Lords of the Sith

[Phil]

Mine came in the mail yesterday, and I plan on reading soon. Anyone else get theirs?

 

[Brandon Rhea]

I read it a few weeks ago. Good book. I've always liked Cham Syndulla.

 

[Srota]

Just finished it, I enjoyed it, but as with heir to the jedi, I think it could have been a lot better.

 

[Andrewza]

are all these books cannon now? it is all so confussing.

 

[Phil]

Everything that has come out since the book "A New Dawn" has been the new canon.

 

[Andrewza]

well i got to get reading then. I am glad they got rid of the Von. I stoped reading all EU books wants the Von arrived

 

[Brandon Rhea]

are all these books cannon now? it is all so confussing.

It's pretty straightforward. All new books are canon. You never have to ask that question about a new book again.

 

[Srota]

Anyway, here's why I thought this book could have been better.

1. For a book called lords of the sith, I felt like the two characters were underused. The Vader - Palatine dynamic is incredibly fun to read about, and yet we see none of it here. I get that this was to be set closer to RotS than ANH, but still. A little bit more conflict between the two would have gone miles imo.

2. Moff Mors (sic?), she was a nice addition to the universe, but I would have enjoyed a bit more back story in the beginning about her, and also a bit more of a resolution of her storyline.

3. What new did this book give us? Besides the moff, and a brief look at one of the threads that will become the rebellion, I don't feel like this book did much to develop the new canon any more than Heir to the Jedi did. Perhaps even less so.

In the end, I enjoyed the book, especially since every single new star wars audio book seems to have better and better production values, but in the end, it just felt incomplete. This has been an issue of mine with much of the new canon, aside from A New Dawn and Tarkin. Even the comics have felt like they are really not doing much to build the world up and show us all sorts of new things that aren't in the movies. Also, I didn't see much that's a call out to the Legends stuff in this book, perhaps even less than in Heir, and I hope this is not a trend the books follow.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Legends should only be called out if it makes sense to do so, IMO. Too much and they run the risk of just looking like a re-canonization info dump.

But anyway, I enjoyed this book. I've always been a Cham Syndulla fan, so I'm glad he was in this. I thought Moff Mors' character was largely problematic, and unfortunate as the first LGBT character in the new canon, but she improved later in the book.

 

[Srota]

Oh, I agree, they should use them as needed, but I felt like there were some places where we could have seen some of the old twilek culture brought back into canon. Things like the head clan and the like. The kinds of things that could flesh out the culture on ryloth. in the end, it just didn't do a good job really expanding the star wars experience for me, ya know?

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Guess it depends on the perspective with which you approach the book. For example, you mentioned the limited use of Vader and Sidious. I didn't go into it for that. I went into it for Cham Syndulla and the Free Ryloth movement, because this book is another part in planting the seeds of the Rebel Alliance. The seeds that began, chronologically speaking, with none other than Cham himself on Ryloth. So I was happy to see that story continue in book form.

 

[Srota]

I can agree with that, Bac. It was definitely interesting to see more of the seeds that will grow into the rebellion, it was just off putting to me that the implied main characters of the book (who are prominently on the cover) were not used nearly as much as I expected.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Fair enough. I figured they wouldn't be the primary focus, but I can certainly understand why someone would.

To elaborate on my last post, since I wrote fast, I think these are the two key passages from the book (SPOILER ALERT). First, from the beginning:

"Cham stared at the screen as if he could pull his comrades through hyperspace by sheer force of will. Assuming they'd even been able to jump. The whole operation had been a huge risk, but Cham had thought it worthwhile to secure more heavy weapons and force the Empire to divert some resources away from Ryloth. Too, he'd wanted to make a stronger statement, send an unmistakable message that at least some of the Twi'leks of Ryloth would not quietly accept Imperial rule. He'd wanted to be the spark that started a fire across the galaxy."​

Then, at the end:

"Behind him, towering and dark, Vader ignited his lightsaber. Isval heard her death in the sizzle of its blade. The tears in her eyes dried, replaced by defiance, by anger, by hope kindled in the knowledge that Cham, at least, had escaped, that the fire of rebellion had not gone out because he carried it."​

So that's the perspective I take in looking at Lords of the Sith. It's not about the Lords of the Sith themselves, despite its title. Its about the early days of the revolution that will one day defeat them.

 

[Vulpes]

Ended kind of abruptly. When the Moff finally got interesting, nothing really happened. I hope they are saving her for another book because her redemption could be a cool arc. The lgbt mention was subtlr and felt kinda unneeded imo.

Idk why it was called lords of the Sith when they felt more like secondary characters imo.

I liked it though.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

The fact that a character is LGBT should feel subtle, because it's no big deal that someone is LGBT.

 

[Andrewza]

How can some one be LGBT you can be at max 2 of those normally only 1

 

[Brandon Rhea]

How can some one be LGBT you can be at max 2 of those normally only 1

LGBT doesn't mean you're all of those things at once. It's a term that refers to the community.

 

[Kiro]

How can some one be LGBT you can be at max 2 of those normally only 1

*bangs head against the desk repeatedly*

 

[Andrewza]

don't break your keyboard

LGBT doesn't mean you're all of those things at once. It's a term that refers to the community.

Yeah but cant we just say some one is Gay.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Yeah but cant we just say some one is Gay.

No, because that's not an all-encompassing term. Bi-sexual individuals are not gay. Transgendered individuals are not gay (though they can be; gender and sex are unrelated).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT