Should Barriss be redeemed?

Discussion in 'Star Wars TV' started by StarWarsFan91, Mar 7, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Seerow SWTV★Manager

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2011
    star 6
    I assumed Barriss had been knighted so Luminara is off somewhere else since there is kinda a war to fight and soldiers to lead. Its kinda miss opportunity we'll never know Barriss's old mentor's thoughts. I think Barriss's betrayal is not just a speech about how the Jedi have fallen but there is also a lesson there about the consequences of their way of life and social philosophies.
  2. StarWarsFan91 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 14, 2008
    star 4
    How have the jedi fallen?

    Is it because they are leading armies or taking part in warfare?

    What is your reasoning to state that?
    Last edited by StarWarsFan91, Mar 16, 2013
  3. Ian passman Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 16, 2013
    star 1
    I don't think a 'redemption' arc is needed for Barriss. Her acts are criminal, but I don't believe they're necessarily of the dark side. The dark side is based primarily on the selfish pursuit of power, and it's fueled by negative emotions. Barriss doesn't meet any of the criteria of a Dark Sider. She didn't murder those temple workers in order to fuel her power, nor did she choke that woman as an act of fear or rage. She didn't even frame Asoka as an act of hatred. It was all done so she could continue her guerrilla campaign against the Jedi order, an order that she was leveling completely reasonable charges of complacency and wrong doing, against.

    The idea that Barriss has fallen because she has chosen to use her gifts against the order, is faulty. The order itself is in the service of the Dark Side, even though its members are unaware of this fact. If that's the case, than it is completely believably that a Light Sider (not a Jedi, since she has clearly renounced her affiliation) can use her abilities to bring harm to others in the pursuit of her goals. Her comment about Ventriss' blades 'suiting her' speaks less of falling to the dark side, than it does of rejecting the Jedi. Remember, rejecting the Jedi does not make you dark. If it did, then Asoka became a Dark Sider when she spurned the council's invitation to rejoin them.
    Last edited by Ian passman, Mar 16, 2013
    Circular_Logic and QuangoFett like this.
  4. Cevan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 16, 2013
    star 4
    Personally, I think it'd be interesting if we saw Barriss somehow escape Republic custody, and go to Dooku for help. She may feel that Dooku and the CIS can aid her, since they too felt the Republic was failing and becoming corrupt. It'd be interesting seeing her possibly as an apprentice to Dooku, possibly even leading CIS attacks.
  5. Ian passman Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 16, 2013
    star 1
    I think Dooku would simply kill her outright. Escape from Kadavo, revealed that his plan for the Jedi so far as the Clone Wars television show are concerned, is their utter extinction. He doesn't want them as servants, light or Dark, and I doubt Sideous would even consider allowing him another apprentice after the dual fiascoes of Savage, and Ventress.
  6. Seerow SWTV★Manager

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2011
    star 6
    Because they are peace keepers turned soldier leading an army in war fair. Somebody had to do it but it doesn't change the fact that they are not supposed to be generals. They are basically the war dogs of the military now and likely used as living weapons. By taking that leap the Jedi who seem to be pretty third party become more subject to government scrutiny by the Republic which further alters their way of life. In "Wrong Jedi" the Jedi toss one of their own under the bus on circumstantial evidence alone for the sake of PR then try to offer her knight hood as an insulting apology.
    Last edited by Seerow, Mar 16, 2013
    Cevan likes this.
  7. Cevan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 16, 2013
    star 4
    Couldn't have said it better myself. As Mace said, "We are keepers of the peace, not soldiers."
    Seerow likes this.
  8. Seerow SWTV★Manager

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2011
    star 6
    And remember when Barriss quoted him in "Brain Invaders"?
  9. Cevan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 16, 2013
    star 4
    Wow, I actually forgot about that part until you reminded me of it. That's actually really interesting.
  10. StarWarsFan91 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 14, 2008
    star 4
    Um.....yes they are peacekeepers but history has shown that the jedi have also been soldiers when they have to. Sure around 1000 years has passed since the jedi have been involved in a large scale war, but before Ruusan reformation the jedi were were into warefare, but they sort of had to because of the whole Sith trying to wipe them out.

    If it wasn't for the jedi fighting evil, the Republic would have fallen long ago.

    Yes they should strive for peace, and they should not seek war, or want it to happen, but sometimes they are forced to fight, the clone wars and other conflicts being an example.

    Just because a jedi is a peacekeeper doesn't mean that he should not fight evil when it strives to destroy the Republic/Jedi, im not calling all the Separatists evil (that would be wrong), but the jedi know that the head honcho of the separatists is an evil sith lord trying to wipe out the Republic/Jedi. So you should understand why they fight. They don't like war, but they fight for self-preservation.

