Chee Rejects EU Completism, Confirms Separate Continuities

For all your discussion of canon policies, evidentiary standards, and other meta-debate issues.

Discussion is to remain cordial at all times.
User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Post by 2046 » Thu Jan 11, 2007 12:57 pm

SDN's heavy hitters are weighing in again, but firing blanks. Mike Wong seems to have failed to read about this issue altogether.

Meanwhile, Poe posted Chee's "official continuities" quote, his explanation that the "foggy windows" quote refers only to Film+EU, and his direct statement that there is nothing in the "blank spaces" of the Lucas continuity.

He then states:
Ok, am I not seeing the big controversy? What did Chee say that is new?
Entertainingly, when I searched for "official continuities" last night on Google to see how much press this is getting, one thing I found was a post by Mange the Swede (aka Grand Moff Magnus of Sweden) on the StarWars.com forum:
As a result of Mr. Chee's generous answers in this (and in the Holocron) thread, these conclusions has been reached elsewhere:
{...}
* That the movies and the EU forms two seperate, official continuities
{...}
Somehow, these aren't the same conclusions that I've reached...
Wayne's response at the time was "Well, that's because you don't have an agenda!", suggesting that he agreed in principle with Mange's post. Of course, since Wayne served no useful purpose in that thread there's little more to be said there.

However, on his short-lived StarWars.com blog, Wayne had claimed:

"{...} Lucas considers the stories of the Expanded Universe to be equal parts of the Star Wars "Saga" with his own part, the films themselves. This establishes that it is the opinion of the creator of the franchise that the Expanded Universe constitutes a valid part of the "factual" history of the saga."

Compare the above to:

"The only relevant official continuities are the current versions of the films alone, and the combined current version of the films along with whatever else we've got in the Holocron. You're never going to know what George's view of the universe beyond the films at any given time because it is constantly evolving. It remains elastic until it gets committed to film or another official source. Even then, we know there's always room for change."

Why would there be multiple continuities (one controlled by Lucas wherein the EU is excluded) if George believes the EU is an equal part of the factual history of his universe?

Now, let's mosey over to his site and take a peek at his claims:
Because Mr Cerasi consistently uses the term "continuity", it is clear that this is a specific use of the word, and not a vague generality. The term "continuity" is defined by the 1984 edition of the Funk & Wagnalls Standard Desk Dictionary as "the state or quality of being continuous". "Continuous" is therein defined as "extended or prolonged without break; uninterrupted."

In effect, Mr Cerasi has stated, then, that the Expanded Universe constitutes a continuous, uninterrupted part of the Star Wars saga. It is fully in union with the films themselves, and is without break from them; to relegate it to the status of inadmissible evidence due to non-canon status is to violate the stated policy of LucasBooks, and thence, of Lucasfilm Ltd, and implicitly of Mr Lucas himself.
Hmm . . . just one continuity there. And it seems important that it be so, to Wayne.
Some VS Trekkies and some Star Wars purists say George Lucas is telling us that the EU is a "parallel universe" and is pretty much fan fiction that has no standing in the "actual" Star Wars world. {...} The rest of us already know that the Expanded Universe is not G-level canon, but is part of the overall continuity.
Again, Wayne's claim is based on a single overall continuity inclusive of the EU and the films. The presence of a second continuity that is Lucas's alone defeats his position.

And here's the gem . . . One time I asked Sue Rostoni about the corporate structure of Lucas Licensing and LucasBooks (before I knew it was merely a publishing imprint). Wayne saw me interacting with Rostoni, freaked, and tried to lead (and plead with) Sue Rostoni to saying something he wanted:

"Some have speculated that these divisions follow a seperate continuity unto the books themselves, while the films are a continuity all their own. But from what you've said here, this can't be true, correrct? The books have to follow the same continuity the films do, as they are an integral part of the overall story of Star Wars that Lucasfilm LTD. recognizes as a legitimate continuation of the films, right?" (bolding mine)

Sue replied:

"Yes, the books follow the continuity of the films as best we can taking into account that George follows his own continuity, and rightly so."

Of course, I evilly "spin-doctored" this as a confirmation of separate canons (aka separate continuities).

Wayne and friends require a single continuity in which the films and EU exist together in retconned harmony . . . but there is a second continuity that exists in which they don't, and both Rostoni and Chee ID it as Lucas's continuity. So does Lucas.

So what's the big mystery?

But wait, there's more from Wayne's latest:
The EU has always been seperate from the films, until its introduced into the "film universe", but where the films are silent, the EU is perfectly acceptable continuity.
I swear, this almost sounds like Wayne is trying to retcon himself closer to my position . . . I could just as easily have written that first half-sentence.

But then, Wayne claims that where the films are silent, the EU is perfectly acceptable. And yet he had just quoted Chee:
And what goes in the blank timeline spaces of the Film Only universe - can we never know the history or background of that Star Wars universe like we can in the EU Star Wars universe?
Nothing. That's why it's film only.
Where the films are "silent", there is nothing in the other official continuity that Wayne classically rejected the existence of. Not EU data . . . that's only valid in the official continuity used by Licensing and encapsulated in the Holocron.

Which is, of course, what I've been telling him for years.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Thu Jan 11, 2007 7:21 pm

One word: delusion.

This Poe guy fails at the most basic logic level.

Two official continuities are acknowledged, which in itself already burries the whole "only one singular official continuity" argument.

Then, both continuities are described, one based on the films alone, the other incorporating both the films and the EU.
  • Films : Element A.
  • EU : Element B.
  1. Official Continuity #1: A without B: "current versions of the films alone".
  2. Official Continuity #2: A with B: "combined current version of the films along with whatever else we've got in the Holocron".
What's hard in that? How far do you have to miss the point or twist the words to completely get a convoluted and totally different interpretation of a crystal clear statement?

Whether he cannot understand this utmost simple logic, or is just too damn stubborn and dishonest to admit being wrong, it doesn't paint him as a reliable person in any case.

User avatar
AnonymousRedShirtEnsign
Jedi Knight
Posts: 380
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 10:05 pm
Location: Six feet under the surface of some alien world

Post by AnonymousRedShirtEnsign » Thu Jan 11, 2007 10:53 pm

I think the current counter to the two continuities is that the film only one is less important than the films+EU one. I have absolutely no idea where this notion comes from, but it basically comes across as f*** George Lucas, his Star Wars isn't good enough for me.

GStone
Starship Captain
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Undercover in Culture space

Post by GStone » Fri Jan 12, 2007 12:54 am

They like using more of the available SW, going with the idea there's more to Wars than the movies and baloon it to mean that what Lucas does isn't good enough. It must use the rest of everything else because he can only do so much and that's the reason for hiring all the writers and artists and designers throughout the Lucas empire.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Post by 2046 » Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:13 am

"F*** George Lucas" is right, as is GStone's sarcasm just above.

A reply I just made on my blog addresses the concept of relative superiority. The commenter, a mysterious newcomer known as "KW", has been suggesting that this is all a matter of personal preference, backing up this idea with ill-advised misuse and disuse of the quotes available. I responded thusly:

***

You're still subjectively placing the Licensing continuity above the film-only continuity, not just in some esoteric conception of relative importance, but also simply in regards to the nature of your statements. For example, in the final sentence of your first paragraph above you reiterate that EU facts are C-level canon. In the second paragraph you try to drive the point home with the language of "official continuity" and "It's canon" and "our Star Wars universe" and "designated canon".

You ignore the fact that even the Keeper of the Holocron has stated that there is a continuity where such things don't matter, and that it's Lucas's. Rostoni has told you and me and everyone else the exact same thing. And, of course, it goes without saying that so has Lucas.

I agree completely that the EU has a continuity. I agree completely that Licensing, creators of the EU, are in charge of that continuity. I agree completely that Lucas allows them to refer to and include his films as facts in their continuity. I agree completely that Lucas has even seen a handful of things he liked in that EU continuity and paid homage to them in his canon (i.e. he ganked 'em).

But Licensing is not in charge of Lucas's continuity, nor do they claim to be. And it is Lucas's continuity that makes our Star Wars universe. He allows his films to be used in another continuity altogether, but he's explicitly stated that the other continuity is another universe altogether.

If that's the universe you want to draw facts from, then that's your affair. But it's not Star Wars . . . it's a parallel universe of Star Wars. Who knows what Butterfly Effect / Mirror Universe differences there are? We'll never know, unless and until Lucas is imprisoned in a sweatshop and forced to make films and line-edit novelizations thereof covering every moment in time that the EU has covered.

But that's not gonna happen, so if you want to use the EU as a very, very rough guide then it's all good, but unless you're explicitly tied down to the EU universe then I don't see any logic in tying yourself down to EU facts in Lucas's universe.

"THINK FOR YOURSELF."

