FORKNI-L
Logfile LOG9604A Part 22
April 6, 1996
File: "FORKNI-L LOG9604A" Part 22
TOPICS:
Nick's First night (11)
BB Questions (2)
Nick's a wimp (4)
Ger's Highlander ep?
FK Drink Recipes--Compiled?
MAJOR APOLOGY!!!!
I hope somebody is watching!
Nick as Parent (was Re: Nick's first night) (3)
LIST RULES: NO MORE KINDRED, PLEASE!!! (2)
help/info.
Difference in FK from Beginning to Now (2)
Tracy is Nick Jr.(was Re: Difference in FK...)
RSITHYKYB...
The Other Show
Calling All FoD's!!!
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 15:25:35 -0500
From: Susan Bratt <Vampzek@a.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's First night
In a message dated 96-04-06 13:29:14 EST, you write:
>Not too long ago I asked why LaCroix brought Nick over in the first place
>and someone (I'm sorry I can't remember who now) responded that LaCroix
>brought Nick over for Janette.
Hey maybe Janette seduced him for LaCroix! :) It works both ways!
Susan B
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 14:24:40 -0500
From: Ty Parker <greybro@m.......>
Subject: Re: BB Questions
At 06:52 AM 4/6/96 -0500, you wrote:
> 9)If you're a werewolf, and you eat a human, does that make you a
>canniable?
>
> 10) If you're a werewolf, and you eat a wolf, does that make you a
>canniable?
>
>
According to White Wolf Games' "Werewolf: The Apocalypse", if you are a
werewolf, and you eat the flesh of a human, you're worse than a cannibal.
You've broken the LItany, the rules by which the werewolves live, and as
such you will be hunted down and torn to pieces...but NOT eaten. If you're
a werewolf and you eat a wolf's flesh, I think it depends. If you were born
a wolf, it would be a natural thing to do...a packmate dies, and there's
more meat for the rest of the pack.
The reason the wolves have a rule about not eating humans specifically is
that wolves aren't real big into gathering everyone they know who has a gun
and slaughtering your friends en masse...which humans kinda are.
GreyBrother
greybro@b.......
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 12:54:31 -0800
From: AKR <r@w.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's First night
> Not too long ago I asked why LaCroix brought Nick over in the first place
> and someone (I'm sorry I can't remember who now) responded that LaCroix
> brought Nick over for Janette.
That was me. :) Two weeks ago, that was my pet theory. Again, if anyone
wants to read a really nice discussion of this, I suggest you look up
Susan Garrett's post. If you want slightly less magnificent, but still
darn good imho, analyses, check out mine and Diane's. :)
> If Janette wanted a new plaything couldn't she bring Nick over herself?
And this was my pet theory last week. :)
Janette has never brought anyone across. She said so in "I Will Repay."
Nick had never *successfully* brought anyone across...
I suspect that Lucien "We skipped those lessons, didn't we?" LaCroix
never taught his children how to bring others across properly. It might
have threatened his control, both of them specifically, and of the
composition of his family. In addition, as LaCroix made both Nick and
Janette, they were always, to some degree, equals. I think that is the
kind of relationship Janette wanted Nick for... in part because, as his
sibling, she could leave him (PotM), but if she had been his maker, she
would have been tied to him forever (IWR)...
There are other justifications and ramifications, but they belong on
fkspoilr, so you'll have to ask there... :) And that's where this week's
pet theory is, anyway! <g>
******* Amy, Lady of the Knight (AKR) r@w....... *******
"He willingly gave his life and shared the fate of evil men." Is 53:12
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 13:03:41 -0800
From: AKR <r@w.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's First night
> Also if LaCroix and Nick had never met prior to his conversion, why did
> LaCroix make the comment about Nick asking him for immortality in one of
> the recent episodes?
Offhand, I don't recall a recent episode where LC has rubbed Nick's nose
in the fact that he chose his vampirism, but "Near Death" makes it clear
that both Janette and Nick believe that they had a choice whether to die
as a mortal or live as a vampire (I think the visions were real; others
think they were false (hi, Jamie!); either way, *Nick* thinks they were
real, and LC doubtless knows what Nick thinks).
******* Amy, Lady of the Knight (AKR) r@w....... *******
"He willingly gave his life and shared the fate of evil men." Is 53:12
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 12:07:43 -2055
From: "L. Katherine Queen" <lqueen@p.......>
Subject: Nick's a wimp
This challenge is specifically aimed at the bravehearted Knighties.
