Lit Sword of the Jedi by Christie Golden

That's cool. Thanks! It also makes me wonder...were they planning at that time to make the signature Jedi robes of the era look like Darth Vader's armor sans helmet and breathing apparatus? Because even before he turned to the dark side, Luke was wearing it, and that's also what he was wearing on the cover of the Jedi Academy trilogy. Add to that Luke's vision and they either had a very specific plan for the Jedi that they abandoned, or the artist decided it looked cool.

 

I doubt there was any sort of plan, or even the thought of having a plan, back in the early to mid 90s.

 

Well, probably not, considering Leia's Attitude Of The Week regarding her family.

 

The only problem with that criticism is, like or loathe her, Leia's one of the most iconic female characters going - you could point to Ripley in Aliens as one of a very select group that can match but Ripley's only good in Aliens, the other films? Nowhere near as good. Similarly, Mothma's running the Alliance! These are neither weak nor token roles.

The PT, however, is far more open to such criticism - Padme's arc is nowhere near that of her daughter. In a way, it could perhaps be said the PT has exerted a quite toxic influence on Jaina's character arc, as it seems to be far PT than OT-inspired.

Does the OT look less now due to the social changes of 3+ decades? Yes, but the PT's hardly an improvement, could be said to a major regression. SW's rivals at the time of the OT? Well there was the first Battlestar Galactica, who I can't think of any notable female characters being featured in and Trek, which is pretty much same again. In comparison SW is in lead in this respect.

 

Ripley isn't a strong female protagonist because she's an action hero in Aliens. I think there's more to writing strong female characters than making an action hero female. And if I'm misconstruing your point there, I apologize, but I'm not sure otherwise why you are singling out Aliens versus the other films in that series which feature the character. But I digress!

I do think that Leia from a character perspective is neglected moreso than Luke and Han in the OT. Luke is more broken up over Obi-Wan's death than Leia is over the destruction of Alderaan. Luke and Han have much more substantial arcs.

Just having females in prominent positions like Mon Mothma as leader of the Rebels doesn't mean anything if the character is in the film for all of three minutes.

 

beccatoria, Jaina was named "Sword of the Jedi" (that she would never know peace herself, but bring peace to others) in Walter Jon William's book "Destiny's Way," actually. Never seemed to feature prominently until "Invincible," though.
And nice to see you posting again!

 

The answer to why we don't see Leia going to pieces in ANH is more than likely 2 things combined - one is training and the other is her aristocratic background, both of those would reinforce emotional control, something Luke only starts to master at the end of ROTJ.

I disagree that timespan renders a character's impact irrelevant - if that's the case why is Wedge such a favourite? I'm reasonably certain Mothma has her fans too just from that brief appearance.

I think if you're understanding Ripley in Aliens as just action heroine you've missed a lot of the film and the overall portrait but that's just my outlook. I find the character works far better in Aliens than the others, but again that's just my take. It could be argued that there wouldn't have been the character development we see in Aliens without Leia as trailblazer either.

 

Can I mention Blake's 7 (a contemporary of ANH)? Several strong female characters in that, including the Big Bad!

 

Ah yeah, Servalan - the personification of Thatcher - too bad it doesn't have all that high a profile!

 

I don't see Ripley as just an action heroine in Aliens; her character arc in that film is definitely the best of the series, but I think the portrayal of her character in the sequel Alien 3 and even in Alien Resurrection aren't things to be dismissed. And I really don't like either of those films.

As for time, Wedge in the films doesn't have a character arc, or even really a characterization. He's a fan favorite for the EU depictions.

With regard to Leia, I think it's an oversight on the part of Lucas. Leia in the first film is an object of Luke's affection, a princess for him to rescue, more than a primary character in her own right. In the climax of the film, she stands around with C-3PO and background characters while Luke and Han do the work. She gets the romance arc with Han in the two sequels, but I think her characterization is playing more toward the warrior princess archetype than any desire on the part of Lucas to be breaking down gender barriers.

 

I feel like jumping back a page to comment on something!

I think an argument could be made that free will isn't the dark side at all, at least based upon what is presented in the New Jedi Order, most specifically Traitor and Destiny's Way. If we're to assign credibility to Vergere, the principal lesson of Traitor is a question (which are more enlightening than answers): Who is Jacen Solo? Furthermore, in her conversations with Luke Skywalker in Destiny's Way, she makes a point of emphasis upon self-knowledge, which I find goes hand in hand with her statement to Jacen that "To be a Jedi is to control your passion... but Jedi control limits your power. Greatness -- true greatness of any kind -- requires the surrender of control. Passion that is guided, not walled away. Leave your limits behind."

Now, I'm going to cheat and quote Matt Stover, but since Troy Denning's candid views prompted this I'm gonna do it, where Stover says:

"I've often been a little bit bothered by the 'deification' of the Force in the EU. The Force is not God -- it's not something 'out there,' a unitary entity with its own will and intention. It's right here. A Jedi is part of it -- and so is everything else. Its 'will' (to use an inadequate word) is expressed in existence itself."

