Babylon 5 - Part II

[Bmat]

Wait a sec, the episode where Londo said he did what the Keeper wanted, then he got it drunk, that was where he was talking to the future Sheridan and Delenn and just before he helped them get away- so that makes it the Babylon Squared episode maybe?

[sindatur]

Bmat,

That would be War Without End Episodes or In the Beginning Movie

[Bmat]

Agreeing mainly with Ran. If the Keeper is hooked into the host's nervous system it already knows what the host is thinking, unless it is knocked out by the alcohol's effect on the hosts system.

Let's see- we're also discussing a telepath with a keeper, if the the above is so then a telepath would be no better off than anyone else. If the Keeper is telepathic with respect to the Drakh, however, in theory the telepath could block the signals of the Keeper to the Drakh, but on the other hand, the Keeper would know, since it can read anything going on in the brain. So that leaves the Keeper knowing that the telepath intends to block telepathic signals to the Drakh. The telepath would never be able to sleep, because as soon as he stopped blocking, the Keeper would get the message out. So, I'm back to the telepath with a Keeper not being any better off than a non-telepath.

[ProfCrash]

If I am reading the books correctly, then the Keeper is telepathic. In the third book, the Keeper in the urn communicates with David long before David turns 16.

[sindatur]

Touche Crash, I knew there was a reason I believed it to be telepathic that was concrete evidence. I just didn't recall that specific incidence.

Gotta side with the Prof on this one.

[Bmat]

Yeah...I have to agree that if the books say it and if the books are indeed the intention of the Maker then we have to go along with that. There's something though that rubs me the wrong way about coming to conclusions outside of the tv show or movies. Even if it is in a book, it doesn't seem right that the tv show should be interpreted outside of what happened in the show. It's like tasting a piece of cake that has no nuts in it and saying that it has nuts in it because the recipe says it should have nuts in it. In actuality the only true experience one has of the cake is that it has NO nuts.

[sindatur]

Bmat,

We're not saying (at Least I'm not) that once the keeper takes possesion of you that it controls you telepathically, I happen to agree with you on the nervous system/brain thing. But, if it communicates with the Drahk it was spawned from it, after it leaves him, then the keeper must be telepathic. We do know this from the TV show, so therefore you did have nuts in your cake, IMHO. Maybe they were walnuts and you expected almonds, but nonetheless they are nuts, I think.

[This message has been edited by sindatur (edited January 30, 2001).]

[AsIs]

The keeper is telepathically connected to it's drakh. That much is clear. I don't know that it can telepathically read the mind of it's host. If it could than Londo would have been toast. When Londo had the keeper drunk he would write about what was going on and I don't think Londo could completely not think about that. Or not think about getting the keeper drunk. Etc...

The keeper's main power while in a host is the infliction of pain. Pure and simple.

[Rantarn]

A bit of a sidebar. I am pretty much with Bmat about the books. Maybe with a noteworthy exception or two, I don't consider what happens in anything other than the TV show/TV movies, either on screen off screen, to have really happened. That goes for Star Trek, Star Wars, et al. Your opinion may vary, but that's mine.

[sindatur]

Actually Ran and Bmat,

JMS has said that To Dream in the City of Sorrows and the Trilogies are Canon. The other novels do have inconsistencies which need to be disregarded, but not the Trilogies and TDItCS.