[The only editting done was in trimming the message headers]

Vinay.

From: vinay@cc.gatech.edu (Vinay Pandey)
Subject: Why are you here (rastb5)?
To: straczynski@genie.geis.com
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 1995 23:22:05 -0400 (EDT)

Hi Joe:

I did not post this to the newsgroup because I thought maybe this
message may be lost in the plethora of ATTN:JMS messages, and I feel
that such a question needs to be asked. If you do answer it, then the
answer should be saved in some archive so that whenever someone else
questions your existence on this public forum the answer can be posted
to them. So if you answer, then I will post this letter, and the
accompanying answer to the newsgroup for all to see.

Why are you here (rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5)?

Before you get upset at my asking this question I would like to say the
following to set up the reason for my intrusive question. Recently
there have been some questions about the need for not posting ideas.
Some people feel that the risk of a lawsuit that would stop production
of Babylon 5 is ignorable. These people feel that Babylonian
Productions is at no significant risk from lawsuits, this caused others
to speculate the reason for you reading messages on rastB5.

Some of the speculations are:

1. Joe is here because he wants to get a sense of the room.
2. Joe is here because he cares about his fans and likes to know how
they respond to his show.
3. Joe is here because he likes to be here.
4. Joe is here because he has been invited to be here.
5. Joe is here because he has been on-line for several years and is
addicted to being on line.
6. Joe is here because "he can mine the newsgroup for good plot ideas,
while at the same time keeping in check those who figure out the
story arc by threatening to leave the newsgroup if they spill the
beans in a `story idea.'"

These are speculations that have been brought up by several people who
read this group. And currently one of the responses has started a
discussion; because it not only seems ludicrous, and un-true, but also
seems to be an attempt to get a response.

Since I have become involved in this "discussion" I thought it would
be better if we got the facts from the horses mouth. If I had not
been insulted by speculation 6, I would not have asked this question.

Personally, I don't care why you are here -- the fact that you are
participating on this group is curious to say the least, but it is
also noteworthy and a cause for elation to me. Furthermore, I really
don't think it is anyone's business to question your being here.

On the other hand some detractors use your request for no story ideas
to say that there should be no special considerations for your existence
on the net. So I really feel you should answer this question as
completely as you can, if not for peace of mind, then atleast to
(vainly attempt to) silence some critics.

I apologize for asking a personal question. I wouldn't have, unless I
felt it absolutely necessary.

Vinay.

From: straczynski@genie.geis.com
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 95 08:29:00 UTC
To: vinay@cc.gatech.edu
Subject: Why are you here (rastb5)?
X-Genie-Id: 8041240
X-Genie-From: STRACZYNSKI
Status: RO

The notion that I'm asking for no story ideas to be posted so that I
can rip off story ideas is the most lame-brain statement I have heard in
10+ years of being on the nets. Saying "no story ideas" doesn't kee
anyone from suing; it just keeps useable ideas out of where I can see them,
period.

I have said, often, and repeatedly, and clearly, why I am here. The
problem is that you have one or two absolute mindless conniving distrustful
fuckheads who have no perceivable life other than to try and ride my ass
about one thing or another, swinging from one stupid theory to another to
another with as much astonishing speed and illogic as the Simpson defense
team. They will seize upon anything, ANYthing, and try and twist it around
to try and convince others that somehow, somewhichway, I'm getting away
with something, I'm conning people, I'm lying, I'm actually Reichminister
Goebbels who set up a twin for the little WW II misunderstanding and am
currently trying to sneak back into the United States disguised as Rondo
Hatton.

Loonies and feebs and creeps, oh my.

Okay, you want it straight up? Here it is. I'm here for a number of
reasons. 1) I like to get kind of a sense of the room; I'm not going to
change anything, but writing for TV is like writing for a vacuum; you nevr
(never) get to see the reaction. This is the ONLY chance I get to get a
reaction to something I've written and produced, and maybe it's ego, maybe
it's just that I work very hard to make something effective,and want to see
if it had the desired effect. Writers and artists and singers are like
that.

2) I think that TV producers in general get a very skewed sense of
who's in the audience. This exchange gives access to people across the
country to someone who makes TeeVee, and lets me hear them. How often
would someone in Clearwater, Oklahoma, have the chance to express an
opinion to someone in LA making a TV series? Not bloody often. And that
is in large measure, I think, why TV has become so insular. And so
unresponsive to its audience. So I'm kind of a test-case volunteer for
this, in the hopes of luring more producers onto the nets and creating a
more open exchange, making producers accountable for what they make.

3) I've dedicated over 15 years of my life to trying to demystify
TV production and writing. I've written columns and columns, reams of
articles, a book...all trying to help people understand how this medium
works, because you can't control or influence something unless you truly
UNDERSTAND it...why things are done a certain way. This is part of an
educational project that I've been doing for over a decade, a natural
outgrowth of that process. By the time this is all done, there will be
an online document of hundreds of archival pages -- maybe thousands --
covering the development, birth and ongoing creation of a TV series at a
depth never before chronicled, which will be available to students and
universities and ordinary folks. I think that's a valuable experiment.

Finally: 4) I'm an SF fan. I think SF fans are, overall, the most
exploited bunch around. They're expected to line up, buy the toys,
watch the show and shut the hell up. I think it's time some respect for
that audience was shown by allowing them a voice. This is part of my
sense of personal obligation to the field that spawned many wonderful
years of reading.

My request has always been just that, a request, and a simply stated
one. You can talk about story ideas all you want. But I simply cannot be
here if you do that. I will not run the risk of being sued, or having the
show that I've labored over for, now, eight years being victimized by some
crazed yahoo who posts something and then decides I've ripped him off,
despite the fact that this material has been sitting in my computer for
YEARS. And a Crazed Yahoo (tm) doesn't have to win, doesn't even think
he may have a chance to win...but defending a case can run hundreds of
thousands of dollars, thanks to our wonderful legal system, and can tie
up episodes for years.

You cay some of these people think the chances of a lawsuit are
"ignorable." Yeah, for them. They're not the ones at risk. If they're
wrong, it's "Oh, huh, guess I was wrong." For me it's several years of
courtrooms, lawyers, depositions and the like. It's frankly not their
call to make. It's mine. Warners knows I'm here, and I periodically
have to reassure them that I'm keeping the promise about not exposing the
show to risk. And I have to maintain that stance, or vanish.

I would remind a very few of the feebs I noted before that in fact,
there WAS no rec.arts.b5 area until I showed up on the alt group. At
that point, membership jumped *dramatically* enough to merit the
formation of a rec.arts group. I have no particular infatuation with my
own sense of importance -- much the contrary -- but I do know that my
being here is in many ways directly responsible for there BEING a
B5 rec group. Now I'm being told, "Hey, why make special rules for him,
who cares, let him blow off if he doesn't like it."

Not a special rule. Just courtesy. Plain and simple. Why is it
that one can no longer simply make a request out of courtesy? Instead one
must now back it up with lengthy treatises about legalities and laws and
risk factors...and one's own personal motivations are challenged and
questioned and suspected and put on trial and smeared by a callous few to
whom the very concept of "courtesy" is a foreign idea, and who exist only
to bring grief to me and the bulk of users here. There are PLENTY of
ways for people to suggest story ideas to one another without exposing
them to me...email lists, private groups, whatever.

