What's accepted SW canon?

[Praeothmin]

So inother words, GL owns LucasFilms which owns LFL.
LFL manages licensing (as the name implies) of a product called SW, while LucasFilm manages the production of the Television, Theatrical and entertainment aspects, it says so on the site.

GL does give directives on this "parallel universe" on what they can and cannot do with SW (like not being allowed to kill a character named Anakin), even though it isn't really SW, and he even draws on it for some names and events sometimes, but it's still not SW.
We're to believe that LFL decided all on their own, contrary to what GL wanted, how to manage all these different levels of SW, but again, only GL's material is SW, while the rest isn't?

Quick question:
Has GL ever stated "You know, this canon policy from LFL is bullshit, and I disaprove of it, this is not what I want, and LFL never follows company policy" or anything to that matter?
Not that I know of...
Would anything written in that "parallel universe" be printed if it went against what GL wished?
I think we all know the answer: Never...

So while GL material is above any other material in canonicity, there is no reason to ignore the rest of the material that has been printed, as long as we remember that the ultimate authority is GL-originating material...
And you can say what you want, you'll never have me believing that a guy giving instructions to one of his companies division on character devellopment, or story possibilities, considers that version of SW as "not SW", or even a parralel version as in "completely disconnected with no incidence on my material"...

[KirkSkyWalker]

That is not an argument. It is an opinion.

GL said that the EU is a different universe; so by your own standards, that's what it is. Not an "expansion" of the existing live-action SW universe.

Saying that two different things both fall in the catetgory of "Star Wars," doesn't prove your theory of "unincanon." Since GL holds the copyright, then by law he can make the rules for what goes in his commercially-published works. That's how it works, and that's all there is to it. It's got his name on it, not LFL's.
And he who holds the copyright, divines the canon.

Nor is "unicanon" valid by convention among fans for discussion-purposes; on the contrary, st-v-sw.net is quite adamant that the books are non-canon for discussion-purposes, as well as all who subscribe to that.

On SDN, they make similar "unicanon" arguments to yours-- all wrong, since they're based on misinterpretations of the English language (leading one to believe that either English isn't their first langauge, or else they're just not very good at it), taking things out of context, and conjoining them non sequitur etc.

For example, on their canon-page here, they claim the following:

In the case of Mr. Lucas, he has made it clear on many occasions that Star Wars is bigger than just the movies.

Well yes-- but he's talking about the franchise, not the story. While of course things happened before, during, after and between the movies which aren't shown in them, none of these detail which the books claim to present are official in covering these events; it's just unofficial speculation by writers.
And thus, it's of zero relevance in discussing the movie-universe.

One well-known quote comes from Star Wars Insider #45 where he says "Part of the job of the director is to sort of keep everything in line, and I can do that in the movies - but I can't do it on the whole Star Wars universe."

That's plain in itself: everything not in the movies, is out of line with the whole Star Wars universe.

Continuing:

Another one comes from Cinescape #62 where he says "There are two worlds here ... There's my world, which is the movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say is the parallel universe - the licensing world of the books, games and comic books. They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] they do intrude in between the movies. I don't get too involved in the parallel universe."

Again: that's a clear denial in itself; however Wong seems to have other ideas:

Taken in conjunction, these two quotes clearly mean that Star Wars is bigger than just the movies,

Yes: but again, that's the franchise-- not the official account of everything that happens in Lucas's version of the story.

The franchise holds two different versions: GL's, and everything else. Just because GL allows them both to exist, and they have similar features. doesn't make them part of the same fictitious universe.

but they also indicate that Mr. Lucas does not personally participate too much in the production of materials other than his movies, so they're more likely to deviate from his vision than the movies do (just as the darker, worn-torn DS9 spin-off deviated considerably from Roddenberry's vision).

No, that's different: DS9 etc. is canon, but which in Wong's opinion (and mine, BTW) took a wrong turn somewhere away from the original vision.

But canon isn't about one's opinion of quality or truth to a vision: it's about fact of authenticity; and canonicity is what separates all official work from mere fanfic.

When Lucas doesn't participate, it means the EU isn't the same fictitious universe as the movies (see "multiverse" below).
Here, SDN tops it off with the ultimate misunderstanding:

As an aside, some fans interpret George Lucas' second quote to mean that the Star Wars movies and Star Wars books actually occupy parallel universes in the literal sense, ie- the way Star Trek onscreen characters use the phrase ("a transporter accident shifted us into a parallel universe") rather than the way normal people use it ("religious fundamentalists live in their own parallel universe" or "he's off in a world of his own"). All I can say is that they've obviously watched far too much Star Trek.

Actually they don't interpret it that way at all. That refers to the fact that the fictitious Star Trek universe is a multiverse, which contains various parallel-universes.

