I have a question about a line that always bothered me. In "A Last Time for Everything" when Scafandra is being taunted by Trevor's goons, one of them who is unnamed I believe says to her something like "you wanton little cookie...let's see how crusty, what d'you say?!" to which Scafandra replies "EAT IT!". Now if the line I wrote is wrong can someone tell me what the goon said. And does anyone know what he meant by the line?

More on Trevor's goons...does it strike anyone that they don't dress like Breens? Their scanty attire seems more suited for Monicans! Personally I like the goons better than the other officer types who normally work for Trevor (like Number 3 from "Isthmus Crypticus" and possibly Gildameer from "Utopia/Deutoronopia" as well as unnamed others. The goons have much more personality!

Anyway if anyone has any clue about the line I would appreciate it!

-- Euphoric Industry (brian@bbmail.co.uk), December 09, 2001

Answers

One of these guys said to Scaphandra, "You could get killed in this sort of thing you know"! Was he being protective of her? Scaphie had an admirer?

-- Barb e. (Suesuesbeo9@cs.com), January 07, 2002.

I believe the line is "you're one tough little cookie". Always liked the goons myself. Which one was Mark Mars again?

-- Inukko (nadisrec@worldnet.att.net), December 10, 2001.

Ohhh....one tough little cookie! Thanks!

-- Euphoric Industry (brian@bbmail.co.uk), December 10, 2001.

Sinnah was Mars. Although I'm not sure which drawing that one is. That was an interesting comment about them looking more Monican. I see that although doubtfully paid well, (as evidenced by their superior wardrobe) they are also excellent at what they do; thuggery. Other than that it makes you wonder about Trev's choices, was it for the feeling of superiority? These guys no doubt would give Trevor more than enough of that. Or was it so that he could bestow his paternal feelings on his next door neighbor's troupe of lost boys? Trevor definitely was too intelligent to not miss their IQ status. They sure were an interesting group.

-- Barb e. (Suesuebeo9@cs.com), December 10, 2001.

Thanks Barb I didn't even know he had a name...I alread knew Fatboy and Twikka...thanks!

-- Euphoric Industry (brian@bbmail.co.uk), December 10, 2001.

(I meant to name him Sirhan, I believe and not) "Sinnah" was the one who said "You're one tough little cookie...Let's see how crusty, whad do ya saaaaY...?" and had the ugliest perfect set of teeth I've ever seen. I got to cameo as Sirhan with that . Scaphandra (correct spelling of her name, though of course not my character) was supposed to say, "Eat me." But those PEOPLE up there, they barely let anybody whip it out to take a pee, you know. So dem BSP said we could sy, "Eat it!" Which, in the context of the line frome Sirhan (Sinnah) is actually a touch more atrocious, I dunno....

Look I b back right away

-- dangerboy (artian@earthlink.net), December 10, 2001.

Doesn't it amaze you how ridiculous that censorship was, considering their videos were full of a lot more sexual inuendo and down right endo than Aeon ever contained, but they felt it was more tasteful with music I guess.

-- Barb e. (Suesuebeo9@cs.com), December 10, 2001.

Funny that they wouldn't let Scaphandra say "eat me", but kept in the "foreign tongues" line...

-- Inukko (nadisrec@worldnet.att.net), December 10, 2001.

I don't know guys, sometimes I don't mind the censors (of course, it's not my show that they are wantonly tearing up). And before you all spam me for blaspheming let me explain. Basically the censors represent the lowest common denominator and they only object to the most blatantly sexual material even if most people might not consider it even remotely offensive. In an attempt to work around the censors, I think some producers and directors end up with a more subtle and nuanced product. As Barb pointed out, it's sometimes surprising what actually gets through. Thanatophobia sticks out as an episode rife with sexuallity, yet you never actually see anyone have intercourse. (That scene where Onan and Sybill are doing it through the wall and you see that almost subliminal scene with the sperm is a favorite of mine). A line like Eat Me seems pretty trivial, but I can't help but wonder about some of the more extreme stuff that got cut; and dangerboy can help us out on this. It just seems to me like the subtle ways in which the show gets around the censors is a huge part of what we like about the show. And so in a way the censors are an invaluable member of the production team. Of course I don't know what the original design documents looked liked. Maybe they didn't change much at all and the censors really are just a big nuisance.