    Yes i agree how it was wrong that many basically threw Ahsoka under the bus, but that just shows that even jedi are human, they are not perfect beings, they make mistakes. But that doesn't mean the jedi have fallen, for the jedi have always never been perfect, since the dawn of their order.
    Last edited by StarWarsFan91, Mar 16, 2013
    TaradosGon and Valairy Scot like this.
  11. Hercu Dogla Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 13, 2013
    star 1
    Having just finished the series a few moments ago I'll throw my two cents into the matter. Having watched Barris betray both her friend and the entire Jedi order I don't think she should or in any real way could redeem herself at least in my eyes. She turned against everything she once believed in and fought for. There is no redemption for that. Not only that but I think she could make an interesting villain in the new series (if they follow a post PT era) if she were to break out or be released since we know the Jedi order falls.
  12. Circular Logic SWTV Interview Host

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2013
    star 4
    Frankly, I can't see Barriss surviving post-Order 66, especially if she's still imprisoned at the time. You can bet the clones would simply execute her on the spot. I can even imagine Palpatine attending to the matter personally even before the order is executed. If she manages to escape beforehand though, I suppose there is a possibility that she could live to the Dark Times; perhaps she becomes one of the Emperor's first Hands. However, I'm fairly certain she won't outlive the end of the war. The reason being, I can't see her willingly joining the Emperor after the end of the war. She was so vehemently opposed to the corruption in the Republic government and what she perceived as corruption in the Jedi Order.

    I think Harvey Dent's quote in The Dark Knight suits Barriss's situation very well:
    "You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain."

    Thanks to the retcon of the EU, the latter applies to Barriss now instead of the former. In fact this suits the whole Order, at least in the eyes of the public (even Ahsoka could partly agree after all she went through in The Wrong Jedi).
    Last edited by Circular_Logic, Mar 16, 2013
  13. TaradosGon Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Feb 28, 2003
    star 4
    I believe I stated this earlier, but as others have pointed out, the Jedi have historically served in a military capacity in previous wars. And even if you want to disregard the EU's stance there, it's pretty much heavily implied in the film itself and in Lucas' commentaries. The Sith were said to have once controlled the galaxy:

    "Once more the Sith with rule the galaxy!" - Darth Sidious
    "The oppression of the Sith will never return" - Mace Windu

    Then there is the aspect of Revenge of the Sith. The Sith want revenge against the Jedi.

    "At last we will reveal ourselves to the Jedi. At last we will have revenge." - Darth Maul

    I feel it's heavily implied between the lines that the Sith conquered the galaxy at some point, or at least had control of a huge chunk of it, and that the Jedi were what stopped them. The Jedi were not sitting that past war out being "peacekeepers" they were there thwarting the Sith's attempt to conquer the galaxy and now the Sith want revenge (Lucas has also explained that the Sith began to turn on themselves which destabilized them and allowed the Jedi to rally against them). The Jedi HAVE been soldiers.

    Even in AOTC, Mace Windu does not say that the Jedi will not fight. He never says this. He does not say that the Jedi are peacekeepers and therefore will not fight to save the Republic.

    "You must realize that there are not enough Jedi to protect the Republic. We're keepers of the peace, not soldiers." - Mace Windu.

    He doesn't say that the Jedi are going to sit the war out. He simply says that they can't do it by themselves because there are not enough.

    Filoni even remarked on the irony that the Jedi see themselves as peace keepers and do not want to be generals, but that they are exactly the kind of generals that the Republic needs. Career men like Tarkin that just want to climb the ladder of authority do not have the Republic's interests at heart as the Jedi do. What Barriss wants - for the Jedi to step down - would be an utter disservice to the Republic and put the worst kinds of leaders in charge of the war.

    And she is essentially pursuing a goal by any means necessary, where the ends do not justify the means. Palpatine does this as well on a larger scale, yet nobody would claim that he did not fall to the Dark side. Lucas states in the ROTS commentary that Palpatine sees himself as a good guy, that he wants to end the corruption in the senate - which is a good goal to have - but that it is the lengths that he goes to that make him evil.

    He creates and fosters corruption to end corruption. He wants to end corruption and to do this he exploits that very same corruption to create a crisis to get Valorum out of office. He then exploits that corruption again to split the Republic in two in order to create a crisis. He then exploits that corruption again to get himself appointed Emperor. And then to finally put an end to what Palpatine perceives as corruption, he constructs a giant super weapon to coerce the galaxy into obeying him. He does what Anakin tells Padme a politician to do, he is going to force those that disagree with him to accept what he believes to be best - which is corruption in itself since his actions are entirely self serving.

    Barriss does nothing on this scale, yet like Palpatine she is going to unacceptable lengths to get what she wants. When we watch ROTS and Anakin says, "from my point of view the Jedi are evil" are we really meant to think there is any truth to that pov? That he has a point or that it is some well articulated argument? Obi-Wan asserts that Palpatine is evil, which the audience is given every reason to believe, and when Anakin disagrees (this dude that's killing children, murdering the unarmed and pleading Gunray, etc) he is immediately disregarded as "lost," and the audience is given reason to believe this. Accusations that the Jedi are evil are hollow there, and they are hollow in the fugitive arc.