In contrast, the Star Wars live-action universe is a single universe-- as is the Expanded Universe; neither one is part of any multiverse.

On the contrary, we mean that they occupy separate fictitious universes: i.e. "movies are movies, EU is EU, and never the twain shall never meet."
As in never EVER- not by transporter-accident, the Force, or anything else.

For example, consider the comic-book Hulk, compared to various live-action Hulks (e.g. Lou Ferrigno and the CGI movie-versions).
In the comic-book, for example, the canon states that the Hulk can jump three miles straight up in the air, when he's not even enraged; meanwhile there's never been a live-action version of the Hulk who does that. Obviously they're all licensed by Marvel comics-- but they're clearly not the same Hulk, and thus they have different abilites.
(They even have different names, life-stories, etc).

Likewise, in the G-canon we see Darth Vader deflect blaster-bolts with his artificial hand (which is made of blaster-resistant material, like Luke's); however in the books, he's able to do it using only the Force such that blasters are completely ineffective against him: something we've never seen anyone do in any movie. Again, they're able to do it simply because they're not the same Vader.

This also doesn't mean that the Hulk and Vader are different incarnations of the same critter in different universes (aka "planes" etc.) of the same fictitious multiverse, as with "our" Kirk and "mirror-Kirk (or "our" Superman and Bizarro-Superman etc): it means that they are in entlrely separate and different fictitious universes, which have absolutely nothing to do with one another within the same fictitious universe.
Mirror-Kirk and Bizarro-Superman are indeed multiverse-counterparts of their main-universe namesakes; live-action Hulk and live-action Vader are neither in the same universe nor the same multiverse-- merely the same franchise.

It also doesn't mean that they're all part of the same universe, but the live-action version simply "chooses not to do these things," for one reason or another-- and claim that they're the same universe, "except where they contradict," whatever their similarities otherwise.

Therefore in order to make a claim of precedent for the movie-universe, one can only draw solely from the movie-universe; one may not drawfrom the books, and demand that any detractor "prove that it contradicts the movies."

On the contrary, the proponent must prove that it doesn't contradict-- and the only way to do that, is to stick exclusively to the movies.

[Praeothmin]

That is not an argument. It is an opinion.

Yes, based on what I read, as is your entire post...

Since GL holds the copyright, then by law he can make the rules for what goes in his commercially-published works. That's how it works, and that's all there is to it. It's got his name on it, not LFL's.
And he who holds the copyright, divines the canon.

Except that the copyright owner has created LFL for this exact purpose, to take care of the SW name in other venues as movies.
What you and 2046 try to argue for is that he has nothing to do with LFL, and that LFL's canon policy is not valid when discussing SW.
Except, as 2046's examples clearly showed, GL does indeed give directives to SW authors on certain aspects, just as the RotS novelist sometimes was refused inclusion of some EU material in the book, because Lucas didn't think it fit with his vision.
Except that a lot of EU material did make in the book, showing that Lucas doesn't disagree with everything in the EU, and that some things in the EU do fit with his vision of SW.

One well-known quote comes from Star Wars Insider #45 where he says "Part of the job of the director is to sort of keep everything in line, and I can do that in the movies - but I can't do it on the whole Star Wars universe."

That's plain in itself: everything not in the movies, is out of line with the whole Star Wars universe.

No, what is plainly said is that GL has direct control over the movie side of SW, but not the rest, or "the whole Star Wars universe"...
Notice how he did not say "parallel universe", but clearly called it the SW universe...

"There are two worlds here ... There's my world, which is the movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say is the parallel universe - the licensing world of the books, games and comic books. They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] they do intrude in between the movies. I don't get too involved in the parallel universe."

The SW universe, the stories happening "in-between" the movies, is what GL refers to as "the parallel universe".
He never says "This is not part of SW", he says it's not part of his world of SW, which in this case consists of the movies and TCW series, plus the movie novelisations with whish he was very involved...
GL has always stated that the SW universe wasn't just the movies, that the movies in fact only explored a small part of this universe, that there were other stories out there.
The only thing he was always adamant about was that his vision is the ultimate word of God, and what he says is, but anything that doesn't contradict this also goes...

On the contrary, we mean that they occupy separate fictitious universes: i.e. "movies are movies, EU is EU, and never the twain shall never meet."
As in never EVER- not by transporter-accident, the Force, or anything else.

Except that they do meet, since GL has from time to time used names and locations in the PT and TCW that had first appeared in the EU, and the EU using many locations and characters from the movies...

