Suzanne Takes You Down for Cranberry and Tequila
Please Bear With Me

Darthness on the Edge of Town

Which is more shameful, friends?  That I was reading The Corner at National Review Online in the first place, or that I am the unnamed "reader" who felt compelled to correct Jonah Goldberg concerning Star Wars lore?  Mr. Goldberg writes:

From a reader:


    Your analysis of the non-rightwing nature of Darth Vader’s history contains a clear terminological error.  So far as I can tell from episodes 1-3, 'Darth' is not a name but a title, indicative that its bearer is one half of the then-extant pair of Sith.   Hence, Darth Maul [who has no other identity we know of], Darth Tyrannus [aka Count Dookoo] and the Emperor Palpatine as Darth Sidious.  Darth is the equivalent of 'Sir' or 'Lord' (or 'Dark Lord').

    Don’t feel bad, though: Obi-Wan Ben Kenobi makes the same error in Episode IV.

Me: Point taken.  However, the Count on Sesame Street is often called "count" as if it was a first name too.  And his dialogue is often better written than the junk we heard in the last couple Star Wars movies. 

This, if you are curious, is the item that inspired my moment of weakness.  O! the ignominy of it all!


A.C. Douglas

Which of the two is more shameful? You forgot the third alternative: that you knew the _Star Wars_ "saga" intimately enough to make the correction. That's the most shameful of all.

(Sorry! Couldn't resist.)




Not clicking. Not clicking. Not clicking.

Everytime I read something by Goldberg, I get a little stupider. I can't take that risk, even is he is touching my beloved Star Wars.

The comments to this entry are closed.