Sorry fellas, I'm not trying to push people around or be a jerk about it. It's just that when people quote personas for their own references, sometimes things are twisted around for personal use, if you know what I mean. I just like being informed 1st hand, not 2nd, 3rd and so on. It just kind of gets under my skin when people rip other posters apart without having verifiable info on their own posts. Nothing personal, I just don't know you, so when someone says it's a direct GL quote, I want to see it. Anyway, I think I worded the previous post poorly. I don't mean that EU is just as worthy as GL's word. I meant that, since everything that's been posted is unverifiable as it stands, these "quotes" from GL are about as valid as EU. I agree that EU and GL don't agree, most of the time, in fact. And GL always takes precedence. As for starwars.com, I think that's about as canonical as you can get, especially when it already makes the distinction between the movies and EU. Errors or no, it's no reason to say it's not canonical when it doesn't support your own argument. I don't like being pessimistic and doubtful of other quoters, but when there's so much mudslinging going on, I think it's necessary in order to make a well-informed opinion.
Gregor, sorry, but the website is not canonical- FACT. Your opinion on the matter does not change that. It's no more canonical than what Rick "Only three lightsabre colours" McCallum says- it might be official, but it has no canon status, and I do not appreciate your implication that I am only saying that because what it says does not suit me. I am saying that because it is TRUE, and such statements do not aid your assertation that you are not trying to be a jerk. The reason it distinguishes between the films and EU is because it simply acts as a non-canonical source reference for both (it is not part of EU canon either, only the EU itself is).
As yerssot has said, only the primary stories directly from GL, as far as the storyline is concerned, count as film canon- as mentioned by GL in interview and by Lucasfilm's Continuity and Production Department inside Star Wars Insider. As far as outside the story is concerned, obviously anything GL says about his own work is canon. Other than that nothing else- nothing at ALL- has any claim at canonicity, from the website to the enyclopedias. The very fact they contain mistakes demonstrates this- canon sources can't be mistaken as what they say is automatically true unless it is specifically recognised by the makers to be an error- like the ROTJ rank badges.
Try approaching things from a less detached and doubtful view. If you want to be informed first hand, go check things yourself. This is a discussion area and you can either believe what I say or not but I am not going to continually repeat myself over references I have given a hundred times just to please your doubt on what I say- all my GL quotes are VERY easy to look up if you so wish to. Whether you know us or not, it is still very galling to have you come in here from nowhere and immediately imply that my GL quote might be inaccurate or twisted; this isn't a history essay with an annotated list of source material. If you could gather stuff that contradicts or disproves what I say then by all means do so but to simply make out in public that you do not believe it shows a certain want of grace and community spirit. It MIGHT be better if you appreciated the fact that some of us here know a heck of a lot about which we are talking.
I DO appreciate that you are only trying to approach things from an objective perspective... but really, that wasn't a very friendly way to go about it.
Member, 'EU' is the Expanded Universe, a collective term for all Star Wars stories not written by George Lucas himself- the books, the games, the comics etc.
What kills me in this is that my quote from starwars.com in no way interferes with the earlier quote you cited, Usharrak. It actually enhances and fortifies it.
I agree that EU has no place on this particular thread, because this thread is based on the movies directly and there are definite distinctions between the two. It just gets under my skin when purists lash out at the people who bring EU into the picture. Altar was pretty harsh in his statement about arrogance, but there was some truth behind it, too.
If it’s generally accepted that Lucasfilm is the mouth of Lucas, I personally accept starwars.com as another mouth of Lucas, especially when they already help make the distinction between EU and the movies. I mean, if you’re accepting of Star Wars Insider, starwars.com isn’t even a leap.
I wasn’t implying anything about you, Usharrak, either. If anyone, I was implying Yerssot, who I mentioned in a previous post.
As for citing quotes, it’s nothing personal against anyone, but I don’t know any of you. If you’ve taken the time to give a direct quote, an extra 5 seconds just to say where you got it from isn’t going to be a big deal. If you don’t want to be bothered, then don’t. It’s not a big deal, but when people are having arguments about sources, then it’ll help your own argument if you can prove where it came from, rather than having everyone take your word.
This forum is about Ep 3 and, in particular, the Sith. It’s more than just having uninformed individuals ask questions and have those few who have GL’s quotes at their fingertips answer them and tell everyone else. Various sources about the movies should be looked at, analyzed and assimilated. EU is different for this particular thread, of course.
While I may be a newcomer, it doesn’t mean this is the first time I’ve discussed Star Wars. I’m new to this site, yes, but I’m not without some sense of background. I do appreciate that some of you on here are very experienced and know what you’re talking about. What I don’t appreciate, however, is how everything you say is right, and everything that doesn’t agree with you is wrong. This is a forum, let the ideas be heard in a friendly manner. Instead of blasting Altar, redirect him to the EU threads. Instead of telling me starwars.com is worthless, say “hmmm, that’s interesting or different or whatever” and then point out what you read about GL. I never would have charged into this forum with guns drawn if the purists in here weren’t so hostile to begin with.
By the way, if you want to discount starwars.com because of errors, then discount GL too. That whole Revenge of the Jedi fiasco, for instance (which I’m not sure, but that may have been what you were referring to with the badges). No one is infallible, especially GL. His world is a living, breathing, changing creation. I doubt that GL has held on to every idea about his world from the start. I’m sure as new ideas came along that fit into his mindset, he’s altered things. There’s lots of ideas running around. That’s ok, I love hearing about all of it. Tell me it all! If you want to distinguish where it came from, that’s groovy. Just don’t shoot people down when they introduce something that doesn’t come from what you think are the only official channels. This is a forum, it’s meant to introduce and discuss all sorts of ideas, let’s just have fun with it.
Well, first of all, I specified that there was no reason to doubt what you said about the Sith.
Secondly, Starwars.com is NOT the Mouth of Lucas. He doesn't write it. Insider is not the mouth of Lucas either. But the Continuity and Production department ARE the people charged by Lucas with keeping this whole canon thing organised. Insider was not trying to be canonical, it was simply interviewing the people who are responsible for deciding what is and what isn't, and they described that as such, so your point there is irrelevant.
When in a discussion in THIS area, the film area, about the Sith, then a clear distinction must ALWAYS be made between what is and isn't canonical. When someone asks the question they did, then only canon sources can be counted as TRUE. Anyone else can give whatever opinion, from whatever soruce, that they like, but it must NOT be represented as undeniably factual, as Altar did, and we were entirely within our rights to point that out to him. Likewise I acknowledged what you said about the Sith but pointed out that the website was not canon either. The question was asked about why there were only two Sith; I gave the ONLY canonical comment on that that exists.
It was a costuming error that caused the ROTJ problem but it is odd to make out that therefore other sources can be as canonical as GL. Other sources are not people making accidental errors, they are sources saying things that are simply not true- or more to the point, not canon. They are trying to fill gaps but they do them with no canonical power at all. What the website says about who founded th Sith and so on is all very well and good but it has no canonical status and therefore is open to debate; what is canon is NOT debatable.
As I say, I would rather, if you are doubting a quote of mine, that you took the trouble to check it out rather than coming in here and flat out suggesting that it might be false. A search through these forums would find what you need. And if you think I was remiss in not giving the source- which, as I point out, is only because I have done it a dozen times before- then you were at least equally remiss in not simply asking "Where did you get that quote from, Ush?" instead of suggesting that what I said might have no value. Knowing us or not, that was a brusque way to go about things.
About right and wrong- let us be very clear here. It is not US who sets what is and is not canon. It is not US who says these canonical things. LUCASFILM sets what is canon. The canon sources themselves say what they say. Opinion no longer enters into it. The reason we are right when we say these things is that we ARE right. No discussion as to debating things canonical, or disputing Lucasfilm's own canon policy, can possibly be entered into. it is what it is and that is simply not up for debate. So do not confuse our reportage of what is true and undebatable with us somehow assuming that everything we say is right and what others say is wrong. What the canon sources says is right. What Lucasfilm says is canon is so. We don't THINK what the channels are. It is not our opinion. We have taken the time to get to KNOW what they are, in the same way that the complete opposite is true with the Matrix storyline, with all of its 'EU' equivalent being canonical. That is how it is, end of story.
Discuss the Sith from various soruces as much as you like but be prepared to be continued to be told when your sources are non-canonical and therefore not certain, because it is important that these things be distinguished. Altar refused to accept this- he may as well dispute that red is red- and he did it without any grace and that is why things got as they did. I don't go screaming blue murder every time someone posts EU here- I simply point out the issue- but someone giving attitude back when things have been made clear to them is unlikely to receive courtesy in return. He may have been wound up by Finti saying that EU was worthless but that was just an opinion and no reason to accuse us of arrogance just because yerssot pointed out the facts.
If GL or Lucasfilm change their mind about what is and isn't canon then so will we, but until that time things will remain as they are.
These ARE discussion forums, and they have worked perfectly well on this basis for several years. The primacy of canonicity is vital to that but that by no means means that there is no room for discussion and debate. My GL quote was designed to answer the question for the poster and cannot be denied, but "I doubt any proper Sith training can start until he is on the Dark Side" is an opinion- debate that all you want. Likewise for your quote from the site, if anyone has reason to.
Now, this rambling achieves nothing. Let us bring things back to topic, please. If you have further comments about this particualr problem, make them in private.
I'm going to post one last reply, only because my overall point in this is meant for more than one person, and not even really the person I would have sent it to.
I don't debate that GL is the king on all this. His word is law, nor do I so much question the quotes I've seen. If this was a friendlier thread, I wouldn't have even asked about where it originally came from. The only thing that gets me is this- GL could very well have said things that are on other non canonical sources, and he very well could not have. It's just that all I see is the "It's not canonical" defense, and the idea is dropped. When someone makes a direct quote from him, just say so, that's cool, we know its truth. When someone says they heard stuff elsewhere, there's no need to constantly remind the person that its not canon and its worthless. That's just as obnoxious as people like Altar.
I mean, Usharrak, you've been pointing out stuff that I've mentioned that isn't very nice, and I'll work on that. Again, under different circumstances, there'd be no gripe. In this case, though, I'm trying to say that it's not very nice of those who've hounded others without canonical sources. It's very frustrating to be constantly told that what I'm saying is invalid. I just want to say what I've heard/read/seen without others dogging my every word. I mean, face it, I don't follow GL that well, so I don't have any quotes for anything. I hear stuff elsewhere, I write it down for others to see, and then I get berated for its validity. That's kind of deterring, don't you think? Altar deserved what he got, mind you, but my concern is that the treatment he was delivered is reserved for more than just the idiots. I've posted to other forums and seen similar kinds of attitudes, but nowhere have I seen it as much as I have with the Star Wars people. Their passion is apparent. I'm just making a suggestion to keep these threads friendlier to those that have something to say without official backing.
I have to admit though, when you put these two sentences together, it sounds kind of funny:
"These ARE discussion forums, and they have worked perfectly well on this basis for several years. The primacy of canonicity is vital to that but that by no means means that there is no room for discussion and debate."
No room for discussion? And these are discussion forums?
Obviously you are having trouble understanding- that sentence clearly says that it by NO MEANS means there is no room for discussion. Yeah? As in the primacy of canonicity is no impediment to discussion and debate. But if you don't like the fact that non-canon sources will get relatively shorter shrift, then sorry, but you will just have to live with that.
Also, next time I say things should move on, then move things on. I said clearly I did not want this to carry on in public, and you directly defied that- your motivation for that does not interest me, that the threads are kept in good order and the mods listened to does. Please- when mods make a decision on a thread then follow it. Any more off-topic comments will be deleted.