Curious what people think about lore-ish stuff

[xordevoreaux]

I've only read one Star Wars book, and that was 30-odd years ago, Splinter In the Mind's Eye which to me was okay, but many people have panned it.

 

Beyond that, and the movies, I haven't traveled far afield in the Star Wars universe. Even so, like everyone else, I've managed to form strong opinions of what I feel the "real" Star Wars universe is, and like everyone else, you can't sway my opinions.

 

So with that caveat, I'm curious what people think of some of the ideas that I've fashioned regarding Star Wars despite lacking full inculcation in the lore / extended universe take on the Force. I know there are plenty of examples of Star Wars which are patently counter to my opinions, and like everyone else, I don't care.

 

This is my Star Wars universe:

 

1. Force blind means force blind, whether that applies to a single being or an entire species, meaning all of these supposedly force blind Jawas, flesh-raiders, etc., should stay that way, no exception.

 

2. Bending the force to one's will takes a toll on the body, but the technique can be used to extend physical life. Accepting the will of the force does not extend physical life, but opens the possibility of immortality as a force apparition. I therefore disagree that any Sith should ever exist as a force apparition, and strongly believe when D.V. tossed the emperor down the rabbit hole, and all that blue energy shot upward, that was the emperor and his hold on the force evaporating, permanently, meaning he should never have been resurrected, nor should any Sith ever be resurrected or be able to reconstitute themselves. No matter how many centuries an extravagantly powerful Sith may live, for Sith and the force blind, dead is dead.

 

3. The net effect of wielding the force means manifesting physical change in the universe through non-physical means (and a bit of clairvoyance, as shown in the movies when D.V. detected Luke's thoughts that he had a sister). Therefore, truly powerful force wielders need not stoop to using merely physical martial abilities, certainly not smacking each other around with glow sticks. With as little exertion (if any, certainly none was apparent) as Qui-Gon used to roll over the chance cube using telekinesis (and subsequently freed Anakin), that same minor effort is all it takes to sever the vagus nerve (connecting the brain to the heart), split open the carotid arteries, rip the aortic valve from the heart, cause a pulmonary embolism, or any other such immediately mortal wound. Adept force wielders never need fear some moron lobbing grenades; just sever his spinal cord at the base of his neck, and that grenade-lobbing arm, as well as the rest of him, drops. So for me, every time a non-force wielder killed a force wielder in the movies, I was like, okay, how convenient plot-wise the force is suddenly useless there.

 

4. Healing, as a manifestation of the force, is used conveniently at some points in SWTOR and conveniently ignored in others. "Jedi, can you heal me?" occurs in more than one cut scene, and boom, the person's healed, at least to the point where the Jedi can say "you're gonna live" and then get on to other matters. Had force healing been used consistently, rather than as a device only when convenient, force healing would have upended several point plots in SWTOR. Therefore, telekinetics, coupled with healing, clairvoyance, and tossing lightning around, means force wielders are far, far more formidable than their will-die-and-stay-dead tech-reliant force blind counterparts.

 

5. I entirely disagree with the viral reason why the Rakatta lost their connection to the force. The force is mystical, not something that a couple rounds of antibiotics or a virus can affect (and midichlorians should never have existed).

 

I won't be offended if you go thermal on me for my opinions, it's what Star Wars fans do, but I'll still be interested in your counter-opinions.

Edited March 3, 2021 by xordevoreaux

[OderWolfe]

I appreciate the ideas you have expressed here but find myself in disagreement with some of them. It is interesting that you say you don't care care what everyone else thinks about your opinions (which you have self described as "lacking full inculcation in the lore/extended universe take on the Force") but solicit what others think about about them. I cannot resist the temptation to respond.

 

First, let me say that I have read twenty plus of the canonized Star Wars books and seen all the movies several times, and play SWTOR regularly. It does NOT make me a Star Wars authority, in fact I find myself greatly lacking when it comes to Star Wars facts and history. You describe your treatise as your take on the Star Wars universe but address the Force as your subject. The following is my take on the force.

