PT Did Anakin Betray The Force? I Say No.

The prequels do not actually tell us outright that the Force did this by itself. It is implied, through the suggestion of one of the characters that the midichlorians did it, but in another prequel it is suggested that the Sith may have been responsible by influencing the midichlorians. The last "official" word on the subject was that either alternative is viable.

That such a life could be created by either supernatural means is something that only the prequels tell us. And any mention of a prophecy that only Anakin could fulfill is completely absent from the originals.

Destroying the Death Star is not the same thing as destroying Palpatine. We see in ROTJ that the Emperor had an escape shuttle, which he would have gotten to a lot faster than Luke did, because he wouldn't have been dragging an armored Vader.
We see in ROTJ that Palpatine was aboard a doomed space station regardless of what Vader did or didn't do.

Actually, it is. This idea is a part of many of the religious/philosophical traditions which SW draws on. This is adequately demonstrated by The Masks of God, a book which Lucas read while creating the saga and which is shown in the Empire of Dreams documentary. Balance means both sides of the Force are present.

Also absent from the originals is this idea of balance. The one idea that is ubiquitous is the necessity of destroying the Empire because of how destructive it is. Nobody ever says "The Force needed this Empire to be there." Nobody says anything about the Dark Side being a necessary complement to the good side. So no, balance is you define it is not part of the Force, in either trilogy. That's like saying a balanced diet includes a lump of poison for breakfast.
And once again, despite your definition of balance, you cling to Anakin begint he Chosen One, when he was only a single resource used in a plan that was actually planned and brought to fruition by Palpatine, who accomplished quite a bit without Anakin's help.

But obviously Lucas thinks that Anakin was supposed to join the Sith. If he didn't, Anakin wouldn't have joined the Sith in the movie that Lucas wrote. If he didn't, what Lucas wrote Anakin doing after he joined the Sith wouldn't have fulfilled the prophecy that Lucas wrote.

Lucas wrote a movie in which he combined a pre-existing Vader with the character of Anakin's father, and only later came up with a prophecy. In so doing, he attempted to retro-fit a single act (killing Palpatine) as the fulfillment of it. That Anakin became Vader was already established continuity. It would be contrary to the entire idea of either Luke and Anakin having a choice in the matter of Anakin wqere simply constitutionally unable to doing anything without fulfilling the prophecy in the process. Essentially you are arguing "Anakin is the Chosen One. Anakin did X. Anakin can do no wrong, so X must fulfill the prophecy." Doesn't work.

 

This is a reply to the earlier asserted idea that Atheism is impossible within the world of star wars. I would argue that Atheism is simply a disbelief in a god/higher power, and so it could thrive in the GFFA. If you view the force as simply a life force which binds the universe together, it's not a 'higher' anything, it simply is. Once you add ideas like 'wills of the force' or more of an over soul concept that's somehow worth more than a single soul, then you're getting out of atheist territory. But the force itself is not against base atheist beliefs. It's simply another force of nature, albeit a mysterious and harness-able one. It's similar to those that act like atheists in the Marvel and DC universes are crazy because they've likely seen gods. That's even less justified in my opinion, because if i had seen many people just as powerful or even moreso than a supposed 'god', why would i believe that god to be true? When mortal men can be gods, God is even harder to prove. Now that's a bit off topic but does connect to this idea that supernatural activity has to somehow be connected to the existence of an afterlife or god. If Ghosts then Jesus, basically. I highly dissagree with this both as a concept that applies to fictional narrative and real life. I'm an atheist that sometimes believes in things that are not completely understandable (as of yet), but i never will believe in a god. And that's all that'd be required of a fictional atheist as well.

 

Wrong. If Vader hadn't killed him, he could have gotten off the station. He could get to a shuttle faster than Luke did in the film, given that Luke had to drag Vader. And we know Luke made it out. Lando is not the Chosen One.

Including me.

Nobody except Lucas, that is. Using the Empire and the dark side interchangeably is an invalid substitution and will get you nowhere. The Sith are not the dark side. Destroying the Empire does not mean destroying the dark side. Nobody ever says anything about destroying the dark side, either in the films or EU.

Everyone knows that the balance of the Force was not mentioned in the OT, but it was in the PT, and it is a balance between the sides of the Force. If the Force is reduced to a one-note concept there is nothing in the Force that is being balanced. Having no dark side is not balanced in any way.

Which may have something to do with the fact that both concepts ( Chosen One and balance of the Force ) were first introduced in the same exact scene, if not the same line of dialogue.

Who cares? Anakin isn't defined as the Chosen One because of what he did for Palpatine. He's defined as the Chosen One because of destroying the Sith.

