Seite - 117 - in JRFM - Journal Religion Film Media, Band 06/02

Book Review: The Myth Awakens | 117www.jrfm.eu 2020, 6/2, 114–118 In chapter eight, Syed Adnan Hussain discusses the importance of collec- tive memory in establishing continuity or a “heritage of belief” (138) as it ap- plies to Star Wars canonicity. Hussain problematizes the idea of canon here by highlighting George Lucas’s attempts to alter the Original Trilogy through the re-releases, which were strongly resisted by some fans. Hussain argues: “The fundamental schism caused by de-canonization and revision in the Star Wars universe should be conceived as a crisis of collective memory or as a break in the chain of tradition” (143). He concludes that the sale to Disney changed the trajectory of the franchise but reiterated the role of fans in shap- ing future films. Chapters seven and nine both problematize the notion of canonicity. In chapter seven, Justin Mullis examines the nature of the relationship between George Lucas and his fans and concludes that it can be likened to the rela- tionship between a hierophant and their devotees. He contends that Lucas’s diversion from the “canon” of the original trilogy (particular with regard to the “Han shot first” controversy) in re-released editions challenged core aspects of the mythology, resulting in the fans’ rejection of Lucas as “leader” or director. Mullis references the “established canon” of Star Wars in his discussion of how the Prequel films (Episodes I–III) altered the Original Trilogy (Episodes IV–VI), but it would be useful to address in further detail the process of can- onization itself. The process is complex and deserves somewhat fuller theoret- ical consideration here. When and how does the Original Trilogy come to be characterized as canonical? And what role do ritual and repetition play in that process? Here drawing from scholars of ritual such as Catherine Bell or Ronald Grimes might be useful for explaining how ritualization occurs (and in this case leads to the formulation of a canonical mythology). Chapter nine contains what might be expanded in chapter seven: a clear theoretical outline of canon- ization. Kenneth MacKendrick employs J. Z. Smith’s framework on canon and religious authority to argue that canon refers “to the creation and authoriza- tion of a shared imaginary world” (147). MacKendrick describes the process of canonization, the mechanism for moving from an open to a closed canon, and the role of authority in determining “canon”. The discussion of fan reactions to the Disney takeover is analogous (in some ways) to new discoveries of non-ca- nonical religious texts such as the Nag Hammadi scriptures (which are labeled as Gnostic but have clear references to Christian theology). MacKendrick con- siders how “truth” is determined to be present in some parts of the mythology but not others. He argues, “Once canonized, the arbitrary assemblage of items takes on a totalizing function. The canon and its authorities establish an im-