Star Wars Ring Theory

Television, Movies Games and Books Star Wars
#1

Mike Klimo has done exhaustive research concerning the Star Wars Prequels and made claims of the artistry of George Lucas. There has been much criticism from fanboys and the public alike about the Prequel Trilogy. I have been very vocal regarding my feelings and the Prequels. See Rewrite the Star Wars Prequels.

My biggest beef has been that GL is a master visionary but I felt his writing of dialogue to express his vision was poor. Mike Klimo does not dispute that or even mention it for that matter. However, he does add something to the conversation that is unique. The connections he makes are revealing and insightful. My only question surrounding his comments are, “Was this Lucas’ intent?” Mr. Klimo makes assumptions but those assumptions are very convincing.

If you’re looking for a new perspective and appreciation for the Prequels. Then read Star Wars Ring Theory.

#2

Just when you think you have things figured out, somebody opens that trap door and we go to discover something new. Thank you Mr. Talos.

#3

Extremely informative and very interesting. I do wish that George Lucas had put as much work into the dialog and characters as he had the visuals though.

#4

Hi! Loved the Ring Theory Article. It’s very Post Modern and I love me some good Post Modernism.

I’m wondering if anyone has read Robert Venturi’s Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture. I have recently. When I reached the part about the rules of ring theory I notice a strong tendency toward symmetry. In CCA, Venturi argues that past architecture relied on symmetry to create beauty while Modernism broke from this by creating asymmetry making architecture more complex. His view was that Modernism was started much earlier then when the square box designs came about and was present in much earlier designs. He saw that great buildings had both symmetry and asymmetry making them complex while being contradictory (leading to his theory of “both…and…” = complexity and contradition = greatness, to put it simply).

In Starwars, I am wondering if it was Lucas’ plan all along to break from this symmetrical construction of 4-6 in 1-3 and that we are not seeing the “and” part of his construction and his asymmetry - at this point it would be too long for me to go into identifying those asymmetrical points, a guy’s got to work - because we are fixated on what is symmetrical because we have so much information pointing to the symmetry. Those people who are wanting to see the symmetry between 4-6 and 1-3 and are confused by the disjointed feeling between the two triptychs may be because there is asymmetry at work here = complexity. Once we see this complexity the story doesn’t feel as disrupted.

I think the contradictions are as abundant as the symmetry. Types of wealth, government, colors, locations, characters all break from the symmetry while contradict between the two triptychs. Even the Hero’s journey is contradictory between Luke and Anakin and even Obi Won’s journey is contradictory.

Although, like many people, I don’t value 1-3 as much I am finding because I am nostalgic for 4-6 (I was young when they come out and they are original to me) I wanted 1-3 to either break completely to tell a new story or I wanted 1-3 to be symmetrical to 4-6. Neither happened. What I got was something more than what I expected and I couldn’t understand why.

I have a question for people who are familiar with Joseph Campbell’s writing on the Hero’s Journey. Is there any mention of this notion of asymmetry between the stories he uses to illustrate his points?