 

I have struggled with this to, but you must look at the fact:

The darkside is already stronger than the lightside in the PT

This is why Sidious has such power and the Jedi's use of the Force is diminished.

The balance of the Force is determined by all living things, not the number of Jedi and Sith.

In the PT most people are unbalanced towards the dark...we see greed and selfishness on both sides of the war.

The PT Jedi are too light and as such contribute to their shadow, the Sith.

The Jedi engaging in the war pushes the galaxy further into darkness.

I don't think the PT Jedi had to be destroyed but they should have become more balanced.

In the OT the people in the galaxy come together to fight the Empire...they start to bring the balance back to the Force.

ROTJ is the first time in the saga something doesnt go according to Sidious' plans as his power is waining.

Luke is the first truly balanced Jedi we see.

 

Once again I completely agree with Arawn_Fenn on all points and to be honest I can?t really see the argument here.

The Sith are, in some uncertain way, the ?root? of the imbalance in the Force towards the Dark. The Jedi ? as established by Lucas on several occasions ? do not cause imbalance (the films even confirm this). The Force consists of a natural Light and Dark which are essential for life? the Sith cause the Dark to envelop this natural process and throw the Force into imbalance.

The Sith should be viewed as an unnatural cancer which has sprouted from the Jedi Order. They cause unnaturalness and have brought about imbalance. We have to stop seeing the Jedi as any type of imbalance causing organization.

I agree with your points completely Loupgarou, however I would just like to address this point. It really depends on what you interpret is meant by ?will of the Force?. To me, I have always thought the ?will of the Force? was the instinctive ?voice? which moves us towards balance. I always thought it, in a way, meant ?will of nature? and as such it could be interpreted as the same instinct which tells an animals to hunt, drink, etc, etc?

?if you interpret it like that the ?Will of the Force? could very much be aligned with atheism.

I have always viewed the philosophy of Star Wars to be more of an all-encompassing spirituality, which is predominantly unbiased and neutral.

 

And that's what i mean by atheism fitting in star wars as a viable belief (i don't mean Han, because he didn't believe in the force at all, i mean believing in the force but not in a higher power). Some practice buhdism as a religion, some more as a philosophy. It's a life force, not an intelligent creator nessecarily, it may have a will but that's debatable. And that's my point. A force user could believe the force is without will and is not higher. Therefore, that force user could be atheistic without ignoring facts.

 

Right from the outset you seem to be a bit off in your presumptions. Even here, at the beginning of your very first post. "Radical" ideas are usually something nobody has really ever considered. This viewpoint you've currently been arguing for has been covered many times, by many people, on many forums over the years.

And it's still erroneous.

 

One major factor that leads me to agree with the view that the Jedi were also out of balance is the obvious lack of vision on the part of the council. Qui-Gon is shown to be more of the "ideal" jedi than Yoda, because he listens to the force rather than to the dogma of the council. Similarly, Yoda and Obi-Wan believe that Vader needs to be killed, partly because of their war against the dark side, but also because they don't understand the father-son compassion that ultimately is the only thing that does bring about the fall of the sith. The Jedi were broken, and cut off from the force due their dogmatism, and Luke represents they gray zone of being driven by the Force, rather than "selfish/selfless" rules.

 

I do not think that it has ever been posited that he "betrayed" the force. The more pressing question is whether or not he actually brought balance, and when. If you take all of SW into context, it's a common mistake us fans make to think that the events on DS II settled everything.

While it said he would bring balance, it did not provide a road map for that, nor did it say how or when. Perhaps, if we are to take into account the continuity (the EU) it was through Anakin, and more specifically the later Skywalker line that would bring about the balance and just maybe, we're not there yet?

True, Luke took care of the Vader, Palpatine issue but looking at the whole of continuity, even after the Battle of Endor galatically speaking you can't swing a cat without hitting a rogue dark jedi wreaking death and havoc, pissed off Sith Spirits and now a whole Sith World and the Later Legacy Era Sith Empire which clearly a Skywalker is going to address. So while the scales have tipped to and fro, perhaps we're not at Balance just yet.

As for the atheism bit, the poster who put up Hans quote from ANH is spot on.

 

If you are looking to delve deeper into the Christian/Force relationship I highly recommend reading THIS

 

Misguided =/= out of balance. And they weren't "cut off from the Force." They were simply incapable of looking into what was causing all of the problems, due to the prevelance of the dark side surrounding everything.

 

If you are to take into account the EU. However Lucas has made it abundantly clear Anakin brought balance to the Force in ROTJ making it the overall point of the Saga. It is far more likely ? if you are attempting to integrate the EU ? that the post-ROTJ ?Sith? or ?Dark Jedi? do not have the same ?attributes? which cause imbalance (whatever these might be). However the fact remains that Anakin brought balance to the Force in ROTJ.

