I Will Not Go Quietly!

The Doctor wrote: James Lee wrote: ^ you mean that didn't occur to you the first time you saw the films? I thought Lucas & co. were pretty heavy-handed about the social commentary. It was almost too pointedly relevant. Actually, Lucas has emphatically stated that the rise of Palpatine is in no way intended to be a social commentary on the political situation in the U.S.  One only needs to look at the timeline of the films to realize that this is true.  First, the entire story for the prequel trilogy was drafted in the mid 90's, long before the world ever heard of W.  The first movie, The Phantom Menace came out in 1999.  The second movie, Attack of the Clones, came out in 2002; however, scripting was done on AotC in early 2001.  These were the two movies where Palpatine did most of his scheming.  The third movie, which was scripted and filmed after W's first election (appointment), deals more with Anakin's fall and the fruition of Palpatine's scheming.  So by a simple analysis of the timeline of the prequel trilogy, one can see that there was no way Lucas could have intended this as a social commentary on the Bush administration.  Of course, you are free to draw your own parallels if you wish.

"Lucas, responding to a question from the Sun at a Cannes Film Festival press conference, said he first wrote the framework of Star Wars in 1971 when reacting to then U.S. President Richard Nixon and the on-going events of the Vietnam War. But the story still has relevance today, he said, and is part of a pattern he has noticed in his readings of history.

" 'I didn't think it was going to get quite this close,' he said of the parallels between the Nixon era and the current Bush presidency, which has been sacrificing freedoms in the interests of national security. 'It is just one of those re-occurring things. I hope this doesn't come true in our country. Maybe the film will awaken people to the situation of how dangerous it is.' "

David Germain writes for the Associated Press: "Lucas never mentioned the president by name but was eager to speak his mind on U.S. policy in Iraq, careful again to note that he created the story long before the Bush-led occupation there.

" 'When I wrote it, Iraq didn't exist,' Lucas said, laughing.

" 'We were just funding Saddam Hussein and giving him weapons of mass destruction. We didn't think of him as an enemy at that time. We were going after Iran and using him as our surrogate, just as we were doing in Vietnam . . . The parallels between what we did in Vietnam and what we're doing in Iraq now are unbelievable.' "

Lucas said he has long been interested in the transition from democracy to dictatorship.

"In ancient Rome, 'why did the senate, after killing Caesar, turn around and give the government to his nephew?' Lucas said. 'Why did France, after they got rid of the king and that whole system, turn around and give it to Napoleon? It's the same thing with Germany and Hitler.'

" 'You sort of see these recurring themes where a democracy turns itself into a dictatorship, and it always seems to happen kind of in the same way, with the same kinds of issues, and threats from the outside, needing more control. A democratic body, a senate, not being able to function properly because everybody's squabbling, there's corruption.' "

Well, Doc, 'if the shoe fits...' (and Lucas has plainly affirmed that it does), does it matter that it wasn't specifically written about Bush? Which, by the way, was not my claim to begin with...but it would take some serious self-imposed blindness not to 'draw a parallel' in this case.

