Authorial intent in Star Wars - does it matter or not?

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Azronger
I'll briefly write my opinion on this.

Once an author publishes his/her work and that is accepted into the continuity by the story group/whoever is in charge of such things, it becomes canon.

Canon is the keyword here. Because when discussing Star Wars canon, only things that are part of it, should be treated as fact. This is literally so obvious, that it should not need stating. And yet it does, because whatever notes an author has made on his/her work after the publishing, are not canon, unless accepted into the continuity by the story group, is not canon.

And yet people still use them freely in debates concerning the Star Wars canon, despite not being part of it. A common defence (the only defence that I've heard so far) is that the author made the work, therefore his/her opinion over it is official.

But in reality, the only thing that's official here is what's approved by the story group. And the author's opinion on their own work is not (except in the case of Lucas but he's an exception to the rule). Honestly, I might as well accept fanfics as well, and make up some random excuse to back it up.

Yeah, an excuse. Because that's all it is. The rules of canon are clear. Authors have absolutely zero power over it; their words cannot bend its rules. Authorial intent is an excuse to further one's agenda, and that's it.

_____

My opinion of course, you are free to have your own. Let's discuss this in a civil manner.

cs_zoltan
Originally posted by Azronger
Let's discuss this in a civil manner.

Choke on a dick.

Geistalt
Originally posted by cs_zoltan Originally posted by Azronger
I'll briefly write my opinion on this.

Authors have absolutely zero power over it.

My opinion of course, you are free to have your own. Let's discuss this in a civil manner.
Choke on a dick.

NewGuy01
Because the authors know the correct interpretation of what they wrote. Duh.

ares834
It's irrelevant. Death of the author. Etc...

Beniboybling
Arguably yeah, though if they are clarifying on a matter of fact. I don't see that as problematic.

|King Joker|
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Because the authors know the correct interpretation of what they wrote. Duh. thumb up

DarthAnt66
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Because the authors know the correct interpretation of what they wrote. Duh.
thumb up

nfactor1995
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Because the authors know the correct interpretation of what they wrote. Duh.

Yep, this.

Geistalt
Originally posted by DarthAnt66 Originally posted by NewGuy01
Because the authors know the correct interpretation of what they wrote. Duh.
thumb up
Originally posted by nfactor1995
Yep, this.

Az would neglect "Vader's roughly 80% as strong as Sidious" just to suit his anti-Revan hormonal tantrums.

Sinious
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Because the authors know the correct interpretation of what they wrote. Duh. We've been trying to explain this to him for the past couple hours sad

cs_zoltan
On a serious note when someone comments on their own work, it okay. If someone asks their opnion on something, that's not.

For example FPJ saying "yeah Kanan was in Oneness" is acceptable. Drew saying who would win between Revan, Bane, and Vader is not.

Geistalt
Originally posted by Azronger
With that out of the way, I'd say it's quite laughable to suggest Tyth is beating Vader. Yes, I said it: Darth Vader beats Tyth.
In a thread where people were seriously contesting Tyth vs. TPM Sidious.

Feels before reals?

MythLord
The authors can clarify an event/explain it, from their own works, yeah... They can't, however, just randomly decide who in their personal opinion is the most OP/most interesting/most combatively capable and have that as being official, unless the company canonizes it.

RHaggis
Originally posted by MythLord
The authors can clarify an event/explain it, from their own works, yeah... They can't, however, just randomly decide who in their personal opinion is the most OP/most interesting/most combatively capable and have that as being official, unless the company canonizes it.

This pretty much sums up my view on this issue.

Azronger
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Because the authors know the correct interpretation of what they wrote. Duh.

Oh? So there is a "correct interpretation" now? Unless it's accepted into the canon, there is no such thing as a "correct interpretation".

Azronger
Originally posted by Geistalt
Az would neglect "Vader's roughly 80% as strong as Sidious" just to suit his anti-Revan hormonal tantrums.

No idea what I've ever done to upset you, tbh.