 

The EU Sith have always been killed before they reached even close to the level that Sidious and the Banite Sith did during their 1000 years in the shadows. I'd say up until Legacy the force was experiencing something similar to just regular ebbs and flows. The dark gets more powerful, but then gets replaced by the light and so on and so on in a natural progression. Balanced.

Then Krayt came up with his One Sith and threw it out of balance again. But I think until Krayt cheated death that it became unbalanced again. Before then it was just a group of strong dark siders controlling the galaxy, nobody worse than someone like Lumiya (though Krayt was powerful). Now that Krayt has cheated the force though, the force needs another Skywalker to bring it in balance.

 

I agree with this. Much like in nature there are periods of natural excess in destruction and natural excess of flourishing creation. I would call this natural fluctuation and as such it is part of ?balance?. This is what is proposed to occur in the post-ROTJ EU in my opinion.

The ?true? Sith however (c.5,000 (?) BBY ? 4 ABY) were an extreme form of unnatural cancer which, for one characteristic or another, caused imbalance throughout their history. They create excessive Darkness which is not part of the natural process of balance. The post-ROTJ ?Sith? do not have these key characteristic which causes imbalance within the Force...

...at least that is my theory at the moment (even though I am unsure of my personal canon including post-ROTJ aspects anyway)

 

I agree with the idea that if you take the movies-only approach, "evil" was destroyed at the Battle of Endor. Now, remnants of the Empire certainly would've survived that battle, but the people in charge were nowhere near on the level of "evil" as was Palpatine and Vader.

Now, if you want to reconcile the EU into the fold, then you simply add all these "hidden Sith" from over the years in with the "low level Imperial officers" that remained. And, to me, it just goes to show how truly evil Palpatine really was. If all these Sith "Lords" that popped up after his abscence were blips in the Force next to Palpatine, then he must've been an absolute Super Nova of the Force.

 

Wrong. If Vader hadn't killed him, he could have gotten off the station. He could get to a shuttle faster than Luke did in the film, given that Luke had to drag Vader. And we know Luke made it out. Lando is not the Chosen One.

Palpatine has been known to take stupid risks because he thinks he has Anakin so thoroughly wrapped around his finger that he can rely on him to get him out of it. Witness the phony kidnapping at the beginning of ROTS and throwing the fight with Windu. Palpatine is also no longer in the same shape in ROTJ as he was in ROTS, he shows nothing approaching the agility he would need to get to a shuttle before the Death Star exploded. Also, the very fact that he had a second one built, and even baited the Alliance into attacking, shows that he doesn't really acknowledge the threat they pose. ("Your overconfidence is your weakness.") Like Tarkin, he refuses to recognize that he's even in danger. As for Lando, I never claimed he was the Chosen One. What I argued what that defeating the Sith, the Dark Side, the Empire, all involved much more work than simply hoping for a single redemptive act from Vader.

Including me.

Maybe you haven't been paying attention, but there are quite a few on this thread arguing that the ascendence of the Sith and the creation of the Empire were in fact part of bringing balance to the Force. In fact, given the next quote, it sounds like you belong on that list.

Nobody except Lucas, that is. Using the Empire and the dark side interchangeably is an invalid substitution and will get you nowhere. The Sith are not the dark side. Destroying the Empire does not mean destroying the dark side. Nobody ever says anything about destroying the dark side, either in the films or EU.

It is a valid substitution, as it is Dark Side users who brought the Empire about. Lucas himself did not say the Dark Side was a necessary complement to the good side. In fact he has quite publicly said it needed to be defeated.

Everyone knows that the balance of the Force was not mentioned in the OT, but it was in the PT, and it is a balance between the sides of the Force. If the Force is reduced to a one-note concept there is nothing in the Force that is being balanced. Having no dark side is not balanced in any way.

Are you not aware by now that I'm arguing that much of the prequels contradicts what's in the originals? That includes this new-fangled idea of bringing the Force into balance, prophecies, virgin births, the elitism of Forcfe ability, and a Force that actually has a "will".

Which may have something to do with the fact that both concepts ( Chosen One and balance of the Force ) were first introduced in the same exact scene, if not the same line of dialogue.

