Deus ex Machina: the Will of The Force ...

[The Great Phantom]

The Force is fate. The Will of the Force is not like the will of a person. It is used as an analogy for fate for destiny. Saying the force has a will is merely a personification of saying that the force is fate, it is the course of human events; it does not DETERMINE destiny, it simply IS destiny.

 

The force is not good nor evil, it is equilibrium and the path of equilibrium, Anakin killed the Jedi COuncil and brought balance back to the force, Im sure most of you know why I say that. The force did not force him to do so, he simply walked down that path his choices brought him down that path. His choices made his path his coices MADE the Forces "will". That path was the path of the force it was teh will of the force. Which is why the force is tied to to life and life tied to teh force. Its very complex and is the old chicken or the egg principle.

 

The force cannot die because as long as life exists in the universe and humans will be able to walk down a path, the force will exist becasue the force is that path. That is why teh force is so bonded to life because it is 100% derived from life.

 

It is symbiotic we need the force to walk our path in life, the force is a path that woudl not exist if there was nothign to wlak down it. DO you understand?

 

The force exists as long as life does. Many people, like Kreia and Neo, hate the idea that fate adn destiny control our lives but that is because they do not truelly grasp the concept of fate and destiny and teh force i guess. It does not control it is nto a patht that is forced upon you, it is somethign that is created through ur choices but at teh same time has alwasy existed.

 

I know it is a very difficult thing to understand, im still trying to.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Close, but not quite. Since when do you know what Balance means? For all we know, it could be a team of Gizka doing an aggressive takeover of the Czerka Beer Corp. (Hey, why else would they be so important to the Sith??? ).

 

Some points you make are agreeable, but many have determined that the Force only leads one (who knows WHICH one?) to a 'peak' in time, where they have to make a choice that will determine where the next 'peaks' will be.

[Influence]

The Force is fate. The Will of the Force is not like the will of a person. It is used as an analogy for fate for destiny. Saying the force has a will is merely a personification of saying that the force is fate, it is the course of human events; it does not DETERMINE destiny, it simply IS destiny.

 

The force is not good nor evil, it is equilibrium and the path of equilibrium, Anakin killed the Jedi COuncil and brought balance back to the force, Im sure most of you know why I say that. The force did not force him to do so, he simply walked down that path his choices brought him down that path. His choices made his path his coices MADE the Forces "will". That path was the path of the force it was teh will of the force. Which is why the force is tied to to life and life tied to teh force. Its very complex and is the old chicken or the egg principle.

 

The force cannot die because as long as life exists in the universe and humans will be able to walk down a path, the force will exist becasue the force is that path. That is why teh force is so bonded to life because it is 100% derived from life.

 

It is symbiotic we need the force to walk our path in life, the force is a path that woudl not exist if there was nothign to wlak down it. DO you understand?

 

The force exists as long as life does. Many people, like Kreia and Neo, hate the idea that fate adn destiny control our lives but that is because they do not truelly grasp the concept of fate and destiny and teh force i guess. It does not control it is nto a patht that is forced upon you, it is somethign that is created through ur choices but at teh same time has alwasy existed.

 

I know it is a very difficult thing to understand, im still trying to.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Close, but not quite. Since when do you know what Balance means? For all we know, it could be a team of Gizka doing an aggressive takeover of the Czerka Beer Corp. (Hey, why else would they be so important to the Sith??? ).

 

Some points you make are agreeable, but many have determined that the Force only leads one (who knows WHICH one?) to a 'peak' in time, where they have to make a choice that will determine where the next 'peaks' will be.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How could u possible tell what a "peak"is. Are you saying peopeles choces lead them to one point where they then have teh free will to determine what choice they will amek and that shapes the future? So only one person has a choice that occurs only once in their life? Tthe butterfly effect man there are no inconsequential choices everything is a peak everything has a signifcance. what you are saying would mean everything is a variable and that there is no will of the force there is no fate, there is no force. What u say contradicts itself.

 

As for what u said aobut not knwoing what balance is, You are correct we do not knwo what balance is but life seeks homeostasis any way it can. we woudl never be able to comprehend what balance for the entire universe is becasue there are almost an inifinite number of possibilities but LIFE SEEKS BALANCE. The force, being what i defined it as does not have a midn of its own, but it is the sum of all things it is derived form life and the complex inner workings of all teh life in teh universe determines what balance is, what ever plays out IS balance cause it woudl nt

[The Great Phantom]

The Force is fate. The Will of the Force is not like the will of a person. It is used as an analogy for fate for destiny. Saying the force has a will is merely a personification of saying that the force is fate, it is the course of human events; it does not DETERMINE destiny, it simply IS destiny.

