Jedi Council Forums - "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."

Jedi Council Forums » Star Wars Films » Revenge of the Sith »

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

« 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 » - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
DialRP0070 Registered: May '05	Date Posted: 5/25/05 5:24pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	Wow, you guys are brilliant. So many great explanations of this line. I have really enjoyed reading these posts (I posted on page (3?)) My personal favorite is that the line is a use of irony as it pertains to the Jedi (Lapti_Nek?) I think if Lucas had put half the thought into it as you all have, it would have come out much better. But I hate to say it I don't think he thought it through, I still believe he was taking a shot at Bush. Whatever. Now I can choose to apply any of a myriad of these explanations to the line in my own mind from now on when I watch the movie, and all will be well. Thank you.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
SaberLover Registered: Sep '04	Date Posted: 5/25/05 6:59pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	Originally posted by: DialRP0070 But I hate to say it I don't think he thought it through, I still believe he was taking a shot at Bush. Whatever. DialRP0070, One of the things that is so impressive about this line, is (as was stated earlier) the original quote has several simulataneous meanings.. Lucas is commenting on both the ploitics within the SW universe, but, he is also dropping a subtle warning to "the real world" that dealing in absolutes, especially political absolutes, is a Dark path to go down.. That is what makes the line so impressive. It has several meanings
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
vikingjedi1 Registered: Nov '01	Date Posted: 5/25/05 9:54pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	Anybody pick up that statement by Padme' in the Senate when they were all cheering? Something like "Thats how the end of democracy begins, with thundering applause". Definitely a shot at Pres. Bush. -----signature----- Minnesota Vikings - Future 2006 Superbowl Champions http://vikingjedi.tripod.com
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Elle-Wan Registered: Jul '04	Date Posted: 5/25/05 10:01pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	Lucas bent over backwards to put this line in the movie in order to take a shot at GWB's "Axis of Evil" comments. Basically he's calling Republicans "Sith." Needless to say he contradicts himself almost immediately with the Obi-Wan line "Anakin, Chacellor Palpatine is evil!"
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Mr_Darth_Hulk Registered: May '05	Date Posted: 5/25/05 10:32pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	Actually republicans haven't been complaining one bit, only ppl I have noticed pointing out and making comparisons have been AOL with a poll they was doing. AOL ran by time/warner a known liberal media. they was taking a poll asking ppl who the thought was most like who, for Bush you had 2 choices vader or Luke, for Cheyenne it was emperor or yoda, that seemed a little stacked. i just rolled my eyes cause theses PT were made and hashed out long before Bush was prez. i think that ppl try to take advantage of a persons emotions and make you feel and think anything they want from you. I my self am completely against politics nothing gets accomplished with the special interest groups theses days, Washington warned us that political parties only serve to divide ppl.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
GuardianLegend Registered: May '05	Date Posted: 5/26/05 12:55am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	I don't think any quotes from the PT can be related to stuff from the OT. The two trilogies are very different, and George Lucas sought to express a very different set of ideals with the PT. The OT was loved for its very simple and straightforward "good vs evil" backdrop, and personal redemption story. That's why it became so popular. Like The Lord of the Rings, people like absolutes. But the PT became a post-modernist story, where the motivations and life of the "bad guy" is fleshed out. Some may find this a failing, but I think that the nature of the PT demanded a post-modernist take on things. There's no way the PT would work if you had no doubt Anakin was purely evil all the time. If so, you wouldn't be able to sympathise with him or his friends at all. You would say "KILL ANAKIN! KILL HIM NOW!" At Cannes, Lucas said that the point of the PT was to show you how "bad people think they're doing good." So of course, the ideology of PT isn't going to be totally in line with the ideas of OT. For one thing, remember that the Sith didn't even exist until Phantom Menace. Neither the Emperor or Vader were ever called Sith. It was a completely new concept from Lucas, introduced in Menace, so of course you're not going to see both trilogies connect very well. Furthermore, the Jedi Order and their philosophies were not explained in detail at all in the OT. Only the PT did this. I think if you're going to look for inconsistencies from Obi-wan's "absolute" quote, you need to stay within the PT. As for the "Lucas is a liberal, and tried to inject that into Star Wars" issue, I think if you read the scripts closely, this is just obvious. Actually, I'd go further and say that Lucas may be a socialist. COUNT DOOKU: The Chancellor means well, M'Lady, but he is incompetent. He has promised to cut the bureaucracy, but the bureaucrats are stronger than ever, no? The Republic cannot be fixed, M'Lady. It is time to start over. The democratic process in the Republic is a sham, no? A shell game played on the voters. The time will come