The theory, as I understand it, is that people are coming up with
story ideas because they like the show. Why, therefore, would they
choose to *endanger* the show by posting them where I can see it? I had
this recently with a fanzine publisher who turned down a B5 fictional
story because I'd asked, politely, that none be published until after the
show had ended. The writer got very upset and said, "Well, who CARES what
he wants?" The side-product was more important than the creation that
spawned it.

I've made my motivations clear from day one. Anyone who wants to
challenge them can go fuck themselves, I don't have to answer to them or
give them any credence whatsoever by even acknowleging them. It's in all
the faq files from the beginning; let them go do some research, it's all
there. They pick on this today; tomorrow they'll move onto something
else, because they don't actually CARE about the truth. They care about
being hyenas, and biting at people who didn't bow down and kiss their
respective asses.

And frankly, that to me has become one of the most wearing aspects of
being online; the wackos and creeps who just live to make trouble. For
that reason alone, I sometimes think, "Fuck it, I don't need this, I don't
need to go to bed angry, I don't need the distraction when I'm trying to
write, I'm doing this to do a Nice Thing. Period. And if all I'm going
to get is a few relentless assholes bitching at me 24 hours a day, then
the hell with it." Then the sane part of me remembers that the word FEW
appears in that sentence. And that these few jerks are irrelevant, despite
their attempts to create relevancy for themselves by attacking others. And
I calm down, and after a bit, log back on again.

To continue the experiment, as outlined above.

And that's the sum and substance of it. It's really a question of
which people prefer: having access to the producer of Babylon 5, or
blowing out huge story ideas. There can be one, but not the other. It
ain't the best case scenario, but it's the only workable one. It's my show
that would be at risk otherwise, and I'm sorry, but on that count noboty
(nobody) else gets a vote. Nobody else is entitled to determine the
risk factor, or determine if it's relevant. That's my call. And should
enough people decide their story ideas are what they really want to
discuss, or even a few (it only takes a couple to pose sufficient risk),
then I'll simply have to fade outta here.

Because the experiment will continue, on other systems. Compuserve,
GEnie, others...where the understanding is respected, and courtesy rises
above self-interest or unwarranted personal attacks. And AS HAS BEEN THE
CASE HERE, I should point out, since this thing began. If a few people
want to change that, well, that's their right. I just can't be here if
it happens. That simple.

And yes, you can repost this, but if you do in the public forums,
do so in toto. The usual band of self-styled critics/hatchet folks will
get all bent out of shape because I used a couple naughty words here and
there, and because I got all bent out of shape simply because they did
something as innocuous as impugning my motives and implying theft on a
daily, consistent basis, but y'know what?

Fuck 'em.

jms

From: straczynski@genie.geis.com
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 95 09:02:00 UTC
To: vinay@cc.gatech.edu
Subject: Why are you here (rastb5)?
X-Genie-Id: 9757609
X-Genie-From: STRACZYNSKI
Status: RO

A postscript to my previous note. I debated including this, because
it sounds self-serving, but it also happens to be the truth, so after
thinking about it, I'm going to add it anyway.

I don't get paid to be here. Nobody asked me to be here. Nobody's
forcing me to be here. (And a few here would, apparently, love nothing
more than to drive me off here so they can say whatever they want without
the inconvenience of the target for their attacks disagreeing with them
with anything as unfair as facts.) I'm a voluntee

I am, insofar as I know, the ONLY television producer to be on-line
to this extent, creating what is really an interactive experience. This
is a great experiment, one which will probably go down in the record
books when people look back at the history of the net. There have already
been huge articles about this in books and magazines. We're pioneering
something here. And a lot of other producers I know are looking on to see
how this all shakes out. If it works, others will come on-line. If not,
if they're just going to get hammered and slandered and abused, they're
not.

Maybe the problem is...I'm free. And you respect something to the
extent you pay for it. My consulting fees are in excess of $100 per
hour. I spend 3 hours per day just on the internet. That's 21 hours a
week, 2 and a half work days per week. Most of that I spend not in
forwarding my own ego, or selling merchandise, or making money...I spend
it answering questions. Who was this actor? What did this mean? Why
are CGI used? How long does it take to make an episode? What does a
producer do? How do you write a character? How do you sell a show?

It's the kind of information you can't get anywhere else unless you
want to take one of those triple-damned McKee seminars and spend, oh,
about $500 for one weekend doing so. I read and I read, 500 messages per
day slip past me, some in detail, some less so. I provide a service. I
provide information. I answer questions. I don't do it for the ratings,
beause if you added up all the people who read this group, which I think
is about 10,000 people, they won't even show UP on the Neilsen ratings.

I do it, in addition to the reasons given a moment ago, to provide a
service. Were I providing this service to a studio, or as a consultant
on another project, it would cost them a couple thousand bucks a week. I
do all this without asking for money, or gifts, or even respect (he said
with a glance to the people riffling their papers in the back of the room
and tossing spitballs). I have only ever asked for *one thing* in exchange
for this service: no story ideas.

And I honestly don't think that's a terribly high price for the hours
and days I spend here when I should be writing, or trying to relax a bit,
or maybe going out to dinner once in a while. I'm chained to the keyboard
when I write scripts; and then volunteer to stay up here, until 2 or 3 or
even 4 a.m., dead-tired, answering one more ATT: JMS note, because I think
maybe, just maybe, it's important, and right, and honorable, and
respectful. I don't think most folks understand what this takes out of me
on a daily basis. And I suppose they shouldn't have to. It's not their
problem. It's my choice. I don't even like bringing it up, because it
sounds self-serving. But with all this going on, I figured maybe it
SHOULD get mentioned. Because it's the truth.

Anyway, enough. It's now 2:03 a.m., and I have 248 Internet messages
in my mailbox to get through before I crash tonight.

jms
--
*****
vinay@cc.gatech.edu (Vinay Pandey) wrote:

>This is a long post; it contains a transcript of e-mail from me to J.
>Michael Straczynski and his response. Draw your own conclusions.

<snipped because it speaks for itself>

> ............................but y'know what?
>
> Fuck 'em.
>
> jms

Right ONNN!! And if you supply the baseball bat, I'll join the squad.

<snipped a perfectly valid truth>

> And I honestly don't think that's a terribly high price for the hours
>and days I spend here when I should be writing, or trying to relax a bit,
>or maybe going out to dinner once in a while. I'm chained to the keyboard
>when I write scripts; and then volunteer to stay up here, until 2 or 3 or
>even 4 a.m., dead-tired, answering one more ATT: JMS note, because I think
>maybe, just maybe, it's important, and right, and honorable, and
>respectful. I don't think most folks understand what this takes out of me
>on a daily basis. And I suppose they shouldn't have to. It's not their
>problem. It's my choice. I don't even like bringing it up, because it
>sounds self-serving. But with all this going on, I figured maybe it
>SHOULD get mentioned. Because it's the truth.

God, Joe, you've made me feel like a shit.

> Anyway, enough. It's now 2:03 a.m., and I have 248 Internet messages
>in my mailbox to get through before I crash tonight.
>
> jms

What can I say? Should I say anything? I *want* to say something. It
makes me so *angry* that I can't get the words together. I'm sorry
that rastb5 has been such a thorn in your side. If I, personally, have
offended in any way then it was done in ignorance and I apologise. Not
that you need my advice but, for what it's worth, I suggest you quit
*now*. It's not worth it Joe even if it leaves them feeling that
they've won. As long as someone keeps passing on your Genie and
Compuserve posts then we'll survive. The nerds won't have a reason for
being here any more. You'll have a couple of hours a day for getting a
life. You don't *have* to take this. Most of us don't expect you to
take this. I'd like to say sorry for those who don't have the humility
to even feel that *they* should. Maybe respect and courtesy are things
of the past.

