Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 20:25:23 +0200

From: jmcs

Subject: Re: Did they or didn't they?: Interesting thread on ne

At 15:13 19/06/97 -0400, you wrote:

>

>>That´s very interesting! I had noticed when Leah says to Ste "Give us an E

>>or I´ll spread it round where you slept last week". As far as we know, Jamie

>>and Ste only slept together two nights in a row: the "Hello" night and THE

>>night. Apparently, the party took place the night after THE night so how can

>>we explain Leah´s "last week"?

>

>I think you'll find that the party was NOT the third night. It's at least

>several nights later. Jamie has been concerned that Ste has not stopped by

>after THE night ("I knocked for you a *few* times"). Leah spotted Ste

>coming out of Jamie's apartment the morning after. I'm sure that's the

>first she knew of Ste sleeping over, and managed to get the details out of

>Sandra or Tony. Therefore, I think (this is my opinion only) Leah's

>reference to spreading around where he slept "last week" is a direct

>reference to that night. This means that Ste was actually intentionally

>avoiding Jamie for several nights, which is what makes that garden party

>scene so powerful. After a great night (for Jamie anyway), Ste has had

>serious second thoughts about continuing and has made himself scarce.

>

>> To me, they´ve been sleeping together many

>>nights after Ste´s beatings, just 'top and tailing'. They must have talked a

>>lot over the years, after all talking is how we get to know each other and

>>maybe that´s how Jamie fell in love with Ste in the first place. He got to

>>know him very well.

>

>I never got the impression that Ste had ever slept over before. Remember,

>Ste doesn't even know that Jamie wears glasses! If he spent a lot of time

>with Jamie outside of school, he would know that, I'm sure. Also, when

>Jamie goes to the party, he say's "I'm going out with my mates," to which

>Sandra replies "You haven't *got* any mates." If he was spending a *lot* of

>time with Ste, I don't think she would have said that. I think Jamie has

>been very attracted to Ste for awhile, but has never spent too much time

>with him, in spite of the fact that they live next door to each other.

>Jamie is NOT friends with Ste's friends, who delight in tormenting him.

>

>My opinion only. Glad to hear what others think.

>

>-Eric

 

My God, you´re right! I don´t know why I thought of that. I don´t have the

stageplay so I couldn´t be certain about a few things, but all you said

makes sense.

Somehow, the two nights and the party seemed so consecutive in the film that

I actually thought... oh, well. I was wrong. As for them sleeping together

often, yes, it was my overactive imagination again.

 

On a more personal ground, I would like to thank you all for the great time

and the regard you show me. I´m not used to it. Thank you very much.

Take care.

 

Sandra.

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 15:50:55 -0400 (EDT)

From: Todd

Subject: Re: Why is J a "misfit"?

I'll field that one. I was being called a fag, queer, etc. before I even

knew what it ment. When you don't know for sure, are questioning your

sexuality, it is very easy to be withdrawen and unsocial, of sorts. Jamie

seemed like the kind of boy who never really 'fit in' and therefore he was

easy to pick on. For most guys, the most humiliating thing is to be

called gay just because of the steriotype. I think Ste participated

because he was one of the guys and was afraid to let on that he was

interested in Jamie. It was a macho thing and wanting to fit in with the

guys. I eventually became that way. Hiding my true self deep within and

just being one of the guys. One of the hardest things I ever did. I just

wanted to be who I was and not be an outcast. That's what I love about the

closing scene. It's as if Ste is saying "I don't care what you think.

This is who I am and I love this boy."

Todd

On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Edward wrote:

> Hello all,

> New here. Not sure if I'm even doing this right, but here goes:

> Just saw the film a week ago. Bought the soundtrack yesterday. Needless

> to say, I'm in love--although for some odd reason the film has

> precipitated a mini-crisis in my life. I guess having to do with memories

> of my coming out to my mother. In fact the most powerful scene for me is

> when Sandra confronts her son.

