DarthUr posted:And this is why I see Traviss' handling of Mandalorians as a constant unending process of Mary Sue-ification. Anything that other writers insert into the Mandalorians that make them less than perfect -- the fact that, for instance, they were mistaken about something once in their lives, that they were vulnerable to the same kind of personality-cult religious manipulation that basically all cultures have been at some point in time -- has to be retconned away. The Mandalorians are this kind of ideal for Traviss, the ultimate goodhearted badass pragmatists who basically don't make mistakes, are morally correct about everything and admired by everyone. And I just find that really annoying. It's especially annoying because it makes her Mando characters *all the same*. Spar as a deluded madman whose delusions nevertheless push him to heroic heights and reignite the Mando culture -- that was pretty awesome. That's a very interesting character arc that doesn't have a clear parallel in current SW canon. The implications having to do with religion and legitimacy and historical vs. spiritual truth and the nature of mental illness and identity -- it was chock full of potential. Abel is very good at writing hooks like that. That was *really cool*. Compare it to what we've got now. More pragmatic Mando politics. More smartass Mandos who come up with grand plans that work out perfectly. Actively *mocking* Abel's article and the much-more-interesting culturally-atavistic-madman version of Spar with Spar's sarcastic jokes about "voices in his head". It seems like nothing can ever happen on Mandalore except canny political manipulators doing the difficult-yet-pragmatically-correct thing to preserve Mando culture and cracking black-humor jokes about killing people while doing it. Seriously, I cannot express how disappointing and annoying it is to have the charismatic genius Spar was presented as turn out to be JUST ANOTHER MANDALORIAN who has the exact same character voice and motivations as EVERY OTHER MANDALORIAN.
Dirk_Loechel posted:patchworkz7 posted:I think we just disagree on this at a basic level, so fair enough, it's not something that bothers me, but I respect that it's an issue that bothers you. Thanks for the discussion. Yes, it is my personal view after all, doesn't have to be yours. It's not the most grating point I have with her wrting either. You're welcome.
patchworkz7 posted:I think we just disagree on this at a basic level, so fair enough, it's not something that bothers me, but I respect that it's an issue that bothers you. Thanks for the discussion.
Havac posted:That's the problem we've seen with the latest "improving" retcons from Traviss, Karpyshyn, and others of the same school. Replacing unique, interesting, thought-provoking, original characterizations and scenarios with "better" "more interesting" or "more realistic" thoroughly genericized versions indistinguishable from every other instance. Spar as an instance of a mad clone with identity issues who becomes a charismatic leader? Boring. Silly. Let's take away every individual characteristic the source originating him gave him, let's take away his whole story hook, and just make him another clone who wanted to get out of the Kamino/Republic military/industrial complex of abuse and then went off to be a Mandalorian bounty hunter. Why even include him if all you're going to do is say "Every single thing about him was wrong, he never did any of that stuff, and also he's much more boring than you were led to believe. But here he is sitting around and . . . being Sull 2.0"?
Robimus posted:Just a general question because I don't know the answer. Has History of the Mandalorians ever appeared beyond the Insider Article?
blackmyron posted: As far as continuity goes, I can deal with the small stuff. It's the nightmare of the CWAS that keeps me up at night. Well, not really but it does bother me much, much more than anything else. I've always found the complete destruction of the 'Story of General Grievous' to much more... well, grievous. In general, I've found Traviss' work to be more accomodating than dismissive of other authors. While I can't speak for personal motivations, I doubt Traviss was actively mocking Abel in print like DarthUr seemed to suggest. As far as Spar, I thought that he's still insane by the NR era.
CadderlySoaring posted:Blacymyron, How has Traviss been more accommodating towards other authors? Her own blog has said how she shouldn't read previous history/fiction of the EU. She focuses on what she desires to pass to readers out the present context of our world/morals.
blackmyron posted:Making references to characters from Children of the Jedi in her last book hardly bears this out, by way of example. Or the strong linkage with the Republic Commando game in the first two RC novels. Or the Dark Forces reference in "Odds". Or numerous other small details that came from other works. One wonders where she gets them from... actually, not really. She derives them from the Holocron and discussion with other authors.