Jeannette

BTW. Has anyone told you "you're cute when you're rumpled"?

*****
Re: "you're cute when you're rumpled."

Not nearly HALF as cute as I am when in the process of hunting down
small furry creatures named Jeanette.

Hand me my chainsaw, mother, I'm going out to catch dinner....

jms
*****
Only because I'm an idiot, and I forgot, and I thought it was implicit
in the message I wrote, but sometimes implicit isn't sufficiently clear
(certainly not when I'm behind the keyboard)....

The other aspect is that you're all (well, mostly) a bunch of cuties.

Occasional nincompoops notwithstanding...I see more well-considered,
substantive, bright and funny comments here than I can count. There isn't
a day that goes by that I don't sit here and perk up at a particularly
insightful message, or laugh at the latest Top Ten or whatever. The
majority of messages here are nothing less than terrific, and I hope that
that implication was clear enough in my message(s); if not, take it from
this one.

As for the few weasels...my spousal overunit has a great saying:
"Don't fight the rabbits; the lions'll get you."

jms
******
<straczynski@genie.geis.com> writes:

> [Clarification deleted saying we were mostly a bunch of great people]

> As for the few weasels...my spousal overunit has a great saying:
>"Don't fight the rabbits; the lions'll get you."

I'm speechless. I think your a treasure among TV producers. I really wish we
could clone you and put you in charge of all TV production (with some obvious
little changes here and there to promote variety).

I think I speak on behalf of 95% of rastb5 readers when I say:

Thank you for being on the 'Net and interacting with us. I personally think my
satisfaction with B5 went through the roof since a friend directed me to this
newsgroup and I read your postings. Your interaction helps us all better enjoy
this fine vision of yours called "Babylon 5".

Thank you again for being here.

Travers Naran -- SF fan

*****
I was reading a posting the other day that implied that the climax of the
series would be the defeat of the shadows.

Since Zathras in "Babylon Squared" talked about the war as if it was still
taking place and Sinclair was much older than he appeared in season 1, I
had always assumed that the season would end with the war well underway.

Do we have any info, suggesting any different?

--
Regards,

Lee E. Parsons
Systems Oracle DBA lparsons@world.std.com

*****
It'd be foolish, I think, to try and extend the shadow war across
3 years of the B5 series; I think it'd get redundent real fast. I'd say
there has to be more than that, wouldn't you?

jms
*****
Marty Katz (hbcsc091@huey.csun.edu) wrote:

> straczynski@genie.geis.com wrote:

> > It'd be foolish, I think, to try and extend the shadow war across
> > 3 years of the B5 series; I think it'd get redundent real fast. I'd say
> > there has to be more than that, wouldn't you?
> >
> > jms
> Ok, I can't refute word from the Joe, but it seems to me that so
> far its been implied that the war against the shadows will be nothing
> short of a titanic struggle. So while it might get redundant, I would
> sure expect the war to last a long, long while. Besides, are there really
> any other major threads in the arc that have been building all of this
> time?

Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! Something just occurred to me, based on this post and
several others I've seen over the last few months.

What if ...

Year three is the Shadow War, and it's over by the end of the season,
and we lose? That still doesn't end things. And it doesn't leave the
EA or Humanity or any good guys down and out forever, nor does it mean
the series won't have a happy ending. Perhaps season 4 looks into the
struggle to deal with the Shadow's victory. There's infinite ways the
Shadows could win the War without getting the final victory.

The season 3 prologue is rumored to say something like (see elsewhere
for the actual quote)

Babylon 5 was our best hope for peace ... it failed. And it
became our best hope for Victory.

Can you image season 4's prologue changed to include something like

Babylon 5 was our best hope for victory. It failed. But it
became ...

Just a few random thoughts off the top of my head.

David B. Mears
Hewlett-Packard
Cupertino CA
mears@cup.hp.com
*****
On 9 Jun 1995 straczynski@genie.geis.com wrote:

> It'd be foolish, I think, to try and extend the shadow war across
> 3 years of the B5 series; I think it'd get redundent real fast. I'd say
> there has to be more than that, wouldn't you?

Do you realize what this means? The Shadow War is just setting us up for
SOMETHING ELSE. Something BIGGER!

May God have mercy on our souls.

******
Some new starfuries will be arriving at B5 next season....

jms
*****

"The Last Evil Jest"

When the last evil jest has been made, and the rest
Of the ink of hypocrisy spilt,
When the awfully right have elected to fight
Lest their own should discover their guilt;
When the door has been shut on the "if" and the "but"
And it's up to the men with the guns,
On their knees on that day let diplomatists pray
For forgiveness from prodigal sons.

Talbot Mundy

When Mundy wrote that some 79 years ago, he was referring to his
contemporaries in Afghanistan and the British secret service. And I
once thought his references frighteningly prophetic. Now I know
instead that, given enough time, the events of any bygone era, adapted
into fiction, will eventually become timely again. This is no way
diminishes Mundy's brilliant analysis of world events that are still as
relevant today as they were in 1916. (Read the first chapter of
<Jimgrim at Allah's Peace> for a disturbingly accurate account of the
current Jewish-Muslim situation on the the West Bank, despite the fact
that it was written over 70 years ago.) So it should be no surprise
that a poem nearly eight decades old describes so well events set in
the 23rd century, as well as those taking place behind the scenes on
two or three current TV shows. History will tell you much of the
future if you let it.

I'm seeing a lot of talk on the net lately concerning JMS "borrowing"
from Tolkien or "copying" from this author or that. Hell, I'm the one
who said two months ago that the Shadows reminded me of Lovecraft's Old
Ones and Elder Gods. Do recent episodes make me right? Yes and no.
Like all of us, JMS is a product of his environment and, more
importantly, the environment he's chosen to expose himself to.
Consequently, B5 like JMS himself is a melting pot of those ideas and
concepts that struck a chord in him when he first read or saw them.
These are the items which tend to linger in one's mind until a useful
application can be found. The more works and authors you expose
yourself to the larger your arsenal when the need arises. I've yet to
see any one idea or concept that seemed stolen directly. This is the
kind of mixing and adapting of ideas that's been going on for decades
in pro SF, but up 'til now had never made many appearances on TV
largely because it was never considered mainstream enough. All you
need to know is that writing SF, particularly pro SF, is a bit like
raising kids; you'll never understand it until you've done it yourself.
Writing SF for TV, on the other hand, is a bit like making love in a
canoe; you can bump and grind to your heart's content, providing you do
it in the direction the river wants you to go. Too much to the left or
right and you end up taking a cold dip. Trust me on this.

I've read enough comparisions of Star Trek and Babylon 5 lately to
choke a tribble, and I'm beginning to think that much of the
significance of ST:TOS in its original run and B5 now is being
forgotten. All fannish animosities aside, ST was one of the single
most influential TV shows ever to run on any network, but not, as many
ST fans would have you believe, because it portrayed the human race as
an achievement of universal significance or a utopian ideal that other
races should model. POF, in the sixties the show was much better at
provoking a response than making a statement. Back then we tuned in
more to watch our favorite alien races, those sexy costumes, and
Spock's coolness than listen to Shatner ramble off the Constitution.

