Jedi Council Forums » Star Wars Films » Revenge of the Sith »
Register | Login | Search | Help | New Boards | Harassment Policy | Rules of the JC | TOS | Markup Codes
Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 » - Previous | Next | Reload
Author Topic: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
XAeon  153 posts
Registered: Apr '04
6973_Duality
Date Posted: 5/21/05 9:38pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
Rob, you are correct. You obviously percieved the line in question as it was meant to be taken:
-----------------------------------------
DV: I have brought peace, freedom, justice and security to my new empire!

OB1: You're new empire?

DV: Don't make me kill you.

OB1: Anakin, my allegiance is to the Republic, to Democracy!

DV: If you're not with me, then you are my enemy.

OB1: Only a Sith deals in absolutes. I will do what I must.

DV: You will try... *leaps into battle*
-----------------------------------------
For all of the overly sensitive Republicans out there, unfortunately you need to play the role, and stop being so damned sensitive.
For all of the overly pompous Democrats out there, unfortunately you also need to play the role, and keep politics out of it.

Before I get to the context of the dialogue in question, I would like to humbly request that the Democrats/Republicans and their convenient liberal/conservative perspectives be left out of the interpretations of dialogue in a sciencefiction / fantasy story.

In vein efforts to hide your apparent needs to make profound real-world political statements - using dialogue and backstory from Star Wars is a clever (albeit misplaced) method of speaking out to the masses. Stop it, please leave the free-thinkers of the world to fight for your revolution at a later time.

For now, I'd rather enjoy George Lucas' freedom of expression for what it is: a wholesomely good, thought-provoking, and imaginative (though sometimes not so imaginative) story of life's lessons.
-------------------------------------------
Back to the SITUATIONAL dialogue (what is important):

Obi Wan is making one last check of Darth Vader's position by questioning DV's statement : "... MY new empire." Obi Wan's love for Anakin (not Vader) is precisely why he didn't come hauling ass down that boarding ramp and immediately dispatch of Vader the second he began to hurt Padme.
This is also precisely why Obi Wan chooses the passive route (by trying to discuss this unfortunate situation). Obi Wan questions Vader's statement, as an individual who does not immediately accept a situation, but tries to get to the source of the situation. Democratically, in a Republican way... (they are 2 different eyes of the same beast's vision)

Keep in mind: Anakin as a padawan, and even after he became a Jedi, was questioning authority - questioning things on a situational basis. There is nothing wrong with this. Only after Darth Vader emerges, does the questioning (questioning is the quest for truth) cease. Darth Vader is not on a quest for truth, but one of absolution. Truth is entirely situational, and the Jedi (specifically Obi Wan) understand this.

Though many individuals seek absolute truth, there is none. It is a shame that individuals close their minds and choose to percieve empirical data and statistical analysis as absolute truth. Unfortunately, these things are only fragments of the truth, nothing absolute. The previous statement itself can be percieved as an absolute, or a fragment of a greater truth, either way it seems to degrade into a paradox.

The Sith are a paradox. The nature of a paradox reveals a suspension from a foundation from which to operate, a percievable detachment from reality. A paradox is a revolving door - if you never choose to move beyond the door, you will move according to the nature of the paradox, though you'll never reach any destination but your origin. From within the paradox, you lose your orientation. Without ever leaving your origin, there is a perception of locomotion, though only spinning tires, going nowhere.

Obi Wan's ABSOLUTE: "My allegiance is to the Republic, to Democracy!"

All of you political analysts out there, shred it. Consume it and digest it and spew it forth from your bowels. If you have any ground on which to stand you know that democracy and republicanism are but 2 vantage points of the same ideal. That ideal is NOT absolute. The ideal itself is a suggestion of plausible absolute from within the chaotic nature of a group of individuals trying to reach a single resolve. When you shred and analyze Obi Wan's only genuine absolute, you find that his absolute is quite diluted. His only dedication is to the random order that can potentially emerge from chaos. Obi Wan understands that his choices are entirely situational and always dependent on the input of others. Here's where the input from others follows:

Vader's ABSOLUTE: "If you are not with me, then you are my enemy."

