marc@pyuxn.UUCP (08/30/83)
Anyone have answers to the following mind boggling questions ?
1) Why did the theme to the prisoner change every other week, ever
so slightly ?
2) What were those big bubble type things ?
3) What information did the Prisoner have , that they wanted ?
4) Why did they have a different (Guest Star? ) # 2 each week , with
some on for two weeks ?
A comment posted a while back indicated that the final episode
reveals # 6 = #1. Everyone who knew anything about the series knew
that. Anyone know what the images in the final episode were supposed to
represent. The trial ? The bus trip to London ? The beatles ?
One final point. Every week, a portion of the theme went like this:
Who is number 1 ?
You are number 6 !!
putting the emphasis a little differently, we find that number 2 was
answering #6 question week in and week out with the correct answer.
observe:
Who is number 1 ?
You are, number 6 !
Hoping someone has the answers..
Marc Schare- BTL PISCATAWAYnotes@fortune.UUCP (08/30/83)
#N:fortune:11200003:000:1100 fortune!norskog Aug 29 17:24:00 1983 Ahhhhh, yes, "The Prisoner". Best TV show ever made. They showed the entire series on the Bay Area PBS station a few years back. After the last episode they had a live interview with Patrick McGoohan. The Guardian balls were originally going to be a giant machine that would move around on any terrain or underwater. A prototype, called Rover, was built and they were shooting the first episode. Rover's first shot was to be a scene where it arose from the water onto the beach when No. 6 was trying to escape. They cued it to surface, but it didn't. They waited. The inventor told them it never would. "What do we do now?". McGoohan was staring into distance and saw a weather balloon, and the Guardians were whether balloons ever since. Whenever I go to the local co-op grocery store, and they ask me for my co-op number, I say belligerently, "I am not a number, I am a FREE MAN!". None of the clerks or people around me have ever gotten it. I get some strange looks. All I will say about the last episode, is that it champions the doctrine of Free Will. No spoilers, please.
jonb@cucard.UUCP (08/31/83)
There MUST be someone out there who remembers a British series called "The Prisoner" from the late 1960's. Who played the lead role? Who did #1 turn out to be in the end? What was the customary parting phrase used between citizens of The Village? What was the name of the big rubber ball that chased people along the beach (and everywhere else)? Thanx, Jon B.
edward@utcsrgv.UUCP (Edward Hsing) (09/01/83)
References: <1915@tekecs.UUCP> <1056@rlgvax.UUCP>, <629@grkermit.UUCP> <179@pyuxn.UUCP> 1) Every other week the voice of #2 would be changed. 2) The bubble things were called "Rover" and were the guards of the Village in case anyone tried to escape. 3) The Village wanted to know why #6 resigned. 4) #2 was constantly replaced because he/she could never break #6 and force him to divulge why he resigned. Ed Hsing
davidl@tekecs.UUCP (David Levine) (09/01/83)
The news system told me this bounced so I'm trying to post it again...
please forgive multiple copies.
Answers to questions about The Prisoner:
The large white things were Rovers, the Village's perimeter defense and
guard system. Whenever anybody tried to escape a Rover would track him
down and envelop him, suffocating him to unconsciousness or death.
Rovers were apparently quasi-living machines and were under direct
control from Village Central, although they displayed some meager
intelligence from time to time (see "The Schizoid Man"). Rovers were
capable of fantastic speeds on either land or water.
There was always a New Number Two from week to week to emphasize that,
although the people in power may change, the power structure remains
constant. This was pointed up in the episode "Free for All." (This
point makes more sense in the British system, where elections are held
at random intervals.)
I wasn't aware that the theme changed from episode to episode, although
the opening sequence was spoken by whoever was playing #2 that week.
6: Where am I?
2: In the Village.
6: Who are you?
2: The new Number Two.
6: Who is Number One?
2: You are Number Six.
6: Whose side are you on?
2: That would be telling.
6: What do you want?
2: We want information.
6: You won't get it!
2: By hook or by crook, we will.
We want information... information.
6: I am not a number, I am a free man!
2: <laughter>
(Forgive any errors, it's been a few years since I've seen it...)
The information that "they" wanted from #6 (the Secret Agent Man) was
why he had resigned. It was never made clear why this was important,
nor did we (the audience) ever learn the answer either.
As to the significance of the final episode, your guess is as good as
mine. Dem bones, dem bones, dem dry bones....
-- David D. Levine (...decvax!tektronix!tekecs!davidl) [UUCP]
(...tekecs!davidl.tektronix@rand-relay) [ARPA]jonb@cucard.UUCP (09/02/83)
I guess I posted my quiz before I saw yours....
....anyway, the answers to your questions are:
(1) I don't remember any change in the theme music, but then again it's
been a while since I saw the show;
(2) That was one of my questions. Its name was "Rover" and it was used
to catch fleeing Village dwellers (particularly #6) and to generally
keep the peace;
(3) Come on now! They wanted to know why he resigned. As to why this was
so important, I dunno.
