lurkers-guide/ftp/GEnie/jms96-07

JMS on GEnie
July 1996 postings


SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 374       Mon Jul 08, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 01:43 EDT
 
     If GEnie should go away -- and I haven't heard anything either
way on this -- I'd just stick with the other services I'm on already, mainly
CIS, AOL and rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated.


jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 381       Tue Jul 09, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 22:27 EDT
 
     I've said it before, I'll say it again: this show was born under
a black star.

     Starting from the debut of the pilot in New York, where we were
literally blown off the air by the World Trade Center blast, which took out
WWOR's antenna, until now, anything that can go wrong, does.

     After 3 years, we're finally, FINALLY, going to get a good sized
article in TV Guide (July 27th) as part of their SF round up.  They sent a
photo crew out to do the shoot.  Very difficult and elaborate, cast came 
in on breaks and cut short time away to do it.  

     So today WB calls to say that after Federal Expressing the
original negatives, transparencies, everything, to NY in time for the 
article, the truck carrying the art was hijacked at gunpoint, and 
everything inside went with it.  So now it's too late to redo the shoot, 
and they'll have to go with older art provided by WB.

     We can't catch a break on this show....

                                                                   jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 390       Wed Jul 10, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 01:49 EDT
 
     No, the driver was fine, only the stuff was taken, driven off.

     Boy, those Paramount boys'll stop at nothing....

     (the preceding was a joke, for the jocularity deficient)

                                                                   jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 2
Message 234       Tue Jul 09, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 15:50 EDT
 
     Yes, the UK will be getting the final 5 starting in August.  WB
Int'l had agreed to the run straight through, and C4 held them to it.  To 
change it would've caused problems.  


jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 2
Message 241       Tue Jul 09, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 22:31 EDT
 
     Allen: yes, that's a correct statement.

     Trys: why can't they change us?  Situation is this: the UK
doesn't have ratings periods.  The US does.  They check their ratings all 
the time, and determine their rates for advertising, and don't generally 
have rerun periods.  So they play straight through.

     If WB plays the shows in July, August, or September, those aren't
sweeps periods.  Also, those months are when TV viewership figures (they 
call them HUTs, Households Using Television) are at their lowest, because 
people are away from home, on vacation, at the beach, whatever.  The 
November sweeps are *crucial* to keeping a show on the air.  So WB wants 
to air the final 5 in October, to ramp up the ratings in November, for 
that reason.  (It often takes weeks for people not online to discover 
there ARE new episodes on.)  

     If they play us out of sweeps, we're a less valuable commodity to
the stations, and thus it's more likely we'd get canceled.  Pick your
poison.

                                                                 jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 427       Fri Jul 12, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 16:37 EDT
 
     I think part of the disagreement here comes over how you define
what a STORY is.  A story is the connotation of consequences, and 
context, as opposed to a PLOT, which is the series of events in which the 
story takes place, A, B, C, D.  "The king died, and then the queen died" 
is a basic plot.  "The king died, and then the queen died of grief" is a 
story.

     I preface this by saying I haven't seen ID4 yet, so take what
follows cum granus salus, but....

     As I understand it, ID4 is an incident/plot driven movie.  Bad
aliens come to Earth.  Bad aliens smash.  Good humans smash back.  Good
humans win.  The aliens are there to shoot and be shot at, and we don't 
really know much about who they are, where they come from, their 
cosmology, any of that.  It's a series of incidents.

     With Star Wars, you got the sense of things happening outside the
plot, and you got the sense of context and consequences.  It delved into
matters of belief, the use of the Force, the Zen notion of letting go of 
the conscious self.  It carried with it a sense of history, the notion 
that there had been prior wars, and the whole history of the Jedi 
Knights, which carried with it a sense of mystery and wonder.  There was 
a fairly well realized political framework, with Imperials and rebels and 
other planets that chose not to get involved.  You got the sense that the 
events in the story came from somewhere, and would lead to something.

