File: "FKSPOILR LOG9606" Part 2 TOPICS: Urs and Lacroix (AtA spoilers) (5) Tippi's take on virtual season Spoilers: Last Knight & HF (2) SPOILER: AtA, LK (Urs, Fleur, LC) (2) SPOILER: LK, Don't blame Tracy Just remember ... (Virtual Season) virtual season and FKfic-L SPOILER: LC & Nick The Virtual Season -- Chew on this SPOILER: LK and NiQ Spoilers: Last Knight (this refers to the bit about Tracy's "trust") (3) Urs and Lacroix (AtA spoilers & LK) Spoiler: Urs and LaCroix Urs and Lacroix (AtA spoilers) [some Nick psychoanalysis] ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 13:25:06 -0500 From: TippiNB <Tippinb@i.......> Subject: Re: Urs and Lacroix (AtA spoilers) Apache wrote about Urs: >> intellectual powers of a flea John and Donna wrote: >That's just nasty. What evidence do the shows have to justify that? Trophy Girl: Tracy walks into the Raven looking rather slinkily dressed for an undercover operation. Urs points her out "Isn't that your friend?" (or something like that). Vachon says, "Or her evil twin." Urs, "She has a twin?" I don't remember the exact quotes, but Urs is definitely portrayed as being one bulb short of a chandelier. Wicked Cousin Tippi, dollar bill wrangler of the Thong Throng! *Founding Member of the Unnamed Faction*Voyeur of the Menage LaCroix* "Would that this thong were a less annoying undergarment." - Anon. Wickedness Site! http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 14:23:55 -0400 From: "Margaret L. Carter" <MLCVamp@a.......> Subject: Re: Tippi's take on virtual season Yes, that's how I see it -- a series of stories adhering to the "facts" of the televised series, each one structured like a TV episode. No attempt to create "canon," but a specially labelled "track" those who are interested can read. I see no reason why all stories can't partake of the "character story" mode, more so than some of the "routine" cop episodes on the TV series did. Not all stories can involve major life passages, of course, but they can all be "character" stories to some extent -- not only is this what most people probably want to write, it's what I want to read -- and I suspect I'm not alone. It would be rather like a multi-course banquet composed entirely of desserts, but hey, sounds like Paradise to me <G>. Margaret Carter, virtual chocoholic ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 14:34:11 -0400 From: Arletta Asbury <g4akl@e.......> Subject: Re: Spoilers: Last Knight & HF At 12:52 PM 6/1/96 -0500, John wrote: >On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Will Steeves wrote: >> Cynthia Hoffman & Jane Credland wrote: >> >Tracy has never given Nick any reason to believe that she's trustworthy. >Tracy has given Nick reason to regard her as trustworthy, in regard to >vampires. Everyone seems to be forgetting that she kept quiet about the connection between Janette and Nick during the murder investigation in Human Factor. And *she* did realize there was a connection although she didn't know for sure what it was. She saw the picture of Janette's 'brother' that was clearly Nick and she still kept quiet. She only asked Nick at the end of the ep if everything was ok now. That actually violated some police regulations, I believe, although maybe one cop would be likely to cover for their partner in that kind of circumstances. (No I'm not slamming cops, I like cops, sorta, my brother is one.) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 11:38:49 -0700 From: Amy R. <akr@n.......> Subject: SPOILER: AtA, LK (Urs, Fleur, LC) Apache's lovely post this morning made me think that it would be unnecessary to toss my opinion into the ring on this one. However, as much potential as Urs had, it was wasted potential, and she was simply not in Fleur's league. Several months ago, on forkni-l, I asked if anyone had written an Urs/LC story, and I pointed out the superficial resemblances to Fleur and Nick, physically and emotionally. No one responded, so I assume no one has explored that possibility. However, when I wrote that, I was not in any way suggesting that Urs would be more than a passing distraction for LC. Fleur is the love of his life. She brought out a humanity in him he thought long since dead and buried. She evoked emotions he could neither understand nor control. What he did for Fleur has become his *definition* of love, most recently cited in LK. Nick thought LC loved Fleur's innocence. Nick was mistaken. That was part of the attraction, yes, but to put things in a nutshell and skim past NB's breathtaking performance in BMV, by the time LC shouted at Nick, "My immortality has nothing to do with my feelings -- love," he had just previously *tasted Fleur's blood*. Therefore, as indicated in Francesca, LC was reacting to all of Fleur, not just the "innocence" her brother fixated on. Urs, dear though she was and much though she might have become, was weak. Fleur was strong, determined, and willing to seize what she wanted. Not only, as Apache pointed out, did she revel in the knowledge LC had watched the world abandon, she reacted to the