|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 19:07:28 GMT -5
Diane, I too agree with Nan about holding debates off this board. It doesn't have to be just you and me, others can play if they want, but I do think it would be best to start a new topic so we won't have to wade through countless posts to find the other's response.
Personally, I don't care what topic we debate next - the one I mentioned was just a possible idea. I know it's been done to death but I thought it could be interesting for you to have to argue that B/A is a better relationship than B/S. I really don't care if we don't do it - no skin off my back.
Waiting until your essay is done is perfectly cool - I hope you didn't think I was pressuring you to debate right then and there. I had just thought of that idea and wanted to toss it out there for whenever we got around to debating again. I don't care when we start back or what we debate - give me a heads up so I can prepare to knock your puny little arguments aside! ;-)
We can debate whatever you want - would you like to pick the debate topic this time? Anything is good for me - you can pick if you want since you will be playing devil's advocate. Just let me know date and topic and I'm there!!!
Now I'm off to read the latest submissions to the website!
-L
Lee Hollins
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 19:09:09 GMT -5
Kathy -
Welcome to the Soulful Spike Society - you will find (although I'm sure you already have) that we are a crazy, yet fiercely devoted, group (as David can tell you). I too was a long-time lurker and when I first delurked (is that a word?), I received nothing but a warm reception. This is a great group - we love to have fun (and do we ever) but we also have serious debates, discussions, essays, analyses, that are unmatched. Can you tell I love this group? Again, welcome and I am so glad that you decided to delurk!
Oh, have you asked Vlad for a profile?
David -
I'm not sure if I ever formally welcomed you to the S'cubies. So....welcome (nothing like being late!). I am so glad you have stuck around, you have already added much to our boards. Now, not only do we have a Xanderphile, we also have a Willowphile. I can tell you already fit right in!
Welcome our two newest posters!!
-L
Edited By Lee Hollins at 4/19/2003 6:50:00 PM.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 19:10:36 GMT -5
Thanks Ellie and Spring for the kind words. However, I was kind of hoping no-one would read my essay: I submitted it because I felt guilty about not sharing not because I thought I had anything worth sharing. I was also hoping Vlad would hide it a bit better. If I had my time over I would give him more explicit instructions: convert it to hidden text and no advertising it's presence. Once again thanks for the kind words.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:12:02 GMT -5
I think it's Buffy Wrong that the Canadian radio-stations are subjecting you to Men at Work all these years later. Can I infer from your aside to Vlad that some people think Canada is part of the USA? Take heart, I had an American friend who lived in Australia for a while and he referred to Australia being like "another State in America". It's a worry.
Kerrie Davis
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:12:51 GMT -5
Ooooooh! Exactly what I was going to say, except (obviously) I wouldn't have said it so well.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:13:39 GMT -5
Diane:
Excellent story! While reading it I was certain who the vampire was and then BOOM!! The rug was swept clear under me when I read who it really was (not saying here in case anyone hasn't read it yet). The first words that came out of my mouth were "Holy s@*&!" - yeah, I know, not the best choice. Seriously, great story and I am eagerly anticipating your "Baby Steps Toward Redemption."
Kerrie:
I really enjoyed your essay. I thought it was very thought-provoking. The whole idea of "Can you love without a soul?" is a very intriguing one that I don't think has a clear answer. I admire people who take an issue with many ambiguities and attempt to provide an answer. Not many people can do that well but you most certainly did! You were able to back up your answer in quite articulate terms. I do hope that you plan to contribute more essays in the future.
Josh:
Loved your essays. Mirrors was especially interesting - I loved the parallels you drew between the characters. The Troika are a frequently misunderstood group but you eloquently described the members in a clear manner. The Troika were never favorites of mine but now I have a newfound respect for them. The fashion essay was also fun. I loved your description of Willow and Giles and what their fashion choices represented. I hope that you too will continue to write essays for the site - I want more Josh!
Kudos to all three of you - you all did a great job!
-L :-)
Edited By Lee Hollins at 4/19/2003 6:51:00 PM.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:17:06 GMT -5
Kerrie, I loved your essay. Lots of fascinating food for thought.
Let me pile on with all the others in my never-ending awe of Vlad's contributions. He makes the S'cubie site go. I'm not sure what we can do in order to honor him properly, but whatever it is I'm enthusiastically on board.
Karen, welcome to the board. I hope when you read the fanfic section you'll be gentle toward me. I'm still very new at this writing stuff.
Dave, I forgot to welcome you aboard. Even though you have the affliction of being a Buffy/Angel shipper, it's always great to have your thoughtful contributions.
Having said that, I feel the need to make something clear: there are FAR more Buffy/Xander shippers out there than you may realize. Just because we aren't vocal (well, except fools like myself) in public forums, there are plenty of groups who have never let go of the dream.
This .1 percent figure you came up with is far too low. B/X shippers make up at least five times that much. :-)
Rob Sorenson
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:18:27 GMT -5
Please forgive me, Kathy, for calling you Karen. At times my brain takes a dirt nap.
Rob Sorenson
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:19:40 GMT -5
(yet still competely off topic)
*L* well I guess I was asking for it, listening to a 70s and 80s show. I actually like Men at Work though, so no great travail.
(Oh dear, just realised that that wonderful, eloquent word that I am misusing is just the French word for work. Man, the things you learn when you write things down! Gee, I wonder how I should spell that word? then I type it down and Bam! I am struck by the obvious!)