     There's not much question that Star Wars contains more actual
story than ID4.  Which isn't the same thing as saying that one is 
*better* than the other.  That's a mug's game, because whatever's better 
for us is a purely subjective decision.  But one can point to the two 
movies and say, with a fair amount of objectivity, which one contains 
*more* story than the other, which involved the most creativity and 
world-building.

     Just to try and clarify the argument a little....

                                                           jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 33
Message 278       Fri Jul 12, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 00:46 EDT
 
     So given that all of season 3 has only one author, given that you
can easily define a season (apparently there was some confusion about what
a season is) as Year 3, episodes 301-322, given that this year they're
MUCH more directly linked as one dramatic unit...what d'you think the 
odds would be of getting all of season 3 of B5 considered as one dramatic 
unit for Hugo consideration next season?

     (Heck, we gotta compete with ID4 *somehow*....)


jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 33
Message 281       Fri Jul 12, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 16:51 EDT
 
     But is it really an exception?  You have two books as potential
nominees. One is 100,000 words long, the other is a huge 300,000 word 
potboiler. But they're both written by one author, so they're both 
eligible.  If a two-part episode can be considered a dramatic unit 
because it has one author, and a single episode can be considered because 
it has one author, then why not a 22- parter with only one author?  Just 
because the unit has more pages shouldn't mitigate against it any more 
than the 300,000 word novel should be disqualified.

     If you stop and think about it dispassionately for a moment, the
exception would be in NOT allowing a whole one-author season be
nominated.  The committee has already allowed the notion of multiple-part 
nominees by accepting two-parters.  You've crossed the one-episode barrier
already.  So logically if you've accepted that, why suddenly change it to 
just one episode?


     Conceivably, I could take all 22 scripts, put a huge binder on
it, and slap a cover page on it reading SEASON THREE, WRITTEN BY J. MICHAEL
STRACZYNSKI, and drop that one single unit on the desk of the
committee and say, "Here, here's one dramatic unit."  

     On one level, it's really kind of an intellectual exercise; I
like to feather around the rules and see what things mean when little things
get changed, and what the *sense* of the rule is vs. how it's applied
sometimes.

                                                            jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 458       Tue Jul 16, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 03:14 EDT
 
     I was in college when Star Wars hit, first year or so, I think,
and had somehow managed to utterly and completely miss ALL of the hype 
and PR about the movie *for the entire duration of its run*.  (I was, by 
turns, studying heavily, writing heavily and dating heavily.)  I finally 
wandered in to see it on the last day of a screening run at a small 
theater in Chula Vista, about the last place on earth still playing it by 
that late date.  Sat down to watch it, figuring it'd be another cheesy 
awful film like the (I think) Star Invasion movie I'd seen just before, 
with Robert Vaughn, I think, and Christopher Lee....

     No expectations, no knowledge.  Tabula rasa.

     Two or three other people in the theater as it went dark.

     That first shot pinned my ears to the back of the room and never
left.


jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 467       Wed Jul 17, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 00:20 EDT
 
     I'd say Sinclair and Garibaldi both caught traces of that future.

                                                                   jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 26
Message 448       Sat Jul 13, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 02:14 EDT
 
     The videos were the same, in the case of "Requiem," but the
projection system wasn't really up to snuff.

     Now, I toss out a philosophical question for general
consideration.

     When they first showed "Requiem," I was watching from the back,
as is my wont.  I always try to make sure *everybody* can see and hear 
stuff as well as conceivable.  The lights were on low in the middle of 
the room, which washed out about 60% of the video; there were whole 
sections where you couldn't see squat.

     I was very bugged about this, and when I went to the stage, and
set up things to show, I said bring the lights down *all the way*.  One
person with the con said "We can't do that."  This seemed remarkable to 
me, as I understood that most electrical devices had on and off switches.  
So I cupped the mike and indicated that if the lights didn't go down I'd 
shoot them out.  They went down.

     The second time we went dark, I found out what was going on sub
rosa.  There were, I think, 3 or 5 deaf people in the front of the room, 
and had someone signing for them to tell them what was being said on the
clips.  The person doing the signing was very upset with me, to say the 
least.

     So here's the dilemma: you keep the lights up, and 2,400 people
can't SEE the screens.  If you lower the lights, they can, but the 3-5 
people with hearing problems can't hear what's being said.

