MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 504 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: book lovers by Becky Anne Christensen 2) missing sig by cscd3150121-+AT+-ewu.edu 3) Heinlein. Come out fighting. Was Re: Everything under several suns! 40 digest digest by mealink-+AT+-syd.au.swissbank.com (Kerry Mealing) 4) Merlin's view(was Re: Arthur & IIPTNIG by cscd3150121-+AT+-ewu.edu 5) Re: book lovers(reading speed) by Becky Anne Christensen 6) Re: Reading speed by Becky Anne Christensen 7) Re: Cover artists by Gyrfalcon 8) Re: book lovers(reading speed) by Roger Dahl 9) Worst Analogies (off topic) by Roger Dahl 10) Re: Star Wars by "Kristin A. Ruhle" 11) SELF-GRATIFYING EGO TRIP by Heather Watson 12) Re: Cover artists by kadessa-+AT+-ix.netcom.com (Leah M Postrech) 13) Re: Sacrifice. SPOILERS for a Saint book. by mealink-+AT+-syd.au.swissbank.com (Kerry Mealing) 14) Re: The Birdcage (off-topic) by Heather Watson 15) Re: Arthur by starlite-+AT+-intergate.bc.ca (Midnite Whisper) 16) Re: book lovers(reading speed) by ywlau-+AT+-singnet.com.sg (Lady Windsong) 17) Re: Misty's first by ywlau-+AT+-singnet.com.sg (Lady Windsong) 18) re: language by dbackhau-+AT+-isou10.estec.esa.nl ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 20:11:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Becky Anne Christensen To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: book lovers Message-ID: On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, Roger Dahl wrote: > On Mon, 22 Apr 1996, Vrondi wrote: > > > > You say that you are comprehending what you read faster than me. You say > > > that you even _think_ faster than me. I find that statement somewhat > > > offending. > > Whoa, whoa, whoa, stop here a minute! Some persons' nervous systems > > process information quicker than others! ok? live with it. > [snip] > > Ah. So people that read a book in 10 minutes where I use ten hours, they > actually _think_ sixty times faster than me. They feel the same things I > feel, only sixty times faster. Where I laugh for 3 seconds they laugh for > 50 milliseconds. Neat. Thanks for enlightening me on this. > Now, that is going a bit too far don't you think? No one said they could read it in ten minutes. It doesn't mean that everything you do would be speeded up, you don't move ten times faster, you just read faster. That's all this is about, reading, not everything else. > > > Again, it seems you think that slower readers like me are simply devoting > > > more time to the words themselves than you do. Isn't it just as likely > > > that I'm experiencing the book in another way than you do? > > You are experiencing the book in no better or worse a fashion than > > anyone else > > How can you be so sure? > Okay, well, I went and I tried reading slower, and I couldn't do it and still get more outof the book. So now I know that I personally can't get any more out of a book by reading it slower, I lose track of what's happening, because I have to consciously refrain from reading at a normal speed for me. > > , but I think the point of the origional post was that if > > your natural thought processes are relatively quick, then to try and > > slow down interrupts those thought prosesses! > > Yes, that was the point. And my point was, to spell it out more clearly, > was that maybe the slow reader doesn't actually have slower thought > processes, but are instead thinking more about what he reads and giving > himself more time to feel the emotions. > I don't agree with you at all. I define reading as feeling all the emotions, not just reading words. I do take the time and feel the emotions, and I think a lot about what I'm reading. In fact in our English class, we're reading Lord of the Flies, and I read it much faster than the other people in the class, yet I was also one of the few that picked up on all the symbolism in the book. How it was also an allegory for the book of Genesis. I have experienced the books I have read. Lady Becky The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go. --Dr. Suess ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 20:05:59 -0800 (PST) From: cscd3150121-+AT+-ewu.edu To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: missing sig Message-ID: On Wed, 24 Apr 1996 cscd3150121-+AT+-ewu.edu wrote: > > Speaking for myself, I've never really pictured God as male or female, > just seems kinda, well, mortal. I mean why should it/they have sex or > sexual characteristics? Could it be we are creating gods in our own image? > And I was sure I put my name on it! Sorry, David Tiffany ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Apr 96 13:05:51 EST From: mealink-+AT+-syd.au.swissbank.com (Kerry Mealing) To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Cc: kerry_mealing-+AT+-il.us.swissbank.com Subject: Heinlein. Come out fighting. Was Re: Everything under several suns! 40 digest digest Message-ID: <9604240305.AA07057-+AT+-syd.au.swissbank.com> Cennyd/Mage of Green Silences/Rossinyol/ (Stark raving schizo? ) wrote: > Alifarr-+AT+-aol.com wrote: > > Try Heinlien's Time Enough For Love" for an entirely reverse attitude from > > current American