Home Page How I Found Forever Knight Forkni-L Archives Main Page Forkni-L Earlier Years
My Forever Knight Fanfiction Links E-Mail Me


FORKNI-L Digest - 15 Jan 2001 to 16 Jan 2001 (#2001-17)

Tue, 16 Jan 2001

There are 17 messages totalling 759 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. Nick's Sexuality? (WAS: Re: Horrorscopes)
  2. Forever Knight Party
  3. USA/Nikita thing (2)
  4. Admin: Rules are enforced
  5. Lacroix Mortalfied (5)
  6. Horrorscopes (2)
  7. Bon Bons (was Nick and Urs (was Horrorscopes))
  8. Nick and Urs (was Horrorscopes) (3)
  9. Toronto(ish) question - DWI vs. DUI


Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 17:06:25 -0500
From:    Portia 1 <portia1@m.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's Sexuality? (WAS: Re: Horrorscopes)

>>And UF believes in studying and discussing the relationship of Nick and
LaCroix in ANY form, not just sexual. Some just can't see them together in that
way, while others can. --Libby<<

Excellent explanation, Libs!



Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 17:22:24 -0500
From:    Penny <drmusic@a.......>
Subject: Forever Knight Party

Announcing a Forever Knight Party!

When:  Saturday, February 3 at 8:00 PM

Where:  Ocala, Florida

Some very good FK friends are coming to Florida to visit, so we're
having a party in their honor.  It's been a long time since we've had an
FK party, and now we have a new house in which to party.
If you live anywhere nearby and would like to attend, please e mail me
privately at drmusic@a....... for more details.

 Hoping to meet some new FK friends,



Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 17:56:28 EST
From:    Erika1228@a.......
Subject: Re: USA/Nikita thing

Susan Garrett wrote, regarding our efforts at USA as per her conversation
with the Rhysher Ent. person:

> <<We were sunk from the word go.  Period.
> Doesn't that bode very poorly for any efforts that we are still making now?
> Not to be pessimistic--I would do anything necessary to keep FK alive. But
> is it a lost cause?

BTW, Susan, congratulations on your new job. Hope you're still writing.

 Christine Hunt


Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 17:55:50 -0500
From:    mclisa <mclisa@m.......>
Subject: Admin: Rules are enforced

I've just had to nopost a subscriber for a rule violation and after a
warning. The fact that I had not had a response to the warning and that the
same violation had happened a number of times were factors in the nopost.

I just thought it might be as well to remind us that the rules are enforced,
although Don and I try  hard to avoid noposts.

Nopost means the person can read the list but not post to it. It is _NOT_
the same thing as the nomail notices that people sometimes get when their
addresses have been bouncing. Please be assured that nobody get noposed
without a warning.

To all the many listers who always keep the rules or at most, like me,
simply make mistakes, thank you!

McLisa (Lisa McDavid)
"That will be trouble".
Listowner, Forkni-l and Fkfic-l


Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 15:33:07 -0800
From:    Chris Rosmini <chrismin@e.......>
Subject: Re: Lacroix Mortalfied

I don't know the others Kyer asks about, but the story about LC becoming
mortal and Nick pondering the issues involved in making him a vampire again
may be one of my favorites: Amy R.'s terrific "Fireweed", which was
posted on FKFic a while ago.

Chris Rosmini


Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 18:24:03 -0500
From:    Cindy Ingram <cgi271@a.......>
Subject: Re: Horrorscopes

Uh-oh, anti-lurker alert! I feel myself getting sucked in ... <*shlurpp!*> <g>

Kyer wrote:

><snip> If Nicholas becomes mortal, Natalie will lose that fascinating,
>quality that lured her to him in the first place. Will *just* the remnants of
>'Nick Knight' be enough to satisify her?<snip>

For what it's worth, I think "Nick Knight" is pretty much who Nick is these
days. As Bonnie said, I don't see mortality doing much to change his
essential character -- except, perhaps, over a long period of time. Nick is
a vampire, yes, but that's not all he is. Aside from being remarkably
good-looking with undeniable charm, there's a very warm, caring, witty,
courageous, cultured, talented, intelligent, good-hearted person there. He
certainly has his flaws, but don't we all, to some extent or another?

