[EDITOR'S NOTE: This thread emerged from inside the thread on "Journey to Where."] Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 20:10:06 -0500 From: Chris Hlady (chlady@escape4tag.ca) Subject: Re: Space1999: Journey to Where Petter and David, Personally, I find the Donald James story arc (Exiles; Journey to Where; The Seance Spectre), is not as substantial as Anthony Terpiloff (Earthbound; Collision Course; Death's Other Dominion; The Infernal Machine; Catacombs of the Moon), Christopher Penfold (Guardian of Piri; Alpha Child; The Last Sunset; War Games; Space Brain; Dragon's Domain; Dorzak), or Johnny Byrne (Matter of Life and Death-with Art Wallace; Another Time, Another Place; Force of Life; Voyager's Return; End of Eternity; The Troubled Spirit; Mission of the Darians; The Testament of Arkadia; The Metamorph; The Immunity Syndrome; The Dorcons). Of them, I find Anthony Terpiloff is my favourite. Donald James is my least favourite. There were good things about his stories: a parade of space-coffins; returning to Earth during the wrong time period; the senseless destruction of psychotic obsession. There were also hopeless annoyances: juvenile delinquents; monitoring medical signals through time; people following psychotics. Regarding Journey to Where, maybe I'd like to mention some of its offspring: 1) the ST:DS9 episode where O'Brien picks up a transmission from a stranded Star Fleet officer. Time is spent trying to find her, only to discover that a planet's atmosphere had had created a time warp. When they discovered the corpse, they found they had been talking to someone who had been dead for five years. 2) another ST:DS9 episode where Sisko is stranded in a 21st century civil rights fight. 3) a ST:Voyager episode where the Doctor's back-up holographic program has to deal with the distortion of history, and being separated from his comrades by hundreds of years. There are more, but these episodes illustrate some of the legacy of Space: 1999. Of course, I still love the Scottish broadswords. Chris
From: Petter Ogland (petter.ogland@dnmi4tag.no) Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 10:34:03 +0000 Subject: Re: Space1999: Journey to Where > Of them, I find Anthony Terpiloff is my favourite. Donald James is my least > favourite. Personally I enjoy Edward di Lorenzo (Ring Aroung the Moon; Missing Link; Alpha Child) very much as he stresses psychological aspects even more than ecological. His first episode, RING AROUND THE MOON, is my favourite of all SPACE:1999 episodes, closely followed by BREAKAWAY, MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH and BLACK SUN. It is interesting that you value Terpiloff so highly, Chris. To me the Terpiloff episodes are the ones that seem most cartoon-like, perhaps anticipating Year Two slightly, but they are obviously written by an intelligent and scholared man with all the references to literature and mythology. It is perhaps Terpiloff's obsession with power and death that makes me a bit uneasy. The deeper meaning of Byrne and Penfold's contribution to the series seem easier to pinpoint, both continuing their ecological writing with BBC's retelling of James Herriot's advendures in ALL CREATURES GREAT AND SMALL. Both of these writers output seem astonishingly intelligent and captivating. As opposed to market driven formula writing, as one might suspect Freiberger is aiming for in his triology - although I believe there may be found insights in these as well, the Byrne/Penfold output seem extraordinary novel and profound, stating the popular philosophy of the day proheted by people like Capra, Lovelock and Marsalis, and which does not seem dated even today in the way that the original STAR TREK series or LOST IN SPACE does. This is quite astonishing, I feel. To me Donald James seem to belong to the same school of writers, and although Year Two is less cerebral and more action oriented, his metaphores of the cold war as fleet of coffins in THE EXILES, the "who needs nature" line in JOURNEY TO WHERE and the comments on social unstability in THE SEANCE SPECTRE are wonderful contributions to the more meaningful point of view to the series I think. > There were good things about his stories: a parade of space-coffins; > returning to Earth during the wrong time period; the senseless destruction > of psychotic obsession. There were also hopeless annoyances: juvenile > delinquents; monitoring medical signals through time; people following > psychotics. Good points and weak points, I agree. From my point of view, however, the good points outdo the weak points, and I'm not really all that bothered by things like monitoring medical signals through time and whether the Alphan's knew the Morse code or not, or even why they had to be explained that Scotland was a part of the British Isles. This may have been because Freiberger was afraid that knowledge on geographyt and history of science may have been a little weak in the market he was aiming at and perhaps adding a few lines to the script here and there or asking Donald James to do so. Petter