society. > > Don't *EVEN* get me started! Heinlien is the most pathetically > misogynistic, chauvinistic emotionally stunted writer that ever walked > the face of the earth. OK, maybe not the absolutely most...but in the > top 10! His societies are the most pathetic, adolescent-pipe-dream > fantasies of women who are never more than compliant, eternally > submissive, promiscous sex kittens! I mean I know a few boys who would > have these fantasies, but I don't know any healthy, emotionally > well-adjusted men who would. Oh well, what do you expect from a dinosaur? Oh come now.. Holly Jones, the girl who's planning the first long-distance space ship (quite seriously and professionally). Hilda Burroughs, the lady you just do not cross, the lady who put Lazarus Long in his place in less than 24 short hours; the lady who was a better Commander than any of the men around. D.D. Carter - the lady with the savant maths ability, who at age 15 was handling all the accounting, business & tax dodges for an enormous amount of networked companies that owned the patents on her father's inventions; and the lady who at age 15, calmly stopped the car she was driving, stepped out and flagged a cab when her father back-seat drove. Friday, the female agent who was the best at her trade. Maureen Johnson Long, who bullied the directors of a mega-corporation into pushing into space exploration when it didn't seem profitable; a strong -feminine- female executive/power-player in a time when they were -not- the norm. The list goes on and on. Sure, some of the ladies enjoyed healthy sex lives, but that doesn't make them sex kittens; and coming from anyone other than you Cennyd, I'd say that applying the term promiscuous to them, smacked a little of feeling threatened. In your case I'm assuming that you have a valid reason for the term and I'd be interested in hearing it. And before someone says it - yes, some of the ladies did settle down and have a family life and seemed quite content with doing so. And some of them had a family life and a career. But so what - Heinlein never chastised or looked down on any character for having simple goals. His points were about thinking for yourself, and thinking clearly and logically - about looking past societal mores and taboos to the reason behind them; about self- sacrifice; about the different societal structures; about human behaviour; about sexism and racism and all the other nasty little biases in human society; about suicide; and about learning to be seen to fit in while being your own person and about self-confidence. As for his female characters - compliant? Hardly. Submissive? I don't think so. They cried at times, sure - but I'll argue to my dying breath against the idea that feminine behaviour can be equated with submissive behaviour. And the men cried sometimes as well. On the whole, Heinlein's characters were strong, -intelligent-, forthright, feminine, independant females - sure some of them had problems and foibles and flaws, but that's what made them human and live and breath. And I'd be proud to call almost any of them my partner in life. And if that makes me a pathetic, adolescent, pipe-dreaming emotional cripple, so be it. That's your call, not mine. I don't always agree with what some of Heinlein's books -seem- to advocate, but I'm damned if I'll sit by and let a statement like that go unchallenged. *grin* No IMHO's, because I'm not feeling humble. :) Cennyd - lets hear some evidence behind those statements. (I leave in about 5 hrs for a 4 day holiday, so don't be surprised if I don't reply immediately to this thread..) :) Cheers, Kerry. "Twenty years fron now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." - Mark Twain ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 20:11:31 -0800 (PST) From: cscd3150121-+AT+-ewu.edu To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Merlin's view(was Re: Arthur & IIPTNIG Message-ID: On Wed, 24 Apr 1996 Soljan-+AT+-aol.com wrote: > Oh, wow! I forgot about these! I borrowed them from my seventh grade > teacher. They were great! I was never really interested in Arthur, but > these were great, they were from Merlin's perspective though, weren't they? Yep. David Tiffany ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 20:30:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Becky Anne Christensen To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: book lovers(reading speed) Message-ID: On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, Kerry Mealing wrote: > Roger Dahl wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Apr 1996, Vrondi wrote: > > > > > So, how is it > > > that one cannot believe that each has a built in comprehension speed > > > and some are just faster than others? > > > Tends to. Not an absolute. There are no absolutes. (Except this one *grin*). > > > What I think, though, is that to comprehend something is not the same as > > *feeling* it. And *feeling* what you read is, in my opinion, the main > > point of reading entertainment literature. > > Okay, first add lotsa smilies and IMHO's to taste, but (there's always a > but) - can we now drop the issue - it's getting