkeys sitting on the hill, banging nonsense into the
typewriters, writing everyone's fate, as if peoples' lives were
manuscripts to be read and published! By the way, this was a really great
book, lots of fun to read.
Wow. Deep thoughts.
I agree with you, too. I'd love to go back with an eraser and pencil,
write in "Slow down and smell the bread bake!" "Play with the baby!" and
most of all, "Tell him you love him one more time!"
Peace,
jackieboo <*>
(who thanks WB and all involved for the lovely screensaer she won! Won!
WON!!!)
Craig Cheslog
In article <4r7lj8$d...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5)
wrote:
> "If you had to do it all over again, what would do you do differently, or
> would you even do ANYTHING differently?"
>
> Professionally? No. I wouldn't change a thing.
>
> If "it" includes the personal side...
>
> (he looks off, a long moment, smiles sadly and shakes his head)
>
> There are an infinite number of moments I would like to rewrite, words I'd
> recall, opportunities lost I'd give a right arm for one more chance to
> take...five minutes when I would've stopped going through my life like a
> man late for a bus, missing the moments, because in the final analysis,
> the moments are all we have.
>
> Would I do some things in my life differently? Yes. Most definitely.
>
> Goes with the territory.
>
> jms
This post really resonates for me, and I wanted to say how much I
appreciate the fact that you would post something like this here for all
of your fans to see and consider.
I cannot believe the amount of time that you spend responding to people's
questions and thoughts. As a result, I will always give you the benefit of
the doubt -- but I doubt you'll need it, since I think Babylon 5 is the
best television show on the air today.
Keep up the great work, and good luck with everything else.
-- Craig Cheslog <*>
David Filip
Only one question? People have already asked how Control would
have been handled if Andrea stayed, how WWE and the rest of the series
would have been with Sinclair, how the story would go without the folks
from the pilot movie, etc.
Unfortunately, JMS never answers these questions clearly or in a
way that helps us to understand how it fits into the plot. I'd like
to ask *why* he doesn't answer these questions completely.
I can't see the harm in letting us know. JMS has a history of
keeping spoilers as secrets, so I don't expect him to say, for example,
"Talia would have been tickled to death by Draal's green penguin squad in
the fourth season, and Sinclair would have been Control. I changed the
plot so several Disney characters would kill Londo with a plastic Zima
bottle instead, and you know how the rest worked out." He can tell us
what would have happened in the episodes we saw without spoiling events
we haven't seen yet. (Sorry if the above constitutes a story idea).
Please JMS, don't ignore this question or answer it with "Yes."
I really want to know why you avoid those other questions. If you choose
to answer the other questions too (re: Control, original characters in
WWE and the rest of the arc, etc), that would also make my day :)
Lonny the Gothic FIJI
In article <31D4BB...@stanley.bio.purdue.edu> Adam Zabell
<zab...@stanley.bio.purdue.edu> writes:
>"Why the *hell* did the Centauri give Earth jumpgate technology
>100 years ago?"
>Everything I've seen in the typical Centauri psyche points to a very
>Machievellian (sp?) attitude in every aspect of their lives; the race
>as a whole rather expects a return on every investment. The
>explanations I've seen thus far kinda gloss over this. To quote
>from the Lurker's Guide: "In exchange for [the jumpgate] and other
>technologies, they asked only for trinkets, novelties to sell back
>home." I suppose it depends on how you define trinket, but I'd think
>that it would take a hell of a lot of whoopee cushions to equal one
>jumpgate.
Well, here's the thing. Trade brings prosperity. And, as far as I can tell
the Centauri are highly Zenophobic. They can tolerate humans, because we're
Centauri with funny haircuts. Minbari are a little creepy, but at least they
have the same color skin. And narns. Aw hell, let's conquer the narns.
They're ugly. We've seen Londo's reaction to a bug in his kitchen. We know
he hates anything that is not Centauri. I'd say this is true for most of his
race. Vir is the exception.
This is the centauri mentality, and is why they like humans so much. Or they
used to, anyway. I imagine that when they met humans they saw us as long lost
brothers, or something similar. They wanted to help us grow, so that the
galaxy would wind up being filled with "Centauri" types. In a way, they're
not much different from Hitler's Nazi party, but in their case, it's purely
psychological. They can't help hating strangeness. They just do.
Lonny -> But I could be wrong. I ain't JMS.
===============================================================
| _____ | Lonny Zone - I am an elitist. |
| | | fsc...@comet.net |
| ------------O------------ | Send guns, lawyers and money! |
|http://www.comland.com/~lonny| The shit has hit the fan! |
===============================================================
Jms at B5
"Unfortunately, JMS never answers these questions clearly or in a way that
helps us to understand how it fits into the plot. I'd like to ask *why*
he doesn't answer these questions completely."
Sometimes I do. Sometimes I don't. I do more times than I don't. So
your premise is flawed at the core of it, thus any resulting comments from
me would only range further afield into even greater inaccuracy.
jms
Curtis Collier
::hanging upside-down examining this answer's reflection in a miror::
Ah, I see. It makes perfect sense......
Curt
John Nuechterlein
here's three:
1)do you prefer pepsi or coke?
2)do you use visa, mastercard, discover, or amex most?
3)what is your favorite food for dinner?
it's gonna be a long summer
jdn
Brian K. Bragg
TYR1...@tyler.net (Curtis Collier) wrote:
>::hanging upside-down examining this answer's reflection in a miror::
>Ah, I see. It makes perfect sense......
>Curt
Now did you actually understand, or did you pass out and have a
vision?
**********************************************************************
*Let us eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow we shall have hangovers!*
*******************************************************Brian K. Bragg*
****************
Note: The author of this message accepts no responsibility for any
cerebral flatulence occurring here in. Thank you and have a nice day.
Dave Wonnacott
Adam Zabell wrote:
>
> Well..... near as I can tell, the one question I have has nothing at
> all to do with the arc and even less to do with what it would take to
> convince jms to stay in television. To wit:
>
> 100 years ago?"
>
> Everything I've seen in the typical Centauri psyche points to a very
> Machievellian (sp?) attitude in every aspect of their lives; the race
> as a whole rather expects a return on every investment. The
> explanations I've seen thus far kinda gloss over this. To quote
> from the Lurker's Guide: "In exchange for [the jumpgate] and other
> technologies, they asked only for trinkets, novelties to sell back
> home." I suppose it depends on how you define trinket, but I'd think
> that it would take a hell of a lot of whoopee cushions to equal one
> jumpgate.
>
It's always possible that they were trying to get us in the same
position as they had the Narn ("missionaries & savages"), and they
had little enough regard for us at the time - imperialists that they
were. It only became obvious later that Earthers weren't going to
play ball and be nice little slaves, perhaps because we were able
to exploit the technology in ways the Narn never did.
Wonx :)
--
JMS : "You have a problem." Con. organiser : "The room's big enough."
JMS : <fx: shakes head> "No. My people are coming..."
Dave (Wonx) Wonnacott, MSSL, UCL
http://msslac.mssl.ucl.ac.uk/~ddxw/ddxw/ddxw_hp.html
Korey Moeller
In
<Pine.A32.3.92a.960702...@homer16.u.washington.edu>
David Filip <grim...@u.washington.edu> writes:
>
> Only one question? People have already asked how Control would
>have been handled if Andrea stayed, how WWE and the rest of the series
>would have been with Sinclair, how the story would go without the
folks
>from the pilot movie, etc.
>
>way that helps us to understand how it fits into the plot. I'd like
>to ask *why* he doesn't answer these questions completely.
>
>keeping spoilers as secrets, so I don't expect him to say, for
example,
>"Talia would have been tickled to death by Draal's green penguin squad
in
>the fourth season, and Sinclair would have been Control. I changed
the
>plot so several Disney characters would kill Londo with a plastic Zima
>bottle instead, and you know how the rest worked out." He can tell us
>what would have happened in the episodes we saw without spoiling
events
>we haven't seen yet. (Sorry if the above constitutes a story idea).
>
> Please JMS, don't ignore this question or answer it with "Yes."
>I really want to know why you avoid those other questions. If you
choose
>to answer the other questions too (re: Control, original characters in
>WWE and the rest of the arc, etc), that would also make my day :)
>
>
Technically. Not to our satisfaction and maybe not the way we would
like them answered. So I would be VERY careful in phrasing questions,
don't leave loopholes, outs and be careful of your starting
assumptions.
I have to admit I find the answers he gives , if not instructive, at
least entertaining. Classic example, check out the 'can you confirm
this' thread that has been on the last week.
kjm
>
>
Dan Dassow
Let me preface this question by stating that I do not have the answer
for myself, that it may not be possible to answer it, and that it is
probably unfair to ask.
If I could only ask Mr. Straczynski one question, this is the question I
would ask:
Mr. Straczynski, what is most important in your life, why do you
consider it important, what are you willing and unwilling to
sacrifice to attain and/or maintain that which you consider most
important, and how has this affected your writing (including
BABYLON 5) and life in general?
Dan Dassow
Keith Wood
In article <4rclu5$6...@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>,
kmoe...@ix.netcom.com (Korey Moeller ) wrote:
[In
[<Pine.A32.3.92a.960702...@homer16.u.washington.edu>
[David Filip <grim...@u.washington.edu> writes:
[>
[> Only one question? People have already asked how Control would
[>have been handled if Andrea stayed,
"The Corps is mother! The Corps is father . . ! Er . . .Would you
believe second cousins, once-removed . . !
"Sorry about that, Bester, that'll neve happen again . . !"
Oh, not THAT "Control"?
