I'm sure I've said this before, but...

Something said in this thread made me think...

There's a difference of methodology here between two groups of fanboys - for (some) people like myself, "continuity" is the aggregate of all the EU material, including the paradoxes; for (other) people, a fiat or firman from George or his appointed agents can override the actual 'story' material and impose a clear-cut 'truth'...

For instance, for them, the phrase "the evil Galactic Empire" in the ANH crawl means that the Empire is inherrently evil, whereas for us, the Empire is simply, and can only ever be, an aggregate of the actions of its citizens...

Not that those two POVs are necessarily mutually exclusive, but I suspect this difference underlines a lot of disagreement on these boards, including people's attitudes to the Force...

Oh, and, Myrkr=Yuuzhan'tar?

- The Imperial Ewok

EDIT-Removed names, so as not to focus on specific users

 

I was disappointed to find this wasn't a conspiracy theory thread... until I read the last sentence.

 

Once again, I'm enraged at McEwok for depriving me of my deserved holodeck.

And I think he did throw that line in just so he could keep up a streak of never starting a topic without a crazy theory.

 

I'm with you and Killfire. I don't see how something GL says in an interview or Sue Rostoni says can override something in print.

 

I'm with you and Killfire. I don't see how something GL says in an interview or Sue Rostoni says can override something in print.

Ummmm, because that's the way it works*?

* -- only for George...

 

Have you said this before?

Count me in - if George Lucas or his underlings are given the word to dispute something in print, it's because they're trying to cover over a mess up.

Oh, and, Myrkr=Yuuzhan'tar?

The question mark implies that either a) you're looking for reaffirmation of your own theory or b) you're not quite sure what you're talking about.

Which is it? Or is it something else entirely?

And I think he did throw that line in just so he could keep up a streak of never starting a topic without a crazy theory.

Mmm...

 

* -- only for George...

Technically not even for George, unless he puts it in a movie, book, comics, story, cartoon, etc.

 

Sue Rostini's VIP thread (on the official forums) also holds considerable weight with EU retconning.

 

Technically not even for George, unless he puts it in a movie, book, comics, story, cartoon, etc.

Not true.

All George has to do is speak, and it is thus.

That is the nature of the G-canon...

 

It's as McEwok says, for some the sources have pretty much equal value and are read according to their literal continuity; others imagine the movies at the privileged heart of Star Wars and the overall symbolism is more important to them. It's to do with how we think about art, and which parts of Star Wars have mana and emotional attachment for us. This is far from a stereotyped 'completist' vs 'purist' thing; Lucas Licensing's own position is much closer to the Lucascentric one than some of the people on this board.

For myself, the Empire is a mythological entity that is the subjugation of all processes to a single egotistical will, the running down of the universe into something like Philip Dick's Black Iron Prison. So interpreting it as the aggregate of its elements in the EU seems to totally miss the wood for the trees. There you go!

 

All George has to do is speak, and it is thus.

He should have to put it in a book, movie, or other form.

That is the nature of the G-canon...

It's stupid that if he is in a bad mood about the EU he could say that it is infinities and then when he's in a good mood about the EU he says it is the official contiuation of his story. Do you have any idea how much retconning this can and does create?

 

It doesn't matter if you think it's stupid. If GL says it, then it is so. This, to a lesser degree, applies to the statements of the VIPs at TOS.

 

All George has to do is speak, and it is thus.

All stormtroopers are clones? The EU is in a "parallel universe" totally seperate from the movies?

 

"All stormtroopers are clones?"

According to Pablo Hidalgo George has also said that "some" stormtroopers aren't clones in some interview that he was part of.

"The EU is in a "parallel universe" totally seperate from the movies?"

They are parallel to each other in that they are,

Parallel: a : similar, analogous, or interdependent in tendency or development b : readily compared : COMPANION c :'identical syntactical elements in corresponding positions

-webster.

He also says that the EU intrudes into his story, for the material to "intrude" it has to be "interdependent".

However, his exact quote, and the context there of was that moving making world is one universe that he is involved with, and the licensing world is another universe that he doesn't get involved in much.

Licensing is a seperate entity from his producing, that as he puts it, " he doesn't get involved", as they aren't movies, and he is a movie producer, not a book licenser.