when that cult of greed, called the Republic, will lose even the pretext of democracy and freedom. PADME: I cannot believe that. I know of your treaties with the Trade Federation, the Commerce Guilds, and the others, Count. What is happening here is not government that has been bought out by business... it's business becoming government! I will not forsake all I have honored and worked for and betray the Republic. I don't think this made it into Episode 2, but it's part of the script, according to this link. I'm guessing it was cut because it was so bluntly political that people would've reacted badly. For those unaware, one of the strongest critics of overly democratic government are people who are labelled "free marketeers". Often they are called libertarians (not the anarchist variety), or just plain capitalists. Basically, they believe that one dollar should equal one vote. That you can "vote with your pocketbook" on anything you don't like. If you ever watch John Stossel on 20/20, you're familiar with this ideology. He's a libertarian and believes that most wrongs in the world should NOT be fixed through bureaucracy, as Dooku harps about, but through the market. And that's what the Separatist forces represent. That's why they consist of the Banking Clan, Techno Union, and Trade Federation. Each of them represents businesses that are frustrated with high taxes and industry regulation, things that are inevitable in a democratic capitalist government. Elsewhere in the PT, we hear mentions from the Jedi and their allies criticise how politics is influenced by money. That the wealthy can fund political campaigns and thus buy favors. Obi-Wan says this in episode 2. OBI-WAN: (V.O.) It's been my experience that Senators are only focused on pleasing those who fund their campaigns... and they are more than willing to forget the niceties of democracy to get those funds. Later, when Padme is talking to the new Queen of Naboo: PADME: I'm afraid that, despite the Chancellor's best efforts, there are still many bureaucrats, judges, and even Senators on the payrolls of the Guilds. SIO BIBBLE: It's outrageous that, after all of those hearings, and four trials in the Supreme Court, Nute Gunray is still the Viceroy of the Trade Federation. I fear the Senate is powerless to resolve this crisis. Do those money mongers control everything? I think that Lucas is most definately a liberal, and possibly a socialist. The latter possibility because such strong language is rarely going to come from a mere American liberal. And if you follow Cold War politics, you're more inclined to see Lucas' statements as part of the Red-tinged camp. George W. Bush himself called FDR a socialist in college, and FDR's views are in line with what is said by Star Wars. Still, I don't think Lucas was targetting Bush at all. The PT is mostly a parable of the rise of fascism before WW2, as others have said. The Nazis rose to power by constantly appealing to "threats to security", often threats that were fabricated by the Nazis themselves. They burnt down the German Reichstag (their Capitol Hill building) and then blamed it on a Communist Jew. The Japanese faked a bombing in Manchuria, and said it was done by the Chinese. All this was used as a pretext for stronger Executive powers and a more militarized society. Both nations were at one point democracies, but then were convinced that threats surrounded them, and thus abolished democracy for the sake of security. German communism was on the rise, and just a few years earlier, communists had attempted to overthrow the government. Germans believed communists were actually a plot by the Russians to take over. In Japan, the Japanese leaders were convinced America and other Western imperial nations would attempt to colonise Japan, as they had done to sections of China, all of Vietnam, Korea, and Burma. The film isn't anti-Bush, but here are some reasons people are seeing it as such. They see parallels between the following real world events and the film events. 1. Former CIA and NSA agents believe that GWB "fixed" intelligence data in order to support the case for war. Click here. A leaked memo from the UK government seems to confirm this. This can connect to how Palpatine manipulates intelligence info. In Episode 3, Palpatine tells the Jedi that Grievous is on Utapau. The Jedi wonder how Palpatine could see that, when none of the Jedi's intel agents were able to find that out. 2. Bush used the American response to the 9/11 attacks in a way that is considered, to put it gently, "opportunistic". Almost... insidious. He used 9/11 as a way to get America to approve of war against nations that had nothing to do with 9/11. Polls showed that most Americans believed that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11, despite the fact that Bush himself did not believe that. However, Bush never seemed to want to correct the public on such a grievous mistake. He knew it helped him to launch the war. This belief is fueled by former US counter-terrorist chief Richard Clarke's book, Against All Enemies. He says that Bush, immediately following 9/11, was informed that Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11, but that Bush seemed disinterested, and that he wanted Iraq. 3. A White House Bush aide told NYT reporter Ron Suskind, "That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality." Click here. I don't see how Lucas could've made this an anti-Bush story. Phantom Menace was in 1999, and the beginnings of this story were already there, before Bush was even President. Attack of the Clones came before the Iraq war, too, and it was probably scripted before 9/11 had happened. If Lucas made this anti-Bush, then he must have the ability to see into the future...which Yoda says is a power only Dark Side users have..
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
africanus Registered: May '00	Date Posted: 5/26/05 1:35am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	"Does this quote make sense? The Jedi deal in absolutes: good vs. evil, right and wrong, etc. Palpatine (and later, Anakin) talks about how it is all a matter of your point of view. There is no absolute evil or good, it all depends upon how you choose to view things. It seems like the Jedi see everything in black and white and the Sith see shades of grey, so shouldn't it be said that the Jedi are the ones who deal in absolutes, and not the Sith? Obi-Wan's quote doesn't make sense to me in view of the larger story." No, it doesn't make sense. Lucas is apparently an amateur philosopher. I've heard nonsense like this before. Post-modern philosophy has a very strong trend involving a radical skepticism about epistemology [theory of how knowledge works] and metaphysics. The whole idea of "The Force" is a metaphysical. "...it is all a matter of your point of view..." Well, if apply this same reasoning we can see that it is self-defeating. If it's all a matter of point of view, then the idea that it's all a point of view is itself, just a point of view. It can't be a true statement. "...The Jedi deal in absolutes: good vs. evil, right and wrong, etc..." The concept of "no absolutes" would be easier understood if we replace the word absolute with objective. What Lucas is really trying to say is "no objective good or evil." Classical relativism is an idea that goes all the back to the pre-Socratic Greeks. I suppose I could ask Lucas if he thought I would be "wrong" to say that relativism, as he's communicated it, is false. Then I would ask if it would be "bad" to circulate an idea that is "wrong." If Lucas really believes this stuff [perhaps he doesn’t, but it wouldn’t surprise me], and if we’re just emoting what we “perceive,” then why use good and evil language at all? In any event, I still love Star Wars.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
ImRightYouAreWrong Registered: May '05	Date Posted: 5/26/05 1:53am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	no you people are missing the point entirely example: had mace windu killed the emperor not out of self defence he would have turned to the darkside and sidious would have been right about the jedi's taking over the galaxy the force is one identity and "Jedi" are simply force users who use their ability under the "jedi order" which decidely deals in GREY AREA notice how they tried to spy on the chancellor, and used secretive methods such as obi-wan abandoning his ship to be discreet ... obviously not black and white for them sith lords however, use their power only for power and accept that ... very black and white viewpoint ~im right you are wrong~
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Penkhull Registered: Apr '04	Date Posted: 5/26/05 5:07am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	They only keep telling Luke he has to kill Anakin to set up Luke as the only one who believes in Anakin (In his own mind). It fits into GL's ideas about a hero believing he is totally on his own. -----signature----- Whatever you do to the least of my brothers you do to me.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
SaberLover Registered: Sep '04	Date Posted: 5/26/05 9:51am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	Guardian: Im going to pick 2 things to comment on, because I simply dont have the time to do any more.. originally posted by Guardianlegend: For one thing, remember that the Sith didn't even exist until Phantom Menace. Neither the Emperor or Vader were ever called Sith. It was a completely new concept from Lucas, introduced in Menace, so of course you're not going to see both trilogies connect very well. Darther Vader was called "Dark lord of the Sith" in the original script for Star Wars. Infact, he was refered to as Sith, in every draft leading up to the final draft, of "A New Hope". The term Sith was also used in countless Lucas pieces directly related to the Star Wars world, VERY early on.. almost immediately.. Most of these were official sources. Everyone knew Darth Vader "Was the dark lord of the Sith". Eventhough it was never directly stated in the films, it was common, general knowledge. Furthermore, the Jedi Order and their philosophies were not explained in detail at all in the OT. Only the PT did this. I think if you're going to look for inconsistencies from Obi-wan's "absolute" quote, you need to stay within the PT. The Jedi order was never explained??? "The jediknights were guardians of peace and justice for the old republic" -Obiwan.. ("Before thedarktimes.. Before the Empire") Also, Yodas entire training sequence with Luke on Dagobah, was basially teaching the ways of the Jedi order to Luke. Everything he says, is the teachings of the Jedi order.. Hes a Jedi master representing all of the Jedi order wisdom and teachings, to Luke! How much more dialogue can you possibly want than that to cover the topic? And the PT does not link to the OT?? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?? I could go on and on for this comment.. The defiantely link, on many many levels. and Im sorry you dont see the themes between the series... You guys are killing me with some of these comments.. Guardian, some of the things you said are valid, but definately not everything.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
SaberLover Registered: Sep '04	Date Posted: 5/26/05 10:00am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	Aficanus.. You make some valid points but you are overanalyzing. Take a step back, and simply take the comment for what it is.. A simple line that comments both on Anakin's tendancy to deal in absolutes about politics, and also, to give a subtle warning to to all of us in the real world as well.. Thats all it is folks..
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
SonOfGrievous Registered: May '05	Date Posted: 5/26/05 10:07am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	I was going to open a new thread on this very topic, but seeing as how the discussion has already started on this line, I've taken my argument and pasted it below. Forgive me for it being a bit long, but I originally meant for it to start a discussion. Anyway, I believe my thoughts adequately sum up one side of the debate. I give to you the absolute worst line in the entire epic six-part saga that is Star Wars. Sure, there are those lines that make you cringe. Some make you wonder, “Didn’t George realize it sounds bad?” The “Yippee!” from Episode I strikes me as terrible. Same with much of the romantic dialogue from Episode II (“I’ve been dying a little bit every day since you’ve come back into my life”). The “We did it!” from Episode IV also makes me cringe, not to mention the delivery of “Two fighters against a Star Destroyer?” line from Episode V. But the absolute worst line in six movies? It has nothing to do with delivery of the line. It’s what the line means. The line: “Only the Sith deal in absolutes.” This one line strikes such a blow to the very themes of the whole series that I wonder how it has not been commented on in great detail (only six pages on this topic in this forum as of now). I’ll try to avoid the political ramifications of this line since most people know what Lucas meant when he put this line in. I could go into detail about the wisdom of Lucas thumbing his nose at sixty million people who apparently do believe in absolutes, but that’s for another thread. What I want to do here is discuss how this one line, in an effort by Lucas to inject some political potshots at George W. Bush, effectively tears down the very series itself and what it stood for. What else does Star Wars represent if not the battle between Good and Evil? That was very apparent in the original trilogy. The bad guys were evil and wished to destroy freedom and kill innocent people. The good guys wanted to restore freedom and save lives. This was Good and Evil in the purest of forms, and it was one of the reasons that Star Wars was so successful in the first place. As detailed in the Original Trilogy documentary “Empire of Dreams,” many of the films from the 1970s dealt with shady characters, anti-heroes, and other assorted types. When Star Wars came around, finally Good and Evil were clearly defined and people could root for the good guys and jeer the bad guys. This type of formula has seen equal success with the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. There are no real shades of gray. The very battle of Good and Evil defines Star Wars. The entire point of Luke’s journey is his decision of whether to join the Good Side or the Dark Side. Notice that when Luke wishes to redeem his father, he doesn’t say “I know I can bring him back to that middle ground area.” Or notice how Obi-Wan (apparently contrary to his own words) talks of Vader’s descent to the Dark Side, not from Good to Neutral to Evil. Or notice Yoda’s advice: “Once down the Dark side you turn, forever will it dominate your path.” The choice is made to go down the dark path, not cross from white to gray to black. The Good Side and Dark Side are clearly marked. Even in Episode III, the movie where this line comes from (and also a movie I liked very much, by the way), Anakin’s choices are between two polar opposites, not a gray area. Indeed, the whole point of Darth Sidious’ manipulations is to convince Anakin that there IS a gray area in between (Ex: Join the Dark Side and you will be able to sustain life). It is this talk of a gray area that clouds Anakin’s judgment and allows him to turn to the Dark Side. If anything, it is the Sith that deals with ambiguous moral questions and the Jedi who believe in absolutes. So this is what strikes me as so odd. Lucas pretty much editorializes that the Sith deal in absolutes. So who are the Sith? Aren’t they evil? Sure they are. Then what are the Jedi? Aren’t they two opposite entities? If the Jedi don’t believe in absolutes, as Obi-Wan says, than why bother to get rid of the Sith? Surely under his definition there can be a good Sith that does good deeds and by hunting the Sith, the Jedi are dealing in absolutes. But wait, if a Sith starts doing good deeds, he’s no longer a Sith. He would be on the good side. You see where I’m going with this? For someone with the power of the Force, the choices they make only have two possible paths: Light and Dark. Notice no middle ground. The world of the Force has absolutes. Certain powers are achieved by going down each