FORKNI-L

FORKNI-L Digest - 7 Feb 2001 to 8 Feb 2001 (#2001-46)

Thu, 8 Feb 2001

There are 15 messages totalling 482 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. Help, I'm posting gibberish! (2)
  2. Last Knight
  3. Right Place, Right Time (2)
  4. Child In Time (2)
  5. Right Time, Right Place (3)
  6. Horrorscopes
  7. Sandi Ross info
  8. LaCroix's 'poison' ring (2)
  9. Looking for Fic--Julie Randolf

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 7 Feb 2001 20:24:54 EST
From:    LDukie913@a.......
Subject: Re: Help, I'm posting gibberish!

Hi All,
I am posting this with McLisa's permission.

I started out this year with some computer problems. 4 weeks, an new mother
board and new memory later I finally have my computer back. I am an AOL
subsciber and just reloaded AOL 6.0 to my system via one of their CDs. The
problem is that now when I post to FORKNI I am leaving a lengthy trail of
HMTL behind me (look below and you will see it. :-D) McLisa is pretty sure
that this is an AOL 6.0 problem and figures that there is a way around it.
Does anybody know how to fix this? Please reply off list. LDukie913@a.......

Thanks.
Lori


------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 7 Feb 2001 18:45:40 -0700
From:    KYER <KYER@p.......>
Subject: Re: Help, I'm posting gibberish!

Lori wrote:  problem is that now when I post to FORKNI I am leaving a
lengthy trail of HMTL behind me (look below and you will see it. :-D)

<blink blink>  [Kyer looks at the bottom of the screen, at her keyboard,
desk, the floor, the peacefully multiplying dustbunnies in her Dustbunny
Sanctuary and Preserve munching on the fallen crumbs from last night's snack
[peers closer] or maybe last month's...

Nope.  No sign of HMTL or MIME beasties anywhere, Lori.

:)=
Kyer, kyer@p.......
and if anybody knows what happened to that FK Fan Faction book that was
supposed to be published last year...

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 7 Feb 2001 21:16:45 EST
From:    Julia Kocich <JKocich@a.......>
Subject: Re: Last Knight

Eric wrote:

> There was one other option, though it might've gotten
>  a bit awkward after Nat crossed over: why didn't Nick
>  just let LaCroix bring her across for him?

Ah, Eric, welcome to the infinity loop of If Nick Loves
A Woman ...

Without getting into the question of whether or not Nick,
Nat, singly or together, loved the other or not <g>, since
Fleur, we have been told that LaCroix has exacted a quid
pro quo from Nick: that LaCroix gets to take away Nick's
"true love" in exchange for his letting Fleur die a mortal.

(What that says about Nick's feelings or lack thereof toward
Alyssa is just one of the many black holes on the infinity loop
of If Nick ...

>  LaCroix was
>  experienced, trusted Nat, and probably wouldn't have
>  had a problem with it, especially if it would've
>  gotten the three of them out of there any faster.

Here's some room to play: what if Nat DID love Nick? Then LaCroix
would taste that, and even Nick would be wary of such a prospect.
Or should have been.

>  That done, think of the fun the writers would've had with
>  Nat's conflicting loyalties.

I've read some LaCroix-brings-Nat-across stories, but none that
have convinced me that either character was, er, in character.
I suspect some writers take the "transition" as a reason to turn
Nat into all sorts of other personalities other than Nat, as a vamp.

If anyone has suggestions for good examples of that situation
in fanfic, I'd be glad to hear them, since there is a lot of potential
there. (No, I haven't come close to reading all the fanfic, so don't
take it personally if you've written such a story and think that I
have a specific story in mind.)

Regards,
Julia
jkocich@a.......
UF list cobra and fanfic scourge

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 7 Feb 2001 23:50:17 -0500
From:    Cindy Ingram <cgi271@a.......>
Subject: Re: Right Place, Right Time

Mary Combs wrote:

>Nat doesn't actually ask Nick to bring her across. She says that she
>trusts him, that she's not afraid of an eternity in darkness "as long
>as I spend it with you." This could simply be her attempt to reassure
>him that she's not afraid of what will happen if he brings her across
>unintentionally.

That's exactly what my take has always been on what Natalie said to Nick.
While it was worded ambiguously enough that it could be taken either way, I
think the key is in the other thing she mentions -- death.