(4) The reason why there was a new #2 every week was that as each #2 tried
and failed to crack #6's resistance, he would be dismissed, and those
in power (#1?) would try someone else.
You say "anyone who knows anything about the show" knows that #6 = #1.
I thought then (and think now) that that's sort of open to interpretation.
As I remember, #6 is fighting with a man in a gorilla suit, then somehow
the ape's mask comes off and Patrick McGoohan's face is underneath. I was
rather disappointed that the makers of the show fell back on such a trite
and obvious solution to #1's identity, so I tend to interpret it in various
pseudo-Freudian bullshit ways that I won't waste screen space on. In any case,
the last few episodes were very bizarre and dreamlike, so I guess you can
see it any way you like.
So you won't have to waste time searching for my quiz, here are the quest-
ions:
(1) What is the customary parting phrase used between "citizens"
in the Village?
(2) How many times did #6 actually manage to escape from the
island?
There were others, but I can't remember 'em.....
Cheers! -Jon B.ellis@FLAIRMAX.UUCP (Michael Ellis) (09/03/83)
I'm afraid my TV knowledge ends at this show. Was fortunate enough to see the `Prisoner' in its first display ~1967. This was the first and last TV series to grab my attention, in fact to the point of hero worship. During my last years of high school, I lived in a VERY conservative high school environment (Colonial Hts, VA.) as counterculture spirits were entering my spirit, and then there was this weird guy on TV who lived in a place where everybody was out to get him. My favorite episodes were: o the Chimes of Big Ben - where, in spite of the apparently sympathetic people he meets, his choice of reality remains totally within. o Free for All - Power politics seldom more beautifully illustrated (on TV). o Schizoid Man - Self anti-confrontation that still evades today's language. o Many Happy Returnd - Odyssean epic with a wonderfully mundane conclusion. o Checkmate - Power forever destroyed. o Living in Harmony - Psychedelia par excellence! Byrds fans unite!! o Change of Mind - O Hammmer into Anvil - o Girl Who was Death - God! definitely... O Once Upon a Time - Die! die! O Fall Out - These somehow evade any comment whatsoever. I'd see them if I were you! One of the worst problems with this series is the extraneous number of episodes done beyond the original sequence that ended with Leo McKearn. -michael
mh@aplvax.UUCP (05/29/84)
Does anyone out there know of a local PBS station or private individual who has the complete BBC "Prisoner" series? This is the early (?) 70's series which starred Patrik McGohan (?) of "Secret Agent" fame. I have been trying to obtain copies of the entire 13 episode series since I can't get any of my local (Washington D.C.) stations to braodcast it. Please reply directly to ... (?) ... !aplvax!milo!klr Thanks in advance. The Mad Hacker
eli@uw-june (Eli Messinger) (06/01/84)
The creator and star of The Prisoner is Patrick McGoohan. There are 17 epsiodes in all. About six years ago there was a course based on this series offered in Toronto through The Ontario Educational Communication Authority. Their were two study guides, "The Prisoner Program Guide" and "The Prisoner Puzzle." The latter includes the following: For information about videotapes of the progtams in the series... write to: OECA Order Desk Box 200, Station Q, Totonto, Ontario, M4T 2T1 (CANADA). ... uw-june!eli
msc@qubix.UUCP (06/01/84)
> Does anyone out there know of a local PBS station or private > individual who has the complete BBC "Prisoner" series? It wasn't a BBC series. It was made by one of our commercial TV outfits, probably Lord "Low" Grade's (now disbanded) ATV for overseas distribution by his ITC outfit. -- >From the TARDIS of Mark Callow msc@qubix.UUCP, decwrl!qubix!msc@Berkeley.ARPA ...{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!decwrl!qubix!msc, ...{ittvax,amd70}!qubix!msc "I'm a citizen of the Universe, and a gentleman to boot!"
