Ugh. The "birth" of the reader does not require the "death" of the author. The author's intentions are a legitimate part of considering a work, and when the reader's interpretation of a work varies wildly from the author's intention, then one must look at why that is -- is the reader lacking context, did the author fail in his effort, etc -- and not simply dismiss the author as meaningless.

Effing postmodernism...

It just means that everyone will imagine and Read into it differently, based on individual imagination and references. . The author can't force that.

Not sure if you're aware of this or not, but the guy you're quoting flat-out said that once a work is finished, the author, his intent, his context, everything, is entirely meaningless.

So that means that whatever Roland Barthes believed is meaningless and we can reinterpret his quote however we feel like, right?

Well, some of us would disagree that it's fine for a movie too. I'm fairly forgiving of plot holes, depending on the nature and size of them. But when it's just so obviously contrived, then I get a little snippy about it.

I wouldn't have minded if they had, you know, investigated that Jedi connection. Made it a mystery subplot or something, to further uncover the Sith influence. But nah, they just, sort of ignored it.

I guess at the end of the day it's a kid's film. I didn't analyse it at 7, and even at 14 I remember just being a little sore that they reused the same ending as in the first film.

Lucas himself seems generally unhappy with the hardcore fans who analyse every little detail. He didn't put as much effort into it, so he doesn't think they should either.

As someone else stated elsewhere, his movies bend over backwards so the Jedi never have to make tough decisions.

Regarding a broader discussion, however, when trying to make sense of the hash that was made of the setting, it's vital to understand what Lucas was up to -- his 70's pop-syncretism, and his dedication to mythbuilding and spectacle at the expense of coherent worldbuilding, are key components of understanding where to start from and how to take the pieces we have and make them something internally coherent and consistent.

A fair point. I generally agree we should judge films and people in their correct context, time and place.

Just trying to make sense of SW as a whole, these details are important.

But in playing an RPG, none of that matters to me. I don't need midichlorians because he needed a harder-sci-fi explanation for a single scene.

Again, I think this comes down to the strictly passive role of someone watching a movie, and the active role of someone setting up a campaign in an RPG. Don't like gungans or ewoks? If you're playing an RPG, you don't have to include them.

On the first, my insistence on critically analyzing the OT movies' shortcomings as "moral tales" comes mainly from some other people's insistence on focusing so very deeply on the supposed "moral nature" of the OT movies. Of course, with the way that some people read a lot into the OT movies that's just not there, I'm actually engaged in critical analysis of the things they've inferred to be in the movies.

On the second, I think we largely agree.

Ugh. The "birth" of the reader does not require the "death" of the author. The author's intentions are a legitimate part of considering a work, and when the reader's interpretation of a work varies wildly from the author's intention, then one must look at why that is -- is the reader lacking context, did the author fail in his effort, etc -- and not simply dismiss the author as meaningless.

Effing postmodernism...

It just means that everyone will imagine and Read into it differently, based on individual imagination and references. . The author can't force that.

Not sure if you're aware of this or not, but the guy you're quoting flat-out said that once a work is finished, the author, his intent, his context, everything, is entirely meaningless.

So that means that whatever Roland Barthes believed is meaningless and we can reinterpret his quote however we feel like, right?

MY point was: Are droids alive? It is up to the reader(you, the gm, the player), even if the author (Lucas, Star Wars, the genre) says Something else.

I belive the genre means that droids are alive.

On the first, my insistence on critically analyzing the OT movies' shortcomings as "moral tales" comes mainly from some other people's insistence on focusing so very deeply on the supposed "moral nature" of the OT movies. Of course, with the way that some people read a lot into the OT movies that's just not there, I'm actually engaged in critical analysis of the things they've inferred to be in the movies.

On the second, I think we largely agree.

Yep, while the films are entertaining, and fairly deep for a kid's film in 1977, a lot of people see stuff that probably isn't there, and are inclined to give the movie characters a free pass.

We saw that in the 'morality' thread. I respect some people who hold that opinion, like Donovan, I just don't agree with it personally.

In episode 2 the battle droids that rolled off the assembly line seemed pretty self aware to me. Lots of "uh-oh", and such. Granted they're designed to be expendible soldiers so there's very little concept of self preservation, but they do have enough of a personality for me to assume that they would roll off the line with some self awareness.

Also, I consider droid brains to all be mechanical copies of a "developed" droid brain. As in the take a basic version, train it to walk, talk, fight, etc to their baseline standard. Then they essentially copy and mass produce it.

The thing is that B1 battle Droid had remote processors a central computer where the CPUs resided... I imagine that the central computers /Droid brains were active for some time and cycle through several Droid bodies as the expendable "hosts" are destroyed and they get assigned new ones, so calling newly activated Droids self aware from the get go based on B1 battle Droid is not in my opinion a strong argument

Wasn't that just for S1 though? I recall that, due to the massive defeat at Naboo, the CIS army switched to independent droids that had their own processors. That way they wouldn't loose complete armies if a ship was destroyed.

If they did that's news to me, and IIRC the beginner box adventure (or follow up adventure) says something about Teemo modifying the design to use independent processor to prevent that

They did. It eliminated the major weakness of needing a command ship... If they hadn't following the Battle of Naboo, they'd have deserved the ass-kicking they got.

Looking on Wookieepedia I think that got wiped from EU canon into the legends category

Just watch clone wars - they're autonomous units in the series, despite the same externals.

