Star Wars Star Wars Discussion Thread - LET THE PAST D-! Oh, wait, nevermind

(...) people do naturally write their biases into their stories. Tolkien was devoted catholic, Lucas was a love child of the 60s and it shows in their respective works. With Star Wars in particular The EU did fundamentally change Lucas's narrative especially in terms of the nature of the force. Gone was new age "Property and attachment is theft and reproduction is abuse" and replaced with "No emotion and attachment are not what lead to the darkside, Obsession, narcissism and corruption do." and it worked because it made for better stories. *Cough cough clone wars and Mandalorian wars cough cough*
Responding to this here, since this thread is the more sensible place to do so.

I'd like to note that Lucas's notions of property and attachments being bad only entered into the mix with the prequels, when the various EU contributors had been churning out works for quite a bit. Nor did Lucas ever suggest "property is theft" or "reproduction is abuse". That's just nonsense. He argued that property and possessions form temptations.

The OT obviously had such bits as "the Force is strong in our family". And when Lucas revealed tidbits about his ideas for sequels, back in the '80s, he spoke about children of Han and Leia... and also of Luke. In fact, when Disney abandoned his outline for the sequels and came up with a different idea, Lucas's first -- literal first -- words were: "what happened to the grand-children?!"

Because to him, it very much is a family saga.

Lucas sure has a streak of '60s hippie-ism in him, but his narrative is a lot more traditionalist than you're making it out to be.
 
Responding to this here, since this thread is the more sensible place to do so.

I'd like to note that Lucas's notions of property and attachments being bad only entered into the mix with the prequels, when the various EU contributors had been churning out works for quite a bit. Nor did Lucas ever suggest "property is theft" or "reproduction is abuse". That's just nonsense. He argued that property and possessions form temptations.

The OT obviously had such bits as "the Force is strong in our family". And when Lucas revealed tidbits about his ideas for sequels, back in the '80s, he spoke about children of Han and Leia... and also of Luke. In fact, when Disney abandoned his outline for the sequels and came up with a different idea, Lucas's first -- literal first -- words were: "what happened to the grand-children?!"

Because to him, it very much is a family saga.

Lucas sure has a streak of '60s hippie-ism in him, but his narrative is a lot more traditionalist than you're making it out to be.

I thought there was this huge thing with Lucas being into stocism and buddism. Is that a revisionist thing or am I misremembering something?
 
I thought there was this huge thing with Lucas being into stocism and buddism. Is that a revisionist thing or am I misremembering something?
He was interested in it, but he only really used it to "flavour" his works. I've argued before that Lucas essentially wrote a very Western story, with some "Asian" flavouring and garnishing.

Ironically, the prequels are -- more than anything else -- an exercise in exaggeration. He doubles down on the "Eastern" notions, yes, but he also turns Anakin into a sort of (failed) Space Jesus, thus making the very much Western narrative aspect far more explicit, too.
 
Once again, I strongly recommend reading The Secret History of Star Wars. It documents the evolution of Star Wars, from George Lucas' formative years, to how Star Wars got funded, to how the drafts changed over time, the co-writers and producers of the movies, Lucas' statements and how he began contradicting himself over time, and so on. The revisionism really began during the 80s and the 90s because it was convenient to Lucas and the public pressure, as Star Wars had become emblematic of pop culture. Fascinating stuff.

I thought there was this huge thing with Lucas being into stocism and buddism. Is that a revisionist thing or am I misremembering something?

It's hard to tell if Lucas genuinely practiced Buddhism. Later on, he claimed to be "spiritual" but it doesn't seem like he practices any one particular religion. At the time he created the first movie, he certainly didn't know anything about Buddhism beyond what your average person knew. When Gary Kurtz saw the original scripts, Lucas' description of the Force was incoherent and nothing like he had heard of, and Kurtz had studied comparative religion. It seems that if any Buddhist elements were intentionally added into the original trilogy, it came from the other writers who worked on the original trilogy's story such as Lawrence Kasdan and Irvin Kershner, who were knowledgeable of Buddhism.

One thing that is important to keep in mind is that a lot of changes in the prequel trilogy were in service of the story, not about some greater message. Lucas began writing the prequel trilogy with Obi-Wan as the main character, but then decided to switch to Anakin as he found the idea of a fallen hero to be more interesting. Lucas then needed plot devices to explain why Anakin would turn against the Jedi. Thus, the Jedi were (once again) repurposed to conform to the needs of the plot. It seems that rules of the Jedi were to explain why Anakin would become restless within their organization and susceptible to outside influence, rather than any statement on Buddhist teachings.

