TeaTimeSunday
TEA TIME in L.A. THE BRONZE / 3.20-5.22.02
RESTORED ARCHIVE OF DELETED FORUM POSTS (NO LINKS OPERATIVE)
BOKE
CORKBOARD for Wed. TEA TIME in L.A. (#40) REMINDER: 7-8PM Bronze Time


CORKBOARD for Wed. Tea Time in L.A.(#40) REMINDER 7-8PM Bronze Time / 12-1AM London
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 08, 2002, 4:08 PM

TREF_40CB

= = = WEDNESDAY (5/8) TEA TIME #40 INFO & LINKS = = =

EOTD BtVS Episodes Of The Day: #119 (6.19) - "Seeing Red"

SOTD Sonnet Of The Day: ?????? Will be posted by 5:00 PM Bronze
Rhetorical verse in Shakespeare's form.


NOTE: 112?/154


= = = GENERAL INFO & LINKS FOR NEW TEA TIME PARTICIPANTS = = =

THIS IS NOT TEA TIME. THIS IS THE CORKBOARD.
Use the Corkboard for messages to forensicpopouri or discussion before or
after Tea Time. And, yes, do post comments, suggestions, insightful quotes, . .

REMINDER: Look for TEA TIME in L.A. at the top of the Bronze threaded
forums page at 7PM Bronze Time. Tea Time lasts one hour.

EACH DAY'S CORKBOARD appears 3 hrs before Tea Time (4 PM Bronze)

NEW TEA TIME PARTICIPANTS SHOULD READ THESE:

* SONNET SCHOOL FOR SLAYERS - tid=81761

* WHY I POST IN SHAKESPEAREAN SONNETS: (1) tid=48156 (2) tid=48152

* TEA TIME FAQ & INDEX: tid=67836

* DESTINY (THE PORTAL, THE ORACLE, AND YOU): tid=59313

* MOST RECENT TEA TIME THREAD: tid=107804


POSTCARDS FROM FORENSICPOPOURI (if any) will appear as 1st resp. below


you speak



Responses


END OF CORKBOARD #40 ========================================================
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 4:33 PM 1 of 54

CORKBOARD #41 (for Thursday 5/9) is up at tid=120176
http://www.buffy.com/bronze_posts.jsp?tid=120176


NOTE: No new Buffy sonnets today . . . but I think <g> I'm going to
post a non-Buffy sonnet . . . and a related quote . . . that . . .
well, who knows why I post these things?<g>



NOTE: New CORKBOARD will be approximately half an hour late (4:30 PM Bronze Time)
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 3:58 PM 2 of 54

. . . for reasons that should be clear to all. <g>


To prunehilda now
Posted by: Supernatural lawyer - May 09, 2002, 3:49 PM 3 of 54

Re: your post about women, feminism, etc.
I very much agree with you on that one. Especially about not knowing what we want! And the myth of Mr. Right. (did I mention I stopped watching Ally--and not just because the writing has been going downhill--and that my new found passion--in addition to Buffy--is Six Feet Under; I guess as we get "older" we crave realism, at least as shown on TV).
If I can add something (not especially profound): when in real life, we're lucky enough to meet someone who is as close as we will ever get from that myth, someone who "gets us" but we still dare to have second-thoughts... How is that possible? That's probably where the "grow up" part comes to play! Or maybe it's just me (or Buffy!)...<smile>



P.S. to prunehilda
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 3:37 PM 4 of 54

. . . and not only did I humble myself for your sake . . .

. . . I went on to crucify myself . . . for your sins. (ROTFL)




Oh yes, the CORKBOARD . . . POOF



I did it again (sorry). Oops. <smile>
Posted by: Supernatural lawyer - May 09, 2002, 3:34 PM 5 of 54

Please read the stricken out paragraph as if it was not crossed out.


quick note to prunehilda
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 3:33 PM 6 of 54

I suspected how you might (initially) feel about my SL request . . .