 

The force is not good nor evil, it is equilibrium and the path of equilibrium, Anakin killed the Jedi COuncil and brought balance back to the force, Im sure most of you know why I say that. The force did not force him to do so, he simply walked down that path his choices brought him down that path. His choices made his path his coices MADE the Forces "will". That path was the path of the force it was teh will of the force. Which is why the force is tied to to life and life tied to teh force. Its very complex and is the old chicken or the egg principle.

 

The force cannot die because as long as life exists in the universe and humans will be able to walk down a path, the force will exist becasue the force is that path. That is why teh force is so bonded to life because it is 100% derived from life.

 

It is symbiotic we need the force to walk our path in life, the force is a path that woudl not exist if there was nothign to wlak down it. DO you understand?

 

The force exists as long as life does. Many people, like Kreia and Neo, hate the idea that fate adn destiny control our lives but that is because they do not truelly grasp the concept of fate and destiny and teh force i guess. It does not control it is nto a patht that is forced upon you, it is somethign that is created through ur choices but at teh same time has alwasy existed.

 

I know it is a very difficult thing to understand, im still trying to.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Close, but not quite. Since when do you know what Balance means? For all we know, it could be a team of Gizka doing an aggressive takeover of the Czerka Beer Corp. (Hey, why else would they be so important to the Sith??? ).

 

Some points you make are agreeable, but many have determined that the Force only leads one (who knows WHICH one?) to a 'peak' in time, where they have to make a choice that will determine where the next 'peaks' will be.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How could u possible tell what a "peak"is. Are you saying peopeles choces lead them to one point where they then have teh free will to determine what choice they will amek and that shapes the future? So only one person has a choice that occurs only once in their life? Tthe butterfly effect man there are no inconsequential choices everything is a peak everything has a signifcance. what you are saying would mean everything is a variable and that there is no will of the force there is no fate, there is no force. What u say contradicts itself.

 

As for what u said aobut not knwoing what balance is, You are correct we do not knwo what balance is but life seeks homeostasis any way it can. we woudl never be able to comprehend what balance for the entire universe is becasue there are almost an inifinite number of possibilities but LIFE SEEKS BALANCE. The force, being what i defined it as does not have a midn of its own, but it is the sum of all things it is derived form life and the complex inner workings of all teh life in teh universe determines what balance is, what ever plays out IS balance cause it woudl nt

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'll ignore that last paragraph, because I'm getting a bit tired of the monotony of my own statements being repeated back w/ little tidbits added.

 

1st Paragraph: No, I said 'one', as in ANYBODY. Somewhere in the early pages of this thread is that quote... I'll drag it up for you.

[The Great Phantom]

Here's a conjecture; the Force is not the death of Free Will. Although it might guide your life to a specific point, even a series of specific points, the choice of what to do when you reach those points is entirely your own.

 

Looking at another science fiction classic - a literary one - I use an example taken from Dune, and examine Paul Atredies' 'future sight'. He saw the future as like a landscape, a series of highs and lows - the highs were these 'specific points', the crisis points at which crucial decisions were made, and he was unable to see what lay beyond that ridge - the rest of the future, in other words - until he had reached the top and he was at the crisis point. At which point he would be able to see all the way to the next ones, but not beyond them.

 

If we look at one genuine example of farseeing in Star Wars - Luke's visions of Han and Leia being tortured in Cloud City, while he was on Dagobah - he was able to see to that crisis point, that important pivot in his destiny. The Force gave him that vision, but it was his choice to go there - and, likewise, things could have gone either way, for him to die, for him to reject the dark side, or for him to embrace it.

 

Ergo - the Force is not the death of Free Will, but if one is Force Sensitive, then the Force tends to make the choices you are presented with very important indeed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Here you go, Influence. (Are you under it? JK)

[metadigital]

[1]The Force is fate. The Will of the Force is not like the will of a person. It is used as an analogy for fate for destiny. Saying the force has a will is merely a personification of saying that the force is fate, it is the course of human events; it does not DETERMINE destiny, it simply IS destiny.

