I apologize, abake; I didn't mean to suggest that the midichlorians thing would be the takeaway from reading the 1981 conversation transcript. I was referring mostly to how Anakin's fall was described. Whenever I reference the story of the PT (ROTS in particular), my biggest objection has always been the way that I feel Anakin's turn was handled horrendously. I've maintained (and always will) that it was flimsily-established, nonsensical, rushed, and just poorly executed technically.
In that 1981 conversation, Lucas outlines how Anakin would've demonstrated erratic behavior over the course of Jedi missions (plural!) across the galaxy, where he even starts killing Jedi who turn their back on him. That type of evolving descent into darkness would make a lot more sense than turning to the dark side "to save his wife" and having his first act (moments after turning) be the slaughter of younglings.
The "save Padme" rationale for why the greatest villain in cinema history turned evil is the single-dumbest thing I've seen in SW. I know that you disagree (strongly), but I'm just telling you what aspect of the 1981 conversation makes people like me yearn for that earlier version instead of what we actually got in the PT.
Also, GL's description of Yoda not being a fighter, and having no chance against someone like Vader, was completely turned on its head in the PT. Had Lucas kept Yoda's characterization the way he described in 1981 (as a guru of the Jedi ways), his exile on Dagobah would not be able to be interpreted as cowardly. I think it would've preserved more integrity for the Yoda character by sticking with the original characterization.
Finally, there's the bit about Leia having her mother around for a couple of years. That would have made her look like less of a senile ***** when she's describing her mom to Luke in ROTJ. GL's prequel story in 1981 was superior (in my opinion only, of course). That was my point.
..
