To (ironically, yes) "cut it up into chunks" - in multiple ways, since this is only part 1 - I key in on where he says "A text worth understanding works by gradually building a greater and greater total effect from the progressive development of its elements and their interactions
". Only a clueless buffoon would disagree with this statement as a general deal.
Specifically in regards to The Last Jedi
though, it reads somewhat as if he is claiming that the state in which we find Luke in The Last Jedi
feels like an effect which is "gradually" built. Is Graham claiming that the Luke who gave up on young, underdeveloped family feels like a "progressive development" from the Luke who by the end of the OT knows that you don't even give up on old, horrifically entrenched family?
Because I feel like this is the crux of the matter. It's not a narrative development which plays as gradual or progressive. (Of course it's possible that Luke may have
been slowly, gradually faltering, and this would have been extremely powerful if dramatized effectively
, but if that was
the case then it's not part of the story The Last Jedi
dramatizes, and so Luke's story is robbed of that gradualness just as Han's was in The Force Awakens
.) It's a MUH-HASSIVE
turn for the character and while the aftermath plays beautifully that lack of gradualness causes the key turn itself - the most dramatic, character-defining event in the entire Sequel Trilogy narrative - to land with a dissonant clunk for many, even those of us who are WOKE AF and FEMINIST AF. I mean, I don't even see
Anyway, of course this is just part 1 so maybe he goes there in part 2 or something. I hope so. My dreams would come true if he does.