Are the NJO books *that* bad?

I'm in hurry. Here's a couple points.

"Cato's actions of causing the Scipio's downfall had most to do with morality rather than absurdidty. Cato's view was that Rome could be glorious without its own self-degradation."

The trial of the Scipios. It all started with Lucius Scipio's alleged embezzlement of the war indemnity that he received from Antiochus. So Cato indicted the Scipios, and as it turned out, the value of the property of Lucius Scipio's estate was actually *less* than the charged amount. His guilt doesn't even exist. Political machination. Where was the morality in abasing another and exalting one's own ideals? (Bibliography: H.H.Scullard's A History of the Roman World 753 to 146 BC, fourth edition)

It was indeed Cato's view, but did it suit the situation? Would it work especially when Rome had already become the mistress of the Mediterranean, with her sphere of influence extending from North Africa to Asia Minor? His view was obsolete long before he came to the stage of history. He championed to close the doors that could not be shut anymore, to raise the barriers that cuold not be raised again. How very in tune was his character with his policy--dwelling in the past and finding inspiration from the calcified customs of his ancestors.

Self-degradation? For a state that would endure for another seven centuries? Look at how pure Rome was before the Punic Wars, mesieurs and mesdames! And did it produce anything that's worth going down in the pages of history? Were there any extraordinary men then--creative geniuses or individuals of high enterprise? Do you expect a state of conformity and rigidity to produce ones who are not content with status quo or who dare to go beyond the boundaries of their time? Didn't Thomas Carlyle pronounce that history was no more than the biographies of great men?

Greatness also implies uniqueness in a sense. Yes, there indeed had been many states of high sense of morality and discipline, like Sparta. How many could have brought the organic unity under one rule? If everyone were great, then who would be the great?

Everything has its own element of decay. When Rome opened her gates, it was totally inevitable for certain influences to come in. But without acceptance, would anyone accept Rome's rule?

In a nutshell: By Cato's policy, Rome would have never been the great civilizing power encompassing Western world. In other words, there would have been significance whatsoever attached to Rome's existence.

Risquer rien, attraper rien.

<<However, it is absurd to call on the "glory" of the United Stated of America by pointing to the XFL and WWF.>>

Ridiculous. A poor analogy. What does XFL and WWF has to do with Scipio's accomplishment in war? XFL, WWF are trivialising entertainment for the mass, something not to be taken seriously, while Scipio's deeds were done in service of his country at its moment of need. Is that what one ascribes to a man who had defeated Hannibal, who had never lost a battle, who had given the legions its famed elasticity? He championed the Imperial policy, which might differed from the views of the traditionalists. But does this divergence of view make him absurd, for he was just striving for a Roman supremacy? One could not set the time back half a century.

What does self-degradation had to do with Scipio Africanus? He merely opened the gates to the Hellenistic East, but as for individual morality, what did Scipio had to do with it? Does that somewhat imply the whole national morality rests on the shoulders of one man?

"I suppose you were partially correct in making the parallel - history has vindicated Cato much like history has vindicated Marvel."

Crudel!

Semantically speaking, it's only a half-truth. Factually speaking, it's a lie. Mentality of victimhood. History does not vindicate anyone. Perspective of history does.

I merely made a joke out of boredom about Cato and your perisistence in your advocacy on Marvel. Turns out to be--you prefer to put a stretch to the matter in sty

 

Bror Jace...
Amazing, Bror. You actually wish to reopen an arguement you have been proven to have lost!?! The reasonable response from you in the face of such overwhelming evidence is "Sorry, I was wrong." However, I admit that that behavior would be completely out-of-character for you...

"Ghengis,
Take a good, look at the EU. There has been *no* effort to tie the Marvel Comics? events or characters into the stories that have been produced in the last 10 years."

That's simply just plain wrong. You've shown that you are ignorant of past efforts and have ignored them when brought to your attention. There has been efforts dating back at least to 1993 to tie new EU continuity to the existing Star Wars continuity. Since that time, there's been the whole multi-media tie-in's from comics to games to novels.

"This speaks louder than any fan argument on this board or interview with some paid mouthpiece ever could."

I agree - which is why their existence would help back up the point even more.

"Face it, that all-but-forgotten series is merely an answer or two in some extreme SW trivia contest. How good could they have been if they disappeared due to lack of interest? Why was the decision made by LFL to start fresh after RotJ with a completely unrelated storyline if the Marvel stuff was so good, so important? (These are rhetorical questions in case you didn?t know.)"

Well, obviously you actually don't know the answer to them. I'd help you answer them, but you'd no doubt dislike those answers.

