Dooku's a DARK JEDI MASTER!? And he's a Sith too!

...the same author who just wrote the TPM-AotC "bridge" novel, The Approaching Storm.

Alan Dean Foster Novels - Star Wars (As George Lucas)

Alan Dean Foster FAQ

IS IT TRUE YOU GHOST-WROTE THE FIRST STAR WARS BOOK?

Yes.

 

A novelization based on the script. I know you're not going to tell me that ADF came up with the term "Sith".

 

It doesn't matter who came up with it. The term was used in a non-movie source first, which means any so-called movie purists should not have known of the term before TPM's release, which makes it EU.

 

Just because you disagree with it doesn't mean it's not correct.

Very well said. If only you'd apply that to what you say and think too.

 

Bib...
"It doesn't matter who came up with it. The term was used in a non-movie source first, which means any so-called movie purists should not have known of the term before TPM's release, which makes it EU."

You don't even have to carry it that far. You don't even have to talk about EU or canon or anything.

That means anyone who only saw the OT films wouldn't/shouldn't know Darth Vader was a Sith. However, Darth Vader was a Sith.

Count Dooku's Dark Jedi status is no different.

 

Let's start over, because this is becoming an excersise in semantics and definitions and worse, a canon debate. The original question was why "Sith" is accepted and "Dark Jedi" isn't, since according to your definiton, they are both EU. The answer is, because "Sith" was from Lucas and "Dark Jedi" is not. Agree or disagree, that's the reason. So the definition of what is and isn't EU is irrelevent for the purposes of this discussion if we word it like that.

 

You're missing Genghis' point, PB:

That means anyone who only saw the OT films wouldn't/shouldn't know Darth Vader was a Sith. However, Darth Vader was a Sith.

Count Dooku's Dark Jedi status is no different.

 

It's different for two reasons.

1) Lucas made up the term Sith
2) The word Sith was stated in a later film

 

Read the post again:

That means anyone who only saw the OT films wouldn't/shouldn't know Darth Vader was a Sith. However, Darth Vader was a Sith.

 

2) The word Sith was stated in a later film

For agrument sake, I'd agree that in the most strict definition of Canon, Sith was EU until TPM.

So can we consider "Dark Jedi" EU until it shows up in a movie?

 

You just answered your own question, MetallicPea. Until it is in a movie, it is EU.

 

Right. Same as Coruscant. EU until in a movie. DOesn't change the fact that it was EU first though.

I think the CCG card on the first page is ample proof enough that LFL considers Dooku a Dark Jedi AND a Sith.

 

MetallicPea :

2) The word Sith was stated in a later film

For agrument sake, I'd agree that in the most strict definition of Canon, Sith was EU until TPM.

So can we consider "Dark Jedi" EU until it shows up in a movie?

Bib Fortuna, Twi'lek :

You just answered your own question, MetallicPea. Until it is in a movie, it is EU.


Great.

Seven pages to end to this.

It was damn long.



Well, there are only 20 Jedi who have ever resigned their commissions in the modern age of the Jedi Order, that's post-Sith War (rule of two, Darth Bane, etc) 2000 years pre-TPM. That's trivia I got off of those Jedi Fruit Rolls, but that's the wording they used - "resigned their commissions" and "modern age," defined as after the fall of the Sith, 2K yrs before the PT.

Lord Bane, You keep saying that the Sith were defated two thousand years ago. Ahem, I thought that war did happen only ONE thousand years ago, not two.

And err... this point about "modern age" of the Jedi is interesting.

Anyway, banned Jedi aren't counted as lost. So even in the modern age of the Jedi Order, some Jedi may have been banned by the Order and then turned to the dark side.

 

Wasnt Vader refered to as Sith in the original ANH scripts?

 

Yes he was, but he was never referred to as a Sith on-screen, so the term was EU until TPM came out.

 

CA : "And the ANH novelization is EU."

Absolutely not.

Actually, it has been reclassified as EU. Look under any movie character in the databank. Then click on the "Expanded Universe" section of their bio...It's almost always information that was exclusively in the novelizations.

That is why Owen Lars is now no longer Obi-Wan's brother. If the novelizations were "true canon", then it would be a supreme contradiction by Lucas to avoid using that.

Mister_Oragahn : Lord Bane, You keep saying that the Sith were defated two thousand years ago. Ahem, I thought that war did happen only ONE thousand years ago, not two.

See my note on this from page 1 or 2. The battle with the current Sith Order lasted for two thousand years.

 

Commander Antilles...
"...novelization is EU...

Absolutely not.

Good, I'm glad you feel that way about the novellizations. The following is from the TPM novellization. You are of the belief that the novellizations are not EU. How do you respond to the following...

"The Sith had come into being almost two thousand years ago. They were a cult given over to the dark side of the Force, embracing fully the concept that power denied was power wasted...He was alone at first, but others from the Jedi order who believed as he did and who had followed him in his study of the dark side soon came over. Others were recruited, and soon the ranks of the Sith swelled to more than fifty in number." (The Phantom Menace, Terry Brooks, p. 135)

1. The Sith are a cult given over to the dark side of the Force who fully embrace the concept that power denied was power wasted.

What does one call someone given over to the dark side of the Force who has not fully embraced the concept that power denied was power wasted? That person is NOT a Sith. That person is also NOT a Jedi, Jedi have no connection to any belief - either partial or full - that holds power denied is power wasted.

2. What does one make of someone who believes - either fully or partially - that power denied was power wasted, yet is not a part of the Sith cult. They are NOT Sith, because Sith as of 2,000 prior to ANH were a specific cult.

3. What does one make of someone who has given themselves to the Dark Side that is not part of the Sith cult. They are NOT Sith, because Sith as of 2,000 years prior to ANH were a specific cult.

4. What does one make of someone who has given themselves to the Dark Side, yet has no belief regarding the concept of power and/or the denial of power. They are NOT Sith, because Sith have given themselves to the Dark Side and believe fully that power denied was power wasted.

5. There were more than FIFTY Sith. That number was an unknown quantity of former Jedi. It could be all 19 outside of Dooku who left the order and became Sith, or it could have been 10 or five. We know it was at least 3 of the "Fallen 20" - if such a group actually exists. The initial Jedi who left to start the Sith cult and the others (plural, at least two more) who quickly joined him.

Therefore, aside from the original Sith cultist, what does one call his two to 19 Jedi cohorts prior to their initiation into the Sith cult. Remember...
1. They ARE/WERE Jedi.
2. They HAVE given themselves over to the Dark Side.

6. Now, speaking of the non-Jedi who joined up with these three, what does one call them prior to their initiation into the Sith cult. These are people who...
A. Are NOT former Jedi.
B. HAVE given themselves over to the Dark Side.

Hopefully, you won't simply give in and cry "But the movie adaptation is EU!" While it's fun to watch, I hate to have to see anyone change their opinions on my account.

But, we don't even need to bring the EU into it at all to know what the only answers are...

1. The Jedi who turned were "dark" Jedi, or "evil Jedi," or "bad Jedi." As in...

Dark Jedi: Hey, you original Sith cultist, I want to join.
Darth Original: Why do you think I should let you join?
Dark Jedi: Because I'm an evil freakin' Jedi, that's why.
Darth Original: Have you embraced the Dark Side?
Dark Jedi: Yes.
Darth Original: Do you fully embrace the idea that power denied is power wasted?
Dark Jedi: Yes.
Darth Original: You are now a Sith. You shall be known from this day forward as Darth One.

2. The non-Jedi who came to join them were "darksiders" or "followers of the Dark Side" or "users of the Dark Side." As in...

Darksider: Hey, you evil Jedi...
Darth Original, Darth One and Darth Two in unison: Call us Sith.
Darksider: Hey, you Sith, I want to join your cult.
Darth Original: Have you embraced the Dark Side.
Darksider: Yes.
Darth Original: Have you fully embraced the idea that power denied is power wasted?
Darksider: Yes.
Darth Original: You are now a Sith. You shall

 

Darth Sin, you have made the most sense out of anybody in this post.

 

Great research, Genghis. Way to trap PB in his own web of logic.

 

You just answered your own question, MetallicPea. Until it is in a movie, it is EU.

I will grant you that if you agree that "Dark Jedi" will always be EU .

 

Have I ever said otherwise?

 

Remember, it's good to inform.

All we are asking is that certain people open their mind to the idea of Count Dooku and Anakin Skywalker alternately being called "Dark Jedi", in addition to "Sith Lord"'s, if one chooses to do so.

The fact that the term itself is EU isn't really relevant.

 

Well, actually, watching only the OT movies would lead one to believe that Vader was a Dark Jedi rather than a Sith:

"A young Jedi named Darth Vader...Vader was seduced by the dark side of the Force."

"The Jedi are extinct. Their fire has gone out of the universe. You, my friend, are all that's left of their religion."

 

Are you people braindamaged or just posting on autopilot? I said several posts ago that I don't care what your definition of EU is. Call the script EU if you want. That's a load of crap, but if it makes the non-Lucas EU seem more validated to you then fine. But understand that everyone else thinks of EU as "not of Lucas" and that's why they accept "Sith" and not "Dark Jedi". It's a simple as that.

And to me, the novel is EU, except the parts justified on the screen, so Genghis12's diatribe is wasted on me.

 

Bib...
Thanks.

Sturm...
"All we are asking is that certain people open their mind to the idea of Count Dooku and Anakin Skywalker alternately being called "Dark Jedi", in addition to "Sith Lord"'s, if one chooses to do so."
...and hopefully we're asking in a manner that can get a goo dlaugh out of everyone.

Bib...
Yes, the OT PROOF of the existence of Dark Jedi cannot be denied. That in fact is the only logical manner to accept the film evidence from those who saw it when it was released and up through the release of ROTJ.

One does not get from either of those statements proving Dark Jedi...
"Gee, we've heard about Obi-Wan Kenobi, a Jedi Knight. We know they were an order destroyed by one of their own. We've seen that Vader was thought to be the last one. That can only mean...

...

...there exists some new organization of evil guys calling themselves something which Lucas never tells us... hmmmm... I'm getting a picture of an 's' in my mind. 'Sith!' Yes, Darth Vader must be a Sith!"

That is not common sense. That is rather an exercise in surrealism.