Go-Mer's Debate Thread

My gut reaction to ESB in 1980:

"WHAT THE **** ?!"


Now I think it's a gem.

 

JenX: Why do people treat Yoda's words as law? If the PT has shown us anything it is that the Jedi are incredibly stupid.

Go-Mer: How are they stupid?

Do I have to list the ways? The fact that Obi Wan needs a child to point out that if your star map tells you there is a planet in location x but the little glowing light isn't showing up it might be a good idea to fly there and have a look.

They think the best way to stop an assassin from killing Amidala is to hide her on...her home world, protected by...a young, arrogant padawan whose training they opposed (yes, I know Amidala wasn't killed, but that doesn't make the Jedi's decision any smarter).


I love the fact that QGJ and OB1 protect Anakin, the "chosen one", by taking him all the way to Naboo when the planet is under siege, walking him into the middle of a palace battle and telling him to hide in a space ship! D'oh!


None of this is a slam on either TPM or AOTC. I have argued with many bashers that George Lucas is deliberately portraying the Jedi as incredibly stupid. I think it helps explain the ease with which the Emperor gained power and wiped them out.

JenX: So Yoda, who (apparently) wasn't even born when the Jedi last encountered a Sith, says that there are always only two of them. So what? If we are allowed to make assumptions if it helps the films make sense then I am going to assume that Yoda was wrong.

Go-Mer: Of course he wasn't. The rule of 2 is supported in all the films so far.

Wait a second. Lets look at the quote from Yoda which expounds this "Rule of two":

Yoda: "Always two there are. No more, no less. A master and an apprentice."

So, as SomeRandomNerd and others have pointed out, the "rule of two" is directly contradicted in both TPM and ROTJ, because in both films a Sith dies without being immediately replaced by a new Sith. "No more, no less"? Nonsense.

So, if Yoda was wrong about that part, I don't see why I can't assume that he was wrong about the whole thing. It's just another example of the Jedi's stupidity.

JenX: The midi's are a lousy concept badly explained.

Go-Mer: Actually, they are ingenious and explained so well a 9 year old could understand it. Why would you suggest otherwise?

Well, I would suggest otherwise because that is what I believe. I wouldn't have thought I needed to explain that, but I'll know better next time.

JenX: Oh, and we get the added bonus of discovering that Jedi don't actually communicate directly with the force! Hurrah!

Go-Mer: I never got that. Whatever made you think this?

Let me borrow a quote by QGJ from TPM:

"Without the midichlorians, life could not exist, and we would have no knowledge of the Force. Our midichlorians continually speak to us... telling us the will of the Force...when you learn to quiet your mind, you will hear them speaking to you."

You see, it was "explained so well a 9 year old could understand it." The Force communicates with the midichlorians, who then convey the messages to the Jedi. Without them the Jedi would have no knowledge of the force.


Without the midichlorian technobable, we are just left to wonder how a person can communicate with the force.

With the midichlorians we are left to wonder how the midi's fromed a symibiotic relationship with a life form when (apparently) life can't exist without them, how the force communicates with midi's, why the all pervasive force can't communicate with people without the need for an intermediary, how midi's communicate with people, how the people then communicate with the midi's, how the midi's relay this message back to the force and how a midi would be able to fertilise a woman's egg. Not to mention ancillary questions about midi sentience and the ability to become one with the force and communicate with it if you no longer have a body, and thus no longer have any midichlorians (which would/will directly contradict what QGJ said an

 

ESB forced me to assume that either Ben or Vader was lying... I chose the latter.

3 years later I had to adjust that assumption.


I think there are but a few people who post here who are really out to hate the PT, the majority is just filtering out the things that work for them. (some do it by deduction)

It's just that we have different tresholds.

 

Doesn't Vader say to Luke something to the effect of "join me and together we will rule the galaxy as father and son." To me that suggests that the rule of two is alive and well in the sense that Vader hopes to join forces with Luke to topple the emperor.

To me it seems likely that "the rule of two" is not some express law written down in some impossibly ancient text, but rather just Yoda commenting on the nature of Sith lords: Yoda understands that three Sith lords can't work together productively. Because the dark side of the Force is characterized by an absolute will to power, the Sith are forced into uneasy pairings of one strong and one weaker, with the weaker member always looking for a third-party ally who can unbalance the pairing and put him in charge. Thus Dooku looks to Obi-wan to overthrow Sidious. Vader looks to Luke to help him overthrow the Emperor. Both the emperor and Vader know what it means to bring Luke on board, but they are both kind of playing along so that in the end Vader hopes to kill the emperor, and the Emperor is content to kill either Vader or Luke, because either way he's still in charge.

