by David Brin
NICK MAMATAS: If the Ford Escort talked to me and saved my life, sure I'd remember it.
FORD ESCORT: Honk. Honk.
ME: What's that, Fordie? Star Wars sucks! My God, you're the smartest car ever. I'll remember this moment for the rest of my life.
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: As any self-respecting EU' fan knows ...
NICK MAMATAS: There are self-respecting EU fans?
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER:... R2-D2's internal rockets are aftermarket modifications, not standard equipment on R2-series astromech droids. Are you saying it's clearly impossible that other, further aftermarket modifications could, under any conceivable circumstances, have necessitated the removal of these rockets? What evidence do you have for this?
NICK MAMATAS: No, I'm saying the movies stink. If you have to appeal to non-movie sources like the EU to explain and patch up the events of the movies, you prove my point. Welcome to the smart side of the Force!
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: What evidence do you have for the preposterous claim that the starfighters of Episode III are technologically superior to the starfighters of Episode IV? For example, Luke's X-wing has an internal hyperdrive (that takes him to Dagobah, and then to Cloud City, as you might recall), whereas Obi-Wan's and Anakin's require external hyperdrive rings. Is this counting wings thing just a biplane fetish?
NICK MAMATAS: You realize that you're arguing about a form of technology that uses wings in space, right? Wings. In. Space.
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: As for putting Luke with Owen and Bern Lars-are you familiar with "The Purloined Letter"? With the concept of hiding in plain sight? Are you saying that Edgar Allan Poe is not for readers "interested in stories that make sense"?
NICK MAMATAS: "The Purloined Letter" is also a fiction; Poe's artistry is that he made us believe it, and it is worth noting that Poe himself felt his ratiocinations were ultimately rather contrived. Are you saying that that short story is some incredible insight into human psychology, and that, say, the best place for Osama bin Laden to hide would be in a giant castle with a neon sign reading "Osama's Place"? At least the titular letter was on a desk with a bunch of other papers; it wasn't in a special envelope marked "Stolen letters-check me out."
I'm sure the petty criminals (in real life) who escape from the cops only to run home and get caught three hours later cite Poe when they explain to the cops that they aren't really incredibly stupid.
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: And where is the evidence that Admiral Motti is an "atheist"? His comment is on Vader's failure, not on the nonexistence of the Force. Would you again like to admit that you weren't really paying attention?
NICK MAMATAS: I'll cite the witness Vader: "I find your lack of faith disturbing."
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: Is the entire Court getting as tired of this garbage as I am?
(Reaction in the courtroom)
DROID JUDGE: Mr. Stover-
MATTHEW WOODRING STOVER: What I mean to say, Your Honor, is that we can go back and forth all week with this childish "Is not! " "Is too!" crap. Let me put a stop to the whole business by calling my final witness, Don DeBrandt.
DROID JUDGE: If the Prosecution has no objection? Very well. Let Mr. DeBrandt take the stand.
OUR HONOR, LADIES AND GENTLEBEINGS of the jury, my esteemed colleagues; thank you for your kind attention. We are here today to try a most complex case, one which on the surface appears simple, but most assuredly is not. The defendant stands accused of multiple plot holes, inconsistency and contradictions of internal logic; in his defense, I intend to take a somewhat controversial approach to the subject, one whose direction will not immediately be made clear. Please bear with me.
First of all, let us define our parameters. While I will cite evidence from the initial three films-hereby known as Episodes IV, V and VI-most of my arguments will focus on the most recent trilogy, hereby known as Episodes I, II and III. It is these three films which have borne the brunt of these accusations, and thus these three films which I will address.
Let us examine the evidence.
In Episode I-a.k.a. The Phantom Menace-an important element of the plot concerns a podrace, the outcome of which will determine whether or not the protagonists will be able to leave the planet. Our heroes are able to manipulate those with weak minds-but the mechanic who can fix their ship, unfortunately, is from a race immune to such "Jedi mind tricks."
Certain questions immediately spring to mind. Do they:
A) seek another mechanic?
B) find someone with a weaker mind and a working ship?
C) find someone willing to accept Republic currency, to which they have access to a whole bunch of?
Sadly, the answer is D) none of the above. They gamble their fate on the racing skills of a small boy, whom they just met.
Who has never won a race.
And his Podracer-which he built himself.
Still, it all works out in the end, so they must have known what they were doing. The boy turns out to have a strong connection to the Force, and seems to be subject of an ancient prophecy. Obviously he's an extremely important figure, one who must be rescued and trained and kept from harm. Qui-Gon Jinn, the Jedi Master, clearly understands this.
Then why does he decide to take the boy along on a highly dangerous military mission?
Perhaps he means to use the boy as a secret weapon of some sort? No. He abandons him in a hangar halfway through, telling him to stay put and stay out of trouble-something the boy most impressively fails to do. Jedi Knights may be able to wield lightsabers, manipulate the Force and do impressive backflips, but they have a lot to learn about baby-sitting.