I realize that someone with a different view of Natalie's character might
disagree, but I believe those are the qualities she loves most about Nick,
whether they're in addition to or in spite of his status as a vampire. The
fact that he is one certainly added spice to Nat's life, there's no denying
that. But like I said, I have no trouble at all believing she could have
loved him, vampire or no vampire.

Thus, I believe her feelings for him would in no way lessen if he stopped
*being* a vampire. While his mysterious quality (along with his
drop-dead-gorgeous good looks <g>) may have been a big part of what
initially attracted Natalie to him, I doubt it would have been enough to
sustain her interest over the next five-to-six years. That kind of
attraction doesn't last, and you can't build much of a relationship on it
if there's nothing else there.

I think Natalie's smart enough to realize that. She recognizes her own
fascination with these supernatural creatures, but I've seen nothing in the
show to suggest that her feelings for Nick were based on that alone. As
previously mentioned, it was enough to draw her to him, the same way any of
us might be attracted to someone upon first meeting them. But after closer
acquaintance, you generally either lose interest, or you start building a
more solid foundation for that initial attraction.

As time progressed, Natalie got to know the whole package, at least as much
as one person can truly know another, and I believe that's what she fell in
love with -- for better or worse, warts and all.

Whether or not that was a wise thing to do, especially in retrospect, is a
whole other debate. But the heart rarely follows reason. <g>

Kyer also wrote:

>I also wonder if Natalie is truly in love with Nicholas de
>Brabant---or just the fictional facade that is Nick B. Knight.  (A sore
>point with me in many fics which treat 'Nick' as real and 'de Brabant' as
>merely The Vampire.)

Which begs the question, who is Nick, really? Aside from one very complex
individual, of course. Is he Nicholas de Brabant, Nick Knight, or some
strange amalgamation of the two? That could be a pretty hard question to

For my part, I'd have to say it's "none of the above." Vampire or not, Nick
isn't the same person he was 800 years ago, or even 100 years ago.
Everything that's happened to him before and since has gone to shape the
Nick we know and love (or not <g>) in the present day. And if he were to
live another 800 years, that Nick would disappear, to be replaced by
numerous other Nicks, all born from his collective experiences. Maybe very
similar, maybe not -- but all different in their own ways.

I know what Kyer means about Nick B. Knight's "fictional facade," but when
you get right down to it, the only real fictional element is that he's
mortal, with a mortal past and a mortal future. (I know, I know ... that's
a pretty big pretense. <g>) But Natalie knows that. She's always known it.
And his kindness, his compassion, his sense of humor, his basic goodness --
along with his angst, his heartbreaking determination to blame himself for
everything that goes wrong, and that maddening tendency he sometimes has to
act first and think later (following his heart and not his head) -- all of
these are very real.

And then there's that whole idea of who each of us really is -- the person
we think we are, the person others think we are, or the person we truly
are. I'm not even going to touch that one. <g>

Bonnie Rutledge wrote:

>The show portrayed important elements in any long-term relationship in addition
>to the probing, however: a foundation of friendship, respect, and physical
>attraction. Each character finds the other intelligent. They argued, they
>disappointed, and they forgave each other.

In a nutshell. <g>

Bonnie also wrote:

>Now...would mortality make Nick happy? Would remaining a vampire? Neither, I
>say, not until he learns to accept himself completely, to process guilt and his
>mistakes and let them go. He's been content as both for a period, but the
>>ultimate decision is up to him.

Brava! Couldn't have said it better. <g>

Nancy Kaminski wrote:

>><snip>I simply can't see Nick having anything to do with Urs,
>> a rather (IMO, of course) vacuous child-woman. Nick is way too grown up and
>> sophisticated for her. They might understand each other, but what would they
>> talk about? It takes more than mutual depression to make a

Which is why I can see a friendship developing, but not much else.

