Star Wars Episode VII has a title—The Force Awakens—now and it feels so weird to be reading about and speculating on a new Star Wars movie. Even as titles and plot details and set pictures leak out, it still doesn’t feel like it’s really happening.
I think it’s partially franchise exhaustion. I only have so much time to care about Marvel Cinematic Universes and DC Cinematic Universes and X-Men Cinematic Universes and Universal Monster Cinematic Universes and Hobbits and Ninja Turtles Jesus Yes Really and Pacific Rims and whatever the hell else is steamrolling over us in the next four years. The only reason Star Wars gets any space in that overcrowded toybox of the mind is because it withstands nostalgia better than most.
But it’s that nostalgia that I think is also the reason why The Force Awakens doesn’t feel real. I still vividly recall the excitement leading up to the release of the first prequel, The Phantom Menace. Star Wars was back and while we had grown up on the original trilogy, this one was ours. This was the Star Wars we’d be able to tell our kids about seeing for the first time.
And we all know how well that worked out.
So this new sequel trilogy, this veritable new hope, is something I’ve felt very cautious about. I want to believe that it’s going to feel like Star Wars and that it’s going to make the whole franchise feel real again. But I don’t want to be disappointed again, so I keep myself distant from the news and speculation in hopes that this will buffer me from any potential letdown.
But.
But there is one idea that I’d love to see play out on the big screen. An idea that I haven’t been able to let go of. An idea that isn’t all that great of an idea but oh gosh, the implications it would bring to this universe, to these heroes, would be grand indeed. An idea that I thought I had calmed down about (the first draft of this article was written in March 2014!) but which the revealed title of Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens has brought roaring back.
I want Star Wars Episode VII to get rid of the Force. Even though the title says outright that the Force awakens. Here are five reasons why.
1.) Getting rid of the Force affects every character in a different way.
The most exciting aspect of The Force Awakens is that we’ll get to see what happened to Luke, Leia, and Han after Return of the Jedi. The decades-long popularity of the Expanded/Legacy universe is based in this concept. We want to know everything about our original trilogy heroes, because the end of the story left open so much possibility for their future direction. Although preferably we want to see them be the heroes we remember them being just one last time.
And to do that you need a plot that’s going to affect these three central figures. A struggle to get rid of the Force, or to stop the Force from disappearing, would obviously affect Luke, but it could also have serious ramifications for Leia and Han, as well.
Imagine that getting rid of the Force starts as a legislative decision made by a new galactic government and that Leia was the leader of, or at least part of, that legislative body. Maybe there’s another Sith on the loose (Episode VII concept art shows an ominous hooded cyborg cradling Vader’s helmet, after all) and after the Emperor everyone has just had enough and starts exploring the option of a Jedi-less and/or Force-less galaxy.
There are some logical arguments to be made for sealing the Force off from potential Force users. You ensure that disasters like the Emperor can never happen again and you don’t have to be worried about policing a galactic population full of Jedi who no longer have any organization of their own. What if someone figures out a way to do this without severing individual Jedi from the Force through surgery, genetic manipulation, or anything else invasive?
Leia would be forced to argue this issue in the government, she would be forced to choose between hurting herself and her family and ensuring the greater good of the galaxy. How does Leia solve problems like this? Does she compromise or is she a hardline politician? Getting rid of the Force puts everything she loves is in peril, and it could come down to her making that peril a reality with a single signature of approval. Does she refuse? Does she go ahead?
Even if there is no governmental push to tap off the Force, Leia still retains a huge personal stake in the Force vanishing, since she, and presumably at least one of her kids, are Force-sensitive.
Han wouldn’t suffer the personal loss of the Force like Leia, but if he and Leia have a family of Force-users, that puts him in a unique position. The person or group proposing a Force-less galaxy would sure seem fishy to Han, don’t you think? And even though he’s a hero of the Rebellion and related to two galactic figureheads, few people would notice if he and Chewie slipped away in the Falcon to get to the bottom of this getting-rid-of-the-Force-business.
Han also provides an important perspective for the audience in regards to being incapable of understanding or experiencing the Force. He’s uniquely positioned to ask Luke and Leia if it would be so bad if the Force was gone, allowing us to hear from them just how devastating it would be to lose their abilities, further allowing us to learn the intricacies of how the Force affects you on a day-to-day basis and how it widens your understanding of life itself. Through Han, we could get a much deeper perspective on this mystical aspect of the Star Wars universe.
Regardless of his own feelings, in the end getting rid of the Force threatens his family. And that probably includes his children. And while we’ve seen Han brought low, or pop up winningly in impossible situations, we’ve never seen someone as cunning as Han decide that he’s coming after you. And a righteously pissed Harrison Ford is a joy to behold.
Seriously, if Han decides he is going to take you out then you are fucked. His Wookiee lifemate will tear your limbs off, his wife will send entire fleets to melt your planet into slag, his lifelong business associate will snake your finances out from under you…remember Jabba the Hutt? Yeah, no one does because Han’s probably-brother-in-law destroyed his entire operation like 30 years ago with little more than a glowy sword and two bumbling droids. And if you somehow manage to escape all of that? Boba Fett probably owes Han a favor by this point. Enjoy your explody space death!
2.) Getting rid of the Force immediately defines the post-Empire era with a single event that has a large number of repercussions.
A unique hurdle that the Star Wars sequel trilogy will have to overcome is introducing us to characters that we’ve never heard of. We faced this with the prequel trilogy, but even then we still knew of a lot of the characters even if we didn’t yet know that theyssa would turn out to be dumber than a bag of poodoo.
More importantly, we already knew the larger context that these characters would be operating within. We’d be getting to know Anakin and Obi-Wan and Padme and Palpatine as the Old Republic crumbled around them, as war and fascism gripped the galaxy, and no amount of pod racing could distract us from the knowledge that we were not heading towards a happy ending.
The context of the Star Wars sequel trilogy is a mystery, though, and that will make it harder to explain what motivates new characters towards conflict. The sequel trilogy could take a page from Star Wars Episode IV, the only other instance in the franchise where brand new situations and characters were introduced, and just start fresh with new faces, locations, and conflicts. And judging from some of the rumors and concept art, it seems like it will be doing exactly that, albeit in the physical trappings of the old conflict.
But do we want to see Episode IV duplicated? Will we see new characters slowly coming together to form a rebellion? Against what? Against the characters of the original trilogy? Why would we want to see those beloved characters grown shiftless and evil? Maybe Luke, Leia, and Han are still fighting a rebellion against a persistent Empire and the new characters join them. But that’s a pretty depressing thought in itself. Have they really made no progress in decades?
Any new context in the Star Wars sequel trilogy will have to avoid undercutting the characters in the original trilogy while not entirely retiring them. That’s a tall order, but getting rid of the Force provides a possible way to do this. We’ve realized how that would affect the characters of the original trilogy, but that kind of event would also provide an immediate crisis for any new characters, as well.
At least some of our new characters are bound to be the offspring of the characters from the original trilogy. (Just like some of the characters of the original trilogy were the offspring of characters from the prequel trilogy.) That means some of the new characters will be new Force-sensitives, and probably some of the first in a brand new generation of Jedi. Since it has been revealed that the new trilogy will start 30-ish years after Return of the Jedi, that means the Jedi Order might have only just re-achieved some form of stability, order, and influence. Either that or there isn’t ANY Jedi Order, but in the end the consequence is the same: Getting rid of the Force strips an entire generation of Jedi and/or Force-users of their inheritance. The reactions to that are bound to be varied, and give us an easy way to sympathize and understand these new characters.
Basically, it turns this:
“Hi, I’m promising new teenage Jedi Zap Rowsdower and I just saved you from that nest of gundarks! Let’s have a pizza party!”
Into this:
“Hi, I’m promising new teenage Jedi Zap Rowsdower and I’ll be damned if I let some politician treat me like a weapon instead of a person. Even if that politician is probably played by Benedict Cumberbatch, because that guy is everywhere these days.”
You don’t even have to do this with all Force-users, just some of them. Turning a have into a have-not is another way to create drama that allows us to get to know these characters better.
3.) It’s not just another war…but it still allows for daring battles.
The series is called Star Wars so let’s see some wars amongst the stars! But…different than the ones that included massive amounts of ships, CGI clones, lightsaber duels, and people flying in and around a Death Star.
Getting rid of the Force hinders this goal, actually. Without the Force there’s nothing that allows really cool duels and that just leaves us with the same space battles we’ve seen in the last six movies.
But really, that just means you have to keep following the idea of getting rid of the Force to further extrapolation. Over and over in the movies, we’ve heard that the Force is intrinsic to life. It’s more than just a fun way to do flippies in the air, it’s a fundamental aspect of the galaxy, like gravity. What happens if the Force’s affects on the galaxy disappear? It would do more than just make Force users sad. Something else, something bigger, would happen.
What if the omnipresent will of the Force, along with giving Jedi something to brag about, was also keeping something out? Something old and unknowable and dark? Something straight up wrong? Something that can be shot at with X-Wings without getting the pilots into moral quandaries?
And…something that can take a myriad of forms! What if these things are shadowy and sort of biological and creepily adaptable? What if one day you get a rain of locusts and the next you get a planet-eating goliath? (Very Yuuzhan Vong-ish, this idea, I know.) We’d see lots of hotshot maneuvers from plucky X-Wing pilots, that’s for sure, with ingenious defenses, thrilling chases, and terrible catastrophes. Imagine the mind-bending duels that could occur with shadowy creatures that generate two limbs for every one you chop away with your lightsaber. What are you going to do? Especially without the Force to back you up?
Not having the Force to back you up is key. If the sequel trilogy uses that as the defining conflict then we have to see it succeed, otherwise there are no stakes, no setbacks, and certainly not enough conflict to fill three (or more) movies. Sure, they have to get the Force back eventually, but it would be exciting to see our heroes being brought low and then rising to the impossible challenge before them. Those impossible odds are what hooked us in the original trilogy, after all.
Plus, having Luke, Leia, Han, et al take back the Force allows the sequel trilogy to do something truly fascinating.
4.) It provides a new threat that allows us to learn more about the conflicts in the previous trilogies, and the Force itself.
The Force is…so weird. Are there even rules to it? There seem to be. I mean, the Jedi Order in the prequel trilogy were so hard on about them that Anakin went nuts trying to obey them. (And then Darth Vader snapped and threw the Emperor down a pit trying to obey the other set of rules.) But Luke doesn’t seem to follow those rules in the original trilogy; he straight up Force-chokes people in Jabba’s Palace. And he still gets to save the galaxy and get home in time to see the Force ghosts of all of his teachers give him the thumbs up.
Oh yeah, those Force ghosts. What’s up with them? Apparently this is an ability that the Jedi had to rediscover, which is kind of baffling when you think about their numbers in the prequel era. So Qui-Gon just…figures it out in a way that generations full of other Jedi couldn’t? (Did he acquire it in a game of chance? What gives?) And then Liam Neeson’s ghost told Yoda and Obi-Wan how to pull it off? But who told Anakin?
And Anakin was a virgin birth because the will of the Force just…had to?
And midi-chlorians?
WHAT THE HELL IS ANYTHING.
Qui-Gon’s revelation of Force ghost abilities can at least be explained. Obi-Wan states in The Phantom Menace that if Qui-Gon would follow the Jedi code he would be on the Jedi Council, our strongest indicator that Jinn does things his own way, according to his own morality. He’s unorthodox and more open-minded to doing things with the Force that other Jedi wouldn’t realize a need for. (Yoda’s cool and all, but it’s still hard to imagine him thinking, “DUDE, I WONDER IF COULD USE THE FORCE TO BE A GHOST.”) Whereas that was probably the first thing a crunchy crusader like Qui-Gon thought after taking a long pull on a death stick.
That unorthodox approach mirrors Luke’s in the original trilogy, and from there it’s not hard to imagine that this is the “balance” to the Force to which the prophecy in Episode I was referring. The rigidity that the Light side of the Force insisted on made them vulnerable to the flexibility of the Dark side of the Force and before you knew it things were getting seriously Order 66-ish across the galaxy. The Emperor slaughtering the old Order and Anakin producing Luke and Leia restored Jedi to the galaxy who could grow up utilizing the Force in a flexible fashion, crossing between traditionally Light and Dark tactics. The Emperor’s death and Vader’s redemption are the fulfillment of this prophecy.
This is all theory and speculation, but by focusing the conflict around the presence of the Force, the sequel trilogy has an opportunity to flesh out the nature of the Force and either make this all overt canon or offer its own exploration of the prophecy, Light and Dark, and the mechanics of the Force.
What if Luke is training an entirely new Jedi Order under these flexible rules? He would probably try to commune with his teachers a lot just to make sure he’s doing it right. This means we’d get to see Yoda and McGregor’s Obi-Wan again. And we could get really interesting character meet-ups like, Qui-Gon and Luke, that would really knit together the previous two trilogies into a cohesive timeline. Luke taking advice from Qui-Gon would enhance that character’s actions in the dodgily-plotted prequel trilogy just by virtue of proving that Qui-Gon’s actions mattered decades after they were committed.
Most importantly, we could have scenes between Luke, Leia, and their father Anakin. The kids can get to know their father in a way that shouldn’t be possible, and thus the audience could them and their history better. This would give Anakin an opportunity to lament his actions from the prequels, as well, and provide a new perspective to them that would help those movies make more sense. I can hear the internet groaning at the prospect of seeing Hayden Christensen again, but honestly, I think he deserves another crack at Anakin under a director who will actually bother to give him more direction than “Pretend you’re in love” or “Jump over that green block then duck under the next one.”
This mixture of original, prequel, and sequel casts provides a lot of different perspectives, and if the threat is Force-related that means all of them really need to define just what the Force IS and why they need it so badly. And with a deft touch, this can be done without sacrificing the mystique of the Force as outer space magic.
Which brings me to my final argument.
5.) Getting rid of the Force preserves the science-fantasy structure of the series.
Star Wars has never been entirely sci-fi and it has never been entirely fantasy, but rather an inarguably appealing mixture of the two. The Force functions as a traditional fantasy magic system in regard to how the characters use it, and while we’ve faced off against science fiction threats like the Death Star and seen how magic can avert the course of an entire galaxy’s political sytem, we’ve never quite dug into the magic itself.
And although Star Wars is a franchise that brings to mind visions of spaceships, blasters, droids, and more, in the end all six movies are bound together by the presence, absence, and use of the Force.
It surrounds the movies, penetrates them, binds them. And if a third trilogy must be made then its story has a responsibility to avoid being a soulless cash-in and to utilize what came before in order to enable a deeper understanding of this epic, its settings, and its characters. (And with a title like The Force Awakens, one wonders if they are taking this sentiment to heart.) The prequel trilogy gave us a richer understanding of the events leading to the Empire. The original trilogy gave us a thrilling understanding of how this galaxy functions under tyranny.
What will the sequel trilogy illuminate? I don’t know, but I obviously have an idea, and that idea ends with our heroes triumphant, having returned the Force to the galaxy and gained a crucial, deeper understanding of how it works within us. Then, finally, these words:
“The Force will be with us. Always.”
I’ve obviously given this idea a lot of thought, but I won’t be saddened if it doesn’t come to pass. (Actually, I’d be a little weirded out.) It’s not the only idea as to what the story of Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens could be; and considering the sheer legion of fans waiting to see how the new trilogy unfolds it doesn’t seem possible that whatever story there is will please everyone.
In fact, the power of that expectation is a little frightening because of that very vacuum. Episode VII is playing with a story that engenders so much devotion that it’s become its own culture. In that sense, postulating a possible story for the Star Wars sequels is a dangerous move, one that could be taken as an imposition of my own will, my own wishes, over other fans who have wishes that are just as valid.
But it’s that validity that makes wondering about Episode VII exciting in the first place. What you personally want to see might just show up on the big screen, finally, after all this time, after the disappointment of other Star Wars movies or projects! That’s thrilling.
In the end, we can’t hold off our hope for these new movies. What do you want to see up on that screen come Christmas 2015? How would you want to see your heroes sent off? What would make Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens a worthy addition to the Star Wars universe?
Personally, Chris Lough would appreciate the addition of the Force to the present day, even though he would mostly just use it to float his cat around.
The failure of the prequel trilogy hinged largely on Lucas’ choice to recontextualize the force as a measurable scientfic phenomenon (thereby removing the undercurrent of spirituality which was vital to the original series) – eliminating the force entirely would essentially double down on that mistake. I predict the title refers to a quiet period in regards to the force, in which there were no dark lords or jedi openly competing for control of the galaxy – a condition which will presumably change (or be revealed as a misconception) at the end of the film.
An idea worst than the prequels. Impressive. Most impressive.
@1: I would also add that the Clone Wars series basically re-instated the Force’s spiritual dimension.
@3 – I thoroughly enjoyed the 2003 animated series (best product of the prequel era), but I can’t remember the details too clearly. If you’re referring to the 2008 CGI series – I’ll have to watch it (please let me know). I caught all the episodes of Rebels so far, and it’s fine – entertaining, bite-sized, and feels like canon, but not entirely engaging (yet).
I don’t think it’s possible for me to disagree more strongly with this idea. That aside…how would the government even manage to accomplish legislate and enforce the ‘removal’ of the Force? Are you saying the government somehow gets rid of the Force? Or that they are outlawing the use of the Force? The first seems, frankly, impossible on a ridiculous scale. The second is a bit more interesting.
I’ve long been of the opinion that at some point, the Jedi organization should be separated from any one governmental institution. The Jedi, as servants of the Light Side of the Force, are going to have different concerns (usually along lines of Light/Dark and good/bad) than governmental issues (legal/illegal and shades of political expediency).
Seeing the Jedi not accepted in larger governmental circles, and having them viewed by the government as essentially vigilantes, while they’re out trying to help the common people and, along the way, keeping at bay growing threats that seek to topple the new governments, would be interesting I think.
Because even if they win and stop the bad guys, they’re still essentially outlaws and outsiders.
I completely (read: vehemently) disagree with the overall suggestion. However, I do like the discussion in #4, but I think all those things could be addressed WITHOUT getting rid of the Force. In fact, I think those would be some great story elements. The rest is complete bunk, though.
I agree that it would be good to downplay the Force as a storytelling crutch. Compare the mild use of the force in Star Wars to the outright sorcery in Empire.
But actually changing the lore? That’s crazy talk.
My biggest concern about losing the Force is that I’ve seen it done in other franchises, to disastrous effect. Specifically, I’m thinking of Dragonlance. This was a tradtional fantasy world predicated on the gods and magic, and for some reason (I think to shake things up), they decided to get rid of the gods (and therefore magic!). This left a world that was rather depressing, turning the series into an emo version of Led Zeppelin songs. Eventually (and it was probably the plan all along), magic did come back, but at the cost of my not caring anymore.
As you note, the Force is the defining mythos of the galaxy. Star Wars has faced a non-Force world (in the EU) via the Yuuzhan Vong, and it was some of the best story-telling, but it still feels gimmicky.
Finally, I like the idea of a “no-Force users/X-Men-like” order, but wasn’t that basically what we saw when the Empire got rid of the Jedi? I wonder if that’s just old hat at this point.
These are well-thought out ideas, and I think they’d make for some interesting storylines, but (as you point out) I doubt we’ll see the Force awaken…and then go back to bed.
What about going the other way? Let’s take the title literally: the Force (which is alive) gains sentience. What does that do to the Universe? What are the motivations of the Force?
Then, in the long run, the Force self destructs slowly, which puts us into an SF version of the Niven/Pournelle Magic Goes Away style universe.
Wasn’t this pretty much exactly what the Empire did when they came into power?
Well, they kept two force users at hand, but the “ancient religion” became pretty much a myth after they killed all jedi.
My understanding may be off, but The Force is basically what allows life to exist. Getting rid of it would kill everyone and make for a dull and depressing film. Although the idea of it keeping Cthulu at bay is intriguing…
Anyway, other contentions: please, for the love of god, let’s stay the frell away from galactic politics. That is a big part of what killed the prequels, remember? Han will not and cannot figure too prominently. None of the orig. trig. characters are: they are there as a bridge. I don’t want to see Harrison Ford limping about all film. Let the man show up and then go back to what he loves: flying helicopters and getting high.
Biggest contention: do you want a whole movie that is about depowering the heros? It would be like watching Superman wear kryptonite underwear for a whole film and just, not take it off for some reason. It may be interesting to explore in novels or some other side work, but not really what you want to do with the first installment, intended to revitialize the francise you paid 2 billions dollars for.
No, I’ll wager they are going back to formula. Star Wars IS formula. For our three movie arc we have: 1) establish our threat and find our new generation of heros who will discover their power and achieve a victory (that is less significant, strategically, than it seems); 2) the heroes continue to gain power and experience, but will now suffer a defeat and a setback (being cut off from The Force might work here); 3) our heroes regroup, level up and finally defeat the bad guys, hopefully without needing the help of teddy bears.
I have my own theory on the title.
A young civilian is thrown into a dangerous situation, and survives by using powers she didn’t know she had.
Realizing that the Force has awakened within her, she sets out on a journey to find the one individual who can help her control these powers…
The culling of the Jedi likely made Force sensitivity a much rarer occurrence than it once was, and the first new apprentice in 30 years would be a boon for Luke… or for the new villain.
@@.-@ Transceiver
He’s almost certainly referring to the 2008 CGI show. The Mortis Trilogy (and the Yoda’s Arc in Season Six) especially are about that.
You should give the series a try. It has a shaky start, and there are not-exactly-great episodes throughout, but when it is good, it’s very good. And their Anakin is a huge improvement on the films, while still making sense as Anakin.
@@@@@ 13 – Thanks! Whoa – 121 episodes. I’ll check out the episodes you referenced for now.
Terrible, terrible idea. But then when it starts with a line like this i don’t know what else to expect:
Hey all!
I haven’t had a chance to check in on the comments until now and I’m blown over by how thoughtful your responses are. I knew that this was an article that would spark vehement (very vehement!) disagreement, but by and large ya’ll are using that to craft really incisive and exciting takes on the Star Wars universe. (fcoulter, I’m going to be thinking about your comment for a while. The Force as an active participant! Hmmmm.)
I also wanted to point out that those interested in The Clone Wars might want to follow along with Emily’s liveblog from earlier this year:
http://www.tor.com/tags/the-clone-wars
As she points out, there’s a lot of great Star Wars awaiting you in that series.
Springboarding off the end of my article here…I’m curious what everyone thinks the story of the Star Wars sequels should include so that they feel like worthy installments. The original trilogy cast is a must, of course…but what else, I wonder?
Blasphemy.
@@@@@@.-@@@@@ & @@@@@ 13: Bingo. Those episodes are definitely the ones to check out if you want more Force goodness (and prepare to see/hear some familiar characters too).
I would definitely recommend you try out the rest of the series too. It puts a lot of things in Revenge of the Sith into perspective, like the growing militarisation of the Republic and centralisation of power into the hands of the Chancellor, dissatisfaction with the Jedi (both internal and external), and the devastation on the ground.
Sometimes I feel like the only series fan in the world who didn’t loathe the prequals. They paid homage to the original set while retexualizing the scenery and ideals. I thought the story, while a bit rambling, was interesting, and the caveat that we all knew was inevitable was still gripping and tragic. What I HATED was the casting. Barf. Ewan McGregor is the only actor who didn’t utterly destroy their character with wooden or whiny overacting. That aside.. I don’t think Disney is smart enough to make an intelligent political drama like what you propose re: legislation. Disney is not about to lampshade the dangers of democracy, yall. And besides that, I have to ask, what democracy? We don’t have enough information about the story to know what Disney is proposing to have happened after the fall of the Empire. If Disney goes the realistic route, because that’s totally Disney’s niche yall, then there would be total ANARCHY with the Rebellion and the “senate” in control of little more than what they managed to conquer, everything else falling to warlords of the imperial military. I find it hard to believe that 30 years is enough to transform a GALACTIC civilization from an iron-fisted empire into a hum drum “stable” democracy. But this is Disney, after all. What I suspect we will see is Leia in a Vladimir Putin-style position of authority over an obnoxious bickering body trying to remember how to be a Senate; this at least is feasible even if totally unrealistic. What I suspect Luke has been doing all this time is finding the Force Sensatives out there and bringing them into the new Jedi fold (hence Force Awakens). As for conflict, I suspect its’ going to be the usual cliche Warlord X who sees opporitunity for power, blah blah. There is potential if Disney incorporates the idea of dissatisfaction with the force into Warlord X’s faction, but we’ll see. I’m cynical when it comes to Disney; I truly suspect what we will see is a beautifully rendered if totally predictable story that follows the happy-sad-climax-happy arch of every Disney movie. in SPACE.
Side note: my captcha for that first post was “criticisms lawnote.” Um, totally appropriate amirite?
By the established backstory you cannot get rid of the Force without exterminating all life in the Galaxy. You may as well outlaw the strong nuclear force as the Force. I am guessing part of what the sequel will be based on is what to do with all the Force sensitive children maturing now with no Sith emperor to suppress them and no real Jedi Order to responsibly train them.
As a lifelong SW fan, I think you are on to something about putting and end to the force. Although I would handle it in a different way, as Episode 9 would essentially be the end to the force.
Episode 7 would be about another Sith Villian or Villains who surface and Luke, Leia and the next generation have to fight and kill them throughout the ST.
This makes Luke fearful that the Force must erradicated, because the temptation of the darkside will always be there for someone. Sort of a Garden of Eden metaphor.
But the Force can’t be outlawed by the government because it diminshes it too much. This plot point must be handled in some fashion in a way that Superman chose to lose his powers for Lois Lane in Superman II.
Maybe Luke & Co. have to go on a mission to find the original source of the force: Possibly the cave on Dagobah? And once its destroyed, then all force users lose their power, and THAT would be a true ending to the 9 movie saga.
It would be a gutsy move by Disney to go this route, as it would probably split the fanbase. But I don’t want to see just another trilogy of good vs evil, and the good guys win in the end.
@23 – Or in a very similar vein, maybe have some sort of Modesitt/Recluce order:chaos balance thing going on. For every good practitioner of the Force, that frees up an equivalent chunk of darkside Force which has to go somewhere/corrupt someone.
The only long-term way to protect the galaxy is to weave them together too tightly to be unlocked by anyone – good or evil.
I just cannot support this idea, in any way. The Force surrounds us, it penetrates us, it binds the galaxy together. Getting rid of it would mean the end of the galaxy, not to mention making Star Wars just another space flick (assuming the galaxy could still exist without the Force to bind it together). It’s just such an integral part of the SW universe, I csn’t see it being eradicated.
@11, From what I understand, Han will feature prominently
The one lesson I’m praying that the filmmakers learned from Empire and Episode I is that they don’t need to pander to children by including a cute but incredibly dumb and annoying character for comic relief. Kids don’t need their entertainment to be dumb. If we get Episode VII without a new Jar-Jar or Ewoks equivalent I will be thrilled. Shocked, but thrilled.
That would be so boring. We should also get rid of the tequila in margheritas and the bacon in BLTs while we’re at it.
It’s an interesting concept. I don’t think the story should be based solely on the force dissapearing because there’s not enough substance with that. But your point 3 does bring an interesting mix. What if the existence of the force kept something terrible from happening? That would really be something to look out for.
But they can’t just take it away, though. I hate when movies just say “it just vanished because no one believed” or some crap like that. Maybe if Luke died, taking the knowledge of the force with him, and Leia never learned it.
I loved the original Star Wars, when it came out in 1977. I liked the sequel. By the time we got to the dancing, furry, oh-so-mass-merchandisable Ewoks, in the third movie, I decided Lucas had jumped the shark.
When he announced that he was going to do the prequel trilogy, I hoped that it would mean he’d had time to reflect, and that he’d come up with something true to the spirit of the first moive. Sadly, what he churned out was, basically, crap. I’ll never be able to disassociate Jar-Jar Binks from all three of the prequel movies, in my mind, even though I don’t remember him even being in the third movie of that trilogy.
At this point, I’ve no desire, whatsoever, to see any of the new Mouse-Wars movies, read more of the books, or have much to do with the Star Wars universe at all. Similarly, I loved the Star Trek original series, despite its flaws, which were legion. I hoped for more from Next-Gen, but Roddenberry was being something of a tyrant with it, until he died, and that did a lot to hobble the series. After that? Meh. Both franchises have jumped their respective galactic sharks so long ago that its now difficult to remember when they weren’t something that’s watched for new ideas and new vistas rather than for nostalgia.
What we really need is a new story. One which captures our hearts like Star Wars and Star Trek did, forty and fifty years ago. Surely we’re capable of that? Even in times in which the visual media is increasingly resembling that in Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451?
Interesting. Although get rid of the Force across the ENTIRE galaxy? It’s just too widespread, not to mention too innate, for a New Republic, or even a setup like the Empire had to be able to accomplish such a thing. And I can’t easily imagine any kind of technology or anything really that would effectively be able to cut people off from that. Instead just trying to ennact laws against Force users might have some result, but really in either situation and by whatever means, the supressive government situation is a trope that’s been done to death. We all know how it’s going to end.
If it really came down to removing the Force in some way, I suppose personally I’d opt for a situation generations later – where any formal organization of Jedi (or Sith even) had been disbanded/nearly forgotten, the Force had moved back into the realm of something more akin to myth without any formal teachings still being passed down, and with society having “advanced itself” beyond its perceived need for such as Jedi. Have a character rediscover this ancient way, bring in an evil that’s not just the return of the Empire, and go from there. Which is, to be fair, not totally different from Luke’s own introduction to the Force in Ep IV, so it’s also not the most unique idea, but done up differently enough and it still wouldn’t be totally foreign to the Star Wars universe.
Just musings though. Thanks for something interesting to think about!
I find it interesting Chris that your proposal for the movie takes the idea from the WORST EU novels(depower Luke because elsewise this situation isn’t really a problem), and runs with it,
If I am understanding your idea to mean a temporary time of Force quiescence (which has some precedence as in the novelization and in the movie they mention their power to sense the Force has deminished, because Palpatine is mucking with it), or some kind of backlash against Force users (reading your ideas makes me think of the X-Men or Watchmen or something similar) I think that could definitely be interesting.
If, however, you mean, some kind of fundamental event that somehow leaves the Galaxy in a new age in which there is no Force (or ability to communicate with it) – similar to the Wheel of Time or Sword of Truth where magic has to vanish from the world, etc – no thanks (although I like both of those series). For me that’s one of the main things that makes Star Wars Star Wars. I’ve always been a lot more interested in the Jedi than the X-wings. And, as others have pointed out, the Force seems pretty critical to the existance of the galaxy.
Also, I really want to see Luke as a total BAMF, as Emily puts it :) Maybe a retiring one, but somebody ready to pass on his wisdom/skills to the next generation.
Responding to a few ideas:
23 – I’m not a huge fan of the ‘get rid of the Force’ entirely as I pointed out, and especially not becuase it’s ‘too tempting’. There will always be ways humans can do evil and hurt people, so getting rid of the Force is not going to solve anything long term. It makes sense with something like the Ring, which is inherently evil and created to tempt people, but the Force isn’t like that. Plus, more and more I think the dark side is something more internal than external.
24 – that’s an itneresting idea too (not familiar with that series) but I never thought of the Force as that quantifiable – this part is ‘light’ and this part is ‘dark’. This may all end up turned on its head but I don’t view the Force the same way, say, saidar/saidin are presented in Wheel of Time (as two very distinct types of power that can even be quantified to an extent – at any rate, you always know which one you’re touching).
At any rate, I’m not sure the Force has one finite source, anyway. I suppose we’ll see where the movies go with it!
But, definitely interesting ideas, I’m not trying to put you down!
You can’t remove the Force, that’s part of the SW universe. You make some valid points but I disagree with other points. The prequel trilogy wasn’t as good because George Lucas, I think he just wanted to make money, not a good story however, I have more faith in this trilogy because Lucas is not involved in it. I’m looking forward to seeing what happened to Luke, Leia, Han and Chewie.
The Force was not explained as a scientific phenomenom in the prequel trilogy…they just explained that ate the celular level, midichlorians were what made beings sensitive to the Force. Pay closer atention to the dialogue.
@36: I agree with you–but I’ve been fighting that battle since 1999, and nobody listens. Somehow, the presence of Midichlorians–even though they’re obviously based on the real-world concept of mitochondria–somehow breaks the fantasy and “removes the spirituality” from the Force. I don’t get that argument, either.
I agree with both of you (37 and 36) and I feel like I’ve been fighting the same fight. Of all the things you can complain about in the prequels (and there are some, even though I like them) I don’t see why the midicholorians are on that list. I think they are awesome.
But then, I used to be a graduate student in microbiology, so perhaps I’m biased :)
The issue I think with the midichlorians, isn’t their existence, it’s their sentience, to spontaneously create the life of Anakin Skywalker.
@@@@@ 36, 37, 38, 39 – I’m going to assume that you don’t identify as a spiritual person, and also that you’re unfamiliar with Joseph Campbell, from whom Lucas cribbed pretty much the entire concept of Star Wars, including the Jedi faith. His work is well worth reviewing – the PBS series “The Power of Myth” is an easily digestible life changer.
Faith is the core component of spirituality. The original trilogy focuses on Luke’s struggle with his faith, and his journey in accepting that he must first sacrifice all concerns of his worldly life in order to achieve the work that a higher power has called him to do. Because of his faith, Luke was able to “let go” and fire the magic torpedo into the Death Star. When he doubted his faith in the force, and his friends, Luke was unable to lift his x-wing from the swamp, and he fell into Vader’s trap on Bespin – all because of worldly fears, and preconceptions of what true power is. Finally, Vader was able to find redemption because of Luke’s faith in him, and in the force.
Yoda’s message to Luke was simple and useful – every living being can accomplish great things through patience, humility, and faith, and I sense that you have the potential to achieve enlightenment. By persevering through trials you can become a tool of god/the force, but you must first unlearn what you have learned (which happens to be Campbell’s monomyth, and the foundation of every major religion, in a nutshell).
The prequel trilogy focuses on Anakin’s arrogance and complete lack of faith in anything besides himself. Qui-Gon’s message to Anakin was simple, but anti-spiritual – You’re already special, a scientific anomaly in fact, the blood test I ran proves it, and the Jedi counsel is making a special exception for you. You don’t even have to try!
Anakin never had to work for his power, and because of that he didn’t cultivate any faith or communion with a higher power, but instead tried to bend god to his will. He’s an irreverent atheist wearing unearned monk’s robes and wielding a scientifically quantified advantage. There isn’t a shred of wisdom to be gleaned from the prequel scripts, aside from a cautionary tale of hubris, which would have been greatly strengthened if Anakin had actually been a spiritual paragon like the other Jedi – instead, his fall from grace was underwhelming because he never had any. Likewise, Anakin’s betrayal of his faith rang hollow because he never had any.
Perhaps most importantly, the science of midi-chlorians completely excludes average people in the SW universe from following the tenets of Jedi faith, which directly contradicts the inclusive spiritual message at the core of the original trilogy (and of every major religion)! To Have faith in the unseen is a choice, not a genetic trait that can be measured.
Whether or not you want to admit it, the mystery of faith is a large part of Star Wars, and it was notably absent from the prequels.
@40, While I enjoyed your comment, it really wasn’t necessary to swipe at a plethora of commenters you apparently know nothing about to make it, especially as none of us said anything that can give you any indication in regards to our levels of spirituality.
@40, Um, no.
There is nothing in the original series that suggests that ordinary people (that is, non-force sensitive) can accomplish great things by having faith. Whether the Force is a religion, or a mental training program for warrior monks, it is explicity restricted to people who have a specific gift.
To the extent that other characters accomplish great things (who exactly? Lando, Han?) it’s not because they have faith, it’s because they are basically good people in tough situations who find the motivation to start doing good again.
Even in the original movies, being Jedi is not a religion, and there is no evidence that anyone who is not Force sensitive has ever believed in it or acted on its principles (and multiple characters who actively dismiss it). Lucas used Campbell’s monomyth but applied it exclusively to one class of people with a particular ability.
@41
Thanks! My statement – “I’m going to assume that you don’t identify as a spiritual person,” was not addressed to you specifically, and I apologize for offending you – I referenced your comment because I believed it was relevant to the remainder of my lengthy comment.
@42 – So strictly literal. As with all stories worth telling, the message is intended for the audience, not Han or Lando, although Luke does teach them to trust in each other and themselves, and you know what, he does give them faith in a higher power – with the miracles Luke performs, how can they deny the force is real? Han certainly comes a long way from the first film in which he does call the Jedi order a religion:
HAN: Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid. (“hokey” because all the Jedi were exterminated before his faithless, empire enslaved generation could witness their power firsthand)
I don’t care to debate about what constitutes a religious order, but the answer in this case is plainly evident to me, in both the ancient religious beliefs, disciplines, customs, and teachings which Lucas actively chose to employ in creating the Jedi order, as well as the Jedi Order’s moral stance vs. evil, and the actions they employ to defend their beliefs.
I got as far as the ‘I’m going to assume you aren’t a spiritual person’ that was addressed to me (38) and did a ‘what the what’?
Dude, I’m a devout Roman Catholic (wait, does that mean I’m not spiritual? Some people might say so!), have scientific training (masters in microbiology) and am fairly familiar with Joseph Campbell. Furthermore, some of my favorite ‘spiritual’ writings are actually about the whole nature of myth, as well as science/rational thought and how it is compatible with religious faith and those spheres of knowledge don’t have to be at odds. That’s partially WHY I loved the midichlorians.
So uh…you kind of missed the boat here in your characterization of me.
Okay, reading on :)
@43, Han is being sarcastic.
I think you are confused about your own argument. Are you saying that the Force is designed as a religion to appeal to and convey religious ideas to the audience, or to others in the SW universe? Because at the end of #40 you state “the science of midi-chlorians completely excludes average people in the SW universe from following the tenets of Jedi faith” (emphasis in original). Life forms in the SW universe were always and explicitly excluded from Jedi practice* unless they met a particular precondition. The prequels only gave an explicit (“scientific”) reason for that exclusion, while the original trilogy was largely silent on why some people had it and others didn’t, except that it tends to run in families.
If you believe that Lucas’ message for the audience was “everyone is The Special” then he did undermine it in the prequels. But that wasn’t your original argument in #40. And I don’t believe that was ever Lucas’ original intent. Han eventually began to respect Lucas’ powers, he never asked to learn them.
*If faith is defined as “believing something in the absence of proof” then Jedis don’t have faith, since they have tangible proof that they have abilities that exceed most other sentient life forms. Jedi practice leads to increased skill at using those abilities. but it’s not faith.
@45 – Sarcastic or not, he still called it a religion, which implies average people viewed it as a religion.
No confusion on my part – I’m stating that the idea of faith presented in the original trilogy is allegorical to reality, a place where countless people have no real faith in anything – but that doesn’t mean it isn’t possible for them to cultivate it, no matter how meager it may be in comparison to people who achieve great things by allowing strong faith to guide them. Midi-chlorian negate that inclusion and break the allegory, especially because Anakin was incrediby strong but never had any faith. He was an incredibly self-centered and angry immaculately conceived son of god, which makes for an inert, practically useless character if your story is meant to be a morality play.
I in no way implied that Lucas’ message was “everyone is special.” I won’t restate my opinion on the matter (see above).
In response to your final paragraph – The force is an allegory.
Anakin should have been a regular Jedi, with flaws similar to Luke’s, whose rise and fall would therefore have been far more poignant – it was a mistake to make him into an evil Jesus from prophecy, not because that idea may be offensive to believers in Christ, but because it’s a poorly conceived, awkward idea, and offensive to good writers, fans of good writing, and fans of Star Wars who happen to be either or both. The choice to write “Evil (and unlikeable) Jesus: The Trilogy” necessitated the midi-chlorian explanation for his unorthodox birth. So, Midi-chlorians need never have entered the picture, just like the countless waves of needless CGI extravagance that buried the entire trilogy.
Anakin’s story ends up being little more than an ironic ponderance, that fails to even give pause – “It was said that you would destroy the Sith, not join them! You were to bring balance to the force, not leave it in darkness!” – except it isn’t even ironic, because Yodog saw it coming from miles away.
Addressing your comment specifically now, I disagree with some of this.
First of all, I am not sure I interpret the first trilogy as being about Luke’s faith in terms of the Force. Yes, about his faith in the goodness of his father, and redemption. Yes, he had to ‘trust’ the Force and unlearn what he had learned and open himself up to it. I can agree with you here that this takes faith. However, I don’t think the message to the audience (via Yoda) is necessarily about faith in yourself (since obviously not everybody has the Force in the Star Wars universe) but more about balance and resisting temptation to power, aggression, etc.
I also don’t see this contradicted in the prequels in any way, shape or form. Just because we know have a way to measure a person’s Force sensitivity or a way to show how we communicate with it (which doesn’t explain the Force itself at all) – that doesn’t change or ruin Anakin’s story. In both trilogies, some people had the Force, and some people didn’t. Some people had it stronger than others. The Jedi were always a ‘special’ class of people with a special power that are used to be a metaphor to the audience.
Now, I agree with you that Anakin’s problem IS a lack of faith, and more to the point, an inability to let go of attachments. But I fail to see how the midichlorians have anything to do with that. Whether or not there were midichlorians, he still would have been an inordinately strong Jedi who didn’t have to ‘work’ for his power. None of the Jedi have to work for their power, really – but they do have to work to control it and discern ethical use. And that’s true with or without midichlorians and the tragedy of Anakin is that he didn’t do that.
@46 ARRRGH ANAKIN WAS NOT IMMACULATELY CONCIEVED!
/rant on
If you are going to argue about religion and faith (and also tell me that I must not be spiritual) please get your terms right. The Immaculate Conception is a Catholic dogma referring to the conception of Mary as benefitting retroactively from Jesus’ sacrifice so as to provide a vessel free from original sin to bear Christ.
Jesus Himself was a virgin birth, but the dogma of the Immaculate Conception does not refer to Him, nor is it an appropriate analogy to Anakin being conceived by the midichlorians. Also, the idea of a virgin birth isn’t unique to Christianity so Anakin is not necessarily a Christ figure. Perhaps because he later dies to save Luke and bring balance to the Force you can say that, though – but I think that’s a bit of a stretch. Anakin is not a sinless person who takes on the sins of others, so for me the Christ analogy doesn’t work. But that doesn’t mean I think Lucas can’t use some similar elements.
/rant off
I guess I’m still not seeing the dissonance though, or how it breaks the allegory. The tragedy for Anakin is that he does NOT allow faith to guide him. I enjoy the midichlorians for the scientific aspect, and the virgin birth part did make me raise an eyebrow a bit, but I don’t think it ruins that message. I also disagree that your idea of how it ‘should’ be is the only way that message can be accomplished.
Plus even in the movie, it’s hinted that Plageus had something to do with it anyway (which the EU ran with) so it may not even be a matter of the Force spontaneously generating him.
Regarding your general point on Anakin’s fall not being as tragic because he never had faith and he is generally unlikeable, this actually makes me laugh a bit (not at you) because there’s a whole other subset of fans who hate the prequels becuase Anakin isn’t evil enough in the first one. Not saying that was all executed properly in terms of the acting/scripting/directing but I am not opposed to that idea in principle.
@48 – Correction noted – thanks for the education. At least we both knew I was referring to the virgin birth, even if I was unaware of my mistake. At any rate, it brings a relevant point to the conversation – extraneous dogmatic explanations (such as the Immaculate Conception) which retroactively affect canon, are a large part of the difference between religiosity and spirituality.
“Anakin is not a sinless person who takes on the sins of others, so for me the Christ analogy doesn’t work. But that doesn’t mean I think Lucas can’t use some similar elements.”
Exactly – the Christ analogy didn’t work for anyone, because it is a terrrible template to use for an evil character – but that’s exactly what Lucas did. Both births were prophesied by their people, both were virgin births of mothers with simple faith, both performed miracles at a young age (and in middle age), and both were denied by their people as savior – the difference is that Jesus was a fantastic person and Anakin was not – which is my point! He had no faith, and no spiritual discipline, yet he had immense spiritual power, and we explain that discrepancy away retroactively through science! One must first work for something of this nature in order to have it, and one must first have something to lose it! So, midi-chlorians were only written in to help jam Anakin’s awkward virginal birth into the story (similar to how the Immaculate Conception is an unecessary explaination of Mary’s prerequisite purity). Worse still, Anakin had no character development across three films because he was needlessly based on the wrong archetypal template – he was a ‘savior’ because Lucas thought it was a cool idea, but archetypal saviors do not fall (at least not in a well written story). It had never even been hinted at in the original trilogy. At least make him an actual likeable savior for half a $@&%ing hour, so we have some decline.
Lucas: Well, we know Anakin was a super powerful and at least somewhat wise Jedi, but that he was also an asshole who killed everyone – how do we reconcile those stark differences? A coherent, meaningful, rising and falling story arc? Nah, I’ll go with science, no discernable story arc, and petulant acting.
Lucifer, a fallen angel who once had immense faith, but rebelled against his creator, would’ve been a better template – this wouldn’t require a virgin birth, and the archetype contains a trajectory of character which lends itself extremely well to an eventual redemption. Qui-gon should’ve just found him roaming the streets as a force sensitive orphan with no memory of his mother.
I agree with the “subset of fans” who think Anakin wasn’t evil enough – the films were uneventful and very slow paced – less time should have been spent on inconsequential relationship issues and politics, and more time should have been spent on Anakin’s descent into the dark side – you know, the stuff that we were actually supposed to see happen to the main character of the 6 hour trilogy.
Anakin’s fall to the dark side wasn’t because of spirituality, or lack of it, but because of a lack of trust that alienated him from everyone who was his support.
He didn’t trust the council to tell them he was in love.
He didn’t trust Obi Wan to tell him he had married Padme and he feared for her death in childbirth.
He didn’t trust Padme’s fidelity.
The Council didn’t trust Anakin’s appointment to the council by Palpatine, thus feeding Anakin’s mistrust of the council. The move to allow him on, but deny him rank, was a petty power struggle that they willingly made Anakin a pawn in.
Mace Windu didn’t trust him enough to take him with them to Palpatine’s office.
These are the things that fed Anakin’s fall. From way back in Phantom Menace, we saw how the fundamental distrust of Anakin spurred him to action.
They didn’t trust him the fight of Naboo
They didn’t trust his visions to allow him to check on his mother
They didn’t trust their own teachings to bend the rules of apprenticeship for older children.
And most tragic of all, the power Anakin sought to save Padme, Obi Wan possessed. You see him use it on Padme after Anakin chokes her to death(this is why she died, she was brought back, knowing the man she loved killed her). You also see him use it on Luke after the Sand People beat him to death(this is in the books, from Artoo’s perspective, he scans no signs of life in Luke until Obi Wan shows up).
If he’d have only trusted Obi Wan with his fears, Anakin would have had no reason to be seduced by Palpatine.
Anakin wasn’t “evil enough”, that’s what makes the story a tragedy.
@50 –
If you were wise, you wouldn’t trust an arrogant, secretive, tempermental superhuman who though he was above the rules either. Anakin was a self centered $#!^ who was incapable of making wise choices because he wouldn’t listen to a PLETHORA of wise mentors. The council had sound reasons for disallowing Anakin to particpate in various events, just as buddhist monks have sound reasons for forbidding their charges to stray from the rules that successfully brought them enlightenment. Faith is the ability to let go and trust in god. Anakin did not posses that trait, and it was evident to everyone that he was untrustworthy. His fall was less a tragedy than it was a totally predictable result.
Aeryl, I agree.
Tranceiver – your ideas are interesting so I hope I don’t come off as attacking. (I also don’t totally appreciate the aside jabs at ‘extraneous dogma’ and again with the implications that I cannot be a spiritual person; obviously we disagree about Mary but that’s not really the point of this discussion so we can leave that at that.)
When I say the ‘Christ analogy’ doesn’t work for me, I don’t mean that it worked in a sense that I thought the movie was trying to evoke Christ and it failed and I came away feeling disappointed, but that I just didn’t even make that connection in the first place. And maybe GL was trying to specifically evoke Christ but I didn’t get that impression (there might be a quote out there proving me wrong) – at any rate, I don’t think a virgin birth or working ‘miracles’ automatically means ‘CHRIST STAND IN!’ They may have some elements in common, but I don’t see them as analagous or even like they were intended to be analagous aside from some surface similarities. Or, maybe the contrast itself is what matters.
So, what you are trying to say (I think) is that you would rather have seen Anakin become extremely powerful through some sort of hard work/study/discipline…and then abandon that, to make his fall more poignant. And I think that could also have been an interesting story. But instead we get Anakin who seems to inherently be more powerful than others, and falls, but had never really attained a great height to start with, morally. But I don’t see that as horrible either (nor do I think the midichlorians are what make that story bad, if you don’t care for it – there could still be midichlorians in a version that Anakin actually does attain greater mastry over his powers through discipline, and even in the general shape the story takes now, he could just be the Most Powerful Jedi who meets X Prophecy Requirements without necessarily invoking the midichlorians). In fact, it’s kind of an interesting subversion because a lot of fantasy stories do have the hero who just happens to be blessed with some kind of special power or has more than others (for example, most of the channler heroes in Wheel of Time are inherently more powerful than many of their counterparts) and they ultimately live up to the expectations placed on them.
But in this case, Anakin does not. He has power, but no trust/faith in those around him (and is also mistrusted by those around him) or an ability to accept loss…and that’s what makes him ripe pickings for Palpatine who lures him on an easy path and feeds his arrogance, making him feel that becausae of his strong power alone he is entitled. In a sense, the tragedy is that he’s doomed from the get go. He doesn’t really get the chance to rise to a great height (although I’ve heard in some ways the Clone Wars series actually does a lot for Anakin’s character in this sense). I think you may have some leigimate grievances as to what the movie focused on and spent its time on – they could have been done better and shown more of Anakin in a better light before he got all whiny and petulant (10 year old boy aside). I think maybe Episode II was SUPPOSED to do that, but I agree that one is not so good, especially when it comes to the love story/characterization. But I don’t think they were total failures either, and I don’t think the midichlorians were necessarily part of it.
@52 – I think we’re on the same page more or less. It could have been a truly brilliant trilogy with some more time and consultation, but personally, there was really nothing to enjoy besides portions of Episode I and the last half hour of Episode III. I admit I was incorrect in assuming that you don’t identify as a spiritual person, and I apologize for offending you, as well as Aeryl. It would appear that I still feel strongly about this issue! Haha!
@51,
If you were wise, you wouldn’t trust an arrogant, secretive,
tempermental superhuman who though he was above the rules either. Anakin
was a self centered $#!^ who was incapable of making wise choices
because he wouldn’t listen to a PLETHORA of wise mentors.
His behavior is established to be no worse than any of the other Jedi we meet, there is nothing about him that establishes him as the worst, most untrustworthy Jedi everyone, from Yoda on down, aside from Obia Wan, treats him as.
ALL Jedi, by their very nature, are arrogant, secretive, and tempermental, and think they are above the rules.
The only between Anakin and every other Jedi, is that he wasn’t indoctrinated at a young age, and because the Council refused to adapt to his different circumstances, they treated him as different than other Jedi, and he, like any person would, took offense at being singled out.
@@@@@ Aeryl (54) – “ALL Jedi, by their very nature, are arrogant, secretive, and tempermental, and think they are above the rules.”
Those are actually Sith traits, and the fact that you sympathise with Anakin on those notes is a little troubling. Jedi are humble, honest, calm, and follow a strict code of ethics. So, if that’s what you believe (which, to be clear, is fundamentally incorrect), there’s no conversation to be had with you.
I doubt Aeryl will respond to you, and frankly, I don’t expect her to (I don’t know that I would want to, personally – you really should tone it down a bit) but:
That’s an idealized version of the Jedi, but not how the Jedi actually are in the prequels (well, some Jedi, at least – I wouldn’t say that all Jedi are). Even in the RotS novelization, Yoda thinks about how the Jedi have gone astray. Although in my mind, it’s not something that is part of the Jedi’s very nature, but rather something that they did not practice enough vigilance over. Their system became corrupt. I don’t think it was an inherently bad system, but they allowed it to become too rigid.
The difference in Jedi/Sith philosophy has more to do, in my mind, with aggression, power, etc. But you can still be a Jedi and be an asshole, just like you can be a priest and be an asshole (even though you obviously shouldn’t be). Things like arrogance and pride are something ALL human beings are prone to. So I don’t think she is intending to sympathize with Anakin on the fact that he is arrogant, etc and say that’s a good thing, but just that it’s no surprise he didn’t trust them, and it’s also nothing unique.
I wouldn’t agree with her as far as to say there’s no difference between him and other Jedi, as in the end he obviously performed some atrocities that go beyond whatever mistakes the Jedi have made, but the core personality flaws at the start weren’t unique to him, and could have been resolved if he were treated more fairly/flexibly from the beginning.
@56 – I appreciate your mediation. You’re absolutely right – I’m taking this far too seriously, and we’re way off topic.
Aeryl (apparently) sympathises with Anakin’s view of the Jedi, a skewed view which was born of Anakin’s impatience and arrogance – the very qualities that make for a reckless untrustworthy Jedi – hence his masters’ distrust of him. Furthermore, it was Palpatine who put those ideas about Jedi in Anakin’s head! Doesn’t that alone illuminate the ideas in question as wrong by default? It wasn’t society that caused Anakin’s fall – it was Anakin himself. If anything the Jedi were too flexible with him, and continued to allow him to bend the rules.
@55, Have you had any exposure to the SW verse beyond the movies?
I ask, not to play some gatekeeping, “who’s the truer fan” game, but to demonstrate that my idea of the Jedi as a flawed order is far from unique.
In the Knights of the Old Republic(10,000 years before the movies) game, the Jedi Council memory wipes the former Jedi/Sith Lord(a Sith they had created by their own refusal to get involved in a galactic war that was killing billions), and sets them to undertake the same quest for ancient technology they had taken as a Sith.
This is an insanely risky endeavor, because the PCs memories AS the Sith Lord start coming back as they continue the quest, and the game even gives you the chance of turning Sith.
This demonstrates fully that the Jedi, while not dedicated to the aims of enslavement and control of the Sith, are still arrogant and detached from the world. Members of the Council, knowing full well that the PC is the former Sith Lord yet has no memory of that, at this time in the game, continue to treat the PC with a simmering resentment for actions they are now not culpable for, belying the Jedi’s own tempermental natures.
This is established canon behavior of the Jedi, 10,000 years before Anakin Skywalker. This pattern of arrogant behavior is established in characters like Mace Windu and Qui Gon Jinn and even Obi Wan(Sith Lords are our speciality?). Obi Wan and Anakin’s entire relationship is based upon attempting to one up one another in a continuous game of “Who’s the better Jedi?”
It is demonstrated by how the Jedi have allowed themselves to become isolated from the general populace, and how they have become an unaccountable enforcement instrument.
The issues Anakin had, were people issues, because the Jedi were people, and their doctrine was unnatural separation from their innate personhood and set the Jedi, Anakin in particular, up TO fail. And these issues could have easily been addressed by the Council, had they not been blinded by their own fear of what Anakin’s presence meant.
THIS is the lesson of Anakin’s fall, not this spiritual framing you are attempting to impose on it(and finding dissastisfaction in the story for not telling the story you want told, instead of accepting the one that is).
The lesson is about hubris, and what happens when you attempt to impose artificial social constructs on people. The Jedi Code itself is flawed, it is indoctrinated onto children who do not have the tools to evaluate it critically, much like our systems of racism and sexism.
The Jedi of the Pre-Empire timeline were plagued by arrogance, and ruled by their emotions. They had become completely unaccountable to anyone, and effected galactic politics as they saw fit, with no regards to the consequences. These things are what allowed Anakin’s problematic traits to remain unaddressed until it was too late.
@56,
When I say by their very nature, I am referring to the fact that the Jedi hold this exalted status that encourages them to see themselves as superior, breeding that kind of arrogant hubris that disregards the rule of law, and isolates them from everyone else in the galaxy.
Compare the Jedi to the XMen, who while flawed, have developed differently from being on the bottom of the pile, instead of the top.
I think a lot of this has been addressed by the EU, as a Jedi backlash was the center of the Fate of the Jedi series I still haven’t read yet.
@58 –
Sure, and Luke trained to be an arrogant, hubristic, tool of doctrine, just like Yoda and Obi-Wan, because that’s what the galaxy needed to overcome evil. I love a nebulous anti-establishment sentiment. Someone’s indoctrinated, that’s for sure.
If any other sane individuals are still reading this, feel free to chime in.
Sure, and Luke trained to be an arrogant, hubristic, tool of doctrine,
just like Obi-Wan, because that’s what the galaxy needed to overcome
evil.
No, by this time Obi Wan and Yoda had learned from their mistake with Anakin, for the most part.
Don’t forget that it was Luke’s ultimate rebellion against their teachings that led him down the path to eventually defeat Vader and the Emporer. If he’d never saved Leia and Lando, they wouldn’t be alive to be integral to the attack at Endor, and if he hadn’t learned the truth about Vader, against Yoda and Obi Wan’s wishes, he would have instead killed Vader in cold blood, opening himself to the dark side.
So ultimately, it was Luke’s rebellion against years of established Jedi doctrine that saved the galaxy.
@60 – “No, by this time Obi Wan and Yoda had learned from their mistake with Anakin, for the most part.”
So they taught Luke the exact same tenets of Jedi faith that Anakin refused to internalize? Which Luke nearly refused to internalize? Non sequitur.
If Luke had stayed and completed his training, he would have learned the truth in time, and he would have dealt with the issue as a Jedi Master – calm and collected – without ever having touched the dark side. He was rash, it almost cost him his life, and he didn’t change the course of events on Bespin by arriving. Through this event he learned to let go – to have faith in the force’s flow, and not try to bend it to his will as his father did. He wasn’t a master, he lost his final fight against Vader, and only by having faith in the force (and his father) was he able to avert complete defeat.
“I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”
(and he surrendered to the force)
NOT
“Forget the Jedi, I’ll do it my way.”
If Luke had stayed and completed his training, he would have learned the truth in time,
Assumes facts not in evidence
and he would have dealt with the issue as a Jedi Master – calm and collected – without ever having touched the dark side.
Too bad Obi Wan set him on this path because of Luke’s own desire for vengeance, so that message got lost, huh?
He was rash, it almost cost him his life, and he didn’t change the course of events on Bespin by arriving.
Lando would not have been able to do it if Imperial Forces on Bespin hadn’t been more concerned about Luke. He didn’t even make the decision to DO it, until after Luke arrived.
He wasn’t a master, he lost his final fight against Vader, and only by
having faith in the force (and his father) was he able to avert complete defeat.
And if he’d stayed to become a Master, he never would have been able to do that, because he’d have no reason to believe that Vader would save him. Luke’s faith in Vader is a flat out rejection of the “no attachments” ideology of the Jedi.
@@@@@ 62 – “Obi Wan set him on this path because of Luke’s own desire for vengeance”
You believe Obi-wan set him on his course? For vengeance? I’d love to see your elaboration on that complete misinterpretation. Well deserved justice against a tyrannical empire is more like it. You’re literally arguing that the Jedi are a bad influence. I don’t know why you bothered to familiarize yourself with the extended universe if that’s your take on the story.
Luke fell for the bait on Cloud City, but events wouldn’t have changed if he didn’t – Lando never spoke with Luke, and Lando rebelled against Vader before Luke even arrived. Luke doesn’t interact with anyone besides Vader.
Luke laid down his weapon and plead for compassion from a broken, forsaken man who had strong feelings for family. Saving the galaxy through wise compassion and pacifisim sure sounds like a Jedi solution to me.
I’d love to see your elaboration on that complete misinterpretation.
“There’s nothing here left for me now, I want to learn the ways of the Force, and become a Jedi like my father”
It’s right there in the script.
Saving the galaxy through wise compassion and pacifisim sure sounds like a Jedi solution to me.
A modern Jedi solution.
Not the way the Jedi were established to behave in the prequel period.
The Jedi of the prequel period brought an army and fought a war of attrition.
You’re basing your view of the Jedi from the behavior of one half trained child with motives that do not align with the Jedi Code. The path that Luke was on by ROTJ is the fulfillment of the one started down by Anakin, with tragic results because no one trusted him enough to allow him to walk it. In the original period, there was no one to stop Luke from walking it.
The thing you’ve completely missed from all the movies, is that Yoda and Obi Wan were wrong.
@64 – Wow. First, this was Luke’s destined path – Obi-Wan didn’t ask for the droids to come to Tatooine, or kill Luke’s aunt and uncle himself – he was there for 20 years to protect Luke from his father.
Second – “I want to learn the ways of the Force, and become a Jedi like my father.” If you’re getting vengeance from that hopeful and inspired bit of text, delivered in the face of inescapable fate, then you need to check your subtext filters.
Third – The Jedi were against the senate’s war machine initiatives, they had grave misgivings about them, and Palpatine in specific, but they were knights of a Democratic Republic which they were sworn to protect, regardless of how that body voted. They had too much respect for democracy, and wanted to precisely deduce and root out the evil that was perverting it – Palpatine. Get it? Palpatine wanted Anakin to believe that the Jedi were arrogant and self centered. You are agreeing with the villain, who is lying in this entire exchange:
PALPATINE: (continuing) Anakin, you know I’m not able to rely on the Jedi Council. If they haven’t included you in their plot, they soon will.
ANAKIN: I’m not sure I understand.
PALPATINE: You must sense what I have come to suspect . . . the Jedi Council want control of the Republic . . . they’re planning to betray me.
ANAKIN: I don’t think . . .
PALPATINE: Anakin, search your feelings. You know, don’t you?
ANAKIN: I know they don’t trust you . . .
PALPATINE: Or the Senate . . . or the Republic . . . or democracy for that matter.
ANAKIN: I have to admit my trust in them has been shaken.
PALPATINE: Why? They asked you to do something that made you feel dishonest, didn’t they?
ANAKIN doesn’t say anything. He simply looks down.
PALPATINE: (continuing) They asked you to spy on me, didn’t they?
ANAKIN: I don’t know … I don’t know what to say.
PALPATINE: Remember back to your early teachings. Anakin. “All those who gain power are afraid to lose it.” Even the Jedi.
ANAKIN: The Jedi use their power for good.
PALPATINE: Good is a point of view, Anakin. And the Jedi point of view is not the only valid one. The Dark Lords of the Sith believe in security and justice also, yet they are considered by the Jedi to be. . .
ANAKIN: . . . evil.
PALPATINE: . . . from a Jedi’s point of view. The Sith and the Jedi are similar in almost every way, including their quest for greater power. The difference between the two is the Sith are not afraid of the dark side of the Force. That is why they are more powerful.
ANAKIN: The Sith rely on their passion for their strength. They think inward, only about themselves.
PALPATINE: And the Jedi don’t?
ANAKIN: The Jedi are selfless . . . they only care about others.
PALPATINE smiles. PALPATINE: Or so you’ve been trained to believe. Why is it, then, that they have asked you to do something you feel is wrong?
ANAKIN: I’m not sure it’s wrong.
The Jedi never teach anything but compassion, discipline, and patience, and the fact that they realize some real world problems still require force, is not damning in the least, but realistic. This is not a modern belief – it is an ancient, real world, human belief, at the core of many religions.
@Aeryl, Transceiver: Moderator here. The tone of this discussion is getting way too heated and snarky. Feel free to argue your opinions, but please do so in a more civil and pleasant tone. Thanks!
@Stefan Raets – Thanks Stefan, I needed that. I’ll bow out. I’m just repeating myself anyhow. May the schwartz be with you!
@66, Yes Palpatine is lying, but that doesn’t excuse the Council for then acting selfishly, confirming Anakin’s fears about them.
Just because I think the Council is wrong, doesn’t mean the Sith are right, and I’d prefer if you refrain from imposing your own Manichean viewpoint on me.
Palpatine was only able to exploit Anakin’s mistrust of the Council, because the Council itself had made itself untrustworthy.
Again, which is why the lesson of the prequels isn’t about faith, as the lesson of the originals was, but instead about hubris institutional intertia breeding corruption, and how engaging in brainwashing, even for a noble reason, is still wrong.
@69 – I didn’t intend to equate you with evil, I merely wished to point out that your view is very similar to the view Palpatine peddled, which, while it is presented in the films, is perhaps not the message intended for the audience. At least we’ve come to agree that the prequels were lacking in spirituality.
One last note, If I may – Yoda’s insistence that Luke must “unlearn what he has learned,” is made in reference to the buddhist practice of removing extraneous social constructs within the mind as a means of reaching enlightenment, which is the opposite of brainwashing.
I merely wished to point out that your view is very similar to the view Palpatine peddled,
The most, dare I say it, insidious things about Palpatine, is how he used the truth to his own advantage. Palpatine didn’t need to create the Trade Federation’s greed, he just used it to his own advantage. He didn’t have to create the legit issues the Seperatists have, the Senate did it for him, giving him the opportunity. And with the Jedi, he used their already existent flaws to take them down.
One last note, If I may – Yoda’s insistence that Luke must “unlearn what he has learned,” is made in reference to the buddhist practice of
removing extraneous social constructs within the mind as a means of
reaching enlightenment, which is the opposite of brainwashing.
It’s enlightenment when practiced with adults. It’s not the same with children, who are never given the opportunity to attain wisdom, but instead must live within the constraints imposed upon them by others, until they are too conditioned to know any different. Hence, the charge of brainwashing.
I never stated that the prequels weren’t lacking in spirituality, I’m only pointing out, spirituality was never the point of the prequels, it’s a construct you are imposing, which is why the story is failing to satisfy you, because it’s not telling the story you want told.
The first trilogy is a story of rebellion from institutions, and the empowerment faith can bring.
The prequel trilogy is a story about assimilation into insititutions, and hubris certainty of faith can bring.
It would be redundant storytelling, to have the prequel trilogy be the SAME story as the first one. Which is why it isn’t, Lucas had something new to say, something more appropriate to the times we were living in.
I am not familiar with some of the EU Aeryl quotes (I don’t really do video games) but there IS a precedence set for her idea. Some of Traviss’s books set in the Old Republic tackle similar themes. I haven’t read FOTJ yet either. I don’t actually agree that the Jedi Code is itself automatically bad or corrupt (I am in general not an anti-establishment person), but I do agree that the Jedi as we see them in the prequels are corrupt – perhaps not in an overtly malicious way (and I don’t view them as corrupt on the same level as the Sith), but blind and complacent, certainly. I agree with your thoughts on their exalted and isolated status. That’s actually why I love the EU version of Luke’s Academy because it is so much more integrated (in my mind) with the rest of the galaxy.
And while I do hold Anakin accountable for his own actions, I do think the Jedi played a part in making it easier for him to choose the wrong thing. This is very similar to some of Tolkien’s own writings in his letters on the fact that Sam – a heroic character in his series – is in fact a serious stumbling block for Smeagol/Gollum’s redemption, and in fact is part of the reason Smeagol turned against them at the end.
This doesn’t mean I don’t also think Anakin’s story can’t have a ‘spiritual’ component or resonate with me on that sense. I think pride and arrogance are certainly obstacles to spiritual growth, as is an inability to let go of attachment (the Jedi had a kernel of truth there regarding their fears/concerns. The problem is taking such a draconian view towards attachment entirely, instead of learning how to really deal with it). But I think the whole thing that started this discussion had to do with whether or not the midichlorians negate that. When you talk about Anakin not having faith, I could also say that, but for me it doesn’t so much have to do with the midichlorians or the fact that he’s already pretty much the most powerful without having to work for it (or achieve through faith, as you put it), but the fact that he doesn’t have the faith or courage needed to let go of those desires and fears and accept life’s losses. The reason Luke is awesome isn’t because he has a ton of power (and I suppose we can assume he is also more powerful than average from the get go), it’s what he does with that power.
Now (Aeryl) I do think that is an interesting way to look at Luke’s decisions and I hadn’t quite considered them from that angle before – should Luke have left or not? If he had stayed, what would have happened? Are we as the viewer supposed to view Luke’s actions ultimately as rash and ill-considered (but thankfully things turned out okay), or realize he was right all along? If he WAS right, is that more an indictment against Yoda and Obi-Wan specifically, or the general Jedi teachings? My general feeling right now: I don’t know that we are supposed to reject the teachings or the Jedi Code itself (especially the ones we do hear in the original trilogy) but perhaps we are supposed to realize that Yoda and Obi-Wan don’t necessarily know everything and may make the wrong decisions. On other hand, Luke’s decision to leave is a little close to the mistakes Obi-Wan and Yoda saw Anakin making, which is to be unable to let go of certain attachments when appropriate, so of course it made them nervous. But perhaps this is where we see the importance of the middle path. Anakin took it too far, but the Jedi of Yoda/Obi-Wan’s generation take it too far in the other direction. Luke is somehow able to find that balance, because in the end he IS able to do what his father was not, and to ‘let go’ when needed, and he doesn’t have the same pride/arrogance issues his father did. Hmmm.
(Arrgh – lots more comments posted as I wrote this):
Hmm…I have to say I didn’t quite interpret a desire for vengeance from Luke’s statement either, just a kind of realization that he had a heritage and nothing left for him on Tatooine, a place he never quite fit in from the start. Nor do I think Obi-Wan and Yoda had that intention either.
Also, my husband and I have also talked a lot about how getting the Jedi embroiled in the war in the first place was part of Sidious’s plans partially because it would result in so many compromises on their part and perhaps was not something they should have been a part of.
Your pun at 71 cracked me up. I think that is true – I don’t think anybody here is arguing that Sidious was the good guy and the Jedi were the bad guys. My personal opinion is that Sidious is the bad guy and the Jedi aren’t quite as good of good guys as they should be, which is partially what allows the bad guy to win. (I think I am a little more pro-Jedi than Aeryl. But I definitely think we are supposed to see them as flawed).
Aeryl, I do like your breakdown of the two trilogies though…but I do think there is also room for ‘spirituality’ in the prequels as well, or at least to look at some pitfalls that can detract from it. The prequels aren’t really the whole story (the original trilogy can and does make a self contained story, but the prequels pretty much require the original trilogy to make sense – which is perhaps a flaw in the storytelling, I don’t know) though, so they are mostly going to say negative things and show what NOT to do. So it might not be fair to compare the two and look for a spiritual message. Maybe Anakin doesn’t have as dramatic as a fall as we’d like because he’s not starting from a great moral height, so to speak, but the more I think about it, the more that in and of itself might be part of the story. But I think taken together all 6 definitely have one, and the prequel story does overall contribute to that message as a contrast between Anakin and Luke.
Despite some snarkiness I actually have enjoyed this conversation very much.
Luke is somehow able to find that balance, because in the end he IS able
to do what his father was not, and to ‘let go’ when needed, and he
doesn’t have the same pride/arrogance issues his father did. Hmmm.
THIS, yes. Luke’s path works better, because it’s not focused on detachment. He loves, and loves hard. But he is still able to place the concerns of the mission or the galaxy, above his own desires, because he loves.
Anakin, being forced to deny his love, never learned how to let it go, and instead held it too tight.
And to be clear, I am VERY pro-Jedi, just not pre-fall Jedi, though I like them individually, as a group they were too hidebound to tradition and ruled by their emotions, regardless of the lip service they paid to the Code. They feared Anakin from the start, and outright rejected teaching him(imagine what would have happened if Qui Gon hadn’t accepted him anyways?), and they willingly made him a pawn in their power play with Palpatine.
And like I said, I do think spirituality is a component, but it’s the flipside of the original trilogy, it’s more about the problems certainty of faith can bring, instead of the empowerment.
I am actually pretty interested in how the Jedi are portrayed in the new movies. I don’t think Lucas intends us to view the pre-fall Jedi as the ‘right’ way to Jedi, so I am guessing we won’t just see things take the same form. I’m hoping for somthing a little more like Luke’s Praxeum.
The one thing I do think was truly wack was the fact that the Old Republic Jedi took the candidates as babies and just locked them away (and, if the EU is to believed, regardless of the parents’ consent on the matter). That’s despicable. So I agree with you there – it’s not the ‘Code’ itself (if by Code, we mean teachings) that I have a problem with, but some of the practices.
I actually think one of the few gems in the prequels was when Anakin talks about compassion as being encouraged to love instead of forbidden to love. That resonated with me a lot and it’s one of the few times we see Anakin show some maturity, at least at that moment.
I don’t know that the life of the Jedi necessarily requires celibacy but I don’t think celibacy has to be a bad thing either but it is definitely something that requires a lot of deep thought. As you say, it’s not about just ‘denying’ love and trying to repress it, but trying to be more available to the service of all and so letting go of specific attachments, but still being ‘attached’. So I think for some Jedi it may well be a viable path. But I do wonder if in the new trilogy the Jedi will still be a celibate order.
@74, A thing to remember too, is that the SW universe is FULL of aliens that do not necessarily experience emotions as humans and other species do, so these teachings may have worked fine on those people, but not so much on others.
And THAT’S something I’d really like to see explored. I thought how the NJO and later books brought the Barabels in, with their not human morality and viewpoint, was a fascinating addition to the series.
@Aeryl, 71, 73, 75 –
“The prequel trilogy is a story about assimilation into insititutions…”
Freedom is lost gradually. When greedy, power hungry bureaucrats are allowed to dodge regulations, they will soon begin inciting strategic wars in which they are key objects of trust, thus giving them carte blanche to extend their term limits, and divest existing governing councils of their power – it’s a path that mirrors the political birth of real world dictators.
The prequel trilogy is a story about evil men, selfishly exploiting systems and people at any cost, keeping useful, corruptible individuals in their pockets, and destroying anything and anyone that gets in their way, while misdirecting their opponents with overwhelming conflicts that conceal one’s real goals (galactic domination and spiritual warfare). It’s about perverting the minds of the populace with rhetoric, convincing them that their protectors are in fact their oppressors, and achieving all of this slowly, so that when the guardians of society finally realize something is wrong, it is already too late.
It’s about knowing what is right, keeping an objective perspective, having the humility to accept wise council, and using your power for good when you are given the choice.
Even though the Jedi were being attacked from all sides, even though their ability to see the force had been limited by dark side techniques, they recognized evil for what it was, and remained calm and vigilant, trusting that the force would reveal all to them in time – and it did. Palpatine’s plot was revealed, and the Jedi had a serendipitous chance to put it to an end, and save the galaxy from darkness.
Trusting in god, or in this case the force, means surrendering (in prayer or meditation) to its flow, and trying to better understand your place in the world (and in your life) from within that context – this is especially important in our darkest hours, because serenity often illuminates choices that were previously overlooked, and it allows one to realize when the time is correct to make subtle, calculated moves in the right direction.
In other words – the darkest hour often comes just before dawn – if Anakin had learned to appreciate that perspective, he would have had hope for the future, instead of a dark fearful vision, fueled by an evil politician’s calculated rhetoric. His fear defined his vision as a dark one – had he spent time in serene meditation, perhaps he would’ve seen a brighter future.
What would you do if you were afraid your wife was going to die in childbirth? Would you pray with all your spirit? Or would you betray and kill your friends because an evil politician said he could save your wife’s life if you did?
This message of serenity, of listening for the voice that tells you the way – it isn’t a form brainwashing – it’s the truth, and one that is unfortunately scarcely understood in society. Anakin had been surrounded by this truth from a young age – and yet, he never listened – not to the voice, and not to his wise elders – he always, arrogantly, thought he knew best, and acted in self-interest. The Jedi were not mistaken in this basic belief – Anakin was mistaken in his disbelief.
The council saw Anakin’s slide toward the dark side, and upon learning that it had hinged on his friendship with the recently revealed Sidious, they forbid him from attending Palpatine’s arrest, knowing that his presence may trigger Anakin’s complete fall to the dark side. Anakin could have, at that impasse, explained the events that had led here, told the Jedi of his visions, of his fears – he could have trusted in his friends, but he was too certain that they were fools whose opinions were to be ignored, and he was too afraid – so afraid, in fact, that submitting to his faith seemed like a worse idea than betraying the Jedi and slaughtering countless people. What rebuke could the Jedi possibly offer him in response to his confession that would make utter betrayal seem like the better option? Exile? Anakin chose mass murder to avoid the comparably small and ultimately transient personal heartache of Padme’s death – and she wouldn’t have died if he had simply trusted in anything besides his own power. Teaching Anakin that personal relationships could distract him from his spiritual growth was wise, and correct, because lo and behold – that happpened (because Palpatine used his relationship with Padme against him), but those teachings didn’t make him a murderer. His wildly mistaken, inexcusable lack of perspective was his own.
