Lit Do you like the new canon?

Pros of the New Canon:
Vader/Anakin
The Vader and Star Wars comics,
Dr Aphra
Kylo Ren
The First Order as a faction of followers of the Original Empire like the Neo Nazis
Snoke
Kanan and the Rebels show
Rogue One
Thrawn is canon
The Aftermatch Trilogy
The Clone Wars show is canon (I do not like the show but I have to put it on)

Cons of the New Canon:
All the Old Republic lore is not canon now
The Lightsaber Crystals
Ahsoka with to much protagonism
Luke never founded a new Jedi Order
Leia is still a General
The Resistance
There was never another big conflict in the post ROTJ era the last great battle was the war of Jakku where the Empire surrendered
Vader met Boba Fett during OT and not before
The new Mandalorians
Jango and Boba are not Mandalorians
Rey is very powerful to the point that she defeated Kylo Ren in his first encounter
Han Solo like an old failure
Kyle Katarn, Dash Rendar and Mara Jade are not canon
The Canon version of Quinlan Vos is awful and Asajj Ventress is a good girl now

 

But that doesn't mean they'll never be canon again. They're already bringing back Old Republic stuff. Hell, we saw Hammerhead corvettes in Rogue One!

What do you mean by this?

Yes he did. It just failed miserably.

Vader, as Anakin Skywalker, met Boba Fett during the Clone Wars.

...Are almost entirely destroyed. The Mandalorians have basically all gone back to clans and houses.

After he was shot in the chest with a Wookie bowcaster.

Ventress isn't a good girl. She had a good moment where she sacrificed herself for Vos.

 

I'd put the Luke's JO in the "con" column to. But more for the "but we never got to actually SEE any of it, they all died offscreen, and now they've regressed him back to being the last Jedi again, and he's a bitter old man moping on some island" reasons.

As for Ventress, my issue with that is that I don't think that her death was well-handled at all, and it felt very unnecessary.

 

The NJO is purged in the EU but much later and to a much lesser extent. With the NuCanon it was only around for 20-30 years and then everything is reset to 19 BBY.

 

Both of those are fair. My point was mostly that those were either non-issues or just incorrect.

 

While I like Dark Disciple I wish they didn't give Ventress and Vos complete redemption.

I get why they were fully redeemed but they are far more interesting as anti-heroes.

 

Hmm. "I dislike the new canon because it invalidated the old canon". I don't find that holds up well at all as an argument. It encourages us to close the blast doors on anything new at all.
Nevertheless, it's probably the commonest and most frequently cited.

I don't really care about a reset button either way - the problem is when you keep hitting that button continuously - then it just becomes fragmented and discontinuous, a la Star Trek or some other 'non-serialized' fiction.
And Star Wars, it seems, really starts to become rote and uninteresting when it loses a wide band continuity. A good example of this would be the old EU bantam years vs. the NJO - consider that the earlier books were "villain of the week" stories, whereas the NJO was string continuity with an emphasis on character development.

This is why I'd much rather have had cameos only for the OT characters in TFA - I hope this re-asserts itself in TLJ.

The issue is a lot of people ask for new ideas in SW then suddenly back track and regret it and they have this bizarre sour aftertaste of the PT which I can't really level with - "Come up with something new! Wait! Stop! No, I take it back! Stop coming up with new things! Stop it!" ...

 

The NuCanon isn't bad because it's different; I'm just apathetic towards it b/c it doesn't continue the previous story. I'm sure the new novels are good. I'm just not interested.

 

So you respect the novels for being good, but you find them uninteresting?

Where would you have had the new novels pick up? Remember they would have been inheriting an EU which was really quite divisive by 2013/14.

 

Legacy, Old Republic era, original Clone Wars era. Tell me when they start making stories in those eras and I'll read them.

 

NuCanon isn't bad because it's different, but because it's worse different in many ways. Look at the discussion of what Marvel has done to Leia in the Han and Leia thread. She is now a sociopath who disregards Luke's life to kill Vader, is physically abusive to Han, verbally abusive, and has a condescending behavior to Luke: "Are you going to make me regret it?" when reminded about Luke's comforting words, threatening to take Luke back to Tatooine, etc.

Han is now a smuggler who gambles with the Rebellion's money and really lost what moral fiber he had in the EU. And people thought Greedo shooting first was bad?