The Secret History of Star Wars pages 304-305 said:
During the writing of the prequels, the Jedi order itself underwent a fundamental change. The Jedi first were conceived in Journal of the Whills as intergalactic super-police, having their own army, requiring training at an academy, and providing military services such as escorting cargo through hostile territory. They re-appeared in the rough draft of Star Wars and were now more closely based on the samurai warriors Lucas came to be familiar with through Akira Kurosawa's films. As the drafts went on, sci-fi mysticism and E.E. Smith's Lensmen mixed in with the samurai aspect to create more superhero-like characters partly reminiscent of the original Journal of the Whills presentation, but a wizard-like spin provided by Alec Guinness and the character of Ben Kenobi gave them a quasi-magical quality that emphasized their spiritual aspect.

The final product introduced to audiences in Star Wars was that they were a mystical police force, a mysterious group of warriors which anyone could be recruited for and whom called upon the powers of the Force, a power which anyone could learn to harness if only they believed in themselves. Even in the sequels the Force was usually seen in a mystic, spiritual light, but Lucas brought back the “superpowers” he may have originally envisioned, such as acrobatics, telekinesis and levitation. For the prequels, Lucas decided to make the Jedi into outright religious monks, a route that the comics and novels had been heading along as well.

This of course was born out of the strong Zen Buddhist overtones of Yoda in Empire Strikes Back-appropriately, Lawrence Kasdan and Irvin Kershner are both Buddhist, and although Lucas was raised Methodist, he has not surprisingly professed heavy Buddhist leanings in the years since: “I was raised Methodist. Now let's say I'm spiritual. It's Marin County. We're all Buddhists up here.

During the initial period of pre-production for Episode I, Lucas had toyed with his original concept of a more police-like Jedi, similar to the Templar Knights of myth, the Lensmen, or the samurai warriors, as can be seen in Episode I production artwork where Obi Wan is portrayed in black body armor (Episode I's rough draft explicitly describes him as being dressed in black684). In the 1983 Return of the Jedi documentary Classic Creatures, Lucas remarks to Mark Hamill during a costume fitting that his new, sleek, militaristic black costume was “Jedi-like.”

However, in re-developing the Jedi order as a dogmatic monk-like organization for the prequels, their visual look shifted accordingly, presenting them clad in priestly robes. “At one point during the Episode I design, we were thinking of the Jedi as lone samurai, then as teams of samurai,” concept designer Ian McCaig says. “They were going to be like a police force, dressed in black and a lot more militaristic. But they evolved into the peacekeeping force they are in the current film.” The designing of the prequel costumes is described by Laurent Bouzereau:

“Everything from full body armor to long, flowing capes were considered for the Jedi's costumes—although Lucas eventually went back to the designs from the first trilogy. 'George wanted to make sure that when the audience saw these characters for the first time, it would immediately register that these were Jedi knights,' McCaig explained. For these characters and for Yoda, we had to establish some familiarity in the costumes with those existing films. I looked at the original Star Wars costumes to understand the style and influence, and I realized that those designers were very medieval, so we kept to that.' ”

However, this decision was based on a major oversight—the “Jedi garb” of the original trilogy was not Jedi garb at all! Obi Wan wore the standard desert robes of an inhabitant of Tatooine, modelled after middle-eastern dress—in fact, Uncle Owen is dressed in almost the exact same costume as him. Yoda as well is not wearing Jedi robes but merely hand-crafted rags (in a similar manner, his gimmer stick, house and belongings are crude self-made items as well). This problem may have been fostered due to a misinterpretation in Return of the Jedi-when Anakin appears in spirit in the final scene, rather than coming up with a proper Jedi costume, he was simply dressed identical to Obi Wan, perhaps creating the confusion that his clothing, identical to Obi Wan's and similar to Yoda's, the only Jedi ever seen in the films, was the traditional Jedi garb. There is at least an in-universe answer though-since Anakin is from Tatooine, his traditional clothing might be the same desert garb that Uncle Owen and Obi Wan wear. In any case, this decision is a minor but often forgotten evolution (and certainly it may confuse future viewers who may be wondering why everyone on Tatooine, especially Uncle Owen, is dressed as a Jedi and why Kenobi, supposedly hiding from the Empire, strolls around the stormtrooper and bounty hunter infested Mos Eisley streets in his Jedi dress).

