Are Tuskens All Bad?

Discussion in 'Attack of the Clones' started by gezvader28, Nov 17, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Lord_Hydronium Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 11, 2002
    star 5
    mixza:

    It was only after he saw his mother, beaten and tied up, die in his arms, that his anger... his darkness, took over.

    That's hardly a justification for doing something wrong. A crime of passion is still a crime. Heck, Palpatine was dark all the time, but that doesn't mean it was OK for him to arrange a war, kill the Jedi, or try to kill Luke.

    Anakin did not kill all the Tuskens, just the ones in that particular camp.

    Fine. Replace "nuke the Middle East" with "nuke Kabul".

    After the Japanese bombed Pearl Harber, the U.S. went to war with Japan. Most of the soldiers we killed were innocent Japanese civilians who had had nothing to do with the bombing, they were merely drafted into the war. Some were as young as 15. But war is war. And they started it.

    In war, a member of an opposing army is fair game. So the "innocent Japanese civilians" are not civilians if they are drafted, they certainly are Japanese, and while morally they may well be innocent, in the rules of war they are not. In the Tusken-settler war, there's no problem with Tuskens and settlers killing those who chose to fight. It's only when innocents/non-combatants/civilians come into the picture (Shmi and the women and children) that it becomes wrong.

    I said I blamed the Tuskens for bringing his (Anakin's) anger onto them.

    Sorry I misinterpreted, but I think this is still rather suspect reasoning. Yes, the Tuskens are partially to blame for bringing about his situation, but your original post seemed to absolve Anakin, and I think it's important to remember the fact that in the end, only one person is responsible for Anakin's actions: Anakin. I mean, Rebel activity was what got Tarkin angry enough to blow up Alderaan, but I would hardly blame the Rebels for causing that.

    People have said that the Tuskens took Shmi because the farmers were taking over thier land.

    Ultimately, this is probably the reason. But it's not a direct reason. The land-taking comment is more to explain the general Tusken mindset (which I don't think we can assume based on the activities of one group).

    And there is plenty of land. It's not like the Tuskens are being forced onto reservations.

    See my Indian example for why this is hardly good reasoning. Even before the reservations, settlers were driving out and killing Indians. The frontier aspect of Tatooine, amongst other things that I've mentioned previously, leads me to believe that the analogy to the Indian situation is accurate.

    a_g:
    If you want specifics, it's going to have to wait til tomorrow.

    Fair enough.

    However, for generalities, I refer you to the quotes I made from the novelization, which described in detail what the Tuskens did to Shmi. Lucas endorsed the novelization and the screenplay, which I also have.

    OK, so they were endorsed by Lucas. The screenplay in and of itself makes no value judgements. However, in those quotes, Lucas does in fact make a judgement, calling the slaughter "completely inappropriate" and "terrible".

    So in other words, this is a thread meant to bash Anakin.

    I'd love to know where that came from, because it sure wasn't my post. I'm going to assume you missed what I said, so I'll post it again:

    "We're not asking whether it was OK to torture Shmi (because we all agree it wasn't), we're not asking whether Anakin killed men (because we know he did) or whether it was justified (because we all agree that it was as justified as any revenge), we are discussing whether it was OK for Anakin to kill the children. Thus, it's logical to assume that people are going to be talking about Anakin killing children. If you know a way to talk about Anakin killing children without ever mentioning that Anakin killed children, by all means, tell us."

    No, I won't dignify insulting statements such as this one, in which you imply that my defending myself against the attacks of many other posters in this thread are "straw man arguments", etc.

    No, I'm calling them str
  2. soitscometothis Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 11, 2003
    star 5
    anakin_girl,

    Check out the novelization. Anakin didn't "deliberately target" the kids. They were caught in the crossfire. A bunch of Tuskens ran away from him into a tent, and he dropped a rock on the tent. He didn't find out until later that there were actually kids in there.

    That wasn't the impression I got from the movie. Does the novelization really come out and state that Anakin didn't know he was killing women and children, or is left open to interpretation? Anakin not being aware of whom he was attacking would change the situation and his culpability quite dramaticaly for me. However, as I said before, this is not the impression I get from the confession scene in the film.

