FORKNI-L

FORKNI-L Digest - 28 Apr 2003 to 29 Apr 2003 (#2003-125)

Tue, 29 Apr 2003

There are 13 messages totalling 444 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. I have to rethink LaCroix's relationship with Nick (7)
  2. Virtual Reality Loft - Need Your Input (2)
  3. French (was Relationship) (2)
  4. Relationshp (was : French (was Relationship))
  5. Lights, Camera, Auction 6!

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

Date:    Mon, 28 Apr 2003 19:58:01 -0400
From:    Debbie Clarke <dittany121@h.......>
Subject: I have to rethink LaCroix's relationship with Nick

The other day I was watching  the episode  Killer Instinct and in particular
the scene where LaCroix is training Nick.    As is my custom I was trying to
listen to the French to see if I knew what they were saying   without the
translation.  (this time I did since it was quite basic  french.)   i was
therefore very surprised to hear him use the formal vous form of the verb
when he was speaking to  to  Nick  instead of  the familiar Tu form  of the
verb  you'd expect him to use when speaking to  his  fledgling.

At first I wondered if this  had been    a slip up on the part of the
writers    but  I dismissed this notion since venir (or revenir in this
case)  is one the   first  verbs you learn.  Even  after all these years I
can still pull the familiar imperitive tu command out of my head without
even thinking about it. .  I may have to think about the spelling   but I
remember what it was.  Reviens

That being the case I have to conclude   the choice  of the formal verb form
  was quite  deliberate.

So my question to you   what exactly is the relationship between Nick and
LaCroix.

  Nick  most decidedly is  not   his slave,     nor  would it appear    is
he just his  student .  Father and son is out since that  it goes without
saying   you use  tu  to speak to your children.

Can it possibly  be  LaCroix's  regards Nick   as an equal???????

Debbie  Clarke

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

Date:    Mon, 28 Apr 2003 17:43:30 -0700
From:    Amanda Berendt <debrabant_foundation@y......>
Subject: Re: I have to rethink LaCroix's relationship with Nick

--- Debbie Clarke <dittany121@h.......> wrote:

> Can it possibly  be  LaCroix's  regards Nick   as an equal???????

Ooooh a Nick & Lacroix relationship question....
  Ok, I have recently started really thinking about this.  It would
seem (to me at least) that at the point of the KI flashbacks, Lacroix
 *may* have thought of Nick as an equal, of sorts.  Or at least, as a
potential equal.  Then, as time went by (a long time, as we see Nick
and Lacroix without much of a problem between them during earlier
flashbacks) and Nick started rebelling in various ways, Lacroix
seemed to look down on him more and treat him more like a child. (and
thus less like an equal)
This seems to me like the same way some parents clamp down on teenage
children just as they are beginning to assert their independence.

-Amanda

=====
"Give me your soul and your heart will take flight
Forevermore in the night, Forever MINE in the night"
http://operacellar.tripod.com/phantomslair.html

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

Date:    Mon, 28 Apr 2003 19:46:53 -0700
From:    Megan Hull <mistrydder@y......>
Subject: Re: I have to rethink LaCroix's relationship with Nick

>This seems to me like the same way some parents clamp down on >teenage
>children just as they are beginning to assert their independence.
 Once, while living near my brother, I downloaded a story I was interested in
reading, then left it on his computer when I went to work.  When I came back,
he'd read it.  I asked him what he thought and he said he was dissappointed in
the story's treatment of Nick, which portrayed him very much like a teenager.
His comment was 'Nick isn't an adolecent.  He wasn't one when he was brought
across and he certainly isn't one now.  He's an adult, even if he has his faults
and childish moments.  Who doesn't?'  The remark really stuck with me, because
he was right.  I try to refer myself back to it whenever I work with the
charecter, because I think it's too easy to treat him like a child, especially
when looking at his relationship with LaCroix. On the original topic of this
discussion, remember that language is always changing.  'Usted', the formal
singular 'you' in Spanish, didn't even exist until about 250 years ago.  We may
be able to chalk up 'vous' vs 'tu' to changes in French over the years (even
though the French would deny it!)
-Megan

"Eternal nights too short,
How quickly melt away,
With all the love we shared once,
Forever in a Day."

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

Date:    Mon, 28 Apr 2003 20:01:20 -0700
From:    Cloud <clouddancer@c.......>
Subject: Re: I have to rethink LaCroix's relationship with Nick

> We may be able to chalk up 'vous' vs 'tu' to changes in French...

Since none of the list "elders" has chimed in yet: I saved this post a
while back. It was forwarded to the list by someone who was here when
Nigel was on the list.

