Any comments on this site?


http://www.webcs.com/b5/neverwas.html

Zathrus asked:

<<Any comments on this site?>>

Sure.  Why worry about might-have-beens?

JMS has said that the story that got told was at least (quoting from memory
here) 85-90% of the story he started out to tell.  I doubt that there are many
other TV producers who can say as much.

One of the amazing things about the B5 story is that Joe was able to write
around things like actors leaving and breaking bones and needing time off for
other projects and still tell his story. 

In some ways, it may have even made for a better story.  Case in point is the
episode where Claudia Christian broke her foot.  JMS has said that he'd
originally planned for Ivanova to get out of the predicament by herself. 
Instead, he had to write where Garibaldi is instrumental in her rescue. 
Personally, I thought that that episode made Garibaldi much more 'real' to me. 
Another was when Stephen Furst needed time off for another project.  This
served to illustrate Londo's isolation which made him an even more tragic
figure.

Yes, I think that it would have been interesting to see the Sinclair character
evolve more onscreen.  That's balanced out by my opinion that Lyta was a more
effective character than Talia.  Either way, I appreciate the story that did
happen and can't worry too much over what might have been.

Jan
well, you did ask....:-)

jbonetati@aol.com (Jan) wrote in message news:<20020617230310.02209.00001264@mb-ch.aol.com>...
> Zathrus asked:
> 
> <<Any comments on this site?>>
> 
> Sure.  Why worry about might-have-beens?
> 
> JMS has said that the story that got told was at least (quoting from memory
> here) 85-90% of the story he started out to tell.  I doubt that there are many
> other TV producers who can say as much.
> 
> One of the amazing things about the B5 story is that Joe was able to write
> around things like actors leaving and breaking bones and needing time off for
> other projects and still tell his story. 
> 
> In some ways, it may have even made for a better story.  Case in point is the
> episode where Claudia Christian broke her foot.  JMS has said that he'd
> originally planned for Ivanova to get out of the predicament by herself. 
> Instead, he had to write where Garibaldi is instrumental in her rescue. 
> Personally, I thought that that episode made Garibaldi much more 'real' to me. 
> Another was when Stephen Furst needed time off for another project.  This
> served to illustrate Londo's isolation which made him an even more tragic
> figure.
> 
> Yes, I think that it would have been interesting to see the Sinclair character
> evolve more onscreen.  That's balanced out by my opinion that Lyta was a more
> effective character than Talia.  Either way, I appreciate the story that did
> happen and can't worry too much over what might have been.
> 

That being said, I think it would have been interesting if a couple of
story arcs had played out with the original characters.  It would have
been very effective to deal dramatically with the disappearance of
Catherine Sakai, rather than have Sheridan show up with his wife's
disappearance already a _fait accompli_.

Also, I have no idea if the story arc that JMS had planned for Ivanova
and Lyta for the 5th Season would have been the same one he would have
had if Talia Winters had still be around.  But the dynamic of Ivanova
involved with Byron, with Talia as his loyal "disciple" would have
taken on a interesting dynamic, given Susan and Talia's previous
romantic involvement.

Again, I loved B5 the way it turned out.  "Might have beens" aren't
very productive, but that doesn't mean they can't be fun.

"Paul McElligott" <mcelligott6@cox.net> wrote in message news:c926b0f.0206180948.2340d7c@posting.google.com...
> jbonetati@aol.com (Jan) wrote in message news:<20020617230310.02209.00001264@mb-ch.aol.com>... <snip>
> Also, I have no idea if the story arc that JMS had planned for Ivanova
> and Lyta for the 5th Season would have been the same one he would have
> had if Talia Winters had still be around.  But the dynamic of Ivanova
> involved with Byron, with Talia as his loyal "disciple" would have
> taken on a interesting dynamic, given Susan and Talia's previous
> romantic involvement.
> 
Ok, what are you smoking and why aren't you sharing? There was no 
romance between Talia and Ivanova. They were merely friends.

<<<Ok, what are you smoking and why aren't you sharing? There was no
romance between Talia and Ivanova. They were merely friends.>>>

There was certainly a suggestion of such.

1--The scene where Talia spends the night w/ Susan and wakes up in her bed.

2--Talia's (the "bad" Talia's) mockery of Susan, which implies that she used
Susan's love to get secrets out of her or generally to get closer to the
command staff.

3--Then there's the more explicit "I think I loved Talia," the "thing you've
never told anyone" which Susan shares w/ Delenn.

They aren't girlfriends, but there's certainly some sexual tension there,
and they do share a bed at least once.  Maybe they were simply "bed friends"
but even that's a little more than "just friends."  It's a sort of first
step to becoming lovers, in my book.

Of course, Talia's bad personality was "outed" by Lyta directly afterwards,
so we never saw what might happen.

Jenn

"Raven Woman" <HrafnWif@hotmail.com> wrote: 

>[Talia and Ivanova] aren't girlfriends, but there's certainly 
>some sexual tension there, and they do share a bed at least 
>once.  Maybe they were simply "bed friends" but even that's a 
>little more than "just friends."  It's a sort of first step to 
>becoming lovers, in my book.