In other words, it's easy to read the "rule of two" in a way that doesn't create a contradiction between the OT and PT, provided the "rule of two" isn't overinterpreted to mean "an expressly stated element of Sith dogma."

For me, the "rule of two" just means "Yoda's comment about the nature of evil."

 

Very good, Jabba. I agree completely.

----------

JexX re: midichlorians:

You seem to be from the camp that says that the midichloriains cheapen the idea of the force, but then you pose about half a dozen questions that prove the exact opposite. If anything, the mystery of the force is not simplified with the addition of midis but is in fact made more complex. The fact that even proponents of midichlorians are in disagreement as to their exact nature and function proves that there is still plenty of room for your imagination to work within the concept. That's the nice thing about Star Wars: Lucas will just kind of throw concepts out there and let the collective imagination of his audience take it from there.

At the same time, midichlorians create a practical limitation to the Jedi ranks making it plausible that two rogue force users could wipe them out in a few years.

 

Go_Mer, your new icon is not a Halloween alteration... (some are really fitting) are you sure you wanna trade that wise and tranquil voice I hear in my head for a mumbling nasal one?

 

"He will join us or die, Master."

Rather than dismissing me AGAIN as just some cranky old basher who dearly wants to hate the PT, Durwood, how about addressing specific dialogue such as the above line. How does this "fit perfectly" with the "rule of two" Lucas dreamed up for the PT?

 

"He will join us or die, master."

As in "He will (he will) join us (ditch the Rebellion and join the Empire) or die (or we'll have to kill him before he gets powerful enough to be a real threat), master (sir)"



>>>Do I have to list the ways? The fact that Obi Wan needs a child to point out that if your star map tells you there is a planet in location x but the little glowing light isn't showing up it might be a good idea to fly there and have a look.

Does he? I thought he went to Yoda with the problem that the star charts were apparently wrong, and Yoda turned it into a lesson for the class he was in the middle of teaching?

I guess it depends on your point of view...

>>>They think the best way to stop an assassin from killing Amidala is to hide her on...her home world, protected by...a young, arrogant padawan whose training they opposed (yes, I know Amidala wasn't killed, but that doesn't make the Jedi's decision any smarter).

I thought that was Amidala's idea, and Palpatine who arranged it in the first place?

>>>I love the fact that QGJ and OB1 protect Anakin, the "chosen one", by taking him all the way to Naboo when the planet is under siege, walking him into the middle of a palace battle and telling him to hide in a space ship! D'oh!

Yeah. They should have left him in the Coruscant Creche with a "My First Lightsaber" book with chewable pages to learn from...


>>>>With the midichlorians we are left to wonder how the midi's fromed a symibiotic relationship with a life form when (apparently) life can't exist without them

The same as Mitochondria. Life could not exist in it's current multi-cellular, self-aware form without the evolutionary step of combining with them thousands of years ago.

>>>...how the force communicates with midi's

Why does the Force need to communicate with midichlorians? And if it does, why does it need a mechanism to do so- can't it just do it directly? It was always assumed that Jedi were in direct touch with the Force (and vice versa)- why do midichlorians suddenly change that?

>>>>why the all pervasive force can't communicate with people without the need for an intermediary

Who says it can't? (I thought the OT proved otherwise with the blue ghosts...)

>>>>how midi's communicate with people

Through the Force, I thought...

>>>>how the people then communicate with the midi's

They don't have to- they communicate with/through the Force.

>>>how the midi's relay this message back to the force

Again, they don't have to.

>>>...and how a midi would be able to fertilise a woman's egg.

They wouldn't. Qui Gon was smoking death-sticks, and had some crazy ideas. Shmi was probably impregnated through an incident of carnal desires, unusual implements and poor personal hygiene.

Either that, or it was just some sort of freaky occurrance.

>>>Not to mention ancillary questions about midi sentience and the ability to become one with the force and communicate with it if you no longer have a body, and thus no longer have any midichlorians (which would/will directly contradict what QGJ said and would/will be another example of the stupidity of the Jedi).

Or, it could be an example of the concept of midichlorians being completely misunderstood by some of the fans, thanks to assumptions based on something that wasn't actually in the film...

>>>You see, it was "explained so well a 9 year old could understand it." The Force communicates with the midichlorians, who then convey the messages to the Jedi. Without them the Jedi would have no knowledge of the force. Without the midichlorian technobable, we are just left to wonder how a person can communicate with the force.

I don't remember the film saying that the Force communicates with midichlorians... or that they "convey" anything to the Jedi either.

