Frankly, Kane, I'm being profoundly courteous by giving your posts the time of day. They are upside-down absurdities that I reply to only to plumb the depths of spin-doctoring. But I thank you for your assistance in idiot-proofing future CanonWars updates.
Carrying on:
Kane Starkiller wrote:The critical issue here is that you pretend that his usage of the word "universe" is the same as yours, namely actual physical universe. This way you can pretend that when he says "separate universe" he actually means real parallel universe straight out of a TNG episode.
Dude, that's what "parallel universe" *means*. How many ways must he explain it to you?
2001 - "outside of my little universe"
2002 - "the parallel universe – the licensing world of the books, games and comic books"
2003 - "different universe”
2005 - "The other books and everything kind of go off on their path"
2005 - When I said [other people] could make their own Star Wars stories, we decided that, like Star Trek, we would have two universes: My universe and then this other one. They try to make their universe as consistent with mine as possible, but obviously they get enthusiastic and want to go off in other directions."
2008 - "these were completely different and didn't have anything to do with each other. So I said, "OK, go ahead.""
Your argument requires that Lucas be a moron who . . . despite vast experience with science fiction and despite having worked on a script involving parallel universes . . . does not know what the term means.
Naturally anyone looking at all his quotes
Deal with this one. Don't try to re-imagine it based on fanciful (read: BS) ideas of what he said before.
such as the ones in which he states that novels DO INTRUDE on his universe
You mean parts of their timeline they were supposed to avoid.
that he tries to keep things consistent
He doesn't use the same names for different people . . . so what? That's professional courtesy. But he doesn't even read the novels, so it isn't like he was making the prequels with the Licensing Holocron as reference.
ROTS commentary in which he flatly states that Anakin's scar will be explained in the novels
Of course it would be explained in the novels. They have names and backstories for virtually every living thing seen on screen. That doesn't mean he accepts their version. Indeed, he even joked that he thought Anakin got it from slipping in the shower. And that's the very point . . . for him it was a visual storytelling maneuver, making a point about the character (battle-hardened, been through stuff, not the same whiny brat we saw before) without having to go into a lot of detail, but for Licensing it was the source of a story.
Knowing how the business works and accepting their storyline as your own are two different things.
realizes that novels are indeed part of the same continuity
Source?
and phyisical universe (as in the same Galaxy) but not part of his "universe/world" that is his own story.
That would only work if there was no use of the same characters. The term "parallel universe" (and the other similar phrasings Lucas has used) could be taken metaphorically, much as people use the term metaphorically to describe Main Street vs. Wall Street, or Ma and Pa's corner store versus the Wal-Mart empire.
And indeed, Lucas has appeared to approach such phrasing to describe the live-action show, which is apparently to occur in the same movie universe but elsewhere in the galaxy, with mostly different characters. However, he's been explicit about the fact that it is in the same universe and consistent, so that doesn't help you at all.
Licensing tells stories with the Lucas settings and characters. Luke got married, the Emperor got cloned, and so on. Yet Lucas explicitly says these things do not happen in his post-RotJ timeline . . . he isn't sure what happens, but he knows that isn't it.
Just out of curiosity, how exactly would he have to phrase things in order for you to accept the truth? What precisely would he have to scrawl on the proverbial 2x4?