Solo, I see you continually bring out this argument that Lucas has claimed to always have every detail of the Star Wars saga written in stone some thirty years ago. Can you support this with referenced quotes? It would be unfair to perpetuate this "myth" you speak of.
Oh come on. I can't whip out my "George Lucas Quote Book" and point to page 4, line 6 where he says XYZ, but for the past 30 years the guy's been essentially talking about what he "meant" to do with the series, how it was planned out, etc. I don't have quotes ready to support the fact that J.K. Rowling says she planned the whole thing with Harry Potter either, but she's said it. Go look it up yourself. In general, if he hasn't come right out and said the exact phrase "I always intended..." followed by something that visibly contradicts what appears in the films themselves, then he's at the VERY least allowed the notion that he planned the whole thing to develop without ever really bothering to say "What are you talking about? I make it up as I go." Actually, I'd challenge anyone to find a quote of him saying something to that effect and pointing out that he's not this grand orchestrator of the overarching saga (which, by the way, apparently changed from being a story about Luke to the story of the Skywalker family to Anakin's story at any given moment).
It would also be a foolish thing to presume that art can only ever be valid if it's conceived in it's entirety, in one single sitting with no option ever for further modification or refinement.
I'm hardly arguing that point. I have no problems with art being made up on the fly, but if you're gonna do that, you need to do two things: (1) Keep a sharp eye on continuity to avoid gaffes, and (2) manage your audience's expectations. I think you can probably manage #2 by keeping a close eye on #1 and by not telegraphing something that you either fail to pay off, or pay off in a way that has people saying "WHAT?!?! Are you f-ing KIDDING ME?!!"
For damn sure I'd better not tell everyone that I have everything planned out to the finest detail. I'll give you an example from someone who hasn't really done "epic fantasy" storytelling: Quentin Tarantino. Tarantino has said in director's commentary or in extras or interviews relating to Kill Bill that he knows the fate of all his characters. Now, he doesn't say how in-depth he goes with that, but for example, he knows that the daughter that The Bride leaves alive after killing her mom DOES eventually seek revenge. He's said as much. If later on he did "Kill Bill...Again" and featured the daughter but never had her seek revenge, fans would be entirely justified in saying "WTF? So much for knowing everything that happens to everyone. Looks like he changed his mind or just made it up as he went along."
Now, as I said, I have zero problem with someone flying by the seat of their pants, but I do think that approach lends itself far more to mismanaged expectations, thematic shifts, and continuity problems. All of which is BAD WRITING. But I'll get to that in a minute.
I'm not surprised that most people complain about midi-chlorians, generally it's the juvenile whining of those who believe their childish bubble has been burst and have knee jerk histrionics to something that actually requires a more considered view.
I am surprised though that someone who professes such an interest in creative writing, can miss the obvious of why there is a science over mysticism angle on the Force in the PT. If you think the approach taken with midi-chlorians/the Force is in any way a goof in consistency with the OT and bad storytelling in general then I have to question to what level of creative writing you actually aspire to.
It doesn't help matters when you post detailed ideas on what you think is a much better story and admit to starting to write an alternate version (really?!) which frankly at best is the same old fanfic and at worst is a telling sign that you are so immersed in a hazy romantic memory that you've lost better judgment and are hostage to it.
Seriously, if you are to take anything from Star Wars it should be to plough your own field.
Lucas has made some questionable choices no doubt, but the midi-chlorians shouldn't be on any level headed persons list. Qui Gon not appearing to Yoda in Sith is the number one narrative failure that bridges the trilogies, imo.
But then again, Lucas got away with a big narrative anomaly in Star Wars and no one ever sees it, so some he wins and some he doesn't.
Ok, lots to respond to here, so I'll take it bit by bit.