<JSFICS>
--
================================================================
Keith Wood -- Brass Cannon Productions -- Producer/Host:
The Computer Program, Flying Time!, Infinity Focus . . .
and introducing --== Stop, Look and Listen Up! ==--
Associate Producer: Genevra, Colin, Heather, Nicole and Ethan
(with Kyla Littlejohn)
================================================================
David Filip
It's a thrilling thing to be recognized by the Great Maker, but I
really wish that it weren't just to correct a misstatement. I'm sorry if
you took offense JMS, that was definitely NOT my intent. If I may,
I'd like to rephrase my question.
To the rest of you in the newsgroup, be warned that there are
some major spoilers for the second half of War Without End.
[opening the jumpgate to spoilerspace]
<*>
On 3 Jul 1996, Jms at B5 wrote:
> "Unfortunately, JMS never answers these questions clearly or in a way that
> helps us to understand how it fits into the plot. I'd like to ask *why*
> he doesn't answer these questions completely."
>
> Sometimes I do. Sometimes I don't. I do more times than I don't. So
> your premise is flawed at the core of it, thus any resulting comments from
> me would only range further afield into even greater inaccuracy.
My revised question is at the end of this post, but I think I
should tell you exactly why I feel the need to ask it.
You implied that Talia would have gone down a path similar to the
one we saw, but you also said that Andrea wanted out of her contract
sooner than you originally planned. I'm sure everyone wonders how Divided
Loyalties would have been written if Andrea wanted to stay -- or when it
would have appeared in the arc.
Since Sheridan didn't exist when you first created the arc, WWE
opens another floodgate of speculation. Sinclair was clearly set up as
Valen from the beginning, but how could he continue as the head of B5 if
he stays back in time to fight a war 1000 years in the past? Who would
have been The One Who Will Be? Who would have gotten the flashforward to
Londo's palace? Who was in the shuttle from Signs and Portents? Would
Delenn's space suit shell game have gone as we saw it?
As much speculation is raised with "what might have been" as with
the series itself. From what we have heard of the arc's rough draft, it's
almost as fascinating as the final draft. People have asked many of the
questions above, but you stated that you did not wish to answer these
*specific* questions yet.
Since most of the events in the "original" DL or WWE were probably
altered by the events in the final draft of the episode, I doubt that
spoiler protection has been your main concern -- the circumstances that
would have been spoiled don't even exist anymore. You have been
entirely honest and open about every other non-spoiler aspect of the
show, so I wonder why you are keeping the rough draft a secret.
In one sentence, my question is "Why have you chosen not to tell
us how WWE or the Talia/Control situation would have been handled if
Sheridan had not been introduced and/or Andrea wanted to stick with the
show for as long as she could?" Thanks.
Keith Bennett
Spoilers for WWE
kmoe...@ix.netcom.com (Korey Moeller ) wrote:
>Where did you hear Sheridan was not part of the arc from the beginning?
>If this is an assumption based on the fact we didn't hear about him in
>season 1, I would say that's not a good assumption. This is a 5 year
>story, why would it be expected that all the twists would be out there
>in the first year? I believe there are a number of events in season 1
>that made Sheridan necessary and not an after-thought.
>
>kjm
>
Its my understnading that the "one who will be" was always part of
the storyline, but that some trap doors have been activated.
<speculation mode on>
All of this is guesses:
I think that WWE was origionally supposed to occur at the end of
season 5. Think of it... you watch the show for 5 years, and then
watch as Sinclair goes back to do it all over again.
I believe JMS also mentioned that Laurel Takashima (sp) was supposed
to be 1st officer until the third season, around which time she'd be
revealed as a traitor, allowing the "second officer" (ie, Corwin's
position) to take over - said person being a dour russian named
Ivanova.
Laurel Takashima left after the pilot; her first officer position
was immediately given to Ivanova, the traitor was given to Talia, and
the third season change was ignored.
IF Sinclair had still been in command, sinclair would still be the
one who was, Delenn would be the one who is... and I have no clue who
would be the who will be. Possibly Ivanova or Garibaldi; or even Lil'
Davey.
However, Michael O'hare left the series after season one, and in
came Boxleitner. I think it was Sinclair and Delenn who were supposed
to have a child, after Catherine (?) disappeared investigating a new
planet. This would be the Anna thread we all are speculating about.
Sheridan then inherited the "one who will be," and the romance with
Delenn. Sinclair kept the one who was. Morden was made to be a
shipmate of Anna, to tie Sheridan even closer to the shadows. I'd
guess that Ranger one was either supposed to be sinclair-as-commander,
or possibly Rathenn or one of Delenn's grey council pals.
Third season, Andrea Thompson has left, collapsing the traitor
thread. I still think that her & Ivanovas relationship would have
been highlighted more if she had remained longer - possibly comeing to
the fore at Severed Dreams or Ceremonies. In addition, JMS mentioned
that he intended Ironhearts gift to be taken away from the characters,
as an "oh, shit, now what do we do." Either that, or he enjoyed the
chance to do it to us.
Lyta, from the pilot, returned, and resumed the Vorlon / Teep
connection thread (and, if reports are to be believed, the Shadow /
Teep connection). I do not know if Lyta would have picked up
Ironhearts gift if she had stayed (I'd assume so). Her other threads
will probably become more clear in October.
<whine>
I have no idea what the old doctor was supposed to have done.
"I'm the one your holy book warned you about"
Brian K. Bragg
kmoe...@ix.netcom.com (Korey Moeller ) wrote:
>Where did you hear Sheridan was not part of the arc from the beginning?
>If this is an assumption based on the fact we didn't hear about him in
>season 1, I would say that's not a good assumption. This is a 5 year
>story, why would it be expected that all the twists would be out there
>in the first year? I believe there are a number of events in season 1
>that made Sheridan necessary and not an after-thought.
>kjm
Read the FAQ at www.hyperion.com. He got the idea because JMS
statemented that that was the case
Korey Moeller
In
<Pine.A32.3.92a.960703...@homer03.u.washington.edu>
David Filip <grim...@u.washington.edu> writes:
>
> It's a thrilling thing to be recognized by the Great Maker, but I
>really wish that it weren't just to correct a misstatement. I'm sorry
if
>you took offense JMS, that was definitely NOT my intent. If I may,
>I'd like to rephrase my question.
>
> To the rest of you in the newsgroup, be warned that there are
>some major spoilers for the second half of War Without End.
>
>
>
Jms at B5
"Mr. Straczynski, what is most important in your life, why do you consider
it important, what are you willing and unwilling to sacrifice to attain
and/or maintain that which you consider most important, and how has this
affected your writing (including BABYLON 5) and life in general?"
Yeesh....
Okay, in something resembling the order asked:
The work. The writing. It's the only thing I'm worth a damn at doing.
I'm willing to sacrifice anything that is of myself specifically, and
unwilling to make anybody else pay that price. I won't walk over somebody
else to take a job, and I won't compromise on my standards or (if I can
use this word) the art involved. I won't sacrifice control or quality for
security; I've walked off half a dozen jobs on principle in the last ten
years or so. I don't hold that up in search of applause; it's not
something that served me well, it made my life harder, it was probably
financially and career-wise stupid...but it's how I'm hardwired. I don't
have much choice.
To the "of myself" part...best example: when I was working to break in as
a writer, I didn't earn a lot of money, never more than about $3,000 a
year IF that much, and it was often close to my sole source of income at
times. Very often I had to choose between food and writing supplies. I
chose the latter every time. I got by on beef jerky and Mountain Dew for
days at a time. At one point I dropped down to about 150 pounds, even at
my current height of almost 6'5". I looked like a refugee from Dachau.
(A photo of me at this time got printed as an illustration for my colulmn
in Writer's Digest a year or two ago...very bad.)
The writing was all that mattered. The work is all that has *ever*
mattered. And if that meant getting by on beef jerky, and not going out,
and dropping every dime on typewriter ribbons and Liquid Paper and
stationery and postage, then that's what was done. In retrospect, it was
stupid...I was of the mindset of, "Either I'll make it, or I'll crash and
burn," but I didn't know any other way. And I'd probably do it again.
How it's affected my life...some you've just read above. I'm a very hard
person to get to know. I'm constantly working stuff through for the
current script, the next story, the new book. In an interview with
Richard Biggs published in a UK magazine, he commented that whenever he
sees me, at lunch, I'm off by myself, "a million miles away. I don't know
where he is, but it's nowhere near reality."
I'm a perfectionist, I won't settle for less than absolute 100% effort,
and thus tend not to accept less in others. Consequently, I'm a pain in
the ass. I don't have a lot of friends, mainly because I don't have time
for much outside the work. I'll meet someone, we'll get along, in will
come an invitation to a dinner party, I'll have deadlines, or meetings, or
revisions to do, and I won't go or I'll just forget (I have a 64K brain in
a 3gigabyte profession), and after you do this enough times...the
invitations understandably stop coming. When I'm caught in the white-heat
of a project, everything else goes by the boards. Finding the right
words, the _mot just_ is extremely difficult, and if I'm on a roll, and
it's finally coming, and I get interrupted...I can get cranky.
My life is my work, my work is my writing, and my writing is my life.
That reads as awfully indulgent and pretentious, and maybe it is. But as
Henry Kissinger once noted, "it has the added benefit of being true." If
the universe said, tomorrow, "You can't write anymore," there'd be a
pause, then a puff of purple smoke...and I'd disappear.
jms
Jms at B5
"Why have you chosen not to tell us how WWE or the Talia/Control situation
would have been handled if Sheridan had not been introduced and/or Andrea
wanted to stick with the show for as long as she could?"