increasingly insulting to > those who do read fast. :) Firstly they're told that they don't comprehend > as much, then that's clarified to them not emoting with the book as much. > > Might we agree to disagree on the subject? > Yes! I agree wholeheartedly, there really is no way to prove much of anything, unless someone can find textual evidence, but I agree to disagree. Lady Becky The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go. --Dr. Suess ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 20:37:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Becky Anne Christensen To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Reading speed Message-ID: On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, Heather Watson wrote: > speed-read more or less naturally. They aren't really missing anything > substantial, necessarily, in terms of story, theme, and so forth. On > the other hand, you do lose the rhythm of the language and the texture > of the words to some extent. This wasn't about speed reading, just natural reading speeds, how you read when you're reading at a relaxed speed. > Personally, I wouldn't trade the experience of settling in for a long > afternoon of mulling over a book, rereading passages, noting imagery, Me either, I usually reread books, and ponder them, but during the time when I'm actually reading, it's at my natural speed, which tends to be faster. Lady Becky The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go. --Dr. Suess ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 00:09:30 -0400 From: Gyrfalcon To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Cover artists Message-ID: <317DA97A.5F6F-+AT+-menger.eecs.stevens-tech.edu> Chelsea Amberle Fischer wrote: > > On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, Leah M Postrech wrote: > > > wrong. I love the pictures as much as you, but has anyone noticed that > > although using magic bleaches one's hair white, and it is often pointed > > out that Vanyel's hair is white, on both the cover of MPromise & > > MPrice, he has totally black hair? Jody Lee didn't seem to pay too > > much attention to the details (IMHO). > > I may be wrong (it's happened once), but I thought that it was only the > *Tayledras* magic/way of using magic that turned the hair white, not just > any old magic ...................? But, IIRC, Van did use Tayledras magic. in fact, he was trained primarily by Starwind, who was a Tayledras Adept. So his hair would have turned white. --Gyrfalcon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~msowers-+AT+-menger.eecs.stevens-tech.edu~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Magic still exists. We have only to reach out and touch it, it is a part of the very fabric of the world. When our belief of magic completely dies this universe shall die. Because that magic; Hope, Dreams, Love, Beauty, Wonder, Belief, and Discovery are what make us a people. They are all part of a great Art whose workings are still a mystery but whose applications can be seen every day. If we ever lose the Art mankind shall not last the day. Let the magic that is in us roam free in our work, play, in each other, and most of all in ourselves. Let it roam free or it will die. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 18:46:24 +0000 (GMT) From: Roger Dahl To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: book lovers(reading speed) Message-ID: On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, Kerry Mealing wrote: > > What I think, though, is that to comprehend something is not the same as > > *feeling* it. And *feeling* what you read is, in my opinion, the main > > point of reading entertainment literature. > > Okay, first add lotsa smilies and IMHO's to taste, but (there's always a > but) - can we now drop the issue - it's getting increasingly insulting to > those who do read fast. :) Firstly they're told that they don't comprehend > as much, then that's clarified to them not emoting with the book as much. Hi Kerry. Nice to hear from you again. Yup, I'm ready to drop this thread. What else can I do when people refuse to even discuss it :) Though I can't help wonder why people where so extremely touchy about my questions. I never said that speed reading decreases comprehension and retention. Finally I want to say that if the notion that a fast reader doesn't allow hirself as much time for feelings as slow readers do are insulting, then I think that the assertion that a slow reader is also a slow thinker is even more so. -+*#*+- -+*#*+- -+*#*+- -+*# Roger Dahl - rd-+AT+-redleaf.bbs.no #*+- Now Hounds of Love are Hunting ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 18:52:52 +0000 (GMT) From: Roger Dahl To: Lackey-List Subject: Worst Analogies (off topic) Message-ID: This is off topic but it IS funny (and it's about writing so I feel partially justified... :) -+*#*+- -+*#*+- -+*#*+- -+*# Roger Dahl - rd-+AT+-redleaf.bbs.no #*+- Now Hounds of Love are Hunting >Subject: Worst Analogies (taken from High School papers) > > > He spoke with the wisdom that can only come from experience, like > a guy who went blind because he looked at a solar eclipse without > one of those boxes with a pinhole in it and now goes around the > country speaking at high schools about the dangers of looking at > a solar eclipse without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it. > (Joseph Romm, Washington) > > > She caught your eye like one of those pointy hook latches that > used to dangle from screen doors and would fly up whenever you > banged the door open again. (Rich Murphy, Fairfax Station) > > > The little boat gently drifted across the pond exactly the way a > bowling ball wouldn't. (Russell Beland, Springfield) > > > McBride fell 12 stories, hitting the pavement like a Hefty Bag > filled with vegetable soup. (Paul Sabourin, Silver Spring) > > > From the attic came an unearthly howl. The whole scene had an > eerie, surreal quality, like when you're on vacation in another > city and "Jeopardy" comes on at 7 p.m. instead of 7:30. (Roy > Ashley, Washington) > > > Her hair glistened in the rain like nose hair after a sneeze. > (Chuck Smith, Woodbridge) > > > Her eyes were like two brown circles with big black dots in the > center. (Russell Beland, Springfield) > > > Bob was as perplexed as a hacker who means to access > T:flw.quid55328.com\aaakk/ch-+AT+-ung but gets T:\flw.quidaaakk/ch-+AT+-ung > by mistake (Ken Krattenmaker, Landover Hills) > > > Her vocabulary was as bad as, like, whatever. (Unknown) > > > He was as tall as a six-foot-three-inch tree. (Jack Bross, Chevy > Chase) > > > The hailstones leaped from the pavement, just like maggots when > you fry them in hot grease. (Gary F. Hevel, Silver Spring) > > > Her date was pleasant enough, but she knew that if her life was a > movie this guy would be buried in the credits as something like > "Second Tall Man." (Russell Beland, Springfield) > > > Long separated by cruel fate, the star-crossed lovers raced > across the grassy field toward each other like two freight > trains, one having left Cleveland at 6:36 p.m. traveling at 55 > mph, the other from Topeka at 4:19 p.m. at a speed of 35 mph. > (Jennifer Hart, Arlington) > > > The politician was gone but unnoticed, like the period after the > Dr. on a Dr Pepper can. (Wayne Goode, Madison, Ala.) > > > They lived in a typical suburban neighborhood with picket fences > that resembled Nancy Kerrigan's teeth (Paul Kocak, Syracuse, N.Y.) > > > John and Mary had never met. They were like two hummingbirds who > had also never met. (Russell Beland, Springfield) > > > The thunder was ominous-sounding, much like the sound of a thin > sheet of metal being shaken backstage during the storm scene in a > play. (Barbara Fetherolf, Alexandria) > > > His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking alliances > like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free (Chuck Smith, > Woodbridge) > > > The red brick wall was the color of a brick-red Crayola crayon. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 21:46:59 -0700 (PDT) From: "Kristin A. Ruhle" To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Star Wars Message-ID: <199604240447.AA18515-+AT+-> > > > The problem is that these characteristics are robust across genres. > There is nothing about having a horde of bad guys, some badly outnumbered > good guys, a threatened locale, and a hero that defines a particular > genre. It eliminates a few genres (interestingly, one the ones that is > eliminated is the "opera"). These are just characteristics of a whole > slew of epic and neo-epic genres. I mean, these are all characteristics > of LotR and I don't think anyone is going to argue that LotR was based on > a "horse opera." As I mentioned (and I am stilling looking for my copy > of the paper with the analysis), there is an excellent analysis of SW as > a mytho-poetic transformation of the WoO, where both stories are > considered to be examples of a rite-of-passage quest. I think that, if > you wanted to claim that SW was a c&i story, you would need to identify > the exact definition of a C&I story (particularly the features that > distinguish it from other genres) and then show that SW had these same > features, in the same structural configuration within the text. > > science-fact. There is no terribly scientific explanation for a lot of > things that go on in sci-fi, but that doesn't mean that the genre isn't > sci-fi. Also, I would distinguish between spirituality and fantasy-type > magic. What occurs in SW is a type of mysticism that is embedded in a > scientific Secondary World. It is qualitatively different from magic in > a fantastic Secondary World. In SW, the use of the Force stands out as a > contrast to the rest of the Secondary World of the text. It is clearly > different from the general world-view. On the other hand, in MPrice, for > example, the magic that occurs is does not stand out in contrast to the > general world-view. > > Oops, gotta run. A huge storm just blew in, and I don't want my computer > to get fried, so I had better turn it off. > Um. Much as I hate to get started on keeping an off-topic thread going but... Science fiction fans distingish between "SF" and "sci-fi" or "skiffy." Serious/hard SF tries to at least keep the scientific facts