Some of these story decisions don't even seem to make sense from a business perspective. Hobbie was a major character in the EU X-Wing subfranchise, and they introduced him in Rebels in new canon. Then he's unceremonially said to be killed at Hoth in a throwaway line in a reference book in new canon. These aren't decisions that are made for the best use of story, or for best use of marketing even. It's just to be different from the EU for the sake of it.

Many people aren't complaining about the new canon because they want the EU back. They're complaining about it because a lot of aspects just aren't good--they are not thought out. Dr. Cylo and his clones are another example.

 

I can more readily forgive those sort of weaknesses on the grounds that they aren't being put out there with heavy-handed, unilateral agency. They seem genuinely interested in making use of the creative license rather than manipulating it needlessly for some peculiar end (think Denningverse). So depending on your view, they are taking it in a direction that's uninteresting for you, or you find it really interesting, you keep reading etc.

It really shows when the creative process gets messed up at the editorial/authorial end - that's sad. I hope it doesn't happen with Disney's efforts here and in future.
You can forgive a film for playing the market etc. That's old news. But novels really should put in a peg above all that.

I don't think there is the commitment to the novels that we've seen in the past, because they're being written mostly as supplementary material - I hate to sound pessimistic but the EU as we loved it was really a product of timing; the state SW was in at the time creatively. I don't think it will come around again any time soon given that we've got a ST. The novels of the old EU were carrying story all by themselves. These newer novels have the help of the films, and so they're going to be inherently less important, arguably weaker.

 

I disagree about the importance - see Guardians of the Whills or Princess of Alderaan, two top books. Both can be seen as supporting the films, but each also works very well on its own.

Now if you meant plot importance, of having big events in books that cannot be ignored then yes, those days are probably gone.

 

Oh I think it's absolutely about timing and how Star Wars was at the time

 

The books still have an effect though.

If you watch RO without having read Catalyst for instance it'll seem fine, however, with Catalyst added you see Krennic reduce as a villain once Vader and Tarkin are on the stage far more.

 

They have a sense of depth which, of course, is great.

Story wise, however, the films are leading the way, the books obediently follow, throwing in some great characters and intriguing sub plots along the way. This would have been the case with Legends if Lucas had done a ST instead of PT. But he didn't, and we got the old EU as it stands. I'd call that luck (if you believe in such things ).

 

The truth is that when you've experienced the highs of the EU, seeing Han and Leia's kids grow from babies to adults, literally witnessing the rise of a New Jedi Order, and seeing multiple HUGE galaxy changing conflicts play out, even with all the lows the EU had towards the end it's hard not to feel like the NuCanon is a let down. When you opened up an EU book you did feel this sense of it being part of some grand tapestry, now it feels like I'm opening up a corporate product.

I know that isn't fair to the NuCanon or many of its fine authors, but it is simply hard to reinvest yourself and essentially start over from ground zero. One thing I would like to see explored once TLJ and maybe IX is out is this question: Are Luke, Han, and Leia fundamentally DIFFERENT characters in the NuCanon vs. the old? Were they different characters in the EU then they were in the OT? Has our judgement of what those characters are been warped by the dozens of novels we read featuring them in their later years? Is Kylo Ren's story more compelling then Jacen's? These are the kinds of contrasts and comparisons that I think would be really interesting to talk about---that aren't being talked about right now.

 

I was hoping no when the reboot was announced, but it seems now that the answer is yes. And in regards to stuff like Han gambling with the Rebellion's money in new canon comics and Leia being verbally and physically abusive to Han in the new canon, none of which were really indicated in the OT--I'm going to say the OT characterizations from the old Legends EU novels, classic newspaper comics etc in this timeframe got the characters right. It's the new canon stuff that's getting it wrong, for no reason other than a desire to be different than what came before, ignoring that what came before had a strong basis firmly rooted in the films.

Luke might be a bit similar, but TFA Luke--I just can't see the EU Luke going hermit when the galaxy's in trouble. I know in the Black Fleet Crisis EU Luke did the same, but the galaxy wasn't in an obvious crisis at the time.

 

Each 'crisis of the week' in those 90s novels was presented as just that - a galaxy spanning crisis. Otherwise, where is the dramatic tension?

Darth Droid makes the good point of re-highlighting that the criticisms of the New Canon are overwhelmingly comparative. They are evaluating worth based on what has come before (i.e. they are really just proclaiming disappointment). Whereas true criticism will take a mixture of comparison and evaluation of the merits of the novel/film as a piece of art/entertainment in its own right.

SW novels don't have any primacy any more, for that, we may have to wait until after the ST is settled and sorted.

 

My opinion is that people who judge 20 years of STAR WARS against a few years of it don't get to cherry pick.

No, you don't get to judge The Thrawn Trilogy, Shatterpoint, and Rogue Squadron versus the new stuff unless you ALSO judge it with Waru, Hoojibs, and Saba murdering the Grand Master while Jacen Solo kills Mara.

 

Waru, Hoojibs, and Saba were attempts to take risks with material. Yes, many of these risk attempts fell flat, but that is the point of risks. By their very nature many of them will fail.

Starting with TFA, it seems the new canon is trying to play it safe (desert planet, Palpatine 2.0, no new Jedi so Luke can be last Jedi again, Han back to smuggling, etc). When judging the worst of the new canon (abusive Leia as a distortion of what was in the OT, Han gambling with Rebel money because they think this is how he was in the OT despite Rieekan's high regard for him) with the worst of the EU, there's the fact that the worst of the EU did try to do something different. Waru, etc. The worst of the new canon is giving fans what the writers think is what they want, playing it safe, and still getting it wrong.

Even if I dislike the worst elements of the EU, I still applaud them for trying to be different (same with George and his prequels). I'm not sure I can say the same for the worst of new canon.

 

People really need to define what "taking risks" and "be different" mean because right now it's just "whatever I want them to be". The new comics and Rebels have some crazy things (good or bad) going on in them but apparently none of this matter for some people, they're not "taking risks" or "be different" enough.

 

I would define risk taking as treading into new timeframes. The books and comics taking place in the OT timeframe, which has been covered in media for 40 years, is about as far from risktaking as you can get. How many times do we need to see the gang in the aftermath of Yavin? Who was badgering to see this? The only reason this was done was for Marvel to market to a mainstream audience.

Battlefront 1 (new) did not even have a single campaign! There are no games like KOTOR and Jedi Academy expanding the timeframe. This is what I'm talking about!

The Ahsoka novel was about as close to venturing away from "safe" timeframes as we got so far. Maybe Bloodline too.

 

So, what? Just say "**** the OT, we're going 6000 years into the future where everyone is dead and just messing about"? Lose any relation they have with the audience, squandering the license, and molding Star Wars into something entirely different?

I don't care if something is different or innovative. I care that it's good. And what I've seen so far is pretty good, even if it isn't especially innovative.

 

What I've seen so far isn't good--the damage to Leia and Han's characters: I've written about this in other posts, I'll requote one here:

I was hoping no when the reboot was announced, but it seems now that the answer is yes. And in regards to stuff like Han gambling with the Rebellion's money in new canon comics and Leia being verbally and physically abusive to Han in the new canon, none of which were really indicated in the OT--I'm going to say the OT characterizations from the old Legends EU novels, classic newspaper comics etc in this timeframe got the characters right. It's the new canon stuff that's getting it wrong, for no reason other than a desire to be different than what came before, ignoring that what came before had a strong basis firmly rooted in the films.

Again on why the new canon I feel isn't good, detailed arguments:

NuCanon isn't bad because it's different, but because it's worse different in many ways. Look at the discussion of what Marvel has done to Leia in the Han and Leia thread. She is now a sociopath who disregards Luke's life to kill Vader, is physically abusive to Han, verbally abusive, and has a condescending behavior to Luke: "Are you going to make me regret it?" when reminded about Luke's comforting words, threatening to take Luke back to Tatooine, etc.

Han is now a smuggler who gambles with the Rebellion's money and really lost what moral fiber he had in the EU. And people thought Greedo shooting first was bad?

Some of these story decisions don't even seem to make sense from a business perspective. Hobbie was a major character in the EU X-Wing subfranchise, and they introduced him in Rebels in new canon. Then he's unceremonially said to be killed at Hoth in a throwaway line in a reference book in new canon. These aren't decisions that are made for the best use of story, or for best use of marketing even. It's just to be different from the EU for the sake of it.

Many people aren't complaining about the new canon because they want the EU back. They're complaining about it because a lot of aspects just aren't good--they are not thought out. Dr. Cylo and his clones are another example.

I am providing detailed arguments on why I feel the new canon so far is lacking. Very detailed. I guess there are just differences of opinion here, we are all obviously reading the same material but I don't feel it is good.