I like Urs, and I think there's probably more to her than we were ever
given a chance to see. But I don't believe she would challenge Nick (both
emotionally and intellectually) in the same ways that Janette and Natalie
do. I think the description of child-woman, at least at this point and
time, is very apropos, for the little bit we were able to see of her.

I don't necessarily consider that a bad thing. Sometimes it can be pretty
endearing. But while that quality would probably appeal to Nick's
knight-errant sensibilities (it wouldn't be the first time he was attracted
to a lovely "child-woman"), I doubt it would prove a lasting kind of
attraction -- more of a temporary infatuation based on mutual need and not
much else.

Oddly enough, I *can* see Urs with Lacroix, though again, I'm not convinced
it would lead to serious or long-lasting feelings for either one of them.
I'm not really sure why I can see them together so easily. Maybe it has
something to do with the old cliche that opposites attract? <g>

Bonnie Rutledge wrote:

><snip>I also have to echo the choking noises
>in regards to a Les Mis relationship. It screams 'enabler' to me.

Absolutely. I think the drawbacks would outweigh any benefits of a such a
relationship. It would be just as easy, if not more so, for Nick and Urs to
be a bad influence on each other as it would to be a good influence.

Julia Kocich wrote:

>I respect Nat enough to believe that the most import thing for
>her is to help Nick find a cure, not to land an ex-vamp husband.

Yup. That's pretty much how I view it. Anything beyond that would be icing
on the cake. <g>

Julia also wrote:

>(In the same ... er ... vein, I don't believe that Lacroix wishes to
>crush Nick's rebellion, or to have an acquiescent Nick to follow
>him slaveishly through the millennia <gak>.)

Of course not!

He'd want him kicking and screaming the whole way, right? <weg>

Bonnie Kate wrote:

>Urs doesn't illicit this same response from me.  I think Urs is shy,
>lonely, depressed, spiritually lost, insecure, but not vacuous.

Yep. I'd say that pretty well sums up what little we were shown of her.

Bonnie Kate also wrote:

>Enabler?  You mean Urs enabling Nick?  Or Nick enabling Urs?  I think
>there is an arguement for either,


> but I think there is also an agrument for them actually helping each
>other: Urs finally having a relationship with a man which wasn't based
>solely on sex, and Nick having someone to help, to teach, who could also
>make him feel that his quest for mortality isn't a solitary one. <snip>

Bonnie makes some good points here, though I still don't see it happening.
However, Dorothy Elggren wrote an excellent story exploring this very
theme. It's called "The Darkness of the Soul."

Regardless of which side of the Les Mis debate you're on, for those who
haven't read the story, I highly recommend it.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'd better get back to that list of 1,001 Things
to Get Done Before the End of the Week. <g>

Cindy Ingram

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people
very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." -- Douglas Adams.


Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 17:25:48 -0700
From:    Kyer <kyer@p.......>
Subject: Re: USA/Nikita thing

  Susan Garrett wrote, regarding our efforts at USA as per her conversation
  with the Rhysher Ent. person:

  Someone care to forward Susan's message to kyer@p....... ?

  I seemed to have missed this.

  : (


Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 21:08:55 -0500
From:    Gladys Bears <rockiebears@n.......>
Subject: Re: Lacroix Mortalfied

Kyer <kyer@p.......> wrote:
>I love weird story lines and wish someone would collect an archive so I
>wouldn't have to keep asking the various lists for this stuff...

Please, keep asking! I read most of the fictions people were looking for in this
list, and they were all worth reading. The short description of the story really
arouses one's interest.

BTW, the story with the metal snake is The Cure by Sandra Gray.



Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 21:18:46 -0500
From:    Portia 1 <portia1@m.......>
Subject: Re: Horrorscopes

Cindy, chicklet!  For a women who was on the verge of being swamped out of
the list, this was a pretty long, well-thought out post!  And I'm glad!!!
Your points were all lucid and compelling, but this sentence was my favorite:

>>Aside from being remarkably good-looking with undeniable charm, there's a
very warm, caring, witty, courageous, cultured, talented, intelligent,
good-hearted person there.<<

Mmm-hmmmm -- exactly the reasons why Nat and I both have found long-term
interest in the guy! "g"

>However, Dorothy Elggren wrote an excellent story exploring this very
>theme. It's called "The Darkness of the Soul."