Just trying to stir things up a bit. It's dead out there in cyberland today.
Nick is a wimp. No matter how terrible people, ie. LaCroix, Janette, and
occasionally Natalie, are to him he just takes it. He doesn't try to
defend himself or justify his actions. He doesn't rail against LaCroix
when he so cavalierly trounces him. Maybe he is a masochist and he
considers any abusive and cruel treatment the best that he can expect or
deserve. LaCroix truly is Nickolas' cross to bear.
In responding to this challenge please keep in mind that I have strong
Knightie leanings and love Nick and his angst.
Katherine, of the newly Knighted
lqueen@p.......
"Thou liest, abhorred tyrant; with my sword I'll prove the lie thou
speaks't." Macbeth, Act V, Scene VII
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 13:07:17 -0800
From: "Andrew E. Nystrom" <wo991@f.......>
Subject: Re: BB Questions
> At 06:52 AM 4/6/96 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
> > 10) If you're a werewolf, and you eat a wolf, does that make you a
> >canniable?
> >
this doesn't really answer the question, but along similar lines, if you
want to see how a wolf rather than a human might be affected by the
curse, read Peter David's "Howlin Mad." It alos features a vampire who
cuts himself shaving all the time because he can't reflect in the mirror.
--Andy
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 13:21:41 -0800
From: AKR <r@w.......>
Subject: Re: Ger's Highlander ep?
> >it is #25, "Turnabout," the third episode of the second season of HL...
> Surely you jest about them being run in order? This is the network that just
> re-ran Blind Faith only four weeks after the last time it was run!
> Sorry, couldn't resist the sarcasm.
:) Actually, USA is better about showing HL in order than they are about FK.
I don't understand why... Surely there is no need to subject the world to
"OtL" or "MBIAV" again, but as they keep showing "HoD" and "TG," taste is
probably not a factor... Why won't they rerun "BB"? Their re-run loop
seems to go from "HoD" through "Fever," ignoring the first six episodes
of this season... which are the bulk of the eps with their fingerprints.
******* Amy, Lady of the Knight (AKR) r@w....... *******
"He willingly gave his life and shared the fate of evil men." Is 53:12
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 12:55:43 -2055
From: "L. Katherine Queen" <lqueen@p.......>
Subject: Nick's first night
Amy writes:
>Janette has never brought anyone across. She said so in "I Will Repay."
>Nick had never *successfully* brought anyone across...
I remember reading somewhere, although I have not seen the episode referred
to, that Nick brought across Natalie's brother. Is this not so?
Katherine, ever closer to Knightie-dom
lqueen@p.......
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 13:55:31 -0800
From: Tara Housman <amprsand@s.......>
Subject: FK Drink Recipes--Compiled?
Has anyone been saving a collection of Forever Knight drink recipes
(preferably both imaginary as well as plausible ones, but at least the
mixable ones)?
If so, could you possibly email me a copy? The task of sifting through
the past month or two of FORKNI-L digests looking for them is daunting, and
I'd like to try out some recipes at our SyndiCon Forever Knight party this
Friday.
Thanks,
&&&
-Tara Housman (amprsand@s.......)
Forever Knight has been cancelled. To find out how you can help, visit:
http://members.aol.com/CuznJamiMR/SaveForeverKnight.html
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:17:04 -0500
From: Karen Parker <HorCgal@a.......>
Subject: MAJOR APOLOGY!!!!
Im SO-O-O sorry!!! I didn't know that my last note "SCARY" counted as a
spoiler!!! Please forgive me everyone!!! I got lots of letters from all of
you and Im really, really, sorry!! Im new to this list I thought I had the
rules memorized and I truly didnt know I was being bad!!! SORRY, SORRY,
SORRY!!! Please dont kick me out yet, Im just figuring out what everyone is
talking about with the abbraviations and nick-names and stuff! Im sorry I
know now that Im supposed to put everything under spoiler, and Im really
sorry! I'll never do it again, I swear!!!! Humbly, Karen
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 19:11:27 -0500
From: Cyberspace Vanguard Magazine <vanguard@p.......>
Subject: Re: I hope somebody is watching!
I can jump over there and see what I can do for you. What do you need?
---- TJ
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 19:19:47 -0500
From: Cyberspace Vanguard Magazine <vanguard@p.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's first night
>I remember reading somewhere, although I have not seen the episode referred
>to, that Nick brought across Natalie's brother. Is this not so?
Well, it wasn't esxactly a success. Like everyone else he's brought accross,
Richard became a homicidal maniac.
---- TJ
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 15:10:38 -0800
From: AKR <r@w.......>
Subject: Nick as Parent (was Re: Nick's first night)
> I remember reading somewhere, although I have not seen the episode referred
> to, that Nick brought across Natalie's brother. Is this not so?
IWR: Nick brings across Nat's baby brother Richard, and then is compelled
to stake him because he is totally out of control.
IWR: Nick brings across a very ill woman (in a flashback) and then is
compelled to toss her in a fire because she is totally out of control.
Fever: Nick brings across that doctor (in a flashback) and then abandons
him to the vengence of the crowd because he is totally out of control.
*Do we see a trend here?*
******* Amy, Lady of the Knight (AKR) r@w....... *******
"He willingly gave his life and shared the fate of evil men." Is 53:12
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 18:18:32 -0500
From: Lisa Anne Prince <Moonlight@g.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's first night
Hi All :)
Amy writes:
>>Janette has never brought anyone across. She said so in "I Will
>>Repay." Nick had never *successfully* brought anyone across...
Katherine replied:
>that Nick brought across Natalie's brother. Is this not so?
Actually, Nick's brought several people across. However, most of
them disappoint him in one way or another and he ends up having to
kill them or they get killed by someone else. For example,
Natalie's brother Richard was killed by Nick after being brought
across, then you had the Doctor during the Plague years (yes, I
forgot his name :)) who goes bad and ends up getting killed by an
angry mob. There was the female leper who Nick ended up tossing
into a fire, etc. etc. etc. Nick's brought quite a few across,
however, they don't seem to last very long. The only one I can
remember off hand that's been around for quite a while is Serena
from Baby, Baby. Now there's a woman that could definitely rival
Nick in the angst department.
This is definitely not a complete list and I'm sure others will add
names on :) Suffice it to say that Nick has successfully created
fellow vampires.
Lisa Prince (Moonlight@g.......) Official Charity Drive Organizer
Please make checks payable to the Pediatric AIDS Foundation
Send to: Lisa Prince, PAF "Forever Knight" Group Charity,
000 Xxxxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Suite 000, Xxxxxxx, CT 00000-0000
Rage, my friends, rage against the dying of the Knight
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:22:24 -0600
From: Margie Hammet <treeleaf@i.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's First night
L. Katherine Queen wrote:
>someone responded that LaCroix brought Nick over for Janette.
>Also if LaCroix and Nick had never met prior to his conversion,
>why did LaCroix make the comment about Nick asking him for immortality in
>one of the recent episodes?
Do we really know that LaCroix and Nick had never met prior to Nick's
conversion, or is it just that we've never seen a flashback where we see
them meeting? Also, in AFWTD, LaCroix tells Janette that he's been watching
her for a long time, so similarly, LC could have been watching and listening
to Nick. He could have seen aspects of Nick that he liked, as well as
finding out enough about Nick to know the best way to get Nick to go along
with him, as he did with Janette.
In flashbacks soon after Nick was brought across, LC refers to Nick as
"my protege". Usually when someone chooses someone for a protege, they
choose someone they see positive aspects in, someone they feel they can
develop. I think LC chose Nick for his own reasons, not just cause Janette
liked him too. Whatever Nick's weaknesses, he is independent-minded and
determined, when he wants to be, and I think that is very much like La Croix.
I think that's what La Croix saw in him; he just didn't count on the guilt
thing.
The comment about Nick asking for immortality is from Dark Knight, one of
the first two episodes. Actually, La Croix says, "You wanted immortality,
I gave it to you." It's a little different from Nick directly asking for
immortality. But Nick did not disagree with what LC said.
Also, in Sons of Belial, when Nick is questioning the brother of the woman
who died, the brother, I think, talks about being seduced by evil, by a
promise of strength and power. Nick listens as if he is also trying to get
some insight into himself.
Margie (treeleaf@i.......)
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 15:42:05 -0800
From: AKR <r@w.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's a Wimp
> This challenge is specifically aimed at the bravehearted Knighties.
We are all brave-hearted. It's part of the job description. Have to
balance out the angst with something, you know. :)
> It's dead out there in cyberland today.