I do recall Qui Gon saying that they "speak to us, telling us the will of the Force." I pres

 

Random, unless we get at least one low-level (read: not a Sith) dark Jedi in Episode III, then Luke's allying himself with the Empire would (from what the movies have shown us) mean that that pesky old "rule of two" would kick in, and once again it would make "he will join US or die" utter nonsense because in order for Luke to join, there could be no further "us" between Vader and the Emperor.

 

What undermines my argument I think is Vader's wimpy tone in ROTJ. "I must obey my master," or whatever he says, but in any case he doesn't sound like someone capable of plotting against the emperor. In ESB, Vader makes a clear invitation to Luke to help him overthrow the emperor. In ROTJ, Vader is a meek slave until his moment of redemption.

 

So, Patrick, you're claiming that as soon as any Jedi (or anyone else, for that matter) turns to the Dark Side of the Force, or serves Palpatine's Empire (which, come to think about it, all the Jedi are doing at the end of AOTC) they immediately become a Sith?

 

Random, have we seen any dark-side Jedi OTHER than the various Sith?

I mean, this isn't some minor plot point that we can just leave to the EU. This is central to the main characters of the saga. So far, the PT has shown no dark side users other than the Sith. Obviously, we see none in the OT other than Vader and the Emperor. So unless Lucas does show dark Jedi in Episode III other than the Sith, then yes... the implication in ESB will be that Vader and the Emperor are talking about turning Luke and making him a Sith.

Or do you honestly watch ESB and think "A powerful ally... aha! That means they intend to hand Luke a mop and have the shiniest Stardestroyer floors imaginable!"?

 

I agree with Patrick about them not seeing Luke as anything less than a Sith Apprentice.

 

Patrick Russel said: Or do you honestly watch ESB and think "A powerful ally... aha! That means they intend to hand Luke a mop and have the shiniest Stardestroyer floors imaginable!"?

Hilarious! LOL.. Aw man, that was a good one. The bottom line is the line mentioned above completely refutes the Rule of 2. It's just an inconsistency between the OT and PT. I think the "nature of evil" argument is too much of a stretch of Yoda's word. Yoda in TPM does not explain the rule of 2 as some by-product of evil people. He explains it as what it is: an organizational rule. The fact that he actually says, a master and apprentice, gives more indication that this is not really baout morality. This is the rule the Sith follow. When Vader and the Emperor walk and openly talk about recruiting Luke, the Rule of 2 is negated. It's just a new idea thrown in with the PT that defies the logic of the OT.

JENX said: With the midichlorians we are left to wonder how the midi's fromed a symibiotic relationship with a life form when (apparently) life can't exist without them, how the force communicates with midi's, why the all pervasive force can't communicate with people without the need for an intermediary, how midi's communicate with people, how the people then communicate with the midi's, how the midi's relay this message back to the force and how a midi would be able to fertilise a woman's egg. Not to mention ancillary questions about midi sentience and the ability to become one with the force and communicate with it if you no longer have a body, and thus no longer have any midichlorians (which would/will directly contradict what QGJ said and would/will be another example of the stupidity of the Jedi).

And lets not mention the midichlorian count nonsense.


All very true, and good points.

 

The Rule of 2 is borne out of the events that transpire in ESB. Just because they are trying to play it off like there is no rule of two doesn't mean there isn't one. It may be that this topic never came up between Palpatine and Anakin/Vader.

It isn't so much that they follow this rule as their very natures makes the rule come true. They are so evil and greedy that this is the only way things can play out for the sith.

As to JenX's comment about there always being 2 no more no less, it isn't meant to be taken so literally that if one of them dies, another one pops into existance. It is merely the natural balance the Sith order naturally seeks. If Luke killed Vader, then Palpatine would try and make Luke his apprentice, and if Luke joined Vader, they would plot to take out the emperor.

It fits so well that it is almost hard to think of there not being a rule of 2 talked about in the prequels.

 

"He will join us or die, my master."

First of all, it is made extraordinarily clear that Vader and the Emperor are both trying to play each other. They are both aware of the rule of two, and they know that for Luke to join them, one of them is going to have to die. If Vader and Luke successfully vanquish the Emperor then it means that Vader has become powerful enough to become the Master and Luke will become his apprentice. If, however, Luke kills Vader then the Emperor has a new, stronger apprentice. But if Vader kills Luke then it means that Luke would not have been a fitting apprentice and the Emperor still gets the stronger of the two. So no matter what, somebody is going to have to die. It's because of the rule of two that Vader so willingly brought Luke before the Emperor. I have a feeling that Episode III will reveal this to be the natural order of things for the Sith--in fact, I believe Anakin's journey to the darkside will perfectly mirror Luke's, except that Anakin will kill the former apprentice and take his place at Palpatine's side.