. . . that's why I included that (humbly) in there. <ewg>



To all (and FP is he still my "friend' <hopeful smile>)
Posted by: Supernatural lawyer - May 09, 2002, 3:31 PM 7 of 54

I apologize if I came out a little too strong about author X. He is a very controversial figure in France (but many people do like and respect him; don't think I am the " French Authority" around here <smile>). He tends to "change his shirt" (as we say in French)--politically and intellectually I mean-- depending on who is running the country, what is the opinion or philosophical idea in vogue, etc. In other words, he's pretty flacky. One of those people that get all hyped up by the media (he's a constant guest of any economic/philosophical/political debate on TV, just because he fought with the Che). Of course, I should have been more careful with my choice of words. I was in a hurry and forgot the usual "sarcasm warning." FP, I despise author X for who he is (I "confess" passionate and irrational opinions at times <smile>), not you (never you) for reading/citing his books. I hope this "mea-culpa" built back trust between us. And we all know how much trust is important. <smile> In any event thank you to VR for her support.

On a lighter note, SL it is then. Being myself quite obsessed with SNL (do I need to go on about my pop culture obsessions again?), I like the shorter version much better. Thank you FP for making it official. Of course, you can also call me "Super," but I may get a big head again and start annoying everyone. Again. <smile>



AS YOU MAY BE ABLE TO GUESS . . . from the AMOUNT of my CORKBOARD posting . . .
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 3:29 PM 8 of 54

. . . this has not been a normal Tea Time day.

QUICK ASIDE TO SL: Delighted to hear this is an exceptionally good day for you.

Partly I was "thrown off stride" <smile> by that "imaginary quote"
about Spike's Slayer Bone Tea (SBT on the menu from now on <g>)

BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY . . . the end of BtVS Season 6 is fast approaching.
May 21 will bring a season-ending two-hour Buffy.

Since the "Tea TIme" project was designed (sort of) <smile>
to be somewhat in sync with the flow of the Buffyverse <g> . . .
the intent is that sonnet 154 will come the day after that
broadcast.

WHICH IS TO SAY: The "final " TEA TIME is "designed" to be
Wednesday 5/22 . . . with the "topic" being the Season 6 finale.

SO: I've spent the morning (when not posting on the CORKBOARD<g>)
mapping out just how this can be achieved.

IF I WILL QUIT TYPING NOW <smile> . . . I will post "THE PLAN" of
the last 10 "episodes" of TEA TIME on today's (new) CORKBOARD.

Hitting submit.



And here's "part 2"
Posted by: VretilRaduriel - May 09, 2002, 3:13 PM 9 of 54

And the end result, regardless, is irritation and often frustration. As for another guess, perhaps SL dislikes said author for reasons other than the work you cite and cannot overcome her dislike due to those reasons. I'm fairly well read, and I have a fairly open mind, but I know of a few people I loathe and cannot stand to read. Case in point: There is man in the world of literary criticism by the name of Grebanier. I've read two of his works and he could write the next holy grail of the literary world and I wouldn't read it. Why? Because, based on his previous writing, I find him to be an umitigated ass and a sloppy scholar who thinks far too highly of his own opinions entirely without merit. I hold for this man an active dislike bordering on rabidity. And I know it. And I know that people change and he too may have changed since the last work I read by him, but I simply cannot bring myself to read his work without risking apoplexy. So I don't. And I make nasty comments. So, don't judge too quick or think cultural or intellectual snobbery just yet, FP.

Last note: In interests of full disclosure, I will say that my dislike of Grebanier springs, in part, from our polarised opinions about the capabilities of the male and female genders. <smile, with pointy canines showing>



While taking a break from the constraints of my life I read posts....
Posted by: VretilRaduriel - May 09, 2002, 3:02 PM 10 of 54

And feel compelled to respond. To some -- other responses will come later when I have more time. First though I'll spring to SL's defense (in a typically feminine way by recounting, perhaps?, a parallel I see in my own views). While I would not presume to give you SL's reasons for dislike of that author -- and I hope she'll reveal them -- I will venture a few guesses. Perhaps she longs for good, clean prose -- though FP, your presentation may have altered the author's. It's all too common for the intelligesia of our times to offer pronouncements designed to sound authoritative. I say "designed" deliberately, precisely because no "common" reader would ever want to submit to the torture of demystifying sentences full of academic double speak that signify very little or at most something that could have been said much more clearly. It reminds me of hazing and sophomore frat boys who offer as excuse "Well, I had to go through it, so why shouldn't you?" If the point is to communicate and communicate well -- then why hide the ideas in prose designed only to be understood by a few? It's either a serious misapprehension of the audience or cultural snobbery & either way the writer defeats the point of communicating knowledge.


