Luke Skywalker and the Shadows of Mindor Discussion Part 2

The old thread was locked, so I started a new one.

I re-read Luke Skywalker and the Shadows of Mindor a few months ago and it got me wondering how this story fits into continuity. I definitely got the sense that the way the Battle of Mindor is depicted in the book is not "the real story", but the holothriller Geptun came up with. The prologue and epilogue of "Mindor" take a much more realistic and gritty tone than much of Star Wars, certainly the movies, and you get the sense that every story you have heard about Star Wars is an idealized distortion of what actually happened. So what does this mean? Are the prologue and epilogue of "Mindor" the only "real" accounts. Or is only the story in "Mindor" falsified, while the rest (including the movies) are "true"?
_________________

Where sky and water meet,
Where the waves grow sweet,
Doubt not, Reepicheep,
To find all you seek,
There is the utter east.

That depends on your point of view.

From the POV of the author he probably wants you to not know what is real and what isn't.

From the POV of continuity it's all true.

From the POV of George Lucas nothing happens after episode VI.

Inception! Shocked

_________________

"It's not about the legacy you leave, it's about the life you live." ~Mara Jade Skywalker

I thought of that while I was typing.
_________________

Where sky and water meet,
Where the waves grow sweet,
Doubt not, Reepicheep,
To find all you seek,
There is the utter east.

You can probably consider the facts more or less accurate, but stylized somewhat. As a result, the book can be taken as being within continuity, but little details can be ignored by other authors if they needed to, and retcon those details as "that part was fiction".

It's like the Genndy Clone Wars cartoon series. The facts are all correct, but the stylization messes up the finer points. The absolutely massive space battles and ground battles that are way off scale.
_________________
It was the year of fire… the year of destruction… the year we took back what was ours.
It was the year of rebirth… the year of great sadness… the year of pain… and the year of joy.
It was a new age. It was the end of history. It was the year everything changed.
The year is 2261.
The place: Babylon 5.

So the Plagueis thread doesn't get more derailed...

I'd like to pick up on the discussion about Luke being a psychopath.

First off, realistic portrayals of individuals should not equate to everyone who kills people to suffer from post traumatic stress syndrome. Not everyone who comes out of combat suffers from that. Many people go on with their lives. They have memories, good and bad, but that doesn't ruin their lives.

Secondly, Luke has done a lot of good. I'd also go as far as to say that anyone on the Deathstar was more than fair game in a war. You can't be stationed on a weapon designed to annihilate entire planets and think "I'm not such a bad person for supporting this regime and keeping this station going." It doesn't work like that.

Furthermore Luke has reflected on these things in the books, so it's not like he's never mentioned all those people he killed. There's no reason for him to constantly mention it either. That would get old real fast.

Getting back on focus, people who kill other people in combat, and then don't suffer PTSD, are not psychopaths. I just do not agree with that statement at all. Psychopaths are people who kill others when they don't have to, when they are not under combat situations, and generally they kill unarmed people.

If you try to say everyone on the Deathstar was unarmed, or some extrapolation on that degree, then bomber pilots in real life are psychopaths. The worst of them all would be the ones who dropped the A-Bomb.
_________________

I don't see how blowing up the Death Star is any different than blowing up a Star Destroyer, or more comparably a fleet of ships during a battle. The Death Star was a military post with defense battlements and fighter squadron and battleship support, not a civilian research installation, and it falls under whatever moral or legal rules are followed according to the principles of warfare.

On top of that it was the staging point and instrumentation of the destruction of billions on Alderaan, even if all members of it's crew at the time of it's own destruction were not directly responsible; It was also setting up to destroy Yavin IV, so the Rebels acted not only according to the rules of engagement but also in self defense.

Still Luke may have felt bad about the loss of life, but it's hard to argue that it wasn't justified.

Knight Joined: 10 Apr 2011 Posts: 434

Wait ... is this the same Geptun from Shatterpoint?!!

Master Joined: 09 Jun 2009 Posts: 1410

Not sure but probably. Kar Vastor and Nick Rostu from Shatterpoint are also in the book.
_________________
Roqoo Depot co-founder.

Knight Joined: 10 Apr 2011 Posts: 434

Wow! I had no idea Vastor and Rostu were still around in the New Republic era!

Master Joined: 09 Jun 2009 Posts: 1410

Uli Davini from the Medstar books is in Death Star. I liked that because I wondered what happened to Uli. I like it when there are character crossing eras.
_________________
Roqoo Depot co-founder.

Keep in mind, I don't consider Luke a psychopath. He's one of my favourite characters after all. I said that in real life Luke would be considered a psychopath, but because Star Wars is idealized science fiction, I can buy his goodness. It's a different type of story-telling and one with plenty of merits.

It's true that not every soldier is diagnosed with PTSD, but I would say the majority are thoroughly shaken. If that isn't the case, I think that soldier has a mental problem. I remember reading about an American sniper who had killed many enemy soldiers in the Middle East. I forget his name, but he's had a book published and said his only regret is that he didn't kill more people. Something's wrong there. You can't just kill people, be unshaken by it (and even brag about it!) and be considered mentally stable. Confused

_________________

Where sky and water meet,
Where the waves grow sweet,
Doubt not, Reepicheep,
To find all you seek,
There is the utter east.

It depends on how we define "thoroughly shaken." Let's say Luke's portrayal in current Star Wars is a realistic portrayal of a real person. Luke really exists, he's killed thousands of people in combat.

Under those circumstances, how do you think he should be portrayed?

In my opinion, he would be the same. He would reflect on the deaths, feel bad about, when he has to kill someone those deaths would recur to him, he would realize he's adding to the total. But I don't think he would be incapacitated by all that. Luke has a strong sense of identity and a good sense of morality. I don't think it would stop him from still being able to live his life.
_________________

Page 1 of 3		All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next