My first thought was: Well, I guess I’m done with this
whole series now. That was my state of
mind after taking in the strange social phenomenon/debacle now known as The Last Jedi. What’s makes it even more weird is the Disney
studio insists on behaving as if it all had something to do with the series of
films, and various assorted novels, short stories, and video games known as Star Wars.
The good news is, my thoughts have evolved since that
initial first reaction. For anyone else
out there seriously pondering whether or to remain a fan, or just renege on the
whole deal, perhaps this post can provide a few reasons not to stow away the
old childhood memories in the attic trunk just yet.
If nothing else, the most positive fallout TLJ is that it can serve an opportunity
for fans and aficionados to pause take stock of SW, not just as a franchise, but as a phenomenon with a history
that includes more than just the films, but also its relation to Science
fiction as a whole.
There are a lot of SW fans out there who might have
found my take on TLJ to something of a letdown.
My opinions on the matter were agreeable, just a lot less substantial
than anyone might have liked. Why didn’t
I go into more detail about certain plot elements, or into the portrayal (or
lack thereof) of all the major legacy characters? My reasons for that are interesting. In the first place, by the time I managed to
get those essays down on paper, I’d spent hours doing the same as others fans,
pouring over countless YouTube videos by disgruntled fans and online critics,
each of them more than willing to take the Disney franchise apart one detail at
a time. In this regard, some of them
were able to do better than anything I could.
I’d especially like to single out reviewers like Mauler, theMisanthrope, along with EU expert Matt Wilkins, and Joseph Choi for both his
essay and video of same essay on the Character Assassination of the one figure
who I’d have to argue is has really been the main focus of the series all
along.
With this in mind, I’ve sort of found it easier to
build a case against what I prefer to think of as the “Disney Franchise” by
examining both the Original Trilogy as well as the Expanded Universe. I’d like to examine both topics in relation
to the ever-present question of just what is supposed to be canon, anyway? I’d like to make a case that even before
Disney acquired the property, what was done with the EU was more than
enough. The EU had just enough
inspiration in all the stories it needed in order to stand on its own
legs. I’d also like to argue that right
now, the old EU is the closest offer fans are likely to get in the way of
artistic compensation as well as satisfactory form of imaginative consolation.
In order to do this, there are several elements of the
OT we’ll have to examine. We need to
look at what kind of characters we’re dealing with. It also helps if we stop and try to dig as
much as possible into the nature of the archetypes that ultimately stand behind
and support both the OT and, I’d argue, the EU.
If I’m being honest, my goal here is a lot less grand
than it sounds. The only reason for this
essay is just to help sort out my own thinking, and at least try to gain something
close to a coherent perspective on the whole mess. I’ve had time enough to get at least some
thinking done about the matter. I’m not
just talking about Disney’s own Heaven’s
Gate. I’m also considering whether
or not such a spectacularly bad film has any claim to validity, either as
Canon, or as art. Because of that, I
want to focus on just what is the right perspective to view Star Wars.
In other words, when is the story on the right track,
and when does it go off the rails. What
kind of story is Stars Wars? Is it like an endless serial on par with the
business model of DC or Marvel Comics?
Or is it meant to more along the lines of a traditional narrative, with
a definitive beginning, middle, and an irrevocable end? Who gets to decide all this stuff,
anyway? Who’s in charge of piloting this
whole thing?
I think there are answers to these questions. The irony lies in whichever circuitous paths
this quest for answers may wind up leading us down. So far, I think the best answer can be found
in asking the following question:
How was the original idea written down? In other
words, is there any grand design behind the scenes as so may fans claim, or is
the story something else?
What is the exact nature of the Star Wars story? This question is related to the one
above. The difference lies in one of
perspective. The first question asked is
more concerned with the nature of the composition of the Original Trilogy. This question is concerned with what precise kind of story is the finished
product? Specifically, I want to know,
regardless of any stated design, whether or not there is any creative idea
underlying the first three films. This
could be important for a number of reasons, all of which lead to the last
point.
If there was a genuine creative idea behind the
inspiration of Star Wars, finding out
just what that idea is may be able to give us a clue not just to how we should
view the nature of the films, but also how far it could go in terms of an
over-arching narrative. This will help determine my final talking point: the question of Cannon.
This has become a touchy subject, with the
fanbase splitting up into basically two warring camps. My focus has been to follow the logic of my
own thinking on the matter. I think a
definitive answer as to which Star Wars,
the old Expanded Universe or the Disney version, should be considered canonical
can be found. The trick is laying out a solid
enough case for it.
We’ll also have to take the plunge and examine the
curiosity that is The Last Jedi, in
order to determine what kind of story it is, and what, if any, narrative
validity it has (maybe it got lost somewhere between the couch cushions or
something).
What follows are just the insights I’ve been able to
glean from what will probably go down as one of the great cinematic debacles of
Hollywood history. In order to make my
points clear, I’ll have to examine the actual creative process behind the
Original Trilogy, and how it differs from the current Disney product.
If the goal for this
series of posts is to define what Star
Wars is, in order to gain a better understanding of what it’s not, then it
only makes sense to build your case one level at a time. The last entry helped establish part of the
answer by taking a look at the history behind the writing of the Original Trilogy
by examining the creative methods of George Lucas. The big reveal was that Lucas had no method,
or rather that he has a hard time both coming up with, and constructing, a well
thought out narrative with engaging characters, setups, and resolutions. The record shows that Lucas has always worked
best when he is more the sounding-board from which capable screenwriters are
then able to develop and re-shape into a workable form consonant with the
format.
