Orcs, Droids and Clones

[4thofeleven]

Continuing my infrequent rants about things I’m sick of seeing in stories…

Inhuman enemies. Now, I don’t mean just non-human enemies; they’re cool. I mean the sort of enemies that are carefully designed so there can be no possible moral issues about Our Heroes killing them en masse. Maybe they’re robots. Maybe they’re zombies. Maybe they’ve got a hive mind. Maybe they’re just instinctively aggressive. Either way, they’re there to a, pose a threat and b, then get killed.

Now, if the genre is, say, a zombie story, that’s fine – you don’t want the audience distracted from the protagonist by speculating about the culture of the zombies or what their greater goals are. They’re there, there’s lots of them, they’re going to eat your face. The problem is when they start wandering into other genres, where slightly more nuanced antagonists would probably serve the story better.

I’ve always felt they’re kind of a cheat, for starters. The author has a story where the hero kills lots of baddies, doesn’t want to deal with the possible moral issues, and so makes them into orcs. Or demons. Or zombies. Or zerglings. Or clones. And the problem is this tends not to actually improve the story much. If you introduce these sorts of enemies, well, your villains are now a lot less interesting; you can’t do a ‘hero and villain have to ally against a greater threat’ story. You can’t do a ‘misguided yet sympathetic villain’ story. You can’t do stories about negotiations or peace treaties or defectors or intrigue. And you haven’t really gained anything – if your Orcs or whatever are invading or pillaging or otherwise causing harm to the heroes, it doesn’t really matter if there’s peaceful Orc nations on the other side of the world or if they’re all born evil; the ones the heroes are facing are a threat, and there really aren’t many moral issues in killing them.

Star Trek: Deep Space Nine has a race of aliens called the Jem’hadar. They’re genetically engineered soldiers, created to be unquestionably loyal to their masters, the Dominion. They’re instinctively violent killers, created purely for warfare – and as a result, they’re not that interesting. There are really no stories you can tell about Jem’hadar that you can’t tell with a regular militaristic alien like a Klingon – and there’s plenty of Klingon stories you can’t tell with Jem’hadar. And once you’ve said that the Dominion army consists entirely of Jem’hadar, you can’t tell stories about the sort of people that would fight for the Dominion anymore, or how they reconcile their job as brutal enforcers of an evil empire with their civilian lives. Nope, they’re specially created monsters with no lives or goals outside of making our hero’s lives difficult.

Or take the Star Wars prequels and their reliance on droids as enemies. The Separatist armies aren’t made up of idealistic if misguided revolutionaries. Nah, judging by the movies, the entire separatist cause consists of a dozen businessmen and a Trade Federation brand Build Your Own Army kit. Now you might say, ‘Well, you can’t have the Jedi hacking their way through people just because they’re on the wrong side’ – well, sure, there’s a lot less moral issues in having robots as the enemies, but, you know, the moral issues should be the point – or, at least be an option, not rendered completely impossible to even consider.

Now, alright, maybe I’m being a little unfair. If you’ve got a story where the baddies are just there to serve as nameless extras, it doesn’t really matter who they are or if they do anything outside of combat. Still, it strikes me that the setting as a whole suffers a little. I mean, I know from a narrative point of view neither Stormtrooper #8 nor Battledroid #00823 is going to suddenly decided to cast his lot in with the heroes and turn against his superiors – no, they’re going fire ineffectually at the heroes and then get shot or cut in half. But I don’t think the *characters* should know that’s all their enemies exist for… That’s why I get into arguments with anyone who claims the Stormtroopers in the OT are clones.*

Of course, that leads into the second big problem with Inhuman Enemies – The Inhuman Enemy who Isn’t. This is where we get told by the author that the enemies aren’t real people and it’s perfectly alright to kill them, maim them, torture them, or set them on fire – despite the fact that other than the author’s assurances, there’s nothing to distinguish them from regular people. I see this one a lot in vampire stories, where the author insists that vampires aren’t alive, so it’s OK to kill them, even though they’re behaving and talking exactly the same as anyone else. Or you get robots that are clearly self-aware and have their own personalities, except we’re apparently meant to still think they’re somehow not entirely on the same level as meatbags humans. The Star Wars EU has a particularly bad case of this, where R2-D2 is clearly considered a ‘person’, while generic astromech units are considered only tools. There’s a particularly annoying bit in one of the X-Wing novels, where Wedge casually memory wipes his astromech because he doesn’t like its personality, yet somehow he’s still meant to remain a sympathetic protagonist…

And then there’s the Clonetroopers**. Are they meant to be read as people, or not? Because if they’re people, then the Jedi are leading a slave army into battle. Now that sounds wrong, and probably isn’t how we’re meant to interpret things – but clones aren’t robots or zombies, they’re the same as regular people… hell, that’s the point! But Yoda and Mace Windu’s big concern is “The Chancellor has accumulated too much power” and not “The entire Republic and the Jedi Order is complicit in a massive violation of human rights.”, so I guess we are meant to consider the Clonetroopers closer to battle droids than to people…

And that’s why I dislike the Inhuman Enemy concept – if you do it right, you’re still not adding anything to your story. And if you screw it up, and don’t think it through or set it up properly, then you end up with a really weird scenario, where the reader is forced to accept that certain characters are inherently less than human, in spite of their being no real evidence within the story to support that.

There’s evil people, you know – and there’s plenty of regular people who still fought for evil regimes and committed atrocities. Write about them, and stop trying to create morally pure warfare, where one side is irredeemably evil unsullied by the hint of good…

 

* Well, that, and that it doesn’t make sense to refer to a conflict as “The Clone Wars” if most of your military still consists of clones – be like referring to WW2 as “The Infantry War”…

** Seriously, I don’t bring up the SW prequels every time I talk about flaws in stories because I hate them or enjoy ragging on them – it’s just most people on my friends list is familiar with them, so they make good examples. It’s easier to talk about these things when everyone knows the same stories being talked about – Shaka, when the walls fell.

