# Intro to Star Wars: 1-2-3-4-5-6 or 4-5-6-1-2-3 ?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070>\
**Category:** Cafe Society\
**Created:** [January 31, 2010, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070 "2010-01-31T00:56:58Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 8

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![caligulathegod](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/caligulathegod/32/9685_2.png) [@caligulathegod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/caligulathegod)\
**Post date:** [February 6, 2010, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/141 "2010-02-06T18:02:48Z")

</div>

> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> > [@caligulathegod](#):
> >
> > You’ve been saying that there is a Love Triangle because we, the audience, think there’s a Love Triangle because of story conventions dictating the Hero (Luke) gets the girl (the Princess). Because we expect this it must necessarily be so. My comment about Passion of the Christ is about how someone could walk into a film and think because of the title that it will be about a passionate love affair or something, therefore it is, when Passion is actually a word that means great suffering.
> 
> No, I haven’t; you’ve misread my comments as thoroughly as you’ve misheard Lucas and mis-watched the movie. I believe story conventions strengthen it by playing on audience expectation, but I’ve said that a weak triangle exists in its own right even before we factor in any icing for the cake.

You keep saying, “I believe story conventions strengthen it by playing on audience expectation,” and it has been in context of the relationship of Luke and Leia. (And sorry, I’m not making distinctions of who is saying what, but I have a couple quotes from you ready.) Like because of this “weak” triangle (and if you are seriously talking familial-brotherly love then we’re arguing two different things) that since the audience expectations through story conventions think that Luke and Leia have a lover relationship (to distinguish from brother-sister relationship) then that must be the case. Audience expectations and story conventions really don’t come into it here. They don’t make something exist that doesn’t exist. There’s also a story convention that says the guy who seems to be the most at odds with the girl usually ends up winning her over.

> [@](#):
>
> No, I’m correcting you. You stated that Luke and Leia have no interaction in the film; that’s incorrect; I corrected you. Your incorrect statement is copy-and-pasted right there; my correction is right under it;

Ok, and they wave to each other in the hall. That make you happy? You know very well what I meant. And even that kiss, as much as a kiss can be non-interactive, is pretty detached from anything other than Han. She wasn’t so much kissing Luke as “kissing anyone BUT Han.” For all practical purposes, she doesn’t even make eye contact with Luke in that whole scene.

> [@](#):
>
> That’s a beautiful sentence; I suggest you contemplate it at length, pondering each word one by one.

This is the nitpicking-est forum I’ve ever seen. Even this whole discussion started with _my_ nitpick. Let me fix the sentence.

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> Regardless, I’ve given a reason for the clearing up the “triangle” which doesn’t have to do with there actually being a triangle

> [@](#):
>
> Yes, if you leave out what Han said right before she tells him that at the end, then you’d have a fine argument.

Quoting myself, yet again.

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> Han and Leia’s line at THE END OF THE MOVIE, when it is too late to affect anything, was to inform Han of this relationship in a dramatic flourish. It doesn’t mean he’s been seething the whole film thinking Leia is just passing time with him while she waits for Luke. It was simply a dramatic device to bring everyone full circle. Why didn’t Leia tell Han right away? It’s a freaking drama. She has just been told the most devastating news of her life. Darth Vader is HER FATHER and Luke, who turns out to be her brother (whom she has always thought of as a brother-hence the I’ve always known remark) is going off to face him. She needs to process this and is not ready for the full blown conversation that telling Han is going to cause. So she delays the revelation and just wants the man she loves to hold her tighter than she’s ever been held. When everything is solved at the end of the film, she can feel Luke and he’s still alive. This wistfulness confuses Han and he makes his statement about stepping off, because he loves her so much he would rather her be happy, even if it’s not with him. It then occurs to her that she had neglected to tell Han that Luke is her brother. She didn’t make him think she loved Luke. They were just at cross purposes. This does not make a Love Triangle.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\
**Post date:** [February 6, 2010, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/142 "2010-02-06T19:06:15Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> \<snip\>  
> This is the nitpicking-est forum I’ve ever seen. \<snip\>

Have you met Great Debates? 😃

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![TWDuke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@TWDuke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TWDuke)\
**Post date:** [February 6, 2010, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/143 "2010-02-06T19:32:34Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> Even if you don’t agree with me, you have to admit it is a good argument.

I don’t. Luke is obviously attracted to Leia. Leia is attracted to Han. Han is jealous of Luke. Luke and Han go from antagonists to buddies. That’s your triangle right there. Whether or not Luke ever stood a chance, or if his feelings for Leia ever went beyond a slight crush, or if Leia ever returned those feelings, have no effect on whether or not a triangle existed.

Your argument that there is no romantic triangle depends entirely on having a different definition of romantic triangle than is commonly accepted.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![caligulathegod](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/caligulathegod/32/9685_2.png) [@caligulathegod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/caligulathegod)\
**Post date:** [February 6, 2010, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/144 "2010-02-06T19:56:45Z")

</div>

Welcome to the thread. When you’ve bothered to read the rest of it then we can talk. I’m not responding to the exact same questions for the umptheenth time.

Summary: They set up a potential Love Triangle in the first movie to be explored in the subsequent films. When they made the second film, they dropped the idea, essentially canceling any Love Triangle before it started. Han and Luke are \*never \*antagonists. Where the hell did you _ever_ get that idea? What we get in the second film is Luke going off to become a Jedi and then face Vader and Leia and Han having a straightforward formula romance from “Meet Cute” to dramatic love declaration. I have addressed all of this in exhaustive detail.

