You are.

Eh. Whatever.

Lucas Arts isn't as controlling as you think. Authors don't have to get every single thing pre-approved and who the Supreme Chancellor is is not on the list of "must contact Lucas for approval" items I am pretty sure. In this case we know that particular change (just like much of the Mando crap in LotF, and the death of Mara Jade) was one that originated with Traviss.

You are correct in that it was Traviss' Idea but it still had to be approved by someone else higher up in the publishing department, so any one single person is not solely responsible. I'm not defending Traviss or any one else I'm just tired of people complaining about an author ruining that persons favorite character especially since these large story arcs are written by 3 or more people not to mention the editors and others (like Leeland Chee and his staff who have to make sure that every thing published fits together with some consistency) responsible for getting a book out the door.

Lucas Arts isn't as controlling as you think. Authors don't have to get every single thing pre-approved and who the Supreme Chancellor is is not on the list of "must contact Lucas for approval" items I am pretty sure. In this case we know that particular change (just like much of the Mando crap in LotF, and the death of Mara Jade) was one that originated with Traviss.

But other ones, like Jacen falling originated with Denning, also Traviss was not involved with FOTJ and it is just as much of a train wreck as LOTF was.

But other ones, like Jacen falling originated with Denning, also Traviss was not involved with FOTJ and it is just as much of a train wreck as LOTF was.

Jacen's fall originated with a mandate to discredit Vergere and establish her true identity as a failed Sith to be correct. If you want to blame someone for that blame Allston who pushed for more ambiguity within the Force through his mouthpiece Vergere.

Also FotJ is one of the most well received series we have. Better received than NJO, DNT, and LotF... So I wouldn't cal FotJ a train-wreck.

You are correct in that it was Traviss' Idea but it still had to be approved by someone else higher up in the publishing department, so any one single person is not solely responsible. I'm not defending Traviss or any one else I'm just tired of people complaining about an author ruining that persons favorite character especially since these large story arcs are written by 3 or more people not to mention the editors and others (like Leeland Chee and his staff who have to make sure that every thing published fits together with some consistency) responsible for getting a book out the door.

One also has to consider the fact that there wasn't really anyone other than Daala available, for various reasons...

The admiral that used to work with Jacen? -- uh potential war criminal

An Imperial Moff? -- Heck no!

Boba Fett? -- No, just no.

Luke Skywalker -- unlikely

Leia Solo -- She already had it once and wasn't stupid enough to take the job again.

It ended up falling to Daala because she was the least objectionable out of all sides, which is downright scary.

I think she would have been a halfway decent Chief of State except for the little coup that was causing all those issues in the outer rim in conjunction with Abeloth starting her rampage, then we had the Sith Tribe. I think if she had figured out who was actually trying to cause problems she probably would have detained the Jedi that were under Abeloth's influence but not in the manner she had without that knowledge (probably more access to medical care and attempting to block out Abeloth, let's face it if they could be removed from tentacle lady's influence they would potentially be good intelligence assets and Daala was hard core military). She also probably would have probably arrested some of the conspirators and had them put on trial. Finally, she probably would have not only let the Jedi go gunning for Abeloth and the Sith, but she probably would have hired a bunch of Mandalorians as backup, and loaned the Jedi a few Mon Cal Cruisers and Star Destroyers for good measure.

If she had known what was really going on before things spiralled to the point she had burned all her bridges, I really don't think the Jedi would have pulled that coup because they wouldn't have had to.

What you don't seem to get is that once that line was crossed action was demanded. It is your attachment to a certain ideal that is clouding you on this.

Attachment is not much of a criticism coming from someone who is equally attached to different ideals. Or, say, to a specific character.

The only attachment I have is to good storytelling. Or rather, internally coherent storytelling.

Jedi are not supposed to play political games. They aren't supposed to sit down and talk politics when people are dying or being threatened.

This is a false dichotomy, however. And the books' narrative (particularly Conviction) make it false. The book's justification, as we've discussed, is Daala's order to send Mandalorians to Klatooine. That both Conviction and Vortex already give means for the Jedi to directly intervene against the Mandalorians immediately undercuts its statement of necessity.

