Kamino Cloners CIV

[swphreak]

If you can show me where I said EU is Cannon, then I will give you a cookie. I said EU versus "Ture/Canon Star Wars"

 

I'm just trying to say EU is a part of Star Wars. It may not be worshipped my GL or Canon, but it is.

[CorranSec]

Luke's dad: I realise that both fan films and EU are not "In the Core" (ie canon) SW, but fan films aren't officially authorized and EU is. So EU is SW. Simple fact. I know it's not canon, and you may not want it to be accepted as a good SW story, but it's SW. Simple fact.

 

Windu: Exactly. I do not disagree with anything you said (a rarity in these parts). EU is not SW canon, and EU is approved by LucasFilm. And, by the way, EU is SW.

 

Vostok: I'm sure that there was one small thing in the movies that GL didn't like. For example, Han Solo's line "I know" wasn't his idea, and he didn't like it originally. I daresay he still would've preferred his line. Is that line to be considered "Not Star Wars?" Or if GL looks at a movie, and thinks "Aww, the lighting in the DS hangar scene isn't quite right," is the DS hangar scene "Not Star Wars?"

It may not be perfect, but it's accepted, approved and authorized. What more evidence can there be?

[Admiral Vostok]

Okay, here's a new, simplistic definition for what real Star Wars is:

 

If it needs authorisation to exist, it is not real Star Wars.

 

You are right about those things like the "I know" line, Corran. But those things did not need authorisation by George Lucas to exist. So my new definition I believe to be infallible. All the stuff in the movies needed no official signed document to appear in the movies. But EU needs a signed document to exist. Therefore, EU is not Star Wars.

[CorranSec]

Vostok, come on. That's even more insane than the last.

 

The "I know" line needed authorization from GL, because some other guy made it up, and came to him asking permission to give it to Harrison Ford. GL gave it. Is the "I know" line not real Star Wars?

I'm sure that plenty of the costumes were run past GL, and needed his approval to be in the movies- so are the stormtrooper outfits not real Star Wars?

I'm sure that many elements of the script were added by people who aren't GL (such as the "I know" line). Are these parts of the movies not real Star Wars?

And even if we accept your crazy definition, many things did need a signed document. The inclusion of Industrial Light and Magic into the creation of the movies probably requires a signed document. Should all the stuff done by ILM (such as CGI characters) be ignored?

Also, I'm sure that plenty of stuff wouldn't have required signed documents. People may have been contracted to write SW books, but it's not like they sign the Official Secrets Act or anything like that....

 

If it doesn't have authorisation, and doesn't have copyright privileges, then it's not real Star Wars. So "Troops" isn't real Star Wars, and all the other bits of fan fiction aren't real Star Wars, although they might be really good stories set in the SW universe.

 

However, those things with authorisation and copyright privileges, such as all elements of the movies, the SW books, the SW comics and the LA games, are real Star Wars.

 

 

You are endeavouring to find a definition which excludes EU, and in your desperate rush, you're completely ignoring the truth. Please don't.

[Admiral Vostok]

Okay, I'll bring up my tried an true logical argument. You may not have seen this because I wrote it just before all that wierd thread-deletion and the dissolving of the OTDC.

 

What do we know? There is only one thing we truly know to be true, and that shall be my first premise:

 

(1) Everything in the movies in fact.

 

So if everything in the movies is fact, clearly anything that goes against what the movies say is not fact. So I get the argument:

 

(2) If everything in the movies is fact then anything that contradicts the movies is not fact.

 

So what contradicts the movies? Well I've brought up several concepts in the past that I will only repeat if someone really wants to know, but my favourite is the mistakes concerning the nature of the Force. So we get the premise:

 

(3) EU contradicts the movies.

 

Using the above we can conclude that:

 

Everything that contradicts the movies is fact.

EU contradicts the movies.

Therefore EU is not fact.

 

As a pre-emptive strike against what I know Corran's comeback will be I will say this:

I know Corran will give me explanations from EU to try to prove that EU does not contradict the movies (thereby negating my premise (3) and proving my argument incorrect). However, you are using a faulty beginning to your argument, Corran. To use explanations from EU to justify EU, you must first prove EU to be fact. After all, you obviously can not prove something based on something else that is not proven. So the only way you can prove EU to be fact is to use examples from the movies, which you are unable to do. Therefore, you can not prove EU correct.

 

 

I apologise if I made anyone's head explode using my formal logic mumbo jumbo.

 

 

Oh and as a side note it was Harrison Ford himself who suggested the "I know" line.

[CorranSec]

What do we know? There are several things we know to be true. I'll start with two basics:

 

1) GL has ultimate power over anything SW.

2) Thus, what GL says goes.

 

These two lead to a logical conclusion:

If GL does not accept something as SW, then it would not exist with the SW logo, and would be nothing other than fan fiction.

 

From this, we can establish several things.

1) Because GL basically made up the movies, the movies are SW.

2) Because GL allowed the Star Wars licence to be given out by Lucasfilm, those things that are given that licence are to be considered "SW."

 

From this we can determine that EU is SW.

 

There are a few other thoughts that some have thrown around, such as:

1) If it's authorized, it's not SW- wow, this guy must have been quite insane.

2) Anything other than canon is not SW because it's not canon- just as odd as the last, and with no real logic at all.

3) EU is wrong because, to this person, some things in it contradict canon- well, even if an entire book contradicted canon, seeing as it's authorized it's still SW.

 

As for the special case of 3:

I proved above that EU is quite obviously SW. Thus, the explanations in EU apply.

[swphreak]

you also accplished to give me a headache......

 

 

I agree with Corran

[Admiral Vostok]

Allow me to illustrate my point:

 

On which planet was Boba Fett born?

 

The EU tells us it was Concord Dawn, where under the name of Jaster Mareel or something he worked as a Journeyman protector (or something).

 

The Movies tell us he was really a clone of his "father" Jango Fett, and his place of birth was really Kamino (although he was created rather than born).

 

Which is correct? The movie one. Why? Movies are always right, because they are canon. In this case EU is wrong. But wait... it was allowed to exist by George Lucas!

 

Therefore your 2nd argument numbered (2) - next time a continuous numbering system would be helpful - is false.

 

Therefore your entire argument is false.

 

Therefore EU is not proven true.

[swphreak]

There are some Continuity errors back when another book company was doing the EU, but then when whoever is doing it now (cant remember), they started to follow continuity. Plus, I think I read somewhere that Jaster is actually a Mandolorian Warrior. I think from "Open Seasons." So, I guess Boba Fett just used his name and said he lived @ Concod for some reason, who knows.

[Admiral Vostok]

Actually I think since Episode II came out, the EU community has changed the Jaster Mareel story to be Jango Fett's background. In the StarWars.com databank it lists Jango Fett's homeworld as Concord Dawn.

 

This is really just an attempt to correct the mistakes in the original story. The fact remains it still says Boba Fett in the story, not Jango Fett.

[CorranSec]

GL himself, in a recent "Ask Jedi Council" question, defended the multiple EU backgrounds of Boba Fett. He also said that he approved Boba's comeback from the Sarlacc in the EU. Now, what does that tell you?

 

EU is right, because it was allowed to exist by GL, and what he says goes. This has always been your standpoint, I believe, and I doubt you would desert it now.

[Darth Windu]

Actually Corran, thats not true.

 

1. GL NEVER answers 'jedi council' questions

 

2. The answer was actually that GL considers Boba to be dead, he died in the sarlac pit.

[pbguy1211]

Originally posted by CorranSec

GL himself, in a recent "Ask Jedi Council" question, defended the multiple EU backgrounds of Boba Fett. He also said that he approved Boba's comeback from the Sarlacc in the EU. Now, what does that tell you?

 

That tells me they were dying to somehow bring back to life a popular character so they didnt have to use their weakening brain power to attempt to create a new one.

 

Or that they were wrong in killing him off...

 

Probably a little of both.

[CorranSec]

Windu:

Well, the question was about GL, and the JC member answered it about GL.

Look. I'll quote the entire thing, and we'll settle this.

 

Q: Did George Lucas intend for Boba Fett to die in the sarlacc, despite what others may say or print?

 

Steve Sansweet: Yes, in George's view -- as far as the films go -- the baddest bounty hunter in the Galaxy met his match in the Great Pit of Carkoon where --unfortunately for Mr. Fett -- the ghastly sarlacc made its home.

 

*pic of Boba and Han*

 

HOWEVER (here's the important part), Lucas also approved Fett's comeback in the expanded universe. And of course, by going back in time with the prequels, the Star Wars creator has brought Boba Fett back to life himself, albeit at a much younger age.

 

And in another question about the Jaster Mereel situation, GL said that perhaps Boba had created the multiple EU backgrounds himself, to muddle his past somewhat. So he's defending the EU!

[Admiral Vostok]

Corran, you are right in that I have always taken the standpoint that it has to be approved by George Lucas to be Star Wars. However, this is obviously open to interpretation.

 

While it says in the AskJC article that George "approved" Boba Fett's return, they are using approve in a different sense than I am. George approved the book to be written, but he did not approve it in that he agrees it is in line with his vision of Star Wars.

 

Also, the discussion about the "I love you" line has similar different interpretations of the word approved attached. (As a side note I believe that George wasn't against this amendment in any way, as soon as Harrison Ford suggested it George agreed and the script was changed, but the argument still applies for other aspects of ESB, which Lucas did not write the screenplay for.)

 

So I now alter my definition for what is truly Star Wars in light of this:

"That which is in the movies is real Star Wars. Outside of the movies, it must be specifically created by George Lucas and be in keeping with Lucas' overall vision of the Star Wars Universe to count as real Star Wars."

 

I should clarify further: if it is in the movies, it is real Star Wars, even if it is contrary to something George Lucas believes. If it is not in the movies, George Lucas must have personally created and it must be continuous with the movies. Afterall, Lucas is the creator of the universe. If someone does a cover version of a Beatles song, taking the original idea and changing it, does it cease to be a Beatles song? No, it is primarily a Beatles song and should be recognised as such, but the cover is a valid interpretation of the song.

 

An example: George Lucas actually pronounces some things differently to how they are in the movies. He pronounces Dooku "DOUGH-ku", Naboo "NAY-boo" and Geonosis "Geo-NOH-sis". One could argue this is the real way the should be pronounced, but seeing as EVERYONE in the movies pronounces them consistently otherwise, the movie pronounciation is correct.

[CorranSec]

approve (say a-proov), verb

To agree or consider as worthy, correct, etc: eg. 'the company has approved the proposal.'

Courtesy of the Heinemann Australian Dictionary, 4th Edition

 

It's not open for interpretation at all. The mere fact that EU exists and is approved by GL means that it is worthy and correct. Thus, he obviously thinks that Boba's return is worthy and correct, because he approved of it.

 

The "I know" line was originally disliked by Lucas. But he thought it was a worthy alternative option, so he arranged two preview screenings of ESB, one with "I love you" and one with "I know." Audience reaction to "I know" was so much better than that to "I love you," so he considered it worthy and correct and approved it. Now, it's Star Wars.

 

Your new definition is also quite mad. "Approved" does not mean "Is created by." It means "Is considered worthy and correct by," and GL approved the existence of EU, so he considers it worthy and correct.

 

I should clarify further: If it is the movies, it is real Star Wars. If it is not the movies, it must be approved by GL to be real Star Wars(thus, fan films are not real SW). After all, Lucas is the creator of the universe. If someone does a techno version of The Yellow Submarine, does it cease to be The Yellow Submarine? No. And EU isn't really a techno version at all- it's like The Beatles asking some other band to write some new songs and continue their legacy after their band..... um....... disbanded.

[swphreak]

That is an interesing way of putting it........ You from Australia?

[Admiral Vostok]

It's not open for interpretation at all. The mere fact that EU exists and is approved by GL means that it is worthy and correct. Thus, he obviously thinks that Boba's return is worthy and correct, because he approved of it.

 

It is open to interpretation. On the one hand, Lucas approves of the writing of Boba Fett's resurrection. On the other, Lucas disapproves of the "correctness" of the story, preferring instead to consider Boba Fett dead for all intents and purposes.

 

Your new definition is also quite mad. "Approved" does not mean "Is created by."

 

I know. That's why the word "approved" does not appear in my new definition at all.

[CorranSec]

Phreak: Yeah, I'm from Australia. How did you...... oh, right. It's not like other countries have an Australian Dictionary...

 

Vostok:

He does not disapprove of the 'correctness.' Nowhere does he say "Boba is dead for all intents and purposes." There is the fact that he made Boba fall into the sarlacc, and the fact that he let Boba crawl out of the sarlacc.

 

But "approved" is the key point, because otherwise, nothing other than the movies can exist, even though the facts show otherwise.

[Admiral Vostok]

You said yourself in quoting the Ask the Jedi Council article:

Yes, in George's view -- as far as the films go -- the baddest bounty hunter in the Galaxy met his match in the Great Pit of Carkoon where --unfortunately for Mr. Fett -- the ghastly sarlacc made its home.

This shows that he does disapprove of it's correctness. What else could you take it to mean?

 

Nothing other than the movies can exist? So what! It is a movie! Star Wars is one of the few movies that has an Expanded Universe, so why aren't fans of other movies saying "I want to know where Doc Brown goes at the end of Back to the Future" or "What happens when the kid from Stuart Little grows up?" or "What of Andy and Red's adventures outside Shawshank prison?" It's only a movie. What happens outside the movie? Nothing! It's not real!

 

The EU exists because some authors aren't creative to come up with their own Universes. Take Kevin J Anderson for example. I've seen his name on the cover of Star Wars books, X Files books, Buffy the Vampire Slayer Books, and he even co-wrote the prequel to Dune. Can't he come up with an original idea? Or maybe the authors have a great idea that will only be read if it has the words Star Wars on the cover. With so many science-fiction books out there, how can you really make yours stand out?

Most of the authors don't care about continuing George Lucas' legacy, they are just making money. They don't care if they totally contradict the movies, as long as they get a book deal.

[CorranSec]

I also said:

Lucas also approved Fett's comeback in the expanded universe.

So there we have it. Stuff outside the movies exists, and is approved by GL. So, it has the creator of the movies' approval, yet it can't have yours....... I'm sensing a lack of coherency here, you know?

 

Star Wars is an epic, which includes movies, games, books and so on. Star Wars has an EU because it is such an amazing universe. Back to the Future isn't huge enough, popular enough, whatever enough to warrant an EU.

 

The EU exists because Lucasfilm wants it to exist. I'm not quite sure how the first EU book came about, but I think it's likely that Zahn was asked to write it.

And that is the case. Authors don't just turn up and say "Okay, I'm writing for SW now." It's invitation-only, and many authors are commissioned to write specific stories- for example, James Luceno's new political thriller.

 

So, EU is SW, because it's been created at Lucasfilm's request.

[Admiral Vostok]

You still seem not to understand the different interpretations of approve. Let me us my dictionary to illustrate:

 

approve vb. 1. (followed by of) to consider fair, good, or right. 2. to authorize or sanction. [Latin approbare]

- from Collins Australian Pocket Dicitonary of the English Language

 

So in allowing the books to be written, George Lucas approves of EU according to definition 2. But in considering Boba Fett dead, he does not approve of EU according to definition 1.

 

The only reason EU was created is to make more money. Well they aren't getting any of mine.

[swphreak]

for the love of god this is still going on?!?

 

EU is a part of Star Wars. Can we please drop it. You will never change each other's mind......

[Darth Windu]

Corran - u from tassie?

 

With Star Wars, there is a difference in respect in ALLOWING and APPROVING of something. EU is allowed to exist to earn money, it is however not approved of by Lucas himself, who as we saw a while ago considers Boba to be dead, while he is alive in EU.

[swphreak]

Would everyone be happy if we just said EU is a PART of Star Wars. In may not be George's view of Star Wars, but it is a part of Star Wars. I feel like we're going in circles here....