So why did Vader offer allegience to Luke? It was nothing more than a ruse to get Luke to come before the Emperor. Certainly, if Luke had killed the Emperor then Vader would have been a made man, so he threw the offer out there in the slim hope that Luke would bite. But his ultimate purpose was to bring Luke before the Emperor.

So why did he say, "He will join us..."? It's just a matter of semantics. He could have said, "He will join you," or he could have said, "He will join me," although the latter would have been too suspicious.

This "contradiction" is not nearly so tricky as you make it out to be, Patrick. In fact, reconciling ESB with the rule of two takes nothing more than the application of simple logic.

 

"So why did he say, "He will join us..."? It's just a matter of semantics. He could have said, "He will join you," or he could have said, "He will join me," although the latter would have been too suspicious."

Why would it have been suspicious if the two of them had an understanding that if one of them brought a new potential apprentice into the mix that one of the two of them would have to die? There is no reason for any secrecy, any pretense, any front being put up whatsoever. The "rule of two" kills the need for any scheming whatsoever. "Bringing a new prospect in, Vader? Well... then it's "Go Time" between the two of us."

I mean, why bother skulking around putting on a front when a basic tenet of the Sith code is that in order to take on a new apprentice, one of the existing Sith must die?

Yes, he could have said "join you" or "join me". But he didn't... he said "join US". But by definition, there would be no "us" for Luke to join. See?

 

The Rule of 2 is borne out of the events that transpire in ESB. Just because they are trying to play it off like there is no rule of two doesn't mean there isn't one. It may be that this topic never came up between Palpatine and Anakin/Vader.

Oh, it never came up? So are you suggesting that Vader just wasn't told about it? Now that is indeed a stretch. And the only other 'proof' you offer is that they are just 'playing it off' like there is no rule. For what? Are they having some Sith fun? Why would they play it off?

Durwood-- Patrick already offered a good explanation earlier of why this whole "Sidious vs. Vader" game with Luke is not really true. Their dialoge directly indicates that they want Luke as an ally and that it won't come down to Luke picking a side and the other dying. Your argument loses a lot of steam when you say:

So why did he say, "He will join us..."? It's just a matter of semantics. He could have said, "He will join you," or he could have said, "He will join me," although the latter would have been too suspicious.

Too suspicious??? As if openly recruiting another Sith aprpentice in direct violation of the 'rule' is not suspcious enough??? If Sidious and vader are competing for Luke and know one of the must die in order for Luke to have a spot, then there would be no need for subtlety.

The line emans what he says: they were entertaining the possibility of 3 Sith. The Rule of 2 did not exist in the OT.

 

Green Destiny... exactly.

 

No they never considered the possibility of having 3 Sith. Vader wanted Luke to help him ice the Emperor, and the Emperor wanted Luke to replace Vader. They both played it off as though the three of them could all co exist as a big Sith family, but they were both just playing dumb.

When Anakin joins with the Emperor and helps to wipe out all of the Jedi (or so they thought), there is no more rivalry. There are no other Force users with which to recruit for Sithdom, so it would make sense that the subject hadn't come up.

When ESB rolls around, the Emperor is suprized to find out that Vader's son is running around helping the rebels, so when Vader suggests that he could be turned, the Emperor plays it off as "a good idea". He knows his best bet is to Have Anakin seek him out, so he goes along with it. But his full intention is to replace Vader with Anakin, just as Anakin's full intention is to take out the Emperor with his son's help.

It's almost too perfect.

 

I have to agree with Go-Mer's first paragraph. Especially if you buy my argument (I know most don't) that the "rule of 2" is just Yoda's conclusion about the consequence of Sith in-fighting, then it makes perfect sense, and it's not as big a stretch as suggesting that Vader "just didn't know the rule."

But either way, it seems that sloppy PT writing, and in particular inattention to the dialogue of the OT, is what's forcing us to contend with all this speculation to begin with. If Lucas had really been planning ahead, and had made some real efforts to promote continuity between the trilogies, then no one would be confused about the rule of two, or about Vader's plans for Luke or about Owen and Beru's lack of a relationshp with Anakin, etc.

Then again, maybe it's the speculation and the sense that we pay more attention to the details than Lucas himself that makes fandom so much fun.

 

The reason the rule of two works is because Lucas wrote it. Why would he write something that contradicts his own films??

 

Maybe, unlike us, Lucas just doesn't give a damn.

 

Oh he does. He just doesn't give a damn about whiney, petty, malcontents who have lost their inner child. Lucky there are enough fans out there who understand what he is doing and that is more than enough.

 

It makes sense to me, but maybe that's just because I want it to.