1. Welcome to the new boards! Details here!

Speculation Balance to the Force - plotline continuation in Episode 7

Discussion in 'Star Wars: Episode VII and Beyond (Archive)' started by Darth_Darkmoon, Nov 1, 2012.

  1. Lord Tyrannus

    Lord Tyrannus Jedi Padawan star 4

    Oct 18, 2012
    You made an interesting, paradoxical observation. In the films, Anakin's role was to destroy the Sith order. I mean, the chosen one is not supposed to destroy the entire darkside, the darkside of the force is a part of nature and always exists, but he has to defeat the evil people who use it. And not all darksiders, just the Sith Order. The reason is, they are the main predominant darkside group that's causing all the trouble. So, in the film story, not fanfic ideas, anakin is the chosen one because he ends the Bane sith order. With both sith either dead or converted to the light at the end of Episode 6, no one is there to continue the cycle of the Rule or two, no sith exist anymore.

    If you really think about it, the prophecy of the Chosen One seems kinda violent, you know?

    As I'll get too soon, I'll explain a plot hole in the Chosen One idea in the movies.

    Here's the explanation for anakin's conception, as you asked. from the SW wiki. It had to be plageius involved somehow. I mean, why would Lucas put that in there for no reason? But that makes no sense either. Plageius was a sith legend. He was around thousands of years before ROTS. Legends are old stories. How could he have been around to create anakin?

    Nearly a decade before his death, the Sith Lord, Darth Plagueis, and his apprentice, Darth Sidious, committed an act that directly violated the nature of the Force. To advance their plan for galactic domination, the two Sith attempted to will a being of their own design into existence, pouring their abhorrent intent into waves through the Force to the countless midi-chlorians that were spread throughout the galaxy. The experiment failed, however, and the midi-chlorians, not willing to obey, not only frustrated Plagueis' attempts, but countered in reprisal, conceiving a child within the slave Shmi Skywalker.[9]
    Skywalker's mother claimed that her son was conceived without a father, but could not explain how that had happened. It was the theory of Jedi Master Qui-Gon Jinn that the will of the Force caused his birth.[10]
    Wasn't Palpatine immortal? Or was he gonna die anyway? So no need for a chosen one.

    How was Anakin the only one who could do it? Are you telling me, that if Qui gon never freed anakin from tattoine, the Sith would rule the galaxy and destroy dozens of planets, for all eternity? Millions of years? What? So, without anakin, it couldnt be done?

    Well, windu was just about to defeat the sith, before anakin stopped him.

    Plot holes.

    I'll admit, your ideas are pretty good though. George Lucas made a story filled with plot holes and a convoluted plot points that he didn't explain. The only problem is, he never explained the plot holes to fans.
  2. GeneralCeel

    GeneralCeel Jedi Padawan star 2

    Nov 4, 2005
    Deleted scene.... but a good point. I'm going to assume that if they survived the Clone Wars they probably didn't respond to the distress signal and return to the temple... so in theory some should be out there...
  3. Chewbacca89

    Chewbacca89 Jedi Master star 5

    Oct 25, 2012
    I like the analogy of the see-saw. I woul be ok with anakin balancing out the force, but just temporarily...
  4. Lord Tyrannus

    Lord Tyrannus Jedi Padawan star 4

    Oct 18, 2012
    Anakin is not supposed to bring entire balance. He's not supposed to destroy all darksiders. Or the darkside itself. Just one order of darksiders-the Sith, the most, dangeros, powerful, evil ones that could exist for millenia or eternity if the 2 master and apprentices arent defeated.

    One thing I didnt like about the Chosen One in the movies was that the prophecy was way too violent.
  5. the_sinister_hologram

    the_sinister_hologram Jedi Knight star 3

    Nov 3, 2012
    I admit, I've never really looked at it from this perspective.
    So from this I understand that in case one of Luke's apprentices goes rogue, he won't become a Sith, just a...fallen Jedi, who has embraced the Dark Side, but doesn't follow the Sith tradition or teachings.

