Star Wars on Trial by Keith R. A. DeCandido, David Brin, Tanya Huff, Kristine Kathryn Rusch, Matthew Woodring Stover Page B
Authors: Keith R. A. DeCandido, David Brin, Tanya Huff, Kristine Kathryn Rusch, Matthew Woodring Stover
Ads: Link
nobody there had read the book yet.
Not relevant? Thousands of Star Wars fans (not to mention film and book critics and right-wing talk-show hosts all over the country) would disagree.
Now, I'm no fan of President Bush, and this is no secret. However (unlike Opposing Counsel), I don't pretend to know Mr. Lucas's personal politics; it seems to me that if Mr. Lucas is the feudal reactionary that the Prosecution paints him, he'd be an admirer of an hereditary aristocrat, ruling our nation with openly stated imperial ambition....
So the answer I gave-the only honest answer I could give-is that to the best of my limited knowledge, Mr Lucas sketched the outline of the fall of the Republic and the rise of the Empire back in the seventies, when the Bush Dynasty was merely a blip on the future political radar, and that he took his inspiration from Rome, not from the United States. But when you create a story using a mythic toolbox, you can touch on truths you do not intend; if the Star Wars Empire reminds people too much of ours, it's not a comment on Mr. Lucas's politics, it's a comment on America's.
Again, this was only my opinion. Was and is. Take it for whatever it is, or isn't, worth.
Here again, I will admit to being possibly under-educated and over-opinionated. I'm not here as an expert on politics, either terrestrial or those of Star Wars (again unlike Opposing Counsel). But it sure looks to me like the Prequel Trilogy, on one level, could be read as a cautionary parable on the dangers of giving peopleeven good people-too much power with too little accountability, on the vulnerability of democracy to demagoguery (especially in wartime, and in the absence of a free, critical and aggressive press), and on how events can transform even the actions of folk of good will into terrible destruction, when arrogance and too much faith in the Unseen blind these folk to the pitfalls in their paths.
This is an interpretation which the jury is free to decide may, or may not, be relevant to our situation in 2006.
Which brings us back to arm-waving and Truth and all that murky metaphoric stuff, and if you keep poking the buttons on any loaded metaphor, eventually it's gonna go off and blow up in your face. Which is another way of saying that there's no need to go staggering out the airlock under the weight of all this, but still-
Yes, Star Wars is about more than lightsabers and spaceships.
Which, I might add, is also Opposing Counsel's opinion. Or we wouldn't be here.
DROID JUDGE: Now let's hear from the next witness for the Defense.
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: I call science fiction writer Keith R. A. DeCandido.
O MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER said to me, "Keith," he said, "BenBella's doing a Smart Pop book called Star Wars on Trial. I'm one of the editors. How'd you like to contribute?"
Having already contributed to four previous Smart Pop books, BenBella probably figured it was an easy sell. What the good folks at BenBella don't know, of course, is that I have been using Smart Pop to finagle a way to get paid for preexisting rants. I was carrying on about how "The Train Job" sucked as an intro to Firefly and how the last line in King Kong was bull and how cool Kitty Pryde is for ages before I wrote about those topics for Smart Pop books, and I can rate actors the way I did for the various Superman folks in my sleep. BenBella never cottoned to the fact that this wasn't work, this was funand also didn't require anything like effort on my part.
Having half a dozen rants on Star Wars' waiting to go, I said, "Sure, no problem."
"You'll be a witness for the Defense," Matt continued.
"Uh, okay." All of a sudden this sounded like work, thus belying my entire Smart Pop credo.
"You'll be taking on David Brin. He'll be arguing that the politics of Star Wars are elitist and anti-democratic. You probably have seen his Salon article."
As a matter of fact I had. When the article first went live in 1999, I would never have considered
Not relevant? Thousands of Star Wars fans (not to mention film and book critics and right-wing talk-show hosts all over the country) would disagree.
Now, I'm no fan of President Bush, and this is no secret. However (unlike Opposing Counsel), I don't pretend to know Mr. Lucas's personal politics; it seems to me that if Mr. Lucas is the feudal reactionary that the Prosecution paints him, he'd be an admirer of an hereditary aristocrat, ruling our nation with openly stated imperial ambition....
So the answer I gave-the only honest answer I could give-is that to the best of my limited knowledge, Mr Lucas sketched the outline of the fall of the Republic and the rise of the Empire back in the seventies, when the Bush Dynasty was merely a blip on the future political radar, and that he took his inspiration from Rome, not from the United States. But when you create a story using a mythic toolbox, you can touch on truths you do not intend; if the Star Wars Empire reminds people too much of ours, it's not a comment on Mr. Lucas's politics, it's a comment on America's.
Again, this was only my opinion. Was and is. Take it for whatever it is, or isn't, worth.
Here again, I will admit to being possibly under-educated and over-opinionated. I'm not here as an expert on politics, either terrestrial or those of Star Wars (again unlike Opposing Counsel). But it sure looks to me like the Prequel Trilogy, on one level, could be read as a cautionary parable on the dangers of giving peopleeven good people-too much power with too little accountability, on the vulnerability of democracy to demagoguery (especially in wartime, and in the absence of a free, critical and aggressive press), and on how events can transform even the actions of folk of good will into terrible destruction, when arrogance and too much faith in the Unseen blind these folk to the pitfalls in their paths.
This is an interpretation which the jury is free to decide may, or may not, be relevant to our situation in 2006.
Which brings us back to arm-waving and Truth and all that murky metaphoric stuff, and if you keep poking the buttons on any loaded metaphor, eventually it's gonna go off and blow up in your face. Which is another way of saying that there's no need to go staggering out the airlock under the weight of all this, but still-
Yes, Star Wars is about more than lightsabers and spaceships.
Which, I might add, is also Opposing Counsel's opinion. Or we wouldn't be here.
DROID JUDGE: Now let's hear from the next witness for the Defense.
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: I call science fiction writer Keith R. A. DeCandido.
O MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER said to me, "Keith," he said, "BenBella's doing a Smart Pop book called Star Wars on Trial. I'm one of the editors. How'd you like to contribute?"
Having already contributed to four previous Smart Pop books, BenBella probably figured it was an easy sell. What the good folks at BenBella don't know, of course, is that I have been using Smart Pop to finagle a way to get paid for preexisting rants. I was carrying on about how "The Train Job" sucked as an intro to Firefly and how the last line in King Kong was bull and how cool Kitty Pryde is for ages before I wrote about those topics for Smart Pop books, and I can rate actors the way I did for the various Superman folks in my sleep. BenBella never cottoned to the fact that this wasn't work, this was funand also didn't require anything like effort on my part.
Having half a dozen rants on Star Wars' waiting to go, I said, "Sure, no problem."
"You'll be a witness for the Defense," Matt continued.
"Uh, okay." All of a sudden this sounded like work, thus belying my entire Smart Pop credo.
"You'll be taking on David Brin. He'll be arguing that the politics of Star Wars are elitist and anti-democratic. You probably have seen his Salon article."
As a matter of fact I had. When the article first went live in 1999, I would never have considered
Similar Books