Usually, depending on the circumstances. But in this particular case,
it seems fairly clear that there's some kind of romantic/sexual
involvement between Talia and Ivanova. Being "bed friends", i.e.
starting with cuddling in bed together without having sex, is IMO a
really nice way to start a relationship (using "relationship" in the
loose sense, i.e. any romantic relationship, not necessarily a primary
one). It seems rather difficult to arrange things that way, though.
IME it's harder to be "bed friends" first with a different-sex partner
than it is for two men, and I'd guess that it would also be easier for
two women than for a man and a woman. This probably just reflects how
society is at the moment, at least largely.

Matthew

[large para. about "bed/friends" and sexual relations]

>>>>This probably just reflects how
society is at the moment, at least largely.>>>

Matthew, you've hit on a great problem.  In the B5 timeframe, presumably,
some social mores have changed (think about the difference between 20th
century and 18th century people!).  Along with the change in customs, the
ways of "signaling" behavior/intent/etc have probably also changed.  But to
"show" the story, the author has to use "signals" that people here-and-now
will recognize.  A real challenge for the storyteller.

Assume, hypothetically, that in B5 time, it's common for same-sex friends to
share a bed (without sex) to express the warmth-extent of their friendship.
Then, you want to give just a "hint" that Talia/Susan have become such close
friends that they decide to share a bed?  How do you do that?

1--show a brief bedscene (like the one in the ep) and risk the viewers
thinking "sex"!!

OR

2--introduce a lot of narrative explanation for the new custom

Neither is ideal.

If you want to assume a LOT of cultural drift, then the more burdensome
discussion you have to introduce, and the less freely you can
"suggest"things by a glance, a facial expression, an empty bed, etc etc etc.
Because the viewers won't know what's being "suggested."

Think how much narration there is to "explain" teep
culture/customs/relations with the rest of society.  We have to be told
about the gloves, about their rules, about sex for teeps, etc.  JMS does it
well, but it means that he can't just "hint" at nuances of teep behavior
very well.

So unless we got background explanations (which we didn't) I guess we should
assume that sex relations and courtship rituals are about the same in B5
time and now.

Jenn

In message <af2fcj$17na@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>, "Raven Woman"
<HrafnWif@hotmail.com> wrote on Sat, 22 Jun 2002 14:38:17 -0400:
[...]
> 
> If you want to assume a LOT of cultural drift,
[...]

...which is a bad idea in any *good* SF.  Anything that is different
from our current society, technologically, culturally or whatever,
should be explicitly expounded.  Thems the rules, like in detective
fiction, where all the clues available to the sleuth have to be
available to the reader/watcher.  Otherwise, you can end up using
technobabble to get out of impossible situations.

All fiction is to some extent a comment on humanity as it is now, so
no author wants to change too much.
-- 
Richard Tibbetts
http://www.primepeace.ltd.uk/

"Raven Woman" <HrafnWif@hotmail.com> wrote: 

>Matthew, you've hit on a great problem.  In the B5 timeframe, 
>presumably, some social mores have changed (think about the 
>difference between 20th century and 18th century people!). Along 
>with the change in customs, the ways of "signaling" 
>behavior/intent/etc have probably also changed.  But to "show" 
>the story, the author has to use "signals" that people here-and-now
>will recognize.  A real challenge for the storyteller.
> 
>Assume, hypothetically, that in B5 time, it's common for 
>same-sex friends to share a bed (without sex) to express 
>the warmth-extent of their friendship.

That might be a nice idea for different-sex friendships also. Of
course, in either the same-sex or different-sex case, it would only
apply to situations where both persons were comfortable with it. So,
there'd be some friendships where it didn't apply; it'd probably only
apply to fairly close friendships, for a start. I guess that it would
be a good middle ground in between platonic friendship and sexual
involvement, which does seem like somewhat of a false dichotomy.

<snip> 

>So unless we got background explanations (which we didn't) I 
>guess we should assume that sex relations and courtship rituals 
>are about the same in B5 time and now.

I agree entirely. However, I wasn't actually talking about this, and I
think you've misinterpreted what I was saying. I apologise for my part
in the misunderstanding if the way I structured my post was ambiguous.
I wasn't even talking about Talia and Ivanova, or B5, for most of my
last post; other than the first two sentences, nothing I said in my
last post had anything at all to do with B5. Rather, I was talking
about dating issues IRL. The reason I made the "This probably just
reflects how society is at the moment, at least largely" comment was
that I was saying that it could be changed.

My point is that, with the way society is at the moment, often it's
hard (especially so with a different-sex partner) to take the physical
side slowly when you're dating. The idea of just being "bed friends"
for a while first is very appealing (for me, anyway), but often hard
to achieve in practice. I think it's easiest for two women, because if
one of them said she wanted to wait a while before having sex, it
would probably be better understood. OTOH if a *man* says he wants to
wait a while before having sex, it sounds unrealistic due to
stereotypes about gender roles. Men are generally expected to always
want sex and not to have any emotional needs to take things slowly;
it's a bit like how men aren't supposed to cry, and all that.

Read the rest of this message... (27 more lines)

Message 10 in thread From: Raven Woman (HrafnWif@hotmail.com) Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was   View this article only Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated Date: 2002-06-28 06:47:55 PST

> >So unless we got background explanations (which we didn't) I
> >guess we should assume that sex relations and courtship rituals
> >are about the same in B5 time and now.
>
> I agree entirely. However, I wasn't actually talking about this, and I
> think you've misinterpreted what I was saying. I apologise for my part
> in the misunderstanding if the way I structured my post was ambiguous.

snip snip
>
> Am I making sense here?
>
> Matthew

No, I probably wasn't following.  I'm more interested in issues of
storytelling than dating, so I must'a just picked out what I wanted to see.

