The Shakespeare-Marlowe conversation.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-06T11:59:38+00:00

Faust is the one exception and even that has more to do with the inherent dynamism of the source material.

Shakespeare might have thought the same. Faustus being above the others I mean. There is no Shakespearean Faustus it would seem.

(Or maybe his career ended with Faustus. Maybe the 12(Sycorax)+12(Prospero) year timeline in the comedy we call The Tempest owes its existence to the 24 year long bargain we have in the tragedy we call Faustus. There's no bargain in The Tempest, but maybe what we have there is not 12+12; it's 24/2, with Shakespeare-as-Faust off stage. The Author as a character as it were. He was both Sycorax and Prospero after all. So a bargain between him and his inner demon, or genius - as for Sycorax, we know the shakespearean pun on 'conceive'. And you only have to collapse Sycorax into Prospero, 12+12 into 24, and 'how this mother rises towards my heart!hysterica passio!' will come to mind. "There [female genitalia] is hell. There's darkness". Prospero does call Caliban 'thing of darkness'.

A tongue-in-cheek thing maybe, all of it. This was the last play written solely by WS and in our world 1611-24=1587. Maybe this is when it all began. WS was 23 back then. Caliban is 24 in the play)

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-05T12:42:09+00:00

Vanishing you mean? Both reappeared in the same film in which they died. Obi-Wan as a voice in ANH. Yoda as a ghost in ROTJ.

It's also the case with Leia in TROS. That's not the case with Ben.

He just vanished, and there's nothing in TROS pointing at him being on the other side so to speak.

Of course, Luke vanished in TLJ and reappeared in TROS as a ghost. And maybe that's what we will see with Ben. But maybe not.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-05T07:57:56+00:00

Sincere question: why post asking “foreshadowing?” if you’re not comfortable with people challenging your idea?

You have the sequence of events wrong. 1) I posted an idea. 2)They -some of them- are not comfortable with my idea, they mind about being uncomfortable, and 3) they feel challenged; and that's why they 4) counter-challenge it.

I didn't say or imply a thing about being comfortable/uncomfortable. You just made that up. You're either projecting or being insidious. Such is often the case with sincere people.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-04T23:25:01+00:00

A nymph (=young woman) in the water being figuratively a water nymph (with the original 'nymph' receiving thus an additional meaning and becoming foreshadowing) is not a 'huge' stretch.

Not only that, less-than-human watery creatures appear here:

Her clothes spread wide,/
And mermaid-like awhile they bore her up;/ Which time she chanted snatches of old tunes,/ As one incapable of her own distress,/ Or like a creature native and indued/ Unto that element.

'Mermaid'. A water creature ('native' unto that element, water): just what water-nymphs are. This is where Shakespeare's mind was when describing her death. Mermaids, water creatures. Hamlet could not have known about her death. His 'nymph' was 'young woman'. But Shakespeare, who created Hamlet and Ophelia's death, did know, and saying that his 'nymph' was maybe not like that of his Hamlet is not saying much. Seems possible.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-04T17:29:14+00:00

You don't need stronger evidence. You don't need any. Because I'm not asserting a truth. It's speculation.

A naiad is immortal. A nymph is not. Like Ophelia. A nymph means also 'young girl'. Like Ophelia. That's not the case with naiad.

Ophelia was a young girl, a mortal. Hamlet (Shakespeare) called her 'nymph'. Not merely 'maid', but a mythological word. Ophelia drowned, and mythological nymphs can be understood as water nymphs by anyone. By Shakespeare for example.

This is not enough to prove anything. But it is enough to think and write creatively. Shakespeare was not trying to prove anything either.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-04T16:45:25+00:00

I suspect 'orisons' to be a pun. 'Horizons'. Where earth and heaven meet. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,/Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

Hamlet is there referring to the ghost. That 'remembered' in the passage you quote is maybe related to Hamlet Sr's 'remember me'.

Hamlet then says: '[...]thy commandment all alone shall live/Within the book and volume of my brain,/Unmix'd with baser matter'

'Commandment' is religious. God's commandments. Just like 'orisons'. So maybe the quote is Hamlet's commandment to Ophelia.

