Lit The Legendary 181st Imperial Discussion Group: Choices Of One!

Allegiance would definitely have benefitted from losing one or even two of the three plots. What's the verdict on Choices of One, which storylines would you remove first? Or is it harder to cut something out here because you'd lose an important facet?

 

The problem with Alliegance was not the plots themselves but the fact they went no where.

While in Choices what should be the main one ie setting up a new rebel base is really sidelined for Mara's plot and the Thrawn/Esva stuff. Both pretty pointless and not that interesting that add nothing to either character. Maras discovery of missing the Hand of Judgement adds nothing to how her character will develop while as said before her whole not informing Vader about Luke does not even go with the character Zahn is trying to write. As for the Thrawn it was absurd from the get go and the love story with Car Das was not that interesting either.

Also what's the point in writing about a major character ie Luke Skywalker if you are going to write him so differently to what's in the films and make him pretty pointless to the plot. In Alliegance he is literally locked in the closet and in this he hangs around in the background while Mara and the Stormies do there stuff.

 

I'm ready to go full advocatus diaboli on this. Who needs another "setting up a new rebel base" plot, especially in the Yavin-to-Hoth era?

 

But Han Solo learned something about leadership!

 

Not me. If the three plotlines were "Hand of Judgment," "new Rebel base" and "Thrawn vs. Nuso Esva," that last one is by far the most interesting one to me.

So how did y'all feel about Nuso Esva? Did he work as a worthy adversary operating on Thrawn's level? He kind of reminded me of Moriarty (the guy he was modeled on) in good ways as well as bad - the concept is great, but it's over too quickly and the character doesn't live up to his own hype, partly because it's hard to take a one-shot villain as a worthy nemesis. At least Esva got away, leaving a possible hook to more stories... but that didn't end up happening (apart from one short story where Zahn told us the end).

 

It sort of feels like Zahn is more interested in his Star Wars between Thrawn and Unknown Regions factions than he is in the main conflict of the series. I get the feeling that if Del Rey let him, we'd have gotten a ton of books about Thrawn in the Unknown Regions.

 

None of them are important facets, and that's the problem. Thrawn vs. Esva is a fascinating concept, but there's nothing interesting about the execution here and it doesn't really tie into the other plotlines all that well. It's just sort of a concept that's forced over the entire plot -- "Oh, it's all part of some scheme in Thrawn's rivalry with this new guy" -- but they're both off in their own corners because they can't actually interact with anybody and it's functionally superfluous. It's not like Side Trip where Thrawn at least gets in the story with the other characters. So it's the most obviously cuttable. But none of the other plotlines are developed that interestingly, either, and Thrawn is the one that has the most potential to be interesting and original if you'd just get the big three and Mara out of there and rewrite the whole thing to be about this duel of wits, and maybe Thrawn can recruit the Hand of Judgment.

 

Regards Moriarty and the comparison. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle invented him as villain who would kill Holmes (the hero of his books) He was somone who was Holmes equal intellectualy as shown by the scene where they meet (which a century later still crackles tension) and who Holmes himself respects (dubs the Napoleon of crime) Moriarty forces Holmes and Watson to flee across Europe. The end scene where Holmes writes his farewell (which Moriarty permits him) to Watson before they duel over Richenbach falls is still again a century later emotional. Now there have been people based on this before. In Dr Who the Doctor and The Master are obviously similar to that. Moriarty is a great villain archetype who can match our clever hero wits for wits.

But here's the thing Thrawn is not meant to be the hero. Thrawn is meant to be the VILLIAN. Giving him another villain to play off just does not work. Esva anyway comes across more off a scooby do villain anyway than a Moriarty "I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for you Thrawn" Like with Mara Zahn basically changed Thrawns story. So he went from clever but evil warlord to this caring guy trying to save the galaxy who uses Palpy (basically an equal) and who leads Vader by the nose. The problem is it just does not work. It's the same with Mara turning a manipulated assassin whose not that important to someone who is super awesome who can punk Vader and have Luke standing there in awe yet at the same time not do anything bad or wrong.

I think Zahn loved Thrawn and Mara so much he felt he needed to change there stories which to me is to there detriment.

DigitalMessiah What you say may be true as Zahn did say that if he was going to write anymore it would be a trilogy set in Chiss Space.

 

That's an interesting thing to point out. But first, I wouldn't say that having a rivalship between two villains doesn't work; I think it's a genius move to have two villains work against each other, possibly forming a Mexican Standoff with the heroes. I don't know about all superhero comic books, obviously, but from what you gather from the most prominent examples, you mostly end up with villain teams that want to bring down the hero (that old Batman movie with four whacky villains in a submarine comes to mind). The X-Men movies sometimes go in that direction when you have Magneto and his team somewhere between understandably cynical enemy of evil government/miitary forces and remorseless psychopath beyond redemption. Basically, I think two evil or "villainous" characters probably shouldn't get along at all, since their goal is not being evil or villainous. Once their goals include world domination or a bunch of money or whatever, why would they trust or even share with another guy who doesn't believe in following the rules, either? So having Thrawn fight against another villain could turn out to be a good concept. Especially if you had a way in for the audience via Car'das who could notice that Thrawn isn't simply losing it step by step, but that he never had it in the first place.