discovery of vampirism without fear -- only fascination and a fierce determination to be with the one she loved. Fleur was worthy of LC. And, as both Nick and LC observed, Fleur was of life: "life-giving." Urs was of death: "let me die." Urs has changed a good deal between HoD and AtA. She dresses differently, she speaks boldly, and she fights for her life. I think this is important -- I'm collaborating on a story exploring it -- but I do *not* think that a relationship with LC -- or anyone -- is the only option for explaining it. Urs was at a turning point in her life at the end of HoD. There are many possible paths from that point to this. *** Amy, Lady of the Knight (akr@n.......) *** * Knightie *** Fleur-Booster *** Light Cousin * ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 14:49:12 -0400 From: Arletta Asbury <g4akl@e.......> Subject: Re: Urs and Lacroix (AtA spoilers) At 01:25 PM 6/1/96 -0500, Tippi wrote: >Tracy walks into the Raven looking rather slinkily dressed for an undercover >operation. Urs points her out "Isn't that your friend?" (or something like >that). Vachon says, "Or her evil twin." Urs, "She has a twin?" <snip> >, but Urs is definitely portrayed as being one bulb >short of a chandelier. Actually, I think, Urs said "isn't that Nick's partner?" Vachon says "or her evil trin" and Urs frowns and says "She has a twin?" And I thought it rather intelligent of her to recognize Nick's partner. She. obviously, didn't know of Vachon's relationship (or whatever) with Tracy. And therefore didn't relize that Vachon out of famialiarity with Tracy was making a comment on her manner of dress. I would argue that this scene shows intelligence on the part of Urs just a lack of knowledge about Vachon and Tracy. And Vachon would be likely to keep an ex-girlfriend in the dark about a new or potential girlfriend. Right? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 11:58:32 -0700 From: Amy R. <akr@n.......> Subject: SPOILER: LK, Don't blame Tracy I rewatched LK again yesterday. It was for my continuing analysis of Nick's feelings for Nat, actually, but I noticed something in the locker room scene that I really hadn't before. No doubt someone else noticed this in the initial flurry of LK posts, and I apologize if I am repeating. The red light in that scene is, of course, the emergency lights which went on when Dawkins shorted things out. I've been in windowless rooms with only those red lights on, and it is much darker than would have been practical for television. Tracy would have been nearly invisible in the shadows. And the fact is, she was. It was the lights coming back on -- turning the room blue -- which first snapped Dawkins out of Nick's whammy, and then allowed him to see Tracy. When Dawkins looked at Tracy, Nick turned as well, and she saw him vamped out. The shock made her lower her gun slightly, and then Dawkins fired two shots into Nick. Nick slammed him against the wall, and his arm went flying in Tracy's direction, squeezing the trigger twice more. Tracy was not the best cop in the world, but she was not incompetent. As has been pointed out, HF was Tracy's best episode. I don't think anything that happened in LK contradicts the Tracy we saw there. *** Amy, Lady of the Knight (akr@n.......) *** ** Knightie *** Fleur-Booster *** Light Cousin ** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 15:43:51 -0400 From: TJ Goldstein <vanguard@p.......> Subject: Just remember ... (Virtual Season) I want to put my 2 cents in and agree with Listmommy. We're in this for the fun. Some things to remember: 1) Nobody is trying to extend FK cannon. This is simply another, albeit organized, view of things. 2) There is room for everyone to be creative. There is no exclusivity in this. 3) FKFIC material has ALWAYS been discussible on FORKNI-L. This is, in fact, an outgrowth of that, a way to get us all discussing the SAME FKFIC. 4) For the record, I'm in favor of a topic to allow people who are absolutely opposed to this to avoid it. 5) I would like to particularly invite the people who think it's a good idea but breaks down in practice to join in and help us. You may have a better idea on where the problems can come from, and maybe with your input we can avoid them more easily. We're putting together a process loop now, so please tell us if you want to be on it. 6) No story is going out un-checked for spelling, etc., if I have to do it myself, and with the huge number of proofreaders (I think we have more volunteers for that than almost anything else!) I don't think that's going to be a problem. 7) (Sorcha says ...) I tend to just read and lurk, but I really felt a need to add a short opinion here: Too many times I've seen a really good club with a bunch of wonderful people in it grow and take themselves and the group too seriously. Over the last few months this group has grown and I've been pleased to see that just about everybody has been friendly and added something to the list with their personality as well as their opinions. No matter what any of us do, we really must focus on remaining friendly and having fun. I can't think of any other reason, other than to support FK and each other, to be on the list. I, for one, am going to do just that. The best thing any of us can do is just remain open-minded. ---- TJ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 15:31:35 CDT From: "OREL, SARA" <FA55@n.......