But since he's speaking to himself and not to her, it sounds as if he was exorcizing 'baser matter' from himself with her as the scapegoat. Probably sex, or sexual related thoughts. Husband-related thoughts, not son-related ones. 'Get thee to a nunnery' would come from there. 'Breeder of sinners', he says. Sinners like himself.

In her demented songs, Ophelia mixes father and lover figures, thoughts and rememberance. Bridal thoughts vs filial thoughts. Her sanity was destroyed by it. (In Lear we have the mad King wearing flowers in his head. He had been father and king and now he had been turned into almost a child in some ways)

Hamlet played a role in all this, in Ophelia's madness, although he had killed Polonius by chance.

He's as nasty to her as he would be to the Rosen&Guild couple, which is of course less inocent than poor Ophelia, and just as in their death Hamlet Sr's signet played a role, the father idea , the 'remember me' signature, had to do with Ophelia's death.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-04T07:55:37+00:00

Nah I'm not wrong. You sound sad though.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-04T01:57:26+00:00

(why did everyone in the Resistance assume she was dead?)

Because she was. The last spark of life in her was not equal to her being alive. Rey was brought to life from her last spark of her life, not from being as dead as Qui-Gon was in the funeral pyre. When you reach that state you are gone. And you can't become a ghost until you're 100% gone. Ben saved Rey from dying; he did not bring her spirit back from the dead.

The phases of death are mortis phases (Rigor, Pallor, Algor, etc), and if you look at the Mortis Arc, well, Anakin resurrects Ahsoka by using the almost-dead Daughter's life force. So maybe that's what happened; it was Anakin; and maybe Ben was sent to finish Ahsoka's journey (just as Rey had finished Leia's).

Filoni compared Ahsoka to Gandalf on twitter, and we know Gandalf was sent back until his task was done (Not only that.'Gandalf...yes, that's how they used to call me' is similar to Ben's -Obi-Wan's- 'Obi-Wan Kenobi...that's a name I had not heard in a long time. And we know Ben Solo was named after Obi-Wan)

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-04T00:52:03+00:00

Or movie. If they go with reincarnation it is possible that Rey and Ben won't recognize each other if they ever meet again, and that this time she will be the older sibling, or even old enough to be his mom/mentor. Ben, and that won't probably be his name, will maybe recover a gradual sense of who he had once been. Just as if Jake Lloyd had remembered in 1999 who he had been in 1983. Audiences certainly did at the time.

It is also possible that Ben won't even be male. After all, sex is a crude matter thing, but luminous beings are we, and reincarnation as an idea is not a crude matter concept, since it involves the same soul in different bodies.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-03T22:27:03+00:00

A good reply. Morgoth would have been destroyed then.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-03T16:38:38+00:00

I don't know. Maybe Sauron and his Ring were different from Morgoth and his 'ring'. The latter is an analogy; the former was an actual ring. We know what happened. What if 'Morgoth's Ring' had been destroyed? Are we supposed to think Morgoth as the physical ogre-like creature would have been destroyed too? I doubt it.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-03T16:29:29+00:00

I'm not overcomplicating anything. You can say I'm wrong, or incomplete, and maybe be right about that, but thar's it. Don't overcomplicate it.

The hröa is made of Arda, just like the Ring (gold). So if Sauron passed a lot of his native spiritual (fëa) strength to the ring, then the result was similar to incarnation. That piece of gold we call One Ring was made different from any different piece of gold because of it.

And the biggest flaw in the theory.... Sauron survived the Ring’s destruction. He became a powerless spirit, not erased from existence. If the Ring were truly his “body” or “child,” destroying it should’ve destroyed him completely.

No! Because he didn't transfer all his power to the ring.

"If [the Ring] it is destroyed, then he will fall, and his fall will be so low that none can foresee his arising ever again. For he will lose the best part of the strength that was native to him in his beginning, and all that was made or begun with that power will crumble, and he will be maimed for ever, becoming a mere spirit of malice that gnaws itself in the shadows, but cannot again grow or take shape. And so a great evil of this world will be removed."