If a novel wants us to believe a plot point wherein a single action is being offered at the only possible solution, it better do a damn good job of making it the only possible solution. But FOTJ falters at this key junction. As I've said, I have no problem with a coup. I, and many others, take plenty of discomfort at the action occurring when the narrative's insistence that it is the only way is outright contradicted by the narrative itself.

You talk about political games and then act as if it means gathering signatures in protest while Mandalorians are flying to Klatooine but it doesn't. And the fact that you're holding on to one part of the narrative (ie. Daala's lack of dismissal after Kani Asari's death) is little more than ostrich behavior. Situations change, narrative progresses. And the situation by the time of Conviction is even far more disadvantageous to Daala than what it was in Allies. You've been shown how. And you've yet to properly respond.

You say that action is required once it has been shown that the person pulling the strings is untouchable but the novels almost go out their way to slowly but surely deprive Daala of any political clout that makes her so.

But more problematic is this notion:

Once that happened the Jedi should have, Hamner included, said, "Okay. Galactic Alliance. Natassi Daala is the one who sent those Mandalorians. They murdered a child on our doorstep. You have seventy two hours to remove her from power or we are removing her from power."

First off, we shouldn't forget that the Jedi are illegally holding Sothias Saar and Turi Altimik when the siege occurs. But beyond this...

Deposition of government is just as much "playing politics" as anything else. In fact, it's not just playing politics, it's controlling politics. People have looked back at Luke appointing Jag and expressed discomfort at the moment. If that's the case, we equally would have to cringe at your above scenario. If any action should have been taken, it likely should have been against Rhal. He fired the shot. And regardless of Daala's diffidence towards the Jedi, she didn't order him to kill Kani Asari.

The underlying sentiment you're expressing here is a dangerous one, indeed. You're talking about a what amounts to a private religious order (of individuals who are citizens of the GA, mind you) dictating the composition of the government and deposing its legitimately elected official. And worse yet, in your fantasy, they immediately head down this road without a second thought for what the action implies or expresses. The Jedi don't get to decide who is and isn't in charge of a government, particularly in the GA. That right belongs to the sum total of the citizenry. Not just a single subsection of it.

Diplomacy works until it has been shown that the person pulling the strings is more or less untouchable... Daala not being tossed out right then and there showed to me, diplomatically, that Daala was untouchable.

You don't get to selectively choose what the text conveys and does not though. Plot details are a type of facticity. They outline what a character or group of characters can or cannot do by dictating the realities of the setting and circumstance. And bottom line is that there's not enough facticities with the narrative to force the singular course of action that we see. If you're questioning the novels' logic by the time Asari is killed, why are you so ready to accept it by the time of Plan Delta? It's cognitively dissonant.

If you want to blame someone for that blame Allston who pushed for more ambiguity within the Force through his mouthpiece Vergere.

She's a poor mouthpiece then, because he never uses her. Vergere has never spoken dialog in a book by Aaron Allston nor ever actually appeared as a physical character. She does not appear in Enemy Lines II: Rebel Stand and is only mentioned in Rebel Dream. She does not speak in the latter. His next book after Rebel Stand? Betrayal, the first book in LOTF.

Who are you talking about?

If a novel wants us to believe a plot point wherein a single action is being offered at the only possible solution, it better do a damn good job of making it the only possible solution. But FOTJ falters at this key junction. As I've said, I have no problem with a coup. I, and many others, take plenty of discomfort at the action occurring when the narrative's insistence that it is the only way is outright contradicted by the narrative itself.

Yes they could have attacked the Mandalorians... Which would have resulted in a loss of life. Manadlorians or Jedi. They knew they could depose Daala with minimal risk to people and they managed to stop the Mandalorians and take Daala down with 0 loss of life.

Yes they could have attacked the Mandalorians... Which would have resulted in a loss of life. Manadlorians or Jedi. They knew they could depose Daala with minimal risk to people and they managed to stop the Mandalorians and take Daala down with 0 loss of life.

And yet, we've still no reason for the text's notion of magically rescinding the Klatooine order to hold. Largely due to lack of information in general, itself indicative of how poorly exposited the situation is. In fact, we've covered how the text generally fails either way on that point and you're still ignoring it (along with, I cannot fail to notice, quite a bit) with a counter rebuttal that only amounts to "But the text said so!" which means nothing when the text is not internally coherent. It's actually the problem.

