A Station Eight Fan Web Site
: « First : « 250 : « 25 : Displaying #771 - #795 of 995 records. : 25 » : Last » :
Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : 100 : All :
I really admire the patience and dedication of longtime fans and admirers (including yourself) of "Gargoyles." I only discovered the show for myself (with the help of my two young daughters) a bit more than a year ago, and I KEEP hoping that "some day" will come already and new episodes can be made.
Folks can say what they want about Toon Disney, but that's how my daughters found it and shared it with me, so the channel is at least providing the opportunity for a few new viewers to discover the show.
It's clear from watching the series, and then finding this Web site and learning more about the behind-the-scenes processes involved in its making, that there were a lot of thoughtful, creative, talented people behind it. Your ideas about characterization and story continuity have prompted me to post some thoughts and an inquiry here. (It's at the heart of one of the main reasons why I really lament that there aren't any more episodes being made ... yet.)
From a writing point of view, I think "Hunter's Moon, Part III" -- which I realize was a season finale -- would have served as a much better "final" finale for your involvement than "The Journey," which just left everything dangling for me like an unfinished book. Maybe I should say "like an unfinished chapter" because I don't want the book to end. At least in "Hunter's Moon," it ended with a bit of a payoff: an open declaration of mutual love between two main characters ("You know how I feel about you, right?" "How we both feel, yes." and even a kiss). It helped bring together a few loose strands that had been threading from almost the very beginning of the series without completely shutting it off from future development (far from it, actually).
In "The Journey," there is an aborted, sort-of date with very little discussion between Goliath and Elisa about what is really happening between the two of them or that very significant exchange between them from the previous episode. Also, from the information shared in this site, it seems you knew this was your farewell episode in many respects. So I would be interested to learn what you intended to have at work between Goliath and Elisa in this episode because I'm not sure that I "got it" all. I think an argument could be made that the episode, coming immediately in sequence after "Hunter's Moon," implies that a relationship between the two is A-OK with them without any internal conflicts.
Did you really want to make things seem less defined between them and let some time pass before they actually had The Talk about their relationship, specifically to help sustain fans' interest at a time when you may not have known what the future held for the series and their story?
Sorry to ramble on, but I don't want to appear as though I'm sorry you stayed on for one episode too many (again, far from it!) I'd like to learn your thoughts about the episode from a story/character development perspective.
Thank you.
Well. I was trying to play fair, I think. I was leaving, but the series had 12 more episodes that I was at least supposed to advise on. Most of my positive (try this) advice was ignored, though some of my negative (hey, don't do that) advice was taken. I wanted to give ME some closure, but I wasn't trying to give the series closure.
Specifically, what I was saying was that the journey would continue. That the adventure would continue. That even Japan had gargoyles, and Vinnie (or Greg Weisman) would never be totally out of the picture. That no matter what hassles Goliath and Elisa had ahead of them, that they would still have each other as companions on the journey forward.
This was not to imply that Elisa was all copecetic about loving the gargoyle. But that she knew that she did. That she would never abandon him. And vice versa.
Does that help?
Feel free to ask more specific questions, if I haven't covered it for you.
And by the way, cuts or no cuts, "Deadly Force" or no "Deadly Force", I'm still glad that Toon Disney's airing the show.
Aris-
As long as we're chatting, well, yes. It is annoying and boring. That's unavoidable, but also why I only did a handful. Unsportsmanlike? Absolutely. Which is why I'm more than a little sorry for doing it. Though it honestly didn't occur to me before that the robot numbers would have some logic behind them, I figured they were random (guess I wasn't thinking about how Greg operates). Maybe I won't be able to work up the guts to do more acronyms later, we'll see. This time I was swept up in the excitement of knowing two letters for sure. If you want, we can make a note that the point I got for the "994" is tainted. And I'm not sure the website completely atones for my sins, either. But really, is it so much worse than when the clans contest was going on?
I suppose Greg will be reading these. His challenge will be making the next contest one he won't end up regretting...
You guys worry too much.
Btw, (and so that I'm not negative all the time), I want to thank you, Ray, for the page with the text and the blanks filled in. That *does* atone for the brute-force tactics :-)
:)
Sorry about this, but it must be done. :-)
Ray, don't you think that the brute-force tactics you are constantly employing are a bit annoying *and* extremely boring, not to mention unsportmanslike?
Once again, sorry...