Forensic
Posted by: prunehilda - May 09, 2002, 3:00 PM 11 of 54

I was going to post a big raspberry to you but now you've got me thinking Saturday Night Live. How do you do that? SL it is then ( if she agrees to it).

With so many books how do you find the one you want? Do you catalogue them? I ask because I've only got about 600-700 and it seems I can never find the one I looking for.



an apparently trivial . . . but cultural-transmission significant . . . request regarding SL
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 2:46 PM 12 of 54

Although I have been guilty of it myself . . .

. . . I humbly <smile> request that Supernatural lawyer's identity
NOT be abbreviated SNL . . . but rather SL.

WHY?

BECAUSE of previous cultural associations encoded in my brain
by years of television (and now in daily re-runs) SNL
transmits to me Saturday Night Live.

Can't I just tell my brain not to think of Saturday Night Live
in the Tea Time context. Well, sure. AND have you ever told your
mind not to think of something.

IN ANY CASE . . . SL chose the name Supernatural lawyer
which is composed of two segments, not three. AND I KNOW that
I may well have been the first to contract it down to SNL
and so I take upon all the sins of every SNL and crucify myself
right here <ewg> . . .

. . . as I ask that we just refer to Supernatural lawyer as
                                SL



NOTE TO SL (and all) regarding my quoting AUTHOR "X" . . . (Part 1)
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 2:24 PM 13 of 54

One thing I have discovered in accumulating my substantial
private library (which is predominately philosophical / sociological /
theological / cultural / literary critical / rhetorical )
is that . . .

. . . author fill-in-the-blank is a complete fill-in-the-blank . . .
except in those passages where they are fill-in-the-blank.

NOTE ON HOW I SELECT BOOKS . . . I go to a (very good bookstore)
and take a couple of hours considering at every title
in each section that appeals to me. (Most of that time in philosophy,
literary criticism, cultural studies . . . NOTE there is usually
NO section on RHETORIC but that's my real section . . . but my
definition of RHETORIC encompasses ALL SECTIONS)
. . .

The title TRANSMITTING CULTURE (by the author we shall
not mention<smile>) is a PERFECT description of what is most crucial
to me . . . AND BTW is what we are actually talking about (at a deep level)
when we are talking about BtVS.

Am I a fool <smile> for not seeing that author X is an idiot
when "every well-educated Frenchperson" knows this?

What can I say <smile> . . . perhaps he had a very smart translator.
FOR EXAMPLE: (SEE QUOTE THAT FOLLOWS)



Part II of message to SL . . . . a longer passage from "TRANSMITTING CULTURE"
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 2:22 PM 14 of 54

Communication excels by cutting short,

TRANSMISSION by prolonging

even if it must condense its ample forms

of expression into the emblematic currencies of

     the motto

                the logo

                                the apolgue

                                                        the parable . . .

Religion, art, ideology: these variegated categories of transmission . . .

We transmit meanings so that the things we live, believe, and think

do not perish with us (as opposed to me).

To accomplish this, we have license

                              (depending on the historical period)

to invent the means of oral epic poetry with its rhythms

and ritornellos conductive to memorization;

or the arts of drawing or writing;

or printing, audiocassetes, CD-ROMS, or the World Wide Web,

as the search for target user audiences . . .


