"eddie": "Sue, or any other Vip, can you tell us a little more about GL's official stance towards the EU? or do you, like the most of us, have not the slightest idea. I read the following in Rayten's blog:
Within the issue of Starlog magazine with the War of the Worlds cover is an interview article with George Lucas. He stated something which he had said before, which is that he doesn't follow the SW EU, he doesn't read the books or comics. He also said that when they started doing all this (which is allowing other storytellers to tell their own SW tales), he had decreed that the Star Wars Universe would be split into two just like Star Trek (I don't know nuts about Star Trek, so don't ask me about that), one would be his own universe (the six episode movie saga), the other would be a whole other universe (the Expanded Universe). He continued to say that the EU tries as much as possible to tie in to his own universe, but sometimes they move into a whole other line of their own. "
Sue Rostoni: "Yeah, this is pretty much what I've heard, except that people have said he reads the comics."
(Note: I'm not sure, but I think this might be the June issue of Starlog, which would be #336 by my reckoning. I'm trying to locate one, since although Rayten was pretty thorough in what he said, it's still hearsay.)
Of course, Rostoni has made this point several times before, but the SD.Netters have invariably twisted whatever she said into a pretzel and gotten the completely wrong idea. The underlying problem, of course, is that they are unable to synthesize data or understand it in context, because they are so blinded by their desire for a preferred outcome.
I'm not going to gloat about it . . . I'm just saying that there's a lesson here for anyone involved in the debates, or in anything else. Indeed, the outcome of the Vs. Debate itself is entirely unimportant. What's important are the lessons you should be learning from it . . . how to think and reason given a subject's rules. And of course, thanks to the other side of the aisle you get to see some interesting psychological problems . . . such as people threatening others for disagreeing over their beliefs about science fiction programs. (Indeed, my personal opinion is that the other side of the aisle has many people providing many examples of how not to behave, but that's neither here nor there.)
But I digress. Regarding that lesson, let's take a look at some of the things Rostoni has said in the past about Lucas's position on things:
"In general, George does not take the EU into account when he's making his movies."
"It's our job to manipulate the EU into fitting George's future movies, which often contradict stuff we've done."
"He doesn't see the extended universe as "his" Star Wars, but as "ours.""
"Yes, the books follow the continuity of the films as best we can taking into account that George follows his own continuity, and rightly so."
Even from these four lines, logical suppositions can be formed. It would, for instance, probably be inaccurate to say that, in Rostoni's opinion, Lucas works closely with the EU-makers to keep continuity between his films and the EU and vice versa. And it would probably be accurate to say that, in Rostoni's opinion, Lucas doesn't pay much attention to the EU continuity, instead making his own that does not fit in with the EU (until she goes back to try to make the EU fit).
Such reasonable inferences are not, however, what the SD.Net EU-philes believe. Indeed, from the last quote above, Wayne Poe declared that "Rostoni completely dashed all of [G2k's] hopes of making the EU illegitimate".
" . . . The hell?" . . . that was roughly my reaction when I saw him say that, and it still is. Now that Rostoni has made her point about her beliefs on Lucas clearer, though, is it possible that Wayne and his fellows would reconsider that belief?
Qui-Gon: "Hmm . . . not likely."
It's too easy to just mock them. I mean, any number of jokes about the Iraqi Information Minister come to mind instantly. And it's not useful to get angry with them, except insofar as it can help to fuel the complete deconstruction of their position. And given their threats (like Wayne's death threat postings, et cetera), it isn't like you can pity them, really. And, of course, since these people are the pro-SW intelligentsia (as scary a fact as that is), I personally can't really just ignore them.
And so, I just get to keep making posts like this. In any case, though, one must avoid getting too terribly smug, for although I disagree with the notion that a stopped clock is right twice a day (it's just lucky), the sentiment is still accurate. You never know when even the worst idiotic scoundrels might make a valid point.
I'll be waiting . . . though I won't be holding my breath.
Another indepth, intelligent, logical, and scathing little mini-article... I wonder how they'll discredit this one...
But yet in any honest analysis, the overriding priority of the movies renders disputes over Star Wars canon policy mostly moot, at least in terms of the important issues.
I predict bullshitting the likes of which we have never seen or could have imaged before, though some will just say that it isn't an official statement, since it came from an interview in a magazine and shouldn't be used. There's something to be said about such stick to it-ivness.
These people should not be allowed to breed.
"But yet in any honest analysis, the overriding priority of the movies renders disputes over Star Wars canon policy mostly moot, at least in terms of the important issues."
Unfortunately, SDNers (those who get involved into st-vs-sw debate) tend to twist canon policy until it becomes "if it contradicts ICS2 it has to be reshaped/reinterpreted in way that will confirm it". Dishonest, but typical.
Post a Comment