Vader does not question himself, nor does he subscribe to the random order that can potentially emerge from within chaos. Vader wishes to abandon disorder. Vader wishes to allign the chaotic elements of existence into an order of controlled non-variables. Destroying the free variables (even those variables that are quite possibly positive and balancing) only guarantees an apparent perception of control. Anakin was a free variable. Vader destroyed that variable in the name of control.

Obi Wan's percieved ABSOLUTE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes. I will do what I must."

This statement is entirely situational, on the basis of sith-involved circumstances. Perhaps a better way of wording it would be "A Sith only deals in absolutes." The Sith perception is that absolution is possible. However the dialogue may be worded, the message is clear: A Sith only sees individual cause and effect. As powerful and all encompassing as a Sith strives to be, the flaw of the Sith is that their selfish nature blurs the vision of how personal cause and effect creates new cause and inevitably effects the masses. Their tool for correcting this blurred vision is totalitarianism.

The Jedi believe absolution is a loose reference to percieved truth, from a circumstancial standpoint. The Jedi on the whole appear indecisive and even blind at times because of the bigger picture that they try so veinly to keep in focus. This is their fatal flaw, and can even be said as ABSOLUTELY why their failure was inevitable.

The Jedi lost their resolve for absolution on a situational and circumstancial basis, and allowed their perception to dissolve across the "big picture." QuiGon, and eventually Obi Wan and Yoda recognized that their perceptions had become diluted... this realization is what saved them, and in turn what allowed them to save Anakin through teaching Luke.

"I will do what I must." is the most loaded statement of the entire saga. What Obi Wan must do, is entirely situational, based on the circumstances of each sequential situation. This is completely evident (for those that require empirical data and statistics) from the moment he makes this statement, until his final dialogue in Return of the Jedi: *clipped* "...I cannot interfere..." to this point, Obi Wan HAS DONE "all that he must."

At first glance "what you must" is an absolute itself... but without definable action, "must" desolves to a dilute, and only comes into focused resolve in hindsight.

Vader: "You will try..."

There is no try. Only do or do not. That is the way of things. An absolute? Maybe.

Until you see Obi Wan try and try again until Luke DOES. This redeems every "try" that ObiWan puts forth... as DOING.
------------------------------------

Don't bring real-world b/s into this dialogue... when you do, you destroy the power and conviction of the message. My analysis of the situation is not absolute, just a percieved truth from my realm of circumstance...

wink

 

-----signature-----
Duality is the only form of balance.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
wiggedywhacked  81 posts
Registered: Nov '00
24052_Palpatine
Date Posted: 5/21/05 9:41pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
I am now dumber.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Improbability_Drive 
Registered: May '05
19249_20-Sided Die
Date Posted: 5/22/05 12:05am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
Lucas was too busy trying to take a shot at President Bush and look witty to his liberal Hollywood friends in doing so to concern himself with whether or not it made sense for a Jedi to say that.


While I do agree that art is usually better when not mixed with politics, I'm still troubled by this statement. It seems to vilify the mere act of criticizing President Bush's words or actions.

I very much doubt Lucas cares whether his "Hollywood friends" think he is witty. He doesn't listen to any of the Hollywood response to his movies, and he bashes Hollywood for a variety of reasons any chance he gets. All evidence suggest it is far more likely that Lucas is expressing his own personal political beliefs when he equates Bushco warmongering to the Sith.

The whole idea of Hollywood being a monolithic liberal entity is patently absurd. Virtually all of the actors who enter politics do so as republicans, and two of them (Reagan and The Gropinator) are/were very famous and influential republicans. "Liberals," the supposed "Hollywood party," have never had the audacity to run a third rate actor for president.

Another point I find interesting is the response to criticism of Bush. It seems very often that hear conservatives squealing like stuck pigs at some recent verbal lashing of their fearless leader, at which point they personally attack the person responsible for the criticisms, feign outrage, and generally make complete asses of themselves, all while totally failing to respond to the original criticism. Compare this to the Clinton era, when Clinton was attacked with greater frequency and venom than Bush, even in Hollywood movies, and more often than not he let it slide like water off a duck's back.