> BLA, BLA, BLA...My question:

> Why do all his team/class-mates taunt Jamie so? Even Ste (if I remember

> the first scene correctly) participates. Is he suspected of being queer?

> My impression was that J himself didn't "really" know until later. How

> can the others "know"?

>

> ED

>

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 16:22:00 -0400

From: "Harry

Subject: Re: Did they or didn't they?: Interesting thread on new-sgroup

This dialog has proved very interesting and I'm as fascinated with the

different views as Mike is. Puzzeling out the various bits for me took

some time for I made some assumptions right off. Yes, I think they had sex

but that Jamie and Ste each brought their own personalities into it. Jamie

is fairly aware of his feelings, that he is homosexual and that he wants to

get physically intimate with Ste. He's the 'agressor' in the developing

relationship. Ste does not appear to be much aware of his feelings.

Possibly because he's getting beat too much and to really think about that

would force him to deal with things that would have consequences to

difficult to deal with, hence suppressing feelings avoids whole

complications and he has probably by now become quite adept at it. We know

he surpresses feelings because in the first evening in Jamie's bedroom

Jamie ask Ste if he likes Sally (I think) and his 16 year old reply is that

he " hasn't given it much thought, really". Highly unusual for a 16 year

old in this day and time, especially in Thamesmead. Secondly, Ste is

athletic, a jock if you will, and I've found that jocks are into physically

acting rather than thinking about it.

My guess is that Jamie pretty much knew that he wanted to express his

affection and developing love for Ste by having sex. After all, he was

prepared with the Peppermint Foot Lotion. Ste, on the other hand, probably

was aware in a vague sort of way on some level that turning around in bed

with Jamie might lead to sex but not in any up front conscious way. I also

don't think that teenagers living in Thamesmead today would be unware of

sex, that people have it and that their friends do it frequently. Ste just

hasn't given it much thought as far as it relates to himself (possibly,

again, that on some level he might suspect and the consequences would be

too difficult to deal with). Anyway, I think that they touched and had

sex.

For Jamie, of course, he would think it was a bit weird that Ste wouldn't

stop by and avoided him for a week. He knew what had gone on. Ste

probably began to come in conscious touch with his feelings for the first

time through the physical sex that night and had to sort it out. That was

probably one long introspective week for Ste. Later, at the party Ste had

clearly come a long way to dealing with having homosexual sex but not yet

made a personal commitment to being gay or straight. Later on that night,

after the party, in the scene on the bridge, he is offered straight sex and

declines. It is during those thoughtful moments that he finally comes to

terms with the facts that he's had homosexual sex, accepts that that is his

orientation, that he has strong feelings for Jamie and is prepared to see

where that leads. Jamie is several steps farther down the road but Ste is

rapidly catching up.

I don't think that they went through the full repertoire of gay sex (I even

haven't - several chapters to go and the appendixes are a bit thick as

well) but they did have sex to orgasm and Sandra does reference that they

were doing the "70 minus 1" and Jamie, while it took a second or so for him

to catch the drift, didn't protest the joke. Anyway, that is my two cents

on the subject.

- Harry

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:23:40 -0700 (MST)

From: mesocyclone Subject: Re: Tony's character?

 

As for Jaime ending up years later being the victim of domestic abuse from

the once abused Ste, naw. I don't think Jaime would take it. I think

Jaime would walk out the door the minute Ste hit him. He wouldn't say

anythign about it, but he wouldnt' stay around either.

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 14:27:35 -0500 (CDT)

From: sean

Subject: Re: Did they or didn't they?

 

Love is a relative term. It means different things to different people.

By putting a standard definition to love destroys what it really is...an

intense emotion that comes in various forms and ways. Each of us

expierence love differently...to me love is having someone to share my

most sacred feelings, fears, and worries without having to justify or

argue them (and thus reciprocated). There is obviously much more to it

than that, but putting it into words is quite impossible.

as for whether they did it or not...I think it really does not matter...I

am sure that most of us wanted them to but the point of the movie is not

that...and after seeing it again I realized that their "night together"

was insignificant in relation to the rest of the story. Love is a

beautiful thing and we should cherish it as much as we can. Probably the

most poignant movie to come out...it doesn't matter if you have sex, are

gay, black, or whatever but that everyone deserves to be loved by someone.