I also want to second your recommendation of Dorothy's story (heck, I
recommend *all* of D.E.'s story -- girl can WRITE! "g").  As those of you
who know me can attest, I seem to be drawn to just about any relationship
faction for Nick, and this story certainly lent charm to the "Le Mis."

>Now if you'll excuse me, I'd better get back to that list of 1,001 Things
>to Get Done Before the End of the Week. <g>

Oh girl, I wish at least one of those Things were to write some FK fic --
you know I love your stuff!  Be well.



Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:16:44 -0800
From:    Bonnie Kate <callalily@l.......>
Subject: Re: Bon Bons (was Nick and Urs (was Horrorscopes))

At 05:00 PM 1/15/01 -0500, Libby wrote:
>When we have a very intelligent conversation between the two Bonnies, is that
>a "Bon Bon?"

Two Bonnie do not make a gooy, sweet, readily consumed Bon Bon.  Two Bonnies
make a force to be reconned with!! ;-)

><Snip>if LaCroix wanted a vampire version of
>junk food, would the afore mentioned human "Bon Bons" count?

I cannot speak for The Rutledge, but for myself all I can say is, "Try it,
General, and you'll get a chop stick where it will definitely leave a scorch
mark!"  (Just ask Vachon!!)

>This is a question that will boggle FK fandom for ... for ... for ... at
>least two minutes!

Libby, all your questions boggle the FK fandom.  What makes you think this one
would be any different?

Bonnie Kate


Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:17:01 -0800
From:    Bonnie Kate <callalily@l.......>
Subject: Re: Nick and Urs (was Horrorscopes)

At 05:00 PM 1/15/01 -0500, Bonnie Rutledge wrote:
>What gives me nightmares about Urs is that she's 120 years old. She's lived through
>the suffrage movement and the ERA. She's had the time to develop interests and
>a career in an area other than dancing. It's not that she's a dancer that
>bothers me. It's that she shows no change from the mortal Urs we see in 'Hearts of

It's not that I don't agree with you here, it's just that, well, I don't exactly
agree with you here.  Speaking about Urs, Vachon says to Nick, "She's like she
was when I first met her."  That statement says to me that Urs has behaved
differently between the time she was brought across and now.  Vachon seems
surprised and disappointed by the reversion in Urs.  Maybe working at the Raven
triggered it for her.  Maybe you are correct -- having lived through the
suffrage movement (not to mention women working in factories during World War II
and even serving in the armed forces) and the ERA -- maybe she had been doing
more with her life.

On the other hand, maybe running with Vachon's crew has given Urs a very
sheltered life -- or just the sheer act of becoming a vampire -- maybe it
allowed her to bury things deep inside instead of dealing with them.  Yeah, 120
years is a long time to keep things buried, but she's a vampire running with a
crew who was more or less always on the move.

Maybe she hasn't been dancing all these years.  Maybe being back at it, at the
Raven, has finally brought all those repressed memories back for her -- maybe
even having to witness another woman behaving as she used to behave was what it

Wow, that's a lot of maybes, but I guess that's my point.  Without any
flashbacks except those about her coming across, there is really no way to know
how she has behaved this past century.

>She's still performing for male approval, and she still has a low self-image.

Again with the maybes, but what if she hasn't been dancing all these years.
What if she's avoided it or hasn't had the opportunity (how many vampire-own
underground clubs could there be in the world?), and only now that she's doing
it again do the self-esteem issues come flooding back.

Vachon is even caught off guard by her behavior in HoD when Monica is dancing on
stage.  No, he's not the most observant,
in-touch-with-his-feelings-or-anyone-else's kind of guy, but you think he or
Screed or Bourbon might have noticed something like this over the years.

