Lit The Evil Empire, or, rather, a commentary on what Legends did to the Empire

We don't know the context yet. Evidently if they're warlords, they might've functionally opposed Cinder. There might've been a wider Imperial Civil War between Cinder-adherents, warlords, and legitimists, and the Shadow Council's basically the leftovers. We really don't know enough of the context, too early to tell.

 

Did the Empire ever do any democratic reforms or liberalization under Pellaeon and his successors, or were they happy to retain all their totalitarian instruments?

 

You say this like it is not also true for most other systems.

 

This again goes into the flawed thinking that liberal democracy is something universally desired, by everyone, ever, but...

Yeah, the Empire did hold elections around 44 ABY, between Jagged Fel, Natasi Daala and Vitor Reige. And it seemed to be one in which the majority of Imperial citizens were capable of voting on who the Imperial Head of State is (just call 'em Grand Moff, damn) so it was the US system, unlike, say, the Republic system which is the Parliamentarian/UK system where the legislature elects the head of government/state.

 

Is the Empire fascist? I think that's that's unanswerable. At the least, the argument over "what is fascism" is a argument raging to this day. Robert Paxton, in his book The Anatomy of Fascism, offers as close as a comprehensive answer as anyone does, and he defines it very narrowly; the only successful fascist regimes in his definition (excluding ones imposed by outside force, like the Arrow Cross or the Ustaste) are the Germans and the Italians. That excludes even regimes that called themselves Fascist, like the Dolfuss/Schusnigg government in Austria. Was the Empire fascist? Probably not, because Palpatine does not really have a mass movement, he doesn't care about the relationship between labor and capital, he doesn't want to maintain public legitimacy through referendums, he doesn't want to create a volksgemeinschaft, he doesn't have irredentist claims, and so on. But a) the Empire is meant, through design language, Lucas' own words and that of the other EU creators, to bring to mind the Nazis, and b) you can be evil and not fascists. Many evil people, in fact, are not fascists! Evil was not localized to Europe between 1922 and 1945.

As to the reformation argument; I agree that it's good when states reform and become better, and I agree that it's possible. If Russia democratizes tomorrow while keeping the iconography of the Putin regime, great! That would be wonderful. Not as good as a popular revolution bringing down the Putin government, but I want as many people as possible living free lives. But we're not looking at Star Wars through a window into another universe; we're looking at a work of fiction created by human beings. Why the human beings who made Star Wars chose to have the Empire evolve from faux-Nazi genocidaires to a far right quasi-democratic junta to a monarchy mostly on the side of the heroes is the more interesting question, I'd say.

 

That choice involved multiple authors, editors and artists over a period of about…20 years(well 15 but also 20). There was no plan in 1991 for the Fel Empire. It was simply an evolution of character arcs, story plotting and worldbuilding as had been developed through that time. So calling it a choice is a complete misnomer.

It was a complex punctuated process. If you want to argue that the old EU’s writers were far sympathetic to authoritarian politics or what have you, that may be worth a cursory investigation.

Personally I don’t see the point. This entire discourse ultimately rests on moralism and moralistic criticism-“it’s not the story, it’s the authors, who must be subjected to interrogation for their choices”.

I don’t believe in this Doylist interrogatory moralistic approach to media. I think it’s harmful to producing good stories and good art. Though for someone who feels that ensuring media is basically a didactic sermon that always sends the “correct” message, I have no doubt that sentiment would be unmoving. I am also not interested in trying to engage with the argument “media has to present things a certain way to reinforce moral sanctity”. (Or more simply, I’m not interested in trying to convince media moralists, and they aren’t convincing to me).

I’m sorry, I just don’t find that worthwhile.

 

We know that they were willing to elect the Head of State by the time of Jagged Fel's successor. It's not really stated if there were any other forms of liberalization. The text just says it's "less oppressive". It's implied that the restrictions on the press and freedom of speech were loosened, since we have open criticism of Imperials by other Imperials both in the press and in general conversation without any fear of arrest or fine.

 

I don't think the rehabilitation of the Empire holds up in an age of resurgent far right ideology, quasi and neo fascism.

It seemed less offensive at the end of the Cold War and normalization with communist China because of the age of the authors of that time. Imperial rehabilitation was accelerated, no doubt, in the wake of the War on Terror wherein even many liberals felt more draconian/authoritarian policies and tactics were a necessary evil to combat terrorism. While there were without a doubt refutations of Imperial ways within the texts in which the Empire was rehabbed, you could see how sympathetic writers could be towards those perspectives. Even our heroes became steadily harsher in how they dealt with situations.

Now we live in a time when the far right has taken power as a result of War on Terror era policies and prejudices. Our significantly more progressive authors are not sympathetic towards the Empire, or the neo-Imperial First Order. it's going to be a while before any sort of moderation is going to be put into Imperial remnants, if ever.

I also think there's always an element of like, Imperial ships and soldiers are cool toys to play with for writers, artists, and filmmakers so it can be hard to resist not making a sympathetic version to play with.

 

What this shows to me, is that art is indelibly shaped by the trends and anxieties of any given time(admittedly an obvious truism). Still I cannot but feel a bit cynical, that people’s views and dispositions are so clearly dependent on the given zeitgeist.

 

I'm not convinced that Star Destroyers and TIE fighters looking cool requires sympathetic Imperial portrayal, if anything the cool tech plays into the seduction of evil angle of SW.

What does seem to get overlooked in this kind of discussion, even by authors, is the rebels have X, Y, B, A and E-Wings, which have their share of the cool cachet. One of the best parts of Rogue One is both a Y-Wing squadron bombing run on the Imperial station and squadron ion torpedo hit on a Star Destroyer.

 

I don't think making the Empire sympathetic is going to affect IRL politics. Villianizing it did not stop Donald Trump from getting elected.

 

Its not about it affecting IRL politics.

It's aboit whether people would be receptive to such.

 

Its having the opposite effect. I'm more liable to support Donald Trump if it means we get more nuanced storytelling and heroic Stormtroopers again.

And I'm not certain as to why at the height of the War on Terror, where America was actually restricting freedoms both abroad and at home, and was waging a literal war of conquest, the Empire is portrayed more sympathetically than when you have a President who just says some mean words but has ultimately been a lame duck.

 

I mean, this is my point. I think that's impossible. It is not possible to be a soldier for the institution that blows up planets and to be heroic. There is no such thing. As a soldier for a state, you are responsible for what that state does, or at the least, implicitly signalling your support thereof. You're saying that you're willing to kill and die for that institution. The idea that it is possible is a product of the propaganda spread post-war by Franz Halder and Erich Manstein and the like; people who were trying to say that they were simply apolitical soldiers, and the fact that the regime that they were apolitically fighting for were trying to murder every Jew in Europe simply didn't matter.

 

A third trump term is definitelu going to lead to "more nuanced storytellimg with good stormtroopers". Third time's the charm, its going to happen any minute now.

Its odd that you jump from "star wars wont affect IRL politics" to "it is causing more people to vote for Trump out of sheer contrarianism and a desire to see better star wars movies".

Frankly I pity anyone who votes based on their opinion on SW.

 

The thread is cooked and needs to be put out of its misery. Anyone got a Death Star lying around?

 

Hall-of-Famer Star Wars Fan Quote

 

Yes, hammering home an opinion is going to be what gets you opposed even for the sake of contrarianism. That's something the Religious Right learned to the point they were practically unelectable post-Bush. And speaking of, I find it extremely funny that a President that says mean words is seen as worse than one that started a literal war, and established government agencies restricting freedoms and using surveillance on his own citizens. Yeah, Trump will have a third term. Just like Obama and Bush declared themselves dictator and were literally Hitler. Heard it all before.

Trying to hammer home that one side is a stand-in and that side are basically Nazguls is specifically what is going to get you a blowback that you shouldn't be looking for. Fiction can and should be political. Star Wars should be political. Andor is a good example of this, and its something the Sequel Trilogy should've done. But equating a certain side to your hated IRL enemy and making them a punching bag is where you get a response like this*.

*this is opposed to just making allusions. Sure, Palpatine was Bush, but George went out of his way to characterize him as more than a simple maniac, and his supporters as having reason for doing what they're doing. He was even going to give Palpatine a somber backstory and move towards redeeming him, if Underworld is anything to go by.

 

Honestly, "deciding my vote based on some farfetched idea of it affecting how SW is written in the future" is a statement so insane that there is no real way to engage with it IMO. Yet sadly I'm compelled to give one more shot.

Canon does not have any shortage of good characters working for the empire. The difference is that they eventually recognize the Empire is evil and stop working for it or find themselves forced to commit more and more atrocities and having to justify it to themselves until they become First Order fanatics or a suicidally honorbound tool. There is a whole book dedicated to protagonists who are all imperial, Lost Stars.

"Grayness in the Empire" already exists, it's just that the Empire exists institutionally to push people towards evil. Especially the higher on the hierarchy they are. People don't automatically lose their humanity and become evil when they put on an imperial uniform, Good Imperials simply don't last.

What does someone who continues to serve the Empire loyally after the Empire has lost its many many wars actually fight for? The ideals that the Empire stood for? The ideals of ruling through force, planetary destruction, humanocentrism?

According to HoT, yes

If Pellaeon isnt standing for those ideals, why is he part of the Empire? What is he "honorably defending" and fighting for for the last several decades?

It is simply not right to fight for those kinds of ideals, while the narrative of the EU when it comes to Pellaeon is that because he is so goshdarn "honorable" and "loyal" even to a cause that is genuinely disgusting, that it inherently makes him a moral character. This is all put best by the Dark Empire Sourcebook.

Honestly, I don't necessarily mind Pellaeon and his loyalist mindset existing, I just don't like it being held up as a gold standard to the point that Krefey and Pellaeon are joking about creating their own little empire in the Unknown Regions because politicians are annoying. This is not "nuance", it is just "military people are inherently better than icky stupid politicians who are bigoted against the poor innocent Empire" and "please don't think that the Empire actually stands for anything at all, its just a cosmetic choice and in no way effects how I interact with aliens".

So please, stop with your endless talk of "just wanting nuance" and "I would vote for x as president of the united states to get better star wars stories".

Its the most bizarre form of grandstanding I have ever read, frankly.

 

Regarding the end of Legacy, I've never really seen that as the triumph of the Empire.

Firstly, the Moff Council is gone. The Republic's transformation into the Empire really began with the regional governors (i.e. Moffs-to-be) ruling over subjugated territories in the former C.I.S. While that is more or less inevitable in a war of reunification, it was the perpetuation and expansion of that status quo which saw the Galaxy subsumed into the Empire. I would actually argue that this was no less important to the Rise of the Empire than Palpatine's declaration of a New Order (one of the major implications of which was that this state of affairs would last indefinitely) or the dissolution of the Imperial Senate (which was made possible through this). With the Moffs out of the equation, the Empire's ability to rule imperially is also greatly hampered, made worse when Marasiah changes the nature of the Imperial Knights. Which brings me to...

Point Two: At the conclusion of Vol. 2, Marasiah redirects the Knights away from being loyal to the Empress alone. In such an event, the Imperial Knights largely seem to be reverting to being a local Jedi offshoot, like the Corellian Jedi were under the Old Republic. This further weakens the influence of the imperial throne, and eliminates what was basically the only real third alternative to Moffs or local elections. Similarly, the Imperial Mission was disbanded.

Thirdly, the good will that the Empire garnered by standing against the Ossus Project and the Vong is probably not once it once was since it was discovered that the disasters that resulted were the result of Sith sabotage. Of course, the fact that the Empire was losing that war until they made a deal with the Sith, (Morrigan Corde says that the Empire "needed" the Sith and back when Krayt takes the Throne at the beginning, the Imperials talk about the necessity of rewarding their allies) and then those same Sith proceeded to tyrannize the Galaxy and commit multiple acts of public genocide may not have won the public's favor either. Let's not even consider that the Imperials are not winning this war either until they, the Jedi they helped massacre half of, and the Alliance-in-Exile they began the war by fighting, pool their resources in order to win on Coruscant. Further, at Coruscant, Krayt was taken out by a Jedi strike team, whereas Rogue Squadron and Skull Squadron seemed to be doing equal work. All of this might be part of the reason that the recruitment of defectors to the "true" emperor always placed a great deal of emphasis on personal loyalty to the Fels, and less so on "our noble cause" (the specifics of which grew increasingly muddled). Granted, Yage defected out of ethical concerns, notably he was recruited by his daughter when she defected, and neither of them had really spoken much with Imperial Knights before.

Fourthly, and this ties into the third point, given that the Imperial Throne is, at this point, essentially held up by Roan and Marasiah's personal popularity and charisma, the fact that Hogrum Chalk conspired with Krayt and Maladi to murder the trillions of people on Coruscant - and Roan was manipulated into going along with this to the point where his own Knight had to kill him - would probably be very, very damaging if it got out. Moreover, because Marasiah is part of the Triumvirate, her reputation is tied to its successes and failures. She can't do like the Moffs had her father do and portray herself as the alternative to the government on Coruscant.

Fifthly, the Triumvirate does not seem to be involved in day-to-day issues, indicating that those are being handled by another political body. Since the Galaxy is large, much government has always been local (Even Krayt didn't disband the Mon Calamari Council until Gial Gahan caused him problems), and if Krayt didn't disband the Senate, I struggle to imagine the Triumvirate did. How the Triumvirate and the Senate relate is not clear, however, I feel confident in asserting that it isn't an absolute monarchy with three heads, even if having three Charles-de-Gaulles running around probably does mean they don't get a lot of political pushback in the years immediately following the war.