Sean

On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Kevin wrote:

> > I've asked this question before -- to little avail. What do we (on the

> > list) think love is? When do we know we are in love vs. in heat? How are

> > love and sex related? Are they ONLY supposed to go together? Do they ONLY

> > work independently? I'd be interested to hear what folks think about this.

> >

> _____________________

> Ok, Mike - in answer to your question - I am doing Fiddler on the Roof

> and there is a scene where Tevye sings to Golde "Do you LOVE me?" - and

> she responds "For 25 years I've lived with him, fought with him, starved

> with him - 25 years my bed is his - if that's not love, what is?"

> And I contemplated that that's not what love is at face value - if it

> were, love would be depressing (having to stay with you when you're poor

> and fat and ugly and old - I'm pushing the point here) - but instead

> WANTING to stay. In the marriage ceremony, a couple is asked if they

> will stay together thru richness thru poorness in sickness and in health

> (blah, blah, blah) - all opposite sides of the spectrum - "til death do

> you part!" - I believe no one can honestly answer these questions in the

> affirmative unless there is love behind it - I heard a song once that

> goes -> "love is not a feeling it's an act of your will" - that's a

> pretty strong statement - but I think it more readily describes love

> than the "feeling" thing - I mean, God, feelings come and go (the guy I

> would've sold my soul to be with last week, today I can't figure out

> WHAT I saw in him...) - that's not love (and I think we ALL know that) -

> on the other hand, wanting to love someone and be loved by someone is

> all well and good - we can take it, but can we dish it out???

> I don't know if we can ever really know what love IS - but that doesn't

> stop us from trying to attain it (heck, why are there so many love songs

> on the radio otherwise?)

> Kevin

>

>

*****************************************************

From: Kane

Subject: Scott and Glen not gay. *sob*

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 16:40:21 +1000

 

Kane here again.

I'm just curious, after reading on the Beautiful Thing homepage that Scott

Neal and Glen Berry are not gay, if anyone else's stomach sunk when they

found this out? I know mine did, as did my best friend's. I know it

probably sounds immature, but in a way I sort of fell in love with the

character of Ste and it was weird to have the whole illusion shattered.

Hehe. :-)

Silly, maybe, I know - I'm just sharing my thoughts.

..Kane

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 97 15:15:41 EDT

From: RG

Subject: Re: Why is J a "misfit"?

 

Jamie being picked on is just what goes on in High School. Kids is a group

can always zero in on the enlightened ones!! I always feel, they want to

be like us but can't, so all they can do is pick and mock us! Ste was

going along with it because in order not to get picked on too, you have to

go along with it. That's school-law! Going against the grain when you

aren't even sure what's going on in your own life is really hard to do.

You haven't even established yourself as an individual, so there was no way

Ste could've stood up for Jamie.

The movie, to me, really didn't comment that the boys on the team thought

Jamie was "queer", they just didn't want him to play because he wasn't any

good. Considering him less than a man, I guess. So Jamie left, not

wanting to be around those who didn't think like him. Plus, he had a much

better life with his old movies, musicals and "gayness"!!

And Jamie really didn't put a label of "gay" onto himself. He knew how he

felt and went with it. Only until Ste brought it up about being queer or

gay, was when Jamie put a label on what he was feeling. His line was great

when he said he wasn't sure what he was, but that he was happy when he was

with Ste. I SIMPLY LOVE THAT THOUGHT!

.but that's me!!