straight, while skiffy, as exemplified by Hollywood (at least since B films in the 50s!) often throws scientific accuracy to the four winds. In Star Wars, space ships make noise in a vacuum and behave as if they were airplanes! The best literary science fiction tries not to insult the intelligence of readers who know physics. The science fact underlies and serves as a background for the fiction. That said, SW is a lot of fun, but I wouldn't call it science. In fact the Force strikes me as very similar to a magical system in some ways. As a corollary you *could* call magical systems 'a different kind of science.' That would apply not only to Misty's books set on Earth (remember Born to Run, where the engineer figures out exactly how iron will affect Sidhe magic, and the Fairgrove defenses are built accordingly?) but increasingly to Velgarth, where she is portraying the Blues as taking a logical approach to magic. When you're not dealing with *hard* (accurate) science, the line between sf and fantasy is very much blurred. Here I've gone and muddied the waters even more.... Kristin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 00:11:07 CST From: Heather Watson To: Subject: SELF-GRATIFYING EGO TRIP Message-ID: <24APR96.00200263.0065.MUSIC-+AT+-NEMOMUS> Me, too! Me, too! Hey, if Kerry can re-introduce himself, I want to talk about me for a while After all, I never officially sent the "Hi, I'm here, and I'm happy to be Heather," post that people do when they subscribe to the list. I just jumped right into the middle of an argument about the Lizard Wizard. (Sounds about like me, eh, listmates?) Of course, I was wrong about that one (I was arguing that Gervase was a really big Pelagir lizard, not a hertasi; he's a hertasi), and it was such an embarrassing experience that I decided never to be wrong again. And that, children, is why Heather is always right. At any rate, I'm 20 and a third- (fourth-, if I survive finals) year history student, eventually aiming for a master's degree in secondary education, so I can aid and abet teenagers in subversive thinking, and thwack the ones who read Misty while I'm trying to tell them about the French Revolution, which is far weirder than anything any speculative fiction author ever would have thought up. I'm currently procrastinating on papers for Medieval history, African-American history, and government. Thank you. To sustain myself, I cook in a very noisy bar with good burritos and gorgeous waitresses. In my spare time (Ha! Hahahaha!), I'm writing a novel, a fantasy of manners (this is also a real subgenre, and nobody try to argue with me about whether or not they should be called "fantasies of manners."), about chivalry, politics, and sex -- um, I mean romance, of course. I'm also writing short stories (including one about a prostitute, so there) and providing lots and lots of creative assistance on my she'enedra's fledgling fantasy novel. This requires a lot of long-distance phone calls, which require the job. I go to school in Kirksville, Missouri which is a pretty cool town for a hamlet of 20K in the wilds of northern Missouri, dominated as it is by Truman State University, which has been called the Harvard of the Midwest. I seriously doubt that, but it's a pretty nice place. My real life is in Columbia (home of the MU Tigers, for any Big 8 fans out there), where I have an apartment that I share with my she'enedra, the lovely lady who introduced me to Misty 3 or 4 years ago, about a mile away from my Ancestral Home, or at least the one that houses my parents, my little sister, and my dog and cat. We have a cat at the apartment, but she likes Barbara best. Her name is Ehlanna, yes, named after the Eddings character, and she's dumb as a pillow. Coincidence? You decide. My posts are always long, and you'd think I'd have better things to do with my time, but apparently not. Sometimes I feel guilty because people are paying for this nonsense, but then I figure, at least they don't have to live with my Latin grade on their transcripts. So who's really suffering the most? Anyway, I wanted to do this because...um...because Kerry did it first. In case anyone hasn't realized it yet, Kerry is uniformly cool, and back before I realized he was male, I would have been on a plane to Australia in a hot second after an invitation like that. Heck, I still might. (You don't get to know my Kinsey rating. A lady has to stay somewhat mysterious, you know.) Oh, yeah, and also I'm going to invest this summer in getting my fantasy zine off the ground. The parts of the magewar I witnessed convinced me that there are a lot of people with talent on this list, and I'd encourage anyone who writes to contact me for submission info, for yourself or your friends. (I'm also shamelessly willing to distribute copies of my infamous Fantasy Top 10 List or the first chapter of my novel to all comers. As long as you promise to say sweet things and stroke my ego. I don't think I could handle honest criticism this close to finals week.) Like everyone else on the planet, I'm in the SCA (though currently sort of inactive) and an avid gamer (mostly White Wolf, with a little D&D thrown in, and Back Alleys, which is a game you've never heard of because my friends Mike and Dave are writing and designing it, and I'm one of their hapless playtesters -- at least until that &-+AT+-#*! demon catches up with us). My other mailing list (yes, I cheat on you guys) is a SF&F writers' list, and the people there are nice enough, but the activity is much lower than here. I also read all the stuff my she'enedra forwards me from her gay&lesbian alt.sex.bondage group, which is always an interesting interlude to a busy day of academia and Lackey. Now, aren't you glad I didn't introduce myself from the very beginning? You'd have kicked me off the list. Now, see, you already love me, and it's TOO LATE -- hahahahaha! HTH "We're not alcoholics. We're the authors." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 22:08:48 -0700 From: kadessa-+AT+-ix.netcom.com (Leah M Postrech) To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Cover artists Message-ID: <199604240508.WAA27990-+AT+-dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com> (snip) >I may be wrong (it's happened once), but I thought that it was only the >*Tayledras* magic/way of using magic that turned the hair white, not just >any old magic ...................? > > ---Chelsae Since Vanyel, Savil, and Elspeth were all Adept-mages able to use node energy, *and* were Tayledras trained, their hair was bleached. I can't say for sure if it's only the Tayledras' training that bleaches hair or the use of node energy but I personally think it was from the use of node energy rather then the training, as I seem to recall something in at least one of the books about that. (I couldn't say even approximately where, as I've not had a chance lately to reread any of the books. :P) Anyone else have an idea? > I thought that Van had a *little* white hair on the cover of MPrice, > and it is also mentioned that Van was very resistant to the bleaching > effect. Maybe all the white hair is on the other side of his head? > :) I *think* that "little white hair" is snow, but I could be wrong. :) I don't remember ever reading that Van was resistant to the bleaching effect, but I'll admit, it's been a while since I've read them. Next time I get a chance I'll look for it. You wouldn't happen to know where it is approximately, would you? Lady Bard Kadessa of Heilmarsh Keep "Life is like a journey, who knows when it ends..." e-mail address: Kadessa-+AT+-ix.netcom.com Windfoenix-+AT+-aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Apr 96 15:50:47 EST From: mealink-+AT+-syd.au.swissbank.com (Kerry Mealing) To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Sacrifice. SPOILERS for a Saint book. Message-ID: <9604240550.AA09270-+AT+-syd.au.swissbank.com> HTH/Heather wrote: > It is interesting, isn't it, that Vanyel, wonderful a guy as he was, > significant as the sacrifice he made was, just did not have the ability > to rid the world of Ma'ar once and for all. > I find that refreshing in fantasy, where all too often you can do > anything, just because you're the hero. The idea is that you've done so > much right, you somehow *deserve* to be able to do whatever it is you > really want to do. Life, however, isn't always like that. > > Sometimes people, worthwhile, deserving people, try very very hard to > do something, and don't. Success should not be automatic, even in > fiction, unless we're talking about the purest escape fiction, where of > course we're counting on success. I think in any work that expects you > to think, you should have to *wonder* if it really will all work out. > And there wouldn't be much doubt in anybody's mind if we hadn't at some > point read at least one book where it *didn't* turn out perfectly in the > end. Where Vanyel sacrifices everything, and still can only hold off > the inevitable. A little chilling, perhaps, but I wouldn't enjoy > reading if I always knew everything would work out by the last page. > Sometimes, sure. But not always. This reminds me very much of one of my all-time favourite books - and it's not one of Misty's and it's not even sci-fi/fantasy. It's _The Last Hero_, by Leslie Charteris - a Saint book. Read it read it read it. I'll stake my oath that you won't regret it. It's lovely and poignant and never fails to bring a tear to my eye. Major major Spoilers follow - if you're convinced to read it already, don't read on. I really urge you to go out and buy it. It's the one book I'd take with me to a desert island, even over LHM and all the rest. S P O I L E R S It's set after world-war one in a time where another world war seems imminent and in it, a horrible new weapon has been developed by a British scientist. The Saint, Simon Templar and his girl, Patricia Holm and his two dearest friends Norman Kent and Roger Conway are fighting to keep the invention from falling into the hands of either a syndicate of foreign interests and the British. I was going to say lots more here about how poignant and brilliantly written and emotive the story/plot is but decided not to spoil it. Along the way, they're bruised and battered and they all make sacrifices. And even when they escape, there's foreshadowing. As