PT Who was Palpatine referring to?

Does any of this matter if we consider that the Sith Eternal existed before their introduction in TROS? And that they wanted to find an heir to the Sith legacy post-ROTJ? We don’t know much of the Sith Eternal, but we know they acted as a support system for Sheev and his ideals, so leading up to TROS, the Rule of Two didn’t matter. With this line of thinking, if we consider the Sith Eternal as a group that existed pre-TPM, then as long as you had access to this group, whether you be Tenebrous, Plagueis, or Sidious, then the idea that you could cheat death was likely an annual sermon at the most holy place on Exegol. Then the question becomes if Sheev had special access to the Sith Eternal that previous Darth Sith Masters did not.

 

@eko32eko7 It really doesn't need to be confirmed, because I think the majority of the viewers already understands that Plagueis was Sidious's master on the movie. I never even doubted that while watching the movie until you guys bring that up. This really looks like a technical issue to me that Sidious needs to say Plagueis was his master on the movie. He was. Sidious says ''He taught his apprentice all he knew, and then the apprentice killed him while he was asleep.'' , then ''To cheat death is the power only one has achieved,''. If Plagueis was master of another Sith other than Sidious, then Sidious wouldn't say ''only one has achieved'', because that means there would be 2 people at least before Sidious, because Plagueis taught everything he knew to that apprentice, that would make 3 people at least (Plagueis - another Sith - Sidious), and Sidious couldn't actually know how many Sith achieved that power, if he didn't know Plagueis personally, and if he wasn't Plagueis's apprentice and if he didn't kill Plagueis personally. He couldn't even be sure Plagueis was dead, if he didn't kill him personally, because that power is about being immortal, and you don't talk certain if you didn't see that person die personally. He was sure about that. He doesn't need to say ''I was Plagueis's apprentice'', it's obvious that he was.

As far as the canon goes;

Book (which is canon) has also a reference on starwars.com itself.
https://www.starwars.com/news/star-wars-tarkin-exclusive-excerpt

RotS Novel directly states that Plagueis was Sidious's master.
''Anakin could force out only a strangled whisper. "Real . . . ?" "Darth Plagueis was my Master. He taught me the key to his power," the shadow said, dryly matter-of-fact, "before I killed him."

TRoS Novel, directly states that Plagueis was Sidious's master.
''His very own apprentice had turned against him, the way he himself had turned against Plagueis.''

 

Need? I suppose not. The franchise could go on and never address it, I suppose. I'm not sure how much fun that is, but okay.

Having said that, the determination of the majority has no impact on actual truth, thus it is not a major contributing factor to my determination here. I appreciate that you find such value in the opinions of others. I do not share this appreciation. The majority of the Senate, for example, believed that the Jedi tried to overthrow the Republic, that doesn't mean it was true.

In understand that you think this, and I tend to agree that this is the most logical conclusion at which to arrive given the information available. The Tarkin novel (current canon), to me, seems to affirm this. Others are less than impressed by information available only from ancillary sources and I support that perspective.

My calculations do not match yours. Knowledge, in this case, does not equate to achievement.

Only one has been able to cheat death, but the implication is that this one taught the technique to one other individual, but, apparently, this student has not yet "achieved" success, regardless of their knowledge. I count two individuals with knowledge and only one who has "achieved" success. Thus, this one that has learned, but not achieved success doesn't necessarily have to be Palpatine/Sidious. This idea is, in fact, supported by the piece of dialog conspicuously absent from your post:

"To cheat death is a power only one has achieved, but if we work together, I know we can discover the secret."

If? Work? Discover? Secret? These don't sound like the words of an adept individual with existing knowledge and experience, these sound more like the words of a zealot on a pilgrimage to uncover ancient knowledge. Again, these words come from Palpatine/Sisious so they can only be taken as such, but he doesn't sound all that knowledgeable in this moment. What you say, as of now, is only true if we assume (which I am unwilling to do) the information transfer could only occur between these two specific people, Sidious and Plagueis.

Lets not forget the use of the phrase "Sith legend". Another scenario is that the the Plagueis taught his apprentice, his apprentice recorded the technique in a holocron and Palpatine/Sidious is aware of the story and the existence of the holocorn. The story exists as a Sith cautionary tale as to why you never teach your apprentice everything you know.

(Pleae note: ^ the above scenario is not described because I believe it to be true. I simply present it as an alternative that is not in opposition to the dialog.)

I don't find this argument compelling. I have heard no indication that Plagueis was immortal, only that he could "save the ones he cared about from dying".

Further, I'm not so certain how beneficial it is to be an eye witness to death in the case of fantasy/SciFi/Space Opreas...
We saw Maul "die", but nope...
We saw Palpatine/Sidious "die", but nope...
I've never killed anyone, yet I'm fairly certain people have died (I tried to re-write this with an identity attached and it was too morbid, please forgive the overall generality).

Ultimately, though, Palpatine is an unreliable narrator, Therefore we can't really trust any conclusion that stems from information he provides. Palpatine doesn't care about being accurate, he cares about us thinking what he wants us to think so he can use us for his own gain. As I explained above, we can only believe that which Palpatine says insofar as we know that the way the information is provided is done so to lead us to the specific conclusion that Palpatine intends. Whether or not this conclusion is consistent with the "truth" is another matter entirely and I argue that only happens when it serves Palpatine's machinations. I am not willing to go with the conclusions based on information provided by Papatine's description of events because he has likely left out important details.

This is enough, as I said, to satiate my curiosity on this subject, but I also have deep respect for the perspective of those of whom do not read the ancillary material. To my mind, they deserve a bit of expansion on the details surrounding the subject of Palpatine's origins. I mean, eventually.

Not canon, though I wish it were.

 

They are canon, there is really no need for a wish.

RotS Novel;

TRoS Novel;
https://www.starwars.com/news/star-wars-the-rise-of-skywalker-novelization-excerpt

Well they don't need to because, as far as I am concerned it's obvious in the movie. And if anyone is still wondering, if it's %100 confirmed or not that Palpatine said ''Plagueis was my master'' anywhere in any official Star Wars canon release, they can ask people who knows more about Star Wars if they don't want to involve in anything other than the movies. In that case that would be the people who read the canon books.

The majority of the Senate was being bribed by Palpatine, and most of them were afraid to oppose him. It has nothing to do with understanding what is seen on screen without being manipulated and without being biased.

We know Sidious was a liar. But what we also know that Sidious had powers that no Force user has shown before; transfer essence, creating a Force user creature like Snoke, learning the abilities of the nightsisters, Sith rituels that can cloud the vision of the entire Jedi Order, and reaching through the world between worlds, and being undetected for years in front of the Jedi, even in front of Yoda. Sidious can be a liar, but that's also part of his Sith identity, it's not all about lying, it's also about having the powers that no Jedi has. Otherwise there is no point for being a Sith. It's about having the power to change life, and being obsessed with not dying. It really make sense that Plagueis, as the Sith master of the most powerful Sith Lord in the galaxy and being responsible of creating the most powerful Sith lord in the galaxy, could actually achieve this power. Just like Qui-Gon learned the secret of being a Force ghost when Obi-Wan didn't know about it. It make sense when you think about what Sith has done so far, what they are obssesed with, and why they worked in secret for hundreds of years without showing themselves to the Jedi, it was all because of learning the secrets of the immortality.

 

Please review your source. The source is not Lucasfilm and the quotes provided in your previous post do not "align with what is seen on screen". Therefore, they are not officially canon. I understand that the quotes from the novel don't contradict the film, but this source only confirms the validity of that which aligns. That could mean these quotes are valid, but it hasn't been confirmed on screen or it could mean they don't align and that simply hasn't been demonstrated yet. Only time will tell.

I enjoy the ROTS novel and I would love for it to be 100% canon, but there is far too much phraseology here because the question of whether or not the novel can be considered canon cannot be answered with a simple "yes" or "no"; caveats and qualifiers abound. There is also the recent revelation that Ahsoka's experience at the end of the Clone Wars did not happen as was described in her novel. I enjoyed the novel and I enjoyed Clone Wars, but they do not align. While I would love for the idea of one true canon to be actualized, I have not witnessed it in reality.

I understand this is your position and something upon which we do not, at lest entirely, agree, yes.

Um... I'm not sure I'm parsing this portion of your post correctly but I will say this... Lucasfilm hasn't done the best job of keeping things consistent. Therefore I find the observation that, just because something is read in a book doesn't mean that LFL wont simply ignore it when writing their next film, credible. I had not remembered the information provided in the Tarkin novel and that is the most we have to go on at this moment. The Tarkin novel is great and I am really hoping for more James Luceno Star Wars novels.

If, however, LFL were to release a new film or television show that reveals, in much greater detail, that Plagueis' relationship to Palpatine is not what we were led to believe, I would not put it passed LFL to simply ignore the Tarkin novel altogether. I don't like it, but, I'm sorry to say, that is the more likely outcome, based on recent history.

I do not find this appeal to popularity to be compelling. Did the majority of the audience members walking into TESB on opening night believe that Darth Vader was Luke's father?

A very skillful liar who often uses a description of truth to mislead, yes.

I don't think we know these things, but I'm happy to review any current source on the matter. There is a lot of mixing of EU/Legends material with current films etc required to make this leap. This sounds interesting and I'm not opposed, but I cant bring myself to agree.

I see that there are many similar characteristics between the transfer essence technique introduced in the Dark Empire comic series, but I have not seen anything in current canon that indicates to me that the technique described the old EU and the ritual performed in TROS are one in the same. I would be surprised if that were true because Disney LFL tends to reintroduce old EU elements only after altering them significantly.

Also... Palpatine was the only one to use Transfer Essence? I would appreciate your source on this as well, please.

The Sith are selfish. I'm sure they could describe, at length, all of the justifications and reasons why that is the only true way, etc, etc... It doesn't matter. The Sith are not to be believed, they are to be defeated. I am not hearing, outside of the Tarkin novel, however, anything pertaining to any description of any quality that precludes the possibility that Palpatine wasn't Plagueis' direct apprentice. I get that you believe that to be true and I agree with you so far as I believe that to be affirmed by the Tarkin novel. Simultaneously, I acknowledge the possibility that the Tarkin novel may, eventually, be circumvented by a film or television series. Again, I don't like this and I'm not advocating for this, but I still acknowledge its possible... and maybe even likely.

I don't agree, at least not entirely. I strongly suspect that, as far as GL is concerned, the Sith are not capable of achieving true immortality. This is, obviously, a point rendered somewhat moot in the case of current canon, but i find it relevant in that the Plaguies novel was published prior to the sale to Disney and, theoretically, while GL was writing his treatments for the ST.

I think that immortality has likely been the carrot at the end of many a Sith's stick, but that carrot might be a lie too... or.. as I suspect, hide a horrible and hideous caveat.

 

It's the official account of Del Rey, it's the same company who still publishes canon books from Star Wars Lucasfilm. If there is a contradiction with the movie, then the movie overrules the novel, there is no contradiction with stating that Plagueis was Sidious's master, as I said it's obvious, you can agree or not, that's a fact.

I am not defending LFL, nor I am saying that they are doing the best job. I just told you what's canon and what's not according to what they are telling us. The only relevant thing is you guys asked that if Plagueis being Sidious's master is still canon or not, and I provided the canon sources which states that Plagueis is Sidious's master in the new canon as well, if the movie is not clear for you. (for me it's clear anyway).

The minority can question the fact that Vader was Luke's father, it doesn't change the fact that Vader is Luke's father, just like it doesn't change the fact that Plagueis had the power to save others from dying and he was Sidious's master.

Just like %99 of the Sith Lords. I wouldn't say it's special to Sidious. That doesn't mean he would lie about the power of the dark side and the power of the Force.

We don't know what ''things'' exactly? Sidious created Snoke, in case you don't believe it, we've seen the clone Snoke bodies in Exegol. Sidious reached the world between worlds through a Sith rituel, he was very close to controlling the time and space. Sidious informed Vader about the Sith Lord Momin, and Momin actually managed to come back from the dead by using the dark side of the Force. These are all canon, you accepted it or not.

It's not only Tarkin novel, RotS and TRoS novels are canon as well.

Sith transfer essense is in the TRoS novel. And Plagueis had this power as well, in fact it's a better version of what Sidious had.

Spoiler

The Sith can't turn into Force ghosts, that's what they told us. That's a different kind of immortality than the ones that Momin, Plagueis and Sidious has achieved. Logically, both the Sith and the Jedi are using the same Force. If one can achieve the immortality, then the other can as well. Although with a different form.

Sidious exchanged the secret knowledge with Nightsister Talzin, they mingled the dark side abilities with the nightsister magicks. And the spirits of the nightsisters can possess the other people's bodies to some degree. It's canon that the dark siders can also possess the immortality, it's just not the Jedi's spiritual immortality.

 

Acknowledged. Lucasfilm's silence in deafening. The official starwars.com databank doesn't have an article on Plagueis at all. I think its safe to say that LFL is less than willing to commit to anything regarding this particular character. I'm not advocating for it, but it still seems to be the case.

My interpretation of their claim and yours differ greatly. I don't interpret "align" as meaning "as long as it doesn't conflict". I think they mean that if you saw it on screen and its also in the book, then its canon. All that stuff that's not onscreen... sure... its canon... for now, until it conflicts with something seen in a movie or TV show.

The point is that they aren't going to change plans for a film or television show because it conflicts with a part of the ROTS novelization that was not seen onscreen. Therefore, to me, the ROTS novelization is not canon, except for where the book directly reflects the events of the film.

I understand that is what you are driving at, but the 'they' who are telling us that the ROTS novelization is "canon" where it "align(s) with what is seen on screen in the 6 films and the Clone Wars animated movie" is not Lucasfilm, it's Del Ray. I understand that their (Del Ray's) word is good enough for you, but it is not for me. If Hasbro or EA came out with a similar claim of canonicity I wouldn't actually ever believe it until it is affirmed by LFL or the event is seen onscreen in a film or television show. I'm not trying to frustrate you, it's just the way I see it.

(Well I think we had a misunderstanding here, but its okay.)

No. Different. Darth Vader proclaims onscreen "I am your father". This is not a detail left to a book that is "canon" where it "align(s) with what is seen on screen in the 6 films and the Clone Wars animated movie".

Regarding "transfer essence": there are too many moving parts in this conversation. I don't consider the old transfer essence to be the same as the ritual performed in TROS. There may be many similar characteristics, and similar adjectives used to describe each, but when it counts, the new material will not be limited by what is established in the old EU. Therefore we cannot use any of our knowledge of the old EU when speculating. All we can use is what LFL has produced since 2014.

To sum up and conclude this discussion:

We Agree:
- Tarkin novel is canon. Therefore, because the Tarkin novel affirms the suspicion, Palpatine/Sidious was Plagueis' apprentice.

We Disagree:
- The canonicity of events in the ROTS novel that do not appear onscreen.
- The degree to which LFL is beholden to events in novels when crafting new films and television shows.

I think everything Palpatine/Sidious says, even when telling the truth, is said in order to deceive Anakin and, by extension, the audience. Its possible he means Plagueis, but, the more I think about it, he might, somehow, be aware of, and be referring to Qui-Gon Jinn's fate. If so, this raises a host of other questions... and stories for another time.

(edited for clarity)

 

It has nothing to do with what I think, or what I believe. I just told you how it is. An official from Lucasfilm already confirmed that before, it's here;

Spoiler

Since nowhere in the movie Sidious says ''Plagueis wasn't my master'', there is no contradiction with the movie. It's canon that Plagueis was Sidious's master, and I think that's what the majority of the viewers understands from the movie (that includes me).

 

I disagree. You explained your position. The actual scenario is not recognizable to me when I apply your description to reality, however.

Please check your source again. This individual at LFL did not confirm anything, but rather, demonstrated an unwillingness to confirm or commit to anything outside of what is actually seen onscreen.

"it's true until it isn't"
= we are not committed to these details and we will change them as we see fit
= not canon

Agreed; no contradiction, there.

Disagree. Plagueis is Sidious' master as affirmed by the canon novel Tarkin. What the 'majority' thinks and why is irrelevant.

I understand you feel differently. We simply disagree. I'm okay with that.

 

-canon, very low overridable canon
-that's a good way to look at it

"it's true until it isn't" it's canon until the moment they decide to change it. Did they change that Plagueis was Sidious's master? No they did not. Then it's canon for now.

That's how canon works. Boba Fett was dead, they brought him back in 1992. Maul was dead, they brought him back in 2012. Palpatine was dead, they brought him back in 2019. No canon is unchangeable. That doesn't mean there is no canon. There is. If the movie novel has no contradiction with the movie, then it's canon. Since no where in the movie Sidious or anyone else says that Plagueis wasn't Sidious's master, and that information from the movie novel doesn't contradict with anything what is seen on screen. Thus it's canon.

 

"it's canon until..." = not canon

If LFL is not willing to commit to maintaining a description of an event, it isn't canon. They can say whatever they want, but these items/detail/sceanrios/lines of dialogue in the ROTS novel, but not in the film are not criteria they are committed to observing when developing new projects. Until this commitment has been made, the use of word canon to describe these items is inaccurate.

It isn't, nor should it be. My standard of canonicity is much, much higher. I expect much more from LFL.

These are examples of canon mismanagement, that's all. Please don't let previous failures negate the potential for future success.

I see... Luke who? The farmboy from Tatooine was Stuart Smalley, obviously. That was always his name, we just forgot. oopsie... or something.

Agreed. Canon is exactly what they said it is:

"This includes the six Star Wars episodes, and the many hours of content he developed and produced in Star Wars: The Clone Wars. These stories are the immovable objects of Star Wars history, the characters and events to which all other tales must align."

^This is what they are committed to along with, supposedly, all books films, television series released in 2014 and after. This commitment is what makes it canon. If they are not committed, it isn't canon, regardless of what words they use to describe their classification. At that point, however, it becomes a matter of inaccurate/misleading descriptions, not actual canonicity.

I find this idea of "not conflicting = canon" weak. It isn't the lack of conflict, its a commitment by LFL that is the distinguishing characteristic.

If the developers/producers/creatives are committed to observing specific items/details/scenarios/lines of dialogue as immovable objects when crafting new projects, then its canon. If they are not committed to specific items/details/scenarios/lines of dialogue as immovable objects, it is not canon.

 

Everything is canon until someone decides to change it. You should know how it works by now. They have the power to change even the movie canon as they did right here;

No, that's not ''mismanagement'', that's how it is. There are stories they needed to tell to the audience, and they can change the canon accordingly if they think it would suit their new stories. It has nothing to do with liking it or disliking it. It's a fact. If you don't want to hear this or accept this, that's fine. I am just telling you the reality about the canon. They can change most of the canon if they want. That's how the canon works. And that's how it is.

And they brought Palpatine back after this canon announcement. And they changed Luke's character. Like it or not, they can change most of the things. You may think otherwise that they can't, but it's reality that they can change it if they want, like it or not.

So if you think just because the novels are not canon because they can change it in the future, that's wrong. They can change most of the canon, not only the books.

It's not up to your ideas or it's not up to my ideas, or anyone elses. They told us the old movie novels are canon, and I even showed an official from LFL is approving that it's canon, but you're denying it. You can have your own headcanon of course, but what is canon and what's not is clear. They told us the movie novelizations are canon where they align with what is seen on screen. Plagueis is being Sidious's master is canon because no one said otherwise in the movie. Not sure why you are denying what Del Rey said about the canon, and I don't know why are you trying to change what LFL official said about this subject, probably I would never know.

 

He was referring to Plagueis. The line is within the content of his story about Plagueis to Anakin. I also believe he was lying to Anakin in an effort to further play on his fears of Padme dying. I think the dreams Anakin was having were being "fed" to him by Sid Palps, and add in the lie to further goad Anakin to turning. Once Anakin turns, Sid Palps makes the comment to Anakin about working together they can unlock the secret. Which would invalidate what he told Anakin when telling him of Plagueis. And since Sid Palps was successful in turning Anakin, he no longer needs to lie to him about the power to save others.

 

I understand this is good enough for you. That's fine. Rock on.

It is not good enough for me. It could have been managed better. I'm not mad about it, but I'm also not going to act like it was anything other than what it was... mismanagement. Mistakes were made. No biggie. Let's move on and commit to trying to do better. That is all anyone is really asking for.

Oh I agree, these are all examples of horrible decision making. This is the sort of thing I'm concerned about. Obviously they are capable of terrible things, yes. It is of the utmost importance, therefore, to acquire a fresh commitment to refrain from this sort of thing moving forward.

No. It not whether or not it can be changed that is the distinguishing characteristic. All fiction can be changed. It is the level of commitment and the degree to which LFL is enthusiastic about making sure it isn't changed that is the distinguishing characteristic

I do not question their ability. Of course they are able, hence the need for commitment to refrain.

It is, actually. Its up to the good people at Lucasfilm.

You provided a tweet of an individual using the wrong word to describe details that they have no intention of considering immovable objects when developing further material, that is all. You are misrepresenting this conversation.

I'm not denying that you provided a tweet. I simply pointed out that what this person described is not actually 'canon'. That's all. I know you will deny that, but that's what happened.

True. It is clear LFL has no intention of committing to aspects of the ROTS novel that do not appear on screen in the film as immovable object, yes. This is quite clear.

Del Ray insists that the novels are canon where they align with the film. All other aspects are, therefore, not regarded as canon, such as the dialogue referenced in your previous post.

True, this is affirmed in the canon Tarkin novel published in 2014.

Incorrect.

I am more denying your interpretation of Del Ray's statement than anything else, but I will also gladly draw attention to the fact that they are not the ultimate authority. Unfortunately, the actual authority has a lackluster record and is not demonstrating the attitude necessary to resolve that issue moving forward, as evidenced by the aforementioned tweet with questionable/misleading/inaccurate word choices.

 

@eko32eko7 can you please stop cutting my post into a thousand pieces?
And this;

This is not funny at all. Unless you think I didn't mean only the viewers of Star Wars, viewers like us. You can't actually think that I meant people at LFL can't decide it as well. I even showed you a statement from a LFL official on twitter.

They are not ''good enough'' for me. I think some of the decisions were bad. That's not the point. The point is you're trying to change the subject by calling it mismanagement etc. The point is they are actually proofs that people at LFL can change the movie canon as well. In fact, Lucas himself liked to do that a lot in the past, when he changed the original scene between Han Solo and Greedo by doing an extra edit to his old movie.

That's how the canon works. That's how it is. Even before selling it to disney, Lucas was making tons of edits on his canon movie, he was changing the movie canon from time to time.

As I said, Star Wars canon had always been changeable. Even the movie canon. And I just showed you how they changed in the past, and they can do it again easily. That's the point I was making. But I think you know it, and you're trying to change the subject.

It looks like to me that you want to change what ''Del Rey'' (it's Del Rey btw, why you are calling it Del Ray?) said about the canon as well, and what LFL official said in the twitter as well.
(-canon, very low overridable canon)
(-that's a good way to look at it)
I hope this is not the reason why you keep cutting my post into pieces? Because I didn't see these parts in my previous quote.

Plagueis being Sidious's master perfectly align with what is seen on screen. That's what I understand from the movie. Since you also accepted that Tarkin novel's canonicity, you should also understand that RotS Novel was actually giving us the right information by saying that Plagueis was Sidious's master. That's how it is.

 

I cannot promise this, no. Each individual assertion must be handled as such so the point is not lost amid assumption and to expose the disparity between our positions.

It was not intended to be funny. The word 'anyone' has a meaning.

I am not trying to change the subject. I am responding your your citation of previous lackluster performance as some sort of an indicator of what is to be deemed acceptable moving forward. I do not find value in such an exercise so any conclusions based not his assertion are of no value to me. No offense meant to you.

Again, I am not questioning LFL ability to change aspects of the lore. In fact, it is their ability to do such a thing that prompts my desire for a commitment from them to refrain from making such changes. As far as Lucas' obsession with the Greedo scene, Yes! This is an excellent example of what not to do. I love GL and have all the respect in the world for him, but the Greedo scene changes are ... unfortunate. The Greedo scene changes, such as changes to the dialogue and who shoots when, should have been left alone. If a similar scenario were to arise moving forward, I hope LFL would chose to refrain from make such changes and remain content with upgrading the picture quality.

This might be how it has worked and it hasn't been great. Using the word 'canon', though to refer to details that can be changed haphazardly, is inaccurate, however. Past mishandling of 'canon' is not the standard by which I will judge the quality of future results. If LFL's record here were impeccable, such advocation would be unwarranted. I am advocating for improvement. By definition this requires a break from past failure. Basing current expectation on past results is the antithesis of advocating for positive change and improvement.

If the only point you are making is that details can be changed in a fictional continuity, then I agree.

No one, however, is arguing against LFL's ability to change details in the franchise. Of course they can make changes. Why do you think I'm ignoring this? I have addressed it directly more than once.

I am, rather, calling attention to that ability to change, advocating that we choose not to do that, break from past failure and move on to a world where we seek to be as consistent as possible with enthusiasm. I am advocating for LFL to acknowledge the past changes you reference as not demonstrating the best possible performance and express a genuine, enthusiastic desire to keep the Star Wars as consistent as possible.

Okay... you're rapidly loosing credibility. You have your interpretation of the verbiage and I have mine.

My take is that this is mostly marketing and not a lot of substance. Del Ray can say whatever they want and LFL can use the word 'canon' to describe details that haven't conflicted with the films, but that doesn't the statement accurate. I am not as hung up on what they have said, but more what it means to the details in the book that do not appear in the film.

To me, any detail that LFL does not intend to treat as an immovable object is not canon, regardless of which words they use on Twitter. You do not need share my interpretation, but that is my interpretation nevertheless.

 

It's not like the name "Ewok" for the primary sapient species that resides on Endor is in the ROTJ film. But it's so prevalent in tie-in media, that nobody disputes that it is the canon name for them.

 

The name 'Ewok' appears in the end credits of the original finished product (ROTJ) as seen in theaters in 1983. This name has subsequently been utilized throughout other canon material. I suspect the name 'Ewok' is considered by LFL to be an immovable object within TGFFA and is, therefore, canon.

 

"Darth Plagueis is Darth Sidious's Master" is IMO just as "immovable" given how many "newcanon works" (both novels and reference books) use it.

And conversely, being "in the credits" does not make something immune to minor retcons. Tagge is spelled Taggi with an I in the credits - but all subsequent sources, including the Databank, spell it "Tagge" so that's the canon spelling and the credits ares considered wrong.

https://www.starwars.com/databank/general-tagge

 

Exactly. Lucas made many changes to the canon. Making Vader Luke's father. Making Leia Luke's sister. Greedo shooting first. Not to mention all the changes to how a line in the OT is interpreted with the prequels being added.

 

Agreed, with reservations. Based on the canonical status of the Tarkin novel, I affirm that Plagueis' status as Palpatine/Sidious' master is canon.

The primary disagreement between @Erkan12 and myself revolves around the canonicity of lines of dialog in the ROTS novel that do not appear in the film.

I would never raise concern over something as slight as spelling change or typo. That sort of thing is of zero concern, unless we start changing the spelling of 'Luke' to 'Michael' or something like that.

 

I agree that the movie leaves it ambiguous. Of course we know the likely implication is that it refers to Plagueis, since it’s a continuation of the opera conversation. And while it could have been a lie, I think it works better for the story if Plagueis really did achieve that power, but that in his eagerness, Palpatine ended up losing it.

Despite what the novelization for TROS states, the way the author presents Palpatine’s resurrection, as essence transfer, doesn’t really fit too well with what we’d heard about Plagueis’s ability. Plagueis could manipulate midichlorians to preserve and create life. There’s nothing about spiritual transference. So that’s definitely a retcon and not one that I think works too well.

Instead, I think Palpatine’s resurrection was likely based not only on what (little) he got from Plagueis, but also on whatever he may have found out over the decades. And, more importantly, I think it was the Sith cult that did the work to bring Palpatine back. Palpatine may have planned it, but I think that power depended on having someone else bring you back. Because that’s what Plagueis could allegedly do, save others.

After TROS, I also like the idea that what Plagueis did with his power was not create Anakin but create Palpatine himself. He is, after all, pretty much the Sith antichrist. So if he’s all the Sith, then it makes more sense to me that this was unique to him and not something that was common for all Sith before him. But that’s really just my interpretation. Yet it works, and I enjoy it.