Conjecture in Character Biographies?

Hi all,

The other day I took a closer look at the "Ed Straker" character
biography on the new Carlton UFO DVD's, and I noticed a lot of
background information which isn't found in the TV series.
Things like his military background, his temporary reconciliation
with his wife Mary after his son has a bad reaction to antibiotics,
etc.

Personally, I've never liked such conjecture to appear on
such "official" products. I was wondering what other people
thought about this subject? Do you approve, not approve, or
don't really care?

Marc

Oh... one more thing I forgot to mention -- the biography says
that Mary's new husband Rutland is a naval captain, implying
that this is the same guy that we see in DESTRUCTION. I'm
not sure that this was intended by the writers either...
unless it's specifically stated in the original script
(which haven't seen)

Marc

--- Marc Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Oh... one more thing I forgot to mention -- the
> biography says
> that Mary's new husband Rutland is a naval captain,
> implying
> that this is the same guy that we see in
> DESTRUCTION.

I think that's a strech...

JF

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

I was very impressed! But again I wonder...is it
"official" from the Book of Anderson, pure gospel? Or
maybe a Carleton copywriter getting creative?

I'm sure there must have been character bios when the
series was being planned so the (the writers) would
have a frame of reference.

JF

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

Marc Martin wrote:

>
> Personally, I've never liked such conjecture to appear on
> such "official" products. I was wondering what other people
> thought about this subject? Do you approve, not approve, or
> don't really care?
>


I mildly disapprove .. given that the DVDs are the current media
vehicle of the official UFO product, I believe that only canonical
information is appropriate. Imaginative forays into non-canon
territory are great for magazines, annuals and fanfic, but on the
official DVD release, it's just not kosher imho.

James

>I was very impressed! But again I wonder...is it
>"official" from the Book of Anderson, pure gospel? Or
>maybe a Carleton copywriter getting creative?
>
>I'm sure there must have been character bios when the
>series was being planned so the (the writers) would
>have a frame of reference.

The only known remaining pieces of the UFO writers
guide were published in Fanderson's FAB magazine
(issue 28 and 29), and it didn't have this sort
of information in it.

This Straker biography was most likely written
by Fanderson chairmain Chris Bentley, and is
derived from a more extensive Straker bio which
appeared in Fanderson's FAB 25. Some of the
information in the bio is supported by what's
in the series, but some of it is not.

Also, for the benefit of those who don't have
the DVD's, Christian has sent me frame captures
of the whole Straker bio, so you can read it at:

http://ufoseries.com/charProfile

Thanks Christian!

Marc

CONTENTS DELETED

>I've already had squealing on the EdBishopFans list over Straker's
>astrological sign, which if you use this bio, is Cancer. I get the John
>McEnroe reaction: Cancer??????!!

The character birthdates seem to be loosely based on the actor's
birthdates. For example, if I look in the Boxtree's "UFO and
Space:1999" book, compare
the characters vs. the actor's birthdates:

Ed Straker : 10 July 1940. Ed Bishop : 11 June 1932.
Alec Freeman: 31 August 1938. George Sewell : 31 August 1924.
Paul Foster : 25 November 1951. Mike Billington: 24 December 1941.

So I don't think whoever did this took into account their behavior
based on astrology...

>http://ufoseries.com/charProfile/d2-ex-chprof05.jpg AAAAAAAAAAAA!!! I
>hadn't seen this shot! What's that from? Blueprints!

Well, there's lots of photos on these DVDs that I've never seen before,
but this *isn't* one of them! This is a shot from TIMELASH. I think
I've seen this before in an old issue of TV Zone... (?)

Marc

CONTENTS DELETED

> I wonder if naming Straker Edward George had anything to do with either
>English kings or more likely the fact Alec was played by George Sewell. <g>

I thought it was because Ed Bishop's original name was George Bishop...

Marc

Thanks to all for putting up those frame grabs of the biographies. I still
have a crappy TV hooked up to my DVD/VCR's etc etc etc. I guess I have
trouble with DVD features that require me to look...(wait for it) Close Up.

But I agree, the character bio's, unless they are part of series canon,
part of the original "bible" or writers guide for the show are a little
useless.

I'd only looked at the pictures of these so far and didn't bother to read
them. Reading off the TV for me is a little tedious and these sort of text
features (On both the UFO and 1999 DVD's) I don't bother with. If there
are "blanks" in the official canon of the character bio's then its up to
the fan fiction writers to take these and run with them I say.