Romantic Triangle implies more than a casual crush expressed by a character upon first meeting another, which is then dropped and never visited again. Luke’s destiny is to become a Jedi Knight and redeem his father. Why does everyone insist that he must have some relationship with Leia? It’s not required by the story. Luke has a perfectly fulfilling story arc, as do Han and Leia. They are all friends and love each other as such. The Commonly Accepted idea of a Love\Romantic Triangle is something like Gone With The Wind, Casablanca, Popeye, etc. Having two lovers and their mutual, but casual, friend in a story is not a Love Triangle.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![TWDuke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@TWDuke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TWDuke)\
**Post date:** [February 6, 2010, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/145 "2010-02-06T20:10:42Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> Welcome to the thread. When you’ve bothered to read the rest of it then we can talk. I’m not responding to the exact same questions for the umptheenth time.

I did read the whole thread. Believe it or not, it’s possible for people to read your argument and disagree with it. Repeating it ad infinitum doesn’t change that.

> [@](#):
>
> They set up a potential Love Triangle in the first movie to be explored in the subsequent films. When they made the second film, they dropped the idea, essentially canceling any Love Triangle before it started.

That would be canceling it _after_ it started, actually. But has been pointed out many, many times, Han’s uncertainty about Leia’s feelings persists until the end of the third film.

> [@](#):
>
> Han and Luke are never antagonists. Where the hell did you ever get that idea?

From the movies. Perhaps you should watch them.

> [@](#):
>
> What we get in the second film is Luke going off to become a Jedi and then face Vader and Leia and Han having a straightforward formula romance from “Meet Cute” to dramatic love declaration. I have addressed all of this in exhaustive detail.

Yes, exhaustive and irrelevant detail.

> [@](#):
>
> Having two lovers and their mutual, but casual, friend in a story is not a Love Triangle.

It is if that mutual (but certainly not casual) friend has demonstrated a romantic attraction toward one of them.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![The\_Piranha\_Brothers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/aca169/32.png) [@The\_Piranha\_Brothers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Piranha_Brothers)\
**Post date:** [February 6, 2010, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/146 "2010-02-06T20:18:04Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> I’m not responding to the exact same questions for the umptheenth time.

You do actually. And the reason the question doesn’t go away because you keep repeating yourself, while avoiding the arguments you can’t counter.

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> Romantic Triangle implies more than a casual crush expressed by a character upon first meeting another, which is then dropped and never visited again.

It IS revisited, in VI. But when we mention VI you claim it was never there to be continued. Admittedly in V it is almost absent (or completely absent according to you). Like someone said earlier, it is a very weak triangle.

Oh, and in Casablanca, the man who turns into a hero does not get the girl. So that’s not the best example you could have chosen (but again, it is a love triangle).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![cactus\_waltz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@cactus\_waltz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cactus_waltz)\
**Post date:** [February 6, 2010, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/147 "2010-02-06T22:13:28Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> Audience expectations and story conventions really don’t come into it here. They don’t make something exist that doesn’t exist. There’s also a story convention that says the guy who seems to be the most at odds with the girl usually ends up winning her over.

_So_, there might actually be two conventions playing part at the same time, which makes two of the male characters love interests for the only lead female. Hmm, if only there was a word to describe this phenomenon!

And of course story conventions matter, they are like the implications of language. To say “No, you can’t” is different from “No, _you_ can’t”. Same words, but it’s the nuance that makes the meaning of the sentence.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![caligulathegod](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/caligulathegod/32/9685_2.png) [@caligulathegod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/caligulathegod)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/148 "2010-02-07T00:47:12Z")

</div>

> [@TWDuke](#):
>
> I did read the whole thread. Believe it or not, it’s possible for people to read your argument and disagree with it. Repeating it ad infinitum doesn’t change that.

No, you skimmed it, otherwise you wouldn’t have repeated the exact same unsupported assertions as everyone else that I’ve already addressed. I don’t care if you agree with me. But don’t tell me you’ve read the whole thread.

> [@](#):
>
> That would be canceling it _after_ it started, actually. But has been pointed out many, many times, Han’s uncertainty about Leia’s feelings persists until the end of the third film.

Ok, who gets the girl in Star Wars? Who even tries? No one. They get a medal. As soon as the rescue is completed they go right into the destroy the Death Star scene. They set up a potential triangle which they didn’t follow up on. That’s been my point all along. I never denied they set up a potential Love Triangle. I’ve addressed the Han and Leia thing in the third film.

> [@](#):
>
> From the movies. Perhaps you should watch them.

I just did. In what way are they antagonists? Where do they oppose each other?

> [@](#):
>
> Yes, exhaustive and irrelevant detail.It is if that mutual (but certainly not casual) friend has demonstrated a romantic attraction toward one of them.

Next time I’ll just make unsupported assertions rather than actually quoting the material in question or explaining my argument. That make you happy?

> [@The\_Piranha\_Brothers](#):
>
> You do actually. And the reason the question doesn’t go away because you keep repeating yourself, while avoiding the arguments you can’t counter.

What argument have I avoided or not countered? Actually, none of my arguments have been countered. You guys keep repeating the same three arguments over and over. The Kiss, Leia’s secret and final revelation and that the audience expects it to be so, so it must be. I’ve countered all three in detail.

> [@](#):
>
> It IS revisited, in VI. But when we mention VI you claim it was never there to be continued. Admittedly in V it is almost absent (or completely absent according to you). Like someone said earlier, it is a very weak triangle.

Please define “weak triangle”.

> [@](#):
>
> Oh, and in Casablanca, the man who turns into a hero does not get the girl. So that’s not the best example you could have chosen (but again, it is a love triangle).

Why not? Who the fuck cares who gets the girl? Not getting the girl doesn’t negate a Love Triangle. Not participating in a Love Triangle negates a love triangle.