-- Logo (Vosepherus@aol.com), December 11, 2001.

I see Trevor's goons attire as the result of the their proximity to the man himself. While the public peacekeepers have to wear spiffy uniforms, Trevors goons have a little more freedom because they are never publicly acknowledged. Or if they are caught doing something illegal, they can never be associated with Trevor.

-- Logo (Vosepherus@aol.com), December 11, 2001.

Well, I guess I'll defend the censors. Basically there needs to be some sort of arbitration over what is shown on television. And I think that standards are important because they prevent every show on television from being hardcore pornography. I really don't want to watch the 10 o'clock news in a porn context. What's with this need to see sex and violence on TV? There is no NEED -the violence and sex is superfluous, which is why censors exist. A big nuisance? Yes, when they impede an artist's vision or storytelling method, but there is a fuzzy line separating freedom of expression and freedom of interpretation. There is also a fuzzy line between freedom of display and human decency. If people were decent, censors wouldn't be needed; but sometimes decency does not fit into the picture, which is why the government is trying to rate every show according to content -handing the choice to the parent, rather than impeding freedom of expression. As a result, shows have been more creative and suggestive with symbols (with mechanical rotors and phallic symbols). Are these "enough"? Are these a substitute for real sex scenes? The decision is yours. Instead of bashing the censors, maybe you should be bashing the people who complain about sex and violence on TV, you know? Go after grandma and mom... hahaha -they're the reason why censors exist. J/K.

-- cynical (gemini318@excite.com), December 11, 2001.

For the record, I am not defending censorship. I just thought I would point out the silverlining to the dark cloud of censorship that hangs over us all.

-- Logo (Vosepherus@aol.com), December 11, 2001.

I am beginning to wonder though if Trevor's goonsquad there - Scaphandra in the chair... "AEon - !! You're IN on this!?!?!"

"(haha)--She KNOWS you're NOT--!!"

Was Trevor's test an evaluation of AEon's behaviorology (AEon having in this scenario been therefore successfully lured into the situation for this purpose - Trevor's intention to copy her for a control being the most-desired outcome)?

Or perhaps it were really the Goonsquad who were being evaluated for same general purposes - hmmmm....

Or, - look I'm really not teasing or anything I swear to fucking God - Chung authored the stories and in some ways the lot of us were relied upon to flesh them out at least whether we might hopefully be prevailed upon to intervolve with him for sake of stories' development to effects perhaps less ambiguous than sometimes were left to remain thereafter....

I have begun to consider these workshops for retroactive development in regards to the original (finished) series installments themselves.

-- dangerboy (artian@earthlink.net), December 18, 2001.

I'm wrong.

That was not a test , that was me again. I thought about it for two MINUTES this mor- TWENTY .

That's bad.

Sorry. Anyhow, yeah Trevor did not anticipate Flux. He still should have deduced she would have seen what he did to S. w/ the watch - So now anyhow here he's got her right here - "saw an opening"...

But I doubt TG would have been so unrealistic or foolhardy to spill his trump on her right in front of her just to flaunt an advantage which now had been blown to the wind. It was in response to his being bid the only opportunity for serious honesty with her or anyone else he'd probably really ever had. Because he knows that - standing right beside him - she is far from vulnerable. I doubt - and know him well enough too that he would have to realize to toss a spew (hers! I LOVE IT!!!!!) that way was tantamount to a SURRENDER.

-- dangerboy (artian@earthlink.net), December 18, 2001.