Login

Username

Password



Not a rebel yet?
CLICK HERE to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one from Orac HERE.

Current User Info

· Lurkers Lurking: 5

· Rebels Active: 0

· Total Rebels: 918
· Newest Rebel: Wooks63

Login Help

If you are having problems logging in, please bear in mind that if you originally registered at the site before 8th January 2014 and you haven't re-registered since that date your old login details will no longer work. If this is the case, please re-register, preferably with your former username. If you are having trouble with the registration process itself, try looking HERE and HERE for help and advice. If you need further assistance, please do CONTACT us.

Current Poll

Who is your Favourite Guest Rebel?

Avalon - (Project Avalon)
Avalon - (Project Avalon)
18% [17 Votes]

Selma - (Horizon)
Selma - (Horizon)
5% [5 Votes]

Tyce - (Bounty)
Tyce - (Bounty)
15% [14 Votes]

Norm One - (Redemption)
Norm One - (Redemption)
2% [2 Votes]

Bek - (Shadow)
Bek - (Shadow)
6% [6 Votes]

Kasabi - (Pressure Point)
Kasabi - (Pressure Point)
19% [18 Votes]

Hal Mellanby - (Aftermath)
Hal Mellanby - (Aftermath)
14% [13 Votes]

Hunda - (Traitor)
Hunda - (Traitor)
5% [5 Votes]

Deva - (Blake)
Deva - (Blake)
9% [9 Votes]

Other
Other
6% [6 Votes]

Votes: 95
Login to vote.
Started: 09 July 2016

Polls Archive

Forum Activity

Newest Articles

B7 Images

+ Cookies +

The Horizon website uses cookies to allow user log-in and navigation. The site does not host advertising that requires the use of third-party cookies. Registering as a member of this site implies your consent to the use of cookies.

View Thread

 Print Thread
Blake
trevor travis
Grade Four Ignorant wrote:Basically, I see the Freedom Party being a bit like the ANC during Apartheid. Foster and Blake being roughly allegorical to Albert Lutuli (advocate of non-violent resistance) and Nelson Mandela (co-founded the MK, used methods of violence).


Interesting comparison, since while Mandela ended up revered as a man of peace, he engaged in activities while he was younger that were undoubtedly terrorist in nature.

Personally, I feel Blake has differences to Mandela, Mandela also had the capacity for diplomacy and I doubt Blake has. Blake would make an awful leader of a republic.
Edited by trevor travis on 18 January 2015 10:04:14
 
lemon
Surprisingly learned about the assumptions that Blake can be regarded as a terrorist. I never thought that way about him. Fell under his charm since Way back.

Blake is complex and sometimes unpredictable for me than the other characters. I still can't understand how he refers to each member of his team. It seems that he same for all, the members of crew to interact in different ways beetwen each other.
He is the driving force Liberator, attractive and forcing to revolve around him other people, charismatic, kind, optimistic with moral ideas, although not a perfect man who have may do mistake.
 
JustBrad
lemon wrote:

Surprisingly learned about the assumptions that Blake can be regarded as a terrorist.


Indeed, although that is primarily from the perspective of the Federation.

The series does touch on the subject, though they tread lightly in the conversation between Cally and Blake in Star One. To Blake it is the choice between freedom and comfort (discomfort coming with the destruction of Star One), a choice he is willing to make on behalf of humanity, based on his own moral choice.

There is a fine line between resolution and fanaticism.
 
lemon
Thanks JustBrad for your explanation!
Yet to be seen Star One, however, it is interesting to look at this point. Blake has sometimes obsessed in his action, but I explain it as the ardent desire to do away with corrupt power in Federation. How else he should fight in their situation?
Someone already noticed he does not bombing of innocent people. Well, of course, despite the fact that in the Federation, there are exist good people and motive of attack in Mission on Destiny and Trial I not quite accept, but I understand. Informal war
 
President Solvite
Yes I think you can only buy into the terrorist argument if you dismiss much of what is seen and noted in episode one.