    Barriss has some pov that the Jedi are evil and wants to see them held accountable for the crimes she perceives them to be guilty of, so to this end she frames a Jedi... That's like me seeing my neighbor beat his wife and believing him to be a scum bag that should go to jail. So I go over, murder his wife and frame him for it so that he gets locked up... Barriss sees the Jedi as guilty of crime A, so SHE is complicit in crime B - which involves the gruesome act of turning Letta's husband into a walking bomb - to draw attention to the Jedi for a crime that they did not commit in order to bring them down.

    The ends do not justify the means here. Perhaps they do in Barriss' mind, but like Palpatine, I don't think the audience is meant to have any kind of sympathy for her or to see this as some kind of justified conflict. She is committing treason to expose what she perceives to be a violation of the Jedi purpose, even though the Jedi HAVE historically been military leaders in times of war and Filoni himself has remarked that they are better military leaders than the alternative.
  14. Hercu Dogla Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 13, 2013
    star 1
    What an extremely elegantly worded statement. That was very well said and I agree with it all. A lot of what transpires both within the jedi order and the senate/republic is taken on a POV bases. Who is looking at what and from which angle or side? I really liked your criminal analogy as well certainly made things clear. Again, this is why she shouldn't be redeemed.
    Valairy Scot likes this.
  15. rumblewagon Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 24, 2004
    star 4
    Barriss does not need to be "redeemed" if it can be proven that she was under the influence of mind-altering effects to explain her actions in the Temple bombing, etc. She already has a history of having been possessed by mind altering agents before. And how can we be sure that there's not some spirit that has possessed her from that statue she is kneeling in front of?
    I believe that statue is talking to her and commanding her to committ those acts she did.
    [IMG]
  16. Hercu Dogla Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 13, 2013
    star 1
    o_O I can't tell if this is supposed to be serious or sarcasm... I'm going to assume serious because I mean you do sort of have a point but just because you can't prove something didn't happen doesn't mean that it did. As south park says, since we can't prove that aliens were not at the first thanksgiving does that mean they were there? I am inclined to believe she acted on her own accord based on the little speech she gave against the jedi after being caught.
  17. rumblewagon Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 24, 2004
    star 4
    Again, it doesn't matter what she did or says until it is determined that she is not under the effects of mind-altering agents. I seriously doubt any medical examination was done before Anakin dragged her into that Senate chamber.
  18. Hercu Dogla Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 13, 2013
    star 1
    Okay, but what kind of mind altering agent do you suggest? What could make her appear so in control of herself when she really wasn't? You used the worms as an example but those under their influence clearly could not form coherent sentences aside from the freaky noises and a few muttered syllables.
  19. rumblewagon Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 24, 2004
    star 4
    The clones spoke coherent sentences. I can't remember if Barriss did. And without a complete medical examination, there's no evidence that Barriss is not under the influence of a combination of those previous mind-altering agents: brainworms and bota - or the spirit residing in her statue.
  20. Hercu Dogla Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 13, 2013
    star 1
    Fair enough... I guess unless they specifically explain it we will never know will we...
  21. Circular Logic SWTV Interview Host

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2013
    star 4
    The main reason why I don't think brainworms are involved in this case is Occam's Razor. Why overly complicate things by bringing up a plot point that was supposed to be resolved in Brain Invaders? It would be kind of cheap to only blame Barriss's actions solely on brainworm remnants infecting her brain, making her actions in the arc not of her own volition. Not to mention it opens up its own can of worms (no pun intended) regarding the clones who were previously infected in Brain Invaders. If the brainworm remnants are still in their brains, what would they end up doing?

    In any case, Quango and I discussed earlier that they can retroactively retcon the incident at Drongar such that Barriss did not end up resisting fully the lure of the Dark Side when she was exposed to bota, so your point can still be valid, Rumble. No comment about the statue though.
    Last edited by Circular_Logic, Mar 18, 2013
  22. rumblewagon Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 24, 2004
    star 4
    Good one. I don't recall if we got any information on what happened to the infected clones - treatment, etc. The retcon idea is very good.
    As far as "no comment" on the statue, are you unwilling to confirm or deny your belief that a malevolent spirit is in habiting it?
  23. Circular Logic SWTV Interview Host

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2013
    star 4
    Meh, I just take the statue at face value, i.e. it's merely a Mirialan totem or an equivalent to a RL Buddha statue; hence, Barriss praying or meditating in front of one of her god(s).
  24. The Shadow Emperor Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 29, 2012
    star 4
    Yesterday it was brainworms and today it's malevolent statues?

    Look man, I know you can't stand the thought of Barriss turning traitor, but it's like you're not even trying anymore.
  25. RG4 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 16, 2013
    star 2
    I dunno I think picture is the best explanation.
    [IMG]
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.