they're fleeing to their retreat in the early dawn they pass a massive old abbey and Norman Kent fancies he hears the angelic choir voicing a hymn, "To give light to them that sit in darkness, and in the valley of death; And to guide their steps into the way of peace." At their retreat they eventually come into possession of the scientist and his notes and plead with him not to publish, with the foreign cartel hot on their heals. Their location is found out by the foreign cartel and a small number of british secret service men; and the supposedly secure house that they're in is surrounded, unbeknowns to them. In the meantime the Saint kills the scientist because he will not see reason and refuses to suppress the weapon. (No, these aren't baby-sweet books). Norman has the scientist's notes. Before the notes can be destroyed, the house is stormed, quite effectively, quite thoroughly and Norman takes a soft-tipped bullet in the thigh, ie he's seriously injured and the bone's shattered. The bad guys (who -do- have personality and charm and reasons for their actions) demand the papers from the Saint. (One of the bad-guys is an old nemesis of the Saint). Major three-way stand-off, everyone including the secret service guys are holding guns and there is no way out. Norman says as much. He tells the Saint to trust him, promising that everything will be all right and that he'll hand over the papers he's holding and buys the Saint, Patricia & Roger, half an hour's safe-conduct out of the area, with himself and the papers as hostage. The Saint's nemesis agrees, knowing the lengths the Saint will go to protect a friend. Norman talks very fast and contrives very cleverly to slip a note into the Saint's pocket unbeknown to him. Half an hour goes by, the nemesis and his ally's demand the papers. Norman hands over the papers he's holding, which turn out to be a simple letter. He stands, ignoring the pain and moves between the bad guys and the young secret service guy and admits that he slipped the real papers into the Saint's pockets, saying simply, "Nothing is won without sacrifice." And that single line is all that's on the note to the Saint. The secret service guy makes a break out the French windows down to the boat-house and Norman deliberately takes the one clear shot that the bad guys have at the ss guy. The ss guy gets away and Norman dies with the sounds of trumpets ringing in his ears, with a strang peace filling him. And the crickets chirp in the evening stillness and the setting sun reflects gently off the river behind the house. The epilogue is a single page with the Saint talking and he says something like: "What gifts hath fate for all his chivalry? Even such as hearts heroic oftenest win: Honour, a friend; anguish, untimely death.." Do you remember me telling you about Norman Kent? When I came back to England I found his grave and I had those words carved upon it, and d'you know, I've often thought I should be proud to have earned them on my own. I'm not doing the book justice here in the slightest. It's much better than I can portray it. The sacrifices aren't cheesy or obvious and it's not at all clear that they're going to be enough; and the characters -know- that they're not going to be able to stop war happening permanently. All they can hope for is to stop it happening at the moment. And it's very chilling to know that they didn't stop the war - at best they delayed it for 20 years or so, but as they said, that's enough. And the characters make major sacrifices and all they can do is hope that it'll be enough. Even the three who do survive are outlawed in England and the loss of Norman is a shadow over their lives that haunts them in years to come - it's hinted at in later books. A very good book. :) Cheers, Kerry. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 02:36:45 CST From: Heather Watson To: Subject: Re: The Birdcage (off-topic) Message-ID: <24APR96.02821676.0017.MUSIC-+AT+-NEMOMUS> Oh, I liked The Birdcage well enough. I was a little wary of it at first, but it seemed harmless enough. There was a real respect there for the characters that I had feared would be wholly absent. By the time that snot kid had spent half the movie insulting Albert, you were really ready to clock him one, because the viewer realized that Albert was worth three of Val. Okay, I don't know about *every* viewer. But I'd say that was the experience of most people. (The people who are unconvinceable probably didn't go see the movie). And, heck, I just enjoyed seeing Gene Hackman in drag. Okay, now that the public has decided there need not be mass rioting in the streets if Hollywood makes a movie about gay men, the next step is to make a movie about gay men where they actually get to *kiss.