    If we are going to consider the EU, there are places such as Korriban with tombs of dead Sith Lords, filled with dark energies which also most likely contain their teachings and remains of the Sith philosophy. What would happen if one of the post-ROTJ era Jedi/fallen Jedi discover one of these places and get corrupted by them. Would that technically make them Sith?
  6. Legacy Jedi Endordude

    Legacy Jedi Endordude Jedi Knight star 3

    Sep 9, 2012
    I always thought of the chosen one wasn't about destroying the Sith once and for all, but about balancing the force. Because I mean, thousands of Jedi vs. 2 Sith is a bit unbalanced wouldn't you say? That makes the most sense to me.
  7. Garth Maul

    Garth Maul Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    May 18, 2002
    It's NOT equal numbers. It's about the effect the Sith have on the Force and the galaxy.
    Jedi Merkurian likes this.
  8. the-jedi-prince

    the-jedi-prince Jedi Knight star 2

    Jun 2, 2011
    maybe after rotj the jedi in surviving come out of hiding
  9. TaradosGon

    TaradosGon Manager Emeritus star 5 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Feb 28, 2003
    Garth Maul is correct.

    It has nothing to do with the numbers of Force users. In the Darth Plagueis novel, Plagueis and Sidious push the Force out of balance. The Force being out of balance was not something inherently caused by the Dark Side (though prior EU disagrees). It was something that the Sith consciously carried out and the consequences of the Force being out of balance in favor of the Dark Side was that it diminished the ability of the Jedi to tap into the lightside. The Jedi, despite numbering in the thousands, were at a disadvantage. It has nothing to do with the number of Sith or Jedi. Mace says that the ability of the Jedi to use the Force had diminished in AOTC, and it was due to the imbalance.

    The Force being back in balance does not mean that the Dark Side doesn't remain or that Jedi cannot fall to the Dark Side or that the Sith cannot return. The Sith returning does not necessarily mean that the Force will be put out of balance again.The Force seemed to be in balance for the first 900+ years that the Sith were in hiding, if it is not actually pushed out of balance until Plagueis and Sidious do so.
    Marcus-Kinn likes this.
  10. ShaneP

    ShaneP Ex-Mod Officio star 7 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Mar 26, 2001
    The sith unbalance the Force through their actions, not by their numbers.

    Think of the Force as a river. It flows freely. Now, picture a sith as a dam. They stop the flow of the Force because they use and draw more power away from their surroundings as much as they use of their own. They want more to themselves.

    So they unbalance the Force because they don't let it flow freely. They use it for their own selfish ends.

    So one sith can = unbalance.
  11. jedimikey

    jedimikey Jedi Padawan star 2

    Oct 21, 2012
    No. Enough with that "bringing balance to the Force" ballyhoo. I would like a NEW story, please. That business ended when Palpy finally bit the dust. The Force is fine, now, thankyouverymuch.
    Sitara likes this.
  12. ShaneP

    ShaneP Ex-Mod Officio star 7 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Mar 26, 2001
    If the Force is fine now then how do you suggest you top the Force being unbalanced and helping ushering in a new dark age?

    How do you top it?

    Remember, this third trilogy will now be regarded as the third act. Those are the climax of the story.
    I guess you could better Peter Jackson and have a entire trilogy of endings. SIX HOURS of denouements.
  13. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Force Ghost star 7

    Jul 2, 2004
    Lucas never described the natural state of the Force as being the light side. Whether you're looking at the early pre-ANH scripts, the production of the OT, or statements released during the PT years, Lucas has been completely consistent on this point. Lucas envisions the Force as dualistic in its natural state; the Force in its natural state has two sides. In Lucas' own words they both need to be there, which is precisely what the Father says in Mortis. The OT referred to the sides of the Force right from the very start. However, a significant portion of the fan base rejects the concept of a two-sided Force in its natural state. As a result, the balance plotline of the PT is interpreted to mean that a Force which is all light side is "in balance". This is nonsense; all of one thing and none of the other is hardly balance. It is, in fact, the exact opposite of what the definition of balance is supposed to mean. Wookieepedia may continue to promote the myth of the naturally one-sided Force, in part because of erroneous sources like the JATM, but this has never been Lucas' view, and various EU sources including Cloak of Deception, Revan, and Darth Plagueis state outright that the balance of the Force is a balance between the light and dark sides.

    The imbalance first started due to the actions of Tenebrous' master, but it can be said that the actions of Plagueis and Sidious significantly deepened it.
  14. GeneralCeel

    GeneralCeel Jedi Padawan star 2

    Nov 4, 2005
    "Too much black and white morality"

    Star Wars is a classic morality play. Its not post modern. Its represents the ideal, not the real. See Nolan's Batman for that.
    Jedi Merkurian likes this.
  15. TaradosGon

    TaradosGon Manager Emeritus star 5 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Feb 28, 2003
    I don't blame them. Pull any passerby off the street and ask them if they think the Dark Side in the Star Wars tale is some essential thing that the Jedi were trying to preserve, I'd wager they would go with the erroneous belief. If Lucas meant anything else (which I am aware that he did), then I would give that up to bad story telling on his part, at least in this case. A story shouldn't rely on extensive behind the scenes interviews, spinoff novels and TV shows to clarify what he meant. You have to distinguish between Sith and Dark Side, but the word Sith never crops up in the OT. Vader is simply referred to as a Jedi that was seduced by the Dark Side, which in the black and white morality play of Star Wars is depicted as bad. When Luke distinguishes the "good side" from the "bad," Yoda makes no attempt to step in and remedy Luke's arrogance if the Dark Side is not actually some bad thing but an essential part of the Force. There's no mention of restoring balance to the Force or anything like that.

    It's a tale of the Light Side/Freedom Fighters overcoming Dark Side/Evil Empire. Nobody is there telling Luke that he must establish balance, or telling him that the Dark Side that the Sith follow is actually an essential part of a dual nature of the Force. The Dark Side is simply depicted as something bad and all that follow it are depicted as evil and those evil people are killed by the heroes.

    "That place… is strong with the dark side of the Force. A domain of evil it is. In you must go."

    The prophecy thing just all of a sudden gets dropped in the fourth movie released and still it's not elaborated on to any great extent. Simply that the Force must be balanced and Anakin is the one to do it. It is not even stated that the balance is between the light side and dark side, which leaves wiggle room for people to conjure images like ShaneP did with the idea of a river and the Sith/Dark Side disrupting it. Ignoring any behind the scenes material and only going by what's on screen, that kind of interpretation sounds just as reasonable as anything else, perhaps even more so, since it accounts for how Jedi that reject the Dark Side and stick to a light side ideology are triumphing over evil and somehow achieving balance despite rejecting one side of the Force and fighting those that embrace it.

    Anakin even gets ready to pounce on Palpatine when he mentions that his knowledge of the Force extends to the Dark Side, as though to know the Dark Side is to know some kind of forbidden black magic. And Palpatine's spiel about knowing both sides of the Force and embracing a larger view seems like it would be encouraged if the Dark Side is a natural side of the Force that exists in balance with the light side.

    I'm aware of Lucas' view on the matter. But IMO if the ST is going to continue the idea of Balance or continue on with the Prophecy, then they need to address explicitly the nature of the Force. Not continue on in the vaguest of descriptions and depicting the Dark Side as being synonymous with evil, having the evil Sith be its followers, and having the Sith be sworn enemies of the Light Side Jedi that are trying to destroy them and somehow achieve balance in their "narrow dogmatic view" that excludes learning of the Dark Side... Only to turn around and describe it as yin and yang behind the scenes, since the closest description of the Force in that way comes from Sidious who is immediately identified as a villain.

    Light vs. Dark/good vs. evil in the OT is about as black and white as the Fellowship vs. the Forces of the Dark Lord Sauron. The prequels, despite introducing the phrase "balance of the Force" seemed no different to me. Even Mortis, aside from one throw away line about too much dark or light being bad, shows no tangible result as to how the Dark Side can yield good or how too much Light Side is bad. And in the end the Son that represents the Dark Side is the villain that has to die.
  16. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Force Ghost star 7

    Jul 2, 2004
    :rolleyes: Oh, this again. First of all, this is nothing more than a valueless appeal to majority even if true. But I see no reason to assume this "wager" is correct. Here we are in RLM territory once more: "the man on the street obviously agrees with me". And I don't think the Jedi worry much about preserving the dark side. As a part of the Force, its existence goes along with the existence of the Force. They don't try to preserve it because they don't need to; what they try to preserve is the balance.

    It doesn't. Plenty of people understood Lucas' concept of the Force just from the films themselves. This includes some random people unfamiliar with EU as well as certain EU authors. Those EU authors who first expressed a dualistic view of the Force did not rely on "extensive behind the scenes interviews, spinoff novels and TV shows". Their view was based on the impression they got from the OT films. A naturally dualistic concept of the Force is not bad storytelling just because some people don't want to accept it. Given that the OT speaks explicitly of multiple sides of the Force, the concept that the Force naturally has more than one side is certainly no less reasonable an interpretation than the alternative.