Things aren't actually *normally* as crowded as they were while you were
all posting Kindling-related things. (Singing: "I didn't see it..."<g>)
> Nick is a wimp.
Provocative, aren't you? :)
Come now: have you never been given advice on how to deal with bullies?
Is not the stronger man he who turns the other cheek?
Your premise that Nick does not defend himself may be flawed.
Nick is certainly guilty of as many selfish actions as selfless ones.
Nick knows the depths of his own depravity. He is only too aware of all
the horrible sins he has committed in his long life. So, yes, he does
often think he deserves what he gets in the way of personal abuse. Does
that make him a wimp? I don't think so.
When Nat is bitchy to him, he knows perfectly well that that is just her
way of dealing with the frustration he causes. He does, indeed, deserve
it, and so defending himself would be hypocrisy. I can recall no
instances of Janette being gratuitously abusive of Nick -- and in fact,
he held his own in the argument that ensued over her leaving him (he's so
cute when he pouts <g>). And Nick's relationship with LC is far too
complex to be so cavalierly dismissed -- yes, the relationship has been
abusive, but LC is Nick's father, and a far stronger vampire...
Speaking of defending himself, Nick *has* tried to kill LC.
> He doesn't try to defend himself or justify his actions.
<g> That is what Sandra is here for... <g> (Juuuuuuust kidding...) <g>
******* Amy, Lady of the Knight (AKR) r@w....... *******
"He willingly gave his life and shared the fate of evil men." Is 53:12
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 20:17:38 -0330
From: Ngaire Genge <ngenge@n.......>
Subject: Re: LIST RULES: NO MORE KINDRED, PLEASE!!!
On Sat, 6 Apr 1996, Jamie Melody Randell wrote:
> At the request of a surprisingly large number of listmembers, I am posting
> the following SECOND NOTICE:
> We have discussed Kindred. We have done it quite thoroughly. And now we
> are DONE. These are the FK lists. Kindred postings are off-topic. They
> must cease.
With all due respect for Jamie's poor head (btw, keeping your rooms a few
degrees cooler than usual will help that), I assume the above notice
presumes that the Kindred postings are _not_ part of a discussion _about_
Forever Knight? Regardless of the number of listmembers who dislike
discussion of the Kindred, comparing Forever Knight to any program (even
an unpopular one) should fall within the scope of this list, shouldn't it?
If, for example, I compared Forever Knight to Kolchak: The Night Stalker
on the basis of background and incidental music, that's fair, right? Or
compare the performances of our favorite villian and, for example, a
Highlander, villian because they share the common trait of having to
deal with immortality, that would be a reasonable and on-target
discussion, wouldn't it?
I guess what I'm asking here is: Are we banning off-topic postings, or
are we banning _all_ postings that mention the Kindred? My apologies if
this was hashed out previously, I had to dump a lot of mail
unexpectedly. If it's simply a case of tender feelings about
"competition" when we're still smarting over our own disappointment, I'd
like to think we can all use the previous good judgement seen on the list
and ensure any mention of the Kindred program _is_ part of a Forever
Knight discussion.
Cheers,
Ngaire
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 15:48:40 -0800
From: LC Fenster <lucienlc@i.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's first night
Amy writes:
>>Janette has never brought anyone across. She said so in "I Will
>>Repay." Nick had never *successfully* brought anyone across...
>I remember reading somewhere, <snip> that Nick brought across
Natalie's brother. Is this not so?
Yes, it is so. He brought Nat's brother Richard across in "I will
Repay". He also successfully brought across a woman named Elizabeth,
who is seen in the flashbacks of that episode. However, he was forced
to kill both of them when they started to kill indiscrimately. I think
that's what Amy meant. He's never brought someone across who's turned
out to be a happy, respectable member of the vampire community. (Cf
Serena - who he also brought across just fine, but who has been trying
to cross back ever since.)
Now whether this is LC's fault, as Amy suggests ("We skipped those
lessons") or Nick's for denying any responsibility for his progeny ("I
don't accept that") or the fault of the particular persons brought
across is debatable. :-)
Otoh, LC's record in bringing across happy, well-adjusted vampires
isn't so great either <g>: Nick, Tran, Alexandra, maybe Daniel (though
he could have been Janette's). The only real success he's had was
Janette - and even she's gone through a serious crisis and is no longer
*his* daughter.
Or maybe it's just difficult to be a happy well-adjusted vampire?
