Nope, the Infinite Empire had already been around for almost 10,000 years by the time of DotJ. I was wrong about it already being in decline though, looks like that didn't quite start until a few centuries after DotJ.
Star Wars Books Thread
- Thread starter Mr Light
- Start date
^Yeah, IIRC DotJ was in line with what KotOR established as far as the Infinite Empire was concerned.
As I said, my issue with it was the contrivance of the setting. Instead of showing that the Jedi and the Republic emerged from the ruins of an ancient and decrepit Empire the hard way, they came up with this needlessly complicated Noah's Ark like concept.
Personally I thought it would have been more interesting if the Jedi philosophy was something that sprung up among the enslaved peoples of the Infinite Empire. A true light in the dark, not something stage managed in a specially isolated system by some mysterious godlike third party. It felt like lazy storytelling. Instead of telling an actual story of the downfall of one civilisation and the rise of another, they cooked up a ready-made civilisation that existed "just because" and opted to tell a soap opera instead.
I prefer to think of the Jedi order starting out as a more straight-up monastic order that gradually became a martial organisation out of necessity to keep the fledgling Republic together. In DotJ it has them starting out as warriors with a fully formed philosophy, traditions and rituals.
It all felt too familiar to what the Jedi would become and somewhat undermines the story of their eventual failing if they started out more or less exactly the same as they ended up. The only interesting thing they did with it is the concept of balancing the light and the dark, which is a cute idea but betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how the force works. The light and the dark aren't meant to be a stand-in for yin and yang, they're a reflection of what you bring to the table. So far as i can tell, just like nature, the force itself is amoral.
As I said, my issue with it was the contrivance of the setting. Instead of showing that the Jedi and the Republic emerged from the ruins of an ancient and decrepit Empire the hard way, they came up with this needlessly complicated Noah's Ark like concept.
Personally I thought it would have been more interesting if the Jedi philosophy was something that sprung up among the enslaved peoples of the Infinite Empire. A true light in the dark, not something stage managed in a specially isolated system by some mysterious godlike third party. It felt like lazy storytelling. Instead of telling an actual story of the downfall of one civilisation and the rise of another, they cooked up a ready-made civilisation that existed "just because" and opted to tell a soap opera instead.
I prefer to think of the Jedi order starting out as a more straight-up monastic order that gradually became a martial organisation out of necessity to keep the fledgling Republic together. In DotJ it has them starting out as warriors with a fully formed philosophy, traditions and rituals.
It all felt too familiar to what the Jedi would become and somewhat undermines the story of their eventual failing if they started out more or less exactly the same as they ended up. The only interesting thing they did with it is the concept of balancing the light and the dark, which is a cute idea but betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how the force works. The light and the dark aren't meant to be a stand-in for yin and yang, they're a reflection of what you bring to the table. So far as i can tell, just like nature, the force itself is amoral.
Last edited:
Yes and no. They treated it in far too simplistic terms which I felt undermined the basic concepts at play.
You act too aggressively or get angry too much? You're exiled to the lightside moon until you calm down. You act with too much compassion and passivity? Got to the dark side moon and learn to kick puppies until you're in balance. They treated it like the kind of polar point based morality scale you get in RPGs. Which is fine for game mechanics, but that's not how a philosophy works and was overly literal in it's interpretation of the concept the force.
Again though, even if we put that aside, they never even showed how or why they came to this idea. It was just there, fully formed.
It would have been more interesting to show the Jedi begin as monks and missionaries, even apostates under the decaying rule of the Rakatta. When I think of the very early Jedi, I picture something more along the lines of the the ancient Mystics from 'The Dark Crystal'. Truly spiritual practitioners.
If it were up to me I'd cast them as functioning much like the church did in medieval Europe, at least in the sense that it was an organisation that spanned many kingdoms and for the most part, was the only common point many of them shared.
In the beginning the Jedi would be missionaries and educators who preserved knowledge in the ruins of a fractured empire, having temples and missions spread all across the galaxy. Later ubiquity and neutrality would make them natural mediators and envoys who were trusted by all parties to settle disputes and convey messages without distortion or prejudice. Passive almost to a fault until at some point they began turning their martial skills towards the physical defence of the weak and helpless, but always and only as a last resort.
That's how I see the origin of the Jedi, not a bunch of upstart apprentices that are eager to jump into a war so they can test out their newly forged lightsabers. That sounds more like the origin of the Sith, much later down the line.
Last edited:
The way things were depicted in Dawn of the Jedi were fine. It established how different things were in regards to how the Force was originally regarded, but showed the first hints of the sundering that was to come. The really great thing about it was the differences in philosophy and organization between the original Je'daii Order and the later Jedi Order. It just never had the opportunity to really tell how the former became the latter before Dark Horse lost the comics license.
To me, seeing one order of force users turn into a slightly different order of force users with less exciting fashion sense just isn't very interesting. Especially when the former is so obviously and artificially flawed. I'd much rather have seen the process of discovery than a melodrama about the use of violence.
It also didn't help that the characters were utterly forgettable. Seriously, I couldn't name a single one without looking it up on wookiepedia.
It also didn't help that the characters were utterly forgettable. Seriously, I couldn't name a single one without looking it up on wookiepedia.