For the reason that it may not have changed as much as you think it
might've.
For the reason that a writer never publishes his rough draft. Any time a
writer writes a novel, by the time you're halfway through you're learning
things, and changing your mind about stuff, and coming up with better
ideas...it's a *process*, rememer...and as you hit these things, you jump
back into the earlier parts of the book and edit and revise and realign so
it all hangs together, and the first part is made better by what you know
of the latter parts. The reader never sees those parts.
Nor should they. Any more than the audience should see the fumbling part
of a magician's education when he's still trying to get that rabbit/hat
thing worked out. Any more than he should stop in the middle of a
performance and tell them how he got to this point.
And frankly, it's taxing enough just keeping all the permutations of the
current story going smoothly without dragging in possibilities of other
permutations.
jms
Andrea B. Novin
It is said that a fanatic will redouble his efforts, but lose sight of
hisgoal. From what I have just read, you are starting to sound like a
fanatic. Maybe I shouldn't say this, but sticking my foot in my mouth
seems to be a genetic defect we both share. I am not sure I would like
to see any show written by a fanatic. Someone that is obsessed with is
own point of view is chilling, becauses he loses track of the outside
world. Being a perfectionist is fine. Being in the engineering field,
doing things second rate gets you professionally dead real quick.
However, being a perfectionist still allows the person to "have a life,"
outside his profession. Fanatics don't have any outside life. Maybe,
after the fives yeas is over, JMS should go out and take a six month
cruse around the world with wife and say screw the word processor.
Perspective is a wonderful thing that helps keep us on track, fanatics
don't have it.
I remove foot from mouth now.
Chuck
Daniel O'Riordan Casey
Hear hear! (not to sound like I'm kissing up to the great maker). One of
the reasons I enjoy Babylon 5 so much is the feel of it. Within the plane
of the story, there is a continuity. When Talia turns out to be a spy, it
fits in. We've had forshadowing of this and it all makes sense. If the
"real" reason is because the actress decided to leave, who cares?? Maybe
Andrea was nuts, maybe she wasn't. The thing is
I DON'T CARE.
It's Talia that I know and her relations with Ivonova and the crew that
I'm interested in. I know nothing about Andrea and (no offense if she's
reading) but I'm not really interested. Same with all of the other actors
and actresses. I haven't met any of them, I've seen and read interviews,
but anyone who knows about the process of interviewing knows that this is
shallowness at its best. I like them all, they are all good enough to
allow me to suspend my disbelif enough to believe they are who they
pretend to be (which isn't easy).
It's natural to think things like: What if Talia was a spy and wasn't
caught? How would Sinclair have dealt with this? But (like in real life)
you can't turn back the clock. Talia's gone, maybe dead. Sinclair is
gone on his journey. They're gone. Focus on what's going on.
(I can't believe I wrote all that)
Thanks for reading!
Dan Casey
"If you ever drop your keys in a river of molten lava, don't try to go
after them because, man, they're gone"
- -Jack Handy, Deep Thoughts
Peter Walker
Jms at B5 (jms...@aol.com) wrote:
[why not to explain "what would have been if..."]
: For the reason that a writer never publishes his rough draft. Any time a
: writer writes a novel, by the time you're halfway through you're learning
: things, and changing your mind about stuff, and coming up with better
: ideas...it's a *process*, rememer...and as you hit these things, you jump
: back into the earlier parts of the book and edit and revise and realign so
: it all hangs together, and the first part is made better by what you know
: of the latter parts. The reader never sees those parts.
Of course, this makes it all the more imperative that you one day have
offspring, Joe, so that decades from now we'll all be shelling out for the
18th volume in the "History of Babylon 5" series, edited and compiled by
said progeny.
Granted, should this happen, the comparisons to a certain other famous writer
would grow so enormous that the universe would with a single great "groan"
collapse into a singularity from their mighty and unfathomable gravity, so
I suppose it would not be a good thing after all...
[smilies for the over-worked and humor-impaired]
Peter Wykoff Walker II | EMAIL: p...@spacsun.rice.edu
Rice University | WWW: http://spacsun.rice.edu/~pww/
Dept. of Space Physics & Astronomy | PHONE: (713) FIX-VEEK
Brian K. Bragg
"Andrea B. Novin" <fem...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>It is said that a fanatic will redouble his efforts, but lose sight of
>hisgoal. From what I have just read, you are starting to sound like a
>fanatic. Maybe I shouldn't say this, but sticking my foot in my mouth
>seems to be a genetic defect we both share. I am not sure I would like
>to see any show written by a fanatic. Someone that is obsessed with is
>own point of view is chilling, becauses he loses track of the outside
>world. Being a perfectionist is fine. Being in the engineering field,
>doing things second rate gets you professionally dead real quick.
>However, being a perfectionist still allows the person to "have a life,"
>outside his profession. Fanatics don't have any outside life. Maybe,
>after the fives yeas is over, JMS should go out and take a six month
>cruse around the world with wife and say screw the word processor.
>Perspective is a wonderful thing that helps keep us on track, fanatics
>don't have it.
>I remove foot from mouth now.
>Chuck
Foot in mouth desease is a common trait and I don't trust anyone who
doesn't do it from time to time, and since we have arleady started I
think I'll join in and say that this ounds a lot less like fanatisism
than addiction. And contrary to popular befief sometimes addiction
should be left alone because by removing it you can destroy the
person. There are people to whom the creative urge is everything. It
is the defining aspect of their being. I wouldn't die if I couldn't
write anymore even though it is important to me. Living is much more
important. I don't really believe in an afterlife on a fundamental
leel and the thought of dying terrifies me. One might say I am
addicted to living or fanatical about my own survival but no one would
because everyone feels the same to a large degree and if some one
doesn't then we consider them mentally ill. Yet when someone has that
same sense of attachment to something else then we think it is wrong.
It maybe wrong for you but if it is right for him I say leave him to
it. It is, after all, his life.
Jeff Vavasour
In <4rfugj$q...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) writes:
[on seeing the draft plot]
>The reader never sees those parts.
>of a magician's education when he's still trying to get that rabbit/hat
>thing worked out.
That sounds a little like blooper shots that turn up in the credits of
movies and TV, though... no chance you'd consider "writing bloopers" then? :-)
Seriously, it has been done (I can recall George Lucas talking about how the
Star Wars trilogy originally culminated with a battle on the Wookie home
planet, and that there weren't any Ewoks), but to each his own. Your work is
no doubt a very personal thing and as you are a self-proclaimed perfectionist
(from another post), I'd expect that revealing the earlier draft ideas would
be akin to taking a step backward in the perfecting process.
I could see also the tone of many inquiries about the "original plot" coming
across as implying (though intentionally) that the original was somehow the
ideal and the final outcome has bandages. This would be something that might
likely discourage you from revealing the draft/development process as you
want the final work to be respected as a complete whole -- the culmination of
the work, not some approximation of it.
Personally, I'd be curious about these things only to gain a greater
appreciation of how the ideas evolve and of the inspiration that lead to what
we see, rather than to get the "true" plot.
- Jeff
Jay Denebeim
In article <4rhadq$3a...@mule2.mindspring.com>,
Brian K. Bragg <bkb...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>There are people to whom the creative urge is everything. It
>is the defining aspect of their being. I wouldn't die if I couldn't
>write anymore even though it is important to me. Living is much more
>important.
And that is why Joe's name is on the screen, and yours is not. To
create something truely extrodinary, it takes all the effort of and
extrodinary person. That's true whether you're talking a TV show, a
book, or a computer program. Nothing less will do.
Jay
--
* Jay Denebeim, Moderator, rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated *
* newsgroup submission address: ras...@solon.com *
* moderator contact address: rastb5-...@solon.com *
* personal contact address: dene...@deepthot.cary.nc.us *
Jay Denebeim
In article <4rhrsa$44...@mule1.mindspring.com>,> I would
>ask that you read my posts a little more closely before you responed.
Sorry, I should have spoken clearer. All I was saying was that it
takes everything someone has to create something. I know it's true of
me when I'm coding, and the same goes for writers. Even Asimov, who
made it look easy, gave it his all, that's all he did.
IMO, to achieve greatness, you HAVE to be a fanatic.
Brian K. Bragg
dene...@deepthot.cary.nc.us (Jay Denebeim) wrote:
>In article <4rhadq$3a...@mule2.mindspring.com>,
>Brian K. Bragg <bkb...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>And that is why Joe's name is on the screen, and yours is not. To
>create something truely extrodinary, it takes all the effort of and
>extrodinary person. That's true whether you're talking a TV show, a
>book, or a computer program. Nothing less will do.
True enough, but then we weren't really talking about me. I was using
myself as an example. I love to write, and have been told I am rather
good at it, which I certianly hope is true because I am good at
nothing else, but I realise that I don't have the same level of talent
as JMS. The person to whom I was responding had suggested that this
made JMS a fanatic, and I was pointing out the differance. I would
ask that you read my posts a little more closely before you responed.
Brian K. Bragg
dene...@deepthot.cary.nc.us (Jay Denebeim) wrote:
>IMO, to achieve greatness, you HAVE to be a fanatic.