  3. SLR Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 20, 2002
    star 5
    I really think a lot of this comes down to misconstruing the difference between sympathy and justification. Anakin and the Tusken men were both wrong and not justified in their actions. The responsible Tusken men kidnapped and tortured an innocent woman. Anakin was wrong for slaughtering an entire village for the act of a few men.

    The difference is that Anakin is more sympathetic of a character. For one, Anakin had snapped after his mother died and probably suffered from a lack of good judgment. We sympathise the pain that he was going through. Secondly, Anakin showed remorse afterwards. SOmething that the Tuskens never did.

    But sympathy doesn't excuse the wrongful conduct. Sympathy and Anakin's ability to show remorse goes only to mitigating the punishment that Anakin should have received for his actions.
  4. gezvader28 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 22, 2003
    star 4
    Mixza
    His mom was dead. Anakin was hurt and angry. He was not thinking rationally.

    ...what?
    Hang on, let's look back at what you've said previously:

    >>> Mixza -" But I believe he was justified, because he had good reasons to do what he did."

    Gez - "What 'good reasons' did he have for slaughtering children? "

    Mixza " Dead mom, Dark Side, uncontrollable rage..."

    Gez -" "Dead mom" - how is that a 'good reason' for killing children? "

    Mixza - "His mom was dead. Anakin was hurt and angry. He was not thinking rationally." <<<

    If he's irrational then how can that be a 'good reason' for killing children? Irrational thought is the oppositte of good reason.

    And - How can you offer 'not thinking rationally' as justification for killing children?

    g
  5. gezvader28 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 22, 2003
    star 4
    Jen X- Err, what sentence have I typed which should end with "who tortured his mother to death".

    A_G - The one that says "Anakin slaughtered children".


    Only if someone knew that the children tortured Anakin's mother to death could they say that.
    You don't know that they did that and yet you have the nerve to tell someone else they should say it. [/shakes head]

    Anakina Jade You "assumed" that if your own mother had been tortured and killed, you would've killed the Tuskens. So you're also "assuming you know what you would do in a situation you have never been in.

    A_G - Now who is misconstruing whose statements (not to mention calling another TF.N user a "hypocrite")?


    ?[face_plain] But you've already said you'd do it, a few days ago you said :
    "I would have done the same thing in his shoes. "

    And you've previously said how you cheered him on.

    I'm also not elevating myself above someone else by making that statement. I am being empathetic, which is a good quality, rather than judgmental, which is a bad one.

    And yet you conclude that the children tortured Shmi when there's no evidence of it. But hey, you're not judgemental are you. ;)

    g
  6. FuzzyRatt Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 16, 2003
    star 3
    Well, it is nice to see how warm and fuzzy it is in here. 8-}


    Just one note on the whole "Anakin: The Child Slaughter" bit.


    "They're animals! and I slaughtered them like animals. And not just the men, but the women and the children."


    Sounds pretty streight forward to me.




    I still feel that Anakin was right to kill the men for what they did to Shmi, but I believe that Anakin was wrong for kill the whole village.




    By the By: From what I saw in ANH, I feel I am proven currect. :D
  7. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    By the By: From what I saw in ANH, I feel I am proven currect

    And I wonder if people would feel so strongly against Anakin if they didn't have the OT to show what he becomes.

    People have come to love to hate Darth Vader, therefore, they want him to be bad, and unsympathetic--even as Anakin Skywalker.

    Maybe that's why I see things differently--the last time I hated the guy was about halfway through my first viewing of ESB back in 1980, just before he first tells Luke, "I am your father." After that, I thought, "This guy isn't just your average villian. There is something more to him than this." I didn't come to love him the way I do today until the end of ROTJ in 1983, but I stopped hating him in 1980.
  8. FuzzyRatt Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 16, 2003
    star 3
    "they want him to be bad"

    And how!

    Vader is my second favorite villain of all times. Second only to Ming. He is great .


    I guess my biggest problem is that I don't the way GL is handling the transformation of Anakin Skywalker to Darth Vader.

    In TPM we get Ani. He is a warm, caring, and giving person. Who risked his live more than once to help people he barely knows.

    In ATOC we get Anakin. He has change to a self centered person. His mean focus in the story is his obbession with Padme. He has grow to almost hate Obi-Wan. Believes that he is always right. The change form Ani to Anakin is to great. We are not shown enough between the films to explain it. It is just poorly done.

    Now, we only have one film to get from Anakin to Darth Vader. The road is still to long.

    If you think I don't like it now, check back in June 2005 and see what I posting then. ;)
  9. TrueJedi Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 22, 2000
    star 5
    The only good good Tusken is a dead Tusken.

    I would highly support the experimemation of the Tuskin until they can be turned into Urai-kai. That way they will be a great fighing force for the third group of force that is fighting for power in the universe.
  10. FuzzyRatt Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 16, 2003
    star 3
    YES! At long last, I have done it. I have killed the Tuskens vs. Anakin debate.








    I win. They're all EVIL!!!
    [face_devil]
  11. Lady_Sami_J_Kenobi Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 31, 2002
    star 6
    Fuzzy,

    Only because a_g is on vacation until the 18th. Then I suspect the thread will once again be a hotbed of debate.

    On bringing up the scenes from the book, when Anakin tosses the boulder into the hut filled with Tuskens, it is mentioned that he saw a group of them running for the hut, so he had to have seen children in the group and had to have known that there were children in that hut.

    I think that what we were supposed to take from the massacre was that Anakin crossed the line and later regretted it. It also is meant to illustrate his tasting of dark side power, altho the film does little to convey his feelings of power and strength. It also does a poor job of conveying his confusion at where this power came from.

  12. FuzzyRatt Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 16, 2003
    star 3
    What a buzz kill, Lady Sami. :(


    Could you not just let me live in the dream world a little long? 8-}
  13. Admiral_Lobot Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 16, 2004
    star 1
    Tuscans are nonsentient savages. They do not deserve the slightest bit of mercy. They are animals, and should be dealt with as such.
  14. Lord_Hydronium Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 11, 2002
    star 5
    Tuscans are nonsentient savages...They are animals, and should be dealt with as such.

    Incorrect. Regardless of what you may think of them, they are clearly sentient: they have a language, they make and use tools, they can make shelter, they can domesticate banthas, and they live in organized tribal units.
  15. Sarahthenerd Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 30, 2003
    star 1
    Thoughts(have been reading through this thread again):

    Most SW characters are 'murderers', when you think about it. Obi-Wan killed Maul, Mace killed Jango, Luke killed those guards at Jabba's palace, Han killed Greedo (please...let's not get into that :D ), Leia killed Jabba, etc etc etc. It doesn't necessarily make them bad, wrong, or evil. Anakin, it seems, is only different because he killed the children as well, whether or not he knew what he was doing. (I'm not so sure he did, but never mind...) But the Tusken men (or most of them, at least...I suppose it's possible that one or two of them wouldn't have taken part in the murderings/torture, although I'm not sure how) more than deserved to die. (Seriously...that thing with the wire in the novel squicked me out big time) Actually, now that I think about it, for all we know, the Tusken women could have actively participated in the torture...we don't have any way of knowing. They remain pretty much mysterious. Heck, maybe that's why people post in support in them...they're fascinated by these evil guys, and want to know more about them. I mean, why not? It's a different universe...

    Anyway, the fact that the characters I mentioned are 'murderers' by the dictionary definition doesn't necessarily make any of those characters bad guys or bad role models...not even Anakin. Because he was geniunely sorry about it afterwards, and I do think if he could go back in time with knowledge of what he'd done before he'd have left the children alone. He doesn't want to hate them. That's the impression I got anyway. He was in pain. If he'd just shrugged it off and said 'Well, the kids and babies would've grown up to be evil anyway, so it was a good thing I killed them, etc etc.' Everyone's always saying that someone else 'forgets' one of the important things about this scene, whether it's the fact that Shmi was tortured or that the kids died...my own contribution is 'everyone forgets how much agony Anakin was in afterwards! He was crying!'(note: that wasn't a rant. Honest. Something between a joke and an observation) He wasn't a hero for killing them...far from it...but neither is he totally a villain. And to go back to what I was saying somewhere up there about Obi-Wan and Luke and everyone being murderers but not murderers, maybe Anakin is a 'child-killer' by the dictionary definition but not by the whole meaning of the thing. If you understood that, good...cause I'm not even convinced I do. :D

    And now I've had a thought: I love Luke, but there were about a thousand other ways he could've gotten rid of those guards. Did he use them? Nope, he just chokes them. It does make me wonder why no-one ever brings that up...both acts are meant to show that the person doing them is falling towards the dark side, except Luke is falling a lot more slowly, he didn't kill nearly as many people and none of them were kids, and he wasn't so angry while doing it...okay, quite a few differences, but still...