Maybe living forever does that to you? :-)
Laurie
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 18:51:44 -0500
From: Karen Parker <HorCgal@a.......>
Subject: help/info.
Hi guys, I'm not sure if everyone is done being really mad at me but Im
hoping no one holds a grudge against a newbie....Anyway I had posted a note
when I first started on this list so it might not have even gotten "on" the
list because I was still figuring out the difference between Forkni and
Listserv, but I was looking for info. on Ben Bass. I've seen him on other
shows and liked him then and even more on FK but to date have only been able
to find a little "snippet" of info on the web site. If any Vaquera's (hope I
said that right) out there can help I'd really appreciate it. Thanks! Karen
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 16:01:17 -0800
From: LC Fenster <lucienlc@i.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's first night
Julie wrote:
>A friend and I believe that Lacroix went after Nick because Nick was a
>crusading knight. Here was a chivarous knight just back from the Holy
>Wars. If he could be seduced in becoming a vampire, what a coo for
>Lacroix.
I vaguely recall from somewhere that Nick was supposed to be
disillusioned when Janette and LC found him. He'd been badly wounded
(Last Act) and may have been imprisoned for awhile, though I'm not sure
about that. But I don't think he was a naive, pious "innocent". (In
fact, considering what went on in the Crusades - raping, pillaging,
burning folks alive, looting villages, etc. - I doubt anyone would have
returned from the Crusades as a naive pious innocent. :-))
>It is like how Lacroix denies the existence of God so
>vehemintly in the exorcism episode. To admit that there is even the
>slightest chance of a god or superior being would admit that he is
>lost and doomed and that his life is meaningless.
For me that was one of the most fascinating aspects of A More Permanent
Hell. To listen to LaCroix discuss the possibility of the existence of
God with Nick - to hear him wondering why, if there was a God, S/He
would allow such "torture" (in essence, the same types of questions we
mere mortals pose every day <g>), to discover that he (LC) does have
doubts, was tremendously moving. (And, of course, there's the famous
scene from that episode, unfortunately cut, where LaCroix goes into the
church and asks "Why?" :-) )
LaurieCF
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 17:55:36 -0500
From: Ty Parker <greybro@m.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's a wimp
At 12:07 PM 4/6/96 -2055, you wrote:
.
>Nick is a wimp. No matter how terrible people, ie. LaCroix, Janette, and
>occasionally Natalie, are to him he just takes it.
Well, you know...not to raise the Religious Right's hackles or anything, and
no offense intended to anyone of any religious persuasion, but Jesus Christ
sat there and "took it," too...no matter how terrible people were to him.
Nick's trying to regain his Humanity...maybe he's attempting to follow the
religion of his childhood...sort of a worship by following the example thing.
GreyBrothr
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 19:21:09 -0500
From: Dotti Rhodes <dottir@w.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's first night
At 12:55 PM 4/6/96 -2055, Katherine wrote:
>
>I remember reading somewhere, although I have not seen the episode referred
>to, that Nick brought across Natalie's brother. Is this not so?
>
>
Yes, but the key word here is "successfully". Everyone Nick has ever brought
across, including Nat's brother, has had something go wrong.
Dotti R
Knightie 4-Ever
dottir@w.......
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 19:41:20 -0500
From: Dotti Rhodes <dottir@w.......>
Subject: Difference in FK from Beginning to Now
I have been watching FK from Dark Knight on this weekend and it suddenly
dawned on myself, my husband and my daughter what we missed so very much
from first season to this one. See if you agree..
1) Schanke - First and foremost what a major loss to the show to lose the
relationship between Nick and Schanke, and Nick's anchor to the mortal world of
family and sense of humor.
2) Nick and Nat's relationship - though not obviously loving, was definitely
close and fun and nurturing to each other. Not only did they have a great outlet
for letting loose pressures at the end of the day, they could even yell at each
other once in a while - it was great!
3) Janette - Obviously the loss of Janette was a terrible loss - the loss of
Nick's anchor to his vampire world and a confidant who understood him and what
he was going through - and didn't pity him.
4) The focus of the show originally was Nick and his world(s) and his struggle
to maintain balance between them and seek mortality and redemption. I believe
the focus this season was more of "The world and what Nick tries to do in it-
sometimes". With all these new characters (and yes, I'm sorry I find Vachon
attractive too, and I did have a soft spot for Screed, but there were too many
distractions from Nick and his struggle so that it kind of got lost in the
shuffle.
I have been enjoying the first season so much. Sure, there are clunkers, but
there were definitely more hits than misses.
Those of you have been there since the first, what do you think? Discuss?
Dish? Yay? Nay?
Dotti R
Knightie 4-Ever
dottir@w.......
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 19:48:10 -0500
From: Dotti Rhodes <dottir@w.......>
Subject: Re: LIST RULES: NO MORE KINDRED, PLEASE!!!
I think when Jamie says no more Kindred posts she means no more just talking
about how good or bad the show is, or going into great detail about what
happened on the show. I would think that a comparison discussion between
Kindred and FK would be okay, just as, in Ngaire's example, you discussed
Nightstalker and FK's music, etc. I think she just wants to put an end to
all the griping back and forth about it.
Am I right Jamie?
Dotti R
Knightie 4-Ever
dottir@w.......
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:01:16 -0800
From: AKR <r@w.......>
Subject: Tracy is Nick Jr.(was Re: Difference in FK...)
>4) The focus of the show originally was Nick and his world(s) and his
>struggle to maintain balance between them and seek mortality and redemption.
(Slight rant...)
Have you noticed how much Tracy is just like Nick? She's like a baby,
mortal, female Nick. Setting aside the fact that they're both blond, and
the way they're even beginning to dress her like him, there is still the
fact that she goes to Vachon exactly the way he went to Janette, and that
their respective father figures are both controlling manipulators who
want their children to be just like them. She started out as a kind of
"Nat Jr," whose relationship with Vachon was supposed to parallel Nat's
with Nick, and she has turned into Nick Jr, completely obliterating the
tension and contrast that make a pairing interesting.
Ummm... thoughts?
******* Amy, Lady of the Knight (AKR) r@w....... *******
"He willingly gave his life and shared the fate of evil men." Is 53:12
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 20:27:13 -0500
From: Lizbet Ann <Lizbetann@a.......>
Subject: Re: Nick as Parent (was Re: Nick's first night)
Amy said:
<<<IWR: Nick brings across Nat's baby brother Richard, and then is compelled
to stake him because he is totally out of control.
IWR: Nick brings across a very ill woman (in a flashback) and then is
compelled to toss her in a fire because she is totally out of control.
Fever: Nick brings across that doctor (in a flashback) and then abandons
him to the vengence of the crowd because he is totally out of control.
*Do we see a trend here?*>>>
Ah ha! But how many other vamps have we seen brought across?
DBTLOTM--Nick, by LaCroix: we do not see immediate aftermath (immediate
being the next hour to the next week or month or even year)
(Brain missing episode title) Alexandra, by LaCroix, see note on DBTLOTM
If Looks Could Kill, The Baroness by Janette (?, question mark in referance
to the fact that Janette said in Can. ver. of IWR that she has never brought
anyone across), see note on DBTLOTM
Bad Blood, the female cop by Jack the Ripper, see note on DBTLOTM
BB Part 1, Vachon and Inca, see note on DBTLOTM
We have see very few vamps brought across, really. All of the above were
almost invariably abandoned by their master (certainly in BB and Bad Blood,
and conjecture in Looks and Alexanda) maybe they all did go out of
control--and we just don't know about it. Nick is the only parent who cared
enough to stay with his kids! (Killing with kindness?)
Oh, and since I haven't seen her mentioned, what about Serena, from Baby,
Baby?
Lizbet, Proud Member of Mercenary Guild
elewis@u.......~*~*~Lizbetann@a.......
Ravenette of the New Order--Knightie/NatPacker/N&NPacker with Cousinly
Tendencies and faint leanings toward Vanquera-ism
http://members.aol.com/Lizbetann/mypage.html
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 20:51:52 -0500
From: Lizbet Ann <Lizbetann@a.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's first night
<<<>I remember reading somewhere, although I have not seen the episode referred
>to, that Nick brought across Natalie's brother. Is this not so?
Well, it wasn't exactly a success. Like everyone else he's brought accross,
Richard became a homicidal maniac.>>>
Not to belabor a moot point (has anyone transplanted any dead horses from the
HIGHLA-L over here <g>) but are *all* vampires homicidal? (And sucking blood
sounds pretty maniacal to me.)
