George Lucas & Karen Traviss' visions of Star Wars are NOT the same...
So whenever I come across this image:
I keep in mind that it's from a book written by Karen Traviss, who is a brilliant author (I adored Legacy of the Force: Bloodlines and Sacrifice) but whose stance on Anakin, Yoda & the Jedi and Star Wars morality is this:
As opposed to George Lucas' stance on Anakin, Yoda & the Jedi and Star Wars' morality, which is this:
In a children's story about Light and Dark, good and evil, selflessness vs selfishness, George Lucas marks the Empire as absolutely evil and the Rebels as absolutely good, in the Original Trilogy.
In the Prequels, the situation is more complex (the Jedi are drafted into a war and forced to do things they know they shouldn't be doing, but have to for the greater good; the Sith bring about order to a corrupt government) but the morality stays the same... the selfish, greedy Sith are absolutely evil and the selfless, compassionate Jedi are absolutely good.
And, as a character, Yoda's function is to deliver that thesis. It's no wonder why Lucas treats Yoda's words as absolutely correct:
Yoda is Lucas' mouthpiece in the Prequels, his self-insert.
George Lucas' narrative frames Yoda as objectively right.
So when Karen Traviss questions the Jedi, particularly Yoda's character and wisdom, she's disagreeing with George Lucas' thesis.
Which is fair. Traviss, is a different person than Lucas, she's an ex-journalist with a more "grey" view of the world and a different philosophy re: fiction aimed at children. "Death of the author" and all that. Again, fair enough.
And if you like Travis' interpretation and philosophy more than George's, if her read resonates with you more... also fair enough.
But the EU is not a reliable source on Lucas' vision.
I've talked about this in MUCH more detail here, but if you do care about George Lucas' vision, then maybe don't draw from the Expanded Universe, which includes content written by authors who expressly disagree with him, like Traviss.
Sounds logical, but for some reason people will read the above-posted Dooku quote and treat it as reflective of Lucas' vision, when it's not the case.
George Lucas' Dooku doesn't have an issue with Yoda or the Jedi (at least not openly, as Darth Tyranus, the Sith Lord he wants them all dead). Dooku's issue is with the Senate and the Republic.
George Lucas specifically added that most Jedi share Dooku's concerns. Before he's revealed to be a mass-murdering, Sith who enslaves neutral systems, the Jedi think he makes a good point and are even reluctant to consider him a murder suspect.
But let's not start saying that Lucas' Prequels are meant to be about "the Jedi's failure" and "Dooku being right that the Jedi are corrupt.
Because that's not the case.
If that's how you see them, great. It's certainly how Traviss saw them. To each their own, authorial intent be damned.
But it's not what they were about, to Lucas. Stating the contrary is... I dunno, lying? Rewriting history?
It's as if I got hired to write a Lord of the Rings prequel seen from Gandalf's POV. And y'know what, maybe I don't like Gandalf.
So I write him as a scheming asshole going âmyahahahah, fuck hobbits! Iâm gonna let them keep the One Ring so a bunch NazgĂťl will swoop through the Shire and murder them!â and suddenly, everyone starts writing posts about the notion that âGrowing up is realizing that Tolkien always intended for Gandalf to be the secret villain of LOTR!â as if that had always been the case and I didn't just reframe him that way retroactively.
Finally, I'd also encourage you to read @rendar-writes' well-made point here about the fact that, while claiming she "doesn't give the answers", Traviss nonetheless shows a clear anti-Jedi bias.