Jedi Council Forums - Tolkein Vs. Galactic History

Jedi Council Forums » Star Wars Films » Star Wars Saga

Welcome to the Saga Forum. This forum is for in-depth, analytical discussions that bridge the entire SW Saga. This forum DOES NOT ALLOW: "What if?" Threads, Humor Threads, Favorite Lists, Game Threads, Speculation Threads, Movie Sequel Threads & Topical Threads. For information about the threads, purpose and rules of this forum visit the Rules & Announcements Thread & the Index Thread

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

Author	Topic: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
Ternian Registered: May '00	Date Posted: 2/13/03 9:35pm Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	From the Oxford Concise Dictionary: Versus: as opposed to; in contrast to. May be also used in Legal or Sporting terms as "against." Since we are not in a court of Law, nor playing sport, "against" has no meaning here. Compare: estimate, measure, or note the similarity or dissimilarity between. I think you did ask for a comparision, just by the title of the thread. Sorry, you're wrong. My original post looks at Tolkein's take on history in CONTRAST to GL's provided Galactic history in the PT. Although this may seem like a simple question, you are INDEED asking how the PT COMPARES to Tolkein, at least in one aspect, the larger history. No. I am asking if the PT lacks a history as Tolkein describes in the quote provided. I strongly suggest you read the complete opening post. -----signature----- "Their people are suffering, Master Jedi! I must return." - Lady Amidala - RRM, Episode III --------------------------------------------------------------- This weeks X-Site! is... http://www.jedicenter.com.br/
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
DarthAttorney Title: Manager Emeritus Registered: Nov '00	Date Posted: 2/13/03 11:04pm Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	scuiggefest & Glockenspiel: Please stay on topic and do not try to derail this thread. If I need to warn either of you again, you'll be banned for 48hrs. -----signature----- http://www.millenniumfalcon.com OMG I LUB U
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Glockenspiel Registered: Jul '02	Date Posted: 2/14/03 9:40am Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	Hey, I was merely pointing out the stupidity of his post. -----signature----- "Pass the courvoisier" "Fear not, for one day we shall have good tasting soup
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
jedi5150 Registered: Dec '00	Date Posted: 2/14/03 10:18am Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History - Date Edited: 2/14/03 10:23am (1 edits total) Edited By: jedi5150
	"I strongly suggest you read the complete opening post. " Umm...I did, 3 times. And I read this entire thread. And it seems to me as though several people are COMPARING the fact that Tolkien hinted at a larger history to whether or not the PT and/or OT hint at one. Maybe it's just me, but that's what it seems like. Oh well, sometimes there's no winning. My question is this: Why are we contrasting/comparing/analyzing/etc a book VS. a movie (or set of). I've seen LOTR, and it seems like most of the larger history is in the books, not the films anyway. You can't fairly put a screenplay up against a novel (not compare, right?). LOTR (according to amazon.com) is 1216 pages. The original trilogy novelizations are 1248 pages. About the same. Now, if you read the novelizations, there's a bunch in there that's not in the film, some of it hinting at a larger history. If you want to discuss if SW has the same type content/history/lore/whathaveyou as LOTR, at least use the novelizations and not just cut-down-to-just-over-2-hours-so-kids-don't-get-bored-or-to-please-studio-execs films. But why is it always LOTR anymore? As Oscar said, there are a lot of other book series that were written BEFORE LOTR that have the same kinds of story ideas in them. So, tell me: Contrasting is finding the differences, comparing is finding the similarities. Which do you wish to do in this thread? Find the similar larger histories, or contrast showing that LOTR has one and SW does not? -----signature----- jedi-5150@fanforce.net idaho@alpinegarrison.com TK-1430, 501st Alpine Garrison Join the Empire! http://www.501st.com/
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
RoseBlue Registered: Feb '03	Date Posted: 2/14/03 1:00pm Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	Tolkien wrote books, not movies. It is very hard to get history in movies while it is very easy to do so in books. The only way we can compare is going by the movies. Since I haven't seen them, I can't compare. In Saving Private Ryan, I don't remember any explanation of WW2 or of recent history. It just gave enought to understand what was going on. The PT does that.
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Oscar_the_Gungan Registered: Jan '01	Date Posted: 2/14/03 2:04pm Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	That's very true. Much of the history of the PT has to be fleshed out in the books there simply isn't time in the movies. If we want to learn about the political climate of the galaxy as TPM opens we should read Cloak of Deception, it explains some of the history of the Trade Federation and why it is penalized with heacy taxation. The casual movie goer doesn't want to know about that stuff. The separatist crisis is spelled out in much more detail in The Approaching Storm. For the Clone Wars there will be a lot of reading material between now and Episode III. The films offer hints but can't flesh out, Such as comments about the alleged extinction of the Sith in TPM. Other sources go into much more depth about the battle of Ruusan. The same goes for Lord of the Rings. If Jackson was to get into that stuff each film would be 20 hours. -----signature----- I'm open for business, business of giving you the business," Meatwad Harold:"The universe tends to unfold as it should." Star Wars is forever, the Force will be with you .... always!
