Joseph Campbell Meets George Lucas – Part I (2015) | Hacker News Reader

Joseph Campbell Meets George Lucas – Part I (2015)

starwars.com

49 pointsindigodaddy27 comments

The two rode on each-other's coat tails during their ascent. Lucas was happy to give a "yeah, I was totally thinking that!" when people would point out some classic hero stuff in his simple little wonderful space opera (not damning with faint praise here - Star Wars is a ridiculously wonderful film!).

And Campbell knew a good thing when he saw it, happy to agree that Lucas' film represented a hero's journey.

This was a time when Campbell's writing was entering broad pop consciousness and his speaking engagement schedule was starting to grow: the massive popularity of Star Wars was a great ship to catch a ride on.

People wanted to see a depth in Star Wars that caught Lucas off guard (remember that he just wanted to replicate the exciting, cliff-hanger kids serials of his 1950s childhood). He decided to go with it, saying it was all part of a big plan, "I have ten movies with their stories all plotted out" etc. The reality is he cobbled things together ad-hoc and kind of quickly, with no real overarching intent - something he only decades later finally admitted.

I feel for him: in his mind, he was just a nuts-and-bolts technology guy who loved the "how would I make that?" questions and work far far more than the story he had to come up with to tell. He freely admitted he hated writing. If he had it his way, he would have merely been the head of ILM, excitedly figuring out ways to use new technology to solve film making problems, but Star Wars blew up on him, becoming an over-the-top ultra-success.

The real connection between Lucas and Campbell was nearly non-existent, but it was a useful thing for each of them to strategically latch on to as their popularity began to rapidly grow.

If it wasn’t for THX-1138 you cynicism might be warranted. The other factor is that the simple matinees are just as tied to the hero’s journey as Star Wars. The hero’s journey is tied to stories from the beginning of storytelling. Lucas experienced his own hero’s journey in producing the movie.

Finally from what I know Cambell ended up living on Skywalker Ranch. I see no reason to minimize connection.

This is an interesting take. Did Lucas ever actually admit he didn’t know about *The Hero with a Thousand Faces* before he wrote Star Wars? My understanding is he read Campbell after the motorcycle accident, and then it became a big influence.

Either way, I wouldn’t be surprised if Campbell was the one making the connections—between Life of Milarepa (which, in my opinion, is the closest pre Campbell example of the hero’s journey to Campbell’s original framing) and The Wizard of Oz. Meaning the stories all have the parts of the journey but the Life Milarepa has a 1 to 1 correlation.

Can you share some links to substantiate these claims that lucas didn't have a clue as to what he was doing, and moreover hadn't been infuenced by Campbell? Because I've paid quite a lot of attention to both of them, and thats completely contrary to what I've understood. Moreover, the OP link and it's follow-on say otherwise.

Campbell believed all stories were the Hero's Journey in some convoluted manner or another. Could tell him you tripped down the stairs, and he'd say something like, 'yes, but going down those stairs again would be you learning to conquor your fears, thus resulting in a more well rounded person.'

Or you could say 'I should stop drinking milk, because I'm somewhat intolerant' and he'd say, 'ahh, yes, you're in the middle of the hero's journey, on the precibus of learning to set your desires aside for the betterment of your health'

Any story with conflict becomes the hero's journey, and what stories worth telling don't have some kind of conflict. 'Proto-story' nonsense.

precipice, not 'precibus'

Part 2: https://www.starwars.com/news/mythic-discovery-within-the-in...

If you're interested in storytelling and Joseph Campbell's work, Mike Hill has some excellent videos, analyzing some blockbuster movies. [1]

Just ignore his podcast / interview type videos. This would be a good start: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXU7xzYhiiQ&list=PLrsgFKqTmu...

[1] https://www.youtube.com/@mikehilldesignstudio/videos

> In December of 2015, audiences will once again return to the cinemas -- as ancient peoples once gathered round a fire or into an amphitheater -- and collectively partake in the magic of myth. As Lucas and Campbell sat together in front of a silver screen to share an experience, so too shall we with our friends and family. It’s time for another good story!

Well, that wasn’t to be, unfortunately.

One of my favorite video essays is on this subject and KOTOR! For Noah Caldwell-Gervais, it’s actually not a terrible length haha

Well worth the watch: https://youtu.be/OI2iOB8ydGo?si=hDUzjVXIzjI9zR0V

George Lucas's other influences:

"George Lucas in Love" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZ49Smi2SLQ

Maybe if Campbell was still alive in the 1990s, he would have been able to help Lucas with his scripts for the prequels?

We now know Lucas wasn’t really a good storyteller. He was just really great with visuals, but was surrounded by great storytellers. His first wife Marcia and people like Irvin Kershner and Campbell were the ones who were able to convince Lucas that the story mattered more than the visuals. They were noticeable absent in the prequel production.

While I generally subscribe to the idea that the editors of A New Hope helped a lot with the final product, it's massively unfair to say that Lucas wasn't a good storyteller, Campbell didn't help directly with a New Hope and it was scripted by Lucas - ie it's his story.

When I took my son to see Dune, he said it was a major Star Wars rip-off.

Dune (the novel) was published in 1965.

I think that was the joke. It's obvious Star Wars stole a lot of ideas from Dune. But many people think it's the opposite since star wars predates the Dune movies.

Wait till you read "Voyage of the Space Beagle"!

https://www.amazon.com/Voyage-Space-Beagle-van-Vogt/dp/07653...

A New Hope was innovative visually, but it was also the weakest story wise in the initial trilogy. Lucas’s strength is primarily with visuals.

Lucas got a lot of feedback from people over several years as he revised his initial concept. https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/The_Star_Wars_rough_draft The first version was not very Campbellian and did not have "Use the force." He also didn't come up with the "I am your father" story arc until after finishing the first movie.

Also worth a watch is Sukhavati, place of bliss by Joseph Campbell. I believe it can be found on archive.org.

OK, this is awesome, I had no idea they met. Big Campbell + Star Wars fan here, always assumed the influence was abstract. This was a great historical read.

It's a shame that Joseph Campbell was wrong about everything, because he is an entertaining writer in the pseudo-profound register.

What was he most wrong about?

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ww3d8h/how_a...

that's an abominable assessment of campbell. I'm not even going to bother responding to it, other than to point out this absolute nonsense:

> The monomyth is Campbellian imperialism. It's an appropriation of things he despises -- 'dreamlike mumbo jumbo', 'mystic[s]', and 'bizarre Eskimo fairy tale[s]' -- normalising them in an effort to make them tolerable

Jung, who is as associated with dreams as anyone, was one of campbell's greatest influences. Campbell deeply revered dreams, and you could probably find 1000 references of him talking about that's where myths come from.

I think it is a form of scientism to say Campbell is "wrong" but people love scientism. For many it is standard orthodoxy and a blind spot of mass stupidity.

I think Campbell is the pop version of The Golden Bough. I have only read a little of the The Golden Bough but is so immense, alien and unrelatable. I have also read how James George Frazer was also "wrong". As if the conclusions of a 19th century Victorian somehow negates the 12 volumes of collected mythology. Independent thought and reasoning though is not a strength of those prone to scientism.

You avoided the actual substantive critique in the post. Namely, that Campbell's system doesn't even work for the most canonical works in Western literature.

I don't know what Jung has to do with anything. But if helps, I also think he was a crank, and the collective unconscious is a neat metaphor and nothing more.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com