ST Episode VII Article in 'Entertainment Weekly' #1311

When push came to shove, Luke didn't have a possessive, obsessive attachment to Leia or his father and he was willing to let go. So, I still maintain that it's NOT attachment, but obsessive, possessive attachment... unhealthy attachment, that causes the problems.

 

I think Luke's attachment to Vader-revealed-to-be-Anakin was pretty obsessive. But I don't think an attachment has to be obsessive/outright unhealthy for it to be able to manipulate you. Being able to be twisted by the Dark Side gives Jedi a lot of responsibility and logically leads to taking on the type of personal sacrifices an ordinary person doesn't need to worry about. The attachment rule makes a lot of sense. It doesn't mean you have to be an emotionless Vulcan. But personal attachments makes you very vulnerable. That an enemy can use your spouse or children against you and/or blind you to a moral decision is a big risk for a powerful person sworn to protect the galaxy. There's also the question of Jedi genetic lineages/families/successors... something that can easily lead to nepotism and dynasties antithetical to democracy and justice.

 

I guess that means you don't think Leia should have children either, right? After all, she would continue the lineage/family/successor too.

 

If she's not a full-fledged Jedi with children who are to form the basis of a new order, it shouldn't be much of a problem for the galaxy. If Episode VII doesn't shy away from dealing with Lucas-ian ethical issues in (imo misguided) reaction to distance the new films from the PT and the implicit social commentary of the OT, and if they do go with Luke/Jedi Leia having Jedi children, it'd be cool if they'd consider these consequences and make it one of the ST's themes.

 

Well, by the logic of no attachments how is Luke supposed to even train his niece and/or nephew in the ways if the Force. Wouldn't his love for members of his family be a weakness that could be exploited too?

I'm going to fall in under attachments being dangerous if allowed to become obsessive and possessive, but they're also the ONLY thing that has done the impossible and SAVED someone from the Darkside and brought them back to the Light (something that outside of the EU has only happened once in more than thousand generations).

For all the talk of how Luke rid himself of his attachments at the end, that WASN'T what defeated the Emperor. Indeed, all his detachment won him was an agonizing death at the Emperor's hands. It was Anakin's attachment to his son that gave him the strength to break free of the Darkside and destroy the Emperor where every Jedi had failed.

Attachments are like fire, dangerous, but if it is respected it can also be the most useful of tools and the foundation of our very civilization. The Order's mistake was that rather than train themselves on how to treat that fire with respect and care they banned it out of fear for what could happen and we all know what fear is a path to... anger, hate, suffering and the Darkside.

 

I think you guys are overthinking or overanalyzing simply the poor writing of the prequels. The prequels made this stuff so philosophically convoluted that it doesn't really matter all that much.

Just contextualize Luke's action in terms of the OT. Don't try to tie it together with the prequels(it falls apart). Lucas didn't seem to think about it all that much either when writing the prequels. Why should you?

 

Reminder: This is not a PT vs. OT thread.

 

Leia was not a Jedi by the end of the OT. Luke was. If being a Jedi makes having relationships unwise (which I will speak to later), then Leia having a child is the only wise way to continue the family line. It's easier for her not to be a Jedi around conception time, since she hasn't already committed to it. She can still learn about the Force without having to be a Jedi. It wouldn't be so easy for Luke, as he already committed. He would have to quit, which would be interesting, but a bit inexplicable.

I don't see why it wouldn't have been one of the first things Yoda (or even Ben offscreen) would teach him. Remember that from those two senior Jedi POV's, Anakin was still someone to be destroyed, not redeemed. To them, his attachment to Padme led to the mess they were in.