> Subject: virtual season and FKfic-L One of the other advantages that I saw to the virtual season (and I agree with what Tippi said, and almost all of what Laurie said) is the amount of reading it would entail. Now, I love to read the stories on the fiction list. There are, with regularity, some absolutely amazing things posted, but I don't subscribe to the list. Why? Because I don't have time or space to do so. I get 100+ messages a day, and most of them are things that I really do have to read (late antiquity, egyptology) for my real life. I periodically wander through web pages to find things that people have recommended on the spoiler list or on Forkni-l, but more than that I cannot do. I saw the Virtual Season as a way to get an FK fixonce a week, to read something that might be enjoyable, without having to sort through fifty stories (many of them well-written), some of which refer to tv shows I don't watch, some of them poorly proofread, and many some 12 or more parts long, often never to be finished... Advantages to the Virtual Season for me were that it was going to limit the number of stories I would read to one a week, one that would have been beta-read, one that would be consistent with what had gone before, and which I then could imagine was on tv... (I have a good imagination). I am sorry that it has upset so many people, and I can see the reasons why. I sympathize with many of the points you have brought up. But the tone of this has become a bit nasty, and I hope it settles down. Look, I guess I am just a bit stressed out at the moment. I am about to go off to teach a course in something I feel I know nothing about, in a country where I cannot speak the language, with people I don't know (either at all, and some not very well)... I am afraid that if I keep on the list much longer (which I can't do anyway, as I am off next week) I will start to get very grumpy. I can hardly claim to be one of the "Old Ones" on the list, but I have been here for two years, and I have participated in both this list and the main one. I am not on anyone's off-list loop (except as a mercenary), so I don't know what discussion has been going on, except when it shows up here. I have enjoyed being here, and I thought the "Virtual Season" (which TJ and Sorcha understood would be a lot of work to manage well) was a great idea. Still do. And the initial discussion about what would happen next started out to be very interesting. At least that discussion worked out well. Anyway, I am disappointed with the way talks have been going in the last bit, and I am really wrapped up in real life now, so I am going to sign off. I hope I can figure out what the final verdict was when I get back. I hope I don't sound snooty, or "I'm taking my ball and going home" -like. I don't mean to be. Just a saddened "Play nice" and "Don't believe the worst of everyone" from someone who probably is a bit too close to real life these days. Hope you all have a nice summer, and don't get too burned when you wander into the sun! Sara Orel FA55%nemomus@a....... By the way, if anyone wants to complain to me about this in person, I will be on email for another three or four days, so feel free to write me at the address above... ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 13:34:34 -0700 From: Angie <alasher@e.......> Subject: Re: SPOILER: LC & Nick >Fleur is the love of his life. She brought out a humanity in him he thought long since dead and buried. >She evoked emotions he could neither understand nor control. Nick thought LC loved Fleur's innocence. > Nick was mistaken. That was part of the attraction, yes, but to put things in a nutshell and skim The thought struck me earlier today, that when Nick was shot and his memory gone with it, did LC happen to associate Nick in this *state of Innocence* with Fleur in some way? And be became a *kinder gentler LC* seeing some of her in her brother? I may be way off here, but that is the impression I got rewatching this ep. That this new *innocence* of Nick brought that long buried emotion and humanity to the surface. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 16:37:47 -0400 From: Joy Davis <Rjoy2@a.......> Subject: Re: The Virtual Season -- Chew on this Hi all! I absolutely agree with TippiN about why we watch the show. The conflict between Nick & LaCroix is exactly why I even watch the show. I have always been drawn to that type of relationship. I also liked Nick/Nat, until the last episode. Why they would take a brilliant, strong, independent woman and have her unable to go on without a man...makes me sick to see this. And where was Nick going? Why did he have to leave? I've got male friends who stay friends. Sometimes that's better than the romantic intanglements, with all those extras problems. enJOYing FK Cousin of the Knight~~~Unnamed Faction All around crazy for FK! ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 16:53:14 -0400 From: Joy Davis <Rjoy2@a.......> Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK and NiQ I've noticed the amazing continuity in this show. Now, they're not perfect, but much better than most. Alot of the little details that fit are extraordinary. I find myself drawn to this type of show. The characters take over and are very real. Highlander is one I just don't 'get'. There doesn't seem to be the same layers of complexity written into the characters. (Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes, here!) I understand Nick and why he is how he is. Duncan is still a mystery. enJOYing FK Cousin of the Knight~~Unnamed Faction All around crazy for FK! ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 17:01:32 -0400 From: Tammy Stephanie Davis <tsd@u.......> Subject: Re: Spoilers: Last Knight (this refers to the bit about Tracy's "trust") On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, John & Donna Spert wrote: > On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Will Steeves wrote: > > Cynthia Hoffman & Jane Credland wrote: > > >Tracy has never given Nick any reason to believe that she's trustworthy. > > ...well, other than engaging a criminal in a gunfight to the death (_his_ > > death, that is), I suppose... > > Tracy has given Nick reason to regard her as trustworthy, in regard to > vampires. She saw Vachon supposedly hypnotise Nick in Black Buddha. So, > in LK she knows that Nick is a vampire; Nick must know Vachon is a vampire; > Vachon must know the same about Nick. Nick knows that Tracy observed > Vachon putting the whammy on Nick. Therefore Tracy knows that Vachon is a > vampire and never told anyone, including Nick. Therefore she could have > been trusted to keep Nick's secret. But he never trusted her to. > > John > There's all this talk of trust, but no one has mentioned the other possible reason for Nick not telling Tracy he was a vampire. Maybe he didn't want her to be burdened by the secret. Look how much Nat has to go through to maintain the secret - both professionally and personally. It's one thing to have an occasionally friend/boyfriend be a vampire, but your partner as well? And wouldn't the more vampires a mortal knows the greater danger they're in from the Enforcers? Maybe Nick thought her life was complicated enough. Despite Tracy's last words, trust may not have had anything do with it. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 17:50:59 -0400 From: Apache <lf@c.......> Subject: Re: Urs and Lacroix (AtA spoilers) > > On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, John Spert wrote: John and I are debating the nature of Lacroix's attraction to Urs, and whether it can be likened with, or equated to, his attraction to Fleur. > I don't think it's implausible. Urs was a very large-hearted person. > Look at her behavior in Hearts of Darkness [examples]. And whose [sic] to > say how good or bad her mind is? Fleur was raised in a medieval noble > house. Urs' childhood led her to a career as a saloon singer. My whole point was, to put it very simply, that Urs has the sweet heart without the sharp mind. And Urs has had 120 years of vampire life to hone her intellectual leanings, if she had any. She doesn't; she's not a bookish sort. Fleur clearly was, reading astronomical treatises in the early 13th century at a very young age -- as a mortal female. Lacroix has a powerful philosophical streak; the irony, leavened by wistful, bitter, or even occasional yearning poetry, in his radio broadcasts is that of a deeply thoughtful man. > > Urs, by contrast, is a sexually mature young woman with the > > You think Fleur was prepubescent? I don't think LaCroix is quite that kinky. I think Fleur was a never-been-kissed adolescent virgin. Urs probably lost her virginity early, maybe even to her own father, and had certainly learned to use, and even barter, her sexuality by the time she was in her early twenties, the presumed age at which she ran up against Vachon. Actually, I was startled when Lacroix turned out to be hetero. I think I had this impression because of the arch way he needled Nick's very active heterosexuality. Until AMPH I took him as Roman-style homosexual, who would have kept catamites (young boys), which was not unheard of among army officers. And of course there was a bit of sexual tension with Nick, with GWD mentioned in an interview I posted on forkni the other day. > Or do you mean sexually *knowledgeable*? Somehow I can't picture > LaCroix getting hot just because someone is a virgin. And what would > that say about loving Fleur for her mind? :-) Actually, I can picture Lacroix getting hot and bothered over a virgin, not because he has a thing for maidenheads, but because such a girl would be a 'tabula rasa,' blank sheet, on which he could write whatever he wished. Lacroix clearly has *wishes* for