> [@cactus\_waltz](#):
>
> _So_, there might actually be two conventions playing part at the same time, which makes two of the male characters love interests for the only lead female. Hmm, if only there was a word to describe this phenomenon!

What are you talking about? This conversation is getting surreal. How does a second convention make the other character a love interest? He either is or he isn’t.

> [@](#):
>
> And of course story conventions matter, they are like the implications of language. To say “No, you can’t” is different from “No, _you_ can’t”. Same words, but it’s the nuance that makes the meaning of the sentence.

I’m not saying story conventions don’t ever matter. I’m saying you can’t force it in where it doesn’t go. There’s already a story convention going on for Luke and it doesn’t necessarily mean he has to get the girl. Jedi aren’t supposed to get the girl.

What’s so hard about this? It’s a simple story. Luke becomes a Jedi and Han gets the girl. Other than Luke thinking Leia was hot in the first movie, he really isn’t a factor in the Han and Leia relationship. Before any of you respond again, watch Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Skip Star Wars because is seems to be coloring your expectations.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/149 "2010-02-07T02:32:54Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> You keep saying, “I believe story conventions strengthen it by playing on audience expectation,” and it has been in context of the relationship of Luke and Leia.

Well, yeah. It’s two separate things: I think it stands on its own, and I think it gets strengthened by playing to audience expectation.

Imagine, say, a movie where someone gets killed and detective work uncovers the culprit’s identity; I’d probably call that a murder mystery. Now imagine that movie first involves maybe seven or eight interesting characters spending the weekend at a country estate: there’s the too-young fiancé of the rich old woman whose prim and disapproving personal assistant is making eyes at the seemingly unscrupulous heir-in-a-hurry, plus the estranged daughter nobody had seen for the last six years and the butler who’s worried about being let go and the family attorney who thinks likewise while drawing up a new will – oh, plus the author-turned-amateur-sleuth played by Angela Lansbury.

Now, sure, all that stuff plays on my expectations; it strengthens the conclusion I would’ve reached anyway, it gets me thinking “murder mystery” even before the sine qua non starts piling up. But that shouldn’t count _ **against** _ the fact that I would’ve spotted the “murder mystery” regardless; it’s icing, not cake.

> [@](#):
>
> Audience expectations and story conventions really don’t come into it here. They don’t make something exist that doesn’t exist. There’s also a story convention that says the guy who seems to be the most at odds with the girl usually ends up winning her over.

The latter part merely tells us how love triangles usually play out.

The former, of course, is irrelevant.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![caligulathegod](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/caligulathegod/32/9685_2.png) [@caligulathegod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/caligulathegod)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 11:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/150 "2010-02-07T11:01:38Z")

</div>

You keep dancing around this. Is your only justification for insisting there is a Love Triangle (and I’m talking Capital “L” Capital “T” where you have two male protagonists competing for the female protagonist- a full on _Unambiguous_ LOVE TRIANGLE, not some, “well, brothers and sisters are love triangles, too,” bullshit.) is that the audience expects it? Even though all remnants were excised from the film (and are conspicuous by their absence-They didn’t just remove scenes that had the \*effect \*of portraying Luke’s interest in Leia in Empire, they cut out the actual scene where he confessed his love and tried to kiss her) ?

I am a fan of movies. I understand context, subtext and all that. Sometimes it’s blatant, sometimes it’s not. My point has never been to deny some minuscule attraction the characters might have for each other that is not expressed verbally. It’s just that people always refer to the Star Wars Love Triangle as though there is this active competition and participation between the characters. We’ve watched these films for over 30 years and it’s ingrained in us that this is so. I’m playing the part of the person who recognized that the Emperor has no clothes. A straightforward, factual look at the films shows that there is less of a triangle than we perhaps thought. Star Wars was \*never \*a stand alone film. Lucas negotiated sequel rights when he made the first movie (this was back when sequels weren’t big money, like they are today). He didn’t have any plot planned out, but he knew he was going to explore these characters more in the future. When making Empire, Lucas did in fact want to make a competition between Luke and Han. As they were shaping the film, they realized Luke had his own destiny and he would be diminished as a character if it was perceived that Han bested him. This would also have the effect of diminishing Han because the audience would dislike him for moving in on the girl who should be Luke’s. They trimmed out the most obvious scenes that indicated Luke’s _continuing_ attraction for Leia. Luke’s storyline keeps him physically separated from the other characters for the rest of the movie until the end. And then, Luke is trying to rescue his friends, not Leia specifically. The Luke-Leia romance element is factually not in Empire Strikes Back. The only subtext is if you imagine Luke is training to get strong to impress Leia, like he’s read the Charles Atlas Dynamic Tension adverts in a comic book and you think he’s going to go kick sand in Han’s face. This isn’t the case. Luke doesn’t see Han or Leia in the cave. He sees Vader. And in Vader, he sees himself and his destiny to become like Vader if he fails. He’s gone beyond Leia now onto a bigger, more important destiny.

Return of the Jedi is not as well written as Empire. Outside of Luke’s confrontation with the Emperor, it’s largely plagiarized from the first movie and the original scriptment. Rescue of Han=Rescue of Princess. Third Act destruction of _another_ Death Star, but with the added primitive society overcoming the more tech advanced one (George’s Viet Nam statement, since Copola stole Apocalypse Now from him). I’ve already gone into an explanation of the Jedi scenes in question. With the subtext removed from Empire, there’s nothing really to hang that peg on in Jedi. Leia’s bit with Han has the effect of clearing up why there _wasn’t_ a triangle since they didn’t establish one. This is what subverts the audience’s expectations and why they don’t come into play. Leia, from the beginning showed her preference for Han. The audience expected her to go for Luke. Han briefly represents the audience when he is surprised with the revelation. Whatever doubt crossed his mind at that moment does not rise to the level if LT, or if it does, it is so weak as to be inconsequential.

I have only pointed out facts. Is the adolescent fantasy that Luke was supposed to get the girl so important that any ragged thread, no matter how small, must be accounted for to preserve the fantasy? If Lucas had wanted this to be a story element, he would have kept it in and it would be so obvious that we wouldn’t be discussing it like this.

Also, I’d like to apologize to TWDuke. I was very harsh. It just angered me that I’d spent days responding to those exact questions and comments and that initial post does come across as someone who read little of what I’d said.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![cactus\_waltz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@cactus\_waltz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cactus_waltz)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/151 "2010-02-07T12:51:50Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> I have only pointed out facts. Is the adolescent fantasy that Luke was supposed to get the girl so important that any ragged thread, no matter how small, must be accounted for to preserve the fantasy? If Lucas had wanted this to be a story element, he would have kept it in and it would be so obvious that we wouldn’t be discussing it like this.

Yes, it is important. I think it does explain why the love triangle is percieved as such.  
Star Wars: Luke Gets Leia is assumed because of storytelling clichés.

Empire Strikes Back: Luke gets a kiss from Leia, looks smug, then goes on to his adventure. Leia and Han confesses love to each other. Some viewers still assume that Leia might be game for Luke when and if he comes to save the day, especially with Han frozen solid and the final scene with Leia and Luke standing against eachother.

Return of the Jedi: Brother/sister resolution. Han has a moment of confusion to clear away any final doubt in the viewers. However, the fact that this has to be done _actually justifies previous thoughts of a love triangle!_ Earlier in the thread you called this a mistake from Lucas’ side. I can agree with that, if his intent was to dismiss the thoughts of a love triangle, because as it is, it does only the opposite.  
I also agree with you that if George Lucas had fully intended there to be a full fledged love triangle between those three, the second and third movies would probaly have been a lot less subtle. It would have had more interaction between Leia and Luke and also more twists and turns and oohs and aahs.  
But, it is what it is. As it stands, I think it has enough scenes in it to be interpreted either way. Even if Leia and Luke barely interact in the Empire Strikes Back, there is still kissing (to spite Han, yes, but it’s the image that matters) and standing close to eachother. There is something there. It is explained as sibling love later, but when two thirds of the trilogy has passed, there is still hope, if diminished such, in the Luke Gets Leia camp.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![caligulathegod](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/caligulathegod/32/9685_2.png) [@caligulathegod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/caligulathegod)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/152 "2010-02-07T14:01:43Z")

</div>

> [@cactus\_waltz](#):
>
> Yes, it is important. I think it does explain why the love triangle is perceived as such.  
> Star Wars: Luke Gets Leia is assumed because of storytelling clichés.
> 
> Empire Strikes Back: Luke gets a kiss from Leia, looks smug, then goes on to his adventure. Leia and Han confesses love to each other. Some viewers still assume that Leia might be game for Luke when and if he comes to save the day, especially with Han frozen solid and the final scene with Leia and Luke standing against each other. (Stop right there. Luke standing against each other at the end of the film…when they are watching Lando and Chewie go off in the MF to try to catch up to Boba Fett and rescue Han…? Was Luke supposed to avoid her like she has Cooties or B.O.? I mean, COME ON!)
> 
> Return of the Jedi: Brother/sister resolution. Han has a moment of confusion to clear away any final doubt in the viewers. However, the fact that this has to be done _actually justifies previous thoughts (in other words, “assumptions”) of a love triangle!_ Earlier in the thread you called this a mistake from Lucas’ side. I can agree with that, if his intent was to dismiss the thoughts of a love triangle, because as it is, it does only the opposite.  
> I also agree with you that if George Lucas had fully intended there to be a full fledged love triangle between those three, the second and third movies would probably have been a lot less subtle. It would have had more interaction between Leia and Luke and also more twists and turns and oohs and aahs.  
> But, it is what it is. As it stands, I think it has enough scenes in it to be interpreted either way. Even if Leia and Luke barely interact in the Empire Strikes Back, there is still kissing (to spite Han, yes, but it’s the image that matters) and standing close to each other. There is something there. It is explained as sibling love later, but when two thirds of the trilogy has passed, there is still hope, if diminished such, in the Luke Gets Leia camp.

How many times did you have to say “assume” there to make anything you said fit into your position? More dancing around admitting that the idea of a Triangle is completely made up by the audience because they are horndogs that believe Luke Must Get The Girl, when that’s not the story Lucas wants to tell. You know what they say about when you “assume” anything.

I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree since we are at an impasse. I did just find something that sheds a little more light on the kiss scene. Take it for what it is, but this is the 4th dradft Shooting script for Empire Strikes Back. Compare this scene from what made it into the movie (quoted by me earlier) and it becomes clear that a pretty substantial subplot was deliberately and systematically excised. The contrast is incredible. It changes the whole complexion of the scene with and then without the missing parts.