    The implication of mutual exclusivity here is invalid. The dark side is no less an essential part of the Force by virtue of being called the "bad" side in this instance. The Force is described as an energy field generated by life. It is not said to be something which only represents "good". As something generated by life, it should in theory reflect both good and bad, because the life generating the Force is assuredly not purely good in nature.

    Because the concept hadn't been invented yet.

    By the same token, no one is there telling him that the dark side is not an essential part of the Force. No one is telling him that he must destroy the dark side itself. No one is telling him that the dark side can or should be destroyed.

    It is now. In any event, the balance being between the light side and the dark side is a logical conclusion which one may arrive at when obvious non-starters such as "Jedi-Sith head count" are discarded. Attempts to make the balance plotline work in the context of a one-sided Force were somewhat desperate and irrational.

    This does not follow. The dark side being a natural part of the Force does not mean that it would be a good idea for Jedi to use it. It does not have to have the same characteristics as the light side.

    Once again, in the use of the phrase "turn around", we have an implication of mutual exclusivity that does not really exist. Nothing in the above is inconsistent. You say the dark side is identified with evil. Evil is part of the yin/yang of existence. You cannot eliminate the sapient capacity for evil. But a relatively small group of dark side sorcerors? They can be eliminated. That's why the films speak of ( and depict ) the elimination of the Sith, but no one ever talks about eliminating the dark side. The Sith are not the dark side, no matter how often people may wish to conflate the two.
  17. TaradosGon

    TaradosGon Manager Emeritus star 5 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Feb 28, 2003
    That doesn't mean that the Dark Side has any kind of value. Or that the concept of yin and yang adds anything. You can't eliminate a person's capacity for evil; that doesn't warrant any kind of metaphysical commentary nor is it a theme of the films. It's a tale of good vs. evil, black and white. And the idea of "balancing" good and evil carries with it a completely different connotation than fighting evil wherever it is and upholding that which is right, what the Jedi do. Yoda never sits down with Luke and tells him that the Force exists as two parts and that without one life could not exist or that the capacity for evil in the universe has some role to play in life. Instead Yoda and Obi-Wan put the idea forth that the Dark Side is a corrupting influence that destroys a person's sense of good and from which they can never be redeemed and that warrants their death. You don't get that lecture about the Dark Side having its place in the universe until the Father says it three seasons into a TV show - the show itself seeming like an afterthought for Lucas while working on ROTS. And that very arc establishes that too much goodness/selflessness is bad if there isn't selfishness/evil to balance it, and that is never given any kind of example nor that idea really having any kind of relationship to the films.

    The Jedi abstain from the Dark Side, remain compassionate to all life but not attached, and fight evil wherever it is in the Republic (at least in theory) and bring it to justice. They are completely anti-thetical to the Sith which bring about imbalance in favor of the Dark Side. The Sith can no more destroy a person's capacity for good any more so than the Jedi can destroy a capacity for evil. The end of ROTJ showed that there was no shortage of good people in the galaxy despite over two decades of oppression and fear. How one brings imbalance by following the Dark Side, while its antithesis brings balance by following the Light Side doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If they are two sides of the same coin, then choosing one side should be no better than the other. The Sith choose one side and are bad, the Jedi choose the other and are good. Dark Side is imbalance, Light Side is balance. That doesn't exactly fit with Mortis and the idea that both need to be present for balance.

    The "erroneous" take of some EU that the light side is the natural state of the Force makes more sense. The Light Side serves all equally (and that could be the "balance") while the Dark Side favors the selfish. I find it curious that Lucas would even put forth the idea that the Dark Side can lead to unnatural abilities, if it is part of a natural balance.The alternative interpretation that the Jedi imbalance the Force just as much in favor of the Light Side as the Sith do in favor of the Dark Side and that the prior must be destroyed as well to bring balance also seems reasonable. Son and Daughter were followers of the Dark and Light sides respectively, and balance was only maintained while both lived or both died.

