Saga Star Wars, Lucas and TMIS

Should we take Lucas's word for it though, is the question?

Sure - he thinks that this is how the Jedi should be - now that he's written the PT - but I could see a case being made that this is too hard-line a portrayal - and that if the 20+ year old Luke can become a Jedi despite having "formed emotional connections" - maybe other people can too.

 

Luke has formed attachments, but his training is in letting go of those attachments. So that he can love Leia and his friends, but he won't give into the dark side to save them. Anakin loves Shmi and when he failed her, he flips his **** and goes on a murderous rampage. He then vows to become powerful enough to stop others that he cares for from dying. Three years later, Anakin sees Padme dying and he starts on the path to the dark side because he is attached to her. He is thinking of himself and the fact that he'll be alone. He cannot accept life without his loved ones and he hates change. He told his mother that he is afraid of change and she said that he cannot stop change. Remember in the novelization of AOTC, the first chapter features Anakin having a dream with the ideal life. With his mother, with Padme, with people that he cared for on Tatooine. All these people that meant so much to him and then that dream turns into a nightmare, shattering before him. That dream represents what he wants which is an ideal life. Much like Yoda saw an ideal life with all the dead Jedi being alive and with those who fell, no longer evil and war was never an issue.



Anakin is attached to ideas about life. To a time in life that is precious but is now gone. Remember, he thinks fondly of what happened during TPM. When he was with his mother, with Padme, with Jar Jar, with Qui-gon and when he was on Naboo. He says that he has thought of these people and things for ten years. HIs attachment is to that time and place that meant something to him. Something that we can all relate to. Like a favorite holiday, or family gathering, or personal time that you had. Your first date. Your wedding. A time in your life that is good before the life takes a turn in another direction.

So Anakin wants things to be a certain way. He wants people to be a certain way. He wants his happiness to last. But the reality is that it doesn't last and things change. People die. People divorce. Places change in one way or another. What was was and what will be is. Luke also has to accept that. It is more subtle in the OT because we saw one half of the equation. But it was there. Luke asked if he should give up his friends and he is told that he may have to, since they are willing to die for him.

LEIA: "Luke! Luke, don't -- it's a trap! It's a trap!"

 

Only one of several possibilities; Anakin may have been created by the Sith.

By the same token, "created by the midichlorians" ( "created by the Force" was never said in the film ) was never elaborated on either. So by that standard both suggestions fail equally.

And Anakin's choice was to go completely against that supposed role for over twenty years. So that "knowledge" ( which was never assumed to be conclusively proven ) didn't exactly control him like a puppet, did it? More like the opposite.

Well, you answered my question. Some have argued... others have argued... those are fans, not films. The films don't present that message.

How is Palpatine's "full and complete choice" to do what he does lessened in any way by the existence of a will of the Force?

Yoda and Obi-Wan both have influence on the universe; the will of the Force, allegedly, has influence over the universe. What makes the influence of the will of an energy field "divine"? It is only a question of scale. Yoda's will does not remove agency from Obi-Wan; Obi-Wan's will does not remove agency from Yoda; by the same token the Force's will does not remove agency from anyone.

 

They live in the universe. Thus, their actions influence the universe.

Is that what you think the Force is doing?

 

We all have the potential to influence anyone. We would just have to do something that impacts a person, or go there and interact with that person directly.

It just implies that the Force has a will. But what makes that any more "divine" than the will of a person?

Say what??

 

As Sir Isaac Newton himself revealed through mathematics, when an apple drops from its tree down to the earth, the Earth itself also falls toward the apple. That the Earth's movement may be so small as to be imperceptible to the human eye does not change the fact that it happens.

Likewise, spaceships in Earth's orbit can move in a vacuum because, when they expel gas behind them, the mere action of expulsion conversely drives the ships forward. The principle was devised by physicist Robert Goddard--who initially suffered much derision at the hands of more eminent scientists, who believed that such movement in the vacuum of space would be impossible. But the evidence of actual experience proved him right.

The More You Know....

 

What I get from the 'will of the force' in Star Wars(outside of the prophecy concept) is that it's supposed to be perceptions of Omniscience by its Force users. Like an Absolute Knowledge is out there and Force-Sensitives are able to tune into it and get small 'flickers' of understanding, but through their imperfect non-omniscient human mind they are the ones projecting a will unto it. They never get all the picture but based on the sample they gain they through their own bias and experience choose how to interpret it and act accordingly.