Your analogy with the comic book world is flawed, because the comic book world follows a cano policy more closely akin to that of Paramount and ST.
Paramount said: Canon is only the movies and live-action shows, plus elements from two novels, period.
It seems comics are the same: Canon is only the comics, period.
While the people responsible for licensing of the GL owned products have said: Canon policy is the following: G, T, C and N...
Since Lucas never said he disapproved, and since he's clearly given instructions to LFL on certain things related to SW before, then it is quite easy to think that the Canon policy is valid according to GL...

And even 2046/Guardian2000/Darkstar, on his st vs sw page, uses some EU material to analyze SW speeds and firepower (Darksaber, anyone).
So if the EU is irrelevent, then it should not be used... At all...

[KirkSkyWalker]

That is not an argument. It is an opinion.

Yes, based on what I read, as is your entire post...

Since GL holds the copyright, then by law he can make the rules for what goes in his commercially-published works. That's how it works, and that's all there is to it. It's got his name on it, not LFL's.
And he who holds the copyright, divines the canon.

Except that the copyright owner has created LFL for this exact purpose, to take care of the SW name in other venues as movies.
What you and 2046 try to argue for is that he has nothing to do with LFL, and that LFL's canon policy is not valid when discussing SW.

I didn't argue that. We're discussing what's valid within the movie-universe, not the whole darn SW franchise. You're using different definitions of the same word, like Bill Clinton regarding what "is" is.

Notice how he did not say "parallel universe", but clearly called it the SW universe...

Meaning the franchise.
CONTEXT, Mr. President.

"There are two worlds here ... There's my world, which is the movies, and there's this other world that has been created, which I say is the parallel universe - the licensing world of the books, games and comic books. They don't intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] they do intrude in between the movies. I don't get too involved in the parallel universe."

The SW universe, the stories happening "in-between" the movies, is what GL refers to as "the parallel universe".
He never says "This is not part of SW", he says it's not part of his world of SW, which in this case consists of the movies and TCW series, plus the movie novelisations with whish he was very involved...

His world of SW refers to the part that he's involved with-- which includes TCW, but that clearly isn't in the same universe as the movies.

GL has always stated that the SW universe wasn't just the movies, that the movies in fact only explored a small part of this universe, that there were other stories out there.
The only thing he was always adamant about was that his vision is the ultimate word of God, and what he says is, but anything that doesn't contradict this also goes...

In the parallel universe.

On the contrary, we mean that they occupy separate fictitious universes: i.e. "movies are movies, EU is EU, and never the twain shall never meet."
As in never EVER- not by transporter-accident, the Force, or anything else.

Except that they do meet, since GL has from time to time used names and locations in the PT and TCW that had first appeared in the EU, and the EU using many locations and characters from the movies...

Except that PT and TCW don't take place in the movie-universe; it's even precluded by in-movie dialogue.

Your analogy with the comic book world is flawed, because the comic book world follows a cano policy more closely akin to that of Paramount and ST. Paramount said: Canon is only the movies and live-action shows, plus elements from two novels, period.
It seems comics are the same: Canon is only the comics, period.
While the people responsible for licensing of the GL owned products have said: Canon policy is the following: G, T, C and N...
Since Lucas never said he disapproved, and since he's clearly given instructions to LFL on certain things related to SW before, then it is quite easy to think that the Canon policy is valid according to GL...

Sure-- in a different universe. Just because he makes the policy for both, doesn't make them one in the same.

And even 2046/Guardian2000/Darkstar, on his st vs sw page, uses some EU material to analyze SW speeds and firepower (Darksaber, anyone).

ONLY as an indulgence-- which cannot be construed as granting carte blanche to presume a blanket-policy of such.

So if the EU is irrelevent, then it should not be used... At all...

UNLESS they're simply allowing it for the sake of argument.
For example, in one instance G2K uses the EU to refute Wong's claim that SW "Durasteel" is part neutronium; here he uses other material from the EU to refute this.
This simply means that even if one was to consider the EU as valid-- i.e. for the sake of argument- then it still wouldn't bear out their claim.
You can't confuse an indulgence with a carte-blanche.

[Praeothmin]

PT (prequel Trilogy) and TCW (The Clone Wars animation series).
The PT definitely IS part of the movie universe...

[KirkSkyWalker]

But TCW definitely is not.

[Mike DiCenso]

Lucas' world of SW now no longer simply contains simply six movies, scripts, their novelizations, and radio screenplays. They now include a seventh movie (the TCW movie), as well as TCW series, both of which are George Lucas produced, with him givening direction as well as occasionally writing for. Maybe, if they ever get around to it, a live-action TV series. The fact that a few bits and pieces of the EU managed to get snuck into the PT and TCW material does not invalidate them any more than the ST:TAS references in TNG, DS9 and ENT are invalidated, nor in turn does it validate either franchise's non-canon or lesser canon material.