Apart from 'hear say' and reports most viewed acts of Federation brutality are off camera. (apart from the massacre of civilians on Zondawl)

Personally I think Blake is mostly correct in all the actions that he takes. Yes he makes mistakes (Don't we all? Even more so under pressure and stress!)

The terrorist theory seems to mainly come from his supposed cause of millions of deaths with the destruction of Star One. But since this episode (good though it is) has more plot holes, goofs and apparent inconsistencies, it is hard to determine what is meant beyond a dramatic emphasis of argument. The you were right part.. I think refers to Cally's objection to the implication that it is Blake's fight solely..

In Voice from the Past for example I think subconsciously many people blame Blake for his actions, where instead he is being influence by that signal. Or they buy into Avon's assessment of Blake which despite Avon's skills with logic, is heavily laden with emotional histrionics, especially at the conclusion of Star One.

I find it interesting that some here bear great weight on Cally's line of millions will die, but dismiss Cally's defense of Blake to Avon "You're wrong" in the episode Trial

Even in late season 2 Blake demonstrates he can work with Federation moderates for the greater good of humanity.

Yes I sort of equate him as a Mandela kind of figure, although in B7 you have no external forces working on the Federation like South Africa had.. Global Media, Political Pressures, Sanctions, Sport Exclusions etc.. etc.. Mandela had it relatively easy compared to Blake.. (I mean no disrespect but he had tremendous support globally, recently hearing the song Free Nelson Mandela... )

Blake is largely working in isolation along with a few other 'pockets' With an overwhelming military the Federation can do pretty much what they want. With minimal protests and resistance.

But hey what a story it makes..

A love those lines...

Where are all the good guys?
You could be looking at them
What a depressing thought!

That works on many levels, from the futility of it all to the fact that they as criminals etc.. representing the best hope for the 'honest man' of the Federation.
 
http://nothingsforgotten.freeforums.net/
JustBrad
I don't think any objective person would call Blake a terrorist. However, I can easily see where The Federation Ministry of Information would eagerly do so. I can also see where someone who suffered a collateral loss might call Blake a terrorist.

Take for instance the daughter of a civilian contractor installing installing air conditioning unit on Centero when Blake blows it up.
 
lemon
JustBrad wrote:

Take for instance the daughter of a civilian contractor installing installing air conditioning unit on Centero when Blake blows it up.


Other side of the coin indeed.
Why don't they continue the line with child molestation? This is a strong trump card against him.

President Solvite wrote:

A love those lines...

Where are all the good guys?
You could be looking at them
What a depressing thought!

That works on many levels, from the futility of it all to the fact that they as criminals etc.. representing the best hope for the 'honest man' of the Federation.

Oh, I love this line too! They're actually good guys who started out as criminals and become legends due to the changes in their lives related with Blake. They could long ago it all together to get him out of the Liberator and continue their old life, but caught follow his ideals.
 
peladon
I think, and always have thought since I first started having such discussions with people, that you have to be very picky in what you pay attention to if you want to call Blake a terrorist. Just as you have to be very picky to see Avon as socially inept, Cally as gentle or Gan as a psychopath. But some of the glaring anomolies, and, lets it face self indulgent writing, do allow for that pickiness. Shadow and Star One are the most obvious examples, both redrawing the lines of the Blake character contrary to what has gone before, without reason, and both laden with plot holes and other inconsistencies. But then I personally take the view that canon is weighted by how early it occurs not how late, so for me how the character is set up trumps a later view unless that view is justified in some way (which it isnt in either of those two episodes). From that perspective whilst Blake is focussed often to the point of arrogance and discounting other opinion (notably Avon) he is still a basically honest man.
 
Ellen York
JustBrad wrote:

I don't think any objective person would call Blake a terrorist. However, I can easily see where The Federation Ministry of Information would eagerly do so. I can also see where someone who suffered a collateral loss might call Blake a terrorist.

Take for instance the daughter of a civilian contractor installing installing air conditioning unit on Centero when Blake blows it up.



That is a very good point. I've never considered Blake a terrorist. I agree with his cause (though not always with the methods). But even someone who in theory agreed with the cause would probably have doubts if someone they cared for was caught in the cross fire (friendly fire isn't).
 
Anniew
I couldn't stand Blake when I first watched the series but now I understand that without the character, the show wouldn't have worked. I know - simplistic but it's taken me this long to feel it emotionally not just intellectually. His basic 'give a damn' is so necessary and without it the ending is not tragic - just a mess. Through the character we can see how lost the crew have become, especially Avon and to feel sad at Blake's death and that it wasn't right - he didn't deserve it. Also it is so moving that he sort of forgives Avon with his dying breath. I wish the others had challenged Avon more - stood up to him- shouted and shaken him- particularly Cally but of course that wasn't her way. Oh gosh it's sad!
Just because I can't sing doesn't mean I won't.
 
BrainButNoHeart
I know this thread is dead, and I've never actually posted anything before (I just joined), but I wanted to contribute anyway. I think maybe some of this discussion is a little too black and white on the terrorist vs freedom fighter. I don't anyone can ever really come to an agreement about that- there are some definitions of terrorism that Blake's actions don't seem to fit, and then some that they do, like the CIA's definition- "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents." And yes, some of their targets are noncombatant. Whether or not Star One and some communication targets were *useful* to the Federation, they were not actually combatant targets. And Blake and his crew are definitely subnational, and do not qualify as a military- it's a bunch of individuals who work towards the same vague cause, taking down the Federation, without any form of organization or hierarchy outside of a few groups occasionally coordinating their efforts enough to work together for one particular goal. There are figureheads of the resistance, but there is no actual leader with actual power.

But even if we decisively determine that he doesn't fit the description of a terrorist, that does not necessarily mean that all of his actions are justified. It's not a matter of terrorist vs. white knight. Blake's fight against the Federation is at least heavily inspired by vengeance, which while not an unfair motive, is hardly a particularly honorable one. He's also shown the capacity to be rather callous in pursuit of his goals, particularly, as has often been mentioned, in the Star One affair. There's no real way to justify that in my mind. Yes, it was a heavy blow to the Federation in that it got most of their soldiers killed, but that was only by risking most of the galaxy to an alien invasion, which was actually an accident anyway. The real plan was to take down Star One, which would consequently wreak havoc on most Federation planets. Even when only parts of the computer control were down, there were major catastrophes- whole planets, which wouldn't have been monitored if they weren't inhabited, became unlivable, likely killing most residents there; there were also serious crashes without automatic flight control, crashes that killed 4000 civilians on board as well as civilians in the city that the wreckage landed in. And you can hardly justify trying to work with the Terra Nostra, either.

He's also willing to ignore, manipulate, and even lie to his crew to get them to do what he wants even after they agreed everything would be thoroughly discussed, so, you know, take that as you will.

Of course, Blake isn't a wholly bad guy- he's done lots of good things as well, and his aim is a good one. But he's also a fanatic, and has toed the line, if not outright crossed it, several times. Not fitting the literal definition of 'terrorist' doesn't necessarily mean you're justified, or even a good person. After all, Servalan and Travis aren't terrorists, are they?

To be fair, though, I might be a little biased. My favorite thing about Blake's 7 is the moral ambiguity and how most of the 'heroes' barely fit the title, so I'm actually a much bigger fan of the negative aspects of characters than the positive ones, because I find them more interesting. I'm liking Blake better on my rewatch than I did on my first viewing, because I'm noticing a lot more than I did before.
 
Spaceship Dispatcher
BrainButNoHeart wrote:

To be fair, though, I might be a little biased. My favorite thing about Blake's 7 is the moral ambiguity and how most of the 'heroes' barely fit the title, so I'm actually a much bigger fan of the negative aspects of characters than the positive ones, because I find them more interesting...

You're certainly not alone here in valuing that aspect of the show! Indeed, characters don't have to be 'nice' to be interesting.

Welcome to Horizon by the way Grin
Reversing the polarity of the neutron flow. I bet that means something. It sounds great.

Blake's 7: Trojan Horse (s4 fanfic) - Blake's 7: Through the Needle's Eye (s2 fanfic)

Spaceship Dispatcher's fanfic site
 
sweevo
I always thought of the Liberator crew as a (slightly) dysfunctional family, with Blake playing the role of the well-intentioned but too prideful and borderline authoritarian father and Avon being the only one in the "family" - the son - able or willing to call him out on his hypocrisies and BS.
 
BrainButNoHeart
Not sure I'd want to be part of that family... Grin
 
peladon
BrainButNoHeart wrote:

I know this thread is dead, and I've never actually posted anything before (I just joined), but I wanted to contribute anyway. I think maybe some of this discussion is a little too black and white on the terrorist vs freedom fighter. I don't anyone can ever really come to an agreement about that- there are some definitions of terrorism that Blake's actions don't seem to fit, and then some that they do, like the CIA's definition- "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents." And yes, some of their targets are noncombatant. Whether or not Star One and some communication targets were *useful* to the Federation, they were not actually combatant targets. .


I cant think of a target Blake hits prior to Star One that is not a legitimate military or combatant target as we see them. Even the communications centres are major installations, the destruction of which would give a military advantge proportionate to the costs of their destruction ( and the associated collateral damage) which is what I believe constitutes a 'legitimate' target in a war.
 
Spaceship Dispatcher
peladon wrote:

...which is what I believe constitutes a 'legitimate' target in a war.

War? What war? It doesn't start until Star One and it's over by Aftermath.

And then all the humans are on the same side anyway.
Reversing the polarity of the neutron flow. I bet that means something. It sounds great.

Blake's 7: Trojan Horse (s4 fanfic) - Blake's 7: Through the Needle's Eye (s2 fanfic)

Spaceship Dispatcher's fanfic site
 
peladon
Spaceship Dispatcher wrote:

peladon wrote:

...which is what I believe constitutes a 'legitimate' target in a war.

War? What war? It doesn't start until Star One and it's over by Aftermath.

And then all the humans are on the same side anyway.


Blake considers himself to be at war, he is engaged in resistence activities a form of civil war (there are a number of types of war). War is armed combat or hostilities commensurate with the technology and size of the parties. Hence 'war'.
 
Spaceship Dispatcher
Commensurate with the size of the parties? The might of a huge space empire covering who knows how many star systems and with probably millions of personnel and billions of subjects, versus one spaceship with how many people on board? Six at the most? How does that equal a war?
Edited by Spaceship Dispatcher on 02 October 2015 22:13:47
Reversing the polarity of the neutron flow. I bet that means something. It sounds great.

Blake's 7: Trojan Horse (s4 fanfic) - Blake's 7: Through the Needle's Eye (s2 fanfic)

Spaceship Dispatcher's fanfic site
 
JustBrad
Blake is full of good intentions, and as the proverb almost says, the road to Gauda Prime is paved with good intentions.
 
peladon
Spaceship Dispatcher wrote:

Commensurate with the size of the parties? The might of a huge space empire covering who knows how many star systems and with probably millions of personnel and billions of subjects, versus one spaceship with how many people on board? Six at the most? How does that equal a war?


Blakes war is that of the resistence against the Federation, and we know he is not alone in that war. We only see his aspect of it but that does not mean the wider war does not exist or that Blake does not consider himself to be a part of it. Nor for that matter that the Federation doesnt consider him to be a part of it. If the series had been about one unit of the French resistence with a handful of rifles in 1942 no one would consider that the war they were engaged in was not a real one.
 
Jump to Forum:
Orac rendered this page in 0.40 seconds
9,449,079 unique visits since 8th January 2014