There seems to be a fine line between "good killing" and "bad killing" with
regard to new vampires, at least in Nick's eyes. Richard and Elizabeth went
after people who had harmed them. Bad. The doctor in Fever betrayed the
reason he had asked for immortality. Bad. We didn't see Serena's adjustment
to the nightlife. Who knows?
Lizbet, Proud Member of the Mercenary Guild
elewis@u.......~*~*~Lizbetann@a.......
Ravenette of the New Order--Knightie/NatPacker/N&NPacker with Cousinly
Tendencies and faint leanings toward Vanquera-ism
http://members.aol.com/Lizbetann/mypage.html
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 19:52:25 -0600
From: Margie Hammet <treeleaf@i.......>
Subject: Re: Nick's a wimp
At 12:07 PM 4/6/96 -2055, L. Katherine Queen wrote:
>Nick is a wimp. No matter how terrible people, ie. LaCroix, Janette, and
>occasionally Natalie, are to him he just takes it. He doesn't try to
>defend himself or justify his actions. He doesn't rail against LaCroix
>when he so cavalierly trounces him.
He's fought LaCroix and fought against the things LaCroix tries to do a
number of times. Trying to justify his actions or railing against LaCroix
is not going to help.
Margie (treeleaf@i.......)
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 21:05:44 EST
From: Ian Curtis <102425.1537@c.......>
Subject: Re: RSITHYKYB...
<<Didn't know you liked Sailor Moon. Cool!
Yes even I, a neurotic Malkavian, love Sailor Moon! It's contagious I
tell you! I first watched it, and found it rather silly but my girlfriend told
me to give it a second chance, now I still find it to be extremely silly, but
I've got the theme song memorized!! It's Insidious I tell you!! (I think that
will satisfy the paranoids out there) <g>
ObFK: I keep seeing all these different dates for when the sodding
networks will be showing the new eps, who knows the story behind this?
and if they will only be playing on the sf channel, is there anyone near
Toronto who gets the SF channel so I can send them some blank tapes?
-- Ian Curtis
Malkavian Monitor of Toronto
"Children of the Night...SHUT UP!" - Love at First Bite
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 20:03:06 -0600
From: Margie Hammet <treeleaf@i.......>
Subject: Re: Nick as Parent (was Re: Nick's first night)
> Nick brings across Richard, and is compelled to stake him because he is
>totally out of control. Nick brings across a very ill woman and then is
>compelled to toss her in a fire because she is totally out of control.
>[one more example] *Do we see a trend here?*
Well, yes, it does seem to be a trend, but Nick also brought across Serena,
and she was never out of control. I think Nick knows how to bring people
across. What happens afterwards may be a combination of the person's own
character and how much effort Nick spends in helping him/her. With Nick's
own feelings about being a vampire, it's not surprising that he would have
difficulty teaching someone else to be a "good" vampire.
Margie (treeleaf@i.......)
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 21:24:19 -0500
From: Susan Bratt <Vampzek@a.......>
Subject: Re: Difference in FK from Beginning to Now
In a message dated 96-04-06 19:43:56 EST, you write:
>I have been watching FK from Dark Knight on this weekend and it suddenly
>dawned on myself, my husband and my daughter what we missed so very much
>from first season to this one. See if you agree..
I had not seen any second or first seasons episodes until last week when a
friend of mine sowed me one from the second I think. What I noticed was that
LaCroix seemed less... English in that episode than he does this season. Is
it my imagination? His voice is so much more suave and elegant now I think.
Susan B.
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 19:54:36 -0700
From: Lisa Marvin <wyllow@n.......>
Subject: Re: The Other Show
>Time to write _Entertainment Weekly_ enmass. Why you may ask?
Could someone supply the email and/or snail mail addresses? I feel a letter
writing fit coming on.
Thank you !!
wyllow@n.......
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 21:36:39 -0500
From: Jamie Melody Randell <immajer@p.......>
Subject: Calling All FoD's!!!
ATTENTION: All FoD's...
Help! I need input...
Will all those of the FoDly persuasion please contact me via private e-mail
at immajer@p.......?
Thank you.
--
Jamie M.R. -- Asst. Listowner/Mommy/Nag, FORKNI-L etc.
Illustrated Webgoddess & Keeper of Warm Fuzzies
"I may do what I have done. I may smash the hollow rock
without breaking stride and splinter the glitter inside
all over a midnight street." -- L.F.
=========================================================================
Knight graphics and parchment background created by Melissa Snell and may be found at http://historymedren.about.com/