It wasn’t what the Jedi failed to teach Anakin, or failed to allow him that caused his fall – their efforts to share their enlightenment didn’t make Anakin a petty, impatient, thoughtless person – he simply refused to be anything else. It wasn’t an institutional failing that caused his decline – it was a personal failure to meet the most basic requirements of being a decent person (respect your elders, don’t lie, don’t be conceited, don’t murder people), when everyone was actively trying to help him become a decent person, through teaching, and example. He was young, confused, and inexperienced, yet he believed he knew more than the Jedi, and that he was better qualified to make decisions than any other living creature. He was wrong, and the Jedi gave him every chance to just listen, but he was too caught up in the story Palpatine was trying to tell (see my second paragraph), in which he had cast Anakin as the victimized hero. That story is a complete perversion of the truth, which Palps used as a tool.
“The prequel trilogy is a story about… (the) hubris (that) certainty of faith can bring.”
The prequel trilogy is about the destruction that hubristic lack of faith brings.
Anakin still had the choice to let go, to listen to the force, to make that calculated choice in the right direction, to behave like the other Jedi would – the future was undecided, and most importantly, he had received the exact teachings required to make the right choice in this moment – if he had chosen wisely, and submitted, Padme and all the Jedi would have lived – but instead, he chose, once again, to exercise his own self serving power over the situation, against the will of his wise elders, against the will of the force – he raced to the arrest, killed Mace Windu, and set history on the very course that fulfilled his dark vision. It was his choice alone – a fated, undecided moment of massive significance which his life had always been building to – the Jedi simply did their best to help him choose correctly.
the Jedi had a serendipitous chance to put it to an end, and save the galaxy from darkness.
The Jedis decision to stand against the Emporer in secret, instead of openly opposing him, before the Senate and the galaxy, is EXACTLY what caused their plan to fail. So either the Force led them astray, or their own hubris blinded them to what should have been done.
it isn’t a form brainwashing
You continue to elide that this is imposed on children who do not have the capacity to make such decisions for themselves. Read blogs by the children who religious fundamentalists, and you will see that these families attempts to impose their “wisdom” on their children, as the Jedi did in the prequels, instead of providing them with the tools to find their own wisdom, end in all kinds of failures. I recommend LoveJoyFeminism or Homeschooler’s Anonymous.
the recently revealed Sidious,
And who revealed Sidious again? And what “slide” to the Dark Side had Anakin envinced by this time?
For the last part, I don’t necessarily disagree with, but this
he had received the exact teachings required to make the right choice in this moment –
Is not the case. They took a system, designed to indoctrinate children with no external life experience to the serene life of the Jedi Temple, never knowing need or oppression, and tried to impose it on an older kid with a completely different life experience.
Ask foster parents what happens when you take a kid from poverty, and try to impose middle class values on them, when they have no relative experience with such a lifestyle. It doesn’t all turn out like The Blind Side.
The ultimate failure of the Jedi, in regards to Anakin, was their failure to acknowledge that they must adapt to Anakin, instead of demanding he adapt to them.
@77 – They couldn’t openly oppose what they had not yet identified. Palpatine chose to escalate his conflict with Windu.
Fundamentalist extremists are another thing entirely. The Jedi code is based on noninvasive, moraly, mentally, and spiritually sound real world belief systems.
Case in point – these children turn out to be awesome people:
“The ultimate failure of the Jedi, in regards to Anakin, was their failure to acknowledge that they must adapt to Anakin, instead of demanding he adapt to them.”
I’d argue that attempting to teach focus, and anger management techniques to a powerful, impatient, unfocused child with anger issues is a wise course of action. A lot of people could use guidance in becoming better people. The Jedi didn’t teach anything that was damaging to society.
On that note, here’s this morning’s relevant tweet from The Dalai Lama:
(Speaks directly to Anakin’s final choice, as well)
At any rate – universal moral and spiritual constants do not adapt to individuals, and neither do the orders that teach these constants – individuals must adapt their perspective to account for them. Anakin refused to accept this fact out of the misguided belief that sheer power trumps wisdom.
Case in point – these children turn out to be awesome people:
Where is your evidence of this? Do some of them? Many of them? All of them?
Or are you just making an assumption on what you wish to be true?
And what about those children’s backgrounds? Are they orphans who’ve already learned to deal with loss? Or were they taken or given up from loving homes? If so, do you think they were counselled on how to cope with their grief, or were they just told to “let go” with no further advice on how, as we’re seen done with Anakin?
At any rate – universal moral and spiritual constants do not adapt to individuals, and neither do the orders that teach these constants –
I don’t believe in universal moral and spiritual constants. Morality and spirituality must always adapt and evolve to ever changing people, or it becomes a stagnant force that doesn’t bend towards justice.
Luke’s middle way path, balanced between the innate desire for connection and attachment, and the need to place the needs of others above their own, drawn from a collection of people who lived under tyranny and oppression, have created an Order that far surpasses what the prequel era Jedi ever achieved.
Which has been my point all along. The orginal trilogy demonstrated the excesses of one path, and the prequels demonstrate the excesses of the other. Luke, through the legacy of his father, truly establishes balance with the Force
@79 – “I don’t believe in universal moral and spiritual constants”
At all? Is no act inherently wrong 100% of the time? Is behavior aligned with destructive acts acceptable?
@80 – And, more importantly, what are some examples of this from the movies/books we’re discussing?
(Your friendly neighborhood moderator Stefan, asking everyone to make sure we stay both friendly and on topic…)
I feel like I am interrupting sometimes!
Is it weird that I can read both posts and feel that I agree – at least in part. In some ways I don’t think they necessarily contradict each other or have to be mutually exclusive. That it can be about both the danger of a corrupt government taking power (on a large scale) AND a group of people who become complacent/arrogant/blind on a more personal scale, and aren’t able to help Anakin in the way he needs to be helped.
I DO believe in universal moral constants, but I disagree with this. “and neither do the orders that teach these constants – individuals must adapt their perspective to account for them.” I think that the way we teach things can change. Even in my own faith, while certain core beliefs have not changed, practices and the way things are framed certainly change as we learn more. I don’t want to make this about any specific religion, so I’ll just say I actually do agree with your assessment of where Anakin went wrong – about his fear and lack of trust – and I do think the Council was right to warn him against attachments, but I don’t think they went about it in the right way at all, especially given his unique circumstance. Not out of malice – but just a rigidity that didn’t allow for any other way.
so I’ll just say I actually do agree with your assessment of where
Anakin went wrong – about his fear and lack of trust – and I do think
the Council was right to warn him against attachments, but I don’t think
they went about it in the right way at all, especially given his unique
circumstance. Not out of malice – but just a rigidity that didn’t allow
for any other way.
THIS
It’s not that I’m making excuses for Anakin, or seek to make him less culpable for his own behavior. I am only pointing out the ways in which he was failed by the institution, because of their own hubris and flaws.
This doesn’t excuse Palpatine for taking advantage of the situation, and it doesn’t make everything the Council’s fault.
I am merely saying that Anakin WAS failed as much as he failed.
@@@@@82 – I’ve very much enjoyed your comments as well.
I don’t believe that a priest’s right to wed is decided by a moral constant. Nor am I saying that perspectives on many such issues are set in stone – moral constants are far more basic, such as – it’s never ok to murder, rape, or exploit others for personal gain – accepting this as fact allows us to assert that it’s beneficial to society if we, as individuals, practice patience, humility, and compassion as these lead us away from comitting truly morally corrupt crimes. These basic alignments do not change, yet many people live in ignorance of the impact of their actions (including religious leaders who teach antithetical messages) – so, instilling this enlightened perspective often requires formal discipline. Romance can detract from one’s ability to learn these disciplines, especially if they’re not listening in the first place.
No personal circumstance is unique to a religious order that has evolved over several millenia – they’ve seen it all before, and have tenets in place to disuade pupils from the most commonly made, and most potent mistakes. I agree, one size does not fit all, people are different, but let’s be honest – all questions regarding the validity of forced celibacy aside, exceedingly few people are capable of as twisted a crime of passion as Anakin was, and if he’d internalized a shred of the Jedi’s teachings, he wouldn’t have slaughtered anyone in a misguided attempt to avoid personal heartache.
@@@@@ 83 – Let’s for a moment, imagine what requirements would have led the Jedi council to allow Anakin to court Padme.
First, Anakin would have to be honest with the council – he would have to have enough trust and respect for them to actually tell them about the relationship, however, this was an act his fear and arrogance disallowed him. To me, any idea of the Jedi failing Anakin is already dead in the water in light of that fact. The kernel of guilt is here, with Anakin, doing what he thought would best serve himself.
Had Anakin been a different person, who displayed behavior deserving of trust, he likely would have been allowed to court Padme upon asking, as similar concessions had, in fact, been made for other Jedi (mainly Corellians, and some others), and the other Jedi therefore had (several millenia of) experience with the pitfalls of such relationships – they could have offered guidance, but again, Anakin preferred lying because he was impatient, and because he never trusted the council’s considerably more developed wisdom over his arrogant will, despite their efforts to temper him long before his affair with Padme entered the picture.
Anakin felt passion for Padme, but he never valued their relationship – had he valued it, he would be willing to sacrifice for it – but once again, in his arrogance, he sought to pursue power, status, AND love which he chose to define as secret – it was more important to both Anakin and Padme that their careers remain unchecked by the limitations open romance would impose on them, than it was that they have a non-destructive relationship. Wisdom would say that he could not have it all, that priorities must be ordered, and something must be sacrificed, but Anakin was not big on wisdom. Relationships which are secondary to career, and which are based on lies and secrecy, are weak, and more vulnerable to lies, as well as fears of infidelity.
Jedi celibacy was in place to keep 90% of such extradisciplinary distractions in check – in special cases, a basic expectaion of trust and honesty could avert trouble. The Jedi couldn’t even teach Anakin basic trust and honesty, not because they were dogmatic dinosaurs who failed to teach him, but because he refused to listen to anything anyone ever said, from an early age, before romantic attachment ever entered the picture (unless what they said was well suited to his desires). Some people just insist on being awful, including the (probably) 10% of Jedi who went dark side, no matter how you try to help them. Anakin was beyond help, not because his friends lacked compassion and understanding (they didn’t lack either), but because his arrogance meant he refused to even consider accepting help, let alone ask someone for it.
Given these well established personality traits, I’d bet that Anakin’s arrogance and disrespect for the council would only have increased had he been given further special treatment (marriage) which he had not earned through patience, trust and respect (just like he didn’t earn his seat on the council). He would still be consumed with fear over Padme’s impending death, and though he might share his fears with the Jedi, Palpatine would still use it as a tool, and Windu would forbid Anakin from attending Palpatine’s arrest because of it, but Anakin would still go, because he was willfully disobedient, and weakminded.
I think willfully disobedient, morally unaligned children need more discipline than intrinsically good children, not less.
Life would cease to exist if you get rid of the Force. Duh.