1.) I **** on the counter argument of "Oh yeah, well let's see YOU do better!" I don't have to know how to manufacture cars to recognize when my car is driving poorly. I don't have to be a master chef to know when the food tastes like ****. Or even when it doesn't taste like a dish is supposed to taste. I don't have to be a sommelier or a vintner to tell you that XYZ Pinot Noir tastes nothing like a Pinot Noir, and if that's by design, then I don't like it. Why? Simple. Because I've experienced good writing, cars that handle well, and food and wine that taste good enough to know the difference. Even if I can't produce it myself, I can still spot quality (or lack thereof) when I see it. Past that, it's a matter of taste. Maybe you like your Pinots to be high alcohol and with no back end to 'em. Fine and dandy. I like it differently, and regardless, when it has a nose reminiscent of cedar and apples, and fruit flavors of bananas, I'm gonna wonder why the hell you're selling it as a Pinot, because it tastes NOTHING like one should.
2.) Before you start giving me crap for writing bad fan fic, recognize that I gave it up specifically because any time I tried writing it, it came across to me AS bad fanfic. I have no desire to write that. (p.s. skip to the end of the post you "paraphrased" where you'll see I say just this) Nor do I have any desire to be constrained by the requirements of an existing universe if I'm ever going to bother writing a story. I've got my own ideas about how the prequels could've been done better, but I'm not gonna bother with it because I don't profess to be a writer. Never have. I DO profess, however, to being a discriminating consumer of fiction, quite aware of my own tastes, and certainly able to spot f-ups in this or that approach to a tale. Maybe some day I'll write some epic work of science fiction myself. Most likely I won't. None of that, however, will change the fact that Lucas dropped the ball PLENTY in his storytelling, and trying to play "jedi mind trick" by claiming stuff that doesn't appear on the screen as the justification for it is just fanboy blather. I mean, I have no real problem with folks taking their love of Star Wars to the point where they'll concoct elaborate explanations for why Han Solo's obvious discussion of measures of speed confuses the concept of the parsec, but I do have a problem when they don't do so with a wink and a grin and an acceptance that hey, Lucas screwed it up, but we'll continue to have fun anyway.
3.) On the midichlorian point specifically, I suppose you'd argue that OBVIOUSLY it's an emphasis on science to highlight how out of touch the Jedi are....except in my opinion, he doesn't really pay that off particularly well. He drops little hints here and there, I suppose, but he never really focuses on it much. Moreover -- and in my opinion a far more problematic aspect of this plot device -- he does nothing to set it up. It comes completely out of left field. You want to know why audiences react to it with something between "Huh?" and "WTF?!?!?! YOU'VE DESTROYED MY CHILDHOOD"? It's because the midichlorian thing had no connection to anything when it was introduced. It was just stated as if it were fact, conveniently ignoring the fact that Yoda and Obi-Wan had both spent several scenes in the OT talking about how it's this mystic energy field in borderline spiritual terms. Then all of a sudden it's cells in your blood? Where'd THAT come from? Lucas also gives the audience no sense of where (if anywhere) he's going with that. Is he going to show us how reliance on science and hyper-rationalism dooms the Jedi? Well...not really. Is he going to show us that the explanation was, in fact, wrong and a total misunderstanding? Nope. He just throws it out there, and then ignores it later.
Again, that's just bad writing. Period. If I tell my audience "These are the rules of the universe," sure, I can break those rules later, but I've got to explain it. I can't just casually toss out the notion that everything I told them before was a lie, was wrong, or now requires THEM to come up with some convoluted explanation as to why, no, no, I didn't really just suddenly change the rules on them and it all fits together perfectly. Lucas, however, just throws it out there, and then proceeds as if nothing happened. No lead-in, no payoff, just there and gone. Bad writing. Certainly not his only example -- and yes, the OT has plenty of other similar moments -- but there's so much else wrong with the PT that it ends up drawing all the flaws to the forefront in this laundry list of problems. Arguably it also makes the flaws in the OT more apparent, too.
None of this is to say that, whatever Lucas' intent may have been, the notions of "Oh the Jedi fail because of an overreliance on science/rationalism/denial of emotion/etc." couldn't be interesting. It could, it just isn't (to me, anyway) in the PT as portrayed. Moreover, the radical shift in explanations, as I mention, just isn't really dealt with. There's never any lead-in line where Qui-Gon says he'll test for midichlorians, and Obi-Wan says "But Master, you know this theory is the source of much debate in the Jedi Order..." There's never any payoff for it where Yoda rejects the notion. We just have, essentially, two completely different sets of explanations for how the Force works, and the fans are given the task of squaring them with each other.
thumbsup