END QUOTE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh . . . I see now. A complete idiot. SARCASM WARNING
I will burn his book immediately. Where is the ligher fluid. Bad, bad.
Bad author. Wash mind out with soap. Will never read what
"all the smart people say" (intellectuals on TV?) say is bad.<EWG>



Now that I've read SNLs post I figure I am probably dead wrong.
Posted by: prunehilda - May 09, 2002, 1:53 PM 15 of 54

But I stand by my thoughts on the man/female conundrum. Do I have to move so that I can stay on top of pop culture? I do have to move to get any kind of culture.


SNL
Posted by: prunehilda - May 09, 2002, 1:33 PM 16 of 54

Thank God! I've been worried that the writers may have messed up the story too much. The moral of this is NEVER PAY ATTENTION TO SPOILERS.


Now lets talk about the direction the sonnets have taken.
Posted by: prunehilda - May 09, 2002, 1:22 PM 17 of 54

I keep starting this message and it never comes out right. The sonnets (and maybe I'm dead wrong) seem to be in answer to the whole male vs female thing and that unanswerable question "What do women really want?" and of course "How can Hollywood deliver?" We say we want a nice, sensitive guy but we lust after the guy with the motorcycle. Forensic, we don't know what we want. I don't know how to make it any simpler.

If you put Buffy Summers, Ally MacBeal, and Carrie Bradshaw in the same room with the perfect man (whatever that means) and told them to scrap it out to get him, they would end up discussing their old boyfriends. Those three waifs would agonize over Billy, who is dead, Angel, who is sort of dead, and Mr. Big who is the consummate bachelor. All unavailable men! The perfect guy, now leaning against the wall near the door would be left shaking his head in disbelief and waiting for a quick release.

What else can I add but that it's good for the economy. Buying a new pair of shoes makes everything all better! Doesn't it?

Sorry, but I'm a feminist of the "Oh, grow up" school.



Sorry
Posted by: Supernatural lawyer - May 09, 2002, 1:13 PM 18 of 54

I did not mean to cross out my lines. here is the end of my post again:


He's a very complex character, the ultimate "gray area." Listen carefully to his speech at the end of Seeing Red. It reveals a lot about what his issues are. Then tell me if you hate him. A lot of Bronzers focus on the infamous "bathroom scene" (you may know what I mean if you have read spoilers, otherwise, I'll let you discover it). It is a pivotal scene, but I don't think the debate should be focused on what he did to Buffy but why he did it (just more interesting from the a-moral plot-line point of view).

Note to all: I have a meeting this morning and am hoping to get off before Tea Time (yes, it may be one of those meetings where you get in at 10:30a and get off when it's dark outside. Oh, joy.). My apologies if I don't make it then. I will post something in the C thread.

Lastly: you will all be happy to know that today is a good day for me. Aren't you relieved! I hope all of you are blessed with such luck.



Dear prunehilda
Posted by: Supernatural lawyer - May 09, 2002, 1:12 PM 19 of 54

Good to see you. And thank you for answering FP's questions. As always I was slightly off-topic! How strange that FP is expecting us to follow "rules" in our voting decisions when he himself changes rules all the time. I guess that's his prerogative. <g>

prunehilda, as for Spike, I will let you watch "Seeing Red" and we can talk about it next week. I am not sure we are supposed to "hate" him. I certainly don't. Pity was probably the first feeling that came to my mind (mixed with anger, confusion, disappointment... ). He's a very complex character, the ultimate "gray area." Listen carefully to his speech at the end of Seeing Red. It reveals a lot about what his issues are. Then tell me if you hate him. A lot of Bronzers focus on the infamous "bathroom scene" (you may know what I mean if you have read spoilers, otherwise, I'll let you discover it). It is a pivotal scene, but I don't think the debate should be focused on what he did to Buffy but why he did it (just more interesting from the a-moral plot-line point of view).

Note to all: I have a meeting this morning and am hoping to get off before Tea Time (yes, it may be one of those meetings where you get in at 10:30a and get off when it's dark outside. Oh, joy.). My apologies if I don't make it then. I will post something in the C thread.

Lastly: you will all be happy to know that today is a good day for me. Aren't you relieved! I hope all of you are blessed with such luck.



Dear FP
Posted by: Supernatural lawyer - May 09, 2002, 12:48 PM 20 of 54

Apologies accepted--although not directed at me <smile> (I watched Seeing Red twice last night looking for that mysterious Tea quote!) Sometimes, just because of the language barrier I don't quite get what Spike is exactly saying, but this time I thought I did. However, I am grateful, because the more I watched it the more I got it (if there was anything to "get").

As for angels, well just as Clem may be the characters' guardian angel (or the convenient confident?), VR is our "angel" (in the true greek sense of the term of course) and I will not let you insinuate anything bad about her again <smile>. Didn't I warn you about angering lawyers? Like Spike, it makes us do stupid stupid things (or is that stalker-syndrom that does that <g>).

Oh and please do not cite to Regis Debray in my presence again... He may be considered a real author outside of France but he's nothing but an intellectual fraud (in my "humble opinion <g>). But again, I forgive you <g>.

Have to run.



Gee whiz Forensic
Posted by: prunehilda - May 09, 2002, 12:48 PM 21 of 54

Don't we have enough homework? Now it's questions, questions, questions.

1. I sincerely vote for Glow. Her line was straightforward, more direct.

2. Still haven't figured out the "short line" but then I haven't looked either.

3. The problem with the Buffy verse (even though I have yet to see the episode!) seems to be the vilification of Spike. Wasn't it just a week ago that we heard him say that he would never hurt Buffy? And hasn't that been the case for the last two years? Now the fans are supposed to behave like good trained monkeys and hate him.

4. As to JNW/VRs identity.I've always known that VR was a friend, confidant and writer of sonnets. Enough said.



POOFING CORRECTION: and replayed the scene where I HEARD Spike say
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 5:50 AM 22 of 54

POOF POOF POOF POOF POOF POOF POOF . . . I really mean it now . . . POOF


P.S. <embarrased smile> Regarding SPIKE'S "TEA" (and super-tea-attunement)
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 5:46 AM 23 of 54

Hmmmm . . . I went back to the video tape one more time
and replayed the scene where I was heard Spike say that he

MADE my TEA with her [the slayer's] bones.

AND WHAT I NOW REALIZE HE REALLY SAID WAS:

PICKED my TEETH with her bones.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AND THE MORAL OF THE LESSON IS . . .

When you're listening for something . . .

                          . . . . you may hear something more "inspirational" <ewg>

than what is actually said. IF SO . . . run with it. <smile>


BOTTOM LINE: My sincere apologies (to glow especially) for
wasted time re-watching "Seeing Red" listening for this non-existent quote.
<smile>BUT for the record . . . I really like the idea of Spike making Tea
with slayer's bones.
In MY Buffyverse . . . he does.



+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 5:19 AM 24 of 54

POOF


Some "random" QUOTES I feel "inspired" to share . . . from my library
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 5:11 AM 25 of 54

SOURCE: Transmitting Culture by Régis Debray

(31) . . . in Greek . . . The messenger or delegate was called angelos.
Though it falls to the angels to be the bearers of good news, one
should avoid forgetting Rilke's warning, in the opening lines of
the second Duino elegy . . .

       Every angel is terrifying.

(44) Wherever . . . we may go,
an angel will await us on the doorstep . . .
and it is futile to want to do without [his/her] intercession.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRECISE QUOTE/REFERNCE MISLAID FOR BELOW:

Beyond ( above / around / throughout ) . . . Los Angeles
lies a city of angels.



CORRECTION TO EARLIER POST: Perhaps I'm SIMPLY more attuned to noticing "Tea"
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 4:43 AM 26 of 54

OK. I'll find the scene on the videotape one more time . . . and make sure
I'm not SO attuned to "TEA" that I heard it where it wasn't.
<smile>

OBVIOUS NOTE: If you're looking for something, you'll see it everywhere.
(except your car keys<g>).