That tends to happen in a series with all-new characters, but I disagree they were utterly forgettable. Indeed, several are stuck visually in my mind even years later. It was fascinating to see how different and similar the Je'daii were to the Jedi though. The Je'daii's martial aspect was obviously adopted by the Jedi, but other aspects were either modified, combined with others, or flat-out abandoned. If there was some way for the Je'daii to meet the later-day Jedi, they probably wouldn't recognize one another, much less agree with their views on the Force.
A character being visually distinctive doesn't make them memorable characters, it just means the artist came up with some memorable designs. What I'm talking about is the writing; actual characterisation and personality. I remember vaguely what a few of them looked like, but no names and no character traits beyond the two dimensional (eg: "that's the one that's always angry", "that's the brash reckless one", "that's the dull one", "that's the cool assassin one" etc.) Nothing about what drives them, what their internal lives are or how they're liable to react in a given situation. Honestly, most of them felt interchangeable.
Anyway, nothing you mention mitigates the fundamental flaw: they didn't show how or why the Jedi formed, they just presented us with a ready-made order that resembled the Jedi just enough that they could hand-wave how the one became the other. Basically, that's cheating.
Even worse, it directly undermines the narrative of how the Jedi eventually failed, by having them originate from a martial organisation. DotJ seems like it wants to imply that they just reverted back to their roots in the Clone Wars rather than stray from their true purpose (which is what actually happened.) It's not a good way to begin a story.
Still, by biggest beef with the whole thing is still the artificiality of the Tython system's civilisation and yes, by extension the "Je'Daii" aswell. The will of the force is one thing, the will of the god-like aliens that dumped them all there is something else entirely. It's 'Star Wars', not '2001: A Space Odyssey' meets 'Stargate'.
Anyway, nothing you mention mitigates the fundamental flaw: they didn't show how or why the Jedi formed, they just presented us with a ready-made order that resembled the Jedi just enough that they could hand-wave how the one became the other. Basically, that's cheating.
Even worse, it directly undermines the narrative of how the Jedi eventually failed, by having them originate from a martial organisation. DotJ seems like it wants to imply that they just reverted back to their roots in the Clone Wars rather than stray from their true purpose (which is what actually happened.) It's not a good way to begin a story.
Still, by biggest beef with the whole thing is still the artificiality of the Tython system's civilisation and yes, by extension the "Je'Daii" aswell. The will of the force is one thing, the will of the god-like aliens that dumped them all there is something else entirely. It's 'Star Wars', not '2001: A Space Odyssey' meets 'Stargate'.
Last edited:
I really can't agree with any of your points. You may not have liked Dawn of the Jedi, and that's fine, but I really don't find it anywhere near as flawed as you do.
In a way, that's kind of the driving thought behind the series, IMO. It's a different time and age, with a diverse order that will ultimately become the Jedi, but aren't there yet.
I'm not saying it's "flawed" from a narrative standpoint, I'm saying the premise is unimaginative, needlessly contrived and a wasted opportunity all round.
If it was set say 5,000 years later or earlier and centred on some other order not directly related to the Jedi it would have worked just fine. Indeed, the idea that at one point there were several major force using groups active in the galaxy besides the Jedi and the Sith is an interesting idea and one that may be worth exploring (like the many schools of the mind from 'Dune'.)
But presenting *this* particular group as the sole progenitors of the Jedi? No thank you.
I disagree. I think it's the exact opposite. It was a departure from what we're used to, yet the seeds of it were there. It was really clever the way it was set up.
Sorry, I don't feel that way at all. Loved the series, and would have loved it even more if it had continued.
I'm in the middle of reading Aftermath and the first hundred pages were really rough. The author's writing style is weird with his very short sentences. It took me about 100 pages to get acustomed to it.
I'm guessing that Temmin Wexley is Snap Wexley played by Greg Grunberg in The Force Awakens. It's pretty obvious.
I'm guessing that Temmin Wexley is Snap Wexley played by Greg Grunberg in The Force Awakens. It's pretty obvious.
I don't think it's meant to be a mystery or anything. Pretty sure Wexley's history was already briefly summarised in the visual dictionary back when TFA came out.
The fact it's written in present tense also takes time to adjust too, IMO.
Don't they even call him "Snap" in the book? Or does that not start until Life Debt?
I'm 2/3rds of the way through Aftermath and no Snap yet.
It's easy to miss since he was a very minor character in TFA who I don't think is ever referred to by name and reading the book, you're not going to instantly associate this kid with his psychotic old battledroid with the "Greg Grunberg is an X-Wing pilot" guy. But at the same time it's not like they tried to hide it or make it a big revelation and the information is there for those who were paying attention.
I just had a look as the Visual Dictionary and sure enough, on the page about resistance pilots is says plain as day: "Snap hails from Akiva, in Outer Rim world that was an Imperial base until it was liberated by the New Republic. He is the son of a Rebel Alliance Y-Wing pilot who flew at the Battle of Endor..."
I just had a look as the Visual Dictionary and sure enough, on the page about resistance pilots is says plain as day: "Snap hails from Akiva, in Outer Rim world that was an Imperial base until it was liberated by the New Republic. He is the son of a Rebel Alliance Y-Wing pilot who flew at the Battle of Endor..."
Last edited:
In the movie? Poe does call him Snap in one scene, I think its the briefing where everyone's discussing Starkiller.
Similar threads