>It's one thing to enjoy being in touch with your sexuality, it's another to
>feel trapped by it. In 'Hearts of Darkness,' Urs says she felt trapped, as a
>mortal and in present day. She doesn't see her own capacity for freedom
>during most of her appearances. (Note that I wrote 'most.' I'll get to my
>exception in a couple paragraphs.)

Well, yes, I agree with this, but a lot of people go through their whole lives
never acknowledging their short-comings or never admitting that they could fix
their short-comings.  Urs has lived only slightly longer than a normal human
existence, so I think it is possible she still feels this way and hasn't dealt
with it yet.

I mean, maybe she doesn't know how.  It's not like we've seen a Vampire Shrink
on the show -- but I think if there was one, he'd be awful busy!!

But, let's put her for a moment in the context of the other vampires on the
show.  Let me just get Divia out of the way by saying she was probably insane to
begin with.  In "Father's Day" it was revealed that LaCroix has issues with his
own father -- and he's almost two millennia old.  In ... I want to say "A Fate
Worse Than Death" (but I can't remember the title for certain), Janette, based
on her own history as a former non-voluntary prostitute, is positive that the
hooker in this one is the victim and wants to save/reward her by bringing her
across, only to find out in the nick of time that the hooker is actually the
killer.  In "Black Buddha," Nick has to threaten Vachon to take responsibility
for Tracy's safety from the vampire community after telling her what he and
Screed are, and Vachon STILL goes to the travel agency to book a flight out of
Dodge before the Inca can catch him!  Tell me he doesn't still have issues he
hasn't dealt with after nearly 500 years.  Not to mention 800-year-old Nick --
I mean, the ENTIRE series is about his plethora of emotional issues!!  Oddly
enough (and NO gloating here, Libby!), Screed seems to be the only well-adjusted
one of the bunch!

So, I say, if Urs is figuring out and dealing with her psychological damage at
age 120, she's WAY ahead of the game!!

>I meant that I'm wary that Nick and Urs would enable each other, feeding each
>other's unhappiness by example.

This is definitely a possibility.  But, even those in such relationships can
learn things, grow, deal, change.  Maybe even because of them.  I know it sounds
weird but sometimes being close to someone as messed up as yourself is more like
a kick in the head and it actually allows you to finally look inside to solve
your own emotional problems.

Then again, it can also just be an awful, painful, destructive mess.

>I agree somewhat that a friendship between the two of them could
>have a positive benefit, mainly Nick benefitting by escaping the isolation of
>being the only vampire wanting mortality.

My point exactly.  After all, he has Janette to understand the vampire part of
him and Nat to understand his desire to be human, but he doesn't have someone
who can truly understand the hardship of a vampire who wants to become mortal.
I'm not saying necessarily that Urs would want to be mortal again, but she might
and if so she'd fit the role.  Then again, she might just turn out to be a
happy, content vampire once she straights out her emotions -- then she would be
the WORST friend Nick could have!

>I'm not so attuned to the idea of Urs
>having a man as a mentor. From HoD, obviously a large portion of her issues
>stem from relationships with men. Maybe the 'hair of the dog that bit you'
>approach could work if Urs had a positive, companionable experience with Nick,
>but I still don't seeing any romance working there.

That's sort of what I was thinking.  Give Urs a healthy relationship with a man
who doesn't just use her and ill-use her, and maybe she could see that there are
good men out there.  It might be an eye-opener and a self-esteem builder.

>More that I think on it though, I'm not comfortable with the idea of any mentor
>- male, female, undefined - being the solution to what torments Urs. I think,
>like Nick, Urs would have to find happiness on her own, not defined
>by another person, to be truly content.

But sometimes people (or vampires in this case) can't do it alone.  That's why
there are physiologists and AA meetings and Weight Watchers and all those other
things which help people make the changes to their lives they want to make but
just haven't been able to on their own, for whatever reasons.

I'm not saying Nick should tell Urs how to act or what to want, but he could
guide her, teach her, help her to help herself.  You know, when he's not too
busy wallowing in his own angst. ;-)

>The tag scene of HoD is interesting, because Urs acknowledges being abandoned
>by her father and how that led to her abusive relationships and searching for
>approval. She's self-aware now, there's a hint she's changing, but when Vachon
>asks her if she still wants to die, she doesn't answer.