--
Cloud

Date:    3-APR-94
From: Nigel Bennett
Subject: MUFFLED DIALOGUE

SO, THE FRENCH THAT EVERYONE HAS BEEN TRYING TO WORK OUT IN THE SECOND
EPISODE WAS AS FOLLOWS. GER'S LINE WAS INDEED VA AU DIABLE.... GO TO THE
DEVIL.
MY LINE WAS SOIT TRANQUILLE....BE CALM.
I'M NOT SURE WHY WE USE THE MORE PERSONAL SINGULAR FORM- WE ALWAYS DO- I
WAS TAUGHT PARISIAN FRENCH WAY BACK IN SCHOOL, AND ALMOST INSTINCTIVELY
GO FOR THE FORMAL PLURAL. THEY ALWAYS CATCH ME!
AND ANOTHER THING! SOMEWHERE IN AN EPISODE DIRECTED BY MIKE LEVINE THERE
IS A SCENE IN THE PRECINCT, AND IN THE BACKGROUND A PETTY CRIMINAL IS
BEING LED TO THE CELLS BY A COP. THE PETTY CRIMINAL IS NONE OTHER THAN
ME!!!
WE DID IT AS A JOKE, AND IF THE SCENE IS IN, SO AM I.
TONIGHT'S ASSIGNMENT....CAN YOU FIND ME????
I WISH I COULD TELL YOU MORE ABOUT THE NEW EPISODES, BUT I REALLY CAN'T.
THEY ARE, HOWEVER, MUCH BETTER THAN THE OLD ONES SO FAR; MORE INVENTIVE,
CLEVERER, AND MORE FUN TO DO.

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

Date:    Mon, 28 Apr 2003 20:14:47 -0700
From:    FKMel <sgt_buck_frobisher@y......>
Subject: Re: I have to rethink LaCroix's relationship with Nick

Could someone please be nice and tell me what ep that
was? I just don't want to have to go digging through
all ten of my tapes to try and find it. If you want,
just tell me the ep and I'll watch it and look for the
scene.

Mel, who thinks it would be nice if he was still on
the list...what happened? Did he get too busy? Or was
it just because the show went off the air?


SOMEWHERE IN AN EPISODE DIRECTED BY MIKE LEVINE THERE
IS A SCENE IN THE PRECINCT, AND IN THE BACKGROUND A
PETTY CRIMINAL IS BEING LED TO THE CELLS BY A COP. THE
PETTY CRIMINAL IS NONE OTHER THAN ME!!!


=====
FK:NickNatPacker, Knight of the Cross,Knightie, Natpacker/Highlander:Duncan
Flag-Waver/Due South Fan/Tracker Fan/Angel Fan/Port Charles Fan
Forever Knight: The show that gives new meaning to the phrase "Take a bite out
of crime"

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

Date:    Mon, 28 Apr 2003 22:47:08 -0500
From:    Kristin <kris1228@e.......>
Subject: Virtual Reality Loft - Need Your Input

Greetings,

My friend Myrhia is in the process of creating a virtual reality loft from
"scratch." She plans to make this available to all the fans, but she needs
your help with as many details as possible. If you know any answers to the
questions below, please don't hesitate to reply.

Does anyone know if a floor plan of the loft still exists on the internet?
If so, where?
What episodes show more of Nick's bedroom all the way around?
What are the names of some of the key items in the loft such as the scream
painting above Nick's fridge?
What kind of carpet does he have?
Any specific names for any of his furniture?
Any "key" items from any of the 3 seasons you would like to see in the loft?

Thanks for your help,
Kristin
http://knightvision.4ever.cc
"When you only have eyes for the Knight..."

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

Date:    Mon, 28 Apr 2003 21:08:06 -0700
From:    NAT <nat1228@A.......>
Subject: Re: Virtual Reality Loft - Need Your Input

At 10:47 PM 4/28/2003 -0500, Kristin wrote:
>Does anyone know if a floor plan of the loft still exists on the internet?
>If so, where?

I have plans for the loft, courtesy of Chris Rosmini, on my page at:
http://nat1228.tripod.com/loft2.htm

Nancy


~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Nancy A. Taylor  -- Knightie, N&NPack
nat1228@a.......
http://www.squidge.org/~nat1228/fk.htm

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

Date:    Mon, 28 Apr 2003 23:16:07 -0500
From:    Nancy Kaminski <nancykam@A.......>
Subject: Re: I have to rethink LaCroix's relationship with Nick

> --- Debbie Clarke <dittany121@h.......> wrote:
> Can it possibly  be  LaCroix's  regards Nick   as an equal???????

First off, on the "vous vs. tu" issue---it's extremely possible that
was a screwup. Things get written in a hurry, and if you have a script
writer who doesn't know French, you'll gambling with what comes out
(even in a country where many people do speak French!) I wouldn't
count too heavily on the use of personal pronouns in this case!