Comments

[fialleril.livejournal.com]

Lots of good points here. :) I'll just comment on one thing:

Are they meant to be read as people, or not? Because if they’re people, then the Jedi are leading a slave army into battle. Now that sounds wrong, and probably isn’t how we’re meant to interpret things – but clones aren’t robots or zombies, they’re the same as regular people… hell, that’s the point! But Yoda and Mace Windu’s big concern is “The Chancellor has accumulated too much power” and not “The entire Republic and the Jedi Order is complicit in a massive violation of human rights.”, so I guess we are meant to consider the Clonetroopers closer to battle droids than to people…

I've always thought, actually, that the clones and the Jedi are meant to be considered as parallels to each other. The clones (and specifically the clone children) are first introduced in AOTC, and to Obi-Wan. This is only moments (in film time) after the Jedi children are first introduced, again, to Obi-Wan. And in both scenes we see essentially the same thing happening: a group of children is being trained to use the weapon that will later define them. *cough*This weapon is your life.*cough*

So, maybe this is just me reading too much into things, but I think there might actually be something to that "the Jedi are implicit in a massive human rights violation" theory.

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

I hope you don't mind the intrusion and the debate. Please feel free to ignore me, if you don't wish to discuss the issue.

I don't think the clones and the Jedi parallel each other at all--that's a rather odd and canon-inconsistent view. The Jedi and the Sith parallel each other (though in a dichotomy). The Jedi children and the clone children are depicted in completely dissimilar ways in AotC. For example, the Jedi children are practicing what are presumably katas (as you'll recall in ANH, Luke practices with his lightsaber not to fight, but to defend and learn how to contact the Force), and the Jedi children both talk and think on their own, as well as bring up a point the adults could not. The clone children simply do as they're told in their brief scene (which is completely visually dissimilar to the scene with the Jedi children), and they don't speak at all.

If anything, Lucas is showing the Jedi children can think for themselves while the clone children can't. Just because the scenes show children doesn't mean they're the same thing. I know you're very fond of maligning of the Jedi, and they certainly deserve their share of criticism (though the Republic as a whole deserves more), but I think your bias might be skewering your perception here. Remember that film is a visual medium, and you have to pay attention to visual similarities, too. Lucas is recalling Obi-Wan training Luke on ANH with the Jedi children training in AotC and also showing how Yoda trains the little younglings so we understand that he did train Obi-Wan before Qui-Gon came along.

So, maybe this is just me reading too much into things, but I think there might actually be something to that "the Jedi are implicit in a massive human rights violation" theory.

I don't believe it's a case of reading too much into things, but simply a case where the dots don't connect. It's an interesting idea, and you could always try to make it work in fic, but the symbology doesn't line up at all in a canon reading between the Jedi children and the clone children. Besides, in the massive human rights violation area, the entire Republic is to blame, not just the Jedi. However, this massive rights violation is also presumably unintentional, especially since Lucas never paid it any mind or even talked about it (to my knowledge). Lucas displays no sympathy towards the clones, nor do any of his heroes or villains. A lot of the ethical problems that arise from the Jedi are usually due to him not really understanding how other people see things differently, not to mention him either not fully understanding or not explicating the thinking behind the Eastern religions he so liberally borrowed from. And we're left trying to rectify the Jedi's ethical issues with how he clearly depicts them as heroes in both reference, visually, and symbology. Which is why I think of them as flawed heroes, blind to their own problems, as many people are. Lucas unintentionally made them more realistic.


ETA: Corrections. (I promise to leave the post alone now! ;))
ETA2: I lied, but now I really promise to leave it alone. I type so fast in comments that I make a few grammatical errors. XD I will X this window out now, and if something made no sense, I beg forgiveness.

[sodzilla.livejournal.com]

One small point because I don't have time for a whole reply - they expect me to go to work around here!

There ARE some displays of sympathy toward the clones, or that's how I've interpreted them. I don't know how much of the body of SW stuff you personally consider canon so I won't bring up anything from the EU, but it's a fact that by RotS the clones have names (Cody and Oddball for ex.) and are treated more like people by their Jedi commanders.

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

Eh, I consider the EU optional. I'm sure they have dealt with it differently, but I'm speaking of the films, primarily.

I don't consider names an act of sympathy, personally. It's a bit of human development, but nothing is really done with this since we don't even see the clones having normal conversations or doing anything but working. People may call them by their names, even joke with them, but it's usually just part of giving orders and no one ever seems upset when a clone dies, nor do they try to protect them, which is why I say there's no real acts of sympathy. At least in the films.

[(Anonymous)]

Then again, when do we see ANYONE in the films doing much of anything except fighting? Out of all the Jedi we do see on screen, only about half a dozen ever TALK. Obi-Wan, Anakin, Qui-Gon, Yoda, Mace, and I think Ki-Adi-Mundi (guy with pointy head) has a couple of throwaway lines.

By your reasoning, there's no reason to suppose anyone in-universe gave a damn about Plo Koon or Aayla Secura for example, because all we ever see them do is fight and then get gunned down during Order 66.

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

Fair enough, but I'm not speaking of the characters in the universe. It is logical to assume there was some compassion and friendship at some point, especially from Anakin--though it had limits, as their deaths are quickly forgotten. I'm speaking of the storyline itself--the story of the films is not designed to produce much sympathy for the clones (the opening of RotS may be considered one), nor to deal with any of the ethical issues surrounding their creation and use. The storyline itself does not build them as human characters, but as cannon fodder. The closest you get to sympathy for their deaths has little do with them--most of it is a reaction shot of Anakin's discomfort with abandoning his team. The narrative marginalizes them.

And furthermore, to follow your line of reasoning, we are made to sympathize with the death of Plo Koon and Aayla Secura through the narrative. As Jedi, a prominent group, it is natural to assume people cared about them.

You can assume that some Jedi had sympathy for the clones, but canon proves this sympathy is rather limited, and since canon fails to show us much of anything, there's rather a lot of assumptions to be made, and they can go either way with a marginalized group like the clone troopers.


ETA: Again with the typos. Sorry for the corrections.

[4thofeleven.livejournal.com]

It's weird, because Lucas clearly can write stories where the audience is invited to sympathise or identify with the minor characters - look at the rebel pilots in ANH, or even the imperial officers in ESB - and there is an effort in RotS to use Commander Cody to give the clones a bit of personality... except then he's pretty much used only to emphasis that the clones have no problems stabbing the Jedi in the back. (Which, of course, then only raises more issues, like whether the clones have any real free will, or if they were more programmed than trained...)

D'ya think Lucas realised the mess he'd end up unleashing when he idly decided to call the conflict old Ben Kenobi once fought in "The Clone Wars"? *grin*

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

Oh, very true. Lucas knows how to create sympathetic shots for minor characters, as you said. He's a skilled filmmaker. The fact that he, at best, only gives the clones a touch of personality, but fails to sympathize with them through the medium of film, is fascinating--he himself thinks of them as little more than the tools the Kamino suggested they were.