     The logical solution, I believe, was what I did: the lights go
down, on the theory that the 2,400 outnumber the 3-5.  But at the same 
time, I'm sensitive to the problem.  I know that the signer was 
upset...but at the same time, I figure, if you knew you were going to be 
signing in a room where a SCREENING was going on, which therefore would 
get dark, you'd bring a low-level light or flashlight for those periods.

     Comments?  Discussions?

     I think I made the right decision...but it's a tough call, y'know?

                                                                   jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 26
Message 463       Sun Jul 14, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 03:26 EDT
 
      Unfortunately, my master copies aren't closed-captioned, only
the broadcast copies, because that takes 'em down a generation.


jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 33
Message 297       Mon Jul 15, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 00:16 EDT
 
     Actually, I'd mitigate *against* the 5-year story being
considered as a whole dramatic unit because it has multiple writers.  I 
think that would tend to violate the spirit of the Hugos.


jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 501       Fri Jul 19, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 20:14 EDT
 
     For those with questions about the fan club, or who haven't yet
received some of the material, B5FC head Jim Lockett now has an email 
address: JPLB5@AOL.COM.

                                                     jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 532       Mon Jul 22, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 04:44 EDT
 
     Peter: well, as you note, if the response hadn't been as strong
as it is, we'd likely be off the air and it'd be a moot point.  (Or, if 
the show were swallowed into silence, maybe that'd be a mute point.)  But 
for the sake of argument, let's take a middle ground...sufficient ratings 
to stay on the air, but zip in the way of direct response: no B5 forums, 
topics, web pages...a silence vast as space.

     I'd do exactly what I'm doing.  I can't work any other way.  I
believe in this show, in the story I'm telling, right down to my socks.   
Not to be grandious, because I'm not even within 50 light years of this 
class, but...in his lifetime, Van Gogh sold exactly 1 painting, for (I 
believe) 40 francs.  Everyone considered him a failure.  He lived with 
his brother, who paid his bills, kept him in food and clothing, which he 
felt VERY guilty about...nobody knew him, or his work.  But what he 
painted, he painted.  He painted what moved him, what *meant* something 
to him.  And if the world noticed, or if it did not, that didn't change 
what he saw, or the way he presented it on canvas.

     He suffered greatly, endured greatly, but the work was the work.
It was in-between that his life was most disasterous, when he wasn't 
working, when he wasn't *seeing*.  And it was in that dry stretch that, 
on a warm Spring afternoon, he went out into a field five miles from his 
brother Theo's home, put a gun to his chest, and fired...out of guilt for 
taking up so much of his brother's money, out of fear, out of failure, 
the vessel not the equal of the talent it contained.  (And even at that, 
he failed; the bullet did not kill him at once.  He lay there for almost 
an hour, then crawled back to Theo's home, where several hours later, he 
died in his brother's arms.)

     And now, today, industrialists and collectors pay millions of
dollars to hold one of his paintings to their eyes and peer through the 
bars to greatness...for the chance to see what Van Gogh saw through those
tragic eyes.

     The work is the work.  To fall prey to despair when it isn't seen
for what (you hope) it is...or to puff proud like a pouter pigeon when the
crowds cry out your name...both are equally anathema to the creative  drive.
You have to listen to the calm, clear voice in the back of your head and
paint what you must paint, write what you must write, dance what you must
dance and sing what you must sing, because to *not* do so is suicide, and 
to do so for the wrong reasons, to appeal to the momentary trends of the 
crowd, is a much slower but just as sure a death.

     The story is the story, and the work is the work.  There is no
other answer that would mean a damn.

                                                                 jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 547       Tue Jul 23, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 16:58 EDT
 
     Vampyr: Zelazny collected 500 rejection slips before he sold
anything, so you've got at least 499 more to go before you're entitled to 
get depressed.

     And yes, the piece can be reprinted, as can anything I write
here.

     I'd hoped not to generally have this known...but no, I don't
drive.   I have a bit of a proble with depth perception that only comes 
into play really in any significant way when I'm behind the wheel of a car.
Translation: I hit things, and they frown on that.  So for the good of the
Commonweal, I stay off the roads.

