It doesn't- although GL's disucssions of the origins of the Sith contain no reference to a race being involved, so it is suspect.
What is in contradiction is saying that they are not True Sith. If you think there is a Sith race that can be the only spource of being 'True', you are therefore in contradiction.
i like to see things in terms of what george lucas intends them to be. its obvious that they are true sith lords, and very very powerful ones. i hate it when its obvious that hes trying to show something and people will make a big essay full of comic references and obscure eu trivia and dont just look at how the movies are intended to be interpreted.
I can act Japanese all I want, but I'm not Japanese by race.
Same with Sith. S and V were true Sith, but not the Racially pure Sith as in the Ancients. They came first so any Sith after them is one of two things:
1.) Some descendant of the Ancient Sith line who is trained in the Sith ways, like Sadow's long-lost heir or w/e.
2.) Someone who is trained in the Sith ideals and practises, and IS, by title and knowledge, a Sith. But they are not blood-tied to the First Sith which started it all.
Practically, every Sith who followed after the Hyeprspace War was #2.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
But as far as GL is concerned, 'Sith' is not a matter of birth. It's just an organisation you join.
You do realize you're in an EU section, right?
The Sith race exists in EU, therefore for those who include EU in their knowledge of Star Wars note that there is a Sith race. It does not directly contradict the higher levels of canon and GL hasn't come out and said that Sith is only a club you join in.
True Sith = Sith race, following Sith ideals.
Sith = Followers of Sith ideals, not neccessarily of the Sith race.
Look, the whole idea of the 'True Sith' is EU (yes, I am aware this is the EU section, but I'm talking about the movies here). The Sith, as we know them to be in the movies, are the dark Force users: Sidious, Maul, Dooku, and Vader. There is no mention of the 'True Sith' in the movies, so they don't exist. So therefore, we have no reason to believe that Sidious and Vader are any less Sith than any Sith that came before them.
Originally posted by Veneficus
Actually no. They are Sith but only becuase they follow the Sith ideal. Guys like Naga Sadow and Ludo Kressh were true Sith in race and ideal because they were members of the Sith specieces.
Well, EU is technically a parallel universe. So long as it doesn't contradict the movies on a scale that would make the movies themselves not fit the timeline, it stands. Saying that GL's word (or rather, your interpretation of GL's comments and your idea of what his idea is) means there can be no true Sith is a bit... off.
Originally posted by Ianus
You do realize you're in an EU section, right?The Sith race exists in EU, therefore for those who include EU in their knowledge of Star Wars note that there is a Sith race. It does not directly contradict the higher levels of canon and GL hasn't come out and said that Sith is only a club you join in.
True Sith = Sith race, following Sith ideals.
Sith = Followers of Sith ideals, not neccessarily of the Sith race.
Someone was saying earlier that Vader and Palpatine were not Sith, like, at all. That's what he's arguing against, because that's just stupid to say.
There is no 'true Sith' thing, seeing as the Sith race weren't the evil guys until the Dark Jedi came anyway. Technically, a true Sith SHOULD be the ideal, because it started with offworlders and renegade Jedi Knights.
Originally posted by Ianus
By that logic Exar Kun doesn't exist because he wasn't mentioned in movie.
You're absolutely right. In the movie universe, Exar Kun didn't exist. Why? Because he's not mentioned. There is no reference to the Ancient/True Sith at all. We have no reason to believe they exist anywhere besides EU.