Umm... Grayson?

[snip for space only]

In general I think your point is well made and right on.  The fellow
attacking Gary seems to me to be doing a bit of trolling.  The thing I
always look for is "defensible".  That is, is/are the change(s) defensible?
Can an argument, based on canon, be made to support them?  I don't expect
that (sometimes hypothetical) argument to be totally convincing or that it
absolutely crush all counter arguments... just that it exist.  Something
more than "because I said so" in other words.  Gary's take on Soun's cooking
_is_ certainly defensible.  That's good enough for me... now on with the
story, which is the truly important thing, after all.  I hope most folks
would agree with this.  I mean, it seems pretty reasonable to me.

There is one small quibble I want to quib with you, though.

This would be different from, say, depicting a friendship evolving between
Ukyou and Ranma AFTER the series (as I think was the case in "Bitter
End," but it's been a while since I read the story).  At this point, the

argument

is whether you agree that it's a reasonable projection of how the characters
would behave or grow after time.  In such debates, there's a lot more 
leeway for interpretation.  An author has to be more careful if he/she is 
going to try to read new stuff into the original series.  I think it's

perfectly

reasonable to ask people to get the history right, if they are claiming
to use it as a basis for their story (and for the record, I don't consider
this to be an absolute - Dave Eddy's "Masks We Must Wear" and "Cut
Wood, Carry Water" are good examples of a writer who takes some 
liberties with the original material but turns out a very enjoyable story in
the process).

Dave is generously hosting "The Masks We Must Wear" and "Cut Wood, Carry
Water" on his home page out of the kindness of his heart.  I wrote them,
though.  Thanks for the kind words, btw.  *grin*

Best,

Bob Barnes 
rbarnes@moscow.com 
Moscow, Idaho 

When opportunity comes, the trick is to CATCH the red hat.