That being said, I find it a very interesting approach to see whether Thrawn is a hero or an anti-hero. And whether it is comprehensible for us which one he is supposed to be. When Thrawn entered the SW galaxy, he was a villain; Once you start writing more from his point of view, what do you get? Do you understand him and his motives? Or do you gain more insight into why he is wrong? Does "the Imperial perspective" work all that well when you do not write about the Good Imperial? It works for Sith, and there's a clear separation between them being the protagonists, but not being written as "heroes" in the sense of a character in a positive light. Darth Bane, Darth Plagueis, the Ax parts in last month's Fatal Alliance - while their POV might help us understand them better, at no point were we really told that the Sith way is possibly the right way. But with Imperials, the distinction seems to be harder to make. Why is that? People like to put on Sith costumes as much as they like to put on stormtrooper costumes. Imperial toys are just as beloved as Sith toys. Is it because Sith have to be foaming at the mouth to be good at their jobs, while Imperials (including Uli from Fatal Alliance) have a 50/50 chance of being shown as regular guys, only on the other side of the war (with the other half being genocidal madmen or laughable fools)?

 

By the way - you don't really go ahead and call your sci-fi franchise character Odo nowadays, do you.

 

The problem with Thrawn as the hero is he plays it straight now. He lacks the ruthlessness that defined his character as a villain in the eponymous trilogy. In Outbound Flight, it's understandable, because he's a young officer that hasn't been influenced by the Galactic Empire yet, but he still clashes with his own culture because he's ruthless to the Chiss since they view preemptive strikes as unethical. But Thrawn in this book and in Crisis of Faith seems to be the same Thrawn from Outbound Flight, and I guess we're supposed to conclude that he only seemed to like a bad guy originally because he was on the other side, in this whole "heroes on both sides" sense. But that's baloney. Some dude on Wayland harmlessly shot him in his body armor with an arrow and he got pissed because C'Baoth wouldn't let him summarily execute the guy. He demolished random houses because no one was answered his questions. He betrayed Mara Jade the same way that Vader betrayed Lando.

Apparently somewhere along the way, the fact that he was slightly more pragmatic than Darth Vader or some of the more cartoonish Imperials overwhelmed his characterization to the point where he might as well have been a good guy because it is pragmatic, but since also being an Imperial is part of his core identity, it really doesn't make sense why he didn't simply seek to end conflict with the New Republic rather than perpetuate it, especially if he had foreknowledge of the imminent Yuuzhan Vong invasion. The whole Revanian "he was making the galaxy stronger through conflict" is such a bunk argument.

 

And because the guy in the house shot at him:

"Shy, aren't they?" Pellaeon murmured, keeping his hand on his blaster as he looked around.
"Understandably," Thrawn said, pulling a megaphone disk from his belt. "Let's see if we can persuade them to be hospitable."
Cupping the disk in his hand, he raised it to his lips. "I seek the Guardian of the mountain," his voice boomed across the square, the last syllable echoing from the surrounding buildings. "Who will take me to him?"
The last echo died away into silence. Thrawn lowered the disk and waited; but the seconds ticked by without any response. "Maybe they don't understand Basic," Pellaeon suggested doubtfully.
"No, they understand," Thrawn said coldly. "The humans do, at any rate. Perhaps they need more motivation." He raised the megaphone again. "I seek the Guardian of the mountain," he repeated. "If no one will take me to him, this entire city will suffer."
The words were barely out of his mouth when, without warning, an arrow flashed toward them from the right. It struck Thrawn in the side, barely missing the ysalamir tube wrapped around his shoulders and back, and bounced harmlessly off the body armor hidden beneath the white uniform.
"Hold," Thrawn ordered as Rukh leaped to his side, blaster at the ready. "You have the location?"
"Yes," the Noghri grated, his blaster pointed at a squat two-story structure a quarter of the way around the square from the palace.
"Good." Thrawn raised the megaphone again. "One of your people just shot at us. Observe the consequences." Lowering the disk again, he nodded to Rukh. "Now."
And with a tight grin of his needle teeth, Rukh proceeded-quickly, carefully, and scientifically-to demolish the building.
He took out the windows and doors first, putting perhaps a dozen shots through them to discourage any further attack. Then he switched to the lower-floor walls. By the twentieth shot, the building was visibly trembling on its foundations. A handful of shots into the upper-floor walls, a few more into the lower-
And with a thunderous crash, the building collapsed in on itself.
Thrawn waited until the sound of crunching masonry had died away before raising the megaphone again. "Those are the consequences of defying me," he called. "I ask once more: who will take me to the Guardian of the mountain?"
"I will," a voice said from their left.

