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