iannucci@sjuvax.UUCP (iannucci) (02/12/85)
[ #6: Whose side are you on? #2: That would be telling! ] >I propose we move it to net.tv. I do love it and want to get a rollicking >discussion going about it. Re: episode 7, I have seen it so what do >you have to say? And how do you *know* where the Village is? > >-Michael "on the Twilight Node" Weiss ...!psuvax1!gondor!weiss Sounds like a good idea to me, Mike, that is, to move it to net.tv. From now on that is where I will look for discussion. Point well made re: How do I *know* where the Village is. I guess I don't *know* where it is. I should know by now that nothing, repeat NOTHING, is ever as it seems in this show. But I can tell you how I *think* I know. ***** ALERT!! ALERT!! SPOILER APPROACHING!! ******* In episode 7, did not No. 6 and his old colleagues trace the route he had sailed and determine using various scientific methods that his point of departure must have been the Baltic coast of Lithuania? And did he not fly in the jet to that very spot when he was dropped like a hot potato? It seems to me that this is pretty convincing evidence, but I do concede that there is always a 'bug' lying dormant in evidence like this. By the way, do you (or anyone else) have any ideas about the 'funny-umbrellas' or the old-fashioned bicycle. viz. significance? I hope we're not going to dominate this discussion. -- David J. Iannucci (the dirty vicar) St. Joseph's University {allegra | astrovax | bpa | burdvax}!sjuvax!iannucci Philadelphia "A witty saying proves nothing. " --Voltaire =============================================================================
bwm@ccice2.UUCP (Brad Miller) (02/20/85)
Well, gang, I JUST saw the last one in the series. This is a serious question to those of you who may have seen the entire series: I have faithfully watched every episode. Unfortunately, I have no understanding whatsoever of what was really going on in the last two episodes. I still have no idea of why #6 was there in the first place, let alone all the other chicanery that was going on in the last 2 episodes. Can anyone enlighten me, preferably telling me why I don't understand it? (like, is it based on something a contemporary Brit would know?) Failing that, if you just have good conjectures, I'd be glad to hear from you. Thanks, Brad Miller -- ..[cbrma, ccivax, ccicpg, rayssd, ritcv, rlgvax, rochester]!ccice5!ccice2!bwm
rdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone) (02/21/85)
> > Can anyone enlighten me, preferably telling me why I don't understand it? > (like, is it based on something a contemporary Brit would know?) Failing that, > if you just have good conjectures, I'd be glad to hear from you. > > Brad Miller > Don't feel bad Brad, I was going to make a similar posting and this is the third time I've seen the series! I guess what they are saying (and this differs from the view I had in the 60's when the series was first aired) is that there are no sides, only a system. By retaining his individuality, #6 beats the system. In doing so, he becomes the new "system" (hence the scene of everyone returning to London and their appointed places in society). Another viable alternative is my wife's idea that it is just a series that was "relevent" in a time when EVERYTHING was "relevent". [:-/-)] Or was it all a dream? (a modified view of my 60's opinion). *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
iannucci@sjuvax.UUCP (iannucci) (02/22/85)
[ I hope you choke on it, bug ... ] >A question: I don't remember the title, but it was the episode with >the assassination attempt on old No. 2's life. No. 6 held young No. 2 >at bay while old No. 2 made good his escape. The question is, why didn't >No. 6 go with No. 2 or at least try to make a bargain for a later rescue? >Was it some sort of ethical thing? >Also, why the big gala killing? All the previous No. 2's (who failed >to break No. 6) simply dissappeared (presumably killed). Why didn't >they do that to this guy? What is thought on this out there? > >(PS: What was the title?) >-- >-Michael S. Weiss BITNET: weiss@psuvaxg.bitnet The title of this episode is "It's Your Funeral". Could it be that No.6 knew that he could never get away? After all, the "Village" was getting rid of the old No.2, and he couldn't have had any bargaining power left. This is really not clear to me either. As far as the ostentatiousness of the assasination, I think that it was just for the sake of the plot. Are we going to hear from anybody else!??? -- David J. Iannucci (the dirty vicar) St. Joseph's University {allegra | astrovax | bpa | burdvax}!sjuvax!iannucci Philadelphia "A witty saying proves nothing. " --Voltaire =============================================================================
ado@elsie.UUCP (Arthur David Olson) (02/23/85)
Note: an event in the final episode of the series is described below. > . . .By retaining his individuality, > #6 beats the system. In doing so, he becomes the new "system" (hence the > scene of everyone returning to London and their appointed places in > society). . . Sorry--but if you look (and listen!) carefully, you'll find that when the butler enters the London home near the end of the final episode, the door closes automatically (in the manner of "Village" home doors). So much for triumph. -- UUCP: ..decvax!seismo!elsie!ado ARPA: elsie!ado@seismo.ARPA DEC, VAX and Elsie are Digital Equipment and Borden trademarks
andrew@orca.UUCP (Andrew Klossner) (02/24/85)
I was cleaning out some old files (when a 220Meg disk gets full, it's
time to clean), and found this. I never followed up ... did anyone?
-- Andrew Klossner (decvax!tektronix!orca!andrew) [UUCP]
(orca!andrew.tektronix@csnet-relay) [ARPA]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Relay-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site orca.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site uw-june
Path: orca!tektronix!uw-beaver!uw-june!eli
From: eli@uw-june (Eli Messinger)
Newsgroups: net.tv
Subject: Re: The Prisoner
Message-ID: <1531@uw-june>
Date: Thu, 31-May-84 16:20:50 PDT
Article-I.D.: uw-june.1531
Posted: Thu May 31 16:20:50 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 1-Jun-84 19:44:17 PDT
References: <614@aplvax.UUCP>
Organization: U. Washington, Computer Sci
Lines: 12
The creator and star of The Prisoner is Patrick McGoohan. There are 17
epsiodes in all. About six years ago there was a course based on this series
offered in Toronto through The Ontario Educational Communication Authority.
