Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
The Star Wars expanded universe, those that ahere to it and its wiki.
I'm not sure where I should begin with this, so let me briefly explain how I got here.
So, there's this TTRPG, called The Riddle of Steel. You might've seen the thread on it. One of its large draws is its combat system, which is based on tactical decisions where prowess supports one's judgement. It's based on historical European martial arts. Good times.
So I thought this would go well with Star Wars, right? Some minor adjustments and you've got lightsaber combat. I got it into my head to check up Wookieepedia for some flavour terminology, and what I found was complete horror. Writing this now, I should've known better; I've experienced this before from the same website and same fandom. But every time I experience it again, the revulsion is just as sharp.
I get that an expanded universe can be fun and provide more media in various forms. It's what allows some IPs to continue life while expensive forms of media are closed to them, for a while or forever. Sometimes, I'm thankful for this. The Alien vs. Predator games spring to mind, as much as I dislike a lot of Alien-related EU stuff. Sometimes, however, the weight of this extra material has ultimately negative results, and this is what I fear has happened to Star Wars. Let me me give you an example that's close to my heart:
Lightsabers.
In the right hands, a lightsaber isn't just cool, but uniquely effective. Star Wars does well in setting up a context where a knightly (energy) bladed weapon sees use that is both limited (for narrative and dramatic purpose) and reasonable. The weapon itself is ingenious in its simplicity; the way it acts as both a functional tool in the setting and as clearly recognisable symbol in meatspace is among the greatest and simplest triumphs of the original trilogy. We knows what it is. It's a sword, the kind that would be wielded by knights. We don't need any more details because of how it looks, how it functions and who uses it.
What bothers me on the wiki is all the detail. Detail on its (phony) mechanics and physics. How it's constructed. The variations. Its history. All that. There are variations, some of which are especially stupid -- the lightwhip and "light tonfa" spring to mind. Plus, there are examples of things attributed to lightsabers in the movies that we never see. Apparently Darth Vader's lightsaber has two length settings that he switches between for surprise techniques. How excruciatingly irrelevant. It's also clear that whoever wrote the wiki (or at least the pages concerning lightsaber combat) have no experience in real swordsmanship. Not only are inefficient, and often clearly suicidal techniques mentioned and praised, one comment paints kendo as "slower and more strength based" than Olympic fencing. This writer has not only shown their lack of experience in martial sports and martial arts, but has failed to even observe them on the simplest level.
So the pages concerning lightsabers and combat with them show us a lot of information. We come to know how they're constructed, their history, the way they're used, their aesthetics, behind the scenes trivia and all manner of irrelevant, bullshit information that is clearly unnecessary for us to understand. But here's the kicker.
There is absolutely no discussion of what the lightsaber is supposed to be in terms of thematics or symbology. Sure, there's a mention of it alluding to knights and samurai, but that hardly counts. The wiki uses thousands of words to spew a whole load of crap about a fictional item, the use of which was secondary to its thematic value, and completely fails to elaborate on why the lightsaber goddamn matters in the first place. There is no discussion of the lightsaber as a symbolic sword. I could simply scoff at all the foolishness of the wiki were it not for the lack of information that broad and relevant to the matter at hand.
Star Wars is not reality. It is fiction. Very important, influential and endearing fiction, granted. At the end of the day, however, the fine details are not important, especially when said details are irreconcilable with reality on any level (and, in this case, I mean any level). What is important and relevant to the general audience is why the lightsaber was there in the first place, why it stuck with us and why it had so much value and investment attached to it outside of that fictional universe.
I think this is is an issue that plagues the whole wiki. There's an article on Darth Vader's armour. I thought it might be interesting, so I bit. There's a whole heading, with multiple paragraphs, dealing with a particular glove.
What is this.
How can a media wiki and fandom have such an eye for detail whilst ignoring humanistic analysis of these pieces of media? Especially for media that, while very clever, is also very simple? This is arguably the most influential and relevant sci-fi film series of the last few decades, and the fandom and wiki themselves have missed the boat entirely.
inb4 "Alex demands more accuracy". That would be appreciated in the lightsaber technique, but that's very much beside the point. I consider getting swordsmanship right in media to be of importance, but more important is initial emotional investment, and that's what the wiki fails to discuss at all.
Also, while failing to do that, it gets all its swordy stuff wrong. That's two strikes, but three, because this is so fucking stupid on every level that I'm adding one.
So, there's this TTRPG, called The Riddle of Steel. You might've seen the thread on it. One of its large draws is its combat system, which is based on tactical decisions where prowess supports one's judgement. It's based on historical European martial arts. Good times.
So I thought this would go well with Star Wars, right? Some minor adjustments and you've got lightsaber combat. I got it into my head to check up Wookieepedia for some flavour terminology, and what I found was complete horror. Writing this now, I should've known better; I've experienced this before from the same website and same fandom. But every time I experience it again, the revulsion is just as sharp.
I get that an expanded universe can be fun and provide more media in various forms. It's what allows some IPs to continue life while expensive forms of media are closed to them, for a while or forever. Sometimes, I'm thankful for this. The Alien vs. Predator games spring to mind, as much as I dislike a lot of Alien-related EU stuff. Sometimes, however, the weight of this extra material has ultimately negative results, and this is what I fear has happened to Star Wars. Let me me give you an example that's close to my heart:
Lightsabers.
In the right hands, a lightsaber isn't just cool, but uniquely effective. Star Wars does well in setting up a context where a knightly (energy) bladed weapon sees use that is both limited (for narrative and dramatic purpose) and reasonable. The weapon itself is ingenious in its simplicity; the way it acts as both a functional tool in the setting and as clearly recognisable symbol in meatspace is among the greatest and simplest triumphs of the original trilogy. We knows what it is. It's a sword, the kind that would be wielded by knights. We don't need any more details because of how it looks, how it functions and who uses it.
What bothers me on the wiki is all the detail. Detail on its (phony) mechanics and physics. How it's constructed. The variations. Its history. All that. There are variations, some of which are especially stupid -- the lightwhip and "light tonfa" spring to mind. Plus, there are examples of things attributed to lightsabers in the movies that we never see. Apparently Darth Vader's lightsaber has two length settings that he switches between for surprise techniques. How excruciatingly irrelevant. It's also clear that whoever wrote the wiki (or at least the pages concerning lightsaber combat) have no experience in real swordsmanship. Not only are inefficient, and often clearly suicidal techniques mentioned and praised, one comment paints kendo as "slower and more strength based" than Olympic fencing. This writer has not only shown their lack of experience in martial sports and martial arts, but has failed to even observe them on the simplest level.
So the pages concerning lightsabers and combat with them show us a lot of information. We come to know how they're constructed, their history, the way they're used, their aesthetics, behind the scenes trivia and all manner of irrelevant, bullshit information that is clearly unnecessary for us to understand. But here's the kicker.
There is absolutely no discussion of what the lightsaber is supposed to be in terms of thematics or symbology. Sure, there's a mention of it alluding to knights and samurai, but that hardly counts. The wiki uses thousands of words to spew a whole load of crap about a fictional item, the use of which was secondary to its thematic value, and completely fails to elaborate on why the lightsaber goddamn matters in the first place. There is no discussion of the lightsaber as a symbolic sword. I could simply scoff at all the foolishness of the wiki were it not for the lack of information that broad and relevant to the matter at hand.
Star Wars is not reality. It is fiction. Very important, influential and endearing fiction, granted. At the end of the day, however, the fine details are not important, especially when said details are irreconcilable with reality on any level (and, in this case, I mean any level). What is important and relevant to the general audience is why the lightsaber was there in the first place, why it stuck with us and why it had so much value and investment attached to it outside of that fictional universe.
I think this is is an issue that plagues the whole wiki. There's an article on Darth Vader's armour. I thought it might be interesting, so I bit. There's a whole heading, with multiple paragraphs, dealing with a particular glove.
What is this.
How can a media wiki and fandom have such an eye for detail whilst ignoring humanistic analysis of these pieces of media? Especially for media that, while very clever, is also very simple? This is arguably the most influential and relevant sci-fi film series of the last few decades, and the fandom and wiki themselves have missed the boat entirely.
inb4 "Alex demands more accuracy". That would be appreciated in the lightsaber technique, but that's very much beside the point. I consider getting swordsmanship right in media to be of importance, but more important is initial emotional investment, and that's what the wiki fails to discuss at all.
Also, while failing to do that, it gets all its swordy stuff wrong. That's two strikes, but three, because this is so fucking stupid on every level that I'm adding one.
Comments
There is absolutely no discussion of what the lightsaber is supposed to be in terms of thematics or symbology. Sure, there's a mention of it alluding to knights and samurai, but that hardly counts. The wiki uses thousands of words to spew a whole load of crap about a fictional item, the use of which was secondary to its thematic value, and completely fails to elaborate on why the lightsaber goddamn matters in the first place. There is no discussion of the lightsaber as a symbolic sword. I could simply scoff at all the foolishness of the wiki were it not for the lack of information that broad and relevant to the matter at hand.
Tessek, Jabba's accountant, a Quarren from the planet Mon Calamari.
Unbeknownst to his fellow patrons, Labria was actually Kardue'sai'Malloc a famous Devaronian war criminal.
lightsaber technique, but that's very much beside the point. I consider
getting swordsmanship right in media to be of importance, but more
important is initial emotional investment, and that's what the wiki
fails to discuss at all.
Got there first, Juan.
In any case, there's thousands of words, here, about the fictional swordsmanship of Star Wars. This is a page that is literally only of interest to those who care about swordsmanship.
Wikipedia also has a "cultural relevance" section, or something of a similar title, on its pages for important, long-running or very old works.
I'd say they're linked at the seams -- in media, cultural relevance requires emotional investment. If the work fails at investment, there's small reason for it to be relevant at all. There are exceptions, but the majority of well-remembered, well-studied and well-analysed works of media succeed at audience investment in the first place.
What are some of the obviously suicidal techniques it praises?
There's a general understanding of combat informed more, it seems, by video games than actual martial concepts or even the Star Wars films. This gives rise to the wiki casually describing concepts, tactical approaches and techniques that are in no way applicable to real combat, the Force be damned.
For instance, there are seven lightsaber "Forms". Each has a lengthy explanation and a short list of techniques that characterise said forms. Every example is one of two things:
- Stupid.
- Inherent to all martial forms of fencing anyway.
For instance, one of the lightsaber forms is based on fighting multiple adversaries, also with lightsabers. To do this, it utilises wide, sweeping motions so as to attack multiple targets at once. That's not going to work, because if they already have lightsabers, then they can parry and one's wide movements are for nothing. Furthermore, such large movements are slower than smaller, more efficient, faster and stronger techniques. So for absolutely no benefit, the lightsaber form suggests reducing one's combat effectiveness by a considerable amount. It doesn't even discuss turning a fight where you are outnumbered into a series of one-on-one fights with footwork, terrain and decisive tactics and techniques.
There's also a variety of jump attacks described. These would have to be very high to be of an effectiveness. While, in real terms, an adversary would be quite surprised at your sudden capacity to jump overhead and land gracefully, an adversary who considers and expects such a technique will cut you down as you pass overhead.
Furthermore, there are suicidal tendencies implied through weapon construction. Enter the "light tonfa", which makes no sense on any level. It's a short-bladed lightsaber with a secondary grip emerging from the elongated handle; the first grip is braced against one's arm while the secondary grip is held. This is a parrying weapon most often made from some lightsaber-resistant material. It's still stupid, though; a lightsaber's blade is already longer, can be more easily manipulated by its wielder and has more offensive potential as well as being easier to parry with. Furthermore, this "light tonfa" would have to parry at a ninety degree angle, or close to, for the lightsaber-resistant hilt to get any use (which the wiki says is a primary reason for its existence). A standard lightsaber can parry at any angle that crosses the blade of one's adversary.
So your standard lightsaber is superior in offense, defense, reach and versatility. The tonfa shouldn't exist in any practical sense. And it probably shouldn't exist in any thematic sense, either. Jedi are magical knight/samurai hybrids, remember. They're all about the swords, and the tonfa doesn't really express anything in particular for a Western audience.
The entire approach to combat is bunk. Each form has a single focus and a very limited amount of guards and techniques at its disposal. Despite what the wiki says, no singular form would be suitable for combat between its lack of techniques and the holes in said techniques. To make a genuinely sound fighting system out of the information there, one would have to combine all the forms, weed out everything that didn't make sense and then add everything that's missing.
To be fair, there is one good technique described. It's where one deflects a blaster bolt, and uses the energy from the resistance to bring the weapon around for a strike or further deflection. A great idea, very sound and very efficient. If the rest of it were like that, it'd be pretty great.
Discuss multiple perspectives and post links to other sources of analysis.
I won't blame a wiki for being too comprehensive about its subject
matter. I'd blame its sources instead. (I'm assuming most of these
things come from official sources).
I've spoken to enough people who take this kind of thing as gospel. The fandom (and, by extension, the wiki) has this tendency to try and link everything. I don't blame the wiki for existing and cataloguing, but this is lunacy.
This is Lak Sivrak, A Shistavenen wolfman who eventually joined the Rebellion, along with his lover
Dice Ibegon, a Lamproid.
A more ill fated pair of lovers were M'iyoon Onith and Feltipern Trevagg
links to other sources of analysis
Despite the intended humour, this is a fair point for a lot of reasons.
Plus, Kyle has the best escort mission in any game during Academy.