"I'm not afraid of death, or an eternity in darkness as long as I spend it
with you."

Meaning she's not afraid of dying (if he accidentally kills her) *or* of
being a vampire, if he accidentally brings her across. (Or intentionally
brings her across, rather than letting her die.)

Bottom line, she was saying she wasn't afraid to try, no matter what the
outcome might be.

Of course, the "I'm not afraid of death ... as long as I spend it with you"
seems to imply that she would then expect Nick to kill himself so they
could be together, but I just can't buy that. (Nat was distraught and not
thinking straight but surely not *that* distraught! <g>) I prefer to think
she meant that she wouldn't be afraid of dying (alone) *or* of spending an
eternity in darkness with him.

Or maybe she was planning to wait around until Nick found his mortality and
*then* joined her. <g>

Cindy Ingram
<cgi271@a.......>

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

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 7 Feb 2001 23:50:49 -0500
From:    Cindy Ingram <cgi271@a.......>
Subject: Re: Child In Time

Eric wrote:

>implied that either Nick or LaCroix had to kill the kid, since when Nat
>asked what happened to him, Nick doesn't give an answer, and if he'd just
>whammied the boy, he would've just come out and said so.

I'm behind in my digests, so forgive me if someone has already mentioned
this, but it's been reported during past discussions about the Father
Figure ep that TPTB originally intended to bring the character of Daniel
back for another episode. (Ostensibly to continue his story, I suppose, and
answer the question about his fate that was left hanging in FF.)

But because of the long hiatus between first and second seasons, the young
actor grew too much to reprise his role, so that ep never materialized.

Cindy Ingram
<cgi271@a.......>

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

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:16:39 -0500
From:    Cindy Ingram <cgi271@a.......>
Subject: Re: Right Time, Right Place

Mary Combs wrote:

>Perhaps Erica returned to show Nick that a vampire would not necessarily be
>condemned to darkness?

I think I'm in the minority in that I've never thought of Erica as a ghost,
but rather as a manifestation of Nick's subconscious. (Like the spectral
Lacroix who appeared in Feeding the Beast and one or two other first-season
eps.)

Instead of following Hamlet's example of debating with himself ("To be or
not to be ...") the merits of suicide vs. life (and the continuing struggle
it represents), Nick took it one step further. Erica could have represented
the opposite side of the stance Nick eventually took (which was to live) --
sort of like a psychological devil's advocate who helped him work out
things in his head.

Cindy Ingram
<cgi271@a.......>

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

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:41:48 -0800
From:    Brenda <bcammarata@h.......>
Subject: Re: Right Time, Right Place

Cindy wrote:

>>I think I'm in the minority in that I've never thought of Erica as a ghost,
>>but rather as a manifestation of Nick's subconscious

This was always my take on Erica, too.  Nicks great understanding of how her
thought processes worked and her feelings about life and death, not to
mention Nick's over-active imagination were what caused him to see her.

Carpe Noctem

Brenda
UCCelebration 2000, Wolfville 2000

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 8 Feb 2001 01:09:39 -0500
From:    Cindy Ingram <cgi271@a.......>
Subject: Re: Horrorscopes

Eric wrote:

>Then again, LaCroix's and Nick's occasional brawls could've been an
>example of jockish behavior. <snip> A little knock down/drag out for old
>times' sake, for the good ol' days when they were soldiers and could be
>hurt or killed in battle.

That's one possibility, but I'm not sure "jockish behavior" is an
interpretation I can wrap my head around. <g>

While I think it could apply to some of their other encounters, perhaps,
the fact that Nick skewered LC at the end of the ep (and thought he had
destroyed him) is just one of several reasons I think they were both pretty
darn serious about things.

I think, basically, the LC we saw in the pilot episode was closer (in terms
of villainy) to the less complex, "evil" Lacroix depicted in the Nick
Knight movie. But Nigel Bennett quickly took the character and developed
him into something quite different than the original prototype.

Strictly imo, of course. <g>

Cindy Ingram
<cgi271@a.......>

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

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 8 Feb 2001 03:35:37 EST
From:    DanaKnight@a.......
Subject: Sandi Ross info

For those that are going "Who's Sandi Ross?" here's the answer - Grace
Balthazar (Nat's assistant and friend).