Some thing are more important than greatness to me. I guess I'm just
not ambitious enough, but I would rather be happy. Still, I have at
times been miserable because I do right, and that can make you happy
to. But I have to have a life outside my work or the work is
meaningless. I create to live rather than live to create. Subtle
differance, but I still from time to time do damn good work, or so
people tell me. I don't think I've ever been satisfied. I stop
working on a piece when the nausia, headache and insomnia get to the
point where I can't take it any more. If it happens to have an ending
at that point I show it around, if not I come back and finish later,
when the anxiety attacks stop. But like I said, I was using myself as
an example to make a point. I didn't want to get into a discusion of
my writing ect. That can wait a few years until there is a news group
dedicated to my work. I'm here to talk about JMS's work.
Jms at B5
"Of course, this makes it all the more imperative that you one day have
offspring, Joe, so that decades from now we'll all be shelling out for the
18th volume in the "History of Babylon 5" series, edited and compiled by
said progeny."
Blecch...one more reason I'm glad I had a vasectomy.
jms
Jms at B5
"It is said that a fanatic will redouble his efforts, but lose sight of
fanatic. Maybe I shouldn't say this, but sticking my foot in my mouth
seems to be a genetic defect we both share. I am not sure I would like to
see any show written by a fanatic."
Don't know many writers, do you?
I care passionately about my work. If that passion makes me a fanatic,
then I'm a fanatic and proud of it. I've been this way all my life, and
it's a little late to go changing things now. It's a choice that works
for me. Your mileage may vary.
jms
Andrea B. Novin
Jms at B5 wrote:
>
> "It is said that a fanatic will redouble his efforts, but lose sight of
> fanatic. Maybe I shouldn't say this, but sticking my foot in my mouth
> seems to be a genetic defect we both share. I am not sure I would like to
> see any show written by a fanatic."
>
>
> I care passionately about my work. If that passion makes me a fanatic,
> then I'm a fanatic and proud of it. I've been this way all my life, and
> it's a little late to go changing things now. It's a choice that works
> for me. Your mileage may vary.
>
> jms
OK, Joe, message came in lound and clear. Other that what is below to
answer your question, I will say no more regarding this.
I still think the cruise is a good idea in 1998.
To answer your question, yes I have known a few writers in my life. None
of them I would count as my friends, but there were men who I got to
talk to alone, who answered my silly questions and whom I knew as good
or better than you. First, Ben Bova ,taught me how to read science
fiction, and the basics of writing it. Joe and Jack Haldeman I have met
many times. Jack taught me about using Science Fiction as therapy during
that part of my life when I had a lot to get off my chest. I had a few
all too brief conversations with the late Issac Asimov. He taught me you
can be a broad based intellectual and a wit while having a galatic size
sense of humor. This was at a time when I had all too much intellect and
all too little humor in my life.
I feel all of these men care(d) very passionately about their work. All
of them wanted their message put forth in their way. None of them were
afraid to spent the time and effort to get it the way they wanted. I
would say only Joe Haldeman was really passionate to the point of
being a fanatic about, "The Forever War."
Yet, Joe, all the above did not care about their work to the exclusion
of everything else in creation. This is what I am starting to get from
reading your messages. Now I admit, I have no window into JMS's heart,
and especially into his soul. I have no idea what demons drive you and
why. I met all the above during the time they were creating, and all
were fun to talk to too. I am not sure I would want to meet and talk to
the current JMS. From your posts and from what I see on the screen, I
think JMS and I share many concepts on religion, character, storytelling
and technology. Someday, I would like to sit down and discuss these with
you, but I will never sit down with a fanatic, because from past
experience, that is time wasted.
I think I will wait, and maybe if I am still around for the Third
Millennium, talk to the JMS at that point, assuming he has any interest
in sitting down with me. I still say, that I have no wish to view a show
written by a fanatic. You would know best if you are one or not, but
then what do I know.
Chuck
J.M.Egolf
JMS wrote:
>> I care passionately about my work. If that passion makes me a fanatic,
>> then I'm a fanatic and proud of it. I've been this way all my life, and
>> it's a little late to go changing things now. It's a choice that works
>> for me. Your mileage may vary.
>>
>> jms
>
newsreader's funny that way) to offer this observation:
There's a difference between 1) deliberately dedicating one's self to a
cause or activity by either creating it, contributing to it and/or using
it to inspire one's one endeavors; and 2) becoming unwittingly fixated on
an activity or endeavor without contributing to it, or recognizing the
effect that the fixation has on one's life.
The difference is choice, and self-awareness.
--
*******************************
J.M. ("Jamie") Egolf
<*> jeg...@mcs.com <*>
"We find meaning where we can."
Patrick M. Berry
In article <31DD0F...@worldnet.att.net>, "Andrea B. Novin" <fem...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> I had a few
> all too brief conversations with the late Issac Asimov. He taught me you
> can be a broad based intellectual and a wit while having a galatic size
> sense of humor.
You probably don't want to cite Asimov as an example. If anything, Asimov was
even more fanatical about writing than JMS. He wrote ten hours a day, seven days
a week, and hated to take vacations because that meant he had to stop writing.
By the way, his first name is spelled Isaac. I would not normally pick that nit,
but Asimov *hated* having his name misspelled. Those who wish to honor his memory
should make a point of getting it right.
> Yet, Joe, all the above did not care about their work to the exclusion
> of everything else in creation.
Asimov did. He said on many occasions that there literally was nothing else in
life that he would rather do than write.
> I still say, that I have no wish to view a show
> written by a fanatic.
Then change channels. No one will mind.
Keith Wood
In article <31DD0F...@worldnet.att.net>,
"Andrea B. Novin" <fem...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
[Jms at B5 wrote:
[>
[> "It is said that a fanatic will redouble his efforts, but lose sight of
[> his goal. From what I have just read, you are starting to sound like a
[> fanatic. Maybe I shouldn't say this, but sticking my foot in my mouth
[> seems to be a genetic defect we both share. I am not sure I would like to
[> see any show written by a fanatic."
[> Don't know many writers, do you?
[>
[> I care passionately about my work. If that passion makes me a fanatic,
[> then I'm a fanatic and proud of it.
[To answer your question, yes I have known a few writers in my life.
[Ben Bova, Joe & Jack Haldeman, Isaac Asimov]
[Yet, Joe, all the above did not care about their work to the exclusion
[of everything else in creation. This is what I am starting to get from
[reading your messages.
You're missing several factors. First, NOT ONE of the writers you
mentioned is doing episodic television -- where several thousand
words MUST be written EVERY WEEK. JMS is "fanatic" because
he's got about 12 days' worth of work to do in 5 days and however
many nights he cares to stay up until 2 AM. Plus weekend appearances
at those few conventions that he can justify the time to attend.
Second, you DON'T know JMS except from his messages. Those messages
are in a forum dedicated to B5, and again they take time out of his
work sched to generate and answer. OUR focus here is B5 -- what do
you think HIS should be . . ?
Third, B5 is his creation, and he knows that his every line of
script, every FX loop, and every extra in the background will be the
subject of commentary and debate for decades into the future. He has
a very real example of this in Gene Roddenberry.
STAR TREK was such a force in TV that it spawned THREE spinoffs
TWENTY YEARS AFTER IT WAS CANCELED. Roddenberry is a household name,
and most people can name his various SF series and pilots, but most
people can't name the WWII series that he produced before TREK.
JMS knows that B5 has propelled him upward out of the ranks of "mere"
producers (most people don't know or care who produces the vast
majority of TV shows and movies) and into cult "creator of" status.
I've spoken with a number of people in "the Industry" who are known
for their work on STAR TREK 30 years ago. When I first met Bob
Justman, he was with his teenage son, who was ASTONISHED at how many
people knew who his father was. It's quite a shock to disvocer that
your father is a cult hero, and the poor kid had never imagined that
a dozen or more fans could come up, look at Dad's name tag, and
respectfully ask if he was "the" Robert Justman -- all in a 10-minute
period.
Leslie Parrish is not identified as Richard Bach's wife (despite
millions of copies of the books identifying her as such) -- she is
most often identified with her ONE-TIME role in STAR TREK!
If YOU knew that this was going to happen, that hundreds of people
would find their lives defined to a million people based on YOUR
work, wouldn't you work your butt off to make sure that your show
can stand the pick-apart scrutiny . . ?
None of my shows is ever going to make me a cult figure, but when I'm
working on one it gets my full devotion. And I'm working with NO
BUDGET and a staff of half a dozen (at best). And I guess I'm
equally fanatic about it.
George Cifrancis
Andrea B. Novin (fem...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: that part of my life when I had a lot to get off my chest. I had a few
: all too brief conversations with the late Issac Asimov. He taught me you
: can be a broad based intellectual and a wit while having a galatic size
: sense of humor. This was at a time when I had all too much intellect and
: all too little humor in my life.
I was at the Marcon convention here in Columbus a few months back where JMS
was one of the guests. Trust me, the man has a GREAT sense of humor.
Besides, anyone who uses colorful phrases like "you necrophiliac, corpse
banging bastards..." is ok with me. 8-)
(JMS was referring to a few people he overheard that were attending a
Funeral Director's convention (at the same hotel) who made fun of some of the
Marcon attendees.)
: I think I will wait, and maybe if I am still around for the Third
: Millennium, talk to the JMS at that point, assuming he has any interest
: in sitting down with me. I still say, that I have no wish to view a show
: written by a fanatic. You would know best if you are one or not, but
: then what do I know.
If season 3 of Babylon 5 was written by Joe (and it was) and he is a
fanatic (as you say), then based on the quality of the show at this point, I
wish there were a lot more shows written by fanatics.