> [@](#):
>
> 1. INT ICE CORRIDOR - REBEL BASE - HOTH
> 
> Han strides down a corridor carved from the ice. Leia follows quickly, agitated. Behind them, unnoticed, an appendage of a Wampa Ice Monster suddenly detaches from a seemingly solid section of ice wall.
> 
> LEIA  
> Han!
> 
> Han stops in the quiet corridor and turns to face Leia.
> 
> HAN  
> Yes, Your Highness?
> 
> LEIA  
> You said you were going to stay. What happened?
> 
> HAN  
> That bounty hunter we ran into on Ord Mantell changed my mind.
> 
> LEIA  
> Does Luke know?
> 
> HAN  
> He’ll know when he gets back… Don’t give me that look. Every day more bounty hunters are searching for me. If I don’t pay off Jabba soon, there’ll be too many to stop… Remotes, Gank killers, and who knows what else. I’ve got to get that price off my head while I still have a head.
> 
> LEIA  
> Han, we need you here.
> 
> HAN  
> We?
> 
> LEIA  
> Yes.
> 
> HAN  
> Not you?  
> LEIA  
> (mystified)  
> Me? I don’t know what you mean.
> 
> HAN  
> (shakes his head, fed-up)  
> You probably don’t. How could you? You’re so terrified of your own emotions…
> 
> LEIA  
> And what are they, pray tell?
> 
> HAN  
> You want me to stay because of the way you feel about me.
> 
> LEIA  
> I respect you. You’re a bold fighter, maybe not the brightest, but…
> 
> HAN  
> No, your worship.. That’s not what I’m talking about.
> 
> Leia stares at him, understands, then laughs.
> 
> LEIA  
> You’re imagining things.
> 
> Han has had it with this broad. He steps closer. Leia is almost against the wall. Han puts a hand against the wall to cut off any retreat.
> 
> HAN  
> Am I? I say you came running after me because you were afraid I was leaving you without even a kiss.
> 
> LEIA  
> I’d just as soon kiss a wookiee.  
> HAN  
> There’s no accounting for taste. Believe me, you could use a good kiss.  
> (warming to the subject)  
> You’ve spent so much time doing your duty and giving orders you’ve never learned how to be a woman. It’s a shame, because you’ve got all the makings for one. I could have helped you plenty in that department… if you’d have let go for a minute. But it’s too late now, sweetheart. Your big opportunity is flying out of here.  
> LEIA  
> We are fighting for a cause much…
> 
> HAN  
> Spare me please! Don’t tell me about the Rebellion again. I’ve had it with your noble mission. All you let yourself think about is the Rebellion. The result is you’re as cold as this planet.
> 
> LEIA  
> And you think you’re the one to apply some heat?
> 
> HAN  
> Sure… If I were interested. But I don’t think it’d be much fun.
> 
> He steps away from her, takes a last cool appraisal.
> 
> HAN (Continued)  
> We’ll meet again. Maybe you’ll have grown up a little by then.
> 
> LEIA  
> You have all the breeding of a Bantha, but not as much class… Enjoy your trip, hot shot!
> 
> Leia walks away.

> [@](#):
>
> 1. INT MEDICAL CENTER - REBEL BASE
> 
> Luke is out of the chamber, lying on the bed previously occupied by Han. Leia is at his side. She brushes the hair out of his eyes and runs her fingers along the scar on his face.
> 
> LEIA  
> The Bacta are growing well. The scars should be gone in a day or so. Does it still hurt?
> 
> LUKE  
> I’m fine. Really. Leia… when I was out there and it looked pretty bad… well, it made me think about things.
> 
> LEIA  
> Me too. I was afraid.
> 
> Their eyes meet. Luke touches her cheek with his hand.
> 
> LUKE  
> I don’t really know how to say this… I never have before… Leia, you know how I feel about you…
> 
> She does and it’s confusing. Their lips are very close. About to kiss. The door opens noisily and Threepio enters with Artoo. Leia pulls back, startled. Luke realizes the moment has been lost. His mind races for a way to regain it as Leia takes on her more formal manner. The droids are a bothersome distraction; Luke’s concentration is on Leia. Artoo beeps a cheerful greeting.
> 
> THREEPIO  
> Master Luke, it’s so good to see you functional again.  
> LUKE  
> Thanks, Threepio. Leia…
> 
> Artoo beeps and whistles.
> 
> THREEPIO  
> Artoo expresses his relief also.
> 
> LUKE  
> Good. Thanks, Artoo.
> 
> LEIA  
> (about to leave)  
> You rest now.
> 
> THREEPIO  
> So much has happened during the period of your indisposition, sir.
> 
> LEIA  
> I’ll be back later.
> 
> LUKE  
> (anxious to keep her)  
> Leia… What would you think if I went away for a while?
> 
> LEIA  
> What did you say?!
> 
> Leia’s reaction is so much bigger and more vociferous than Luke expected, it starts what is to become a growing snowball of confusion for him.
> 
> LEIA  
> Where are you going?
> 
> LUKE  
> I have this… feeling. I’m not sure, really…
> 
> LEIA  
> That’s just great. Why doesn’t everyone just take off?
> 
> LUKE  
> What are you talking about?
> 
> LEIA  
> First Han, now you. When am I going to learn not to count on anyone but myself?..  
> LUKE  
> Han’s leaving?
> 
> LEIA  
> … I was getting along just fine before I met you two moon jockeys.
> 
> LUKE  
> Calm down, will ya? Tell me about Han.
> 
> LEIA  
> He wants to pay off that criminal he’s in hock to.
> 
> LUKE  
> Jabba the Hutt?
> 
> LEIA  
> (back to her tirade)  
> I could get more loyalty if I went down the hall and recruited some of those snow creatures.
> 
> LUKE  
> Snow creatures… they’re here?!
> 
> THREEPIO  
> Yes, sir. But they’re being trapped quite cleverly.
> 
> Artoo beeps and whistles proudly.
> 
> THREEPIO  
> (to Artoo)  
> What do you mean, you took care of that? I would hardly call your part in that matter great…
> 
> Luke’s head is spinning as Han and Chewie make a vigorous entrance. The Wookiee GROWLS a greeting.
> 
> HAN  
> Hi kid, you look strong enough to wrestle a Gundark.
> 
> LUKE  
> Thanks to you.
> 
> HAN  
> That’s two you owe me, junior.  
> Han turns to Leia with a big, devilish grin.
> 
> HAN  
> Well, your worship, it looks like you arranged to keep me close by for a while longer.
> 
> LEIA  
> I had nothing to do with it. General Rieekan thinks it’s dangerous for any ships to leave the system until we know where that probe came from.
> 
> LUKE  
> Probe? What probe?
> 
> HAN  
> That makes a good story. But I think you just can’t bear to let me out of your sight.
> 
> LEIA  
> I don’t know where you get your delusions, laser brains.
> 
> Chewie is amused; he LAUGHS in his manner. Han is enjoying this. He regards Chewie good-humoredly.
> 
> HAN  
> Laugh it up, fuzz ball. You didn’t see her alone with me in the south passage.
> 
> Luke sparks to this; he looks at Leia.
> 
> LEIA  
> (to Luke)  
> I don’t know what he’s talking about.
> 
> HAN  
> Ooops! I guess you haven’t told Luke about that yet.
> 
> LUKE  
> About what?
> 
> HAN  
> Now don’t get the wrong idea, pal. She was just trying to express her true feelings for me.  
> LEIA  
> (to Han)  
> You must have gone completely out of your feeble mind.
> 
> HAN  
> Come on, your highness, are you telling me you haven’t been thinking about that kiss?
> 
> Leia is flushed, eyes darting between Luke And Han.
> 
> LEIA  
> Why you low-down, stuck-up, half-witted, scruffy-looking nerf-herder.
> 
> HAN  
> Who’s scruffy-looking?  
> (a big grin)  
> I tell ya’ sweetheart, I must’ve hit pretty close to the mark to get you hoppin’ like this. Doesn’t it look that way to you, Luke?
> 
> LUKE  
> (staring at Leia)  
> Yeah… it does… kind of.
> 
> Leia looks vulnerable for a moment, then the mask again, focusing on Luke.
> 
> LEIA  
> Oh it does, does it? Well, I guess you don’t understand everything about women yet… do you, sonny?
> 
> With that Leia leans over and kisses Luke on the lips. Then she stands and walks out. Everyone is dumbstruck. The door closes behind Leia and they all look at each other in silence.
> 
> In the distance, the muffled sound of an alarm is heard.