Poor Lucas. I think if he saw half the debates that go on in fandom, he'd be all "O.o Holy Crap, Coppola was right!" XD

[sodzilla.livejournal.com]

Well, the canon you acknowledge proves that in your opinion the sympathy is limited. I still maintain that as far as I can see, the vast majority of the Jedi treated the clones as a superior officer should treat soldiers under their command - which doesn't necessarily involve much bonding with individual soldiers, or taking time out from the mission to get upset when a soldier is killed in line of duty.

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

Well, the canon you acknowledge proves that in your opinion the sympathy is limited.

? Your sentence is wonky here, but I'm thinking you're trying to say that only the film canon supports my point of view? That's exactly what I'm saying above. I never got much into the EU, so I can't speak about its themes. I am looking forward to Star Wars: The Clone Wars, which I'm sure will re-adjust my opinions (especially on the matter of the clones), since I'll be considering it as canon due to Lucas's involvement.

The Jedi did treat the clones as soldiers under their command, so I don't disagree with you, but that doesn't change the lack of sympathy in the narrative itself. And while your argument that superior officers don't have much time or opportunity to mourn their soldiers is perfectly valid, it still doesn't change the narrative doesn't provide the audience with a sympathetic look at the clones. I think you might be confusing my arguments against the narrative with arguments against the Jedi. I actually don't find the Jedi particularly out of line in their behavior with the clones, beyond the over-arching ethical problems of cloning and breeding people strictly for war--an ethical problem the entire Republic shoulders.

[sunnyskywalker]

I didn't see it as -- to paraphrase Stover here -- "This is the Jedi Order, right now." I saw the clones more as the shadows of the Jedi. Right now, yes, the Jedi younglings have some independent thought and individuality, and right now, they're mostly doing katas to develop focus. However, we know that the Jedi are increasingly having problems with dogmatism and flat-out suppressing emotion, and that they all have a sense that big trouble is coming and these kids might end up fighting earlier than is usual. Which apparently does happen with Ahsoka - that's one step down that road.

So the clones and the clone kids to me are more like a warning from the future, telling that Jedi that if they don't do something soon, this could be them.

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

I'm going to leave Ahsoka aside, since her canon isn't out yet, and I'm going to speak of the six films only. When TCW comes out, then we can meta/debate on what this means. ;)

At best, there's a contrast between clones and Jedi, but there's nothing in the story or the visual symmetry to suggest the clones are a warning for the Jedi's future (beyond the seeds of their own destruction). That's a rather random idea to draw--you might as well argue the Senate shadows the Jedi, or the Sand People shadow the Jedi, and the lists goes on. There's nothing in the narrative to support or disprove any of those notions. It's like arguing slash is canon. You could make it work in fic, but it's not canon. See what I mean?

Just because the Jedi are dogmatic and suppress emotions (well, that's arguable, because they are following an Eastern way of thought on emotions) doesn't mean they're clones or going to turn into clones. Those are entirely different problems. As I said before, the dots just don't connect in canon. Especially since if the clones were meant to shadow the Jedi or foretell their future, I doubt they would have been so marginalized in the storyline, as the Jedi were both narratively prominent and sympathetic characters. There's no symbology, no visual parallels, no dialogue suggestion of this.

The only reason I'm arguing against this point of view is because it's canon-inconsistent. If you want to make it work in a fic, you could try your hand at making it believable. Just don't confuse the fannish world you construct with the one Lucas constructed, is all I'm saying.

[sunnyskywalker]

Mm, I don't think you can actually say the clones and the Jedi are as randomly connected as the Sand People and the Jedi. Besides Anakin, the Jedi never have any contact at all with the Sand People. Ever.

The Jedi and the clones, on the other hand, are both inextricably bound up in similar (though not identical) roles as servants of the Republic under the command of the Senate. They are parallel organizations, in a way. A lot of this is contrast - the Jedi only fight sometimes, whereas the clones are created solely to fight, the Jedi have more free will than the clones, etc.

However, they're further linked in several ways. The Jedi become the generals of the clone army, making the clones effectively (though not in name) an auxiliary of the Jedi Order. Also, the clones were created in the first place at the command of Dooku, a former Jedi who was corrupted. Both these links suggest to me that there is a parallel here: Jedi who are slowly losing their way are willing to command a slave army from an unknown donor in an unjust war (which causes further decay), and a corrupt Jedi is the kind of person who would order the army in the first place.

These aren't visual parallels, but they're all entirely plot- and canon-based. I think it's enough to at least hint that this is a potential future for the Jedi.

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

You've supported your argument well, but I'm afraid it still looks like you're pulling strands out of thin air. The plot and the canon don't add up. Just because the Jedi order the clones around does not connect them beyond the seeds of their own destruction. Letting the clones in was like letting the wolf in sheep's clothing in. While they may work together, the plot does not connect them in any meaningful way beyond saving the Jedi in AotC to later kill them in RotS. The clone troopers' biggest part is when they kill the Jedi, in one of the most tragic moments of the saga. At the orders of a Sith Lord

Dooku was a Sith Lord when he created the clones, and the clones are Palpatine's tools, not the Jedi's. Everything you said highlights the parallelism between the Jedi with the Sith, not the clone troopers, especially since Dooku began as a Jedi. The Sith can command the clones, the Jedi lose control of them, the Sith create the clones and pin it on the Jedi, they create the clones to kill the Jedi. Your argument is feeding into my own. XD While you can read the occasional bit of contrast between Jedi and the clone troopers (and believe it or not, you could do the same with the Jedi and the Sand People, to illustrate my point further), that doesn't meant it's a narrative metaphor. And I think that's where you're losing me. Rather than simply connect a few scenes, you're trying to connect the whole story. I could accept a couple of scenes here and there of Jedi and clone trooper parallels, but not the entire story.

Also, remember the entire Republic has voted to use clone troopers. The use of them is not strictly a Jedi fault, and that's why your argument falls apart. You assume because the Jedi fight that they're only people in the war, and they're not. They're just the combatants. The Senate and specifically Palpatine are the warmongers.