George Cifrancis
--
/--------------------------------------------------------------------\
| George Cifrancis III | Network & Systems Administrator |
| Columbus, Ohio USA | Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation |
| g...@infinet.com | MIS - Wide Area Network Support |
| | http://www.infinet.com/~gc3/ |
\--------------------------------------------------------------------/
Mark Shannon
Keith Wood wrote:
>
>You're missing several factors. First, NOT ONE of the writers you
>mentioned is doing episodic television -- where several thousand
>words MUST be written EVERY WEEK. JMS is "fanatic" because
>he's got about 12 days' worth of work to do in 5 days and however
>many nights he cares to stay up until 2 AM. Plus weekend appearances
>at those few conventions that he can justify the time to attend.
>
>Second, you DON'T know JMS except from his messages. Those messages
>are in a forum dedicated to B5, and again they take time out of his
>work sched to generate and answer. OUR focus here is B5 -- what do
>you think HIS should be . . ?
>
>Third, B5 is his creation, and he knows that his every line of
>script, every FX loop, and every extra in the background will be the
>subject of commentary and debate for decades into the future. He has
>a very real example of this in Gene Roddenberry.
>None of my shows is ever going to make me a cult figure, but when I'm
>working on one it gets my full devotion. And I'm working with NO
>BUDGET and a staff of half a dozen (at best). And I guess I'm
>equally fanatic about it.
SOME must be sacrificed if ALL are to be entertained....
Robert A. Hayden
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Jms at B5 (jms...@aol.com) wrote:
> "Unfortunately, JMS never answers these questions clearly or in a way that
> helps us to understand how it fits into the plot. I'd like to ask *why*
> he doesn't answer these questions completely."
> Sometimes I do. Sometimes I don't. I do more times than I don't. So
> your premise is flawed at the core of it, thus any resulting comments from
> me would only range further afield into even greater inaccuracy.
exactly...
Joe, have you thought about going into national politics? With your
ability to talk and say nothing, I think you could go all the way to the
top.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: PGP Signed with TinSign 1.1
iQCVAwUBMd1MKzokqlyVGmCFAQHljQP9E/0t5Z/Y7pLunNDRJZBcVFycIPvf+4Ly
7OtUU1KAzRaSCO1Ir2kBIJoHAUbgWOyWsxB7q7bKZ/fsmzAfB0Qb0k4zSoQFghab
bmUVY7tSox8czSIOmqOToIZwoSUfmbYbDAKHKI+OwlzKQrt5+kTpgA+8BFCLtkNh
iE9Um/p0zJo=
=45iQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hay...@krypton.mankato.msus.edu
\ /__ Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Finger for PGP Public Key
\/ / -=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-
\/ http://krypton.mankato.msus.edu/~hayden/Welcome.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GED/J d-- s:++>: a- C++(++++)$ ULUO++ P+>+++ L++ !E---- W+(---) N+++ o+
K+++ w+(---) O- M+$>++ V-- PS++(+++)>$ PE++(+)>$ Y++ PGP++ t- 5+++ X++
R+++>$ tv+ b+ DI+++ D+++ G+++++>$ e++$>++++ h r-- y+**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Brian K. Bragg
"Andrea B. Novin" <fem...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Yet, Joe, all the above did not care about their work to the exclusion
>of everything else in creation. This is what I am starting to get from
>reading your messages. Now I admit, I have no window into JMS's heart,
>and especially into his soul. I have no idea what demons drive you and
>why. I met all the above during the time they were creating, and all
>were fun to talk to too. I am not sure I would want to meet and talk to
>the current JMS. From your posts and from what I see on the screen, I
>think JMS and I share many concepts on religion, character, storytelling
>and technology. Someday, I would like to sit down and discuss these with
>you, but I will never sit down with a fanatic, because from past
>experience, that is time wasted.
I think you might just be surprised. Writing can get under your skin
and go from occupation to biological imparative in no time flat. The
comes a point where the story takes over and you have to write are go
insane. The voices begin dancing in your head and if you don't start
putting what the say on paper the volume becomes deafining. And when
the words "The End" roles out of your pen you have a God damn orgasm.
Writing, is addictive. It becomes a must. The story becomes the
center of your life and you don't care about anything else. It is an
addiction like no other because the result is something beautiful.
You have added to the imagination of the universe. You have CREATED
something that no one else could. I don't know from experiance but I
imagen it's about the same feeling parents get at the birth of a
child. It is something all writers feel when the voices start. And
if that makes us fanatics, then so be it. But if we are fanatics, and
you don't want to veiw a show watched by fanatics may I suggest a
sitcom. The just have people turning out the same old jokes week
after week, no passion for the work there. IOW all writers who care
about their work get a little bit obsessive and if you don't like it
you got a real problem cause anything good is going to come from the
hands of someone in this frame of mind. I am only like this in the
later stages of a story, when I am past the research, plotting, and am
down to the actual writting of dialog, but I know people who are like
this all the time and I don't consider them fanatics because I know
the feeling and know how hard it can be to resist.
>I think I will wait, and maybe if I am still around for the Third
>Millennium, talk to the JMS at that point, assuming he has any interest
>in sitting down with me. I still say, that I have no wish to view a show
>written by a fanatic. You would know best if you are one or not, but
>then what do I know.
Some how I don't think he is.
>Chuck
The_Doge of St. Louis
In article <31DBB6...@worldnet.att.net>, "Andrea B. Novin"
<fem...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Jms at B5 wrote:
>> My life is my work, my work is my writing, and my writing is my life.
>> That reads as awfully indulgent and pretentious, and maybe it is. But as
>> Henry Kissinger once noted, "it has the added benefit of being true." If
>> the universe said, tomorrow, "You can't write anymore," there'd be a
>> pause, then a puff of purple smoke...and I'd disappear.
>
>
>It is said that a fanatic will redouble his efforts, but lose sight of
>hisgoal.
By whom, just out of curiosity? In any case, jms seems to have his
artistic goal quite firmly in his sights, as far as I can see.
It is also said (by me; I believe in citing sources) that a "fanatic"
is somone decidated to something which you don't understand.
> From what I have just read, you are starting to sound like a
>fanatic.
No, he's sounding like a creative artist. As you note later on, you
are not a creative artist yourself, so perhaps you (understandably) don't
appreciate how genuinely creative people think and act. You would, IMHO,
be better advised to learn a bit more about this before applying
pejorative terms like "fanatic" to those whose motivations are unfamiliar
to you.
[...]
>Someone that is obsessed with is
>own point of view is chilling, becauses he loses track of the outside
>world. Being a perfectionist is fine. Being in the engineering field,
>doing things second rate gets you professionally dead real quick.
>However, being a perfectionist still allows the person to "have a life,"
>outside his profession.
Artists - at least the genuinely great ones - don't make an artificial
distinction between their "profession" and their lives. Being a writer,
sculptor, artist, composer, etc., isn't a 9-to-5 job that you forget as
soon as you leave the office. It's nothing like engineering, and it's
myopic, IMHO, to apply those standards here.
Schubert and Mozart, for example, were constantly writing music.
Inspiration flowed from them a like a river. They didn't knock off for a
beer at 5:00 and forget about composing.
As for being a perfectionist: wanting to see your creation realized in
a way that matches up with your vision of same isn't "fanaticism", it's
artistic integrity. There's a difference here, as anyone involved in the
arts could tell you.
> Fanatics don't have any outside life. Maybe,
>after the fives yeas is over, JMS should go out and take a six month
>cruse around the world with wife and say screw the word processor.
JMS should do whatever he darn well pleases. As he is a writer,
however, suggesting that he should stop writing for a year makes about as
much sense as saying that an Olympic athelete should stop working out for
a year and sit around watching TeeVee and eating Oreos and stop being such
a fanatic about exercise.
As one of the old Greek philosophers {can't recall which one at the
moment) noted: That which is used grows stronger; that which is not used,
wastes away
>Perspective is a wonderful thing that helps keep us on track, fanatics
>don't have it.
Niether do those who think their own experience is the sole possible
measure of human behavior.
>
>I remove foot from mouth now.
About a paragraph too late, I'd say.
--
<*> "The war between the sexes is the only one in which both sides
regularly sleep with the enemy."
--- Quentin Crisp
======================================================================
<*> The_Doge of St. Louis
Stage, screen, radio
http://www.inlink.com/~thedoge/
David Hooper
jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
>"It is said that a fanatic will redouble his efforts, but lose sight of
>his goal. From what I have just read, you are starting to sound like a
>fanatic. Maybe I shouldn't say this, but sticking my foot in my mouth
>seems to be a genetic defect we both share. I am not sure I would like to
>see any show written by a fanatic."
>Don't know many writers, do you?
>I care passionately about my work. If that passion makes me a fanatic,
>then I'm a fanatic and proud of it. I've been this way all my life, and
>it's a little late to go changing things now. It's a choice that works
>for me. Your mileage may vary.
> jms
Well spoken, sir!
Most of the truely successful, truely happy people I know are driven
by some internal, unknown force. And all of the great artists I know
of have been, especially Michelangelo.
Bye!
David
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares."-- Hebrews 13:2
Alan Caldera
Hubert Lundberg
In article <4rfugj$q...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5)
wrote:
>"Why have you chosen not to tell us how WWE or the Talia/Control situation
>would have been handled if Sheridan had not been introduced and/or Andrea
>wanted to stick with the show for as long as she could?"
>
>For the reason that it may not have changed as much as you think it
>might've.
>
>For the reason that a writer never publishes his rough draft. Any time a
>writer writes a novel, by the time you're halfway through you're learning
>things, and changing your mind about stuff, and coming up with better
>ideas...it's a *process*, rememer...and as you hit these things, you jump
>back into the earlier parts of the book and edit and revise and realign so
>it all hangs together, and the first part is made better by what you know
>of the latter parts. The reader never sees those parts.
