did Luke's guardans put him at unnescessary risk?

Why didn't Obi-Wan and the Lars family give Luke the name Lars instead of Skywalker?
Granted Tatooine is far from "the bright centre of the universe" but still - a big security risk, isn't it??

 

Apparently it wasn't considering no one ever noticed. It may have been Owen who insisted upon Luke keeping the Skywalker name, possibly against Obi-Wan's advice. Owen wanted Luke to grow up normally and have an ordinary life on Tatooine, away from the rest of the galaxy's complications. Luke had lost both his parents, something Owen blamed on Anakin's involvement in things which shouldn't have concerned him. He didn't want that to happen to Luke. So although he lied to Luke about who his father was, he may have wanted Luke to retain as much as possible of his family heritage so he allowed him to keep his real name. Owen also lived with Shmi for many years and so may also have wanted to honour her by allowing the Skywalker name to be passed on.

 

The name change didn't really keep Leia safe.

 

I kind of like this explanation. It's explained in the Ep.2 novel that Owen was rather fond of Shmi. I could see him wanted to honor her by doing this.

Also, it's not like Leia was at risk because she was a Skywalker.

 

her name was Organa

 

true no=one noticed, but hindsight is 20/20 vision.
I like the explanation though.
Is there a deleted scene between Owen and Anakin in AOTC where Owen asks Anakin to stay??

 

My point being, that she was at risk anyway. Not because she was daughter of Anakin Skywalker, but because she was a rebel. I know her name was Organa, but she was still a Skywalker. It was just not the Jedi blood that got her into danger.

 

yes, but her hertitage wasn't advertised like Luke's.

Why did Obi-Wan change his name?
and why Ben?

 

I don't really understand what you mean by "advertised"? The fact that he kept his last name? Or the fact that he's living with his aunt and uncle. Not that it made a difference.

 

I just meant that it was risky leaving him with his father's name. he could have been discovered.

but do you know were the name "Ben" came from?

 

[image=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/62/Ben_Michael_Jackson.jpg]

 

Is there any indication at all that Owen and Beru knew that Anakin=Darth Vader? If they actually believed that Anakin died ("a certain point of view"-Obi-Wan could certainly have told them something like that), then there is really no security risk involved in keeping the name...

 

true, it has always been ambiguous how much the Lars knew about what really happened to Anakin, but irrespective of that there would still be a security risk, it would just mean that Owen and Beru didn't know about it?

Kenobi could have just lied about why the boy was in danger. I doubt that Owen and Beru would flick the bird and say we will honour the name anyhow.

 

Out-universe, it is an oversight resulting from the organic nature of the character consolidation of Anakin Tiberius Skywalker and Darth H. Vader. By any logical standard, and not just that required for an R-rated espionage movie involving the witness protection program, Kenobi should have never taken Luke to his father's home planet, nor his mother's, nor even Kenobi's own, should never have taken him near his father's in-laws, and at the absolute least should have changed his surname.

In-universe, if we assume that Lucas knew during the scripting of SW77 what he knew at the end of ROTS, Kenobi should have at least changed his name as an insurance policy against the unforeseeable, considering Luke's proximity to the location of Anakin's first small turn to the dark side. A butterfly flapped its wings, and a random event occurred when Jawas diverted R2's mission to Kenobi. A second random event occurred when Jawas introduced Luke to R2. Luke's taking off the restraining bolt was a piece of necessary character development to the extent that it was plausible in-universe, and who doesn't cut corners with the security of their property sometimes? The resulting plot was deterministic: Luke would fly against the Death Star, Vader would detect a Rebel pilot strong in the Force, he'd put two and two together.

Luke's surname didn't mean much after the fact of his being introduced to R2, but it could have made the difference between a multiverse of safe and perilous outcomes. In narrative terms with SW77's projected audience, minimizing taxes on the attention span results in future costs of credibility. The standard to apply is: How long after the fact did this begin to bother someone? If it was apparent right in the movie, that's a big fail. If it takes 30+ years and a prequel series, then that's a big pass.

 

Hi, Hernalt.

Except that in 1977, not only was Luke probably born there too (and thus not 'taken' there), but, more importantly, Vader at least (if not also the Emperor) knew Skywalker had a son living on his dad's home planet, but Luke was no threat, as long as he didn't become a Jedi like his father (which wouldn't have seemed likely anyway, being that the Empire and Vader didn't know that Obi-Wan had lived to an old age, much less living on Tatooine, at that).