Now, the clone army could parallel the Republic itself, then later the Rebel Alliance (in contrast). They serve Palpatine, believe/do as he tells them, are completely marginalized in the storyline, and degenerate under his rule (because Lucas has stated the stormtroopers are the clone troopers, which is another thing you're forgetting and it topples your argument since there's no connection between Jedi and stormtrooper in the OT). Later on, the Rebel Alliance completely opposes them, and despite being marginzalized, are actually shown with sympathy. I think you're better off with that argument--not so many problems with the logic, and its fits the overall plot.

The clone troopers as even a potential future for the Jedi has no canon support. Like I said, you could try to make this work in fandom or even the EU--but this requires a lot of narrative additions that the films don't have. The films just aren't telling that story.

My apologies if I'm too emphatic in here. It's no skin off my back if you still think Jedi and clones connect, but I'm arguing a point, and sometimes I get a bit carried away. If I stepped over any boundaries, feel free to tell me to step off.


ETA: Typing too fast again, sorry.

[sunnyskywalker]

you're trying to connect the whole story [...] remember the entire Republic has voted to use clone troopers [...] the clone army could parallel the Republic itself

Now here's where I think you're feeding into my argument. The Republic is the boss both the Jedi and Grand Army of the Republic serve, the thing that connects the two bodies in the first place. The Jedi take command of the clone army to serve the Republic. A large part of the trilogy is about the decline and fall of the Republic. The Jedi, the politicians, the populace, the clones -- everyone -- all follow the Republic government's lead together, and all are Palpatine's dupes together. They're all bound together in multiple ways under the "Republic goes downhill" plot.

Like the clones, the Jedi follow Palpatine's orders and march into battle. Both the clones and the Jedi are his military pawns, and it's all connected to the disintegration of the Republic. They start realizing they've been duped and resist in the end, which is a hopeful sign that they wouldn't end up like the clones (but then Anakin screwed things up, so we never got to see how it could have turned out), but it doesn't erase the fact that both organizations served as Palpatine's military arm together.

I don't think it's fair to blame the Sith for the whole thing, either. The Jedi actually had more choice than the clones, and they still chose war (and command over a slave army). Really, I think we're both right: the clones and the Sith are alternate paths a Jedi could end up on. They didn't, and might not have, but they had taken a few steps. They're like baby Anakin, really -- he had a few issues that made you go, "OMG get this kids some therapy stat!", but he was also basically a sweet kid who wanted to do the right thing. He didn't have to end up as the Sith in the black helmet. It was just one possibility. Anakin actually fills all three roles at different points, in a way -- Jedi, Sith, and slave/clone/Palpatine's tool.

Er, getting back on track... This is one thing I think Lucas actually succeeded in doing: he wanted to show a tapestry of the whole Republic going downhill, and most of the main organizations within the Republic reflect that in their own ways. The clones follow Palpatine blindly, the Jedi follow Palpatine for a while and then figure out something's wrong, the politicians are Loyalists until they rebel outright, and they all have their own flaws which include blindness in some form. They don't end up exactly the same way, but that's why I say the clones are one of the Jedi's shadows, not an exact representation. The clones turning on the Jedi is like a fight between brothers, one party following Palpatine's orders to eliminate the other, kind of like Anakin and Obi-Wan.

Sorry that's all a bit jumbled and long!

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

Well, while the Republic may be in charge of everything, it's completely nonsequitur to suggest that this means the Jedi and the clones parallel each other--especially since the Republic is, in turn, controlled by the Sith. I'm not feeding into your argument at all.

I do think the clones are a symbol of the Republic being Palpatine's pawns, but the Jedi are not his pawns. While manipulated, they still stand against him, and that's why he destroys them. I think this is the problem with your argument--you think Palpatine controls the Jedi, when he doesn't. He opposes them and seeks their destruction. Which is why he took control of the Republic and used it to gain power, just as he took contorl of the clone and use dit to destroy the Jedi.

The Sith are not the only ones at fault, but the primary ones at fault--the Jedi felt they couldn't leave the galaxy at the emrcy of the Sith, and I don't blame them for that. It's a pretty good reason to go to war, in fact. The Jedi were not corrupt, exactly, just flawed and in need of re-invigoration. I think this is why your argument is flawed--you're suggesting the Jedi are so bad that they would have turned into clones or Sith Lords. I don't think they doomed themselves--I think they blinded themselves to their doom. Dogma and tradition are not the same as brain-washing genetically-engineered soldiers--unless you want to make the argument that socialization in general is like brainwashing. But then once again, this supports my argument that the clones are a microcosm of the entire Republic--which does encompass the Jedi, but not the Jedi specifically.

The clones turning on the Jedi is like a fight between brothers, one party following Palpatine's orders to eliminate the other, kind of like Anakin and Obi-Wan.

Again, this doesn't work. A fight between brothers includes some sort of relationship and reluctance, even pain. The clones aren't even important during Order 66--they're just tools, extensions of Palpatine's desire to kill them (hence the showing of Palpatine's hologram). We're not shown any relationship between the Jedi and the clones beyond giving orders--a clear superior/inferior interaction, and we see no bonding aside from one weak joke Obi-Wan gives while giving orders.

I respect that you're able to work so hard on defending your thesis, and I give you an A+ for rhetoric, but the problem is that every evidence you provide for your thesis supports other arguments, not your own. We can't both be right, because the very act of making us both right damages your own thesis--either the clones parallel the Jedi or they don't. I argue they parallel the general populace of the Republic (manifested through the Senate), and later the Empire (whose counter-will manifests in the Rebel Alliance). I also notice you can't pull a single defense out of the OT--that's because there's nothing to pull from there, and if the clones really paralleled the Jedi, there would be connections between them there, too, and there aren't. It's simply not present in the canon narrative.

ETA: On reflection, I think I see where you're coming from. You're stacking a few assumptions I don't agree with, but I can see where it comes from now. (At first, it was so far out of left field for me, that I was all O.o at the suggestion.) I think my inherent problem is that while I see the Jedi as flawed and worthy of criticism, I still think they were a force for good in the galaxy. The tragedy of the prequels being, for me, is tha tthe forces of darkness close arund them, swallow them, and destroy them, and they were too blind and arrogant to see it. I don't see them as a malign force as you and a couple others do--I don't think the narrative supports that argument at all, but I can see where you draw the reaction from (for you, the negative outshadows the positive, etc.). This parellel that you're drawing from is a direct result of that belief, which is why it's so strange to me--it's an assumption stacked on an assumption, and diverges wildly from my own. But at least I see why you're arguing for it now.