***

User avatar
AnonymousRedShirtEnsign
Jedi Knight
Posts: 380
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 10:05 pm
Location: Six feet under the surface of some alien world

Post by AnonymousRedShirtEnsign » Fri Jan 12, 2007 6:28 am

While I don't agree with KW's points, at least he's civil (unlike many EU completists). And I can't wait to get miss quoted about the F--- GL thing.

Socar
Bridge Officer
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:09 pm

Post by Socar » Fri Jan 12, 2007 6:30 am

To be frank, I'm a little surprised that there isn't more (or really any) supportive commentary from the other SDN'rs on the matter. After seeing Wayne and Mike post about it last night, I was almost positive I was going to come back the next day and see a bunch of posts in agreement, but nothing. Could it be that even they are having a hard time buying this?

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Fri Jan 12, 2007 12:34 pm

It's quite obvious that there's a limit to where you can go in distording one's words before the sentences completely loose sense.

Truth: For a decent versus debate, the stuff in the films alone is not enough. Novelisations included.

That's why the EU is so important to oppose relatively similar quantities of data.

Imagine Star Trek only had six feature films and all of Star Wars, films and EU, were the must have canon, wouldn't you Trekkies feel a bit... cheated?

No, cheated isn't even the good word. It's that there would be no point about it.

That's also why this new TV show will boost the whole debate back to the top spheres, looking at Lucas' involvement, etc.

Basically, I'm sure that many here would actually accept the more purist canon to include:

Films.
Novelisations.
Eventually radio dramas.
New TV show (the one with real actors).

I could happily live with that version of canon, as long as Lucas is sufficiently involved.

Now, as far as I'm concerned, I do recognize the existence of the two official canons, or continuities if you want to nitpick, but I'm still unconvinced about the validity of certain whole segments of the EU within that "film+EU" canon.
For example, the Death Star note in ANH's book.
I suppose you have to dismiss certain inconsistencies, and maybe even consider the novelisations wrong in some cases.
It's not the way it should work, but it's either that or the whole EU as a supposedly coherent element of mutually affecting plotlines could not even exist.

That's also why I'm happy not to bother with that bigger continuity, because I don't have to mess with those issues.

Of course, there are those EUphiles who will insist that such inconsistencies do not exist.
Well, that's another issue on its own, but I rarely pay attention to such drivel, since it has proved so many times to be a pure waste of time.

EDIT: besides, there's the question about what happens regarding this current "purist canon" once George Lucas won't be among us anymore.
Last edited by Mr. Oragahn on Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Post by 2046 » Fri Jan 12, 2007 1:12 pm

AnonymousRedShirtEnsign wrote:While I don't agree with KW's points, at least he's civil (unlike many EU completists). And I can't wait to get miss quoted about the F--- GL thing.
Yep, you're screwed there. ;)

As for KW, I think it's a woman, or at least a man who thinks the same way. I had absolutely no conception as to how to respond until it dawned on me that he/she hadn't really said anything except how he/she feels.
Socar wrote:To be frank, I'm a little surprised that there isn't more (or really any) supportive commentary from the other SDN'rs on the matter.
Well, the situation's rather like the one in regards to the Starlog quote. It took them awhile to come up with a counterclaim about the quote that they could really get behind . . . indeed, they really haven't fully done that yet. They just insist that one is about production and then run away before they have to explain what they just said.

Right now they're just in denial. Poe exemplified it, but Wong's in the same boat. First, he makes a poor straw man:

"I honestly don't see how this changes anything. RSA claimed that Lucasfilm has a firm policy for its continuity, and it doesn't."

Except I never claimed that. I even reiterated that [url=http://forums.starwars.com/thread.jspa? ... start=1965]over a year ago[/quote] when they claimed it then, to which I replied:
Ackbar's Trap at StarWars.com wrote:3. LFL canon
Chee's rejection of an LFL canon policy refers to a structured canon policy like Licensing's official continuity policy (OCP). As far as that goes, his rejection is perfectly accurate.

However, as defined,

... the Lucas/LFL policy I speak of with is an informal one based on Lucas's comments and those of others at Lucasfilm. Those comments are the Lucas/LFL canon policy. (The question of whether "policy" was a good choice of terminology will have to wait for another day.) EUDF'ers are rejecting the existence of the policy-as-defined. Here's the definition given to Swede et al. months ago:

Unlike the Lucas Licensing official continuity policy, the Lucas/LFL policy is not so formalized. It is primarily known through comments George Lucas has made in various venues such as press releases and interviews. Comments by Steve Sansweet {...} also contribute to our knowledge {...}

Since the Lucas/LFL canon policy is defined as the stated positions of Lucas et al., one cannot possibly reject the existence of it without rejecting either the existence of the statements or the right of Lucas to make them. No one is realistically trying to do that, are they?
The italicized quote above is from my SW canon page and has been there for a long, long time.

