Entertainment
 

Talk:Journal of the Whills

From Wookieepedia, the Star Wars wiki.

Contents

[edit] Canon Whills

Besides the attribute at the start of the novelization, is there any IU reference that explicitly supports the conjectural explanation of the Journal of the Whills? --SparqMan 02:40, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

  • There's a brief sentence in The Movie Trilogy Sourcebook that says, from Voren Na'al's POV, "When our time is considered in the Journal of the Whills, I hope that people remember more than the events of the time, but have an understanding of why those events happened." (Italics theirs). Doesn't add much, but it adds a little. JSarek 08:06, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Most of what I've heard about the Whills has been OOU stuff about early drafts. It seems like the Whills would be better off in an OOU article. – Aidje talk 14:15, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
    • Qui-Gon states he learns the secret to immortality from a Shaman of the Whills, IIRC, so not everything about them has been removed from the SWU.--Eion 14:17, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
      • From the ROTS graphic novel: "The remote asteroid station of Polis Massa ...

YODA: Failed to stop the Sith Lord, I have. Still much to learn, there is ... QUI-GON (voice): With my help you will be able to merge with the force at will. YODA: Eternal life ... QUI-GON (voice): The ablity to defy death can be achieved, but only for oneself. A Shaman of the Whills discovered the secret .... but it will never be accomplished by a Sith Lord. It is a state acquired through compassion, not greed. YODA: A great Jedi Master you have become, Qui-Gon Jinn. Your apprentice I gratefully become." --SparqMan 14:32, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

  • Thanks Sparq--Eion 14:36, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Keeper of the Whills

In the recently released "The Making of ROTS" book, Lucas talks to Rob Coleman about R2´s importance, noting that "100 years after the events of ROTJ, R2 recalls the story of the Skywalker family to the "Keeper of the Whills", who writes it down into the Journal." VT-16 13:17, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

  • Which contradicts other statements by him that he abandoned the idea and replaced it with the Force. Regardless, it needs to be stated through Lucas to an IU source. Perhaps he'll do that later, but hasn't yet. --SparqMan 14:32, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
  • What are you talking about, he´s just telling his story to some keeper and the guy writes it down in his journal. What has that got to do with Lucas original intention with the Force? That the book was magical? And I was under the impression that when it was written down in a official Lucas publication, it was part of canon. is this wrong? VT-16 15:18, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • In early drafts of the screenplay, "The Whills" was the mystical power that later was developed into "The Force". The version of the screenplay that Alan Dean Foster had to work with included a note about the replacement of the Whills, but Foster kept it for stylistic purposes - a stylistic need that would be filled with the opening crawl in the films. As far as canon, things that are stated in off-hand comments are not considered to be canon until they are published in an IU source. Thus when Lucas says something like, "Well the Ewoks were the Wookiees, but I changed it" we don't have to reflect that somehow the Ewoks evolved from the Wookies. Make sense? --SparqMan 17:51, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • But the Whills are still present in one source, whether they are a different concept from what they started out as or not. For example, Coruscant was orignally called Alderaan, but Alderaan still made it into the films, just not as Coruscant. --Fade 17:57, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm not saying the Whills aren't canon (although almost nothing canon has really been stated about that). I was arguing against the use the comment in The Making of Revenge of the Sith to canonize R2-D2 as the recaller of the tale to the Whills. --SparqMan 19:11, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Exact time

The above sentence:

Voren Na'al: "When our time is considered in the Journal of the Whills, I hope that people remember more than the events of the time, but have an understanding of why those events happened."

This indicates that the Journal had been being written for years or rather centuries by the Whills, and was already known to historians. The Journal concerned past things, and anyone knew that his recurring 'present' time will eventually be written in the Journal as well after, say, 100 years or so. So the Journal did not originate from R2, nor does it contain only 9 chapters (the movies) as the Wookiepedia says, but the whole known history of the Galaxy. R2 was the contributor of just those 9 chapters which concern his own time. 62.74.5.10 07:24, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC)

  • I just had a thought. Perhaps the Journal is not so much real as an idiom. Bear with me. It could be a common expresion to say, for instance, "I won't get more than a sentence in the Journal of the Whills." or, "If you look up redundent in the Journal of the Whills, it says see redundent." Perhaps galactic society at large has created a whole concept of a future society writing down the history of the galaxy, if only out of logic, and this future society may not exist at all, or perhaps not in a state recognizable as galactic wikipedians. Just a random thought from a very tired user.--Eion 09:42, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC)
    • "Journal of the Wills" as an expression? Interesting, but purely speculation. It reminds me, however, that it is nowhere stated that the Journal is an actual book. We just assume that. The article should be rewritten to reflect this uncertainity. --Imp 14:14, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC)
      • How about the words 'chapter', 'First Saga', 'excerpt' and others? These can refer only to an actual book 62.74.5.28 16:33, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC)
        • Ugh, of course. I don't think this vacation thing is good for my brain... --Imp 17:36, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC)
          • Maybe more about the Journal will be revealed later on... my guess is that the Whills are the first sentient species to discover the force, long before the Rakatan Empire. The journal is probably a compilation of 'sagas' from many millennia.134.192.86.90

Um, 'chapter', 'First Saga', 'excerpt' are all used to describe films these days and comics and TV shows. (EX: I was watching the 18th chapter on my DVD copy of AotC from the first Star Wars Saga...) Since this is true, then this indicates the Journal could be a hologram, computer database or in another form other than written. Perhaps a minute consideration, but a consideration into the physical nature of the Journal.70.71.2.129 22:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tolkien ref

The Journal, as a plot devide, was maybe inspired by Tolkien and his Red Book that is supposedly the ultimate source of Lord of the Rings and his other works. Similar tricks were used by other, earlier sci-fi and fantasy authors.

What does that open speculation provide? The use of an external narrator is not a technique invented, popularized or commonly used by Tolkien. That seems like an unhelpful piece of speculation. --SparqMan 13:10, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)

True, but one could easily argue that the use of a single, mythical book to chronicle the comprehensive history of a multigenerational fantasy story from a future perspective was a concept very likely borrowed by Lucas from the Red Book. --Thetoastman 03:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
A quote from a fictitious book at the beggining of a chapter actully reminds me of Dune.--Bodo-Baas 23:00, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Whozawhatsits?

Who exactly wrote this? Because, as far as I know, I don't know... -User:Sniper112 6023-Have you heard of cows?

  • You mean the Journal itself? It doesn't exist. It's a legendary in-universe document supposedly maintained by the Whills. But it's not an actual document written by Lucas - Kwenn 18:16, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Legacy Comics After R2 tells tale

Hi, reading this I noticed that Lucas said he imagined R2 telling this story to the Keeper of the Whills or what not about 100 years after ROTJ but then I noticed that the new Legacy Era Comics take place about 140 years ABY. Does this mean that R2 has already told his tale and we have a different story teller or is this an instance of Lucas making something up on the fly? Thoughts? Stinkywookie 18:42, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

  • I believe it's Lucas' off-the-cuff remark and doesn't neccessarily fit into the timeline as established by the Expanded Universe - Kwenn 18:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Agreed. I also think it adds to the ambiguity of the whole Journal of The Whills concept as far as its canonicity. (I LIKE TO MAKE UP WORDS!) Stinkywookie 19:12, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

But you didn't make it up. "Canonicity" is a real word.

[edit] Fanon comment

The Journal of the Whills was a legendary record of events in the Galaxy. Ostensibly, the Journal was maintained by the Whills, a mysterious group or species of which very little is known. Possibly they were Rakatans.

Okay, this last comment is most likely fanon.If you guys don't mind, I'll remove it. —Unsigned comment by 201.230.104.87 (talk • contribs).

[edit] "Son of the Suns"

The phrase "Son of the Suns" in this article is currently a wikilink to the article The Chosen One, i.e. Anakin, but i'm not entirely sure that that's accurate. Isn't it also at least possible that it is talking about Luke? It refers to a "Son", and also that he arose during the time of "greatest despair", which IMO is much more likely to be a reference to the Galactic Empire itself rather than the political crisis occuring during Episode I. The "of the Suns" could also be a reference to the twin suns of Tatooine, the place where Luke grew up (although of course that could equally apply to Anakin). --86.135.178.19 04:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


No. Double wrong. it was written back in the early-mid 70s before Revenge of the Sith was even conceived. It refers to THAT version of whichever protagonist was featured in THAT version of "The Star Wars" and thus it does not refer to the Anakin or Luke that we know of today.

[edit] wtf

at new york comic con a couple years ago, 2 actors of star wars inc. the officer vader infamously chokes in the meeting room, were discussing lucas and they said the journal of the wills was a 9 part outline for the sw universe. like ep 1 - 9. anybody here this b4? Izquierdista 07:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] History

Can anyone provided a source for and/or clarify what is meant in the History section of this article? - Brandon Rhea (talk) 04:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Good question. Well, the concept of the Journal of the Whills is that the Star Wars script is from it, as an historical source. But we don't know anything about its history, its beginning. Was all the known Star Wars saga past, and then, some centuries later, those Whills wrote the Journal? Perhaps. However in some novel that takes place during the Civil War, there is a character that says (more or less, I can't quote it exactly): 'I hope what we do here will be so important that will be immortalized in the Journal of the Whills'. So, that means that this individual was aware of the existence of the Journal. The Journal had begun already, and its writing was ongoing. The quote also suggests that it recorded important deeds, so he hoped his own deeds would be judged adequately important/heroic to be recorded there. It's like if you say 'I hope what I did will be shown in the news!'
All of the above (I hope I was clear enough), gives us some information about how the persons of the Galaxy knew or view the Journal of the Whills. The History paragraph clumsily wants to express all this in a few phrases. It is very sad that the exact quote of that character is missing (I remember it was here in an older version of the article). MoffRebus 23:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I sent a message to SparqMan, who put the history there, asking him to point me to the correct source so I can clean this up. I also have a list of ten-ish sources regarding the Journal that I'll be able to use here. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 02:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Journal_of_the_Whills"