(etc)
> jms
It's astounding, this viewer interaction! The only comparable thing I can
think of is, perhaps, the (was it?)Dickens stories that were serialized in
the 19th century. Only in his case, his work wasn't delivered in such a
pervasive manner as tv. All I can say to all is 'lighten up! and enjoy
the show!'(except for dear JMS, of course, who has to PUT ON the show!)
BTW-here's a question I've been trying to ask:
Is there any connection between character names and actual terms/places/etc?
Two have come to mind-
Ivanova-there's a city of half-million in Russia with that name.
Refa-There's a Turkish word(at least it sounds the same)that loosely
translates as 'welfare.'
E.M.P. Pringle
In article <4r9ae1$l...@louie.udel.edu>,
Alexander Glazamitsky <glaz...@eecis.udel.edu> wrote:
>Yvonne Bennett <catb...@nrv.net> wrote:
>>zab...@stanley.bio.purdue.edu says...
>>>
>>>"Why the *hell* did the Centauri give Earth jumpgate technology
>>>100 years ago?"
>
>>Otherwise, they wanted us to be so thankful to them that we would let
>>them rule us as yet another planet in the Centauri Republic.
>
>"Hey, look, there is a planet with humanoids. They seem quite primitive -
>probably never really got much beyond their own system. Look like us, too,
>except that they have weird hair style. I bet if we feed them some story
>about being related, they would just fall all over themselves and we will
>get most of their resources cheap.
>
>One problem, though. Seem like nobody wants to go to run these primitive
>worlds anymore. Too much hassle, too expensive.. oh, let's just trade
>jumpgate tech for some trinkets. They'll be so grateful, we could get good
>trade terms without putting a lot of people on their world. That always
>causes problems anyway. Remember how those thrice-damned Narns reacted?"...
>
>
Actually, it seems to me that the physical similarity between the two races may
be the answer. It may be incorrect to extrapolate from human reactions, but I
imagine that most humans would be more willing to treat the Narn badly than
someone who lokked superficially completely human...perhaps the same is true of
the Centauri?
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
Miss Elizabeth Pringle |
Univ. Museum of Zoology | I knew a phoenix in my youth so let
Cambridge University, England | them have their day.
David J. P. Long
jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
>Don't know many writers, do you?
>
>I care passionately about my work. If that passion makes me a fanatic,
>then I'm a fanatic and proud of it. I've been this way all my life, and
>it's a little late to go changing things now. It's a choice that works
>for me. Your mileage may vary.
Joe,
I have to tell you that you've accomplished something else. You
really have opened up the creative process and allowed "outsiders" a
peek at what it takes. That peek is frightening. That's what makes
you a writer and me a computer wizard. It's what I do best and people
keep wanting to pay me to fix their problems.
It's taken a creative mind to come up with solutions and, with other
hobbies, I've come up with a few "stories to tell" myself. However,
the "myths" of what it takes to be a real writer have, thank to you,
been exploded for me. I thank you, sir, for keeping me from making
myself look ridiculous as a pretender.
...my ex-wife, however, still harbors the myths.
You have shown just how much *real* work it takes to get the story out
The Way You Want It.
I think everybody believes, at one point, that they have The Great
American Novel swimming inside their heads and they only need "let it
out". Your examples show that you have to go in and drag it out
kicking and creaming every word of the way.
...and exploding the TeeVee myths takes that another step further. I
remember meeting Bjo Trimble at a convention a few years ago and we
got to talking. This was while she was trying to start the SFAN
(Science, Fantasy and Adventure Network) as competition to the
forthcoming Sci-Fi Channel. They were looking for original series
ideas and I've had one for a long time that nobody has ever done and I
thought it would play well in that environment. I fleshed out the
directions, characters, episodes, etc. I gave her my name and address
and her lawyers were supposed to contact me. To say the least, I'm
still waiting for the lawyers and the forms I was supposed to be sent.
When I joined MSN, I found her there and asked whatever happened to
SFAN. Another myth exploded.
Thanks again Joe. You've done more than just put out the best damn
show on the tube. You've demystified the Cult of Entertainment and
excited quite a few people. You should see what my daughters thinks
about your show. Your consistency has her, at the age of 8, picking
out inconsistencies in other shows and she's taking it as them trying
to insult her intelligence. Thanks.
---------*---------------------------------------------------------
*** djl...@magic.mv.com _ _
***** djl...@msn.com (_) (_)
******************* +------------+
************* | Sig under |\
*********** |construction| \
****** ****** +------------+ \
**** **** | \ | \
-**-------------**------------------|----\-------|----\------------
Andrew J. Petrarca
In article <thedoge-0507...@thedoge.inlink.com>,
The_Doge of St. Louis <the...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> From what I have just read, you are starting to sound like a
>>fanatic.
> No, he's sounding like a creative artist. As you note later on, you
>are not a creative artist yourself, so perhaps you (understandably) don't
>appreciate how genuinely creative people think and act. You would, IMHO,
>be better advised to learn a bit more about this before applying
>pejorative terms like "fanatic" to those whose motivations are unfamiliar
>to you.
The way you're writing, I get the impression that you think that technical
fields are somehow less creative than the "fine arts". (Pardon me if I'm
wrong in this impression, but you implied that an engineer probably doesn't
know what it's like to be "genuinely creative".) I assure you that the
humanities have no monopoly on creativity, even the lifelong, all-consuming
creative spirit you refer to above.
The distinction between fine arts and engineering disciplines falls roughly
(but far from perfectly) along the lines of emotional vs. intellectual, but
most certainly not along the lines of creative vs. non-creative! Music,
story-telling, sculpture, etc. are very emotional pursuits. In those
fields, if you don't _feel_ it, you aren't doing it right. In science,
engineering, and mathematics, the focus is more on understanding,
describing, analyzing, building. This is a major difference, but the
fundamental force that keeps the technical fields moving is the same
creative spark that allows plays to be written, songs to be sung. The Muse
takes many forms.
> Artists - at least the genuinely great ones - don't make an artificial
>distinction between their "profession" and their lives. Being a writer,
>sculptor, artist, composer, etc., isn't a 9-to-5 job that you forget as
>soon as you leave the office. It's nothing like engineering, and it's
>myopic, IMHO, to apply those standards here.
> Schubert and Mozart, for example, were constantly writing music.
>Inspiration flowed from them a like a river. They didn't knock off for a
>beer at 5:00 and forget about composing.
The most important phrase in the above is "the genuinely great ones". For
every Schubert or Mozart, there are a thousand C+C Music Factories or KLF's.
The same is true in science and engineering. There are some who do it
purely for the money, and who never touch the soul of their craft. The
majority, I would say, feel the instinctive urgency of the creative act to a
varying degree. Then there are those who live and breathe through their
work. Newton and Tesla, Goddard and Feynmann (for example) didn't do what
they did just to pay the bills at the end of the week!
> As one of the old Greek philosophers {can't recall which one at the
>moment) noted: That which is used grows stronger; that which is not used,
>wastes away
Interestingly enough, to the ancient Greeks, science and art were one and
the same. They did not distinguish between them.
In summary, I agree with your description of the creative spirit, but I
think you are wrong to imply that an engineer can't understand it, and that
analogies drawn between engineering and dramatic writing are necessarily
flawed. I've studied and practiced (but admittedly not to a level of
mastery) several arts and sciences, and for all of their differences, they
are all built on the same foundation. The fundamental creative act is the
same in every one - it pours not from the heart (on which the artists focus)
or the mind (which the engineers prize), but from the soul (which is largely
ignored in our society).
Pearl Buck said it very well:
"The truly creative mind in any field is no more than this: A human
creature born abnormally, inhumanly sensitive. To him a touch is a blow, a
sound is a noise, a misfortune is a tragedy, a joy is an ecstasy, a friend
is a lover, a lover is a god, and failure is death.
Add to this cruelly delicate organism the overpowering necessity to create,
create, create - so that without the creating of music or poetry or books or
buildings or something of meaning, his very breath is cut off from him. He
must create, must pour out creation. By some strange, unknown, inward
urgency he is not really alive unless he is creating."
--
Bitwise, android. &
Edward John Auerbach
Jms at B5 (jms...@aol.com) wrote:
: "Of course, this makes it all the more imperative that you one day have
: offspring, Joe, so that decades from now we'll all be shelling out for the
: 18th volume in the "History of Babylon 5" series, edited and compiled by
: said progeny."
: Blecch...one more reason I'm glad I had a vasectomy.
Aaaack! If any posting ever deserved a spoiler warning, this was it.
My lunch has now been quite thoroughly spoiled.
If I had one question to NOT ask JMS, it would probably be something like
this... :)
--
Eddie Auerbach, University of Florida, Gainesville FL
WWW - http://www.chem.ufl.edu/~eja/
email - e...@ufl.edu
David Serchay
Jms at B5 (jms...@aol.com) wrote:
: "Of course, this makes it all the more imperative that you one day have
: offspring, Joe, so that decades from now we'll all be shelling out for the
: 18th volume in the "History of Babylon 5" series, edited and compiled by
: said progeny."
: Blecch...one more reason I'm glad I had a vasectomy.
I think that's a bit more than I needed to know. :)
--
David Serchay
a013...@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
Jeff Vavasour
In <4rmqs5$a...@sidehack.gweep.net> and...@sidehack.gweep.net (Andrew J. Petrarca) writes:
>The distinction between fine arts and engineering disciplines falls roughly
>(but far from perfectly) along the lines of emotional vs. intellectual, but
Hey, scientists and those in the technical disciplines can be passionate
about their work too, for that matter. There can be something aesthetically
pleasing about a concise solution, the subtle symmetry in description of
nature or a well-written piece of computer code. For those who are passionate
about it, it can feel every bit as much art as painting or writing.
