Up until now, most scholars have taken it for granted that the Star Wars saga came from a single source. Tradition has always held that one man, George Lucas, wrote the Star Wars movies. People for nearly a millennium (according to the popularly held theory that the corpus was filmed sometime in the late 20th to early 21st centuries) have viewed the films from episode I, The Phantom Menace, through episode VI, Return of the Jedi, and considered it a coherent body. In fact, the very term "sextateuch" refers to the six episodes as being the main work of George Lucas, with the Indiana Jones being a separate body written by him, or perhaps a "Pseudo-Lucas," or a follower of Lucas. It is my contention, however, that if we view the movies from the Historical-Critical method, we realize that they are not one coherent body.
As currently understood, the movies go something like this: Episode I chronicles the story of how boy Anakin Skywalker started his jedi training. In Episode II we find Anakin well into his training and the Clone Wars begins. Episode III concludes the Clone Wars, and Anakin first becomes a jedi master, then a sith lord and the Old Republic becomes the Galactic Empire. Episode IV finishes the tale of Obi-Wan Kenobi, Anakin's mentor who dies at his hand, and the story of how Luke Skywalker, Anakin's son, helps a guerilla faction of rebels to fight against the Galactic Empire. In Episode V, Luke begins training as a jedi, has a duel with his father, and many of the rebel leaders go into hiding. Episode VI concludes the story with the rebels regaining their strength, defeating the Galactic Empire and Luke defeats his father, but not before his father is able to return to the good. This is a very crass and basic summary of what would take a person the better part of a day to watch.
I believe that the films are now viewed as a comprehensive whole, but my research and scholarship suggests that this was not the way many of them were intended to be made. Consider the following: Episodes I-III chronicle the rapid ascent to power and fall of Anakin Skywalker, but Episodes IV-VI focus primarily on Luke Skywalker and the rebel alliance with the name "Anakin Skywalker" rarely mentioned. This basic distinction led me to suspect that the first three episodes were not written at the same time as the last three. The following explanation will help elucidate my point, I hope.
Many of the planets mentioned in the first three movies are never mentioned again in the last three. For example, Naboo, Coruscant, Mustafar and Kashyyyk all play prominent roles in the first three movies but the action in IV-VI takes place on Tatooine, Yavin IV, Hoth, Bespin, Tatooine again and Endor. Naboo and Coruscant play important parts in the first three movies, being featured in all three of them, but the only planet that remains intact through the series is Tatooine, the birthplace of Anakin Skywalker and the home of the young Luke Skywalker. One has to wonder why the planet Coruscant, so significant in the first three is absolutely absent in the last three.
This information, tied with the fact that the emperor makes his throne the death star, and not the capital of Coruscant in the last movies suggests that they were actually written first, and the importance of Coruscant was a later redaction. This supports the odd fact that other scholars have pointed out in that the story of Luke focuses on a period of probably no more than five years, all from his late teen to mid-twenties. The story of Anakin, however, starts from when he's a prepubescent boy and stretches across a longer gap till he is in his mid-twenties. It also explains why the narrative action is so different--The Phantom Menace through Revenge of the Sith shows the rise and fall of Anakin, while A New Hope through Return of the Jedi shows only the rise of Luke. Furthermore, the setting of I-III is a galactic republic, torn by inner-strife while IV-VI suggests none of the old struggle and only presents a polemic against the empire.
It is also worthy of note to see the incredible gap of time between episodes III and IV. The end of Revenge of the Sith is the birth of Luke and Leia and A New Hope begins while Luke is in his late teens. This constitutes the biggest time gap between episodes and suggests that that they were not originally written together.
It may be argued that since A New Hope, Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi inclusively are explicitly subtitled Episode IV, Episode V, and Episode VI respectively that these titles must have been written after the first three. The argument here is that nobody would rationally begin a story midway through. This is a very reasonable objection. My response is that there are two possible explanations that hold true to my theory. Either the subtitles "Episode (number)" were inserted at a later date by a redactor or else there was an original first trilogy that was somehow lost and replaced by the the versions we know today. This seems suspect since most people agree that George Lucas was the writer of the entire sextateuch and that the first three are just as much his as the last three. This leads me to my next point.