Oh, one other thing about the bio's since I've read them in the temp
folder, where it recounts the events in AQOP it says, "John was knocked
down by a motorist" in the USA we'd say John was hit or struck by a
car. To me this reads like John was pushed by the driver after he got out
of his car! : - )

At 11:22 AM 4/14/02 -0700, you wrote:
>Personally, I've never liked such conjecture to appear on
>such "official" products. I was wondering what other people
>thought about this subject? Do you approve, not approve, or
>don't really care?
>
>Marc

Not to get too anal, but I'm all for "canon" pure and simple.

I know there might have been a writer's guide, blah-blah-blah, but if it
didn't make the TV screen, then it didn't happen - pure and simple.

Yes, there is the gray area of a script being cut or scenes being cut --
I'll leave that to the "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin"
committee -- but for me, please don't "make up" a character's bio.

I certainly don't mind a writer's guide that helps writers get into the
character's head, but if the information didn't somehow make it to the
screen, then it doesn't count.

Anthony
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marc Martin" <[hidden email]>
To: "SHADO Discussion Group" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 2:22 PM
Subject: [SHADO] Conjecture in Character Biographies?

>Marc Martin <[hidden email]>
wrote:
>Things like his military background, his temporary reconciliation
>with his wife Mary after his son has a bad reaction to antibiotics,
>etc.

"Temporary"? The original script from AQOP states that he's been divorced
since John was 5! If that's temporary, I've got news for you: 5 years can
be a VERY long time in a bad marriage! (Don't ask how I know.) So,
evidently whoever wrote the bio didn't consult the original scripts. Did
they dream it up?

>Personally, I've never liked such conjecture to appear on
>such "official" products. I was wondering what other people
>thought about this subject? Do you approve, not approve, or
>don't really care?

You know, it's hard enough trying to keep up with all the tiny tidbits of
info that surface from time to time. How much harder is it when you can't
even confirm the validity of the facts?! In the end, a fan fic writer is
forced to go with what info the series actually provided. The rest is
really no help at all.
Yours,
Denise

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.

"Denise Felt" wrote:
But they separated before he was even born, no? As we see in
Confetti Check A-OK .. ?

Also - it's the supposed reconciliation that's described as
temporary, not the separation.

James

[hidden email] wrote:

> About the antibotic thing, for me it doesn't work, I go by what was actually
> in the series, which to me(and this is my personal take on it) seemed to
> indicate Ed was already divorced when Johnny got ill.

Well, I don't recall him getting sick from antibiotics on the show.
And Christian sent the WHOLE bio? Way to go, Chrissi! :-)

I don't really know what to think about a thing like this on an official
dvd release - I'm new to such things ...

> http://ufoseries.com/charProfile/d2-ex-chprof05.jpg AAAAAAAAAAAA!!! I
> hadn't seen this shot! What's that from? Blueprints! I wanna a dvd player
> and the dvds !! and I can't afford them waah. Okay, I'll calm down. Moving
> right along-- this bio says that Mary (the screecher) was a secretary at the
> ministry of defence. Uh excuse me but is this the same Mary that tells Ed
> later"Oh break the bloody rule for once" How the heck would she pass the
> criteria for Intelligence with an attitude like that?

Well, she was preggers ... that messes with your mind, or so I'm told
...

===============
Anthony D wrote:

Well, that just shoots to heck any attempt at fan fiction, doesn't it?
Sorry, I can't get behind THAT ideal.

=============
Denise Felt wrote:

Ummmm, what????? They could have been seperated since John's birth and
then gotten back together for three weeks when John had a bad reaction
to antibiotics and then gotten officially divorced when John was 5 -
what's the problem with that?

I mean, I'm not saying it's true, but it is plausable ....

A fanfic writer is forced to make things up. Which is fine for me, as MY
storylines were certainly never shown on the show.

{{;-)


-- Y

--
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
Yuchtar zantai-Klaan | [hidden email]
I am not a number! I am a FREE FAN!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"An apple a day keeps the, uh ....
No, never mind."
-- Doctor Who
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
http://yuchtar.users4.50megs.com/
http://nunzie.users2.50megs.com/

[hidden email] wrote:

> About the antibotic thing, for me it doesn't work, I go by what
> was actually in the series, which to me(and this is my personal
> take on it) seemed to indicate Ed was already divorced when Johnny
> got ill.
>

I agree. I think the bio-writer may have come up with this to
attempt to explain the remarkably close relationship that Straker &
son have as shown in AQOP, which IS remarkable given that they have
been estranged since the child's birth.