[original attribution of the following quote lost]
>> Artists - at least the genuinely great ones - don't make an artificial
>>distinction between their "profession" and their lives. Being a writer,
>>sculptor, artist, composer, etc., isn't a 9-to-5 job that you forget as
>>soon as you leave the office. It's nothing like engineering, and it's
>>myopic, IMHO, to apply those standards here.
Tell that to my boss. I've been eating my meals in front of the keyboard
for the past few months, 12 to 14 hours straight. Even when I stop I can't
stop thinking about it. It's instinctive, my mind just seems to play through
the problems from all angles whether I want it to or not. I dream solutions.
I *cannot* "leave it at the office."
Anyway, to put it back on topic a bit, I've seen a couple posts that imply
that JMS is married (though I don't know this for sure). If this is the
case, I'd say that Mrs. JMS deserves quite a lot of credit because it takes
a special kind of person to be supportive of such an all-consuming passion.
(I'm quite grateful that my wife is so understanding of the time I've put in
on things the past year or so, but I still feel quite guilty about it...)
Finally, to tie into the subject line, my question for JMS would be, "could
you ever go back to being anything less than exec. producer?" I'd think that
the amount of creative control he's had over Babylon 5 would make it harder
than before to enjoy writing under the constraint of other script editors or
producers...
- Jeff
Jim Cassell
"Why green and purple?"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Cassell jwca...@UNC.EDU
two...@ix.netcom.com
Keith Bennett wrote:
>
> Spoilers for WWE
>
> kmoe...@ix.netcom.com (Korey Moeller ) wrote:
>
> >Where did you hear Sheridan was not part of the arc from the beginning?
> >If this is an assumption based on the fact we didn't hear about him in
> >season 1, I would say that's not a good assumption. This is a 5 year
> >story, why would it be expected that all the twists would be out there
> >in the first year? I believe there are a number of events in season 1
> >that made Sheridan necessary and not an after-thought.
> >
> >kjm
> >
>
> Its my understnading that the "one who will be" was always part of
> the storyline, but that some trap doors have been activated.
> <speculation mode on>
> All of this is guesses:
> I think that WWE was origionally supposed to occur at the end of
> season 5. Think of it... you watch the show for 5 years, and then
> watch as Sinclair goes back to do it all over again.
>
> I believe JMS also mentioned that Laurel Takashima (sp) was supposed
> to be 1st officer until the third season, around which time she'd be
> revealed as a traitor, allowing the "second officer" (ie, Corwin's
> position) to take over - said person being a dour russian named
> Ivanova.
>
> Laurel Takashima left after the pilot; her first officer position
> was immediately given to Ivanova, the traitor was given to Talia, and
> the third season change was ignored.
> IF Sinclair had still been in command, sinclair would still be the
> one who was, Delenn would be the one who is... and I have no clue who
> would be the who will be. Possibly Ivanova or Garibaldi; or even Lil'
> Davey.
>
> However, Michael O'hare left the series after season one, and in
> came Boxleitner. I think it was Sinclair and Delenn who were supposed
> to have a child, after Catherine (?) disappeared investigating a new
> planet. This would be the Anna thread we all are speculating about.
> Sheridan then inherited the "one who will be," and the romance with
> Delenn. Sinclair kept the one who was. Morden was made to be a
> shipmate of Anna, to tie Sheridan even closer to the shadows. I'd
> guess that Ranger one was either supposed to be sinclair-as-commander,
> or possibly Rathenn or one of Delenn's grey council pals.
>
> Third season, Andrea Thompson has left, collapsing the traitor
> thread. I still think that her & Ivanovas relationship would have
> been highlighted more if she had remained longer - possibly comeing to
> the fore at Severed Dreams or Ceremonies. In addition, JMS mentioned
> that he intended Ironhearts gift to be taken away from the characters,
> as an "oh, shit, now what do we do." Either that, or he enjoyed the
> chance to do it to us.
> Lyta, from the pilot, returned, and resumed the Vorlon / Teep
> connection thread (and, if reports are to be believed, the Shadow /
> Teep connection). I do not know if Lyta would have picked up
> Ironhearts gift if she had stayed (I'd assume so). Her other threads
> will probably become more clear in October.
> <whine>
>
> I have no idea what the old doctor was supposed to have done.
Talking about him, anyone remember that quote of his from the Pilot? It went
something like "There are times in your life when everything changes, when the
............and you see the universe in a new way. I've looked on the face of a Vorlon,
Laurel, and nothing;s the same anymore."
I always liked that quote, but cant remember it...can anyone help me out?
-Alan
>
> "I'm the one your holy book warned you about"
two...@ix.netcom.com
Andrew J. Petrarca
In article <4rntli$2...@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>,
Jeff Vavasour <je...@physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
>In <4rmqs5$a...@sidehack.gweep.net> and...@sidehack.gweep.net (Andrew J. Petrarca) writes:
>>The distinction between fine arts and engineering disciplines falls roughly
>>(but far from perfectly) along the lines of emotional vs. intellectual, but
>
>Hey, scientists and those in the technical disciplines can be passionate
>about their work too, for that matter. There can be something aesthetically
>pleasing about a concise solution, the subtle symmetry in description of
>nature or a well-written piece of computer code. For those who are passionate
>about it, it can feel every bit as much art as painting or writing.
Hey, read my article more carefully, and you'll see that that was one of the
points that I made.
--
Bitwise, android. &
Jay and Jennifer Swartz
Dave Hitt wrote:
>
> I love SF, and have been watching it on TV for years. IMO B5 is
> simply the best SF that's ever been on TV. We could use a few more
> fanatics like JMS.
Fanatics, hmm? Harlan Ellison, anyone?
Jay Swartz
Gaithersburg, MD
"Life. Don't talk to me about life." -- Marvin the Paranoid Android
David Filip
On 4 Jul 1996, Jay Denebeim wrote:
> IMO, to achieve greatness, you HAVE to be a fanatic.
Take a look at Bill Gates. He keeps semi-regular hours, watches
basketball games and has a social life. He is not a fanatic, but his
personal monetary worth and Microsoft's clout are so giant that the
word "greatness" is almost diminutive. (Please, I know that everyone on
the internet hates Microsoft, but you can't deny the company's power)
How did he achieve it? In an interview, he said "I just made the
choice to work and do exactly what I wanted every day." If I may
paraphrase Ranger One, Bill is the arrow that springs from the bow. He
knows what he wants to do, how it could get done, and he does it without
hesitation.
Jimi Hendrix thought greatness lied in inventive music, so that's
what he perfected. Mother Theresa felt greatness was found while helping
others, so she did it. Like G'Kar in PoNR, JMS simply knows what his
distractions might be and chooses to do avoid them. That way, he stays
on the path to do what he truly wants (to tell us the story of B5). He
knows what he wants, sees the necessary path to get there, and does
everything necessary to stay on the path. Anyone who sticks to that
plan can be great without being a fanatic.
This concludes today's lesson in Greatness 101.
David Filip
Great Maker! Please keep reading! I'm sorry I haven't been able
to keep track of the newsgroup very well for the past week, but I need a
bit more clarity on an old question:
> "Why have you chosen not to tell us how WWE or the Talia/Control situation
> would have been handled if Sheridan had not been introduced and/or Andrea
> wanted to stick with the show for as long as she could?"
Here was your reply. Ordinarily, I would say it's enough, but
your own comments in the lurker's guide seem to contradict you. Since
you're usually so consistent, the contradiction has puzzled me.
[a major Interludes and Examinations spoiler lurks below. If you haven't
seen I&E yet, the rest of you should just skip this post and see how
JMS replies]
On 4 Jul 1996, Jms at B5 wrote:
> For the reason that it may not have changed as much as you think it
> might've.
>
> For the reason that a writer never publishes his rough draft. Any time a
> writer writes a novel, by the time you're halfway through you're learning
> things, and changing your mind about stuff, and coming up with better
> ideas...it's a *process*, rememer...and as you hit these things, you jump
> back into the earlier parts of the book and edit and revise and realign so
> it all hangs together, and the first part is made better by what you know
> of the latter parts. The reader never sees those parts.
>
> Nor should they. Any more than the audience should see the fumbling part
> of a magician's education when he's still trying to get that rabbit/hat
> thing worked out. Any more than he should stop in the middle of a
> performance and tell them how he got to this point.
I don't think any of us would regard the revelation of you
original plans as "fumbling," we would just like to know how the process
went along. It would simply be fun for us to see what possibilities
you've juggled around.
If you were truly concerned that revealing your original ideas
would look "bad" in some way, then why have you told us so much about
unused plot ideas? If you didn't want us to know about the rough
drafts and ideas you abandoned, you could have held back items like
these (off the top of my head)...
1) Laurel's role as control.
2) The fact that you originally would have killed Kosh later than you
chose to, and that Sinclair would not have been able to give Kosh the
direct, argumentative confrontation that Sheridan did.
3) The unused "some things we do not allow" ending to Grail.
4) The fact that Sinclair would have continued his relationship with
Sakai if he had stayed.
5) The unused idea where Talia's brain was in a jar for Ship of Tears.
6) The right/left Narnish text mistake in Point of No Return.
7) The abandoned CGI bartender.