But as to Nick and Lacroix's relationship: I think it is a big mistake
to assume that Lacroix regards Nick as a child. As someone noted, Nick
was to all intents and purposes middle-aged when he was brought
across. I think more important to their relationship at that time was
that Lacroix seemed to regard Nick as his vassal---a man who owed
allegiance to his better, and who vowed obedience and loyalty.
Remember the scene where Nick kisses LC's ring and tells him he will
repay him for the gift of vampirism? This gesture is one of fealty
(even though the way Nick vows to repay LC, the coin of repayment
wounld not necessarily please LC).

I suspect that LC was looking, not for a slave or a son, but a boon
companion, someone who would share his existence as a loyal friend.
Not as an equal, mind you, since LC was clearly in charge, just like
Lord Delabarre was the boss when Nick was in his entourage. Everyone
in those days was comfortable with the social hierarchy; who you were
defined what you were and what you did. Nick, as a mid-level noble (or
even lower mid-level) would expect to serve someone, just as he had
others who served him.

It was only later, as LC's concept of the relationship became more
paternal (and perhaps more personal--hello, UF!) and as Nick's human
morals started ocming to the surface that things got really bad. Also,
it's common for military commanders to consider their junior staff
officers as "their family". I'm sure that LC, as a Roman legate, had
his own circle of loyal officers who he trusted and loved (in that
soldierly, "band of brothers" way, of course! <g>).

I wonder if LC had held the tether more loosely, would Nick have been
less rebellious? He seemed only to want to go his own way most of the
time, but obviously dind't reject LC entirely. In other words, he
needed his space. <g> But then where would we be, with a contented
Nick? No angst, no show!

Nancy Kaminski
nancykam@a.......
apparently one of the "oldtimers" <gah!>

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

Date:    Tue, 29 Apr 2003 07:17:34 -0400
From:    Brenda Bell <webwarren@e.......>
Subject: Re: I have to rethink LaCroix's relationship with Nick

At 07:46 PM 4/28/2003 -0700, Megan Hull wrote:

>On the original topic of this discussion, remember that language is always
>changing.  'Usted', the formal singular 'you' in Spanish, didn't even
>exist until about 250 years ago.  We may be able to chalk up 'vous' vs
>'tu' to changes in French over the years (even though the French would
>deny it!)

Not necessarily deny it! Remember that all "official" changes to the French
language must be approved by L'Academie Française.

One thing to keep in mind is that until recently (1960's or so? certainly
mid- to late-1970's) the use of the familiar form was restricted to
children, pets, intimates, and -- in some cases -- social inferiors. It was
also used as a derogatory form of address between social equals or near-equals.

To provide a parallel, in the Three Musketeers trilogy (Les Trois
Mousquetaires, Vingt Ans Après, Le Vicomte de Bragelonne -- the last of
which includes "The Man in the Iron Mask"), Dumas-père shows us exactly how
close Athos feels to D'Artagnan when, in cases of impending personal peril
to the younger man, Athos uses the familiar form "tu". Invariably, Athos
(aka le Comte de la Fère, a close relative or descendant of Henri III) has
dropped his aristocratic/formal mask in the case of extreme emotional
stress, makes his point, and then returns to the more formal usage.

If this were done consistently in FK, one might argue for an intimate but
nonsexual relationship, and even though usage has migrated a lot more
towards the familiar in the past 30-50 years, the ingrained habits of
formality would have remained through to the present day (in which case
Nigel's "automatic" reaching for the formal would be absolutely correct).
OTOH, the occasional slip from the familiar to the formal might imply
either an UFfish relationship which is corrected for (though occasionally
forgotten) "in public" so that an outsider might not discern the
relationship, or it might imply a master-child relationship in which
Lacroix finds Nick occasionally "growing up" in a vampiric sense... and
then relapsing, in which case he uses the "tu" form as a way of berating
Nick for his (re)lapse.

Unless Nick were sexually intimate with Lacroix over a long period of time,
he would not have easily (or often!) addressed Lacroix with the familiar
form. (There are only some degrees to which derogatory comments and social
presumption can be taken, and Nick considering himself Lacroix's equal is
*not* one of them!)