Right and that's the kind of attachment the Jedi seek to avoid by forbidding relationships. Being a Jedi is more like a monkish discipline than a civil service. It got pressed into civil service by their affiliation with the republic, but in it's pure sense, it's not a job, it's a religion. The way I see it, Anakin was not fit to be a Jedi. Where he went wrong was not in marrying Padme, but in not leaving the Jedi. He wanted the best of both worlds. He just shouldn't have been a Jedi to begin with. There was nothing indicated by what little was known about the Prophecy that the Chosen One needed to be trained as a Jedi in order to destroy the Sith. If the council had disapproved of Anakin's training, Obi-Wan would have gone on his own to do it, as he told Yoda. The blame falls squarely on the council for retracting their decision not to train Anakin. Why they did this has always been unclear. This boy was all wrong for the Jedi Knighthood. Qui-Gon was right about his destiny, but wrong about how best to get him there, IMO. The fall of the Jedi occurred because they broke the rules, not because they adhered to them.

I'm not averse to a reformation of the Jedi Order, but if that's the case, I'd rather see it happen over the course of the trilogy, rather than with Luke already having made radical changes from the get go.

 

Luke clearly overcame his inability to let go in the OT. He came awfully close, but I think he's good to go now on this front. Having a biological child, though, might be one hell of a temptation. Who knows? A situation like this might lead to good ST drama. Or going through his OT tribulations might've helped him achieve perfect Jedi "nirvana." But not every Jedi may happen to forge their willpower.

It was Luke's example of doing what Anakin once couldn't do that inspired Vader to redeem himself. Luke's self-sacrifice and refusal to turn, either in order to eventually become powerful enough to kill the Emperor, save himself, and/or save or seek vengeance for the death of the rebels, his sister and friends inspires Vader. He sees that his son has succeeded where he had failed, realizing what it means to be a true Jedi Knight. Vader was attached to the physical plane, attached to "his" Empire and controlling the galaxy for its own good, attached to the idea of joining forces with Luke (if Luke didn't join him, it would be pointless for Vader--his attachment to Luke wouldn't be served by remaining enemies with him). But he finally lets go of his selfishness and risks his life to help someone else (this is the opposite of attachment and control).

 

Now you can make the case that Luke should know a lot more about the Order. I mean you think Obi-wan and Yoda could have grabbed some holocrons on their way out the door or written up some journals of useful information such as force techniques, lightsaber combat styles, training methods, meditation, etc. Also its only been around 20 years or so which means there should be quite a few people around with a good deal of knowledge on the order around that he could find to ask question. But there is really no proof from the movies that Luke got a complex breakdown on all the dogma of the old order.

 

Here's something *dont know if it has already been posted* but
http://www.broadwayworld.com/bwwgee...urn-of-Harrison-Ford-69-20140519#.U3pGL_ldV8E

Kinda makes sense that they would want Han Solo to be a leading character IMO

 

I would really like to meet this 'Hans Solo'

 

As George Lucas said, making movies is not a business, it's an art form. Basing this sort of thing on some poll on what the public wants is the wrong way to go about it. Do whats best for the story.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

Yes, me too. I believe he is Han's German second cousin

 

also, that poll makes no sense. 50% want to see Carrie return yet R2 beats her for most popular character

 

Oh Leia, if only there was someone who loved you

 

I don't know about Han, but Hans ALWAYS shoots first.

 

Lets not forget this Hans

This Hans has an oscar

 

And Star Wars Episode VII has an Oscar:

 

But he is nothing compared to Oscar...the Grouch

 

which brings us back to this old grouch:



and back to Han! The circle is complete!

 

Less guns, more beer. Fair trade.

 

That's one interpretation of events, but its far from the only one. Equally valid is that it was Vader's love for his son and his desire to not see his son die (ie. an attachment to his son) is what gave him the strength to break free of the Dark side's hold on him and destroy the Emperor in order to save his son.

I don't know what the canon status of the film novelizations are currently, but that's about the only thing I could think of that might offer any insight into exactly what Anakin was thinking in that moment in RotJ and even that might not still be canon.

ETA: if it were really Luke's example of how to be a good Jedi that brought Anakin back from the Dark side, why didn't he turn on the Emperor immediately? Why did he wait until his son was writhing on the ground screaming "Father! Please..." before he finally turned on his master?

 

Awesome! Reminds me of the story Mark tells about the Fox execs wanting the Wookie to wear Lederhosen