This gets into a big philosophical question but Star Wars is simultaneously both a work of art and a product. George wanted to tell interesting stories while simultaneously selling toys. That’s clear from the beginning, when Lucas bargained for full merchandising rights for the first film, which continued into the other films (what is that Lucas quote about Ewoks and Benji?) as well as the prequels. So are you saying the new films are more product and less art than George’s films, which were more art and less product? I think that’s splitting hairs, and a bit unfair to the new storytellers who might being in fact trying to tell interesting stories despite it still being a product.

EDIT: Is there a difference in the apparent legitimacy of the Disney-era films between a scenario where Disney takes Star Wars from Lucas’ cold, dead hands, and Lucas giving Star Wars to Disney with the knowledge they would continue the story without him?

The writer gives a story to another storyteller knowing they will continue that story without him. Is that consent irrelevant to the validity of the stories post-Author?