From: "Petter Ogland" (petter.ogland@dnmi4tag.no) Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 10:52:34 +0000 Subject: Space1999: Donald James trilogy / Journey to Where It's interesting to read much of the positive response to JOURNEY TO WHERE. Some have found a personal afinity to the style of this episode. Personally, the thing that fascinates me the most is what appears to be the deeper meaning to the story and a general understanding of Donald James contributions as a writer to the series. Of his three contributions, THE EXILES, JOURNEY TO WHERE and THE SEANCE SPECTRE, I find JOURNEY TO WHERE the most positive and easily accessible, at least at the present. THE EXILES was partly a remake of ALPHA CHILD, I feel, and even if the moral may have become more clear by having it vehicled by Freiberger's emphasise on simplified storytelling, the writers deeper message with this episode is not all that obvious, I feel. THE EXILES and ALPHA CHILD are somewhat different from MISSION OF THE DARIANS, I feel, even if that episode also emphasise on the social dynamics of groups of people unable to cooperate. The point in Byrne's story seems to be that the only thing to do is to join forces in order to survive, even if Ray Austin doesn't make us too convinced that this actually is possible. In THE EXILES and ALPHA CHILD there is a similar play on groups of people who try to survive, and indeed, the question also underlying these two episodes is if there are no limits to where a people might go in order to survive. Jarak and his people in ALPHA CHILD are, in the typical style of di Lorenzo and Penfold, portrayed not as evil and not as good, but rather changing their morals depending on the situation. When seizing Alpha Jarak may appear as purveyor of Nazi-type ideology and tactics, but later when he has lost he shows himself to be a gentleman and a man of good taste, much to the bewilderness of Koenig et al. In THE EXILES John Koenig behaves very much in the same manner as Jarak did towards the Alphans earlier on in the series. The existence of Alpha is put against the existence of Cantor and his people. The moral conflict is played down later on, however, as Cantor and Zova goes to drastic steps in order to make their race survive and even appear to be enjoying menacing Alpha. What is Donald James trying to say by this? One possible solution could be that he was trying to focus on the globalisation of the world in that it is becoming increasingly difficult to defend a people living by their own laws in a world that is becoming more and more connected. James Lovelock published his first book on Gaia in 1972, and, as others have suggested,the ecological movement and focus on the social and biological world as a global enterprise was in centre of focus at the time these series where being made. In both the case of Penfold and James this suggestion, in the case of the episodes dealing with exiles, may perhaps make some sense at least as they also wrote material for SPACE:1999 with a deep ecological angle. SPACE BRAIN is a good example of this on the behalf of Penfold, I think. In the case of James, JOURNEY TO WHERE is a quite intruiging episode in many ways, I feel. The actual story being deployed by JOURNEY TO WHERE, I feel, is that we are now about to change the face of the Earth due to pollution, but we are at the same time changing ourselves as more ecologically fit to live in such a world, and we would indeed not even be able to survive in the the environment of our forfathers. We should therefore abandon the dream of Arkadia and continue our travel in the direction of "arrow of time", that is the direction of evolution. I like this realistic prospect very much. In fact, I can't remember any Year One episode looking at the future from this perspective. Perhaps James was influenced by Freiberger's "The future is fantastic" slogan. Some of the most interesting dialogue in JOURNEY TO WHERE is the part, also mentioned by David Acheson, about "Of course, who needs nature?" mentioned by Carla and responded to enthusiastically by Alpha. It appears to me that Donald James, perhaps be smiling when he says so, but, nevertheless, is acutally meaning what he is saying. Interestingly at the end of THE SEANCE SPECTRE the Alphans are looking at old photos of trees and bushes perhaps to say that this is soon reduced to a part of our history. Another interesting point is where Koenig explains that all competitive sports where abandonned on Earth. I like this dialogue. It also strengthens the hypothesis of James global world view in the interpretation of THE EXILES, his end-of-war statement. Even if