Allow me to begin by expressing that there are aberrations on both sides; people who are different from the majority. This is only speaking in generalities. Star Wars (YUK!) is casting a storm trooper as a black man. Reviews are mixed (as expected). Fans of the story are going ballistic that a black man is cast as the bad guy. IMPOSSIBLE!!! GASP!!! Fans of the competition are all for equal rights for people; good bad or indifferent. It has been this way for at least 154 years. I wonder why? Examine these excerpts. Another angle for SW vs ST was very deeply covered by a very interesting 1999 Salon article Star Wars despots vs. Star Trek populists by a sci-fi author David Brin. As the title implies, Brins evaluation is that Star Wars exemplifies the elite/heroic storytelling where select few decide for the unwashed masses what is good and bad for them. Now, as far the difference between the fans (as per the question), this means that the fans of Star Wars are a lot more OK with the classical Homeric big elite hero worldview, as opposed to a more democratic (lower case d[1])/populist worldview of Star Trek fans. Lest people think its Brins vivid imagination, heres the article quoting non other than Lucas himself: Lucas defends his elitist view, telling the New York Times, Thats sort of why I say a benevolent despot is the ideal ruler. He can actually get things done. The idea that power corrupts is very true and its a big human who can get past that. In other words a royal figure or demigod, anointed by fate. (Like a billionaire moviemaker?) To further quote Brin: Regarding Star Wars: Just what bill of goods are we being sold, between the frames? Elites have an inherent right to arbitrary rule; common citizens neednt be consulted. They may only choose which elite to follow. Good elites should act on their subjective whims, without evidence, argument or accountability. Any amount of sin can be forgiven if you are important enough (think the redemption of Anakin at the end of ROTJ - DVK). True leaders are born. Its genetic. The right to rule is inherited. Justified human emotions can turn a good person evil. Regarding Star Trek: In Star Trek, when authorities are defied, it is in order to overcome their mistakes or expose particular villains, not to portray all institutions as inherently hopeless. Good cops sometimes come when you call for help. Ironically, this image fosters useful criticism of authority, because it suggests that any of us can gain access to our flawed institutions, if we are determined enough -- and perhaps even fix them with fierce tools of citizenship. By contrast, the oppressed rebels in Star Wars have no recourse in law or markets or science or democracy. They can only choose sides in a civil war between two wings of the same genetically superior royal family. They may not meddle or criticize. As Homeric spear-carriers, its not their job. EVEN WRONG_WING SALON magazine recognizes that leftists are generally the ones who are against a democratic republic and in favor of a dictatorship! scifi.stackexchange/questions/3032/what-are-the-philosophical-and-societal-differences-between-star-wars-and-star-t
Posted on: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 01:13:34 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015