In conclusion, unless Marasiah gets possessed by the spirit of Hego Damask, the state of democratic governance in the Galaxy far, far away will probably continue to improve for the foreseeable future. And even if she somehow did, I'm not sure even he could pull the Galaxy back into what Nom Anor would have considered "a more rational form of government" (i.e. dictatorship).

 

If we believe that all men are created equal, then doesn't that necessitate democracy? Also, since we're talking Star Wars, isn't George Lucas's core message that democracy is good? If you tinker with that, then aren't you fundamentally changing what this story is about?

 

I mean, hypothetically if it was a really huge issue for Lucasfilm they might have done something about it or addressed it. They’re characterising the Empire as more overtly evil in their current storytelling, but we haven’t quite seen them actively comment on or disavow how the EU did things with the Empire. That’s probably when this goes from an intellectual curiosity for hardcore SW lit fans like us and becomes a larger conversation within the fandom as a whole.

There is also a question of how much of the wider EU storytelling is going to be widely read in the years and decades to come.

 

Indeed, this entire discussion hinges on the notion the EU will be widely read or at least understood enough that anyone will care to critique its legacy. I have my doubts.

There will probably be small old EU fan communities for a long time-but I don’t think you’re going to see people who have never and will never be reading the EU writing editorials “you know the Fel empire just really doesn’t hold up in the year 2035”. Not enough people will know or care to make an issue of it. It may be debated amongst fans and I’m sure comparisons to canon will continue and people will defend their preferences, but the fact is, the old EU is still very niche. It’s a bit more accessible-if only because since it’s finished anyone who wants to get into it doesn’t have to keep up with new releases, but very few people will.

So in summary, this entire debate will always be a niche subject within EU fan spaces. Not some sort of broad consensus regarding the EU’s politics or creative choices. (No one cares enough about the EU to come to such a consensus).

I know this is an EU board and we are all very familiar with the EU-but at the same time this makes it easy to forget just how niche we are, even within the broader SW fandom.

 

It was clearly a joke, but judging by your response, I might be right to start campaigning for his third term.

Yeah, portraying a fictional faction is wholly evil unless you're defecting from it doesn't really help matters.

That's fundamentally the difference between us, that I'm not sure talking about it more will yield any results. You want to push a particular message, and equate the Empire, a fictional faction, to (I would argue, to some extent also fictional) bad guys in the real world in order to drive home a point. Its not working, you're not going to make me hate the Empire and I don't really care about shifting social mores, what you're making me do is sympathize more with that one IRL enemy you hate so much.

The Empire is not Nazi Germany nor Donald Trump. Donald Trump is not a Nazi any more than Barack Obama or George Bush was.

Yes, Pellaeon is portrayed favorably. This somehow offends you. I see very little issue with the portrayal of military people as good. The thing is, I don't have much issues with the New Republic/Alliance being at the forefront of heroics.

Says who? The IRL idealized mindset? I don't care for it. As I said, you can equate me a Nazi, I REALLY don't care how I am perceived because I don't find the need to abide by modern social currents. And I will continue to support the Fel Empire.

Lucas' core message is redemption. But you also operate under the mistaken assumption that I want the Empire portrayed as complete good guys. The Fel Empire and Imperial Remnant is cool specifically because it has an edge to it, because its the extreme solution you pull out when you have an extreme problem. I would definitely not place the Felpire thematically in stories above the New Republic and the Jedi. And I would not have them portrayed a perfect government, either. And they weren't in the actual EU stories. The Moffs backed Caedus, and later Krayt. Roan Fel thought he could beat the Dark Side with his own Dark Side, and he was getting tricked.

But ultimately the Empire is just a nation and a government. Those do bad and good things, depending on the people in charge. The Empire's system by default means there's going to be less people to say 'no' when someone high enough decides to do evil. That's a fundamental problem with it, and I'm not saying we should ignore it.

Andor's portrayal is a step in the right direction. I did not see some sort of evil monster that those blinded by ideology like to push. Tony portrayed a government bureaucracy. It did not do evil for deh evulz, but because it needed to get something done. It needed resources, so it moved against Ghorman. You could make the argument that the Empire was super evil and that's why they did it, or that Krennic was too focused on his end-goal that he didn't really care who he killed in the process, or that ISB fumbled the whole operation, and that they should've just gone with Syril's idea and arrest the ringleaders while putting in a puppet that'll allow the mining operations to kick off anyway. What the Empire did to Ghorman reminds me of certain IRL events, and they have to do with a President exactly 20 years ago, not now.

In such a situation, innocent soldiers still got killed (well, they were ISB, so policemen? I dunno). One of them by their own under a politician's ambitions.

And this kind of ambiguity and lack of fan-imposed policing (which I won't abide by, lmao) led to the Fel Empire. And it is coming back. You just haven't seen it yet.