Noted science-fiction author David Brin has some interesting things to say about Star Wars: Episode II in terms of dramatic technique and plot holes. However, one thing he mentions in his addendum to the original article caught my eye:
George Lucas’s version of romanticism is obsessed with nostalgia, feudalism, pyramid-shaped social orders, elitism, a hatred of science and the concept that only genetically advanced demigods matter. He openly avows to never having researched what real heroes do. He also expressed open contempt for this democratic civilization, telling the New York Times that he prefers a ‘benign dictatorship.’
His silly Yoda-philosophy was bearable in Empire Strikes Back (ESB), where it seemed a mild pseudo-eastern wisdom. Indeed, ESB conveyed something true — getting angry CAN cloud your judgement. Calm can help a hero stay effective.
But then ROTJ and TPM went much farther, spreading an outright lie that tipped over into madness, claiming the following… that the mere act of getting angry AT evil will TURN you evil!
So, all the men who got mad at Adolf Hitler ran right out and joined the Nazi Party, right? Find one example where that happened. Even one. Yet, dig it, that IS what Lucasian force-dogma predicts.
Here we have a very good counter to the liberal orthodoxy that violence and war is inherently evil. (After all, George Lucas is a rather typical Southern California liberal in many ways.) It isn’t – there are times when resistance to evil and anger at evil is anything but unproductive. No one can be faulted for being angry at al-Qaeda for killing 3000 Americans on September 11 – and no one should be faulted for demanding that such evil is destroyed utterly before it has the chance to strike again.
Ah, there Mr. Brin goes again, trying to strike down Star Wars…
Well, admittedly, I like fantasy better than science fiction. Why? How many sci-fi characters can I name off the top of my head, in contrast to fantasy characters? For balance, I won’t use characters from movies or TV shows (including those which were books before they were movies, such as LotR). I’ve read equal amounts of both types of fiction, so, in theory, this should be a dead heat, right?
Well, let’s see:
Sci-Fi: Hiro Protagonist, Y.T., John Percival Hackworth, Rav3n, Nell, Dr. X, Emilio Sandoz, Sofia Mendes, Supaari va Gayjur, Hlavin Kitheri, Jherik Carnelian, Emilia Underwood.
Fantasy: Raistlin Majere, Caramon Majere, Tika Waylan, Sturm Brightblade, Kitiara uth Matar, General Verminaard, Rand al’Thor, Egwene Al’vere, Moiraine Damodred, al’Lan Mandragoran, Siuan Sanche, Matrim Cauthon, Perrin Ayabara, Elayne Trakand, Ba’alzaamon, Lanfear, Asmodean, Ishamael, Drizz’t Do’Urden, Elminster, Catie Brie, Bruenor Battlehammer, Elric of Melnibone, Erekose, Mordenkainen, Urza, Mishra, Gerard Capashen… do I need to continue the drubbing?
Fantasy is about people and their concerns- which are often drown out in sci fi. It’s the sci fi writers who either write fantasy as well (Moorcock), have a stylistic mastery that allows them to create extremely well-built, memorable characters (Stevenson), or cross-over into mainstream fiction (Russell), who can pull off character drama. Niven’s characters are cardboard cutouts- same with Vinge’s, and Brin’s. These hard sci-fi authors can make us think- but they can’t make me care.