thin Star Wars
don't get me wrong either. Of course the Star Wars universe is much, well,
'thinner' than Tolkien's world, but look at the text in which great myths
or mythic circles are articulated! It's not the text itself that counts,
it's the 'openness' and the number of its implications, and Star Wars does
exactly what Tolkien, in this respect: it gives you a brief description of
a world and leaves to your imagination and logic to fill up the details.
It's only a question of the quantity of these leads that makes the
difference, I believe. And by the way, Star Wars has grown into a very
'thick' system in the meanwhile with all the Star Wars SF-books appearing,
which, if I'm right in assuming, are 'canonised' by Lucas for some extent.
Doubtless the oncoming new episodes will shatter some details that some
individuals have built up during the time that elapsed dince 'Jedi', ande
I suppose this is why some people will not like these new films. If you
have paistakingly worked out what the Clone wars were, and you find that
in the 'canonical' version (I gather the Clone wars, for example, will be
the subject of the episode coming out in 2002) is everything but that, it
may shatter you a bit.
So I still find Star Wars a great mythopoieic thing, and still think it is
fundamentally similar to Tolkien's technique.
Jozsef Attila University