As I read through the Ascendency trilogy, it is becoming more and more clear that the Chiss Ascendency is as hateful as the Empire. And it's odd how few people call that out. I think it is because Zahn does a fantastic job at hiding it through Chiss POV, but even then, the Chiss are still incredibly xenophobic and controlling. Yes, this includes Thrawn, he isn't the saint that so many people like to paint him as and frankly could be argued as worse.
I keep thinking about Ar'alani admitting she never saw non-Chiss as people. She is brilliant and kind, but only to other Chiss. We view her in a purely positive light because the POVs in these books are primarily Chiss, who agree with her. Of course her mindset is normal amongst Chiss, of course it isn't questioned, of course Ar'alani herself never questions it despite her experience off-world. It takes a direct and pretty personal interaction for her to think twice, and even then it is difficult for her to accept the humanity of a non-Chiss. They are lesser in her eyes. They are lesser in the eyes of most, if not all, of the Chiss.
It is fascinating, it really is. It's an interesting look into a xenophobic society without the initial hate from the reader. Because xenophobia is born out of misunderstanding and perpetuated systems of ignorance. If a similar situation was told but through the eyes of Imperial officers, fewer people would be willing to see the nuances. Because Empire=Bad and anyone associating with it is also Bad, right?
But, propaganda and cycles of ignorance are also to blame. Not every Imperial Officer was born hating aliens. Hell, even TARKIN started out incredibly sympathetic to alien species according to the canon novel by James Luceno. But his family taught him otherwise, just as the Chiss Ascendency teaches its own children see other species as lesser.
This mentality from the Ascendency is also seen in Thrawn: Treason with how Eli Vanto is treated simply for being human. The majority of officers hate his existence, insist he must prove himself (despite being at a lower rank than he was at when with the Empire), and are distrustful of him. Very similar to how Ronan treats Thrawn in the same novel.
This isn't, like, a call to love Chiss characters any less, but it's a bit odd to imply that Thrawn, or any other Chiss, would be against the Empire for the same reasons the Rebellion is. The Ascendency doesn't like the Empire because it could encroach on their rule, their space- not because it's xenophobic and oppresses too many people to count. The two systems are remarkably similar, which may be part of why Thrawn was inclined to help the Empire. It is familiar, and a system Thrawn himself has never opposed, even without taking Legends into account.
(SIDE NOTE: PLEASE DO NOT BRING UP SPOILERS FOR GREATER GOOD OR LESSER EVIL ON THIS POST. I AM STILL READING THOSE BOOKS AND WOULD LIKE TO ENJOY THEM SPOILER-FREE)
haha ❤️ hilarious post my friend! *eyes narrow and my face goes stone serious* but it does not resonate with my own ideological schema, so i shall not be reblogging it
vadertyrannus asked:
The fact that Dave Filoni called Anakin “the greatest Jedi ever” is proof that he’s bias AF. His anti-Jedi rhetoric is bupkis.
david-talks-sw answered:
I wonder if he means “the greatest” in terms of in-universe fame…?
Dunno if this is the case in Canon (then again Dave Filoni blatantly ignores any *non-motion* transmedia elements in Canon so meh), but in Legends he’s:
“Anakin Skywalker, the Hero with no Fear™, handsome, dashing, the face of the Republic’s army during the Clone War, the only Jedi who tried to resist the nefarious Order’s coup and was treacherously murdered for it”.
And I seem to remember that, in Canon, he’s like the Jedi Temple’s superstar anyway, every Jedi recognizes him on sight. I mean, that line from Baylon about “Anakin speaking highly of Ahsoka” must have some meaning beyond artificial personal stakes.
So from a fame and a “power level” standpoint… sure.
He’s the greatest.
I’m giving Filoni the benefit of the doubt.
While I’ve talked about why Filoni’s entire headcanon about the Jedi doesn’t track with what George Lucas’ intended narrative, I think it’s worth acknowledging that Filoni’s bias comes from part of his duties while directing The Clone Wars was.
One of the goals of TCW was humanizing Anakin, expanding upon his character make him go from “a character whose only purposes is to embody the themes presented in three movies based on the matinee serial format” to a relatable person, a good man, the hero Ben mentions to Luke in A New Hope.
I think it’s normal that he’ll see Anakin in a more positive light.