path, but no one can have all available powers. There will be those that look at Anakin’s redemption as proof that there are no absolutes. Such a thought process isn’t necessarily correct. While Anakin was able to be redeemed at the very end, that doesn’t take away from the fact he still committed evil acts in the past. It also doesn’t take away from the fact he committed a good act at the end of his life. Once again, he had choices between the two sides. There was no middle ground choice. The only question was whether the choice was light or dark. Once again, the Force is a world of absolutes. There must be absolutes. If there are no absolutes then there is no right or wrong; it’s only a matter of opinion and perception. With no absolutes there is no dark or light, good or evil, and therefore, the very theme of making choices is torn apart in one fell swoop by a single line. So you can see why it somewhat upsets me. Whether or not you agree with George Lucas’s political insinuations, the part that everyone should be upset is that he would rather make a political statement than hold true to the very essence of Star Wars. This also brings up the question that if he really feels this way – that morality, good, and evil should only depend on one’s point of view – then is the whole battle of good versus evil that he’s conjured up in the original trilogy not to be taken the way generations now have looked at it? That thought should strike the ardent Star Wars fan with a deep shudder. Did anyone else find the line completely contrary to the central themes of Star Wars, or am I wrong in how I view the line? -----signature----- Lisa:But don't you realize you're descending to the level of the mob? Homer: But if I'm part of that mob than I can steer it in wise directions. Now where' my giant foam cowboy hat and air horn?
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Darth_Deception Registered: Nov '04	Date Posted: 5/26/05 10:12am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	I don't understand this debate. It was a great line with a great delivery by Ewan McGreggor/Obi Wan. It's not that big of a deal nor is it hard to understand. Sith deal in absolutes: join me or die Jedi don't always: Obi wanting to face Sids instead of Anakin. Yoda saw the fallacy in this, however, so he told him no. -----signature----- Justice, Like Lightning...
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
05ers_pwn Registered: Mar '05	Date Posted: 5/26/05 10:17am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	i dont know why people insist on saying palpatine is supposed to be like george bush... in no way is george bush an eloquent speaker. and instead of saying the jedi are bad cause they attaked his daddy, he had pretty legitimate reasons for hating the jedi, and he also could prove it. and bush didnt have one young impressionable man to kill women and children... he had thousands. mYbAlLsYoUrChIn. -----signature----- official soliciter, advertiser, buyer, seller and trader of tfn. Padme: "anakin, your breaking my heart." Anakin: "no, thats the sound of me crushing your windpipe.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
SaberLover Registered: Sep '04	Date Posted: 5/26/05 10:19am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
	Son of Grievous.. You are missing one very important thing though, that has been brought up many times in this thread already.. THE CONTEXT in which the line was said.. The CONTEXT of the line was in the context of politics.. (Look elesewhere in this thread to what we mean by "the politics") The absolutes of Good versus Evil, were not at all what he was talking about... You people have to remember the context in which the lines are delieverd.. You simply can not take one line, and apply it to whatever you want.. Look at what is being said around the lines, and what is happening in the scene to understand properly. Context is very importnant here is the dialogue from ROTS, so you can give it the right context ANAKIN: Don't lecture me, Obi-Wan. I see through the lies of the Jedi. I do not fear the dark side as you do. I have brought peace, justice, freedom, and security to my new Empire. OBI-WAN: Your new Empire? ANAKIN: Don't make me kill you. OBI-WAN: Anakin, my allegiance is to the Republic ... to democracy. ANAKIN: If you're not with me, you're my enemy. OBI-WAN: Only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes. I will do what I must. (ignites his lightsaber) ANAKIN: You will try.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

« 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 » - Previous | Next | Reload

Jedi Council Forums » Star Wars Films » Revenge of the Sith »