With this stuff all in, there is no doubt that there was a Love Triangle. It just makes it clearer when you see what was cut out that they did seek to diminish the suggestion of a Love Triangle. Look at how blatant and over-the-top this exchange was. Are you going to tell me they cut all this and decided to go with a subtlety that defies description. Look how many times you had to say all this was assumed. Here it is in black and white. With this material deleted it no longer is an assumption but an outright pretending by the audience that you seem to think hates Han so much that they STILL want Luke to get Leia despite one of the greatest film romances of all time. This whole argument has been a passive-aggressive repudiation of Han Solo.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![cactus\_waltz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@cactus\_waltz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cactus_waltz)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/153 "2010-02-07T17:44:03Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> How many times did you have to say “assume” there to make anything you said fit into your position? More dancing around admitting that the idea of a Triangle is completely made up by the audience because they are horndogs that believe Luke Must Get The Girl, when that’s not the story Lucas wants to tell. You know what they say about when you “assume” anything.

I also know what they say about smoke and fire. Still, I don’t see the problem, I’ve been defending assumptions all along. Just that the assumptions are based on storytelling conventions and clichés which are understandable in this context and even supported in parts as previously discussed. I think that if 9 out of 10 movie-goers experience that there’s some form of a love triangle in Star Wars, they aren’t all ignorant or obtuse, but there might actually have been something in the over-all experience that led them to feel that way, regardless of director’s intentions. And it is the end product we are discussing, not the mind of Lucas.

> [@](#):
>
> Stop right there. Luke standing against each other at the end of the film…when they are watching Lando and Chewie go off in the MF to try to catch up to Boba Fett and rescue Han…? Was Luke supposed to avoid her like she has Cooties or B.O.? I mean, COME ON!)

Didn’t you say yourself that “nuh-uh” isn’t an argument? If you think that a closing image of Leia resting against the shoulder of Luke doesn’t mean anything at all and doesn’t lend itself to any interpretations whatsoever, then fine, not more I can say about that.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![caligulathegod](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/caligulathegod/32/9685_2.png) [@caligulathegod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/caligulathegod)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/154 "2010-02-07T20:43:15Z")

</div>

> [@cactus\_waltz](#):
>
> I also know what they say about smoke and fire. Still, I don’t see the problem, I’ve been defending assumptions all along. Just that the assumptions are based on storytelling conventions and clichés which are understandable in this context and even supported in parts as previously discussed. I think that if 9 out of 10 movie-goers experience that there’s some form of a love triangle in Star Wars, they aren’t all ignorant or obtuse, but there might actually have been something in the over-all experience that led them to feel that way, regardless of director’s intentions. And it is the end product we are discussing, not the mind of Lucas.

And this is why I brought all this up in the first place. My first line about this was that it was the biggest misconception about Star Wars. My whole point has been that people believe this but when you take an \*objective \*look at the material, it turns out that it’s overstated to the point of being practically non-existent. I’ve then laid out the case for my argument. You can’t say “Your argument is wrong because this is what people believe, regardless of what 's actually there.” That’s not a rebuttal, that’s just taking my premise and repeating it back as a contradiction. I think what you are saying is that in the most general, vaguest way, then there kind of IS a triangle. If you are going to call a story a Love Triangle, then that implies that it is a major part of the story, not some vague undercurrent that might exist if you look at it in a certain way and imagine that the characters might be after each other, because that’s the way these stories usually go. I’m not talking about absolutes to such a metaphysical certainty. Just that the story at face value, is not really about a love triangle, but about a boy who becomes a Jedi and saves the galaxy and a rogue who wins the heart of a princess.