 

[2]The force is not good nor evil, it is equilibrium and the path of equilibrium, Anakin killed the Jedi COuncil and brought balance back to the force, [3]Im sure most of you know why I say that. The force did not force him to do so, he simply walked down that path his choices brought him down that path. [4]His choices made his path his coices MADE the Forces "will". That path was the path of the force it was teh will of the force. Which is why the force is tied to to life and life tied to teh force. Its very complex and is the old chicken or the egg principle.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1. You are playing semantics. The Force determines the outcome of the (seemingly) random events in history, therefore it is fate. Determine indicates some sort of decision has been made, which implies a will and perhaps consciousness.

de

[FortranDragon]

yet people always seem to apply the rules of Science on everyting in our world .. God does not exist, there is no proof! where's the scientific data? There is no meaning of life! we have no free will, since everything behaves according to ceartin rules we can't escape (no need to quote Quantum Physics/Mechanics, I've read it, but people use this argument alot) ..

 

we trap ourselves in logic boxes, killing some creative thoughts and human values .. and that's where I say no ..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Yes, many people try to use, misuse really, science to support their fervid positions. That's just as bad as someone who ignores the facts in front of them because of a zealous belief.

 

God (the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-present version) and science has more to about the creation of the universe and the way it works. Invoking God when there are simpler explanations (that work) is a big problem. Science tends towards simple, robust explanations over more complex explanations (assuming both work equally). The problem with God is that it really doesn't explain anything. One just waves their hands and says "God willed it. The End.". Since God becomes an extraordinary claim it requires extraordinary evidence that God actually did this. Science 'wants' to know why God is a better fit over the simpler non-God explanation of the facts.

 

(This also skips the fact that removing God removes mankind from the pinnacle of Creation. A fact that upsets some people.)

 

Science is important because it describes our capabilities and our limits. Knowing our limits and trying to cope/bypass them is one of greatest sources of creativity. For example, man, as he is born is unable to fly by his own physicality. By using our physical intellect man has been able to build a machine (which completely accurate communication and shared perceptions, I might add ;-)) to fly. A machine solely powered by the human body. By letting our creativity be spurred on by our limits we achieved something grand.

[FortranDragon]

Thank you, I was wondering when somebody was going to mention that.  While the philisophical discussion is fascinating, let us not forget that George Lucas created "The Force" much like L. Ron Hubbard created "Scientology" (may his eyes be eaten by small rodents..Hubbards not Lucas.) As I recall George was reading a great deal of Joseph Campbell and Jung at the time he wrote Star Wars.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Umm, no. ;-) It looks like Campbell and Lucas created their little lovefest *after* the original Star Wars movie became a cultural phenomenon. George provided the popularity and Joseph provided the academic 'blessings'.

[metadigital]

... (This also skips the fact that removing God removes mankind from the pinnacle of Creation.  A fact that upsets some people.) ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have heard some interteresting counter views:

Grass -- includes Wheat, Barley, Rice, and Corn or Maize -- which have domesticated the nomadic tribes of homo sapiens sapiens (they also being relative newcomers to the Earth, only 11 million years -- so no Dinosaurs ate grass).

Armoured arthropods -- crabs, scorpions, cochroaches (sic: the rude-filter didn't like the real spelling ), centipedes, etc, etc -- whose numbers are greater than all other life forms put together and who haven't changed since they conquered the hostile terrain outside the oceans over 200 million years ago.

 

So we humans look pretty puny in comparison: we're only here because a freak asteroid hit the Earth and killed off most of the Dinosaurs (sharks and crocodiles take a bow) 67 million years ago; had that not happened would we be typing with taloned hands?

 

And the pertinent question is: Did God send the asteroid? Was it fated to strike at just the time to let puny mammals become the dominant species on this planet? :D

[Grooby]

Thank you, I was wondering when somebody was going to mention that.  While the philisophical discussion is fascinating, let us not forget that George Lucas created "The Force" much like L. Ron Hubbard created "Scientology" (may his eyes be eaten by small rodents..Hubbards not Lucas.) As I recall George was reading a great deal of Joseph Campbell and Jung at the time he wrote Star Wars.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Umm, no. ;-) It looks like Campbell and Lucas created their little lovefest *after* the original Star Wars movie became a cultural phenomenon. George provided the popularity and Joseph provided the academic 'blessings'.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

Not to nit pick.....

 

Never mind I love to nit pick, just ask all my monkey friends.