Who cares? Anakin isn't defined as the Chosen One because of what he did for Palpatine. He's defined as the Chosen One because of destroying the Sith.[/quote]

Wow, suddenly we're back into destroying the Sith category. Earlier you seemed to think the Dark Side was necessary. The point is this: if you define balance as allowing the Dark Side to Rise (which you and others have done), then the natural choice for a Chosen One is the man who brought that about: Palpatine, not another (Anakin) who was largely expendible in the process, and was fighting against him much of the time. Bringing the Dark Side to power was done without Anakin's help, so it can hardly be called a part

 

He doesn't need exceptional agility; he's still going to be moving faster than Luke dragging Vader. Besides, he still has the dark side if necessary.

Tarkin is a Force Muggle. Palpatine may be overconfident but he displays a clear ability to sense when Vader is in danger in ROTS. It is not a stretch to assume that this Force-granted danger sense applies to him as well.

You still insist on lumping "the Sith, the Dark Side, the Empire" all together as though they are interchangeable. Destroying the Death Star is one thing; defeating the Sith is another.

Maybe you haven't been paying attention, but I never took that position, so directing the rebuttal toward me is pointless. I have explicitly argued otherwise in many places, citing a Stover interview which stated that the prophecy could have been fulfilled in the Chancellor's office in ROTS.

That doesn't make dark side = Empire a correct substitution. By that logic light side = Luke = Luke's saber. Dark side users are not the dark side ( also, that which is brought about by an entity is not really interchangeable with that entity, because the Sith order might have survived the defeat of its Empire ). Defeating the Empire does not destroy the dark side, a fact which is borne out by the EU.

Wrong; he said the Sith needed to be defeated. From that you only get "the dark side needed to be defeated" if you make the invalid substitution Sith = dark side. It is evident from various sources, including Lucas' own scripts and recent episodes of The Clone Wars, that the dark side is a natural component of the Force. Lucas made clear through the PT and public statements that the Force needed to be balanced, not purged of the dark side.

None of those things contradict the originals; that's not what the word "contradict" means. Those things simply constitute new information which was not known until the prequels. They are entirely consistent with the OT.

The Sith are not the dark side. There is no inconsistency in my position; you simply insist on substituting one for the other.

I never said any such thing. Balance would only be achieved by "allowing the dark side to rise" if there were a

 

He doesn't need exceptional agility; he's still going to be moving faster than Luke dragging Vader. Besides, he still has the dark side if necessary.

Luke, even limping under his father's weight, walks faster than Palpatine.

Tarkin is a Force Muggle. Palpatine may be overconfident but he displays a clear ability to sense when Vader is in danger in ROTS. It is not a stretch to assume that this Force-granted danger sense applies to him as well.

That explains how he knew when Han pulled a fast one on his "best troops" on Endor, and when Lando and Wedge succesffuly turned the tide of the battle. Oh, wait. He didn't.

You still insist on lumping "the Sith, the Dark Side, the Empire" all together as though they are interchangeable. Destroying the Death Star is one thing; defeating the Sith is another.

Not when two Sith are already on board a doomed space station.

Maybe you haven't been paying attention, but I never took that position, so directing the rebuttal toward me is pointless. I have explicitly argued otherwise in many places, citing a Stover interview which stated that the prophecy could have been fulfilled in the Chancellor's office in ROTS.

You have taken the position that the Dark Side is a necessary complement to the good side, even going so far as to put those word's in Lucas's mouth. That's exactly what the Sith ascendency=balance argument rests on.

That doesn't make dark side = Empire a correct substitution. By that logic light side = Luke = Luke's saber. Dark side users are not the dark side ( also, that which is brought about by an entity is not really interchangeable with that entity, because the Sith order might have survived the defeat of its Empire ). Defeating the Empire does not destroy the dark side, a fact which is borne out by the EU.

Sorry, but you've created a far worse analogy than I ever could have there. The power that the Dark Side has over the galaxy is on account of the Sith creating the Empire. They are all connected. And destroying the Death Star will the Emperor on board would in fact kill two birds with one stone. Minus Vader's intervention, that is exactly what would have happened.

Wrong; he said the Sith needed to be defeated. From that you only get "the dark side needed to be defeated" if you make the invalid substitution Sith = dark side. It is evident from various sources, including Lucas' own scripts and recent episodes of The Clone Wars, that the dark side is a natural component of the Force. Lucas made clear through the PT and public statements that the Force needed to be balanced, not purged of the dark side.

And being balanced, as you seem to think we?re agreeing, means defeating the Dark Side, the Sith, and the Empire in one gesture.

None of those things contradict the originals; that's not what the word "contradict" means. Those things simply constitute new information which was not known until the prequels. They are entirely consistent with the OT.

