Subject:
|
Re: Ep1 peeves (includes episode 2 spoiler-maybe)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Thu, 27 May 1999 02:22:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
849 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.starwars, ljorgensen@uswest.net (Lee Jorgensen) writes:
> > <SPOILERAGE>
> > May include book spoilerage!!!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > (hopefully this is enough)
> >
> > At the end of TPM, Yoda and Mace were discussing the Sith, and I believe
> > that Yoda said "There are always two, a master and an apprentice."
> >
> > So what about the end of RotJ, where both Vader and the Emporer (I don't
> > remember his name), both die? Does this mean that the Sith are 'extinct'
> > again?
>
> I don't think they meant that there were always supposed to be exactly two
> Sith...I think they meant that whenever there was one, there was another --
> meaning Sith in pairs rather than alone.
>
> --Todd
The way it's explained in the novelization of ep 1 (and may be common knowledge
to the real SW fans) was that a billion years ago, or something, one rebel Jedi
pulled toward the dark side, and began recruiting followers. The numbers grew
very fast, and before long there were a couple hundred in the ranks. Then they
all turned on each other, killing the entire group. Since then, there have been
only and exacly two members: the master and the apprentice. I may have flubbed
the telling of this a bit, so if anyone wants to clean it up, go right ahead.
-Jonathan
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Ep1 peeves (includes episode 2 spoiler-maybe)
|
| (...) knowledge (...) Jedi (...) been (...) Below is a small excerpt from the EP1 Novelization by Terry Brooks that explains the Sith: The Sith had come into being almost two thousand years ago. They were a cult given over to the dark side of the (...) (25 years ago, 27-May-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Ep1 peeves (includes episode 2 spoiler-maybe)
|
| (...) I don't think they meant that there were always supposed to be exactly two Sith...I think they meant that whenever there was one, there was another -- meaning Sith in pairs rather than alone. --Todd p.s. It's said that Palpatine didn't (...) (25 years ago, 26-May-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
67 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