 

 

Joseph Campbell wrote "The Hero with a Thousand Faces" in 1949.

 

After reading several articles on the origins of Star Wars I have found that Lucas had read this book in college then picked it up again while he was writing the movies.

 

So how about we compromise?

[metadigital]

Umm, no.  ;-)  It looks like Campbell and Lucas created their little lovefest *after* the original Star Wars movie became a cultural phenomenon.  George provided the popularity and Joseph provided the academic 'blessings'.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Very interesting article. I must say I had bought the myth, so I am interested to hear the nay-sayer's voice. I have read a lot of the references except the EE "Doc" Smith Lensmen series. (I think I did try to read one of his novels once, with little success.)

I agree with his conclusion (that due credit should be paid to the gloriously unappreciated Sci Fi trailblazing masters of the Pre- and Post-WWII years), but I am not sure about some of his waypoints. It is all well and good to say Coruscant is a copy of Trantor (which is true), but is a planet-spanning city a particularly unique thought?

Similarly, it is quite difficult to say that all GL's references came from this Golden Era of Sci-Fi ... but a lot of the writers have been influenced from the classics, too; making conclusions regarding originality difficult. (To quote his example, both SW and the Foundation series use the most famous Empire in Western literature.)

 

As for our discussion, the relevant quote is:

"Crystaline semi-sentient life forms attuned to their personalities"; which implies that the Force is nothing but an extra-sensory power used by a separate (parallel) race of organisms. The Force isn't fate. The Force isn't neurtal, either. The Force is analogous to the human race: made up of multiple (millions?) of these semi-sentients, of all alignments, whose combined will affects the universe in concert with the "Lensmen" Jedi. So we are back with dualism (good lenses/crystals/midichlorians for LS and bad ones attuned to the DS characters) and non-determinism / free will. The Force is just a small "f" force, like gravity, weilded by the symbiotic semi-sentient partners of each "Lensman" Jedi in accordance with their wishes.

 

So maybe Kreia might have uncovered a well-hidden plot by this race of lenses/crystals/midichlorians to enslave the races of this universe (True, True Sith, anyone ) ... and the only way to win this war is to attack the Force. Kreia was right, she is the True Prophet!

 

PS What do the turtles represent in Rocky?

[Influence]

u are all thinking too two dimensional and seeing fate and choice in black and white, even when u talk about fate birnging u to a specific place in which u make a decision that depends entirely on chocie not fate like teh whole Peaks theory, you are still missign teh points.

 

You are treatign fate adn choice as individual things that happen at differnt times and work together in differnt roles. I am saying that they are more fluid and more intertwined then that and its extremely difficult to explain what i mean Via text without writng an entire novel that can brign ur brain through the process of understanding what I understand.

 

However if u ponder this question enough, and you are smart and creative enough you will eventually understand what I am lucky enough to. Sorry if that sounds liek I am right and you are all wrong i dotn mean to beat everyone's ideas cause teh truth is NO ONE knows **** cause we all ahve puny human minds, but the truth is i am thinking at a different level than msot of u which is why u are not understanding my ideas.

 

i understand yours becasue i once thought that way but trust me if u really pick at this and knwo enough about physics and philosphy i think you will arrive at a conclusion about fate that you believe to be truth and not a rehash of theories you have read or heard.

 

A base knwoledge in phsysics and philosphy helps but forming ur own ideas is what i consider true "force enlightenment" haha!

[FaramirK]

Influence, your spelling makes my eyes hurt.

 

u are all thinking too two dimensional and seeing fate and choice in black and white, even when u talk about fate birnging u to a specific place in which u make a decision that depends entirely on chocie not fate like teh whole Peaks theory, you are still missign teh points.

 

Since we are deep in Metaphysics, and none of this is any more than speculation, fate and choice may be very two dimensional!

 

You are treatign fate adn choice as individual things that happen at differnt times and work together in differnt roles. I am saying that they are more fluid and more intertwined then that and its extremely difficult to explain what i mean Via text without writng an entire novel that can brign ur brain through the process of understanding what I understand.

 

It seems you are treating fate and choice the same way that Sovereignty and Free-will are treated in Christianity. I won't go in to that argument, but if fate is the guiding force of the Starwars universe, there doesn't have to be "free Choice" at all. You could argue that any choice you make without knowing the outcome is (from your perspective) "free", and yet still be completely controlled by fate.