[sunnyskywalker]

Ah, I think I see where I'm not explaining what I mean very well now. I'm not saying the Jedi definitely would head down those roads, just that their flaws are such that some of them could. That's why it's a shadow side, not a "this is them right now, all the time." They got a little more confused and violent during the Clone Wars, which could have led them down those roads - but they were starting to change before they got killed, which I think makes it all the more tragic. It's not necessary that the negative outweigh the positive for the parallel to work, just that the negatives that exist show potential for developing into that form.

I think there's also a tension between external and internal forces of corruption in the saga that muddles things. Anakin has a lot of external pressure to turn to the dark side, from Palpatine eg, but his own fear and anger etc. led him to accept that external pressure and go with it. Similarly, the Sith set up that army as an external force to destroy the Jedi - but the Jedi also put themselves in a risky position when they didn't protest Palpatine's emergency powers, didn't protest the use of brainwashed clones, and agreed to fight a war with those clones from a shady source. The attack wasn't what they expected, and unfortunately came when they were realizing things were not what they seemed, but they did ally themselves with some dodgy powers, which they must have known was a teeny bit risky somehow or other. Their blindness and arrogance helped set them up for some sort of disaster.

Well, Lucas hadn't even made up the clone storyline when he made the OT. I mean, he mentioned clones offhandedly, but there's no indication that they were the origin of the stormtroopers, or that he'd even decided on that origin yet. You can't use the OT to support any theories on Padme's death, either, since he seems to have changed her death date (and possibly manner - no way to know) between trilogies. Continuity glitches between trilogies don't invalidate something that appears in one trilogy.

Anyway, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I find it really, really hard to see things from the Jedi POV, so it's no wonder we see them differently.

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think I was having my own kneejerk reaction to your argument, but I see where you're going with this now. The thing is that the Jedi POV is really the only one I can see in the prequels. They're the only organization I had any sympathy for, and they're the only reason I care about the prequels at all. I can't get behind the Sith, the Separatist, the Trade Federation, the Gungans, the Naboo, the Tatooine dwellers, Padme, Anakin, or anyone's else view but theirs. Everyone else is either irredeemable or far too idealistic (I oppose the idealism of naive people like Padme and Anakin--it annoys me, even--give me a nice, realistic, jaded POV like Obi-Wan's).

I don't agree with the Jedi in a few spots, but I think, standing in their position, they made the best decisions they could and they're the best of all the prequel organizations. Their flaws, particularly those of Obi-Wan and Mace, are similar to my own. I get them, I think. It might be the lapsed Catholic in me, or maybe just because I can be remarkably callous and distanced from people sometimes.

Out of all their possible fates, I still can't see them turning clone-like at all. I don't see that particular flaw in Jedi thinking--theyr'e too individualistic for that. I think that's because I don't view dogma, tradition, and socialization the same way as you. There's a basic existential difference in our views on that, which is neither bad nor good, since existentialism is all about choice. ;) But I can see why you draw your argument of Jedi and clone similarities, even though I think we shall have to agree to disagree on that particular issue.

I agree with the combination of internal and external pressures that led to the giant fallout of the Republic, but I still don't see the Jedi as corrupt. Corruptible, perhaps, but they weren't actually there yet. They were guys holding the wall up with their eyes shut so they couldn't see the wall was crumbling. If you'll forgive me waxing poetical, they were the last light in the galaxy, flickering under the powers of darkness because their light wasn't strong enough. The Jedi made many mistakes, but I still think they were a force for good--the problem was that they weren't good enough.

Yeah, I think the inherent problem with trying to meet up on our views is that I am, ultimately, sympathetic to the Jedi POV. I can at least understand why you aren't and why you draw such different conclusions--at least it makes sense to me now! And boy, am I wordy. Sorry about that!

[sunnyskywalker]

Ahaha, you have no idea what a relief it is to have a rational, fascinating debate about Jedi on the internet. Well, actually you probably do :D (I say this after reading a very long thread wherein a bunch of people hit every square on the anti-racist bingo card and the one specifically for fantasy, and they just kept repeating themselves.) It's great to have friends that like to tear apart ideas with me!

Yeah, we're definitely starting from different places. My religious upbringing was Episcopalian, so when Eddie Izzard pokes fun at the CoE in Dress to Kill, I die laughing, because it was just like that. Only with less alcohol. I think. If anyone started talking about their personal relationship with God or how they felt guided to do something or other, the way Jedi do with the Force, I think people would be embarrassed for them most of the time. It was just one of those personal things you didn't talk about casually. I don't remember anyone bringing up pesky little things like actual doctrine, either - the priest actually based one sermon around Bill and Ted and the concept of being excellent to each other. So, um, not much actual religion. Just cake or death.

That's ultimately one of my problems with the PT - I don't really identify with anyone in them. I mean, I'm not exactly a royal revolutionary or a farmboy or a smuggler either, but at least I can see where the OT characters are coming from. The PT characters are like aliens to me. I think I said about Padme once that I just can't identify with a girl who wears velvet to battle.

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

Ahahaha, well, I'm not always rational, but it was fun debating with you and really digging into things with the Jedi. Most people aren't really willing to get into it.

kdjfhdksj Hee! I can see that. Where I come from, the way the Jedi talk is pretty normal. Yes, I come from a scary place. XD

Yeah, I think a lot of people had trouble with the PT. I did, at first, too. But RotS changed my thinking. My point of entry is Obi-Wan (and through him, the Jedi), and his flaws make him more real to me than Luke, and even Leia (who I love love love, but am terrified to screw up while writing).

I think I said about Padme once that I just can't identify with a girl who wears velvet to battle.

dkjfdhfsajk So true. She's so pretty, but so slick and glossy that I can't get into her very well. I admit to liking the magical cutesy girls in some anime (*hides Yuffie obsession*), but most of them often hide something deeper and you can dig past their bouncy exteriors and build real people out of them. Padme's like polished durasteel--lovely to look at, but I can't scratch the surface. It's so weird, because with Leia, I can build on her, but not Padme. I'm not sure if it's her or just my prejudice born of disgust with the way her character arc ended. I swear, I did not ship Anakin/Obi-Wan as a slash couple until Anakin/Padme turned out to host a veritable feast of my squick buttons. So weird.