-
By the way (also on that same document) I agree with you that a big problem with the notion of "Goliath as a human who was transformed into a gargoyle" is that the audience would be expecting and wanting him to find a cure, which of course would be out of the question in a television series since it would automatically end it. I found that particularly interesting since I've noticed that there are many cases of television series which have an explicit or implicit specific objective for the protagonist(s) which, if achieved, would automatically force the series to conclude. Thus, unless, the concept is handled extremely carefully, the series develops a note of frustration about it as the protagonist always has to fail to achieve his or her objective, to keep the series going.
"Gargoyles", fortunately, managed to avoid that problem by making the protagonists' goal something that was a journey rather than a destination. The gargoyles' goal is to survive in this strange new world, understand it, and protect it, all three ongoing quests rather than ones with a specific end of "We've done it; now the story's over". Which, I certainly believe, was a good thing for "Gargoyles".
(Of course, some of the spin-offs might be described, from what you've said about them, as falling into the "concrete objective" category, but even there, there were solutions to that here and there. For example, in "Pendragon", Arthur and Griff's goal is to find Merlin, but from the evidence that you've given, the story would definitely not be over after they do find him and get him out of the Crystal Cave. "Timedancer", of course, would be a different story, since the series is definitely over once Brooklyn gets back to Castle Wyvern, but since that won't be for forty years after his adventures begin, there's room enough for a lot of stories there).
Yep. I like things that evolve.
Hey Greg!!
Um, I have a question about doing my own kind of gargoyles story. But I want to make sure that the characters I'm thinking up don't mix too much with Disney and what you came up with. Is there a way I can email you, or you email me, so I can maybe get some interesting ideas or even some council? This is something I would like to do as maybe a comic book series or something. Or maybe just a book series with a lot of illustrations. Kind of like a teen book, or even an adult book or something. But without the unnecessary adult material which I consider sacred and unneeded in todays hideously over-rated Hollywood. It's so hard to see movies these days because there aren't any good ones to see.
Anyway, my email is Marie Destine@aol.com. I'm not sure at this point if there is anythin at all that I will be able to do. This is just an idea at pressent that I want to explore and hopefully make a reality. So, if there's anything more you need to know about the ideas I have so far, or wouldn't mind giving me some tips I would appreciate it. I just figured I should ask you what is the best course to take because you are in the business and I thought that you might be the best person to ask.
So anyway, any help you could give would be great.
Thanks in advance!! ^_^
I don't think I can be of much help, and I'm not too clear on what you have in mind anyway.
Gargoyles (generic) unrelated to Disney's property are certainly fair game. But, frankly, I'm not about to help you with what in essence would be competition TO my work, inspired at least indirectly BY that work.
Gargoyles based in any way on the series would get you in major trouble with Disney, assuming you didn't have their permission. And again, I'd love to be writing books based on the series. So we'd be competing.
And in any case, I make it a policy not to look at other people's ideas, to protect myself legally.
Sorry.
Hey there Greg.
I was thinking of posting a guess for the contest but then I thought: Why pour gasoline on a burning house? You know, this new contest reminds me of a Simpson's episode where Apu hides a snake in the Quick-E-Mart on Whacking Day as a marketing ploy. The first one to whack the serpent gets a free Squishy. Unfortunately the participants search for the snake by knocking over counters, flinging food, and smashing products. Apu sighs after giving up on telling them to control themselves and says, 'I really should have put more thought into this.'
I still need sleep…
YOU need sleep?!
Another "more-musing-than-question" comment here. In "M.I.A.", when Leo and Una are urging Griff not to take part in the Battle of Britain, saying that "the Nazis are a human problem", Goliath replies that "in my experience, human problems become gargoyle problems."
What I found interesting about this remark is that, in fact, the origins of the "gargoyle problems" in the series do bear out the truth of Goliath's remark.
1. The Wyvern Massacre of 994. Arose in part from an attack on the castle by Hakon and his Vikings, who were initially doing so for the plunder (and Hakon at first didn't even believe that there were actual gargoyles living there).
2. The flight of the eggs to Avalon in 995. Arose from Constantine murdering Kenneth II and wanting to marry Katharine to strengthen his claim to the Scottish throne that he'd just usurped.
3. The troubles that Demona and her clan underwent at the hands of the Hunters in the 11th century. Stemmed partly from Gillecomgain's personal vendetta from Demona (which was essentially a gargoyle problem), but also from Duncan and Canmore's feud with Clan Moray over the succession to the Scottish throne (definitely a human problem).