Perhaps this was merely a slip. Qui-Gon is portrayed as a rebel who doesn't always do as he's told, and those types rarely excel at domestic duties. Tell them to blow up a star cruiser, they'll do fine-ask them to change a baby and you'll probably wind up with an upset infant, an unspeakable mess on the ceiling and the charred remains of a diaper pail.
Certainly they would never make the same mistake twice. For instance, having witnessed the consequences of jar jar Binks getting involved in anything more complicated than preparing a light snack, they would never give him any serious responsibilities.
Like, say, an important government position. Why, that could lead to a disaster of unmitigated proportions....
Which, of course, it does. In fact, it more or less plunges the Galaxy into an immense civil war which destroys the fabric of democratic civilization as they know it.
Hey, everybody makes mistakes. Unmitigated stupidity on the part of an individual character is not on trial here; we're taking a larger view. Sentient beings are unpredictable and tricky-one can never say with any certainty what they will or will not do. For instance, Anakin Skywalker claims to be tormented by nightmares of his mother. He was taken away from her, the only parent he has ever known, at a tender age-such separation anxiety is understandable. Why, I'm sure he visited her as often as he could the entire time he was in training....
What? He didn't? I guess the Jedi wouldn't let him travel off-planet-what's that? He was gallivanting all over the galaxy with ObiWan, on dozens of different missions? Surely he must have at least tried to contact her ... no? Not even once? I guess communication between planets isn't that easy ... oh, wait. They send instantaneous holograms to talk with each other all the time, don't they ...
I guess he just couldn't afford the long-distance charges.
Anyway, Anakin turns out to be a pretty nasty guy, so not phoning home for a decade isn't that implausible. This is Kid Vader we're talking about, not E.T.
And like I said before, sentient beings are unpredictable. Why, sometimes even the question of sentience itself is murky; look at how droids are treated in the Star Wars universe. On one hand, they're simply objects, to be used as cannon fodder in battle scenes without any messy blood-or, for that matter, consequences-to worry about; you can even have them dismembered or mind-wiped for comic effect. It doesn't matter, because they're not people
.
Well, except that they have personalities, of course. They bicker, they worry, they make jokes. They strive, they take risks, they even simulate heroism. I suppose a clever machine can fool almost anyone ... but not a Jedi, of course. Obi-Wan states quite clearly in Episode III that droids can't think for themselves. Which means that treating them like they can actually make decisions is obviously absurd; anything that might appear to be a personality quirk-bravery, fussiness, fear-is either faulty programming or a trick of our perceptions. If we're searching for truly sentient beings, these droids aren't the ones we're looking for.
That's enough consideration of such unquantifiable areas as intelligence and motivation. Before we become mired down in concepts like "good" and "evil," let's examine something a great deal more solid: weapons.
I don't mean the neon swizzle-stick hedge trimmers the Jedi like to play around with; I'm talking about hardcore, continent-busting, spacefleet munitions here. I'm talking about armor, I'm talking about ships, I'm talking about lots and lots of guns.
We all know where the clone army came from. But where in the name ofJabba's left armpit did all their stuff come from? I mean, did the Republic just happen to have a huge honkin' space navy in mothballs somewhere?
What?
I apologize, Your Honor. Yes, I was getting carried away. It won't happen again.
Let's move on to an even more specific use-or rather, misuse-of weaponry. General Grievous, the leader of the droid army, unveils a rather unsettling surprise when confronted by Obi-Wan Kenobi; not only does he know how to use a lightsaber, he has four of them-and four cybernetic arms to wield them with. Since these arms are mechanical, they can do things human arms can't; spinning like windmills, for instance.
This should enable the General to cut Obi-Wan to pieces. ObiWan only has one blade, and can thus only parry strikes from one side at any given time. Even if the General is using two blades for defense, he can still simply attack from both sides at the same time.
Which he never does.
Maybe this is just a Jedi mind trick. Grievous isn't actually a robot; he's some kind of little beastie in a cybernetic suit, so presumably that sort of thing would work on him. Of course, you couldn't pull that sort of stunt on another Jedi; not only are Jedi well-versed in the ways of the Force, they're also the ultimate lightsaber fighters. In the thick of a deadly serious hand-to-hand battle, they routinely pull the kind of midair acrobatics that would get an Olympic gymnast an eleven from a Russian judge, so there is absolutely no way one could be fooled into misunderstanding what is or isn't a viable combat strategy.
Like whether or not standing a few feet up an embankment from your opponent-an opponent that you, yourself, personally trained to jump at least twenty feet in the air while doing a somersaultis going to give you any sort of practical advantage in a lightsaber duel.
Obviously, it isn't. He's just going to bound into the air like a big, angry kangaroo, flip around at the zenith-possibly getting in a few swings while he's up there-then land on his feet and continue to attack. Right?
It was a rhetorical question, Your Honor. Yes, I know that under those self-same conditions Obi-Wan managed to lop off both Anakin's legs and one of his arms in a single strike. Your model isn't programmed for irony, is it? ...
