Can we get back on topic please?
As George Lucas himself would surely say, thanks to Star Wars being the core essence of Joseph Campell's theories on myth, everything is on topic.
Oh, and 88Devin, if you have a problem with Shakespeare's licentiousness, why are you so desperately defending a series that promoted incest? Or did Lucas edit that out of the latest special edition?
It didn't promote incest. Luke kissed Leia in the first film, prior to it being worked out that they were brother & sister. With Han Solo, you had the drama between the three. Han was going to be killed off in 2, leaving Luke with the princess. However, it was worked out that Luke & Leia were brother & sister (therefore couldn't be together) and the fans loved Han Solo so much Lucas ended up having to include him in ROTJ. The fact Han Solo lived was due to the pressure of the fans on Lucas. Also, incest would imply something happened between Luke & Leia, which nothing did, and in fact it was "broken off" once they found out.
So- according to you, full on making out with your sister is ok so long as (a) you didn't know it was your sister; (b) the director/screenwriter didn't know it was your sister; and (c) she only did it the second time to make that lovable rogue jealous? So long as these requirements are met, and "nothing happened" (other than, you know, making out) everything is fine?
Your point is completely invalid. As I said, in the first movie, when it came out, Luke & Leia were not brother and sister. When the second movie came out, they were, but again, neither knew it yet.
Like I said, your point is completely illogical and invalid. Incest is certainly not promoted or celebrated in the film. It's not a black or white issue. Incest is wrong, but incest is not promoted in the film.
In fact, if you look at the very definition of incest, it isn't "kissing", it's sexual relations between two people who are too closely related. That never happened, therefore, no incest. As I said, your logic and your argument is completely invalid.
So, just to be perfectly straight here, you see nothing wrong with open mouthed kissing between brother and sister, so long as they don't know? It's not legally incest, after all- no naughty parts are touching (unless you consider tongues to be naughty). There's nothing even close to "sexual relations" going on there?
As for the first movie- here's something to ponder: while it is certainly true that Luke and Leia weren't brother and sister when the first movie came out (speaking outside of the movie universe), they WERE brother and sister when the second movie came out (unless Lucas originally intended Han to be the "another"- which fits in perfectly with his hack screenwriting "I've had it all planned out for years" [seriously, I just wrote it about five second ago] MO). Further, in the Special Edition Lucas is so in despair at the thought of Han shooting first that he digitally rewrites history, where merely a few snips of film are all that are required to remove the "ick" factor from this discussion. So, shooting first if the other guy has pretty much flat out stated he is about to shoot you is bad, but brother/sister make-outs are perfectly fine in Lucas's book.
Again, your logic is completely flawed here. I never said that two siblings kissing is "okay", I said it is not incest, and isn't the promotion of incest. You cannot fault the two for doing so, because they didn't know the other was their sibling, what do you expect, do you expect people to not kiss until marriage? Do you fault someone for falling in love with someone, even if that other person is married, and the other person isn't aware of the marriage? Do you automatically accuse them of adultery? You are jumping to conclusions and falling into a fallacy. You have A, and you have C, but A & C doesn't equal B.
Your logic is thus:
A. Luke & Leia kiss
B. Luke & Leia don't know they are siblings
C. Incest is sex between siblings
D. Incest is wrong
E. Making out with a sibling is wrong
F. The movie promotes incest
Where you say: A + (C + D) = F where C is apparently also the definition of E, and equivalent.
You leave out factor B. Where ignorance plays a huge part in the equation. You also make an error in equating incest with making out.
Your logic just doesn't add up and makes no sense whatsoever.
Your assumption is that my equation of C with E is incorrect which I might grant you now (though I would at least consider brothers and sisters making out to be attempted incest), but my 3 year old self whose first clear memory is seeing Jedi in the theater would have thought nothing of the actual naughty parts, however he knew quite clearly that E (to the extent of making out, subtracting the sibling) is something only Mommy and Daddy do, would beg to disagree. I leave out factor B because factor B is irrelevant, especially in the context of classical literature- factor B did not stop Oedipus from gouging out his eyes when he found out what he had been up to, nor (to put it more closely to your private interpretation of classical) Arthur paying the price for siring Mordred upon his sister. You also leave out the true factor F that leads to G (your F)- namely that Lucas has seen no problem revising those portions of the trilogy he currently finds morally questionable (Han shooting first), yet he leaves in not one but two make out sessions between brother and sister.
No, again as I said, you cannot find complete fault with them, and cannot ignore the fact that they don't know each other is their sibling. I'm not talking about, nor care about classical literature, I'm talking about real morality here and modern norms and practices.
There are many cases out there of people who marry and later find out they are actually brother and sister, and were adopted by different families with different last names and all. Do we automatically condemn them unconditionally for incest? No, we recognize that the fault doesn't lay with them. Now, if they didn't separate, then it would become their sin.
Same thing for this story. Again, Luke & Leia never had sex, therefore, incest isn't committed, and your comparison with "classical literature" is not consistent, because in those cases, incest is actually committed.
Also, as I'm saying, you shouldn't find anything morally abhorrent about what happened, because neither of them knew and neither of them did something sinful. In fact, as soon as Luke found out, he stepped back and treated her as a sister. There, however, would have been a wrong if he hadn't broken it off once he knew.
Like I said, would you prefer that people courting each other should even refrain from kissing until they are married?
As for Han shooting first, it wasn't that it was morally objectionable for Han to shoot first, Lucas edited it because it didn't fit the narrative of Han he wanted, and it showed Han as being too cold-blooded. If it fit the narrative he wanted to tell, he would have kept it in there, it's morality is irrelevant except in however Lucas wanted to show Han. Did he want Han to be a cold-blooded killer, or did he want him to be a bad boy who was really a good person at heart?
For Luke & Leia and their "kissing", leaving it in shows their innocence and the consequence of their father's fall to the dark side. It shows they are two innocent teenagers/early 20ers who are oblivious to the fact that they are siblings. It doesn't show them as being immoral, or as "tainted" in some way.
Things are not as black and white as you seem to want them to be, there is a lot of grey out there.