> [@](#):
>
> Didn’t you say yourself that “nuh-uh” isn’t an argument? If you think that a closing image of Leia resting against the shoulder of Luke doesn’t mean anything at all and doesn’t lend itself to any interpretations whatsoever, then fine, not more I can say about that.

It doesn’t mean that scene IN ITSELF is proof of such an interpretation. In fact, if it DID actually mean that Luke is somehow macking on Leia at that point, that is the most cynical, repugnant view of that scene I’ve ever heard of. _The Love of Her Fucking Life_ has been captured by a bounty hunter and his frozen body is being delivered to a ruthless gangster. Yeah, Luke, this is the PERFECT time to hit on Leia now that Han is finally out of the picture. I’d be ashamed to admit that this was what comes to me when I watch Empire Strikes Back. In that case, Luke doesn’t fucking DESERVE to have Leia. Wow. Just wow. I think this argument has met its end if that is the implication.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![cactus\_waltz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@cactus\_waltz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cactus_waltz)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/155 "2010-02-07T20:54:42Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> It doesn’t mean that scene IN ITSELF is proof of such an interpretation. In fact, if it DID actually mean that Luke is somehow macking on Leia at that point, that is the most cynical, repugnant view of that scene I’ve ever heard of. _The Love of Her Fucking Life_ has been captured by a bounty hunter and his frozen body is being delivered to a ruthless gangster. Yeah, Luke, this is the PERFECT time to hit on Leia now that Han is finally out of the picture. I’d be ashamed to admit that this was what comes to me when I watch Empire Strikes Back. In that case, Luke doesn’t fucking DESERVE to have Leia. Wow. Just wow. I think this argument has met its end if that is the implication.

I wasn’t speaking in terms of “macking on”, just to say that it’s kind of a “I’ll be there for you” moment and a memorable final image of the best Star Wars movie. But whatever. We’ve been beating this horse long enough I should say.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![The\_Piranha\_Brothers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/aca169/32.png) [@The\_Piranha\_Brothers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Piranha_Brothers)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/156 "2010-02-07T21:10:44Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> Please define “weak triangle”.
> 
> Why not? Who the fuck cares who gets the girl? Not getting the girl doesn’t negate a Love Triangle. Not participating in a Love Triangle negates a love triangle.

Weak triangle: it has been mentioned several times before. It is a weak triange for three reasons: 1. it is unimportant as a subplot 2. it is not very convincing, or in other words it’s unoriginal and not well-written 3. it quickly becomes clear which way things are going.

That is also why it makes rather a big difference who gets the girl.

Oh who are we kidding here, you’re just trying how long you can make a discussion by not listening.

You’ve read what it said on wikipedia. It’s about three main characters who have each not completely figured out what they want from the other two. Their relationships to the other two need to be redefined and this happens by events and choices in the story (or made by the writers of the story). In this case, with two men and one woman some sort of solution was required. Consider how it would have been if at the end of the trilogy, Luke had been left empty handed? Impossible. The writer’s needed to address this issue and that is why it is a love triangle.

If not, then why don’t you give us YOUR own personal definition of a love triangle? Again, it isn’t necessarily two fighting over a third.

You know, I think it’s also a matter of Jedi being celibate and detached from material things and pleasures. Otherwise it would have been easy to enter a love interest for Luke, some minor character added in V or VI.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Taomist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/53a042/32.png) [@Taomist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Taomist)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/157 "2010-02-07T21:13:25Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> \<Script Stuff\>

Ok, that was pretty cool!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![The\_Piranha\_Brothers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/aca169/32.png) [@The\_Piranha\_Brothers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Piranha_Brothers)\
**Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/158 "2010-02-07T23:33:21Z")

</div>

> [@caligulathegod](#):
>
> You keep dancing around this. Is your only justification for insisting there is a Love Triangle (and I’m talking Capital “L” Capital “T” where you have two male protagonists competing for the female protagonist- a full on _Unambiguous_ LOVE TRIANGLE, not some, “well, brothers and sisters are love triangles, too,” bullshit.) is that the audience expects it?
> 
> My point has never been to deny some minuscule attraction the characters might have for each other that is not expressed verbally. It’s just that people always refer to the Star Wars Love Triangle as though there is this active competition and participation between the characters.

Caligula, what you are doing is technically known as a fallacy. You pretend people say there is a clear, obvious, and complete love triangle where Han and Luke are both fighting over Leia. But no-one said so.

This whole ongoing argument is based on you fighting a claim that nobody is defending. That is why you refuse to give your definition of a love triangle.

What everyone in this thread except you is saying, is that you can’t possibly rule out the low profile triangle that is used as a weak romantic subplot.

You can’t see any reason why people would analyse Star Wars as a triangle, and yet you claim to fully understand the movies you watch? Very strange.

And I bet you’re going to ignore or distort everything I just said. Unless you have a proper answer, but if you do, I will be VERY surprised.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![caligulathegod](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/caligulathegod/32/9685_2.png) [@caligulathegod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/caligulathegod)\
**Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/159 "2010-02-08T00:27:38Z")

</div>

> [@cactus\_waltz](#):
>
> I wasn’t speaking in terms of “macking on”, just to say that it’s kind of a “I’ll be there for you” moment and a memorable final image of the best Star Wars movie. But whatever. We’ve been beating this horse long enough I should say.