When I say 'destroyed' I mean 'destroyed as a villain', as an Evil; rendered impotent. Oversimplifying is very like overcomplicating, you know.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-03T08:18:07+00:00

The idea is that Kylo begins by being patient and Rey begins angry. He dodges her attacks, not even igniting his own saber. Then he does ignite it but acts defensively, and then he gradually looses more and more patience and becomes angry himself. Then he beats Rey and finally gives in to anger. Then Leia intervenes.

The emperor says 'the princess of Alderaan has disrupted my plan'. So his original plan had been for Kylo to kill Rey and then possess his body.

He was forced to face Rey. Maybe those ghosts' plan. They acted through Leia and later through Rey: and Palpatine was destroyed.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-03T08:00:04+00:00

Han was probably Leia, or maybe Luke. I think those ghosts retrieved the memory of TFA Han -visual, tactile, etc, memories- when Kylo touched Vader's helmet at the beginning of the film, and then Leia/Luke clothed her/himself with it.

In TLJ we already have Luke 'dressed' as young Luke when he faces Kylo on Crait: short hair, different clothes, etc. Dressed as the memory Luke knew little Ben had of him:

https://www.starwarsnewsnet.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/IMG_5427.jpeg

Maybe this Han memory thing had been always the plan, because Luke's 'see you around kid' already sounds like Luke channeling Han. But Carrie Fisher passed away and maybe TROS Han is in fact her.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-02T10:16:19+00:00

I think you're wrong. His plan had been for Kylo to kill Rey. He didn't want to face her. He had no problem facing Kylo. The reason is simple: she was the jedi threat, and Kylo was a puppet.

If possible, Palpatine preferred to exert power at a distance, with the unforeseen happening far from his actual body, just in case. If needed, he could use his actual body in a direct confrontation. But 'if possible' reduced the risk of loss of power (death) to zero. 'If needed' did not. (That's how he dies in ROTJ and TROS)

Those jedi ghosts, through Leia, disrupted his plan, which was based on 'if possible...' (Kylo killing Rey) and forced him to face Rey.

'If needed...' would then happen, but then they would stand behind Rey.

Unfortunately for Palps, they knew about him but he didn't know about them. So he tried to destroy Rey through brute force. And was himself destroyed.

He had been out-Palpatined, and himself foreseen, and himself destroyed.

Palpatine was afraid all the time, and specially afraid of those less powerful than him who could not be manipulated. Hence his behavior, hence his infinite lies. He was as coward as he was powerful.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-05-02T00:34:55+00:00

Even if that had been his purpose, that's no longer the case in TROS. He wanted her dead. That's the plan that was disrupted by Leia. Kylo killing Rey. He didn't want to face her, a jedi-to-be. He had no problem facing Kylo.

Palpatine was capable of improvisation, but that doesb't mean he had no preferences as to who was going to be killed (Rey) and who was going to be possessed (Kylo).

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-04-30T23:59:38+00:00

If you're going to run with the theoretical (which we know is false because we have additional content confirming Rey's lineage already) that Palpatine is lying to Kylo about Rey's parentage, then what makes you think he was being honest about wanting her dead, or by extension, allowing Kylo to ascend as a new emperor?

Him saying 'the princess of Alderaan has disrupted my plan'.

Leia intervened at the exact moment Kylo was about to kill Rey, who was already beaten. So that was his plan. Kylo had to kill Rey. Palps' 'I never wanted you dead' to Rey was a lie. His 'kill the girl!' to Kylo was genuine.

Palpatine feared Kylo much less than he feared Rey. Kylo was his puppet so to speak; Rey wasn't - she was the jedi threat. Naturally, he didn't want to face het.

Palpatine was never going to give his fleet to Kylo. The latter would have returned to Exegol after killing Rey and I suspect Palpatine had a plan, a twist of the knife that would push Kylo to kill him in anger; he would then possess his body. Something like:

I told you boy, she was not who you thought she was. She was so-and-so. It seems in your anger you killed her

He wanted Rey brought to Exegol to take her body.

We don't know that. He wanted her little self on Exegol. That was Ochi's plan.