At any rate, the original poster was protesting that Ivanova/Talia didn't
have a relationship, and I was arguing why we have to interpret "evidence"
as parsimoniously as possible--ie. assume an empty bed means what an empty
bed means now, narratively speaking.  Unless other customs have been
introduced.

Sorry--
Jenn


From: Matthew Vincent (warlock@es.co.nz)
Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was 

 
View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Date: 2002-07-01 22:38:04 PST 
"Raven Woman" <HrafnWif@hotmail.com> wrote: 

>I'm more interested in issues of storytelling than dating, so 
>I must'a just picked out what I wanted to see.

*nods* yeah, that's understandable. I'm kinda the other way around, I
think, in that I'm far more interested in the social issues that B5
makes reference to than I am in B5 itself. If it was just a Sci-Fi
show to me, there's no way I'd be spending all this time posting here.

>At any rate, the original poster was protesting that Ivanova/Talia 
>didn't have a relationship, and I was arguing why we have to
>interpret "evidence" as parsimoniously as possible--ie. assume an
>empty bed means what an empty bed means now, narratively speaking.

I agree entirely. It seemed so obvious to me that Ivanova & Talia
*were* romantically involved, that I figured I'd go on to discuss
something different since that issue had (IMO) already been sorted.
Btw, in response to someone else's comments in the thread regarding
Talia's feelings for Ivanova, I'd imagine that the sleeper personality
couldn't invent romantic feelings altogether. Rather, Talia already
had romantic feelings for Ivanova prior to the sleeper personality
playing on them.

>Sorry--
>Jenn

It's alright. It is easy to misunderstand people on the net, when all
we have to go by is verbal communication.

Matthew

From: Kerry Casey (kcasey@bom.gov.au)
Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was 

 
View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Date: 2002-06-20 21:28:57 PST 
>"James Bell" <jamesb@naxs.com> wrote:
> >"CaptJosh" <captjosh@phantos.subspacelink.com> wrote:
> >>"Paul McElligott" <mcelligott6@cox.net> wrote:
> > >>jbonetati@aol.com (Jan) wrote: <snip>
> >> Also, I have no idea if the story arc that JMS had planned for Ivanova
> >> and Lyta for the 5th Season would have been the same one he would have
> >> had if Talia Winters had still be around.  But the dynamic of Ivanova
> >> involved with Byron, with Talia as his loyal "disciple" would have
> >> taken on a interesting dynamic, given Susan and Talia's previous
> >> romantic involvement.
> >
> >Ok, what are you smoking and why aren't you sharing? There was no
> >romance between Talia and Ivanova. They were merely friends.
>
> You're joking, right?  When were they friends?  They fought each other all
> the time and then had a sleepover.
>
>

The first time through, I never saw the "tension" between Talia and
Susan as anything other than friends. It's not until I read the
newsgroup that I realised that there was an understated attraction
between them. However, when showing B5 to a cousin who'd never seen it
and knew nothing of it, after the first few scenes between Susan and
Talia, she said "Hah, lesbian love interest!"



Kerry

--

Kerry Casey
kcasey@bom.gov.au


From: Ryan Pearman (rpearman@chem.columbia.edu)
Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was 

 
View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Date: 2002-06-21 17:56:25 PST 
> Ok, what are you smoking and why aren't you sharing? There was no
> romance between Talia and Ivanova. They were merely friends.

Yikes....  unlike that bed scene just before Talia goes Postal, or Ivanova's
confession to Delenn......

    --Ryan

Read the rest of this message... (40 more lines)

Message 37 in thread From: Svetislav (svsol@t-online.de) Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was   View this article only Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated Date: 2002-06-18 07:30:35 PST

Read the rest of this message... (65 more lines)

Message 38 in thread From: Kathryn Huxtable (kathryn@kathrynhuxtable.org) Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was   View this article only Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated Date: 2002-06-18 18:15:23 PST

Read the rest of this message... (97 more lines)

Message 40 in thread From: Dennis Francis Heffernan (hefferman@comcast.net) Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was   View this article only Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated Date: 2002-06-19 06:24:30 PST

Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

"Dennis Francis Heffernan" <hefferman@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:s700huo7jpfadfnh8pp1octhaft2gcbr7j@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 11:19:18 -0400, "James Bell" <jamesb@naxs.com> wrote:
>
> |Sheridan was not planned from the absolute beginning.  The idea came along
> |some time during season one and grew from there.  Since there was no
> |Sheridan at first, he couldn't have been the one at the end, either.  It
> |turned out ok, though.
>
> Eh, dunno about that.

Well I think it turned out ok.  YMMV.


> "War Without End" happened more or less when it was supposed to (JMS let
> slip the fact that we'd see the flip side of B^2 in season 3 before O'Hare
> left).  That pretty much means Sinclair wasn't going to be around for the
> ending, so someone had to be stepping into his shoes.
>
> Or you have to pull another character out of your ass to become Valen
> and/or completely reinvent Sinclair's importance to the Minbari.  This can be
> done, of course, but at that point you're completely off the map, IMO.

We don't know that War Without End happened the *way* it was supposed to,
though.  It may have been written differently. (I can think of ways to pull
off WWE and keep Sinclair in the present.  I can also think of ways to do
Season 4 and 5 without Sinclair or Sheridan and without introducing a new
character.)  It isn't as if WWE was already written during season one.  When
Sinclair left and Sheridan came in, the way the arc was to be presented
changed radically.  I am sure that JMS got to tell his story but *the way*
the story got told was significantly different from the original plan.  This
isn't a bad thing.  Nevertheless it is what happened.