> Mary (the screecher) was a secretary at the ministry of defence.
> Uh excuse me but is this the same Mary that tells Ed later"Oh
> break the bloody rule for once" How the heck would she pass the
> criteria for Intelligence with an attitude like that?

Well, Straker evidently became a colonel in military intelligence
with more or less the same attitude! Alec has to talk him out of
breaking the bloody rule for once, don't forget.

Many parts of this bio just don't hang together - if Mary worked for the
Ministry of Defense, she would have been aware of security requirements and
able to live with them. However, her meddling Mom mitigates against this as
Mom's meddling would have no doubt interfered with her work - meddlers
meddle in everything and if Mary had had the gumption to tell Mom off then,
Mom wouldn't have felt free to look for dirt against Mary's husband.
I suspect the whole MOD idea was to give them an opportunity to meet without
adding complications like mutual friends.
As to the 'reconciliation' and Straker's close relationship with his son - A
'reconciliation' works if one posits that Straker's workload lessened
immediately after John's birth OR he finally came up with a good lie to
cover himself.
Straker could remain close to his son despite not living with John if Mary
had actually come to terms with the fact that her ex wasn't evil but just
too busy to be the husband she wanted. Her comments during AQOP came at a
time of extremely high stress and may not have reflected her mental
accomodations to the situation.
There isn't enough info given in AQOP to determine whether Straker and Mary
were still together when John was 6 months old - he does recall details of
the incident when she was too upset to remember, indicating to me he was
there and involved at the time.

Without an original writer's guide concerning the back history of the
characters, I feel the 'officially' published bio has as much credence as
the researched bios created by fan-fiction writers. AND, unless Straker was
a commissioned serving officer at 19, a birthdate of July 1940 makes him way
too young to be a full colonel in the USAF in 1970.
Deborah

-----Original Message-----
From: James Gibbon [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 5:00 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Conjecture in Character Biographies?


[hidden email] wrote:

> About the antibotic thing, for me it doesn't work, I go by what
> was actually in the series, which to me(and this is my personal
> take on it) seemed to indicate Ed was already divorced when Johnny
> got ill.
>

I agree. I think the bio-writer may have come up with this to
attempt to explain the remarkably close relationship that Straker &
son have as shown in AQOP, which IS remarkable given that they have
been estranged since the child's birth.

> Mary (the screecher) was a secretary at the ministry of defence.
> Uh excuse me but is this the same Mary that tells Ed later"Oh
> break the bloody rule for once" How the heck would she pass the
> criteria for Intelligence with an attitude like that?

Well, Straker evidently became a colonel in military intelligence
with more or less the same attitude! Alec has to talk him out of
breaking the bloody rule for once, don't forget.






Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.344 / Virus Database: 191 - Release Date: 4/2/02

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.344 / Virus Database: 191 - Release Date: 4/2/02

<<Marc Martin <marc@u...> wrote:
><Well, there's lots of photos on these DVDs that I've never seen
<<before,
><but this *isn't* one of them! This is a shot from TIMELASH. I
<<think
><I've seen this before in an old issue of TV Zone... (?)
<<Marc

Yes Marc. You remember correctly.
The Issue of TV Zone is the Issue 10 in the 1990.
Just I update today on my site also with the complete article signed
by Andrew Martin.

http://www.ufotv.it

--
Angelo Finamore
--

Hi All,
on the Visual Imagination Web Site I read that the Issue 29 (May 2002)
of the UK Magazine ULTIMATE DVD have inside contents about UFO Box
Set 1-13 and "...UFO - Once charged with maintaining planetary
security, Ed Bishop tells us how miniskirts and Nehru jackets were
all that stood between mankind and alien domination..."

http://www.visimag.com/ultimatedvd/d29_display.htm

--
Angelo Finamore
--

...and just now I read of others UFO DVD contents in UK Magazine TV
ZONE Issue 150. Always Visual Imagination Web Site at:

http://www.visimag.com/tvzone/t150_display.htm

--
Angelo Finamore
--