Whoa, that is not what you said.

> [@The\_Piranha\_Brothers](#):
>
> Weak triangle: it has been mentioned several times before. It is a weak triange for three reasons: 1. it is unimportant as a subplot 2. it is not very convincing, or in other words it’s unoriginal and not well-written 3. it quickly becomes clear which way things are going.  
> The original post that started this discussion stated that one should watch the films in the order they were made because the revelation of Vader being DAD would lose its impact and the Love Triangle between Luke, Leia and Han would seem silly. I merely pointed out that there’s less to the Love Triangle than people think. That’s all. I’m not trying to make the absolute statement you think I am. I’m just saying, for all intents and purposes, there really isn’t enough of a Love Triangle to consider it worth even mentioning.
> 
> That is also why it makes rather a big difference who gets the girl. How does that make Casablanca a bad example? As you said, it IS a Love Triangle film. That’s why I used it as an example, not because he gets the girl.
> 
> Oh who are we kidding here, you’re just trying how long you can make a discussion by not listening.
> 
> You’ve read what it said on wikipedia. It’s about three main characters who have each not completely figured out what they want from the other two. Could you be more vague?Their relationships to the other two need to be redefined and this happens by events and choices in the story (or made by the writers of the story)And this presents itself in the story how?. In this case, with two men and one woman some sort of solution was required. Why? Because two of them possess penises and the third a vagina? There MUST be something going on then. How could I be so naive? Consider how it would have been if at the end of the trilogy, Luke had been left empty handed? He IS left “empty handed”.Impossible. And yet… Have you even seen these movies?The writer’s needed to address this issue and that is why it is a love triangle. The only way the writers address it is an explanation why it DOESN’T happen. Namely, the characters don’t have much interaction to speak of, and they turn out to be siblings.
> 
> If not, then why don’t you give us YOUR own personal definition of a love triangle? Again, it isn’t necessarily two fighting over a third.
> 
> You know, I think it’s also a matter of Jedi being celibate and detached from material things and pleasures. Otherwise it would have been easy to enter a love interest for Luke, some minor character added in V or VI. Which is yet another reason there really isn’t much of a triangle.

> [@The\_Piranha\_Brothers](#):
>
> Caligula, what you are doing is technically known as a fallacy. You pretend people say there is a clear, obvious, and complete love triangle where Han and Luke are both fighting over Leia. But no-one said so.
> 
> This whole ongoing argument is based on you fighting a claim that nobody is defending. That is why you refuse to give your definition of a love triangle.
> 
> What everyone in this thread except you is saying, is that you can’t possibly rule out the low profile triangle that is used as a weak romantic subplot.
> 
> You can’t see any reason why people would analyse Star Wars as a triangle, and yet you claim to fully understand the movies you watch? Very strange.
> 
> And I bet you’re going to ignore or distort everything I just said. Unless you have a proper answer, but if you do, I will be VERY surprised.

OK, at this point I think we are all on the same page but in denial about it. We’re all basically saying that the Love Triangle plot is 95% gone while I’m saying 5% is essentially nothing at all while you are saying 5% _is_ something, even if it is weak. We’re all arguing this same fallacy you mention. I never said (or meant to say, I’m sure someone will take something I said out of context) that there is ABSOLUTELY no and has never been a Triangle. What I’ve said is they set up a potential Love Triangle in the first movie (although if you look at it closely with knowledge of romantic tropes, it is heavily weighted towards two particular characters getting together) and decided to drop it in the subsequent movies to the point that it is more or less non-existent. But you guys _were_ arguing that there was a clear, obvious, and complete love triangle and this argument has been weakened progressively as the thread has gone on to be some vague “weak triangle” backed up by nothing more than audience expectations and one brief misunderstanding by a character in the third movie. I just believe that if you want to describe something you don’t define it by what is basically less than 5% of its makeup.

I will agree that this horse is dead and rotting.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![The\_Piranha\_Brothers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/aca169/32.png) [@The\_Piranha\_Brothers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Piranha_Brothers)\
**Post date:** [February 8, 2010, 10:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070/160 "2010-02-08T10:48:23Z")

</div>

Hey! Don’t go reversed fallacy on me! I’m not going to read every post again, not even to use them against you, but as far as I know there was no-one who really argued that this triangle was important or essential or perfect or anything like that.

On your last post I can more or less agree, partially, but I can’t resist correcting just a few points you seem to overlook:

Luke is not left empty handed. He is left one handed, but that’s a different thread. He and Leia are sisters -\> the relationships within the 3 main characters are now reestablished, possible causes for tension between them eleminated.  
And they don’t “drop” it. They do not use it in V except perhaps for that kiss and then they reprise it briefly in VI. You admit the possibility is there in IV and you can’t deny the actual dialogue in VI. So you only have V to make your point. Well in V they are seperated so there wasn’t much opportunity for any form of threesome.

And yes, two penises and one vagina usually IS cause for some form of competition. You can’t shut down expectations that are part of the way stories are normally built. The story of star wars is not exceptional or experimental but it is a classic construction. So common expectations, that the makers were aware of as well, certainly apply here. Hero needs girl. Two heroes and one girl need a solution.

You claim it doesn’t make any difference who gets the girl. But at the same time the lack of L-L interaction is your main argument. Well, that is why it is in more than 1 way a WEAK triangle. We’ve been through that before.  
With your arguments you might as well claim that Casablanca isn’t a love triangle because the only real romantic (inter)action is between Rick and the girl. It’s just an anomaly that he lets her go.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070.md?page=7)

[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/intro-to-star-wars-1-2-3-4-5-6-or-4-5-6-1-2-3/527070.md?page=9)