*LOL* I am listening to an mp3 CD a friend of mine prepared and now, just as we are discussing countries, the song Nations of the World from the Animaniacs cartoon begins. I think it mentions every single country of the world, and doesn't use many superfluous words. Funny!
Yes, as I was going to say before I digressed, Vlad and I have a friendly little disagreement on the exact relationship between Canada and the US. I guess that the fact that Canada has not joined the war on Iraq has distiguished us from them. That is kind of reminiscent of Canada's declaration of independence from England by declaring war on Germany a day later than Churchill. Hmmmm... is there a parallel there? *L* When did I get so profound.
Okay, I intended to warn the rest of you that having completed my Bill Bryson book on Australia, I have begun a Bill Bryson book on the US. It is called THE LOST CONTINENT: Travels in Small Town America. You have been warned. Now, instead of pestering Kerrie with my little nuggets of useless Australian information I will have new nuggets of useless American information.
Do you know that Australians are quite capable of losing one of their Prime Ministers? Imagine that! The guy goes for a quiet swim and is never seen again! Australians are also quite wonderful at losing things in the deserts. I guess that is what happens when you live in a country that isn't even mapped yet. All this I gleaned from a little book. So, I have come to one conclusion:
I really have to work on getting Bryson writing a book on Canada.
I wonder what we have managed to lose in the tundra or under all those ice floes? If Australia can lose whole geological formations in a sea of heat, then what could Canadians have lost in the world's second largest country where 99% of our 300 million people live within 100 km of our southern border. We have found a baby woolymamoth cryogenically preserved. Just imagine what jewels of archeology lie in wait in all that empty space.
Goodness, I am about to lose my S'cubie status for all these off topic posts! I had better get to work on something S'cubierific!
Watergal, who is thinking about writing a little more fanfic.
Edited By Watergal =^..^= at 4/19/2003 7:24:00 PM.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:20:29 GMT -5
Okay folks, I'm in need of some opinions. My fanfic storyline has been in constant flux over the past few months, mostly because I should be working on my thesis, but also because of Lies My Parents Told Me blew Chapter 2 out of the water. I am left with a first chapter, or really a prologue which is hanging out there, but chapter 2 has been scraped.(Although it was completed, the story has evolved beyond it. It may reappear in another form later on.)
Now to the poll:
I think it was quite obvious that Spike's mother was a widow. So what do you all believe happened to dear old Daddy? And, I think some of you were giving Mum a name. What was that, and where did you get it?
I am in hope of tying my storyline together with LMPTM.
When I started this story arc, my intention had been to have it all take place in the past, with a final act occuring in the present with Spike thinking back to his past. I was trying to resist the urge to tie the whole thing together with the present. However, then my two new main characters took over, and away the story went. (Nan, you will no longer recognise it.)
So, now I have this new plot idea floating around half formed in my brain and I am trying to tie it all up, lay it out, and make a coherent whole. Now if I can only figure out how to start. So, we need to know how Daddy died.
Poll:
How did Spike Sr. *tee hee* die (or did he)? Was it tragic? Did he run off with the maid and never return? Was he domineering? Was he kindly and geeky?
Help.
Watergal
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:21:15 GMT -5
Lee, for a subject, since we're dry for ideas, what do you say we have the membership make some suggetions?
Diane U
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:21:55 GMT -5
Rob,
Small (or no) consolation, but over on the allaboutspike site she is taking a survey, but only about Spike ships. However, Spike/Xander is currently second only to Spike/Buffy.
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:22:31 GMT -5
LOL. That's great. Everybody wants the Xandman when their first choice isn't available.
Rob Sorenson
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:23:10 GMT -5
I read in an interview with a series writer (on that ep, I believe) that William's mother was named Ann. I don't recall if it was Anne or Ann. I know I read it but I don't remember which interview or where. My mind is a seive for useful facts: only the useless ones are retained.
If anybody recalls that online interview session better than I--I think it was interactive, whatever they call that: people writing in questions and the scriptwriter answering them--they can settle the vexing question of Anne or Ann.
Let's see, about the father: he was well to do, since William doesn't work and apparently he and mom are able to maintain a decent household and servant(s) AND William is invited to upper-middle-class parties/gatherings, which he wouldn't be if he were not of at least upper middle-class social status since he has no wit (sorry) and not much beauty (etc.) to recommend him. William is almost undoubtedly an only child and from the look of mom, born relatively late (in those times) in her life--when he's in his upper twenties, I believe (at the time he was turned), she looks at least 50 and probably older than that. So he was born when she was nearly thirty, at least--an unusually late first child for those times. I don't believe William was more than 7-8, and probably much younger, when pa departed--he's too much of a mama's boy to have had a father (probably) effectively present by the time he turned, say, 10 or older.
So here's my conjecture: Mama was twice a widow. Married early (for love, if you please) and widowed early, with no children who lived. Married a second time in her mid-twenties, with one child, William, born shortly thereafter. The second time, she married for security to an older man with some property, who was carried off by an apoplexy (or something) when they had been married about 6 years. So she poured all her unspent emotion in to her son, whom she raised to be the head of a household that pretty much ran itself. He didn't work, had an excellent education, and fancied himself a poet. He had no purpose, few ambitions, and mostly just drifted on the fringes of things.
Is that enough of a skeleton background to get you going, Watergal? I'll be interested to see what other flavors of conjecture other S'cubies chime in with.
Nan
|
|
|
Post by Dalton on Jul 29, 2003 20:23:38 GMT -5
She was referred to as "Anne" in the TV Guide blurb, as in "Anne" played by actress....
|
|