Cool comparison, but ultimately wrong
Consider this: A powerful politician craves ever more power and realizes that he cannot gain full reign while the just and balanced laws of the republic curb his abilities. So he realizes the only way to gain full control is to prod a tense political situation into a full blown war. Under the threat of war he would be able to act freely, using the fear of his populace to throw away freedom after freedom.
George W. Bush? Maybe. Emperor Palpatine? Yes.
The Daily Ghost gives George Lucas too much credit for an ability to craft subtle commentary, first of all, and second of all ignores the fact that the execrable Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones were written well before the 2000 elections, the 2002 midterms, and the attempt by Bush to be a bigger man than his father. They cannot therefore be a commentary of any kind on current events.
Still, it's neat thinking. It's kind of like the "Woman gives birth to JC, savior of the human race" summary that you can apply to "The Terminator."
posted by Robert at
3:07 PM
1 Comments:
(Savannah) I liked the Daily Ghost's final paragraph-- "Remember how the Emperor threw out the Geneva Convention?...Oh, wait..."
It is true that Lucas could not have specifically intended to comment on events that had not yet occurred. However, the storyline is still relevant. Maybe Lucas was prescient. Maybe tyranny is banal, and all he needed was to have Napoleon, Hitler and Stalin vaguely in mind. For my money, "Gladiator" wins the Unintentional Relevance prize, seeing as how it's about a son driven mad by jealousy of his father. Although feckless and incompetent, he seeks to become greater and more beloved than his father, to which end he stifles dissent, imposes tyrannical control, intimidates people into submission, persecutes those who won't be cowed, *pretends to be a great warrior* (hello, hello), and uses brutal spectacle to distract his people from his failed reign.
By
Anonymous, at 4:48 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home