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Ternian Registered: May '00	Date Posted: 2/14/03 10:59pm Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	jedi5150, my opening post couldn't be any more clearer. Nowhere in do I ask for LotR to be compared to SW, nor do I ask if LotR is anymore complicated than SW. The question is: Does the PT suffer from a lack of glimpses of a "large history" as described by Tolkein? And the description by Tolkein is: "Part of the attraction of the L.R. is, I think, due to the glimpses of a large history in the background: an attraction like that of viewing far off an unvisited island, or seeing the towers of a distant city gleaming in a sunlit mist." I think too many people are eagar to jump on the LotR Vs. SW bandwagon. My post, in no way, addresses this. -----signature----- "Their people are suffering, Master Jedi! I must return." - Lady Amidala - RRM, Episode III --------------------------------------------------------------- This weeks X-Site! is... http://www.jedicenter.com.br/
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Oscar_the_Gungan Registered: Jan '01	Date Posted: 2/17/03 8:38am Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	I'm sorry but I think if I started a thread where I wanted to talk about hints at a larger galactic history I wouldn't want to run the risk of having it derailed by calling it "Tolkien vs. Galactic History." In fact I'd leave Tolkien completly out of it. It just isn't worth it. Anyone who calls a thread that at the Jedi Council Forums is asking for it. By even mentioning it it is going to make people compare and contrast. It is to be expected. -----signature----- I'm open for business, business of giving you the business," Meatwad Harold:"The universe tends to unfold as it should." Star Wars is forever, the Force will be with you .... always!
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Ternian Registered: May '00	Date Posted: 2/17/03 11:54pm Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	End of subject, Oscar. I have outlined what this thread is about. If you still have problems, PM me. -----signature----- "Their people are suffering, Master Jedi! I must return." - Lady Amidala - RRM, Episode III --------------------------------------------------------------- This weeks X-Site! is... http://www.jedicenter.com.br/
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
OBI-GYN_Kenobi Registered: Jun '02	Date Posted: 2/18/03 7:33pm Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	Han Solo = Aragorn. Now, that is the funniest thing I've ever read on this site. Han Solo is closer to Bill Ferny than Aragorn. Well, Boromir fits better. Dooku = Saruman? Why? Because Christopher Lee plays both guys in the movies? Well, maybe they're a little similar..... >>>>>There are many clues all over Naboo, like the giant stone heads and the ruins in the Gungan sacred place. None of that stuff looks like it was built by Gungans Middle Earth doesn't have clues. Just facts, facts & more facts. As JRR Tolkien said in Unfinished Tales, in the foreward, I think (and I paraphrase), 'In my recollection, the only 2 things alluded to that are not explained are The Cats Of Queen Beruthiel & The 2 other Wizards (out of 5).' Come to think of it, it's not in the forward, but in 'The Essay On The Istari'. -----signature----- "Obi-Wan Kenobi.... Obi-Wan. Now that's a name I've not heard in a very long time."
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Oscar_the_Gungan Registered: Jan '01	Date Posted: 2/19/03 9:24am Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	I think we need to remember that Star Wars is still a work in a progress. It hasn't been finished yet and it might not be for a while. After Episode III, we will have the archival editions and then whatever bridge novels come out before and after that so who knows what will be explained in those. -----signature----- I'm open for business, business of giving you the business," Meatwad Harold:"The universe tends to unfold as it should." Star Wars is forever, the Force will be with you .... always!
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
eclipseSD Registered: May '02	Date Posted: 2/19/03 6:46pm Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	Here is a good essay comparing JRRT and GL, and the two sagas. Keys for an understanding of Tolkien´s Poetics There are several notions supporting Tolkien´s Poetics, necessary to his mind in order to make up a consistent tale, a good story: Sub-creation, Primary World and secondary worlds, Fantasy, Escape, Recovery, Consolation and Eucatastrophe. It is my intention to offer a useful guide of these terms, so I will briefly explain each one of them. Sub-creation means for Tolkien the main job of any artist: the construction of feasible worlds where a story can be developed —that is, told. They must be likely and consistent, to avoid magic —inherent to any aesthetic experience— from breaking, and preserving Art from failing (see On Fairy Stories, pages 36-44). This state of secondary belief is a shared experience in both Cinema and Literature, and it is so interesting in order to make an analysis of similarities and differences between the worlds we are studying. The Primary World is the real one, our world. We could consider it as the reference for the reader-spectator to place his own perspective, and understand what he contemplates and experiences as a work of art. Secondary worlds are the universes of fiction, as varied as the different arts —the possibilities of creating beauty. For Tolkien, Fantasy is not only the primary task of the artist, but also the art of giving a story ‘the inner consistency of reality, which commands or introduces Secondary Belief’ . The making of feasible worlds needs Art, and not only imagination. In fact, the ability of Lucas and Tolkien is obvious when elaborating deeply consistent worlds, where internal laws of logic are always fulfilled. So it is easy to identify in them the Primary World —they are true— and the story renders the experience of aesthetic pleasure —they are desireable. The next notion used by Tolkien is Escape. He defines it as the legitimate runaway towards true reality, which goes beyond the flat vision of everyday life. This flee is not the one of the desertor, but the legitimate runaway of the prisoner, who cannot be blamed if, ‘finding himself in prison, he tries to get out and go home. Or if, when he cannot do so, he thinks and talks about other topics than jailers and prison-walls’ . Close to this notion is Consolation: the trascending of countless limitations experienced by human beings along the way. Good fairy tales offer, according to Tolkien, the great consolation: the chance to escape from Death. He calls this the Great Escape. In fairy tales we find an explanation of the deep aspirations of the human soul, fulfilled by good stories contained in books. For we must never forget that, after all, fairy tales have been written by human beings. Finally, Tolkien analyzes the notion of eucatastrophe: the ‘Consolation of the Happy Ending (...). The eucatastrophic tale is the true form of fairy-tale, and its highest function’ . We will see later that, in Tolkien´s mind, the happy end has nothing to do with the blunt, unreal ‘perfect’ ending. It must, above all, lead to a final conclussion according to the requirements of the plot to that point in the story. The joyous turn of events, which occurs when all hope seems to have withered, is capable of causing the reader´s sympathy when our intimate experience of life is met by a deeply moving tale. In real life (the Primary Morld) events do not occur the way we had planned. Much on the contrary: they are woven like the threads of a tapestry crafted by providence and personal freedom. As Professor Odero has pointed out in his essay, ‘those fairy-tales are not nursery rhymes. They are tales filled with fantasy, but they contain a poetic recovery of so many elementary, both human and cosmic realities, intimately connected with deep human desires’ . We will deal later with this. Summing up, I will approach in the first place the narrative methods proper to both Cinema and Literature, and explain how each one condition a story. I will conclude that the vehicle of the eucatastrophic moments of Star Wars is the language of Cinema: the soundtrack, special effects, close-ups –those visual elements, the demand of a made-in-Hollywood happy ending, more removed from the Primary World than anything that occurs in Middle-earth. The possibility of eucatastrophe in Literature rests upon the vital experience of the reader, and its fulfilment requires a sort of magic on the side of the author, who must be capable of causing the subjective identification with the sole use of words. Once upon a time... the fairy-tale It has been said that Star Wars is a traditional tale, a space fantasy -in as much as the scenario and atmosphere, and at the same time, an ‘updated’ myth. I do not agree with this point of view. The story is placed in far away solar systems, but the plot is deeply human, so that the drama can be overlooked without detriment of its connection with the real world. The Trilogy starts with the huge universe as backdrop where a fading text updates us on the situation. Its purpose is to carry the spectator to an alien place (this device has been referred to as ‘space travel’). But a closer look will allow us to see that we are being invited to travel in time, too. ‘A long, long time ago...’, is an echo of the fixed expression ‘Once upon a time’ with which traditional tales begin. In this respect Star Wars and Middle-earth meet: mythical worlds develop outside time, that is, ucronic: they do not exist, but could exist, and that makes them applicable in essence, and not only in the surface, for all ages. In this background ‘a conflict between the man and the machine’ is established, in the opinion of Joseph Campbell. I disagree, since this view simplifies in excess the underlying themes of the story. The conflict does not respond to a mere confrontation in terms of good/evil, man/machine, or even a simple struggle between the Empire and the Rebellion. This perspective owes too much to a manichean understanding of history, a view that does not account for a deep analysis of the narrative elements of the plot. George Lucas asserts that every artist creates according to a specific poetics, seeking the truths that underlie the surface. To this end he uses mythological archetypes. Han Solo illustrates this pattern, a pattern that has no correspondence in Middle-earth, where we can hardly find secondary characters or extras: the powerful, pervasive presence of a common history acting as a background that explains the present, is an antidote against dependability from which all characters profit. This is another difference between the Trilogy and Tolkien´s world. The limitations imposed, especially by the duration of the film, on the narrative, make the characters of Star Wars stand for human types, and occasionally, their deeds hardly respond to the personality of each character. In any case, as a whole, the Trilogy allows us to analyze the depth with which George Lucas enhanced the actors of the drama. Tolkien´s characters are not archetypes; on the contrary, they are essentially human. Their inner consistency makes them credible: their evolution as agents of the plot can be traced step by step. From this point of view the applicability to the private universe becomes an easier task. Their freedom throughout internal time makes them individual beings, identifiable along the story through their actions ans reactions in the face of the unexpected demands of the plot. The deeds of the hero or life as adventure The characters must undergo a transformation of their general outlooks. They used to act according to references that must be surrendered to wider interests: an overwhelming task. In both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings exists a paralelism –non exclusive of those particular characters among Middle-earth; it can also be found in Niggle, Túrin Turambar or Beren- with respect to the personal ripening of the hero: Bilbo, Frodo and Luke Skywalker are examples to be considered. Subjective identification of the spectator with the hero is prompted by the directness with which the hero is introduced to him. The main agents of these tales