Pillar and Berman would have you believe, 25 years later, that
Roddenberry had a grand noble scheme of which ST:TNG, DS9, and ST:V are
the crowning achievements. This is a shockingly distorted view of GR's
original concept which was, put simply, to show us in the 60's, facing
nuclear war, Vietnam, race riots, the generation gap and a mess of
other damning troubles; that somehow, in some way, the human race would
survive it all and eventually overcome. That it! That's all!
Roddenberry was playing Martin Luther King, Jr. for the whole human
race screaming at us every week that "We shall overcome!" Don't
believe me? Watch some of GR's other teleplays. The other day I
watched a pilot he wrote titled "Earth II" back-to-back with the B5
pilot. Anyone remember "Earth II"? It was a prequel of sorts to
ST:TOS in which the nations of the Earth in the 21st century establish
an orbiting space station to function as a sort of neutral United
Nations in space where governments could settle their disagreements
without resorting to bloodshed. Unfortunately someone sabotages the
whole plan by sending an orbiting nuclear weapon past the station. The
crew are left to identify the culprit and disarm the threat
(interesting when watched back to back with the B5 pilot). Was JMS
"borrowing" from GR? Hell no! There are as many differences as
similiarities, but it does show that JMS and GR have/had more in common
than most people care to admit. Just disregard Pillar and Berman's
adaptions and go back to the true "source". JMS recognized and is
addressing the same fears GR dealt with 20 years ago because those
fears, in many ways, are still there. THE HUMAN RACE DOESN'T GET
ALONG! (Try posting a B5 commentary on the ST newgroups if you need
proof.) Now, I won't deny that GR had a hand in the creation of
ST:TNG, but listening to him at cons over the last 20 years of his life
it became obvious that he was less interested in exploring current
social issues with TNG than developing character concepts that had been
brewing in his mind for years. I can't fault him for that. His
interests had simple changed over the years. But it started <Trek> off
a very different path in the eighties. Part of me would like to
believe that if someone trapped GR in stasis, say about 1968 and
revived him in 1993, that B5 would be the sort of current interest SF
show he would ultimately have come up with. But I can't help feeling
that it's actually better than that.

Yet the one great irony, far too often overlooked, is that
Roddenberry's greatest gift to fandom was the brilliant spark he
ignited (typical of GR without realizing it) that gave forth fandom
itself. Oh there were conventions and media fans before <Trek> but
never more than an obscure fringe of literary SF. <Trek> gave media
fandom its unity and brought many fans "out of the closet" so to speak,
in a way <Twilight Zone> or <Lost in Space> never could have and the
early cons reflected that. Many were little more than parties for the
actors and pro writers, writers going pro, or just plain fans. The key
element that's been lost somewhere along the way was that back then the
line between the pro and the fan was all but nonexistant. If Fontana
was invited to a con and didn't show it was her loss. If you invited
Gordy Dickson to a room party, he'd not only come, but fifty/fifty he'd
still be there the next morning sleeping it off. Hell, I learned more
about writing alien races drinking scotch with Pohl Anderson at the
hotel bar as we composed dirty limericks than I ever did at a panel
talk. You didn't go there to get paid, just to have a damn good time.
What happened along the way reminds me of professional sports.
Somewhere, money got in and the gap widened. Then an ugly evil called
Creation Con came along and took its place alongside the baseball
players' union and that brilliant spark that Roddenberry so unwittingly
lit so long ago. Creating a "band of brothers" was somehow, in some
way dimmed and replaced by something more resembling a worship service.

In my few humble years upon this planet I've been asked to or attended
more than four dozen cons, but I will not go to a Creation Con.
There's something fundamentally wrong with thousands of people paying
ludicrous sums to sit and listen to Gates McFadden talk about her hair!
The truth is there is nothing about going to LA and being cast in a SF
show that qualifies you to be able to talk in an intelligent or
beneficial manner to five thousand people for $15,000 an appearance. I
remember when Isaac A. and Bob Heinlein used to do two lectures, an
autograph session and a panel talk for the price of busfare, room and
board and you could learn something from them, even make a living from
it. Would I attend a panel with JMS? Sure, we seem to have a lot of
common views, but would I pay an EXTRA $30 to listen to Michael O'Hare
or Bruce Boxleitner talk about flubbed lines or their makeup?
Absolutely not. I'd pay dollars plenty to bring back Isaac or Bob for
just half an hour (Lord, I miss them). There's a zillion things I'd
love to talk about. But pay for questions for Katsulas?

I recently had the opportunity to see Mira Furlan, Richard Biggs, and
Jerry Doyle while at the 30th Marcon and, I must admit, I attended
their talks with great reservation. Fortunately, I was pleasantly
surprised when they spoke freely and from the cuff, no pre-scripted
deliveries, and very little reservations about telling it like it is.
They did precisely what they need to be doing to promote the show:
simply be candid and accessible, with just enough hints of upcoming
episodes to whet your appetite, and, more importantly, AT NO EXTRA
CHARGE. Unfortunately, I have little doubt that if JMS allows them to
schedule their own appearances they'll soon become seduced by the big
bucks that only Creation Con can offer and they'll become the exclusive
property of those fans who've chosen to lay belly up to the CC blade.
Don't try to tell me I'm wrong -- I've seen it happen too many times.
To quote Yoda, "Once you start down that path, forever will it dominate
your destiny." This sort of fandom and the gross commercialization
that I so disdain go hand in hand.

If you must have an autograph, fine. But $250 for an autographed
collector's plaque - what the hell is that? The saddest thing I ever
saw at a con was a woman rooting through trash bins pulling out used
straws with the <Star Trek> logo on them because they were
"collectible". Just what kind of fandom are we creating?

JMS, if you must send the performers, for God's sake don't put them on
a pedestal; and don't let them finance small countries with their fees.
It's our duty to keep ourselves "human" or we too will be as much
responsible for what fandom has become as the Creation Con moguls.

Perhaps we all just need to dust off our kids' books, pull out our
copies of "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" and reread the last two
pages. Fandom's a lot like Christmas:

It came without ribbons, it came without tags.
It came without packages, boxes or bags.

It's time we realized that the most valuable treasure fandom has isn't
collector's plaques or $15k a pop performers, but just plain each
other. If we ever forget that then the greatest gift Gene Roddenberry
ever gave us will truly be lost forever.

Hakuna Matata,

The Big Cat
******
Melody....

Wow. Holy smokes. That was an amazing message. I've saved it to
disk for the archives. Excellent points, all. (And I share some of your
concerns about the paying conventions.) Really well done.

jms

*****
How Jungian are the shadows? Hrrmmmm...that's a hard one to
answer, because in part it requires revealing more than I want to at the
moment. To varying extents, yes, certainly. But there are also some
elements of Joseph Campbell, the Old Testament, and Freud.

jms

****
Confessions of a Babylonian

You could say it's all Don's fault. There I was minding my own business
and Don Yakielashek (Amigaphile extraordinaire) comes by and tells me of
the this cool new SciFi that is in the process of being made that will
feature CGI special effects done on Amigas. "Oh." I say. "There's all this
information on the net about it. I will download it for you." replies Don.
"Uh, sure." I say feigning interest. True to his word, the next day I am
presented with a disk containing the some background information that some
guy known only as "jms" has uploaded.

"Hmmmm", I mutter perusing the information. "5 year story line, different
races in various degrees of conflict, etc..". Ok, I remember thinking, it
does sound interesting, but It's not Star Trek. I mean how can some guy
(jms) think he can come up with a universe that is as diverse and as
interesting as what Star Trek has created in 25 years of development.
Imagine trying to come up with aliens as diverse as Klingons, Vulcans and
all the rest. Set on a space station ? Sounds stupid, what type of plots
could they possibly have? The computer takes over the station and activates
the autodestruct sequence, but the crew disables it just in the nick of time?
Or maybe one of the crew steps into an alternate universe where all the good
characters are evil and vice versa? Nah, as I said, sounds stupid.