But beyond that, if we're supposed to magically accept the book's events, then (to follow the logic thread) we could believe anything it tells us. Up to and including the Jedi stopping the Mandalorians without loss of life. So the argument that it must result in loss of life? Out the window once we talk about accepting anything and everything the text could offer.

It's almost funny that you're arguing for the value of Mandalorian life. One of the nominal enemies in the text. I could list upwards of forty to fifty different reasons why that's ironic in this case. Perhaps, if it were anyone else trying to raise a point about life's sanctity, I might give it heed.

PS. The Allston question isn't rhetorical. I want to know who you're actually talking about. Because you've made that mistake more than once now. Explain to me how a character is a mouthpiece for an author who never used them.

One also has to consider the fact that there wasn't really anyone other than Daala available, for various reasons...

 

The admiral that used to work with Jacen? -- uh potential war criminal

 

An Imperial Moff? -- Heck no!

 

Boba Fett? -- No, just no.

 

Luke Skywalker -- unlikely

 

Leia Solo -- She already had it once and wasn't stupid enough to take the job again.

 

It ended up falling to Daala because she was the least objectionable out of all sides, which is downright scary.

 

I think she would have been a halfway decent Chief of State except for the little coup that was causing all those issues in the outer rim in conjunction with Abeloth starting her rampage, then we had the Sith Tribe. I think if she had figured out who was actually trying to cause problems she probably would have detained the Jedi that were under Abeloth's influence but not in the manner she had without that knowledge (probably more access to medical care and attempting to block out Abeloth, let's face it if they could be removed from tentacle lady's influence they would potentially be good intelligence assets and Daala was hard core military). She also probably would have probably arrested some of the conspirators and had them put on trial. Finally, she probably would have not only let the Jedi go gunning for Abeloth and the Sith, but she probably would have hired a bunch of Mandalorians as backup, and loaned the Jedi a few Mon Cal Cruisers and Star Destroyers for good measure.

 

If she had known what was really going on before things spiralled to the point she had burned all her bridges, I really don't think the Jedi would have pulled that coup because they wouldn't have had to.

It was a stupid idea when it happened and time has not changed that. I f the authors needed a new anti-jedi COS then why not Fyor Rodan? After all he had run for COS during the Vong War, and would have won had Lando not blackmailed a bunch of senators, so he had political clout for the GA and he was already established as an honorable anti-jedi politician so he could have raised many of the points that were discussed in the opening FOTJ books. Also as he was not head of the Confederation he would be seen as more neutral and it could also show a re-unification between the two.

But if they needed the COS to be a Villian then invent some one new. Daala is an insane war criminal, she massacred refugees on Dantooine, losing the element of surprise for no real reason, and bombarded Mon Cal surface cities killing hundreds or thousands of civilians, not to mention slavery, building weapons of Mass Destruction and being Tarkins lover. The only reason she should be on Courscant is to hang her.

And Walsh you surprise me with your ludicrous defense of Daala as, she could have been a good leader, I thought I knew who you were a purist jedi/Luke supporter and I could respect that, even if I thought you were to extreme, but now I don't know why you are saying anything nice about Daala?

She was never shown to be a good leader, she was never chrasimatic enough to get the warlords to fall in like Thrawn, she murdered a bunch of them and then failed to keep her power, eventually just giving up and going home. So she was a bad leader.

Also what proof do you have that FOTJ was better recived then Legacy, NJO and LOTF?

Did it make more money?

Did it get better reviews?

Did 'fans' respond better?

What are you basing your statement on? Other then possible the fact you liked it more.

Also back on topic an new blurb from randomhouse via Jedi Council fourms (ie. I found it through them)

SETS UP NEW SERIES: With this book, Han, Luke, and Leia are passing the torch to the next generation of Star Wars heroes, and the stage will be set for the next major Star Wars series.

GOD I HOPE SO

Also Walsh I think you meant to say Stover.

And Verge is not a Sith, she is Verge you can't put her in a standard box. And she never said, "no dark side' she said "Dark side inside you", as in your own darkness corrupts you rather then it being some kind external force, rather like what Kyle believed in, and Kyle is Star Wars Chuck Norris (sp?), so no one talks bad about him.

edit

Yes they could have attacked the Mandalorians... Which would have resulted in a loss of life. Manadlorians or Jedi. They knew they could depose Daala with minimal risk to people and they managed to stop the Mandalorians and take Daala down with 0 loss of life.

