inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Aug 8, 2016 15:46:59 GMT
Whether Star Wars is fantasy or not, wanting to explain or elaborate it, is neither futile nor stupid. I've always found works that try to explain their magic and put rules on it a lot more interesting than just stopping at "it's magic, don't worry about it". And the former tend to spark up more discussion than the latter do. Debating the rules, playing with the lore to support one conclusion over another seems much more fullfilling than just running facefirst into AWizardDitIt everytime, no?
So yeah, I'm with HawkeyeGod on this. Star Wars deserves to be elaborated on and enriched with lore and rules. Whether that's by trying to harden it up sci-fi wise or just expanding on the nature of the Force, that seems to yield far more enjoyment down the line than "idk just dumb magic lolol" You're certainly welcome to do that and just leave it there. But I for one, don't think you're getting all the enjoyment you could out of the franchise.
|
|
inherit
118
0
6,166
The Hype Himself
Proud Sponsor of Swingin' Seamen Charter Fishing: My Live Bait Will Catch Your Fish Every Time!
4,023
August 2016
hawkeyegod
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by The Hype Himself on Aug 8, 2016 15:49:18 GMT
That's exactly my point, it is subjective. The sentiment I was stating was that this person was implying that it was inherently moronic, and I was calling said person out on expressing the same sentiment you're accusing me of. That's art, no? The stories are different within each other, making any inherent comparison nil - to which I was never doing. Space Fantasy, Sci-fi lite, whatever you want to call it, my point is that the quoted person is making a claim that there is no need for any kind of internal literary/thematic development, or expansion of the lore. You're getting hung up on a semantic value. I'm stating that said person quoted is trying to inherently trivialize the subject. Then why does it matter at all because if you do believe it is subjective, then you're both equally valid in your evaluation of the issue. Why call out his statement when it doesn't really matter because it's so dependent on the viewer's interpretation? My point being that he's perfectly valid to think that star wars is stupid because it is subject to his view or "taste" on the matter. Also from what I understand, I didn't feel like he was inherently trivializing the subject, as I felt his point about space magic, planes in space etc to be rather accurate. But that doesn't mean that star wars is any less off because of it, rather that it is a different kinda setting aimed at a different outcome. And yes, it does make a whole lot of difference when you're comparing a fantasy to a sci-fi setting because it's a difference of genres that goes beyond the stories being simply different to each other that runs through the core of how the author tells the story and sets up the universe. That'd be like saying the Need for speed games are the same as driving simulators like Gran Turismo when there's a world of difference between the two. Because I felt as though the quotee was more or less telling me 'don't overthink it, it's just mindless bullshit'. I never challenged his assertion otherwise, and I don't know why you're challenging mine here. I'm defending my point of view, not attacking his beyond what I perceive is his own attack on mine. You're missing the point. I never made a comparison of Star Wars to any of the other settings. All I asked was if he uses the same level of appeal to simplicity in other areas of fiction, and if he treats them any differently or the same. I for one never said anything about the similarities from one franchise to the next. You did. I also happen to disagree. Is a 'Song of Ice and Fire' (a dark fantasy) any less lore driven than say Larry Niven's 'Ringworld'? You're arguing on a false premise; while the narrative conventions of the two genres of fantasy and sci-fi are different, the characterization, development of the lore, or level of seriousness of the story isn't. I'm not making the comparison between such genres as you say I am. All I've said is a question regarding whether the quotee took other forms of fiction just as non-seriously. And that's something that applies to all fiction, and not under the semantics of different franchises and their intent.
|
|
inherit
Upright Slug
681
0
Jul 25, 2023 22:51:54 GMT
2,664
Darth Dennis
On holiday on Dantooine. This whole "vengeance on the Jedi" thing gets very tiring after a while.
1,480
August 2016
im3gtr
Mass Effect Trilogy
iM3GTR
|
Post by Darth Dennis on Aug 8, 2016 15:53:21 GMT
Hoth has the best quotes of any battle in the EU. "No one ever complained about the cold on Hoth. We never felt it. Even though we were blinded by blizzards, we could see the final end of the Rebellion in our blaster sights. Was it only a mirage? Perhaps; but on that day, on that planet, our blood ran hot with dreams of victory, melting the ice that stood in our way." "There is no tomorrow, men. Today, we crush the Rebellion, once and for all." ―Unnamed Imperial officer during the Battle of Hoth
The whole 501st journal is the best thing to ever come out of the Expanded Universe.
|
|
inherit
Darth Dennis
111
0
Jul 27, 2022 16:20:32 GMT
9,146
masterwarderz
8,113
August 2016
mastermasterwarderz
19,824
|
Post by masterwarderz on Aug 8, 2016 16:03:42 GMT
Hoth has the best quotes of any battle in the EU. "No one ever complained about the cold on Hoth. We never felt it. Even though we were blinded by blizzards, we could see the final end of the Rebellion in our blaster sights. Was it only a mirage? Perhaps; but on that day, on that planet, our blood ran hot with dreams of victory, melting the ice that stood in our way." "There is no tomorrow, men. Today, we crush the Rebellion, once and for all." ―Unnamed Imperial officer during the Battle of Hoth
The whole 501st journal is the best thing to ever come out of the Expanded Universe. Ehhh... I don't know about that personally. But then again I really like expanded conflict between Rebellion and Empire.
