C3PX said:
As for not having time for silly revisionist nonsense in Star Wars, I suppose this includes the extremely revisionist Empire Strikes Back, where the main villain and the father of the hero were merged into one character, or the even more revisionist Return of the Jedi where "the other" Yoda talked about turns out to be Luke's former love interest, who also happens to be his sister. Do you even realize what revisionist bullcrap two thirds of the OT are?

That's the OT. The OT has a right to be revisionist. Other stuff, coming along years later, does not. The OT was made in basically one long creative period from the mid 70s down to 1983. It is also the main Star Wars material. Other stuff that is secondary material and/or comes along much later (years after the original Star Wars creative period was over) does not have the same license to take liberties with the story.

Don't tell me you're happy with the way the prequels reinvented the Star Wars story. Or the way the special edition tried to rewrite the story of the OT (Han shooting second). I think it's easy to see how that sort of revisionism is different from the valid sort that went on during the creation of the OT.

Similarly, while the OT might have the right to be revisionist as regards stuff from the OT, I don't think it's necessarily the case that spinoff material has that right. Spinoff material is subordinate. It should respect what was done in the original material and try to stay true to it.

First off, I am sorry to hear someone force fed you SOTE, that must have sucked. Personally, I read it of my own free will, which I am sure contributed to my enjoyment of it.

I didn't. I read it because I felt I HAD to because it was being pushed as THE story of what went on between the films.