• The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.

Question about Psi-Corp Trilogy Book Finale

I do wish some people around here would drop the hero worship when its completely an inappropriate situation...and at least admit that "yea, the guy was out of line there."

And I wish that you and others would see how freaking insulting it is to have one's opinions cavallierly dismissed as 'hero worship' just because you don't agree with them or have the courtesy to *ask why* an opinion differs or even respect that a differing opinion might just be as valid as yours.

First of all, Recoil, you and Crazy are acting like I and others were saying that what happened should be incorporated into everybody's family traditions instead of simply saying that we don't think it's a big deal.

You're also acting like JMS told the story to brag instead if it simply being an example of how real life becomes part of the writing. Just as he has with many other examples from his and the actor's lives. One of the reasons for the script books, remember?

As for why *I* (and I don't speak for anybody else) don't think it's a big deal is because nobody was hurt. Show me actual, quantifiable harm that was done to another creature and I'll start shaking my finger with the rest. Until then, by my personal definition, no 'sin' was committed.

A character flaw was revealed, yeah. And if any of you are completely free of those, feel free to keep casting stones. Just because JMS has a small measure of celebrity, is he supposed to be perfect? Dream on. Maybe...just maybe I don't feel qualified to sit in judgment of somebody I don't know the way others here do.

And for the record, from here on out, anybody who dismisses a different opinion with the 'hero worship' strawman can expect to get handed his or her head. Is that perfectly, crystal clear?

Jan
--who apologizes to the rest of the group and will probably absent herself for a while.
 
Hero worship and matyrdom in one foul swop,class :LOL:

Hand me my head please :LOL:

It's only the internet FFS :)

OK,JMS isn't dead yet so it never hit home.

How would you feel if I defiled Andreas Katsulas's final resting place?

Not a nice thought.
 
As for why *I* (and I don't speak for anybody else) don't think it's a big deal is because nobody was hurt. Show me actual, quantifiable harm that was done to another creature and I'll start shaking my finger with the rest. Until then, by my personal definition, no 'sin' was committed.

QUOTE]

http:/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrilege /en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desecration

No big deal :rolleyes:
 
Rightly or wrongly, the artisticly inclined have often demonstrated symbolic eccentricity in making a point.

Whatever you think of this... it's not exactly on the level of say, for example... van Gogh.

Often people's perception of desecration is relative to their perception of who the memorial or grave being desecrated, commemorates.

A guy decapitated a statue of Margaret Thatcher (ok she is still alive) with a cricket bat. Not many people take offence at that because of the hardship her Government caused many of the poor.

"Bomber" Harris had his statue frequently attacked with graffiti... because of the feelings many people held over the total annihilation of Dresden.

People will always express their disdain in ways that make others uncomfortable.

Perhaps the reason many people find this story offensive is because the man reffered to, is ambiguous.

I wouldn't agree with sticking a stake in someone's grave... but there are more than a few politicians whose graves I'd want to visit... just to make absolutely certain they were dead. Sadly though they may not rise.... it's almost certain that somebody equally terrible will rise to take their place.
 
I'm actually mystified this became so heated between Jan and Crazy Horse.

CH's initial post that started this heated feeling specifically says he's surprised "the more religious types" would be cheering the action on. To me, that comment seems to single out KoshFan and Galahad (and anyone else I may be forgetting) who are so immersed in their Faith of their individual versions of the Supreme Being. Jan's response that she believes all the trappings that go with after Death rituals are "boogedy boo" leads me to believe Jan isn't as immersed in her Faith of a God as KF and Galahad. Therefore, the question or suprise wasn't aimed at her. If you don't believe in all those "after Death rituals" why would it be considered a sleight against you? It was aimed at those who do believe in all the "boogedy boo". He was asking how those (and anyone with as strong an immersion into their Faith) two reconcile their beliefs with cheering on the action, IMHO.

Jan, if you are as immersed in your Faith in God as much as KF and Galahad, please forgive my not noticing or assuming wrongly.
 
Ironically, if it was aimed at myself, I didn't take it to be, because I hadn't really said much at that point.