He also mentions that the Licensing people write things that intrude between his movies (in other words they do cross into his movie making universe) to intrude they have to share the same universe.

Licensing isn't the EU itself, but rather the group that exists on Earth that produces the books, and releases them to the public.

Lucas also said in the same interview that after he finished movies the spin-off material be the only source of material that would continue the stories of his universe.

Which is to say in the end Lucas was using a figure of speech to designate the difference between the world of moving making and the world of licensing(those that write spin-off stories", that he doesn't get involved in making.

However the movie making and licensing do exist in the same universe in actuality, as they both exist on earth in this universe.

"There's my world, which is the movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say is the parallel universe - the licensing world of the books, games and comic books. They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] THEY DO INTRUDE IN BETWEEN THE MOVIES. I don't get too involved in the parallel universe."

Course unless people actually read the entire article, they may not know they are twisting Lucas' own words and putting things into his mouth beyond the context of what he was saying. If they did read the entire article and still chose to twist his words, and misread his context by resoring to use that one quote from the interview, then they are commiting a form of dishonesty, and false conduct. They are choosing to lie to other people.

As for LFL's current policy;

Jan 21, 2004+

Are the entries in the Holocron sorted as cannonical & non-cannonical? Are there various degress of oficialness?

The database does indeed have a canon field. Anything in the films and from George Lucas (including unpublished internal notes that we might receive from him or from the film production department) is considered "G" canon. Next we have what we call continuity "C" canon which is pretty much everything else. There is secondary "S" continuity canon which we use for some older published materials and things that may or may not fit just right. But, if it is referenced in something else it becomes "C". Similarly, any "C" canon item that makes it into the films can become "G" canon. Lastly there is non-continuity "N" which we rarely use except in the case of a blatant contradiction or for things that have been cut.

I will not go into specifics as to what is considered "S" canon or what items that are seemingly "C" canon are actually "G" canon.

...continuity "C" canon which is pretty much everything else. " By everything else I mean EVERYthing else. Novels, comics, junior novels, videogames, trading card games, roleplaying games, toys, websites, television, etc. As I've mentioned earlier, any contradictions that arise are dealt on a case-by-case.

This has been our general approach to co

 

Definition of "parallel universe," though it's not quite the way I think Lucas meant it. From that quote, I get the idea he sees the "licensing world"(EU) as an alternate Star Wars, not necessarily having any bearing on "his world"(the movies).

 

Again you are twisting Lucas words, I don't know if you read the entire cinescape article in which he said it or not, and if are twisting his words intentionally, or not, or are simply listening to those that are fallaciously twisting his words by only referring to one line, out of the context of the entire interview.

But he was specific that he was designating between the world of moving making, and the world of licensing, as being parallel universes, that they correspond to each other, and are interdependent with each other, but he doesn't get involved much with "licensing".

It was the departments he gets involved with the most that he was most concerned about in his context, not what they produced. In the expanded version of the interview he is specific to point out that stuff that comes out of licensing intrudes into his movie making, but he doesn't let the licensing control what he does in his his movies. He went on to point out that the licensing would be the only place that make more stories, that would continue where his movies leave off in galaxy after he is finished making films.

Lucas has also said (borrowing the quote from someone else so I don't have to type it out myself);

"After Star Wars was released, it became apparent that my story...was only one of thousands that could be told about the characters who inhabit its galaxy. But these were not stories that I was destined to tell. Instead they would spring from the imagination of other writers, inspired by the glimpse of a galaxy that Star Wars provided. Today it is an amazing, unexpected, legacy of Star Wars that so many gifted writers are contributing new stories to the Saga."

Note how he says the stories are being contributed to "the Saga", and "they are stories about characters who inhabit its galaxy", and that they are stories he wasn't destined to tell.

 

It doesn't matter if you think it's stupid. If GL says it, then it is so. This, to a lesser degree, applies to the statements of the VIPs at TOS.

Every year they change their definition of canon.

Everything GL says is not canon. From my reading of the current definition, it is implied that it has to be a film, or otherwise a document, note or directive sent to LFL specifically about Star Wars from George Lucas. Thus an interview would not be canon since he is not doing it to add to the Star Wars mythos, it is not directed to LFL, and it is simply giving a snap shot of his opinions at that point in time.

