How to deal with a topheavy multi-level contradiction

[Marc Xavier]

Here's a question I'd like to vote about and discuss. What is the best way to deal with a topheavy multi-level contradiction in Star Trek/Star Wars?

First off, I'll define what I mean. A contradiction is multi-level if it involves 2 or more "levels" of a canon policy. For example, a contradiction between EU and The Movies in Star Wars would be a multi-level contradiction. In such a case, the Movie would overrule the EU since the Movie is a higher level.

Now, a multi-level contradiction is topheavy if it involves a contradiction between two pieces of information on equal footing (say, a contradiction between 2 Movies) and a lower-level piece of information that matches one of the two higher-level sources. So for example, you would have a contradiction between two Star Wars movies, but a random EU novel agrees with one of the movies and contradicts the other.

[Howedar]

You can't formulate a harmony between all three if they contradict each other. Do you know what "contradict" means?

[Marc Xavier]

You can't formulate a harmony between all three if they contradict each other. Do you know what "contradict" means?

Example taken from this thread.

In "A New Hope" Obiwan says that "For a thousand generations, the Jedi were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic."

Yet, in AoTC, Chancellor Palpatine says "I will not let this Republic, which has stood for a thousand years, be split in two."

Emphasis mine.

Perhaps a better word would be "inconsistency." Illuminatus Primus formulated a harmony between these two disparate quotes by using a bit of information from a third source, speaking about the EU Sith War which occured about 1,000 years before AoTC. In his harmony he claimed the Republic actually fell, even though it had existed for many millennia prior, and then was re-established, hence why Palpatine said 1,000 years and Obiwan said 1,000 generations.

Although we did not come to a conclusion as to whether the Republic actually fell around the time of the battle at Ruusan, his attempt to explain a way to connect all three pieces of information into a coherent theory is an example of what I mean when I talk about formulating a harmony.

[Darth Wong]

In real life, when you have two pieces of verifiable, repeatable physical evidence which seem to contradict each other, you must devise a new theory in order to explain them both simultaneously. In the example you gave, that is precisely what was done. In real life, the apparent contradiction between the wave and particle nature of light was resolved by simply concluding that light must be both a wave and a particle.

[NecronLord]

In this case, Palpatine means that the republic has stood unchallenged since the last Sith was seen, however, the reference to the Jedi being around as guardians for a thousand generations, includes times when the Republic was challeneged by enemies, because the Jedi were protecting the Republic in those times. I hope that helps.

The Sith War is, incidentally not entirely EU, Yoda explicitly mentions that they had been around a mellenia ago.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Simply: it is more reasonable to take the Movie explanation that is consistent with EU and find a method to encorporate the other, new explanation. I find it preferable to do so in such a way that you do not destroy much of the EU and make much of it awkwardly based on incorrect information.

Naturally, there's some idiots I've debated with who had the brilliant idea of destroying the EU, and taking the AOTC quote and forcing the ANH one to comply by claiming that to a Jedi, "one year = one generation of a new class of younglings." Naturally their justification for this bullshit and destorying the EU was "my explanation appeals to me more." I suppose mine was explicit enough for their bare brain stem to register a response.

Now, the Republic didn't necessarily fall, but I'm assuming it did unless people want to get into the semantics of "having stood" meaning new constitution or something. Either way works, but to me it seems reasonable that, in fact, there could've been many wars and government roll-overs that certainly tore-up and were violent for the Core and the elite. However, the Outer Rim was pretty irrelevent in the power games and didn't much notice the couple-year hiccups in galactic authority. To them, its lasted a thousand generations. Not to mention some areas of the fringe are semi-independent. Similarly, even during wars or government changes or choas, their guardianship over the Republic was constant. Therefore it too lasted 1000 generations.

