Full Series The Clone Wars: Episode 316: Altar of Mortis Discussion Thread

Great debating as usual, guys. Darth_Tarkus and others, watch the double-posting and (though this is just advice) the extremely lengthy posts. I have a hard time following after a certain point.


One thing I was really hoping Lucas would show in the PT and now in TCW is the effect that war has on the Jedi Order. This is something that was brought up extensively in Matt Stover's Shatterpoint and in the Dark Horse SW:Republic. You have Jedi leaving the Order, refusing to fight, deciding that the Jedi have lost their way. You have Jedi joining Dooku. You have Jedi like Quinlan Vos who decide that the only way to destroy the darkness is to become it.

How does a Jedi deal with the concept of "collateral damage" or "acceptable losses"?


One quick point on Yoda: his dialogue really irritates me in TCW because it's a little TOO backwards; as pointed out by Humble and others, in ESB he doesn't always speak in backwards grammar. "He is too old. Yes, too old to be trained."

If this was TCW, he'd say something like "too old he is. Too old to be trained the boy is."

 

I think some of our "discussion" regarding if the Jedi use the dark side, even as a little, is obfuscated by semantics.

Light.

Dark.

We (many of us) are brainwashed into believing light=good, dark=evil as has been mentioned before.

But many here are referring to traits as "dark" when the concept might be better assimilated by some when replaced by a more neutral term. Action - change -I don't know what word might best serve the purpose.

To grow is to change and to change involves action. Striving to make things better, whether for altruistic purposes or selfish purposes. Dark impulses MAY drive this, but the actions are not dark.

Hence IMHO the Jedi are not balancing "light with dark" in their behavior or thoughts.

Any of you other philosophers out there want to take a stab at this?

 

I was thinking "Order" and "Chaos".

 

Someone who is the embodiment of selflessness cannot take offense to someone touching their body, especially in the cotext of doing so to save their life. To me that seems totally contradictory. It's not that she yelled about it, it's that she even thinks of it in those terms.

I'm not saying arrogance and selfishness are necessarily the same thing, one can be arrogant because of their attempts to be selfless as the less pure of the Jedi circa the prequels do, I'm just saying because the center of both concepts revolves around self and self-perception that they both lean more towards the Dark Side than the so-called "Light" which according to this arc is supposed to epitomize selflessness. They may be two different concepts, but I'd say they're equally diametrically opposed to the concept of selflessness, which is what the Jedi attempt to achieve. Sorry for repeating myself, but the Jedi seek to sense and implement the will of the Force while the users of the Dark Side always seek more power so they can impose their own will. These are not morally equivalent goals that taken to their respective extremes have equally negative results. And "Jedi" and "Dark Side" are the only terms we get in the original trilogy, and "Light Side" is not a term ever used by the Jedi in the films whatsoever as far as I can recall.

 

From a certain point of view. From a different point of view they do not.

It might not be a one-to-one correspondence. For example, in the EU it is indicated that the dark side can be used to heal or to revive those who are dying. From ROTS it may be possible to use the dark side to create life.

 

I guess my suggestion would be to take out perhaps the original quotes?

I understand the need for completion in your argument and for the sake of reference, but after a while, I can't be arsed to review each huge post over and over to figure out what you're talking about.

 

Love it - the mind doesn't work well when one is looking over one's shoulder while at work.

 

Well, Altar of Mortis at least touches upon it. Did you happen to catch my theory on the sword?

I believe the sword represents Daughter's willingness to engage in the conflict (which mirrors the Jedi engaging in the war). I also think the sword represents the conflict itself, as she ends up being destroyed by the conflict she tries to stop (just like the Jedi end up being destroyed by the war they try to end). It even calls back to Luke who, taking only his weapons with him in the cave, ends up finding only conflict.

(As an aside: did Son put that weapon there? Just like the Sith secretly created the clone army?)

Then there's Mace in AotC: "We are keepers of the peace, not soldiers.", plus the RotJ commentary on the final duel where Lucas explains it's only the dark side that wants to fight.

So yes, in my opinion it looks like the series is finally touching upon the subject that it is wrong for the Jedi to partake in the war. I also believe Daughter willing to get the sword means that the light side is being corrupted by conflict. The fact that Ahsoka turns dark by a bite seems to symbolize that the dark side works like a poison.

It would be great if the series took up on this theme as an aftermath of the Mortis trilogy, in a more concrete story that is dedicated to the subject. But perhaps I'm hoping for too much. So far, the good guys always manage to avoid a lot of 'collateral damage', for which I blame the format.

---------------------

As for multiple layers of meaning in this episode, here's another one:

Brilliant thought! This episode just keeps geting better and better!

And so the sword, which at first glance seemed to be the laziest plot device in the entire story, turns out to be the most important symbol of the episode.

Pure genius.

 

On the theme of the Jedi being affected by the war in bad ways...

Well, this would certainly be the best metaphorical sign we have. Let's hope it makes its way to the surface.

I'm thinking back to Heroes on Both Sides, where Mina Bonteri lost her husband to the war, but they mostly mentioned clones and it was more of a 'war is bad for everyone' message than 'war is bad for Jedi' one. Still, one step at a time.

 

And yet...when one is IN that reality, can one not fight for peace? Has not pacifist Satine been roundly roasted by a number of posters for being naive and simplistic?

Was not Chamberlin (I think? before my time) roundly criticised post WWII for not responding to Hitler's incursions sooner?

Not that I disagree about the Jedi per se, but Palps trapped them brilliantly into their own destruction. It wasn't the fighting, but the fighting a manipulated war.

When does turning the other cheek (in one sense, a form of passivism) become complicit in the destruction of others?

Just like after real world events, we are looking at the Clone Wars through the lens of an exterior perspective.

 

Heh, think you are quoting the wrong person there.

 

I am unsure how to ?prove it? however I am of the impression that Anakin, in some way, was always integral to his plan. If Anakin were to be removed I think Palpatine would have had a considerable time, not necessarily gaining tyrannical powers, but destroying the Jedi as conclusively as he did. As he said it would have been ?civil war without end?... I also think if the Jedi had found evidence of his true identity (somehow separate from Anakin) they could have very well eliminated him in my opinion.

There is also the fact that with Anakin removed the Jedi could have very well ended the war within another year or so forcing the Separatists to sue for peace. Palpatine would have been left with a mangled plan. If the war got to that stage I would imagine that more and more Jedi would have been withdrawn from the front lines and returned to Coruscant. This would have made Order 66 far less effective and would have made a raid on the Jedi Temple far less winnable. The Jedi would have very well been able to assassinate Palpatine or capture him if more of them survived (Mace Windu, Kit Fisto, etc). Palpatine likely would have ceased power, however he would have unlikely been able to maintain it.

It?s an inconclusive argument, however I think Palpatine?s establishment of power would have been far less conclusive than it was seen ROTS.

Yes, the Americas are the ?New World?... namingly the countries within the continents of South America and North America. I don?t mean to be ?racist? when I say that either; the majority of people who I talk to (and enjoy talking to) are from the United States and surrounding countries... as such it is always refreshing to talk to people outside of that ?sphere?. Just a question, however if you live in the continent of North America how would you not know what the ?Americas? are...?

I didn?t say it wasn?t real... but rather I think it was ?the Force? creating a distress call. That?s my opinion anyway...

I think I have established this fairly articulately. Regarding why someone ?outside? would need to maintain balance: I believe that the entire situation is the metaphorical natural Force within each and every one of us. If we do not maintain balance it is very easy to lose control of our lig

 

Yes i agree Anakin was not necessary but he made things easier- without Anakin Dooku would've been alive still- two sith were more than enough- especially when they had two immense armies -all against the jedi...

I agree about the jedi- they should deal with problems instead of having "perfect good guys" against evil coward seppies or sinister bounty hunters- making jedi perfect makes them less humane and less interesting- it seems only Anakin and Ahsoka are know these "radicals" we should see more internal conflict within the jedi order- PT deals with this very little but enough with Qui-Gon Jinn, Dooku and mentions of arrogant jedi etc. but TCW should now show more.... little simple lines in Lair of Grievous about war changing the jedi were welcome... more conflict please ... also the Palpy's ironic speech as defender of the jedi needs more background- more anti-jedism please would be interesting and foreshadow the Imperial views.....

 

I love Star Wars so much. In fact, I take it quite personally. It's been something that has meant a great deal to me ever since I was a kid. Sometimes I feel that it was made just for me. Am I the only one who feels personally affronted by the anthropomorphizing of the Force? Save you nerdtastic arguments of "Lucas said this. Lucas meant that. It's all supposed to be a metaphor." It was stupid. I appreciate philosophy, symbolism, and allegory, as much as the next geek. But, come on! The Force (oooooooh mystical energy field) is really an old single father who has to keep his two squabbling brats in time-out, while at the same time communicating the will of the cosmos through single celled organisms that live in your blood? Really? REALLY?! Oh yeah, and they can die...from stabbing. What? People hail Lucas as this epic genius of storytelling why?

Now, stop right there with your readily prepared, pseudo-intellectual, overly-reaching explanation that delves into the power of myth and Mr. Lucas' creative rights. I'm not interested. Nothing you can say will change my mind. I don't appreciate the mythos I hold so dear to be rendered into tripe. Forget George Lucas. He didn't make Star Wars great. It was the combined efforts of many other TALENTED people. Efforts which have been trampled over in the name of intellectual property and creative liberty.

I will keep watching The Clone Wars as love and hope keep me optimistic. But, this whole Season has been terrible. If you defend it, then you are terrible. When I buy the season on Blu Ray, I'll also be terrible for supporting it. But, hey, it's just a metaphor! It represents my love for something that continually makes me hate it and myself for loving it. Symbolism, hey! That's cool, right? And that makes it okay? No.


EDIT - That's the last piece of flaming from you. You can hate the show without hating on the people who watch it. - Gry

 

Well, I'm glad you're here to tell us these things!

Chewie, take the Professor in the back and plug him into the hyperdrive...

 

It's pretty crazy to think about it, but you yourself are part of the metaphor we've been watching in this Mortis arc. You see, in this forum, there are Negative Points of View and Positive Points of View. One cannot exist without the other: yin/yang, good/evil, order/chaos. You are part of the constant cycle! Welcome!

 

Uh... no? If that's what you understood of these episodes, then you haven't understood them at all.

Well, it does sound a bit racist, or rather parochial, to consider such countries as Argentina, Chile or Brazil to be "surrounding the USA".

Yeah, the distress call could have been created by sheer manipulation of the Force, since it's hard to imagine Father operating a communicator. On the other hand, that monolith looked pretty technological, so there might be a technical side to this Mortis things that we haven't really seen. But either way, my point is that the existance of the distress call in the "real world" proves this wasn't all just a dream.

 

First of all you don't seem to like Star Wars.... you like your own little fanfiction you created and now you are affronted because it is not official - not the view of Lucas either.... well interesting that is but really REALLY? is there any sense in such a sentimental view of the fictional franchise i think you can understand yourself that there is not..... Star Wars is Lucas' creation and trademark it is his- not yours that is official truth- there wouldn't be SW without Lucas by underestimating him you actually say you don't like star wars- he made ANH, (original SW) not alone he had talented people there but they made other stuff not the story and all eu is heavily based on Lucas' story...

not that his all ideas would be improvements no way- I never had issue with midichlorians (single organisms in living cells and there is energy field created by life- then what? makes sense to me- field needs some sources- some links between material and mind) still this arc is pretty foolish and yes i'm geek anough to feel personally affronted a bit by these ridiculous gods added there but on the other hand it's said they are metaphors and not deities- so ok.... they are as real as Vader in dagobah cave they can be overlooked and abandoned as "random visions"- when Yoda says "Feel the Force around you" he is not talking about overlords lurking somewhere but Force is still the Force -nothing more -nothing less..... you don't have to change your vision of the Force -i won't- it is still supposed to be just the Force-

Father is not the Force- he says it himself that even their powers are merely a reflection of the Force- he is no more Force than Yoda or Palpatine he is just more powerful but Force is still there- it's still mystic- midichlorians are not the Force they are causing the sensitivity of it, overlords are not the Force they mirror the nature of the Force but they are powerful mortals or simply visions not gods of the Force, Mortis is not the Force(but it's amplifier)- Force is the Force and that's it

but i agree this season sucks- not that it would be completely bad but it could've been so much better.... wild ideas and lazy writing- bad combination and bad season 1. and 2. were much bett

 

Perhaps ?Americas? was too much of a generic term... I couldn?t think of a term to accurately describe Canada, USA and Mexico... perhaps the just Northern American countries would have sufficed I guess. I think you know what I meant... anyone who has any idea politics and cultures of the ?Americas? knows that the majority of nations do not ?literally surround? the USA in any type of cultural or political way. What I meant the countries directly surrounding the ?super-power? that is the USA... in name Canada and Mexico.

I know it was justified in the context however I do find being described as narrow-minded rather offensive. I passionately study various humanities subjects revolving around history, politics (and sub-fields), national cultures, religions, philosophy and geography; this has given me a rather wide outlook on the world and I think my view would be anything but ?narrow minded?. Although what I said could be perceived as parochial, I would like to make the point that was not the intent of the comment.

Just like the Fascist, Communist and Liberalism thing... I knew what I was talking about I just didn?t articulate my point well enough.

In that case we agree. Everything is ?real? until the heroes pass out when entering the monolith... I think the Force may have ?tampered? with the ship and drawn it to the incorrect place within the galaxy (whilst maintaining the navicomputers with incorrect information). Perhaps the monolith itself is a manifestation of the Force... in reality it is probably meant to be ambiguous anyway...

 

so it's not all 'real' after all but "ambiguous"

 

Let open to interpretation, yes. In my opinion everything until they enter the ?monolith? is real and everything after is ?real? but rather told metaphorically (the Force speaking through avatar's within our heroes minds)... if that makes sense...

But I think it is left ambiguous enough for the audience to make their own mind up...

 

i would say that everything that happened to the shuttle (and 3 heroes inside it )after loss of communications was ambiguous- something happened for sure but was any of it 'real' it is hard to say- definition of reality depends from our point of view anyway- what comes to fiction it is even more free for interpretetion than this so called 'reality' we live in ...

ok i was bit too philosophical now.... you're the one who calls himself 'philosopher' anyway

 

Only Sith deal in absolutes...

 

Yeah, I didn't mean to say you were narrow-minded, only that your comment came off as such, because as you said yourself, it wasn't worded quite correctly. If you meant Canada, EUA and Mexico, that would be North America in a nutshell. Sorry, being Brazilian it's just a pet peeve of mine when people misrepresent the Americas.

 

Aren't Canada, the US and Mexico just called... North America? That's still one of the seven continents, right? One of the two Americas of which you speak, and the only one containing the nations to which you refer? I know they change stuff.. apparently there is a new ocean and Pluto is deplanetized... but anyway. I don't think it was a bigoted thing to say; you were just stating that you like a perspective outside of the dominant paradigm, and you were pretty clear that it was just a personal preference.

Back on topic, am I correct in thinking that the sudden appearance of Father's tower right behind Obi-Wan confirms for the characters IU that Mortis does not have real, consistent "physical" geography or form? And this whole thing where they're leaving in the shuttle... just where do they think they're going? It kinda seems like they should be doing a little more comparing of notes, but they have been split up a lot... maybe we will see some of that this week.