I blissfully continued along in my life until Star Trek: Deep Space Nine aired.
"Hmmm", I thought this sounds familiar. A scifi series about a space station.
I wonder where Paramount got the idea for this one, especially since the
characters seem to have a one to one correspondence. And look, stories such
as: the computer taking over the station and activates the autodestruct
sequence, but the crew disables it just in the nick of time; and one of the
crew steps into an alternate universe where all the good characters are evil
and vice versa? Oh well (sigh) it's Star Trek therefore it has be good. Right?

Then it happened, Don called. "The pilot for Babylon 5 will be shown next
week!". Sure, If I wasn't busy I would watch it. Well I watched it. Hey this
wasn't bad at all. A little heavy on exposition, and I wouldn't have stood up
as a stand alone movie, but for a series pilot it was pretty damn good. And
even if the CGI wasn't as good as special effects in Star Trek, they were
certainly adequate for getting the story across. I will have to watch this
when the series comes out. "What they won't be airing the series for another
year yet?", Oh well (sigh) there's still Star Trek.

A year passes, and the series starts. I start watching them. I'm hooked. Wow
they have improved the CGI, good. The stories are decidedly non trekish, good.
Don is pissed off because he doesn't get the channel that is showing Bab5, but
I'm a good friend, so I lend him the takes. All is well.

Then RDTV starts screwing with me. They start moving Babylon 5 around in their
scheduling, preempting it to show hockey play offs (as if there is any in Canada
who would rather watch hockey than Babylon 5, huh imagine). I actually missed
two episodes of the first season. But NBC affiliate out of Spokan starts showing
it, so all is well. I also get an internet account so I can read RASTB and the
Lurkers guide.

My addiction deepened. "So you know it has a five year story arc?" I ask my
spouse. "Yes, you told me" she replies. "Don't you find it interesting how
that characters are changing as the story progress?" I ask. "Yes, I have been
watching the show". The guy at the local comic store was probably getting quite
annoyed with my calling every week to see the first issue of the commic had
arrived yet. And worse, I started trying to convert people at work.
Several succumbed to the seductive question "What do you want [from a SciFi series]?".

I even started making jokes that only other Babylonians would get. For example,
one week at work, all the guys in the tech support department decided to shave their
heads (possibly to distinguish them selves from the developers who mostly had long
hair). I was the only developer to cut my hair short (not quite as short as the
techies). When they asked why I had cut it, I replied with "I have undo gone this
transformation, in hopes of encouraging a better understanding between our two
groups." Blank stares from all around. Maybe I should confine my jokes to fellow
Babylonians.

It was getting so, even the self declared "I never miss a convention" Trekies
though I was taking this a little far. Such was the depths of my addition.
So right now I am faced with a choice. Do I seek help for my addiction or do
I continue on as is. Well, the show has been renewed for another season. What
could one more year hurt ....
*****
In looking at the story breakdown for year three, there isn't much
on that wish list physically, except for one big addition to our little
B5 universe. Beyond that...we're going to make some modifications to
C&C that I've wanted to do for some time now, add a couple of recurring
characters, do a bit more CGI than we're doing now...but the rest of the
pieces are all there. Now it's time to just focus in on the story.

jms
*****
Brent Gordon Jones <bgjones@acs1.acs.ucalgary.ca> wrote:

/You've said before that most or all loose ends will be tied up.
/Will we learn more about bureau 13 and Talia's mentor? Also will
/we find out all the powers Talia has and of what use these will
/be in the Shadow war?

Loose ends? Like who poisoned Kosh, why they were framing Sinclair, and
what about Sinclair caused the Grey Council to stop the war? Or why
they wanted to kill him if he remembered, but changed their mind? Or
why "what do you want?" reverberated like crazy in the Council Chamber?
Or why it was after Sheridan asked "what do you want?" that the Streibs
moved to Stage 2 of their testing? Or just how the Soul Hunters made it
on the Grey Ship -- and off again?

(Actually, their collars make them reminiscent of the Minbari. Some
spiritual relation, somehow?)

*****
We'll see Minbar at least once in year three, perhaps more.

jms

*****
This isn't B5-specific, so you can reply to the group or just to me as you
think appropriate - if you even have the time to reply -

As a very busy student, I lit upon fan-fiction writing a few years ago as
a fun, not-too-serious outlet that I could squeeze in amidst my studying.
(Don't worry; I wouldn't dream of coming within light-years of your show.)
It's an activity that has proved to be very rewarding, with the feedback and
support I have gotten on the net (something I'm sure you can understand),
although I do hope I can put aside these stories soon (if Aeia will ever be
satisfied with how I've told her story) and work on something 'real' that can
get published somewhere other than just the 'net.

However, in the meantime, my efforts have become more and more serious and
I am crafting more and more intricate storylines. Quality is becoming more
important to me, and I'm doing a lot more editing. I've noticed that sometimes
my dialogue comes across somewhat arch. I've also noticed that your dialogue
is somewhat similar, but that for some reason it seems to come to life in ways
I'm afraid mine might not.

You have said that you got your start in writing for the theater. Do you think
having real human beings bringing forth your words breathes a life into dialogue
that might be very different when just reading off the page? Or is it just
that you have several decades more experience than I, and you are
fantastically skilled besides, so there's no way I should dream of a
similarity existing? *grin*

If you have any observations to share from all of the experience that you
have and I do not, I would be grateful to hear them. I realized recently
how much I envy your position, and the courage you have had to fight to
bring your dream to a reality. Becoming a SF writer is something I still
hope to achieve part time while I earn my living in 'reliable' ways, but a
very large part of me wishes I had the courage to step out on a limb and
just DO IT.

--lisa

*****
Thanks. That scene in "Coming of Shadows" is one of my favorites;
it does, as you say, convey that sense of wonder which is one of my main
goals with this show.

Until "The Long Twilight Struggle," nothing else has come close to
that scene for me. But there's some stuff in there that finally manages
to surpass it. Just gorgeous and scary and awe-inspiring.

jms
******
Writing for the page and writing for the stage are considerably
different processes; what looks good in a book sometimes sound bogus
coming out of someone's mouth. Which is why it's so hard to translate
much of Bradbury's stuff to the screen; the language is lovely on the
page, but the second someone starts saying it, something goes wonky
and it sounds off.