 

I'm already ahead of you. See my earlier post about Gus and Walter in Breaking Bad in regards the villain stand off.
Esva just does not work. Like I said he comes across more a scooby doo villain than anything.

Also it's not showing Thrawn as grey more simply good. Different from the TTT where he casually talks about how he ended up destroying a world, in regards to some Artwork, Pelleoan comments on. Not developed but different. Thrawn and Mara were essentially re-written which was apparent from the Hand of Thrawn books onwards. That's further hammered over the head with the 2 comparisons with Thrawn with both, Palpatine at the start and Vader at the end.

Your theory about Zahn writing being deep with the whole grey/good imperial doesn't really work for me as they just fight other Imperials and pirates or in the case of Esva someone from the unknown regions. That ISB agent suddenly deciding to have Mara killed for no reason, I could spot coming a mile off. It's all nice a safe them working with the good guys or inadvertently helping them. Is that really grey/deep for you Grey ?

This like Allegiance is a prequel but we as readers learn nothing new about either Thrawn or Mara that sheds new light on there characters or that enhance there stories. Zahn tells us they are awesome and even does comparisons with OT characters to do it but that does not tell us anything about them as characters merely that they have Skillz. Well Maras epiphany that she misses the Hand of Judgement could be classed as development but it falls flat as they were only invented in these books anyway.

As DigitalMessiah mentioned. Outbound Flight was well done when it comes to Thrawn and his development, in becoming a ruthless Warlord but this is not.

 

Wistfully, not casually. It's called his "one failure".

Still, the differences are apparent. They're far from unique to Zahn though.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CharacterizationMarchesOn
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WatsonianVersusDoylist

From Zahn's point of view, Heir Thrawn might be "Thrawn as written by a less experienced writer" compared to Choices Of One Thrawn.

Just as Color of Magic Vetinari is very different from Guards, Guards Vetinari.

Doesn't he even say something along those lines in interviews, and in the Heir To The Empire 20th Anniversary Edition?

I know this interview:

http://theforce.net/jedicouncil/interview/timothyzahn.asp

suggests that, from his point of view, most people who are contributing to evil in the world don't "know they're on the wrong side"


Have you ever deliberately written strong characters who don’t realise they’re the bad guys, or are you using these characters to challenge our expectations about the extent of ‘wrongness’ among the Sith and the Empire?

Sure – Mara herself is the classic character who doesn’t realize she’s on the wrong side of the moral fence. (Doriana, in contrast, is much more a gamesman and opportunist who knows perfectly well he’s working for the bad guy and is fine with that as long as he can turn a personal profit on the deal.)
In the real world, I think, there are many people who really ARE fighting and working for the wrong side, and in doing so are actually contributing to evil in the world. (And no, I’m NOT going to get into the details of my views here.) I also believe that most of them are sincere in believing they’re on the right side (which should show that sincerity, in and of itself, is really not all that useful).


Maybe Zahn thinks Thrawn is one of these?

 

Indeed, you're so far ahead of me that I don't see that post about Breaking Bad yet. Or could it be that this was in some other discussion?

See, fett 4, this is exactly what I was afraid would happen. We're talking about this book and it's all "Zahn pet characters Zahn pet characters Zahn pet characters". I'm posing open questions to get people to take part in this discussion and you're berating me because I'm not saying "Zahn pet characters" (which I actually am saying from time to time). I enjoy finding a meta-level on which Zahn isn't simply an egomaniac who's in love with his original characters but maybe an author who tried something and failed, or who knows maybe he succeeded but the audience isn't there with him and why could that be.

For example, I really like this bit:

Because it's a new angle. It's even an angle that opens up discussion about another praised writer of another fictional universe who, as we could continue to argue about, may well be well past his prime as a writer or who might well have lost contact with his audience who originally loved his work which he might deem sub-par, making his audience incompatible to him. From there, it's a short step to mention Special Edition Lucas and his unhappiness with what the rest of the world sees as perfect, and how it ends up with him in a very unfavourable position.

But Zahn pet characters.

 

thanks zahn

 

Grey1

Your clearly misunderstanding.

The Gus/Walter comparison was only a page back and my example off how a villain to villain contest can work. Like I also said Esva comes across to Scooby Doo to work on that level anyway, while Thrawn himself is written less as a villain or someone morally grey but as a hero. That is why the comparison does not work for me, that and the whole plot seems so convoluted it seems pointless.

While my points earlier were not just Zahns in love with his pets but specific in regards to asking what do we learn that's new about those characters.

Let me ask you though, since you raise the point:

but maybe an author who tried something and failed, or who knows maybe he succeeded but the audience isn't there with him and why could that be.

• What was he trying to do that's new ?
• Where do you think he failed or Succeeded ?
• Why wouldn't the audience be with him ?
  

 

What we learn that's new about Mara - she's willing to spare the life of someone who has technically committed treason - if she thinks there's enough mitigating circumstances.