Obi-Wan Kenobi series: speculation

That it is the Disney era goes without saying. And yes, they can do whatever they want, as made evident by the many instances where they chose not to honor or respect what Lucas took the time to create and established in his own works so that they can rewrite things however they see fit.

But Pasquali's fallacy is based on the false premise that Lucas left room for interpretation on this instance, or that he meant something else entirely when that's not the case at all. Ever since 1977 Lucas made it clear that the last time they met Obi-Wan left Vader for dead when the latter fell into a volcano. That's the event that the characters and the dialogue hark back to.

Worse, he knows it's not true and that he's not being honest, so he ends his narrative with the argument that Lucas changes his mind about stuff so therefore anything goes and excuses Disney from doing whatever they want. Except that's a very bad excuse and a false equivalence, since Lucas doesn't change his mind that often, and when he does it's often either a compromise or a refinement of an idea that he already had. And virtually all changes he makes have the sole purpose of serving the story he wants to tell. But this is not the creator and storyteller telling his story. This is a corporation artifically creating an illogical situation so that two legacy characters can share the screen together one more time in order to get people's int€re$t.

You know, I'd like to think given the backlash to the ST, and the nature of the project, that the Obi-Wan show is being handled especially carefully. This is the first Disney show where the main protagonist is from the original set of films. Unlike any of the previous Disney SW shows or movies here's nothing separating it from the main story. If Disney has learned anything, they know they can't mess this one up.

Alexrd
Then there's the line vader said to luke in ROTJ

''Obi-Wan once thought as you do''

And as Dave Filoni said under mentor GL, "In Star Wars, retcons are your friend."
If you don't like it, don't buy it.

Edit: In fact, I think that advice may have come from GL himself. As prequel fans, who are we to disagree? Am I the only one here who debated MeBeJedi?

Of course he does. It's Pasquali. It's better to not give him the attention he doesn't deserve.

The entire sequence on Mustafar. No matter what Obi-Wan does to talk him out of it, Anakin keeps showing him over and over again that he's beyond reason and redemption.

I'll start here with a Lucas quote:


From this quote, it is clear that Lucas was hesitant to give Leia memories of her mother. He seems to have settled for a fudge in the end: Leia would recall her, but only through "images" and "feelings" -- suggesting she is remembering her through the Force. This is doubled down upon in the scene itself, since Luke then tells her, "The Force is strong in my family" -- implying she already has good abilities of her own through her recall. Thus, Lucas' vision didn't really change all that much in the prequels on this point. Of course, he may still have thought about sending Leia off with a weak and sickly Padme to Alderaan, or some other secret location, but the essence of it remains the same: Padme dies under tragic circumstances, likely as a result of Vader or the Clone Wars, and Luke and Leia are orphaned, leaving Luke with no memory and Leia with fragments. 


Interestingly, this is the exact picture Palpatine paints of Valorum to Amidala and the audience, and it may well be a piece of propaganda that some believed once Palpatine became Chancellor. Anakin in Episode II thinks that Palpatine is a "good man", but also complains to Padme that he doesn't think the system works, and suggests that what's needed is a wise leader to make everyone agree. Padme blanches at this and Anakin pretends to be joking. Yet it's basically the same concept again: Palpatine probably made Anakin believe he was doing the best he could, but that the bureaucrats and corporate conglomerates were almost impossible to overcome without changes to the constitution, even for a man as learned and wise as he. Thus, the vision didn't really change as much as you might initially think.  


Exactly, Mike. This is really the crux of it. Lucas changes his mind, but not without good reason, and many of the themes stay as they are -- or, better yet, are deepened and strengthened.


Again, the themes stay relatively consistent. But I'll give you the rest. It seems Lucas originally anticipated making a backstory with a good deal less action and humour, for example:


Arguably, however, the prequels are less of an "action adventure kind of thing", and they don't have as much comedy or camaraderie in them as the Original Trilogy -- yet there's the fantastical podrace in Episode I, an enormous Clone War battle in Episode II, and no less than five lightsaber duels in Episode III; and they certainly don't lack for humour or wackiness. 

However, I sense Lucas was more into the idea of making the PT a macroscopic story, and less of a character piece, until he saw Anakin's character coming into focus once Episode I was basically complete. Note that Episode I is more of an ensemble piece, and Anakin doesn't become the main character until Episode II, or perhaps not even until Episode III. Lucas appears to have started the PT not thinking he was making a character study. For instance:


This Vanity Fair article captures a profoundly interesting throwaway comment in that regard:


And in this other archival interview from 2005, we get Lucas making several confessions about the storytelling structure of the PT:


In other words, minutiae and world-creation were Lucas' main focus with Episodes I and II, even though he knew there was a lot of story and drama coming up in Episode III -- but even he underestimated just how much of both were still to be tackled.

Incidentally, while hardly an unbiased source, Gary Kurtz claimed he couldn't bear to watch the PT unfold, because, in his words, it was very different to what Lucas allegedly planned to make when working on the Original Trilogy:


Even Lucas himself said back in 1977:


So the concept of Star Wars evolved over time. But that's natural in any drawn-out storytelling process.

Unfortunately, Lucas does act like he conceived the bulk of Star Wars back in the 1970s -- and perhaps he did. But it can sound a bit fishy when the prequels perhaps came out very different to what Lucas imagined in previous decades. Just how different, of course, is hard to quantify.

On the other hand, one cannot ignore how Lucas' personal experiences shaped his outlook and his storytelling ideals between the OT and the PT, and it would be unfair and foolish to discount them as a major piece of the creative puzzle. The ruinous nature of greed, for example, seems to be a post-Reagan element that Lucas put in the PT -- along with the contrapuntal emphasis on symbiosis and the need to work together. Even works like Carl Sagan's "Pale Blue Dot" and Sagan's famous soliloquy about the fragility of Earth in space ("A mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam") may have molded -- or catalysed -- Lucas' philosophical worldview.

In short, and in deciding to lay a bold foundation, Lucas inevitably grounded the OT in a rich assortment of meditations. The prequels are a kind of idea-space as much as they are a linear narrative. Themes that were already implicit in the OT were suddenly made explicit and undeniable in the PT -- which might be why some people reacted strongly to them. Lucas was likely trying to construct some kind of overarching urtext, starting with the Special Editions, continuing with the Prequel Trilogy, and reaching quasi-conclusion with "The Clone Wars" and the last round of changes to the Saga films made for the 4K masters in 2012. 


Yoda not being a "real Jedi" is sublimated into the PT narrative, in my opinion. He still feels like he stands apart from the other Jedi in some way. Yoda's fallacy, perhaps, was getting lost in the bureaucracy of the Jedi machine -- hence him being cast out of the false paradise of the Republic in Episode III (rather literally) and retreating to Dagobah with its mud, its vines, its creatures, and its mystical tree cave (a place of nature drenched in the Force). Yoda is also shown in a teacher role with the younglings in Episode II. And he seems, subjectively speaking, to be at his best in that scene. Indeed, Yoda is indirectly responsible for the younglings being killed in Episode III -- which is likely why he realises he has "failed" after attempting to assassinate Darth Sidious. Lastly, it is Yoda and Yoda alone that makes contact with Qui-Gon from the Netherworld of the Force. Again, lots of subtextual meat to the PT. Lucas' earlier ideas weren't so much culled as transformed in the epic crucible of the PT.


Of course. That is basically the essence of Star Wars, too.

"You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

OK.. so you know what the quote you provided shows?

He changed and changes his mind.

His vision(s) of his story changes.

Which is what I have been saying...


You may not have sen them, because I added them after the fact to my post. I added three relevant pieces of information from the Making of Return of the Jedi. I will repost here:



I am going to push back on your intrepretation of the scene from ROTJ because you are relying on narratives pushed into the scene because of the recontextualizing from the Prequels. What is important is not what your interepreation is, but what Lucas was thinking of the issue when making the movie ROTJ. Intrepretations can be wrong, what is factual is the stuff that Lucas says while writing and making ROTJ, which I provided above.

Lucas told Kasdan that Leia remembers her mother.. Flat out says "yes" when Kasdan asks if Leia remembers her mother because Lucas flat out tells Kasdan Leia lives with her natural mother for a period of time. This is further backed up by at least two draft iterations that say the same thing that Lucas told Kasdan.

Now let's look at the actual scene in ROTJ when Luke tells Leia:



Does anyone ever wonder how Luke knows that Leia has a "real mother". That is because what becomes obvious is that line of dialogue (of Lukes) is left over from the above parts of the script where Yoda and Obi Wan reveal to Luke that Leia has a real mother. Luke now know Leia has a real mother because Ben and Yoda told him (Luke) Leia's story.

This wasn't something that Lucas bounced around in his head for a hot minute and than let pass. He is telling his fellow script writer (Kasdan) the backstory, in fact doubling down on it when Kasdan asks for confirmation. He and his fellow script writer are putting that concept with actual dialogue into rough drafts of scripts. I am sure he debated it at some point, but, that's because the man changes his mind.. A LOT.

Luke tells Leia that in time she will learn to use the Force as he has.. Nothing about passive force abilities, that stuff (passive force abilities) doesn't come until the Prequels with the explantion as to why Anakin can podrace.

Clearly, the dialogue between Luke and Leia in ROTJ is built off of the premise that Leia was with her mother for a short period of time, thus she remembers her only through images and feelings.

Leia comes out and says her mother dies when she was very young, NOT, in childbirth. There is a huge differene in context when I say my mother died when I was very young, and my mother died in childbirth. Most rational people don't equate "very young" with I was about a minute old...

What happens in ROTS is clearly a retcon, because Lucas at some point, changes his mind on the backstory of the birth and the twins going into hiding. He is telling people and writing dialogue that is contrary to what we see in ROTS. Because.. Because.. Because... He changes his mind.. A Lot..

AS I said, earlier, the retcon works, as it is setup in the Prequles that there are passive force abilities that people who are strong in the force can unconsciously tap into. But, again, that doesn't come until the prequels.



I like the quote.. "You are entitled to your own opinion, not, your own facts"

The books are awesome, If you don't mind having the curtain pulled back a bit on the story. It has been my experieince that some Lucas fans (Lucas Loyalists) don't like what's in the books because they feel it backs up the "anti-Lucas" crowds constant whining that Lucas never had the whole trilogy planned out. The easy argument against that bullshit, is that Lucas has never said he had everything planned out to it most minute detail. As I said earlier though. Multiple things can be true at once. Lucas had this really general idea and story in his head (true), and as he worked his way through it, his vision of that general story/idea changed quite frequently (true), even from day to day as he worked it all out. One day Luke was a man, the next a woman, and than the day after that back to a man. Han was human, than a gren alien, back to human etc etc etc..

Wht's interesting is the reactions when I point that out. There is the automatic, almost reflexive reaction by some to push back against it as if some how I am hurting Lucas's honor. I am not, I am a huge Lucas fan as anyone else, I just don't think the man is infallable.

For instance.. DArth Maul as the main villain for Lucas's ST... OMG. That is a hard pass... That is worse than Palpatine coming back. What calms me is the fact that Lucas changes his mind, a lot, when it comes to his visions as he works through them, thus, there was a good chance that Maul would not have actually been the main baddie for Lucas's ST.