REGARDING VR's choice of name
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 4:36 AM 27 of 54

I will remember the absolute perfection of "the elaboration"
of VR . . . until my last breath.
NOTE: This is somewhat "encoded" . . .
. . . to protect the purity of what occurred. A miracle of sorts.
Good Lord, this is the Bronze, after all.


Well, duh. We all know who VR is NOW don't we? <ewg>



A . . . LOOK AT THE MOON, NOT MY FINGER POINTING AT THE MOON . . . QUESTION <smile>
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 4:17 AM 28 of 54

Based on my midnight comments (as Tuesday turned to Wednesday)
I assume you can tell the general drift of my feelings about "Seeing Red" . . .

. . . Given that context what might be fp's reasons for choosing the
"unusual path" for the Wednesday's sonnets?



RELATED QUESTION: Which part of the Buffyverse . . . exceeded
design specifications?



A STRAIGHTFORWARD QUESTION FOR ALL -- Is it really true . . .
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 4:07 AM 29 of 54

. . . that none of you heard the ingredient of Spike's tea
in Seeing Red?


Perhaps I'm simple more attuned to noticing "Tea " . . . <smile>

NOTE: Not long after Clem makes the comment about Buffy:
"Sweet girl. But issues." Spike goes into his speech
(more to himself than Clem) about how things used
to be so clear.
I believe you will find a line about Tea
slipped into that speech. Or was it only a dream? <g>



CORRECTION: I want you to keep in mind is how true collective intelligence is achieved ...
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 3:30 AM 30 of 54

. . . that is in some ways conflicted with gracious conviviality.


AND NOW IT IS THURSDAY IN SANTA MONICA ======================================
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 09, 2002, 3:27 AM 31 of 54

If I have not made it clear that I love you recently . . .

Ooops, where am I? . . . Oh yeah, Tea Time Corkboard at midnight. <smile>

If I did not "defuse" my own "delight" with your voices/minds I . . . well,
. . . hmmm . . . need to just shut up about now. <g>


Skimming the channels earlier tonight, I caught this snatch of dialogue
from Married With Children :

                           Men are the lowest.
                           Let's pretend Bud is a man
                           and kill him.

I'll let you make up your own comment. <g>

I'M STILL READING OVER all the posts I hadn't yet read
and Tea Time PORTAL" votes etc. Two quick thoughts
(though I may add more later)

1. I think I remember Mister Verschip saying something like:
"democracy is uglier than this" right before a very important
occurance. Prophetic? <smile> In any case, design flaws on my part
are responsible . . . that there isn't more of this. <smile>

2. Regarding the votes for which line "wins" the Tea Leaves . . .
SOMETHING REALLY IMPORTANT . . . I want you to keep in mind is
how true collective intelligence is achieved . . . that is
in some was conflicted with gracious conviviality.
I.E. Suppose you were actually writing a script for a Buffy episode
collaboratively . . . and were going to decide which line to pick . . .
how would you vote? (Lots more to say here. You say it. <serious smile>)

POSTING THIS NOW . . . going back to pondering the posts.



My fun is over for the day
Posted by: glow - May 08, 2002, 8:12 PM 32 of 54

Must get back to work, but I enjoyed my break. I'll probably be a no show for a few days. Sorry <frown>, but I'll try to pop in on Friday for a bit.

Thanks again FP and your "friends" or "co-workers" or whatever the bloody hell you call them. <smile and LOL>

Also, many thanks again to my fellow "C" conspirators. Can't say enough how much I enjoy and search out your company. Much scooby love to all of you.

The *glow* you know



Nope, sorry Glow
Posted by: VretilRaduriel - May 08, 2002, 8:04 PM 33 of 54

Several scans as three <smile> keep trying though!


I think this is the short line
Posted by: glow - May 08, 2002, 7:05 PM 34 of 54

There's several, so let's go one by one.

I count only 9 syllables. Am I wrong?



Not me -- but to tell truth,
Posted by: VretilRaduriel - May 08, 2002, 7:03 PM 35 of 54

I haven't even tried. Actually, I'm not sure if I'll have time to be in tea for more than a few minutes. <no smile>


VR and prunehilda
Posted by: glow - May 08, 2002, 7:02 PM 36 of 54

Have either of you found the other line that FP was talking about?