are not the distant heroes of Greek mythology. On the contrary, they are perceived as individuals that are not prepared to fulfill the quest they have been appointed. This quest seems to them to be a fruit of chance, an intruder in their lives. Nevertheless the mission is presented as the ultimate reason of their personal histories. Reciprocal loyalty becomes the support of hope. To name a few examples, the increasing friendship between Solo and Luke –and by means of it, his commitment with the Rebellion-; the faithfulness of Chewbacca towards Han, or, possibly the finest example, the loyalty displayed by Sam towards Frodo throughout The Lord of the Rings. In A New Hope, R2D2 and C3PO try to fulfill a mission they have not looked for. R2D2 is driven by his loyalty to Princess Leia, while C3PO is compelled by the same feeling towards R2, even against his will. Since both robots are capable of loyalty, they are not machines but an imaginative synthesis of rational beings with metal skin and bones. They are persons disguised as machines. C3PO´s comments offer a keen counterpoint about how little must be expected from wordly realities, and the need to accomplish obligations: ‘We seem to be made to suffer. It´s our lot in life’, says C3PO while wondering through the desert with a heavy heart. Frodo is fully aware of this when, wishing farewell to Sam, he states, ‘I tried to save the Shire, and it has been saved, but not for me. It must often be so, Sam, when things are in danger: some one has to give them up, lose them, so that others may keep them’ . This mission -which takes on the literary form of a journey, therefore resembling the flow, the narrative of life-, appears at a more or less unexpected moment, as a bothersome addition that shakes an existence full of routine. The journey leads the characters to a place they would have never chosen to go –Mordor or the Death Star. The awareness of the role to perform in the chain of events from this moment on becomes painful: the subjective certainty of the characters´ lack of talent, fear of the unknown, the possibility of a probable death, and so on, as well as the certainty that the quest will demand the best of them, that is, commit their lives to something bigger than themselves. ‘Yet such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are elsewhere’. Elrond –the author of this line considered by Tolkien in an BBC interview as ‘the most intelligent’ sentence of The Lord of the Rings- and Gandalf are brilliant instances of wise characters, capable of understanding the way wheels turn in the world –both in real and secondary. Frodo and Luke are also paradigmatic in this respect, perhaps in a deeper way than Bilbo. And possibly Frodo stands above all. Luke is willing and selfconfident. He wants to part with Obi Wan, anticipates to Yoda his desire to learn, and thinks he is sure of learning faster than what his master believes, although it is not so. In a sense it is easier for him to leave behind his everyday life –once his family has been murdered by the troops of the Empire, ‘there´s nothing here for me now. I want to learn the ways of the Force and become a Jedi like my father’. But still Luke has little self knowledge. Frodo has no intention of leading a different life than the one he already enjoys at the Shire. The dangers to come are clearer in his mind than they are to Luke, and he is more aware of his incapability. In fact, he is more incapable: Luke relies on the Force, which comes to his aid in the final assault to the Death Star, as well as in other moments throughout the Trilogy. Frodo´s only ally is his own loyalty, thus achieving a moral stature all the deeper since he must go through countless inner torments that seem to drown his will, always close to the razer´s edge. Tolkien created Frodo using as inspiration the ancient heroes of Northern European Literature: heroes that fought out of a sense of duty, trusting upon a faithfulness that went beyond all hope and reward. The story of The Lord of the Rings –just like the one of Túrin or Beren, Beowulf or Kullervo- achieves in this way a more powerful epic sense, closer to the Primary world than Luke´s actions do. The latter are more transparent and identifiable from the receptor´s co-ordenates in the superficial realm of expectations. Luke is presented as a teenager and his goals are, in this sense, clear from the real world. Both Luke and Frodo must part from everyday life, leave behind a comfortable life in order to save something. During the journey they will mature as individuals, and this personal ripeness shines through in the progressive acquisition of real wisdom, as well as in the building of a deeply merciful condition. At the end of both stories we find two characters inclined to understand others´ weaknesses and prone to forgive, finally cleansed by the pain of living. The ultimate destiny of their respective universes weighs upon their shoulders. They must employ their whole lives in this deliverance without expecting a single reward. But their freedom to accept or reject the mission is not predetermined. Ben Kenobi faces Luke with the need to involve himself in the ways of the Force, with the purpose of saving the galaxy –‘I need your help, Luke’, he states; and he goes on by saying ‘You must do what you feel is right, of course’. Similarly, Gandalf expresses his joy when he learns about Frodo´s loyal condition, twice: at Bag End, and in his firm determination to head for Mordor, expressed before the Council of Elrond. But Luke and Frodo could have turned down the proposal, leaving the story to evolve otherwise, in perfectly feasible ways. Yoda´s character gives new light to the study of Luke´s personal evolution. George Lucas has the opinion that a master, teaching from a specific philosophy of life, has a deeper influence than the hero. Yoda came from ancient times, from wiser and more civilised ages. Obi Wan introduces the Jedi lightsaber as ‘an elegant weapon for a more civilized age’. Yoda is WISE and PRUDENT. But he is not on top of everything, past all things. Most importantly, he is not on top of death although -as in the case of Aragorn-, he seems to have chosen the moment of parting from the world. Luke, througout his personal journey, will be increasingly wise and prudent, as well as merciful, just like Frodo. In the end, both are essentially serene characters, full of inner peace. The fight between Luke and the Emperor reveals a key aspect in the underlying conflict that is being held during the decisive scene of The Return of the Jedi. Luke says: ‘your overconfidence is your weakness’, and the Emperor replies ‘your faith in your friends is yours’. In essence, what is at stake is the victory of either humility or the will to enslave –the former being the means of catharsis, that is, purification: all characters grow in the journey of voluntary self-denial –choosing between trusting their own capacities, or questioning them. Both the size of the Empire, or Melkor and Sauron´s huge power, rest upon the void that is at their heart. Evil is but an absence of due being, the vocation of things´ fulfilment denied. It doesn´t exist on its own ground and so, it is not self-suffcient. That is why their final defeat is complete. Good, though seemingly weak –Yoda is a proper example-, is nevertheless powerful because it does not rely in itself, it does not presume a strength it has not. It is self-suspicious of its own strength, relying instead on other elements and instances other than itself, for example on the very idea that is defended, being its force –or in freedom, one of the patterns in The Lord of the Rings. Obi Wan´s death is an example of willing sacrifice in favor of someone else. In real life, the victory of an idea depends on its weakest supporters. The real battle is fought between Luke and the Emperor, not between the cruisers and the ships of the Rebellion; in an even sharper way, doom hangs on an edge while Frodo and Sam climb painstakingly as fragile insects towards the Cracks of Doom, although it would seem that the decisive battle is unfolding in the Pelennor Fields. In Fairyland nothing can be intentionally preserved from the fight. Both Lucas and Tolkien´s worlds illustrate a fact directly drawn from real life. The dilemma the characters are faced with occur, in one case, during Gandalf´s visit to Frodo (The shadow of the past, chapter II of The Fellowship of the Ring) while, on the other case, we find a first stage marked by the initial acquaintance with Ben Kenobi (A New Hope), followed by the progressive improvement of Luke as a Jedi knight (The Empire Strikes Back), and his full maturity (The Return of the Jedi). The scenes in which Luke chats with Yoda show the way a Jedi should mistrust himself in order to rely increasingly in the Force. Yoda is not the great warrior Luke expected to find –‘war makes one not great’, remarks the master when they first meet. In essence, what is required from Luke is an act of faith –a jump-, an element always present in the narrative universe of Lucas (other examples being the Indiana Jones series or Willow). Luke wavers when he must ‘pull’ his ship out of the marsh: ‘I will try’, he says. ‘No’, replies Yoda, ‘do or do not; there is no try’. Luke fails, not because the ship ‘is too big’, but because he lacks faith. ‘You always say it is impossible’, Yoda complains. Only in Luke´s mind is it impossible to move the ship. Yoda answers with the demonstration that judgements should not be founded upon appearances, often misleading. ‘You judge me for my size; it doesn´t matter one´s size’. The Force makes them ‘luminous beings’, and Luke must discover its presence between the rock and the tree, between himself and his master... When the scene is over and Luke´s ship is out of the pond, he says: “I..., I can´t believe it”, but Yoda´s reply is eloquent: ‘Yes; so you failed’. The obstacles are never the problem. We build the trenches within our hearts. Luke can feel the Force but he can not control it. His impatience makes him an easy prey for the dark side (a synonym of ‘wrath, fear, agression’) since ‘there´s much hate in him’ , which is something that the Emperor has already noticed. The dark side of the Force is ‘faster, easier, more seducing’. It will rule forever the destinies of those that allow its victory: it will erase their freedom, turning them into slaves of their own ambition just like the Ring does, gnawing at the will of its bearers. Hence the compassion that Frodo feels for Gollum: he knows first hand the inner struggle that Gollum is going through since he increasingly feels the call to claim the Only Ring as his own. The core evil of the Ring or the Dark Side lies in that they impair their subjects´ capacity to tend towards and to do what is right; they handicap a truly free choice. Ben and Yoda advice Luke to be patient when he determines to save his friends before his training had ended. ‘If you honour what they fight for, you can let them die’. In a sense, Luke wants to become providence for his friends –to control his own personal story as well as his role within the general plot that unfolds before him. He will soon realize the truth. Faced with his determination, the last advice is: ‘Don´t let the hate overcome you’. Another important milestone in Luke´s training as a Jedi is his adventure in the ominous forest where he is compelled by Yoda to enter: ‘You have to enter’. ‘I feel cold, death’, says Luke. Even though he had insisted that he was not afraid, he will see Yoda´s warning become true: ‘You will be’. Luke will find in the woods ‘only what you carry with you’. This scene has a striking resemblance with Galadriel´s Mirror in The Lord of the Rings. Both Frodo and Luke will find within their visions glimpses of things to come, events they do not fully understand. That is, they depend to a great extent on their freedom –that is why the future is constantly changing. Luke faces Vader and eyes his own face inside the torn helmet: his condition of Vader´s offspring, and the possibility of becoming Vader´s alter ego if he is successfully lured by the Dark Side of the Force. Both heroes obtain few clues from their respective visions to solve their enigma: as Galadriel says to Frodo, ‘the Mirror is dangerous as a guide of deeds’. Personal freedom and responsability There is another interesting co-relation between the peculiar sense of providence that pervades both feasible worlds –applicable to some extent to any Fairyland- and each characters´ freedom. The requirements of inner consistency demand that each characters´ freedom remain unquestioned throughout, even though the narrator (Lucas, Tolkien) may play the part of a magician, foreseeing to a certain extent what will happen. In any case, in Tolkien´s instance, his respect for the credibility of The Lord of the Rings led him to write four different endings; the knwon format of the story does not reproduce any of them. There is little general design in a good tale: things flow to their ‘proper’ ends as one of the possibilities contained in the different events and decisions. Just like in real life. Hence, the characters become worthy of praise (the reward that awaited the heroes of ancient Northern Literature, the lofgeornost, lastworda bests with which Beowulf ends, and that encourages Sam to continue when all hope seems to have vanished: their deeds will be worthy of being sung by minstrels in Ages to come); or worthy of punishment, according to their actions. This way of acting allows what Tolkien called ‘the Consolation of the happy ending’. Darth Vader must die, like Boromir: a glorious death fits their requirements as characters. Obviously, the demands of Cinema as entertainment make Han Solo´s death a very unlikely event. Nevertheless, Gandalf dies, like Frodo does, and these events are part of a correct understanding of the work. They are not just simple tricks to push the plot forward. Somehow we expect that everything will be alright while seeing the movies. On the other hand, hope vanishes, leaving no trace, while reading The Lord of the Rings, or the lay of Beren and Lúthien, and especially the story of Túrin Turambar in the Narn i Hîn Húrin, one of the Unfinished Tales. Therefore, the eucatastrophe in the first two instances is all the sharper as it is less expected, while the death of Túrin is fully consistent with the tragic doom that follows the character who is, after all, responsible for all his actions: there is no fatum in Middle-earth. Campbell asserts that DarthVader is uncapable of displaying his free will –in fact, he has become almost a robot-; he rules a totalitarian, standarized system. Even though he has been seduced, he is still free. Each choice carried out is a voluntary act, though mistaken, and therefore he is blameable for it. As a matter of fact, his inner evolution –caused among other reasons by tenderness- reaches its climax with a voluntary good choice before the end (not too late; it never is). Annakin Skywalker-Darth Vader supplies one of the eucatastrophic moments of the story, and his death, already redeemed, represents one more step in Luke´s catharsis as well as in his maturity as a Jedi knight. Luke loses one more support: the future is still wide open and in his hands; he is still free and at the same time the dark side of the Force is still a threat. Every action commits Luke further with his own freedom, and therefore with his personal responsability. So, he always has the possibility of turning back, only now he is at risk of falling deeper into the paths of evil than the Emperor himself, if he chooses to. And this is due to the fact that Luke is now more powerful, that is, more capable of doing what is right, more capable of serving; the risk is to turn this power into vanity. Morgoth and Sauron fall into this same temptation, just like Saruman and Boromir, while Gandalf and Galadriel, faced with the same choice, overcome it. In the duel between Vader and Luke in The Empire Strikes Back, the main argument to tempt Luke is that the Emperor fears him. Consequently, Vader makes him an offer: ‘join me, and with our combined strength we will end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy’ This exemplifies the logic of power: to rule according to one´s own laws. In the same sense, Darth Vader wants to use the Force (as Saruman wants to have the Ring) for his own profit. But that is impossible. We are before the tale of supreme temptation as revealed by Genesis 3, 5 in which what was offered was to have no law but oneself´s: ‘you will be gods’. Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel or Aragorn, all of them characters of a high moral condition and profound wisdom, are precisely because of this, very suspicious of themselves, knowing the consequences that would befall their secondary world should they find the Ring and keep it with the intention of employing it in the service of good. All of them overcome temptation through humility and the service to common good. Luke prefers to jump into the abyss before treasoning the cause that deserves his loyalty. One must do all that is within one´s power, no matter how much, regardless the pain and the most noble feelings –like Luke´s love towards his father and Leia; even if the abyss ahead be unfathomable and chances of being saved seem unlikely. In fairy tales, as in life, there are no certainties: freedom remains unquestioned at all times. And that is why there is hope. When Frodo, speaking of the Ring, says: ‘This Ring! I wish I had never seen the Ring! Why did it come to me? Why was I chosen?’, Gandalf answers: ‘Such questions cannot be answered. You may be sure that it was not for any merit that others do not possess: not for power or wisdom, at any rate. But you have been chosen,and you must therefore use such strength and heart and wits as you have’ . The only guarantee in Fairyland is a somber road plenty of uncertainties. Sméagol-Gollum resembles, in a way, Darth Vader. Ruled by the desire to possess the Ring, he will perform a key role in its destruction, just like Vader in the salvation of Luke from the destructive power of the Emperor. But Gollum is also a character with his moments of mental clarity, glimpses of a joyful past, when he was care free to choose and to go wherever he wanted. The importance of language in fictional worlds There are other links between both narrative worlds. In the first place I will consider the preeminence of made-up languages. These supply feasibility to the stories. In the case of Middle-earth, this aspect is at the heart of Tolkien´s whole outlook. In Tolkien´s mind sub-creation was always subordinated to the suggestive power of words. The Peoples that dwell the secondary world are best understood from the consideration of their own language and separate pasts. As we have said before, for both Tolkien and Lucas, inner consistency is indispensable. In this sense, the phonetic quality, that is, the sound of proper names is a consequence of the close correspondence between the designated objects and their names: Darth Vader, Moff Tarkin, the Death Star; Skywalker, Leia Organa, Obi Wan Kenobi, Yoda Tatooine, Alderaan, Jabba the Hutt, Endor; each people´s language defines their respective role in the story. The harsh language of the Tuskens, the primitive means of communication of the Jawas, simple and naïve, just like the speech of Ewoks. The canned, metal voices of the Empire soldiers, the peaceful diction of Ben Kenobi and Yoda... As far as what Middle-earth is concerned, the intricate linguistic constructions of quenya and sindarin, and the stony, bulky speech of the Naugrim (Dwarves), or the corrupted jargon of the Orcs. A character like C3PO has the priviledge of being able to speak practically all the languages of the galaxy, in a fictional world that compels us to accept the existence of humanized robots capable of communication. On the other hand, Tolkien pointed out as a differential trait of fairy tales the satisfaction of desires unattainable for human beings: to fly as birds, communicate with other human beings or swim like fish through ocean beds. Radagast the Wizard is a good instance of this human desire that finds Consolation within Middle-earth, since he is able to understand the language of different wild life. Mythical scenery and the respect of Nature We must make a commentary on the way Nature is dealt with in these fictions. Star Wars does not focus on the cosmic scenario where the story unfolds. Nature is presented as a hostile or warm environment, often simplified to specific landscapes: ice or sand deserts, wastelands, asteroids, thick forests, marshes. In Tolkien´s world the number of connotations that emerge from Nature is bigger. Its sole presence often triggers a wide range of reactions that go from joy to despair. Oppresive environments (Mordor, Isengard, the Shire raded by Sharkey-Saruman), places filled with a wounding melancholic beauty (Lothlórien, Rivendell), abrupt landscapes (Helm, the Rauros falls, Mount Caradhras) are fine examples of a personification of Nature which reaches ontological traits in Middle-earth. As opposed to an idealized sense of Nature, or Nature presented in a more or less pure state, the machine projects a shadow of absence of humanity, that is, a lack of individual personality. We already mentioned it when we dealt with Vader. But we can also find it in the atrezzo that comes along with the Empire: the soldiers have nothing that could be called an individual countenance, just like the Black Riders. Everything follows a pattern according to the guidelines of a will to domain that uses fear and deception; a will to enslave (as opposed to the echo of those words in the Scripture: ‘The Truth will make you free’ John 8, 32), that inspires Leia´s words to Tarkin: ‘The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers’. The Free Peoples or the Rebellion contain the traits that define what is Right in the mythical universes. Apparently, they have little power, but that is not an obstacle for them to muster an unbreakable resistence that rests upon the strength and perseverance that lie at the heart of truth and freedom. Barad-dûr and the Death Star stand for this view of a nameless machine-like vision. Similarly, if to a lesser extent, Isengard and its progressive, lamentable corruption in Tolkien´s secondary world. Briefly, even though it might be an oversimplified definition, what is at stake is a confrontation between two elements: Technology vs. Force; Corruption vs. Nature. Good, Evil and Hope: Manicheism rejected As in any traditional tale, the oposition between good and evil is one of the patterns of the narrative, but not the pattern. One of the means to present this conflict is the disproportion of sizes. Bad overwhelms, its dimensions are unfathomable, so that the joy of eucatastrophe is always sharp, just like the joy of regained hope in real life. Some eucatastrophic moments are, for example: the destruction of the Death Stars; the unexpected presence of Obi Wan in the final assault, and after; Han and Luke´s encounter in the frozen wasteland; or Han Solo´s rescue. From the very onset of the Star Wars saga, we find this contrast of sizes: the imperial cruiser that runs down the small consular ship; the huge Death Star; the enormous Star Destroyer in The Empire Strikes Back that make the cruisers seem like common fighters. The corresponding instances in Middle-earth could be Sauron´s armies in the Fields of Cormallen; the fortress of Barad-dûr; or the Nazgûl´s presence throughout. We do glimpse the joy that will come with final victory –although this is never complete-, but we ignore the way the challenges will be overcome. What we do know with painful certainty is that we will find suffering along the way. In Fairyland, hope is always hanging from a thin, stubborn thread. I want to point out that all good fairy tales present this struggle with all the different shades and tones inherent to the real life confrontation between good and evil: there is not a good-bad simplification –since that could mine credibility to the mythical universes-; on the contrary, the author strives to present the inner struggle that each character must suffer, with the aim of depicting the key role of freedom, and of showing in what mysterious ways is free will preserved to choose without violence. Boromir and Frodo´s dispute at Amon Hen are two good instances , as in the case of the evolution of Darth Vader in Star Wars. The Trilogy is suitable of a further observation. The Empire´s nazi style expresses a totalitarian conception of power, held through terror –‘Fear will keep the local systems in line’, asserts Tarkin faced with the threat of a general revolt. This conception seems to be a bit oversimplified, since