THE VAGINA MONOLOGUES Eve Ensler's look at the female anatomy. Featuring
Krista Sutton and Sandi Ross and a rotating cast of celebrity guest stars
including Sheila McCarthy, Jann Arden and Jeanne Beker. Previews Feb 13;
opens Feb 14. Indefinite run. $45/$55. New Yorker Theatre, 651 Yonge.
870-8000.

Judy

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 8 Feb 2001 07:16:33 -0800
From:    Lisa McDavid <cecily1349@y.......>
Subject: Re: Right Place, Right Time

>I'm not afraid of death, or an eternity in darkness
>as long as I spend it with you."

Here goes McLisa the nitpicker again, for those of you
who want to run for your lives. :)

This is my take on Nat's meaning. Notice that there's
a comma between death and or? I don't remember whether
it's there in the script but I'm sure CD spoke the
line with the right beat for a comma.

The comma/pause should mean there are two
alternatives.

1. "I'm not afraid of death." That is, she knows Nick
may kill her in trying the cure. She isn't afraid to
die.

2. "or an eternity in darkness as long as I spend it
with you."

FK was never consistent, in spite of various attempts
and statements by writers and producers, about how
someone is brought across in that universe.  I'd say
Nat means that if Nick takes too much and brings her
across by accident, she isn't afraid of ending up as a
vampire as long as they're together. If Nick panics
and brings her over, she isn't afraid.

I don't think she meant she expected Nick to kill
himself if he killed her. Nat said she believes in
life after death.  We don't know whether this includes
a religious belief. She has been a godparent, and the
denominations which include godparents in baptism
strongly encourage the parents to chose practicing
Christians. Some require the same denomination. If it
is a religous belief, she's only likely to expect an
eternity in darkness if she believes in a literal hell
and thinks she and Nick may go there. I can't imagine
her saying she wasn't afraid of death in that case.

More likely, she means FK vampirism. It is for
eternity in that universe unless the vampire is staked
or burned. It is also in darkness since FK vampires
can't take sunlight.

Just my interpretation, of course.

McLisa

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:26:53 -0700
From:    Rose Thatcher <dreamerextrodanar@h.......>
Subject: Re: Right Time, Right Place

>I think I'm in the minority in that I've never thought of Erica as a ghost,
>but rather as a manifestation of Nick's subconscious.

THat's what I always thought!
               'Rose
who just had to throw her two cents in. <G>

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 8 Feb 2001 14:09:36 EST
From:    Marel Darby <Frostsaint2@a.......>
Subject: LaCroix's 'poison' ring

LaCroix's large silver ring is usually referred to as a 'poison' ring. I'm
just wondering why he chose this particular adornment. I didn't notice
him sporting it as a mortal in the flashbacks of AMPH, and, imo,
poison would not in any case have been his preferred method of
removing enemies. He seems to have acquired the ring as a vampire,
when he'd have even less need of it. Of course, it does look glamorously
sinister.<g>
Does anyone have any ideas?

Marel

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:38:01 -0700
From:    KYER <KYER@p.......>
Subject: Looking for Fic--Julie Randolf

I've only got part 2 of Julie's Something In Common, which looks to have
been a Last Knight story with possible What Dreams May Come (Robin William's
2000 cinema movie) simularities.
I'm really intrigued by the premise of Lacroix venturing into Hell to see if
Nicholas got trapped there instead of being with Natalie in Heaven.

Does anyone have any info?  **Please**

:)=
Kyer, kyer@p.......

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 8 Feb 2001 14:46:21 EST
From:    KnightLaw1@a.......
Subject: Re: LaCroix's 'poison' ring

Hi Marel!!

A couple of years ago I was at a fan gathering with Nigel Bennet and someone
asked about he ring.  He said he saw it in wardrobe one day and just thought
it was a good look for the old general.  He said he got compliments on it and
from then on it just stuck.

Hope this helps.

Peace,
maria

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:10:29 -0700
From:    Kyer <kyer@p.......>
Subject: Re: Child In Time

> But because of the long hiatus between first and second seasons, the young
> actor grew too much to reprise his role, so that ep never materialized.
> Cindy Ingram

So what was there excuse with Divia? <eg>

:)=
Kyer, kyer@p.......

------------------------------

End of FORKNI-L Digest - 7 Feb 2001 to 8 Feb 2001 (#2001-46)
************************************************************