But when they fought the Mandos in Abyss, the jedi took the to school, even Han was able to beat one, so maybe they could have beaten them with out a loss of life.

But isn't deposing Daala playing the political game?

Also what proof do you have that FOTJ was better recived then Legacy, NJO and LOTF?

 

Did it make more money?

Not sure.

Did it get better reviews?

Yes.

Did 'fans' respond better?

NJO was the most controversial series in Star Wars EU history. Tons of people loved it, but also tons hated it, hated it to the point that authors were receiving death threats.

LOTF was very disliked by fans, mostly for the horrible writing of Karen Traviss and due to the events surrounding Jacen Solo. Fan backlash was so hard and nasty Karen Traviss was eventually given the option of quitting as a Star Wars author or being fired. She also, by her own admission, was receiving death threats for her role in the death of Mara Jade.

FOTJ has, alternatively, not received anywhere near the violent backlash that either of the other series had. There were no death threats over FotJ and nobody lost any jobs over FotJ.

SETS UP NEW SERIES: With this book, Han, Luke, and Leia are passing the torch to the next generation of Star Wars heroes, and the stage will be set for the next major Star Wars series.

If this is true well... At least it means that is one less $7 - $27 I have to spend every 3 months on Star Wars novels. I can finally close all four footlockers and put them into storage forever. Once Luke is out of the picture I'm done with it.

If this is true well... At least it means that is one less $7 - $27 I have to spend every 3 months on Star Wars novels. I can finally close all four footlockers and put them into storage forever. Once Luke is out of the picture I'm done with it.

Don't let the internet hit you on the way out.

And no one lost their job over LOTF, she left because of the new Clone Wars series. (Best thing it did)

Any way FOTJ was much worse then LOTF in terms of plot coherence.

The reason people got death threats is because fan loved characters died in both those series, also the Vong were very different from what came before, in FOTJ there were far fewer deaths, mostly new or minor characters.

Also what about Legacy? (the comics)

Addendum: NJO would have made more money because it was a bigger event and had more books, even if not all of them were hard covers, it also some of the best reviewed books in Star Wars; Star by Star, Traitor and The Unifying Force. Out of these TUF was least controversial and one of the most Star Warsy things out, IMO until the KOTOR comics.

I don't like Legacy it has a lot of flaws, but I will say this at least the author acted like he had a plan. The Mortis arc was out well into FOTJ's run, so yeah.

One more thing that FOTJ gives us; Jedi Assassins, so that is more Star Wars then redemption? And no saying surrender or die does not count as offering redemption, not to people who have known nothing other then Sith for all of their lives are these people, who never chose this path, to be grated less mercy and compassion then one who did simply because it is easier to kill them? FOTJ says yes.

Back on topic

I hope this is the passing of the torch, but it is about ten books late and I think they are lying, hope they aren't.

I'm very curious about this new novel. I was really disappointed with the way FOTJ ended, by half way through Apocalypse I was thinking; "how are they going to tie all this up?" Rather than deconstructing the Abeloth powder keg they tossed it in a lake to put out the fuse and let it sink to the bottom. In other words the ending of Apocalypse just fizzled out. It was a disappointing end to otherwise enjoyable (at least for me) series.

Even though the book is supposed to be stand alone, I wonder if it will redeem anything from Apocalypse.

The discussion here has been intriguing, I didn't read Legacy and I'm on the fence if I should. FOTJ has so much reference to it, it feels like the story arc is spoiled. Is it worth going back to read?

Unlike good ol' Grandpa ProfessorWalsh, I am excited for the future and the next generation to rise and take Luke's place. I have to say that Ben has become my favorite character throughout these novels simply due to the fact that he seems to act much more normal for someone his age as opposed to most other Jedi who came before. He relies more on intelligence than feelings, he is skeptical, slow to trust like most teenagers his age should be, but he has a child-like kindness about him that is borderline naive. It is also incredibly apparent that Luke always questions if he has prepared Ben for the next step in life, and always chooses real life situations and events to test him. Not only can fans my age identify with that, but it just seems right to me.