the development of his vampire children when he brings them across; it showed up with respect to both Janette ("I want you to be so much more than *merely* noble") and Nicholas, who were both carefully chosen. How much more likely would he be to have a grand vision for the development of a vampire female he wished to bring across as his eternal mate? Again, it is the combination of mind with the female qualities that I think Lacroix responded to so passionately in Fleur. Urs does not have both. She is bighearted; in fact, that's her ruling character quality, and it makes me wonder how often she killed; it would be easy to believe that all her blood comes from bottles now. But she's not brainy. And she definitely uses her sexiness to get what she wants; when Vachon was turning her down when she asked to be killed, her response was to start kissing him. She probably only meant it as a form of persuasion ("please"--kiss--"please"), but of course it stimulated the vampire to lose control and bite. > > > intellectual powers of a flea > > That's just nasty. What evidence do the shows have to justify that? Well, I was exaggerating for effect, but... 'Trophy Girl' Urs: "Isn't that Nick's partner?" Vachon, reacting to the sight of Tracy's tarty outfit: "It's either that or her evil twin sister." Urs: "She has a twin sister?" Not to mention, look at the company she keeps. There's Vachon, who does not exactly choose to present himself to the world as an intellectual powerhouse, and Screed -- well, actually, Screed was pretty smart, and eloquent in his twisty way. > > > is naive, rather than innocent. > > This seems like semantic wordplay. Urs believes that being kind can make > a difference. Is that naive? What does that say about Nick? Innocence is not necessarily naive, and naivete is not necessarily innocent. Innocence refers to the quality of unspoiledness, purity, freshness, just basically immaculate beginningness. Naivete is a certain kind of approach to the world that can persist long after innocence is gone. It looks like a retained innocence, even when you find it where innocence has definitely been around the block a few times. Thus, even as a mortal, Urs was a kept woman, searching out re-runs of her abandonment by her father. When the 'protector' whom Vachon humiliated in the saloon confronts her with a knife -- about to take his humiliation out on her face -- she cries, "why are you doing this? I've never denied you anything." This is not innocence, but it is naivete. Urs is very, very sweet, notwithstanding having seen much of the world's evil as a young mortal, and presumably a good deal more of it since becoming a vampire. I like her a lot, but I don't think it's correct to equate her with Fleur, who was a sheltered, inexperienced and innocent young girl. > > > That (and her beauty) could attract > > Lacroix, I think, but never command his heart the way Fleur and even Divia > > did. > > Divia "commanded his heart" in that he had a father's love for her. > Otherwise why did he reject her? Right, but that, along with his passion for Fleur, are the two great loves of his life (along with Nick, of course). > And I doubt that LaCroix is falling for > "just another pretty face", or why haven't we seen such before. He hung > around the Raven plenty; where are the "flavors of the month"? Actually, what about the wine-and-honey babe he was sweetening up in Trophy Girl (Miss "would that she were a less annoying woman")? And how many times have we watched his eyes track a pretty woman going by in the Raven? At least once, we've seen him peel off and follow such a one. But who knows? The fewness of Lacroix's modern kills has been a subject of heated debate in the past. > > I've always thought Urs and Vachon would have been lovers > > This is debatable. Vachon knew her background of being ill-treated by > men. Heck, in BB he kisses her on the cheek even when he's leaving for > an indefinite period. Yeah, it's debatable, but that's how I choose to read it. Vachon and Urs both seem to relate to members of the opposite sex pretty sexually/physically/tactilely, but that's just my take on them. > > > But if Urs had taken up with Lacroix, or been taken up by him, > > I should say, I bet she would be absolutely offlimits to anyone else, > > And Vachon, found with Urs next to him in the Raven, says "It's not how > it looks". So I think she and LaCroix *are* lovers and *is* off-limits. Certainly the story I prefer! I hope someone will write the fanfic on that relationship. (Has anyone written straight, non-humorous, Urs fic? I did one piece months ago, "Cold Comfort," but otherwise all I remember is the Pert-Plus stuff and "Urs' Big Idea," the karaoke bar story from which I have yet to stop having the occasional demented giggle). Incidentally, did it look to anyone like one of Urs' arms was actually *detached* in the elevator? And... did Nat have time to "take care of" Urs' body before she went to Nick's place, or could it be sorta just lying around in the morgue when Nat leaves for her fateful visit to Nick's place? Apache ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 15:03:23 -0700 From: Angie <alasher@e.......