FAQ Proposal: Expanded Universe Fallacy Debunkation

The entire Boba Fett/Jaster Mereel issue will most likely be cleared up with the new Boba Fett books coming out, the Jango Fett: Open Seasons comics (which explain what happen to Jaster), and we may even see him in Episode III. And don't forget the possibility that, with all of these sources coming out that begin to form Boba's backstory, a novel may be published (or something of the sort) that chronicle his life.

In other words, the Boba Fett backstory has just recently begun to be revealed, and I'm sure that the future holds the whole truth of it..


Ken Kenobi- And you have a nice day

 

I think this is a great idea, Leto. Excellent work once again, and the sooner we see this, the better.

 

Thanks, DVader. I think it'll really fill a niche that's been vacant for quite a while.

I'm reposting this particular explanation for the whole "Lucas/Zahn/Coruscant" ménage à trois issue; it's probably the favorite out of all the ones I've written, and can easily serve as a nice little template for those seeking to set the record straight in other forums:

In Lucas and Kasdan's original concepts for Had Abbadon, the planet was to have been the Imperial capital, but with several substantial differences from Timothy Zahn's Coruscant: there would have been many smaller cities (along Terran lines, in other words), spread out across the planet; and with the planet itself being, in the words of the Revised Second Draft of Revenge of the Jedi, "a polluted, brown planet," and "shrouded in a sickly brown haze."

Timothy Zahn, on the other hand, given carte blanche by Lucas to contribute to the Star Wars universe more or less as he personally saw fit, envisioned an Imperial throneworld along the lines of the Asimovian "Trantor"-model: the entire planet's surface one enormous, gleaming, continuous city, and thus graced it with the fitting appellation of "Coruscant," in Heir to the Empire.

George Lucas could have very easily gone in the other direction, and used the earlier Had Abbadon concepts, but instead (and perhaps this was his intent all along) recognized the validity of Mr. Zahn's contributions in this area to his greater vision, and ran with the ball.

 

Whether or Not Dark Empire Contradicts Lucas's "Balance of the Force" Philosophy

I think we're going to have to wait to see what Lucas actually means by "balancing the force."

It could be:

-Killing Palpatine in RotJ

-Killing off all the extra Jedi

-Saving Luke in RotJ, thus preserving the future Jedi Generation


The only explanation that doesn't jive well with the EU is the first one

 

I think that -- for this particular entry -- we're going to have to list the various possible interpretations of what "Balancing the Force" truly means, because pretty much everybody has their own 0.02 wupiupi to add to the debate. Having as many quotations from George Lucas himself to augment the section's arguments would be terrific; what might also be handy to mention somewhere in there is the fact that Lucas himself completely altered his original concepts of the Sith Order when he wrote The Phantom Menace, meaning that what he said in 1983 doesn't exactly jive as well with his comments circa 1999.

 

My personal theory on balancing the Force is that just because you balance something doesn't mean it can't get unbalanced again later.

 

This is an exceelent idea, Leto!

I shall pore over my books and see if there are any things I can add to help create this stock of EU validating information.

 

Wanted to add in two more areas of controversy for the list:

• The Founding of the Rebel Alliance (Bail Organa, Mon Mothma, Garm Bel Iblis, the Cantham House Meetings, and Episode III)
• The "Lost Twenty" Revisionism (Twenty Jedi versus Twenty Jedi Masters)

 

Fantastic idea, Leto, and I would like to add another issue to the list:

The EU turning Luke into a spineless lapdog of Mara.