Scholars in the field of Indiana Jones research are divided about the authorship of the films. Some argue that the same Lucas who directed Star Wars also directed Indiana Jones. Others argue that it was a student of his, or that both were written by students in the school of Lucas. However, recently many scholars have returned to the argument that it is the same director. There is up-and-coming scholarship, however, that argues that only the first three were directed by Lucas and that the fourth was directed by a student of Lucas'. The argument for this lies in the fact that the narrative is radically different than the original three. A lengthy discussion on Indiana Jones' exegesis would take to long, but suffice to say that Indiana Jones movies have a different female love interest, a different terrestrial (usually Biblical) artifact and generally involve NAZIs. The fourth film features the return of one of the women, Soviets, and an extra-terrestrial artifact as well as poorly written comedic elements and far-fetched supernatural experiences. Some scholars have also argued that Temple of Doom was written by a different director, but rather for the sake of this paper we will side with those who argue that only the fourth is of foreign origin.
Similarly, the first three movies Star Wars movies are not as true to narrative of the last three. To begin with, Phantom Menace contains a major character called "Jar-Jar Binks," a character whose importance is marginal and only serves as a foil for primitive humor. Additionally, the jedi in the last three movies are extremely concerned about discipline and caution while the jedi in the first three seem foolhardy and rash, often rushing into traps and lacking the foresight that Luke would eventually have as well as Obi-Wan Kenobi and Yoda. Similarly, the love story between Han and Leia is one that slowly blossoms and presents their love as lasting while the love story between Anakin and Padme is based on passion and seems fleeting. Finally, we are given a much different view of evil between the two trilogies. In the first trilogy, evil is confusing, marginal and seen as almost a myth. In the last trilogy, evil is the dominating power of the universe and good is the underdog power rising up from the depths. In this way, the story in the first three episodes suggests it was written as a sort of preemptive warning against the dangers of the wrong use of power while the last three seem to have been written as a sort of polemic against the reigning power, a call to revolution, as it were. Thus, based on the differences of characters, tones, moods, themes and even genres, I contend that they were written by different directors.
This explains, then, why there are incongruities within the narrative. For example, in A New Hope and the proceeding episodes, characters frequently refer to Darth Vader's genocidal campaign against the jedi, in which her personally killed them all off. However, in Revenge of the Sith we see Anakin, not yet Darth Vader formally, kill only a few jedi, with the majority of them slaughtered by mere clone troopers. Additionally, Padme, who is a central figure in the first three and the object of obsession for Anakin Skywalker is never mentioned, even in passing, in the last three films. Additionally, at the end of Revenge of the Sith, all trace of Darth Vader's former life is erased from public memory, including the android C-3PO's memory bank and several high ranking officials are sworn to secrecy. However, the characters R2-D2 and Chewbacca, important characters in the first three movies are not sworn to secrecy or in any other way forbidden from sharing knowledge yet seem absolutely clueless about the reality of the Darth Vader and the rise of the Galactic Empire. Some scholars have suggested that they function as secret agents, but considering this is never implied in the films it seems mostly to be an attempt to make sense of the incongruities.
Finally, it is my argument that the first three episodes were written to provide a background for the last three. The last three movies can function independently as a narrative, though the existence of the Galactic Empire and how Darth Vader is Luke's father is obscured in the details. The first three films may almost comprise a whole, however, Episode III makes most sense when viewed in relation to the greater corpus of the work. Thus, it is my contention that Episode III is primarily a narrative bridge, explaining how Anakin Skywalker, who was a rising jedi knight, became a powerful sith lord, had children, and became enclosed in his body-armor suit, as well as how the Old Republic became the Galactic Empire, how the jedi were exterminated, and how Padme died. In short, Episode III only serves to explain how Episode II transitions into Episode IV. For this reason, and I believe this is where my point is strongest, I believe that the latter 3 episodes were the original creation and the first three were written at a later point with the climax of Episode III serving only as a narrative device to join the two narratives.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I pray that my scholarship into Star Wars exegesis proves at least interesting to you. Many today wonder why we should care about a series of movies from 1000 years ago that claim to bet chronicling events even older than that, however, I feel that Star Wars is still applicable today. I hope that my research will only prompt others to follow-up on this to help explain the mystery of this corpus.
No comments:
Post a Comment