But, no, I don't have an anti-Revan agenda. And I dismiss that quote for a different reason altogether: Lucas has said he considers the EU (Legends) a different universe entirely. Therefore, we can logically conclude, that whatever comments he makes, he's not taking the EU into account. And in the EU, Vader isn't near Sidious' power level, as evidenced by his Master casually stomping him and other Vader-tier Force users, as well as Vader's clear inability to replicate or come close to Sidious' best environmental feats.

I feel that's enough to justify me ignoring that statement.

Azronger
Originally posted by Geistalt
In a thread where people were seriously contesting Tyth vs. TPM Sidious.

Feels before reals?

No idea what you're trying to say here, tbh.

Azronger
Originally posted by MythLord
The authors can clarify an event/explain it, from their own works, yeah... They can't, however, just randomly decide who in their personal opinion is the most OP/most interesting/most combatively capable and have that as being official, unless the company canonizes it.

And what makes the other valid and the other not? They're both statements outside canon, therefore, both don't count.

Petrus
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Because the authors know the correct interpretation of what they wrote. Duh.

thumb up

Geistalt
Full-power Tyth can kill off a planet and remain standing.

Revan and Vader haven't the power (nor knowledge, in the case of Vader) to say the same for them. About either of those.

Petrus
Originally posted by Azronger
Oh? So there is a "correct interpretation" now? Unless it's accepted into the canon, there is no such thing as a "correct interpretation".

Um, so who else would know the correct interpretation if not for the people who wrote the material...?

What you're asking for right now is ridiculous imo. The moment any SW material the author created is introduced into games, movies, comics, etc., it's canon. That canon material is up for interpretation by fans, and the only guy who knows what the actual interpretation of the canon material is, is the author.

Or are you honestly suggesting Disney should ask every single author what is the correct way to interpret his/her created material to make it officially and irrevocably canon? You're asking for too much.

Geistalt
It helps conceal his double standard.

In his fragile mind, Kun/Ulic > Vitiate, but Sidious ≤ Abeloth.

Beniboybling
The argument here is that regardless of the author's intents, they do not have full control over their creation. No, the author is not consulted on what the correct way to intepret his or her created material is and that's precisely the point. The moment the book, game etc. is published and enters into wider continuity, the author relinquishes creative control over their own work (ergo, the death of the author) and instead Disney or whomever, are free to read, mold, or even rewrite the material in anyway they please.

For example according to the author of Dark Empire Force storms are not a direct product of Palpatine's power, but a product of the minds of two powerful Force wielders colliding. And yet despite this all secondary sources are unanimous in describing it as a direct manifestation of his power, that he can indeed unleash at will, the intents of the author have been entirely overridden.

ares834
thumb up

Petrus
Originally posted by Beniboybling
The argument here is that regardless of the author's intents, they do not have full control over their creation. No, the author is not consulted on what the correct way to intepret his or her created material is and that's precisely the point. The moment the book, game etc. is published and enters into wider continuity, the author relinquishes creative control over their own work (ergo, the death of the author) and instead Disney or whomever, are free to read, mold, or even rewrite the material in anyway they please.

For example according to the author of Dark Empire Force storms are not a direct product of Palpatine's power, but a product of the minds of two powerful Force wielders colliding. And yet despite this all secondary sources are unanimous in describing it as a direct manifestation of his power, that he can indeed unleash at will, the intents of the author have been entirely overridden.

Well, that is true. But if the author is never actually contradicted by Disney directly, you still believe we shouldn't consider his interpretation?

Also, does this mean you believe Filoni's words about Ahsoka regarding her appearance in Rebels means nothing?

Geistalt
Overwritten, and sure.

But you don't just get to selectively ignore official statements and claim it's canonical.

Beniboybling
Some email from Drew or whatever is not official, that's rather the point.
Originally posted by Petrus
Also, does this mean you believe Filoni's words about Ahsoka regarding her appearance in Rebels means nothing? Could you be more specific?

Geistalt
I was referring to

Petrus
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Some email from Drew or whatever is not official, that's rather the point.
Could you be more specific?

Do you believe that if the author's interpretation is never contradicted, this specific interpretation should be valid?



I'm referring to Filoni saying only Vader and Sidious can go 'blow for blow' with her, or him saying she's grown, etc?

Also, what about what he says of Maul and Kenobi and their fight?

Geistalt
As opposed to

Originally posted by AncientPower
Once the most powerful and dangerous of the Dark Lords of the Sith, he was responsible for the deaths of millions four millennia before the rise of the Empire.
- The Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia

Odan-Urr goes to the Force and the darkest power in the galaxy walks away with something that will make him even stronger.
- Tales of the Jedi

The most powerful and dangerous of all the Sith Lords, Exar Kun
- The Official Star Wars Fact File #1

Geistalt
Originally posted by Azronger Originally posted by Geistalt
Anyone else starting to think the statement that RotJ Sidious > Abeloth still holds water? Nobody thinks that, lol.

Geistalt
He'd even go out of his way to wank Vader through scaling from Palps, y'know.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f6/t642040.html

Beniboybling
Ok mate, wrong thread I think. sad

Geistalt
Nope. That's definitely the one.

"SIDIOUS R 4 TIMES STRONGUR"

Apparently, fan-based claims are more relevant than feats and authorial statements.

Beniboybling
I'm taking about this thread bro, maybe go rant about Az elsewhere. sad

Geistalt
Originally posted by Beniboybling
WAH!

They all think Exar < Vitiate

https://media.giphy.com/media/Wvo6vaUsQa3Di/giphy.gif

Beniboybling
You are a bit weird.

DarthAnt66
Originally posted by Azronger
Oh? So there is a "correct interpretation" now? Unless it's accepted into the canon, there is no such thing as a "correct interpretation".
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/764T6P7cnKM/hqdefault.jpg

Geistalt
It's not even an estimate; he just pulled those numbers out of his rectum and started calculating.

Geistalt
Doubt he's even heard of the exponential growth formula.

Won't stop him, though. He still thinks it holds more relevance than the statements that other Force-users were stronger than Vader and the consensus that he wouldn't be able to kill Tyth or survive the devastation of a planet.

Azronger
Originally posted by Petrus
Um, so who else would know the correct interpretation if not for the people who wrote the material...?

What you're asking for right now is ridiculous imo. The moment any SW material the author created is introduced into games, movies, comics, etc., it's canon. That canon material is up for interpretation by fans, and the only guy who knows what the actual interpretation of the canon material is, is the author.

Or are you honestly suggesting Disney should ask every single author what is the correct way to interpret his/her created material to make it officially and irrevocably canon? You're asking for too much.

Nobody knows it, because a correct interpretation doesn't exist.

Geistalt
Except yours, which is based on official statements. thumb up

Azronger
Originally posted by Beniboybling
The argument here is that regardless of the author's intents, they do not have full control over their creation. No, the author is not consulted on what the correct way to intepret his or her created material is and that's precisely the point. The moment the book, game etc. is published and enters into wider continuity, the author relinquishes creative control over their own work (ergo, the death of the author) and instead Disney or whomever, are free to read, mold, or even rewrite the material in anyway they please.

For example according to the author of Dark Empire Force storms are not a direct product of Palpatine's power, but a product of the minds of two powerful Force wielders colliding. And yet despite this all secondary sources are unanimous in describing it as a direct manifestation of his power, that he can indeed unleash at will, the intents of the author have been entirely overridden.

You are the only person who has had the mental faculties to comprehend this so far. Thank you.

Sinious
Beni being the only person to support your arguments is not good PR at all, actually. erm

SunRazer
Author intent isn't infallible and can be overriden, but if they're just elaborating on their own works and their claims aren't contradicted by canonical information, then it's worth taking into account.

Their opinions on the outcomes of fights or something are irrelevant.

Azronger
Originally posted by Geistalt
Except yours, which is based on official statements. thumb up

Except that even those official statements can be interpreted in a variety of ways.

Azronger
Originally posted by SunRazer
Author intent isn't infallible and can be overriden, but if they're just elaborating on their own works and their claims aren't contradicted by canonical information, then it's worth taking into account.

Their opinions on the outcomes of fights or something are irrelevant.

But again, regardless is contradicted or not, it's still not part of canon.

SunRazer
I didn't say it's canon; I said it's worth taking into account. Much like TSLRCM or DS options.

To suggest than an author's clarification of something that he wrote, especially if it isn't contradicted by any canonical material whatsoever, is completely not worth factoring in at all, is confirmation bias. Their claims might be fallible but they know better.

Beniboybling
TSLRCM is canon :woah:

SunRazer
The people who don't think of it as canon will still believe that it's usable. That's the approach I'm taking. It should apply to everyone other than blatant agenda-peddlers.

S W LeGenD
Why take it into account if it's not canon?

Geistalt
Everyone appears to have conveniently forgotten the fact that the Son died in 21 BBY.

Petrus
Originally posted by SunRazer
I didn't say it's canon; I said it's worth taking into account. Much like TSLRCM or DS options.

To suggest than an author's clarification of something that he wrote, especially if it isn't contradicted by any canonical material whatsoever, is completely not worth factoring in at all, is confirmation bias. Their claims might be fallible but they know better.

thumb up

Geistalt
True.

All Leland's position on the matter means is that gameplay feats represent the authors' opinions of their own characters.

S_W_LeGenD
We may have disagreements over some official aspects of the lore at times since the lore is continously expanding (conventional wisdom is that new information takes precedence over older information but older information does not looses its validity completely and should not be discarded without context). In these situations, clarification from the relevant author on the relevant matter is a meaningful way to address a 'case of uncertainty' in it.

darthbane77
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Because the authors know the correct interpretation of what they wrote. Duh. This seems obvious enough, unsure why it's contested. The author knows best about their own work, so as far as I'm concerned, if an author or a creative leader says something about THEIR project, it's just as valid as the source itself.

SunRazer
You mean it's just as valid. It's not officially canon.

darthbane77
Originally posted by SunRazer
You mean it's just as valid. It's not officially canon. Right, wrong word choice, my mistake.

nfactor1995
What is an example of a specific quote or question that an author clarified that you disagree with? @Azronger

The Merchant
Death of the author should be applied. Tom Veitch thinks Kun~DE Palpatine or outright>DE Palpatine for example and he wrote DE and co-wrote Totj.

Azronger
Originally posted by The Merchant
Death of the author should be applied. Tom Veitch thinks Kun~DE Palpatine or outright>DE Palpatine for example and he wrote DE and co-wrote Totj.

This.

Geistalt
I doubted it was possible, but it's now painfully clear that Veitch is worse than Karpyshyn ever was.Originally posted by Geistalt
Star Wars' 3 Most Massive A$shole Authors:
1. Tom Veitch
2. Drew Karpyshyn
3. Dave Filoni

SunRazer
Yeah, but those are blatantly contradicted by canonical evidence. That's why death of the author applies. It doesn't apply on its own, lol.

SunRazer
Az, you also used authorial intent at one point in your Palpatine essay. It would be a double standard to not give it at least some consideration with respect to everything else, except when canonical material explicitly contradicts the claims.

Azronger
Originally posted by SunRazer
Az, you also used authorial intent at one point in your Palpatine essay. It would be a double standard to not give it at least some consideration with respect to everything else, except when canonical material explicitly contradicts the claims.

Yeah, I've noticed that. I'm currently on the fence about whether I'll accept author intent. Though Harr's vowed to prove that they're canon to me by asking Del Rey.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Petrus
Do you believe that if the author's interpretation is never contradicted, this specific interpretation should be valid?



I'm referring to Filoni saying only Vader and Sidious can go 'blow for blow' with her, or him saying she's grown, etc?

Also, what about what he says of Maul and Kenobi and their fight?



I honestly think that should all be taken with a grain of salt, instead of just being accepted as fact. Authors like Filoni can obviously have their own bias and agendas which the story group may have to hold him back on, and limit how far he takes it in actual canon.

Like Filoni implies Rebels Maul can't match Ahsoka, and yet he does in Canon. Perhaps that was the Story Group holding Filoni back, and if he was completely in charge he likely would have had Ahsoka kicking Maul's butt.


I think applying author's intent until/unless contradicted is probably a safe and reasonable approach though.

Rockydonovang
1. Maul can stalemate ahsoka inconclusively and still be marginally inferior hence not being able to match her "Blow for blow". There's no contradiction here.

Not to mention that the fight happened on a darkside nexus

That aside, agreed. However there has to be an actual contradiction, not a constructed one

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
1. Maul can stalemate ahsoka inconclusively and still be marginally inferior hence not being able to match her "Blow for blow". There's no contradiction here.

Not to mention that the fight happened on a darkside nexus


Being "marginally" inferior would not count as not being able to match Ahsoka blow for blow. He literally was matching her blow for blow.

Taking into account the dark side Nexus would be the opposite end of the argument given it's clear there was no creator intention to show Maul/Vader being amped in their fights against Ahsoka.

Rockydonovang
1. Pretty sure blow for blow is a figure of speech for them being equal. Regardless it was on a nexus per that inquisitor thing.

2. Uh no, because one of the writers implied it was a nexus. And you could certainly argue for it being shown based on the massive discrepancy between ahsoka's performance bs the inquisitors on neutral ground and then on malachor's.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
1. Pretty sure blow for blow is a figure of speech for them being equal. Regardless it was on a nexus per that inquisitor thing.



We can only go by what he said, otherwise we're speculating. He said no one else can match her blow for blow, but Maul did.

That "writer" had himself said he didn't know.



Originally posted by Rockydonovang


2. Uh no, because one of the writers implied it was a nexus. And you could certainly argue for it being shown based on the massive discrepancy between ahsoka's performance bs the inquisitors on neutral ground and then on malachor's.


Nope, not writers intention. Filoni makes it clear the Vader vs Ahsoka happened how he always imagined it (unless you think he always imagined it happening on a DS Nexus lol).

And Pablo Hidalgo himself couldn't confirm to DarthDuelist on Twitter if Malachor enhanced Vader and Maul in combat.

Rockydonovang
1. you have to prove feloni didn't intend for it to be a nexus if you want to use that a basis to overule the other writer's claim. Given the decision to have the fight in a well known nexus in legends, and ahsoka's performance vs the inqusitors, I think the evidence doesn't support you here.

2. Quote for hildago?

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
1. you have to prove feloni didn't intend for it to be a nexus if you want to use that a basis to overule the other writer's claim. Given the decision to have the fight in a well known nexus in legends, and ahsoka's performance vs the inqusitors, I think the evidence doesn't support you here.

2. Quote for hildago?


1. Since when is it guaranteed that Canon follows Legend rules? I don't have to prove anything. It's never hinted in the episode that Maul/Vader had a natural dark side advantage. And neither does Filoni ever confirm or even hint at that. In fact he got to make the Ahsoka vs Vader fight "how he always imagined it."

And neither can the story group confirm any amp.

Not the mention how even more pathetic a loss that would be for Maul against Kanan.

2. It was a few months ago on his twitter account. Message DarthDuelist9. He's the one who asked him.

Petrus
Originally posted by Darth Thor


I think applying author's intent until/unless contradicted is probably a safe and reasonable approach though.

This.

I believe so, as well.

Azronger
Bumping this in light of this topic being brought up again

Rockydonovang
You can't simultaneously claim pis and ignore authorial intent

NewGuy01
Originally posted by The Merchant
Death of the author should be applied. Tom Veitch thinks Kun~DE Palpatine or outright>DE Palpatine for example and he wrote DE and co-wrote Totj.

Which was probably true back when the they were written. Sidious being the most powerful Sith Lord in history was something that was established with the Prequels, back in the 80's and 90's that would have been much less clear. Granted, he still had the better feats of the two even back then, but Tom's opinion isn't outlandish whatsoever--just outdated.

Yes, authorial intent matters... What the creators were trying to convey are the facts. But, newer material trumps older material, provided they clash, which is why we're right and he's wrong in this instance.

Rockydonovang
There's also a difference between an author stating what he intends or has in mind when writing something and when he's just arbitrarily giving an opinion

NewGuy01
That too.

thesithmaster
Originally posted by NewGuy01
Because the authors know the correct interpretation of what they wrote. Duh.

thumb up

Unbowed
Nah, Kun could could beat Sidious faster than it would take Maul to hornbang Ashoka's pussy into oblivion.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.