Star Wars on Trial by Keith R. A. DeCandido, David Brin, Tanya Huff, Kristine Kathryn Rusch, Matthew Woodring Stover Page A
Authors: Keith R. A. DeCandido, David Brin, Tanya Huff, Kristine Kathryn Rusch, Matthew Woodring Stover
Ads: Link
writers (advice I once received from a writer older and far wiser than myself): "If you can state your theme in a sentence, don't write a story. Rent a billboard."
That being said, however, I will offer to the Court my own personal interpretation of what I see as central meanings of the two trilogies.
Original Trilogy: Salvation (not in the Biblical sense, so don't even start) comes through friendship and love, not violence.
Prequel Trilogy: Things fall apart, the center cannot hold... Nothing gold can stay-To hold anything beyond its time brings suffering.
However, as I said above: beyond being gross oversimplifications (an astonishing concept, when applied to Star Wars!) those interpretations represent only what the works in question mean to me. What they mean to you, sir, is clearly different. What they mean to someone else will likely be different from either of our interpretations. Which is okay with me. It saddens me that this doesn't seem to be okay with you.
Now let me satisfy those temptations of yours, Mr. Brin. You don't even have to ask. (Won't be the first time I've played at being a bit devilish-goes with the red hair, y'know.)
(And anyone who's "frustrated" by our "wrangling" is absolutely free to skip ahead to the witness testimony, as they have been since before either one of us started yapping. Hell, I'd be surprised if we haven't lost a few already. Doesn't matter: we'll catch 'em when they read the book again... or maybe the third time ... or we'll pick up some in the library. Or the bookstore cafe... .
YOU! Yeah, YOU! Don't just sit there sipping that latte! BUY this book, you cheap bastard-!
-Everyone who actually shelled out cash or credit-their own or somebody else's, we're not picky-please ignore the preceding private-service announcement-)
Anyway... .
First: I wasn't "arm-waving in the direction of Star Wars and calling it Truth." I apologize for the confusion. I was arm-waving in the direction of Truth, and attempting to remind the Court that stories-all kinds of stories, from The Iliad to Saving Private Ryan to, yes, Star Wars-carry different truths than those kinds which can be settled by a jury, figured on a calculator or spotted by a telescope, and that stories using mythic elements tap resonances deeper than surface appearance. Forgive me for the apparently unwarranted assumption that-as a storyteller of justly legendary skill himself-Opposing Counsel might have understood what I was talking about. Perhaps we can take that up in the online discussion group, as a more fruitful line of inquiry than whether Star Wars fans think Yoda might be Eeeevil... ?
Though one might be forgiven for wondering, if Opposing Counsel has no fear that Star Wars might convey Truth of some description, precisely why he's gotten so exercised about the whole thing....
Second: the political issues in question were from long before 2006, my friend; they've just been bleeding over ever since. And they belong here precisely because the Saga is, in your word, timeless.
Here's another story: To promote the Revenge of the Sith novel, Del Rey Books sent me on a brutally exhausting author tour-twentythree cities in twenty-seven days, if memory serves, with multiple appearances in most of those cities-and at every appearance except one, I was asked some variant of the following question:
"Did George Lucas intend the way the Republic falls and Palpatine becomes Emperor to be a direct critique of the Bush Administration?"
In many of those appearances, the question was not framed in such polite terms-it was more of an accusation. By the time the film actually came out, I could not talk about the book at all without fielding that question; I spent an entire half hour on a live national radio call-in show out of Dallas trying to explain that I'm not telepathic, goddammit, so how the hell should I know what George Lucas intended?
The one event where I didn't get the question? The first one. Due to release restrictions,
That being said, however, I will offer to the Court my own personal interpretation of what I see as central meanings of the two trilogies.
Original Trilogy: Salvation (not in the Biblical sense, so don't even start) comes through friendship and love, not violence.
Prequel Trilogy: Things fall apart, the center cannot hold... Nothing gold can stay-To hold anything beyond its time brings suffering.
However, as I said above: beyond being gross oversimplifications (an astonishing concept, when applied to Star Wars!) those interpretations represent only what the works in question mean to me. What they mean to you, sir, is clearly different. What they mean to someone else will likely be different from either of our interpretations. Which is okay with me. It saddens me that this doesn't seem to be okay with you.
Now let me satisfy those temptations of yours, Mr. Brin. You don't even have to ask. (Won't be the first time I've played at being a bit devilish-goes with the red hair, y'know.)
(And anyone who's "frustrated" by our "wrangling" is absolutely free to skip ahead to the witness testimony, as they have been since before either one of us started yapping. Hell, I'd be surprised if we haven't lost a few already. Doesn't matter: we'll catch 'em when they read the book again... or maybe the third time ... or we'll pick up some in the library. Or the bookstore cafe... .
YOU! Yeah, YOU! Don't just sit there sipping that latte! BUY this book, you cheap bastard-!
-Everyone who actually shelled out cash or credit-their own or somebody else's, we're not picky-please ignore the preceding private-service announcement-)
Anyway... .
First: I wasn't "arm-waving in the direction of Star Wars and calling it Truth." I apologize for the confusion. I was arm-waving in the direction of Truth, and attempting to remind the Court that stories-all kinds of stories, from The Iliad to Saving Private Ryan to, yes, Star Wars-carry different truths than those kinds which can be settled by a jury, figured on a calculator or spotted by a telescope, and that stories using mythic elements tap resonances deeper than surface appearance. Forgive me for the apparently unwarranted assumption that-as a storyteller of justly legendary skill himself-Opposing Counsel might have understood what I was talking about. Perhaps we can take that up in the online discussion group, as a more fruitful line of inquiry than whether Star Wars fans think Yoda might be Eeeevil... ?
Though one might be forgiven for wondering, if Opposing Counsel has no fear that Star Wars might convey Truth of some description, precisely why he's gotten so exercised about the whole thing....
Second: the political issues in question were from long before 2006, my friend; they've just been bleeding over ever since. And they belong here precisely because the Saga is, in your word, timeless.
Here's another story: To promote the Revenge of the Sith novel, Del Rey Books sent me on a brutally exhausting author tour-twentythree cities in twenty-seven days, if memory serves, with multiple appearances in most of those cities-and at every appearance except one, I was asked some variant of the following question:
"Did George Lucas intend the way the Republic falls and Palpatine becomes Emperor to be a direct critique of the Bush Administration?"
In many of those appearances, the question was not framed in such polite terms-it was more of an accusation. By the time the film actually came out, I could not talk about the book at all without fielding that question; I spent an entire half hour on a live national radio call-in show out of Dallas trying to explain that I'm not telepathic, goddammit, so how the hell should I know what George Lucas intended?
The one event where I didn't get the question? The first one. Due to release restrictions,
Similar Books