 

The issue is that, in my opinion, there really isn't any good reason to assume that an individual could make a dent in reality/fate. The universe is governed by complex laws and forces, even more so with Starwars' "Force". A single thread can shout about its individually as much as it wants, but in the end it is a tiny strand of fabric that was created by another and forced to be part of a grand design it can never hope to comprehend, and its whole existance is for some hidden purpose known only to those of equal intelligence to its maker. What hope does even the Mighty Anakin have? He was just a chess pawn.

 

However if u ponder this question enough, and you are smart and creative enough you will eventually understand what I am lucky enough to. Sorry if that sounds liek I am right and you are all wrong i dotn mean to beat everyone's ideas cause teh truth is NO ONE knows **** cause we all ahve puny human minds, but the truth is i am thinking at a different level than msot of u which is why u are not understanding my ideas.

 

I don't think you're reaching Transcendance just yet, Comrade...

 

...and in the words of Kenobi, "In my world there is no such thing as luck..."

 

i understand yours becasue i once thought that way but trust me if u really pick at this and knwo enough about physics and philosphy i think you will arrive at a conclusion about fate that you believe to be truth and not a rehash of theories you have read or heard.

 

Meditating on Meta-science does not "discover" anything more than the extent of a persons imagination. There is only the "educated guess", based on scientific experiment results, and the "Faith" in your own ability to understand what you cannot comprehend.

 

A base knwoledge in phsysics and philosphy helps but forming ur own ideas is what i consider true "force enlightenment" haha!

 

Vanity of Vanities...

[metadigital]

u are all thinking too two dimensional and seeing fate and choice in black and white ... You are treatign fate adn choice as individual things that happen at differnt times and work together in differnt roles. I am saying that they are more fluid and more intertwined then that and its extremely difficult to explain what i mean Via text without writng an entire novel that can brign ur brain through the process of understanding what I understand.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Try me. And if you are having difficulty explaining yourself, then this is your communication malfunction, not mine. I am with you so far: thinking on many levels of connection between actions/events and fate.

You still haven't answered any of my questions of what you are calling "fate" or "pre-destination".

... However if u ponder this question enough, and you are smart and creative enough you will eventually understand what I am lucky enough to. Sorry if that sounds liek I am right and you are all wrong i dotn mean to beat everyone's ideas cause teh truth is NO ONE knows **** cause we all ahve puny human minds, but the truth is i am thinking at a different level than msot of u which is why u are not understanding my ideas. ... A base knwoledge in phsysics and philosphy helps but forming ur own ideas is what i consider true "force enlightenment" haha!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you have read any amount of philosophy you will already know that -- unless you are a truly remarkable person -- someone, somewhere has already thought and written about your idea in some form. All this discussion is amounting to is trying to describe "The Force" in terms of the existing philosophical thought. If you have something genuinely unique to add, I'm all ears (well, eyes).

 

You are, despite your protestations, just saying "I know you are wrong because I am right" -- or at least "more right than you because no-one can really know."

 

This is just a cop-out. If you have a theory, spit it out. If you don't have one you can convey using English, then you can't really join a discussion about it, can you? So either get it together or stop spamming.

[FaramirK]

If you don't have one you can convey using English, then you can't really join a discussion about it, can you?

 

...and with that, Metadigital once and for all destroyed any hope of philosophical debate in non-english cultures.

 

Just Kidding. I realise I horribly distorted the context of your comment.

[metadigital]

If you don't have one you can convey using English, then you can't really join a discussion about it, can you?

 

...and with that, Metadigital once and for all destroyed any hope of philosophical debate in non-english cultures.

 

Just Kidding. I realise I horrible distorted the context of your comment.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I nearly put:

If you don't have one you can convey using English, then you can't really partake in a discussion on an English forum, can you?

But I thought expediently that my meaning was clear and the readers of this thread weren't petty nor cynical enough to misquote me. "

 

j/k

 

Actually you were a lot nicer about critiquing his post than I was (must be that Christian goodwill ).

[The Great Phantom]

metadigital, why did you ignore my quotation of the Demons/Devils thing that sounds a lot like my take on the DS?

 

Well, since we all seem to be subject to entropy ourselves in this thread, I'm going to go communicate w/ some single-celled organisms elsewhere... :ph34r:

[FaramirK]

metadigital, why did you ignore my quotation of the Demons/Devils thing that sounds a lot like my take on the DS?