You don't have to agree.  It's ok to be wrong.  :)

Jim

Oh i see, thanks for letting me know guys


James Bell <jamesb@naxs.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
aenj21$qht$1@solaris.cc.vt.edu...
> Sheridan was not planned from the absolute beginning.  The idea came along
> some time during season one and grew from there.  Since there was no
> Sheridan at first, he couldn't have been the one at the end, either.  It
> turned out ok, though.
>
> Jim
>
> "Svetislav" <svsol@t-online.de> wrote in message
> news:aen35k$rfl$06$1@news.t-online.com...
> > There's one question that i keep thinking about: When JMS planned the story,
> > was it Sinclair he saw "sleeping in light" at the end of the series, or was
> > it Sheridan as we could see?
> >
> >
> > David Williams <dwilliams298@attbi.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
> > ALyP8.83644$6m5.69983@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> > >
> > > "Zathrus" <Izathrus@attbi.com> wrote in message
> > > news:SjqP8.235506$cQ3.9124@sccrnsc01...
> > > > Any comments on this site?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://www.webcs.com/b5/neverwas.html
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes, I would simply ask the site's author, "What's your point?"
> > >
> > > OF COURSE changes were made along the way!  His tone seems to imply that
> > > this is some deep dark secret to all of us.  So, he went to a tremendous
> > > amount of trouble to enlighten us, but he's preaching to the choir.
> > >
> > > It is said that certain rare artists are able to conceive their entire work
> > > in their heads down to the most finite detail.
> > > Eg. allegedly Mozart could hear every single note of an entire symphony in
> > > his head before he ever put pen to paper.  Beethoven, on the other hand, had

Read the rest of this message... (123 more lines)

Message 43 in thread From: Pål Are Nordal (drakh@spamcop.net) Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was   View this article only Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated Date: 2002-06-19 17:51:25 PST

Svetislav wrote:
 >
> Oh i see, thanks for letting me know guys

We all have our theories, some with more evidence backing them than 
others. But the only one who knows for sure is jms, and he isn't talking.

In article <aen35k$rfl$06$1@news.t-online.com>,
Svetislav <svsol@t-online.de> wrote:
>There's one question that i keep thinking about: When JMS planned
>the story, was it Sinclair he saw "sleeping in light" at the end
>of the series, or was it Sheridan as we could see?

I think it must have been Sinclair originally.  I think
that was the original reason that Sinclair taking B4 back
looked older, and that scar on his cheek would have been
from when he goaded Kosh into taking action against the
Shadows.

I think.  Only JMS knows, and he isn't talking.

I really missed Sinclair, all through the rest of the 
series.  Sheridan was good, but something about Sinclair
really clicked with me, in a way that Sheridan never did.

But it was quite a ride for 5 years.

-- 
Have you noticed that,  when we were young, we were told  | Mike Van Pelt
that  "everybody else is doing it"  was a  really stupid  | mvp@calweb.com
reason to do something, but now it's the standard reason  | KE6BVH
for picking a particular software package? -- Barry Gehm

>
> I really missed Sinclair, all through the rest of the
> series.  Sheridan was good, but something about Sinclair
> really clicked with me, in a way that Sheridan never did.
>
> But it was quite a ride for 5 years.
>

Agreeing about Sinclair.  Actually, I saw them in the "wrong" order, season
2-3 first, then missed part of four and all of five, then saw them all
through in sequence.  I liked Sinclair better even *after* seeing Sheridan
first.

But--I don't think JMS just "made the best of it," I think there are
advantages to having Sheridan there for the Shadow War, even if he isn't the
cutie or the intellectual that Sinclair is.

1--With Sheridan, we get to see a "typical officer" getting educated as to
the complexities of the universe.  Sinclair is already a mystic of sorts,
and seems like less of a "company man" than Sheridan.  Sheridan's a relative
"outsider" when he arrives at the start of season 2--certainly he's not as
familiar w/ things Minbari--which makes his POV more interesting & useful in
some ways.  He's Scully to Delenn's Mulder in some ways.  Doesn't
necessarily want to believe.

2--With Sheridan, we get a contrast to the
Sinclair/Delenn/G'kar/Kosh/(need-I-go-on?) spirituality of the show.
Sheridan seems like a solid, uninquisitive agnostic, and an outgoing, "plays
well with others" guy, a regular ESTJ to their (let me guess here)
Delenn--INTP
G'kar--I/E NFJ
Kosh--INTJ
Sinclair--INTP
intuitive, introverted types.

I know Myers-Briggs may be a kind of stretch here, but I just want to
illustrate that he is *totally* a different personality, which shakes up the
command staff a bit.  A nice contrast.

K nuff for now.

Jenn

PS  anyone want to debate my Myers Briggs classifications??  That might be a
fun topic, and I'm not entirely happy w/ them.

"Raven Woman" <HrafnWif@hotmail.com> writes:

>Kosh--INTJ

Cool!, that makes me Kosh-like. *grin*


Chuen Chan                                          c.chan@uq.net.au
---------------------------------------------------------------------
'You can prove anything you want by coldly logical reason - if you pick 
the proper postulates... Postulates are based on assumption and adhered 
to by faith.  Nothing in the Universe can shake them.'        I. Asimov

Erh?  I'm (apparently) also an INTJ, but I'd never say 'Kosh like'.