[sodzilla.livejournal.com]

That's a really interesting take on it! Particularly if you throw in the forced-growth aspect of the cloning process. The clones are grown men physically and in terms of training, but in the really important ways, I don't think they were given the time or the chance to grow up, any more than were those Jedi padawans who were thrown into battle too soon because of the war.

[sunnyskywalker]

Have you seen Space: Above and Beyond? They have the "tanks," humans grown in tanks to fight in a war (but without being programmed to be obedient, so a bunch didn't want to fight). They're only "born" at age 18, so they have a lot of catching up to do in social areas. One of the main tank characters is technically only six, and so his personality is an odd mix of adult and child. For instance, when the other tank character got thrown in the brig for refusing a polygraph, the young tank asked something a kid might: "Did you get the questions wrong?" I thought this was a pretty neat element of the show!

[4thofeleven.livejournal.com]

Huh - that's a really interesting interpretation.

I'm wondering if at least some of the oddities of the portrayal of the Jedi in the prequels and in AotC in general are the result of an attempt to... I don't know, use overkill to really hammer home that the Jedi order is fundamentally flawed... There'd been twenty years of popular culture in which Jedi=heroic warrior of the light, so to counter that, it's not enough to make the Jedi simply 'a little flawed and conservative' - they have to be actively horrible to get it across...

On the other hand, of course, it is probably more likely that we're meant to think "Aww, baby Jedi" and not "WTF? Child soldiers?!"...

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

On the other hand, of course, it is probably more likely that we're meant to think "Aww, baby Jedi" and not "WTF? Child soldiers?!"...

This is sort of pet peeve of mine in fandom, so please forgive me for debating this issue, but the Jedi children are not child soldiers. That scene, with the helmets and floating droids, and the lightsabers, visually recalls the lesson that Obi-Wan gave Luke in ANH. That lesson was one of defense, and one meant to help Luke touch the Force. We, at no point, see a Jedi child fighting, outside of Anakin running off on his own in the Naboo ship and the little boy defending himself and Bail during the Temple attack (which is an entirely different situation). Teaching a child to use a weapon is not the same as making them a soldier. The Jedi children are more like little kids in karate lessons, and many religious orders use martial arts as a form of focus, and since the Jedi Knights are martial, it makes sense they'd train them young, just as certain Buddhists and Shaolin monks do. However, Star Wars: The Clone Wars will feature a very young Ahsoka in battle, and that's where the child soldiers in the Jedi problem arises--not in the films, but in the new animated serial.

The only child soldiers I saw in film canon were actually Padme and her handmaidens in Naboo. In fact, I find the entire Naboo culture rather depraved, for all its glitter. What sort of idiot elects a 14-year-old girl as its planetary leader, trains her to kill, then lets her run off to battle? The Naboo are actually have way more ethical issues than the Jedi do, but so few people complain about them--I find that very odd.


ETA: Corrections. I type so fast that I miss all these errors! Sorry!

[sunnyskywalker]

I complain about the Naboo! Though I guess not at length for a couple years. But still - nearly-identical handmaidens in identical hooded robes do echo clones with identical uniforms...

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

I ♥ you for being the only person I know who has ever complained about the Naboo. I find the Republic as a whole, and especially the Naboo, far more troublesome than the Jedi. Maybe the lapsed Catholic inside of me has a soft spot for dogmatic religious organizations struggling against the forces of secularization? ;)

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

A very interesting post, and a great point. Lucas is a genius in many respects and in others, he's... not. He did make the Clone Wars remarkably toothless the way he did it, and him completely ignoring the ethical issues behind the clones was wince-worthy. Yet, at least it spawns interesting ethical debates in fandom. But I agree that inhuman enemies, as you call them, ar a rather cheap genre convention. Sometimes they're enjoyable, and sometimes they make you stare blankly at the screen.

I'm hoping Star Wars: The Clone Wars touches on the issues behind the clones, though I don't think we can expect too much on the droid front.

[4thofeleven.livejournal.com]

There's something truly odd about the way the Clone Wars are depicted as a massive, galaxy spanning civil war... in which pretty much the entire population of the galaxy are non-combatants.

You'd think at the very least Palpatine would see mass-conscription as a good way to indoctrinate large numbers of people into supporting a future imperial government...

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

You'd think at the very least Palpatine would see mass-conscription as a good way to indoctrinate large numbers of people into supporting a future imperial government...

Definitely. In fact, I remember being very upset with the prequels for trotting out so many tired cliches: the prophesized hero, the hero born of a virgin, a shoddy Romeo/Juliet-wannabe romance, and bad guys as robots, and cannon fodder as clones. I'm mostly over it, but these genre conventions are very cheap to me. How much more awesome would have Palpatine been while sweet-talking the populace and brainwashing the stormtroopers?

While Lucas is fond of easy moralizing and dichotomies (he actually described Star Wars as an exercise in good versus evil), this is what makes the ethical issues he creates all the more troubling, since they were so clearly unintentional. He did not mean for us to take a step back and go "Hey, why are the good guys using people as cannon fodder?" Even though he created them as people. He just thought we wouldn't think of genetically-engineered men as people, I think. It's sort of like the world of Blade Runner--the idea of an entire populace accepting genetically-engineered beings as unreal is a ridiculous set-up if you think about it (and I had to, as I wrote a paper about the ethical issues of Blade Runner). But Lucas comes from another time, where enemies were meant to be seen as mindless battle practice and clones as little more than flesh robots. He pulled a little too much from pulp serials, TV shows, and comic books.

I adore Star Wars, even the prequels (I know, I know), and I respect Lucas, but I really have trouble with some of the ideas he came up with. It's easy to dehumanize aliens and robots, since they're not human, but it's not so easy to get people to swallow that with human-looking clones.

[4thofeleven.livejournal.com]

He pulled a little too much from pulp serials, TV shows, and comic books.