> Subject: Re: Spoilers: Last Knight (this refers to the bit about Tracy's "trust") At 05:01 PM 6/1/96 -0400, Tammy Stephanie Davis wrote: >There's all this talk of trust, but no one has mentioned the other possible >reason for Nick not telling Tracy he was a vampire. Maybe he didn't >want her to be burdened by the secret. I was under the impression that it was against their *vampiric* law to tell the mortals of their existance. Isn't that what the Enforcers are partially about? Why would Nick want to jeopardize Tracy even more with the community? Sure Tracy knew about Vachon and Screed (bless his little heart), but she wasn't seeing or looking for vampires everywhere. ~~~~~~~~~~~Lasher~~~~~~~~~~~ ~Bunny~Unnamed Faction~ MOO~ ~~~~~~Cousins of the Knight~~~~~~ ^^http://home.earthlink.net/~alasher^^ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 17:17:45 -0500 From: TippiNB <Tippinb@i.......> Subject: Re: Urs and Lacroix (AtA spoilers) Apache wrote: > Incidentally, did it look to anyone like one of Urs' arms was >actually *detached* in the elevator? You know, I'm glad you brought that up. Something about that scene bugged me, and kept bugging me, but I couldn't figure out why. Something about her eyes looked "off" to me, and something about her arms. I thought at first maybe her arms had been broken. But now that you mention, it looks really weird. Kind of like how my Barbie dolls used to look after I pulled their arms from their sockets and poked out their eyes. (I was not very kind to Barbie.) > And... did Nat have time to "take care of" Urs' body before she >went to Nick's place, or could it be sorta just lying around in the morgue >when Nat leaves for her fateful visit to Nick's place? Did she go to Nick's? I thought that was in LK... Uh oh I'm getting mixed up. Now the two eps are mixing in my mind... Wicked Cousin Tippi, dollar bill wrangler of the Thong Throng! *Founding Member of the Unnamed Faction*Voyeur of the Menage LaCroix* "Would that this thong were a less annoying undergarment." - Anon. Wickedness Site! http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 18:17:51 -0400 From: "Lisa P." <LadysAVamp@a.......> Subject: Re: Urs and Lacroix (AtA spoilers & LK) Regarding the eyes looking wrong, well I've been keeping this to myself, but didn't they look like they were black? Her eyes were open, weren't they? I think I'm going to have to go back and take a closer look. Nat didn't go to Nick's place in that one. It was in LK that she went to see Nick to tell him that Tracy was dead. Lisa P. *************************************************************************** Only one thing is truly permanent...Forever Knight Cousinly Knightie w/NatPacker tendencies <I do so hate to limit myself> LadysAVamp@a....... -- "Hey, who you calling a lady!?!" oboyyme@t....... -- <Lacroix's unheard thoughts at end of LK> ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 17:22:01 -0500 From: Margie Hammet <treeleaf@i.......> Subject: Re: Spoilers: Last Knight & HF >>> >Tracy has never given Nick any reason to believe that she's trustworthy. >>Tracy <snip> trustworthy, in regard to vampires. >Everyone seems to be forgetting that she kept quiet about the connection >between Janette and Nick during the murder investigation in Human Factor. Whether or not Nick could have trusted Tracy, when you have an important secret, the best way to safeguard it is to tell as few people as possible. Nick and Tracy were friendly, but not all that close. I think he was right in not telling her. This is where the whole thing with whether or not Nick should have felt guilty over Tracy's death hinges, isn't it? Did she die because of her own mistake, or is it Nick's fault that she died? If she had known Nick was a vampire, she would have let him handle the situation, so does that make it Nick's fault that she died? I think I agree with what LaCroix said in the monologue: "You take responsibility for the mistakes and emotions of others when they alone are responsible." This was quite a turnaround though, from what he said when Nick came to see him at the Raven. He said, "The pain you're causing your mortal friends has become unacceptable to them. Those that do survive will demand change." It was as if he were saying, "Yes, Nicholas, it is your fault that Tracy died." This has to have been a contributing factor to what happened later. After LaCroix made the statement about guilt in the monologue, he said, "It has to stop. This, and everything else that's happened here tonight should make that clear to you." But I wonder if LaCroix ever thought back to what he said to Nick at the Raven and acknowledged at least some responsibility for what happened. Margie (treeleaf@i.......) N&NPacker Cousins of the Knight ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 13:49:16 PST From: June Russell <Kat@g.......