James Lee wrote: The Doctor wrote: James Lee wrote: ^ you mean that didn't occur to you the first time you saw the films? I thought Lucas & co. were pretty heavy-handed about the social commentary. It was almost too pointedly relevant. Actually, Lucas has emphatically stated that the rise of Palpatine is in no way intended to be a social commentary on the political situation in the U.S.  One only needs to look at the timeline of the films to realize that this is true.  First, the entire story for the prequel trilogy was drafted in the mid 90's, long before the world ever heard of W.  The first movie, The Phantom Menace came out in 1999.  The second movie, Attack of the Clones, came out in 2002; however, scripting was done on AotC in early 2001.  These were the two movies where Palpatine did most of his scheming.  The third movie, which was scripted and filmed after W's first election (appointment), deals more with Anakin's fall and the fruition of Palpatine's scheming.  So by a simple analysis of the timeline of the prequel trilogy, one can see that there was no way Lucas could have intended this as a social commentary on the Bush administration.  Of course, you are free to draw your own parallels if you wish. <NITF>"Lucas, responding to a question from the Sun at a Cannes Film Festival press conference, said he first wrote the framework of Star Wars in 1971 when reacting to then U.S. President Richard Nixon and the on-going events of the Vietnam War. But the story still has relevance today, he said, and is part of a pattern he has noticed in his readings of history.</NITF> <NITF>" 'I didn't think it was going to get quite this close,' he said of the parallels between the Nixon era and the current Bush presidency, which has been sacrificing freedoms in the interests of national security. 'It is just one of those re-occurring things. I hope this doesn't come true in our country. Maybe the film will awaken people to the situation of how dangerous it is.' "</NITF> <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=238 align=right><T> <T> <TR> <TD width=10></TD> <TD width=228></TD></TR></T></T></TABLE> <NITF>David Germain writes for the Associated Press: "Lucas never mentioned the president by name but was eager to speak his mind on U.S. policy in Iraq, careful again to note that he created the story long before the Bush-led occupation there.</NITF> <NITF>" 'When I wrote it, Iraq didn't exist,' Lucas said, laughing.</NITF> <NITF>" 'We were just funding Saddam Hussein and giving him weapons of mass destruction. We didn't think of him as an enemy at that time. We were going after Iran and using him as our surrogate, just as we were doing in Vietnam . . . The parallels between what we did in Vietnam and what we're doing in Iraq now are unbelievable.' "</NITF> <NITF>Lucas said he has long been interested in the transition from democracy to dictatorship.</NITF> <NITF>"In ancient Rome, 'why did the senate, after killing Caesar, turn around and give the government to his nephew?' Lucas said. 'Why did France, after they got rid of the king and that whole system, turn around and give it to Napoleon? It's the same thing with Germany and Hitler.'</NITF> <NITF>" 'You sort of see these recurring themes where a democracy turns itself into a dictatorship, and it always seems to happen kind of in the same way, with the same kinds of issues, and threats from the outside, needing more control. A democratic body, a senate, not being able to function properly because everybody's squabbling, there's corruption.' "</NITF> <NITF>Well, Doc, 'if the shoe fits...' (and Lucas has plainly affirmed that it does), does it matter that it wasn't specifically written about Bush? Which, by the way, was not my claim to begin with...but it would take some serious self-imposed blindness not to 'draw a parallel' in this case.</NITF>

Well James.  First let me say that your initial post ("I thought Lucas & Co. were pretty heavy-handed about the social commentary") seemed to imply that you thought that Lucas had intended the prequels to be a commentary on the Bush administration.

Second, I have been accused, not necessarily in so many words, of jumping at shadows with my stance on Muslims.  I think that the ultra-left could be accused of the same thing.  Except where my shadows consist of swarthy men with mustaches, their shadows consist of rich white men in suits (I guess that's the more politically correct option).  To parallel something someone said to me (I think it was Syzygy) the rich white men of America are not out to get you.  True, that just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that someone isn't following you, but it also doesn't mean that they are.

Yes, the prequels were based on the fall of democracy into dictatorship, and Lucas looked to the historical precedents of the Roman Empire and Nazi Germany for inspiration; however, first and foremost Star Wars is entertainment, and I think you are reading far too much into it to suit your own liberal agenda.  Finally, you give Bush far too much credit.  He is not nearly intelligent enough to mastermind some hideous plot to overthrow democracy in America.  I may not have much respect for Bush, but he's no Sith Lord.  Now if I ever witness him shooting lightning bolts out of his fingertips, perhaps then I will agree with you.  Of course, if that ever happens, I would become a Bush supporter, because that would just be way cool.

The Doctor wrote: As to your question about the "innocent" Iraqis killed in the war, I have a question for you.  Why would you ask a question you already know the answer to?

So that's a "No" then,is it?

Your placing of " " around "innocent" is very worrying......

Sure there's still racism here, but it's not just confined to the South. And it's not on the massive systematic level it used to be.