Donald James seems to be a very optimistic person indeed, the birth of the Gaia theory in England was also the advent of "New Age" philosophers, and I feel James final contribution to SPACE:1999 could be read in light of this. THE SEANCE SPECTRE certainly does not give a very flattering picture of astrology and similar phenomena. In fact, the beginning of THE SEANCE SPECTRE is almost like COLLISION COURSE seen from another perspective as Sandersons takes up Koenigs previous view of belief being more important than logic. Now, however, John Koenig is a representative for the point of view earlier presented via Victor and Helena. Come to think of it, almost all of THE SEANCE SPECTRE is like COLLISION COURSE with all it's elements more or less intact but viewed from another position. In fact, to me it seems as if James may have been holding Terpiloff's script in his left hand while jotting down his own version. Extraordinary! Well, more on THE SEANCE SPECTRE later. I believe this is one of David Acheson's Year Two favourites, so I have high hopes when the discussion reaches this episod. Petter
From: "Atomic Possum" (atomicpossum@toast4tag.net) Subject: Re: Space1999: Donald James trilogy / Journey to Where Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 07:51:15 -0500 You know, Petter, I think you see more depth in a puddle than most people do in the ocean. It would be interesting to hear your assessment of 'Scooby Doo"--empowerment of idealistic youth over the depredations of their elders, or statement regarding the nobility of our animal friends? '2001' must send you into cataleptic shock. Doesn't it seem more likely to you that the concept of a devastated Earth was to better form the situation in which Koenig/Logan/Alpha find themselves? If there were a statement being made, wouldn't they have stated it? Is "The Taybor" a dissertation on the emptiness of materialism, or is it just dumb schlock? Not everything is an allegory, not everything has deeper meaning, and sometimes things are written simply as a job, or to tell a story (and cheaply to boot). Especially in television.
From: "Petter Ogland" (petter.ogland@dnmi4tag.no) Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 13:48:51 +0000 Subject: Re: Space1999: Donald James trilogy / Journey to Where > '2001' must send you into cataleptic shock. He-he. > Doesn't it seem more likely to you that the concept of a devastated > Earth was to better form the situation in which Koenig/Logan/Alpha find > themselves? If there were a statement being made, wouldn't they have stated > it? That would of course be the STAR TREK way of making statements. Even though Freiberger tried to remove metaphysics and thinking aspects from the scripts, he was not able to write all the scripts himself, and dealing with writers like Byrne, Penfold, James etc. he obviously had a hard fight trying to delete all elements of intellect. Although hardly as powerfull as in Year One, the contributions of Penfold and Byrne still contain thought provoking ideas, I think. Byrne's THE IMMUNITY SYNDROM is one of the more obvious examples of this, I feel, taking much of its main idea from Penfold's Year One effort SPACE BRAIN. In our present discussion of JOURNEY TO WHERE and the Donald James scripts in general, I feel there is much of Penfold/Byrne spirit of the previous year present. In spite of Freiberger's efforts to stimulate the Saturday morning crowd, he must have been having frustrations trying to direct people like Donald James into the "right" track, James apparently using every opportunity to add intellectual angles to his stories. I would not be surprised if Maya's sickness in SPACE WARP is a symptom of how Freiberger was feeling during the second third of the series, obviously not acquiering the exact solutions he was looking for. My impression is that even if the format of the series changed from chic to camp, the intellectual component of the shows was much more difficult to change. I suppose the writing was deeper rooted in the intellectual climate of the time than the visuals and auditives, and having to rely on British writers, there was not all that much Freiberger could do even if he wanted to. The only one that comes to mind, willing to play Freiberger's game, is Michael Winder with his Pasolini pastiche DEVIL'S PLANET. Obviously going for entertainment-value only, Winder's take on the last sequence from 1976's THE CANTERBURY TALES is perhaps too tongue-in-cheek to fit exactly into the Freiberger concept as well. My impression of the final episodes of the series is actually that writers were mocking the whole thing, testing how much Freiberger could take of his own medicine. > Is "The Taybor" a dissertation on the emptiness of materialism, or is it > just dumb schlock? It's interesting that you mention this. Thom Keynes being a close friend of Johnny Byrne, I feel your first assertment seems there more likely one. I wonder what others think. Isn't this the episode we're going to take a look at next week? > Not everything is an allegory, not everything has deeper meaning, and > sometimes things are written simply as a job, or to tell a story (and > cheaply to boot). Especially in television. He-he. I can well imagine Freiberger shouting this to his group of writers. The writers noding politely, going "yes, of course" etc. and then they all go home and continue writing about pollution, ecology, social dynamics and other things they find interesting. Petter