>From the http://typelogic.com/intj.html website it states the following for
INTJ's,

"Perhaps the most fundamental problem, however, is that INTJs really want
people to make sense"

Perhaps we need to come up with a whole new way of personality testing since
the one thing you can say about the Vorlon is that they never make any sense
themselves so how they expect other people to is beyond me!  Everything else
fits though.

Jim




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.371 / Virus Database: 206 - Release Date: 13/06/2002

On Wed, 19 Jun 2002 22:03:50 -0400, Raven Woman <HrafnWif@hotmail.com> wrote:
>1--With Sheridan, we get to see a "typical officer" getting educated as to
>the complexities of the universe.  Sinclair is already a mystic of sorts,
>and seems like less of a "company man" than Sheridan.  Sheridan's a relative
>"outsider" when he arrives at the start of season 2--certainly he's not as
>familiar w/ things Minbari--which makes his POV more interesting & useful in
>some ways.  He's Scully to Delenn's Mulder in some ways.  Doesn't
>necessarily want to believe.

 Sheridan was considered a "solid" officer and complete RA
 ("Regular Army") type that Clark's control freaks would want
 to replace Sinclair with;  They didn't catch on (until too
 late) that their "tool" was more autonomous and had a mind
 (and soul) of it's own.

 Clark wanted to honk off the Minbari (remember, he was already
 unhappy with 'em since he was dealing, albeit indirectly, with
 the Shadows-  who knew the Minbari were aligned with those
 "Lords of Order" the Vorlons.

 Sinclair had depth and curiosity and inquisitiveness that was
 too easily recognized while Sheridan wasn't recognized as
 having these traits-  but had them in spades.

 Of course there was _nobody_ on the series (excepting perhaps
 the Vorlons...) who wasn't dysfunctional in some way-  it's
 just that one's weakness can provide a core strength, giving
 a person a place to stand.

 Something to google for:  BlackAdderlon 59

-- 
 John R. Campbell           Speaker to Machines                 soup@jtan.com
 - As a SysAdmin, yes, I CAN read your e-mail, but I DON'T get that bored!
   Disclaimer: All opinions expressed above are those of John R. Campbell
  alone and are seriously unlikely to reflect the opinions of
  his employer(s) or lackeys thereof.  Anyone who says
  differently is itching for a fight!

> Delenn--INTP 
>From http://typelogic.com/intp.html it states:

<quote>"A major concern for INTPs is the haunting sense of impending
failure. They spend considerable time second-guessing themselves.".<unquote>

When Delenn decides on a course of action she follows it through to the end
(eg. Drac attack, Minbari civil war, and throughout 'In the Beguinning).

<quote> An INTP arguing a point may very well be trying to convince himself
as much as his opposition. In this way INTPs are markedly different from
INTJs, who are much more confident in their competence and willing to act on
their convictions.<unquote>

Again in her dealings with the Grey Council and other major speeches I'd say
she comes across more as an INTJ than INTP.

Some reasons are perhaps:

1.  The whole Minbari culture are very much like an earlier version of the
Vorlon.

2. Can we expect Alien personalitys to mirror the personality types we
define for ourselves, and has JMS written them in such ways?  Really clevor
if he has, but then again we already know that!

3.  How easy is it write a charactor that does not fit in to a 'standard'
personality type?  Could such a charactor exist in real life?

As I neither a writer nor behavoural scientist I can't tell you but it would
be very interesting to hear other peoples views.

Jim




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.371 / Virus Database: 206 - Release Date: 13/06/2002

Galen strikes me as an INTJ.  I think the
only people who know their Meyers Briggs
Personality are INTJs.  Certainly we are
the only ones replying.


From: Andrew Petrarca (android@hotblack.3d.gweep.net)
Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was 

 
View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Date: 2002-06-24 09:00:11 PST 
According to Lucas Bachmann  <lucasbachmann@yahoo.com>:
> Galen strikes me as an INTJ.  I think the
> only people who know their Meyers Briggs
> Personality are INTJs.  Certainly we are
> the only ones replying.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.  ;)

But then, I'm an INxP.  Lucky me, I get to have all the hang-ups of both INFP
and INTP.

-- 
Bitwise, Andrew.                                         &

Lucas

"David Williams" <dwilliams298@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<ALyP8.83644$6m5.69983@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>...
> "Zathrus" <Izathrus@attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:SjqP8.235506$cQ3.9124@sccrnsc01...
> > Any comments on this site?
> >
> >
> > http://www.webcs.com/b5/neverwas.html
> >
> 
> Yes, I would simply ask the site's author, "What's your point?"
> 
> OF COURSE changes were made along the way!  His tone seems to imply that
> this is some deep dark secret to all of us.  So, he went to a tremendous
> amount of trouble to enlighten us, but he's preaching to the choir.


I view the site as more of an apologia than criticism.  William
Piniarski obviously appreciates how hard it was to maintain a cohesive
storyline for 5 TV seasons, and says as much several times on his
site.

I enjoy the open speculation myself.  I have often wondered about some
of the forced direction changes in the plot and what JMS originally
had in mind, but by the same token, I am glad that the Great Maker
himself has kept quite about the original plan.  I remember that when
I read some of Tolkien's early notes for Lord of the Rings it
detracted a bit from my appreciation of the story.  It was sort of
like seeing how a magic trick was done.