Nothing happens over night.  The point is she's moving in the right direction.
It does make me wonder what happened after the scene where Ellen takes the dive
off the balcony.  Urs explains to Nick her reasons for allowing Ellen kill
herself, then they hug.  I know it's off screen at this point, so there's no
canon to support this, but I bet those two didn't just say "see ya round" after
that.  I bet these two talked.  And, if there is any reason that Urs goes to
Nick instead of LaCroix or anyone else in AtA to get help for Vachon, I think
it's because of the connection she made with Nick in that HoD scene.

>The reason why I think Urs' fight with Divia is THE strong moment for the
>character is that she finally answers Vachon's above question. She doesn't want
>someone to kill her anymore. By fighting for her survival, she's affirming her
>self-worth. Woohoo! In Urs' last scene, she is a changed person compared to the
>other urchin glimpses in the series. She's no longer this feminist's nightmare,
>no longer a child needing approval, but her own woman.

Ah, yeah, you could look at it this way, and it's an awfully good way to look at
things, but there are other ways to look at it, too.  Most suicidal people will
fight when someone else tries to harm them, or will even save themselves with
some unconscious movement while trying to commit suicide -- it's an instinct,
self-preservation, and it's HARD to override.  As we know from Nick's coming
across, he had the choice to follow the guardian and walk through the door or
return to LaCroix -- Urs, presumably had that same choice and, despite her death
wish, she chose to return to Vachon.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that Urs fought Divia!!  And I do hope
she did it for the reasons you state.  But, again, we saw nothing between HoD
and AtA to base either argument on -- did she just go along her not-so-merry
way, whiling away the hours in the Raven, staring at foo-foo drink umbrellas or
was she out trying to solve her emotional problems and, if so, how?

Oh, that we had the answers to these questions!!

>"Well, they don't write dramas about young girls who settle for the adventure
>that is mutual respect..." - Sarah Vowell, 'Take the Cannoli'

This is a rather interesting sig line quote, Bonnie, considering our topic here.
Rather appropriate to Urs.  Would she have just been another Alma or Brianna, or
Miklos for that matter, if not for "Hearts of Darkness"?

Again, I say, so many possibilities, so many potential storylines, cut down in
their prime by SSPTB (Short-Sighted Powers That Be)!

Bonnie Kate, happy to discuss just about anything with Bonnie Rutledge just
about any ol' time! :-)


Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:17:07 -0800
From:    Bonnie Kate <callalily@l.......>
Subject: Re: Lacroix Mortalfied

At 05:00 PM 1/15/01 -0500, Kyer wrote:
>Would that be with Fleur?
>I can't give details, but I am looking specifically for a fic that featured
>Fleur and Natalie taking LC out to experience mortal food while Nick ponders
>whether he should bring LC back across. ('cause Nick for some reason was the
>only one who can.)

This sounds like "Fireweed" written by Amy R., an excellent FK writer!  Try
her personal website --  http://users.lanminds.com/~akr/fk/fiction/index.htm

>And Vachon!  Wasn't there one with Vachon?  (I love weird story lines and
>wish someone would collect an archive so I wouldn't have to keep asking the
>various lists for this stuff...)

This one sounds like Nancy W.'s "Phoenix" -- it involves all of the FK
characters, is post AtA and LK, and treats those episodes as if they really
happened.  I'm not sure if it's archived at the FK Fanfic site or not, you'll
have to check.  If it's not there, it will be up at ScreedWasHere.com sometime
in the near future.

Bonnie Kate


Date:    Mon, 15 Jan 2001 23:47:41 EST
From:    Libratsie@a.......
Subject: Re: Nick and Urs (was Horrorscopes)

In a message dated 1/15/01 10:17:43 PM Central Standard Time,
callalily@l....... writes:

> Oddly enough (and NO gloating here, Libby!), Screed seems to be the only well-
> adjusted one of the bunch!

