This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Agreed. There are plenty of reasons to pick at HR. I was tempted to go through more of them. The one paragraph spent on how banal the villains are is legitimate criticism.
Ironically, delving into an expanded, effective Jedi Order is one of the oldest fantasies of the fanbase. Hence all the New Jedi Order material, the Old Republic, and so on. What does the galaxy look like when the space monks are everywhere? Authors keep trying to make this work with varying degrees of success. It’s possible “you think you know what you want, but you don’t.” Is any work featuring a monk police force doomed to silliness?
But delving into that would be the work of a fan, and this author was more interested in scoring political points.
The High Republic was Disney’s latest attempt to monetize that concept. Possibly to Marvelize it, too, and launch an ongoing setting for tie-ins and merch. I absolutely believe that it’s been a nonstarter. Perhaps that’s down to bowdlerization! Personally, I suspect Zahn was tapping into an underserved market which, today, is already satisfied.
Zahn was able to deliver a competent sequel trilogy to Star Wars fans who were hungry for just that and provide a framework for much of the rest of the post-ROTJ EU. That was never going to work with Disney because their plan for a sequel trilogy was the Sequel Trilogy. And while that wasn't the abject failure its detractors sometimes think, it underperformed and (perhaps more critically) failed to generate much enthusiasm or provide room for growth. Even people I know who like the sequels aren't particularly excited about them. Say what you will about the Prequels, they managed to hang a lot of stuff on that framework and the camp element makes the PT very memeable even if it isn't necessarily good.
On the other hand, Zahn is pretty close to the peak of the old EU. There were a lot of baaaaad Star Wars books that are mostly (justifiably) forgotten. I've noticed when people talk about the NJO, they tend to talk about a couple of high-point books like Traitor and not the chaff that fills out the series.
I think that this actually does mark it down as an abject failure. Look at the original star wars movies and both the massive cultural impact and the galaxy of commercially successful properties that came out of it - games, books, toys, etc. When you compare each member of the trilogy of trilogies on a broader scale it becomes immediately obvious that the sequel trilogy has been a huge failure. The individual films underperforming might not be an abject failure when compared to a new property, but when compared to their immediate predecessors the difference is starkly obvious. I can remember countless lines and moments from the original trilogy, but what new ideas and characters have the sequel trilogy produced which had anywhere near that impact?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link