The Force is inherently a pantheistic mode or substance, rather than an immanent one, as Stover points out, and the jury is out whether this idea that it has a "will" is a sign of some transcendent aspect or is expressed by existence or reality as Stover says. Assuming the latter, it seems to be the intention behind Vergere that if you achieve self-knowledge and act from within, you are fulfilling the will of the Force. When Jacen totally melts that dude, he was in the exact place at the exact time doing the exact thing that he was meant to be doing, and he got there by being who he was, and through that he achieved a momentary unity with the Unifying or Cosmic Force. I think the overall point is that the choices that you make are the will of the Force, because you are a part of the Force, and the causes behind your choices are a part of the Force, etc.

I dunno, perhaps that is too fatalistic, or teleological.

 

Ah, of course you're right. Ugh, my bad. My habit of confusing DW with SBS (inexplicable, but persistent) finally catches up with me. I was so sure that Jaina referenced it in DJ. I must be thinking of some other point at which she expressed her feelings about the pressure of her role in the Jedi.

Still, even though it wouldn't be as strong an argument, I think it could be interesting to look at whether a Force-given prophetic role being a form of penance feels like a divine judgement or not...

And hi!

To weigh in on the ongoing discussion about the role of women in Star Wars and other media, I think it's important to view the movies in the context of their respective eras. Leia is not very progressive by today's standards, but was fairly progressive by the standards of the 70s. The PT was a let down, in my opinion, in that regard, but since this all kicked off because of my 13 year old self's expectations for Leia's daughter, that was before the PT was even announced.

It may be relevant to note that Ripley was not written as a woman in Alien. All of the characters were written gender- and race-blind in the script and it was left to the casting department to pick the actors. I also don't think this tool is always appropriate, but sometimes it's powerful and yields interesting results.

Although I also have no idea what the dismissal of Ripley simply because she is also an action hero is supposed to imply? I mean, to start with, Alien is a survival horror film, not an action movie, but more importantly, did you have a specific criticism of Ripley? Because I think you'd be hardpressed to find many people who'd agree with you that she lacks genuine characterisation. And without specific criticism, you sorta come across as dismissing the entire concept as a gimmick. Which is unfortunate. And also irrelevant to Ben's point: if you had to make a list of iconic women in film - as pop culture icons - whether or not you personally agreed that they deserved to be that famous - are you seriously arguing that either Ripley or Princess Leia wouldn't be up there?

Which just leaves -

Can I get a quick vote up in here? "Females" instead of "women"?

I'm gonna assume you probably aren't aware of this, but it's creepy, dude. It's one of those things a lot of us find creepy and weird. Seriously, it's okay to just say "women".

ETA: missed the response re: free will. I don't want to derail the thread, so I won't get into it too deeply, suffice to say I agree that there are many ways to argue it, I just think that's one that would be interesting to examine.

 

I didn't dismiss Ripley... I dismissed the idea that she's only a strong character in Aliens and not in any of the other films. I'm not sure where I ever argued that Ripley had no characterization at all. She's one of my favorite characters and the Alien series is one of my favorite franchises outside of Star Wars. I certainly argued that Wedge and Mon Mothma don't have characterization in the Star Wars films, because they don't.

 

Ah, I understand. Your phrasing made it unclear that you were specifically referring to Ben's statement that he liked her best in that movie. I thought you were making a general statement about her character, and/or that you were specifically criticising the decision to write her as an action heroine. If you're saying that she is an interesting character throughout the quadrilogy (which is not to say her portrayal is flawless), then sure, I agree.

I do think that seeing Mon Mothma as the leader of the Rebellion is valuable, even without a lot of screentime or characterisation. But I also agree that she's not really a defined character in any significant way from the movies. But as I said, it's something you need to judge according to its time.

 

I was disagreeing with Ben's statement that "Ripley's only good in Aliens, the other films? Nowhere near as good." I agree that Ripley has the best character arc in Aliens (she didn't have one in the first film), but despite disliking Alien 3 (despite some redeeming qualities) and Alien Resurrection I think her characterization in those films is still noteworthy, much as I enjoyed Fassbender's David in Prometheus despite that film having problems. Aliens happened to be the film in which she was ostensibly an action heroine, but Ripley really isn't a soldier despite her depiction as such in some of the Aliens EU. Perhaps I shouldn't have assumed that raising Aliens above all the other films was indicative of viewing an action heroine as synonymous with a strong woman protagonist, but I think it's a mistake to dismiss Ripley in Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection outright. Sorry for the misunderstanding!

 

No, it's cool, I get your stance on this particular point. Though we'll have to agree to disagree about the idea that she has no character arc in Alien.

 

What we actually got:

 

That was retconned to be NJO: Edge of Victory 1 Conquest I believe.

 

That or Star by Star. Either one works for me.

 

That's the explanation that I thought back in 2001, but I didn't find it very satisfactory back then. Even less so in 2008.

 

How so?

 

I mean, I always had the idea that the Solo children would be Jedi to take the mantle from the Big 3, and I'm guessing that was the intent considering that there are three Solo children. When Anakin died, I didn't find much solace in the idea that Luke's prophecy only extended to that point, and when Jacen died, it really compounded what I think was a mistake to disregard it.

 

I'm just sad they didn't rock the popped collars.

 

No, from the Guide to Warfare it's explicitly supposed to be Edge of Victory.