Wong's straw man aside, the only meat to his position is given here:

"Chee just reiterated that there is a larger continuity beyond just the films, but that they will not declare precisely what it is because it is subject to change."

Wong's talking about the Lucas continuity, but there's nothing about a continuity beyond the films in the quote . . . just Lucas's opinion about what makes up his universe's background.

(Example: Lucas has stated that he thinks Han and Leia got married and had a family. I'd hardly call that a continuity beyond the films. Similarly, authors or movie-makers commonly have extensive ideas on character histories and futures that might not make it into print/film, but that form part of the background ideas for their writing. That's not a continuity beyond the work . . . that's just part of the continuity itself. Lucas surely doesn't think the universe he works in just sprang into being at the point of TPM, AotC, etc.)

Indeed, the most telling thing is that his opinion of his universe other than the films is not equal to the EU, per Chee . . . or at the very least, not always equal.

It is an intensely desperate "rebuttal". Whereas previously Wong might've brazenly claimed that Lucas believes in the EU and officially accepts it as part of his Star Wars because he oversees it personally, now he's just saying "well, there's more in Lucas's continuity than just the 12 hours of it we see, so nothing is different and thus we get to use the EU".

What the hell?

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Post by 2046 » Fri Jan 12, 2007 1:20 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:Truth: For a decent versus debate, the stuff in the films alone is not enough. Novelisations included.
I disagree there. I've barely scratched the surface of all the tech stuff in the novelizations, and there's a lot more in the films and scripts to work with.

Just because Star Trek has more stories doesn't mean there's an advantage there. Sure we have a lot of detail, but that also means (thanks to Braga-esque "dramatic necessity") we know a lot more about what makes Trek stuff break or not work. Star Wars doesn't have that problem.

Besides which . . . the question isn't about what's fair. Certainly including the EU is not fair by that criteria, because I'd imagine the EU tips the scales of amount of content for SW anyway. And besides, if Viacom and CBS Corp. issued a joint statement declaring TAS and the Trek novels canon tomorrow, there would be no logic in trying to expand the SW canon to match, or vice versa.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Fri Jan 12, 2007 7:08 pm

2046 wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Truth: For a decent versus debate, the stuff in the films alone is not enough. Novelisations included.
I disagree there. I've barely scratched the surface of all the tech stuff in the novelizations, and there's a lot more in the films and scripts to work with.
The amount of information you may have not pointed out from novelisations would never outmatch the vast quantity of data simply revealed by what? eleven films and so many shows.

Plus there are people who don't grant the scripts, and frankly, I've been looking at how novelisations work, and there aren't many ground breaking and very detailed revelations to find.

Most of the time, it's mere limited expansion of what's on screen, that is, more words to tell what's happening, instead of more intricate technical descriptions, and that's if we're lucky enough so that what's on screen matches what's in the books (Coruscant orbiting mirrors anyone?).
Now, the SW novelisations are rather close to the films' shooting scripts, ergo close to the films themselves.
Those novelisations feel like they have lots of information because lots of it is actually a repetition of facts that disprove most recent EU claims.
But all in all, the info is nothing particularily super fresh.

Plus Star Trek has its own lot of film novelisations.
Just because Star Trek has more stories doesn't mean there's an advantage there. Sure we have a lot of detail, but that also means (thanks to Braga-esque "dramatic necessity") we know a lot more about what makes Trek stuff break or not work. Star Wars doesn't have that problem.
In terms of sheer quantity of material and information, I'm afraid I can't see how we can even claim that Star Wars would be on equal terms without the EU.
Besides which . . . the question isn't about what's fair.
I don't think that's right.
Otherwise, I don't see the point of those versus debates if the whole situation is unbalanced from the get go (lack of content, absurd wank, etc.).
For example, do we see that much debates involving Farscape? Not really, and it's not without a coincidence that this universe is rarely quantifiable in useful ways.
Or how the ICSes almost completely killed the SW-ST debates on sites supporting SW's EU.
Certainly including the EU is not fair by that criteria, because I'd imagine the EU tips the scales of amount of content for SW anyway.
But that's talking about the content. My point is about quantity.

Objectively, it was already unfair before this period.