Also, no. I am not taking shots at ProfessorWalsh.

profwalsh often makes a lot of sense, but the whole star wars is luke skywalker is a bit strange, considering we are playing a game over 3000 years before luke was even thought of. and half of the appeal for myself with star wars is the fact the story could go on forever, but luke can't.

as for this new book i can't wait (tho i'm more looking forward to the new TOR book), i have to finish FOTJ first, only one book left now

Oh hey...

I have nothing but respect for those who like the direction it is going... But if this is the last "Luke Skywalker" book then... Well it just means the end of the road for me. It's been a long road. A long journey. I accept that all good things must eventually come to an end.

It simply means it is time for me to move on from Star Wars and onto something else.

It is the circle of life as they say.

Unlike good ol' Grandpa ProfessorWalsh, I am excited for the future and the next generation to rise and take Luke's place. I have to say that Ben has become my favorite character throughout these novels simply due to the fact that he seems to act much more normal for someone his age as opposed to most other Jedi who came before. He relies more on intelligence than feelings, he is skeptical, slow to trust like most teenagers his age should be, but he has a child-like kindness about him that is borderline naive. It is also incredibly apparent that Luke always questions if he has prepared Ben for the next step in life, and always chooses real life situations and events to test him. Not only can fans my age identify with that, but it just seems right to me.

 

Also, no. I am not taking shots at ProfessorWalsh.

I agree, but what I dislike is that 1. Ben knows only one person his age, the jedi girl from Allstons books. and 2. the entire Original Next gen, Jaina, Zekk, ect. Have been brushed over. It anyones me because of all the books that went in to setting them up; Jedi Academy and the like. What was NJO about if not setting the stage for new heros to rise, but it was very much ignored.

To topic, has anyone read Millennium Falcon? Cause I think that would be a good point of comparison.

To topic, has anyone read Millennium Falcon? Cause I think that would be a good point of comparison.

Millennium Falcon dragged on longer than it needed to and was needlessly convoluted. Generally I rank it fairly low on the totem pole.

Oh hey...

 

I have nothing but respect for those who like the direction it is going... But if this is the last "Luke Skywalker" book then... Well it just means the end of the road for me. It's been a long road. A long journey. I accept that all good things must eventually come to an end.

 

It simply means it is time for me to move on from Star Wars and onto something else.

 

It is the circle of life as they say.

I can respect that. From your perspective I can see why you feel the way you do. What Star Wars ultimately boils down to is Luke's atypical heroic journey. If you think about, everything before solely exists as background knowledge of the known Universe in which encompasses Luke, and everything after is nothing more than a testament to his legacy.

But I honestly don't know if I would continue with much interest after Ben's story is told, so in a way I am like you but much younger, no offense.

But I honestly don't know if I would continue with much interest after Ben's story is told, so in a way I am like you but much younger, no offense.

No worries and none taken.

You hit the nail on the head about why I don't like Legacy too.

Legacy took everything Skywalker accomplished, crumpled it up, threw it in a trash can, and then said, "Meh... Ultimately didn't matter." So... Legacy kind of kills Star Wars for me.

As for Ben's story... I might follow it for a short time and *maybe* it will spark something in me... But... I dunno... I'm not a kid anymore. It is hard to relate to him for me.

Why so much Legacy hate? I'm kind of confused about this haha.

This is actually very simple, Walsh doesn't like it cause it starts with the Sith overthrowing the Emperor and destorying the Jedi and ruling the Galaxy, undoing Luke's work. Which I get, but to me what destroys Luke's Legacy is the fact that a jedi of the OLD Republic running things and all of Luke's students dead.

Also Legacy was set up like OT but lost it's way after it dropped the Princess.

Seeing as FOTJ entertains the notion of eternal war between Jedi and Sith, it is hard to say that Luke's work was undone by Legacy if Luke himself posits the notion that the Jedi's work is never done. Besides, Luke's work wasn't undone. The end of Palpatine's empire still remains the most significant event in galactic history and the singular moment in Star Wars history that has the greatest cosmological significance. One Sith, Lost Tribe, or whoever. The end of the Banite line of Sith by the Skywalkers single-handed redeems the galaxy and even the Force.

You don't get much bigger than that. And you can't particularly undo that moment's importance. I'll ignore the ways in which I actually believe that Legacy shows just how much Luke's actions have saved the galaxy over and over again. But needless to say, the effect does not simply end with the man. I think that Luke's actions continually provide the galaxy with the model and sometimes the direct means to its salvation and protection.