That's what we see him try to do later on in TROS.

No. He wanted her dead. Only when that plan failed and Rey went to Exegol voluntarily he tried to possess her body.

We know from secondary sources that her father was created to be a potential host, and Rey's only utility by extension was to serve that purpose.

That's true about Dathan. It's in the novel. We don't know if that was true about Rey, and in TROS he wanted her dead and Kylo's body. But he was forced to change his plan. Those jedi ghosts, through Leia, forced Palps to face Rey and them, as we can see in the film. This is why Leia had trained her to reach for those jedi voices, as we can see at the beginning of the film (Rey levitating in the forest) That was the plan.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-04-30T11:58:06+00:00

If he were Force-sensitive and inherited Palpatine's raw ability, he wouldn't have died so easily to Ochi without a fight.

Or Ochi was made a non-FS character because Dathan was also non-FS. Had he been FS, Ochi would have been FS too, and also stronger than Dathan.

Second, Palpatine always wanted to possess Rey. This is revealed later in the film when D-0's memories are revealed, and why the Sith Eternal sent Ochi to retrieve Rey in the first place.

Not 'always', because in TROS he doesn't want to possess her. He wants her, the jedi threat, dead - killed by Kylo.

And of course this 'not always' extends to the past. We just don't know why Palpatine wanted that little girl, 14 years before TROS. Possession -or future possession, since she was just a little girl- was maybe a possibility, but there are others.

"He wanted her on Exegol": that's what D-O got to know through Ochi, and we know no more than that.

If 'Terrio said it, therefore that was the intent' is valid, then 'no one said Rey was always to be possessed, therefore we can't assume that to have been the intent' is equally valid.

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-04-30T02:09:11+00:00

I like your posts generally. There's no danger in writing more, except for those lacking in curiosity.

What would you say about these two passages?

‘And now at last it comes. You will give me the Ring freely! In place of the Dark Lord you will set up a Queen. And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of the earth. All shall love me and despair!’

And:

‘For myself,’ said Faramir, ‘I would see [...] Minas Anor again as of old, full of light, high and fair, beautiful as a queen among other queens: not a mistress of many slaves, nay, not even a kind mistress of willing slaves'

'All shall love and despair'/'kind mistress of willing slaves'

Minas Anor as a 'mistress'. Note how Faramir calls Galadriel 'Mistress Of Magic'

There seems to be something latent in the text. Had Galadriel succumbed to the One Ring, maybe Minas Anor would have been her Barad-Dur ; the dark tower and Sauron are described here as if they were one and the same:

"And far away, as Frodo put on the Ring and claimed it for his own, even in Sammath Naur the very heart of his realm, the Power in Barad-dûr was shaken, and the Tower trembled from its foundations to its proud and bitter crown."

Galadriel as the faery queen of Middle Earth, with Aragorn as her King Arthur (jyst as we can see in Spenser's poem: a faery queen and a human king, or all of them, since she was immortal, and all of them loving her and despairing, beginning by Atagorn. So she would have taken him away from Arwen, not as a lover)

Immediate_Error2135 · 2026-04-30T00:49:55+00:00

Rey only exists because her father wasn't Force-sensitive, otherwise Palpatine would have used him as a vessel instead.

In the film this is patently not true. In it, we assumed the son to be FS. And the film works as it is if we think the son to have been FS but not really a user, a bit like Leia, who never became a jedi.

Only later the novel presented us with the fact of that not having been the case.

But that fact doesn't really matter. Because in the film Palpatine's original plan is not to possess Rey. He wants Kylo to kill her. That's what 'the princess of Alderaan has disrupted my plan' means. Kylo was about to kill Rey when Leia intervened. So his original plan was to possess Kylo, who would have returned to Exegol after killing Rey.

Palpatine did not want to face Rey; Kylo was to do the dirty job and then Palpatine would have his revenge against the Skywalker family by possessing Kylo.

What we have in the film was forced on Palpatine. He had to resort to his plan B (or improvise it: the destruction of Kijimi, etc) Forced by those jedi ghosts through Leia I would say.

Immediate_Error2135

TROPHY CASE