SF Signal: Star Wars as a Thesis

Star Wars as a Thesis

With Episode III coming out in two weeks, it's no wonder we're seeing a bunch of dissertations (mostly negative) on the Star Wars movies. To wit:

How did George Lucas create Star Wars?

The New York Times gives us a look at what sf authors think of Star Wars.

Sf author David Brin going off on Star Wars again on his own blog.

The Disembodied Brain has some Questions Revenge of the Sith should answer.

I'm not saying Star Wars is great fimmaking by any means. (In fact, I've yet to see anyone credible say that it is.) In my opinion, Star Wars is just dumb fun. Plot holes? Yep. Childish dialogue? Sure. But to me, that's not what Star Wars is about. It's a popcorn movie, not Shakespeare. It's something you watch to while away the time. It's not a statement on man's inhumanity to man - it's an eye candy flick.

So let's put it in persective, people. Get over any expected deeper meaning and just enjory it. Or not.

That's all well and good, but ST and SW have been annointed a form of de facto primacy in many circles of SF fans. Brin's point that we need to demand more from our SF than Campbellian tropes playing out hero/prophecy formulas is dead-on. I'm fed up with prophecy as a a dramatic tool. We need to put it away. Really.
Not to insult anyone who contributes to this esteemed site (which I love dearly, BTW), but the fact that you have posted the number of items about ST and SW in recent weeks adds to this illusion of "primacy." Media-wise, You could be posting about the upcoming episodes of Justice League Unlimited this month, or the Appleseed DVD, the Alan Moore documentary trailer online, or the Alien Planet documentary (which I emailed y'all on, and continue to bang the drum about becasue it's a great classic SF art book getting some serious docu-treatment with actual "name brand" scientists.)
Personally, I consider it a small duty to point out that there is a LOT more to SF than ST and SW, which are poor representations of the genre, and to make this truth to as many people as possible.
I take some pride in the fact that I recently showed Walking with Dinosaurs and The Future is Wild to an eleven year-old, who managed to realize how mind-numbing Yu-Gi-Oh cards were and put them away. As I work at a TV station that shows Yu-Gi-Oh (and Pokemon, and Card Captors, etc) I consider this a form of pennace.

Posted by Jeff on Wednesday May 04, 2005 at 3:33 PM

I'm not arguing that SW is not a prevalent mainstay, I'm just saying that in-depth examinations of a fictional story are driving me batty.

It's. Only. A. Movie.

Posted by John on Wednesday May 04, 2005 at 3:51 PM

Hmm, I believe we did blog about Alien Planet.

There is a lot of SF stuff out there, and we do our best to cover as much as we can, but ST and SW are the mainstays, currently. When BG starts up again, we'll be all over that. We'll be banging the Serenity drum when that gets closer too. The ST and SW stuff will pass as the series and movies move on, and so will we.

Posted by JP on Wednesday May 04, 2005 at 4:48 PM

My bad on not catching the Alien Planet posting.

And I agree with you, John, that it's only a movie. I'm just really irritated by the armies of angry fanboys who tear into actual SF authors when they punch holes in the idea that this overblown popcorn fodder that purports to be the flagship of the genre. There are newsgroups clogged to unusability by Jedi and Klingon wannabes bitching about Brin and Card "betraying" science fiction. Sigh.

Posted by Jeff on Wednesday May 04, 2005 at 5:20 PM

You make a good point about the zealots on the SW/ST side. I'm mulling over some stuff about SF in general that your comments have prompted me to think about. I'll post it soon.

Posted by jp on Wednesday May 04, 2005 at 5:49 PM

Here's a thought:
Remember back in the day when each new Star Wars film spurred a wave of imitators? (Battle Beyond the Stars, anyone?). The same phenomenon used to happen more recently on TV, the way Hercules and Xena led to bad TV shows like Sinbad, Conan, Beastmaster, Young Hercules, etc.
Before that X-Files brought forth copycats. Does anyone remember the "sci-fi" season of Baywatch Nights?
Anyway, what ever happened to this phenomenon? Why didn't Lord of the Rings trigger a rush of piss-poor imitators? Where's the glut of shitty TV fantasy? And I don't count SciFi channel showing a marathon of Howl.
And why haven't any of the new SW films have the same effect?
The market is certainly there. On any given week, half the films at the multiplex involve elements of the fantastic.
Like I said, just a thought...

Posted by Jeff on Wednesday May 04, 2005 at 7:01 PM

I think we're in agreement, Jeff. My exasperation with the diatribes on Star Wars lies on both sides of the fence. I'm not against sf authors (or anybody, for that matter) poking holes in movies. Actually, that part is quite fun. Neither am I against discussions, good or bad, of Star Wars in general. It's the essays that try to justify some deeper philopsophical (or political, or religious, or blah, blah, blah) meaning behind the popcorn that tire me, whether written by fanboys or anti-fanboys alike.

I just rarely hear anyone say "Yeah, artistcially, Star Wars sucked, but it's still fun!"

Posted by John on Wednesday May 04, 2005 at 7:59 PM