Let us make things clear.
I love Star Wars. All the episodes, including The Phantom Menace. I really enjoyed watching them, gathering information on them, and I also enjoy for the time being looking into them more deeply and writing down these thoughts. I think that George Lucas produced a very outstanding work for several reasons, technologically innovative, but also and particularly extremely rich as far as the signification and the iconographic language are concemed. Nevertheless, I am not an unconditional "admirer". I think we have to be balanced between the dithyramb and the terrible critics. "If s just a movie" the author explained recently . But the fact that this movie or the whole set gives rise to so many contradictory and virulent reactions, is quite striking.
As far as I am concemed, I think that taking a radical stand for or against Star Wars is more linked to the complex representation in people imaginary mind than to the work in itself (whatever its value). For a long time , the words myth, mythical, conceming G. Lucas's universe have been commonplaces. There are a lot of books, articles, Intemet publications, even newsgroup dedicated to this theme. Smithsonian Institute exhibition across the United-States still emphasizes the concept and gives it a status of obviousness. Nevertheless, this obviousness is not consensuel : shall I remind you that word has several meanings.
I. The myth...
a) Fabulous tale.
The myth is first of all a "fabulous tale, often from popular origin, wich puts on stage beings incarning aspect of the hurnan condition under a symbolic form of nature forces. This definition is far from being perfect (I will come back to it later), but it will be sufficient for this introduction. So formulated, it compares Star Wars with the fables, the legends, the tradition tales, from the Iliade to the Grail Quest passing by Gilgamesh d'Uruk and others. Therefore, all kinds of intellectuels have analysed the work according to the traditional categories and gave it the status of modern times myth . Sometimes with judiciousness, sometimes with a zeal that goes beyond the author's thoughts. Nevertheless, this transposition of immemorial themes with a new form and language was one of G.Lucas's initial objectives and one of the explicit justifications of his work content and form.
b) Simplified image
The myth is also "a simplified image, often illusive, that human groups develop or accept about a character or a fact and that plays a key role in their behaviour or appreciation" . Therefore, Star Wars fans or detractors contribute together to the mythification process of G. Lucas's work. There were in turn metaphysics, anthropology, sociological analyses, theology, defence of a political system, and even recently a racist critic... Whatever their pertinence, these stages of interpretation add to the work and, no doubt, misrepresent it more often than they deepen it. They become consequently constituants that reinforce the mythical side.
c) Spirit Creation
Finally, the myth is also a "simple spirit creation" , something that does not exist. More than a critic questions himself, with a bit of provocation, about the reality of the Star Wars phenomenon -at least in Europe, and probably in the rest of the world. Indeed, without the publicity campaign, the strong merchandising, the gadgets of the fast-food menu or in the com-flakes packs, what does at least remain? Did Star Wars really influence the western contemporary culture ? Or simply the north American contemporary culture ? The question is worth being asked
In short, describing Lucas's work as a myth would cover several meanings. In a peculiar way, these signfications are maybe simultaneously valid ! That is what I will try to demonstrate in the following articles.
II.And what about anthropology?
Star Wars has its own anthropology. Moreover, it is possible to trace its evolution from A new hope to The Phantom menace. The relatonship with man (oneself or the other), with the world, the machine are recurrent themes in Lucas's work and are cleverly handled. It could be funny, intellectually speaking, to trace these marks, to note and analyse them. Why not ? It is a good way to practice your imagination!
Nevertheless, speaking about Star Wars, I see another interesting relationship with anthropology. The way we watch the work reveals what we are. Individually first, but also collectively: I can be sensitive to the philosophical references of the work (there are plenty of it !), whereas an engineer only sees an inspired metaphor about the technological progresse. However, in other words, the Japanese does not see nor undestand the same as the Belgian or the American, the catholic as the muslim or the jew. Critics, analyses, stand takings or mere opinions teach me more about the people who saw the movie, about their vision or apprehension of the world than about the movie. This can be really fascinating... Here is, outlined, what my words are going to be.
Interested ? Go over ! As for me, 1 stay at your disposal : you will find hereafter a visitor's book and an e-mail address to contact me ...