The only real key that I've ever had is to try and make yourself
stop writing and start listening; create the characters, make them as
real to yourself as you can, then get out of your own way and try to
listen to what they say and do, rather than trying to force them to behave
the way you think they should.

jms
******
straczynski@genie.geis.com wrote:
: Writing for the page and writing for the stage are considerably
: different processes; what looks good in a book sometimes sound bogus
: coming out of someone's mouth. Which is why it's so hard to translate
: much of Bradbury's stuff to the screen; the language is lovely on the
: page, but the second someone starts saying it, something goes wonky
: and it sounds off.
:
: The only real key that I've ever had is to try and make yourself
: stop writing and start listening; create the characters, make them as
: real to yourself as you can, then get out of your own way and try to
: listen to what they say and do, rather than trying to force them to behave
: the way you think they should.
:
: jms

Yet another good writer who has said that he works that way. Heinlein
used to "write the first chapter laboriously and then let the characters
take control". Forester used to "sit back and describe what he saw his
characters doing". (These are paraphrases, not direct quotes). Dave
Brin and Ray Feist work much the same way. Now jms. Now hy can't I get
my characters to work with me this way? ;)
cad
*****

What follows is a pair of analyses of two major aspects of the
*Babylon 5* story arc that have recently coalesced in my mind. To
some extent they are independent and could have been typed up as
separate posts; however, if the first analysis is right, it would
also come into play as an argument for what I advance in the second
analysis. Accordingly, I'm putting both together here. Apologies
if the length of this post proves inconvenient. (And apologies of
another sort. At this writing I am a few hundred miles from my
PC, which means (a) I have to write this without the software that
lets me bounce back and forth between the text I'm writing and the
Lurker's Guide to check my memory of plot details, and (b) I have
to type using a keyboard that seems to have been manufactured by
the makers of the Yugo. If there are factual slips, I trust they
will be minor ones that do not preclude the main line of argument;
and if I don't purge this post of all its typos before I transmit
it, bear with me.)

I. The Unified Field Theory of Conspiracies

A few weeks ago, in a post that referred to the abundance of
conspiracies in the Babylon 5 universe, I half-jokingly suggested
we needed a Unified Field Theory of Conspiracies to simplify
keeping track of things. Okay, consider the following paranoid
possibility for an UFTC: All the calamitous problems lately are
the work of the Shadows.

Could the influence of the Shadows really be so pervasive? Let's
consider what evidence is available, taking it species by species:

EARTH: The Earth Alliance is afflicted by three conspiracies of
note--(1) the Clark Administration's accession by means of
assassination and its impletmentation of a number of distressing
measures aimed to enhance its political control; (2) the dirty
tricks operation being run by the group known as Bureau 13; and (3)
the rogue element in Psi Corps's leadership engaged in a eugenics
campaign to develop more powerful telepaths. It's been fairly
clear for some time that Psi Corps is the common thread to these
conspiracies. Garibaldi's treacherous aide Jack gave Garibaldi
the same salute ("Revelations") that Bester gave in "Mind War."
That establishes a link between the Corps and the Clark faction--
a link for which there is other evidence we haven't seen, to judge
by the suspicions that General Hague voiced in "All Alone in the
Night." The Corps is also linked to Bureau 13 by the woman we
know as "Thirteen"--i.e., the woman who managed the conspiracy
seen in "Spider in the Web." Thirteen is a telepath, and Psi
Corps's records have been doctored to list her as dead, thereby
providing cover for her to drop out of sight and manage things
from the San Diego wasteland. Where do the Shadows come in?
For that you have to refer to the current four-part story now
unfolding in the Babylon 5 comics (synopses available through the
Lurker's Guide). It's becoming quite clear that there is some
kind of Shadow presence on Mars, and Mars is also the site of a
top-secret Psi Corps base. Indeed, it's evidently a base where
skulduggery takes place--that's where Bester was interrogating his
prisoner to lethal effect in the outset of "A Race Through Dark
Places." I'm increasingly skeptical that Morden is the only
human with whom the Shadows have been working.

ASIDE: If this is right, then the current debate over who
the traitor on B5 will turn out to be takes on a whole new
twist. The comic series shows the Shadow-minions on Mars
capable of mind-control over humans. And remember Laurel
Takashima from "The Gathering." After he had to abandon the
"Laurel as traitor" thread, JMS indicated that Laurel might
have been acting under duress, against her will. Many of us
might have taken that to mean she was being blackmailed or
otherwise coerced by conventional measures. But suppose it
was mind-control? After all, she had been on Mars before
she was on Babylon 5. So, who else on the series has a Mars
connection? Sinclair, Winters, and Garibaldi. But Sinclair
is off the station now, and if the Shadow-Psi Corps link that
I posit exists had mindcontrol over Winters (doubtful thanks
to Ironheart), Thirteen would not have had to order her killed
in "Spider in the Web." And that leaves Garibaldi . . . .

MINBAR: Things are not going well on Minbar. The population is
declining, and we know from Draal ("Voice in the Wilderness, I")
that the people are suffering a spiritual malaise--a falling away
from the old values. Even worse, the political order is coming
undone with the new imbalance on the Grey Council, where members of
the warrior caste now hold four seats, rather than the traditional
three. Is there any evidence for a Shadow-Minbari connection? Two
possibilities come to mind. First, the assassin who tried to poison
Kosh in "The Gathering" was a Minbari warrior--who better than the
Shadows would know HOW to poison a Vorlon? Second, as another poster
recently reminded us, in "Deathwalker" we see the Vorlon ship that
destroys Deathwalker's vessel fire two shots, the first seemingly
missing--except that JMS has asked us, what makes us think the Vorlons
missed? If the first Vorlon shot was at an unseen Shadow ship, that
would mean the Shadows were watching over Deathwalker. And who had
Deathwalker been sheltered by? The Windswords of the Minbari warrior
caste.

CENTAURI PRIME: Obvious. The seduction of Londo Mollari by the
Shadows' catspaw, Morden, derails the effort of Emperor Turhan to
make amends with the Narn, leads to the murder of Prime Minster Noah,
rouses the Centauri Republic from its torpor to the new Narn-Centauri
war, and brings a murderous oligarchy to power at the Centauri court.

THE NARNS: We've seen them more as the VICTIMS of Shadow actions so
far. The only available "evidence" for a Shadow-Narn link is the
possibility that there is more to Na'Toth than meets the eye. (One
more time: What were the circumstances of the airlock accident that
cost her predecessor Ko'Dath her life? What did Alisa Beldon see
when she scanned Na'Toth in "Legacies"? (Cf. Talia's scan of Morden
in "In the Shadow of Z'HaDum.") And why was keeping Na'Toth on hand
so important that JMS recast the role when Caitlin left after the
first series?

THE MARKAB: This is a stretch, but could the Shadows have been
behind the outbreak of draffa after so long a time? From the
tactical point of view, it eliminated a race that had prior contact
with the Shadows--it was a Markab, wasn't it, who spoke about
ancient horrors at the council meeting in "The Long Dark"? And
then there is that bartender in "Confessions and Lamentations" who
suggested that the Vorlons had poisoned the Markabs. That would
contradict the Vorlon habit of taking "no interest in the affairs
of others." But what other race have we seen with the capacities
of the Vorlons? Only their age-old opponents, the Shadows.

Okay, that's the first analysis. Hold for the moment the idea of this
Unified Field Theory of Conspiracies--i.e., that the Shadows are behind
all the recent afflictions. That brings us back to the recurring
question, "What do the Shadows want?" And that brings me to the second
analysis . . .

II. The Shadow-Vorlon Conflict

On quick, superficial examination, one is tempted to say that all the
Shadows want is war and destruction. But JMS has explicitly told us
that seeing them in such one-dimensional terms is incorrect. There
have been numerous posts suggesting that in some way, the Shadows have
been feeding off the destruction--deriving some kind of sustenance from
the release of energy, souls, whatever. Yet there is no evidence of
the Shadows sticking around after events like the attacks on the Narns
to harvest whatever it is that might be harvested from the wreckage.
Nor is it a matter of picking off a former enemy--the Narn have had
previous contact with the Shadows--because in "Signs and Portents"
Morden gave the Narn the chance to become the beneficiaries of
Shadow influence when he asked G'Kar what he wanted. A different
answer from G'Kar, and the Shadows might have the Centauri in
their sights, not the Narns.

Now, consider this: The common perception of the Shadows on this
group, by and large, has been that they are wholly destructive.
But a case can be made that as a result of the Shadows actions,
two races are, at least for the short term, becoming STRONGER.
In each case, the "strength" in question is characterized by
belligerence and a defective moral sense--but there is a focus
of purpose that can make those powers something to contend with.
The first power, of course, is the Centauri Republic--awakened
from its torpor and ineffectiveness that had characcterized the
later years of the reign of Emperor Turhan, it has suddenly
become focused upon reclaiming its place among the stars. (I
wish I could jump to the Lurker's Guide here to quote Londo's
answer to Morden's question in "Signs and Portents"--I think the
ambition for power and glory out in the stars is key here. G'Kar,
in contrast, wanted only revenge on the Centauri and safety for
his people.) And the second power that might be getting stronger?
Earth Alliance. Yes, I know--with all the conspiracies and
counter-conspiracies, it may not look like it's getting stronger
to us, but remember the terms I used above: "short term" and
"defective moral sense." If the Clark administration is moving
to impose political conformity with instruments like the Ministry
of Peace; if Bureau 13 is orchestrating dirty tricks to maintain
control over Mars Colony; and if PsiCorps is scheming to develop
more powerful psi-powers ... well the case could be made that
Earth Alliance is going to become more efficiently focused on
pursuing its agenda, whatever that agenda might be.

Now here, a bit of flame retardant: I am not *endorsing* the
totalitarian tendencies of the Clark Administration. Given a
choice between totalitarian orthodoxy and democratic heterodoxy,
I'll take democracy every time. Indeed, I believe that totalitarian
regimes inevitably carry the seeds of their own destruction--look
at thecollapse of the Soviet Union. BUT, over the short term, a
totalitarian regime can produce focused results with deadly
efficiency. The affinities between Earth Alliance under Clark
and Hitler's fascism, much noted on this group, are telling--look
what a deadly force Hitler made out of what had been the basket
case that was the Weimar Republic.

To return to the main argument, if the Shadows are weakening some
races (the Narns definitely, the Minbari and the Markab perhaps--
see Analysis I) while strengthening other races (Earth Alliance
and the Centauri), perhaps there is another way we can describe
what the Shadows are doing: What if the Shadows are CULLING THE
HERD? That's right: What if the Shadows are deliberately
fostering the development of some species at the expense of others
--a kind of ruthless animal husbandry on a galactic scale? The
Narns have shown weakness--their desire for revenge against the
Centauri has blinded them to their greater self-interest, plunging
them into an open war they are losing (as opposed to the old war
of attrition that won them their freedom). The Markab showed
weakness by putting superstition--their belief that draffa was a
divine punishment for immorality, not a communicable disease--ahead
of their self-interest. And the Minbari? If their population has
been declining for centuries, then they are a dying people--why
not help that weakness along by manipulating the warrior caste to
stir up internal strife? From the Shadow perspective, the measure
of strength may be a desire to dominate--to dominate out among the
stars. That's what Londo said he wanted for the Centauri in "Signs
and Portents," and we know from no less a figure than Delenn that
Earth Alliance's people have the capacity to "walk among the stars."

Now, hold that thought and consider what the Shadows' rivals, the
Vorlons, do in the way of what I dubbed "animal husbandry." They
are not so ruthless--they interfere reluctantly. They take
no interest in the affairs of others, as Kosh once put it. Rather
they tend to wait and watch, letting the different species find
their destinies on their own. The exceptions seem to be the Vorlons
attitudes toward the Minbari (allies in the last war with the Shadows)
and the Earthlings. The Minbari: It's clear that while Delenn
has been manipulating humans like Sinclair and Sheridan, Kosh has been
manipulating Delenn. It is his decision to show himself that pushes
her over the threshold in "Chrysalis." Humans: Kosh, who has been
studying humans intently, accedes to Sheridan's pressure to teach
him ("Hunter, Prey") and later to teach him to fight Shadows ("In
the Shadow of Z'Ha'Dum").

So both the Shadows and the Vorlons are fostering developments among
different races--and they have an interest in common in the humans.
What do the Vorlons and the Shadows want from humanity?

For the Vorlons, I suggest the answer is: Successors. Someone to
whom they can turn over the responsibility for furthering the values
in which they believe in this galaxy. AFter all, the other Old Ones
have passed beyond the Veil--perhaps the Vorlons want to follow
suit. But as the last of the Old Ones to remain, they can not leave
without having put in place some force to counter the Shadows who
remain behind. It cannot be their past allies, the Minbari, because
the Minbari are a dying race--their numbers are diminishing. The
humans, however, have the capacity to "walk among the stars."

For the Shadows, the interest in humans is not to wipe them out, but
to guide their development so that they will spread into space with
Shadow values, not Vorlon values.

In that light, the conflict between Shadows and Vorlons is not a
fight to destroy or preserve the human species. It is a struggle
to determine how that species will behave--if you will, a struggle
to shape the collective soul of humanity.

Which brings us to a recent post about the Shadows from JMS. Asked
to what extent the Shadows were Jungian, he declined to answer
directly--but he did indicate that his conception of the Shadows
did incorporate elements from Jung, from Freud, and from the Old
Testament. I leave Freud and Jung to others for comment; what comes
to mind at the moment are two Old Testament stories.

THE BOOK OF GENESIS: The opening chapters of Genesis
present us with another tale of two great powers--Jehovah
and the Serpent--contending over a young race, the first
humans, Adam and Eve. At issue is their moral development
--will they yield to temptation and know Original Sin?
For our Babylon 5 metaphor, it is perhaps significant that
in Genesis, the story entails a changed mental faculty--
Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit ofthe Tree of
Knowledge of Good and Evil. And in Babylon 5, new mental
faculties--the spread of telepathy and prophetic dreams--
play a major role. And I wonder . . . is it just a
coincidence that "Earth Alliance" has the same initials
as "Eve" and "Adam"?

THE BOOK OF JOB: Another contention, between Jehovah
and Satan, over a lesser being, the man named Job. For
whom I am tempted to read "Jeffrey David Sinclair."
In one of his early posts about Babylon 5, JMS described
Sinclair as a protagonist who would pass through a
crucible of terrible force--and that certainly describes
the test to which Job was subjected. There is also this:
Most readers of this group will know that phrase "shadow
of death" from the 23rd Psalm ("Yea, though I walk through
the valley of the shadow of death"). But, in fact, the
phrase "shadow of death" appears several times in the
Book of Job--more so than in the Book of Psalms. (Unless
you have one ofthe modern translations that renders the
phrase as "great darkness"--not nearly as eloquent.)

Whew!

Okay, lots of ideas, speculations, and juxtapositions. There are all
sorts of things that this analysis doesn't begin to explain. But I
hope that it will provide a useful basis for new discussion as we
continue to wait out the Endless Summer of Rerun. Let the flames,
agreements, concurrences, disputations, expansions, and rebuttals begin.

******
sdl5241@tam2000.tamu.edu (Shelley Diane Lewallen) writes:

>In article <3rns74$en@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>,
>orso steven n <sorso@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> wrote:

>First off. EXCELLENT job! You have done a great job at looking at
>the whole of the first and second season and finding the depth to
>the shadows involvement.

>Now...

>Ok... that should do it.