 

Well, since we all seem to be subject to entropy ourselves in this thread, I'm going to go communicate w/ some single-celled organisms elsewhere... :ph34r:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It really bugs you, doesn't it? If you really want him to reply, say you believe the bible is literal...

[The Great Phantom]

Nah, that's just stupid. Most of it is metaphorical, or has been expanded out of proportion.

 

Oh, I know what'll work!

 

metadigital's a little idiot!

[Influence]

Dude i live in new yoprk born in new york dont speak any other language other than english jsut fast and inaccurate typist.

 

Thats why i use Microsoft wrod auto correct fools :D

[metadigital]

Dude i live in new yoprk born in new york dont speak any other language other than english jsut fast and inaccurate typist.

 

Thats why i use Microsoft wrod auto correct fools :D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well do your readers a favour and correspond via the word processor so that we all might be able to understand your ramblings.

[metadigital]

metadigital, why did you ignore my quotation of the Demons/Devils thing that sounds a lot like my take on the DS?

 

Well, since we all seem to be subject to entropy ourselves in this thread, I'm going to go communicate w/ some single-celled organisms elsewhere... :ph34r:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I thought you were asking us to guess the source of the quotation; I have never read that passage (at least I don't recall it) so I assumed FaramirK would take the biscuit (sorry, cookie: local idiom).

 

As much as I believe it is high time for this thread to be buried, I found an interesting part in an old YA Fantasy book I was re-reading... I think it fits the Force, if you modify it a bit (which I will do, with the modifications surrounded by <>'s):

 

"<There> are <people>-all of them- <that are> capable of great cruelty, but they are not, even in the very worst of cases, the true embodiment of evil. No, that title belongs to others..." (It goes on for about a paragraph talking about Demons and Devils, which I will equate to the Dark Side).

 

I have wondered if <the Dark Side> could exist without the darkness that lies within the hearts of the reasoning races. <Is it> a source of evil, as are many wicked men..., or <is it> the result, a physical manifestation of the rot that permeates the hearts of far too many?

 

The latter, I believe..."

 

A cookie to anybody that can (correctly) tell me what the title of that book is!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sounds like you are equating the DS to bad (as in a failing of, or incomplete, good) rather than the traditional "Evil" (dualistic connotations: I believe we covered it about ten pages or so back with Nietzsche's difference between "Bad" and "Evil").

 

What were you reading, the Young Anglican book of Daemons and Devils? :D

 

Nah, that's just stupid. Most of it is metaphorical, or has been expanded out of proportion.

 

Oh, I know what'll work!

 

metadigital's a little idiot!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who are you calling little?

[FortranDragon]

Not to nit pick.....

 

Never mind I love to nit pick, just ask all my monkey friends.

 

 

Joseph Campbell wrote  "The Hero with a Thousand Faces" in 1949.

 

After reading several articles on the origins of Star Wars I have found that Lucas had read this book in college  then picked it up again while he was writing the movies.

 

So how about we compromise?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The thrust of the article wasn't that Campbell wrote all of his books after Star Wars came out, but that, but that Joseph Campbell and GL found it quite convenient to pimp each other once Star Wars was a huge success. Before this Joseph Campbell was an obscure academic.

 

I saw Star Wars (when it was just Star Wars) when it was first released. People forget just how much fun the movie was compared to the other stuff on the screen at the time. The commentaries talked about how Star Wars harkened back to the B-movie space and/or cowboy serials. Joseph Campbell, Jung, etc. were never mentioned.

 

As far as reading Joseph Campbell's books (or one of his books) in college, yes, I can see that happening. College is, after all, a time of reading many *assigned* books. ;-) As far as rereading it while writing Star Wars, well, I would prefer to see a quote from that era where he said that. Given the big deal he has made of Joseph Campbell I would not trust any reference from later on. People can and do 'retcon' their memories. GL certainly has the tendency to revise past things.

[FortranDragon]

Very interesting article. I must say I had bought the myth, so I am interested to hear the nay-sayer's voice. I have read a lot of the references except the EE "Doc" Smith Lensmen series. (I think I did try to read one of his novels once, with little success.)

I agree with his conclusion (that due credit should be paid to the gloriously unappreciated Sci Fi trailblazing masters of the Pre- and Post-WWII years), but I am not sure about some of his waypoints. It is all well and good to say Coruscant is a copy of Trantor (which is true), but is a planet-spanning city a particularly unique thought?

