Comics Dark Empire Trilogy

In the annotated Heir to the Empire, he says he borrowed the idea from LOTR.

 

Interesting, that does explain why this is more 'meat puppet' than other battle meditation used later.

 

This evolving topic brings to mind a question I had earlier this year. I’m not anti-Zahn at all, but I do wonder whether others think that his books tend to Star Trek-ify Star Wars?

I’m honestly not too familiar with Trek either. The question came up when I was thinking about the Grysks in his newer books, and something about their description seemed very Trek, and then it made me wonder about Zahn’s other books in general and whether it might be how he approaches SW.

 

I mean, I wouldn't blame him for it, considering that I have no memory of that.

 

You can start right now watching Discovery, a current running show, to get into Star Trek. Seasons 1 and 2 take place before most other Trek except for Enterprise, so you should be able to jump right in (although one arc has some rather obscure references that you had to have watched Enterprise for, just the Enterprise episodes "In a Mirror Darkly Parts 1 and 2"). You can buy Seasons 1 and 2 of Discovery now on Amazon Video without the CBS subscription as those episodes have already been out for a while now.

Strangely enough I don't think Zahn has written for Trek before (although maybe I'm wrong?) John Jackson Miller, who wrote a New Dawn, Knight Errant, and Knights of the Old Republic comics for Star Wars did write for Star Trek including a recent book tie-in for Discovery called Enterprise War.

And from my experience, Trek fans online tend to be a lot more... vicious than SW fans. Yeah I won't deny things have gotten tense on these forums once in a while, but that's nothing compared to stuff going on in TrekBBS a lot of times.

Think of Star Wars forum arguments as Sesame Street disagreements (Big Bird arguing with Oscar the Grouch about something) and Star Trek forum arguments the online equivalent of Mustafar battles with "I hate you" and chopping off opponents' limbs and gleefully watching them fall into the lava.

 

To be fair, this forum is toward the civilised end of the scale. There's probably Trek forums tending to be more like this one. The "vicious end" of the Star Wars fandom tend to congregate elsewhere. Maybe Stardestroyer.net?

 

Maybe not full on Trekkie but a lot of Harder Sci-Fi elements the movies never bothered with were added into the Thrawn Trilogy...More emphasis on military tactics, and ranks and hierarchy than your usual Star Wars affair.

They are slower

More talky

A lot of of time is spent planning then action and space fights

It adds to my point that while the Thrawn Trilogy are good books they'd make TERRIBLE movies.

 

The same could be said of The Hunt For Red October - that it was very military tactics-heavy, and very talky. Yet it made a very good movie - because the writers were prepared to take liberties with the text of the book while remaining faithful to the spirit.

 

I think I prefer my Star Wars to be slightly harder. On a related note, I was looking at "Mohs Scale of Science Fiction Hardness" on TV Tropes and was kinda surprised at first to see Star Trek listed as being harder than Star Wars. But then I thought about the franchise as a whole, with stuff like TCW and Dark Empire etc, and then I guess maybe it made sense.

 

JJM has a couple of old Trek novels plus a pretty epic Klingon trilogy. He has done a couple of Discovery novels.

For other long-running series Zahn is involved, you're better to look to the Honorverse.

Only if adapted literally. Ever see the S5 finale for DS9? The final battle there is very much Sisko vs Dukat, with moves and counter-moves, but it certainly isn't talky.

A smart adaptation would have no problem rendering battle tactics in an engaging way

 

Even still I wouldn't have wanted the Thrawn Trilogy to be a Sequel Trilogy even if it was a good adoption.

The Thrawn Trilogy i good but not a good Sequel Trilogy.

 

Not just thematically better but the characters I think go through bigger changes than they do in Thrawn Trilogy.

I mean that's the Bantam era in a nutshell is that at the end of the day the Universe is more or less the same as it started, even if things like the Thrawn Trilogy and Jedi Academy make bigger steps than most.

But you know Luke doesn't change that much in TTT he's pretty much the same by the end, just a little wiser and maybe has a thing for Mara

Han and Leia don't change character wise outside of having the twins, which you'd think be a bigger deal but strangely doesn't feel like it.

 

One thing I really liked about Veitch’s interview, which wasn’t clear to me from the comic, was that Luke and Leia were especially powerful because they were channeling all the power of the Jedi who came before them.

This idea that the power of the Force is something collective, and that it can in a sense be transferred among individuals, is intriguing and once again has interesting resonances with the ST. For one, it really suggests that the Sith became stronger after they killed the Jedi partially by being able to harness their power. Then when Vader killed Palpatine and died, that power was once again available for those who knew how to harness it.

In the ST, that fits well with how Ben and Rey have so much raw power almost innately. Similarly, the child in the Mandalorian seems to possess a lot of raw ability. So if we consider the power vacuum left by the Sith’s (temporary) demise, that makes more sense. And it resonates with the idea of how legacy affects new generations, in this case almost making it literal as Force power.

Anyway, I love the way Veitch recontextualizes some things I had taken as given in Star Wars, and how that in turn clarifies to me some of what happened in DE and gives me new ways to interpret the ST and other works. For example, the idea that what Leia and Luke do to Palpatine at the end of DE 1 is overwhelm him and almost “taint” him with the light, so that he loses control of his externalized anger, which then turns against him.

And of course, the notion of the Force flowing among individuals also fits well with the climax of the ST, and especially with the idea that the Skywalkers were quite literally directly involved in Palpatine’s final defeat.

 

It feels kind of weird to me to have strength in the Force be a zero sum game. It would make sense for the Sith to think this way (and is alluded to be part of the reasoning for the Rule of Two), but as an overall message for Star Wars to carry? Doesn't fit. It would propagate the idea that power should be concentrated in the hands of a few individuals rather than democratised, and that knowledge should be hoarded and not shared.

 

Except power is already hoarded amongst the genetic elite even with the Jedi. It's a Force sensitive only club. Not only that, but the Jedi claim to have a "deeper" understanding of the universe because of their genetic abilities, and expect everyone else to follow that (the whole baby Ludi business).

Honestly, it sounds like the status Voldemort would want for his magic society in Harry Potter, or more accurately the "benevolent ruling class" business young Dumbledore was aiming for before his sister's death

 

But the message of the Skywalker Saga is that that power could be within anyone, even people the rest of the galaxy overlooks, like a slave, or a farmer, or a scavenger. The Force is a metaphor for the potential that lies inside all of us. Adding "and you can only reach your full potential by stopping others from fulfilling their potential" feels anti-ethical to the themes of teaching, co-operation and harmony promoted by Star Wars.

Plus the PT demonstrates the dangers of complacent, out-of-touch elites, while the ST promotes the virtues of "ordinary" people stepping up to make a difference.

 

Is it though? Has really been that?

 

That's kind of thrown out the window when the implication is the citizens' fleet would still have lost if it weren't for Rey, the literal heir of a Force using dynasty. Palpatine would have just zapped them out of the sky with his lightning if not for her.

 

Are you asking if the Force is actually a metaphor for potential?

I mean, IMO, yes. Hence why I posted that. ANH is about a farmboy with adolescent dreams who wants to go out and have adventures, but discovers that by being calm, patient and mindful he can tap into a deeper connection to the universe that allows him to achieve seemingly impossible goals. He adopts a more mature state of mind and it gives him the ability to do what he needs to do. It's a literal representation of the sentiment "you can do anything if you put your mind to it".

Crucially, in the OT both Obi-Wan and Yoda describe the Force in terms of being an integral part of the ecosystem. Drawing true strength from the Force comes in embracing life in its entirety, of being willing to open yourself up to everything around you. Luke is encouraged to pass on what he has learned, not monopolise it for his own greater power.

Well, that's why JJ Abrams is a poor filmmaker and Rey should have stayed the children of nobodies.

 

See though...I just don't the Skywalker Saga is that democratic as you make it out to be...I mean maybe with Anakin but even then we got the whole Jesus metaphor going.

Essentially the Skywalker Saga has always been just a game of family feud but with big stakes.

Also I'm not the biggest Abrams fan but I think he's not a bad filmmaker ...maybe not the most original storyteller...but he knows how make film.

 

As the franchise has grown the message has got muddied, and the failings of filmmakers (including Lucas himself) can mean that points are implied that were never intended. But if there is one core message that holds across all the films, it's "the unlikeliest of people can be heroes, and the small can defeat the mighty". Even without the Force, people like Han, Lando, Chewie, 3PO, R2, Padmé, Finn, Poe, Rose, Jyn, even Jar Jar have had a major effect on the galaxy.

Ultimately, what do we want to make of Star Wars? Do we want to read it as "only the special people ever make a difference, you shouldn't even try"? Because we could, but then, why are we fans of such a cynical message? I'd much rather believe in the Star Wars universe where a single starfighter can destroy the ultimate weapon, where a dictator can be brought down by something as simple as a father's love for his son, and where a broom-wielding child living in poverty could be the next big hope for the galaxy.

 

For me the message of Star Wars is..."Whatever the filmaker does with it at the time"

For me Star Wars is the ultimate "The Author is Dead" franchise...especially considering how much Original intent gets thrown out the window even by the same creator.

But i'm curious to know what @Sauron_18 makes of this conversation which he sparked ...Any words of insight friend?

 

That's a different point - what I'm getting at is people don't know what they want until they see it.

On paper FACPOV sounds awful, but in execution? It was superb.

 

This, so much.
One thing I love about Star Wars is the multiplicity of derivative works -- the fact that we get epic novels and comics that try to be "like the films", but also novels & entire series that are nothing like that, that contextualize the films in sometimes unexpected ways (e.g. Luceno's Cloak of Deception adding complex political context to the fundamentally puerile TPM movie) or play to a completely different mood than the films (Schreiber's horror, Republic Commando, The Devaronian Version, ...) -- plus extremely involved "secondary literature" like the Essential Guides or HoloNet News, and so much more.
At least in Legends, there never seemed to be a serious attempt at sticking to any central message, theme or mood -- the GFFA was understood to be a playing field where lots of different things can happen, and that's what made it awesome.

Tying in with the Veitch vs Zahn theme here, I love both TTT and DE -- but "it's more like the movies" or "this wouldn't work as a movie" has never been a criterion for me. I'm very much a "lit first" Star Wars fan, probably because I got into the franchise by reading "Dark Force Rising" (yes, I started with the 2nd book of the trilogy...) before I ever watched the movies; and to this day, I enjoy the "tie-ins" so much more than the "originals".