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.
__________________ "Vader's pulse and breathing were machine-regulated, so they could not quicken; but something in his chest became more electric around his meetings with the Emperor; he could not say how. A feeling of fullness, of power, of dark and demon mastery -- of secret lusts, unrestrained passion, wild submission -- all these things were in Vader's heart as he neared his Emperor. These things and more."
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.
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.
Last edited by Darth Thor on May 1st, 2017 at 10:15 AM
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.
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.
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.
Last edited by Darth Thor on May 1st, 2017 at 08:09 PM
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.