The Jedi were also now made to indoctrinate potential members from infanthood, and forbade any attachment to loved ones, like Buddhist monks—this was presumably done to tie into Anakin's tragic flaw, and thus serve as his main motivation for turning to the darkside. In this light, the Jedi were more like a dogmatic religious institution, with strict codes, organised councils and their own private society, the complete opposite of the swashbuckling para-military warriors of the original film. Here their heroism was also re-interpreted, portraying them as sowing the seeds of their own demise with their arrogance, complete with an “ivory tower” temple where they reside.
 
Making the Jedi all militaristic seems wrong to me, but depicting them more as a blend of spiritual mystics and travelling samurai warriors strikes me as ideal. "Wise warriors" who travel the galaxy, righting wrongs, defending the innocent, fixing problems where they arise, and mediating disputes because they are widely respected. That's what I imagined the Jedi to have been. Not a (quasi-)military force that serves the government, and not a hierarchy of monks that largely lives in seclusion.

Here, I must also dispute something from Kaminski's (generally very interesting!) book. He writes, as @Val the Moofia Boss cites above:

"For the prequels, Lucas decided to make the Jedi into outright religious monks, a route that the comics and novels had been heading along as well."

The bolded part is patently false. And it stands out that while Kaminski knows an enormous amount about the films and their histories, he often gets things wrong about the EU in his book. Which is fair enough, his book isn't really about that. But he (unintentionally) misleads the reader here. The EU was often vague and a bit contradictory on the details, but actually tended to depict the Jedi much as I suggested above. To the point that after the prequels came out, the EU had to use various retcons to explain the discrepancy. These retcons included:

-- The way Jedi were depicted in Tales of the Jedi (much more as I imagined them) reflected a distant past, whereas what we see in the prequels is the post-Ruusaan Jedi Order.

-- The way certain more recent Jedi were depicted in the EU (such as Corran's family) only represented the Corellian Jedi, who were now retconned into always being more like I (and many others) had imagined all the Jedi to be. They were essentially a group that was stubbornly disobedient to the Jedi Council and its edicts.

-- Post-1999, the EU suddenly started "prequelising" the Jedi. KotOR introduced the idea that the no-attachment principle had existed even back then, whereas beforehand, there had obviously never been a reference to any uch thing when the history of the Jedi got referenced.

-- Likewise, Luke's New Jedi Order was "prequelised". Whereas pre-1999, Luke's fledgling Order had little in common with what we saw in the prequels, post-1999 his students suddenly all started wearing those brown robes, and the Order became more and more like the one in the prequels (with a Council and a Grand Master et cetera).
 
Actually, there is an easier explanation for Annies fall. One staring us in the face all this time. Anakin had access to a Dark Lord of the Sith for 13 years before Episode 3. Odds Sidious mindfucked the kid every chance he could by using the Force on his mind subtly?
In the context of the films we got, actually showing something like that would have certainly helped a lot. A problem with it is that there was such a time-skip, which covered most of the period where this would have been happening.


As far as Anakin's fall to the Dark side in general is concerned: I just think the prequels we got went about that the wrong way. It makes him into too much of a dupe, who gets tricked/manipulated into it. But in the OT, we got to hear that he was seduced by the Dark Side, suggesting that he deliberately chose that path because it offered something attractive to him (e.g. power).

I would have opted to depict Anakin as the dedicated warrior, who grows into more and more of a blood knight as the Clone Wars go on, whereas Obi-Wan instead grows more disenchanted with the notion of the war being a just cause. This then drives the two friends apart, and Anakin comes to view the Jedi as weak and unwilling to do what it takes. Palpatine reveals himself as a Sith, lays it all out for Anakin... and Anakin decides he agrees with Palpatine. The galaxy needs order, and strength, and the will to impose stability!

Anakin isn't dyped into becoming evil. He chooses it, and he chooses it because it fits with his known motivations, which he makes explicit in the OT: "...we can bring ORDER to the galaxy!"

That strikes me as his core motivation. Anakin responded to the war the same way that the fascists responded to World War I: viewing it as a crucible that had turned the survivors into an "aristocracy of the trenches". Meanwhile, Obi-Wan responds to it more in the vein of Sassoon or Remarque (e.g. becoming ever more opposed to the war, and viewing it as pointless cruelty and carnage).
 
So Tom Vietch, writer of the Dark Empire Comics, passed away at 80 in the last few days.

Love or hate the Dark Empire storylines, they became a huge part of the old Legends EU, and were a big part in expanding the early EU.

