[Star Wars] Salon.com Article: "Galactic gasbag"

[King_Stannis]

...Why, it would be like calling a light saber a "laser sword" or calling the Enterprise a "space ship" instead of a starship....


Carry on....

actually, it's probably more like calling a toaster a cat, or a computer a lamppole, or salon.com a legitimate magazine.

 

[Henry]

Oh, my goodness! I almost missed this line completely (I glossed over the "lensmen" part

There are even hints that Lucas has worked a Lensman-style breeding program into his saga, judging from the story of Anakin Skywalker's immaculate conception in "The Phantom Menace."

I suppose the words "virgin birth" never rang a bell...

 

[King_Stannis]

I don't mean to offend, but I think you're really missing the point of the article then. He's attacking the people who consider themselves "above" a sci-fi movie, and who pretend Star Wars must be something "above" a sci-fi movie, since they enjoy it.

perhaps. but i think you missed my main point, which i will reiterate. the author, in my opinion, took wayyy too many potshots at lucas along the way for this article to be taken seriously.

whatever the intention, for me the result was just of an author who was trying to generate some publicity. quite frankly, aside from the excitement that the cheap shots generated, the article was pretty boring.

 

[Wolfspider]

*shrugs*

I thought it was pretty entertaining myself, but then again, I'm not the most exciting person in the world. I have simple, rather boring tastes, I guess.....

 

[bwgwl]

maybe i'm mistaken, but i don't think Lucas has ever denied that he drew inspiration for Star Wars from Kurosawa films or pulp sci-fi. in fact, i'm pretty sure he has stated on several occasions that they were sources of inspiration, along with Campbell's theories of the monomyth.

so is this article only attacking the fans that won't admit to themselves what the creator of the work has already said?

 

[Wolfspider]

so is this article only attacking the fans that won't admit to themselves what the creator of the work has already said?

Yes, I think so--the fans AND the critics. The article seems to be arguing that a lot of people focus on the academic work of Campbell without acknowledge the pulp influences as well.

 

[Hawkshere]

While I'm not prepared to throw the baby out with the bathwater, ala King_Stannis, I do think he has a point. The article was okay, and it did have some interesting ideas. I thought some of the alledged cynicism was actually healthy skepticism - unfortunately there was enough true cynical vitriol mixed in that it takes real effort to filter out the good from the bad. In the end, I'm still not sure what the point of this article really was. /shrug

However, if you want a really interesting take on Star Wars to debate, just look at the Salon article links sidebar for some older peices on their site. They include a far more provocative take on Star Wars by one of my fave SF authors, David Brin. He's got some ideas there some of y'all will really object to, hehe. Way, way better reading than a hipper-than-thou nitpick article on the Star Wars literary pedigree.

 

[Wolfspider]

Heh heh heh.

I really enjoyed that article, too.

 

[hong]

I still don't see why anyone is taking this article as an attack on Star Wars. It's an attack on the pompous stance that Star Wars descends from literary/religious classics, when it quite obviously descends very directly from earlier 20th-century pulp sci-fi.

It can descend from both.

 

[MulhorandSage]

However, if you want a really interesting take on Star Wars to debate, just look at the Salon article links sidebar for some older peices on their site. They include a far more provocative take on Star Wars by one of my fave SF authors, David Brin. He's got some ideas there some of y'all will really object to, hehe. Way, way better reading than a hipper-than-thou nitpick article on the Star Wars literary pedigree.

This was a pretty neat article I'd never seen before. Brin overgeneralizes so much it's occasionally painful, but it's still a good read. Thanks for pointing it out.

Scott Bennie