From: gene@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Gene E. Johannsen)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.starwars
Subject: Themes and things (was: Just how much of SW did Lucas make up as he)
Date: 30 Jul 92 18:50:55 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

talcott@Apple.COM (Adam Talcott) writes:

>In article <1992Jul29.080433.16481@zoo.bt.co.uk> ipc@zoo.bt.co.uk writes:
>>>I always saw the Vader/Luke relationship as being a little contrived,
>>>it always looked like an afterthought or something designed to shock an 
>>>audience. Concidering the carefull characterisation of the first film    
>>>it seems strange that Luke reacts so violently to the news. It's almost
>>>like Lucas is using that grief to distract the audience from what is a
>>>major plot twist. It's as if HE didn't believe it would stand up to close
>>>scutiny.
>>
>>Too right, I still can't believe he intended Ben to be such a sneaky liar!
>>The plot definately changed course between ANH & SW.

>I don't think when Ben did in ANH would be called lying.  What Ben tells Luke
>is very consistent with the facts.  If memory serves, Ben tells Luke that his
>father was "betrayed and murdered" by a young Jedi he was training who was
>seduced by the Dark Side of the Force.  The facts were that Ben was in the
>process of training Anakin when the latter was turned to the Dark Side by
>Palpatine.  In Ben's eyes, by turning to the Dark Side, Anakin betrayed all
>that he stood for as a Jedi Knight.  The fact that he says he is murdered
>should not be taken literally; it was more of a symbolic murder.

>Also, Uncle Owen mentions that he is afraid that Luke does have "too much of
>his father in him."  One could argue that Owen is aware of Anakin's seduction
>to the Dark Side and that he doesn't want Luke to follow down the same path.
>Owen's refusal to let Luke communicate with Ben helps support this conclusion.

  Oh please!  You are stretching this far beyond the point of believability.
Ben's explanation in RotJ for what he said in ANH makes me cringe every time
I watch it.  It is the lowest ebb in the trilogy and inconsistent in a
profound way.

  The mistake many make is thinking of the trilogy as an organic whole.
Remember that when Lucas was making Star Wars, he was taking a big risk.
Nothing like this had ever been made, not on this scale, and there was
absolutely no guarantee that it would be successful.  I have no evidence,
but I wouldn't be surprised if the movie was threatened constantly for
financial reasons.  As far as anyone knew, Star Wars was a one shot deal, and
might have been universally disliked.  I'm sure Lucas planned more than one, 
but he could not count on having the ability to make them.  I contend,
therefore, that it is wrong to go beyond Star Wars when trying to explain
anything in it.  Anything that happened in Star Wars happened because of
something in Star Wars.  It has no bearing on any future movie.

   Just so we're all clear on this, let's look at some of the underlying
themes of Star Wars:

   Luke is living a boring life as a farmer on an out of the way planet.  But
he has hero potential.  Where does this potential come from? His father was
a great warrior and a great pilot.  Therefore, we know that Luke can be the
same.  (Remember, it's a movie, not real life.  In movies, connections like
this make sense all the time).

  Why is Luke's father dead?  If Luke already were a hero, the movie would
lack much.  The under-dog appeal.  The self discovery angle.  Things like
that.  If Luke's father were alive, the first sign of talent and he would
be in training, and would already be a great pilot.

  To make the movie thematically interesting, just the opposite has to
happen.  Luke has to be stifled, his growth stunted.  This is Owen's function 
in the movie, since he fears the adventure that Luke's father craved, the
adventure that ultimately killed him.  Owen's statement that Luke had too
much of his father in him is consistent with the fact that Owen is simply
performing his function as stifling agent.  Owen had to be removed before Luke
could grow.  In essence, the Storm Troopers who killed Owen actually unleashed
Luke, which ultimately destroyed them.  (Things like that are what make movies
interesting to me.)  I doubt Owen had any idea who Darth Vader was, let alone
that he was related to him.  

  Now, to step a little higher on my soap box, here is what I contend ANH
is all about: 
  1) Luke's father is dead.  As in door nail.
  2) Darth killed Luke's father.
  3) Luke is a stifled hero.
  4) Owen is the stifler. (Sounds like a nutty job to me. :-) 
  5) Obiwan is the teacher who shows Luke how to find the potential in him.
   (Obviously there are more, but these are the ones that pertain to the
    argument.)

  It contains no clues about the future.  Stop trying to justify the Darth as
Luke's father argument.  You sound as silly as Ben did in RotJ.  

  Even though I steadfastly insist Darth is not Luke's father, he is, in fact
Luke's father.  That is what is written, and so that is what is true.  But, no
matter how much I enjoy the Star Wars universe, the characters, ideas, and
themes, I do not have to enjoy the writing, and in this case I must 
strenuously disagree with Lucas et al.

  Darth as Luke's father is one of the most bone headed gaffs I've ever seen.
It destroyed the themes in ANH (see above).  It removed the Revenge Motive
Luke had vs the Dark Lord, which I thought was perfectly acceptable.  This
would have been a great way for the emporor and Darth to try and turn Luke
to the dark side, revenge being a form of hate.  It caused that unforgivable
back peddling scene on Dagobah.  It ruined what could have been a great death
scene of an excellent villian.  At the end of RotJ are we supposed to like
Darth?  What?  Hate him?  Uh... I don't know.  I wish he had died
earlier so that the Emporor might have fixed Luke's hair with his magic
fingers.

  That's what I think about RotJ.  The thing that sticks in my mind is
Luke's butt ugly hair cut.  A very disappointing end to a great series.  My
brother and I laugh endlessly at the end of RotJ.  It's like a silly dream.

>I am unsure whether Lucas knew that Vader was Luke's father in ANH, but I
>believe it is consistent with the first film (and one of my favorite aspects of
>the trilogy!).

  Okay.  Whatever.

>>>Strangely I accepted the Luke/Leia relationship more easily. Every writer
>>>...
>>I never liked that either. I mean Luke has major hots for Leia in ANH but
>>doesn't seem at all disapointed to get rid of her to Han.

>While I still have trouble with the fact that Luke and Leia are brother and
>sister, I have no problems with Luke's changing attitude toward Leia.  As he
>grew closer to and learned more about her, his feelings toward her changed.

>-- 
>Adam R. Talcott		| Wenn ist das Nunstuck git und Slotermeyer? Ja!
>talcott@apple.com	| ...Beirherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput!
>talcott@grape.ucsb.edu	|  -- The Funniest Joke in the World (Monty Python)

gene
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.starwars