* I hope I'm not being too radical, here. Now, in The Birdcage I was reluctantly able to buy it, because Armand was really not the most romantic or demonstrative of men, and I thought, okay, at least the characterization sort of supported it. But Philadelphia? If you are Tom Hanks, and you are in love with Antonio Banderas, and you are never going to see him again this side of the Havens, are you or aren't you going to make out with him at least a little? And in Priscilla I didn't mind it so much either, because the whole romantic subplot was very subtle (though I think it was obvious to those of us who were paying attention that Tony and Adam were crazy about each other). But that's several movies now where nobody gets to kiss anybody else. And let's not even get into Julie Newmar, where one really couldn't prove whether or not they were gay. I want more skin on Love Boat. Priest was pretty sexy, but it was an obscure British movie, hardly a coup for Hollywood. (Excellent, though, please rent it.) Well, thanks to this sort of peculiar thing that so many straight men have for lesbians, we at least have better on-screen sex lives. Marginally. We have The Hunger, and Desert Hearts. And Leaving Las Vegas and Basic Instinct and Diabolique, if that's the kind of thing you want to count as an accomplishment. It is more action than Mercedes Lackey lesbians get, however. HTH "We're not alcoholics. We're the authors." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 00:43:18 -0700 From: starlite-+AT+-intergate.bc.ca (Midnite Whisper) To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Arthur Message-ID: <199604240743.AAA16341-+AT+-diablo.intergate.bc.ca> Having slipped away temporarily from her horrid Physics, Midnite Whisper steals a few quick moments on the computer. Horrified, she learns that she has missed some very important mail about the Mists of Avalon!!! She springs from her chair, and knocks over her mother's bowl of potpourri! Regardless of the mess of dead flowers scattered all over the floor, she takes Firemist's advice, and madly runs for the nearest library! (She's too poor to go to a book store). She succeeds in gaining a black eye from running into a v-e-r-y slow automatic door, curses, but continues her frantic search for the book, nevertheless!! There is NOTHING that can stand in the way of ... MIDNITE WHISPER!!! (Except maybe the physics test which she is probably going to flunk) ;-) >I noticed you did not list MZB's (Marion Zimmer Bradley) Mists of >Avalon in your Have Read list. Drop the mouse, push the chair away, >stand up and RUN (do not walk, but RUN) to the nearest used book >store to see if they have a copy (it's over ten years old, but still >in print) Read it. Read it again. Keep reading it. It is one of the >BEST books ever written (IMO) I've re-read it more than any other >book. I LOVE that book. Given a choise between chocolate and that >book is my definition of hell. THAT'S how good it is! > > > >/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/ >Firemist Thanks again, all! Midnite Whisper ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 16:25:43 +0800 From: ywlau-+AT+-singnet.com.sg (Lady Windsong) To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: book lovers(reading speed) Message-ID: <199604240825.QAA24918-+AT+-sunflower.singnet.com.sg> >Ob Misty: Why does the moment of Choosing transcend all barriers and even >the Heralds with weak mindspeech can hear their Companions? > >Zhai'helleva, > >Lady Wintersong >An Honourable Lady In Green >Cecilia (ckwok-+AT+-rgs.edu.sg) > Because the Herald needs to know that he has been Chosen? and because the Companion has to make this traditional speech? I don't know, I'm confused. Help, somebody! Wind to thy wings all, Lady Windsong One of the Ladies in Green ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 16:46:11 +0800 From: ywlau-+AT+-singnet.com.sg (Lady Windsong) To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Misty's first Message-ID: <199604240846.QAA27272-+AT+-sunflower.singnet.com.sg> (snip) >You mean that I'm not the only one that doesn't dare start a Misty >book unless I'm sure I have the time to finish it? > >Diana >*********************************************************** >Diana L. Heald >Syracuse University >Email: dlheald-+AT+-ais.syr.edu Yes, dear. I don't start a new Misty book unless I have the time to sit down and read it non-stop until I finish it. I'm not so particular with the ones I've already read. Wind to thy wings all, Lady Windsong One of the Ladies in Green ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Apr 96 11:18:44 +0200 From: dbackhau-+AT+-isou10.estec.esa.nl To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: re: language Message-ID: <9604240918.AA04554-+AT+-isou10.estec.esa.nl> Lady Wintersong was whimpering: > Just a pathetic cry for help. When anybody uses quotes, whatever, in > Spanish, Latin...... anything not English, please include a > translation!(whimper) I have this feeling of being lost in a sea of foreign > (to me) languages, drifting around aimlessly until someone provides a > lifeline of a translation. : ) Thanks a lot. well, if I'm included in that, tot ziens - Dutch for "be seein' yah" or somesuch 'n prettige weekend - Dutch for "have a nice weekend" doooie - Dutch slang for "dag", which means day, but is used for a general 'lo, 'bye, see ya' sort of thing dooie, Esmeralda Evensbane (Unaffiliated) ------------------------------ End of MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 504 *********************************