[TV] The Mandalorian (*Spoilers*)

[rhorle]

Rey has not appear in any canon material post RoS

Except for "The Star Wars Book". See that is why you keep dismissing it as non-canon, but sometimes canon, but only the parts I agree with canon. It isn't 100% reasonable to dismiss something as non-canon just because you don't like the claim. There does not need to be any other supporting evidence in order for something to be considered canon. It is canon until something else changes it. And the information about Rey could change in future works. It is how fiction works.

[Darththeo]

Except for "The Star Wars Book". See that is why you keep dismissing it as non-canon, but sometimes canon, but only the parts I agree with canon. It isn't 100% reasonable to dismiss something as non-canon just because you don't like the claim. There does not need to be any other supporting evidence in order for something to be considered canon. It is canon until something else changes it. And the information about Rey could change in future works. It is how fiction works.

I am literally not doing that. I have explained this to you numerous times, oh person you claimed to read everything I wrote.

I am questioning its canonicity because the book contains errors ... that is not "dismissing it as non-canon." And I am questioning the claim "canonicity" because said book contains errors and rather than sourcing from the book itself, we are sourcing through a 3rd party. That is 100% a reasonable stance to take.

[rhorle]

I am questioning its canonicity because the book contains errors ... that is not "dismissing it as non-canon." And I am questioning the claim "canonicity" because said book contains errors and rather than sourcing from the book itself, we are sourcing through a 3rd party. That is 100% a reasonable stance to take.

Nope. You questioned it even before the errors. You said the errors just reinforce your belief that it isn't canon, or quasi-canon, or whatever explanation you are using in the moment. The book is not from a 3rd party. It is from Disney written by a Star Wars executive, an author of several Star Wars compendiums, and a contributer to Starwars.com

[Darththeo]

Nope. You questioned it even before the errors. You said the errors just reinforce your belief that it isn't canon, or quasi-canon, or whatever explanation you are using in the moment. The book is not from a 3rd party. It is from Disney written by a Star Wars executive, an author of several Star Wars compendiums, and a contributer to Starwars.com

I questioned the claim "Rey is a Jedi Master." You then defended your argument by bringing up the book via Wookieepedia (again, we don't have the actual wording from the book). Then I saw said book contains at least 4 known errors.

And reference books are just that, references. How canon they are is always treated supplementary to the actual work. They have always been a secondary to the actual canon. That's how it has always been.

[rhorle]

I questioned the claim "Rey is a Jedi Master." You then defended your argument by bringing up the book via Wookieepedia (again, we don't have the actual wording from the book). Then I saw said book contains at least 4 known errors. And reference books are just that, references. How canon they are is always treated supplementary to the actual work. They have always been a secondary to the actual canon. That's how it has always been.

Anything but the movies (or few TV Shows) is supplementary to the work. You keep trying to put these as lower then other supplementary works just because you disagree with the claims it has made. And that was before you found errors to latch onto as a reason why it should be dismissed. At no point in the past of Star Wars has the compendiums and other reference books been labeled as "Lowest of canon that require other sources to confirm".

[Darththeo]

Anything but the movies (or few TV Shows) is supplementary to the work. Y

That's how it was under Lucas, that is not how it is under Disney. Disney all works (which reference or source books do not count as) are equal in their canonicity. They stated prior to TFA that was their goal. The novels are AS CANON AS the movies under Disney.

You are using Lucas Era facts under Disney Era here. My argument is that across all fandoms, source books are always supplementary to the actual work, they are always a lower level regardless of the subject (whether it be Star Wars, DBZ, Pokemon, etc.) My argument has nothing to do with Disney specifically, but rather a general rule of thumb.

But this is 100% a moot point anyway because you aren't sourcing the book directly. You are sourcing it via a third party.

[rhorle]

That's how it was under Lucas, that is not how it is under Disney. Disney all works (which reference or source books do not count as) are equal in their canonicity. They stated prior to TFA that was their goal. The novels are AS CANON AS the movies under Disney.