Good point - older science fiction and comic books are often unreadable because they insist on classing 'non-human' as 'sub-human'... There's a series of *terrible* Star Trek comics that were published in the late '60s; I ran across scans of them online a while back – in one issue, the Enterprise finds a planet of man-eating plant monsters. The plants surround them and capture them, but Kirk and Spock escape after being dragged to the plant monster’s village and discovering they aren’t just monsters, but a whole civilization with their own language and tools – who, admittedly, were planning on keeping humans as cattle, though since neither side can understand each other, it does seem to be more a misunderstanding than malice…

So what does Kirk do once he beams back to the Enterprise? Why, he orders the crew to open fire on the planet to wipe out all the plant monsters so that “they’ll never threaten humanity again!” Apparently, the author had never seen an episode of Trek in his life, and was just reusing old pulp sci-fi plots, and the result is a series of stories that look more like the evil Mirror Universe than anything else…

Interestingly, the Star Wars OT doesn’t suffer as much from these sorts of problems… The movies do seem to make a point of having Luke treat the droids as people, and there aren’t any evil alien hordes either; the Empire’s all human. I kinda have to agree – Lucas seems to have lost sight of which are the fun parts of pulp to emulate, and which are the problematic parts… there’s also the somewhat questionable use of racial stereotypes for aliens in the PT…

Huh – you know, that might resolve one of my issues with Blade Runner, too. I’ve always found it a kinda dull movie with very little point. So the Replicants aren’t really different from people? Well, yea, why wouldn’t they be? (Friend of mine described the movie as “It’s a slasher film. Harrison Ford is the serial killer.”). I guess the film does kinda assume that you’re not starting with the assumption that Replicants are people, and you’re meant to slowly build to that realisation…

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

I can think of so many storylines I've seen in comic books just like the one your describe. They're everywhere! You can still find them in plenty of fantasy books and games, too. And it is weird to think they hooked something that dubious off of Star Trek, which was one of the first genre shows to take a hard look at genre conventions.

Interestingly, the Star Wars OT doesn’t suffer as much from these sorts of problems… The movies do seem to make a point of having Luke treat the droids as people, and there aren’t any evil alien hordes either; the Empire’s all human.

Yep. And fighting off the stormtroopers there is rather like fighting their namesakes in WWII. They're part of the army of the enemy. In a war, you don't pause too much to consider the ethics of killing, lest you get your head blown off.

So the Replicants aren’t really different from people? Well, yea, why wouldn’t they be? (Friend of mine described the movie as “It’s a slasher film. Harrison Ford is the serial killer.”). I guess the film does kinda assume that you’re not starting with the assumption that Replicants are people, and you’re meant to slowly build to that realisation…

Pretty much. The idea that genetically-engineered humans aren't human is rather... odd. I mean, arguably, children bron from in vitro or artificial insemination aren't natural human beings, either, but we don't even pause to think of them as human beings. Cloning and genetic engineering isn't too far removed from this, and already we have rules and ethical debates on it. I just find an entire galaxy full of people who take clone troopers for granted or an entire human population who marginalizes Replicants as little more than robots positively out of character for our race!

[4thofeleven.livejournal.com]

Oh, I can easily believe that prejudice would exist; that's human nature. What I find bizarre, though, is that the film assumes not just that prejudice exists within the film's world, but that the audience somehow also already has a prejudice against Replicants...

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

Well, see, I do agree the prejudice would exist, but I can't see it not being a hotly-debated subject, and since clone troopers/Replicants are important to their respective storylines, you'd think this debate would at least be mentioned.

But yes, the assumptions about the audience are the most bizarre, especially since cloning is already a hot topic in our world.

[sodzilla.livejournal.com]

Well, we don't really see anyone taking the clones for granted in SW. We don't see Senators or the general public protesting against their use but that doesn't mean it never happened. In fact, I can imagine Palpatine subtly using that in his campaign to blacken the Jedi Order's name... those weird Force-users are leading mind-programmed slaves into battle!

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

Well, of course it could have happened. So could the exact opposite have happened. There's nothing to contradict either. My argument (and from what I understood the post to be about) was about the narrative, no more, no less. What happened off-screen or in the EU is completely irrelevant when speaking about the films and their thematics. Sorry, I'm still in academic essay mode from the Spring semester, so I'm still into analyzing the body of work as presented. When doing a critique of something, you can't make up your own story.

In fandom, fanon reigns, and you can easily splice in anything you want. Especially in Star Wars, where so little of the universe is fleshed out in the films, so the EU and the fandom goes to town adding things and spinning the story in various different directions. The EU and the fandom are no longer Lucas's story--they've been expanded to say other things and become someone else's story.

In fact, I can imagine Palpatine subtly using that in his campaign to blacken the Jedi Order's name... those weird Force-users are leading mind-programmed slaves into battle!

So can I. It's a damn shame we never saw anything like that in the films.

[sunnyskywalker]

I still maintain that R&J was really a play about a cycle of violence turning a stupid teenage crush into a bloodbath. If all had gone normally, Romeo would have been over Juliet in a week, just like he got over Rosalind. But nooo, they had to get sucked into the drama of the feud... Ahem. Anyway, I don't take R&J as the model for great love, that's for sure.

Actually, I think Lucas was aiming for the popular perception of R&J as a great forbidden love with A/P, but ended up a lot closer to my interpretation of "crush turns deadly due to various circumstances, many totally preventable."

Palpatine sweet-talking everyone would have been awesome. I'd even have settled for Palpatine sweet-talking everyone into accepting the clone army as "totally volunteers, really!"

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

Ha! Yes, I agree that Lucas tried to do the popular perception of R&J, but then gave us something so close to real life. He also wanted to show the negative side of too love. The love that Luke had saves Anakin, but the love Padme had condemns Anakin. Lucas actually elevates pure love born of family or even friendship above romantic love. It's one of the things I love about SW, because in our society, I wind up arguing to I'm blue in the face that there's other sorts of love than romantic, and everyone ignores me, because they think getting married and "falling in love" is the only happiness a person can have.

Man, I sorely miss all those opportunities for Palpatine to spin things his way. I still love the only scene where he really does that, at the opera house. That was the only real seduction in canon, and I wish we had been able to see him seduce the populace, too.

[sodzilla.livejournal.com]

First off, a general agreement. This is part of what's turned me off most fantasy these days - the Inhuman Opponents, and their postmodern equivalent, the Human-But-Not-Really ones. You know, where the author and at least some of the characters pay lip service to the idea that the opponents are people, but in practice we're shown that ALL of them are evil people. All the soldiers in the enemy's army are rape-hungry thugs, all the nobles in his court are selling their teenage daughters to each other in bids for power...

Second, about the clones =/= stormtroopers, partial agreement here. Certainly the main army of STs are recruits - I doubt they kept making more clones after the Clone Wars were over. Plus which, the clones do age faster... they look to be in their 30s when they're actually only 10 or so, so by the time of the original movies they'd likely be way too decrepit to serve.