Brenda F. Bell   webwarren@e.......   /nick TMana     IM: n2kye
Arctophile, computer addict, TREKker, stealth photographer...
         UA, PoCBS, FKPagan; Neon-Green GlowWorm
HugMistress of the Ger Bear Project http://members.Tripod.com/~TMana/
Gerthering 3 Photos:  http://members.Tripod.com/~TMana/gertherng/
Visit the Fiendish Glow at http://home.earthlink.net/~webwarren/glow/

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

Date:    Tue, 29 Apr 2003 16:24:42 +0200
From:    Doris Weiss <dorisweiss_2000@y......>
Subject: French (was Relationship)

Here's something else:

I agree that the use if the pronoun was inconsistent
during the show. I would opt for the formal 'vous', I
mean we're talking Middle Ages here. So I go with
Nancy's view.
But I wondered why Lacroix ( in CaC) called Nick 'mon
petit' (my little one) if he didn't consider him his
child of some sorts. The flashback is about a week
into Nick's training/ fledgling phase.

Luc

=====
"Even eternal life is too short to wait for a table." - Uncle -

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

Date:    Tue, 29 Apr 2003 10:39:22 -0400
From:    Libratsie@a.......
Subject: Relationshp (was : French (was Relationship))

I don't know French to comment on the history of the language and meaning of the
word used. However, we always seem to discuss the Nick and LaCroix relationship
based on human terms. They are no longer human. They have human aspects to them,
definitely, but are not human.

I think their relationship can't really be described in terms we can understand.
To me, in a way, they are father and son, teacher and student, etc. But not
exactly. I think LaCroix DOES sometimes treat Nick as a child in the way many
human parents sometimes treat their adult children as still being children
although they are long grownup.  At the same time, it isn't exactly like that.

I, personally, think LaCroix has too much of an ego to see Nick as an equal. I
think he sees him as a POTENTIAL equal, one that has strayed.<g> LaCroix made
Nick what he is, probably full of dreams and schemes just like a human parent
has when he or she has a child. But a vampire child is usually an adult, just
untrained in the ways of the FK vampires. Some of it is instinct, but LaCroix
has taught Nick a lot (where as other vampires such as Vachon receive very
little training... and I suspect Screed received none).

So the relationship, to me, just can't really be described by human terms.
LaCroix sees himself as a lord over Nick in a way. I also can see them as
lovers, but again, not exactly in the same way that humans would be. LaCroix,
Nick and Janette are a family, but not in the same way humans would be.

Libs

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

Date:    Tue, 29 Apr 2003 10:47:20 -0700
From:    Megan Hull <mistrydder@y......>
Subject: Re: French (was Relationship)

Wow!  Talk about your intellegent discussion!  Thank-you, everyone who's
written, you've all made excellent, well-thought-out points.
  >But I wondered why Lacroix ( in CaC) called Nick 'mon petit' (my little
  >one)if he didn't consider him his child of some sorts. The flashback is
  >about a week into Nick's training/ fledgling phase.

I imagine vampires go though an 'infant' or 'training' stage, where they are
just stumbling through, trying to figure things out.  Anyone who's started a new
job in a new industry knows what it's like-- you have no clue what you're
supposed to do or how to do it.  You just follow your mentor around for a while,
being completely confused.  Having mentored in my own work, I can say that
mentoring generally does put one in a paternal/maternal state of mind, but
generally only until the trainee catches on and can work on their own.  But, as
has been pointed out, LaCroix isn't exactly the type to let anyone else be his
equal (reminds me of some nurses I know!) so he wouldn't have ever entirely lost
that. The scene where Nick kisses LaCroix's ring has also been brought up
several times, and what exactly he meant by "I will repay you".  To me, it's
always seemed Nick's expression was somewhat... uncertain.  Like he was
thinking, "OK, you made me, and you're the one keeping me alive!
 , I guess that makes you my lord, but I'm really not sure I like this, maybe
I'll get used to it, but.... " sort of thing.  As Nancy pointed out, Nick would
expect owe fealty to someone-- it was the order of the day-- and obedience was a
'whether you like it or not' deal.  It obviously took him quite a while to
decide he couldn't handle it anymore.                           -Megan

"Eternal nights too short,
How quickly melt away,
With all the love we shared once,
Forever in a Day."

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

Date:    Tue, 29 Apr 2003 13:59:40 -0400
From:    Annmarie <wench@o.......>
Subject: Lights, Camera, Auction 6!

April 27, 2003

Greetings from MPICA!

We are please to announce that registration is open for Lights, Camera,
Auction - Take 6!  Sept. 19-21, 2003.

This year, our charities are the Stroke Foundation of Southern California
and a Canadian charity TBA shortly.

For details, visit us at:

  <http://www.mpica.org/LCA6/main.htm>http://www.mpica.org/LCA6/main.htm

We hope you'll join us! :-)

Regards,

MPICA
<http://www.mpica.org>http://www.mpica.org

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

End of FORKNI-L Digest - 28 Apr 2003 to 29 Apr 2003 (#2003-125)
***************************************************************