    Hence, why I think Anakin killing the Tuskens wasn't evil...very wrong, but not evil. And able to come back again and next time not kill those who didn't deserve it if someone was taken from him. And he could have if not for frickin' Palpatine. :mad:

    From the other side: if someone I knew was hanging out with murderers/guys who'd just watched a murder happen and done nothing (and didn't know) and was killed in someone's revenge attack because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time...then I would probably go and kill the revenge guy too. I think. If he said he was sorry and begged for forgiveness...I don't know. And if I killed him it would probably never stop. Unless someone decided 'The people I've lost wouldn't want me killing in revenge, so I won't/I hate them, but killing them will just lead to more deaths/etc." Maybe this is the sort of situation you can't judge unless you've been in (and I hope no-one here ever is in that situation) but whoever said AOTC had no depth was misinformed or lying.

    Third-to-last po
  16. mixza Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 28, 2004
    star 4
    All excellent points, Sarahthenerd. *gives her a cookie*

    Han or somebody said that Anakin wasn't born with a mask.

    Luke: "Leia, he was just a boy. Do you think he came out of the womb wearing a breather and black helmet?"

    Leia: "The thought had crossed my mind."
  17. Sarahthenerd Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 30, 2003
    star 1
    Ah yes, that's it. Luke, not Han. Thanks. :D
  18. jedi_master_ousley Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 14, 2002
    star 8
    By the moral standards of the Star Wars Galaxy, the Jedi, and civilized earth cultures, yes, the Tuskens are "bad."
  19. Jedi_Bant Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 13, 2004
    star 1
    It is clear to me that in the saga, we are not supposed to sympathize with the Tuskens. They attack Luke in ANH to rob him and maim him and Ben rescues Luke only by playing on their own cowardice. They threw stones at the racers at the Boonta Eve Classic and cause a couple of them to crash. They kidnap, and tortured Shmi as part of a coming-of-age ritual, which implies that Shmi was not their first victim, nor was she their last and they killed the farmers that went to rescue her. So it?s very easy to just label ?Bad? on the Tuskens and we are not given any reason to think that there are exceptions amongst them?
  20. gezvader28 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 22, 2003
    star 4
    By the moral standards of the Star Wars Galaxy, the Jedi, and civilized earth cultures, yes, the Tuskens are "bad."

    All of them?

    g
  21. jedi_master_ousley Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 14, 2002
    star 8
    As a generalization, yes. The Tuskens who captured and tortured Shmi were definitely "bad," and any Tuskens who supported the torture or saw it as just something they do would fall under "bad" as well, because they are doing nothing to stop the torture.

    Within the Tusken society, of course, they all see what they are doing as right.

    But by our standards, it is wrong.
  22. Lord_Hydronium Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 11, 2002
    star 5
    It is clear to me that in the saga, we are not supposed to sympathize with the Tuskens.

    Except that Lucas specifically added in the women and children for a reason. Now, I agree that we're not supposed to sympathize with the males who tortured Shmi (and nobody is). But the women and children are not in there just to show where little Tuskens come from. They are there to add a moral twist to Anakin's actions - if he just killed men we'd probably support him all the way (and missed the point that this is the first step towards the Dark Side), but with women and children involved we can sympathize with them, and see Anakin's actions in the light they were intended for - those of a guy who's going to become Vader very soon. He's not Vader yet (thus, he regrets what he did later), but he's definitely on his way there.

    As a generalization, yes. The Tuskens who captured and tortured Shmi were definitely "bad," and any Tuskens who supported the torture or saw it as just something they do would fall under "bad" as well, because they are doing nothing to stop the torture.

    But that just covers the Tuskens in that tribe that Anakin slaughtered. Can you truly say that because these few Tuskens did something horrible, that means that every single Tusken on Tatooine is bad? If you think you can, does this generalize to Earth cultures? Is any society only as good as its worst members?
  23. SHB-JR Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 18, 2000
    star 4
    Once again- listen to the GL commentary in AOTC.
    GL clearly states killing the Tuskens takes Anakin on the path to the darkside. That it is the wrong thing for him to do. If ALL Tusken's were evil, how could there be any wrong in killing them all as Anakin does ?
    Surely if they were all evil he would have been drawn closer to the light side for having vanquished evil. For having dealt rightous justice ?

