Sam Carter/Jack O'Neill Ship Appreciation Thread

[Caladria]

Hey....I'm Scottish We're a lovely friendly bunch o folks

...or at least, you're lovely while you last before the exploding tumours get you...

Definitely, agree on both the Card/Clarke analogies, and the PRATCHETT! Now THERE is a master of subtlety, comedy, parody and humanity. Just genius. I cheered long and loud when his name showed up in the Honours List this year - shame he had to develop Alzheimers in order to be recognised, though

I've had a number of friends recommend McCarthy to me now, VSS - The Road is on my list. Unfortunately, my spare time for novels is a bit thin right now, but as soon as these papers are out of my way, I'll be able to indulge again

He's had an OBE for years, though - he's just been working his way up. He's done an awful lot for Alzheimers since his diagnosis, as well. There's just so much you could say about him, from his straight out fantasy parodies like Colour of Magic to the things that are incredibly rich, and complex, and layered like Night Watch. (Koom Valley! There's a wealth of metaphor there for conflicts everywhere - the only battle where both sides ambushed each other).

And a mind that brilliant being hit by Alzheimers is... It just makes me miserable.

[Linda06]

...or at least, you're lovely while you last before the exploding tumours get you...

*runs to hide from crazy people trying to implant exploding tumours in me*

[JenniferJF]

They both operate on your mind; Card with a mallet, Clarke with a scalpel?

Wonders if she should say Clarke bores her to tears. I've never been able to read his stuff without constantly knowing I was reading. His imagery just doesn't do it for me. And his concepts seem a bit dated... But then again, I love Heinlein, and you wanna talk about dated.

Nyah.

Though I know Anne and I have fairly different tastes in literary scifi in general, which is funny considering.

EDIT: That's right, I don't really like Asimov's style much, either. But I like his concepts in a rather historic way, since many seem trite now but weren't when he dreamed them.

[silly sally]

Wonders if she should say Clarke bores her to tears. I've never been able to read his stuff without constantly knowing I was reading. His imagery just doesn't do it for me. And his concepts seem a bit dated... But then again, I love Heinlein, and you wanna talk about dated.

Nyah.

Though I know Anne and I have fairly different tastes in literary scifi in general, which is funny considering.

EDIT: That's right, I don't really like Asimov's style much, either. But I like his concepts in a rather historic way, since many seem trite now but weren't when he dreamed them.

I simply don't agree: Read the robot series and especially "The Foundation" saga

[Caladria]

Wonders if she should say Clarke bores her to tears. I've never been able to read his stuff without constantly knowing I was reading. His imagery just doesn't do it for me. And his concepts seem a bit dated... But then again, I love Heinlein, and you wanna talk about dated.

Nyah.

Though I know Anne and I have fairly different tastes in literary scifi in general, which is funny considering.

EDIT: That's right, I don't really like Asimov's style much, either. But I like his concepts in a rather historic way, since many seem trite now but weren't when he dreamed them.

(I've only ever read half of one Heinlein book, and it's not like me to give up)

So. Very. Different tastes. Anything else you hate, that I should give a go?

Although, as the girl says; robots. just... the idea of robots as machines/tools, rather than robots-as-pathos or robots-as-menace, that's something that's just brilliant (and something Stargate's never managed. Replicators have always been Menace). And he's cheeky and wry and self-knowing (and actually, this is why I like Stargate and Doctor Who...)

[Solo]

Wonders if she should say Clarke bores her to tears. I've never been able to read his stuff without constantly knowing I was reading. His imagery just doesn't do it for me. And his concepts seem a bit dated... But then again, I love Heinlein, and you wanna talk about dated.

Nyah.

Though I know Anne and I have fairly different tastes in literary scifi in general, which is funny considering.

EDIT: That's right, I don't really like Asimov's style much, either. But I like his concepts in a rather historic way, since many seem trite now but weren't when he dreamed them.

It's funny you find Clarke's stuff dated - I think the same "disclaimer" you apply to Asimov applies to him, too - they were contemporaries. I think his ideas were pretty historic as well, it's just that ... well, time's passed since either Asimov or Clarke were churning much out. And he's the guy who came up with the idea of telecomms satellites. They may seem a bit obvious now, but they weren't when he dreamed 'em up

I like the recurring theme of ascension that Clarke tends to go back to - humanity advancing from its current level of development to something vastly bigger - I think it's one that Stargate has touched on an awful lot, and maybe that's one of the reasons I love both of them so much.

Although that said, I can't say enough how much I respect the Laws of Robotics that Asimov created. I love all of the moralistic debate that can be made over those!

And Caladria - I don't think that robots are always Menace in Stargate - Reese was a fairly sympathetic character, I thought, and the Reese/Daniel/Jack dynamic was brilliantly done. And don't forget Tin Man, and the follow up to that - that was heartbreaking. Self aware robots...

[mad_gater]

Nope. Pretty sure that one is angst-proof. I'm good...but not that good.

so you yield to the power of the gutter....mwahahahaha!!!!!!

Haha, I'm usually confused, too, but it's mostly my own fault.

I'm Solo here, LeFae on TWOP and FanFiction.net, Colloquielle on YouTube and Ro in WOW. And Heather in person.

sounds like you've got an online multiple personality disorder thing going...

Ok... I don't. But only because of the hug in the end! And the interview... and Teal'c's non-interview... but J-J-Janet!! How could they be so cruel?? Why do they kill off all the docs??? (I want to be a doctor that's why I'm concerned...)...

while I'm not gonna be a doctor I would like to be a massage therapist....I wonder of that's close enough to doc for those that kill off docs?