Similarly, it is quite difficult to say that all GL's references came from this Golden Era of Sci-Fi ... but a lot of the writers have been influenced from the classics, too; making conclusions regarding originality difficult. (To quote his example, both SW and the Foundation series use the most famous Empire in Western literature.)

 

As for our discussion, the relevant quote is:

"Crystaline semi-sentient life forms attuned to their personalities"; which implies that the Force is nothing but an extra-sensory power used by a separate (parallel) race of organisms. The Force isn't fate. The Force isn't neurtal, either. The Force is analogous to the human race: made up of multiple (millions?) of these semi-sentients, of all alignments, whose combined will affects the universe in concert with the "Lensmen" Jedi. So we are back with dualism (good lenses/crystals/midichlorians for LS and bad ones attuned to the DS characters) and non-determinism / free will. The Force is just a small "f" force, like gravity, weilded by the symbiotic semi-sentient partners of each "Lensman" Jedi in accordance with their wishes.

 

So maybe Kreia might have uncovered a well-hidden plot by this race of lenses/crystals/midichlorians to enslave the races of this universe (True, True Sith, anyone ) ... and the only way to win this war is to attack the Force. Kreia was right, she is the True Prophet!

 

PS What do the turtles represent in Rocky?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

1) Some of the concepts aren't unique (Galactic Empire), but some (desert planet/sandworm, city as planet) probably do have specific and known origins. I just find it sad that GL could have helped SF get a bit more academic respect by pointing out that while Golden Age SF had lots of crap, there was gold in them thar hills, err, pulps. How SF moved from its crude origins to something that was thought provoking and just plain fun.

 

2) Perhaps the Force is just a force and all the speculation in the SW universe is just a projection of values and beliefs. An attempt to make sense of the universe and why things happen (usually bad things) to people.

 

I have no idea what the turtles represent. I imagine a follower of Derrida would be willing to do a deconstruction on them for you. ^_^

[metadigital]

1)  Some of the concepts aren't unique (Galactic Empire), but some (desert planet/sandworm, city as planet) probably do have specific and known origins.  I just find it sad that GL could have helped SF get a bit more academic respect by pointing out that while Golden Age SF had lots of crap, there was gold in them thar hills, err, pulps.  How SF moved from its crude origins to something that was thought provoking and just plain fun.

 

2)  Perhaps the Force is just a force and all the speculation in the SW universe is just a projection of values and beliefs.  An attempt to make sense of the universe and why things happen (usually bad things) to people.

 

I have no idea what the turtles represent.  I imagine a follower of Derrida would be willing to do a deconstruction on them for you.  ^_^

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think the Golden Age of Sci Fi is eventually getting its dues despite GL; I hear there is yet another Philip K. D1ck inspired movie being shot (was it Robert Downey Jr saying he was in it?) for release next year. Gotta love PKD -- he certainly was a towering intellect and substantial influence. Funny, I didn't much like his award winning Man in the High Castle, but I certainly did like his style and his short stories; his questioning of what is reality?, and the numerous androids that find out they are made of artificial memories certainly struck a tone way above most Sci Fi that was written at the time, and since. (My favourite Heinlein novel is Job, which I highly recommend.)

 

2) Nope, the Force is obviously a malevolent self-serving being which only tolerates the insect-like inhabitants of the SW universe to further its own goals of self-actualisation. We must take heed of the Prophet Kreia and take up arms against it. "Massively outnumbered? Small chance of success? What are we waiting for!"

 

The turtles (Cuff and Link, can never tell them apart) represent Rocky's projected desire to be with Adrienne; in a safe environment and in a world where he has little power he can provide control for them. Or else he just likes turtles.

[metadigital]

... I have no idea what the turtles represent.  I imagine a follower of Derrida would be willing to do a deconstruction on them for you.  ^_^

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Edit: Well, as I'm not an expert on Derrida, lets examine what Freud might have said:

A dream dictionary lists the meaning of turtle as:

- Protection

- Patience

- Needing to build stable foundations before launching a project

- Needing to ground yourself

- Having the ability to adapt to circumstances

- Somebody who withdraws easily, and tends to be defensive or sensitive

 

All of which seem to be thematic of Sylvester Stallone's character in the Rocky movie.

Edited April 25, 2005 by metadigital