GL has contradicted himself over time on certain issues in interviews, thus everything he has said or done related to Star Wars could not be canon wihtout creating a paradox - and that is not how the current, likely to change again, definition of canon suggests.

If anyone wants to argue that only his most recent statements on everything is what constitutes the "current canon", then canon will be in flux until he dies, because the absolute definition of "G-canon" will not be permanent until such time since he is continuously changing his mind.

 

I think we're probably supposed to apply it within reason.

 

If anyone wants to argue that only his most recent statements on everything is what constitutes the "current canon", then canon will be in flux until he dies, because the absolute definition of "G-canon" will not be permanent until such time since he is continuously changing his mind.

And wouldn't it be funny if, on his deathbed, he said, "None of it happened."

 

And wouldn't it be funny if, on his bed, he said, "None of it happened."

Hmm, funny to you. Some wouldn't be quite so happy. He be contradicting everything he said before that, and we'd be able to pass it off as some mad bout of insanity that struck him right before he died. He would be, after all, old. If not old, impaired by some other medical reason.

And I'm sure that someone will come in and argue their points about how if he contradicts himself in interviews, it most certainly doesn't matter what he says in such an informal situation as his dethbed. Personally, I think he'd have bigger things to worry about then.

 

xoliver: oh, that's Palpatine's goal, all right - but it didn't affect Ozzel's tactical acumen, or Fel's conscience, or Alderaan's politics, or the steady stream of trained defectors to the Rebellion...

And, as a counterpoint, we can note that the Rebels are stealling imagery from The Triumph of the Will as early as the end of ANH...

- The Imperial Ewok

 

Methinks that the root of this divergence in opinion has a lot to do with one's personal belief or lack of belief in absolutes, if you follow.

 

Dude, all I know is that GL is getting big fat paychecks from from all of the other "lower than G" levels of canon being created with his blessing.

If Yoda says that the color red is actually green in a GL written movie and than declares that the color red is actually blue in an authorized novel that takes place further along in the SW timeline, if someone asked me what color Yoda says red is I'd say blue because that is what color Yoda said red is last.

Now, if GL said to someone in charge of "continuity" that Yoda thinks that the color red is actually green, and to make sure that everyone else who writes stories about the "Universe" he has created knows that Yoda thinks that the color red is actually green, then by golly when I read a story with Yoda in it, I want him to think that the color red IS green.

But...if I read a book that has GL's "corporate brand" on it, a book that continues to tell a story about his characters that he has authorized to be told, and in that book Yoda says that the color red is actually blue, then by golly, either someone who is "in charge" of "continuity" has made a mistake and needs to be "sacked", or GL actually doesn't mind it if Yoda thinks that the color red is actually blue or green, OR Yoda's color confusion has shifted through the SW years and he "actually" thinks that the color red is blue now. (With the term "now" meaning the point of time that the situation exists on the SW timeline.)

Now...my question is this:

How hard is it to decide what color Yoda thinks red is?
or
Why can't Yoda just see the color red as ...RED?!

SW continuity lacks discipline.



And another thing...

Just because GL says something in an interview his statements shouldn't automatically override ideas and developments that appear in material that he has AUTHORIZED and has gotten GROSSLY RICH off of.

Whew.

Wait. What was Thrawn's original point? I don't remember now (with the term "now" meaning the point of time that this situation exists on my post's timeline), but, oh well, I'm just playing with the toys that Thrawn McEwok left out in his driveway anyway.

 

Before (people) swoop down and quote quote quote until their fingertips are raw from friction, I would like to take this opportunity to give a good 'right on!' to HSK3.

The current canon policy (and I know what the current canon policy is, so do not repeat it) is an insult, especially when it's used like a phone book to deliver Vic Mackey-style street justice to anyone who dares to entertain a divergent thought. And I don't know if I feel that way because of the fact that it's LFL being pretentious, or if it's because I can't go two steps without the canon policy ambushing me like a random monster.

 

Brett: up to a point...

HalSolOKniser3: that too!

Stinking Liar: yeah, that too!

- The Imperial Ewok