Far, far away from promoting Zen Buddhist ideals of peace and tolerance, the world of Star Wars foments fundamentalist jihad.
From the all-powerful dominance of the Jedi Knights of the Old Republic (and their looming cathedral and sanctimonius pronouncements) to Grand Moff Tarkin’s proclamation that “The last vestiges of the old Republic have been swept away”, George Lucas sets the stage for a sort of “Force-powered” religious jihad or struggle. There is no tolerance in either the republic or the Empire. There is even less difference between the atrocities committed by the fictional crusaders of Lucas’ universe (the destruction of Alderaan and the attempted extermination of the Endorians) and the atrocities leveled at historical crusaders in the real world. This world of Star Wars is set up to perpetuate the idea that whatever religion has the most light sabers, wins.
This religious fundamentalism may in fact go hand-in-hand with Lucas’ worldview regarding government: “But there's probably no better form of government than a good despot."-- George Lucas (New York Times interview, March 1999) http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/1999/06/15/brin_main/index.html
Contrast this to the religions of Roddenberry’s United Federation of Planets in Star Trek. Humans have no overt religion and despite the series creator’s atheism, the sense that comes across is that Human religions have learned to get along with each other. Other aliens have religions as well: Bajor’s Prophets; the Klingon’s remarkably “Catholic” faith; Vulcan mysticism; American capitalism taken only to a bit more of an extreme on Ferenginar; even Cardassia’s family-worship – yet none of these appear to have sects within themselves and there is no one “force” or Council enforcing the observance of particular forms. While there may still be some religious strife, it appears to be minor. No one on Star Trek has attempted to strangle anyone else using the dark side of anything.
So why is Star Wars still more popular than Star Trek? Why do people still go out at Halloween dressed as Wookies and Obi Wan Kenobi rather than as Trill or Admiral Cartwright? Is it a failing that Lucas tapped into – that we prefer despots to democracy? Or is it a result of the Star Wars meme (As defined by Richard Dawkins in The Selfish Gene (1976): "a unit of cultural transmission, or a unit of imitation." "Examples of memes are tunes, ideas, catch-phrases, clothes fashions, ways of making pots or of building arches. ...” http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&start=1&oi=define&q=http://www.silcom.com/~barnowl/chain-letter/glossary.htm&usg=AFQjCNEwcjwYR623FklHq8pPcVxn-aS30Q ) that has infected the US as a result of millions of men, women and children watching the movies over and over and over…
6 comments:
Simple. It's more fun to imagine yourself romping through the universe of Star Wars, being a blaster-slinging or light-saber-swinging solo Hero or Villain.
I ran a contest recently, "The Star Trek Death Scene You Always Wanted to See," and close to half the entrants imagined themselves being redshirts and getting killed off while that glory-hog Kirk got to have all the great adventures and get all the women, including the green ones. Where's the fun in being Anonymous Crewman #3, a.k.a., dead meat cannon fodder?
To understand the comparative appeal of the two universes, don't look at the movies or TV shows. Look at the video games. Star Wars Battlefronts and Battlefronts II are *way* more fun to play than any Star Trek-based computer or video game ever created.
Excellent observations, Guy. While a credal belief is necessary for true communion within a faith, the totalitarian aspects of many religions (including Lucas') are really more secular than spiritual. And as for Roddenberry's universe, atheism or agnosticism is, in a strange way, almost averse to the type of neo-utopia that Roddenberry formed. One thing you mentioned sounds fascinating to me: In what ways are Klingons akin to Roman Catholics (or did you mean catholicism)? Either way, this is quite an intriguing concept...
Hi, David Brin checking in. Good little riff on SW vs ST.
I go into that same comparison more extensively in STAR WARS ON TRIAL, the book where I serve as the "prosecuting attorney" and Matt STover was appointed (unofficially) by Lucas to pull the defense. An amusing romp!
But yes, Trek represents the notion of citizen-based civilization, typified by a naval vessel that needs all hands to function and many civilized rules. SW in contrast focuses on little "air force" fighter planes like the knight's charger (with little quire attached).
Civilization cannot be a character or participate.
Ah, but while I despise what Lucas did - after the beautiful and hopeful EMPIRE STRIKES BACK - I can also satirize trek! See my comedy-serial in Baen's Universe magazine (online).
Keep at it.
david brin
Don't forget the contrast between the treatment of artificial intelligences in ST and SW.
In Star Wars the supposedly "good guys" buy and sell intelligent and emotionally developed robots as property---even wiping their memories whenever its convenient. Slavery, pure and simple. And most fans never seem to notice it or be troubled by it when its pointed out.
In Star Trek, on the other hand, Data is treated as a being with rights. They directly confront the issue of his personhood and rights in one episode---where it is ruled in a hearing by Starfleet that he is an autonomous person with the same rights and responsibilities as any other citizen.
So why is Star Wars still more popular than Star Trek? ..... Is it a failing that Lucas tapped into – that we prefer despots to democracy?
I think the answer is much simpler than that:
The five-year old fanboys in us love a good lightsaber fight.
I think that's actually about 75% of the appeal of Star Wars. With the other 25% being the Zen-like quality of the Jedi---which I think appeals to some of us strongly. Even if, on reflection, it doesn't hold up too well.
The 'fun' factor definitely plays into Star War's mass appeal... but besides that, I think that the series appeals more to our base instincts of justice and right/wrong.
The Dark Side, that is to say, the Sith, represent an absolute evil, while the Light Side represents an uncorruptible good. Thus, there is very little in the way of 'grey' area in terms of philosofy, thereby making characters much more easy to love or hate.
I don't think that George Lucas is promoting religious jihad here, though. The Light Side shows remorse over any civilian deaths or unnecesary tragedies, while the Dark Side is not a realistic, flexible movement filled with some good people but a symbol of absolute evil.
The Light Side is therefore intolerant of the Sith becuase the Sith is essentially 100% bad. The war is not one against a people or even a philosofy but simply one of good vs. evil. Who woudn't love a cut-and-dry conflict like that, full of definite heroes and villains?
Oh, and I have to second brb's comment.... Battlefront is a MUCH better game than anything Star Trek has come up with. =)
Post a Comment