The line about absolutes in ROTS is supremely applicable to the modern GOP, in a very specific sense. The Rovian attitude prevailing at the GOP today is basically anyone who is not an ally of the republican party is a threat. Anyone who doesn't support GOP policies hates freedom and democracy, doesn't care about old people, and does not properly worship the Lord Jesus. You're with us, or you're against us, and evil, too. It's about being dogmatic. Believing that terrorism is wrong is an ethical and moral stance, but believing that anyone who fights in opposition to one's own interests is a terrorist who "hates freedom and loves terror" is dogmatic (and plain stupid). Saying that those who don't agree with your plans for Social Security privatization don't care if SS goes broke in the future is also dogmatic and stupid.

Anyways that's what I got out of the comment, that applying absolute judgments to groups of people is foolish. I didn't mean to post about politics here, but Lucas started it with his political flourishes in ROTS! :P Actually I do like how Lucas worked modern politics into the prequels, especially ROTS. I found the parallels Lucas drew to be (mostly) subtle, succinct, and dead-on.

 

-----signature-----
Maxin' n' Relaxin' with Lando in Cloud City.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Dukhat  102 posts
Registered: Oct '04
7756_Princess Leia
Date Posted: 5/22/05 12:31am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
Stop with the politics BS.

Bush said one line and all you liberals are running off with it and making broad, idiotic generalization (See the post above). And then the hard-core conservatives will be all riled too.

Just take politics out of it, it'll get nowhere because each side is stuck in their paradigm.

 

-----signature-----
Just say no to the prequels.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
dexters  496 posts
Registered: Dec '01
6960_Han<br>LEGO
Date Posted: 5/22/05 12:44am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
To answer the question. Does the statement "only Sith deals in absolutes" make any sense as far as Obi-Wan and the Jedi's actions are concerned?

I think it does. The keyword here is DEAL. The Jedi don't DEAL in absolutes, they can see absolutes and they certainly make absolute statements, but they are portrayed as 'democratic' albiet arrogant in their waning days.

 

-----signature-----
Current Star Wars Rankings
1) ROTS/ESB (9/10) 2) ANH (8/10) 3) ROTJ (7.5/10) 4) TPM (7/10) 5) AOTC (6.5/10)
MAY THE FORCE BE WITH YOU! ALWAYS!
Visit my RT film journal
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/j/dexters
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
archaan727 
Registered: Mar '05
23041_Anakin's Ghost<br>Hayden
Date Posted: 5/22/05 1:31am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
Palpatine was lying in order to twist Anakin's mind. Jedi understand there aren't rulebook answers to everything, and that things aren't simple. Sith do not ultimately accept this: to a Sith, if you're not with him, you're against him; dictatorship is better than a democracy, and greed and selfishness are virtues.

And I don't wholly agree that GL weaves contemporary politics into the fabric of ROTS. Remember that all good art is universal, all bad art merely topical. ROTS, as much as anything, is a lesson in history. Palpatine uses the same route to power that Hitler did (and Mussolini, for that matter), and uses that power for similar purposes. GL is, ultimately, passing on quiet but potent truths about power and coercion.

 

-----signature-----
'The terror of the unforeseen is what the science of history hides, turning disaster into an epic.' Philip Roth, The Plot Against America
Only two things matter in life; Birmingham City FC is the other one.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
zephyrr  138 posts
Registered: May '05
Date Posted: 5/22/05 1:37am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
Well said, Lapti_Nek.

As for what Obiwan said, I guess what he meant was that Siths deals in absolutes in a way that, they kill even innocent harmless people who are not in the way of their missions. For example, Anakin killed the younglings when I doubt they can actually do anything to stop Palp's evil plans.

 

-----signature-----
Twice the pride, double the fall.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
XAeon  153 posts
Registered: Apr '04
6973_Duality
Date Posted: 5/22/05 11:53am Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
unless of course, you see "the will of the force" as for you to use it as an "ally"... but I digress.

