StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Posted: **2007-10-20 06:23pm**

The following is quoted from a never-before-published private interview of George Lucas by Lucasfilm's Carol Titleman back in 1977 as printed in the recent book The Making of Star Wars by J.W.Rinzler.

“In the Old Republic, all the systems sent their representatives to the Senate. It wasn’t an Imperial Senate; it was a Republican Senate, which made the decisions that controlled the Republic. There were 24,372 systems in the Galactic Senate. The Senate would vote in a Chancellor or an overseer who would work for four years as the leader of the executive branch of the Republic. You were only supposed to be able to run for one four-year term—you were only eligible for one term.

What happened was one of the Chancellors began subverting the Senate and buying off the Senators with the help of some of the large intergalactic trade companies and mining companies. Through their power and money, he bought off enough of the senate to get himself elected to a second term, because of a crisis. By the time the third term came along, he had corrupted so much of the Senate that they made him Emperor for the rest of his life.

Giving the Emperor that title for life and doing away with the elective process was all done with a lot of rationalizing. Many in the Senate felt that having elections and changing leaders in the time of an emergency disrupted the bureaucratic system. And the bureaucracy was getting to be so big that changing leaders made it impossible to have any effect on the system and make it work—moreover, the bureaucracy was running amok and not paying attention to the rulers. So they reasoned that the Emperor could bring the bureaucracy back into line. So the Emperor took control of the bureaucracy. The Galactic Senate would meet for a period that was similar to a year, but after it became the Imperial Senate, the meetings were less and less frequent until finally the meetings were only once a year, and they were very short.

With the bureaucracy behind the Emperor, it was impossible and too late for the Senate to do anything. He had slowly manipulated things; in fact, it was he who let the bureaucracy run amok and therefore had blackmailed the Senate into doing things because he was the only one who really had any power over the bureaucracy. It was so large there was no way to get things done, but he knew the right people; the key people in the bureaucracy were working for him and were paid by the companies.

When he became Emperor, a little over half the Senate as it turned out was not involved, was not corrupted—and they reacted strongly against the whole thing. There was a rebellion in terms of the Senate against the Emperor; they tried to oust him legally and have him impeached. But many of the Senators who were fighting the Emperor at that time mysteriously died. The Jedi Knights were alerted immediately and they rallied to the Senate’s side. But there was a plot afoot and when the Jedi finally rallied and tried to restore order, they were betrayed and eventually killed by Darth Vader.”

“When the Jedi tried to restore order, Darth Vader was still one of the Jedi. What he would do is catch the Jedi off-guard and, using his knowledge of the Force, he would kill the Jedi without them realizing what was happening. They trusted him and they didn't realize he was the murderer who was decimating their ranks. At the height of the Jedi, there were several hundred thousand. At the time of the Rebellion, most of them were killed. The Emperor had some strong forces rally behind him, as well, in terms of the army and the Imperial forces that he'd been building up secretly. The Jedi were so outnumbered that they fled and were tracked down. They tried to regroup, but they were eventually massacred by one of the special elite forces led by Darth Vader. Eventually, only a few, including Ben and Luke's father, were left. Luke's father is named Annikin.”

Thanks to Michael Kaminski, author of the The Secret History of Star Wars, for making this available on his web site.

So this is pretty much the smoking gun that proves that Vader and "Annikin" were originally two separate people.

Posted: **2007-10-20 06:44pm**

"The Smoking Gun"? I've noticed your rather anti-Lucas statements in the past (if this is somehow connected to that), but isn't this a well-known fact from the production of ANH, and he even went on record, or someone did, that Lucas wasn't sure whether to make Vader Luke's father during the production of ESB? What is the news here, exactly?

Posted: **2007-10-20 07:04pm**

Axe-grinding; its been obvious that originally Anakin and Vader were different people.

Posted: **2007-10-20 07:26pm**

Galvatron wrote:So this is pretty much the smoking gun that proves that Vader and "Annikin" were originally two separate people.

Ok... Do you have a point? Or is this just another one of those penetrating forays into the painfully obvious?

Posted: **2007-10-20 07:46pm**

Galvatron wrote:So this is pretty much the smoking gun that proves that Vader and "Annikin" were originally two separate people.

OMFG! George Lucas retconned something in Star Wars continuity? No way!