8) Your motivation for moving Sinclair of the board: It was much easier
to introduce the Rangers, build an army, bring in the military
conspiracy and to do "other things" with Sheridan.
I felt that 99.9% of the changes you made were definite
improvements, so I want you to know I'm not complaining about what you've
done. I just don't see how you can say what you did in this post in light
of all the rough ideas that you've already revealed. It's as if you'd
forgotten about all the aborted plans that you had already shared with us
on the usenet and Lurker's Guide. As if you never revealed *anything*
about your "rough draft." In truth, you told us about possibilities
and changes quite frequently, except in WWE and Divided Loyalties.
To clarify my original question further, it is "In light of the
many 'would have beens' that you told us about past episodes and plot
elements, why do you continue not to tell us about the 'would have beens'
for Control and WWE." *This* question was not answered in the 7/4 post.
I don't mean to tell my favorite celebrity "Hey! You're
contradicting yourself!" but when I see something that doesn't fit I
can't let it slide. Is there a chance you'd return to this thread to
take care of the loose ends?
Dave Hitt
jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
>"It is said that a fanatic will redouble his efforts, but lose sight of
>his goal. From what I have just read, you are starting to sound like a
>fanatic. Maybe I shouldn't say this, but sticking my foot in my mouth
>seems to be a genetic defect we both share. I am not sure I would like to
>see any show written by a fanatic."
>
I think it's safe to say only the very best and very worst shows are
produced by fanatics. If they're fanatics about some extreme
political idea or stupid theory you can expect the worst. If they're
fanatics about quality you can expect the best.
Susan Atwater
In article <0dr2xwUN...@sedona.net>, Keith Wood <kei...@bctv.com> wrote:
>In article <4rclu5$6...@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>,>[In
>[<Pine.A32.3.92a.960702...@homer16.u.washington.edu>
>[David Filip <grim...@u.washington.edu> writes:
>[>
>[> Only one question? People have already asked how Control would
>[>have been handled if Andrea stayed,
>
>"The Corps is mother! The Corps is father . . ! Er . . .Would you
>believe second cousins, once-removed . . !
>
>"Sorry about that, Bester, that'll neve happen again . . !"
BESTER: This is *PSI CORPS*!!! Ve don't "pbththtttt" here!
--
Susan Atwater | atw...@netcom.com | http://pangloss.ucsf.edu/~atwater
"There are two kinds of people: those who finish what they start"
Jay Denebeim
In article <Pine.A32.3.92a.96070...@homer17.u.washington.edu>,
David Filip <grim...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
> Take a look at Bill Gates. He keeps semi-regular hours, watches
>basketball games and has a social life. He is not a fanatic, but his
>personal monetary worth and Microsoft's clout are so giant that the
>word "greatness" is almost diminutive. (Please, I know that everyone on
>the internet hates Microsoft, but you can't deny the company's power)
> How did he achieve it?
Sure, he's a good negative example, where did his money come from?
Bill Gates started out by taking Dartmoth Basic (which was public
domain) put his name on it, and started selling it. When IBM wanted
an operating system, Digital Research, who had the lion's share of the
PC OS market at that time jerked them around. Ole Billy boy, payed a
few bucks to a company called Seatle Computer who happened to have a
CPMlike operating system that ran on 8088 S-100 systems, and sold it
to IBM for what eventually became a billion dollars.
As far as I know, he's never created anything but a bunch of smoke and
mirrors.
Bill Gates is a con-man. His corporation has always been sleezy, and
it gets worse as it gets bigger.
When you steal other people's labor, you've got plenty of free time.
This has nothing to do with creativity, other than the stealing of it.
Jay
--
* Jay Denebeim, Moderator, rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated *
* newsgroup submission address: ras...@solon.com *
* moderator contact address: rastb5-...@solon.com *
* personal contact address: dene...@deepthot.cary.nc.us *
Mary Jean Holmes
jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
>"Unfortunately, JMS never answers these questions clearly or in a way that
>helps us to understand how it fits into the plot. I'd like to ask *why*
>he doesn't answer these questions completely."
>
>Sometimes I do. Sometimes I don't. I do more times than I don't. So
>your premise is flawed at the core of it, thus any resulting comments from
>me would only range further afield into even greater inaccuracy.
>
(Hi, Joe -- yes, I have ventured onto the boards at last....)
As a writer, I agree that there are times you don't want to say
much at all for fear of saying too much and giving away
everything (or worse, sending gaggles of fans flocking off into
rampant chasing of Red Herrings...). Please forgive the
temporary lapse into Tolkienism (this is not a comparison, merely
an apt quote): "Many folk like to know beforehand what is to be
set on the table; but those who have laboured to prepare the
feast like to keep their secret; for wonder makes the words of
praise louder." (Gandalf in RotK)
Personally, I have LOTS of burning questions about what is in
B5's future. But I want to see YOU tell the story, played out in
full with your words and ideas realized and defined in the
performance. Yes, the ever-curious part of me (y'know, the kind
that makes you want to skip ahead in a book just to be sure
everything's gonna work out in a satisfying fashion) would like
to be able to ask those burning questions and get answers. But
patience is a virtue, and you haven't let us down yet, IMHO.
BTW, I fully understand your reactions to constant comparisons
with other authors' works (I had an instructor back in college
who insisted my writing reminded her of Ursula LeGuin. I happen
to despise LeGuin's works, but I knew this was the highest
compliment the teacher could pay, so I took it in the spirit it
was offered. Of course, it turned out I knew more about writing
SF than that teacher did, but...). On the other hand, I find it
a compliment of the highest order that B5 is so often being
compared to great works of literature rather than just other TV
or cinema SF. Be proud. You are achieving something that I
believe will in time change the face and substance of TV as we
now know it.
Mary Jean
Lawrence King
David Filip <grim...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
|> > Take a look at Bill Gates. He keeps semi-regular hours, watches
|> >basketball games and has a social life. He is not a fanatic, but his
|> >personal monetary worth and Microsoft's clout are so giant that the
|> >word "greatness" is almost diminutive.
Jay Denebeim < dene...@deepthot.cary.nc.us > writes:
|> Sure, he's a good negative example, where did his money come from?
|> Bill Gates started out by taking Dartmoth Basic (which was public
|> domain) put his name on it, and started selling it. When IBM wanted
|> an operating system, Digital Research, who had the lion's share of the
|> PC OS market at that time jerked them around. Ole Billy boy, payed a
|> few bucks to a company called Seatle Computer who happened to have a
|> CPMlike operating system that ran on 8088 S-100 systems, and sold it
|> to IBM for what eventually became a billion dollars.
|>
|> As far as I know, he's never created anything but a bunch of smoke and
|> mirrors.
|>
|> Bill Gates is a con-man. His corporation has always been sleezy, and
|> it gets worse as it gets bigger.
|>
|> When you steal other people's labor, you've got plenty of free time.
|>
|> This has nothing to do with creativity, other than the stealing of it.
HEAR, HEAR!
Try visiting Seattle for a week, Jay! The newspapers and tv just love him....
Bill Clinton came to town for a fundraiser. On TV, we saw five folks
on stage:
On the left, a congressman and Senator Patty Murray, gazing worshipfully
at the man at the podium;
On the right, a congressman and the President of the United States, gazing
worshipfully at the man at the podium;
In the middle, at the podium, explaining how to reform the educational
system of the United States, ol' Bill Gates himself.
Makes this old American nice and proud......
larry king
univ of washington
Jms at B5
Thanks. It's a difficult dance to dance; between giving away too much,
and not saying enough. Overall, things yet to come are best dealt with by
showing them in the series, as you say, instead of just telling folks.
It's the difference between unwrapping one's gift, and being told what it
is before you have the chance to unwrap it.
jms
Keith Wood
In article <4ru9e7$a...@nntp4.u.washington.edu>,
lk...@math.washington.edu (Lawrence King) wrote:
[|> Bill Gates is a con-man.
. . .but he DID make a concession to the DOJ and M$ has a new
commitment to Truth in Advertising. A macaroni and cheese box has a
picture of mac and cheese, the Win95 box has a picture of blue sky
and vapor.
--
================================================================
Keith Wood -- Brass Cannon Productions -- Producer/Host:
The Computer Program, Flying Time!, Infinity Focus . . .
and introducing --== Stop, Look and Listen Up! ==--
Associate Producer: Genevra, Colin, Heather, Nicole and Ethan
(with Kyla Littlejohn)
================================================================
Brian K. Bragg
kei...@sedona.net (Keith Wood) wrote:
>In article <4ru9e7$a...@nntp4.u.washington.edu>,
>lk...@math.washington.edu (Lawrence King) wrote:
>[|> Bill Gates is a con-man.
>. . .but he DID make a concession to the DOJ and M$ has a new
>commitment to Truth in Advertising. A macaroni and cheese box has a
>picture of mac and cheese, the Win95 box has a picture of blue sky
>and vapor.
ROTFLMAO and scaring the macaroni ducks
Mark Freid
>On 4 Jul 1996, Jay Denebeim wrote:
>
>> IMO, to achieve greatness, you HAVE to be a fanatic.
>
> Take a look at Bill Gates.
No thanks. I break out in rashes.
-Mark
====================================================
[ Mark Freid, Anthropomorphic Cartoonist & NetWolf ]
Web: http://www.av.qnet.com/~canuss
Email: can...@qnet.com
FurryMUCK: Canuss
GEnie: m.freid1 (visit the Beastie Board!)
(Comics RT, Cat 38)
Furry Code:
FCwA+++C++H+M/M+~Z+++SmRLCTcn++d+i++a23e+h*p++sm--
=====================================================