Edit: He was also author of Tales of the Jedi series.
 
Last edited:
That's sad news. Veitch got a lot of shit from people who didn't like Dark Empire, but he did a lot of good work. Regardless of what you think about that one in particular, he also did a lot of the heavy lifting on Tales of the Jedi. Not to mention, the whole Dark Horse run only really got off the ground because of his efforts.
 
I recommend the fic Sith Lord Swell. It's a crackfic which is kind of my thing so if you hate those, pretend you didn't read this.

Luke, Ben Solo (Pre-fall but on his way), and the other Jedi students at his new Jedi Order run into a Sith Artifact that sends them back to before the Clone Wars. Knowing that the Jedi will see him and his students as a heretic if he claims to be a Jedi, Luke creates a persona as a Sith Lord, calls himself Darth Vader for the Lulz, and gets himself elected as Senator of Tatooine. And that's not the half of it...

“Force help me, I’m going to have to do some Sithly research,” Luke groaned. “Do you have any idea what it’s like communing with the Dark Side? It’s like an an abusive, crazy girlfriend who keeps trying to strangle you whenever you sleep. She slaps you, you offer her chocolate, she throws them back in your face and one wild night later you find out she stole your speeder and rode off into the night while you dealt with a bar brawl. In the aftermath, you find a slip of flimsi with a list of people who want to assassinate you and it almost makes it all worth it.” There was a distant, far off, dreamy expression that didn’t seem Dark Side related to Ben.

“Uh, you speaking from experience there, uncle?”
 
Last edited:
I would have opted to depict Anakin as the dedicated warrior, who grows into more and more of a blood knight as the Clone Wars go on, whereas Obi-Wan instead grows more disenchanted with the notion of the war being a just cause. This then drives the two friends apart, and Anakin comes to view the Jedi as weak and unwilling to do what it takes. Palpatine reveals himself as a Sith, lays it all out for Anakin... and Anakin decides he agrees with Palpatine. The galaxy needs order, and strength, and the will to impose stability!

Anakin isn't dyped into becoming evil. He chooses it, and he chooses it because it fits with his known motivations, which he makes explicit in the OT: "...we can bring ORDER to the galaxy!"

That strikes me as his core motivation. Anakin responded to the war the same way that the fascists responded to World War I: viewing it as a crucible that had turned the survivors into an "aristocracy of the trenches". Meanwhile, Obi-Wan responds to it more in the vein of Sassoon or Remarque (e.g. becoming ever more opposed to the war, and viewing it as pointless cruelty and carnage).


I like it. I think people forget that Obi-Wan in episode 4 tried passing the torch down to Luke saying, "I'm too old for this sort of thing." It's not that didn't want to fight because "Something something chosen one." He wanted to retire settle down, live a normal peaceful life and walk into the sunset.
 
Interesting deleted scene from Solo that added some nice context to the extremely truncated misadventures he had that were chronicled in that film. Briefly covers his service as a Cadet operating Imperial TIE Fighters.

 
Interesting deleted scene from Solo that added some nice context to the extremely truncated misadventures he had that were chronicled in that film. Briefly covers his service as a Cadet operating Imperial TIE Fighters.


In the Crispin Solo he was an imperial officer and the helmsman of an SD, IIRC.He got kicked out because he saved Chewie from some asshole slave driver.
Maybe this was their attempt to steal without paying borrow ideas.
 
On the subject of SW fan casting, and in particular Thrawn: they're broadasting the Granada Sherlock Holmes series in my country (as they do periodically), and I caught an episode yesterday. What with Thrawn being sort of inspired by Holmes, it struck me that Jeremy Brett himself would've been a great Thrawn. The series originally aired when Zahn was writing the books, so maybe he even had him in mind.

It had never occurred to me before.
 
Good God, Jeremy Brett would have knocked it out of the park as Thrawn. He's even got the semi-hawkish and experienced looks for it.

Edit: Come to think of it, I think an older Sean Connery would have made a good Pellaeon.
 
Last edited:
On the subject of SW fan casting, and in particular Thrawn: they're broadasting the Granada Sherlock Holmes series in my country (as they do periodically), and I caught an episode yesterday. What with Thrawn being sort of inspired by Holmes, it struck me that Jeremy Brett himself would've been a great Thrawn. The series originally aired when Zahn was writing the books, so maybe he even had him in mind.

It had never occurred to me before.
Better than RDJ, tbh.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top