Glow -- why not try both?
Posted by: VretilRaduriel - May 08, 2002, 6:59 PM 37 of 54

I'm not at all sure greed comes into play when tea leaves are about -- they seem a bit more "spiritual" than monetary, so who could blame you?


Yup. Both lines are correct & prunehilda's are too
Posted by: VretilRaduriel - May 08, 2002, 6:58 PM 38 of 54

And since you're posting here I'll throw my "shots" in as well.
1) By fans (though Spike won't mind sweet womankind)

2) And comfort's fine (the seats are velvet lined)



VR
Posted by: glow - May 08, 2002, 6:57 PM 39 of 54

Oops! I didn't see your response. Both are fine, Yeah me! Now I have to choose. Hmmmm....do you think FP would give me a bonus TLP? No, now I'm being too greedy.

Hiya prunehilda!!!



VR I have the same question
Posted by: glow - May 08, 2002, 6:55 PM 40 of 54

I don't know where to post my answers either. Plus, I want FP to know that instead of writing up my lesson plan for tomorrow, I re-watched the EOTD (Seein Red) and could find no reference to tea or tea leaves made by Spike. However, I did catch Buffy's comment about rhymes.

VR, so both lines have correct IP?




Okay Glow
Posted by: VretilRaduriel - May 08, 2002, 6:54 PM 41 of 54

Both are "glowing" IP, so take your pick!


This is my feeble attempt
Posted by: prunehilda - May 08, 2002, 6:53 PM 42 of 54

Away from all the fawning seedy grind.


CORRECTION: TTREF_40TT
Posted by: goodtvguy - May 08, 2002, 6:53 PM 43 of 54

I left the initial "T" off the search keyword. Not that it would make much
difference, but TTREF is the correct prefix.



Hullo Glow!
Posted by: VretilRaduriel - May 08, 2002, 6:53 PM 44 of 54

And nope, your iambic pent. is just fine. Do you think if we post here we won't need to post the lines in tea time? Or more to the point, just where in hell do we post these sodding lines? (Sodding in reference to mine, not yours <smile>)


My last offering
Posted by: glow - May 08, 2002, 6:51 PM 45 of 54

Just a mini rewrite to my line. I think the stress is incorrect on the word "before," so I've replaced it with "and then." Yet, I'm still unsure.

AND SO WE SAIL through bodies unperturbed.

I BUY TWO BEERS (my own of lesser kind).

WE FIND A BOOTH . . . where we won't be disturbed . . .

I take a swig and then I pick his mind.



FORMAL APOLOGY (for no "late" notice for Sonnets) . . . AND a SEARCH REMINDER
Posted by: goodtvguy - May 08, 2002, 6:50 PM 46 of 54


Dear participants . . .

(1) Please accept my personal apologies as the "Executive Producer"
for the failure of someone (who shall not be named) to place a
notice on the CORKBOARD at 5:00 PM indicating the the SONNETS were
going to be late.

(2) If you are in another thread when at Tea Time comes (and yes, give it
a couple of minutes past the hour <smiie>)
. . . you can use the
BRONZE KEYWORD SEARCH feature to find Tea Time.

Today, the SEARCH KEYWORD is . . . TREF_40TT

Again my sincere apologies for any time it costs you checking the CORKBOARD
between 5:00 and 5:30 PM.

Kindest regards,

GTVG
Tea Time in L.A. Executive Producer



Re: "it seems there's a missing line from the last quatrain in today's sonnets"
Posted by: glow - May 08, 2002, 6:45 PM 47 of 54

Okay, I'll throw my hat into the ring. (*cough* *cough* glow clears her throat)

I take a swig before I pick his mind.

I think my IP is off :(



REGARDING THE BRONZE LINK PROBLEM . . .
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 08, 2002, 6:16 PM 48 of 54

Yep . . . a mysterious tech problem (which is less obvious
than some from the past) . . .