Their were two study guides, "The Prisoner Program Guide" and "The Prisoner
Puzzle." The latter includes the following:
For information about videotapes of
the progtams in the series... write to:
OECA Order Desk Box 200, Station Q, Totonto,
Ontario, M4T 2T1 (CANADA).
... uw-june!elirdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone) (02/25/85)
> > Sorry--but if you look (and listen!) carefully, you'll find that when the > butler enters the London home near the end of the final episode, > the door closes automatically (in the manner of "Village" home doors). > So much for triumph. > -- > UUCP: ..decvax!seismo!elsie!ado ARPA: elsie!ado@seismo.ARPA > DEC, VAX and Elsie are Digital Equipment and Borden trademarks I phrased my original statement very badly, so I will try to clarify it now. I should not have said "returned to their appointed places in society". I should have said "in the NEW society". Your observation is quite right. I wasn't trying to say that individualism wins out. I was trying to say that individualism becomes the new "system". And that system can be just as rigid and heirarchial (sp?) as any other. Why couldn't this be like English 101? At least then we knew there was only one interpretation to the end of any story, the professors! *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
iannucci@sjuvax.UUCP (iannucci) (02/26/85)
[ Be seeing you, bug! ] > The only thing certain about episode #7 was that the pilot knew where >the village was. Since the pilot was the one who ejected #6 it is possible >that he was one of them. You cannot assume that the pilot found the village >by following #6's instructions which means that they may or may not be valid. > >John Eaton >!hplabs!hp-pcd!john I knew there must be a catch lying in there somewhere!! Thanks for pointing it out. Now, we can ask again, who has thoughts on where the Village is (in tvland!)? I guess Lithuania isn't completely ruled out, so until someone can convince me otherwise.... -- David J. Iannucci (the dirty vicar) St. Joseph's University {allegra | astrovax | bpa | burdvax}!sjuvax!iannucci Philadelphia "A witty saying proves nothing. " --Voltaire =============================================================================
iannucci@sjuvax.UUCP (the vicar) (02/27/85)
> In "Many Happy Returns" what was the point? It was obviously > all a setup by the then No 2. Was it just her idea of a birthday > present to No 6? Why? Did she 'dissapear' for it? Also, do you > think it was the scheduled pilot who ejected him, or the milkman who > entered the hangar just before takeoff? > > -Michael S. Weiss BITNET: weiss@psuvaxg.bitnet I'll give it another try. I think that we may be trying too hard to read all kinds of symbolic meanings, etc. into this show. True, it was meant to make you think, but I think we're thinking too hard. I've heard from someone through netmail who said that he saw an interview with Pat McG. in which ol' 6 said that they weren't trying to make the show allegorical to fantastic levels, but rather just trying to make it interest- ing, thought-provoking, and most of all BIZARRE. I feel that many of the things that you are making out to be deep symbols, are really only there to make a good plot. "MHR" is a good example. We are kept on the edge of our seats in anticipation that No. 6 will escape (why do we let impossibilities get to us like that?) and when we find out that it was a trick of No.2/Mrs. Butter- worth, we sit back and say, "Da*n! Foiled again! Boy, that was a good episode!" Those of us who do not tape the series quickly forget little details like the milkman, but my guess is that if you saw a milkman, of all people, enter a hangar on an air base, that he was probably there to do exactly as you suggest. Now that's the type of thing to look for! I hope that my "theory" doesn't get in the way of any good conversations in the future. BTW, I don't know about you, but I have been saving these recent spoiler article without reading them. Have you given in to temptation? -- David J. Iannucci (the dirty vicar) St. Joseph's University {allegra | astrovax | bpa | burdvax}!sjuvax!iannucci Philadelphia "A witty saying proves nothing. " --Voltaire =============================================================================
daveb@rtech.ARPA (Dave Brower) (02/28/85)
> By retaining his individuality, #6 beats the system. In doing so, he > becomes the new "system" (hence the scene of everyone returning to > London and their appointed places in society). The sound of the door closing on 6's London flat at the end of the last episode and it's mechanical motion are identical to the doors in The Village. Given his non-reaction, I always took it to mean he *THOUGHT* he had escaped, but had not since in fact *THEY* ran everything, even The Outside World. I expected the `next' episode to reveal him as much a Prisoner as before... (but I got better! :-) -dB -- ---------------- {ucbvax, decvax}!mtxinu!rtech!daveb "The closer you look, the worse it gets."