> Subject: Re: Urs and Lacroix (AtA spoilers) :> Urs, by contrast, is a sexually mature young woman with the :> intellectual powers of a flea : :That's just nasty. What evidence do the shows have to justify that? Uh, maybe her "Tracy has a twin?" line from Trophy Girl? (As one example.) Kat Kat ( June Russell ) pacifier.com!grendal!kat kat@g....... Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 20:21:51 EDT From: Lisa McDavid <D020214@v.......> Subject: Spoiler: Urs and LaCroix H'mm, no doubt I need my mind washed out with soap, but ... A couple of years ago, Nigel said in an interview in his fan club newsletters that part of LaCroix's visciousness was because he had been a very sensual man as a mortal, who was no longer "doing it." (That's more or less Nigel's phrasing, plus this is a family list. <g>) He said this again during at least one con. If LaCroix and Urs had become lovers, LaCroix was no longer frustrated and that would explain *a lot* of LaCroix Lite. <evil grin.> Seriously, I think I've just convinced myself. Cousin Lisa -- "That will be trouble." Lisa McDavid mcdavid-lisa@s....... ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 21:08:12 -0500 From: John & Donna Spert <jjs@i.......> Subject: Re: Urs and Lacroix (AtA spoilers) [some Nick psychoanalysis] On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, TippiNB wrote: > Apache wrote about Urs: > >> intellectual powers of a flea > John and Donna wrote: > >That's just nasty. What evidence do the shows have to justify that? > Trophy Girl: > that). Vachon says, "Or her evil twin." Urs, "She has a twin?" I don't > remember the exact quotes, but Urs is definitely portrayed as being one bulb > short of a chandelier. We discussed this when we came up with the possible Urs/LaCroix connection, and decided it was more that she's not up on pop-culture references. Especially when we couldn't think of any other examples. Anyway, I don't see the relevance of what her IQ is. Aside from the above example, she doesn't appear stupid. And the first thing LaCroix says about her in BB is "innocent". I think this above all is what attracted him to Fleur and Urs. As was pointed out by an earlier poster, Fleur grew up in a time of ignorance, and I would add violence. Urs had a pretty tough lifestyle. Neither seem to have been touched by it, in their fundamental personality. That may be at the heart of why LaCroix is so contemptuous of Nick's quest for mortality. Nick seeks to become mortal because he sees evil that he's done and believes it's from being a vampire. But Nick was beserk from day one as a vampire, and I think LaCroix sees that the flaws are in the personality called "Nick", not in the form his body takes. As someone who greatly admires the innocent heart, he despises Nick's attempt to eliminate his flaws by changing the outward form. Anyway, the essence of my argument that Urs and LaCroix are lovers is based on incidents in the shows. We can discuss Fleur and Urs and LaCroix until the cows (hi, Nick!) come home, but what I'd really like is to keep discussing those incidents and see if they really show what we think they show. John ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 21:56:16 -0500 From: John & Donna Spert <jjs@i.......> Subject: Re: SPOILER: AtA, LK (Urs, Fleur, LC) On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Amy R. wrote: > Several months ago, on forkni-l, I asked if anyone had written an Urs/LC > story, and I pointed out the superficial resemblances to Fleur and Nick, > physically and emotionally. No one responded, so I assume no one has > explored that possibility. However, when I wrote that, I was not in any > way suggesting that Urs would be more than a passing distraction for LC. Hi, We are not suggesting that you have. John and I both thought during AtA, "Oh...Urs and LaCroix were lovers. How long has that been going on?" We've been having fun rewatching third season to see what evidence there may be of this, and John suggested we post our theory to the list for comment. This was entirely independent of Amy, or any other prior posts. We couldn't comment during the big AtA postings because the machine our account's on had problems with mail. When they fixed it the discussion had moved on to Last Knight. We also have AtA thoughts on Tracy that we've never posted, maybe some day. Donna ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 22:14:04 -0500 From: John & Donna Spert <jjs@i.......> Subject: Re: Spoilers: Last Knight (this refers to the bit about Tracy's "trust") On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Angie wrote: > I was under the impression that it was against their *vampiric* law to tell > the mortals of their existance. > Isn't that what the Enforcers are partially about? Why would Nick want to > jeopardize Tracy even more That's a good point for Nick. Since it's not clear that Tracy knew about the Enforcers, one can say that Nick was trying to protect her but she didn't know. Hence the "you could have trusted me" line. John =========================================================================
Previous |
This month's list |
Next |