>>To return to the main argument, if the Shadows are weakening some
>>races (the Narns definitely, the Minbari and the Markab perhaps--
>>see Analysis I) while strengthening other races (Earth Alliance
>>and the Centauri), perhaps there is another way we can describe
>>what the Shadows are doing: What if the Shadows are CULLING THE
>>HERD? That's right: What if the Shadows are deliberately
>>fostering the development of some species at the expense of others
>>--a kind of ruthless animal husbandry on a galactic scale?

>Beautiful. I think that patched up perfectly... But I see a small
>problem here... there is no connection between the culling of the
>Centari and the Humans... it would seem that they have been unable
>(so far) to bring the humans in league with the Centari (notice
>that in the Centari-Narn war the humans are more on the side of the
>Narn than the Centari.) Which leads to two things.

Or what if the Shadows are not their own masters? The Shadows were
defeated but not destroyed. What if they were subverted by the Vorlons
and the other ancients in the last war, and are now serving the wishes of
the ancients to cull the herd, we know that Humans have the potential
to "walk among the stars like giants" (or something like that, just like
the ancients used to), and that Kosh told Morden "they are not for you"
in reference to the Humans. We know that when the ancients passed beyond
the veil, the Vorlons stayed behind, and that the Shadows have been around
forever (for all anyone knows) and have never passed the veil. What we
don't know is why the Vorlons stayed. Maybe they stayed to judge the
worthiness of the next "generation" of races, and make sure only the
best can pass the veil.

>1) They have been unable to bring these two factions (the Humans and
>Centari) together like they had planned because of the intervention
>of someone (or someones)... in this case it *might* be the group
>on Babylon 5 (and more importantly the commander of the station)...

We don't know that they meant for the Humans to get involved at all,
much less side with the Narns to get annihilated (sp?).

>2) They have no intention of bringing the two together - they are simply
>using the Centari as a test of their power and influence and are putting
>their main efforts into the humans (note the anti-alien sentiment they
>are fostering in the government) to later pit their new "pet" (the
>humans) into the ring with their old pet (the Centari) to fight it
>out.

How do we know that the Corps, Bereau 13 and Control are in league?

>In all of your excellent analysis you missed one thing. *What* are the
>Shadows after? You have done a great job of figuring out what they
>are *doing* but not the main underlying "why". They are fostering
>the Centari and the Humans, but why? To fight the Vorlons? Why?
>Simply because they fought them in the past? I don't think so... there
>has to be a reason the Vorlons and the Shadows are fighting.

What do the Vorlons want? We don't know much more about them than
we do about the Shadows, or the Minbarri other than those on the
station for that matter...

>We shall see.

So we shall...

*****
Along with John Miller's examination, this has to be one of the
most well-thought-out analyses yet. I'd say that a lot of it holds
water. (One nice side-element...I noted a while back that the comics
were not necessary to follow the series, as anything there would be at
some point mentioned in the show if it were important; here, you've
used it correctly to presage and four-wall the series and deduce some
very good stuff.) Splendid work.

jms

*****

BABYLON 5
Ranger Sightings List

compiled by
Lisa Jenkins
<jenkins@rrnet.com>

Last Updated: June 14, 1995

Ambassador Jeffrey Sinclair's army of "Rangers" were introduced to us in "The
Coming of Shadows," but according to JMS, these Rangers can be seen in
virtually every episode of the second season. You need a 4-head VCR or better
sometimes to spot 'em, but they are there. Here is a list of where to begin
looking. If you spot some sightings of your own, please let me know and I
will add them to the list!

"The Long Dark"

While Amis stands on bar shouting about an "Army of Darkness," Ranger sits at
end of bar and listens intently.

"Spider in the Web"

Ranger drinks at bar while Ivanova explains seating arrangements for a new
delegation meeting. He can be seen dead center between Ivanova and Sheridan
when they stop.

Same Ranger drinks at another bar while Able Horn makes his way to terminal to
contact Bureau 13 via a vidcom link. This time the Ranger is closer to the
camera and can be seen better.

"Soul Mates"

As Sheridan and G'Kar speak of "settling in" and the commanding officer being
wisked away to a "mysterious Minbari post," a Ranger passes QUICKLY in front
of them. You need a very good 4-head VCR to see this one.

A Ranger passes between Sheridan and Londo's third wife (Mariel) right before
she approaches Sheridan to make a pass at him.

"A Race Through Dark Places"

While Franklin and Sheridan leave the restaurant and discuss Franklin having a
cot for medical purposes, the camera centers on a Ranger and a business man
talking at the top of the stairs.

"The Coming of Shadows"

We are officially introduced to the Rangers. If you need a slow-shutter to
spot the Ranger in THIS one, you need a new set of eyes!

"Hunter, Prey"

Garibaldi spots a Ranger at the same time Sheridan sees the red ribbon.

"There All the Honor Lies"

While Londo and Vir are at the bar, Vir hands over a flimsy to Londo. The
camera focuses on Vir, and over his left should a Ranger passes by in full
view.

"And Now for a Word"

After the meeting is broken up by the fighting outside the station, the
reporter walks down the corridor to C&C. She turns and speaks of patching the
ISN signal to the exterior cameras, and a Ranger runs down the corridor
towards the camera at full sprint. You'll need a good slow-shutter for this
one.

"In the Shadow of Z'ha'dum"

Vir goes to see Morden in the Zocalo. He stops, a light shines on him, and
just as he begins to move towards Morden, a Ranger passes in front of him.

"Confessions and Lamentations"

Franklin sits at the bar to listen to the news on ISN. Just before the
barkeep speaks, a Ranger moves away from the bar.

******
Of course we're going to find out more about why the shadows are
doing and what they want; it'd be kinda pointless otherwise, no?

jms

******
In article <3rn61p$vi@homer.alpha.net>,
Andy Eagleson <andeagle@earth.execpc.com> wrote:
>Is it me or is something just missing from Babylon 5 battle sequences. I
>don't know this could add fuel to Star Trek Vrs Babylon 5 flame war but
>don't Babylon 5 sequences seem.... dare I say it... Boring. I mean every
>sequence I have seen is COMPLEX but boring. Example.
>
>I watched ANFAW and though WOW nice scene and then sat back and
>said. That was kinda boring. They move strait at each other and fire on
>each other. No battle tactics no last great maneuver to win the battle.
>Just to ships going at it. Thats not fun to watch.

The idea behind most of B5's battles is realism. Here you had one
ship that appeared basically on top of another one and they both had
little recourse other than to try and destroy one another as quick as
possible. It's pretty tough to get something with a mass of somewhere
around 100 million tons moving especially when most of your power
needs to be diverted to your weapons system in order to stay alive.
It wasn't the most stunning thing to look at, but it was realistic.

>(Star Trek haters are gonna hate me for this)
>After watching The Die is Cast on Star Trek and that WONDERFUL
>battle scene. I watched it again and actauly looked at the special effects
>like explosions and ships flying and Etc. They weren't that great. Not bad
>in fact they were better than some I had seen but they weren't as good as
>on Babylon5. So why did I like this Battle better than the other one?
>
>It was exciting. You saw a ship in first person go through and
>attack 3 - 4 ships causing damage to a couple. And then you see three
>Jem Hadr fighters come in and make pork Chops out of a Romulan War Bird.
>All in 12 seconds. Plus you see ships flying everywhere. Explosions left
>and right. You pan to the Bridge. You see sparks flying, fire engulfing
>everything. People next to explosions flying across the bridge. Thats
>exciting.

It was neat looking, but it was so unrealistic the way the ships
moved that I couldn't take it seriously. Big space fireballs, the way