|
|
|
| Arawn_Fenn wrote: |
| Good for you, but that has nothing to do with anything I said. Also, Leland Chee is not the "foremost authority" on SW ( though some may try to wish him into such a position in order to accomplish an agenda ). That status belongs to a different person. |
You were talking about the Holocron hierarchy, not Lucas. Stop dodging. And Leland is the foremost authority there, moreso than Rostoni. And far more than any "understood" or "obvious" things you have assumed about SW. And that is what my comment referred to: Your dismissing of him based on it not making sense per your understanding. That I would not have done the same on such flimsy grounds.
| Quote: |
| When you're trying to negate Lucas as an authority on SW, what you assume is being substituted in his place. |
This might be a little hard to swallow, so I will try to make it more clear:
Lucas is an authority on SW to be sure. The foremost one. However, he has erected a system around him to be caretakers of SW in his place, and as part of their job, those caretakers define the "truth of SW" that the EU is built upon. So insofar as this same truth is to be adhered to, something we pretty much have to in a discussion of Holocron continuity or Canon, the caretakers are the final authority, not Lucas. Not because GL doesn't get to tell them what to do, but because unless he explicitly does so, or they go out of their way to incoprporate comments by him, his opinions and statements aren't reflected in the EU.
It is not a matter of Leland being in opposition to Lucas, or not being a slave to his vision. It is a matter of practicality. Of whether Lucas actually got off his butt and gave Leland an order. Until he does, Leland gets to do what he wants, and since his job includes sound decisions as far as the EU is concerned, it is no stretch that he would have to weigh blind servitude to GL's opinions against the good of the EU. Turn a blind eye to interview comments if these would be detrimental to the EU, for example. We have all been exposed to Lucas' comment about being willing to let others play in his universe. That implies he is willing to let others do stuff with it so long as his core beliefs are respected. His non-core beliefes are not so lucky, however.
It basically comes down to whether you are a Lucas adherent or a Holocron adherent, as I have mentioned many times in the past. And the EU is a Holocron adherent, in practice making most of us that as well.
| Quote: |
| It's not rocket science. He failed miserably when asked to provide examples of EU overriding the films, because EU doesn't override the films. The whole concept of a so-called "emergency" in this context does not make sense, being nothing more than a statement of the same old desperate up-is-down revisionism that puts C-canon above the films. |
None of this justifies why he should not be taken seriously, however. The thing you were supposed to answer. I have above given practical reasons for why an emergency hatch is viable. Cause Lucas might muck things up for the EU, and he pays them to make sure it isn't mucked up. There can be such a thing as paying someone to make sure you don't screw things up for yourself. GL is also perfectly within his rights to force Leland to change this policy. He hasn't, far as we know.
| Quote: |
| It means exactly what it says: Leland's various excuses given to ignore Lucas don't apply to the material in the commentaries, and he has provided no similar rationale to justify the exclusion of that material. |
You are starting at the wrong end. The premise has to be established first. Why should the material in the commentaries be included to begin with? Anything relevant from them can be delivered to Licensing through other, more specialized means, while the commentaries are an informal talk between creators and viewers. If there is a discrepancy between the commentaries and the EU, as there sometimes are , that must mean what was said didn't matter enough to Lucas or the film development team to be included in the Holocron, or was ignored by Leland for some reason. Whatever the case, it means the commentary was not authoritative enough to become part of Holocron continuity.
So if it is the best source for Ani being the Chosen One, it doesn't hold up versus a skeptical audience. Fortunately, no one is really going to doubt Ani being the Chosen One. All they can say it that it hasn't been proven beyond reasonable doubt. And since the GL mouthpieces give conflicting accounts, they don't illuminate the issue either.
| Quote: |
| DarthMRN wrote: |
| However, these being brief forum posts about a subject we fans are not really meant to understand completely, there might well be other reasons to ignore GL too. |
It is only your assumption that we are not really meant to understand the subject completely. This is incorrect. There is no official support for this assumption anywhere. |
Sorry, no. Leland has said as much. The Holocron system is for internal purposes, and fans wouldn't really understand how it works. Of course, with the TOS forum and blog gone, I can no longer prove this. Maybe when the blogs get back online.
| Quote: |
| We already have that. The ROTS DVD is a canon product. |
Nope. Only the film on that DVD is canon. The behind the scenes interviews with Ewan or Rick or whoever doesn't make these people canon parts of the GFFA, for example. The menu system doesn't exist as some entity in the GFFA Han Solo once came across. Stop being silly.
| Quote: |
| You seem to think that disingenuously asking for the "narrator God perspective" while simultaneously refusing to listen to the SW creator God perspective is a neat trick. |
That is because I thought it implied that the God perspective in question was one part of a canon media product. The opening crawl of the films. Textbox text in a comic book. Narration in a novel. Not interviews or commentaries made on the side.
| Quote: |
| It's not. You know what the "God perspective" is on this subject, but you don't accept it as superior to your own. |
Nonsense. I am merely defending healthy skepticism, all the while crushing this silly notion that what can be heard in commentaries and interviews are part of what we today call Canon. It is a matter of general principle. I don't personally doubt that Ani is the Chosen One. I personally doubt you can prove he is. There is a difference.
| Quote: |
| The status of the Chosen One is defined by destroying the Sith and thus restoring balance to the Force. Because Anakin does these things, Anakin is confirmed as the Chosen One. |
This is based on the premise that Yoda's definition is correct, after Mace draws it in question. GL mouthpiece vs GL mouthpiece helps no one. The only way to determine which one was right is through empirical observation, and since the Sith tradition survived under the Holocron paradigm, and we can't actually see the Force getting balanced, we lack that too.
| Quote: |
| Ignoring Lucas won't magically remove the relevant events in ROTJ from canonical existence. To argue that Anakin is not the Chosen One requires more than just a game of Simon Says. It must be shown that he does not fit the definition of the Chosen One. This approach is destined to fail in light of the facts we have. |
The burden of proof is upon the one making a claim to begin with, not the doubters of that claim. And the beginning claim is that Anakin is the Chosen One. Until this is proven, I don't have to prove anthing. It is not my burden to do so. Which is good, for you are right, I couldn't.
| Quote: |
| DarthMRN wrote: |
| Its adherence would be a courtesy, one that must be weighed against the reality of getting a satisfactory product on the shelves on time. |
Hilarious. In what way does confirming or not confirming Anakin as the Chosen One interfere with "getting a satisfactory product on the shelves on time"? |
You need to stop cherrypicking with your interpretations. I was speaking in generalities. That the practical considerations of running the EU justifies the ability to igore GL unless explicitly told something, and perhaps then too. And that as an extension of this, Ani as the Chosen One might not be included in the Holocron just because of some DVD commentary. And until the moment we have confirmation that he is included, though some source claiming so in the God perspective, we can't say for sure that is the case.
| Quote: |
| Utter nonsense. Since Holocron entries are not revealed to us, you can't use this as a requirement to exclude facts you don't like, because you won't be notified either way. By that rationale we can know nothing. |
You are catching on. Except that isn't nonsense. It is healthy skepticism, something this fandom lacks in spades. A truth exists, and it can be found somewhere. That it is hard getting there doesn't mean we can claim facts from what are merely assumptions.
Besides, we can verify whether Ani as the Chosen One is part of the Holocron: By having a source approved by Licensing tell us so from the God perspective. But until one of these scenarios come to pass, we can know nothing, as you say.
_________________
I discuss to learn, not to win. Then again, learning enough tends to translate to victory in the end anyway.
|
|