We know near to nothing about the technical aspects of the Empire's most favoured warships if we stick to the films only (counting the novelisations, RDs and scripts if you want to).
We can't even precisely know how many cannons they have, what type they are, the amount of damage the hull can withstand from a given type of weapon with certainty, etc. I mean, that's just an example among probably thousands that are necessary and composing the backbone of most versus debates.
And besides, if Viacom and CBS Corp. issued a joint statement declaring TAS and the Trek novels canon tomorrow, there would be no logic in trying to expand the SW canon to match, or vice versa.
There wouldn't from LFL's standpoint, because there are literally no chances that they give a damn about versus affairs.
In the end, it's only up to the people who start threads. That's why the motto here is good, because the OP defines the boundaries of accepted material.

Technically, that's also the rules applied at SB.com, but over there, a purist thread has more chances of being filled with mockery and complaints about why you leave the EU out, or it would probably just go completely ignored.

It's just that Starfleetjedi is not very thriving with life atm, but it's a shame because it really asks for more and has lots of potential.
Last edited by Mr. Oragahn on Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Post by Mike DiCenso » Fri Jan 12, 2007 7:57 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
It's just that Starfleetjedi is not very thriving with life atm, but it's a shame because it really asks for more and has lots of potential.
I find it a bit odd, especially since the first ST-V-SW.Net, the STrek-v-SWars.Net, and the second ST-V-SW.Net forums all were fairly well frequented. This forum does seem to be a little be slow, with the occasional "flare up" in activity. I don't think now it's due to a lack of advertisement, either, as this forum has had quite a bit of word of mouth, as well as offical advertisement elsewhere.
-Mike

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2164
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Fri Jan 12, 2007 8:20 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
2046 wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Truth: For a decent versus debate, the stuff in the films alone is not enough. Novelisations included.
I disagree there. I've barely scratched the surface of all the tech stuff in the novelizations, and there's a lot more in the films and scripts to work with.
The amount of information you may have not pointed out from novelisations would never outmatch the vast quantity of data simply revealed by what? eleven films and so many shows.
You're right that six films and their novelizations, scripts, radio dramas, etc, can't possibly measure up to the amount of information given by eleven films and twenty eight seasons of television (each of which individually adds up to a similar amount of produced screen time as the entire SW film saga). We're talking about thirty times as much material. I would say that the scripts and novelizations treble the amount of information available or so, but that's still a factor of ten.

Similarly, however, there are something like 200 novels in the Star Wars EU, and then comic books, computer games, technical manuals, RPG books... etc. If you include the whole SW EU and compare to the Trek series and movies, Star Wars has a similarly huge "advantage" over Star Trek in terms of the quantity of available material.

By bulk, it's not "fair" either way you take it; the only way to be working with a similar quantity of material is to use the whole of both the ST and SW EUs.

IMO, Star Wars taken from a film-purist perspective has a very serious advantage over Star Trek:

Consistency of vision. George Lucas's tight creative control over what has been called the "film canon" is something that a single series of Trek is hard-pressed to match... let alone all five plus the movies.

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Post by Mike DiCenso » Fri Jan 12, 2007 9:30 pm

Jedi Master Spock wrote:
Consistency of vision. George Lucas's tight creative control over what has been called the "film canon" is something that a single series of Trek is hard-pressed to match... let alone all five plus the movies.
That's a double-edged sword, actually. On one hand it is an advantage in portraying the storyverse of SW in a consistant manner. On the other hand can be a disadvantage in how matters like technology are portrayed and continue to be portrayed throughout both trilogies. It's the basis for the continuing arguement that SW firepower is not much higher than a few kilotons or megatons, the exception being the Death Stars. Without the EU, in particular the ICS books authored by Curtis Saxton, SW ships do not stand up especially well against the higher-end firepower and other technology examples from ST.
-Mike

Nonamer
Jedi Knight
Posts: 269
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 7:05 pm
Location: Outer Space

Post by Nonamer » Fri Jan 12, 2007 9:52 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
It's just that Starfleetjedi is not very thriving with life atm, but it's a shame because it really asks for more and has lots of potential.
I find it a bit odd, especially since the first ST-V-SW.Net, the STrek-v-SWars.Net, and the second ST-V-SW.Net forums all were fairly well frequented. This forum does seem to be a little be slow, with the occasional "flare up" in activity. I don't think now it's due to a lack of advertisement, either, as this forum has had quite a bit of word of mouth, as well as offical advertisement elsewhere.
-Mike
Those were all associated with Darkstar, or 2046 here I believe. He's something of a lightning rod of controversy and that site gets significantly more traffic. This website is totally independent and is not nearly as heavily visited. Plus by being the third or so website dedicated to this venture, the enthusiasm has probably waned a bit.

Post Reply