Lets see a link to that. Across all Fandoms they are not supplementary to the actual work. Because as you just got done stating pre-disney didn't treat them that way. Stop contradicting your own claims. There is no universal standard. Your argument has everything to do with Disney because you just claimed Disney officially stated that source books were not sources of canon. Lol. Which is it? A general rule of thumb of specific statements by Disney?

[Darththeo]

Lets see a link to that. Across all Fandoms they are not supplementary to the actual work. Because as you just got done stating pre-disney didn't treat them that way. Stop contradicting your own claims. There is no universal standard. Your argument has everything to do with Disney because you just claimed Disney officially stated that source books were not sources of canon. Lol. Which is it? A general rule of thumb of specific statements by Disney?

You know you claimed you "read what I write" but clearly this isn't the case.

Disney states there is one canon level and all works are the same canonicity (Reference books are not the work, they are references). The work is novels, comics, shows, games, and movies. There is no contradiction in that statement or my argument. What is with you using words you clearly don't understand?

[rhorle]

Disney states there is one canon level and all works are the same canonicity (Reference books are not the work, they are references). The work is novels, comics, shows, games, and movies. There is no contradiction in that statement or my argument. What is with you using words you clearly don't understand?

Provide the link to that statement. The only one saying reference books are not part of the work is you. It has gone from "everyone knows that" to "That was old LucasArts" to "Disney has stated they are not canon". And whatever in between. Reference books are part of "the work" as much as any other non-primary medium. References to work are still "the work". Lol.

[Darththeo]

Provide the link to that statement. The only one saying reference books are not part of the work is you. It has gone from "everyone knows that" to "That was old LucasArts" to "Disney has stated they are not canon". And whatever in between. Reference books are part of "the work" as much as any other non-primary medium. References to work are still "the work". Lol.

No, they are not. They are supplements to the work ... that's what their purpose is. They are meant as quick references, nothing more. They themselves are not the work.

Also: https://www.starwars.com/news/the-le...rns-a-new-page

“We have an unprecedented slate of new Star Wars entertainment on the horizon,” said Kennedy. “We’re set to bring Star Wars back to the big screen, and continue the adventure through games, books, comics, and new formats that are just emerging. This future of interconnected storytelling will allow fans to explore this galaxy in deeper ways than ever before.”

Should we just ignore Kathleen Kennedy? Like what does she know about the canon of Star Wars right?

Later: "On the screen, the first new canon to appear will be Star Wars Rebels. In print, the first new books to come from this creative collaboration include novels from Del Rey Books. First to be announced, John Jackson Miller is writing a novel that precedes the events of Star Wars Rebels and offers insight into a key character’s backstory, with input directly from executive producers Dave Filoni, Simon Kinberg, and Greg Weisman."

This is clearly referencing that the canon is both screen and in print.

[Triceron]

Why would I appologize for something you've shown I did not do. If I was arguing the point that you raised in your first post I couldn't have also mangled what you've said. Right? This entire thing started from me saying Leia was a Jedi. You've shown that she was a Jedi in certain contexts which means for all intents and purposes she is a Jedi. Look up the duck test.

And she is not Jedi.

You had regarded her as being a Jedi because she was training as one, regardless of completing that training or not. You continued to carry on that context with Luke talking about not being the last Jedi, and having that implied to Leia as well.

Yet even Wookiepedia lists her simply as a Force Sensitive, and does not call her a Jedi.

Wookiepedia officially recognizes Rey as a Jedi Master. It does not recognize Leia as a formal Jedi in any capacity.

She looks like a duck, but chose not to walk or talk like one. That's the difference.

[rhorle]

Also: https://www.starwars.com/news/the-le...rns-a-new-page

The Star Wars Book was released after that so is not part of Legends. There is no need to be dishonest and claim it is. Nothing about this discussion ignores Mrs. Kennedy or that link. The Star Wars Book is part of the continued adventure through books. Of course canon is both screen and in print. I have never doubted that lol. You are the one that keeps making difference of what and is not canon based on a silly notion of reference books that isn't even universal.

- - - Updated - - -

She looks like a duck, but chose not to walk or talk like one. That's the difference.

Except when training a person as one. Except when thinking like one when thinking about what approach to training is needed. This isn't just a random force sensitive person we are talking about. The books clearly have Leia as a rival in power to Luke and at an advanced stage before stopping. You accept Grogu as Jedi when he has the same status as Leia. Never completed training. The difference is one agrees with your perception and the other doesn't.

[Triceron]

Except when training a person as one. Except when thinking like one when thinking about what approach to training is needed. This isn't just a random force sensitive person we are talking about. The books clearly have Leia as a rival in power to Luke and at an advanced stage before stopping. You accept Grogu as Jedi when he has the same status as Leia. Never completed training. The difference is one agrees with your perception and the other doesn't.

That is the only context though, when she is training Rey, and only in that context.

You can't then apply that to Luke inferring that Leia was a Jedi when he talks to Kylo as a means of evidence. It really only applies to Rey, because Rey is actively seeking to become a full-fledged Jedi.

Leia has no other interest in being a Jedi herself. She's simply Force Sensitive and had Jedi training under Luke. She is the same as Asohka.

She looks like a Jedi but chose not to walk or talk like one. The context of Rey's training would not have been acknowledgement to anyone else in the galaxy as her actually BEING a Jedi.

Jedi is a religion and profession. Leia knowing its training does not mean she adopts that name, or is being formally recognized as one. Just like someone who is a Priest or a Doctor is specifically of that profession, and not just a title you throw at anyone who happens to practice religion or medicine. It's a formal designation of a chosen profession.

[Darththeo]

The Star Wars Book was released after that so is not part of Legends. There is no need to be dishonest and claim it is. Nothing about this discussion ignores Mrs. Kennedy or that link. The Star Wars Book is part of the continued adventure through books. Of course canon is both screen and in print. I have never doubted that lol. You are the one that keeps making difference of what and is not canon based on a silly notion of reference books that isn't even universal.

Dude, you literally stated that the novels are supplementary to the movies and (some) television shows arguing for a tier canon that the books are less canon than the movies which isn't true under Disney. Reference books are just that reference books, they are not the "continued adventure through books."

Reference books are not the story. The story is what the work is. Therefore reference works ARE NOT anything but supplementary to the work. And you don't even have the freaking book, you have what it says on Wookieepedia and I have at this point order the book to actually cite what the book says specifically.

[rhorle]

You can't then apply that to Luke inferring that Leia was a Jedi when he talks to Kylo as a means of evidence. It really only applies to Rey, because Rey is actively seeking to become a full-fledged Jedi.

Keyword there is full fledged. Don't you find it odd how you have to keep making that distinction in order to create a difference? Luke knows there will be more Jedi because he knows Leia is enough one to train Rey. Does being a jedi require acknowledgement from others? Did Obi-wan stop being a Jedi because the galaxy thought he was Ben the Hermit? It is enough that Luke, Leia, and Rey consider her to be a Jedi in order to prepare and continue the Jedi Legacy. The passage I provided earlier even has her communicating with Yoda and Obi-wan over the years. Things were in motion to put Leia back into the Jedi spot light even if there was no galactic recognition.

- - - Updated - - -

Dude, you literally stated that the novels are supplementary to the movies and (some) television shows arguing for a tier canon that the books are less canon than the movies which isn't true under Disney. Reference books are just that reference books, they are not the "continued adventure through books."

So did you. What is your point? In most works of fiction the primary source is the original work. In this case that is the Movies. You have all the rest that is canon but not hte primary source which is the expanded universe. Disney reset the EU so they would be free to create whatever vision they wanted. A reference book is a book. You have nothing proving that Disney considers them to be outside of canon.

Lol. You actually ordered the book just to win an argument after saying the book isn't even canon?

[Zaktar]

IDK what the big problem is. Ranks decided by an organization are subject to change, in nomenclature as well as in procedure.

Maybe "Jedi Master" once required going through a specific process, and included vetting by a council; now it doesn't, because the organization as a whole has changed. Since Luke is basically the only one left, he gets to say how it works.

That's literally how it worked in comparable institutions, like say religious orders. You can't just look at, say, the Catholic Church and go "oh but he's not a cardinal because in the middle ages, cardinals had to be noblemen and he's not a noble, so..." Things change, rules change, ranks change.

Yeah, that's the clear and convincing answer, but I assume people are bored.

[Triceron]

Keyword there is full fledged. Don't you find it odd how you have to keep making that distinction in order to create a difference?

The distinction is there because there are characters who exist as *being mistaken as* Jedis without formally being one.

This includes:

Anyone who is Force Sensitive and choosing to fight for a good cause. (Leia, Ahsoka)
Sith or former Sith (Starkiller, Darth Revan, Anakin Skywalker before he's formally Sith)
Padawans or Jedi-in-training (Grogu, Rey in Force Awakens, Leia)

We don't have a term to collectively refer to all these 'non-Jedi', and if there was a collective term that we can agree on then I'd be happy to use it.

Luke knows there will be more Jedi because he knows Leia is enough one to train Rey. Does being a jedi require acknowledgement from others? Did Obi-wan stop being a Jedi because the galaxy thought he was Ben the Hermit?

Obi-wan never stopped being a Jedi. He didn't give up the status despite choosing to live as a hermit. He is never considered a 'former' Jedi Master. He is still of that profession.
Leia on the other hand *never finished her training, and chose not to become a Jedi*. In short, she was never formally of that profession, she just did the training and knew the ins and outs of the art.

And Luke would have been referring to Rey, who will become the future of the Jedi. That's the implication of his words. Leia is not regarded as a Jedi in the story. Even Kylo never regards his own mother as a Jedi, otherwise he would not call Luke the last Jedi.

It is enough that Luke, Leia, and Rey consider her to be a Jedi in order to prepare and continue the Jedi Legacy. The passage I provided earlier even has her communicating with Yoda and Obi-wan over the years. Things were in motion to put Leia back into the Jedi spot light even if there was no galactic recognition.

Except no one considers Leia a Jedi in the movie. Leia can be Rey's master, but Leia herself is not a formal Jedi, and that she's just there to help Rey continue and complete her training.

And yes, you are correct that things were in motion to put Leia back into the Jedi spotlight. Yet they never do recognize it. If they did, then we wouldn't be having this conversation - she'd simply be a Jedi. Right?

[Darththeo]

So did you. What is your point? In most works of fiction the primary source is the original work. In this case that is the Movies. You have all the rest that is canon but not hte primary source which is the expanded universe. Disney reset the EU so they would be free to create whatever vision they wanted. A reference book is a book. You have nothing proving that Disney considers them to be outside of canon.

Lol. You actually ordered the book just to win an argument after saying the book isn't even canon?

I did not. I did not place any work below another.

Reference books are NOT the work. They are meant as a source of references for the work.

And I never said the "book isn't canon" I said the book BECAUSE OF ITS ERRORS has questionable canonicity. Why do you make crap up rather than address what I say?

---

It arrived today ... and I am honestly laughing. Literally it isn't even a sentence and could easily be a mistake. It isn't even in the written information but the Holocron information (essentially, just pull out information like Homeworld and Affliations) where is under Rey's status say "Jedi Master" as part of the current status, like they don't have it anywhere else. I was expecting something akin to what Wookieepedia has, but Rey's section literally ends where RoS did and she was NOT a Jedi Master at the end of that movie.

[PACOX]

This whole side discussion on the premise that 'Jedi' is just a title. I think a strong argument has been made against the statement.

[Triceron]

This whole side discussion on the premise that 'Jedi' is just a title. I think a strong argument has been made against the statement.

Then what exactly is it if it's not, and would you consider Leia to be a Jedi even if she doesn't use the title?