Lit MACLUNKY -- The Lit Forum Maclunky Thread, v3

Charlemagne19, deer-ling, I hope you will be tell us when it come in to (s)print so we can give you a buck.

 

Asmara was a really great city. Well worth a visit if those kinds of things are up your alley. And yes, the pyramids are well worth the excursion if you ever find yourself with a long layover in Cairo. Pretty easy to arrange also, all things considered.

 

from http://georgesellas.deviantart.com/

 

Speaking as someone who was making notes every week when watching the original show back when it first came out, I have to say I disagree.

Canon's a tricky thing, and it always has been. Even with single authors, consistency isn't always going to be 100%. With a shared or multi-author universe, that can be an even bigger mess. The truth of the matter is that it can be a complex process to examine and determine how everything can fit together from oftentimes contradictory works.

It's interesting that you mention Sherlock Holmes, because that is really the first 'universe' to really get a pseudo-scholarly examination of the 'canonical truth' of its structure; I think anyone who is interested in doing this sort of thing as a hobby should try to tackle the Doyle stories at least once. And there isn't a true 'consensus' about what is canon - even about the story that are technically part of the canon (there's a school of thought that many of the later stories are 'fictional' in the in-universe sense). Some draw some bizarre conclusions, others follow a more traditional path. But, of course, there's that Doyle himself never weighed in the subject matter, and had an often slapdash approach to being consistent (with one story dated to being within the Hiatus when Holmes was believed dead). But even that doesn't matter sometimes - many Discworld fans refuse to believe that the Patrician in the first novel is Vetinari, the Patrician in almost all the other novels, despite that Terry Pratchett said so. But the different versions of Sherlock Holmes are just that - different versions. They don't really weigh in on the examination of the 'canonical' stories except in an indirect fashion as a commentary, in some cases; I suppose you could examine the individual universes, but I find even following the MCU tedious and rather flat compared to the 'original' Marvel Universe, and I suspect that's the case here as well.

As far as Twin Peaks is concerned, we have the old TV series, the new TV series, the movie, and a limited selection of secondary media - The Autobiography of Dale Cooper, Laura Palmer's Diary, The Guide to Twin Peaks, The Secret History of Twin Peaks, and the audiotape of Dale Cooper. And yes, there are contradictions between the various sources, but that they exist simply means that we have to look at each source and try to reconcile them. For instance, the Cooper's bio has the first look at the Theresa Banks killing - which, of course, is different from the movie, a consequence of Kyle MacLachan wanting a reduced role in the movie and Chris Isaac's character taking his place in the investigation - but it also contains probably the only extended look at the circumstances of what happened between Dale and Caroline.

The bottom line is that 'canon' is a complex beast and while there's nothing wrong with shrugging and saying 'it doesn't matter', there's also nothing wrong with saying 'I think I can make sense of this'. Especially if it is crazily complicated. (My ongoing project for the Marvel Universe is, indeed, a Sisyphean task, but I can't help but love doing it).

 

How I learned to do that: First hand experience from arguing about canon. It got frustrating and I realized I was getting angry over silly fiction books/media. Not a total ''JUST TURN OFF YOUR BRAIN BRO'' but maybe it came with age and caring about every little canon link just isn't worth it, life's too short and full of bantha dung so might as well enjoy a glass of blue milk.

 

I think the trick is to keep your tongue firmly planted in cheek. The Saxtonites represent what happens when you take it too seriously - as you pointed out, it's a fictional universe. Above all, it should be something that you enjoy doing.

 

The broken aesop of Saxon being, "if you take Star Wars too seriously and argue too long about it--you too might someday write for Star Wars."

 

In today's "How close are we to Skynet?" update ... http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40901393

I am NOT amused. True, there's not been any particularly disheartening rumbles about AI lately, but this kind of hardware is bad news in any case.

(And please believe me, I'm not deaf to the argument about sending robots in instead of soldiers. I respect what our folks in uniform give up for our freedom; I just don't trust that this kind of "advancement" is any more helpful toward what should be our ideal goal - solving problems peacefully instead of with violence.)

 

That was true in the short term - but in the long term, it caused Saxton to abandon Star Wars completely over something incredibly trivial, because he had to make a principled stand about a make-believe universe.

Ultimately, it was the people that truly enjoyed putting everything together and engaging with fans - Luceno, Pena, Fry and Wallace - that ended up dominating the latter-day world-building of the EU.

 

My problem with robotic soldiers is not that it is replacing flesh and blood soldiers, but that they are used carelessly.

 

Agreed you need to just sit back chill and listen to some Porg Rock

 

What happened there with Saxon and Star Wars? I missed a lot of his stands.

 

This is bad, but it's not a big step. I'd be a lot more worried about software progress to make this sort of thing (more) autonomous. Sure, this lowers the threshold for violence by removing humans even farther from the battlefield, but as long as you need a human controller for each drone (and limited distance because of time lag) there's an upper bound on much damage you can do with that.
Fully autonomous swarms of these things, however, especially if affordable or easily reverse-engineered... that's actual apocalypse material.

 

Just found out about the old EU's Colossus Wasp and I have to say that I'm disappointed that they only have one appearance

 

Tales of the Jedi was so freaking creative

 

One of his last public comments was regarding his work on the Inside the Worlds, after he took exception to LFL implying that Endor's moon wasn't ruined:
"I would have quit the project and demanded anonymity for my role if the irrationalists had succeeded in inserting anything that gave the impression that Endor is "saved". I consider this a "red line" issue of intellectual integrity. Non-negotiable. "
A post dated 2006 by one his followers indicated that Saxton told him "he no longer had anything to do with [the DK books]".

So... yeah, it's been over a decade.

 

Well not to beat a dead horse, but yes... reallistically speaking, Endor should have been devastated. But canonically, it did not. That ship has sailed.

 

The Death Star disappears when it explodes anyway.

 

Not entirely, obviously, since the Rebels deployed an array of shields and tractor beams to protect Endor from falling debris. Besides, substantial chunks of the Death Star were recovered and offered to the surviving Alderaanians.

 

This is one of my favorite things from the old EU. Sometimes I feel like IMPRESSIVE BIG THINGS are really all I want from Star Wars. (Obviously, Dark Empire I & II are my absolute favorites, but TotJ also did that sort of thing really well on occasion.)

 

Well, that cheered me up. Thanks.

 

In the wake of real life news, I feel this should be mentioned. Whether in Space or on Earth, Nazis are bad people and you should not emulate them.