4. Goliath's modern-day adventures in "Awakening". Ultimately stemmed from a human problem (Xanatos wanting to conduct a raid on Cyberbiotics to steal its research).
5. The Quarryman threat from "The Journey" onwards. While based in part on the public's fear of the gargoyles, as far as Castaway is concerned, it's ultimately really based on a human problem (Castaway's unadmitted guilt over shooting and maiming his brother, which he blames the gargoyles for).
(Not to mention that the evidence in "Once Upon A Time There Were Three Brothers" shows how the feud between two rival Scottish houses over the throne in the years leading up to 971 wound up drawing in the Wyvern clan).
So I'd have to agree with Goliath on that one; a very accurate statement on how the gargoyle race isn't an island.
Yep. And I'm glad Goliath learned that lesson too.
<glances at Adam and says nothing> :-)
Okay, moving on to other things. I had said:
--"Let me just paraphrase a sentence of Terry Pratchett: "All things are true, for a given value of 'truth'."
and you said:
--"Who's Terry Pratchett?"
and I say:
*Shame* on you! :-)
Anyway, Terry Pratchett is a (British) writer of humorous fantasy, probably the best of the lot. His most famous work is the "Discworld" series of books... It ranges from the silly/trivial ('Colour of Magic','Eric') all the way to the deep and serious ('Small Gods', perhaps 'Hogfather') sometimes even venturing into the dark and creepy ('Soul Music', 'Carpe Jugulum')
The early books ('Colour of Magic' 'Light Fantastic') weren't *that* great so I usually recommend 'Small Gods' to beginners, which is also the book I started with - it isn't just a good book but it's also a story with none of the recurring characters of the series so one won't get confused at all.
But perhaps (given the Gargoyles series) a better recommendation would be "Wyrd Sisters" (a humorous take on 'Hamlet'/'Macbeth' and Shakespeare in general). Also its 'sequel', "Lords and Ladies", parodying in part Shakespeare's "A Midsummer Night's Dream".... Great book...
My all-time favourite Discworld book is perhaps "Hogfather". Featuring Death, Death's grandaughter Susan, Auditors of Reality, Santa Claus, a brilliant assassin with the mind of a child, a stupid thug with the mind of a child, the oh god of hangovers, tooth fairies, the first bogeyman *ever*, and also the monster under your bed. A book about the magic (aka 'real terror') of childhood. :-)
That books is also the reason that I know that Santa Claus can be handled in a very serious manner - and "Hogfather"'s utilisation of him is as serious as one can get... I actually have more respect for the big guy now.. :-)
Okay that was a ramble - sorry about that. To finish, I'll just say i've heard than in America Pratchett may be better known because of his co-writing the book "Good Omens" with Neil Gaiman...
Sounds interesting, but here's the thing...
At this point in my life, I don't really want to read other people's creative (i.e. fictional) interpretations of legend and myth. What I've read up to this point, I've read. But now, I'd prefer not to clutter my own creative process with other peoples interpretations. I'd rather go to so-called original sources and come up with my own stuff.
dear god.... its been what? a week if that? I have no sense of time anymore. erhmm... go Greg! good god, I mean good job with the contest! o.O; hoping to get it done in tie for G2001. <falls over laughing> 9.9; so erhm. I'm going to ask a question in next post. This one its just. Good job and dear god... good luck answering these things <if the contest isn't *over* by the time my post hits>.
Uh... thanks... I think...
Hi Greg.
I like the shape of the future you've built, or as far as I can see it. Obviously you won't answer anything on it at the moment, but I'm particularly interested to find out what the other clans are up to. And Coyote-X sounds great. I just hope the Space Spawn aren't the sort to gurgle in their throats or shout, "prepare to die, earthlings!" or something.
As for the large amount of guesses already filled - I still think the last ones will take a long time. Especially since some of them seem to be names that I don't know if we can guess. 233-253 and 306-339 look particularly tough.
Hopefully, will make the Space-Spawn as interesting as Demona and Xanatos were in their way and in their time.
One thing that I was thinking about the events in "The Gathering". Many Gargoyles fans, including myself, didn't approve of Oberon and Titania's attempt to kidnap Alexander, even if it was for the sake of allowing him to achieve his magical potential. But one thing that I recently considered is that their abduction attempt may have been a blessing for the gargoyles, if a disguised one at first.