     So I don't know who drove off at LosCon, but it weren't me.

                                                                jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 553       Wed Jul 24, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 01:26 EDT
 
     I get around...it just requires a certain degree of creativity
some days.

     (And yes, I have the stamp, thanks, it's very cool.)

                                                                  jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 557       Wed Jul 24, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 04:45 EDT
 
      Hmmm...I don't know this for a fact, I'm only speculating, but
the station could be burning off its committment to clear the decks and
the ledgers.  Could be interesting if it backfires and starts doing well
for them, which has the potential to happen when someone starts stripping 
the show nightly....

                                                                jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 586       Thu Jul 25, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 14:51 EDT
 
     The driving *can* be done...but from my perspective, knowing me,
not as safely as I feel should be the case.  Unless I'm 100% confident of my
ability, I won't get behind the wheel of a car and risk hurting 
someone.   It's just not something I can do with a clear conscience.

                                                                   jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 12
Message 354       Tue Jul 23, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 17:02 EDT
 
      It's "arc," as story arc, he kinda misunderstood.

      I'm rather conflicted about the article...on one hand, it's a
positive article, and one should be properly thankful for that.  On the 
other, I'd thought it'd be about the show, and the cast (I wasn't even in 
the photo shoot, which is standard, so again I figured it was about the 
show per se), and instead it's mainly jms stuff, which I'm kinda so-so 
about.  And on the third hand (I have a third hand now), it feels like he 
was looking for some kind of angle on the story, found this one -- that 
we are ABOUT something -- and kinda ran it into the ground.  

     It seems these days that if you care about something, if you want
to make a statement, or believe in your work, somehow that's passe, and 
it's trendy to poke fun at passion.  The trouble with cynicism is that it 
tends to devolve into contempt, and these are cynical times.

     So I dunno...good article, in most ways, others...just kinda sets
my teeth on edge.  But again, this is the first time they've really
acknowledged us, so I have no complaints.  I'm happy they did it.


jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 608       Fri Jul 26, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 15:19 EDT
 
     Re: a gold-plated limo...dream on.  Syndication pays roughly half
what network shows pay.  My agent still shakes her head that I left Murder,
She Wrote and took a 50% pay cut to do B5.  

     The Pegasus Publishing bumper stickers are definitely unlicensed.

     Script #3 title: "The Summoning."

                                                                 jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 624       Fri Jul 26, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 23:58 EDT
 
     BMW?  Please, it's a Mercedes 300E, my only concession to working
in TV, also because it's a very safe car.  (1990 model, still going strong.)

                                                                 jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 2
Message 320       Sat Jul 27, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 05:46 EDT
 
     There are no current plans for Talia's return.

                                                             jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 648       Sun Jul 28, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 23:48 EDT
 
     Mike: the problem is we're telling different stories.  What makes
it interesting for me is that Sheridan *isn't* prepared, Kosh *didn't*
finish his training.  It isn't nice and tidy.  And to stop and explain 
the dream in "Interludes" would've meant taking, oh, about 3-5 minutes 
OUT of that episode, and it's very tight as it is.  And it would've just 
been a case of, "Here, here's this bit of exposition relating to 
something you've seen before."

     No, the dream *does* get explained...and it gets explained *this
season*, in the course of the final five.  In detail.  But at the right 
time, and in the right place.  To have explained it sooner wouldn't work, 
it has to come at the right moment, with the last bits of information our 
characters need to *use* that interpretation.

                                                                   jms
 ------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18,  Topic 1
Message 372       Tue Jul 30, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe]            at 16:37 EDT
 
     Van Dyke had considerable problems with alcohol for many years
before finally coming out the other side, which were widely known and
reported, and he's been very open in talking about them.

     And yes, definitely know that Rod's no longer with us, I was just
playing into the TZ sensibility for a moment.  (While on TZ3 I did a
posthumous collaboration with Serling, taking his outline for "Our Selena 
Is Dying" and turning it into a full episode of the show.)

                                                                   jms
 ------------