weiss@gondor.UUCP (Michael S. Weiss) (03/12/85)
> I'll give it another try. I think that we may be trying too > hard to read all kinds of symbolic meanings, etc. into this show. True, > it was meant to make you think, but I think we're thinking too hard. I've > heard from someone through netmail who said that he saw an interview with > Pat McG. in which ol' 6 said that they weren't trying to make the show > allegorical to fantastic levels, but rather just trying to make it interest- > ing, thought-provoking, and most of all BIZARRE. I feel that many of the > things that you are making out to be deep symbols, are really only there > to make a good plot. > -- > David J. Iannucci (the dirty vicar) St. Joseph's University *** REPLACE THIS man WITH a number *** I am not trying to read too much 'symbolism' into the show. I am just trying to see what other people think about the things I thought about when I saw the show. I am trying to start up interesting conversations. No symbolism, just out and out why did number 2 send him home (as it were)? What do folks think about this? Also, what do you all think the folks sixy-babe used to work for did/thought when he dissappeared again? Let's hear some talk! -- ...then again, maybe not. -Michael S. Weiss BITNET: weiss@psuvaxg.bitnet
iannucci@sjuvax.UUCP (iannucci) (03/12/85)
In article <1628@gondor.UUCP> weiss@gondor.UUCP (Michael S. Weiss) writes: > > No symbolism, just out and out why did number 2 send him home (as it > were)? What do folks think about this? Also, what do you all think > the folks sixy-babe used to work for did/thought when he dissappeared > again? Let's hear some talk! > >-Michael S. Weiss BITNET: weiss@psuvaxg.bitnet Maybe I didn't make myself clear enough the first time. What I was trying to say was that I don't think that there WAS a reason why No. 2 sent him home. I don't think the makers of the show took the show's meaning to the extent that there was a coherent explanation for everything! How about the shower going on when he got back to his pad? There certainly couldn't be an explanation of that (could there? :-)) We are supposed to be intrigued by the surreal quality of the situations in which No.6 finds himself and enjoy ourselves for 50 minutes. Assuming that someone actually sat down to figure out what the "old colleagues" would think after he disappeared again, you would have to assume, of course, that they were not the ones who sent him back. Your milkman would have definitely been the pilot. I would like to discuss "Living in Harmony". I did not exactly under- stand the method by which they were trying to get him to "fess up". Specifically, how were "giving him love", "taking it away", "making him kill", and "facing him with death" going to make him spill his guts? Were they intending to ask him again in his "dream" to spill 'em, but didn't get around to it? If you remember, the Kid did say that the Judge had pushed him into the critical situation too early. Thoughts on this? -- Dave Iannucci St. Joseph's University, Philadelphia ...{allegra|astrovax|bpa|burdvax}!sjuvax!iannucci "A witty saying proves nothing. " --Voltaire
weiss@gondor.UUCP (Michael S. Weiss) (03/14/85)
> Maybe I didn't make myself clear enough the first time. What > I was trying to say was that I don't think that there WAS a reason why No. > 2 sent him home. I don't think the makers of the show took the show's > meaning to the extent that there was a coherent explanation for everything! > How about the shower going on when he got back to his pad? There certainly > couldn't be an explanation of that (could there? :-)) We are supposed to > be intrigued by the surreal quality of the situations in which No.6 finds > himself and enjoy ourselves for 50 minutes. *** REPLACE THIS man WITH a number *** There certainly was a reason for the shower going on! If you remember, at the beginning of the episode 6 tried to take a shower, but there was no water. So HE DID NOT TURN IT OFF! Just as there was no electricity or people when our hero awoke. And just like the lights came on at the end this was a signal that everything was "back to normal." Also, I think every plot was carefully thought out and there was a method to every madness, no matter how strange. As for your other comments/questions I don't think 6's old bosses were in on it, it would have been too easy to get him back without all that searching. And the milkman was way too obvious (what the hell would a normal milkman be doing in an airplane hangar?). Re: Living in harmony. I am watching the episodes sporadically as I go home every now and then and watch them by video tape. (A friend is getting the whole series and is going to get Secret Agent Man when it is shown). In fact, I only recently saw "A, B, & C". Neat one! What did you think? Was no. 2 a real double agent or does our man VI have that much control over his brain? Dunno. My friend told me about Living in Harmony. he said he didn't like it. I will get back to you when I see it. Ok, let's keep this up! Surely there must be other fans than 1 guy from Penn State and 1 from St. Joe's! -- I remember doing the Time Warp. -Michael S. Weiss BITNET: weiss@psuvaxg.bitnet
iannucci@sjuvax.UUCP (iannucci) (03/14/85)