Ron

-------------

Original Text

From: Edward >, on 6/20/97 11:19 AM:

 

Hello all,

New here. Not sure if I'm even doing this right, but here goes:

Just saw the film a week ago. Bought the soundtrack yesterday. Needless

to say, I'm in love--although for some odd reason the film has

precipitated a mini-crisis in my life. I guess having to do with memories

of my coming out to my mother. In fact the most powerful scene for me is

when Sandra confronts her son.

BLA, BLA, BLA...My question:

Why do all his team/class-mates taunt Jamie so? Even Ste (if I remember

the first scene correctly) participates. Is he suspected of being queer?

My impression was that J himself didn't "really" know until later. How

can the others "know"?

ED

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:48:27 -0700 (MST)

From: mesocyclone

Subject: Re: Did they or didn't they?: Interesting thread on new-sgroup

 

Actually, in the bedroom scene, it is Ste who asks Jaime if he fancies

Sally from Coronation Street (at least, I think it is). Jaime replies,

hadn't thought abuot it much, which kinda opens the door to why not? and

if Ste had probed, maybe Jaime would've come out then. Ste doesn't

though, and the revelation is left for another night.

Also, I don't think Ste accepts his feelings on the bridge. He does

turn down the offer for a shag, but remember, he thinks of himself as

ugly. From the peppermint foot lotion night, they are talking about that

somehow, and the convo goes something like this:

Ste: Looking like this?

Jaime: You ain't ugly.

Ste: They've made me ugly.

I think turning down the shag is simply for this reason. I don't think

he accepts his feelings on the bridge at all, bc the next scene in the

movie is on the balcony with Sandra and Jaime. Jaime is leaving and goes

to give his mum a kiss. Ste catches him out there, and shoots him a look

of hot death, then disappears back inside. Sandra asks, "what's his

problem?" to which Jaime replies "oh, nothign, he's just in love". Ste

doesn't come back out until he sees Jaime has left, and there is no risk

of having to talk to Jaime. He goes back outside, and has the

conversation with Sandra where she thinks he's in love with a girl named

Nolene. She gives him money to buy her a nice gift. I think this is

where Ste starts to accept things. Or at least it's the prompt he needed

to start thinking about it in a positive way. Then he goes and buys the

hat, and the relationship starts to blossom, for both of them.

Just my thoughts.

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:21:08 -0700 (MST)

From: mesocyclone

Subject: Re: Tony's character?

 

Sandra dumping Tony.....hmmmm.......well, here's my take:

Sandra raised Jaime. At the beginning of the film, Sandra's and Tony's

relationship is just beginning. Jaime's and Ste's relationship is also

just beginning, albeit furtively (remember, the first time we see Tony is

the night he ends up playing cards with Jaime on the floor, which is the

night Ste ends up there top'n'tailing).

So the movie progresses as the two relationships mautre and grow.

And what happens at the end?

Well, Tony is very in love with Sandra, but she dumps him. She goes in

her apartment, and she doesn't look happy about it at all. She does love

him, but it would appear she can't handle the intimacy, the

vulnerableness of being open to another person in a relationship.

Jaime and Ste, on the other hand, are rushing head long into intimacy

and being open to each other. They end up dancing with each other in the

plaza in front of everyone. They are safe bc they are safe in each

other, and it doesn't matter what the rest of the world thinks.

And unfortunately, that's a point Sandra just can't get to comfortably.

*****************************************************

From: Speaker

Subject: Re: Officially Sanctioned Homophobia: A Response

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:20:53 -0500 (CDT)

And thus spake Andi ...

> For Davie to tolerate such comments as an 'out' gay man is just beyond my

> comprehension, and as the generally perceived 'master' of the channel he

> has a responsibility akin to AOL guides and designated ops on other

> channels.

This is IRC not AOL. IRC, like the rest of the Internet, is

a form of anarchy. If you want a sanitized, cleaned-up, controlled

environment then AOL is for you. I advise that if you expect such

an environment from the Internet/IRC you will be disappointed.

--

*****************************************************

Subject: Re: Of Sanctioned Homos: A Response

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 97 13:21:55 -0700

From: Clem

 

Hello all,

This little development is a real disappointment. I don't want to fan the

flames yet I need to add a bit....