But to reiterate the point, we are now in a time where Lucas is expanding his world, and as has been pointed out in other threads, it is having a rather devastating impact on the lesser or non-canon EU with just about every aired episode of TCW.
-Mike

[KirkSkyWalker]

Lucas' world of SW now no longer simply contains simply six movies, scripts, their novelizations, and radio screenplays. They now include a seventh movie (the TCW movie), as well as TCW series, both of which are George Lucas produced, with him givening direction as well as occasionally writing for. Maybe, if they ever get around to it, a live-action TV series. The fact that a few bits and pieces of the EU managed to get snuck into the PT and TCW material does not invalidate them any more than the ST:TAS references in TNG, DS9 and ENT are invalidated, nor in turn does it validate either franchise's non-canon or lesser canon material.

But to reiterate the point, we are now in a time where Lucas is expanding his world, and as has been pointed out in other threads, it is having a rather devastating impact on the lesser or non-canon EU with just about every aired episode of TCW.
-Mike

The point is that none of it is relevant to the movie-universe. Certain events in RotS not only contradict those in TCW, but preclude them, thus showing that TCW is exactly what it looks like: an age-appropriate cartoon which is incompatible with the movie-canon-- just like TAS is not ST canon.

[Mike DiCenso]

Except that Mr. Lucas disagrees with you:

"It's very much Star Wars. It's not a, you know, South Park comedy. It's not a baby girls show like Hannah Montana. It's sort of the first dramatic animated show that is, um, PG-13, so it doesn't really go on late night, it doesn't go on Saturday afternoon, it actually doesn't go anywhere. I don't know what we're gonna do with it, but we're having a hell of a lot of... a great time making it."

―George Lucas on the May 1, 2007 episode of Late Night with Conan O'Brien

If this isn't good enough for you, I don't know what is. Also, please provide your evidence about RoTS contradicting or precluding elements of the TCW. Even if those elements do exist, how do they make SW:TCW non-canon?
-Mike

[KirkSkyWalker]

Except that Mr. Lucas disagrees with you:

Nope.

"It's very much Star Wars. It's not a, you know, South Park comedy. It's not a baby girls show like Hannah Montana. It's sort of the first dramatic animated show that is, um, PG-13, so it doesn't really go on late night, it doesn't go on Saturday afternoon, it actually doesn't go anywhere. I don't know what we're gonna do with it, but we're having a hell of a lot of... a great time making it."

―George Lucas on the May 1, 2007 episode of Late Night with Conan O'Brien

NOT.
GONNA.
QUIBBLE.

, please provide your evidence about RoTS contradicting or precluding elements of the TCW. Even if those elements do exist, how do they make SW:TCW non-canon?

I don't answer rhetorical questions.

[Mike DiCenso]

Right, in that case I accept your concession.
-Mike

[KirkSkyWalker]

Right, in that case I accept your concession.
-Mike

[Lucky]

But TCW definitely is not.

Are you talking about this: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars%3A_Clone_Wars, or this: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_War ... %28film%29?

The Samurai Jack style one is as I understand it is an in-universe pro-jedi propaganda peace making it an in-universe work of fiction.^_^

The CGI series is most certainly Lucas's work from what I've read. It's a bad idea to get the two series with similar names mixed up.

[Mike DiCenso]

Please note again that the SW:TCW movie as well as the series were executive produced by George Lucas. This has Lucas stamp of approval all over it.
-Mike

[KirkSkyWalker]

But TCW definitely is not.

Are you talking about this: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars%3A_Clone_Wars, or this: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_War ... %28film%29?

No, but that shoe fits... as well.

The Samurai Jack style one is as I understand it is an in-universe pro-jedi propaganda peace making it an in-universe work of fiction.^_^

The CGI series is most certainly Lucas's work from what I've read. It's a bad idea to get the two series with similar names mixed up.

IOW you're saying it's a good idea to pick and choose at whim, which cartoons are real

Count how many things are wrong with this animated picture.
The GL cartoon, is just as non-movie canon as the Genndy Tartakovsky one; as noted here:

Star Wars creator George Lucas hired Tartakovsky to direct Star Wars: Clone Wars

. So they were equally "executive produced" by Lucas in that regard (since an executive producer is simply a term for the person who hires the artist).

Please note again that the SW:TCW movie as well as the series were executive produced by George Lucas. This has Lucas stamp of approval all over it.
-Mike

So you're simplistically claiming that everything GL produces is movie-canon, simply because it has the name "Star Wars" on it and GL approves.
NO.
As Lucky-duck says, "It's a bad idea to get the two series with similar names mixed up."
Like the Star Wars movie-series, and the Star Wars cartoon series.

And the Drawn Together gang said, "cartoons and live-action don't mix;" and if you disagree, then consider their live-action nemesis: