Star Wars on Trial by Keith R. A. DeCandido, David Brin, Tanya Huff, Kristine Kathryn Rusch, Matthew Woodring Stover
Authors: Keith R. A. DeCandido, David Brin, Tanya Huff, Kristine Kathryn Rusch, Matthew Woodring Stover
Ads: Link
Lucas doing the very thing Mr. Stover accuses me of! Taking things way too seriously. Ruining fun with endless prattling lecturey, smarmy, contradictory preachifying that has turned a cool sci-fi romp into a thundering, ponderous pile of Tauntaun....
DROID JUDGE: All right, Mr. Prosecutor. I think you have vented enough, in reply to any ad hominem remarks by the Defense. Do you have a final cross-examination question for the witness?
DAVID BRIN: Just one? I'm tempted to ask Mr. Stover what he means by arm-waving vaguely at Star Wars and calling it "Truth." Huh? Or why political issues from 2006 belong in a book about a timeless moral saga. But this wrangle is frustrating enough for the reader. So let's pose a more direct challenge.
If the core lesson of Star Wars is about rejecting both the vile Sith and the evil Jedi, why is it that nobody out there seems to have noticed?
In the United Kingdom, for example, the fastest-growing religion that people write on census forms is "Jedi"! Yes, a few brash cynics are taunting Yoda on the Web sites. But are you saying George Lucas meant for millions to despise what Yoda has done? And that he succeeded?
We could test it, in a room full of (unwarned) Star Wars fans. If I give a dollar to Mr. Stover for every one who says, "Of course Yoda does evil!" ... will Mr. Stover give me a dollar for every one who calls Yoda "wise and good"?
DROID JUDGE: A challenge, then. Mr. Stover may choose to answer here, or else to take up Mr. Brin's dare online.
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: I'll do better than that. If Mr. Brin can point to the spot in the transcript where I contended that "the core lesson of Star Wars is about rejecting both the vile Sith and the evil Jedi" I'll get down on my knees right here in court and kiss his stanky-
DROID JUDGE: Mr Stover! I am programmed to keep this PG!
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: Sorry; I'm from Chicago. This is the point, Your Synthetic Honor: Mr. Brin has not-so-gracefully skated back to his earlier con game of trying to conflate being arrogant and mistaken with being evil. I hope I never said Yoda was Eeeevil, nor did I mean to characterize the Jedi as such; perhaps we should once again check the transcript.
I do my best not to use the E-word, except when it's flung around by Opposing Counsel. As I said before, I'm not a moralist; even pointing out that Mr. Brin appears to have Sith tendencies is not a moral judgment, it's merely an observation-one I've been reconsidering, in fact, after finding out he likes Qui-Gon so much; I like Qui-Gon, too (though now that I think about it, it was Qui-Gon who essentially infiltrated Darth Vader into the Jedi Order... !).
Hmm ... no wonder he's Brin's favorite....
Anyway, even if I had used the E-word in reference to Yoda, the Jedi, Mr Brin or anyone at all, that would be an expression of interpretation-my opinion-which would deserve no greater weight than the opinion of anyone else. Including Opposing Counsel. I do not claim to be an authority on such matters, nor do I receive supernatural advice on the subject.
I do find it curious, however-and I wonder if some few members of the jury might share my surprise-that Mr. Brin, who spent so much of his Opening Statement explaining to all you Star Wars fans out there that Yoda is nothing more than, in his words, "a vicious little oven mitt," now hopes to make some quick cash by betting that the vast majority of you will think he's wrong....
I mean, jeez. Talk about having your weed and smoking it too.... How high do you have to be to not see though that one? Is it just me, or does this sound like the Prosecution is conceding defeat?
I avoid stating the "core lessons" of any work of art, for two reasons. The first is that I don't believe the function of art is to teach me a lesson-
DAVID BRIN: Not even when a work of art spends every other minute preaching-
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: -the second is that such pursuits always result in gross oversimplification. As I advise young
DROID JUDGE: All right, Mr. Prosecutor. I think you have vented enough, in reply to any ad hominem remarks by the Defense. Do you have a final cross-examination question for the witness?
DAVID BRIN: Just one? I'm tempted to ask Mr. Stover what he means by arm-waving vaguely at Star Wars and calling it "Truth." Huh? Or why political issues from 2006 belong in a book about a timeless moral saga. But this wrangle is frustrating enough for the reader. So let's pose a more direct challenge.
If the core lesson of Star Wars is about rejecting both the vile Sith and the evil Jedi, why is it that nobody out there seems to have noticed?
In the United Kingdom, for example, the fastest-growing religion that people write on census forms is "Jedi"! Yes, a few brash cynics are taunting Yoda on the Web sites. But are you saying George Lucas meant for millions to despise what Yoda has done? And that he succeeded?
We could test it, in a room full of (unwarned) Star Wars fans. If I give a dollar to Mr. Stover for every one who says, "Of course Yoda does evil!" ... will Mr. Stover give me a dollar for every one who calls Yoda "wise and good"?
DROID JUDGE: A challenge, then. Mr. Stover may choose to answer here, or else to take up Mr. Brin's dare online.
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: I'll do better than that. If Mr. Brin can point to the spot in the transcript where I contended that "the core lesson of Star Wars is about rejecting both the vile Sith and the evil Jedi" I'll get down on my knees right here in court and kiss his stanky-
DROID JUDGE: Mr Stover! I am programmed to keep this PG!
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: Sorry; I'm from Chicago. This is the point, Your Synthetic Honor: Mr. Brin has not-so-gracefully skated back to his earlier con game of trying to conflate being arrogant and mistaken with being evil. I hope I never said Yoda was Eeeevil, nor did I mean to characterize the Jedi as such; perhaps we should once again check the transcript.
I do my best not to use the E-word, except when it's flung around by Opposing Counsel. As I said before, I'm not a moralist; even pointing out that Mr. Brin appears to have Sith tendencies is not a moral judgment, it's merely an observation-one I've been reconsidering, in fact, after finding out he likes Qui-Gon so much; I like Qui-Gon, too (though now that I think about it, it was Qui-Gon who essentially infiltrated Darth Vader into the Jedi Order... !).
Hmm ... no wonder he's Brin's favorite....
Anyway, even if I had used the E-word in reference to Yoda, the Jedi, Mr Brin or anyone at all, that would be an expression of interpretation-my opinion-which would deserve no greater weight than the opinion of anyone else. Including Opposing Counsel. I do not claim to be an authority on such matters, nor do I receive supernatural advice on the subject.
I do find it curious, however-and I wonder if some few members of the jury might share my surprise-that Mr. Brin, who spent so much of his Opening Statement explaining to all you Star Wars fans out there that Yoda is nothing more than, in his words, "a vicious little oven mitt," now hopes to make some quick cash by betting that the vast majority of you will think he's wrong....
I mean, jeez. Talk about having your weed and smoking it too.... How high do you have to be to not see though that one? Is it just me, or does this sound like the Prosecution is conceding defeat?
I avoid stating the "core lessons" of any work of art, for two reasons. The first is that I don't believe the function of art is to teach me a lesson-
DAVID BRIN: Not even when a work of art spends every other minute preaching-
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: -the second is that such pursuits always result in gross oversimplification. As I advise young
Similar Books