From: "Ariana" (ariana@n44direct.co.uk) Subject: Re: Space1999: Donald James trilogy / Journey to Where Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 14:54:52 +0100 >Not everything is an allegory, not everything has deeper meaning, and >sometimes things are written simply as a job, or to tell a story (and >cheaply to boot). Especially in television. Still, it's fun to speculate, isn't it? <g> One can always postulate that the writer was doing it simply for the dosh, but that his subconscious was actually intent on making an artistic statement. :) Okay, so I generally take the "it's only television" stance myself, but people do tend to write about what's on their mind when they're writing, so I suppose one could speculate as to the deeper meaning of the episodes. Writing, even at the lowest level, is about making choices, which in turn means there might be reasons behind those choices which can be analysed and discussed (aside from budget considerations etc :). It's like wondering why Tony would be brewing beer. Why isn't his hobby perfecting a pasta machine? shooting rocks on the Moon's surface? playing foozball? Well, the real answer is: because whoever created his character or wrote that particular episode thought that would be a cool/cost-effective/amusing thing for him to do. But it's still fun to discuss the reasons why Tony might want to pursue that particular hobby if he were a real person. Space:1999 is indeed nothing more than a TV show. But we wouldn't be on this mailing-list unless we wanted to do more with it than veg out and have something hopping about before our eyes. Some people are interested in building models of Eagles, I'm interested in writing fanfic about the characters, and Petter likes to analyse the show's possible metaphysical content. To the outside world, we're all equally loony. :P Emma
From: "Atomic Possum" (atomicpossum@toast4tag.net) Subject: Re: Space1999: Donald James trilogy / Journey to Where Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 09:57:25 -0500 >But it's still fun to discuss the reasons why Tony might >want to pursue that particular hobby if he were a real person. Yes, but it's NOT a statement about alcoholism, any more than "Journey to Where" is about environmentalism! ---------------- Jon "Mr. Wonderful" Stadter
From: "Petter Ogland" (petter.ogland@dnmi4tag.no) Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 15:44:29 +0000 Subject: Re: Space1999: Donald James trilogy / Journey to Where > Yes, but it's NOT a statement about alcoholism, any more than "Journey > to Where" is about environmentalism! Well, it could be. On the other hand, you apparently don't seem to see any statement about alcoholism, and neither do I, although when you happen to mentioned it, it could of course be investigated. We would then perhaps need to know something about the drinking habits of the writers, the actors and the crew, and we would also like to know if there are indications that would make such an interpretation likely. This is obviously not an easy task, and personally I'm not all that concerned about alcoholism or interpretations of SPACE:1999 with relevance to alcoholism in order to undertake such a project, especially as I don't expect to find very much going at it in that direction. When it comes to environmental issues in JOURNEY TO WHERE, this is much less daring speculation, however, as we have observed a general interest for such issues in quite a number of episodes, both Year One and Year Two. Mind you, we also have interviews with Byrne and Penfold where they themselves point out such instances. It would of course be interesting if there were other social comments in JOURNEY TO WHERE, enhancing the episode even further. At the present, however, the most likely interpretation of the episode from my point of view would be the one about environmentalism already mentioned. Well, see what you like, Jon, but I can't understand how you can make much sense out of the episode disregarding the environmentalist aspect, really, This is only from my point of view, however. One may of course choose to have more privat interpretations of what the episode is all about or choose to have no interpretation at all if this is more satisfactory. Petter