A more extreme type of "what might have been" site is the fanfic site:

http://www.b5-dark-mirror.demon.co.uk/

What do you think of it? (warning, the final chapters aren't complete)

"Zathrus" <Izathrus@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:SjqP8.235506$cQ3.9124@sccrnsc01...
> Any comments on this site?
>
> http://www.webcs.com/b5/neverwas.html

Well the site is very... inaccurate.

--
==========================
Christian McNeill

Email: red@underground.com.au

"Christian McNeill" <christian@quicknet.com.au> writes:
> "Zathrus" <Izathrus@attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:SjqP8.235506$cQ3.9124@sccrnsc01...
> > Any comments on this site?
> >
> > http://www.webcs.com/b5/neverwas.html
> 
> Well the site is very... inaccurate.

Not to mention badly written. I doubt this guy can write to a
publishable standard. And he can't tell the difference between "than"
and "then", nor can he spell "Sheridan".

I know English spelling is complicated, but people who aspire to write
should double check their work. Many of us are sensitive to these
things.

(I use a different standard to judge email and news postings, which
are written quickly. Please, for those of you who don't spell well for
whatever reason, don't take offense. None is intended. Unless you
write like that on your web site.)

-K

"Zathrus" <Izathrus@attbi.com> wrote: 

>Any comments on this site? 
>http://www.webcs.com/b5/neverwas.html

Yeah, quite frankly I think the site is full of shit. The author is
obviously trying to get attention for himself by disparaging an
existing Sci-Fi show. I think it's a very dishonest and disrespectful
tactic. Among other things, the following line gives it away: "My name
is <name deliberately snipped>. I am a science fiction writer
myself..." (with the words "science fiction writer" underlined so you
can follow the link).

Matthew

warlock@es.co.nz (Matthew Vincent) wrote in 
news:44aa4edb.0206180232.32e6bf10@posting.google.com:

>>Any comments on this site?
>>http://www.webcs.com/b5/neverwas.html
> Yeah, quite frankly I think the site is full of shit. The author is
> obviously trying to get attention for himself by disparaging an
> existing Sci-Fi show. I think it's a very dishonest and disrespectful

Jeez, give the guy a break! It's an *opinion*. Sometimes its fun to 
speculate on what might have been. It's not as though there's much else 
going on right now in the B5 world is there? I don't think the author was 
being disrespectful or dishonest, on several occassions in the article he 
mentions how much admiration he has for jms in creating the show, and how 
he *did* deliver on his promises. 

B5 is a unique situation in any event. Not only was it a unique show, we 
as fans also gained a (sometimes unhealthy) level of inside knowledge on 
its evolution through jms. The knowledge was great, insofar as it brought 
show and fan together like no other show ever has (not even Star Trek 
IMO), but I think it *was* a bit unhealthy in retrospect because its 
difficult to enjoy & take a show at face value whilst knowing about all 
the little pieces of broken glass jms crawled across carrying the 
'elephant'.

One thing about the article that I did agree with was his assessment of 
season 5. I'm not going to get into the 'season 5 was crap' debate, 
because as far as I'm concerned there is no debate (saying that though, I 
think that season 5 was a classic example of how too much inside 
knowledge can ruin one's perceptions of a show). B5 was brilliant, end of 
story. :-) *But* (and I have done this) it comes across as a very 
different show if you watch seasons 1-4 then SiL. Not 'better' per se, 
just different. It still works.

Anyway, all I'm trying to say is, he's only expressing an opinion. As am 
I. Neither are threats to your own beliefs about the show. We all love 
jms' work! :-) There's no need to go jumping up and down about it.

Cheers,

Bil
-- 
   _
_ // Bil Irving                 | Email: *Private*                    |
\X/  Visions Perceived Software | Web:   www.visions-perceived.co.uk/ |

... "Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of
    dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender."
                                  - Citizen G'Kar, 2261

Bil <bil_irving@ntlworld.com> wrote:
: One thing about the article that I did agree with was his assessment of 
: season 5. I'm not going to get into the 'season 5 was crap' debate, 
: because as far as I'm concerned there is no debate (saying that though, I 
: think that season 5 was a classic example of how too much inside 
: knowledge can ruin one's perceptions of a show). B5 was brilliant, end of 
: story. :-) *But* (and I have done this) it comes across as a very 
: different show if you watch seasons 1-4 then SiL. Not 'better' per se, 
: just different. It still works.

Actually I think he is quite wrong about season 5. I believe that
even if season 5 had always been coming, we would have seen the
telepaths and we would have seen Londos decline into servant of
the dark. 

IMO the main difference for season 5 would have been that the
telepath story would have been started already on the 4th
season. Perhaps even during the Shadow-Vorlon war (and they might
have been useful at the time). That would have been consistent
with the way JMS likes to write - putting things up before hand
so he can slam you with a hammer. Regrettably that didn't happen
because of the way season five happened - something that jms had
pretty little control over. 

I guess I'm a kind of funny critter, since I have never really
been interested in single episodes of B5 or any other series. In
B5 it was the story arc that mattered mostly, and I like the
ideas that were there for the 5th season. 

Now I believe that 5th season is quite different from the seasons
2-4 mostly because jms had to create those plotlines during the
season, because he had closed all the major plotlines of previous
year and not opened others. 

Simply put, the circumstances B5 was put in didn't allow for
better, which is a shame. Still I liked season 5 and wouldn't be
happy if it never was. 


-- 
Mikko        "One Ring to rule them all,
              One Ring to find them,
              One Ring to bring them all
              And in the Darkness bind them."

msarela@cc.hut.fi wrote in message news:<aepbtl$6jh$1@nntp.hut.fi>...
> Bil <bil_irving@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> : One thing about the article that I did agree with was his assessment of 
> : season 5. I'm not going to get into the 'season 5 was crap' debate, 
> : because as far as I'm concerned there is no debate (saying that though, I 
> : think that season 5 was a classic example of how too much inside 
> : knowledge can ruin one's perceptions of a show). B5 was brilliant, end of 
> : story. :-) *But* (and I have done this) it comes across as a very 
> : different show if you watch seasons 1-4 then SiL. Not 'better' per se, 
> : just different. It still works.
> 
> Actually I think he is quite wrong about season 5. I believe that
> even if season 5 had always been coming, we would have seen the
> telepaths and we would have seen Londos decline into servant of
> the dark. 
> 
> IMO the main difference for season 5 would have been that the
> telepath story would have been started already on the 4th
> season. Perhaps even during the Shadow-Vorlon war (and they might
> have been useful at the time). That would have been consistent
> with the way JMS likes to write - putting things up before hand
> so he can slam you with a hammer. Regrettably that didn't happen
> because of the way season five happened - something that jms had
> pretty little control over. 
> 

As I understand it, most of Season 4 was written when Season 5 seemed
very unlikely, so the story line was compressed.  Remember how intense
Season 4 was with both the end of the Shadow War and the retaking of
Earth?  I've often wondered if the retaking of earth would have been
left until Season 5 if renewal hadn't been so unlikely.  Also I wonder
if the Drak War would have been taken further if Crusade hadn't been
in the planning stages.

wherentear@netscape.net (WhereNTear) writes:

> I've often wondered if the retaking of earth would have been
> left until Season 5 if renewal hadn't been so unlikely.

What's to wonder?
JMS speaks <http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/countries/us/guide/084.html>:

|  I don't usually comment on this, but...if I had known *with absolute
|  certainty* that there would be a season 5, then season 4 would have
|  ended with 418, "Intersections in Real Time." So you only pull 4
|  episodes forward, really. You'll understand when you see it. 
-- 
"I asked mom if I was a gifted child... she said they certainly
 wouldn't have *paid* for me."
                                -- "Calvin and Hobbes", Bill Watterson

msarela@cc.hut.fi wrote in news:aepbtl$6jh$1@nntp.hut.fi:

> Actually I think he is quite wrong about season 5. I believe that
> even if season 5 had always been coming, we would have seen the
> telepaths and we would have seen Londos decline into servant of
> the dark. 

Yup, almost certainly.
 
> IMO the main difference for season 5 would have been that the
> telepath story would have been started already on the 4th
> season. Perhaps even during the Shadow-Vorlon war (and they might
> have been useful at the time). That would have been consistent
> with the way JMS likes to write - putting things up before hand
> so he can slam you with a hammer. Regrettably that didn't happen
> because of the way season five happened - something that jms had
> pretty little control over. 

Well quite. Jms said once that 'Intersections' would have been the season 
4 cliff-hanger had season 5's fate been determined earlier. That suggests 
to me that the whole 'end of the Earth civil war' thing would have 
happened more progressively over the first half of season 5. There would 
probably have been some telepath setups during this as well.

Most people's problems with season 5 seems to be that there was too much 
apparent 'filler' in the first half of the season, which is 
understandable given that jms had to effectively build completely new 
plotlines that he hadn't had time to introduce earlier. Watching season 
4, then going straight into season 5 - it really is a dramatic change of 
pace. I understand completely why it was done that way, and I have no 
problem with that, it just takes you back a bit.

Another example: Orson Scott Card (my favourite author) wrote the 
'Homecoming' saga, a tale over five volumes. Volumes 1-4 were great, they 
built the characters beautifully, told a tale that was growing in 
intensity all the time. I eagerly awaited each new volume and devoured 
them in a couple of days. Then book 5 ('Earthborn') came out. It was 
completely different. Set hundreds of years after the original 4 books, 
all the original characters were long dead. It was still a great book, 
but somehow didn't fit into the rest of the saga in quite the same way as 
the others did. I feel much the same about season 5. It feels great on 
its own, but as a part of the whole it suffers IMO.

I know others feel a similar way. Others disagree. Your mileage may 
vary...

> I guess I'm a kind of funny critter, since I have never really
> been interested in single episodes of B5 or any other series. In
> B5 it was the story arc that mattered mostly, and I like the

Read the rest of this message... (25 more lines)

Message 70 in thread From: horizon (mcarnicelli@nyc.rr.com) Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was   View this article only Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated Date: 2002-06-20 21:26:21 PST

>It was still a great book,
> but somehow didn't fit into the rest of the saga in quite the same way as
> the others did. I feel much the same about season 5. It feels great on
> its own, but as a part of the whole it suffers IMO.