 

The force is an interesting concept (power) used by good and evil, is taught and teaches and yet somehow remains a mystery. I am as ignorant as the next person when it comes to understanding the force as I think, it was intended to be a mystery. My understanding of it, limited as it may be, is the result of the books I've read, the movies I've watched, and the SWTOR game that I play. Like you, I have formed opinions although I can say they are more malleable than yours. Change I'm told is a universal law, and since the force seems to be universal I tend to think it is subject to change also ... or is it impossible for universal laws to change? Point: force blind may not be permanent in species. Perhaps "midichlorians should never have existed" but since they do, who is to say who/what they may turn up in?

 

Sith and Jedi (and other force sensitives to some degree) use the force. The force serves both good and evil sources...why would it choose/permit only the good source (Jedi) to access "immortality as a force apparition". If the force is indeed a neutral source of power which is bent to the purposes of the user, surely the evil source (a powerful Sith) would have access to "immortality as a force apparition" also.

 

A powerful Jedi "using merely physical martial abilities" when dealing with martial conflict instead of wielding the force as the primary is the basic principle of NOT misusing/abusing the ability of having force access. I seem to have read that or seen that somewhere. Obviously, Sith force users do not limit themselves by this principle.

 

Using the force as a healing tool can be a part of the gift provided by the force, but must be learned and the force user must be trained in the use thereof. I recall several healing situations in the books I read, and I agree that "force healing would have upended several point plots in SWTOR" AND in the movies as well. Clearly exceptions have been made which are quite arbitrary and unsatisfactory. Agreed: powerful "force wielders are far, far more formidable than their will-die-and-stay-dead tech-reliant force blind counterparts."

 

I know very little about the Rakatta and their connection to the force, but again, who/what can place a limitation on midichlorians? I.e. D.V., immaculate conception, unprecedented power.

 

I was influenced by Darth Marr's instruction to my character in SWTOR about the force. He spoke it as am immortal appartion (after Valkorian killed him, but later in the wilderness on Odessen). It contributed to what I think about the force: "There is no death. There is only the force, and it has a plan. The will of the force is a flowing current. You can follow or fight it, but it is always there. The force is a paradox. It empowers and it imprisons. It destroys and unifies. It binds the galaxy together, and tears people apart. It has a will but needs a commander."

[MikeCobalt]

Well Xordevoreaux I do agree largely with your opinions. I'm "Old School" in this as I watched "Star Wars" years ago and since 77 I've been predominantly Movies based. I have read many many books, short stories and others over the years and my acceptance test has always remained...

If it worked in the movies #1,

Was Lucas involved in the creation of this #2

Did Lucas endorse this #3

and Lastly Would this fit in the parameters of the story Lucas told/ is telling #4

 

In #4 the best example I can think of is "Rogue One"; that story/ movie fit in 100%, every facet of RO fits in exactly with what Lucas has told.

Over the Decades some stories just strayed too far, brought in issues that are very contradictory to the Core Story often twisting and or convoluting what was actually said/ seen in Lucas's movies just to prove that issue's validity. When issues (Often very very Minor) need to be stretched beyond reason, said to be a lie or otherwise too limiting just so something a minor story can elaborate any story (ex. Star Wars) will get what I call "The Abrams Effect". That term came Before SW it started with "Star Trek" the original story/ characters bastardized simply so one person can change a popular name to what "That Person" wants.

 

Maybe that's too limiting but we've all watched popular movies/ genre's over the last years typically from the 80's be turned into some very much "Not Appealing at All" just because some cant get past what they want and not remembering it was never theirs to begin with. Rogue One is very very much a liked movie, the fact that it does fit in very well is a big part of that. The Mandalorian also is very much liked, it also fits in very well with what Lucas set down as a post Battle of Endor story setting.

Edited March 3, 2021 by MikeCobalt