After all, one of the major results of the whole kidnapping attempt was that Xanatos ended his feud with the gargoyles, and gave them shelter at Castle Wyvern after the Canmores blew up the clock tower and exposed the clan's existence to the world. If he'd still been at odds with them, I doubt that he'd have done that (or at least, not under as generous terms for the clan); at best, in the aftermath of "Hunter's Moon", the gargoyles would have been reduced to his pawns (just as he'd wanted them to be when he first awakened them), and at worst, they'd be homeless and all but defenceless, most likely to wind up dead or in captivity. I doubt that Titania was anticipating the Hunters' actions a few episodes later when she tried to kidnap Alex, but I can't help but suspect that it saved the gargoyles' life at St. Damien's Cathedral.
Sometimes things just seem to work.
One thought that I had about your remark that Goliath isn't likely to tell anybody about the details of that "Future Tense" nightmare that Puck gave him; I think that it's a good thing, myself. I'm not sure that it would be that advisable to let the rest of the clan know about Lexington being a traitor in "Future Tense", and I'm definitely certain that it would be a bad idea to let Brooklyn know about the "mated to Demona" business (especially where Owen is concerned :)
Yeah. Not much to gain by it, huh?
Hey Greg
Comment about Terry Pratchet. :)
Just find any one of those Discworld books and read the first couple pages. If your not hooked into it by the first or second page... well like thats possible. hee hee
ja!
see my comments to Aris.
I realize I'm cutting myself off from some good stuff, but I don't have a shortage of books to read EVER.
I just read William Faulkner's New Orleans Sketches. It was a great early example of his work.
Another silly Question from Silly Maria: ^_^
Why is 'adopting' for Goliath and Elisa more convenient?
I obviously have a very different thinking pattern. I guess I feel that if someone really loved someone else they would be willing to make some sort of change. So that's why I find it hard to believe that Elisa or Goliath can't make a magical change or something. In my mind, just because you change your form doesn't necessarily mean you are changing who you are. It can change a PART of who you are, but it doesn't change everything about you. You are who you are inside. And that includes your SOUL. Your soul is who you are. That's why we are able to differentiate between right and wrong because GOD gave us that gift. We just abuse it sometimes or ignore it, because we are down here on earth to learn. And from circumstance and learning different behaviors, we sometimes become what we were not in the beginning.
So, why would it be so inconvienient? (Bad spelling. . . :P) I mean, I am probably WAY off base. But that's just the way I feel . . . if that's all right.
I guess the problem for us Goliath and Elisa fans is we REALLY want Goliath and Elisa to have a child. Yet, contradictorally, we understand that ethnically, it would be impossible. And yet we hope for a miracle. I guess in my frame of mind, seeing them raise a family of their own would be like some kind of resolution. Strange, isn't it?
Anyway, enough of my rediculous ramblings. I probably don't make any sense - though I try to. It's just hard sometimes to put my thoughts into words. And they don't always come out the way I want them too. So for that I apologize. A hard life has let my communication skills go to par. ^_^!
Well, if that wasn't too - ridiculous - I'll take off now. TTFn. Ta Ta For Now!! :)
There's nothing wrong with the way you feel.
But it's not the way I feel. I am a secular, at times Pagan, Jew. And yet, I would not convert to another religion for anyone. Not for "love", certainly. If my "love" couldn't accept me for who I am, why would I want her? Most of my life, I dated non-Jews. It's theoretically possible that I might have married one. But I still would not have converted. As it turned out, I did marry a Jew who "practices" the religion more than I do. I haven't gotten "more Jewish" because of her. I've fundamentally stayed the same. And yet, being Jewish is part of who I am. Part of what made me who I am. Same with being short. Same with being nocturnal. Same with being a guy. A heterosexual. A storyteller. I can't change any of these things (or a bunch of other things) without fundamentally changing my identity. Who I am. Who I want to be. I'm not talking about changing breakfast cereals. I'm talking about fundamental factors to my identity in THIS LIFE. Maybe I was someone entirely different in another life, and maybe my "SOUL" is an unchanging light that shines through the prism of each new life. But the prism matters to me. And I think it matters to Goliath and Elisa too. And by the way, I don't see why ADOPTION is any less legitimate a way to share their love with a child than spitting a kid from one's combined loins.
But did I use the word "convenient"? If I did, what was the context? Because the decision was not based on convenience.
Hi Folks!