As I said, I don't agree with the stake gesture personaly... and I don't take kindly to being accredited as belonging to one side of an argument to which I have not become actively involved in. You should know me well enough to know by now that i post at great length when I have chosen a side.

But what is done is done, I don't think it's worth getting an ulcer over... nothing any of you say now is going to change the facts as they happened. So how is it constructive to provoke one another over it?

Disagree with one another if you must, but please don't fall out over it... there's enough discord going around the planet as it is, if you ask me.

Let it go.
 
Ironically, if it was aimed at myself, I didn't take it to be, because I hadn't really said much at that point.

As I said, I don't agree with the stake gesture personaly... and I don't take kindly to being accredited as belonging to one side of an argument to which I have not become actively involved in. You should know me well enough to know by now that i post at great length when I have chosen a side.

But what is done is done, I don't think it's worth getting an ulcer over... nothing any of you say now is going to change the facts as they happened. So how is it constructive to provoke one another over it?

Disagree with one another if you must, but please don't fall out over it... there's enough discord going around the planet as it is, if you ask me.

Let it go.


Well apparently I didn't write that as carefully as I tried to. No, absolutely you didn't take a side, it wasn't my intention to say you took a side, that was why I so carefully kept inserting "(And others as immersed in their Faith)". I apologize Galahad
 
Don't worry, I didn't think you were actively implying me... but you did get me wondering as to whether Crazy was. I don't feel there's a need for anybody to apologise to me... I just wanted to set the record straight.

Heh having said all that, my faith is based on somebody who I believe desecrated his own grave from the inside out!:eek: :LOL:
 
Hey I never aimed my observations at anyone specificly.OK Galahad and Koshfan are probably amongst the more devout and open about their religion but as I understand it at least half the board have religion is some way or another.

I was only pointing out that it was a pretty weird thing to do and that I reckoned that JMS had some problems.

I was genuinely surprised to see people laughing about it and that nobody questioned it.

I didn't expect to be talked to like I'm an idiot or or have my point ridiculed.

I ignored it at first then reacted after it continued.OK maybe over reacted but I am crazy you know ;)
 
My position's on record.

Doing something like that is a little messed up... and I'd probably do it myself, given enough cause. 'Cause us creators, we're not always 100% sane.
 
A character flaw was revealed, yeah. And if any of you are completely free of those, feel free to keep casting stones. Just because JMS has a small measure of celebrity, is he supposed to be perfect? Dream on. Maybe...just maybe I don't feel qualified to sit in judgment of somebody I don't know the way others here do.

See, this here was exactly my point. I agree with that 100%. I don't think I ever posted to the contrary. I've been the one saying that the guy is far from perfect, he's flawed, but many people act as if he is perfect, and nothing he does is ever wrong. Or if he does something wrong it doesn't get acknowledged and its dismissed.

I am not one of those people. I just get tired of those who are.
 
My position's on record.

Doing something like that is a little messed up... and I'd probably do it myself, given enough cause. 'Cause us creators, we're not always 100% sane.

Resurrecting a dead subject because I was thinking back with regard to my actions a couple of years ago.

I had a friend who was dating a girl when an old flame of his came on the scene and expressed an interest in him. He naturally wasn't interested in a relationship... so without me thinking there was anything unusual, before I knew it he was encouraging me to go out with her at least on a social basis... (of course now I realise he didn't have my interests at heart he just wanted someone taking the heat off him). So I had a quasi relationship (wasn't really a boyfriend/girlfriend thing in my book) with this girl and it ran hot and cold. Now on a couple of mutual social events, he wasn't bringing hjis girlfriend and I was driving. He had his arm around her and wa sflirting like mad for the whole journey. He had never admitted to her he was in a relationship... and he was totally leading her on.

Naturally at the time, this caused problems, so I decided to blow his cover and explain that he was ina relationship already. I don't like men who play these games.

A couple of months down the line and his relationship broke up and he just walked straight back in the door and captured that girls attention - she never realy spoke to me after that... at all. so I felt quite bitter towards both of them.