Up until now, all I've done is ask questions. I've made a few suggestions as to the answers, but nothing definitive-if anything, I've taken the position that the answers to certain questions aren't really important, or at least not as important as a good punch line. This is more than a cheesy ploy on my part; it is, in fact, my entire cheesy strategy.
I may have given some of you the impression that I believe Star Wars is full of gaping plot holes-holes, one might say, big enough to drive a starship through. While this is technically correct, it is not the thrust of my argument.
My argument is that it doesn't matter.
Ah, the collective gasp. Thank you; an attorney can go his entire career without ever hearing that magnificent sound. I can die happy now ... hmmm? No, Your Honor, that is not my immediate intention. Yes, I'll get back to my point.
I don't mean to imply that the flawed structure of Star Wars is irrelevant because the films themselves are of no importance. Far from it-far, far away, and long ago from it. Because I do think these films are important. They are woven into the fabric of our pop culture; they're part of our modern mythos. Many children grew up watching these films, and the images and ideas that flow through them have made permanent impressions.
Not on their intellect. On their imaginations.
And now I would like to call on Dr. Albert Einstein.
Thank you for coming, Dr. Einstein. The Court appreciates your cooperation, both in appearing in a pop-culture essay and in conveniently ignoring the fact of your own death. You've chosen to do this, I understand, for one simple reason. Would you please state that reason for the Court?
For those of you on the jury who found it hard to hear Dr. Einstein, I'll repeat what he just said: "Imagination is more important than intelligence."
I'd like to point out that Dr. Einstein is something of an expert witness on the subject of intelligence, being one of the acknowledged great minds of twentieth-century Earth. No, he never did crack that whole unified field theory thing we all take for granted, but there is no doubt he was-sorry, Dr. Einstein, is-a genius. One who believes that the ability to make things up is more important than the cognitive powers of the weightiest intellect.
Because when we are children, the world is magic.
Anything is possible, because we haven't learned what is impossible yet. Our ignorance is our bliss. We believe in Santa Claus and fairy princesses and disgruntled Wookiees, and we don't ask for detailed technical explanations. What we want is heroes and monsters and robots, aliens and spaceships and battles against impossible odds. We want to be thrilled; we want to be amazed. We don't want to see the universe as it is; we want to see it as it should be. We want energy cannons in outer space that make cool sounds; we want wise old men to train us in the ways of the Force. We want the good guys to win.
And it's good that children want these things-not for any simplistic moralistic reason, but because all these things stimulate the imagination. Facts stimulate the intellect, and that's a good thing too, but-as Dr. Einstein knows-creativity is a far more rare and precious jewel than intelligence.
Thank you Dr. Einstein. You may step down.
For my next testimony, I would like to call the renowned artistalso from twentieth-century Earth-Pablo Picasso.
Mr. Picasso, can you please give me your opinion on computers?
Thank you. For those of you who don't speak Spanish, he said, "Computers are useless. They can only give you answers." I'd like to point out that Mr. Picasso was widely-sorry, Pablo, is widelyconsidered to be one of the most influential painters of his era. Even though he worked in an entirely different arena, the label "genius" is just as applicable to him as to Dr. Einstein.
Answers are an important and necessary thing. I don't think anyone here-well, possibly that Vogon in the corner-would argue with that. But an answer, any answer, is an ending. Asking a question is a beginning. One is the culmination of a process; the other is the process itself. Which is more important? The destination, or the journey?
One might as well ask whether a parsec is a unit of space or time. The answer, of course, is space ... but when Han Solo famously claims to have made the Kessel Spice Run in "less than twelve parsecs," the children in the audience didn't care that he got it wrong. They were all too busy wishing they had done it, too.
And sometimes, when children grow up, they take their dreams with them. Star Trek, which predates the original Star Wars by a decade or so, is often cited by professionals in the scientific field as the inspiration for their later work. One of the inventors of the cell phone claims he was simply trying to make a communicator-perhaps a member of this generation will wind up creating a lightsaber or a landspeeder.
And if they do, it won't be because as children, they were fascinated by the well-documented, scientifically accurate processes they saw at the movies or on TV It'll be because something touched them, took them away to a place they loved so much they will spend the rest of their lives trying to find a way back.
Yes, Your Honor, I agree. There is something very sad about thatbut there is something noble, too. Chasing the impossible is a heartbreaking task, but it is precisely those people that propel the human race forward. Engineers get behind people and push; dreamers run to the front and pull. And if the path they choose leads off the edge of a cliff, they're always the first ones to hit the bottom.
Thank you, Pablo. You may step down.
Imagination relies on inspiration. Inspiration is when a previous ly unseen connection between two or more facts suddenly becomes clear. That connection is not a linear process; it is not something that can be accomplished by rational thought or straightforward logic. It is intuitive, organic, unpredictable. It requires a great deal of input, an open mind to receive it, and the proper environment to let that information percolate and interact and grow.
Children's minds are open. The games of childhood are just such an environment. And films-and books, and comics, and video games, and TV shows-like Star Wars provide plenty of input.