Posted: **2007-10-20 07:50pm**

Hey, there are seriously people who think Star Wars didn't go through a writing evolution as the movies were made, and that Lucas had the current state of SW in mind when he started ANH.

No, really, these people exist.

Posted: **2007-10-20 09:01pm**

So what? In one of the early drafts of SW, Han Solo was far older than Luke and Leia (old enough to be their father in fact). Scripts change after the first draft all the time.

Posted: **2007-10-20 09:04pm**

Darth Servo wrote:So what? In one of the early drafts of SW, Han Solo was far older than Luke and Leia (old enough to be their father in fact). Scripts change after the first draft all the time.

Uh, no shit. That's why these people are irritating?

Posted: **2007-10-20 10:08pm**

Stark wrote:Hey, there are seriously people who think Star Wars didn't go through a writing evolution as the movies were made, and that Lucas had the current state of SW in mind when he started ANH.

No, really, these people exist.

Exactly. So the eye-rollers can basically go fuck themselves.

Posted: **2007-10-20 10:24pm**

The eye-rollers were pointing out that the 'proof' you quoted was utterly superfluous. The only people who think that will just say that that interview doesn't explicitly say anything about Anakin not being a Sith. You can't convince the wilfully deluded.

Posted: **2007-10-20 10:55pm**

It is interesting that in the original scenario Palpatine was supposedly at the head of a minority government.

Posted: **2007-10-20 11:18pm**

Stark wrote:Hey, there are seriously people who think Star Wars didn't go through a writing evolution as the movies were made, and that Lucas had the current state of SW in mind when he started ANH.

No, really, these people exist.

Bwahahahaha!

Maybe its just because I'm tired, but that's hilarious...

Well whatever. I'm not about to go "fuck myself" by your request, Galvatron, but I see you had a reason for making the point, at least.

Posted: **2007-10-20 11:42pm**

Publius wrote:It is interesting that in the original scenario Palpatine was supposedly at the head of a minority government.

In the original novelization of Star Wars, it even makes out the Emperor to be a figurehead, with the real power being in corrupt senators and moffs.

Posted: **2007-10-21 12:04am**

Darth Servo wrote:So what? In one of the early drafts of SW, Han Solo was far older than Luke and Leia (old enough to be their father in fact). Scripts change after the first draft all the time.

Not only that, but from what I've heard, Darth Vader's signature costume was going to be a vacuum suit that he just uses to cross over into Tantive IV. They made the suit a permanent fixture after they saw how awesome Vader's entrance turned out to be (I believe they planned it something like "Should we have some trooper announce his arrival?" "Nah, just have him walk in without saying anything and play some scary music to show he's a bad guy.")

Posted: **2007-10-21 01:43am**

Wait a sec.

While I have no doubt that Vader and Anakin were originally separate characters, this doesn't prove a thing.

Because if Lucas knew in 1977 that he was going to pull "Vader is Luke's father" out of his hat, the last thing he would do is tell someone. Even in a "private" interview.

I mean, he told Bantha Tracks in 1978 that Vader, Anakin, and Obi-Wan all fought a duel near a lava pit, and no one thinks that's a "smoking gun." Whether or not Lucas had combined the characters yet, the official story would still be that they are separate!

Posted: **2007-10-21 03:24am**

While I have no doubt that Vader and Anakin were originally separate characters, this doesn't prove a thing.

Unless you honestly believe that Lucas had the whole thing planned out and was deliberately spreading misinformation, "yes it does".

Posted: **2007-10-21 03:34am**

So why isn't Jar Jar's instrumental role in the formation of the Empire mentioned?

I'm joking of course!

Seriously, thanks for posting this, especially for those of us who haven't bought a copy of TMOSW. We've got to keep sticking it to those "always intended" fanboys!

Posted: **2007-10-21 03:57am**

While I don't think Lucas had planned that particular theme from the start, I do think it's possible that he toyed with the idea that Vader was Luke's father and that the idea definitly took root after Star Wars became such a success. Lucas got the story together, if he did it from the start (the way he likes to think) or came up with it later, it really doesn't matter. So what? And to make such a fuss about it and to tell people to go "fuck themselves" is juvenile.

Posted: **2007-10-21 04:13am**

So you haven't read all the recent quotes by Lucas claming that the story was originally meant to be The Tragedy of Darth Vader?

I suggest reading The Secret History of Star Wars. Specifically, pages 354-354.

Posted: **2007-10-21 05:51am**

Galvatron wrote:So you haven't read all the recent quotes by Lucas claming that the story was originally meant to be The Tragedy of Darth Vader?

I suggest reading The Secret History of Star Wars. Specifically, pages 354-354.

Yes, I have (and I have read the book you're linking to, it has been discussed here earlier) and while that surely is exaggerated, let's face it, all screenplays and stories evolves. The most likely is that George Lucas changed his mind along the way and retconned Vader to be Luke's father, but on the other hand we don't have access to Lucas's binder (and there's also the elusive quote from the 70's which I've been trying to track down that Star Wars is about "a father, son and twins") and quite frankly, I don't think that it's so much of a deal. Star Wars is George Lucas's creation if he wants to think that it was planned from the start, then it's his prerogative.

Posted: **2007-10-21 06:21am**

Galvatron wrote:So you haven't read all the recent quotes by Lucas claming that the story was originally meant to be The Tragedy of Darth Vader?

It can't be a tragedy unless Vader and Anakin are the same persons?

Posted: **2007-10-21 06:28am**

It's interesting to see what does stick. The prologue of the novel, IIRC, even mentions the Emperor using 'Great Organs of Trade' to rise to power.

Posted: **2007-10-21 10:08am**

Dooey Jo wrote:
Galvatron wrote:So you haven't read all the recent quotes by Lucas claming that the story was originally meant to be The Tragedy of Darth Vader?
It can't be a tragedy unless Vader and Anakin are the same persons?

Since only part of the story focuses on Anakin (it really begins with ESB) and of that only part of it treating him as a sympathetic figure (ROTJ), and since the prequels were largely written a decade and a half later and used the recast version of Anakin's character from the early 80's, I'd say it really hasn't been "the tragedy of Darth Vader." That's an appropriate title for the Prequels (or at least II & III), but certainly not for the "saga as a whole" as "originally intended." When you think about it, Anakin's redemption in ROTJ is really more of a subplot... a way of tying up loose ends, than the focus of the OT (which was really about Luke becoming a Jedi and the Rebellion defeating the Empire).

The original concept was "the Adventures of Luke Skywalker" and the buzz was that the PT was going to be "the Adventures of Obi-Wan Kenobi" (especially given his ascendancy in TPM). That of course was forgotten once Episode II was coming out, iirc.

I think the issue at hand is that Lucas makes several claims today about what he intended for the story, and these are believed by a significant number of fans (at least if my own random wanderings through the internet are typical) and that differs from the evidence at hand (old interviews, old scripts, accounts by others connected to Star Wars, etc). Much as I'd like to give Lucas the benefit of the doubt, I think his own words contradict him. It's not a problem that he evolved the story, it's only a problem when he basically acts like it didn't evolve. That's just insulting to anyone who's done any research. If he wants to "clear up the confusion" he should produce these "secret notebooks" that explain his side of the story. It's not as if there are "any more surprises left" since all six movies are out and he repeatedly said there would be no more.

So Lucas can think he's the great emperor Napoleon for all I care, but he can't expect intelligent fans to accept it without supporting evidence (other than certain fanboys who'll believe anything he says!).

Posted: **2007-10-21 11:46am**

Unless you honestly believe that Lucas had the whole thing planned out and was deliberately spreading misinformation, "yes it does".

If Lucas had the whole thing planned out, then it follows that he would deliberately spread misinformation to do the big reveal in ESB.

That's why this isn't a smoking gun.

Now, DID Lucas have the whole thing planned out from the beginning? Of course not. He "only" knew Vader was Luke's father for five movies. Watch me not care.

Posted: **2007-10-21 11:52am**

What I like about this old interview more than the Annikin=!Darth Vader, is all the elements that worked their way into the Prequels and Prequel-era EU. Not bad.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The backstory of Star Wars, according to Lucas in 1977

The backstory of Star Wars, according to Lucas in 1977

Re: The backstory of Star Wars, according to Lucas in 1977

Re: The backstory of Star Wars, according to Lucas in 1977

my 2 cents (again)