Middle-earth has not such a flat parallel. History and Tradition The importance of history and tradition is shown in both mythic worlds through a sort of a flashback technique: small pieces of a mosaic depict, little by little, the big tapestry that lies behind the plot. Obi Wan speaks about the Clone Wars, that happened many years before, when ‘for over a thousand generations the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic, before the dark times, before the Empire’. Behind the veil of actual story, we glimpse a world which is a consequence of its own ancient memory. In Middle-earth this impression of a deeper backdrop which is present throughout, is rooted in the existence of three previous Ages to the one in which The Lord of the Rings takes place. This historical frame answers the questions posed by present times. It is in this framework where each character will discover its role, a personal and untransferable one, to keep the fire of hope burning. Some characters as Obi Wan, Yoda, Gandalf or Elrond become bearers of the memories of a past from afar: they preserve the explanatory memory of the present, which makes them capable to foresee the future –though ‘always moving the future is’, as Yoda asserts: freedom makes impossible the prediction of what is yet to come. Yoda will show his surprise later on as he realizes that Vader has told Luke that he is his father –‘unexpected’, he says. The same can be said of Sméagol, whose actions turn decisive before the end, as Gandalf had foreseen, though he ignored the actual manner in which his guess would be fulfilled. Are fairy tales ‘kids´ stuff’? A few more words before the end: are fairy tales ‘kids´ stuff’? Whatever they may be, are children the main readers of tales? It is clear that this is not the place to argue at length on such a complex notion. However, I will make a brief comment on the notion of ‘child’, as explained by Tolkien in his essay On Fairy Stories (pages 33 to 44). George Lucas holds a similar conception of what fairy tales are, judging from the ethical coincidences that both fictional worlds share. ‘If fairy-story as a kind is worth reading at all it is worthy to be written for and read by adults. They will, of course, put more in and get more out than children can’ . This despective opinion about fairy tales as ‘childish’ implies a pejorative vision on children, precisely from the point of view of what is one of the most beautiful virtues of childhood: inocence, the approach to Truth of any kind without prejudices. Childhood means a longing for the pure wisdom. Chesterton had written that children are demanding, since they judge the consistency of actions in fiction according to a sense of justice unaffected by an adult´s tendency to mercy –the way they do in real life. Above all, children want to know, to learn, rather than understand in a rationalistic sense. From this point of view, ‘childhood’ loses its purely chronological connotations. As Tolkien said: ‘fairy-stories should not be specially associated with children. They are associated with them: naturally, because children are human and fairy-stories are a natural human taste (though not necessarily a universal one)’ . Not every tale shall delight every single boy or girl, nor does the main key lie on an individual´s age. It might be fairer to accept that a taste for this literary genre depends on preserving a childlike heart: a brave and just spirit, tough and open to the challenges of truth. Everyday life becomes in this way a fairy tale itself, since each one´s existence is the battlefield where those challenges must be conquered. Down the road, fairy tales give us the Consolation, the echo of what is not yet, but surely will be. Meanwhile, we long for it with all our hearts; as Children do. -----signature----- Totus Tuus
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
rogue11lovesjag Registered: Jun '02	Date Posted: 2/19/03 7:26pm Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	I'm not sure that it was actually the PT era, as much as it was just the opportunity for stories outside what you saw. There are an infinite amount of stories that Tolkien could tell in the Lord of the Rings, and there are infinite amount of stories that you could tell in the Star Wars universe, and that it's those stories, which we find interest in that's the attraction. ~Rogue -----signature----- Carrolé, Handmaiden of the Crest! Give me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change The courage to change the things I can And the wisdom to hide the bodies of everyone who ruins my ships.
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Ternian Registered: May '00	Date Posted: 2/20/03 2:53am Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	But does the PT lack the 'idea' of larger history? -----signature----- "Their people are suffering, Master Jedi! I must return." - Lady Amidala - RRM, Episode III --------------------------------------------------------------- This weeks X-Site! is... http://www.jedicenter.com.br/
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Oscar_the_Gungan Registered: Jan '01	Date Posted: 2/20/03 8:37am Subject: RE: Tolkein Vs. Galactic History
	Anyone interested should check out the visual dictionaries. what is interesting to me about those is David West Reynolds, who writes all the text in the books, is an archealogist and he uses those skills to come up with all sorts of history behind the props, costumes, vehicles and locations. He puts those items through the same scrutiny as if he was investigating items found at a dig site. Granted this isn't the same as if Lucas wrote a history of the galaxy, it does give us little bits of facts to fill in the gaps a bit. Those books have answered a lot of questions I had while watching the films. I don't know if this helps with the questions people are having, but I recommend those books alot. -----signature----- I'm open for business, business of giving you the business," Meatwad Harold:"The universe tends to unfold as it should." Star Wars is forever, the Force will be with you .... always!
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

Jedi Council Forums » Star Wars Films » Star Wars Saga