    Seems like after however many years of a Jedi Order advocating the Light Side and suppressing evil - and being the exact opposite of the Sith - should warrant a Dark Side Chosen One to restore the balance. If the Force is a duality that struggles for balance and prefers the scale tipped in neither direction, then it seems like it should aim to see-saw back and forth until balance can either be achieved through co-existence of both ideologies into a philosophy that neither Jedi nor Sith advocate, or mutual destruction.
  18. Fleab88

    Fleab88 Jedi Master star 4

    Sep 12, 2012
    Some people say Lucas said Anakin restored balance by destroying the Sith and evil for good (You actually need to read between the lines to get that, and Lucas said a lot of things that he changed his mind on.) It really would not be that difficult to give ne meaning to the balance issue in this trilogy because the in movie universe has still left that issue entirely up in the air. Literally anything Lucas said off camera can be changed, and not in anyway conflict with the story.
  19. Greedoliveson

    Greedoliveson Jedi Youngling

    Feb 15, 2012
    With the Empire all but destroyed and no known Sith left, maybe Bounty Hunters could be the new enemy?
  20. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Force Ghost star 7

    Jul 2, 2004
    The primary opponent for the Jedi in the films is the major evil represented by the Sith and later by the Empire. In any era there are far too few Jedi to defeat all evil present in the galaxy. Thus if the Sith/Empire are defeated, evil is prevented from completely taking over, not eliminated. So these allegedly different connotations are really one and the same.

    Yoda has a conversation with Luke that directly refers to the sides of the Force. Never is it said that the existence of either side is optional. Similarly, it is never suggested that the capacity for evil in the universe is something that can be gotten rid of.

    You don't get it explicitly in the films, but you get it from Lucas well before ROTS or Mortis.

    There are several problems with that assumption. First, Sith don't bring imbalance merely by following the dark side; we know that the imbalance results from certain Sith having directly altered the condition of the Force. Also, if we suppose that a given Sith represents a threat to the balance of the Force, then that Sith's destruction by the antithetical sworn enemy of the Sith would be an act which promotes balance.

    That's because "dark side is imbalance, light side is balance" does not literally make sense given that the balance is between the light and dark sides. Both need to be present for balance because having one and not the other is about as unbalanced as you can get. Because the dark side is poised to take over in the film era, the adherents of the light side are aligned with balance.

    This tries to convert the imbalance from a one-dimensional quantity to a two-dimensional quantity, which does not work. It is not said anywhere that the Jedi unbalance the Force in the direction of the light. In fact, despite the presence of thousands of Jedi, we know that the Force is unbalanced toward the dark in the prequel timeframe.

    Don't confuse "balance" in Mortis with the balance of the Force. The Force was out of balance when both lived; the Force was still out of balance after both had died.

    It's the balance of the Force, not the balance of the ideologies or the balance of Jedi and Sith. Replace the balance of the Force with the balance of other things and you're no longer talking about the same quantity. Well before there was ever a Mortis or a CWAS, Lucas made it clear that the balance is restored due to the destruction of the Sith, at a point when the Jedi ideology lives on.
  21. EviL_eLF

    EviL_eLF Force Ghost star 5

    Mar 16, 2003
    The force has a light side and a dark side. Light cannot exist without dark. Jedi cannot exist without Sith. It's an eternal duality.
  22. DRush76

    DRush76 Jedi Master star 4

    Jan 25, 2008
    I thought that the Sith Order was originally created by a rogue Jedi Master. If that is the case, isn't it possible that the Jedi and the Sith are two sides of one coin? What is the point of them trying to destroy one another, when it never works out in the long run? Why can't they accept the idea of co-existence?
  23. EviL_eLF

    EviL_eLF Force Ghost star 5

    Mar 16, 2003
    Because it's an eternal struggle for dominance that is in their basic nature.
  24. Keeper_of_Swords

    Keeper_of_Swords Jedi Master star 5

    Sep 20, 2003
    I highly suspect there will be Sith warriors in Episode 7. It will be interesting to see a kind of 'other established order' of Sith in the new movies..not that the rule of 2 thing wasn't interesting, but in the movies Palpatine was always the puppet master. A new villain will be interesting indeed
  25. Chief_Spirit_of_Evil

    Chief_Spirit_of_Evil Jedi Youngling

    Oct 27, 2005
    I think balance was achieved. Now it's just a case of how to maintain that properly.
    The PT Jedi didn't know how. Luke showed a new way and must now pass on what he has learned.
    Same goes with the Republic. It was restored but now must be made to work correctly and not be corrupted.
    It is these philosophical and moral issues that the ST will be based on in my humble opinion.