Yet he still wasn't interested in a relationship with her, he just wanted someone to tide him over till someone better came along.

Eventually they did... and the day came when they decided to get married.

I went to the wedding ceremony... but I have to be honest and say my reasons for going were not celebrate the marriage... but I too - just wanted to make sure... make sure he was out of the picture and would never have any casue to interfere in the development of my relationships again.

So now we come to the reason I posted it here.... how are my intentions and actions any different from Straczynski's?

It may not be physical but if I'm an honest, mine was a form of desecration in itself... was it not?
 
Well, I clicked this thread not knowing what to expect and it sure does turn out to be just barely about the psi-corp trilogy.


Interesting, interesting. I think I'll play.

I see little wrong with the desecrating, a worse act would be to do so in front of the person's family... or at the very least to let it be known to that family that you had done this.

The desecration in itself is a private act. A catharsis, an act of healing and expression. It harms the deceased about as much as putting flowers on the grave helps them. Funerals are for the people left behind, not the one who died.
 
Why do you think you are safe because he is married?

I don't think he'd sink low enough to mess around that way now he's that far committed and besides he has a baby now.

He cares too much about how people perceive him to step too much out of line publically.

The main threat that came from him is the way he played about with my mind and allowed me to bring my worst charcateristics out in a way that made me look foolish and him look like an absolute stud. He simply won't have the time or the exposure to do this anymore.

I see little wrong with the desecrating, a worse act would be to do so in front of the person's family... or at the very least to let it be known to that family that you had done this.

The desecration in itself is a private act. A catharsis, an act of healing and expression. It harms the deceased about as much as putting flowers on the grave helps them. Funerals are for the people left behind, not the one who died.

And it is out of respect for those that are living that we should refrain. No matter how we feel towards the deceases, their family do not deserve that disrespect.

Also... you must consider how you would feel should someone do that to a member of your family, or how you yourself feel about someone doing that to you when you are gone. Aside from general morality, if you would be hurt by such a thing you have no right to inflict those feelings on another.

So was my wedding attendance an act of desecration?
 
And it is out of respect for those that are living that we should refrain. No matter how we feel towards the deceases, their family do not deserve that disrespect.

Also... you must consider how you would feel should someone do that to a member of your family, or how you yourself feel about someone doing that to you when you are gone. Aside from general morality, if you would be hurt by such a thing you have no right to inflict those feelings on another.

The living don't have to know. The deceased's family members don't have to know. It doesn't matter what someone does to my grave when I'm gone cause I'll be gone.



edit


Nah, that's really not so bad. You were there simply to witness an event that had (a different) meaning for you (than anyone else there).

Let me give a careful read to that wedding story and get back to you.
 
Last edited:
I'm with Ellipsis on this one.

The corpse I leave behind when I die will not be me. In fact, as much of it as may have use for others should be harvested (organ donation), and I really don't care what happens to the rest. If I saw someone do something like this to a grave of someone I cared about, the act itself wouldn't bother me, because my loved one wouldn't (couldn't) be in any way affected. What would bother me was that someone disliked them enough to do that, and I could find that out in any number of other ways even if they refrained from doing it.

Oh, and as for the wedding thing Gallahad, you didn't do anything wrong. You were invited to be there, and you (presumably) behaved in an acceptable fashion whilst there. Your motives remained unvoiced, and had no negative effect on anyone there.

If it's not obvious from all the above I tend to have a rather pragmatic viewpoint, and less of a rigid code of arbitrary morals and more a basic ethical drive to avoid harm to others as my guiding principle on right and wrong.
 
Last edited:
The living don't have to know. The deceased's family members don't have to know. It doesn't matter what someone does to my grave when I'm gone cause I'll be gone.

Hmm this is beginning to sound like that daft philosophical question:

"If a tree falls in a wood and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

However, in this context the question make sense. It all boils down to whether or not you believe that certain things are only wrong if the injured party is aware of the wrong done to them.
 
No, it's whether you consider somebody can be considered an 'injured party' when the incident in question hasn't 'injured' or effected them in any measurable way. :)
 
Back
Top