When it aired, Season 5 suffered from a audience perspective since the
climax of the series had already occurred in our minds, with the resolutions
of the Shadow War & the Earth Civil War.  Anything that came afterwards had
to feel like an letdown.  Seen now in retrospect, Season 5 does have it own
logic and narrative power -- even if elements of it are completely out of
sync.  I guess, for me, the real problems in Season 5 are things like the
telepaths' clothing and personality affectations, which do seem very
specifically tailored to appeal to a certain viewer demographic that perhaps
TNT was urging JMS to court.  If you compare the dress & mannerisms of the
telepath resistance members from Season 2 to this new group from Season 5,
the contrast is all too apparent.  Certain elements of the show appeared, in
least in my mind, to have changed and become much more formulaic.  That
said, once Bryon becomes "toast" and the telepath's disappear from the
scene, the show begins to regain its form.  Obviously, if the uncertainty
around the series cancellation were not a factor, I have no doubt that
Seasons 4 & 5 would have flowed a bit differently.  Personally, I could have
done without the Telepath saga altogether, and would have preferred to see
JMS resolve the loose ends around Sheridan's & Delenn's appearance in
Londo's future (as foreshadowed in WWE) in Season 5...

Matt C


From: David Williams (dwilliams298@attbi.com)
Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was 

 
View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Date: 2002-06-21 07:03:06 PST 
"horizon" <mcarnicelli@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:iCjQ8.29131$QD2.6689435@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> >It was still a great book,
> > but somehow didn't fit into the rest of the saga in quite the same way as
> > the others did. I feel much the same about season 5. It feels great on
> > its own, but as a part of the whole it suffers IMO.
>
> When it aired, Season 5 suffered from a audience perspective since the
> climax of the series had already occurred in our minds, with the resolutions
> of the Shadow War & the Earth Civil War.  Anything that came afterwards had
> to feel like an letdown.  Seen now in retrospect, Season 5 does have it own
> logic and narrative power -- even if elements of it are completely out of
> sync.  I guess, for me, the real problems in Season 5 are things like the
> telepaths' clothing and personality affectations, which do seem very
> specifically tailored to appeal to a certain viewer demographic that perhaps
> TNT was urging JMS to court.  If you compare the dress & mannerisms of the
> telepath resistance members from Season 2 to this new group from Season 5,
> the contrast is all too apparent.  Certain elements of the show appeared, in
> least in my mind, to have changed and become much more formulaic.  That
> said, once Bryon becomes "toast" and the telepath's disappear from the
> scene, the show begins to regain its form.  Obviously, if the uncertainty
> around the series cancellation were not a factor, I have no doubt that
> Seasons 4 & 5 would have flowed a bit differently.  Personally, I could have
> done without the Telepath saga altogether, and would have preferred to see
> JMS resolve the loose ends around Sheridan's & Delenn's appearance in
> Londo's future (as foreshadowed in WWE) in Season 5...
>
> Matt C
>

My concurring opinion is that the perceived weaknesses in S5 are merely due
to the fact that it was too short and left us hanging.  We all knew from day
1 that it was projected to be the final season, regardless of what happened,
so our expectations were probably ramped up a little too high.  jms really
didn't have enough time to wrap everything up for us.  He could only
tantalize us by telling us the first chapter of the telepath war.  The same
with Londo's story, etc.  Though we already know the ultimate fate of most
of the central characters, we didn't get to hear those STORIES.
On the one hand, the gist of the hanging story threads is that the story
never really ends.  There's always more to tell.  ie. There's no such thing
as "Happily ever after..."
But based on that, I'm really left with the feeling that he was hedging his
bets and leaving LOTS of open room for new series, feature films,
theatricals, etc.
The subsequent lack of commercial success of the franchise makes me believe
we might not see anymore B5.  Let's face it, there's apparantly just not
enough of us to entice the advertisers into paying for the show or the
programmers to put it on.  So we'll just have to hope that someday jms is
willing to open up and reveal what his story plans were.
Ultimately I try not to think about it too much, to realize that blithering
idiots on Jerry Springer is a bigger money-maker than well-written Sci-Fi; I
just get too depressed.

Was expecting to move, probably not going to happen soon so will finally
spring the extra $ to get Showtime.
Anxious to finally check out Jeremiah.  Hope I'm not too late.

-David

Read the rest of this message... (33 more lines)

Message 76 in thread From: The Nuclear Marine (Nuke-Marine@cox.net) Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was   View this article only Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated Date: 2002-06-23 21:32:20 PST

Read the rest of this message... (60 more lines)

Message 77 in thread From: Bil (bil_irving@ntlworld.com) Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was   View this article only Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated Date: 2002-06-23 22:30:21 PST

Read the rest of this message... (40 more lines)

Message 78 in thread From: David Williams (dwilliams298@attbi.com) Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was   View this article only Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated Date: 2002-06-23 22:31:01 PST

Read the rest of this message... (59 more lines)

From: Jim Royal (jimroyal@canada.com)
Subject: Re: The B5 That Never Was 

 
View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Date: 2002-06-18 18:16:58 PST 
In article <44aa4edb.0206180232.32e6bf10@posting.google.com>, Matthew
Vincent <warlock@es.co.nz> wrote:

> Yeah, quite frankly I think the site is full of shit. The author is
> obviously trying to get attention for himself by disparaging an
> existing Sci-Fi show. I think it's a very dishonest and disrespectful
> tactic. 

In what sense is the site in any way disparaging? It's a fan analysis.
There's nothing insulting about it, and much of what he says
(particularly about Sinclair's truncated story arc) is quite likely
true.

-- 
Jim Royal <jimroyal@canada.com>
"Understanding is a three-edged sword"
http://JimRoyal.com