|
|
inherit
550
0
1,258
Teabaggin Krogan
365
August 2016
teabagginkrogan
|
Post by Teabaggin Krogan on Aug 8, 2016 16:07:09 GMT
Whether Star Wars is fantasy or not, wanting to explain or elaborate it, is neither futile nor stupid. I've always found works that try to explain their magic and put rules on it a lot more interesting than just stopping at "it's magic, don't worry about it". And the former tend to spark up more discussion than the latter do. Debating the rules, playing with the lore to support one conclusion over another seems much more fullfilling than just running facefirst into AWizardDitIt everytime, no? So yeah, I'm with HawkeyeGod on this. Star Wars deserves to be elaborated on and enriched with lore and rules. Whether that's by trying to harden it up sci-fi wise or just expanding on the nature of the Force, that seems to yield far more enjoyment down the line than "idk just dumb magic lolol" You're certainly welcome to do that and just leave it there. But I for one, don't think you're getting all the enjoyment you could out of the franchise. I quite enjoy it when a particular work tries to elaborate more on the mechanics behind how things work in their respective universe. And I'm always welcome and highly interested in the background lore behind the main narration. However, I also don't expect that out of everything and I can enjoy something just as well even if some happenings are attributed to space magic, as long as it isn't to jarring or too much of a deux ex machina. As I've already stated, I really enjoy the EU material but I also don't mind it that there's somethings that don't really make a lot of sense like for example, dog fights in space. So while I enjoy learning about how the universe works and debating these rules, I also don't mind overlooking instances where it's just a bit of space magic.
|
|
inherit
Darth Dennis
111
0
Jul 27, 2022 16:20:32 GMT
9,146
masterwarderz
8,113
August 2016
mastermasterwarderz
19,824
|
Post by masterwarderz on Aug 8, 2016 16:11:35 GMT
Whether Star Wars is fantasy or not, wanting to explain or elaborate it, is neither futile nor stupid. I've always found works that try to explain their magic and put rules on it a lot more interesting than just stopping at "it's magic, don't worry about it". And the former tend to spark up more discussion than the latter do. Debating the rules, playing with the lore to support one conclusion over another seems much more fullfilling than just running facefirst into AWizardDitIt everytime, no? So yeah, I'm with HawkeyeGod on this. Star Wars deserves to be elaborated on and enriched with lore and rules. Whether that's by trying to harden it up sci-fi wise or just expanding on the nature of the Force, that seems to yield far more enjoyment down the line than "idk just dumb magic lolol" You're certainly welcome to do that and just leave it there. But I for one, don't think you're getting all the enjoyment you could out of the franchise. I quite enjoy it when a particular work tries to elaborate more on the mechanics behind how things work in their respective universe. And I'm always welcome and highly interested in the background lore behind the main narration. However, I also don't expect that out of everything and I can enjoy something just as well even if some happenings are attributed to space magic, as long as it isn't to jarring or too much of a deux ex machina. As I've already stated, I really enjoy the EU material but I also don't mind it that there's somethings that don't really make a lot of sense like for example, dog fights in space. So while I enjoy learning about how the universe works and debating these rules, I also don't mind overlooking instances where it's just a bit of space magic. To be fair... I feel like it'd be less like dogfighting and more like really expensive high risk dodge ball. If you want to look at fighter craft engaging each other in space.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Aug 8, 2016 16:28:56 GMT
I quite enjoy it when a particular work tries to elaborate more on the mechanics behind how things work in their respective universe. And I'm always welcome and highly interested in the background lore behind the main narration. However, I also don't expect that out of everything and I can enjoy something just as well even if some happenings are attributed to space magic, as long as it isn't to jarring or too much of a deux ex machina. As I've already stated, I really enjoy the EU material but I also don't mind it that there's somethings that don't really make a lot of sense like for example, dog fights in space. So while I enjoy learning about how the universe works and debating these rules, I also don't mind overlooking instances where it's just a bit of space magic. I can dig it. But if someone tries to explain or justify those instances you overlook, that's cool too. And actually, the dogfighting in space thing was one of the things Zahn specifically wanted to avoid/mitigate according to the notes from the 20th Anniversary Edition of Heir to the Empire.
|
|
inherit
550
0
1,258
Teabaggin Krogan
365
August 2016
teabagginkrogan
|
Post by Teabaggin Krogan on Aug 8, 2016 16:37:44 GMT
Then why does it matter at all because if you do believe it is subjective, then you're both equally valid in your evaluation of the issue. Why call out his statement when it doesn't really matter because it's so dependent on the viewer's interpretation? My point being that he's perfectly valid to think that star wars is stupid because it is subject to his view or "taste" on the matter. Also from what I understand, I didn't feel like he was inherently trivializing the subject, as I felt his point about space magic, planes in space etc to be rather accurate. But that doesn't mean that star wars is any less off because of it, rather that it is a different kinda setting aimed at a different outcome. And yes, it does make a whole lot of difference when you're comparing a fantasy to a sci-fi setting because it's a difference of genres that goes beyond the stories being simply different to each other that runs through the core of how the author tells the story and sets up the universe. That'd be like saying the Need for speed games are the same as driving simulators like Gran Turismo when there's a world of difference between the two. Because I felt as though the quotee was more or less telling me 'don't overthink it, it's just mindless bullshit'. I never challenged his assertion otherwise, and I don't know why you're challenging mine here. I'm defending my point of view, not attacking his beyond what I perceive is his own attack on mine. You're missing the point. I never made a comparison of Star Wars to any of the other settings. All I asked was if he uses the same level of appeal to simplicity in other areas of fiction, and if he treats them any differently or the same. I for one never said anything about the similarities from one franchise to the next. You did. I also happen to disagree. Is a 'Song of Ice and Fire' (a dark fantasy) any less lore driven than say Larry Niven's 'Ringworld'? You're arguing on a false premise; while the narrative conventions of the two genres of fantasy and sci-fi are different, the characterization, development of the lore, or level of seriousness of the story isn't. I'm not making the comparison between such genres as you say I am. All I've said is a question regarding whether the quotee took other forms of fiction just as non-seriously. And that's something that applies to all fiction, and not under the semantics of different franchises and their intent. But why would you treat all fiction the same way? The development of lore is of course different in the different genres, that's what makes them so diverse in the first place! Same with the measure of realism and seriousness, different works have different levels and types of developing these characteristics and I do treat them differently because what the authors are aiming to get across is also different in these cases. You say you aren't comparing star wars to any other settings, sure fine, but to quote you "Would you say that any sci-fi by Terry Pratchett, or Arthur C. Clarke, or Isaac Asimov, or Neil Gaiman is, at their core stupid escapist fantasy?", the works of Asimov for example, from what I've read personally are very clearly sci-fi and there's not even a question of comparing those to being stupid escapist fantasies because what those works attempt to do are entirely different! Why would you even make that implication in the first place? And I'm not trying to challenge your views here, merely curious.
|
|
inherit
118
0
6,166
The Hype Himself
Proud Sponsor of Swingin' Seamen Charter Fishing: My Live Bait Will Catch Your Fish Every Time!
4,023
August 2016
hawkeyegod
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by The Hype Himself on Aug 8, 2016 16:48:46 GMT
Because I felt as though the quotee was more or less telling me 'don't overthink it, it's just mindless bullshit'. I never challenged his assertion otherwise, and I don't know why you're challenging mine here. I'm defending my point of view, not attacking his beyond what I perceive is his own attack on mine. You're missing the point. I never made a comparison of Star Wars to any of the other settings. All I asked was if he uses the same level of appeal to simplicity in other areas of fiction, and if he treats them any differently or the same. I for one never said anything about the similarities from one franchise to the next. You did. I also happen to disagree. Is a 'Song of Ice and Fire' (a dark fantasy) any less lore driven than say Larry Niven's 'Ringworld'? You're arguing on a false premise; while the narrative conventions of the two genres of fantasy and sci-fi are different, the characterization, development of the lore, or level of seriousness of the story isn't. I'm not making the comparison between such genres as you say I am. All I've said is a question regarding whether the quotee took other forms of fiction just as non-seriously. And that's something that applies to all fiction, and not under the semantics of different franchises and their intent. But why would you treat all fiction the same way? The development of lore is of course different in the different genres, that's what makes them so diverse in the first place! Same with the measure of realism and seriousness, different works have different levels and types of developing these characteristics and I do treat them differently because what the authors are aiming to get across is also different in these cases. You say you aren't comparing star wars to any other settings, sure fine, but to quote you "Would you say that any sci-fi by Terry Pratchett, or Arthur C. Clarke, or Isaac Asimov, or Neil Gaiman is, at their core stupid escapist fantasy?", the works of Asimov for example, from what I've read personally are very clearly sci-fi and there's not even a question of comparing those to being stupid escapist fantasies because what those works attempt to do are entirely different! Why would you even make that implication in the first place? And I'm not trying to challenge your views here, merely curious. Because I want all fiction to be internally consistent with its own rules. The fact that Star Wars has more fantastical elements of its universe doesn't change this. It's not something that changes for any fiction really. It's not a question of narrative diversity, its a point of taking the story for what its internal values are. To dismiss a space fantasy as less worthy of the kind of examination as a hard sci-fi plot is disingenuous. Semantics, man, don't get hung up on them. It's not about fantasy/sci-fi, it's about fiction overall. The point is, does he give the same level of thought to those stories, or does he draw a line between them, with one being more worthy of internal examination than the other? By that matter, do you? The quotee stated that he doesn't think that its useful to look at Star Wars too deeply since it is escapist fantasy. I disagree, since I think there is a lot more than escapist fantasy. I asked him (and you) if you see a particular difference in the treatment of thought in other realms of fiction, and if so, why?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
25
0
Apr 26, 2024 15:59:32 GMT
Deleted
0
Apr 26, 2024 15:59:32 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2016 17:05:55 GMT
I quit Star Wars after they nuked the EU. That was the best thing about it, imo. I a girl I was dating wanted to see it, so I went to see Episode VII. I thought it was basically a gender-bent remake of Episode IV, and didn't really like it at all. The girl and I stopped dating shortly after that. I don't blame you. You had stuff like Caedus, Palpatine returning from the force via cloned bodies and an actual revived Jedi order led by grandmaster Luke Skywalker. I'm still giving it a chance because it seems like they're taking snippets from the EU but changing names and origins. It remains to be seen if Kylo Ren will ever become Darth Ren or whatever name he is given a a sith lord. What I don't care about are the spinoffs. Unless it involves Boba Fett or force wielders, there's nothing for me.
|
|
inherit
118
0
6,166
The Hype Himself
Proud Sponsor of Swingin' Seamen Charter Fishing: My Live Bait Will Catch Your Fish Every Time!
4,023
August 2016
hawkeyegod
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by The Hype Himself on Aug 8, 2016 17:17:48 GMT
I quit Star Wars after they nuked the EU. That was the best thing about it, imo. I a girl I was dating wanted to see it, so I went to see Episode VII. I thought it was basically a gender-bent remake of Episode IV, and didn't really like it at all. The girl and I stopped dating shortly after that. I don't blame you. You had stuff like Caedus, Palpatine returning from the force via cloned bodies and an actual revived Jedi order led by grandmaster Luke Skywalker. I'm still giving it a chance because it seems like they're taking snippets from the EU but changing names and origins. It remains to be seen if Kylo Ren will ever become Darth Ren or whatever name he is given a a sith lord. What I don't care about are the spinoffs. Unless it involves Boba Fett or force wielders, there's nothing for me. Dark Horse did the comics far better than Marvel ever did, and one particular point about the revival of the Jedi Order was Luke struggled so hard to build something totally from scratch again, with him functionally being the only Jedi in the galaxy (with a completely non-traditional Jedi origin for him to boot). He has bare scraps of data and information to rebuild with, since the purge of the Jedi meant that beyond a few troves of data untouched by the Empire, there was little to nothing that he had to build with and he still made it work. And the implication was that even though the Empire wiped out the Jedi, the Order had long been in decline, becoming too dogmatic, unbending, and stalwart in their extremely conservative, traditional views of the Force. Luke, without anything to base that on, changed that (though the later books irritatingly showed him starting to adopt tenets of the old Order, like the robes, the Temple, etc.) I liked the Praxeum system he had, where it was normal people learning that they had extraordinary power, and were able to be great without all the doctrine overwhelming them, and a return to being people who did right by the galaxy with the best of their abilities. He took them away from being warrior-monks who were too religious and dogmatic, and turned them into people who could function in the galaxy as members of it, not just all-neutral-holier-than-thou monks. A great moment in the comics was from the death of Sha Koon by Vader, who had previously worked to keep the ways of the old, dying Order alive in a traditionalist, conservative mean. As she lay dying, she experienced a vision that confirmed that while the Order she knew would die, the Jedi, and the Force, would live on and be reborn and renewed, greater than ever before. As Obi-Wan and Yoda both said to Luke: "You are not the last of the Old Jedi. You are the First of the New."
|
|
inherit
550
0
1,258
Teabaggin Krogan
365
August 2016
teabagginkrogan
|
Post by Teabaggin Krogan on Aug 8, 2016 17:32:11 GMT
But why would you treat all fiction the same way? The development of lore is of course different in the different genres, that's what makes them so diverse in the first place! Same with the measure of realism and seriousness, different works have different levels and types of developing these characteristics and I do treat them differently because what the authors are aiming to get across is also different in these cases. You say you aren't comparing star wars to any other settings, sure fine, but to quote you "Would you say that any sci-fi by Terry Pratchett, or Arthur C. Clarke, or Isaac Asimov, or Neil Gaiman is, at their core stupid escapist fantasy?", the works of Asimov for example, from what I've read personally are very clearly sci-fi and there's not even a question of comparing those to being stupid escapist fantasies because what those works attempt to do are entirely different! Why would you even make that implication in the first place? And I'm not trying to challenge your views here, merely curious. Because I want all fiction to be internally consistent with its own rules. The fact that Star Wars has more fantastical elements of its universe doesn't change this. It's not something that changes for any fiction really. It's not a question of narrative diversity, its a point of taking the story for what its internal values are. To dismiss a space fantasy as less worthy of the kind of examination as a hard sci-fi plot is disingenuous. Semantics, man, don't get hung up on them. It's not about fantasy/sci-fi, it's about fiction overall. The point is, does he give the same level of thought to those stories, or does he draw a line between them, with one being more worthy of internal examination than the other? By that matter, do you? The quotee stated that he doesn't think that its useful to look at Star Wars too deeply since it is escapist fantasy. I disagree, since I think there is a lot more than escapist fantasy. I asked him (and you) if you see a particular difference in the treatment of thought in other realms of fiction, and if so, why? Yup I agree that fiction has to be internally consistent with its own rules, however the point here isn't that a space fantasy is less worthy of examination than a sci-fi setting, rather that they both require different forms of examinations because of the different nature of their setting and narration. And it's not just simply semantics or labeling either, in fact these labels exist because there are fundamental differences to the way these genres are set. For further emphasis, I don't think one is more worthy of internal examination than the other, rather I think that they're each worthy of internal examination but of different kinds that allude to their setting or what I feel the author is trying to convey. To draw a parallel, think of it like paintings. You're not gonna look at a super realistic charcoal sketch the same way as you would something from the more elaborate and exaggerated renaissance style or a piece of more abstract setting. So I do look at these different realms of fiction differently because to look at it otherwise would be a generalization that can lead to me missing out on things because I'm looking for the same things in everything.
|
|
inherit
Darth Dennis
111
0
Jul 27, 2022 16:20:32 GMT
9,146
masterwarderz
8,113
August 2016
mastermasterwarderz
19,824
|
Post by masterwarderz on Aug 8, 2016 17:36:14 GMT
One of my favorite duels in the later EU. Jacen Solo vs Jaina Solo aboard his flagship the Anakin Solo Its brutal, and interesting and overall just one of the most engaging fight sequences I have ever read. Jacen is going into this minus a hand, and with a hole in his gut. Yet the Dark Lord of the Sith is still pretty evenly matched with the Sword of the Jedi, and truth be told he isn't really even interested in fighting her, he's slowly making his way to the exit the entire time they are engaged in battle. He only tries to kill her when she intercedes in that, then he just throws her through bulkheads, flings lightning at her, and in their final exchange of blows. Almost bisects her. Caedus by this point has survived battles with Luke Skywalker, killed numerous Jedi, and is basically unquestionably the strongest Sith since Palpatine in terms of both threat level and power.
|
|
inherit
118
0
6,166
The Hype Himself
Proud Sponsor of Swingin' Seamen Charter Fishing: My Live Bait Will Catch Your Fish Every Time!
4,023
August 2016
hawkeyegod
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by The Hype Himself on Aug 8, 2016 17:42:48 GMT
Because I want all fiction to be internally consistent with its own rules. The fact that Star Wars has more fantastical elements of its universe doesn't change this. It's not something that changes for any fiction really. It's not a question of narrative diversity, its a point of taking the story for what its internal values are. To dismiss a space fantasy as less worthy of the kind of examination as a hard sci-fi plot is disingenuous. Semantics, man, don't get hung up on them. It's not about fantasy/sci-fi, it's about fiction overall. The point is, does he give the same level of thought to those stories, or does he draw a line between them, with one being more worthy of internal examination than the other? By that matter, do you? The quotee stated that he doesn't think that its useful to look at Star Wars too deeply since it is escapist fantasy. I disagree, since I think there is a lot more than escapist fantasy. I asked him (and you) if you see a particular difference in the treatment of thought in other realms of fiction, and if so, why? Yup I agree that fiction has to be internally consistent with its own rules, however the point here isn't that a space fantasy is less worthy of examination than a sci-fi setting, rather that they both require different forms of examinations because of the different nature of their setting and narration. And it's not just simply semantics or labeling either, in fact these labels exist because there are fundamental differences to the way these genres are set. For further emphasis, I don't think one is more worthy of internal examination than the other, rather I think that they're each worthy of internal examination but of different kinds that allude to their setting or what I feel the author is trying to convey. To draw a parallel, think of it like paintings. You're not gonna look at a super realistic charcoal sketch the same way as you would something from the more elaborate and exaggerated renaissance style or a piece of more abstract setting. So I do look at these different realms of fiction differently because to look at it otherwise would be a generalization that can lead to me missing out on things because I'm looking for the same things in everything. We're talking past each other at this point. I agree with the points you're making here, but those aren't the points of what I've been talking about (in fact, what I said was a non-distinct 'they're both worthy of examination on their own merits'). The semantics comes up in that you think I'm trying to generalize a comparison between works that are across broadly different genres, which I'm not doing, and did't say that I was doing. The point I've been aiming for (and for which you shown distinction from the original) is that the original quotee stated in paraphrased terms: "Space fantasy, such as Star Wars, is mindless escapist fantasy. It's a waste of effort to try and make sense of it and better to just enjoy it for the fun as it happens." Despite defending the poster in question, I feel that you've structured your argument around something that I haven't argued against (and am indeed largely for). My purpose was to attack the mindset of 'It's just fantasy, don't think too hard' by asking him if he looks at other fiction the same way, and if so, why he makes an exception for Star Wars. At this point, I'd say to let the guy defend himself here, if he wants too.
|
|
inherit
Darth Dennis
111
0
Jul 27, 2022 16:20:32 GMT
9,146
masterwarderz
8,113
August 2016
mastermasterwarderz
19,824
|
Post by masterwarderz on Aug 8, 2016 17:49:09 GMT
Another profound moment in the EU that all fans know of. ...Whether you love it or hate it, you will never forget it.
|
|
inherit
550
0
1,258
Teabaggin Krogan
365
August 2016
teabagginkrogan
|
Post by Teabaggin Krogan on Aug 8, 2016 18:20:43 GMT
Yup I agree that fiction has to be internally consistent with its own rules, however the point here isn't that a space fantasy is less worthy of examination than a sci-fi setting, rather that they both require different forms of examinations because of the different nature of their setting and narration. And it's not just simply semantics or labeling either, in fact these labels exist because there are fundamental differences to the way these genres are set. For further emphasis, I don't think one is more worthy of internal examination than the other, rather I think that they're each worthy of internal examination but of different kinds that allude to their setting or what I feel the author is trying to convey. To draw a parallel, think of it like paintings. You're not gonna look at a super realistic charcoal sketch the same way as you would something from the more elaborate and exaggerated renaissance style or a piece of more abstract setting. So I do look at these different realms of fiction differently because to look at it otherwise would be a generalization that can lead to me missing out on things because I'm looking for the same things in everything. We're talking past each other at this point. I agree with the points you're making here, but those aren't the points of what I've been talking about (in fact, what I said was a non-distinct 'they're both worthy of examination on their own merits'). The semantics comes up in that you think I'm trying to generalize a comparison between works that are across broadly different genres, which I'm not doing, and did't say that I was doing. The point I've been aiming for (and for which you shown distinction from the original) is that the original quotee stated in paraphrased terms: "Space fantasy, such as Star Wars, is mindless escapist fantasy. It's a waste of effort to try and make sense of it and better to just enjoy it for the fun as it happens." Despite defending the poster in question, I feel that you've structured your argument around something that I haven't argued against (and am indeed largely for). My purpose was to attack the mindset of 'It's just fantasy, don't think too hard' by asking him if he looks at other fiction the same way, and if so, why he makes an exception for Star Wars. At this point, I'd say to let the guy defend himself here, if he wants too. lol yeah, I'm getting that feeling as well. But I wasn't defending the guy at all, rather I was inquiring after your posts on the matter. You're now stating that "they're both worthy of examination in their own merits" when your initial question was whether one was more worthy of internal examination than the other. Also the whole point here that I'm been trying to make repeatedly is about the mindset seeing it as a fantasy and why so, which seems to be going nowhere. Meh, good talk anyways..
|
|
inherit
Darth Dennis
111
0
Jul 27, 2022 16:20:32 GMT
9,146
masterwarderz
8,113
August 2016
mastermasterwarderz
19,824
|
Post by masterwarderz on Aug 8, 2016 18:32:02 GMT
|
|
Nayawk
N3
Posts: 476 Likes: 671
inherit
183
0
671
Nayawk
476
August 2016
nayawk
|
Post by Nayawk on Aug 8, 2016 21:12:08 GMT
I get that a lot of people love the EU, but they were never canon. Not ever. Lucas repeatedly said only the movies were canon , so it is hardly surprising that Disney followed that lead.
Also its not like Disney has come around to your house and personally set fire to your books and comics, they still exist, you can still enjoy them just as much today as you did a 5 years ago. Knock yourself out, enjoy what you want to enjoy (though frankly the Luke/Han/Chewie slash furry fanfic is scaring me) but lets be clear Disney/Lucas hasn't destroyed anything, its all still there.
|
|
inherit
Darth Dennis
111
0
Jul 27, 2022 16:20:32 GMT
9,146
masterwarderz
8,113
August 2016
mastermasterwarderz
19,824
|
Post by masterwarderz on Aug 8, 2016 21:21:43 GMT
I get that a lot of people love the EU, but they were never canon. Not ever. Lucas repeatedly said only the movies were canon , so it is hardly surprising that Disney followed that lead. Also its not like Disney has come around to your house and personally set fire to your books and comics, they still exist, you can still enjoy them just as much today as you did a 5 years ago. Knock yourself out, enjoy what you want to enjoy (though frankly the Luke/Han/Chewie slash furry fanfic is scaring me) but lets be clear Disney/Lucas hasn't destroyed anything, its all still there. Did you ignore the part were they are discontinuing runs of existing EU materials?
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Aug 8, 2016 21:38:46 GMT
I get that a lot of people love the EU, but they were never canon. Not ever. Lucas repeatedly said only the movies were canon , so it is hardly surprising that Disney followed that lead. Factually incorrect. Lucasfilm licensing maintained the Holocron continuity database that maintained the different levels of canon prior to the nuking. George Lucas said he doesn't particularly care about the EU but he did allow (and guide) several works, to say nothing of using several elements of the EU himself. Even in his less charitable statement on the EU he still referenced looking things up in the Star Wars Encyclopedia (which catalogued all Star Wars material not just the movies) to see if anyone had done anything with a name or a species etc. Then if he chose to do something different he could. That was always the understanding, the EU stands but Lucas has final say and can do what he wants and everyone else follows his lead. It worked and it was excellent. Disney and their abominable nuking follows no lead except their own. Which at the end of the day is the only not totally insane reason I can come up with for why they dicked us so bad. They don't give a shit, they just want everything to be Mickey all over. But then I look at Marvel and see that Disney haven't fucked them over and I just go back to beating my head against a wall in senseless incomprehension.
|
|
Nayawk
N3
Posts: 476 Likes: 671
inherit
183
0
671
Nayawk
476
August 2016
nayawk
|
Post by Nayawk on Aug 8, 2016 21:40:32 GMT
Did you ignore the part were they are discontinuing runs of existing EU materials? No I didn't, and yes it sad for those of you that like this stuff that the run is over, but that is a fact of life for nearly every creative form. My point is mostly directed at the 'Disney has destroyed everything' line of thinking. They have taken nothing away, there are still 100s of books and comics and games out there, they aren't going to magically disappear. Sorry if you aren't one of these but it kinda smacks of the same 'Lucas raped my childhood' bollocks I've had to listen to since the prequels and it can but wearing.
|
|
inherit
Darth Dennis
111
0
Jul 27, 2022 16:20:32 GMT
9,146
masterwarderz
8,113
August 2016
mastermasterwarderz
19,824
|
Post by masterwarderz on Aug 8, 2016 22:11:47 GMT
|
|
inherit
118
0
6,166
The Hype Himself
Proud Sponsor of Swingin' Seamen Charter Fishing: My Live Bait Will Catch Your Fish Every Time!
4,023
August 2016
hawkeyegod
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
|
Post by The Hype Himself on Aug 8, 2016 22:47:25 GMT
I get that a lot of people love the EU, but they were never canon. Not ever. Lucas repeatedly said only the movies were canon , so it is hardly surprising that Disney followed that lead. Factually incorrect. Lucasfilm licensing maintained the Holocron continuity database that maintained the different levels of canon prior to the nuking. George Lucas said he doesn't particularly care about the EU but he did allow (and guide) several works, to say nothing of using several elements of the EU himself. Even in his less charitable statement on the EU he still referenced looking things up in the Star Wars Encyclopedia (which catalogued all Star Wars material not just the movies) to see if anyone had done anything with a name or a species etc. Then if he chose to do something different he could. That was always the understanding, the EU stands but Lucas has final say and can do what he wants and everyone else follows his lead. It worked and it was excellent. Disney and their abominable nuking follows no lead except their own. Which at the end of the day is the only not totally insane reason I can come up with for why they dicked us so bad. They don't give a shit, they just want everything to be Mickey all over. But then I look at Marvel and see that Disney haven't fucked them over and I just go back to beating my head against a wall in senseless incomprehension. To back it up further, Lucas also recognized that the EU would conform to the effects that he would put in the universe, and in his more charitable statements, stated that he was supportive to more windows beyond just his own in the Galaxy Far, Far Away. I believe that he wasn't particularly fond of the EU using his characters (The Golden Trio, Chewie, Vader, etc), but he didn't mind and even supported independent creations and stories that were in his universe. And if I recall, when they killed off Chewbacca in Vector Prime, it was Lucas himself who gave his approval to do so. I think an author once mentioned that if they were ever going to do a character death from the main characters (Luke, Han, Leia, the droids, Lando, etc.) they needed his approval to do so. The fact that he allowed the writers to kill off Chewbacca tells me that he wasn't at all against the EU, so long as they maintained the integrity of his stories. As for Marvel, the MCU has the advantage of being a part of a multiverse with various continuities and timelines (they even intersect from time to time.) Any change they or development to the MCU is just chalked up to it being a different timeline to the comics. I think you also brought this up. In which case, everything is fair game for Marvel to interpret however they want in the movies; the only time it's bad is when the movie itself is just a badly made PoS technically. Same goes for the new Star Trek, which was IMO a workable, if cheap, solution to the problem of nuking their EU, by simply turning back time at a crucial event, and causing a change in the timeline. And of course, they were even able to reconcile the new timeline with the old (i.e. Spock Prime). Star Wars couldn't really afford this luxury... oh wait, it totally could have. Remember that really, really, really obscure comic from the 80's where Leia and 4 stormtroopers got sent back in time? They totally could have gone that route too.
|
|
Remki
N1
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Jade Empire
Posts: 27 Likes: 52
inherit
666
0
Sept 17, 2016 22:45:09 GMT
52
Remki
27
August 2016
remki
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by Remki on Aug 9, 2016 0:05:00 GMT
Because it gets set aside creatively by the franchise powers-that-be and no longer has any bearing on the plot. As I've said before, the movies were always secondary to my experience with the Universe. To me, the heart and soul of the series was in the universe, and its vast, different, and complex interpretations from various points of view that showed just how big the galaxy far, far away really is. And yes, the new canon COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY destroys every bit of canon post-Episode III. How much of the EU was left intact after Return of the Jedi? None of it! Seriously, tell me which parts of the EU were kept intact without being picked and clawed at like some vulture chewing on carrion. For that matter, how far back does the retroactive purge go? How much more in the past doesn't make the cut? Stories exist to make sense. They exist to follow a lineage set to make internal consistency within themselves, and when they can't develop or keep that consistency (especially after so much development), they lose their value. It sets aside characters, stories, events, and lore that were developed over decades of work for new characters and events of which we had no bearing or knowledge before. It takes away the purpose of the story, the exposition that it will lead somewhere, and changes it into a direction of 'but it all didn't really happen at all'. I'm not a fan of the changing of an entire universe. To you, it might be a momentary chance to live in universe you love. To me, it's not even the same universe. I've lost my connection to that universe. I have no involvement or love for it anymore, since what I have nobody I identify with anymore. All of what I like is little more than fanfiction. I don't follow 'unofficial' stories. There's no truth in them, nothing to be gleaned from the universe since the rules it was written under no longer apply. The breakthroughs, insights, developments, and changes that are brought about by the book don't have anymore but the esoteric of the esoteric value (which isn't substantial to me). I think stories losing their value is subjective and based off of what an individual is looking to gain from the story. Personally, I don't place value on the consistency of a fictional universe so much as I do on the ability of the universe to influence me in a particular moment. If the content of that moment conflicts with the canon of another moment, it doesn't invalidate my personal experience of both instances. I can see how it might for some, since I don't expect my experiences to be universal. If the EU loses its value to you because it's been severed from official canon, that's a valid opinion but not a general fact applicable to all experiences. Similarly, the value of "unofficial" stories is also subjective, as is what an individual might define as narrative truth. I'm certainly not going to discount your experience, even if it's not one I share. This is unfortunate. I've been on the fan end of similar series shut downs and it's never fun. I have no interest in speaking for/against Disney, but in all likelihood I expect there were legal reasons why they chose to end Legends rather than leave it as a side branch of the franchise, and that's disappointing. But there's still a difference between phasing out a series from publication and, say, rounding up the existing material to burn or some other similar destructive, final means. The EU as it stands continues to exist, in personal collections and what remains in consumer circulation, and as such it will likely continue to be referenced and influence fan experiences in the future. As somebody who frequently seeks out discontinued books for reference, it can be a pain but it's certainly not impossible, especially with mass paperbacks and the proliferation of PDF copies made by people seeking to disseminate hard-to-find materials. Simply put, the existing EU will not disappear overnight (or even over a decade), and it's entirely possible that Disney's relation with the EU might change again in the future. As you stated, there's certainly enough content there for Disney to make a decent revenue stream off continued publication. I'm not sure we're reading the same books, at least in regards to the Empire. Thrawn might not be as wantonly destructive as Vader but I still wouldn't call the Thrawn-era Empire a place that would be good to live in. Also just from a readers stand point there are too many moments in regards to Thrawn's capabilities where I end up thinking "bullsh*t" rather than "amazing". Not that he isn't a good villain or interesting, just that I do feel his status as this amazing Imperial villain that can't be matched by anyone else in either the EU or the new canon feels overhyped. He is, in my experience, very typical of most mid-range pulp scifi villains. I honestly believe the most well-developed character in the whole trilogy is Talon Karrde, for reason's you've stated and others. The rest have their moments but in general my personal experience has been underwhelming for what has been the EUs most recommended series. I'm moving on the Rogue Squadron after this, but I'm not as hopeful for it as I was before reading the Thrawn trilogy. *Shrugs* IMHO Rey is as much a Mary-Sue as Luke was in Episode IV. I feel a lot of the criticism thrown at her character is equally applicable to Luke at the beginning of his story, but refuses to acknowledge the space for growth that he was given in the original trilogy that Rey hasn't had yet, since the rest of her story is as yet unreleased. I'm not going to argue that you have to like her, but the vitrol thrown at the new trio (and Rey in particular) feels less like actual criticism of the story and character arc and more knee-jerk reaction against the "new kids" in general. Otherwise those same criticisms would be equally applied to the old trio as the new. As for turning it into a cash cow, not sure what you thought it was before? Because it certainly wasn't a philanthropic endeavor on the part of George Lucas or his company like some indie series being paid for out of pocket based solely on the love of the story. Lucas didn't sell it because he wanted it to grow beyond him. Even if that was a factor in his motivation, I imagine the biggest factor was really the amount of $$$ on the check he received. Disney is a business, and they paid for the right to an IP. I'm not sure what people seem to expect from that except the (logical) continued use of that IP for the sake of profits. It is certainly well within your rights as a consumer to protest against their acquisition and treatment of the IP by refusing to pay for their product, but like I stated in my earlier post, I just don't understand the negativity towards fans who continue to like/support the new stuff. Feels a lot like throwing rocks at a party because you didn't want to go and don't want others to enjoy it either. No franchise since has ever had such a massive, cohesive universe span decades and across so many forms of media and who knows if another will ever rise again? Not to nitpick but Star Trek and Doctor Who have similarly massive EUs when it comes to books, comics, TV series, audio dramas, games, etc. I would also suggest The Lord of the Rings to some extent, but LOTR EU stuff tends to be more lateral in story movement and simply expands on what JRRT had already outlined in his (admittedly extensive) history of Middle Earth. Some things get officially dropped from canon when they contradict something in the more "main" canon like movies & shows, but generally both ST and DW have an extremely large, loose canon that spans thousands of years worth of war, relationships, scientific progress, people, families, nations, etc. It doesn't change what's happening to the SW EU, but to say that the SW EU is completely unique in its canonical incarnation isn't quite true.
|
|
inherit
Darth Dennis
111
0
Jul 27, 2022 16:20:32 GMT
9,146
masterwarderz
8,113
August 2016
mastermasterwarderz
19,824
|
Post by masterwarderz on Aug 9, 2016 0:12:41 GMT
._. Well that was completely pointless. Reading that crap I mean...anyway. You could have summed it up with: Sucks for you, the EU is gone, get it over it. Rey isn't a mary sue! Except she totally is As this is a Star Wars thread and I am quite sick of reading this back and forth, I'd suggest a new topic. So the folks who like the new shit(god knows why...) can talk about how great Finn is for being a black guy in Star Wars and totally not being a waste of space character, and the folks who favor the EU can talk about how great the EU is. And how its filled with stories and scenarios that the new series will continually rip off at every possible convenience and we shall mock them for it. Sound good?
|
|