Johnboy3434 said:
Vaderisnothayden said:
You're still not getting it. Canon exists independent of Lucasfilm's word. Canon is about what's the real thing, hence what's the real thing is the real canon. Anybody with a brain can take a stab at judging what's the real thing and thus what's the real canon. This is not about "personal canon", this is about the issue of what's the real Star Wars. I do not pick and choose to suit myself and then call that canon. I studied Star Wars works and the overall sitaution and then made my judgement on what I believe to be the real thing. And I believe in my view, after going through so much effort in judging and examining. I do not take some piece of EU and say "I like that, so it's canon". It's not the real thing, so it's not canon, WHETHER I LIKE IT OR NOT. What I like or don't like is irrelevant, what I want is irrelevant . What counts is what happens to be the real thing as judged by the standard of the films that made the legend. As for versions of the films, it is very obvious which versions of the films are the real thing. I don't pick to my taste there, I merely go by the original that made the legend.
As for what grinds your gears, judging from your posting now and in the past, what grinds your gears is somebody confidently expressing an opinion you don't agree with. And you react to this by getting insulting. And that grinds my gears.
BUT WHAT RIGHT DO YOU HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION? The idea of canon originated with the decision of which holy writings were considered inspired. That decision was made by people of authority, people who had intimate knowledge of the workings of language and history (such as it was back then). The point is, the people who made the decision had some degree of QUALIFICATION. You are a fan. I am a fan. We have no qualifications. In comparison with the people who made the decision on holy canon, we aren't the priests or the scribes. We're the farmhands tilling the soil. You speak of judging what's "real" Star Wars as though it were an objective process that any individual could go through and reach the same conclusion every time. I challenge, Hell, I DARE anyone here to detail this process in full without analyzing a single subjective quality. It can't be done, because this analysis and judgment is completely subjective on every level and can literally yield any result that includes some version of the original film. Why? Because other people view Star Wars in other ways, Vader. It is your personal canon, whether you say it is, whether you THINK it is, or not.
No, what grinds my gears is not a differing opinion. What grinds my gears is intellectual dishonesty. Those who own a franchise decide its canon. Now, always, and forever. This is inarguable.
No they don't. This has been proven by Lucasfilm pushing EU as canon (when it's plainly not) and Lucas pushing the SEs and PT as canon (when they're plainly not). If they can go so far wrong on canon then their word counts for nothing (on the topic of canon). Just because somebody owns a franchise doesn't mean they know best what's the real thing -Lucas is proof of this. If canon is just what the supposed authority (franchise owner, etc) says is canon then it's quite meaningless. Just because they label something canon doesn't make it in actual fact the real thing. All you have is a label, nothing more. A label like that is an artificial thing that says nothing real about the true nature of the labeled thing. But the whole idea of canon is what's the real thing, which is a question about a thing's true nature. And we need no help from Lucas or Lucasfilm to see what's the real thing. The real thing, the question of what is the real thing, is something real and substantial. Unlike a "canon" decided by Lucasfilm or Lucas. So WHAT if they own the franchise. That is merely a legal reality, not a moral or artistic thing. It does not in any way make their view paramount when it is clearly mistaken. Inarguable, my ass hole.
The historical knowledge of scholars back at the times of the definition of most bible canons (there are more than one -different groups and religions disagree on canon) was actually not that great. People had some pretty funny ideas about history back in those times. As for their knowledge of language, they knew languages but linguistics and history of language was not a field they were expert in, which left them missing a crucial source of info for their judgments. They were not so much experts as you seem to think.
I'm not going to go into what qualification I have to judge Star Wars canon, but I would argue that no special exclusive qualification is needed. Star Wars is not the bible. It is not esoteric. We are not dealing with works created long ago in a different sort of society, their origins lost in the distant past. What you need most of all to judge Star Wars canon is to to look at the important works and understand the nature of them and how they work. You need to be able to analyze the mentality they project. You need to be able to analyze a work of art and tease out its mentality and underlying principles. Many people are capable of that. I am capable of that.
And you could not list for me any person whose qualifications would make their judgement on the matter of Star Wars canon so superior to other people's as to make it impossible to challenge. Even Lucas has gotten it so wrong and he was at the very center of Star Wars for so long. If Lucas can get it wrong then so can any other "expert".
You put your faith in some higher authority or experts. I recognize that such authority has no meaningful authority and that those experts have nothing essential to the judgement task that I or many other people don't have.
I would suggest that some of things you take as subjective are not so very subjective. We have disagreed on that before. Not everything about examining, judging and understanding art is subjective. You think it is. I do not.
It is your personal canon, whether you say it is, whether you THINK it is, or not.
No, because ultimately all the careful judging effort that I advocate and go into is just a careful precaution against error. Really, it is blindingly obvious what is the real canon and what isn't. It's self-evident. People can choose to not see it if they wish, that is their choice. But it is out there obvious for everyone to see. Once you know the nature of the different elements, it is obvious that the prequels go against the OT in their very soul and fundamental principles, it is obvious that the SE is just sticking things that don't belong into the original films and that the originals which made the legend are the real thing, it is obvious that novels and comics and games exist in another sort of less real Star Wars universe and that things like the Holiday Special and the Ewok movies or 80s cartoons are not serious attempts at Star Wars fiction. Etc etc. These things are obvious.
I didn't pick or choose any canon to suit myself, I just looked to what was the real thing. If I chose a canon to suit my tastes I'd include various other things that I'd love to include as canon if my priority wasn't adhering to a canon that's really there and has an independent existence. Instead I just go by what's obviously the real thing. I'm not interested in dividing lines that are purely subjective. I'm only interested in ones that have an objective existence, and a dividing line that divides the OOT off from all subordinate works is a real objectively existing dividing line. Star Wars is about movies. Everything else is subordinate. And the later movies are anything but real. So there you have it, canon and apocrypha.
But if somebody wants to believe differently they are entitled to. I'm not going to tell them they can't have their opinion. Whereas you are trying to tell me I can't have mine. You're trying to force your tyrannical worship-the-word-of-the-authority viewpoint down my throat. I don't appreciate it.
No, what grinds my gears is not a differing opinion. What grinds my gears is intellectual dishonesty. Those who own a franchise decide its canon. Now, always, and forever. This is inarguable.
Intellectual dishonesty. That's a laugh. What this really amounts to is you see some thinking that differs from yours in its fundamental principles and you don't understand it and its difference from your way of thinking bothers you. It challenges you, it challenges the very principles by which you think. So it makes you angry. So you slap on the label "intellectual dishonesty" to justify your anger to yourself. People are always finding excuses for their aggressive feelings against things they don't understand and/or which are different from them. It's the oldest story in the world. My thinking on the matter of Star Wars canon is subjected to a painful tortured intellectual honesty, but you wouldn't know that, because you don't care to understand me or to even acknowledge that you don't understand me. All you want to do is condemn me and dismiss my disturbing challenging opinion.
But I'm tired of this. You literally can't converse with me without being insulting. Whether it's calling me ignorant or pointing to me as an example of what supposedly gives OOT purists a bad name or accusing me of intellectual dishonesty. You simply cannot GET that civilized discussion doesn't involve throwing insults at somebody just because they disagree with you. Why the hell should I honor any more of your narrow-minded insulting posts with a reply? I don't see why. So I'm done with my side of this discussion. Natter on if you wish, just don't expect me to reply. Find some good insults to throw at me while you're at it, because the ones you've used are a bit boring.