"Ghengis, The quote you found proves one thing: That Star Wars is old enough, large enough and has enough ?official? people involved with it that you can find a bit of published text that backs up just about any absurd position a fan could take ..."

Bror, really it boils down to you acting like a spoiled child who hasn't gotten his way. The statements by a LFL Continuity Editor are made with proper authoirty and are beyond reproach. That is no matter how old, large or the number of employees, he still was speaking as a LFL representative on LFL policy (in fact, speaking on LFL's _PAST_ policy with respect to Marvel). It seems that was the whole crux of the debate - there wasn't official proof of Marvel's being a part of continuity.

Now we have that proof to back up what most of us have always known. If you still wish to hold to your incorrect belief, you are welcome to do so, but only at the risk of taking such an absurd position. But, that's never stopped you before.

 

Hey Ghengis, instead of repeatedly saying that I've lost arguments with you in the past (which isn't true), why don't you try finding some clear, Marvel comic book references in the novels written in the last 10 years which make up a majority of the EU? If you can create even a short list, you have a good point and I'll be proven incorrect. If not, what I've said stands as truthful.

You know, back up something you say with something other than bad manners and arrogance.

 

LOL!

Bror...
"You know, back up something you say with something other than bad manners and arrogance."

Actually, I've already done that and it's been answered with bad manners and arrogance on your part. The fact is that not only _IS_ Marvel a part of continuity, but Marvel always _HAS BEEN_ and referenced whenever releveant. Those are the facts.

If you don't like it, at least get over it.

 

very well...Comic book mentions in the Novels....

Emmmmmmm very disturbing.

Not to many though you might say the same for any novel that doesn't include previous novella (including The Courtship of Princess Leia, Truce at Bakura, and the Thrawn Trilogy which are completely distinct from one another)...

However I find that your own comment about the WEG literature not being revelant shows you have very little knowledge of the novels underpinnings.

and I DARN WELL *DO* Buy roleplaying games you man who claims to be a Fan of STar wars!

Timothy Zahn
Michael Stackpole
and Barbara Hambly all have admitted to using WEG literature in their novels and thus if you've read any of their work you've admitted your part in it.

And WEG used Marvel works.

Also the Bounty Hunter wars I believed were based on a very specific "cameo" character from Planets of the Galaxy Elrood Sector galaxy guide though I may be wrong.

(the web dude-and in the book he was right next to a cousin race of the infamous Lashebees)

Jodo Kast also is a purely WEG character from "Adar Talon" affair in Tatooine Manhunt.

Pash Cracken from The X-Wing novels is actually a character of WEG as Timothy Zahn wrote the Cracken Twist in from General Cracken from the numerous WEG field guides by him.

The character was expanded by WEG in The Last Command sourcebook and adopted by Stackpole.

Tinian D'iat is an original character of WEG written in literature by Barbara Hambly and who appeared soley in Star Wars Adventure Journels until she was a guest star in Tales of the Bounty Hunters and gained her own following.

Timothy Zahn's first appearence of Grand Admiral Thrawn before the Empire and only description of what he was doing in the unknown regions written by him are in Adventure Journals.

Michael Stackpole mentioned in Ruin the world (Whateverit'sname) where Corran was mourning a young woman who died there, audience members in the know will recognize her as an another adventure journal story heroine!

and how she led to him joining Rogue Squadron!

ROLEPLAYING GAMES PRACTICALLY MADE STAR WARS EU! DOWN WITH EVERYTHING BUT WHAT WEG MADE A SOURCEBOOK FOR!

DO NOT BUY WOTC RPGS!

<wookie cry>

Errr...sorry.

-Charlemagne

 

*looks through her novels*

Nope, don't see any Marvel Comics references, save for Luceno dropping a few names with no frame of reference so for all new readers know Luceno made up the names himself.

 

Thank you both Charlemagne & Aleja for helping me prove a point that no longer needs proving.

Aleja...
A reference is a reference regardless if the fan is ignorant or not. Knowledge has absolutely nothing to do do with whether it exists or not.

Bror...
Again - You have your Marvel links dating at least back to 1993. As LFL has stated, they never disavowed it being a part and have always tried to use it when/where relevent. In that respect, Marvel's no different than any number of other SW product references.

You're acting like a chicken who's head has been cut off and doesn't know it yet - running around on pure impulse even though your entire argument has been dead for 24 years now (pretty strong chicken, I know).

You can't get any better than LFL going on record telling us that Marvel has been made Canon because of its classic quality as well as the fact that they have never disavowed it. That is, it is currently a part of Canon, and it has always been a part of continuity.

These statements reinforce what has always been in existence. I'm curious as to what _MORE_ you require? Perhaps George Lucas meeting you in person and telling that to you.

 

Bror,

I suggest that you and Ghengis agree to some sort of truce. The only continuity that the Marvel comics would supply are character and planet names at this point.

And if Marvel was so important in terms of continuity, why is the depiction of Kessel so radically different in Marvel and JAT?

And the importance of WEG should never be forgotten.

Just realized something . . . here I am advising Bror to throw in the towel when I fire off a salvo of my own. Certainly, this is me being hypocritical to a degree, but I'd like to possible delve into greater specifics, specifically where Marvel has been incorporated and where it has been grossly contradicted.

 

Personally, I admire Genghis for his enlightened stance on Marvel. I grew up reading these comics, and still have nearly all the post-ROTJ ones, and some of the ones set between ANH and ESB. I reread them a little while ago, and while the art and storylines in some of them leave a lot to be desired, the best of them, like the Crimson Forever, The Tarkin, Shira Brie/Lumiya arc, and Vandelhelm Mission, put all the other EU to shame. Someone said a while back in this thread that EU hasn't really been *fun* since Marvel finished, and I agree with them 100%.

As regards Marvel being referred to in Bantam/NJO books, we've already had the Fenn Shysa/Tobbi Dala reference from the Boba Fett comic brought up.
There's also the Rik Duel cameo from A C Crispin's Han Solo trilogy. Rik Duel appeared in a Marvel story where he doublecrossed Han, Luke and Leia when they were searching for an alien race's holy statue.

 

CA...
Thanks. Hopefully with its newfound Canon status, fans may gain a bit more awareness of the nearly a decade's worth of classic stories a few of them have been missing out on.

GAW...
"but I'd like to possible delve into greater specifics, specifically where Marvel has been incorporated and where it has been grossly contradicted."

First, off there's already at least one active thread which deals with this subject directly.

I don't know that it has ever been "grossly" contradicted. At least, nothing to the degree that TTT (to use but one of many examples) has been contradicted with items like the origin of the Empire, etc. If we agree that TTT time problem does not constitute a "gross contradiction," then there's certainly nothing more offensive to the continuity than it in Marvel.

If we do agree that TTT has "gross contradictions," then how could one use different standards on different items.

I think first we need to clarify what your definition of "gross contradiction" is GAW before we can analyse things with respect to that definition.

As an example, at first glance, one may use the case of a humanoid Jabba the Hut, who appears in several of Marvel's Han Solo storylines. These took place both prior to ESB as well as ROTJ, where we see a sluglike Jabba the Hutt. The Marvel Hut (one "t") has been proven to be Jabba's Nimbanese assistant. In which case, there's no problem at all.

That's unlike (for example) TTT which mentions characters being Imperial officers long before the Empire has existed among other things. While fans can make up "fixes" for such things, it has not been done officially.

That is, most problems that newer items have tieing into Marvel's existing continuity has already been "fixed." Whereas most of the problems between newer items have not.

Marvel has the benefit that a number of things have already taken care of any minor continuity hiccups it may have had.

If you'd like to know specific examples of continuity hiccups, I would encourage you to take part in the thread in my signature "Intelligently Fitting Newer EU Into Existing Continuity (Or How About A No-Prize).

It has a number of the major ones already singled out for those interested.

 

I own and have read the entire run of Marvel comics.

*looks through novels again*

Nope, barely any references that go beyond name-dropping, especially in the novels that deal with post-RotJ. Care to point out what I may be missing?

 

There were Marvel Comics references (name dropping only) in Luceno's books? That's news to me. No references to actions or events?

You mean to tell me that between the time Heir to the Empire was published and last fall there were none others? That's nearly an entire decade of ignoring them. And then when we do get some sort of reference, it's an obscure name that even I, whose read more stuff than the average EU fan (and all EU fans are among the elite of SW fans) figured it to be Luceno making up a new name? That's lame.

Gee, that means the Marvel stuff didn't have any weight to it, right?

 

Bror Jace...
"There were Marvel Comics references (name dropping only) in Luceno's books? That's news to me."

Yes there were Marvel references in James Luceno's books. It seems a lot of things are news to you on this subject.

"No references to actions or events...Gee, that means the Marvel stuff didn't have any weight to it, right?"

No,it means that you are ignorant of those (many) references which occured during the time you mentioned. You have been told of them, which means you're ignoring the fact they exist. WHich means it's your argument which doesn't have any weight to it, not Marvel.

A good joke definition of "insanity" is doing the exact same thing over again, yet expecting different results. Read through this thread if you want specific references - but IMO it would be insane to expect you to change your incorrect view of Marvel. I say again - LFL has never disavowed them and has included them whenever possible - according to them.

The fact that they were referenced at least since 1993 simply reinforces what we've already known - they are part of the continuity and they have always been so.

You have your proof of references, you have your statement of fact from LFL. If these aren't enough for you then clearly the is with your view, since they are entirely reasonable forms of proof for any reasonable person.

 

Bror, I don't read comicbooks so I figured any name I didn't recognize from Han's past, any character I didn't recognize from either Han Solo Trilogy, was from some comicbook (Marvel or DH) None of these dropped names were of any real consequence to the story. I think Luceno just wanted the comicbook fans to know that he had read the comicbooks.
I didn't run across any events from Han's past life that I hadn't read about somewhere else. I know that Crispin used some comicbook characters, but she explained them well enough that I didn't need to read the comics to know what she was talking about.
There were no events in Luceno's work that I was in the dark about.
So I think you are right in your assessment that the comicbook references were lightweights of no real importance.

 

And Marvel apparantly had extragalactic invaders before, yet the New Republic is caught entirely unawares that their galaxy is open to invasion from beyond.

So much for Marvel being paid attention to.

 

Counterpoint those extra-galatic invaders were pretty well crunched (in the immortal words of Jar Jar Binks) fairly quickly.

Also Luminya might yet be allied with the Vong

 

Gee, for something that is apparently blatantly obvious, I have yet to get a concrete answer. This puzzles me, as I am certain that some people would not stop at the opportunity to prove me wrong, especially when I am all but begging to be shown the error of my ways.

*looks through novels yet again*

Nope, no explicit references to Marvel characters and events that go beyond name dropping.

 

Just like little more reference to other events in novels save name dropping.

Lighten up Aj

 

"Read through this thread if you want specific references"

I started to read through the thread but I don't have time to waste on something I'm unlikely to find.

Ghengis, If you wrote, posted actual references to the Marvel Comics in the EU novels and you know where they are, why don't you just cut and paste them in a more current page?

 

"Read through this thread if you want specific references"

Ghengis, are there really specific Marvel references posted somewhere in this tread? Meaningful references, not just name dropping?
Why don't you take a minute to find where you posted them, copy and paste them so we can see them all, all together in one place. Then we can decide if they are real Marvel tie-ins or just some author showing off his knowledge of long forgotten comicbooks

 

Whether they were beaten off quickly or not is irrelevant. The point would still be that there would have been previous extra-galactic invasions that the NR leadership would be aware of. There wouldn't be any of this talk about the GFFA being insulated by some sort of hyperspace rift or something. And no one commented something like: "Well, perhaps the distrurbance has lessened like it did when the (insert name of Marvel extra-galactic invader here) invaded."

 

GAW...
Actually that has been explained. The NR scientists believed that the Nagai and Tofs had to come from within the galaxy (the Unexplored Regions, etc.) since they didn't have enough information about their means for extragalactic travel.

The evolution of this explanation was given in an essay on the official site in preparation for the debut of VP and the NJO line and then in Star Wars Gamer explaining the scientists' mistaken view.

So, your concerns about the overlap of the extragalactic invasion concept has been dealt with "in-continuity" already. If I can dig out the SW.COM essay "From Beyond the Rim" or something like that which dealt with comparisons between the Charon, the Nagaim, the Tofs and the Vong as extragalactic invaders, I'll post the link. That essay tried to retcon Marvel to some degree and the later Star Wars Gamer #1 article retconned the retcon back to the original way. It's simply more proof that Marvel has always been considered in the scheme of things.

 

So, Ghengis, can I assume that your lack of response with a nice, concise, detailed accounting of those Marvel references means that there really aren't any?

 

No.

For the complete unarguable proof, refer back to page 6 when this thread was ressurected. Start here...
"The answer is from Lucasfilm itself..."

The fact that people would even consider arguing against such a clarification is absurd at best. The point at hand is whether or not LFL ever disavowed its existence and/or whether or not they try to work it in when applicable.

The answers to those questions are that no, they have _NEVER_ disavowed its existence. They have always tried to work it in when applicable.

The fact remains that there are references all throughout the '90's and beyond to Marvel, which ended in the late '80's.

Again, before anyone wishes to argue those points, it is probably best to read LFL's cuurent and past stance on it from SWG #3.

It is amazing the things people try to argue around here.