(to the tune of I CAN CRY IF I WANT TO)

I'm a Ratpacker and can Gloat if I want to
Gloat if I want to
Gloat if I want to
I'm a Ratpacker and can Gloat if I want to
You'd gloat if you were a Ratpacker TOO!

<clears throat>

It never occured to me that perhaps Urs had given up dancing and was just
getting back to it until I read Bonnie, uhr, this Bonnie's post.  The Crew is
no longer running together, so perhaps when they were together, Urs had no
reason to dance for a living, or maybe no desire to.  I've always found it
rather amusing that it is Urs and Screed in Toronto, and memory fails but
Vachon was either just leaving them, or just arriving. (Oh, I think just
leaving as the plane crashed on the way FROM Toronto).  Screed doesn't seem
the type to really want to support anyone, and Urs would need support of some
kind.  These days vampires just can go around collecting their own blood.
Perhaps to stay at the Raven, Urs is required to dance by LaCroix. Or perhaps
she even applied on her own as a way to declare her independence from the
Crew.  She may see dancing as the only way she knows to make a living.

And where is Bourbon? I've always wondered about what happened to him.

Gosh, it isn't fair to make me THINK when it is past my bedtime!

By the way, I just got back from my first professional theater audition (at a
local dinner theater's cattle call) and there was a dead (or undead)
look-a-like for Urs there! I don't mean the actress, I mean the character.
She even sounded like her!  I had an FK moment right then and there and had
to look around to make sure there wasn't a certain intimidating vampiric bar
owner (I doubt I got a part but it was fun in a stressful sort of way)



Date:    Tue, 16 Jan 2001 00:25:16 EST
From:    Laudon1965@a.......
Subject: Re: Lacroix Mortalfied

In a message dated 1/15/01 9:17:38 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
callalily@l....... writes:

<< Bonnie Kate >>

As opposed to Plain Kate ? <g>

Laurie of the Isles
Who is thankful you are not Kate the Cursed. <g>


Date:    Tue, 16 Jan 2001 07:28:06 -0500
From:    Portia 1 <portia1@m.......>
Subject: Re: Lacroix Mortalfied

Thank you Laurie for that Willy S moment! "g"

Portia, the bardophile

>callalily@l....... writes:
><< Bonnie Kate >>
>As opposed to Plain Kate ? <g>
>Laurie of the Isles
>Who is thankful you are not Kate the Cursed. <g>


Date:    Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:22:58 -0500
From:    Diane Harris <diharris@v.......>
Subject: Toronto(ish) question - DWI vs. DUI

I was looking over some corrections by my beta-reader for a story I'm
working on.  I used the abbreviation DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and
she corrected it to DUI (Driving Under the Influence).  I realized that
perhaps different regions tend towards different acronyms.  Which is used in
the Toronto area, or is it something different altogether?

Diane Harris (diharris@v.......)
Proud NNPacker, Knight, FoDS, CoTK, and glutton for any and all feedback.


Date:    Tue, 16 Jan 2001 14:14:04 -0700
From:    KYER <KYER@p.......>
Subject: Re: Nick and Urs (was Horrorscopes)

Bonnie Kate wrote: >>Not to mention 800-year-old Nick -- I mean, the ENTIRE
series is about his plethora of emotional issues!!

[Kyer warily sticks her head up from her hidey hole in order to declare:]

And what a wonderful plethora they are too!!!

>>Oddly enough (and NO gloating here, Libby!), Screed seems to be the only
>>well- adjusted one of the bunch!

[And spout:]

Or is that only because nobody can *understand* him well enough to discover
if Screed has issues? <eg>

[before ducking back down before she can be hit by more flying scrunchies]

Kyer, kyer@p.......
"Nick's issues are the best reading material this side of Time Magazine."


End of FORKNI-L Digest - 15 Jan 2001 to 16 Jan 2001 (#2001-17)

Previous digest Back to January's list Next digest

Parchment background created by Melissa Snell and may be found at http://historymedren.about.com/