Thus the last name wouldn't have mattered, under this scenario.

 

There's no reason for Vader to go back to Tatooine. He has too many bad memories of the place (his mother's death, slavery).

I don't remember the source but Owen and Beru kept the last name to honor Shmi. Still, it does put Luke in danger even if Tatooine is a planet no one cares about.

 

Thank you for the corrections: I will disregard SW77 in isolation and Anakin's presence on Tatooine. My biggest underlying mistake was that considering that the USA is hardly a Kardashev I and the GFFA is a Kardashev III, I was unconsciously imposing external expectations about Homeland Security, TSA, PATRIOT Act, cyber warefare, terrorist watchlists, data mining, wiretapping, etc, onto the espionage and intelligence gathering capabilities of the fascist Empire. But the Empire does not appear to have the same computation. The threat it does pose supports the _general wisdom_ of changing Luke's surname as a precautionary measure.

As for a most specific rationale for Kenobi changing Luke's surname, consider that 1) Senator Bail Organa knew Kenobi's exact location sufficiently for one of Tantive IV's escape pods to be guided by R2 to the adjacent Dune Sea, 2) Senator Bail Organa knew that Kenobi had taken with him the secret son of Anakin Skywalker, 3) Luke was for some time still geographically near to Kenobi, 4) Luke lived a vibrant life unfettered in personal identity within some sizable radius or footprint around the Lars home adjacent to the Dune Sea, and 5) the Empire had at its disposal interdiction, surveillance, checkpoints and informants to locate Rebel leaders, and interrogation and torture to fish upstream for the Rebellion's chain of command.

Had Bail Organa been 'made to talk' prior to events in ANH, the interrogator might have learned about Darth Vader's secret offspring, and Luke *might* have survived such a search if he had a different name. A thin chance, but a chance. Would it be worth living a life without his proper heritage? Well, there are many stories with orphan, step or adopted children who later discover that they have a higher lineage and a 'real' name, so there'd be no harm done.

 

well, it all turned out okay in the end. but was still very risky. after all nobody was looking for Luke, but they were looking for Obi-Wan if an Imperial agent had wondered onto Tatooine and had overheard somebody discussing the "Crazy Hermit" with the name Kenobi... well, then ...

does anybody know though how Kenobi ended up with the name "Old Ben"?

 

A good in-universe explanation for why it's important that Luke keep his last name:

Between episodes 4 and 5, Vader discovers that the pilot who blew up the death star was named Skywalker. If it were any other name, he would not care, but because it is a Skywalker, he know it must be his son and he is now obsessed with finding him, turning him to the dark side, and teaming up with him to defeat Palpatine.

If Luke had a different name, Vader would have no family allegiance or sense of mercy toward him, and would likely just kill him off (like the other Jedi) instead of offering him a place by his side.

It is Anakin/Vader's intense protectiveness toward his family members (a characteristic known to Obi-Wan and Yoda from the Shmi and Padme episodes) that ultimately served as the vehicle for Palpatine's downfall and the restoration of balance to the Force, and it's not unreasonable to suppose that keeping his name Skywalker was an intentional choice by Obi-Wan and Yoda.

(Leia's situation was different from Luke's in that she was being raised in a high-profile family, and they probably did midi-chlorian tests on them to see that Luke had the greater Force abilities, meaning he would be more central to their plans.)

 

Let me ask this: how famous are the Jedis? Here in the US, lets say their equilavent of the Army's Delta Force or the Navy SEALS. Everyone knows of their distinction, but individulally they are unknown. Is it the same for the rank and file Jedi? I imagine Yoda would have been somewhat well known throughout the galaxy due his position on the Council and its political implications, dealing with the Senate, the war, etc. Maybe at the level of a top Army Genral who is in the news during war time.

 

Nope.


Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker were galactically known and always have been-there's a snippet of deleted dialogue from ANH where Red Leader tells Luke that he flew with Anakin.

 

I think they are intended to have the same potential.

 

"From the Adventures of Luke Lars" doesn't sound very good.

 

I feel really stupid that I've never thought of this until now, but did anyone ever think (pre-PT, of course) that Owen might not be Anakin's brother, but his brother-in-law? What with the different last name and all?

And pre-RotJ, it just occurred to me that there's nothing to say Luke didn't know his mother as a very small child; the fact that he only ever asks about his father (again, pre-RotJ) would seem to support this interpretation, too.

I know this is neither here nor there in terms of the Saga, but I just thought it was interesting that these possible interpretations had never occurred to me in all these years.