Original films: 1. The Force is created by all living things. 2. Han et al can?t use it because they don?t believe in it. 3. An entire Rebel Alliance was needed to defeat Palpatine?s Empire; including and especially the contributions of Han, Lando and Wedge at the Second Death Star Battle. 4. The Force is a tool you use. It only partially controls your actions; more importantly it obeys your commands. Prequels: 1. You have little creatures in your blood that communicate with the Force. 2. If you?re not genetically disposed to having a $#Itload of them, forget about learning to be a Jedi. 3. The contributions of Han et al would have all come to naught if not for Vader intervening. 4. The Force desires balance and creates life forms to bring it about.

You also seem blind to the fact that this prophecy revolving around Anakin was a retcon designed to try to make him supercede Luke in importance. The originals do not operate under the assumption that anything going on is fulfilling an ancient prop

 

You seem to assume Palpatine is actually what he appears to an uninformed observer. Going from the evidence in the flms he clearly had time to get away.

He's not omniscient. Lando and Wedge can fly around all they want, they don't pose a direct threat to Palpatine by doing so. They only enter the DS after he is already dead. If things had happened differently and a not-otherwise-occupied Palpatine had been faced with the prospect of the Death Star's destruction, he could have escaped.

I haven't put any words in Lucas' mouth. The Force as described by Lucas in the OT era ( both pre-ANH and concurrent with TESB ) naturally has a light side and a dark side, and this is still true in the PT, which is what the balance of the Force is about - not the elimination of one side. You're the one putting words in Lucas' mouth when you imply Lucas said the dark side itself would be destroyed: you erroneously subtitute "the dark side" in a statement about the Sith.

That makes no sense. The dark side is already ascendant during the PT, so achieving balance means reversing this dark side ascendancy.

Everything is connected. That doesn't mean any of these things can be substituted for any of the others.

Wrong; balance is achieved by destroying the Sith. That is not the same thing as defeating the Empire, and the dark side is not similarly defeated ( again, Lucas never said that it was ). You continue to act as if the dark side, the Sith, and the Empire are all interchangeable, but that is not valid.

Again, nothing in the above ( if accurate ) is a contradiction. The Force being created by living things does not preclude the existence of midichlorians. Everything said about the Force in the OT is still true in the PT. You're not talking about contradictions, you're talking about information that was not previously known. It was never established that Han's apparent inability to use the Force was due solely to a lack of belief; in fact, the importance of the Skywalker line as highlighted in TESB and ROTJ says otherwise. This is made explicit in ROTJ: Leia believes that she cannot use the Force, though she clearly believes in it, and is told that she has the ability due to a familial ( genetic ) connection with Luke. It's hard to say the contributions of Han would have come to "naught" if Vader had not intervened, because the DS still could have been destroyed, weakening the Em

 

Also absent from the originals is this idea of balance. The one idea that is ubiquitous is the necessity of destroying the Empire because of how destructive it is. Nobody ever says "The Force needed this Empire to be there." Nobody says anything about the Dark Side being a necessary complement to the good side. So no, balance is you define it is not part of the Force, in either trilogy. That's like saying a balanced diet includes a lump of poison for breakfast.
And once again, despite your definition of balance, you cling to Anakin begint he Chosen One, when he was only a single resource used in a plan that was actually planned and brought to fruition by Palpatine, who accomplished quite a bit without Anakin's help.


Perhaps that was the major flaw of the Original Trilogy. It lacked a balance between the darkness and light of the Force and nature in general. I think it touched upon it in THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK. But when you look at the OT, it didn't explore the ambiguity of the Force and the characters with a depth similar to the Prequel Trilogy.

 

I think to really understand why the Sith need to be destroyed is by looking at the ultimate expressions of both the Jedi and Sith. A Jedi becomes one with the force, achieves a balance with it that his consciousness continues to exist even after death. A Sith (the only being powerful enough in the Darkside to achieve it) subjugates the force to the point that they stop their own death/whoever they choose deaths. They throw the natural circle of life out of whack, hence the fact that Sith are the cause of imbalance and need to be destroyed.

The best description of the Sith are that they are a cancer in the force. They need to be wiped out like a cancer of the body does.

 

there seem to be this strange fascination with being a good person on these forums. I hear a lot of argument about how you don't need sith for their to be a dark side and so on. My opinion is the jedi should be gone too if we don't need sith as part of our balance equation. It just does not fit my my mental model of balance of the force to only have societies moral view of good being balance. It's been said force users don't equal force balance, then why kill the siths. If the force can conceive a child to bring about its own balance, and that child causes the deaths of untold thousands by his actions, doesn't that make the force more evil than good? If that where true then anakin did exactly as the force intended. He killed all the jedi, he killed the sith lord, and caused his own death. Not to mention the armies under his command killing and dying in war.