[Lara_SGC]

Am I missing something? *is confused by the previous posts*

I'm doing a funny behind the scenes vid and I bumped into this:

(oh and don't worry it's from an interview from like 7 years ago but I loved hearing those words)

Amanda Tapping on Divide and Conquer: We leave it at - ok we admitted it, we finnaly said it out loud. I love you, you love me or I would die for you, you would die for me and not just because we're...you know...in the military. This is as far as it goes.

Oh it went a lot further. How 6 years can change for our Sam and Jack. Oh and for those thinking Amanda's against the ship, she's not. Don't worry. She's the one calling Jack; Sam's fella and that's pretty resent

I'm Misses Positive and I'm SURE we'll get really nice shippy scenes!

[Solo]

sounds like you've got an online multiple personality disorder thing going...

What makes ya think it's just online?

[Pol]

Hey family!!!

We're back! 2,975 miles on the ol' car, but we're home! Whoo.

So...random thought that popped into my head as I was driving. Anyone notice the similarities between these two wedding pics?


From Point of View.

And...

From 200.

Maybe it's just me? (I apologize for the quality and size of the images (and the angles). I couldn't find a good pic of the 200 shot. I know somebody, somewhere has it, but not me. <g>)

Oh, and Jenn, thanks for the rec of my Campfire stories. Nice warm fuzzy to come home to.

[Buc252]

Or perhaps for a non AU...Janet ascended... and comes back just like Daniel...but then you are recycling story-lines again and I dont like that!!!




<snip>.[/SPOILERS]

I considered she could have ascended, but if she had, and we know that a person's body disappears when they do, I doubt Sam would have been as upset as she was, or find the eulogy as difficult to deliver as she did. After all, she's already seen it happen with Daniel, and knows it doesn't mean the person is gone like if they died, so . . . I just don't see how the "ascended" theory can hold water for Janet.

I sure wish it did, though. I wouldn't mind duplicating that storyline if it meant we could have her back!

[Lara_SGC]

This made me laugh out loud (and it's 03u56 here):

They asked Rick about the whole Pete thing and he's like: "I don't know that much about Pete (he starts laughing) to be honest with you. Apparently he's no threat to O'Neill.

[JenniferJF]

(I've only ever read half of one Heinlein book, and it's not like me to give up)

So. Very. Different tastes. Anything else you hate, that I should give a go?

Although, as the girl says; robots. just... the idea of robots as machines/tools, rather than robots-as-pathos or robots-as-menace, that's something that's just brilliant (and something Stargate's never managed. Replicators have always been Menace). And he's cheeky and wry and self-knowing (and actually, this is why I like Stargate and Doctor Who...)

Having thought about it sometime tonight, I think the thing that draws me to a writer - any writer for any genre - are the characters. And - of course IMHO - Clarke and Asimov's characters - and really a whole lot of sci-fi writing from the middle of this century -seem less like individual's than they are generic sort of 'everymen' meant to represent humanity in general rather than to, though a specific person's hopes and dreams, convey truths about mankind in general. In fact (don't shoot me), that's often the problem I have with classic trek, too, and why I tend to prefer later versions. The older characters - like many TV characters of their era - often seem to me more charicatures of arc-types so to speak than real people.

Which does, in fact, bring me back on topic. What I love about Stargate (and also, really, DW and all my favorite Sci-Fi) is when the stories are character driven and it's the little character moments in which the people act most like 'real people' despite the bizarreness of their circumstances which are amongst my favorites. And a lot of the great 'philisophical' sci-fi writers, while big on concepts, fail I think to engage me, personally, with their characters. And hence my disinterest.

Which is probably what draws me to Sam/Jack in particular. Because in all the craziness and space themes and regulations and *whatever* they find themselves in, in a way Sam and Jack are the most representative, IMHO, of all the rest of us struggling to make a life in this crazy world regardless of the circumstances we find ourselves in. They are, in effect, the everyman (or woman) who in their struggle to find their lives represent all the rest of us.

Yeah. Too deep for a Saturday night...

Or, as I told a coworker the other night when I came to sit with her in the kitchen instead of sitting in the living room with the folks we were supporting, I'd rather watch her yawn than watch the idiots on whatever TV show was on do whatever it is they were doing. Because at least I cared about what happened to her. It's sort of that way for me and any fiction. If I don't care about the characters as people, you could have the deepest philosophy in the world and I'm still not going to enjoy it. And of course, this is a very individual preference, and YMMV on what characters engage you... (and what philosophies, cause frankly I tend to disagree with a lot of Clarke's concepts in the first place, which may also be the heart of the problem... )

EDIT: And I have read all of Asimov's books and really do like them. My college philosophy notes were generally references to a lot of his books (and other sci-fi writers) who'd shown the concepts better than the teacher described them. Which is part of what got me thinking. Because it really is that, in failing to really make me care about his characters as people rather than as concepts, he fails to engage me on the deeper level I need to feel truly involved in the story and for me to feel the novel was truly *great*.

[mad_gater]

time for bed

((((((family))))))

'nite

[Seahen]

New forum stuff (rules, rep points to go with new ranks, no more red rep...).



Here's my favorite part.

"No Character Bashing, Please. We've added a new rule for the forum:

Every main character and cast member has a devoted fan following, so it's not conducive to the atmosphere we want to foster to outright bash one of the show's main characters. You can criticize a character to your heart's content, but please keep it constructive and tactful, and avoid outright hate."