There are no absolutes.... ObiWan's statement is that a reasonable person doesn't look for an absolute to make and base their decisions upon.

For everyone who stands on their box (even me), the point still remains... the only absolute is that of someone who recognizes no other alternatives.

ObiWan wasn't necessarily being a hypocrit. He saw alternative actions, and had an adaptive perspective.
Vader did not.

 

-----signature-----
Duality is the only form of balance.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Doctor_SuperJedi  456 posts
Registered: Nov '04
23766_Emperor
Date Posted: 5/22/05 12:19pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
Thank you, xAeon. You saved me a whole lot of trouble in trying to voice my thoughts on this matter, and you did it far more eloquently than I could have imagined myself doing.

I'm really disturbed that this somehow turned into a "Oh no, Lucas is attacking Bush," marathon. Really, this political heat garbage needs to end some day. We already had more than enough of it in the 04 elections, god forbid we carry it with us into another year and into our analysis of a science fantasy genre that is more often than not lampooned by critics and the general public alike as substanceless. happy

On that note, I also felt that Obi-Wan wasn't really contradicting himself. We can spend all day dissecting his words throughout the trilogy, declaring "This is an absolute" and "This is a 'relative' thought" and on and on.

But as xAeon mentioned in his other response, as well as others, Obi-Wan is talking about the personal character of Anakin as compared to himself and the Jedi Order. Yes, both he and Anakin are speaking in "absolutist" terms, but it's the core from which they speak that differs. Anakin begins and ends with himself. When he sees a conflict, he responds, like all Sith do with the "Either for or against me" maxim. There are no shades of grey. No possible alternatives, no perceptions of truth even worth considering in the eyes of the Sith.

The Jedi are absolutists as well... but they carefully consider what it is that they are doing, absolutely. Let's get a little more into the geekdom and question why Obi-Wan is called The Negotiator by General Grievous. That says a lot about Obi-Wan's character. Yes, he is dedicated absolutely to defeating "evil" as he perceives it, but like a true Jedi he is willing to consider that there are other truths, other methods, other realities that he may not have noticed or perceived.

Anakin, as a Jedi, is supposed to defeat the "evil" Count Dooku. Not smite him. This is another show of the Jedi not dealing in absolutes, which another poster in the first page pointed out. The Jedi see the Sith as absolutely evil... but when they fight them the goal is not merely to destroy them entirely. If Dooku is truly disarmed and helpless, why not hold back and capture him? Learn something new, perhaps get him to see things their way through negotiation? The Jedi actually takes time to consider something like this.

For a Sith, such a consideration is garbage unless there is also absolutely a possibility of using that person to their advantage. They aren't questioning themselves or "seeking" the truth of anything except that which they already perceive within themselves.

But I'm repeating myself and everyone else, so I'll stop. That line is not some garbage political snipe though. That's just an insulting way of dismissing a line they don't particularly like.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
XAeon  153 posts
Registered: Apr '04
6973_Duality
Date Posted: 5/22/05 12:33pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
Dr. SuperJedi, I hereby WUL you, as a gift of appreciation for your sensibility and individual repose in such a diverse and muddied topic.

 

-----signature-----
Duality is the only form of balance.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
TrueJedi  6804 posts
Registered: Jun '00
7986_Yoda Spirit
Date Posted: 5/22/05 12:40pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
MatthewZ:

Matthew 12:30

"Whomever is not with me, is against me. Whomever does not gather, scatters."

More likely where Lucas got the line in question than a George Bush speech.