Just a little comment for those who might wonder about the date of my last posting: It might seem wrong, but firstly at my watch it´s really already about an hour after mightnight (there might be some hours time difference between the locations) and so my posting made a little time-travel and landed yesterday ;) - but secondly I guess it will already be also for Greg at least the 28. September when he reads or answers it. (And birthday greeting cards also often come a little time too early. It´s normal.)
Greetings ;))
- Skylar
Thanks.
Hi Greg! I am a long time reader and a first time poster! :)
I know you probally don't remember me, but I was in the late night G98 chat.
Bonnieway...
No real questions this time, so I hope you don't mind if I jump between two topics.
Gargoyles: 2198
You asked for it! 200K+ of responses in less than 24 hours!
A few times you mentioned that the powers to be were afraid (or maybe you were) that Gargoyles would be too much like Batman: TAS
But I have seen an episode that had WAY too many parallels to Gargoyles (It was made well after even 'The GOliath Cronicles' aired)
Basicailly, Jeff Bennet played a crazy character. It has been a while since I saw that episode, but two parts stick out in my mind:
In one part, a angel statue drops on Bennet's character, it's head pop's off and he sticks his head up where the statue's head would have been.
AND in a second part, a castle parade float manages to fly through the air and land on top of a pile of garbage. I even think there was fog below the castle...
Anyway, the episode was VERY funny!
OH, and I think that the Star Trek: Voyager writers threw in something about her Gargoyles character. She said something (to a holodeck character) to the feel of 'Do you think i am the queen of the faries?'
Well, have fun, take care, and see you in LA!
See you there. Be sure to re-introduce yourself.
sorry about the fact that im about to post several times, but im dividing up my rants, as per your request ^_^
re: gay/lesbian gargs
it depends on what culture. in ancient greece, being gay was perfectly normal. you only got ridiculed for being the "feminie" side of the gay relationship. the "masculine" side was just as accepted as heterosexuality.
Yeah, I basically knew that.
Hey just a question that i was thinking about
Why?
With all the talk of starwars (don't worry this question ain't about SW) it made me think, well we all love the original SW-tri. just like we love the 66eps of Gargoyles for us fans it's like a part of culture, well for me it is, and I have read the SW books 80+ and, well SW isn't the same I don't like the idea that Luke, Han, and Leia will grow old and die, latter in the books Chewie dies!!! For some reason I don't want the same thing to happen to Goliath and the trio and Elisa, don't get me wrong but in order to do all this continuing of the story our original cast is gonna grow old and die, personaly I'm glad that the show was stoped, not cuz it was bad, but because it was one of my favorite shows and had great characters and everything, and I don't want to SEE it die.
This probably sounds like sacrliage but I just thought I'd speak my mind. Thanks for your time.
Not sacrilege at all.
But if you trust me, I think you'll find that it can be wonderful to see characters grow, change, even age, and (in a horrible way) maybe even die, if the deaths seem "right". Plus new characters are always going to be introduced. New characters born. Etc. Kinda like life.
One of the things I'm sure you liked about the first 66 episodes was the way the characters evolved over time and stories. If you liked that, I'm betting you'd like what follows.
One thing that puzzled me in the "Guidelines for Villains" document that you posted just now. When it gave a list of the kind of "silly Batman villains" to avoid, it included Mr. Freeze on the list, alongside the Penguin and the Riddler. Now, the latter two, I can see as "silly", from what I know of them - but Mr. Freeze as portrayed in "Batman:TAS" (which is, admittedly, the only interpretation of the character that I'm familiar with) didn't strike me as silly at all. He seemed more like an effectively tragic figure, a man trapped forever in eternal cold, shut out from warmth and aware of his plight, and wanting vengeance upon the hypocritical businessman who had put him in this condition - with the additional element of his grief over his forever being parted from his wife Nora. I'm at a loss as to how such a figure can be considered "silly" - and can only assume that you must have had a different interpretation of Mr. Freeze in some other "Batman" medium. (Since, as I said, I don't know how he was portrayed outside of "Batman:TAS", it's quite possible).
I go way back with Batman. And Mr. Freeze, was , by the way a creation -- i'm pretty sure -- of the Adam West Batman series. The cold was a gimmick. There wasn't any tragic element there. I think that Tim Burton actually did a fairly good job, in an otherwise lousy movie, of making the Penguin resonate as a villain for Batman. And I think that Alan Burnett and crew did a damn good job at creating Pathos (if not resonnance) for Freeze in B:TAS. But I'm guessing that at the time I had that conversation with Fred, I hadn't seen that episode yet. And still, I'm bigger on resonnance with the hero, than the villain's own tragedy anyway. Both are important, but I like to start with the resonnance. (Am I spelling resonnance right? Man, am I tired.)
Hello, Greg.
Here's my question. Are there any Gargoyles CDs or soundtracks available? It seems that soundtracks for videogames and animated series are just too impossible to find in the U.S. Over in Japan, it's as easy as pie to find CDs for such genres.
Anyway, I love your work and it's a shame the series got cancelled. I was so jaded to find that The Goliath Chronicles croaked and I almost cried, I really did. Gargoyles was the one of the VERY last cartoon series I actually LOVED before I got sucked into the world of anime (mostly Dragon Ball Z). Thanx for all the memories your series gave me to cherish and good luck on the next series- I'm looking forward to it :)
You're welcome. And no, no CD's or soundtracks that I know of.
Another note on the "Brainstorming Villains" document: I do find it rather intriguing that a rejected name for Goliath would be "Griffin", in view of the later addition of Griff into the series. So people on the project already knew of the connection between gargoyles and griffons, then?
I don't know if we had it that thought out, but certainly, I was aware that many gargoyles in Britain were "griffonic" in style. We were brainstorming back then. Trying things out for size. Very little was actually sticking, and you can see that we actually went back to the comedy development and borrowed heavily from that, before reaching our final product.
I read your document on the three "proposed and rejected" villains for "Gargoyles" - Mortify, Lichen, and Val Starch - and have to agree that they were "underwhelming", as you put it (although given that, as you also point out, they were the result of not too many people at Disney having experience with the animated action-drama genre at this time, I don't think that one should be too hard on the chap who designed them). The thing that really stands out about this trio to me, actually, is that I'd be hard-pressed to work out how they could serve as suitable thematic adversaries to a medieval gargoyle awakened in New York; they could fit nicely against a purely modern-day super-hero of the conventional sort, but don't strike me as being as appropriate to pit against Goliath as the antagonists who did make it into the series were. (Well, maybe Lichen as a fellow "monster", and Mortify's journalistic background could cause some problems, the way that in the actual series, "Jon Carter"'s report for WVRN did in "Hunter's Moon Part Three", but on the whole, it's more of a stretch than the "finished product" antagonists).
Yeah, I have to agree.
Nothing there for us really.
Greg responds...
I once read a Star Wars novel right after the original movie came out. It stank. Kinda turned me off that whole thing.
But you never know.
;-; you read Splinter of the Minds eye? huff. See when I read this trilogy of books it turned me *onto* the other books. Timothy Zahn is really a great writer. And turned me on so much so that I read through so many of the bad ones... including "splinter" <which was released shortly after the movie, pure crap>. Occasionally I try to make my way through another one here and there..... But everything pales. PALES!!!!!! ~taunts all the star wars fans who disagree~ sheep!!!! can't any of these so called hardcore fans see that a BIG MACHINE OF DEATH is kinda boring? book after book.... ;-; so depressing. But This trilogy.... MWAHAHAHH. 9.9; sorry
erhm, heheh. ^.^ anyways.... ~wavies the books in front of Greg~ If I managed to send these.... or not even these. Just the first one to Jen, would you consider reading it? "Heir to the Empire". Made the best seeeelllleeeerrrssss list. =) Hit number oooooonnnneeee. read the reviews online of it if my sales pitch didn't sell it.
and forget about the rest of the books. <a couple short stories are superb here and there but mostly they're blah>
running off now, spanish homework to do.
You don't have to send me books. (Thanks for the offer.) The truth is, I'm not interested in reading Star Wars-anything right now. That world isn't firing my imagination. The next book I plan on reading is William Faulkner's "New Orleans Sketches." Plan on starting it on the plane ride down to New Orleans. Right now that's just where I want to go.
But if I ever get nostalgic for Star Wars, I know which books to pick up. Thanks.
Sam asked "I was just curious, biologically, how old was everyone in the mini clan back in 1996? Thanks alot!"
yes, the MiniClan is an internet-based fan-clan. The majority of the clan is around the same age. in 1996 most of us were 15/16, with a few ranging off in each direction. that means most of us are around 19/20/21 now. but truely, the ages range from probably 5-50 or so ^_^
O.K. There you go, Sam, you have your answer.
: « First : « 250 : « 25 : Displaying #771 - #795 of 995 records. : 25 » : Last » :