ONLY THING I CAN TELL YOU (which you probably already know, but anyway)
Expect this to happen, and set some bookmarks to come back in via

http://www.buffy.com/bronze_home.shtml

OR

http://www.buffy.com/bronze_forums.jsp



Another Tea Leaf Possibility . . .
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 08, 2002, 6:09 PM 49 of 54

In WHY I POST IN SHAKESPEAREAN SONNETS . . . there's a noticably
short line (not a debatable single syllable).

Before I repost that sequence in a single thread, that line needs to
be fixed.

3 Tea Leaves for the best rewrite (with correct iambic pentameter
and rhyme).

NOTE: Klingon love poetry allusions will disqualify your entry. <smile>

You know who will decide who gets the Tea Leaves, right?



Well well well . . . it seems there's a missing line from the last quatrain in today's sonnets
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 08, 2002, 5:53 PM 50 of 54

Perhaps some Tea Leaves (3) for the best line
(in iambic pentameter . . . and with a correct rhyme)
that someone can figure out how to "shoehorn" in there . <smile>

Who decides who gets the Tea Leaves. Guess. (Not the Oracle.)



Glow you're back!
Posted by: Supernatural lawyer - May 08, 2002, 5:50 PM 51 of 54

<SL steps over annoying clients and colleagues to hug dear glow>
We hope to see you soon in the C thread. And don't be so modest. You are a true original member of the C!

Maybe it's me (crappy day and all), but I was slightly confused by today's sonnet. Of course, like Joss, FP expects and enjoys such reactions. <g>



AT LAST . . . THE LINKS TO TODAY'S SONNETS (109-112) SPIKE'S SPECIAL BLEND . . . tid=116315
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 08, 2002, 5:43 PM 52 of 54

http://www.buffy.com/bronze_posts.jsp?tid=116315

There was an earthquake . . . no wait . . . there was an apocalypse . . . no two . . .<g>



I feel like I'm in Older and Farther Away
Posted by: glow - May 08, 2002, 5:33 PM 53 of 54

Last night and today, I've been trapped in threads. Whenver I try to exit a thread, to check out the topic list I receive that bloody stupid message. "Somebody blew it zeppo. Return to Sunnydale." All I can say is Grr arrgh! And Halfrek get your ass down here!

I hope this wonky bronze won't interfere with my access to your sonnet(s) and Tea Time today FP.

I'm almost caught up on all of the Tea Time threads and its affiliates. Just have to work on the "C" Channel.

SNL, prunehilda, and JNW (or is it now VR?) thanks for keeping the torch alight. I would never have uncovered the information that you all have. I don't feel worthy to be grouped in the same class as my "C" conspirators. <frown> I hope to change that soon.

Allright, time for me to grab my battle axe and fight my way back to the topic list. (glow swings her weapon against the door *clunk* *thud* and nothing.) Hmmmmmm.....let's try the window (*smash* *tinkle* *tinkle*) Ah freedom!

The *glow* you know. :)



PROSE POSTCARDS FROM FORENSICPOPOURI
Posted by: forensicpopouri - May 08, 2002, 4:09 PM 54 of 54

* Running a little late today (AGAIN<g>). Will have them html coded and up by 5:00 Bronze . . .
unless something goes horribly wrong. <smile> Perhaps I have simply dreamed I've written them. <g>
The sonnet sequence today is somewhat different than what has come before. "Inspired"
by one line
from "Seeing Red." A new direction for the sonnets? We'll see.

* Was focused on writing today's sonnets, and haven't had time to read this morning's
comments on previous corkboard. I will.




NOTE: THE ORIGINAL FORMAT-DESIGN (NextLeft FOR UPN) OF THIS PUBLIC FORUM PAGE
HAS BEEN RESURRECTED TO PRESERVE THE VISUAL CONTEXT AND FORM OF THE POSTS
IN THIS EXTENDED ONLINE CONVERSATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF HISTORICAL RECORD.
BOTTOM LINE: THIS RECONSTRUCTION IS FOR NON-COMMERCIAL EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY.