So the books are all invalidated now?

[Particle_Man]

Basically, the big problem with Annakin is that he got attached to Padme, down to having kids, right?

So a big part of being a Jedi is not to get attached?

Which means not to have kids?

So there are no kids of Luke? And there are no kids of Leia? Or is it that Leia has kids, but never undergoes Jedi training?

So if that is true, then any books that mention Luke's kids must be not only non-canon, but rendered invalid by the movies?

Same deal with Leia having kids, if she later undergoes Jedi training?

I haven't read the novels, but am I on the right track here?

 

[BiggusGeekus]

I have a strong suspicion that Lucas regards he Extended Universe as a pure fan effort and while he happilly rubber stamps things as "cannon" he pretty much only worries about being consistient within his own movies.

Of course, it's not like Lucas and I are chums or anything.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I have a strong suspicion that Lucas regards he Extended Universe as a pure fan effort and while he happilly rubber stamps things as "cannon" he pretty much only worries about being consistient within his own movies.

Of course, it's not like Lucas and I are chums or anything.

Exactly. I have a feeling that if he really cared about the EU he would have said no to the Dark Empire comic series.

 

[Kralin Thornberry]

Not really, no.

In the RotS novel, Yoda says something along the lines of the Sith won because they changed, and the Jedi stood firm, and when he trains the next generation of Jedi, he will allow them to change the Order some. Maybe that's just part of the natural progression of the Order. Or not.

 

[Henry]

Basically, the big problem with Annakin is that he got attached to Padme, down to having kids, right?

So a big part of being a Jedi is not to get attached?

Which means not to have kids?

You may have missed the other lesson, which was that the Jedi were too staid and inflexible and dogmatic to their code, which aided their downfall.

The point is not to never have children, the point is to not let your emotions become the sole determiner for rational thought; by the same token, your positive emotions like love and charity can give you the resolve to do what's right. And I think Luke and Leia are intent not to replicate the order's mistakes that brought about the Jedi's downfall.

Anakin in the NJO was best representative of this philosophy.

 

[Desdichado]

Basically, the big problem with Annakin is that he got attached to Padme, down to having kids, right?

So a big part of being a Jedi is not to get attached?

Which means not to have kids?

So there are no kids of Luke? And there are no kids of Leia? Or is it that Leia has kids, but never undergoes Jedi training?

So if that is true, then any books that mention Luke's kids must be not only non-canon, but rendered invalid by the movies?

Same deal with Leia having kids, if she later undergoes Jedi training?

I haven't read the novels, but am I on the right track here?

Two things: 1) What the Jedi did in the timeframe of the Prequels has no bearing (or at least very little) on what the Jedi do under Luke and Leia following RotJ. And 2) Who cares? It's not like Lucas hasn't invalidated huge swaths of EU in the past, nor is it like the EU is so good that it should be lamented when that does happen.

 

[Aeson]

In one of the New Jedi Order books an old republic jedi returns and learns about the new Jedi having children. She is surprised because that was not allowed under the old Jedi Order. I believe it was explained that Luke's research on the old order was incomplete and was unaware of the rule and he also allowed it under the new order to help increase the number of Jedi. Now he did send Leia's kids away to train and they were seperated from their parents for some time and this created friction between parents and children.