Also (and full disclosure this is just me theorizing I am no authority on any of this so if turns out I’m wrong just come right out and say so)…
I’m pretty sure that Filoni, Lesley Headland and most of the recent Star Wars authors are all Gen X, raised by baby boomers forced to conform to society, obey authority and have proper decorum (boys don’t cry!) all of which they strove to rebel against. Add to that the corruption they witnessed growing up and coming out of high school, and you see a kind of jadedness emerge. “The rules aren’t as black and white, the world is grey.”
So while most of them and the boomers despised the Prequels upon release, a few of them projected a more individualistic headcanon onto those movies that fit with where their head was, at the time.
As such: Anakin isn’t interpreted by them as a cautionary tale about what happens when you’re greedy. He’s a misunderstood rebel, a non-conformist who has his flaws but is ultimately good at heart. Which isn’t entirely inaccurate, but it is very clearly an embellishment of a character who will one day become a space nazi.
The fact is… the Prequels were made by a boomer. One with very liberal values and who was himself a rebel, but a boomer all the same. The whole point of his story is…
“we all must come together and fight as one, if push comes to shove; we must all be compassionate and selfless if we are to survive; don’t be greedy, let people go when it’s their time to leave”.
And then he makes the Jedi say that, making them beacons of truth and good and compassion in his fairy tale, now aimed at Gen Z kids.
Gen X-ers hear/read that and project all the boomer BS they had been told onto the Jedi…
“oh, so the Jedi are saying you shouldn’t love yourself, you shouldn’t be yourself, you should give up on what makes you an individual to fit in, you shouldn’t feel any emotions”
Because nobody is that good, realistically, right?
This happened in other mediums. The one that comes to mind on the spot is the relationship between Mufasa and Scar.
In The Lion King, Mufasa is strong and noble, Scar is weak and conniving. Simple enough. Around that same time, in A Tale of Two Brothers, young Mufasa is shown to be pretty nice with Taka (Scar), who is framed as a spoiled brat to begin with.
Skip to the 2019 remake, and it’s hinted Mufasa gave Scar his wound, and in The Lion Guard they explain that Scar got his nickname from Mufasa mocking him for a misadventure.
He went from being a noble king to a bully who had it coming, Scar is an underdog who got picked on. Because again: nobody is that pure, right? Fairytales be-damned.
Nothing is black and white, it’s all grey.
So yeah, long story short I do think that Filoni being part of the generation that wasn’t the target demographic but was old enough to retcon the crap out of the Prequels also plays a role into his view of Anakin.
"boohoo obi wan was such a stickler as a padawan he was all by the books and wouldn't break a rule to save his life"
my brother in christ. he was the worst one out of his entire lineage. he just learnt to poker face. man stayed behind on child soldier planet as a kid because he told qui gon to fuck off. he has never followed any rule but his own, he just knew how to lie. and also to be a bit more refined about it than his master and padawan
Hey weird question but what happens if you put two reasonably likeable anthropologists of wildly different cultures together in the same room? Do they study each other? CAN they? Is it like an infinite conversational feedback loop? I'm imagining two dogs eternally sniffing each others butts at the park
looking at a new fantasy world
ask the creator if it's hard or soft
they don't understand
I pull out an illustrated diagram explaining what is hard and what is soft
they laugh and say "it's a good fantasy world sir"
it's soft
Exactly. We want our fantasy worlds to be rock solid.
I don't actually have a diagram but I can give you my best explanation.
Hard Fantasy vs Soft Fantasy is basically the difference between how strict the rules are.
In a hard fantasy world the rules of that world are thoroughly defined. Some exampes would be they take into account geological movement and activity when drawing the map and the shape of each landmass. They provide a reasoning and cost for why magic works the way it works.
In soft fantasy the details of how and why and rules aren't as important as tone and aesthetics. Similar example being continents look however the author drew them up to be and for whatever reason. Magic is a concept that doesn't have many set rules if it even has them.
So soft fantasy is the boundaries are blurry and less defined and some people like that, and hard fantasy is thr boundaries are clear and well defined and others also like that. Both are equally valid and accomplish different things.
Okay people in the notes seem to pretty exclusively be thinking that by "rules" you mean just the magic system, and because of that they're calling Lord of the Rings soft and like, I need to tell you all that Lord of the Rings has so many rules. JRR created multiple entire languages. The Silmarilion is just a novel-length collection of worldbuilding notes. Magic is not the be-all end-all of whether something is hard or soft fantasy. Something can be hard fantasy but still have a soft magic system, it's not black and white
zeb-z
every time Thurfian and Zistalmu craft some dumbass plot to get Thrawn out of their hair or out of the picture, which directly leads to the endangerment of their people, because they’re petty politicians, I want to put my head through drywall
