Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

December 7th 2019, 6:05 am

Curious to know what your thoughts are

December 7th 2019, 6:58 am

Regardless or the fact that it always depends on the stipulations of a debate, G-canon in SW takes authority over C-canon in the sense that it renders every C-canon source asserting something that’s against what Lucas’s (or something speaking on his behalf) vision irrelevant and therefore wrong. The main example is Darth Vader. Yes, there are sources saying he became stronger after Mustafar, but since Lucas and Hidalgo (on Lucas’s behalf) said Anakin in his younger years was stronger than Vader in his suit said sources are to be considered wrong.

December 7th 2019, 6:59 am Message reputation : 100% (1 vote)

No. Lucas barely acknowledges Legends at the best of the times, and has no interest in giving his views on it. Everything he has ever said has been either to promote the films or explain plot ideas. His ideas on characters like Vader or Grievous don’t line up.

Now, if he says something that fits with Legends or clears up ambiguity, then go for it. Otherwise, not really.

December 7th 2019, 7:15 am

Agree with bod

December 7th 2019, 7:35 am

lorenzo.r.2nd wrote:Agree with bod

December 7th 2019, 10:00 am

BreakofDawn wrote:No. Lucas barely acknowledges Legends at the best of the times, and has no interest in giving his views on it. Everything he has ever said has been either to promote the films or explain plot ideas. His ideas on characters like Vader or Grievous don’t line up.

Now, if he says something that fits with Legends or clears up ambiguity, then go for it. Otherwise, not really.

Yeh and I see some people counter that by saying even if Lucas barely acknowledges legends, there is still a policy that the EU must allign with G-Canon anyway. Eventhough the majority of the time the EU goes against Lucas's canon anyway. So that rule is kinda thrown out the window.

December 7th 2019, 10:01 am

MasterCilghal wrote:Regardless or the fact that it always depends on the stipulations of a debate, G-canon in SW takes authority over C-canon in the sense that it renders every C-canon source asserting something that’s against what Lucas’s (or something speaking on his behalf) vision irrelevant and therefore wrong. The main example is Darth Vader. Yes, there are sources saying he became stronger after Mustafar, but since Lucas and Hidalgo (on Lucas’s behalf) said Anakin in his younger years was stronger than Vader in his suit said sources are to be considered wrong.

But if G-Canon takes priority over anything, then as far as I'm concerned Legends Grievous (the version that everyone prefers to debate for)doesn't exist

December 7th 2019, 10:20 am

Bad thread, the answer is given in the canon policy, Lucas's authority is absolute.

December 7th 2019, 10:25 am Message reputation : 100% (1 vote)

The Apprentice wrote:

Bad thread, the answer is given in the canon policy, Lucas's authority is absolute.

December 7th 2019, 2:11 pm

"they must align with what lucas says" doenst happen lol we KNOW how many times, and how baddly contradicted his statements have been/are.

December 7th 2019, 2:24 pm Message reputation : 100% (1 vote)

Cite an example of Lucas contradicting himself.

December 7th 2019, 2:41 pm

DC77 (Reborn) wrote:Cite an example of Lucas contradicting himself.

Retconning the Obi-Wan vs Vader "half-man, half-machine" quote springs to mind.

December 7th 2019, 3:07 pm

The Witness wrote:But if G-Canon takes priority over anything, then as far as I'm concerned Legends Grievous (the version that everyone prefers to debate for)doesn't exist

And that’s technically true. However, usually, the stipulations of a debate are that legends is taken into account.

December 7th 2019, 4:55 pm

You can always disallow G-canon within your own thread stipulations.

December 7th 2019, 5:04 pm Message reputation : 100% (1 vote)

Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends? Image10

According to Matt Martin ( Lucasfilm story group)
Lucas has contradicted himself "many times"

December 7th 2019, 5:11 pm

Well, yeah, but so has the continuity as a whole. We accept the latest information and discard outdated statements. The same standard applies to Lucas.

December 7th 2019, 5:15 pm

Probably behind the scenes. All writers contradict themselves. For example, do we now take it as being canon that Albus and Grindelwald had an "incredibly intense" sexual relationship, despite it being fairly clear in the book that that wasn't the case? Or better yet, that Hermione could be black according to J.K Rowling, despite all of her original concept art and even the novels confirming that she's white?

All statements by the original creator should be considered and compared to their original work, not just taken at face value. I for one don't believe in the idea that the creator's statements are the "word of god". Not only can their views be altered by time and age and thus not be representative of what they were originally, but they also can fail to line up with the original work, which to me is the single most important aspect of a franchise.

Something like The Making of Revenge of the Sith or the ROTS novel are different because they reflect the creator's intent at that moment in time. Even a year later, and their views can change massively and no longer be compatible with their original vision.

December 7th 2019, 5:37 pm

I say go with what is consistent with the narrative as established by the main sources, that being the movies/novels/comics/show. They are the main foundation in which other authors take inspiration from. Statement wars stemming from sourcebooks no author building upon the lore takes seriously into consideration and vague quoting often spoken offhand just blows everything out of proportion.

December 7th 2019, 6:36 pm

yeah pretty. depending on what contradicts it, we just gotta pic the more logical, consistent, and newer of statements as canon

December 7th 2019, 8:10 pm

@BreakofDawn

For example, do we now take it as being canon that Albus and Grindelwald had an "incredibly intense" sexual relationship, despite it being fairly clear in the book that that wasn't the case?

Where exactly is it indicated that Albus and Grindelwald being in a relationship wasn't the case? I mean, it might not have been her intent when she wrote the novel, but I don't think the idea that they were is explicitly contradicted in Deathly Hallows. A citation is needed tbh.

December 7th 2019, 10:13 pm

Will find it later.

December 7th 2019, 10:28 pm

@The Apprentice Closest I can find to any indication of a romantic relationship between them is this:

“Oh, I had a few scruples. I assuaged my conscience with empty
words. It would all be for the greater good, and any harm done
would be repaid a hundredfold in benefits for wizards. Did I know,
in my heart of hearts, what Gellert Grindelwald was? I think I did,
but I closed my eyes. If the plans we were making came to fruition,
all my dreams would come true.
“And at the heart of our schemes, the Deathly Hallows! How
they fascinated him, how they fascinated both of us! The unbeatable
wand, the weapon that would lead us to power! The Resurrection
Stone — to him, though I pretended not to know it, it meant an
army of Inferi! To me, I confess, it meant the return of my parents,
and the lifting of all responsibility from my shoulders.
“And the Cloak . . . somehow, we never discussed the Cloak much,
Harry. Both of us could conceal ourselves well enough without the
Cloak, the true magic of which, of course, is that it can be used to
protect and shield others as well as its owner. I thought that, if we
ever found it, it might be useful in hiding Ariana, but our interest
in the Cloak was mainly that it completed the trio, for the legend
said that the man who united all three objects would then be truly
master of death, which we took to mean ‘invincible.’
“Invincible masters of death, Grindelwald and lurdo!
Two months of insanity, of cruel dreams, and neglect of the only
two members of my family left to me.
“And then . . . you know what happened. Reality returned in
the form of my rough, unlettered, and infinitely more admirable
brother. I did not want to hear the truths he shouted at me. I did
not want to hear that I could not set forth to seek Hallows with a
fragile and unstable sister in tow.
“The argument became a fight. Grindelwald lost control. That
which I had always sensed in him, though I pretended not to, now
sprang into terrible being. And Ariana . . . after all my mother’s care
and caution . . . lay dead upon the floor.”

If anything, it suggests that he wanted to see the best in Gellert so they could achieve their dreams of "the greater good". No implications of a romantic relationship, let alone a sexual one. Aberforth also didn't believe there was anything romantic between them:

“Grindelwald. And at last, my brother had an equal to talk to,
someone just as bright and talented as he was. And looking after
Ariana took a backseat then, while they were hatching all their plans
for a new Wizarding order, and looking for Hallows, and whatever
else it was they were so interested in. Grand plans for the benefit of
all Wizardkind, and if one young girl got neglected, what did that
matter, when Albus was working for the greater good?
“But after a few weeks of it, I’d had enough, I had. It was nearly
time for me to go back to Hogwarts, so I told ’em, both of ’em,
face-to-face, like I am to you, now,” and Aberforth looked down at
Harry, and it took little imagination to see him as a teenager, wiry
and angry, confronting his elder brother. “I told him, you’d better
give it up now. You can’t move her, she’s in no fit state, you can’t
take her with you, wherever it is you’re planning to go, when you’re
making your clever speeches, trying to whip yourselves up a following. He didn’t like that,” said Aberforth, and his eyes were briefly
occluded by the firelight on the lenses of his glasses: They shone
white and blind again. “Grindelwald didn’t like that at all. He got
angry. He told me what a stoopa little boy I was, trying to stand in
the way of him and my brilliant brother. . . . Didn’t I understand,
my poor sister wouldn’t have to be hidden once they’d changed the
world, and led the wizards out of hiding, and taught the Muggles
their place?
“And there was an argument . . . and I pulled out my wand, and
he pulled out his, and I had the Cruciatus Curse used on me by my
brother’s best friend

This was a case of J.K Rowling pandering again with no elaboration. A typical thing she does where she goes "the signs were all there, you just didn't want to see them" (which is laughable).

December 7th 2019, 10:32 pm

Also, obligatory meme:

https://youtu.be/yUpbOliTHJY?t=13

December 8th 2019, 12:37 am

Azronger wrote:Well, yeah, but so has the continuity as a whole. We accept the latest information and discard outdated statements. The same standard applies to Lucas.

That so?

Well color me confused, cause I see a lot of old and outdated statements that clearly don't apply to later for a character as it's obvious it just doesn't add up to later information in an attempt to lowball them.

December 8th 2019, 12:52 am

yeah lol thats called hypocrisy to some, and ignorance to others, but its wrong regardless.

Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?

Re: Should we be so reliant on G-Canon when debating legends?