(Though actually, the poor performance of the STs in the original films WOULD be a lot more explicable if they're all senescent clones. Eyesight mostly gone ---> can no longer hit inside of barn...)

As for the human rights thing, I agree with imadra_blue in part. Lucas obviously doesn't see the issues here. However, for those of us trying to make sense rather than money out of SW canon (okay, I'll stop bitching at some point... promise) we still have to deal with them. So yeah, I'd have liked to see more acknowledgment that the clones are people.

Hell, even in the EU there's too little of that. Oh, there are a few instances I could mention (The Cestus Deception, Medstar series, and Republic Commando series of books as well as some in the comic) where we're shown that clones have personality and at least the potential to grow beyond their training, but we never really see anyone deal with the consequences. For ex, among all the Jedi who left the Order at the start of the war because they kinda sorta agreed with Dooku, or because they didn't want to be soldiers, I wish there could've been at least some who protested against the use of the clone army.

[imadra-blue.livejournal.com]

However, for those of us trying to make sense rather than money out of SW canon (okay, I'll stop bitching at some point... promise) we still have to deal with them.

Oh, definitely, we still have to deal with them--I didn't mean to suggest that we don't. That's the fun of fandom, I think, is trying to work out this conflicting body of canon we're given. But when dealing with them, I think we have to start from a place where Lucas's intention will not guide us, since it's what Max Weber might call "unintended consequences".

[4thofeleven.livejournal.com]

Heh...

"An entire legion of my best troops awaits them! Or at least, they were my best troops, back in the Clone Wars... I don't see why they still wouldn't be, I mean, I'm still in just as good a shape now as I was then, right?"

[pronker]

Hi, here via Jedi News. I'm glad to see the DS9 comparison to PT clonetroopers as a dramatic construction, as both had shortened lifespans engineered for them and a life fit only for combat. The Jem Hadar had a need for a drug built into them, and an overseer race called the Vorta, who also worshipped the Dominion, to administer the drug that kept the Jem Hadar in fighting trim. In this way, the Jem Hadar differed from the clones and the orcs, though they were all three constructs. There was one aberrant Jem Hadar in season 5 or so who had no need for the drug and he defected to the 'good guys.'

If comics interest you at all, Obi-Wan in Dark Horse comics had gone through imprisonment with torture with a clone and said later on, "No matter how or for what purpose they were made, they have lives and those lives aren't to be wasted."

[4thofeleven.livejournal.com]

Yes, you're right - they do have a lot of similarities. And I think they are both intended to be somewhat morally questionable... I think you are meant to say "That's... not quite right" at the end of AotC when Yoda's leading the clones into battle, though perhaps more because of their visual similarity with OT Stormtroopers than their origins...

There was one episode where the DS9 crew had to work alongside Dominion Jem'hadar to stop renegade Jem'hadar seizing an old Iconian stargate... I think the Clonetroopers would have sat better with me if the Jedi's reaction to them was more like the DS9 characters in that episode - They don't like working with the Jem'hadar, but they don't have any other options. If the Jedi had agreed to use the clones only until the Republic could train a conventional army, at which point the clones would be released from service, I think it would have been a lot less dodgy, without really changing the core story much...

[sodzilla.livejournal.com]

Absolutely! Actually, though we never really see it in the films I tend to assume the Republic must've had a non-clone army as well - there were only, what, 1.2 million clones ready for action or nearly so by the time of Geonosis? Granted, it's a horrifically huge number and the Kaminoans probably had even more still "in production" as it were, but to fight a war on a galactic scale, that's not even a fraction of the armed forces you'd need.

In the comics, of course, we see more of the Republic Navy (which seems mostly non-clone apart from the ships captained by Jedi) and also more of the non-droid fighters on the Separatist side...

[4thofeleven.livejournal.com]

I always assumed Republic member worlds would have had their own armies and navies, and that's why Palpatine went to the effort of commissioning the clone army - because it was the only way he could get troops that answered to the Republic directly, not to their home planet's government...

You know, now that I think about it, the whole Clone plot could have been used completely unaltered - but just throw in a few lines to emphasise just how callous Palpatine is that he secretly breeds an entire army of slaves just to get around the limitations of a Federal Republic...

[sunnyskywalker]

The Separatist subplot could have been... well, maybe just "more convincing" covers it. We're supposed to believe that they have support other than from their robot army, but we never see it. Padme's "Maybe we're on the wrong side" kinda comes out of nowhere when it looks like the problem is just Palpatine being greedy. If we'd had just a teeny more on the Separatists apart from that meeting, I'd buy a huge civil war. (It would have made a nice thematic link for all three movies, too - Padme's horrified by slavery in TPM, finds out the Separatists have some valid complaints in AotC, wonders if they're on the wrong side in RotS.)

Another troubling thing about the inhuman armies is how often they're also really or codedly non-white. Brainwashed Maori clones created the British Empire? Really? The orcs are black-skinned with coarse hair in the movies, and Tolkien describes the half-orc, half-human Bill Ferny as "sallow" with "slanted" eyes. And he also throws in the dark-skinned Haradrim on elephants from North Africa or thereabouts who have joined Sauron because... well, just because. I guess we're supposed to think that of course they'd join?

[4thofeleven.livejournal.com]

Yes - the whole concept of "They look human, but really they're all inhuman beasts who can't be trusted" is one of those ideas that doesn't exactly have a good historical record, and I'm not entirely sure that just replacing Fu Manchu's Asiatic hordes with Saruman's Orcish hordes really does much to redeem it...

Aragorn's bit in RotK at the Black Gate about "Men of the West" also kinda made my skin crawl a little bit when I saw the movie - I keep imagining Stormfront or their ilk re-purposing the speech for their own purposes...

Of course,then Peter Jackson decided to follow up LotR with his remake of King Kong, and, well, I'm not saying he's racist, but he might want to consider not including the "White men vs. degenerate race of dark-skinned Pacific islanders" motif in his next film...

Am I the only one thinking that between AotC and the LotR movies, we're going to start seeing essays in a few decades discussing how fears of Maori invasion affected Western entertainment during the early years of the 21st century? *grin*

[sunnyskywalker]

I think Peter Jackson needs to do some hard thinking, yes. It's not like he can blame the source - he picked the source. And it's not like he didn't tweak other things for the adaptation...

Are the Maori in favor of an independent New Zealand republic, I wonder? Maybe they're Separatists!