Books Star Wars: Last Shot by Daniel Jose Older (Out on Apr 17, 2018)

No. I did find the book worthwhile anyways, though, but your mileage may vary.

 

oh no.

Thank you!

 

I'm about halfway through the audio version of this book. So far, I have mixed feelings. There is definitely some cheesy dialogue. Lando is given some real clunker lines. Still, I'm invested in him and other characters throughout the story. There are some great details, like Lando going through his cape collection in search of the perfect color. The Gungan correcting the meesa dialogue does not bother me at all. I never thought I'd say this, but I'm happy that there is both a Gungan and an Ewok in this story.

I have no problem with a non-binary character and find it strange when people attribute the presence of such a character to political correctness. Not everyone in real life is a binary. Why should Star Wars be expected to deny reality in order to satisfy the agendas of culturally conservative fans? Isn't it 2018?

 

Ah I see . Didn't really catch that. I always thought droids were considered property in SW. Has there been a droid émancipation movement in the new canon ? In the days of the original trilogy droids were certainly just seen as machines to be bought and sold, in the old republic too. Obi Wan particularly didn't think much of them. It's interesting that Lando would have had such a strange relatiobship with L3 in that era. Hopefully we learn more about her and this odd dynamic in Solo.

 

Who has made it about PC? I think the concern was first raised by someone who just genuinely didn't understand the character.

This whole notion of "Get in 2018 idiots!" which you aren't the first to express, is a bit cheap and derogatory when no one has expressed outrage at the character being non-binary.

 

There was the guy a couple pages back who thinks it's the end of Australian civilization apparently. It's not "no one".

 

Well, on the contrary, myself and several others in this thread have explained how the text demonstrates the character is a nonbinary human and that the singular they has been used for centuries, yet this discussion is still going on pages later under the guise of that pronoun being hard to understand.

 

The text doesn't demonstrate the character is non-binary. In the character's advertisement they are referred to as they, and as you have pointed out, that has been in use for centuries in reference to gendered individuals. You're actually contradicting yourself in your response.

 

One guy. This is what happens when you're desperate to find something to be outraged about. Obsession over one stupid comment from one ignorant guy and ignoring all the actual intelligent discussion about the issue.

Which you clearly haven't been paying attention to if you still think the text clearly demonstrates it, or that the pronoun use being ambiguous in the text is a "guise". I can't be the only getting frustrated by the seemingly constant refusal to actually discussion something rationally here.

- It's not butchering the language, it's a common use of phrase
- The use of it in this novel was clearly ambiguous, as shown by multiple people not understanding, or even realising it.
- It's not a huge issue. It's a minor inconvenience at most.

Does that sum things up nicely for everyone?

 

It has nothing to do with desperation. I read something I did not agree with and spoke up. And it's not just one person. Check out the review page on Amazon for instance. It's sad that you resort to name calling ("ignorant") instead of relying on reason. Speaks volumes about your character.

 

ignorant wasn't referring to you. It was agreeing with you.

In fact I wasn't referring to you at any stage in any of my posts so not sure what you have issue with

 

I thought you were referring to me personally. Sorry about that.

 

You are not alone.

But yes, let's move on.

Almost finished, and getting very much a Borg feeling now.

 

Not really. Yes it has been used to refer to gendered people for centuries, but also for centuries it has been used to refer to gender ambiguous people. Like when driving you say "what are they doing" when you don't know the other driver's gender. The book continuing to say "they" makes it clear that Taka identifies as they.

 

But it doesn't make it clear how Han and Lando automatically know that Taka identifies that way, and it takes a while to pick up. That's all. Nothing insidious.

 

How is this still an argument? Look, saying that it's completely unambiguous is objectively wrong. Multiple people have been genuinely confused, it is clearly ambiguous by definition. Unless you think that everyone claiming to be confused by it is an anti-progressive troll pretending because they are against LGBTQ-rights or something ridiculous then your argument is simply wrong.

 

No one here thinks people who were confused are anti LGBTQ+, just that the book did a decent enough job explaining Taka's identification. If you were confused I am sorry, but I think part of the effectiveness of how Taka is done is that people are asking questions and learning something. Holding everyone's hand would likely be criticized for "interrupting" the story, and while I have no issue with stopping to educate, I can understand Older's attempt to go full steam ahead. Heck I did not catch the meaning of the Zhe/Zher in aftermath, but I learned it from that and the confusion went away and I was happy the book just had it in there like it was nothing surprising; that makes it feel more normal and thus helps/makes people learn to adapt to it more than going out of the way and pointing it out every time. In the same way that media used to make a big deal about having a homosexual character, now we just treat it as normal, cause it should be. If people in the 90s were confused by that, then the job of progressives should not be to hand hold but rather to make people have to get used to it and ask around.

Also a lot of people did catch the intent here, it is pretty unambiguous, there are always those who miss the intent, but no one here is saying it is impossible for that to happen. Just that Older did a decent enough job mainly cause he did not account for everyone knowing what he was doing. I prefer the idea that in the GFFA non-binary identification is something most everyone picks up on. Personally I would rather that than realism to our world.

Again sorry if you did not get what Older was trying to say, but that's what the community is for. People can ask their questions and figure out and interact with people more experienced with this stuff. That's what makes these forums so wonderful

 

Plenty of people think that. The "It's 2018." comments from a fair few people are laced with judgement about anyone confused by the usage.

 

It depends on the usage of "it's 2018" cause to an extent I can understand people being frustrated. I totally understand and am ok with yinz being confused, but I am just trying to explain why some of the others got more defensive. It has to do with how certain parts of culture react to progressive movements. so often people get mocked online for being LGBTQ+ and thus get more defensive over that, or see it happen and that makes us frustrated. I certainly do have some judgment of people when I say "it's 2018" cause there are certain things people really should be used to by now. To the point I get being confused by Taka, but after it has been explained in depth I feel that continuing to complain about Older's ambiguity or lack there over is a moot point. The correct way the identify the character has been explained, you voiced you complaints with how it was explained, people voiced their explanation of why it has been normal for a while. Most o the outrage is not aimed at you two but rather at the guy who said this was destroying Australia. This topic has been thoroughly discussed, the usage has been explained and that should be the end of it. We really need to get back to discussing the book itself

 

Which is fine, and a matter of opinion. Clearly there is no definitive answer which is what makes this whole thing such a stupid argument.

 

I don't know if I would say this whole thing has been stupid. Drag on too long? sure, but on the whole it was a worthwhile discussion to have.

To other topic of the book did anyone else wish Lobot got more to do?

 

Wasn't he playing holochess with Kaasha on Chandrila, before disappearing for the rest of the book?

 

On that topic when did it become holochess? Or is that distinct from Dejarik?

 

In Legends at least, Dejarik is one of many variants of holochess:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Holochess/Legends

Apparently "space chess" was the first term used, "dejarik" was much later:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Dejarik/Legends