I prefer to think the Star Wars universe is one of free will and freedom of choices. There might be a small part of Destiny involved, like people having a 'calling', an instinct of what they are more suited to do(career wise, place in the world, etc) but people can decide to ignore it with little consequences.

The Prophecy does complicate matters though(although it *could* be seen as a charlatan interpretation by force users that developed it in the first place). It is implied Anakin has to 'bring balance to the Force' whatever that means(no characters really pause to think about possible interpretations other than a boring unrelated 'Sith Destroyer', not even Anakin himself...). It seems he is the only character, maybe because of his Force Conception, that is stuck into a concretely designed Destiny. It's like no matter what he decides to do he will end up fulfilling this prophecy. Now, since I don't think destroying the Sith(or Jedi) truly fits with 'balance'(it's not really balance to destroy one side, no matter which one it is) and since I think being the only one able to kill a certain person is a real cop-out & unfair for the dark side(seriously, not that I care about the dark side, but isn't a Force having two orientations, light and dark, supposed to be Neutral? )I have invented my own version of balance(see below for my quack interpretation).

My version: Force ideals that were supposed to be balanced because all Force users only had one half of the 'Understanding'and the Force had designed specifically an Outsider-Anakin as The One to Harmonize the Two, but Anakin decided(free will) to kill the organization in which he was supposed to bring balance to in his own imbalance of personality(moral failings) in ROTS, ignoring his 'task'. Then decides(free will) to kill the Emperor in ROTJ, reaching his 'balanced' self and importing via his actions enlightenment of ideals to Luke(who I am assuming will lead a 'balanced' Jedi Order later on). Frankly I'm just happy with any interpretation of balance(mine or others) that doesn't soil the theme of free will & personal responsibility in the saga and one that does not make the Force as God(I'm not religious). So yeah probably that's not at all what Lucas intended but I don't care as long as I am able to view the Star Wars universe as one NOT controlled by Deities.

Free will for the win(or hooray for my twisting of the prophecy concept to avoid validating the idea of God-Force or/and tight destinies erasing free will for characters). Whatever works(for me). Seriously I have nothing against the idea of prophecies in Star Wars or other series, and liked its inclusion in TPM(or rather, the potential I thought it offered) but not a fan of the execution at all.

 

It is the extension of the religious iconography that Lucas has been building since the beginning of the Saga.

"I tried, in my going through mythology, to distill down into certain basic ideas things that seem to exist in a great deal of mythology. Again, to try to find the themes and ideas that continue over a great amount of time and across a wide spectrum of cultures. The Force is a result of that. The Force is the way that many people view the great mysteries of “Is there other realities at work other than the one we can perceive.” I think that the Force represents life—I mean another way to describe it is “life-force.” It’s the spirit of life rather than the physical manifestation of it."

--George Lucas, Laserdisc Commentary, Star Wars Trilogy Definitive Collection, 1993

LUCAS: "I put the Force into the movie in order to try to awaken a certain kind of spirituality in young people--more a belief in God than a belief in any particular religious system. I wanted to make it so that young people would begin to ask questions about the mystery. Not having enough interest in the mysteries of life to ask the question, "Is there a God or is there not a God?"--that is for me the worst thing that can happen. I think you should have an opinion about that. Or you should be saying, "I'm looking. I'm very curious about this, and I am going to continue to look until I can find an answer, and if I can't find an answer, then I'll die trying." I think it's important to have a belief system and to have faith."

MOYERS: "Do you have an opinion, or are you looking?"

LUCAS: "I think there is a God. No question. What that God is or what we know about that God, I'm not sure. The one thing I know about life and about the human race is that we've always tried to construct some kind of context for the unknown. Even the cavemen thought they had it figured out. I would say that cavemen understood on a scale of about 1. Now we've made it up to about 5. The only thing that most people don't realize is the scale goes to 1 million."

--Time Magazine Interview, 1999.

Yes, I know you don't like religious thought, but that is the core of the story. The Jedi Order was a religion as Tarkin put it in ANH. So when we see Qui-gon Jinn, we see a Jedi in the hey day who believed in the notion of a greater power at work, which we see in TCW. At least in part.

 

This isn't me telling you that you're wrong. This is me telling you that this is the storyline that Lucas came up with. It owes its origins to the start and continued straight on to here. As to Lucas's storytelling abilities, this is a man who outright said that he's not a good writer and that he is more of a visual storyteller. People have long noted the religious similarities in the Saga. Why else do you think people started defining their religious beliefs as that of being a Jedi? Creating a Jedi church and what not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jediism

Were these people wrong? Was Bill Moyers wrong in saying what he said, "One explanation for the popularity of Star Wars when it appeared is that by the end of the 1970s, the hunger for spiritual experience was no longer being satisfied sufficiently by the traditional vessels of faith." How could he come to this conclusion if there wasn't anecdotal evidence of it? So what really happen? Did Moyers do research, or did Lucas use a Jedi mind trick on Moyers? So, was he wrong. The answer is no. Because these people believed in a faith system that began with a movie that came out in the 70's. And what about Tarkin? Is he trolling Vader by calling the Jedi and the Force a religion? What about Motti and Han?

MOTTI: "Don't try to frighten us with your sorcerer's ways, Lord Vader. Your sad devotion to that ancient religion has not helped you conjure up the stolen data tapes, or given you clairvoyance enough to find the Rebel's hidden fort..."

HAN: "Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."

TARKIN: "The Jedi are extinct, their fire has gone out of the universe. You, my friend, are all that's left of their religion."


But then, what would they know. They're just internet trolls.


Lucas even wrote in his second draft of ANH, that a holy man named Skywalker founded the Jedi Bendu Order after discovering the Ashla Force. No, he didn't have a will of the Force in mind when he wrote the OT. But the nature of the Force, the Jedi and the Sith being religious? Those have always been there. What about this?

"May the Force of others be with you." Which later became, "May the Force be with you." Isn't that religious? Isn't that like the phrase, "Vaya con Dios"?

 

Well...I don't know...did Moyers do research? None that I know of (if you know of some, could you link to it here?). Is it a choice between that and a Jedi mind trick by Lucas...or is there another possibility - that Moyers simply had an opinion....based on nothing.

So,,,,how is the answer (to a multiple choice question, I will point out) no?

 

So in other words, you don't want to admit what's not only been told to us by the creator, but what is in the films and in various script drafts? If the Force is just an energy field, then why do the characters in ANH refer to it as a religion? Why, then, do the characters who aren't Jedi say, "May the Force be with you?" which is like saying, "Vaya con Dios?" Explain that to me. You know, you don't have to like it, but I think you should at least acknowledge that it is there? That no one is pulling it out of their ass and that Lucas didn't just change his mind when he went to work on the PT.

The reason we keep going round and round here, is because you keep asking why Lucas did this and I give the response. At which point you get upset because you don't like the answers.

If Moyers didn't do his research, then he's a really lousy interviewer. So, Moyers just made it up that people thought that there was a spiritual aspect to the OT, back when it was made and released? Wow. So then, maybe you can answer for me, why in the OT there's religious references to the Jedi and the Force? Why would Han Solo, Willuff Tarkin and Conan Motti call it a religion if it wasn't one? Why have Han Solo, Jan Dodonna and Gial Ackbar who aren't Jedi use a Jedi phrase? I know Lucas changed things in the OT, but certainly not this?

 

While no part of the Star Wars saga is "religious" per se, the saga certainly incorporates religious tropes and elements that might -- at times -- easily lead, or perhaps, mislead, one to that conclusion.

The very basic moral lesson of the saga is less, in a way, a lesson, and more of a melody or prayer, subtly sounded over and over. It totally reminds me of this famous prayer:

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer

 

What I think Moyers was doing was sort of engaging in hindsight bias. He saw the religious aspect of the film, and assumed that that aspect was THE primary reason for Lucas making the film in the first place...and Lucas largely ran with the whole notion, "I saw that a modern mythos was necessary/there was no spirituality to speak of in films anymore", etc. But a better indication, imo, of where Lucas' motivations lay in making Star Wars, are the interviews from the early/mid 70's where he mentions Flash Gordon*, Buck Rodgers, Asmov's 'Lensmen', and yes, Kurosawa's 'Hidden Fortress'.

* he attempted to obtain the rights for Flash Gordon in 1970 or 1971, but was unsuccessful

 

I have never said that you watched it wrong. I have only ever said that there was more to the story than you had realized. You can interpret it how you want, but don't be so surprised or offended by the notion that there was more to the story than what you thought it was. This is where my earlier comparison to the Earth is flat came in. At some point, people actually started to accept it. Even if they didn't like it.

That's not even remotely the same. If an organization was built as a religion, then it is a religion. Running could never be a religion because individual runners do not constitute a religion. If there was a large organization of runners/sprinters/joggers who worshiped Mercury/Hermes, the god of speed and prayed to him, then that would be a religion. In ANH, Han dismisses the Force as something that controls his destiny by labeling it as a hokey religion. Why, do you think, it was written that way?

In the real world, there are different religious beliefs that people have. You've got the Christian belief, but then you've got the Buddhist traditions. Same with Taoism and the Native American beliefs of ancient spirits. In science fiction and fantasy, this is also true. In the case of "Star Wars", as Lucas said, he wanted to create a religion for a society that was not from Earth. Just like "Battlestar Galactica" had its own. That is why you've got the Force and the Jedi. The holy wars and the holy men that existed as the story developed.

Right, but afterwards, as he was doing the world building of his own universe, he had to create a whole society. And by his own admission, that included the notion of religious beliefs. He didn't set out to make a religious film, but as he tried to figure it out, that came up and became part of the story. And when you look at the evolution of the story for the first film, there was no Force that we came to know it, but a spiritual concept. Along with the idea of a holy war and a holy man.

As to Moyers, what if it wasn't bias? What then?

 

A person is a part of the universe. If you influence a person, you have influenced the universe. Anything that can be influenced by the Force can also be influenced by other influences.

It's kind of like how Vietnam is a jungle, but Iraq is a desert.

This one does. It's not an energy field from the real world. It's fantasy energy.

I don't think that holds as an in-universe reality; rather, we only know it to be the case due to having seen the conclusion first.

 

I don't think the 'flat-Earth' example does your argument any favors here. If anything, it would seem to indicate that you do indeed believe that anakinfansince1983 is watching SW 'wrong'.

This is all true....but going back to the OP and only one kenobi's point about the "Too Many Ideas Syndrome": there's a big difference between the OT depiction of this religion, versus the PT's portrayal with it's Force Prophecy, a 'Will' of the Force, and a 'Chosen One'. How does this notional religion necessitate having a Force Prophecy, a 'Will' of the Force, and a 'Chosen One'? A point raised by only one kenobi's was that the OT worked as a coherent story just fine without those concepts.

The bias I referred to on the part of Moyers had to do with the proposition that Lucas intended to make a religious film - which you agreed was not the case - or even that he was intending to make a statement about society circa the 70's. As you said, it had more to do with world-building of the fictional universe he was creating, which wasn't from Earth. However, taking us back again to the "Too Many Ideas Syndrome" theme, there's something about this fictional religion that leave one wondering. I can't seem to find any parallel to any real-life Earth religions where the knowledge of a significant concept such as personal immortality weren't even known to the members of the religion in question until relatively 'late' into the history/space-time of that universe/society. I am talking of course about Force ghosting.

 

Indeed.

Speaking for myself, I can see the world-building he was doing back in the day (70's/early 80's) of writing the OT leading to the idea of that fictional in-universe society having a religion. It's just that to me, it's strange that in such a religion, it's adherents having near super-powers or being able to manipulate their environment would be the order of the day, but something central to many real-world religions like personal immortality wouldn't have been figured out until late in the game.

edit to add:

What I'm saying is, that an in-universe religion being part of a fictional story can work in sci-fi or fantasy. I'm talking about things like the aforementioned religion in Battlestar Galactica, or the religion in Dune (the casual mention of the "Orange Catholic Bible" in the original book comes to my mind). I share only one kenobi's opinion that the religion in the SW Saga 1-6 as it now stands, doesn't work within the story all that well. Instead of acting to enhance the 'reality' of that fictional world, it almost seems to function as a stand-in for the plot, or as a cover for some of the shaky plot or character motivations.