Nothing i've seen in clone wars (the CGI series) indicates whether they have a built in processor or a remote processor... i've probably watched between a half and two thirds of the (CGI) series

Everything I’ve seen in TCW indicates that after the Battle of Naboo, each member of the droid army is a standalone unit, with no external processing. They may not have much brains or personality or capable of doing a great deal on their own, but they don’t just shut down if all remote connectivity is shut off. They’re about as standalone as C3P0 or R2-D2.

I may not remember every single episode, but I have seen all of them — both the early 2d cartoon version and the later 3-d version.

Nothing i've seen in clone wars (the CGI series) indicates whether they have a built in processor or a remote processor... i've probably watched between a half and two thirds of the (CGI) series

Everything I’ve seen in TCW indicates that after the Battle of Naboo, each member of the droid army is a standalone unit, with no external processing. They may not have much brains or personality or capable of doing a great deal on their own, but they don’t just shut down if all remote connectivity is shut off. They’re about as standalone as C3P0 or R2-D2.

I may not remember every single episode, but I have seen all of them — both the early 2d cartoon version and the later 3-d version.

That would at least explain the changes in behavior... the sort of subjective, first-person attitude and language that we start seeing in TCW, as opposed to in PT.

In episode 2 the battle droids that rolled off the assembly line seemed pretty self aware to me. Lots of "uh-oh", and such. Granted they're designed to be expendible soldiers so there's very little concept of self preservation, but they do have enough of a personality for me to assume that they would roll off the line with some self awareness.

Also, I consider droid brains to all be mechanical copies of a "developed" droid brain. As in the take a basic version, train it to walk, talk, fight, etc to their baseline standard. Then they essentially copy and mass produce it.

The thing is that B1 battle Droid had remote processors a central computer where the CPUs resided... I imagine that the central computers /Droid brains were active for some time and cycle through several Droid bodies as the expendable "hosts" are destroyed and they get assigned new ones, so calling newly activated Droids self aware from the get go based on B1 battle Droid is not in my opinion a strong argument

Wasn't that just for S1 though? I recall that, due to the massive defeat at Naboo, the CIS army switched to independent droids that had their own processors. That way they wouldn't loose complete armies if a ship was destroyed.

If they did that's news to me, and IIRC the beginner box adventure (or follow up adventure) says something about Teemo modifying the design to use independent processor to prevent that

They did. It eliminated the major weakness of needing a command ship... If they hadn't following the Battle of Naboo, they'd have deserved the ass-kicking they got.

Looking on Wookieepedia I think that got wiped from EU canon into the legends category

Just watch clone wars - they're autonomous units in the series, despite the same externals.

Nothing i've seen in clone wars (the CGI series) indicates whether they have a built in processor or a remote processor... i've probably watched between a half and two thirds of the (CGI) series

The battle droids even talk about it. I think in one of the battles with the Twileks: They see a destroyed battle droid and say that it was one of the older models controlled by a central processor not by their own like them, no wonder he got destroyed.

Droids are alive, it is just part of the genre. Like animal and human brains are highly advanced biolocical and computers, droids have highly advanced mechanical computers. Not that it even has to be explained that deep in this genre...

The Force disagrees with you.

The rules say the Force does NOT ignore them. They can use it, if only in the form of Destiny Points. It's more correct to say, "Even the force considers them substandard"... And the Force can be used upon droids, too...

Droids are alive, it is just part of the genre. Like animal and human brains are highly advanced biolocical and computers, droids have highly advanced mechanical computers. Not that it even has to be explained that deep in this genre...

The Force disagrees with you.

The rules say the Force does NOT ignore them. They can use it, if only in the form of Destiny Points. It's more correct to say, "Even the force considers them substandard"... And the Force can be used upon droids, too...

When the Force specifies "living being" as a target, then it excludes Droids.

Despite my recent thread on superweapons, I've been thinking I should think a little smaller, and just focus on the Droid Rights militia they introduce in Debts to Pay. I figure droids attempting to take over the Outer Rim, enslaving and killing the organic populace is a pretty big deal.

The Silentium would not like that idea of military conquest by droids. ;-)

They did. It eliminated the major weakness of needing a command ship... If they hadn't following the Battle of Naboo, they'd have deserved the ass-kicking they got.

But they seem to forgot to adjust the programming. The droids still act as if their survival is independent of their body and realize otherwise in very rare cases only. Though it kind of makes sense if you transfer the basic programming from the concept of HQ ships with powerful droidcores to incredible cheap and cpu limited cores in the drone bodies. In general getting these quirks and self-awareness seems to be a central parts of droid brains. Those things develop them if you keep them running for a longer-time.

Droids are alive, it is just part of the genre. Like animal and human brains are highly advanced biolocical and computers, droids have highly advanced mechanical computers. Not that it even has to be explained that deep in this genre...

The Force disagrees with you.

The rules say the Force does NOT ignore them. They can use it, if only in the form of Destiny Points. It's more correct to say, "Even the force considers them substandard"... And the Force can be used upon droids, too...

When the Force specifies "living being" as a target, then it excludes Droids.

In that context, it of course means biological life and beings. In that sense, trees and plants are more alive than droids. In the sense that droids think and feel, that they have computers for brains and that our biological brains are baically advanced computers, they are very much more alive than trees. This is Science Fantasy and Space Opera, this is Star Wars. Of course droids are alive and sentient. It`s a genre trope and the narrative logic of the fiction.

Stop bringing the real world, physics or even hard science fiction into this.