\\ From: David J. Iannucci (iannucci@sjuvax.UUCP) In article <1636@gondor.UUCP> weiss@gondor.UUCP writes: >> How about the shower going on when he got back to his pad? There certainly >> couldn't be an explanation of that (could there? :-)) > >There certainly was a reason for the shower going on! If you remember, >at the beginning of the episode 6 tried to take a shower, but there >was no water. [when it came on at the end ...] >this was a signal that everything was "back to normal." Maybe I once again didn't make myself clear. I agree with what you say about it being a sign that everything's back to normal, but there was no *physical* reason for the water going back on. It would have had to have been some sort of supernatural force! >Also, I think every plot was carefully thought out and there was >a method to every madness, no matter how strange. Well, it's a matter of opinion, but I just don't agree with you here. That's why I don't look past a certain "depth". >As for your other comments/questions I don't think 6's old bosses were >in on it, it would have been too easy to get him back without all that >searching. And the milkman was way too obvious (what the hell would a >normal milkman be doing in an airplane hangar?). Granted re: the milkman. BUT...(o ye who find meaning everywhere :-)) ...how would the enemy have known (in the opening titles) that he HAD resigned when apparently the only person he told was one of his bosses? Was the boss a double agent? Who knows. I also find it hard to believe that enemy intelligence could mobilize their "hearse" on such short notice. If you remember, it was waiting for him as soon as he pulled out of the parking lot. The only way I can explain the milkman is that there are different levels in the British agency. Maybe the people he dealt with on his return ("Many HR") were too low in the heirarchy to know about the Villiage. >I only recently saw "A, B, & C". Neat one! What did you think? It was good, but not one of my VERY favorites. It's been so long now that I forget the intricacies of the dream business. But it was definitely bizarre. I think "our man VI" just has THAT much control over his mind. I thought Living in Harmony was great. Keep an open mind while watching. At first you'll say, "what the F**K is going on here!?", but when the end comes, you should be satisfied. >Ok, let's keep this up! Surely there must be other fans than 1 >guy from Penn State and 1 from St. Joe's! Yeah, like what is this? If it weren't that I was worried we would be leaving others out of a good discussion, I would suggest we conduct this by mail. Hey, that's an idea. We could simply set up a mailing list for those who are interested (is there really anybody?). Let me know. -- Dave Iannucci St. Joseph's University, Philadelphia ...{allegra|astrovax|bpa|burdvax}!sjuvax!iannucci "A witty saying proves nothing. " --Voltaire
klr@hadron.UUCP (Kurt L. Reisler) (03/16/85)
> I would like to discuss "Living in Harmony". I did not exactly under- > stand the method by which they were trying to get him to "fess up". > Specifically, how were "giving him love", "taking it away", "making him > kill", and "facing him with death" going to make him spill his guts? > Were they intending to ask him again in his "dream" to spill 'em, but didn't > get around to it? If you remember, the Kid did say that the Judge had > pushed him into the critical situation too early. Thoughts on this? > -- > Dave Iannucci > St. Joseph's University, Philadelphia "Living in Harmony" is one of the more unusual episodes. I still remember the first time I saw it. Waiting up late to see the next episode of "The Prisoner", and then wondering why there was a freeping cowboy movie on. There was no clear definition of the method to be used to "break" number 6. Other than the usual "pressure of the majority" and giving in to the authority figure. Perhaps it was felt that if they could break him in his "dream" state, they might weaken him when he was awake. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ORANGE ALERT! - Will the real Rover report to the volley ball game? -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
weiss@gondor.UUCP (03/17/85)
> >> How about the shower going on when he got back to his pad? There certainly > >> couldn't be an explanation of that (could there? :-)) > > > >There certainly was a reason for the shower going on! If you remember, > >at the beginning of the episode 6 tried to take a shower, but there > >was no water. [when it came on at the end ...] > >this was a signal that everything was "back to normal." > > Maybe I once again didn't make myself clear. I agree with what > you say about it being a sign that everything's back to normal, but there > was no *physical* reason for the water going back on. It would have had to > have been some sort of supernatural force! No! How about a simple a thing as a main water valve. You turn it off, 6's shower goes off. You turn it on, 6's shower comes on. Yeesh! Supernatural? > >Also, I think every plot was carefully thought out and there was > >a method to every madness, no matter how strange. > > Well, it's a matter of opinion, but I just don't agree with you here. > That's why I don't look past a certain "depth". Given. > >Ok, let's keep this up! Surely there must be other fans than 1 > >guy from Penn State and 1 from St. Joe's! > > Yeah, like what is this? If it weren't that I was worried we > would be leaving others out of a good discussion, I would suggest we conduct > this by mail. Hey, that's an idea. We could simply set up a mailing list for > those who are interested (is there really anybody?). Let me know. Nah, I don't like mailing lists. I feel that even though not many take part in this discussion I feel some enjoy just reading it. Hmmm????? "Be seeing you!" -- Never give a gun to duck. Michael S. Weiss BITNET: weiss@psuvaxg.bitnet
iannucci@sjuvax.UUCP (iannucci) (03/19/85)
In article <1642@gondor.UUCP> weiss@gondor.UUCP (Michael S. Weiss) writes: >> Maybe I once again didn't make myself clear. I agree with what >> you say about it being a sign that everything's back to normal, but there >> was no *physical* reason for the water going back on. It would have had to >> have been some sort of supernatural force! > >No! How about a simple a thing as a main water valve. You turn it off, 6's >shower goes off. You turn it on, 6's shower comes on. Yeesh! Supernatural? Come on now! Are you going to tell me that No.2 gave a signal when she saw No.6 entering his bathroom that the water should be turned back on? That seems very far-fetched to me. I guess you could call me a surrealist when it comes to The Prisoner. I think that there was no physical reason for the water going back on at that time. It was done merely for effect, that is, to make us go "ooooooooh!". >> this by mail. Hey, that's an idea. We could simply set up a mailing list for >> those who are interested (is there really anybody?). Let me know. > >Nah, I don't like mailing lists. I feel that even though not many take >part in this discussion I feel some enjoy just reading it. Hmmm????? Yes, there are those who enjoy reading it, but I don't think it is justified any longer to be posted to hundreds of machines. So far, I have received only TWO requests to be put on the mailing list. I will keep waiting, though, and if I receive a truly great number more, then maybe we should keep this on the net. But don't hold your breath. USENET is becoming bogged down under the weight of the volume of news posted. I think we can do it a service by eliminating some of that. Every little bit helps. >Never give a gun to duck. BTW, true Kliban fans know that the correct quote is "Never give a gun to duck*s*" :-) Be seeing you. -- Dave Iannucci St. Joseph's University, Philadelphia ...{allegra|astrovax|bpa|burdvax}!sjuvax!iannucci "A witty saying proves nothing. " --Voltaire
place@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU (10/17/85)
I seem to remember that the last episode of "the Prisoner" is the one in which "the Prisoner" is finally taken to see his Jailer (Number 1, I believe) and finds that Number 1 is himself (the Prisoner.) Patrick McGoohan, who created "the Prisoner" gave an interview in the last 6? years (magazine? newspaper? TV Guide?) in which he explained "the Prisoner". I believe he said that the last episode (in fact the entire series), was written to be as interpretable as possible so that each individual viewer could derive his own interpretation from the story. His own interpretation was that "the Prisoner" was in fact, a mentally deranged (former? secret agent) who made himself a prison in his own mind. He was, in fact, medically his own jailer. Speaking of "prisoners," I much prefer "Prisoner: Cellblock H," an Australian import about "women in prison." It's been available in syndication for the last 6-7 years. It's certainly much funnier than "the Prisoner." Denise University of Illinois The Super-Computing Illini
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (10/23/85)
>> The last episode of the Prisoner was just played here in New York. I was >> wondering if anyone else has ever seen it, and if so, if you could explain >> to me exactly just what happened? I watched it, but was totally mystified >> by the show. It was totally unlike all the other episodes I have seen. >> ... [LARRY LIPPMAN] > Granted, this episode is just a little bit bizarre. I do have my > own hypothesis about what the episode was trying to say. In the end, Number 6 > finds out that he is Number 1. He finds out that he is in fact an individual, > under no one's control but his own. At least this is what he is allowed to > believe. No matter how hard he tries, his beliefs, decisions and in fact > his whole persona are influenced by other people. Specifically, the gov't > still has control of him. He is just allowed to believe that he is in > control. This is what's going on in the courtroom, when he is trying to > give them a speech. He is now Number 1 but no one will listen to him (is he > in fact, in charge?). The fact that he is not in control of his own life > is also demonstrated at the very end. When the butler goes to > the front door of Number 6's (now Number 1) apartment, the door opens > automatically. He is free, but is he really? [PETER LITWINOWICZ] I've had similar feelings about that last episode (and the series in general). I've also come to the conclusion that part of the message therein is that the way to enslave "ultimate individuals" is to make them FEEL that they are free, all the while controlling/directing their behavior in some manner, contrasting the "1984" style of totalitarianism with the (apparently much more successful) "Brave New World" style of despotism ("Everybody's happy nowadays"). But... > Then again, "they" (the show's writers) may be just playing with our > minds. They may have written the last episode so that people for years to > come would discuss it and say "wasn't that bizarre?" For that last episode the "writers" were Patrick McGoohan himself. I'm not positive, but I think the original series was slated to be 13 episodes (a standard for British TV series), but the distributors requested (demanded?) another four (which were made somewhat later). I get the feeling (from the general feel of the shows) that among those four were the one that took place in the "old west" (which starred the actor who played "young man" in that final episode), called "Living in Harmony", and the episode in which #6 was actually reading a fairy tale all along to a group of children (with the confrontation with the mad scientist dressed as Napoleon in the same lighthouse where #6 eventually met #1?), called "The Girl Who Was Death". AND the final episode, "Fall Out". If you think about it, the penultimate episode ("Once Upon a Time") provides a neat enough wrapping up of the series, in its own hazy way. (An article posted in February by Kevin Dowling at Rutgers, excerpting from the Prisoner Episode Guide, indicated that I may be right at least in part. He said that "Once Upon a Time" was the 13th episode to be filmed, representing the end of the first "season", and that "Fall Out" was not filmed till several months later. This would account for Leo McKern's very different appearance in "Fall Out" from the way he looked in "Once Upon a Time".) How does it end? With #6 proving his individuality over #2, who dies in the process, and getting the chance to meet #1. As the episode ends, he walks off with the bald "supervisor" to meet #1, and that's it. Fini. Any *less* "deep" than "Fall Out"? Not really. But you do get the feeling throughout that episode that McGoohan was indeed having a good laugh at our expense. I've heard a story (unsubstantiated as yet) that the actor who played "young man" was a friend of McGoohan, who just happened to have a "hit" single out at the time of the filming. The song? "Dem Bones"!!! (or whatever that song is called) At times it almost seems like he picked up a book on Freud, and opened it randomly to different pages and included whatever he found that could be surrealistically interpreted as being "deep" (this WAS the sixties, after all!) into the script (?). I think one of the "deepest" interpretations I've yet heard came from a friend of mine. When #6 confronts #1 in the "tower", #1 is at first dressed like just another white robed figure with a black/white mask (although he had a "1" on his robe). But #6 reveals #1's identity by *repeatedly* *and* *successively* *removing* *masks*. The first mask, half-black, half-white, represents cold black & white logic and reasoning on the exterior. The second, the monkey face mask, represents the animal within us that we hide under the outer mask. But the innermost mask, the one we hide most thoroughly of all, is the true face, the true self. (If that's not deep, what is?) No, my friend does NOT partake of illegal chemical substances, nor do I. I vacillate between believing that this episode really has that deep meaning I like to think it has and believing that McGoohan is just having a great big laugh on all of us. Sometimes I think surrealism can best be defined as the art of making people think that something has meaning when it doesn't. I think it's also worth noting that a great deal is made of asking what is the real reason that #6 did resign. When we, too, ask the same question (as the keepers of the Village did), we are missing the point. The point is NOT the reason that he resigned. The point is that it's HIS business and no one else's. (Allow me to insert a plug for the mail.prisoner mailing list run by Dave Iannucci. Some very interesting discussions about aspects of the series have been discussed in that forum. Dave can be reached at: !!grep iannucci ../prisoner* ihnp4!allegra!sjuvax!iannucci OR {{ihnp4 | ucbvax}!allegra | {psuvax1}!burdvax | astrovax}!sjuvax!iannucci ) -- Popular consensus says that reality is based on popular consensus. Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr
pjk607@uiucuxa.CSO.UIUC.EDU (11/09/85)
This message is empty.
MW9@PSUVM.BITNET (02/22/86)
There seems to have been a lot of interest regenerated in The Prisoner
due to a recent posting in net.movies (thus the cross posting).
I would like to start up a discussion on The Prisoner, but in net.tv
where it belongs, so if you followup to this, be sure not to send
it to net.movies.
After this posting I will be posting an episode listing that was
posted a long time ago.
Also, the hotel at which they filmed is the Hotel Portmeirion.
I have a brochure for the hotel, and if anyone is interested
I will post that, too.
For now, here is a compendium of stuff I have gleaned about prisoner stuff.
Now, these were posted by (unknown now) authors, so when the word "I"
appears, below. It doesn't mean myself.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Prisoner stuff and paraphanalia (sp?) can be found in New York City.
Forbidden Planet. 12th & Broadway. 212-473-1576
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Prisoner Appreciation Society
Six of One
P.O. Box 66
Ipswich IP2 9TZ
England
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Prisoner Puzzle", a booklet put together by TVOntario.
They followed each show with a discussion of the episode's major themes,
pointed out nifty pieces of symbolism the viewer might have missed, and so on.
It got a little pompous, but it had good moments.
The booklet could be obtained then by writing to
TVOntario, Customer Relations Dept. in Toronto.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
There were two study guides, "The Prisoner Program Guide" and "The Prisoner
Puzzle." The latter includes the following:
For information about videotapes of
the progtams in the series... write to:
OECA Order Desk Box 200, Station Q, Totonto,
Ontario, M4T 2T1 (CANADA).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Prisoner books are as follows:
The Prisoner by Thomas M. Disch, New English Library, 1980?, $2.95, pb
The Prisoner: A Day in the Life by Hank Stine, NEL, 1981?, $3.95, pb
The Prisoner: Who is Number Two? by David McDaniel, NEL, 1982?, $4.50, pb
(also published by ACE as The Prisoner: Number Two?)
The copyright notices in these books mention that these were all
published by ACE from 1969-1970. I have read the first one, and it does
very well at capturing the essence of the series. It starts after the series.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, I hope this starts the ball rolling. Watch out for Rover!
Be seeing you...
-------
Michael S. Weiss
The Pennsylvania State University
MW9@PSUVM.BITNET
<* The opinions expressed by me do not reflect those held *>
<* by my school nor those of my employer. (If I had one.) *>
allan@nmtvax.UUCP (Alan F. Perry) (02/24/86)
In the 100th issue of _Starlog_ magazine, they had an ad for video tapes of all the episodes of The Prisoner. If I remember correctly, each episode was like $20.00 (therefore, the entire series would cost more bucks than I can afford now). Like thought you'd like to know, Alan F. Perry ...somewhere!in!new!mexico