Lit Are there times the Sith are the "good guys"

Yeah, they're protagonists, but protagonist doesn't always mean hero or good guy.

And for the sake of discussion, what exactly is the point of the Sith school of thought to other posters? Its not like one sect mainly prefers purple lightsabers to red, or very dark gray robes to black, being Sith is all about being evil. The elevation of self above all others, even the Force. For Jedi, some Jedi don't like the idea of marriage, too much attachments, other Jedi are ok with it, but all Jedi are supposed to protect the galaxy and serve the Force.

You occasionally have not so bad Sith, but they're usually not the ones in charge, or they don't stay that way, either they're killed by treacherous followers or they defect, as they're too nice to be Sith. Unless they're just a bit more affable or faux affable if they're just better at hiding the megalomania. The Darth Gravid mentioned in the Plagueis novel is an interesting example- he realized just how bad they were, tried to stop the Banite order from continuing... then died, killed by his apprentice.

Anakin Skywalker is probably the clearest example from the movies- he goes evil, becomes Vader, then sacrifices himself to save his son, and so he's not a Sith anymore.

 

It's interesting to consider that, if my recall is right, Pauline Kael saw Dirty Harry as being pro-fascist, while both Leone and Eastwood's westerns move far away from the prior western paradigm of white / black hat gunslingers.

Neither, however, lays claim to also being a SW story, which is why it can be more difficult to do. Tarkin is an interesting example in this respect as it plays with the reader's notion of who to back - you know what Tarkin will go on to do, you know Vader isn't cuddly either, but it's their story, so they'll win in the end.

 

Like I said, characters like Dirty Harry are often also called the good guys. His methods however are comparable to those of Vader in the Tarkin novel. So where's the difference? As far as I am concerned, Vader fulfills the role of good guy in the Tarkin novel because the opponents are worse, terrorists with little regard for civilian casualties. Sidious is even milder in the book than Vader.

The fact that they're designated villains in the rest of SW doesn't matter if you're just interested in the structure of this one novel.

I agree with what you say.

I'm not talking about the movies, just about the novel and how they act there. They are not only about elevating oneselfs in the novel.

As for their actual philosphy, because the old EU got cut away, we don't know a whole lot.

 

Of course Sith can be good guys. The problem is, once they become good guys, they cease being Sith.

 

This may be of interests
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/...ee-them-outside-of-the-old-republic.50014732/
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/should-the-sith-have-deeper-characterization.31993664/

 

Just re-read this. What do you mean like it is in the movie?

 

You can have good Sith, there's clear examples of them. Darth Vectivus for one. There's obviously some people who use the Dark Side but have no interest in the whole 'take over the Galaxy' shtick. Going by the 'school of thought' of Vergere, Kyle Katarn and early Luke, there technically is no Dark Side and Light Side of the Force, but of the person who may have a dark or light side. I mean yeah, the movies in most cases have a clear good vs evil perspective (and even then it depends, because the Jedi in the Prequels were made to look as bad as the Sith) but we're talking about the EU here, where things are far, far from black and white. Good thing too, moving away from the simplistic view. I would like to have more Sith like Vectivus, or those like Dooku who are idealists and use the Dark Side for what they believe in, instead of following the Sith ideals closely.

Also about people going on like 'True Sith would kick them out' I find that the Sith/Dark Siders are the ones with more differing ideals in terms of what they want their order to be when compared to the Jedi. The Jedi have only had two, or three Orders, while the Sith have countless, often co-existing at the same time. You have the old Sith Empires, you have the revenge-driven Banites, you have occasional 'decent people' like Vectivus (I think Lumiya's Sith were going to strive for this, but it kinda failed due to bad characterizations in LOTF), then there's the usual 'conquer the Galaxy' One Sith and you also have the Lost Tribe of the Sith who are more obsessed with personal beauty than taking over the Galaxy or getting revenge. I like the idea of vanity-driven Sith, too bad in the end they turned them into generic mooks like they did with the rest of Lumiya's Sith (Caedus etc).

 

"Idealist" was a term used for Dooku to hide the fact that he was in reality a liar, murderer and traitor. If Dooku is you're argument for an altruistic Sith Lord then your argument is pretty weak.

 

my bold

What are you referring to?

 

Yeah, have to say the same for anyone using Vader and that peace argument. Take away the reasons (excuses) they gave for their actions, and focus on the actions themselves, which includes murder that ranges in the thousands, if not millions/billions, through a combination of direct and indirect methods.

 

Are you referring to me?

Because I did say there methods (actions) are all wrong and screwed up.

 

Luke and much of the NJO held a supportive view of the Potentium belief, then turned against it after the Yuuzhan Vong War.

 

How is that "early Luke"?

 

By early Luke I mean Luke from ROTJ to LOTF, which is a wide area to go over, I admit. A better term for me to use would be 'middle Luke' (NJO to LOTF) with 'early Luke' being ANH-New Republic Era and 'late Luke' being LOTF-FOTJ.

 

I think "NJO Luke" would be a better term. Luke, like most other characters have changed through the years and authors

 

From my perspective, when grey characters start to overtake the heroes and villains in Sci fi adventure fiction, it loses a lot of what makes it special in my eyes. Real life is full of grey characters, but fiction is an opportunity to escape real life and create the ideal, where hard lines can be drawn between good and evil. When the hero or villain are not doing good and evil, respectively, they are behaving neutrally. The only exception is when a character evolves from evil to good or visa versa.

That is how I like my fiction in this genre so that is how I interpret the movies and like to read the books. The Sith are the bad guys and the Jedi are the good guys, simple, clean, make-believe. I am disheartened when the authors force the point of grey heroes and villains.