Thank God someone remembered it because I forgot myself. Well done. happy

 

-----signature-----
You do not truly know someone until you steal their wallet.
I'm the originator of the title, "EP III: Revenge of the Sith", so give me my accolades.
1977: May The Force Be With You
1999: May You Have Enough Midichlorians To Use The Force
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Lord_Rebel  76 posts
Registered: May '05
23540_Anakin
Date Posted: 5/22/05 12:43pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
Improbability_Drive has once again added evidence to the fact that you can pretend to be intelligent by writing intelligently, yet still be ignorant.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Darth_Overlord  1235 posts
Registered: Jul '01
24202_Palpatine
Date Posted: 5/22/05 3:19pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
Of course the Jedi deal in absolutes in some circumstances, (perhaps "deal" is the wrong word here) and it's not a failure on their part that they do so. Always opposing the Dark Side is a big one. It's being absolute about being absolute that is the problem.

If we take it to be a biblical allusion (which is MUCH more like Lucas to do than any political statement, as many posters have already said) then Anakin only got half the message. In a different context Jesus said, "For whoever is not against us is for us." (Mark 9:40) So even such an absolute statement as "whoever is not for me is against me" has more than one dimension to it.

I'm having a hard time understanding how the Sith "deal in absolutes". If anything they have only one absolute and that's "what do I get out of it?" Anything else can be bent or broken for the sake of this one principle. Sometimes an absolute stance benefits them (totally for or against Anakin; support the Empire or die) other times a relativist stance benefits them (open to a complete knowledge of the Force; Jedi and Sith the same). It is because of this parasitic nature of the Sith (all take and no give) that the Force becomes in balance when the Sith are destroyed.

 

-----signature-----
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected."
-G.K. Chesterton
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Rogue_Knight21  54 posts
Registered: May '05
23547_Anakin Skywalker
Date Posted: 5/22/05 3:49pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
I think some of you may be taking this too literally. Obi-Wan is talking about how he is judging a particular situation, the fact that he thinks that Obi-Wan is his enemy, since he doesn't think what he is doing is right. Also when he talks of what he has done politically, and that he and Padme can rule the galaxy, because only his way of doing things, is the right way to do it. These are the absolutes Obi-Wan is refering to. They are different than, "do or do not." They are much bigger.

The only thing I can think of as an analogy would be stereotypes. Most stereotypes have some truth to them, that doesn't mean that everyone, or everyting is a certain way, and give you a reason to be prejudice. Just because a lot of people from California surf, doesn't mean that everyone does. I know there are beter examples of steroetypes, but I didn't feel like bringing up racism. A sith sees only one way of looking at something, or someone. This doesn't apply to something the Jedi believe like, "do or do not." Yoda is just trying to teach Luke how to focus. You will either do it, or you will not. That is the reality. The Jedi may have some absolutes, but not nearly as many, or as big as the Sith would. Even a Jedi can make a mistake. Afterall, both Yoda and Obi-Wan believed Vader was all bad, because he had become a Sith Lord. It took Luke to show them their mistake, in making an absolute assumption.

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Buddha_Rocket 
Registered: May '05
6553_Han Solo
Date Posted: 5/22/05 4:41pm Subject: RE: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes..."
I think "Trust or search your feelings" means trusting the force, or trust feeling the force, not trusting your emotions.

Also you can trust your emotions if you pick the right ones. wink

I think the whole "absolutes" line is linked to the Jedi/Buddhist/Taoist philosophy, not postmodernism. Just like the "attachments lead to suffering" (or close something to that effect) line from Yoda. Absolute truth is not socially constructed as it stays above human desire. The absence of moral absolutes is likewise very important for it shows that when we understand our empty nature and our interconnection to all other beings and substances, absolute rules are not necessary and actually a hindrance. When you stop clinging to absolutes is when true liberation begins. Suffering is the clinging.

But I think people are correct when they say the Jedi also deal in absolutes. Star Wars deals in absolutes. It's a morality play constructed from different mythologies and religions. As Mark Hamil put it: "religions greatest hits!" There will be contradictions, but it's all part of the fun.

 

-----signature-----
A human being is part of a whole, called by us the Universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separated from the rest — a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is
a ki
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 » - Previous | Next | Reload
Jedi Council Forums » Star Wars Films » Revenge of the Sith »
© 2009 IGN Entertainment, Inc (9.02.17.2300, IGNPRDAPPW64214) 0.688