I was there while this coversation took place yesterday and I have to say

that the DALnet session was one of the most fun sessions I've had in a

long time. I signed off with a big smile on my face. We were very

rambunctiuos and sassy. And we were able to be that way especially

becasue we've talked so much together and have a history of positive

interactions.

The insult in question was merely one of the participants acting out

lines and scenes from the film. We do it all the time and will continue

to do so if for no other reason than it's a lot of fun. I don't think

Andi understood this given his response (both then on the list and now).

And no apology was forthcoming then becasue there was no awareness that

someone had felt slighted. He left and we continued talking and swing'n

from the rafters.

I have most of the dialog from that DALnet session saved as text. I

reread it and it's quite obvious that everyone, including Andi, were

aware of how "bitchy" everyone was feeling. All joined in and played the

game.

I think Andi should remain on the list because these really *are* the

good people who one hopes to meet in life. And in that vein, I think

Davie doesn't deserve what was heaped on him and is owed an apology.

Nuf said from me.

laters,

clem

 

 

carbon life form: David , on 6/19/97 7:07 PM, said:

>On Fri, 20 Jun 1997 02:32:53 +0100, Andi wrote:

>

>>Regrettably, after only a short time on the list I am leaving.

>

>Some points here.

<snip>

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 02:24:45 -0400

From: Kevin

Subject: Re: Did they or didn't they?: Interesting thread o

 

Sandra, have you ever thought of taking up a career in writing???

WOW!!!

Maybe you could write the Americanized version ;) <G>

Kevin

___________________________

> Brace yourselves because I´m afraid this´s going to be a very long post.

>

> First of all, my humble opinion is that as Ste says: 'Nothing happened'

>

> I´m talking about my personal feelings so maybe I´m wrong or I´m very naive.

> Besides, I love diversity and different points of view. I´d love to be

> proven wrong so that we could talk more about it.

>

> Let´s see... (I´m concentrating now):

>

> Ste´s so shocked and shaken about what´s going on that 'doing it' would be

> too much too soon for him. Put yourselves in his place (me too) he´s afraid

> of his feelings, he tries to be a tough guy, he has been forced to survive

> inside his own family, he knows he has no one who cares for him so he denies

> being vulnerable, having any needs whatsoever. But he is, he´s very

> vulnerable and scared. Then suddenly he finds someone that cares for him,

> someone who´s treating him kindly and with respect, someone who values him.

> Someone who´s just kissed him and caressed him. But he´s a man!!

> At the same time he´s realizing he needs Jamie, that he wants him, he needs

> to be touched, he needs to be cared for. Jamie knows this too and I believe

> he´s sensitive enough to give Ste what he needs without going too far.

>

> I´ve thought a lot about what could have happened. Jonathan´s the one who

> can answer this but what my feelings tell me they did is this:

>

> The last thing we see is Jamie caressing Ste´s face and chest. I´m sure all

> of you noticed he was caressing the bruise Ste had just shown him (I cry

> when I see this), so after that sweet caress Jamie bends over Ste and kisses

> his forehead, his eyes, his nose, maybe his lips again and then, very

> tentatively Ste reaches out and starts caressing Jamie´s face, discovering

> for the first time what it is to share with somebody. Maybe at some time

> during their mutual caresses they can´t stand it anymore and they embrace in

> their need. They must be as close as possible, feeling each other´s skin, so

> they undress each other. Maybe they stroke each other in wonder, just

> revelling in the feeling of being caressed, of caressing another´s warm

> flesh. Maybe they even cry at the beauty of it. And then, still in wonder,

> they hold again and they fall sleep in each other´s arms.

>

> Maybe I´ve been too romantic, naive or simply stupid but that´s what my

> heart tells me it happened. I admit I can be wrong and what Mike says makes

> sense. As for 'the aunty in Gravesend who´s deaf' I´d explain it like this:

> Ste´s scared they can be discovered, he thinks sex is 'noisy' and they can

> be heard, and besides they have their whole families around. He feels safer

> 'doing it' for the first time with only a deaf person around.

>

> I can´t prove they did it that night (or that they didn´t do it), I can only

> say what I feel.

>

> I hope I´ve made any sense to you. Thank you for listening.

>

> Take care.

>

> Sandra.

>

*****************************************************

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 08:47:18 +1200

From: Leonard

Subject: Re: Tony's character?

 

mesocyclone wrote:

> As for Jaime ending up years later being the victim of domestic

> abuse from

> the once abused Ste, naw. I don't think Jaime would take it. I think

>

> Jaime would walk out the door the minute Ste hit him. He wouldn't say

>

> anythign about it, but he wouldnt' stay around either.

>

> ======================================================

This may be my mind reading something that isn't there, but during

the scene where Sandra is hitting Jamie, I got the impression that

Jamie's dad also beat him or Sandra. Just Sandra's reaction when she

realises what she has done.

Maybe I'm reading to much into it, what do others think.

Leonard

*****************************************************

From: Jeff

Subject: Re: Officially Sanctioned Homophobia: A Response

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 16:29:26 -0000

 

But the whole point to this is: THERE WAS NO HOMOPHOBIA on the BT channel.

It was all taken out of context. OK? Let's get that settled right now.

As Sandra says to Jamie after their lounge fight: "Give it a rest." As I

plan to now.

Jeff

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

----------

> From: Speaker

> Subject: Re: Officially Sanctioned Homophobia: A Response

> Date: Friday, June 20, 1997 6:20 p.m.

>

> And thus spake Andi ...

> > For Davie to tolerate such comments as an 'out' gay man is just beyond

my

> > comprehension, and as the generally perceived 'master' of the channel

he

> > has a responsibility akin to AOL guides and designated ops on other

> > channels.

>

> This is IRC not AOL. IRC, like the rest of the Internet, is

> a form of anarchy. If you want a sanitized, cleaned-up, controlled

> environment then AOL is for you. I advise that if you expect such

> an environment from the Internet/IRC you will be disappointed.

>

> --

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 14:06:06 -0700 (PDT)

From: Michael

Subject: Re: Did they or didn't they?

 

On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, sean  wrote:

> Love is a relative term. It means different things to different people.

> By putting a standard definition to love destroys what it really is...an

> intense emotion that comes in various forms and ways. Each of us

> expierence love differently...to me love is having someone to share my

> most sacred feelings, fears, and worries without having to justify or

> argue them (and thus reciprocated). There is obviously much more to it

> than that, but putting it into words is quite impossible.

>

> as for whether they did it or not...I think it really does not matter...I

> am sure that most of us wanted them to but the point of the movie is not

> that...and after seeing it again I realized that their "night together"

> was insignificant in relation to the rest of the story. Love is a

> beautiful thing and we should cherish it as much as we can. Probably the

> most poignant movie to come out...it doesn't matter if you have sex, are

> gay, black, or whatever but that everyone deserves to be loved by someone.

>

> Sean

>

Right on!

Love is a very relative thing, and with my previous post, I was trying

to illustrate that "sex" is also a very relative thing. From my experience

talking to straight friends, only one act is really considered "sex":

vaginal intercourse. Oral sex, frottage, etc. is not "doing the deed." I

think that in the gay community, we're not restricted to that definition.

Because two boys can't have vaginal sex, there's no "mainstream" definition

to what "sex" is. I think that's a wonderful gift- to be able to be unlabeled

like that. Did Jamie and Ste masturbate together, did they have oral sex,

anal sex, or did they just kiss and cuddle? I said it before and I'll say

it again... IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER. I disagree with people who say that it's

most romantic if they didn't. "Having sex," whatever that means, with a

person you love is probably the most sublime experience imaginable.

Sex is not necessarily romantic, it's sensual. But love and affection are

romantic, and Jamie and Ste clearly showed that. Because of that, it doesn't

matter if they had sex or not. They loved each other, they slept together,

and the rest is just details. I consider myself an utterly hopeless romantic,

and I just don't see that if Jamie and Ste had sex, that it couldn't be as

romantic. When I watched the movie, I didn't think about what they did in

bed, I just thought that it was outstanding to see two boys in love: now

that's romantic, sex or not!

Just my two cents,

Michael

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:28:00 -0700 (MST)

From: mesocyclone

Subject: Re: Why is J a "misfit"?

 

yeah, they are all taunting him in the beginning. Remember the one guy

(McBride, I htink) who tells the coach that Jaime's name is Hugh Genus

(pronounced awfully close to Huge Anus)? They all suspect him of being

gay, or at least weird. Do they all know he is gay? No. But then, when

I was in grade school, at the age of ten and eleven, I got teased about

being gay. That's how I figured out I was gay. I didn't even know what

it was, and when I asked somebody, they told me, and that's when I

figured it out. People will always make assumptions about you, based on

all sorts of weird thigns, regardless of who you really are.

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 18:38:15 -0400 (EDT)

From: Head

Subject: Re: Did they or didn't they?: Interesting thread on ne

 

Eric,

I totally agree with you. I think that Jamie and Ste have been thinking

about each other for awhile but has not actually spent the night together

until the "hello" scene. Then the next time is when "it" happens and Leah

sees Ste leaving the next morning.

 

jim

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 05:42:10 -0400

From: Eric

Subject: Re: Norway BT Poster

 

At 10:32 PM 6/19/97 -0400, you wrote:

>I just downloaded the Norway BT poster. Thanks for sending it. However, I

>must say after seeing it, I kinda liked the American one now, even with Ste's

>sunglasses. LOL Sorry, I had to express my opinion. However, I am greatful

>that I did get it for my BT pix collection...

>

HI Jim,

I just got on the list, so I'm a little behind. Can you tell me where you

downloaded the Norway Poster from? I'd love to have it.

Thanks,

Eric

*****************************************************

From: David

Subject: Ben Daniels online

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 22:33:09 GMT

 

In case you didn't know already, Ben Daniels, who played Tony, was on the IRC channel

with us Thursday night and spent a fun hour chatting.

The log of the conversation is on the web site. You'll find it from the new

'Interviews' link.

Regards, Davie

*****************************************************

From: Jeff

Subject: Posts and No Need for Apologies

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 14:45:02 -0000

 

Reiterating again... Posts to the email group can't be seen by the person

sending them.

Now, about this IRC debacle. It doesn't seem that any apology is needed. It

sounds as if things were taken pretty much out of context. I for one

believe the BT IRC channel to be the most uplifting and liberating

experience I've had in a long time. As for being called a shirtflaplifter?

Jay was just quoting the movie. Scene 86. Sorry feelings were hurt. Now

let's get on with our fascination with a touching movie.

Jeff

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> From: Eric

> Subject: Test: Please ignor

> Date: Friday, June 20, 1997 9:54 a.m.

>

> Well, now, I DID say "Please Ignor!"

>

> I'm new to the list and I tried to post a couple of times with no

results,

> so I'm checking to see if it's now working before I try to join in again!

>

> At least I'm getting everyone else's posts, and love reading them.

>

> Best,

>

> "E" :-)

>

>

*****************************************************

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 18:41:23 -0400 (EDT)

From: Head

Subject: Re: "Quite, I do not want to distrub Jamie"

 

Todd,

On this point, I disagree. I think that it is more of a "I cannot believe

what I've done"!! I think that he is confronted directly with his feelings

toward Jamie and the fact that he may be queer. Otherwise, why would he

avoid Jamie for the next few days???

Just my opinion

Jim

*****************************************************

From: Durward

Subject: unsubscribe

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 19:01:46 -0400 (EDT)

unsubscribe

the volumn of mail is rediculous

--

Durward

*****************************************************