[Stravo]

Wouldn't the 1,000 year comment be considered a coliquolism, like an American saying our country is 200 yearsl old. It;s older than that, but it's a general number that is sort of close to what the age is. And why do we hold Palpy's number to such a stringent standard, it was an off the cuff statement. Is he going to stop and state an exact figure. At the same time, Obi Wan was giving Luke a history lesson, so his figure would stand to be closer to the truth (though Obi Wan's veracity in OT is questionable. I mean maybe its a thousand generations from a ceratin point of view )

[Illuminatus Primus]

Wouldn't the 1,000 year comment be considered a coliquolism, like an American saying our country is 200 yearsl old. It;s older than that, but it's a general number that is sort of close to what the age is. And why do we hold Palpy's number to such a stringent standard, it was an off the cuff statement. Is he going to stop and state an exact figure. At the same time, Obi Wan was giving Luke a history lesson, so his figure would stand to be closer to the truth (though Obi Wan's veracity in OT is questionable. I mean maybe its a thousand generations from a ceratin point of view )

I agree. Obi-Wan's statement was pretty point-blank. But if we MUST take Palpatine's quote 100%, I think my interpretation works well. Especially with how much we see the Republic ignores the Outer Rim. Major shifts in power at Coruscant with new fancy leaders and titles and parties and constitutions might go totally unnoticed to moisture farmers and shipping crews out in the Outer Rim. It didn't become crazy until the Empire really replaced the Republic and suddenly there were Star Destroyers in every system and a agent from Coruscant looking over every shoulder.

[Marc Xavier]

In real life, when you have two pieces of verifiable, repeatable physical evidence which seem to contradict each other, you must devise a new theory in order to explain them both simultaneously. In the example you gave, that is precisely what was done. In real life, the apparent contradiction between the wave and particle nature of light was resolved by simply concluding that light must be both a wave and a particle.

So you would vote "Formulate a harmony between all three," if I read you correctly.

[Illuminatus Primus]

In real life, when you have two pieces of verifiable, repeatable physical evidence which seem to contradict each other, you must devise a new theory in order to explain them both simultaneously. In the example you gave, that is precisely what was done. In real life, the apparent contradiction between the wave and particle nature of light was resolved by simply concluding that light must be both a wave and a particle.

So you would vote "Formulate a harmony between all three," if I read you correctly.

The key term is "verifiable, repeatable evidence." The movies are a kind of empirical media that can be visually and scientifically analyze.

The novels cannot. Therefore, the movies can be treated like actually being at an event, whereas the EU is like reading it in a history book.

[His Divine Shadow]

Although we did not come to a conclusion as to whether the Republic actually fell around the time of the battle at Ruusan, his attempt to explain a way to connect all three pieces of information into a coherent theory is an example of what I mean when I talk about formulating a harmony.

Wheter it did or not, to the people of the republic it was seen as the beginning of a new age of peace and prosperity, the explanation fits for me.

[Marc Xavier]

Wheter it did or not, to the people of the republic it was seen as the beginning of a new age of peace and prosperity, the explanation fits for me.

So I take it you would vote "Formulate a harmony between all three" as well, then.

[His Divine Shadow]

So I take it you would vote "Formulate a harmony between all three" as well, then.

If it's possible, then yes.

[Kurgan]

Naturally, there's some idiots I've debated with who had the brilliant idea of destroying the EU, and taking the AOTC quote and forcing the ANH one to comply by claiming that to a Jedi, "one year = one generation of a new class of younglings." Naturally their justification for this bullshit and destorying the EU was "my explanation appeals to me more." I suppose mine was explicit enough for their bare brain stem to register a response.

Despite what you claim "idiots" think, this is in fact an attempt at harmonization of the films. If it "destroys" the EU, well, what's the point of having canon in the first place?

Parts of the EU simply flat out contradict the movies, period. If we want to think of ways to try to harmonize those, fine. But to say that an attempt to harmonize the films, which happens to snub the EU in this case, is therefore wrong (simply because you dislike the conclusion), is silly and biased.

This is not the only possible explanation, but it is a perfectly valid one, as were discussed in past threads about it.

[Kurgan]

In short, my answer is that, yes, whenever possible, we should take the events and try to harmonize them.

Of course, you said when they are on equal footing (since we always appeal to the higher canon as per LucasFilm/Paramount policy). The EU in Star Wars is NOT on equal footing with the movies, so if it contradicts the films, that's no big deal. New EU books can be written to try to smooth over the mistakes or oversights made by the EU authors (and this is being done apparently, in the newer books). With regard to the films, we can wait for Lucas to re-edit the movies again to fit, or we can try to harmonize it, and if an EU explanation happens to support one theory, that doesn't prove it, but it does lend some credibility.

Now if we apply this logic to one of those arguments, let's say the "Clones" idea.

Canon sources:

The Original Trilogy doesn't say the Stormtroopers are clones.

Attack of the Clones hints that they are (and Lucas flat out says they are on the commentary track).

"Official" (quasi-canon?) sources:

The Expanded Universe clearly says that Stormtroopers are NOT clones (or if any are, it is a tiny tiny percentage, and appearences of these clones SHOCK people when they are discovered).

Some article published in a (forget the title) magazine in 1980 says Stormtroopers are clones.

Now at first I'd say it appears that since the OT could go either way (though things like differing height and voices tend to disagree with this, unless Lucas re-edits ANH again), and the EU says that they aren't clones, then it looks like this is it.. not all are clones.

Then again, AOTC and the article (which may or may not have any official stance, I don't konw) indicate that Stormtroopers are in fact clones (but then again, it doesn't say they are ALL clones from the same source, so I suppose we could fudge it and say that's the answer).

[His Divine Shadow]

Despite what you claim "idiots" think, this is in fact an attempt at harmonization of the films. If it "destroys" the EU, well, what's the point of having canon in the first place?

I can tell you that canon isn't there so people can just say lower ranking stuff is contradicted and leave it at that.

Parts of the EU simply flat out contradict the movies, period.

And? the last time I we had a similar argument you wanted to destroy the 25.000 year timeline, atleast you gave just that impression, that the whole 25.000 year old timeline was steaming EU bullshit and Palpatine was more right than Obi-Wan.

If we want to think of ways to try to harmonize those, fine. But to say that an attempt to harmonize the films, which happens to snub the EU in this case, is therefore wrong (simply because you dislike the conclusion), is silly and biased.

Name the case before you make such a statement.

[Marc Xavier]

I'm glad to see this discussion is alive and people are taking positions, but the number of actual votes is pretty staggeringly low, considering this thread has had over 400 views.

Only 13 folks who have seen the thread have a stance?

[nightmare]

I'm only logged in when I have time to post anything, and I rarely log in just to vote on polls. As far as the question goes, you should if possible make all evidence harmonize. If not, it's more of a case by case practice. You can if necessary throw out the lower canon or one of the higher canon or both (although this in not preferred) depending on what best suits the rest of the canon universe. At least one of the higher must be left, of course.

[Kurgan]

I apologize, it was "World of Star Wars" magazine, published ("by LFL, Lucas Film Limited") 1981, not 1980.

I don't have the actual magazine, just the old photos of the article "Soldiers of the Empire" that somebody posted on here awhile back.

[Kurgan]

I can tell you that canon isn't there so people can just say lower ranking stuff is contradicted and leave it at that.

Canon is there to say what is "real" in the universe continuity. Everything else is subordinate to that main story. Fans can like or ignore whatever they want, but if we talk about canon, there is a "definitive" set of materials that forms the core story, and all other storylines fall below it.

In vs. debates, I figure a person (who is honest) sets what is canon for the debate at the start. Ideally, he'd pick the materials that make the strongest case for his argument (but that may imply a motive where none exists). Frankly, I figure the canon of Star Wars alone makes it seem more powerful than if you include some of the crud in the EU (though some of the EU is really great). We've all seen the complaints about the smaller ship sizes for example, and the apparent smaller scope of the Empire/Republic in the EU.

And? the last time I we had a similar argument you wanted to destroy the 25.000 year timeline, atleast you gave just that impression, that the whole 25.000 year old timeline was steaming EU bullshit and Palpatine was more right than Obi-Wan.

Lucas changed his mind, so we have a piece of canon that contradicts a piece of canon. The EU went along with his original idea. Hence the problem...

It's certainly possible that Palpatine WAS more right than Obi-Wan.

We can still keep the whole "steaming EU bullshit" we can just interpret it differently. For example, saying that the Jedi Knights counted their generations back before the Republic's existence. Obi-Wan's just an old nostalgic codger spinning tales to impress a farm boy.

We can even maintain this business about the Rusaan Reformation, that's another option. Or we can say that Palpatine was lying and nobody corrected him because he was controlling them with the Force, and the EU and Obi-Wan's statement are literally true.

I'm sure Obi's statements are entirely true.. from a certain point of view.
; )

Name the case before you make such a statement.

I was referring to the case that was referenced above. You know, the one that "idiots" disagreed with. heh

[His Divine Shadow]

Lucas changed his mind, so we have a piece of canon that contradicts a piece of canon. The EU went along with his original idea. Hence the problem...

That is your assumption, my assumption can be that it was colloquial, hyperbole, or that he was reffering to the fact that the republic had it's last major war 1000 years ago and it might very well have been the formation of a new republic, whilst going under the same name.

We can still keep the whole "steaming EU bullshit" we can just interpret it differently. For example, saying that the Jedi Knights counted their generations back before the Republic's existence. Obi-Wan's just an old nostalgic codger spinning tales to impress a farm boy.

Or we can harmonize it with the evidence supplied to us by LucasFilm.

[Kurgan]

That is your assumption, my assumption can be that it was colloquial, hyperbole, or that he was reffering to the fact that the republic had it's last major war 1000 years ago and it might very well have been the formation of a new republic, whilst going under the same name.

Well, the non canonical answer is either 1) Lucas is an idiot and forgot his own story. 2) Lucas changed his mind and changed his story.

Going by Lucas's statements over the years (between the time he made ROTJ and TPM) it's clear he changed his mind about what he wanted to show in the prequels. Now, coming up with an "in universe" explanation is more difficult. We can try to accept EU smooth-overs, sure, but we can also try to apply logic and evidence, etc. which is what I assume we're trying to do.

Or we can harmonize it with the evidence supplied to us by LucasFilm.

Which leads to the whole problem proposed by the thread starter. What do we do when we have two levels of canon on equal footing that apparently contradict?

AOTC and ANH are both supplied to us by LucasFilm. Is it the job of LucasBooks (a lower source of canon) to supply the harmonizing answer (even if past efforts by its authors are also contradictory)?

[Kurgan]

In the last debate I participated in on this topic of the Republic's age, two sides were possessed by the spirt of William Jefferson Clinton.

On the one hand you have idiots (like me) who said that when Obi-Wan said "for a thousand generations" it depends on what the definition of "generations" is.

On the other side, you had people who said, that when Palpatine says "this Republic, which has stood for 1,000 years" it depends on what the definition of "this" is.

Get it? We're both nitpicking words said by characters. The reason this is even an issue is because the EU assumes that Obi-Wan's statement is literally true (ie: 25 years for a generation, so 25,000+ year old Republic), but then Lucas makes AOTC (another canon film source, which is higher than any EU book or comic) which flat out contradicts both the film and the established literature.

[Kurgan]

The EU authors can't really be faulted, because Lucas obviously didn't tell them he was planning to have Palpy say something like that in an upcoming film.

[His Divine Shadow]

Well, the non canonical answer is either 1) Lucas is an idiot and forgot his own story. 2) Lucas changed his mind and changed his story.

3) Lucas meant it to be hyperbole, or he had knowledge about the war a thousand years ago thing.

It's extremely hard to think Lucas wanted to change it given that he'd been involved not long ago in making an actual time line in support of the 25k figure.

Which leads to the whole problem proposed by the thread starter. What do we do when we have two levels of canon on equal footing that apparently contradict?

Look for a third source that might clear it out, as was done here, if there is no such third source, favor the source which is supported by the majority of evidence, both canon and lower ranking sources.
In this case the Obi-Wan, then make up some rationalization for the other source so that it might fit as well.