    But he isn't- and the fact that his action is wrong means there must be value- to the Force- in the lives of the Tuskens, and in the idea that they aren't ALL bad. Forget the justifcations for his act- look how the Force views it. It and it alone is impartial.
    It views Anakins actions as wrong. And so does GL,who knew what his intent was when he wrote the scene.

    In the face of the words of SW creator, and backed by the judgement of his story mechanic (The Force) that determines right and wrong it was an evil act.

    And if it was an evil act ALL the Tuskens couldn't have been evil, because why would the Force have 'judged' against Anakin if he was destroying evil?
    It would be like saying every Jedi went to the darkside when they killed evil beings or even just wild creatures- which of course doesn't happen.
    Otherwise, with all the whomp rats Luke killed, he'd be blacker than sin by the time of ANH !! ;)

    The fact that the Force see's it as wrong makes the Tuskens not animals and not ALL bad.
    It's not just about his (Anakins)angry intent.
    Otherwise he'd have gotten a step closer to the darkside if he's just hacked a brace of trees or fungus on a vaporator in his rage.

    Is anyone going to be silly enough to suggest that ?


    Oh and GL says it is bad too. ;) GL speaks of 'the pain of Anakin *and* the Tuskens' that Yoda feels. He's clearly talking emotional pain. So that puts paid to all the Tuskens are non-sentient or animal ideas. they feel emotional pain that Yoda can sense along with Anakins.

    While I don't always support what GL says, it's backed up by story mechanic in this case.

    Thank you come again !!

    SHB JR
    Don't you love commentaries ?
  24. FutureEmperor Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 15, 1998
    star 3
    For one, Anakin didn't hold all Tusken tribes responsible, merely that village.

    Secondly, the actions and culpability of a tribal village are judged far differently than a massive industrial modern society. For instance, you could have millions of people in the USSR or in North Korea that want to have some measure of freedom and are NOT responsible for what a person in power does.

    but in Tusken-land, you have what--30-50 individuals, all actively planning and participating in their 'kidnappings" and tortures and murders. What many forget is that in such societies, women are given teh task to finish enemies on the field of battle or cut trophies from their bodies. They also are often given the task of pilfering the goods from the corpses. The women are not innocent of the crimes of their males--they are as much a part of their primitive little society as anyone.

    Tuskens are not born "Evil" though they may have great inherent capacity towards violence, but their actions are evil and thus make them targets for reprisal.

    As for the whole "stealing land" business I don't even buy that for a minute. Tuskens seem to be semi-nomadic(as most desert societies would be) and emulate the Arab raiders of centuries ago in tactics and lifestyle. They don't have claim to land that they don't utilize or even live on. They also, despite whatever issues, don't have a reason to go on killing and TORTURING people who did them no direct harm.

    If anything, Tuskens remind me of brutal jihadis who pretty much kill and hate anything that isn't them. You can make up all the justification you want, but in the end--it's not about what you do, but about what they do and about the stories they tell themselves in their culture to justify it.

  25. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    Only because a_g is on vacation until the 18th. Then I suspect the thread will once again be a hotbed of debate.

    Lady_Sami: Does it give you great pleasure to take potshots at my character when I'm not around to defend myself? :mad:

    I only checked here to see whether or not this ridiculous thread was still going--against my better judgement, obviously.

    I don't think it's me that's making this place a "hotbed of debate". I can tell you what it is: it's people being eager to defend beings that tortured an innocent woman to death. I have said all I can on the subject--if people want to continue to make the Tuskens appear as innocent as Ewoks, there is nothing I can do to stop them--obviously. And as one of my friends was kind enough to remind me, a few people on the other side post pro-Tusken stuff just because they get some thrill out of pissing me off--I'm not taking the bait anymore. I'll check the thread and my PMs for your response, but don't dare accuse me of trying to make this place a "hotbed of debate". That's like posting a thread in the Senate Floor that says "Is Hitler All Bad?" then getting your panties in a wad when someone states that yes, as a matter of fact, he most certainly was.

    they feel emotional pain that Yoda can sense along with Anakins.

    Since they tortured an innocent woman to death for sport, I sure as hell hope they feel some emotional pain. I'd like to make them feel a bit more of it.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.